W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2010

RE: text/sandboxed-html

From: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 12:30:55 -0800
To: "'Maciej Stachowiak'" <mjs@apple.com>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D23D6B9E57D654429A9AB6918CACEAA97CA33AFF24@NAMBX02.corp.adobe.com>
Adobe is certainly committed to working with this committee and others to develop the necessary specifications, APIs, etc. that would ensure that our plugins would operate correctly with @sandbox.

Maciej - your company is also a vendor of popular plugins (eg. Quicktime).  Ian, yours is now doing them for 3D and others.  Are you two also willing to participate?   If so, that would cover about 90+% of the major plugins in use today.

So what is the correct course of action to see that move forward?


-----Original Message-----
From: Maciej Stachowiak [mailto:mjs@apple.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 2:45 PM
To: Adam Barth
Cc: Leonard Rosenthol; Ian Hickson; public-html@w3.org WG
Subject: Re: text/sandboxed-html

That's my intent with suggesting allow-plugins - it would only allow  
those that understand @sandbox and have indicated this to the browser  
in some way. But I think we should design the mechanism for plugins to  
participate in enforcing the sandbox and to indicate that they will do  
so, and see if any plugin vendor is actually interested in  
implementing that functionality, before we add allow-plugins. I would  
not want to add it speculatively, if it initially has the effect of  
not allowing any actual plugins.

Received on Wednesday, 13 January 2010 20:31:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:56 UTC