- From: Anne van Kesteren <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Wed, 03 May 2023 01:00:35 -0700
- To: whatwg/dom <dom@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Received on Wednesday, 3 May 2023 08:00:40 UTC
@annevk commented on this pull request. > - <li><p>If <var>parentSignal</var> is [=AbortSignal/aborted=], then - <a for=AbortSignal>signal abort</a> on <var>followingSignal</var> with <var>parentSignal</var>'s - [=AbortSignal/abort reason=]. + <li><p>Set <var>resultSignal</var>'s [=AbortSignal/composite=] to true. I see, that makes sense. In that case setting this state upfront is clearer. And `Request` objects creating empty composite signals makes sense as well as there is not always something controlling them and this would make that more explicit. Though maybe that means composite isn't completely the right term? Perhaps they are "uncontrolled" / "unowned" or some such? -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/whatwg/dom/pull/1152#discussion_r1183358216 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <whatwg/dom/pull/1152/review/1410363063@github.com>
Received on Wednesday, 3 May 2023 08:00:40 UTC