W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > October 2010

Re: Executing script-inserted external scripts in insertion order

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 12:07:08 -0400
Message-ID: <4CB487AC.8040706@mit.edu>
To: Getify <getify@gmail.com>
CC: public html <public-html@w3.org>
On 10/12/10 11:57 AM, Getify wrote:
> Yes, sites will need to keep their LABjs
> up to date, but that's far less impactful to overall page behavior than
> say asking them to keep jQuery up to date

Sites don't keep jQuery up to date.  Not even close.  They don't even 
_try_ to keep it up to date.  They just grab a jquery version, treat it 
as a given, and develop against it.  This means it maybe gets updated 
every time there's a wholesale site redesign.

At least this describes the sites I've seen with my browser developer 
hat on.

> Since LABjs is so
> small and highly focused, I think the risk to sites keeping it up to
> date is minimized compared to jQuery.

I would fully expect that sites wouldn't update their existing LABjs 
installations as well.  Again, short of site redesigns.

> While we'd like to think that proper cache headers are a given

Just like updating libraries... ;)

Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2010 16:07:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:05 UTC