On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 7:15 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:56 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 11:26 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Shawn Wilsher sdwi...@mozilla.com
wrote:
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 7:47 PM, Shawn Wilsher sdwi...@mozilla.com wrote:
On 8/4/2010 10:53 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
Whoatransaction() is synchronous?!? Ok, so I guess the entire premise
of my question was super confused. :-)
It is certainly spec'd that way [1]. The locks do not
The draft minutes from the August 5 Widgets voice conference are
available at the following and copied below:
http://www.w3.org/2010/08/05-wam-minutes.html
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webapps mail list before August 12 (the next
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 2:30 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 7:15 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:56 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 11:26 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 2:30 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 7:15 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:56 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Tue,
Ok, I'm going to start by taking a step back here.
There is no such thing as implicit transactions.
db.objectStore(foo, mode)
is just syntactic sugar for
db.transaction([foo], mode).objectStore(foo)
so it always starts a new transaction. I think for now, lets take
db.objectStore(..) out of
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 2:30 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org
wrote:
On
-Original Message-
From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Jonas Sicking
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 2:12 PM
I suggest we make removeDatabase (or whatever we call it) schedule a
database to be deleted, but doesn't actually delete
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Pablo Castro pablo.cas...@microsoft.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Jonas Sicking
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 2:12 PM
I suggest we make removeDatabase (or
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10302
Summary: Introduce exception handlers at the
transaction/database scope
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
10 matches
Mail list logo