[whatwg] Should window.name be [Replaceable]?

[Ian Hickson]

On Sun, 4 Jul 2010, Joseph Pecoraro wrote:
>
> Should window.name be [Replaceable]?

If there are pages that depend on it being replaceable, or if browsers 
have reliably implemented it that way, then yes.

> https://bug-19967-attachments.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=60491
>
> Browser Results:
>
>     - Safari 5 / WebKit Nightly and Chrome 5
>       NOT [Replaceable], printing "string,string,string"
>
>     - Firefox 3.6.3 / 3.7a5 and Opera 10.5.3 / 10.6
>       [Replaceable], printing  "string,string,number"
>
>     - I didn't have access to IE to test. I'd appreciate
>       someone giving it a shot to see how they act.

I am told IE says "string,string,string" (thanks to Tab and Aryeh).

This argues that we should not make it replaceable unless it breaks pages.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'