- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 06:19:46 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12390 Summary: A sandboxed MIME type attribute would be better than a fully qualified MIME type Product: HTML WG Version: unspecified Platform: PC URL: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#text-html-s andboxed OS/Version: Windows NT Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P1 Component: HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson) AssignedTo: ian@hixie.ch ReportedBy: jrossi@microsoft.com QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org CC: mike@w3.org, public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org, public-html@w3.org I don't believe any browsers implement this yet. But a new MIME type specifically for sandboxed HTML content seems like the wrong way to go. As it stands currently, only text/html has a sandboxed equivelant. What about image/svg+xml, or application/xhtml+xml? Do we really want to make a new fully qualified sandboxed MIME type for every existing type? They wouldn't really be new "types." Rather, they look/feel/smell like existing types with the caveat of setting a single flag. Instead, a MIME type attribute would be better (ex: text/html;sandboxed or application/xhtml+xml;sandboxed). This would allow any existing (or future) MIME types to be sandboxed with the unique origin flag. -- 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 Tuesday, 29 March 2011 06:19:48 UTC