Re: [Bug 11398] New: [IndexedDB] Methods that take multiple optional parameters should instead take an options object

2010-12-14 Thread Jeremy Orlow
Oops. + list again. On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 1:20 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 7:27 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: In addition to createObjectStore, I also intend to

Re: [Bug 11398] New: [IndexedDB] Methods that take multiple optional parameters should instead take an options object

2010-12-14 Thread Jeremy Orlow
Btw, I forgot to mention IDBDatabase.transaction which I definitely think should take an options object as well. On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: Oops. + list again. On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: On Sat,

Re: Call for Editors for Server-sent Events, Web Storage, and Web Workers

2010-12-14 Thread Arthur Barstow
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Doug Schepersschep...@w3.org wrote: But we are looking for more than someone to just push TR copies, we want someone who (like Ian) understands the issues, and knows how to help drive progress through consensus and technical expertise, and who can dedicate

Re: XBL2: First Thoughts and Use Cases

2010-12-14 Thread Dimitri Glazkov
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:33 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org wrote: On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: Then there's no problem.  You don't need the templates to be live to make child changes work.  You just need to maintain some record that

Re: XBL2: First Thoughts and Use Cases

2010-12-14 Thread Tab Atkins Jr.
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:33 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org wrote: On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote: Then there's no problem.  You don't need the templates to be live to make child changes work.  You just need to maintain some record that

Re: XBL2: First Thoughts and Use Cases

2010-12-14 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/14/10 10:25 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: Looking just at the problem itself, it's an open question as to whether it would be simpler to hold a reference to the template or just create the appropriate data structures out of the template. Likely, you'll be doing the latter in C++ anyway, so

Re: XBL2: First Thoughts and Use Cases

2010-12-14 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/14/10 11:03 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: Script should be able to walk and mutate the shadow DOM for an element I'm not sure I agree, in fact. Why should script be able to do this? Sorta supporting this has been a constant source of problems in Mozilla' XBL1 implementation, and

Re: XBL2: First Thoughts and Use Cases

2010-12-14 Thread Dimitri Glazkov
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote: On 12/14/10 11:03 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: Script should be able to walk and mutate the shadow DOM for an element I'm not sure I agree, in fact.  Why should script be able to do this? Sorta supporting this has been a

Re: XBL2: First Thoughts and Use Cases

2010-12-14 Thread Tab Atkins Jr.
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:23 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote: On 12/14/10 11:16 AM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote: This is interesting. Can you give an example? I am wondering if you and Tab are talking about the same thing. What sorts of problems? The issues we've run into is that the

Re: [Bug 11398] New: [IndexedDB] Methods that take multiple optional parameters should instead take an options object

2010-12-14 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: Btw, I forgot to mention IDBDatabase.transaction which I definitely think should take an options object as well. Hmm.. I think we should make the first argument required, I actually thought it was until I looked just

[Bug 11552] New: We should remove timeout from IndexedDB.

2010-12-14 Thread bugzilla
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11552 Summary: We should remove timeout from IndexedDB. Product: WebAppsWG Version: unspecified Platform: PC OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2

Re: [Bug 11398] New: [IndexedDB] Methods that take multiple optional parameters should instead take an options object

2010-12-14 Thread Jeremy Orlow
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: Btw, I forgot to mention IDBDatabase.transaction which I definitely think should take an options object as well. Hmm.. I think we should make the

Rename XBL2 to something without X, B, or L?

2010-12-14 Thread Dimitri Glazkov
Dear all, Looking at the use cases and the problems the current XBL2 spec is trying address, I think it might be a good idea to rename it into something that is less legacy-bound? Hixie already cleverly disguised the X as [X]engamous in the latest draft, and if this spec is to become part of

Re: Rename XBL2 to something without X, B, or L?

2010-12-14 Thread Kenneth Rohde Christiansen
I'm with you :-) I really dislike the current name, and it keeps reminding me of XBEL, the bookmark exchanging language. Kenneth On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 10:24 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com wrote: Dear all, Looking at the use cases and the problems the current XBL2 spec is trying

Re: Rename XBL2 to something without X, B, or L?

2010-12-14 Thread Tab Atkins Jr.
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com wrote: Dear all, Looking at the use cases and the problems the current XBL2 spec is trying address, I think it might be a good idea to rename it into something that is less legacy-bound? Hixie already cleverly disguised the

Re: Rename XBL2 to something without X, B, or L?

2010-12-14 Thread Olli Pettay
On 12/14/2010 01:24 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote: Dear all, Looking at the use cases and the problems the current XBL2 spec is trying address, I think it might be a good idea to rename it into something that is less legacy-bound? Hixie already cleverly disguised the X as [X]engamous in the latest

RE: [Bug 11375] New: [IndexedDB] Error codes need to be assigned new numbers

2010-12-14 Thread Pablo Castro
From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jeremy Orlow Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 5:03 AM I noticed that QUOTA_ERR is commented out.  I can't remember when or why and the blame history is a bit mangled.  Does anyone else?  In Chromium we

Re: [Bug 11375] New: [IndexedDB] Error codes need to be assigned new numbers

2010-12-14 Thread Jeremy Orlow
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:08 AM, Pablo Castro pablo.cas...@microsoft.comwrote: From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jeremy Orlow Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 5:03 AM I noticed that QUOTA_ERR is commented out. I can't remember when or

RE: [Bug 11351] New: [IndexedDB] Should we have a maximum key size (or something like that)?

2010-12-14 Thread Pablo Castro
From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonas Sicking Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 1:42 PM On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: Any more thoughts on this? I don't feel strongly one way or another.

Re: [Bug 11351] New: [IndexedDB] Should we have a maximum key size (or something like that)?

2010-12-14 Thread Jeremy Orlow
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Pablo Castro pablo.cas...@microsoft.comwrote: From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonas Sicking Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 1:42 PM On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org

Re: [Bug 11375] New: [IndexedDB] Error codes need to be assigned new numbers

2010-12-14 Thread Shawn Wilsher
On 12/14/2010 4:16 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote: Shawn said NOT_FOUND_ERR. NOT_ALLOWED_ERR seems slightly better to me. Shawn, what do you think? I don't have a strong opinion either way. Cheers, Shawn smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[Bug 11553] New: Ensure indexedDBSync is on the right worker interface

2010-12-14 Thread bugzilla
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11553 Summary: Ensure indexedDBSync is on the right worker interface Product: WebAppsWG Version: unspecified Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal