[whatwg] scrdoc and session history don't play along in the spec
Boris Zbarsky
bzbarsky at MIT.EDU
Fri Jul 12 13:09:32 PDT 2013
On 7/12/13 3:39 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> That wasn't the intent. I've tried to clarify it.
Hmm. It might help to make it clearer in
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/history.html#navigate
that "new resource" does not mean "URL". Maybe have some explicit thing
that represents the resource being navigated to (which might, for
example, consist of a (url, srcdoc data) pair or something along those
lines)?
> You know, it's disheartening to work on something and have you continually
> insult it like this. Please stick to positive feedback, which you are
> quite good at providing, and avoid the non-constructive negative commentary.
I'm sorry, this certainly wasn't meant to be an insult! I understand
the problems involved in trying to specify this, starting with the fact
that the code that does navigation in browsers is more or less uniformly
insane.
That said, I've had feedback from multiple engineers who were trying to
understand this section of the spec because they wanted to change
something in Gecko and just gave up because they couldn't figure out
where to even start start reading it and any time they thought they
understood it they discovered more "come from" type things that meant
their understanding was incorrect.
One fundamental problem is that a typical engineer working on something
like about:srcdoc doesn't read the entire navigation part spec from the
top down. And if they try to, they get lost partway through. Engineers
consistently end up with bugs in their implementations when they try to
follow this part of the spec. It doesn't help that navigation as
actually implemented in at least Gecko looks nothing like the setup in
the spec (e.g. the fact that history traversal in the spec reenters
itself has no analogue in Gecko), and mapping between two different
navigation models is ... very hard.
I realize this is still non-constructive. Believe me, if I had
constructive suggestions for how to make this part of the spec more
understandable I would be bringing them up! I keep trying to figure out
a better way to organize this stuff and failing. Maybe it's just a lost
cause because of all the complexity. :(
-Boris
More information about the whatwg
mailing list