- From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 11:09:10 +0200
- To: public-web-perf@w3.org
On 06/28/2012 04:20 AM, Jatinder Mann wrote: > On Saturday, June 23, 2012 10:26 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: >> In Gecko, at least, what makes something a "navigation" is whether certain events >> fire and whether the Window object changes. Document object identity never even >> enters the picture. Since this specification does not define what a "navigation" is, >> Gecko is simply using its internal definition, and as far as I can tell that's perfectly >> conformant with the spec as it is written now. >> >> If the intent of the spec is to exclude document.open from changing the state, then >> the specification needs to define "navigation" accordingly. > > I agree that the specification should explicitly define "navigation". Aside from excluding dynamic markup insertion, it is something the spec should have nonetheless. > > I will propose some text shortly and solicit feedback. HTML defines the concept of navigation. It will be very confusing if we have two specs overloading the same term to mean slightly different things. I would prefer we reuse the HTML concepts as far as possible, but if there are clear use cases that require a new concept, we shouldn't reuse the same terminology.
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2012 09:09:53 UTC