W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > July 2007

Re: [XHR2] text/html and responseXML

From: Niklas ┼kerlund <spinningvertex@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 09:11:31 +0200
Message-ID: <b0dd968b0707300011r2f2326d8ked815bdc97e57423@mail.gmail.com>
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 ┼kerlund
Received on Monday, 30 July 2007 16:56:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:58 GMT