[Bug 25924] [Imports]: The spec. is not very specific about the edge cases of the load
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25924 Anne ann...@annevk.nl changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID |--- --- Comment #4 from Anne ann...@annevk.nl --- We should probably actually clarify data URLs. I suspect they should not be allowed here as they would be able to execute scripts. I need to add the flag proposed by Jonas in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2014AprJun/0696.html and HTML imports should probably not set it. Is the text/html requirement stated? Brendan, as for the rest: * blob URLs can work if they're same-origin * redirect should be followed http://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#atomic-http-redirect-handling * HTTP response status should probably be ignored (we never pay attention to it) * only text/html should be allowed (is that stated in the specification now?) * stopping of external resource loading is up to the UA mostly (unless there's explicit API which there's not) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 25915] Cross-origin requests
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25915 Anne ann...@annevk.nl changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED |--- --- Comment #2 from Anne ann...@annevk.nl --- Now you use must in a non-normative section. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 25914] No definition of parsing blob's scheme data
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25914 Anne ann...@annevk.nl changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED |--- --- Comment #5 from Anne ann...@annevk.nl --- This algorithm should operate on a parsed URL, not a fresh URL. You want to hand this algorithm a scheme data component. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
Re: WebApps and permission list?
On 31/05/14 08:12, Jeffrey Walton wrote: I have a question about WebApps manifests and permissions. The page is part of Manifest for Web Applications located at http://www.w3.org/2012/sysapps/manifest/. The editor's draft for Manifest is at: http://w3c.github.io/manifest/ The work item started in SysApps but was transferred to WebApps. -- Dave Raggett d...@w3.org http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
Re: WebApp installation via the browser
On Sat, 31 May 2014, at 10:40, Jeffrey Walton wrote: I have a question about Use Cases for Installable WebApps located at https://w3c-webmob.github.io/installable-webapps/. Under section Add to Homescreen, the document states: ... giving developers the choice to tightly integrate their web applications into the OS directly from the Web browser is still somewhat new... ... [Installable WebApps] are different in that the applications are installed directly from the browser itself rather than from an app store... It sounds like to me the idea is to allow any site on the internet to become a app store. My observations are the various app stores provide vendor lock-in and ensure a revenue stream. Its architected into the platform. Companies like Apple, Microsoft and RIM likely *won't* give up lock-in or the revenue stream (at least not without a fight). Are there any platforms providing the feature? Has the feature gained any traction among the platform vendors? Isn't Add to homescreen feature something you can find in a more or less advanced fashion on Safari iOS, Firefox Android, Firefox OS and Chrome Android? I believe IE had something similar some time ago on desktop but I don't know what's the current status of that. Chrome Apps is also doing some experiments on desktop [1]. [1] https://plus.google.com/+FrancoisBeaufort/posts/74WCmneFJ8j -- Mounir
Re: WebApp installation via the browser
You're probably think of IE's Pinned Sites concept on Windows 8: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg491731.aspx Sincerely, James Greene Sent from my [smart?]phone On May 31, 2014 10:35 AM, Mounir Lamouri mou...@lamouri.fr wrote: On Sat, 31 May 2014, at 10:40, Jeffrey Walton wrote: I have a question about Use Cases for Installable WebApps located at https://w3c-webmob.github.io/installable-webapps/. Under section Add to Homescreen, the document states: ... giving developers the choice to tightly integrate their web applications into the OS directly from the Web browser is still somewhat new... ... [Installable WebApps] are different in that the applications are installed directly from the browser itself rather than from an app store... It sounds like to me the idea is to allow any site on the internet to become a app store. My observations are the various app stores provide vendor lock-in and ensure a revenue stream. Its architected into the platform. Companies like Apple, Microsoft and RIM likely *won't* give up lock-in or the revenue stream (at least not without a fight). Are there any platforms providing the feature? Has the feature gained any traction among the platform vendors? Isn't Add to homescreen feature something you can find in a more or less advanced fashion on Safari iOS, Firefox Android, Firefox OS and Chrome Android? I believe IE had something similar some time ago on desktop but I don't know what's the current status of that. Chrome Apps is also doing some experiments on desktop [1]. [1] https://plus.google.com/+FrancoisBeaufort/posts/74WCmneFJ8j -- Mounir
Re: [editing] CommandEvent and contentEditable=minimal Explainer
I agree it's better to let authors define what behavior they want from UA
instead of defining the set of behaviors ourselves.
Furthermore, I'd argue that we should separately have a mode where scripts
would get intention events but UA wouldn't enact any builtin editing commands
as default actions. This is useful for non-text editing applications such as
drawing and presentation apps.
- R. Niwa
On May 28, 2014, at 1:39 PM, Ben Peters ben.pet...@microsoft.com wrote:
Great idea! If Intention Events (Clipboard, Selection, Command) cover all of
the editing operations that a site would want to handle themselves, we don’t
need CE Min as a feature, only a concept that can achieved with
preventDefault().
From: Julie Parent [mailto:jpar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 4:40 PM
To: Ben Peters
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Subject: Re: [editing] CommandEvent and contentEditable=minimal Explainer
The discussion of which minimal default handling to include with
contenteditable=minimal makes me wonder if contentEditable=minimal is
necessary at all. It quickly becomes a can of worms of *which* default
handling should be included, and it seems likely to not satisfy every use
case no matter which decisions are made. However, minimal is proposed as a
building block because currently, disabling all default functionality of
contentEditable=true is difficult/impossible. But with CommandEvents,
shouldn't contentEditable=minimal be equivalent to:
// Let editRegion be div contentEditable id='editRegion'
var editRegion = document.getElementById(editRegion);
editRegion.addEventListener(command, handleCommand);
function handleCommand(evt){
evt.preventDefault();
}
No default actions would be taken, but selection events would still fire and
be handled. There would be no ambiguity. If implementing
contentEditable=minimal on top of CommandEvents could just be a few lines
of code, why complicate things by spec'ing another property?
Then, if someone wants a region that just does basic text input, then they
simply allow it:
function handleCommand(evt){
switch (evt.commandType){
case 'insertText':
// Let the browser do text insertion
break;
default:
// Prevent all other magic
evt.preventDefault();
}
This hedges on the fact that CommandEvents would capture ALL the cases that
contentEditable currently handles, and that the event would fire BEFORE the
dom is modified, and that calling preventDefault would cancel the event, but
isn't that a goal of this design anyway?
Julie
-- Forwarded message --
From: Ben Peters ben.pet...@microsoft.com
Date: Thu, May 22, 2014 at 4:56 PM
Subject: [editing] CommandEvent and contentEditable=minimal Explainer
To: public-webapps@w3.org public-webapps@w3.org
I have completed a first-draft explainer document [1], taking the generous
feedback of many of you into account. There are 6 open issues on the document
currently, and I'm sure there are others that I have missed. It would be
great to know if this is heading in in the right direction.
My vision is to use this a non-normative Explainer, and create 2 normative
specs to go with it. The specs for contentEditable=minimal and CommandEvent
should have first-drafts next week.
Thanks!
Ben
[1] http://benjamp.github.io/commands-explainer.htm
Re: [selection] Selection.setBaseAndExtent
Thanks! - R. Niwa On May 20, 2014, at 11:36 AM, Ben Peters ben.pet...@microsoft.com wrote: I have filed a bug to track this issue [1]. Ben [1] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25831 From: Ben Peters [mailto:ben.pet...@microsoft.com] Sent: Monday, May 5, 2014 11:28 PM To: Ryosuke Niwa; public-webapps@w3.org Subject: [selection] Selection.setBaseAndExtent I noticed that some websites use selection.setBaseAndExtent [1]. According to what limited documentation I could find, it works similar to selection.extend. Is there any intention to standardize this, or is it made obsolete by selection.extend? Ben [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/985272/jquery-selecting-text-in-an-element-akin-to-highlighting-with-your-mouse
