- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:32:39 -0800
Ian Hickson wrote: > On Thu, 13 Nov 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote: >>> I don't really see how we can do away with this without interop >>> issues. >> It sounds to me like simply saying: >> >> setTimout(handler, ms): >> When called will schedule a event 'ms' milliseconds after the function >> is called. When the event fires 'handler' is called. >> >> would make it a bug to not fire the event and produce any side effects >> that it would have. For exactly the same reasons that canceling a >> pending XHR request would be a bug. > > The above would also mean that the timeout would fire even after the > document has been closed, which is not what we want. True, you also need to define that when a document is closed pending timers and in-progress XHR requests, are canceled. Don't know enough to have an opinion on DB transactions. / Jonas
Received on Thursday, 13 November 2008 23:32:39 UTC