W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > January 2013

Re: Please confirm DAP comment resolution

From: Anssi Kostiainen <anssi.kostiainen@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 15:33:10 +0200
Cc: Doug Turner <dougt@mozilla.com>, Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, "public-device-apis public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-Id: <333AC061-604D-4305-ACBC-31E8710CFFE5@nokia.com>
To: ext Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
On 28.1.2013, at 18.39, ext Anne van Kesteren wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Anssi Kostiainen
> <anssi.kostiainen@nokia.com> wrote:
>> Anne - the side effects concerns aside, what is your preference?
> 
> Well, as far as I can tell you need to dispatch in each Window that
> has a listener. Since the event model is such that you cannot know
> there's a listener, you'll have to dispatch in all of them.

If this is the intended behavior (it seems so, but pending confirmation from Doug), I think we can keep the current concise language:

[[

When the current XXX state changes, the user agent must queue a task to fire a XXX event at the Window object.

]]

Or would "at all the Window objects" be better? Sounds a bit strange though, as plurality is implied.

On a related note, here's an idea how this could be altered to improve privacy:

Dispatch these events only at the top-level browsing context's Window object, and if loosened a bit from there, at any nested browsing context's Window object whose Document object has the same origin as the top-level browsing context's Document.

This would allow these events to be dispatched only within iframes and frames in a frameset that have the same origin as the top-level browsing context's Document. Lose some use cases, gain some privacy protection.

WDYT?

-Anssi
Received on Tuesday, 29 January 2013 13:34:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:57 UTC