W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > October 2014

Re: [whatwg] Expose XMLHttpRequest [Fetch?] priority

From: Chad Austin <caustin@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:48:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+dRvWjVw+46BQP2ShUBOpGoK94GVM0QOAs1b-XOiKejKAiREQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ilya Grigorik <ilya@igvita.com>
Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Ilya Grigorik <ilya@igvita.com> wrote:

>
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Chad Austin <caustin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I believe this proposal is very easy to implement: just plumb the priority
>> value through to the prioritizing network layer browsers already
>> implement.
>>
> What will it take to get this added to the spec?
>>
>
> 0-7 priority is not sufficient. See previous discussion / proposal:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2014Aug/0081.html
>

I would LOVE to have more bits of priority.  :)  Our particular use case
would be satisfied by 7, but if priority was a general 32-bit integer, we
would take full advantage of that.

I do not understand how to map desired 3D asset priorities onto the HTTP
2.0 dependency graph.  We don't have a set of dependent resources - just a
priority for each one.

Does HTTP 2.0's dependency graph + weights system allow traditional
priority semantics?  That is, higher-priority resources would be serviced
before lower-priority resources, unless resource capacity remains available.

I intend to ask on the HTTP-BIS mailing list, but perhaps somebody here who
is more caught up on HTTP 2.0 can explain it to me...

Thanks,

-- 
Chad Austin
http://chadaustin.me
Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2014 23:49:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:24 UTC