- From: Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org>
- Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 06:29:44 -0800
I don't know... to me, "asynchronous" means completes later. Precedence: XMLHttpRequest. The Mozilla network code uses the phrase "load background" to describe a load that happens asynchronously in the background _and_ does not block onload. Perhaps not coincidentally, this mode is used to load background images :-) -Darin On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas at sicking.cc> wrote: > It's a good point. Curious to hear what other people are thinking. > > / Jonas > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:10 AM, Nicholas Zakas <nzakas at yahoo-inc.com> > wrote: > > To me ?asynchronous? fundamentally means ?doesn?t block other things from > > happening,? so if async currently does block the load event from firing > then > > that seems very wrong to me. > > > > > > > > -Nicholas > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________ > > > > Commander Lock: "Damnit Morpheus, not everyone believes what you > believe!" > > > > Morpheus: "My beliefs do not require them to." > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org > > [mailto:whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Brian Kuhn > > Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 8:03 AM > > To: Jonas Sicking > > Cc: Steve Souders; WHAT Working Group > > Subject: Re: [whatwg] should async scripts block the document's load > event? > > > > > > > > Right. Async scripts aren't really asynchronous if they block all the > > user-visible functionality that sites currently tie to window.onload. > > > > > > > > I don't know if we need another attribute, or if we just need to change > the > > behavior for all async scripts. But I think the best time to fix this is > > now; before too many UAs implement async. > > > > > > > > -Brian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 10:41 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas at sicking.cc> > wrote: > > > > Though what we want here is a DONTDELAYLOAD attribute. I.e. we want > > load to start asap, but we don't want the load to hold up the load > > event if all other resources finish loading before this one. > > > > / Jonas > > > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 10:23 PM, Steve Souders <whatwg at souders.org> > wrote: > >> I just sent email last week proposing a POSTONLOAD attribute for > scripts. > >> > >> -Steve > >> > >> On 2/10/2010 5:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > >>> > >>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Brian Kuhn<bnkuhn at gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> No one has any thoughts on this? > >>>> It seems to me that the purpose of async scripts is to get out of the > >>>> way > >>>> of > >>>> user-visible functionality. Many sites currently attach user-visible > >>>> functionality to window.onload, so it would be great if async scripts > at > >>>> least had a way to not block that event. It would help minimize the > >>>> affect > >>>> that secondary-functionality like ads and web analytics have on the > user > >>>> experience. > >>>> -Brian > >>>> > >>> > >>> I'm concerned that this is too big of a departure from how people are > >>> used to<script>s behaving. > >>> > >>> If we do want to do something like this, one possibility would be to > >>> create a generic attribute that can go on things like<img>,<link > >>> rel=stylesheet>,<script> etc that make the resource not block the > >>> 'load' event. > >>> > >>> / Jonas > >>> > >> > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20100213/c6e3a419/attachment.htm>
Received on Saturday, 13 February 2010 06:29:44 UTC