W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > February 2015

Re: [whatwg] <iframe async>

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 16:40:32 +0100
Message-ID: <CADnb78hPFMGV3H9+T+_+8pa9eHr0yC8426rCBRDng499v9bR4w@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com>
Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 4:37 PM, David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com> wrote:
> The exact same question stands for implementors of the current proposal.
> Until what point should a browser delay loading the iframe?
> The difference being that the author knows the relative importance of the
> various iframes among themselves and with the parent (at least better than
> the browser) and can make the choice between (non-exhaustive list):
> * a delay in ms after the delaying script starts executing
> * after DOMContentLoaded or load
>     * or any amount of time after one of the two events. Maybe choose to
> load after twice the time it took for DOMContentLoaded (which one can know
> via performance API)
> * after first paint (there is a way to know when that happens, right? or
> with an upcoming spec?)
> * after some other resource has loaded (maybe to "chain" iframe loading)
> I'm sure there can be other reasonable options.
> I don't think it's reasonable for browsers to implement all these options.

All of those delay the load event per earlier emails...

> You said that you got feedback from someone asking for this.
> What is the behavior they currently implement?

Today they stamp out the template and users suffer (somewhat).

Received on Friday, 27 February 2015 15:40:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:27 UTC