[whatwg] Comments on <dialog>
esprehn at chromium.org
Wed Aug 21 22:41:58 PDT 2013
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> > > It's true that for seamless iframes we could change that, but the
> > > usual use case for seamless iframes is something like blog comments,
> > > so it's not clear that there's a use case for dialogs there. If there
> > > was to be one, we could consider it. It sounds like a lot of work to
> > > do if there's not a compelling need though.
> > Hm, I was given to understand that it *was* intended that dialogs be
> > able to escape iframes through some mechanism.
> That isn't specced currently. I'm not 100% I understand how it would work
> (I guess it would need a lot of infrastructure from CSS?), but I'm happy
> to do it if there's demand and if the CSS side is figured out.
Matt and I discussed this and I don't think we need it anymore. I've also
discussed it with security folks and they're not super comfortable allowing
a nested iframe to show arbitrary content over the main frame. Specifically
this gives non-sandboxes iframes superpowers they didn't have before (so
we'd need a special new attribute) and we'd need to show info bars to
notify the user of the origin of the dialog... even then it's scary because
the content seen under the ::backdrop is from a different origin than the
More information about the whatwg