- From: Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 13:18:34 +0200
On 1/21/10 11:12 AM, Darin Fisher wrote: > In WebKit, history.back() is currently implemented asynchronously. > > However, it was not always this way. Previously, if the back navigation > corresponded to a hash change, then the back navigation would complete > synchronously. If the back navigation corresponded to a different > document, then it would be completed asynchronously. > > The HTML5 spec currently calls for the old behavior of WebKit, which > happens to match the behavior of Gecko. Because the spec is written > this way, there is movement in WebKit to change WebKit back. > > IE however appears to implement history.back() asynchronously in all > cases just like newer versions of WebKit. > > I actually think this is a better behavior to spec for a couple reasons: > > 1) It allows for history.back() to behave consistently regardless of > the type of navigation. > 2) It allows for the back/forward list to be decoupled from the main > thread of the rendering engine. > > This last point is quite relevant to Chrome since we store the > back/forward list in a separate process. We do this since items in the > back/forward list may actually need to be rendered using different > WebKit processes. (Navigating in the location bar is a hint that we can > spawn a new process.) > > We could copy the entire back/forward list to each process and replicate > state, but that seems excessive. Instead, simply matching the > history.back() behavior of IE avoids the need to do so. > > From a web compat perspective, it seems wise to match the behavior of > IE. It also has other benefits. > > Can we change the spec? > > -Darin Do you propose to make all history traversal async? back/forward/go/location.reload ? -Olli
Received on Thursday, 21 January 2010 03:18:34 UTC