Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Force a browsing context group swap when navigating to and from file: URLs #10842

Open
annevk opened this issue Dec 10, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Comments

@annevk
Copy link
Member

annevk commented Dec 10, 2024

And perhaps even generalize this to all non-HTTP(S) URLs.

This came up in #10818 but was reasonably asked to be handled separately as the compatibility impact is unclear and that should not stop an otherwise good clarification.

domenic added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 12, 2024
In "the rules for choosing a navigable," the method to find an existing navigable by name is vague. This updates the definition to accurately reflect what the major implementations do. There are some differences between implementations, so there remains in the spec some optional/implementation-defined behavior, but it's much narrower. In particular, note that lookups are now explicitly scoped to browsing context groups. The previous language in the named lookup about "the user agent determines that the two browsing contexts are related enough" is now no longer a part of the lookup logic, but a consequence of the BCG swap decisions.

In "obtain a browsing context to use for a navigation response," the existing spec only mentions COOP enforcement as a reason to do a browsing context group swap. Some implementations perform a swap for additional security and performance reasons. This is now reflected in the spec.

For context, see:

* #313
* #4198 (comment)
* #5350

This closes #313, but we have opened the following issues to track the remaining implementation-defined interop gaps: #6356, #10842, #10848, #10849, #10850.

Co-authored-by: Domenic Denicola <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant