On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Michael Davidson <m...@google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Tab Atkins Jr.<jackalm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Michael Davidson<m...@google.com> wrote: > >> With a hidden page that's accessible to all Google Finance visible > >> pages, they could share a connection to the server. Even if the hidden > >> page is closed when the last Google Finance page is closed, this is a > >> better situation than we currently have. > > > > Can't SharedWorkers do that right now? If all you're doing is polling > > for data, it seems like you don't need all the extra stuff that these > > various proposals are offering. > > It's my contention that frequently large web apps are doing more than > just polling for data. They're trying to maintain complex data > structures that they pass up to the UI. The programming model of > SharedWorkers makes this difficult. Take the chat client in Gmail, for > example. It's much more complex than passing stock quotes from a > worker to the UI. I understand that this isn't helpful for existing web apps like Gmail, but I think a MVC type model will work pretty nicely with shared workers. It's just the transition phase that's going to be painful. This idea of a hidden page just seems like a big hack to support today's applications. If it were adapted into the spec, I think 5 years from now we'd be very sorry that it was. The other APIs we've been talking about that satisfy the requirements that were originally broken out by Drew seem like much more sustainable solutions. J
