Hi,
Glancing quickly at the editors draft of
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebSimpleDB/ and with help from the WebIDL
checker, I've found the following problems:
* none of the interfaces/exceptions are marked with the extended
attribute [NoInterfaceObject] — I doubt they are all meant to be
On May 21, 2010, at 00:41 , Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Nathan nat...@webr3.org wrote:
If the scope of the identifiers is limited to a single ua, on a single
machine, and specific to that single ua (as in I can't expect to request the
identifier outside of the ua that
Thanks for the feedback, Dom! I'm going to convert this over to a bug to
make sure it gets tracked and fixed.
J
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux d...@w3.orgwrote:
Hi,
Glancing quickly at the editors draft of
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebSimpleDB/ and with help
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9786
Summary: WebIDL bugs in IndexedDB spec
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
On May 19, 2010, at 6:37 AM, ext Jeremy Orlow wrote:
Is it possible for us to change the component name form
WebSimpleDB to IndexedDB or Indexed Database API in the bug
tracker? I know we went through several iterations early on, but
it'd be nice if we could be consistent about the name.
On May 21, 2010, at 7:36 AM, Barstow Art (Nokia-CIC/Boston) wrote:
On May 19, 2010, at 6:37 AM, ext Jeremy Orlow wrote:
Is it possible for us to change the component name form
WebSimpleDB to IndexedDB or Indexed Database API in the bug
tracker? I know we went through several iterations
Hi Arthur,
thanks for encouraging me to reply !
Hi Giles, the focus of our projects are not in the very center of your
questionaire, but anyway :
Our sirius signing server once started for creation and verification of
qualified signatures and we run a free online verification service (
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9789
Summary: We should use the IDB prefix on all IDB interfaces
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9790
Summary: Request is not a good suffix for all the async
interfaces in IndexedDB
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9791
Summary: IDBDatabase should (possibly) be renamed to
IDBConnection
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 8:32 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Shawn Wilsher sdwi...@mozilla.com
wrote:
On 5/20/2010 11:30 AM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
As someone new to this
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9793
Summary: Allow dates and floating point numbers in keys
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 5:45 AM, Kris Zyp k...@sitepen.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I continue to believe that splitting put into 3 methods is a very
shortsighted approach to dealing with put directives. We are currently
looking at how to indicate whether or not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 5/21/2010 6:16 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 5:45 AM, Kris Zyp k...@sitepen.com
wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
I continue to believe that splitting put into 3 methods is a
very shortsighted approach
14 matches
Mail list logo
