- From: Andrea Rendine <master.skywalker.88@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 11:37:39 +0200
- To: Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "public-html@w3.org LIST" <public-html@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAGxST9knpUhLEEnUQ=-ntTvC08aRWiJN=TXtNQXXOv_se1xt7Q@mail.gmail.com>
> can't you just find the parent document's base URI and add a new base URI tag to the child document ... It would be better to set it from the beginning, otherwise it would be a little difficult to change all relative URI after having changed the base. However, I reflected on this and it can be worked around quite easily using root-relative URIs (/foo/bar.html) About your consideration, yes, actually there are aspects in which a seamless iframe will never merge with its container. More so, current spec is already too difficult for UAs to complain, as @seamless is still completely unimplemented. 2015-04-07 8:31 GMT+02:00 Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>: > This is an interesting proposal, but I think that making baseURI's > seamless as well starts to go beyond the scope of what seamless should make > possible. As far as I can imagine a variety of document-centric behaviors > should still be preserved, including: > > * event bubbling (constrained) > > * selection/focus management (constrained) > > * form submission and form pointers (constrained) > > etc. > > > If we allow some DOM behaviors for base URI that it opens up the larger > question of where do we draw the line with others? > > > And for a workaround, can't you just find the parent document's base URI > and add a new base URI tag to the child document to get the same base URI? > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Andrea Rendine <master.skywalker.88@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Sunday, April 5, 2015 12:47 PM > *To:* public-html@w3.org LIST > *Subject:* Relative links in seamless iframes > > Looking at the spec, it is clear that iframes in seamless mode must act, > if possible, as part of the document containing their nested browsing > context. > One thing is missing, though. The base URL to resolve relative URL in > links of nested browsing contexts, as well as embedded resources throughout > the nested browsing context's document, is obtained in relation with nested > document. > Wouldn't it be possible to set base URL for nested document using > container document's base URL? It should be possible at least in case the > container has a frozen base URL and the nested document hasn't. > > I was writing a JS snippet capable of using pushState along with a query > string for keeping track of iframe navigation. This script appends a query > parameter in the form of "iframe_name=iframe_document_relativeURI" to the > address of the page, so that the URI can keep track of the current page > state. This is primarily for link sharing, but anyway the src attribute is > updated server-side for possible reuses (e.g. sitewide link mapping). The > problem is, nested page sets the querystring using relative URL of the link > for site navigation, and relative URLs rely upon nested document's base > URL. If for any reason container and nested documents' bases do not > coincide (e.g. the nested document is specified by a file in a different > directory), URL retrieval is not possible (of course I currently solve the > problem using a consistent sitewide <base> element so that all relative > URIs are resolved according to the same base). > > Are there any technical issues in doing that? Also consider that there > would be no backward compatibility issue, as no browser currently > implements @seamless. >
Received on Tuesday, 7 April 2015 09:38:06 UTC