On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 8:01 PM, Darin Fisher <da...@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Jochen Eisinger <joc...@chromium.org>wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 7:53 PM, Darin Fisher <da...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >>> Matching Firefox behavior likely means that we won't have to worry about >>> breaking sites. We may have to worry about breaking Chrome Extensions or >>> other browser-specific content. >>> >>> >> We could add a method to ChromeClient that would enable an embedder to >> override the restriction under certain circumstances >> > > Or, perhaps something like UserGestureIndicator. I'm not sure which is > better. > Not sure I understand? Are you suggesting to allowing focusing/blurring in response to a user action? I think that's undesirable, as the site that wants to pop-under a window probably "stole" a click to be able to run window.open already. -jochen > -Darin > > >> >> -jochen >> >> >> >>> -Darin >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 1:31 AM, Jochen Eisinger <joc...@chromium.org>wrote: >>> >>>> Hey, >>>> >>>> Firefox restricts the use of window.blur() and window.focus() (by >>>> default). window.blur() is just doing nothing, and window.focus() only >>>> works if the caller is running in the same window. >>>> >>>> Should we implement similar rules for WebKit? The purpose of this is to >>>> make pop-unders more difficult to achieve. >>>> >>>> I think this can be implemented in such a way the the chrome >>>> implementation which is doing the actual focusing/bluring anyway has enough >>>> information to let each port control what they want to do. >>>> >>>> wdyt? >>>> >>>> -jochen >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> webkit-dev mailing list >>>> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org >>>> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
