- From: Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org>
- Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 06:31:59 -0800
The thing is, almost all subresources load asynchronously. The load event exists to tell us when those asynchronous loads have finished. So, I think it follows that an asynchronous resource load may reasonably block the load event. (That's the point of the load event afterall!) -Darin 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/bd5d6c5d/attachment.htm>
Received on Saturday, 13 February 2010 06:31:59 UTC