Skip to content

Introduce browsing context groups#4350

Merged
annevk merged 6 commits intomasterfrom
annevk/bcgs
Feb 22, 2019
Merged

Introduce browsing context groups#4350
annevk merged 6 commits intomasterfrom
annevk/bcgs

Conversation

@annevk
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@annevk annevk commented Feb 8, 2019

The grouping concepts unit of related browsing contexts and unit of similar-origin browsing contexts were not accurate, due to browsing contexts being able to hold a sequence of (potentially cross-site) documents.

Fixes #4198.


/browsers.html ( diff )
/infrastructure.html ( diff )
/webappapis.html ( diff )
/window-object.html ( diff )

@annevk
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

annevk commented Feb 8, 2019

(This does not fix all issues identified in #4198, but it does introduce the necessary infrastructure to fix them and should be strictly better than the status quo. In particular, we will still need to define agent allocation. I'd suggest we file a follow-up for that.)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@domenic domenic left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess all the groundwork has made this a nicely self-contained change; cool. All my feedback seems to be "editorial", but I am fairly concerned about the clarity implications of the remove/discard distinction and the potential null-ness of group, so looking forward to your answers there.

Comment thread source
Comment thread source Outdated
Comment thread source Outdated
Comment thread source Outdated
Comment thread source Outdated
Comment thread source
Comment thread source
Comment thread source Outdated
Comment thread source
Comment thread source
Comment thread source
Comment thread source Outdated
Comment thread source Outdated
Comment thread source
Comment thread source
@annevk
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

annevk commented Feb 18, 2019

This is ready for another/final look. This should also remove "and the user agent itself has a strong reference to its top-level browsing contexts" as that's now more clearly defined, but waiting for #4368 to land first to make rebasing easier and less likely to introduce mistakes.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@domenic domenic left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Will give this the approve bit, because I don't want to block over another weekend. But, I'd like to do one more review if possible and our timelines line up, both with regard to my latest question, and to allow you to remove the text you mention now that #4368 has landed.

Comment thread source
<span>browsing context</span> is <span data-x="a browsing context is
discarded">discarded</span>. <a href="https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/4361">Issue
#4361</a> sketches a setup that could improve this situation.</p>
</li>
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there a reason we don't just return false if either group is null?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@annevk annevk Feb 22, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Well, the responsible browsing context might also be null, right? But in general, they need to remain in the group they were in when they were created. So it seems better to explicitly not deal with something becoming null until we've addressed putting them in the appropriate groups better at which point it'll all follow from first principles.

The grouping concepts unit of related browsing contexts and unit of similar-origin browsing contexts were not accurate, due to browsing contexts being able to hold a sequence of (potentially cross-site) documents.

Fixes #4198.
@annevk annevk requested a review from domenic February 22, 2019 13:49
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@domenic domenic left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM again. I'm content with the XXX because as we discovered in https://freenode.logbot.info/whatwg/20190222#c2016315, discarded BCs are fairly complicated, and the right answer is not obvious. I look forward to fixing that.

@annevk annevk merged commit 0e6d3b5 into master Feb 22, 2019
@annevk annevk deleted the annevk/bcgs branch February 22, 2019 16:17
clelland added a commit to w3c/longtasks that referenced this pull request May 24, 2024
* "Unit of related browsing contexts" was removed from the HTML spec in 2019 (whatwg/html#4350)

* "Report task end time" moved to LONG-ANIMATION-FRAMES and has been renamed "Record task end time"
clelland added a commit to w3c/longtasks that referenced this pull request May 24, 2024
* "Unit of related browsing contexts" was removed from the HTML spec in 2019 (whatwg/html#4350)

* "Report task end time" moved to LONG-ANIMATION-FRAMES and has been renamed "Record task end time"

Closes: #108
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants