27209 2014-10-31 13:21:37 +0000 "Create an event that uses the MessageEvent interface" Why not set the source for a message event in a MessageChannel? 2014-11-06 08:31:14 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WHATWG HTML unspecified Other other RESOLVED INVALID https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#transferMessagePort P3 normal Unsorted 1 contributor ian annevk ian mike contributor oldest_to_newest 114319 0 contributor 2014-10-31 13:21:37 +0000 Specification: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/comms.html Multipage: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/#transferMessagePort Complete: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#transferMessagePort Referrer: Comment: "Create an event that uses the MessageEvent interface" Why not set the source for a message event in a MessageChannel? Posted from: 46.127.136.57 by annevk@annevk.nl User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/36.0 114466 1 ian 2014-11-04 00:36:08 +0000 Can you elaborate? Set it to what? Why? 114474 2 annevk 2014-11-04 08:45:54 +0000 To the source port. Checking with baku if that's really necessary; looking at it closer it seems that if you have a port you have both onmessage and postMessage available, and no real need for e.source. 114477 3 annevk 2014-11-04 10:35:12 +0000 baku's argument is that since we know the source we should just set it to that, even if it's redundant with e.target. (Not sure, but perhaps this will make it slightly easier to write consistent message handling code?) 114575 4 ian 2014-11-06 00:41:12 +0000 The source of a message is the object on which postMessage() was called. That might be in a different worker. We don't want the behaviour to be different based on whether the source is in the same worker or not, since that can hurt later refactoring into multiple workers, which we generally want to encourage.