On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 19:47:08 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 3:50 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com
wrote:
If that is the only real solution I suggest we do that. We can create
some kind of DOMURL type which is either a DOMString or a
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10426
Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10027
Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10765
Summary: [IndexedDB] Need to add an onblocked event to what's
returned from setVersion
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: PC
OS/Version: All
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10765
Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10674
Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
We (www.fry-it.com) produce websites and mobile apps. We have been looking
at HTML5 for developing mobile apps, and for the kind of apps that we want
to produce the client side WebSQL API provided what we needed. The IndexedDB
is not suitable (no joins, no compound indexes etc...).
Having
There's been some recent discussion in the webkit-dev mailing list about the
efficiency of implementation of the responseArrayBuffer attribute. People
are concerned that it would require keeping two copies of the data around
(raw bytes, and unicode text version) since it's unknown up-front
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Chris Rogers crog...@google.com wrote:
There's been some recent discussion in the webkit-dev mailing list about
the efficiency of implementation of the responseArrayBuffer attribute.
People are concerned that it would require keeping two copies of the data
25.10.2010, в 15:33, Boris Zbarsky написал(а):
People are concerned that it would require keeping two copies of the
data around (raw bytes, and unicode text version) since it's unknown
up-front whether responseText, or responseArrayBuffer will be
accessed.
Note that Gecko does exactly
On Oct 25, 2010, at 3:33 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 10/25/10 6:21 PM, Chris Rogers wrote:
People are concerned that it would require keeping two copies of the
data around (raw bytes, and unicode text version) since it's unknown
up-front whether responseText, or responseArrayBuffer will be
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:33 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 10/25/10 6:21 PM, Chris Rogers wrote:
People are concerned that it would require keeping two copies of the
data around (raw bytes, and unicode text version) since it's unknown
up-front whether responseText, or
On 10/25/10 6:42 PM, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
That may become more common when people start downloading arbitrary files, and
storing them to disk with FileWriter. But even years ago, we've been getting
performance bugs forcing us to ensure responseText didn't have to be copied for
As far as I can tell, there's no reason why IndexedDB could not be a backend
for an interface like this built entirely in JavaScript. That's actually
the approach CouchDB seems to be taking. As we implement new features in
IndexedDB (likely joins and compound indexes will be amongst the first),
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 6:09 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 19:47:08 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 3:50 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com
wrote:
If that is the only real solution I suggest we do that. We can
On 10/25/10 7:05 PM, Chris Marrin wrote:
I don't think we can say that. responseArrayBuffer is going to enable new uses
of XHR. Floating point arrays for 3D mesh animation can easily get into the
multi-megabyte range.
Hmm... But will people still be accessing .responseText on those? And
On 10/25/10 7:07 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
Can you think of any use cases where a developer would need both though?
Most any use case where there are multiple developers involved (page +
library, multiple people working on scripts in the page, whatever) and
some want the bytes and others
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Like I said, I think creating an OM that covers all the cases here
would create something very complex. I'd love to see a useful proposal
for http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/.
It doesn't seem overly difficult. Using
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Keean Schupke ke...@fry-it.com wrote:
We (www.fry-it.com) produce websites and mobile apps. We have been looking
at HTML5 for developing mobile apps, and for the kind of apps that we want
to produce the client side WebSQL API provided what we needed. The
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Like I said, I think creating an OM that covers all the cases here
would create something very complex. I'd love to see a useful proposal
for
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Like I said, I think creating an OM that covers all the cases here
would
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
However it still leaves my original statement unanswered:
Like I said, I
25 matches
Mail list logo
