4 ms·

Yes? I mean, you have to admit what you built is the epitome of edge case when it comes to how a browser is typically used, and is actually exactly the type of

by dchuk 10y ago

Yes? I mean, you have to admit what you built is the epitome of edge case when it comes to how a browser is typically used, and is actually exactly the type of thing they want to optimize because basically if you aren't looking at the tab, it's not being used (generally). Maybe use electron or something?

dumbmatter 10y ago
I don't think that replacing a traditional desktop app with a web app is an edge case. That's one of the main points of HTML5.
- kbenson 10y ago
  I think what was meant by edge case is how you've architected this. Going by a statement in another comment of yours: > It is a pure SPA, you just have the option of opening multiple instances at the same time. Like I can open gmail in two tabs, but it's still an SPA. Gmail just runs the UI in the browser though, the actual work of processing, receiving and sending mail is not done in a tab. The tabs are just views into the system. It sounds like you are having one tab as both the client and the server, and separate tabs as clients to that other tab, which is pretty edge case. As someone else suggested, you could move the processing to the server, but I imagine that's not feasible because then you are centralizing the processing and you're paying for processing, not the people visiting. The more appropriate way to architect this (to my eyes, so take it for whatever you think it's worth) would be to use JS to manage tabs within the application (which you mentioned elsewhere already). The really simple way to implement this might be to have the JS tabs just contain an iframe to the prior implementation's real separate tab URL (since it already works that way, there's not likely to be any security issues you have to deal with).
- euyyn 10y ago
  The way you architected it is uncommon, though. For example, with GMail, that you mentioned as achieving a similar effect, server communication is involved.

by dchuk 10y ago

dumbmatter 10y ago

I don't think that replacing a traditional desktop app with a web app is an edge case. That's one of the main points of HTML5.

kbenson 10y ago
I think what was meant by edge case is how you've architected this. Going by a statement in another comment of yours: > It is a pure SPA, you just have the option of opening multiple instances at the same time. Like I can open gmail in two tabs, but it's still an SPA. Gmail just runs the UI in the browser though, the actual work of processing, receiving and sending mail is not done in a tab. The tabs are just views into the system. It sounds like you are having one tab as both the client and the server, and separate tabs as clients to that other tab, which is pretty edge case. As someone else suggested, you could move the processing to the server, but I imagine that's not feasible because then you are centralizing the processing and you're paying for processing, not the people visiting. The more appropriate way to architect this (to my eyes, so take it for whatever you think it's worth) would be to use JS to manage tabs within the application (which you mentioned elsewhere already). The really simple way to implement this might be to have the JS tabs just contain an iframe to the prior implementation's real separate tab URL (since it already works that way, there's not likely to be any security issues you have to deal with).
euyyn 10y ago
The way you architected it is uncommon, though. For example, with GMail, that you mentioned as achieving a similar effect, server communication is involved.