On 10 Sep 2014 10:03, "Olli Pettay" <olli@pettay.fi> wrote: > > On 09/10/2014 08:00 PM, Alex Russell wrote: >> >> I see. It should be removed in favor of fetch(). > > > Why? > > (But that is off topic to this wg.) Because synchronous == bad. >> >> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Olli Pettay <olli@pettay.fi <mailto: olli@pettay.fi>> wrote: >> >> On 09/10/2014 07:48 PM, Alex Russell wrote: >> >> e) The topic of whether or not synchronous APIs must be allowed on workers is being debated on public-script-coord, and it seems like >> there is no >> consensus on that yet. But I find the possibility of running synchronous XHR on the audio processing thread unacceptable for example, >> given its >> realtime requirements. >> >> >> You should remove XHR and, if anything, only surface fetch. Actually, it was my recollection taht XHR isn't in the base interface for workers. >> Is that >> wrong?: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/__web-apps/current-work/__multipage/workers.html#apis-__available-to-workers >> < http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/workers.html#apis-available-to-workers > >> >> >> http://xhr.spec.whatwg.org/#__interface-xmlhttprequest < http://xhr.spec.whatwg.org/#interface-xmlhttprequest> >> >> I can see Exposed=Worker there. >> >> >
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2014 00:26:15 UTC