WebKit Bugzilla
New
Browse
Log In
×
Sign in with GitHub
or
Remember my login
Create Account
·
Forgot Password
Forgotten password account recovery
RESOLVED WONTFIX
61496
[EFL] Add javascript_can_open_window API
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61496
Summary
[EFL] Add javascript_can_open_window API
Gyuyoung Kim
Reported
2011-05-25 19:26:58 PDT
Sometime user doesn't want to open new window for ad popup or unnecessary notification. So, I think it is better to add new API for that.
Attachments
Patch
(3.77 KB, patch)
2011-05-25 19:30 PDT
,
Gyuyoung Kim
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Patch
(3.82 KB, patch)
2011-05-25 19:35 PDT
,
Gyuyoung Kim
tonikitoo
: review+
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Patch
(3.83 KB, patch)
2011-05-25 21:07 PDT
,
Gyuyoung Kim
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Show Obsolete
(2)
View All
Add attachment
proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Gyuyoung Kim
Comment 1
2011-05-25 19:30:12 PDT
Created
attachment 94903
[details]
Patch
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 2
2011-05-25 19:31:55 PDT
Attachment 94903
[details]
did not pass style-queue: Failed to run "['Tools/Scripts/check-webkit-style', '--diff-files', u'Source/WebKit/efl/ChangeLog', u'Source/Web..." exit_code: 1 Source/WebKit/efl/ChangeLog:1: ChangeLog entry has no bug number [changelog/bugnumber] [5] Total errors found: 1 in 3 files If any of these errors are false positives, please file a bug against check-webkit-style.
Gyuyoung Kim
Comment 3
2011-05-25 19:35:46 PDT
Created
attachment 94904
[details]
Patch
Antonio Gomes
Comment 4
2011-05-25 20:59:37 PDT
Comment on
attachment 94904
[details]
Patch View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=94904&action=review
Leandro for final cq+
> Source/WebKit/efl/ewk/ewk_view.cpp:2986 > + * Sets the javascript can open new window.
It reads a bit strange.
Antonio Gomes
Comment 5
2011-05-25 21:00:05 PDT
(In reply to
comment #4
)
> (From update of
attachment 94904
[details]
) > View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=94904&action=review
> > Leandro for final cq+ > > > Source/WebKit/efl/ewk/ewk_view.cpp:2986 > > + * Sets the javascript can open new window. > > It reads a bit strange.
Err Demarchi, even ...
Gyuyoung Kim
Comment 6
2011-05-25 21:07:21 PDT
Created
attachment 94912
[details]
Patch I modify the comment.
Lucas De Marchi
Comment 7
2011-05-25 21:58:10 PDT
Comment on
attachment 94912
[details]
Patch Humn... I'm almost sure I implemented this ~ 1 year ago. Could you check if what you need is not what was done in
r61706
? I remember I was sending a signal to browser which could allow or deny the creation of a new window.
Gyuyoung Kim
Comment 8
2011-05-25 22:16:33 PDT
(In reply to
comment #7
)
> (From update of
attachment 94912
[details]
) > Humn... I'm almost sure I implemented this ~ 1 year ago. Could you check if what you need is not what was done in
r61706
? I remember I was sending a signal to browser which could allow or deny the creation of a new window.
I think this patch is a little different from
r61706
. This patch prohibits that new window creation signal by javascript is not sent to ewk layer. But, it seems
r61706
has similar feature. If this patch is landed, I think there is no problem. But, this patch is a little duplicate with
r61706
. Does you think this patch doesn't need to land ?
Lucas De Marchi
Comment 9
2011-05-26 05:25:29 PDT
(In reply to
comment #8
)
> (In reply to
comment #7
) > > (From update of
attachment 94912
[details]
[details]) > > Humn... I'm almost sure I implemented this ~ 1 year ago. Could you check if what you need is not what was done in
r61706
? I remember I was sending a signal to browser which could allow or deny the creation of a new window. > > I think this patch is a little different from
r61706
. This patch prohibits that new window creation signal by javascript is not sent to ewk layer. But, it seems
r61706
has similar feature. >
Is the net effect the same? I.e.: is blocking the signal any better than waiting for browser to allow or deny the window creation?
> If this patch is landed, I think there is no problem. But, this patch is a little duplicate with
r61706
. > > Does you think this patch doesn't need to land ?
I think we shouldn't have duplicate features, but I'm ok if there's a reason to block the signal instead of waiting for the signal. I remember that the signal treats the case with 'target="_blank"' too, so it seems to support more use cases. Is there any use case that your approach supports that is not supported by the current implementation?
Gyuyoung Kim
Comment 10
2011-06-09 17:06:23 PDT
I can't find better pros than current implementation.
Note
You need to
log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Top of Page
Format For Printing
XML
Clone This Bug