-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update all "queue a task" invocations to explicitly specify their task source #4506
Comments
Closes #4500. Tests: web-platform-tests/wpt#16244 Also moves the task source inline, per #4506.
A citation from a personal experience:
|
Note that #4465 has landed, so if anyone wants to take on this issue, the groundwork is ready :) |
Do you have a recommendation for how to define infrequently used or single-use task sources? In PRs I am working on, I am using the new "on the..." wording, but maintain those redundant statements to define the task source in the section. See #4613 (comment) and #4571. Should I put a Edit: @TimothyGu pointed out that there are multiple precedents to the inline dfn wording, so I will go with that. |
Closes #4500. Tests: web-platform-tests/wpt#16244 Also moves the task source inline, per #4506.
The spec currently is not very precise about how you specify the task source when queuing the task. Lots of parts of the spec do so via nearby sentences such as
or
or even
The way in which you have to search around to find the actual task source is frustrating and has led to some confusion in the past. (TODO citation needed.)
#4465 proposes that we explicitly use "Queue a task on the X task source to ..." from now on. This issue tracks updating the rest of the spec to do so, once that lands.
I am tagging this as "good first issue", and help would be appreciated working through it. Once #4465 lands, the work here should consist of:
<dfn>
to see a popup listing everywhere that uses it.If someone wants to work on this, I suggest they first try it on one or two sections, then send a pull request, and we can make sure the process works out. Then you can unleash yourself on the rest of the spec :).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: