- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 23:09:37 +0900
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>, "Edward O'Connor" <eoconnor@apple.com>, Travis Leithead <Travis.Leithead@microsoft.com>
- Cc: www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
Not entirely sure who to email about this, so I'm bugging you guys and www-archive :-) As far as I know most browsers have a concept of a "fetch group". Something associated with a document responsible for its resource management. I wonder if we should make that explicit. Reasoning: 1) We cannot directly share the Document object with individual fetches as long term we might want fetching to be happen off-the-main-thread. For workers this is already the case. 2) A fetch group would allow for shared state among a bunch of fetches, such as origin, referrer, and CSP policy. 3) If we merge CSP and Fetch by having a CSP parameter to fetch, we can handle the load images directly from disk if the URL has been fetched for the Document before via this fetch group. HTML, CSS, SVG, et al would fetch images using the 'image-src' CSP parameter and the rest would follow automatically. 4) Lifetime of a Document becomes somewhat more explicit than "fetches associated with this Document" although this seems one of the lesser benefits. Now if we don't want to have fetch groups we need something for the following instead: 1) A way to load images without hitting the network for known URLs that can be used across HTML, CSS, SVG, et al. 2) An easy way to identify both the CSP policy in effect for a particular fetch operation (the Content-Security-Policy header and its reporting friend) as well as the CSP type (e.g. 'image-src'). Thoughts welcome. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 25 June 2013 14:10:03 UTC