- From: Niklas Åkerlund <spinningvertex@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 09:11:31 +0200
- To: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>, "Web API WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>
> The author always has the option of not including <noscript> elements in > their response, so I think the usecase is still supported. > > I'm a little bit worried that if we enable scripts for XHR (they are > currently disabled in firefox) that sites would break. Though chances > are probably pretty small. However if scripts are enabled we need to > define exactly in which context they execute. Should they have their own > 'window'? If not 'window.document' would not refer to their own document. > > / Jonas > Hello everyone! I think XHR documents should be dead data. If you want it to be alive and with a window then a frame or popup window seems much more appropriate. And with that in mind, what features would an alive XHR documents implement that wasn't covered by frames/popups? If scripts are allowed, then next we might consider allowing plugins such as flash. It'd be confusing. At least to me :-p Niklas Åkerlund
Received on Monday, 30 July 2007 16:56:51 UTC