Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
JCD: I have already answered about the "load" event, which I believe is disconnected (connected to the loading of the element, not to the loading of the resource when the xlink:href is updated by scripting or animation).progress events are fired because you already have some other operation in progress, which will start and finish. For something like an HTTP connection where you take a couple of seconds to establish the connection it would be useful to fire a progress event with zero bytes loaded.In the case of doing this for a connection where you don't know the length, this will be indistinguishable from a (now presumably completed) zero-length transfer. But since the transfer has presumably finished, what kind of UA would actually fire such a pointless event? It already *must* fire the load event, which you can trap to note that your loading is finished. JCD: I want to be able to start an animation on "beginning of load", and stop it on "end of load", and just use the simple syntax of an event in a begin/end attribute. This is easy, well-known and liked by authors, why do you want to remove that syntax facility ?So the assumption behind the above combination is that it is a justifiable hack. I certainly haven't seen any use case for the zero-length transfer to fire a progress event - if there is one, then of course this hack is not good enough. JCD: Was that too English ? If so I apologize. Did you read the MAE spec and did you find interactions and should we merge the two specs ? Thanks JC --
![]() Jean-Claude Dufourd - Chief Scientist, Streamezzo 21, av. Victor Hugo, 75016 Paris, France, Tel: +33 (0) 153632847 http://www.streamezzo.com - Fax: +33 (0) 142224601 ![]() Streamezzo participates to 3GSM World Congress in Barcelona from 12-15 February 2007. Visit us Hall 7 - Stand 7C28. If you wish to meet us and discover our Rich Media solutions please don’t hesitate to contact us. |
- Re: Progress event spec João Eiras
- Re: Progress event spec Charles McCathieNevile
- Progress Use Cases (was Re: Progress event... Maciej Stachowiak
- Re: Progress Use Cases (was Re: Progre... Maciej Stachowiak
- Re: Progress Use Cases (was Re: Pr... Maciej Stachowiak
- Re: Progress event spec Jean-Claude Dufourd
- Re: Progress event spec Anne van Kesteren
- Re: Progress event spec Jean-Claude Dufourd
- Re: Progress event spec Charles McCathieNevile
- Re: Progress event spec Maciej Stachowiak
- Re: Progress event spec Jean-Claude Dufourd
- Re: Progress event spec Charles McCathieNevile
- Re: Progress event spec Jean-Claude Dufourd
- Re: Progress event spec Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: Progress event spec Jean-Claude Dufourd
- Re: Progress event spec Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: Progress event spec Jean-Claude Dufourd
- Re: Progress event spec Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: Progress event spec Ian Hickson
- Re: Progress event spec Jean-Claude Dufourd
- Re: Progress event spec Ian Hickson


