- From: Yutaka Hirano <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 03:12:34 -0700
- To: whatwg/fetch <fetch@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
- Message-ID: <whatwg/fetch/issues/679/434631744@github.com>
@youennf I think it's valuable to have a policy in the spec, as said in the original proposal. > I think having interoperability here is particularly good from two reasons. > > One is to have a unified policy. Given the leaky nature of the flag, each implementer has to make a balanced decision between developers’ convenience and users’ expectation. Having diverse policies will confuse both developers and users. > > The other is the difficulty to handle errors. keepalive flag is expected to be used when the page is about to unload. In such a circumstance developers are not likely to be able to detect and handle errors correctly. Having a rigid, interoperable restrictions will be developers’ benefit. I think it's good to leave actual numbers hand-wavy. We can replace 9 in https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/issues/679#issuecomment-433827856 with something like: When a fetch group is terminated, for each request r with keepalive set: - Let context be r's associated KeepaliveContext. - Add _r_ to _context_. - User agent may abort _r_ based on the number of requests in _context_ whose done flag is not set. - User agent may abort _r_ based on the number of requests in all KeepaliveContexts whose done flag is not set. - User agent may abort _r_ after certain time passed. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/issues/679#issuecomment-434631744
Received on Wednesday, 31 October 2018 10:12:56 UTC