-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.8k
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
Module workers are fetched with incorrect referrer. #1111
Comments
domenic
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Apr 25, 2016
Fixes #1111, although the problem was more widespread than indicated there. Previously, *only* classic workers had their referrer set correctly. This updates the algorithms to: - Pass the document's address as the referrer for <script>-initiated fetches (both classic and module) - Pass the document's address as the referrer for worker-creation fetches (both classic and module) - Pass the importing module's address as the referrer for import-initiated module script fetches
domenic
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Apr 25, 2016
Fixes #1111, although the problem was more widespread than indicated there. Previously, *only* classic workers had their referrer set correctly. This updates the algorithms to: - Pass the document's address as the referrer for <script>-initiated fetches (both classic and module) - Pass the document's address as the referrer for worker-creation fetches (both classic and module) - Pass the importing module's address as the referrer for import-initiated module script fetches
domenic
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Apr 29, 2016
As discussed in #1122, #1111, and in w3c/ServiceWorker#889 (comment), a number of problems are caused by the current setup of using the settings object of the worker itself as the feth client. Instead, we use the incumbent settings object to do the fetching. (Incumbent, instead of e.g. current, because almost everything else in the (Shared)Worker constructors uses the incumbent settings object.) This fixes #1111 since now module workers are fetched with the correct client, and thus automatically get the correct referrer.
domenic
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 2, 2016
As discussed in #1122, #1111, and in w3c/ServiceWorker#889 (comment), a number of problems are caused by the current setup of using the settings object of the worker itself as the feth client. Instead, we use the incumbent settings object to do the fetching. (Incumbent, instead of e.g. current, because almost everything else in the (Shared)Worker constructors uses the incumbent settings object.) This fixes #1111 since now module workers are fetched with the correct client, and thus automatically get the correct referrer.
domenic
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 3, 2016
As discussed in #1122, #1111, and in w3c/ServiceWorker#889 (comment), a number of problems are caused by the current setup of using the settings object of the worker itself as the feth client. Instead, we use the incumbent settings object to do the fetching. (Incumbent, instead of e.g. current, because almost everything else in the (Shared)Worker constructors uses the incumbent settings object.) This fixes #1111 since now module workers are fetched with the correct client, and thus automatically get the correct referrer.
domenic
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 10, 2016
As discussed in #1122, #1111, and in w3c/ServiceWorker#889 (comment), a number of problems are caused by the current setup of using the settings object of the worker itself as the feth client. Instead, we use the incumbent settings object to do the fetching. (Incumbent, instead of e.g. current, because almost everything else in the (Shared)Worker constructors uses the incumbent settings object.) Notably, for fetching module script trees, this necessitates separating the fetch client settings object from the one used for the module map. This fixes #1111 since now module workers are fetched with the correct client, and thus automatically get the correct referrer.
annevk
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 11, 2016
As discussed in #1122, #1111, and in w3c/ServiceWorker#889 (comment), a number of problems are caused by the current setup of using the settings object of the worker itself as the fetch client. Instead, we use the incumbent settings object to do the fetching. (Incumbent, instead of e.g. current, because almost everything else in the (Shared)Worker constructors uses the incumbent settings object.) Notably, for fetching module script trees, this necessitates separating the fetch client settings object from the one used for the module map. This fixes #1111 since now module workers are fetched with the correct client, and thus automatically get the correct referrer. Dependencies, however, require further work which will happen as part of #1150.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
The way the spec is currently written, a "classic" worker is fetched using whatever document/worker created the worker as referrer for the request of the worker script. I would expect the same referrer to be used for the request of the "main" module of a module type worker, but the way the run a worker algorithm is currently written a module type worker completely ignores the referrer parameter that is passed to the algorithm.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: