[whatwg] localStorage + worker processes

Aaron Boodman aa at google.com
Sun Mar 22 11:53:03 PDT 2009

On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Drew Wilson <atwilson at google.com> wrote:
> I've thought about this more, and I'm afraid that if you start making the
> API cumbersome (forcing only async access) then apps are just going to use
> document.cookies instead of localStorage. I'd hate to see us radically
> change the API to support the worker case - I'd rather get rid of
> localStorage support from workers, or else just enforce a max time that a
> worker can hold the lock.

I don't believe that. Adding one async callback is no inconvenience
compared to the sad farce that is the document.cookie "API". Also,
localstorage has many benefits including structured storage and not
getting sent to the server in every request.

- a

More information about the whatwg mailing list