- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 00:47:20 +0000 (UTC)
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Jeremy Orlow wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote: > > On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Sidney San Mart?n wrote: > > > > > > The cross-document messaging API solves a lot of problems and is > > > overall an Awesome Thing, but requiring a reference to the target > > > window is hugely limiting. When a a window wants to talk to another > > > window and didn't create it, there are basically three options: > > > > > > 1. window.open with a window name argument, which is a hack because > > > the target window has to reload. > > > 2. Comet, which is a horrible hack because a trip to the server is > > > required. > > > 3. LocalStorage and storage events, which wasn't designed for > > > anything remotely like this. > > > > 4. Open a SharedWorker and send a MessagePort to the other window. > > > > > > > Unless there's a reason to prevent free communication between > > > windows, there must be a better solution. I can think of a couple of > > > possibilities. The most obvious one would be an API similar to > > > postMessage that allows broadcasting of messages to all windows, > > > windows by name, and windows by domain. Another one (which I haven't > > > developed very far) would be to stick with window.postMessage but > > > provide an API to ask for windows. So, I could say, "Can I please > > > have a reference to the window named 'x'", or, "...to windows at > > > 'example.com'", or, "...to any window who'll give me one". Each > > > window would obviously have to opt into this. > > > > > > What do you all think? > > > > How do you know there's a Window to get a hold of if you don't have a > > hold of it already? > > > > The main reason for Window.postMessage() is communication with iframes > > (gadgets), not with other top-level browsing contexts. What's the use > > case for the latter? > > I assume the use case for this is similar with the use case for storage > events which essentially is a broadcast mechanism that's specific to > just DOM storage. So if, for example, you wanted to tell your other > windows "hey! I changed the cookie" then you could do it with a > message. This seems much better than, for example polling. > > This could also be useful if you wanted to say "hey, I just navigated to > gmail.com. Do any of you already have the inbox and chat contacts > loaded up?". I suppose there's not much advantage to doing it like this > over shared workers since either way you're passing messages, but I also > don't see any major downsides to allowing broadcasts. Yeah, a broadcast mechanism could make sense. Shared workers are probably a reasonable interim measure though, to help us gauge how much this is really needed. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 15 September 2009 17:47:20 UTC