- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:29:04 -0700
- To: Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com>
- Cc: arun@mozilla.com, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Garrett Smith<dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> wrote: >> With that in mind, do you still think it makes sense to have progress >> events and all the other events you are proposing? > > I've reread my message. The arguments and reasoning given for Events > seem clear and concise. The argument for Progress Events was > illustrated with an example and a comparison. What was confusing? What is the use case for the API you are proposing? I agree that what you are proposing allows for a lot of flexibility, but it also results in an API that is more complex. Thus I think we should stick with the current API unless you have use cases in mind that only works in the API you are proposing. / Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 23:30:07 UTC