W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-perf@w3.org > November 2013

Re: [ResourcePriorities] Spec updates

From: Bruno Racineux <bruno@hexanet.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 17:15:11 -0800
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
CC: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>, "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CEB3EC8D.7D9AC%bruno@hexanet.net>


On 11/21/13 4:57 PM, "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:

>On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Bruno Racineux <bruno@hexanet.net> wrote:
>>>I agree... these names are not very clear. I also tend to get them the
>>>wrong way around and often find myself having to look them up.
>>
>> I have suggested 'delay' in the past. Just a shorter synonym to defer.
>
>All attributes discussed here delay the load in some form or another.
>The difference is in when the stop delaying.

I know. My 'delay' suggestion was before the specs was split in two
attributes.
i.e It was only 'lazyload' then.  And for that, I assume the reason for
the reverse semantics is just a simple mishap that occurred then.
I did not mean that 'delay' should used here.

>
>> Though 'postpone' seems proper, as it carries the same semantics as
>>defer,
>> which provides 'ordered deferred' behavior (IE10+) for scripts.
>
>Again, both attributes postpone the load. The difference is to what
>point in time the load is postponed.

Agreed. But if 'lazyload' matches its proper semantics,
I don't have an issue with 'postpone' in itself. 'priority'? maybe..
The 'post' in postpone actually helps the post-'defer' notion for scripts.
Received on Friday, 22 November 2013 01:15:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:37 UTC