Re: Workers

On Sun, 20 Jul 2008, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
> 
> If it will have 'window' then that 'window' will be an object of 
> different class than traditional 'window'. E.g. there will not be such 
> thing as window.document. Correct?

Right, WindowWorker is what workers see, and WindowBrowsingContext is 
where window.document can be found.


> What methods of the 'window' you want keep, BTW?

http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-workers/current-work/#the-windowworker
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-workers/current-work/#apis-available


> Such things as alert() shall not be available for the script in Worker. 
> It should not use UI in any manner. Am I right?

Right, window.alert() is on WindowBrowsingContext.


> > A browsing context is basically a tab or window or iframe.
> 
> Ah, OK. So it is something under the hood of scripting. Like Worker 
> lives inside operational environment (or inherits that environment) of 
> its owner. That means for example that Worker works on the same level of 
> security as its owner. Correct?

Actually the security context (effective script origin) is derived from 
the URL attribute:

   http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-workers/current-work/#base-urls

In fact I believe that at the moment the script document context of a 
worker is a concept that isn't used at any point, and is thus redundant. 

The script browsing context is needed for instance to ensure that a worker 
started from an iframe with the "sandbox" attribute can't cause 
notifications to be sent, and stuff like that.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Monday, 21 July 2008 00:53:42 UTC