Re: [whatwg/fetch] Add the Priority Hints changes to the fetch spec (PR #1523)

@annevk commented on this pull request.

What will happen to the Priority Hints specification? Does it essentially disappear?

> +<dfn export for=request id=concept-request-priority>priority</dfn>, which is
+"<code>high</code>", "<code>low</code>" or "<code>auto</code>". Unless stated otherwise it is
+"<code>auto</code>".

We need to update HTML's existing references to this concept to use "internal priority" instead.

As far as I can tell from https://dontcallmedom.github.io/webdex/p.html#priority%40%40request%40dfn HTML is the only specification that has references (and they are more of an informative nature).

> +<p>A <a for=/>request</a> has an associated
+<dfn export for=request id=concept-request-internal-priority>internal priority</dfn> (null or a
+<a>implementation-defined</a> object). Unless otherwise stated it is null.

```suggestion
<p>A <a for=/>request</a> has an associated <dfn export for=request>internal priority</dfn> (null or
an <a>implementation-defined</a> object). Unless otherwise stated it is null.
```

> +  <p class=note>The <a for=request>internal priority</a> <a>implementation-defined</a> object
+  could encompass stream weight and dependency for HTTP/2, priorities used in
+  <a href=https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9218/>HTTP extensible priorities</a>, and equivalent
+  information used to prioritize dispatch and processing of HTTP/1 fetches.

We probably ought to say something about H/3.

Nit: I also think the original text here was correct in not repeating the field name.

> @@ -6892,6 +6900,7 @@ dictionary RequestInit {
   boolean keepalive;
   AbortSignal? signal;
   RequestDuplex duplex;
+  FetchPriority priority;

I'd be somewhat inclined to name this `RequestPriority` to match the others. It doesn't matter much as it's not exposed, but still.

> @@ -1734,8 +1734,13 @@ not always relevant and might require different behavior.
 <hr>
 
 <p>A <a for=/>request</a> has an associated
-<dfn export for=request id=concept-request-priority>priority</dfn> (null or a
-user-agent-defined object). Unless otherwise stated it is null.
+<dfn export for=request id=concept-request-priority>priority</dfn>, which is
+"<code>high</code>", "<code>low</code>" or "<code>auto</code>". Unless stated otherwise it is

Oxford comma please.

>     <dt><a for=request>priority</a>
    <dd><var>request</var>'s <a for=request>priority</a>.
 
+   <dt><a for=request>render-blocking</a>
+   <dd><var>request</var>'s <a for=request>render-blocking</a>.

I saw your comment about adding these, but given that internal priority is copied over and therefore non-null it's not clear to me when these would actually end up doing anything. Unless we decided to expose them to service workers, but we should probably do this at that point then.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/1523#pullrequestreview-1192767315
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <whatwg/fetch/pull/1523/review/1192767315@github.com>