[Bug 11665] New: Please enter your feedback, carefully indicating the title of the section for which you are submitting feedback, quoting the text that's wrong today if appropriate. If you're sugges

2011-01-04 Thread bugzilla
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11665

   Summary: Please enter your feedback, carefully indicating the
title of the section for which you are submitting
feedback, quoting the text that's wrong today if
appropriate. If you're suggesting a new feature, it's
really important to say what the problem you're t
   Product: WebAppsWG
   Version: unspecified
  Platform: Other
   URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#top
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: Web Messaging (editor: Ian Hickson)
AssignedTo: i...@hixie.ch
ReportedBy: contribu...@whatwg.org
 QAContact: member-webapi-...@w3.org
CC: m...@w3.org, public-webapps@w3.org


Specification: http://dev.w3.org/html5/postmsg/
Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete.html#top

Comment:
Please enter your feedback, carefully indicating the title of the section for
which you are submitting feedback, quoting the text that's wrong today if
appropriate. If you're suggesting a new feature, it's really important to say
what the problem you're trying to solve is. That's more important than the
solution, in fact.

Posted from: 128.29.43.1

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.



Peepo.com review request, deadline 6 Jan

2011-01-04 Thread jonathan chetwynd
Peepo.com review request, deadline 6 Jan

http://www.peepo.com

Whilst recognising the extremely busy workloads borne by members,

I would appreciate feedback in terms of:

Accessibility,

Fitness for purpose,

Webappiness,

Code efficiency,

Missing features or content,

and any comments of your choice.

regards

Jonathan Chetwynd
peepo.com is temporarily stable.

see: gaming.mozillalabs.com





Re: clipboard events

2011-01-04 Thread Paul Libbrecht
Oh boy... indeed it's a crab's nest!

I think it's rather a good idea to whitelist and blacklist and get it richer as 
the browser makers' awareness grows into a catalog of tags, attributes, and 
properties that need to be sanitized out or may be kept.

I'd rather suggest to start smallishly so that the feature itself is kept (and 
not "disabled for security reasons by upgrade beta+0.003"; I believe this is 
what happened to MSIE's Clipboard APIs) and let it grow as the catalog grows.

paul


On 4 janv. 2011, at 03:01, Robert O'Callahan wrote:

> I specifically avoided the issue of whether to whitelist or blacklist :-).
> 
> Whitelisting is preferably for security, but it turns that the obvious 
> whitelists break things. For example, some HTML editors expect to be able to 
> get pasted HTML from Microsoft Word containing -mso styles, which they will 
> then process into something else. So a CSS whitelist would need to include at 
> least some -mso stuff, and who knows what else


On 4 janv. 2011, at 06:51, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> Probably not. One problem is that if some implementation supports 
> CSS-triggered scripts via some CSS extension, then ideally other 
> implementations would ensure that those extensions are stripped. E.g. Opera 
> doesn't support IE's expression() CSS extension, but if an Opera user pastes 
> untrusted HTML into a Web site, IE users may become vulnerable.
> Maybe your spec should just mention that something needs to be done here and 
> move on. This is a rather tough issue and it wouldn't be fair to make you 
> responsible for solving it :-).