- From: Michael Nordman <michaeln@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:27:58 -0700
There hasn't been much discussion of this yet... a few comments on the list between august and november of 2008... > > > [michaeln] How do workers and appCaches interact? > > > > [ian] workers are associated with browsing contexts, so they go through the > > normal app cache networking changes. This probably interacts badly > > with shared workers used from different app caches. We should probably > > study this more. > > > > Aaron, Maciej, others, do you have opinions on how these should > > interact? > > [michaeln] Seems reasonable to spec that dedicated workers are very related to > their owner, execute in a child browsing context, and consequently > inherit the same appCache. > > Seems reasonable to spec that shared workers are associated with a > browsing context that is very distinct from their clients. Akin to an > "auxiliary top-level browsing context". [ian] The above seems reasonable... > Beyond that it gets less clear. > > Do sharedWorker.js documents need a <html manifest='url'> equivalent? They don't have one today. I don't really want to add one... > Should a shraredWorker loaded from appCacheA be distinct from a named > shared worker loaded from appCacheB or from the network? That seems like a reasonable possibility too... I haven't fixed this yet. On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Drew Wilson <atwilson at google.com> wrote: > I'm trying to understand the ApplicationCache spec as it applies to > workers, but I didn't find anything promising when I searched the archives. > Is ApplicationCache intended to apply to workers? The application cache API > isn't available to workers, but I'm guessing the intent is that if an > application creates a dedicated worker then worker requests (like > importScripts()) would come out of the cache inherited from the parent > document. If not, then it seems impossible to support running workers when > in offline mode. > > Since SharedWorkers are shared by multiple windows, there's some ambiguity > about which app cache it should use (perhaps always the one from the creator > window?) - it seems like an app might get different SharedWorkers() loading > from different app caches depending on the order in which different windows > create them, which seems like a dubious outcome. Has this been discussed > previously? > > -atw > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090325/cef95c24/attachment.htm>
Received on Wednesday, 25 March 2009 11:27:58 UTC