- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 14:12:39 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9851
Summary: Allow plugins in @sandbox via "allow-plugins" option
Product: HTML WG
Version: unspecified
Platform: PC
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson)
AssignedTo: ian@hixie.ch
ReportedBy: arturadib@gmail.com
QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
CC: mike@w3.org, public-html@w3.org
The white-list option "allow-plugins" for sandboxed iframes has been discussed
before:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/0675.html
The option was dismissed on grounds that: (a) plugin APIs are not currently
compliant with @sandbox restrictions, and (b) it's not clear authors want this
option to go with iframes.
The ensuing discussion in the thread focused on how to address (a), which I
suppose was considered a pre-condition for the option.
I have revived the discussion on the "allow-plugins" option after working with
a concrete application that is being crippled by the lack of plugin support,
arguing that the option is useful even if plugin APIs are not yet
@sandbox-compliant:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jun/0047.html
Additional concerns were raised related to (a), but it was also agreed that the
allow-plugins option and plugin API compliance can make progress in
independently:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jun/0059.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jun/0060.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jun/0068.html
Since the present HTML5 specs already specify a "sandboxed plugins browsing
context flag", it's a simple matter of allowing the flag to be manipulated with
a white-list option. (Perhaps a temporary warning in the specs can be added to
alert authors of possible lack of plugin API compliance).
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 4 June 2010 14:12:43 UTC