- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 11:01:54 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>, public-script-coord <public-script-coord@w3.org>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com> wrote: >> Would it makes sense to do one of the following?: >> >> * Expose the sync methods on DedicatedWorker only - this would require usage >> stats of sync methods in SharedWorkers to be insignificant >> * Expose the sync methods on a new global SyncWorker, where >> DedicatedWorkerGlobalScope would be >> [Global=Worker,SyncWorker,DedicatedWorker], SharedWorkerGlobalScope would be >> [Global=Worker,SyncWorker,SharedWorker] > > I like the first option if we can make it fly. Jonas probably has > concerns. Ian will need to update HTML for the second option to work. Mozilla would be fine with the first option. I even emailed this list about this before we started shipping SharedWorker. However Blink (who at the time had the only implementation of SharedWorker) showed no interest in removing sync APIs from SharedWorker and so we ended up shipping sync APIs in shared workers. If Google+Opera shows interest in removing sync APIs from SharedWorker in Blink, in the form of actual patches, then I believe that Mozilla would follow. / Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 29 July 2014 18:02:52 UTC