W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2014

Re: =[xhr]

From: James M. Greene <james.m.greene@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 07:31:28 -0500
Message-ID: <CALrbKZj-wHotQmyOi53nxhBCuXHY4aYd+1SKgyyjvmS-n6g7mQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert Hanson <hansonr@stolaf.edu>
Cc: olli@pettay.fi, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Greeves, Nick" <ngreeves@liverpool.ac.uk>
> The sole reason for these sync
XHRs, if you recall the OP, is to pull in libraries that are only
> referenced deep in a call stack, so as to avoid having to include
> *all* the libraries in the initial download.

If that is true, wouldn't it better for him to switch over to ES6 Module
imports and an appropriate transpiler, for now?

I'm a bit confused as to why it doesn't appear this idea was ever mentioned.

    James Greene
    Sent from my [smart?]phone
On Sep 4, 2014 7:19 AM, "Robert Hanson" <hansonr@stolaf.edu> wrote:

> SO glad to hear that. I expect to have a fully asynchronous version of
> JSmol available for testing soon. It will require some retooling of
> sophisticated sites, but nothing that a typical JavaScript developer of
> pages utilizing JSmol cannot handle.
> I still have issues with the language in the w3c spec, but I am much
> relieved.
> Bob Hanson
> ‚Äč
Received on Thursday, 4 September 2014 12:31:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:26 UTC