Robin Berjon wrote:
On Sep 23, 2009, at 16:07 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
Robin Berjon wrote:
On Sep 21, 2009, at 20:08 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
5.1
Localization
Shall it be possible for the widget to programmatically discover the
localization path it was loaded from (section 9 of PC)?
Yes,
On Oct 1, 2009, at 5:58 AM, ext Robin Berjon wrote:
A rough schedule would then be: during the Nov 2-3 f2f meeting agree
to all changes for LC#3; November 10 LC#3 is published and Exclusion
period begins; December 1 LC#3 ends; Dec 9 CR#2 is published;
January 5 CR#2 ends as does the Exclusion
Le jeudi 01 octobre 2009 à 06:41 -0400, Arthur Barstow a écrit :
Give the July CR says it will not end until November 1, it would seem
a bit strange if we published a new LC before then.
Actually, the end of CR period really means the document won't go to PR
before then - I don't think there
On Oct 1, 2009, at 12:41 , Arthur Barstow wrote:
Give the July CR says it will not end until November 1, it would
seem a bit strange if we published a new LC before then. Given this
and the publication moratorium around the TPAC time frame, I think
Nov 10 is the first publishing
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Scott Wilson
scott.bradley.wil...@gmail.com wrote:
#1 #2 are the same issue; we haven't reached consensus yet, though as
Marcos says in his response on #1, we are in agreement over what we are
trying to achieve with this part of the spec - we just need to
Hi Robin,
Thanks for your comments.
My answers inline below.
Thanks,
Marcin
Marcin Hanclik
ACCESS Systems Germany GmbH
Tel: +49-208-8290-6452 | Fax: +49-208-8290-6465
Mobile: +49-163-8290-646
E-Mail: marcin.hanc...@access-company.com
-Original Message-
From:
The draft minutes from the October 1 D Widgets voice conference are
available at the following and copied below:
http://www.w3.org/2009/10/01-wam-minutes.html
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webapps mail list before 8 October 2009
Hi there,
Reading through the current WARP draft, I note that the semantics of the
access element appear to preclude an important use case (for us).
At BBC RD one of the things we're currently working on is the control
of personal video recorders and TV set-top boxes, from other devices on
Sorry for the cross posting ...
Doug - since I've had at least one question about the use and scope
of public-script-coord with respect to the Web IDL, would you please
clarify if it should be used for all future discussions related to
Web IDL or just coordination-related discussions re
Dear public-webapps,
I would like to propose a small extension to the current draft
specification for Strict Transport Security.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Sep/att-0051/draft-hodges-strict-transport-sec-05.plain.html
The Problem
---
At the moment, if one CA
Hi, Folks-
Arthur Barstow wrote (on 10/1/09 9:32 AM):
Sorry for the cross posting ...
Doug - since I've had at least one question about the use and scope of
public-script-coord with respect to the Web IDL, would you please
clarify if it should be used for all future discussions related to Web
Hi Dom, All,
I am not convinced by the need to include the word pattern in the name of the
attribute taken the current WARP text.
Specifically because the semantics of the value of the attribute is more like
namespace or just the leading part of the URI.
Pattern would be ok, if e.g. we would
12 matches
Mail list logo
