Re: ISSUE-66: should Documents that aren\'t being presented be required to have a null defaultView? from Jonas Sicking on 2006-04-06 (public-webapi@w3.org from April 2006)

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 17:15:23 -0700
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Web APIs WG <public-webapi@w3.org>
Message-ID: <44345D9B.7080409@sicking.cc>

Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> We definitely want to allow all Documents to implement DocumentWindow. I 
>> don't want to have two versions of every document class and have to 
>> worry about constructing the right one.
> 
> Um, well, every browser I've tested already does it, and given the kind of 
> stuff that DocumentWindow has (.location, .cookie, .execCommand, etc), all 
> of which has to be neutered for these non-Windowed Documents, it seems 
> easiest to just remove the relevant members.

At least Firefox does not. It implements nsIDOMNSDocument and 
nsIDOMNSHTMLDocument (which is the interfaces where we have these 
members) on all documents, and I strongly suspect there are other 
browsers that behave the same way.

/ Jonas

Received on Thursday, 6 April 2006 00:15:36 UTC