- From: Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 10:23:04 -0700
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Travis Leithead <Travis.Leithead@microsoft.com>, "gman@google.com" <gman@google.com>, "cmarrin@apple.com" <cmarrin@apple.com>, "glenn@zewt.org" <glenn@zewt.org>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com> wrote: >> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: >>> On Tue, 31 May 2011, Kenneth Russell wrote: >>>> >>>> Jonas's suggestion of adding another argument to postMessage, and >>>> Gregg's generalization to declare it as an array of objects to be >>>> transferred rather than copied, sounds good. >>> >>> We could change make MessagePort and ArrayBuffer both inherit from a >>> [NoInterfaceObject] empty interface, and then make the MessagePort[] >>> argument of the various postMessage() methods instead take an array of >>> this new interface, and then just have ArrayBuffer and MessagePort both >>> define how to be cloned in this way. >>> >>> If people like this approach I can work with Kenneth on getting the >>> wording right in the various specs. >> >> This sounds good to me; in the interest of moving things forward, are >> there any objections? > > No, this sounded good to the people here at mozilla that I talked with > about this. Apologies but I misunderstood something about this proposal and it no longer seems desirable. I've followed up on the other (forked) thread. -Ken
Received on Thursday, 2 June 2011 17:23:29 UTC