W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2008

Re: Workers

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:53:06 +0000 (UTC)
To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0807210046460.12994@hixie.dreamhostps.com>

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?


> 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:


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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:34 UTC