Web APIs Issue Tracker: > The spec requires that any Document being presented in a browsing context > must implement the > DocumentWindow interface, which inherits from the AbstractView interface, and > that the defaultView > attribute thus inherited must be the document's window object. > > It also requires that if any document that *isn't* being presented in a > browsing context implements the > DocumentWindow interface, then the defaultView must be null. > > Ian Hickson questioned whether it makes sense to require this - I am not > sure if it is good or not > myself. I don't think we can necessarily require that such documents not > implement DocumentWindow, > since in browsers they'll likely be the same kind of object as presented > documents. > > (An example of non-presented documents would be the responseXML document of > XMLHttpRequest.) > > Sorry if this point is too obscure for anyone to really care about.
I think it's fine to require any Document not being presented in a browsing context that does implement DocumentWindow to have its defaultView attribute be null. Since, as you say, it may be common for the same classes to implement presented and non-presented Documents, it is not sensible to require all Documents implement DocumentWindow. I'm not sure I understand what the problem is, and how it wouldn't make sense. That a Document implements DocumentWindow doesn't imply that it actually has a Window, does it? -- Cameron McCormack ICQ: 26955922 cam (at) mcc.id.au MSN: cam (at) mcc.id.au http://mcc.id.au/ JBR: heycam (at) jabber.org
