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

Jump to bottom

Update interfaces/html.idl #23943

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Update interfaces/html.idl #23943

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

autofoolip
Copy link
Contributor

@autofoolip autofoolip commented Jun 3, 2020 •
edited

This PR was automatically created by a bot.

Before merging, please check that any tests that depend on the updated IDL files still work.

If additional changes are needed, please manually create another PR based on this one.

See the README for how the IDL files in this directory are used.

Source: https://github.com/tidoust/reffy-reports/blob/d920ea7/ed/idl/html.idl
Build: https://travis-ci.org/tidoust/reffy-reports/builds/720023372

@stephenmcgruer
Copy link
Contributor

stephenmcgruer commented Jun 3, 2020 •
edited

@foolip I was surprised to find that both Worker and SharedWorker are empty in the html/dom idlharness file; do you know if are they tested elsewhere?

      Worker: [],
      SharedWorker: [],

@foolip
Copy link
Member

foolip commented Jun 3, 2020

@stephenmcgruer I suspect the original expectations was that they'd be tested in workers/. That split was undone in #18690, and it looks like they weren't tested there, so it's just an oversight.

@autofoolip autofoolip force-pushed the reffy-reports/html branch 2 times, most recently from 3995644 to 0292491 Compare June 9, 2020 00:40
@autofoolip autofoolip force-pushed the reffy-reports/html branch 2 times, most recently from fb2769f to 73cd6be Compare June 29, 2020 12:48
@autofoolip autofoolip force-pushed the reffy-reports/html branch 2 times, most recently from 0137ac2 to 060dc74 Compare July 8, 2020 18:41
@foolip
Copy link
Member

foolip commented Jul 16, 2020

This introduced new failures because isSecureContext is added.

That is the only IDL defined by https://w3c.github.io/webappsec-secure-contexts/ so the end result should be to remove those tests. It would be nice to not have failures in the interim though.

@annevk @domenic I see this change came from whatwg/html#5659 but is there also a PR somewhere to update https://w3c.github.io/webappsec-secure-contexts/? It looks like not, but should there be?

@domenic
Copy link
Member

domenic commented Jul 16, 2020

As per that PR,

I was planning to send a PR to update the Secure Context spec to point to this (while preserving existing IDs), but given how many open PRs on it have been sitting with no response, I'm feeling discouraged. (And I'd want to wait for at least w3c/webappsec-secure-contexts#76 to land before doing mine.) /cc @mikewest

@autofoolip autofoolip force-pushed the reffy-reports/html branch 2 times, most recently from 37dffec to b1dd7a8 Compare August 13, 2020 18:42
foolip added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 1, 2020
@foolip
Update interfaces/html.idl and remove interfaces/secure-contexts.idl
e96ccbd 
isSecureContext is now defined in HTML, so the Secure Contexts IDL and
test can be removed.

Closes #23943.
@foolip foolip mentioned this pull request Sep 1, 2020
Merged
stephenmcgruer pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 1, 2020
@foolip
Update interfaces/html.idl and remove interfaces/secure-contexts.idl (#…
03807c2 
…25320)

isSecureContext is now defined in HTML, so the Secure Contexts IDL and
test can be removed.

Closes #23943.
@autofoolip autofoolip deleted the reffy-reports/html branch September 1, 2020 18:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@foolip foolip Awaiting requested review from foolip

@stephenmcgruer stephenmcgruer Awaiting requested review from stephenmcgruer

Assignees

@foolip foolip

Labels
interfaces
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
5 participants
@autofoolip @stephenmcgruer @foolip @domenic @wpt-pr-bot