>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Charles Pritchard<chuck@jumis.com> wrote: >>> I don't think localStorage should be (to web workers), but sessionStorage >>> seems >>> a reasonable request. > It's not arbitrary: the names "local" and "session" convey some meaning. > localStorage works well enough, out in the wild. sessionStorage is not in > wide use. > > I don't think it's restrictive, it just creates a wider implementation > divide between session and local. What I meant was: you said that you don't think localStorage should be available to workers, but I don't understand why. Why should sessionStorage be available, but localStorage not? -- Glenn MaynardReceived on Saturday, 8 January 2011 00:57:53 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:15 UTC