- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 22:38:18 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- cc: Bobby Holley <bobbyholley@gmail.com>, public-script-coord@w3.org, w3c@adambarth.com, Johnny Stenback <jst@mozilla.com>, Blake Kaplan <mrbkap@mozilla.com>, Daniel Veditz <dveditz@mozilla.com>
On Fri, 13 Apr 2012, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 4/13/12 5:56 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Fri, 13 Apr 2012, Bobby Holley wrote: > > > > > > I think this is suboptimal behavior. If we value revocation enough to > > > spec it [...] > > > > I don't think we do. It's only specced because that's what browsers did, > > and I try to spec what browsers do. > > Actually, having revocation is very important in some scenarios; > otherwise you can't use document.domain securely at all. Can you elaborate on that? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 13 April 2012 22:38:43 UTC