W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: Adopting postMessage and MessageChannel from HTML5?

From: Arthur Barstow <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 15:10:39 -0500
Message-Id: <A74AAE54-D12C-44B5-A4E4-ECA0F27E7892@nokia.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Thanks for the clarifications Maciej. I don't have any objections to  
WebApps taking on this work.

However, since this functionality is not within the scope of WebApps'  
current Charter [Charter], if we do have consensus within the WG that  
it should be added (and I can start a CfC to determine this), we can  
propose it be added to WebApps' Charter when the current Charter is  
renewed (current Charter expires 30-June-2009). I think the overhead  
of re-Chartering now for just this one deliverable is too high.

In the meantime, the new spec can be added to CVS and the group can  
work on an Editor's Draft but WebApps can't formally publish the spec  
until the spec is part of WebApps' Charter. If proponents want to  
formally publish it earlier, the HTML WG can publish it.

Is the above a reasonable way forward?

-Art Barstow

[Charter] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/charter/


On Jan 9, 2010, at 12:53 PM, ext Maciej Stachowiak wrote:

>
> On Jan 9, 2010, at 6:30 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
>
>> Hixie, All,
>>
>> On Jan 9, 2010, at 3:00 AM, ext Ian Hickson wrote:
>>
>>> Would this working group be interested in adopting the
>>> Window.postMessage
>>> and MessageChannel/MessagePort features from HTML5? It was recently
>>> split
>>> from the main HTML5 spec into a subspec, but some people have
>>> suggested it
>>> might be best in the webapps group. I'd be happy to continue
>>> editing it,
>>> it would just mean a change in the headers, as with Web Storage,
>>> etc (and
>>> would similarly remain in the WHATWG "complete" spec).
>>
>> Why is this functionality being removed from HTML5?
>
> Some Working Group members requested that it be split into a separate
> spec. The reasons cited were that this functionality is not directly
> related to HTML5, and that it is potentially reusable with other
> languages. In that respect, it is much like Web Workers, Web Sockets,
> or Web Storage.
>
>>
>> I would also like to understand: the status of the specification
>> maturity, in particular, its closeness to being ready for LCWD; and
>> the spec's implementation status.
>
> I believe postMessage (cross-document-messaging) is implemented and
> shipping in every major browser. I am not sure about channel
> messaging. MessageChannel is implemented and shipping at least in
> WebKit (both Safari and Chrome) but I am not sure about other browser
> engines.
>
>>
>> Additionally, I don't see a direct connection to any of WebApps'
>> current deliverables although I'm not familiar with this
>> functionality:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/charter/#deliverables
>
> What this functionality allows is communication among frames, windows
> and workers, including possibly ones from separate domains. It enables
> cross-domain APIs similar to what you can do with XHR2, but without
> any network traffic. It also enables widgets/gadgets embedded in a Web
> page to communicate with their containing page. And it is a critical
> dependency for Web Workers. You are correct that neither cross-
> document messaging or channel messaging is explicitly called out as a
> deliverable, but it does seem to bear a close relationship to other
> Web Apps specs that used to be part of HTML5.
>
>>
>> Is the HTML WG not interested in owning this new "subspec"?
>
> I don't believe the HTML WG has rejected it, but some participants
> thought the Web Apps WG should get first crack at it, since it seems
> very related to other Web Apps WG deliverables and is not HTML- 
> specific.
>
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
>
Received on Monday, 11 January 2010 20:11:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:36 GMT