W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: [chromium-html5] LocalStorage inside Worker

From: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 19:57:20 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=Bo30oK5H7w-LudhPFe4D2vm7e0Wt4+5LzN99U@mail.gmail.com>
To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Charles Pritchard<chuck@jumis.com>  wrote:
>>> I don't think localStorage should be (to web workers), but sessionStorage
>>> seems
>>> a reasonable request.

> It's not arbitrary: the names "local" and "session" convey some meaning.
> localStorage works well enough, out in the wild. sessionStorage is not in
> wide use.
>
> I don't think it's restrictive, it just creates a wider implementation
> divide between session and local.

What I meant was: you said that you don't think localStorage should be
available to workers, but I don't understand why.  Why should
sessionStorage be available, but localStorage not?

-- 
Glenn Maynard
Received on Saturday, 8 January 2011 00:57:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:42 GMT