W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > February 2008

[whatwg] Workers in HTML5 (was: postMessage apply(), pipe, etc.)

From: Scott Hess <shess@google.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 13:46:44 -0800
Message-ID: <696e4b7c0802191346k6d5df719gc113e553fc8944a0@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Aaron Boodman <aa at google.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Geoffrey Garen <ggaren at apple.com> wrote:
>  > > Since postMessage API is looking more an more like the Gears worker
>  >  > messaging API (or better), can we go one step further and introduce
>  >  > workers into the HTML5, defined as invisible windows with limited
>  >  > capabilities:
>  >
>  >  Why call these "windows" at all? They seem to have no relationship
>  >  physical windows, or the JavaScript "window" object.
>
>  No relation. It might be easier for some developers to get it if
>  associated with the window. I think it's a bit of a rough metaphor
>  myself, and did not call the object Window in my proposal, but
>  "WorkerContext".

It seems to me that this is an area where if you give an inch, the
developer wants another inch.  If you have something called "window",
then you're just moving things around - instead of saying "Where is my
window?", developers get to say "Why can't my window do X?"  Since
this is all new ground, it might be more reasonable to define the set
of things you want to have in your worker context, and then contrive
to add those things to your UI context.  That way you're explaining
what is there, rather than excusing what is not there.

[Anvil labeled "Legacy Interfaces" lands on Scott's head.]

-scott
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2008 13:46:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:39 UTC