On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> We have three more seats at this point, allocated on the basis of
> first come, first served.
If any are still available, I'd like to reserve one as well :)
Would it be possible to meet the security goals without assuming that the
response body is part of the package? See  for background on why that's
beneficial.. at least for performance side of the story. I'm picturing a
package description where each resource has a SRI token, plus a signature
- I recently got some good offline feedback on the proposal, need to update
it, stay tuned.
- related~ish, may be of interest.
On Tue, Sep
(way behind, slowly catching up...)
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Daniel Buchner dan...@mozilla.com wrote:
Steve and I talked at the Chrome Dev Summit today and generated an idea
that may align the stars for our async/sync needs:
link rel=import elements=x-foo, x-bar /
+1. I think this
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 3:06 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
Just to be clear. I understand why we'd want this. I'm a) wondering
why it'll be successful this time given it has the same
characteristics as ping= b) asking about the desired timeframe given
the highly likely
A lot of the discussion so far focused on the async analytics beacon +
unload use case. However, while this is an important case to consider,
let's not constrain this proposal to on unload case only.
Effectively, what we want is a generic send this request sometime later, I
don't care when, where