Re: [chromium-html5] LocalStorage inside Worker

>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Charles Pritchard<>  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 Maynard

Received on Saturday, 8 January 2011 00:57:53 UTC