- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 12:01:47 -0400
- To: ext Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: Travis Leithead <Travis.Leithead@microsoft.com>, "gman@google.com" <gman@google.com>, "cmarrin@apple.com" <cmarrin@apple.com>, "glenn@zewt.org" <glenn@zewt.org>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
What are the specific change(s) to the Web Messaging spec being proposed: http://dev.w3.org/html5/postmsg/ -AB On Jun/2/2011 11:25 AM, ext Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Kenneth Russell<kbr@google.com> wrote: >> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Ian Hickson<ian@hixie.ch> wrote: >>> On Tue, 31 May 2011, Kenneth Russell wrote: >>>> Jonas's suggestion of adding another argument to postMessage, and >>>> Gregg's generalization to declare it as an array of objects to be >>>> transferred rather than copied, sounds good. >>> We could change make MessagePort and ArrayBuffer both inherit from a >>> [NoInterfaceObject] empty interface, and then make the MessagePort[] >>> argument of the various postMessage() methods instead take an array of >>> this new interface, and then just have ArrayBuffer and MessagePort both >>> define how to be cloned in this way. >>> >>> If people like this approach I can work with Kenneth on getting the >>> wording right in the various specs. >> This sounds good to me; in the interest of moving things forward, are >> there any objections? > No, this sounded good to the people here at mozilla that I talked with > about this. > > / Jonas >
Received on Thursday, 2 June 2011 16:02:22 UTC