Expose navigator.product and navigator.appCodeName constants to workers

Expose navigator.product and navigator.appCodeName constants to workers

Expose navigator.product and navigator.appCodeName constants to web workers as
well, as per the specification:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/workers.html#workernavigator
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/timers.html#navigatorid

BUG=276316
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=157679

[haraken, 2013-08-20 14:34:50]

The implementation looks good. How do Firefox and IE10 behave?

[haraken, 2013-08-20 14:35:58]

On 2013/08/20 14:34:50, haraken wrote:
> The implementation looks good. How do Firefox and IE10 behave?

Also, exposing new DOM attributes/methods/constants will require an
intent-to-ship email.

[do-not-use, 2013-08-20 14:49:05]

On 2013/08/20 14:35:58, haraken wrote:
> On 2013/08/20 14:34:50, haraken wrote:
> > The implementation looks good. How do Firefox and IE10 behave?
> 
> Also, exposing new DOM attributes/methods/constants will require an
> intent-to-ship email.

Firefox 23 and IE10 do not expose those constants to workers yet. The footprint
is really small though and the code is already there.
It looked weird to have some of the NavigatorID attributes in the NavigatorID
IDL interface while others are in Navigator IDL interface.

I am slightly surprised we need an intent-to-ship for such tiny change. I
understand this is a web exposed change but I have landed similar changes with
API owner review only in the past.

[haraken, 2013-08-20 14:58:35]

> I am slightly surprised we need an intent-to-ship for such tiny change. I
> understand this is a web exposed change but I have landed similar changes with
> API owner review only in the past.

Yeah, it looks like an API owner review would be enough for this kind of change,
as far as I see discussion in https://codereview.chromium.org/19749003/

> Firefox 23 and IE10 do not expose those constants to workers yet. The
footprint
> is really small though and the code is already there.
> It looked weird to have some of the NavigatorID attributes in the NavigatorID
> IDL interface while others are in Navigator IDL interface.

hmm, we might want to hear opinions of Navigator experts and API owners.

[arv (Not doing code reviews), 2013-08-20 18:13:34]

LGTM

[abarth-chromium, 2013-08-20 19:30:05]

Wasn't there just a blink-dev thread about wanting to remove these properties? 
Do we need to expose them to workers?

[do-not-use, 2013-08-20 19:40:17]

On 2013/08/20 19:30:05, abarth wrote:
> Wasn't there just a blink-dev thread about wanting to remove these properties?

> Do we need to expose them to workers?

I believe the blink-dev thread was about different attributes: vendor and
vendorSub. Those are non-standard.

However, the 2 attributes in my CL are standard and still present in the last
specification. I honestly don't know how useful they are to workers. However, it
is weird that we already expose all other NavigatorID attributes except these 2.

[arv (Not doing code reviews), 2013-08-20 19:41:13]

On 2013/08/20 19:30:05, abarth wrote:
> Wasn't there just a blink-dev thread about wanting to remove these properties?

> Do we need to expose them to workers?

Wasn't that about vendor and vendorSub? These ones are part of the html spec.

[abarth-chromium, 2013-08-20 19:42:09]

Ah, sorry.  I was confused.

[jochen (gone - plz use gerrit), 2013-09-12 09:40:35]

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-09-12 10:13:26]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/ch.dumez@sisa.samsung.com/22866014/7001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-09-12 11:37:26]

Sorry for I got bad news for ya.
Compile failed with a clobber build on win_layout.
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=win_layout...
Your code is likely broken or HEAD is junk. Please ensure your
code is not broken then alert the build sheriffs.
Look at the try server FAQ for more details.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-09-12 12:29:50]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/ch.dumez@sisa.samsung.com/22866014/18001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-09-12 13:51:01]

Change committed as 157679