[webkit-dev] webkitPostMessage

[Adam Barth]

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Levin <levin at google.com> wrote:
> wrt #1, I believe that postMessage implements what is in the spec and
> webkitPostMessage additional has support for ArrayBuffers which wasn't in
> the postMessage spec yet but was going to be added. If the behaviors from
> webkitPostMessage were added to postMessage, then it coudl be removed.

It looks like the spec has been updated to include support for ArrayBuffers:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#dom-window-postmessage

> wrt #2, I don't know. I think it will break some tests if you go with the
> spec behavior, but if you wish to try this, I don't know of any big reason
> not to.

Ok, I'll make these changes in separate patches in case either causes
trouble down the line.

Thanks!
Adam


> On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Adam Barth <abarth at webkit.org> wrote:
>>
>> I read <https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/DeprecatingFeatures>, but I'm
>> still unsure how to proceed with removing webkitPostMessage and
>> aligning postMessage with the spec.  No one responded to my earlier
>> message, so I'm inclined to just post a patch.
>>
>> Many thanks,
>> Adam
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Adam Barth <abarth at webkit.org> wrote:
>> > I'm trying to understand why we have both DOMWindow.webkitPostMessage
>> > and DOMWindow.postMessage.  I'm also trying to understand the
>> > following comment in {JS,V8}DOMWindowCustom.cpp:
>> >
>> >    // This function has variable arguments and can be:
>> >    // Per current spec:
>> >    //   postMessage(message, targetOrigin)
>> >    //   postMessage(message, targetOrigin, {sequence of transferrables})
>> >    // Legacy non-standard implementations in webkit allowed:
>> >    //   postMessage(message, {sequence of transferrables},
>> > targetOrigin);
>> >
>> > Specifically:
>> >
>> > 1) Can we remove webkitPostMessage?  If we can't remove it now, is
>> > there a time in the future at which we can remove it?
>> >
>> > 2) Can we adopt the behavior in the specification (and drop the
>> > non-standard behavior)?  If not, should we change the specification to
>> > match our behavior?
>> >
>> > Many thanks,
>> > Adam
>> _______________________________________________
>> webkit-dev mailing list
>> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
>> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
>
>