W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > January to March 2014

[Bug 22646] So if we want to say on a per-object basis whether it ought to be exposed to workers (which I think is useful) lets introduce "exposed to document environments", "exposed to worker environments", and [...]

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 00:56:01 +0000
To: public-script-coord@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-22646-3890-QNVw2Z1oTq@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>

--- Comment #23 from Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> ---
(In reply to contributor from comment #20)
> Checked in as WHATWG revision r8430.
> Check-in comment: Try doing this a different way (MessageEvent.source
> exposure)
> http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=8429&to=8430

This has the same problems; the checking of duplicate attribute (and operation)
identifiers is done on the whole set of members, not looking at [Exposed].

How about I just add a conformance requirement that says for an object
associated with a global with a particular global name, only objects with
interfaces that are exposed in that global may be returned?

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 29 January 2014 00:56:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:19 UTC