On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote:
On 5/18/10 2:35 PM, Eric Uhrhane wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Dmitry Titovdim...@chromium.org
wrote:
I have couple of questions, mostly clarifications I think:
1. FileReader takes Blob but there are
On 19/05/10 08:00, Darin Fisher wrote:
It doesn't seem too late to change the name. FF could support both
FileReader and BlobReader. One could just be an alias for the other.
It seems like we have situations like this frequently when it comes to
new web platform APIs. A name only becomes
Hi Kenneth,
On 5/18/10 2:30 PM, Kenneth Christiansen wrote:
I'm OK with that.
Looking at the naming of other specs we have names such as CSSOM
Views maybe we should use something along the lines of Widgets
Views: Media Feature? Just a thought though
The view modes spec does not just apply to
Interesting you'd bring this up. Andrei and I were just looking at indexes
as specced and wondered whether it still makes sense to allow indexes to not
have a keyPath. And, if so, whether we should tie insertion into the
objectStore to insertion to the index. The main reason to make such
Is it possible for us to change the component name form WebSimpleDB to
IndexedDB or Indexed Database API in the bug tracker? I know we went
through several iterations early on, but it'd be nice if we could
be consistent about the name.
Similarly, it'd be cool if the editors draft URL could
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9768
Summary: Indexes should hang off of objectStores rather than
the IDBDatabaseRequest/Sync objects
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9769
Summary: IDBObjectStoreRequest/Sync.put should be split into 3
methods
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Hi Arun,
On May 13, 2010, at 14:27 , Arun Ranganathan wrote:
I have updated the editor's draft of the File API to reflect changes that
have been in discussion.
Cool, thanks!
ArrayBuffers, and affiliated Typed Array views of data, are specified in a
working draft as a part of the WebGL
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 11:31 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Nikunj Mehta nik...@o-micron.com wrote:
On May 18, 2010, at 2:33 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 9:36 PM, Shawn Wilsher sdwi...@mozilla.com
wrote:
On 5/18/2010
On May 18, 2010, at 10:45 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
Can we please rename the View Mode Media Feature to The 'view-mode' media
feature? The current name of the spec is confusing [me].
Ooh, a naming discussion!
I'll be completely honest: I couldn't care less. Since you want it, if no one
else
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I continue to believe that splitting put into 3 methods is a very
shortsighted approach to dealing with put directives. We are currently
looking at how to indicate whether or not to overwrite an existing
record when putting data in the DB, but there
On 5/19/10 1:42 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:
On May 18, 2010, at 10:45 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
Can we please rename the View Mode Media Feature to The 'view-mode' media
feature? The current name of the spec is confusing [me].
Ooh, a naming discussion!
I only brought it up because it's your
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 2:15 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
A draft of the proposed API is here:
http://docs.google.com/View?id=dfs2skx2_4g3s5f857
I just noticed another nit. Your proposal says interface IDBIndex { }; //
Unchanged but the spec's IDBIndex interface includes
+1 to Marcos suggestion (and by extension +1 to Robin's, unless we are
expecting people to distinguish between the view mode media feature
and the quote-view mode-unquote media feature and pronounce them in
that way)
---
ricardo
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Marcos Caceres marc...@opera.com
This is a review of the Last Call draft of the View Mode Media Feature
located at:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-view-mode-20100420/
This is a formal response form the Protocols and Formats Working Group.
Approval to send this response is archived at
Robin,
ArrayBuffers, and affiliated Typed Array views of data, are specified in a
working draft as a part of the WebGL work [1]. This work has been proposed to ECMA's
TC-39 WG as well. We intend to implement some of this in the Firefox 4 timeframe, and
have reason to believe other browsers
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 2:36 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
Interesting you'd bring this up. Andrei and I were just looking at indexes
as specced and wondered whether it still makes sense to allow indexes to not
have a keyPath.
I think so. Consider for example a objectStore that
On 5/17/2010 6:15 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
We've created some examples of what using this proposed API would look like:
http://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1I__XnwvvSwyjvxi-FAAE0ecnUDhk5DF7L2GI6O31o18
we've also implemented the same examples using the currently drafted API:
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote:
3. The renaming of the property to 'url' also suggests that we should
cease to consider an urn:uuid scheme.
I'm not sure that one follows from the other. The property's called 'url'
because that's what will be familiar
On 5/19/2010 1:50 PM, Shawn Wilsher wrote:
Er, and I managed to botch the SQL in the last two examples. Those
should be (if my non-tested SQL-fu is right):
SELECT name, COUNT(kids.id)
FROM kids INNER JOIN candySales
ON kids.id = candySales.kidId
GROUP BY kids.id;
and:
SELECT name,
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Giles Hogben
giles.hog...@enisa.europa.eu wrote:
I am a security expert at ENISA (the European Network and Information
Security Agency).
We conducting a study on smartphone security and would like to have input
from the Web
Apps WG via the attached
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 2:36 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
Interesting you'd bring this up. Andrei and I were just looking at
indexes
as specced and wondered whether it still makes sense to allow indexes
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 2:36 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
Interesting you'd bring this up. Andrei and I were just looking at
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 2:36 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
24 matches
Mail list logo
