W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2010

Re: Issue 100 Zero-Edits Counter Proposal

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 10:59:03 -0700
Message-ID: <r2udd0fbad1004131059pf8d16317z6da2f09acb87dcd1@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, public-html@w3.org
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> I disagree it's irrelevant.
> For instance, the fact that people who were supposed to be the target
> audience of sandboxing aren't interested may indicate that we should
> consider to reduce the "badness" of the sandbox proposal, by killing a very
> specific part of it, but keeping the rest.

Ah, now that's relevant in the vein that I mentioned, where it may not
be useful to reduce network requests, for example if the sandbox
security model is only going to be used in places where a network
request is required anyway (such as for serving ads).

I've provided my reasons as to why I think that isn't necessarily a
strong argument against, though.

Thanks, Julian.

Received on Tuesday, 13 April 2010 17:59:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:01 UTC