- From: Jungkee Song <jungkee.song@samsung.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 17:48:05 +0900
- To: public-webapps@w3.org
Hi, While mulling over the usage of PE event, I came up with a suggestion. As the data attribute of message event delivers structured objects including File Blob and ArrayBuffer objects, authors might need a primitive way of checking the progress of message load. I think the MessageEvent interface derived from ProgressEvent interface would solve many such use cases. It seems we already have candidates: server-sent events, web socket, cross-document messaging, channel messaging, web worker. WDYT? [Constructor(DOMString type, optional MessageEventInit eventInitDict)] interface MessageEvent : ProgressEvent { readonly attribute any data; readonly attribute DOMString origin; readonly attribute DOMString lastEventId; readonly attribute (WindowProxy or MessagePort)? source; readonly attribute MessagePort[]? ports; }; Jungkee > -----Original Message----- > From: Jungkee Song [mailto:jungkee.song@samsung.com] > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 11:53 AM > To: public-webapps@w3.org > Subject: [PE] Start working on Progress Events > > Hi all, > > I came to start working on Progress Events spec to move it towards REC. > Because the spec is already a CR, I am planning to focus on satisfying the > exit criteria to ship it. Please see inline comments and questions. > > Jungkee > > > > From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com] > > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 10:51 PM > > > > On 11/15/12 3:11 AM, ext Jungkee Song wrote: > > > Hi Art, Charles and Anne, > > > > > > At this stage, it will be of great help if you give me some comments > on > > any issues, concerns, expected actions, etc. > > > > Since the spec is already a CR (with exit criteria > > <http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/CR-progress-events-20110922/#crec>), some > > questions ... > > > > * Are there any significant differences between the CR and Anne's WHATWG > > spec? If yes, what are they and should they postponed to v.next? > > > As I've gone through it, there's no significant change. There are only a > few minor ones including term (octets to bytes) and xref (to event > definition) things. > > > > * What is the implementation status of the CR? Are there at least two > > independent implementations that can be tested? > > > This is my question at the moment. Can anyone share implementation data > for this spec? > > > > * Are the tests in the test suite sufficient to test the CR > > <http://w3c-test.org/webapps/ProgressEvents/tests/submissions/Ms2ger/>? > > If not, what is the plan to fill the gaps? > > > I will scope it out. > > > > BTW, I have a relatively strong preference to have this conversation on > > public-webapps so please feel free to copy any part of what I say above > > to that list. > > > > -Thanks, Art >
Received on Friday, 16 November 2012 08:48:43 UTC