The draft minutes from the June 17 Widgets voice conference are
available at the following and copied below:
http://www.w3.org/2010/06/17-wam-minutes.html
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webapps mail list before July 1 (the next
I would like to confirm the requirements for posting list and inverted index
support in IndexedDB. To that extent, here is a short list ordered by
importance. Please let me know if I have missed anything important.
1. Store sorted runs of terms and their occurrences in documents along with a
Hi Adam,
I'm writing on behalf of the Web Apps WG to inquire as to the status of
the Media Type Sniffing spec [1]. The Widgets Packaging specification is
ready to proceed to PR but has a normative dependency on [1]. In order
for the widget spec to proceed to PR, the W3C has asked the WG to
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9769
Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Hi,
I am currently very busy reading your papers about W3C Widgets because I
am writing my master thesis about Widgets. The title is Device
interoperable data visualization using standard W3C Widgets - the
important word is standard. Anyway, I really like your work and I am
very excited how
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Nikunj Mehta nik...@o-micron.com
wrote:
On Jun 16, 2010, at 9:58 AM, Shawn Wilsher wrote:
On 6/16/2010 9:43 AM, Nikunj Mehta wrote:
There are three theoretical modes as you say.
Some quick comments. I'll point some of our FTS experts at this as well.
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Nikunj Mehta nik...@o-micron.com wrote:
I would like to confirm the requirements for posting list and inverted
index support in IndexedDB. To that extent, here is a short list ordered by
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 6/17/2010 10:24 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Shawn Wilsher sdwi...@mozilla.com
mailto:sdwi...@mozilla.com wrote:
So, in summary, I agree to splitting the put method in to
two - put and
Could someone provide more context here. I don't understand any of
what is being talked about. Is this a proposal for a new feature?
/ Jonas
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Nikunj Mehta nik...@o-micron.com wrote:
I would like to confirm the requirements for posting list and inverted index
Would be useful to bear in mind the semantics of the two methods:
1. If storing a record in an index that allows multiple values for a single key,
a. add is going to store an extra record for an existing key, if it exists.
b. put is also going to store a new record for the existing key, if it
Jonas,
As part of the IndexedDB status report, I had indicated that there is interest
in adding inverted indexes to the IndexedDB spec. As there hasn't been any
discussion of the requirements for this feature, I was hoping to have that now.
Nikunj
On Jun 17, 2010, at 10:38 AM, Jonas Sicking
Hi All,
We've debated a bit use cases like storing objects like:
{ name: Elvis, born: January 8, 1935, died: August 16, 1977 }
{ name: Gustav III, born: 24 January 1746, died: 29 March 1792 }
And create an index based on the age at time of death. Similarly,
store HTML documents and index on the
I'm not entirely sure how the maturity levels map between the IETF and
the W3C. The sniffing spec is likely going to be part of the HASMAT
working group, which is starting up in the IETF. I don't expect the
algorithm itself to change much from its current form. Most of the
discussion has been
Hello, folks,
While the official announcement will come later, I would like to give a
heads-up about
a new mailing list,
public-web-p...@w3.orghttp://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/.
This
mailing list will focus on discussion related
to Web performance, including the
On Jun 18, 2010, at 12:54 AM, Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com wrote:
I'm not entirely sure how the maturity levels map between the IETF and
the W3C. The sniffing spec is likely going to be part of the HASMAT
working group, which is starting up in the IETF. I don't expect the
algorithm itself
15 matches
Mail list logo
