- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:26:59 +0000
- To: www-validator-cvs@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6521
Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |karl+w3c@la-grange.net
--- Comment #1 from Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net> 2009-02-03 16:26:59 ---
I asked henri sivonen how it was supposed to work.
[01:32] <hsivonen> karl: not by default, but you can get a callback by
appending &callback=foo to the URL
[01:36] <karl> hsivonen: oh I see :) so the foo is more the choice of the
developer who wants to use the output
[01:36] <hsivonen> karl: you can use any ECMAScript-compatible identifier in
place of foo
[01:37] <hsivonen> (yes, it actually validates whether it is an ECMA-compliant
ident)
[01:37] <karl> hsivonen: what I meant… is that the "foo" is not imposed by
me but by the user
[01:38] <hsivonen> karl: foo is chosen by whoever puts together the URL
[01:38] <karl> cool
[01:38] <karl> thanks
So the template is to be modified and the main source code to give the
possibility of constructing such URI and sending to the template. It also seems
that we have to be careful about the "foo" value which as to be a valid
ECMAscript identifier. So a sanitizer seems to be necessary.
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 3 February 2009 16:27:08 UTC