- From: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
- Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 19:57:20 -0500
- To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
>> 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 Maynard
Received on Saturday, 8 January 2011 00:57:53 UTC