That suggestion has also been floating around in some internal discussions. I'd have to objections to this approach either, although I'm not familiar enough with URL semantics to know if this is a valid use of URL fragments.<div>
<br></div><div>-atw<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Jim Jewett <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jimjjewett@gmail.com">jimjjewett@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
> Currently, SharedWorkers accept both a "url" parameter and a "name"<br>
> parameter - the purpose is to let pages run multiple SharedWorkers using the<br>
> same script resource without having to load separate resources from the<br>
> server.<br>
<br>
> [ request that name be scoped to the URL, rather than the entire origin,<br>
> because not all parts of <a href="http://example.com" target="_blank">example.com</a> can easily co-ordinate.]<br>
<br>
Would there be a problem with using URL fragments to distinguish the workers?<br>
<br>
Instead of:<br>
new SharedWorker("url.js", "name");<br>
<br>
Use<br>
new SharedWorker("url.js#name");<br>
and if you want a duplicate, call it<br>
new SharedWorker("url.js#name2");<br>
<br>
The normal semantics of fragments should prevent the repeated server fetch.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
-jJ<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br></div>