W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > January to March 2014

[Bug 22646] So if we want to say on a per-object basis whether it ought to be exposed to workers (which I think is useful) lets introduce "exposed to document environments", "exposed to worker environments", and [...]

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 00:44:05 +0000
To: public-script-coord@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-22646-3890-f7aGDtRzN3@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22646

--- Comment #18 from Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> ---
(In reply to Ian 'Hixie' Hickson from comment #17)
> Ok, I welcome review of the above. I'm especially interested in how I used
> it here, where there's an attribute with a different definition for workers
> than it has for Window:
> 
>    http://whatwg.org/html/#the-messageevent-interfaces

Ah so that is a problem, I guess.  Currently I disallow any duplicate attribute
names on an interface, not looking at [Exposed].  Given that the dictionary
still has the union, and that as with XHR.send() still having Document in the
types is OK, do you need to split the attribute in two here?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 28 January 2014 00:44:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:37:51 UTC