W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > October 2012

Re: [whatwg] Proposal for Links to Unrelated Browsing Contexts

From: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 22:35:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CABirCh9ku_pd8tRKZxnShBWX5FWwBBSTX5jeiawPBgHayLapFQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: whatwg@whatwg.org, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> > The all-too-common bad reason is "we want people to keep pages open in
> > the user's browser for long as possible in the hopes that it'll make
> > them come back by accident, so we'll sprinkle target=_blank everywhere",
> > eg. amazon.co.jp makes *every search result* target=_blank.)  This is
> > abused so constantly that I disable it with browser.link.open_newwindow
> > in FF.
>
>
> Presumably authors in such cases would not use rel=noreferrer; I don't see
> why they would want to.
>

The only issue I'm concerned with is encouraging yet more target=_blank
misuse by encouraging people to use it where opening a new window isn't
genuinely appropriate to the UI.  As long as there aren't security reasons
to want a new browsing context, that's fine.  It does seem orthogonal:

>  Primary goals:
 >  + have the new page use a different event loop if possible (new process)
 >  + have the window of the new page not be able to reach the opener via
>     a named window.open() or target=""
>
 > As a result, I think these are also necessary features:
> ...
 >  + have the new page be in a new browsing context

It doesn't seem like you need a new browsing context to achieve both of the
above.  (Maybe it's easier to implement in today's multi-process browsers,
if you happen to be opening a new tab at the same time you start a new
process, but that seems like an implementation detail.)

-- 
Glenn Maynard
Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2012 03:35:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 January 2013 18:48:10 GMT