W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2012

[PE] interface MessageEvent : ProgressEvent

From: Jungkee Song <jungkee.song@samsung.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 17:48:05 +0900
To: public-webapps@w3.org
Message-id: <02b901cdc3d7$18517930$48f46b90$%song@samsung.com>
Hi,

While mulling over the usage of PE event, I came up with a suggestion. As the data attribute of message event delivers structured objects including File Blob and ArrayBuffer objects, authors might need a primitive way of checking the progress of message load.

I think the MessageEvent interface derived from ProgressEvent interface would solve many such use cases. It seems we already have candidates: server-sent events, web socket, cross-document messaging, channel messaging, web worker.

WDYT?

[Constructor(DOMString type, optional MessageEventInit eventInitDict)]
interface MessageEvent : ProgressEvent {
  readonly attribute any data;
  readonly attribute DOMString origin;
  readonly attribute DOMString lastEventId;
  readonly attribute (WindowProxy or MessagePort)? source;
  readonly attribute MessagePort[]? ports;
};


Jungkee

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jungkee Song [mailto:jungkee.song@samsung.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 11:53 AM
> To: public-webapps@w3.org
> Subject: [PE] Start working on Progress Events
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I came to start working on Progress Events spec to move it towards REC.
> Because the spec is already a CR, I am planning to focus on satisfying the
> exit criteria to ship it. Please see inline comments and questions.
> 
> Jungkee
> 
> 
> > From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 10:51 PM
> >
> > On 11/15/12 3:11 AM, ext Jungkee Song wrote:
> > > Hi Art, Charles and Anne,
> > >
> > > At this stage, it will be of great help if you give me some comments
> on
> > any issues, concerns, expected actions, etc.
> >
> > Since the spec is already a CR (with exit criteria
> > <http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/CR-progress-events-20110922/#crec>), some
> > questions ...
> >
> > * Are there any significant differences between the CR and Anne's WHATWG
> > spec? If yes, what are they and should they postponed to v.next?
> 
> 
> As I've gone through it, there's no significant change. There are only a
> few minor ones including term (octets to bytes) and xref (to event
> definition) things.
> 
> 
> > * What is the implementation status of the CR? Are there at least two
> > independent implementations that can be tested?
> 
> 
> This is my question at the moment. Can anyone share implementation data
> for this spec?
> 
> 
> > * Are the tests in the test suite sufficient to test the CR
> > <http://w3c-test.org/webapps/ProgressEvents/tests/submissions/Ms2ger/>?
> > If not, what is the plan to fill the gaps?
> 
> 
> I will scope it out.
> 
> 
> > BTW, I have a relatively strong preference to have this conversation  on
> > public-webapps so please feel free to copy any part of what I say above
> > to that list.
> >
> > -Thanks, Art
> 
Received on Friday, 16 November 2012 08:48:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:56 GMT