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

Add missing sandbox keywords to indices #5406

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

bakkot
Copy link
Contributor

@bakkot bakkot commented Mar 26, 2020

The list of recognized keywords for the "sandbox" attribute of iframes as understood by the "parse a sandboxing directive" algorithm had two more values (allow-downloads and allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation) than the list in the index. This adds those two values to the index.

The index was presumably overlooked in #2292 and #4293. Perhaps it would be worth adding a comment (either a Note or an HTML comment) to "parse a sandboxing directive"?


💥 Error: Wattsi server error 💥

PR Preview failed to build. (Last tried on Jan 15, 2021, 8:00 AM UTC).

More

PR Preview relies on a number of web services to run. There seems to be an issue with the following one:

🚨 Wattsi Server - Wattsi Server is the web service used to build the WHATWG HTML spec.

🔗 Related URL

Parsing MDN data...
Parsing...



If you don't have enough information above to solve the error by yourself (or to understand to which web service the error is related to, if any), please file an issue.

The list of recognized keywords for the "sandbox" attribute of iframes as understood by the "parse a sandboxing directive" algorithm had two more values (`allow-downloads` and `allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation`) than the list in the index. This adds those two values to the index.
@domenic
Copy link
Member

domenic commented Mar 26, 2020

Great call! And yeah, a HTML comment makes sense to me.

Any progress on Shape Security/F5 Networks signing the Participant Agreement?

@bakkot
Copy link
Contributor Author

bakkot commented Mar 26, 2020

Any progress on Shape Security/F5 Networks signing the Participant Agreement?

Ah, not yet. I'll ping someone internally. I forgot WHATWG required it even for non-substantive changes (not for the first time).

(Feel free to consider this a detailed bug report and submit a fresh PR fixing it in the mean time, I guess.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants