- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 20:26:17 -0700
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Drew Wilson<atwilson at google.com> wrote: > An alternative would be to make the "name" parameter optional, where > omitting the name would create an unnamed worker that is identified/shared > only by its url. > So pages would only specify the name in cases where they actually want to > have multiple instances of a shared worker. > -atw This seems like a very good idea. Makes a lot of sense that if two shared workers have the same uri, you are probably going to interact with it the same way everywhere. Only in less common cases do you need to instantiate different workers for the same url, in which case you can use the name parameter. / Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 18 August 2009 20:26:17 UTC