On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Antonio Manuel Amaya Calvo <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, we only need to add a magic explained (I did explain it after all, I > think :P) <iframe> variant to the web because FirefoxOS already has some > other magic more or less explained <iframes> (mozapp, and mozbrowser). The > only reason a new iframe is needed is because on FirefoxOS (and I believe > that's specific for FirefoxOS) we have process separation for apps, ...
I mean I understand why you want to introduce something like this and why it looks "webby", but that does not mean it is. The test for that is whether it would work in Safari without special code paths, were Safari to implement the same standardized features as us. Everything else is proprietary and we can pack proprietary bits in whatever way we want, but claiming they're the web is disingenuous and counter to our mission. We do need proprietary features to figure things out and we do need to ship within reasonable timeframes, but we should also remain true to ourselves. -- https://annevankesteren.nl/ _______________________________________________ dev-b2g mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g
