- 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