W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > February 2006

Re: Window object, very rough cut of proposed content for first version of spec

From: Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 13:10:35 +0100
Message-ID: <43F1C8BB.8070304@activemath.org>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: public-webapi@w3.org

Does copy and paste or drag-and-drop not come into play here ?

paul

Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
>
> Hello people interested in Web APIs,
>
> Here's my proposal for what to put in the first version of the window 
> object spec, as IDL with comments. This is a small subset of what the 
> window interface provides in popular implementations. These features 
> were selected as follows:
>
> - Already widely interoparably implemented by mainstream HTML UAs
> - Likely to be helpful for SVG or CDR requirements
> - Simple (nothing that implies the existence of other interfaces with 
> their own complex semantics; no events; but timers and location are 
> included)
> - Likely to be uncontroversial (nothing that would spawn debates over 
> its moral values, like window.open)
> - no networking or XML parsing, that will be in other specs
>
> More complex features would likely be addressed in a follow-on version 
> of the spec.
>
> Please review this rough proposal to see if there's anything in here 
> that you wildly object to, or anything you think desperately needs 
> adding. Keep in mind that this is not the last word on specifying the 
> window object, I would expect work on a follow-on to start immediately 
> once this spec is done, covering a much broader range of features.
>
>
> I propose one of the following for the title:
>
> DOM Global Object (Level 3? or 1.0?)
> DOM Window Object (Level 3? or 1.0?)
> DOM Level 3 Views (especially if we incorporate AbstractView and 
> DocumentView interfaces into this spec instead of just referencing views)
>
> // or global or window or views?
> module window
> {
>     // based on Mozilla and Safari interfaces, Internet Explorer docs, 
> WHATWG draft
>     interface Location {
>         // the current URI
>         readonly attribute DOMString href;
>
>         // pieces of the URI, per the generic URI syntax
>         readonly attribute DOMString hash; // (fragment)
>         readonly attribute DOMString host; // hostname:port if port 
> specified,
>         readonly attribute DOMString hostname; // just the hostname, 
> no port
>         readonly attribute DOMString pathname;
>         readonly attribute DOMString port;
>         readonly attribute DOMString protocol; // scheme
>         readonly attribute DOMString search;  // query
>
>         void assign(in DOMString url); // go to the requested URL
>         // does it make sense to spec reload and replace without 
> specifying history behavior at all?
>         void replace(in DOMString url);
>         void reload();
>
>         // same value as href; not all implementations have this 
> explicitly but toString is always available
>         // in ECMAScript, and probably this should be explicit for the 
> sake of Java. Or we could skip it since
>         // it matches href.
>         DOMString toString();
>     };
>
>     // for ECMAScript there is a special case for this type, it can be 
> either a string or a function.
>     // In the string case, the string is eval'd in global scope when 
> the timer fires.
>     // in the function case JS allows extra arguments after the 
> milliseconds argument; the function
>     // is called with extra arguments if any when the timer fires
>     interface TimerListener {
>         // who knows - what interface would work for non-JS languages? 
> this could just be an EventListener
>         // but then we would have to define TimerEvent; it might also 
> be handy to expose that to JS, in which
>         // case this spec would incorporate one new feature for HTML 
> UAs to implement. But I would expect it
>         // to be a simple one.
>     };
>
>     // should this interface be called something else - Global, 
> DOMWindow, DOMGlobal?
>     // should specify that for ECMAScript execution this provides the 
> global scope
>     // based on Mozilla and Safari implementations, Win IE docs, Web 
> Apps 1.0 draft (some also in SVG Tiny 1.2 draft)
>     interface Window : views::AbstractView {
>         // AbstractView has a document attribute of type DocumentView, 
> should we drop the charade and admit it is a
>         // Document?
>
>         // self-reference
>         readonly attribute Window window;
>
>         // self-reference - why both? because both are used
>         readonly attribute Window self;
>
>         // name attribute of referencing frame/iframe/object, or name 
> passed to window.open,
>         // does it make sense to spec this without being html-specific 
> or defining open?
>         attribute DOMString name;
>
>         // global object of containing document
>         readonly attribute Window parent;
>
>         // global object of outermost containing document
>         readonly attribute Window top;
>
>         // referencing <html:frame>, <html:iframe>, <html:object>, 
> <svg:foreignObject>, <svg:animation> or other
>     // embedding point, or null if none
>         readonly attribute core::Element frameElement;
>
>         // Location object representing the current location
>         // assigning this has special behavior in ECMAScript, but it 
> is otherwise read only
>         // specifically, in ES a string URI can be assigned to 
> location, having the same effect as location.assign(URI)
>         readonly attribute Location location;
>
>         // should timers allow more than long, maybe a floating point 
> type? don't think anyone's timers have more precision
>         // one-shot timer
>         long setTimeout(in TimerListener listener, in long milliseconds);
>         void clearTimeout(in long timerID);
>
>         // repeating timer
>         long setInterval(in TimerListener listener, in long 
> milliseconds);
>         void clearInterval(in long timerID);
>     };
> };
>
>
> Other possible things to add (potentially more controversial):
>
> - SVG uDOM style timers - way less convenient in JS but maybe better 
> for Java
> - Web Apps 1.0 proposed version of setTimeout / clearTimeout that take 
> a language name as third parameter(*)
> - SVG uDOM window.gotoLocation(in URI) - same effect as 
> window.location.assign(URI)
> - IE extension window.navigate(in URI) - same effect as 
> window.location.assign(URI)
> - an interface that adds contentWindow property to DOM elements that 
> have contentDocument; perhaps an issue for individual language specs
> - due to the dependence on AbstractViews, Document is required to have 
> a defaultView attribute that points to the window, perhaps it is 
> desirable to add aliases for it, e.g. "window" as in Web Apps 1.0 
> draft or "global" as in SVG uDOM
> - yet another alias for the window object's self-reference named "global"
>
> (*) - I think this is unneeded, because there's no need to enable one 
> language to set a timer that will eval code in another language. I 
> think the string parameter versions of these should instead be defined 
> as an ECMAScript binding feature and not in the IDL.
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2006 12:10:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:53 GMT