Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Spec partition nonce functionality #149
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Spec partition nonce functionality #149
Changes from 4 commits
eed0df0
9b9be96
2969e29
1f35fdb
99b53f9
a48e6f2
ef943e0
94dc0ec
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
credentialless => isCredentialless
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can't really change this, since it corresponds to an exposed IDL attribute.
https://wicg.github.io/anonymous-iframe/#spec-window-attribute
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well where are you getting
|credentialless|
from then? It's not just a global variable is it?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's a local variable, but I meant it would be weird to call it something else when it corresponds exactly to this preexisting field, and the same name is used throughout the Iframe credentialless spec
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Where is this local variable defined? Sorry I don't think I'm getting it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, I misread this. I didn't mean to name the variable
isCredentialless
above in the declaration. The iframe credentialless spec refers to this kind of variable ascredentialless
throughout, so it would be inconsistent naming to useisCredentialless
here. Changed the declaration back tocredentialless
to match.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So @VergeA what's the verdict here? Should we have a "credentialless" variable in the algorithm declaration? Does everything look good enough here to resolve?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, I believe the "credentialless" variable needs to be declared. Reasoning:
Without it, we don't know whether the partition nonce should come from the credentialless iframe or the fenced frame.
Given that the algorithm here declares |credentialless| as a local variable, and the below algorithms invoke it correctly, this seems fine to me to resolve.
(going to resolve all the other comments before I re-request a review, just need to get this one out of my brain.)