On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 12:49 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Something that has come up a couple of times with content authors
lately has been the desire to convert an ArrayBuffer (or part thereof)
into a decoded string. Similarly being able to encode a string into an
ArrayBuffer
Hey,
I'd like to put forward a proposal for extending the modal prompts
(alert/confirm/prompt) with an optional callback parameter. If the optional
callback parameter is present, the javascript execution would resume
immediately. The callback will be invoked when the dialog that doesn't need
to
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Jochen Eisinger wrote:
I'd like to put forward a proposal for extending the modal prompts
(alert/confirm/prompt) with an optional callback parameter. If the
optional callback parameter is present, the javascript execution would
resume immediately. The callback will be
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 12:49 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Something that has come up a couple of times with content authors
lately has been the desire to convert an ArrayBuffer (or part thereof)
into a decoded
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote:
I have edited the proposal to base the list of encodings on
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/encoding/raw-file/tip/Overview.html - is there any
reason that would not be sufficient or appropriate? (this appears to be a
superset of
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Yes, I think we should enumerate the set of encodings supported.
Ideally we'd for simplicity support the same set of enumerated
encodings everywhere in
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 7:33 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
What value are we adding, and to whom, by keeping the list the
smallest it can be, even when that means keeping the lists of
supported encodings different between different APIs?
Not needlessly extending support for
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
If this is the only reason that'd all have to be specified, that's
probably another reason to consider it...
(Well, there's form data either way. At least encoding is probably easier
to spec, since it only has to deal with
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 7:33 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
What value are we adding, and to whom, by keeping the list the
smallest it can be, even when that means keeping the lists of
supported encodings
