W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > January to March 2015

Re: Figuring out the behavior of WindowProxy in the face of non-configurable properties

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 13:42:45 -0500
Message-ID: <54B80A25.7000102@mit.edu>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com>, Filip Pizlo <fpizlo@apple.com>, "Mark S. Miller" <erights@google.com>
CC: es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>, Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>
On 1/15/15 1:22 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> It's what IE does, according to Travis.

I'll let Travis address this.

>> Care to ask the UA implementors who are clearly not doing anything even
>> resembling your spec?  Because it might turn out they might have reasons
>> for it...
>
> I've asked you many times.

I'm not one of those implementors.  What Gecko does right now is more or 
less black-box indistinguishable from your spec, modulo cross-origin 
issues.  However we may be changing what we do; we'll see.

> Implementations disagreeing with each other doesn't mean the spec is
> undefined.

But it can well mean they're not willing to implement it as written.

> It doesn't match _all_ implementations, certainly.

OK, but have you bothered to find out why?

> Per the HTML spec, there's two ways that WindowProxy can change. One is
> session history traversal. That can never happen with JS on the stack

Are you sure, given showModalDialog?

-Boris
Received on Thursday, 15 January 2015 18:43:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 15 January 2015 18:43:19 UTC