Re: [w3c/ServiceWorker] Behavior for accessing cache storage in opaque origins (#1484)

BrianJDrake left a comment (w3c/ServiceWorker#1484)

The first objective is to align the specification with the implementations; according to the ‘research’ link given earlier, Firefox and Chrome throw a `SecurityError`.

The second objective is to make the specification elegant. It does seem like all the other storage APIs throw (or return a promise rejected with) a `SecurityError`.

This all suggests that throwing a `SecurityError` is the way to go.

On the other hand, I have no special knowledge of implementations, I did mention a specification-implementation mismatch in whatwg/storage#195 (for all I know, there are other such mismatches), and no one has checked WebKit.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/issues/1484#issuecomment-6056413095
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/ServiceWorker/issues/1484/6056413095@github.com>