Re: [whatwg] Proposed changes to the History API

2009-08-20 Thread Mike Wilson
Jonas Sicking wrote: 1. [...] it would be better if you could actually navigate between https://mail.google.com/mail/inbox https://mail.google.com/mail/label/personal https://mail.google.com/mail/label/whatwg https://mail.google.com/mail/label/whatwg/13b4711edac9c1e2 and then

Re: [whatwg] Parsing RFC3339 constructs

2009-08-20 Thread Christoph Päper
Ian Hickson: On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Nils Dagsson Moskopp wrote: Am Dienstag, den 11.08.2009, 07:27 + schrieb Ian Hickson: On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Julian Reschke wrote: Ian Hickson wrote: - the literal letters T and Z must be uppercase It simplifies processing a tiny amount. So for a tiny

Re: [whatwg] Proposed changes to the History API

2009-08-20 Thread Justin Lebar
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Jeremy Orlowjor...@chromium.org wrote: but here it seems like everything can just stay in memory...right? My thought was that if you had a tab open and restarted the browser, that the state objects would be there after the restart, so we'd have to serialize to

Re: [whatwg] Proposed changes to the History API

2009-08-20 Thread Jeremy Orlow
I see. It makes more sense why you mentioned the session storage element then. Note that there has been some discussion about whether session storage should survive crashes, but I know Safari and Chrome are currently planning to _not_ serialize it to disk. I don't have any good use cases for

Re: [whatwg] Proposed changes to the History API

2009-08-20 Thread Justin Lebar
I guess this is just a vision about what the developer really wants to do, or are you thinking of any solutions that would actually allow changing path (or query string) without loading a new Document? The pushState function as currently specified allows you to do precisely this.

Re: [whatwg] Proposed changes to the History API

2009-08-20 Thread Justin Lebar
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Jeremy Orlowjor...@chromium.org wrote: I see.  It makes more sense why you mentioned the session storage element then.  Note that there has been some discussion about whether session storage should survive crashes, but I know Safari and Chrome are currently

Re: [whatwg] Proposed changes to the History API

2009-08-20 Thread Jeremy Orlow
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Justin Lebar justin.le...@gmail.comwrote: On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Jeremy Orlowjor...@chromium.org wrote: I see. It makes more sense why you mentioned the session storage element then. Note that there has been some discussion about whether session

Re: [whatwg] Proposed changes to the History API

2009-08-20 Thread Jeremy Orlow
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: Btw, storing a GUID and using session storage really isn't useful since session storage itself only stores strings. Btw, I lied. This part of the spec just changed, so now DOM Storage can store anything that supports

[whatwg] Microdata DOM API

2009-08-20 Thread Philip Jägenstedt
Hi, There are already two demos of converting Microdata to other formats which I found quite useful [1]. I've taken a closer look at the Microdata DOM API and hacked up a somewhat working JavaScript implementation of it [2]. A few issues came up in the process: To avoid total confusion

Re: [whatwg] Proposed changes to the History API

2009-08-20 Thread Justin Lebar
Overall, I think preserving history API information when restoring sessions is a good thing.  My only concern is whether web developers will program in such a way that this works.  Unless ALL state will need to be either saved in the history API or reconstructible from that information, bad

[whatwg] Typo in 4.2.4 - missing of

2009-08-20 Thread Chris Cressman
From 4.2.4: If one the two files was returned without a Content-Type metadata, or with a syntactically incorrect type like Content-Type: null, then the default type for stylesheet links would kick in. I believe it should read If one _of_ the two files Chris -- Chris Cressman

[whatwg] Typo in 4.2.4 - missing to

2009-08-20 Thread Chris Cressman
From 4.2.4: The LinkStyle interface is also be implemented by this element; the styling processing model defines how. I believe it should read The LinkStyle interface is also _to_ be implemented Chris -- Chris Cressman http://chriscressman.com