W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: [XHR] LC comments from the XForms Working Group

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:39:39 -0700
Message-ID: <48583D2B.8060400@sicking.cc>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-webapps@w3.org, public-forms@w3.org

Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> I suppose. Though it would create some path in the XMLHttpRequest 
>> specification we can't really test and it's not clear to me why we 
>> should do that.
> Because if it's low-cost, and lets people reuse the specification, it's 
> a win. Whoever comes up with another embedding of XHR would write the 
> tests for it, of course.  Otherwise their specification wouldn't have 
> that whole test suite thing needed to exit CR.
>> Also, I forgot to mention that the definition of origin in HTML5 
>> depends on Window and we really want to use the HTML5 definition of 
>> origin.
> Again, it seems like this could be handled by requiring that anyone 
> using XHR not in a Window specify how one gets an origin from the object 
> that the XHR constructor is on (or from the current scope object, 
> whichever XHR is using).
> Or would that not work for some reason?

I fully agree with Boris. Also, remember that we'll have to remove any 
normative references to the Window spec by the time we go to rec one way 
or another no matter what, since the Window spec is unlikely to be in 
Rec before XHR.

/ Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2008 22:41:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:10 UTC