On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Matt Shulman wrote:
>>
>> I sometimes like to write code in the window context (where debugging
>> support is much better) before moving it to a web worker, so it would
>> be awkward if the sync options diff
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Matt Shulman wrote:
> I sometimes like to write code in the window context (where debugging
> support is much better) before moving it to a web worker, so it would
> be awkward if the sync options differed on xhr between the two.
> (Analogous to this - I remember
I sometimes like to write code in the window context (where debugging
support is much better) before moving it to a web worker, so it would
be awkward if the sync options differed on xhr between the two.
(Analogous to this - I remember once i was trying to use the new
FileSystemSync API and during
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:33:38 +0100, Jonas Sicking wrote:
So if I understand the proposal correctly:
After .open has been called with async=false:
* setting .responseType to anything other than "" throws
InvalidAccessError
* setting .wirthCredentials to true throws InvalidAccessError
Additio
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Olli Pettay wrote:
> On 11/15/2011 09:33 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 4:22 AM, Anne van Kesteren
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:55:25 +0100, Jonas Sicking
>>> wrote:
Yes, I think cross-origin should not work with syn
On 11/15/2011 09:33 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 4:22 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:55:25 +0100, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Yes, I think cross-origin should not work with sync. That is currently the
only synchronous communication mechanism cross origin. Wi
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 4:22 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:55:25 +0100, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I think cross-origin should not work with sync. That is currently the
>> only synchronous communication mechanism cross origin. Without it a UA
>> could put up UI if it
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:55:25 +0100, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Yes, I think cross-origin should not work with sync. That is currently
the only synchronous communication mechanism cross origin. Without it a
UA
could put up UI if it wants to explicitly allow users to control such
communication.
Ew
On Monday, November 14, 2011, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:03:53 +0100, Olli Pettay
wrote:
>>
>> I think we should strongly encourage web devs to move away from
>> sync XHR (in Window context, not in Workers). It is bad for UI
>> responsiveness.
>>
>> Unfortunately sync XHR h
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:03:53 +0100, Olli Pettay
wrote:
I think we should strongly encourage web devs to move away from
sync XHR (in Window context, not in Workers). It is bad for UI
responsiveness.
Unfortunately sync XHR has been used quite often with the old
text/xml types. But maybe we could
Hi all,
I think we should strongly encourage web devs to move away from
sync XHR (in Window context, not in Workers). It is bad for UI
responsiveness.
Unfortunately sync XHR has been used quite often with the old
text/xml types. But maybe we could disable sync XHR for the new
types, and also mak
11 matches
Mail list logo
