Re: [webkit-dev] Ambiguity in the style guide
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Martin Robinson mrobin...@webkit.orgwrote: Hello WebKittens, While I am loathe to take up list space with another style guide threads, Eric Seidel recently pointed out to me some ambiguities in the style guide at https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81602. Namely sections three and four of the #include Statements section. The relevant sections are: Other #include statements should be in sorted order (case sensitive, as done by the command-line sort tool or the Xcode sort selection command). Don't bother to organize them in a logical order. and Includes of system headers must come after includes of other headers. The ambiguities are: 1. Are WTF and other WebKit headers included like #include project/foo.h considered system headers? My guideline has been if the header is include with instead of , then it comes after, which is consistent with the sort order of and , so it all seems to come down to sort using ascii order. 2. Exactly what sort order is desired (e.g. capitals before lower case)? Yes (which is case sensitive, as done by the command-line sort tool) Hopefully this isn't seen as just a pedantic exercise. I'm interested in answering these questions so that I can modify check-webkit-style to catch these errors. On the other hand, if the exact nature of these rules is seen as unimportant, perhaps we could just remove that part of the guide. --Martin ___ 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
[webkit-dev] Disabling Inspector on windows
Hello webkit-dev, I am trying to disable the inspector on windows port through issuing following command - ./Tools/Scripts/build-webkit --no-inspector But I think this command line switch is not considered by the build system as I can see the code under ENABLE(INSPECTOR) is still enabled. So any idea how to disable inspector feature on windows? Thank you, Vivek ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
Re: [webkit-dev] Magic Iframe removal proposed
I'm ok with removing this feature for the reasons you described. I concur with others who think we should update the spec. I am also skeptical of state sharing features that work via newer, less tested API surface instead of latching onto existing features. That seems like a more risky strategy since it may be harder to remove such a feature without compat breakage, and it's not clear how it makes the security problems even easier. As a side note, this probably should have had more discussion time before being actually committed. If a change is worthy of webkit-dev discussion in the first place, then 5 hours between initial webkit-dev post and committing the patch is cutting it a bit short. Especially when it is outside normal working hours in the time zones where most WebKit contributors live. I don't want to harp on this too much, since I don't personally disagree with the change, but if anyone does, then they may feel that they didn't really get a fair chance to comment. Regards, Maciej On Mar 19, 2012, at 5:51 PM, Dmitry Titov wrote: Hi, There is a patch posted for removal of the 'magic iframe' feature. This is the ability to move 'live' iframe from one page to another w/o unloading it. If you have interest or ideas about this feature, please reply. HISTORY This feature was added 2 years ago (bug here). It was intended as a shared app context for complex apps that span several pages. In case when random set of pages is closed, the surviving iframe could be passed between remaining pages and serve as 'app state'. This behavior is somewhat described in HTML5 spec: Removing an iframe from a Document does not cause its browsing context to be discarded. Indeed, an iframe's browsing context can survive its original parent Document if its iframe is moved to another Document. All non-WebKit browsers don't have this and always unload the iframe when it is disconnected form the document. PROBLEMS We did have quite a few issues with this mechanism. The root of the problem seems to be that traditionally, multiple 'permissions' and 'live objects' are associated with a top-level page, or a top frame of some kind, instead of being associated with each Frame. Even HTML specifications often formulate the scope of things like permissions in terms of a page - for example, geo permissions are computed based on the origin of the page. When an iframe is transferred from one page to another, it may enter a different set of permissions while already performing operations authorized before. Association with the top-level page is also used to determine which one should show modal UI for HTTP Auth, per-origin permissions, or certificate issues for example. As a result, we had quite a few bugs popping up (and fixed). WHY REMOVE This is somewhat obscure feature of the platform. Only a few apps that we knew used the feature. Most developers, both app and webkit kind, don't even know about it. When new mechanisms/APIs are implemented, a lot of objects get associated with Page (WebView) level and they are almost 'automatically' broken in case of live iframe transfer because once old page closes, it destroys the objects with lifetimes scoped by it. This makes it somewhat dangerous and difficult to support. The benefits that it gives to the big multi-page applications do not seem to warrant the actual complexity of maintaining this feature. Other browsers never implemented the feature, siting difficult design due to various thorny security issues as well. This is potentially a compatibility issue for sites that use document.adoptNode(iframe) to ensure live transfer of an iframe from one page to another. In the future, if there will be sufficient need, it is possible to design a 'shared module' feature that would explicitly deal with various security/lifetime boundaries. Please let us know what you think. Thanks, Dmitry ___ 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
Re: [webkit-dev] Anyone using NEON code on ARM builds?
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Dean Jackson d...@apple.com wrote:
Hi,
There are three files with embedded NEON code to speed up filters:
./Source/WebCore/platform/graphics/filters/arm/FECompositeArithmeticNEON.{h,cpp}
./Source/WebCore/platform/graphics/filters/arm/FEGaussianBlurNEON.{h,cpp}
./Source/WebCore/platform/graphics/filters/arm/FELightingNEON.{h,cpp}
Are any ARM ports using this? (would require SVG and FILTERS both enabled)
If so, could you contact me? Off list is fine.
I see the code came from Felician Marton via Zoltan reviewed by Dirk (eg.
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65522) and it's been very
slightly touched for some chromium build issues.
Chrome OS has ports that use NEON and has SVG and FILTERS both enabled so
this would still be used.
Thanks,
Dean
___
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
[webkit-dev] [GTK] GtkLauncher segfault
hi, I meet this seg-fault always. somebody help me? [Build Mode] --gtk --debug --web-audio --fullscreen-api --no-svg [SVN Revision] r111378 [O/S] Linux 3.2.0-19-generic #30-Ubuntu SMP Fri Mar 16 16:27:15 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux [Log] $ ./WebKitBuild/Debug/Programs/GtkLauncher ASSERTION FAILED: m_verifier.isSafeToUse() ../../Source/JavaScriptCore/wtf/RefCounted.h(53) : void WTF::RefCountedBase::ref() 1 0x7f625b8ac351 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0xc27351) [0x7f625b8ac351] 2 0x7f625b8e6a20 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0xc61a20) [0x7f625b8e6a20] 3 0x7f625c0bd2ee /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0x14382ee) [0x7f625c0bd2ee] 4 0x7f625c2223d7 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0x159d3d7) [0x7f625c2223d7] 5 0x7f625c22abb3 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0x15a5bb3) [0x7f625c22abb3] 6 0x7f625c22a848 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0x15a5848) [0x7f625c22a848] 7 0x7f625c22a5e2 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0x15a55e2) [0x7f625c22a5e2] 8 0x7f625c1eacb8 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0x1565cb8) [0x7f625c1eacb8] 9 0x7f625c194174 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0x150f174) [0x7f625c194174] 10 0x7f625c194952 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0x150f952) [0x7f625c194952] 11 0x7f625c90051e /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0x1c7b51e) [0x7f625c90051e] 12 0x7f625b8cd858 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0xc48858) [0x7f625b8cd858] 13 0x7f625b8cda96 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(webkit_favicon_database_try_get_favicon_pixbuf+0x13f) [0x7f625b8cda96] 14 0x7f625b8fdfad /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(webkit_web_view_try_get_favicon_pixbuf+0xc8) [0x7f625b8fdfad] 15 0x4038ad ./WebKitBuild/Debug/Programs/GtkLauncher() [0x4038ad] 16 0x7f6259e93a24 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Dependencies/Root/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0(g_closure_invoke+0x154) [0x7f6259e93a24] 17 0x7f6259ea3775 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Dependencies/Root/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0(+0x1e775) [0x7f6259ea3775] 18 0x7f6259eab14b /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Dependencies/Root/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0(g_signal_emit_valist+0x60b) [0x7f6259eab14b] 19 0x7f6259eab312 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Dependencies/Root/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0(g_signal_emit+0x82) [0x7f6259eab312] 20 0x7f625b8fe2d3 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(webkitWebViewIconLoaded+0x73) [0x7f625b8fe2d3] 21 0x7f6259e93a24 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Dependencies/Root/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0(g_closure_invoke+0x154) [0x7f6259e93a24] 22 0x7f6259ea3775 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Dependencies/Root/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0(+0x1e775) [0x7f6259ea3775] 23 0x7f6259eab14b /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Dependencies/Root/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0(g_signal_emit_valist+0x60b) [0x7f6259eab14b] 24 0x7f6259eab824 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Dependencies/Root/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0(g_signal_emit_by_name+0x504) [0x7f6259eab824] 25 0x7f625b8ced90 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0xc49d90) [0x7f625b8ced90] 26 0x7f625c0ae3a0 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0x14293a0) [0x7f625c0ae3a0] 27 0x7f625c0ad0da /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0(+0x14280da) [0x7f625c0ad0da] 28 0x7f6259021d35 /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libjavascriptcoregtk-3.0.so.0(_ZN3WTF31dispatchFunctionsFromMainThreadEv+0x10e) [0x7f6259021d35] 29 0x7f6259021aef /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Debug/.libs/libjavascriptcoregtk-3.0.so.0(+0x66aaef) [0x7f6259021aef] 30 0x7f6259bb053b /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Dependencies/Root/lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0(+0x4753b) [0x7f6259bb053b] 31 0x7f6259baf8fa /o/WebKit/WebKitBuild/Dependencies/Root/lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0(g_main_context_dispatch+0x16a) [0x7f6259baf8fa] ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
Re: [webkit-dev] [GTK] GtkLauncher segfault
En 20/03/12 15:42, 박상호 escribiu: hi, I meet this seg-fault always. somebody help me? That's an already known bug in WebKit, the code hits an ASSERT whenever you try to convert icon image data to port specific image data. See https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=67582 for more details. If you still want to use the debug version of GtkLauncher you can workaround the assert just by commenting the whole iconLoadedCb() function in Tools/GtkLauncher/main.c (by doing that you won't get favicons in the url entry). BR ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
Re: [webkit-dev] Magic Iframe removal proposed
Yeah, normally I would have waited longer, but the patch fixed a crash in WebKit2 that was making the bots red. There was a discussion in another bug (sorry, don't have the link handy) where folks graciously held off fixing the crash, and I didn't want them to wait any longer than necessary. Adam On Mar 20, 2012 1:31 AM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote: I'm ok with removing this feature for the reasons you described. I concur with others who think we should update the spec. I am also skeptical of state sharing features that work via newer, less tested API surface instead of latching onto existing features. That seems like a more risky strategy since it may be harder to remove such a feature without compat breakage, and it's not clear how it makes the security problems even easier. As a side note, this probably should have had more discussion time before being actually committed. If a change is worthy of webkit-dev discussion in the first place, then 5 hours between initial webkit-dev post and committing the patch is cutting it a bit short. Especially when it is outside normal working hours in the time zones where most WebKit contributors live. I don't want to harp on this too much, since I don't personally disagree with the change, but if anyone does, then they may feel that they didn't really get a fair chance to comment. Regards, Maciej On Mar 19, 2012, at 5:51 PM, Dmitry Titov wrote: Hi, There is a patch posted https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81590for removal of the 'magic iframe' feature. This is the ability to move 'live' iframe from one page to another w/o unloading it. If you have interest or ideas about this feature, please reply. HISTORY This feature was added 2 years ago (bug herehttps://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32848). It was intended as a shared app context for complex apps that span several pages. In case when random set of pages is closed, the surviving iframe could be passed between remaining pages and serve as 'app state'. This behavior is somewhat described in HTML5 spechttp://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/the-iframe-element.html#the-iframe-element: Removing an iframe from a Document does not cause its browsing context to be discarded. Indeed, an iframe's browsing context can survive its original parent Document if its iframe is moved to another Document. All non-WebKit browsers don't have this and always unload the iframe when it is disconnected form the document. PROBLEMS We did have quite a few issues with this mechanism. The root of the problem seems to be that traditionally, multiple 'permissions' and 'live objects' are associated with a top-level page, or a top frame of some kind, instead of being associated with each Frame. Even HTML specifications often formulate the scope of things like permissions in terms of a page - for example, geo permissions are computed based on the origin of the page. When an iframe is transferred from one page to another, it may enter a different set of permissions while already performing operations authorized before. Association with the top-level page is also used to determine which one should show modal UI for HTTP Auth, per-origin permissions, or certificate issues for example. As a result, we had quite a few bugs popping up (and fixed). WHY REMOVE This is somewhat obscure feature of the platform. Only a few apps that we knew used the feature. Most developers, both app and webkit kind, don't even know about it. When new mechanisms/APIs are implemented, a lot of objects get associated with Page (WebView) level and they are almost 'automatically' broken in case of live iframe transfer because once old page closes, it destroys the objects with lifetimes scoped by it. This makes it somewhat dangerous and difficult to support. The benefits that it gives to the big multi-page applications do not seem to warrant the actual complexity of maintaining this feature. Other browsers never implemented the feature, siting difficult design due to various thorny security issues as well. This is potentially a compatibility issue for sites that use document.adoptNode(iframe) to ensure live transfer of an iframe from one page to another. In the future, if there will be sufficient need, it is possible to design a 'shared module' feature that would explicitly deal with various security/lifetime boundaries. Please let us know what you think. Thanks, Dmitry ___ 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 ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
Re: [webkit-dev] Anyone using NEON code on ARM builds?
Hi Jonathan,
On 21/03/2012, at 12:56 AM, Jonathan Kliegman wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Dean Jackson d...@apple.com wrote:
Hi,
There are three files with embedded NEON code to speed up filters:
./Source/WebCore/platform/graphics/filters/arm/FECompositeArithmeticNEON.{h,cpp}
./Source/WebCore/platform/graphics/filters/arm/FEGaussianBlurNEON.{h,cpp}
./Source/WebCore/platform/graphics/filters/arm/FELightingNEON.{h,cpp}
Are any ARM ports using this? (would require SVG and FILTERS both enabled) If
so, could you contact me? Off list is fine.
I see the code came from Felician Marton via Zoltan reviewed by Dirk (eg.
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65522) and it's been very slightly
touched for some chromium build issues.
Chrome OS has ports that use NEON and has SVG and FILTERS both enabled so
this would still be used.
Excellent!
Zoltan and I have been chatting offline a bit. I was testing compilation on
Darwin/iOS ARM and running into a few issues. The first was about alignment
errors from the compiler. The second was some linking issues, for example:
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81568
Is there someone (you?) on the Chrome team I should CC on any bugs raises?
Dean
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
[webkit-dev] 2012 WebKit Contributors' meeting
Apple will once again be hosting a WebKit Contributors Meeting. It will be held at the Cypress Hotel in Cupertino, CA on April 19 and 20. This meeting is for contributors to the WebKit Open Source Project. As with the meeting last year, this event will have an unconference-like format, allowing plenty of time for impromptu sessions/discussions and hacking. The meeting will be free of charge. All WebKit contributors are encouraged to attend. However, space is limited, so registrations will be accepted on a first-come, first-served basis. Please register for the conference using the form at https://www.webkit.org/meeting/ by April 11. When you register, you will automatically be subscribed to webkit-meet...@lists.webkit.org, which will be used for general discussion and to communicate additional information about the meeting. If you have any questions about the meeting, or about whether this meeting is appropriate for you to attend, you may email me at wei...@apple.com. We hope to see you there! Thanks, Sam Weinig ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
Re: [webkit-dev] Git/SVN is slow
On Mar 16, 2012, at 9:54 AM, William Siegrist wsiegr...@apple.com wrote: On Mar 16, 2012, at 9:26 AM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote: As I stated on this thread, I was getting reasonable download speed from svn and others at home (Comcast business in SF). You may want to compare my traceroute to others and see if there's a difference. I have been comparing them and do not see a pattern. I've gotten reports of people both near and far having both fast and slow downloads, and the problem has been reported against more than 1 service and more than 1 piece of hardware. I'm seeing many fewer clients connected to git and svn. I'm hoping that means the bandwidth problem went away and the backlog has cleared? Is anyone still having problems with a slow connection? -Bill ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
Re: [webkit-dev] Moving WTF out of JavaScriptCore
We're ready to complete the move. https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80911 should land later this evening, moving JavaScriptCore/wtf/Platform.h to Source/WTF/Platform.h Tomorrow (Weds) I will move a .cpp file in the same way. Thursday, I will move all the rest of the WTF files. I will also update svn-apply so that in-flight patches should transparently patch the right files post-move. Let me know if you have questions or concerns. -eric On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Eric Seidel e...@webkit.org wrote: I'm going to push off the move, probably until next week. Thank you for the Qt patch! I'll post a patch for Mark and we can discuss further from there. -eric On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Osztrogonac Csaba o...@inf.u-szeged.hu wrote: Hi, I uploaded the necessary buildfix for Qt to the bugzilla: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=79783 . Please be careful with moving JavaScriptCore/wtf to WTF, because we need zillion trivial fixes for case sensitive file systems. (~4000 files!!!) I made it locally to be able prepare the Qt buildfix and I had to replace all wtf to WTF includes everywhere. (*.cpp, *.h, *.y, *.py, *.pl, *.pm, ...) The patch is huge, ~2Mb and ~4000 files are affected. I suggest landing the following patches separately: - Moving Sources/JavaScriptCore/wtf -- Sources/WTF - s/wtf/WTF/g patch :) - platform buildfixes Please let me know if you have the new date for landing these patches. I would be happier with a more CET timezone friendly timing. - 08:00-00:00 in CET. br, Ossy Eric Seidel írta: We've been talking about moving WTF out of JavaScriptCore for a long time. We believe we're nearly there. https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75673 This will mean that WTF will be built as a separate static library on all ports. The plan is to do this move all in one piece, after work hours PST, when the tree is least active. It won't be the most beautiful transition (as we're likely to break at least one port in the process), but we'll try not to make too much of a mess. We believe all the ports are ready for the move, except AppleWin: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75897 Once AppleWin is ready we'll schedule a date for the transition and announce it one this thread. Thanks! -eric ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
Re: [webkit-dev] Magic Iframe removal proposed
I actually do know of at least one WebKit-only application under development at Google that may be using this feature (I recently suggested it to them). Oh well. - a On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 8:07 AM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote: Yeah, normally I would have waited longer, but the patch fixed a crash in WebKit2 that was making the bots red. There was a discussion in another bug (sorry, don't have the link handy) where folks graciously held off fixing the crash, and I didn't want them to wait any longer than necessary. Adam On Mar 20, 2012 1:31 AM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote: I'm ok with removing this feature for the reasons you described. I concur with others who think we should update the spec. I am also skeptical of state sharing features that work via newer, less tested API surface instead of latching onto existing features. That seems like a more risky strategy since it may be harder to remove such a feature without compat breakage, and it's not clear how it makes the security problems even easier. As a side note, this probably should have had more discussion time before being actually committed. If a change is worthy of webkit-dev discussion in the first place, then 5 hours between initial webkit-dev post and committing the patch is cutting it a bit short. Especially when it is outside normal working hours in the time zones where most WebKit contributors live. I don't want to harp on this too much, since I don't personally disagree with the change, but if anyone does, then they may feel that they didn't really get a fair chance to comment. Regards, Maciej On Mar 19, 2012, at 5:51 PM, Dmitry Titov wrote: Hi, There is a patch posted for removal of the 'magic iframe' feature. This is the ability to move 'live' iframe from one page to another w/o unloading it. If you have interest or ideas about this feature, please reply. HISTORY This feature was added 2 years ago (bug here). It was intended as a shared app context for complex apps that span several pages. In case when random set of pages is closed, the surviving iframe could be passed between remaining pages and serve as 'app state'. This behavior is somewhat described in HTML5 spec: Removing an iframe from a Document does not cause its browsing context to be discarded. Indeed, an iframe's browsing context can survive its original parent Document if its iframe is moved to another Document. All non-WebKit browsers don't have this and always unload the iframe when it is disconnected form the document. PROBLEMS We did have quite a few issues with this mechanism. The root of the problem seems to be that traditionally, multiple 'permissions' and 'live objects' are associated with a top-level page, or a top frame of some kind, instead of being associated with each Frame. Even HTML specifications often formulate the scope of things like permissions in terms of a page - for example, geo permissions are computed based on the origin of the page. When an iframe is transferred from one page to another, it may enter a different set of permissions while already performing operations authorized before. Association with the top-level page is also used to determine which one should show modal UI for HTTP Auth, per-origin permissions, or certificate issues for example. As a result, we had quite a few bugs popping up (and fixed). WHY REMOVE This is somewhat obscure feature of the platform. Only a few apps that we knew used the feature. Most developers, both app and webkit kind, don't even know about it. When new mechanisms/APIs are implemented, a lot of objects get associated with Page (WebView) level and they are almost 'automatically' broken in case of live iframe transfer because once old page closes, it destroys the objects with lifetimes scoped by it. This makes it somewhat dangerous and difficult to support. The benefits that it gives to the big multi-page applications do not seem to warrant the actual complexity of maintaining this feature. Other browsers never implemented the feature, siting difficult design due to various thorny security issues as well. This is potentially a compatibility issue for sites that use document.adoptNode(iframe) to ensure live transfer of an iframe from one page to another. In the future, if there will be sufficient need, it is possible to design a 'shared module' feature that would explicitly deal with various security/lifetime boundaries. Please let us know what you think. Thanks, Dmitry ___ 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 ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
