- From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 01:07:56 +0100
- To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@annevk.nl>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Alex Russell" <slightlyoff@google.com>, "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "Elliott Sprehn" <esprehn@chromium.org>, "Dimitri Glazkov" <dglazkov@chromium.org>, "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@nokia.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Erik Arvidsson" <arv@chromium.org>, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mozilla.com>
Tab,
On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 19:09:33 +0100, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 2:35 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
>> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
>>> Until we can agree on this, Type 2 feels like an attractive nuisance
>>> and, onreflection, one that I think we should punt to compilers like
>>> caja in the interim. If toolkits need it, I'd like to understand those
>>> use-cases from experience.
>>
>> I think Maciej explains fairly well in
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011AprJun/1364.html
>> why it's good to have. Also, Type 2 can be used for built-in elements,
>> which I thought was one of the things we are trying to solve here.
>
> Stay after class and write 100 times on the board: "Type 2 is not a
> security boundary".
This is not appropriate on this email list.
cheers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Friday, 14 February 2014 00:08:33 UTC