New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 741071 link

Starred by 6 users
Status: WontFix
Owner:
timothygu@chromium.org
Closed: Sep 5
Cc:
dvoytenko@google.com
domenic@chromium.org
iclell...@chromium.org
timothygu@chromium.org
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 3
Type: Bug

Blocking:
issue 866274


Participants' hotlists:
document.open


Sign in to add a comment

document.write allows writing to a non-active document

Project Member Reported by rbyers@chromium.org, Jul 11 2017 
Chrome Version: 61.0.3141.7

What steps will reproduce the problem?
(1) https://codepen.io/rbyers/pen/owJxgB

What is the expected result?
Per-spec the resulting document should still be empty (see https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=867102).

What happens instead?
Get "success"

Screenshots showing that only Firefox matches the spec in this regard today: https://www.browserstack.com/screenshots/f08a8f86598cd69ca761c9c5a2daf64987db23e6

Spec debate: https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/2827

Given that 3 browsers already match and there's a reason to want to rely on this for streaming parsing, perhaps we should just be landing web-platform-test and spec changes to match reality.  dvoytenko@ says AMP relies on this today for streaming shadow DOM.  We could add a UseCounter to try to quantify the compat risk of changing, but with AMP depending on it the counter is almost certainly going to be non-trivial.

Comment 2 by hayato@chromium.org, Jul 12 2017

Status: Available (was: Untriaged)

Comment 3 by hayato@chromium.org, Aug 28 2017

Components: -Blink>DOM Blink>HTML

Comment 4 by phistuck@gmail.com, Aug 28 2017 

I am really surprised document.write gets used in newer code. Sounds like a legacy API and sounds like hacky new code. Can you try and advocate against it to the AMP team and suggest alternatives?
While this API will probably never be killed, its use should probably be highly discouraged.

Comment 5 by dvoytenko@google.com, Aug 28 2017 

Please first provide a new API to do incremental and asynchronous parsing. We'll gladly switch to something more modern. As it stands, there's nothing I'm aware of.

Comment 6 by dominicc@google.com, Sep 1 2017

Cc: domenic@chromium.org
I created https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/2993 for the new thing (is there already one?) and we can keep this issue open to track whether to match FF and the specs or not.

Comment 7 by dvoytenko@google.com, Sep 1 2017 

Thanks a lot for filing the API request! I'd just like to make sure the current "streaming API" is not removed until the new one exists :)

Comment 8 by phistuck@gmail.com, Sep 1 2017 

#7 - it is used far too much for a removal, I believe. I do not think it will ever go away, unfortunately.

Comment 9 by timothygu@chromium.org, Jul 16

Cc: timothygu@chromium.org

Comment 10 by timothygu@chromium.org, Jul 17

Cc: iclell...@chromium.org
 Issue 854631  has been merged into this issue.

Comment 11 by timothygu@chromium.org, Jul 17

Owner: timothygu@chromium.org
Status: Assigned (was: Available)

Comment 12 by timothygu@chromium.org, Jul 21

Blocking: 866274

Comment 13 by timothygu@chromium.org, Sep 5

Status: WontFix (was: Assigned)
Per https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/2827 and https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/3977, document.open() is now allowed to be called on a non-active document in the HTML spec.
►

Sign in to add a comment