W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-htmail@w3.org > February 2014

Re: Predefined JS Libraries

From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 17:11:52 +0100
Message-ID: <52F11148.2050501@w3.org>
To: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>, public-htmail@w3.org
On 04/02/2014 14:08 , Innovimax SARL wrote:
> It could be a huge mess to allow **any** library, but it might be a good
> idea to include already well known library
>
> On the top of my head JQuery, Prototype, Processing.js which could be a
> list as in http://jsfiddle.net/

Part of the problem with allowing JS  *any* JS  is that in the webmail 
case you need to ensure that it can only manipulate the rendering of the 
email itself, and not the UI around it.

And even then, it opens up a whole new can of worms (literally). For 
instance, you could send innocuous-looking attachments and 
innocuous-looking JS but if the latter were to modify the former (even 
just by generating a Blob URL and linking to it) then you've made it 
past a lot of virus checks.

I'm not saying that there is absolutely no purpose for JS in email (e.g. 
it could be used to ship MathJAX and polyfill the maths problem) but I 
would rank that as having lower priority than getting the basics to work.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Tuesday, 4 February 2014 16:12:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:54:17 UTC