I think the reason not to formally object is that it leads to
expenditure of both effort and political capital in a way that seems
unlikely to change the result. It's an expenditure of effort
because the goal is that the AC operate by consensus, so the initial
result of formal objections is always
I spoke to some folks who work on Chrome and they suggested because of
their larger usage numbers there wasn't a concrete timeline that they were
working towards, however they think there is an active plan to exchange
appcache for service worker on some Google products they have which will
aid in i
I tend to agree with you. Is there a reason not to formally object?
On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 3:30 PM L. David Baron wrote:
> The W3C is proposing a new charter for:
>
> Decentralized Identifier (DID) Working Group
> https://www.w3.org/2019/08/did-wg-charter.html
> https://lists.w3.org/Archi
+1. This::sounds::like::a::great::change.
-Ekr
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 12:13 PM Nathan Froyd wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In working on upgrading our C++ support to C++17 [1], we've run into
> some issues [2] surrounding the newly-introduced `std::byte` [3],
> various Microsoft headers that pull in de
👏 Thank you!
On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 1:51 PM Emma Humphries wrote:
> When work on https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1417229 is
> completed and the patch deployed to Bugzilla, users who are a Triage Owner
> will be able to see security bugs in their components without needing
> members
Hi all,
In working on upgrading our C++ support to C++17 [1], we've run into
some issues [2] surrounding the newly-introduced `std::byte` [3],
various Microsoft headers that pull in definitions of `byte`, and
conflicts between the two when one has done `using namespace std;`,
particularly at globa
Most of the deltas range from editorial to general good hygiene. The
only changes of any real consequence that I see are:
* Updating their previous work to new versions
* Charter item to work on a profile of TTML2 to support audio-only use
cases
* Catch-all clause at the bottom of §2.1 tha
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 3:30 PM J. Ryan Stinnett wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 at 12:48, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> Note that SharedArrayBuffer itself is already enabled by default as
>> ECMAScript (JavaScript) was never changed. And that standard requires
>> a host to allow cross-thread usage as
On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 at 12:48, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> Note that SharedArrayBuffer itself is already enabled by default as
> ECMAScript (JavaScript) was never changed. And that standard requires
> a host to allow cross-thread usage as while it describes
> infrastructure for threads (agents) it d
Summary: SharedArrayBuffer (SAB) is a feature that allows
high-performance applications using shared-memory multi-threading to
run on the web. Shortly after releasing SAB, Firefox (and other
browsers) disabled SAB as part of our initial Spectre mitigations (see
https://blog.mozilla.org/security/201
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 1:41 AM L. David Baron wrote:
>
> The W3C is proposing a revised charter for:
>
> Timed Text (TT) Working Group
> https://www.w3.org/2019/08/ttwg-proposed-charter.html
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2019Aug/0004.html
>
> The comparison to the g
11 matches
Mail list logo
