On Feb 19, 2008, at 2:57 PM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 2:58 PM, Anne van Kesteren
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Given that most people don't know the difference between the Window
and
the global object and the global worker object will already contain a
bunch of APIs identical to those on the Window object it seems to
me that
giving the object and interface a different name doesn't really help.
I'm not necessarily sold on making the worker context be the global
object. I always thought having the Window object be the global object
was a bit unfortunate, myself.
What if we had separate objects:
- the global scope (with all the typical JS globals, and maybe
XMLHttpRequest)
- workerContext (with all the worker stuff, plus cookies, location,
etc)
Thoughts?
If XMLHttpRequest is one of the APIs available on background threads,
does that include its XML parsing/serialization features (responseXML
and the ability to pass a Document as the post data)? If so, then
effectively the whole DOM API has to be available on the background
thread, which may increase the implementation complexity a fair bit
over having only selected APIs available.
Regards,
Maciej
