- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 15:37:10 -0400
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- CC: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 3/21/15 1:27 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 5:52 AM, Arthur Barstow<art.barstow@gmail.com> wrote: >> 2.<http://www.w3c-test.org/webmessaging/without-ports/025.html>; this test >> failure (which passes on IE) is considered an implementation bug >> (MessageChannel and MessagePort are supposed to be exposed to Worker) that >> is expected to be fixed. > I'm not sure that we can really consider lack of support in Workers "a > bug". Worker support is generally non-trivial since it requires making > an API work off the main thread. > > That said, mozilla has patches for worker support in progress right > now, so hopefully Firefox can serve as second implementation here > soon. Thanks for this info Jonas. My characterization of this failure wasn't especially good. I think the main point with respect to discussing this failure with the Director (or someone acting on his behalf) is that the lack of a second implementation is not caused by a bug/issue in the spec itself, and that at least one other browser vendor already has a relevant patches in progress. Given the large majority of the tests (84/86) have two or more passes and the patch you mention above, it seems reasonable to request moving this spec to PR now. Is that OK with you or should we consider your position a "formal objection"? -Thanks, ArtB
Received on Tuesday, 24 March 2015 19:37:54 UTC