Le 10/03/11 16:26, Dimitri Glazkov a écrit :
Ok, this is interesting. Which proposal by Google is ghost of Daniel
referring to? I don't think there is one yet?
This kind of things for instance?
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Component_Model_Use_Cases#Reacting_to_bound_element_state_change
That's just use cases. I used the latest draft of XBL2 for syntax --
might as well be pseudocode at this point.
:DG
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Daniel Glazman
daniel.glaz...@disruptive-innovations.com wrote:
Le 10/03/11 16:26, Dimitri Glazkov a écrit :
Ok, this is interesting. Which
Cameron++
Also, this is a public wiki. If you feel like the use cases aren't
covering the problem domain to your satisfaction, please feel
encouraged to make additions.
:DG
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Cameron McCormack c...@mcc.id.au wrote:
Daniel Glazman:
Ok, so don't focus on the
Le 10/03/11 16:46, Cameron McCormack a écrit :
We should think of XBL as being a DOM-based thing, rather than an XML-
based thing. Then we can have HTML syntax for the cases where
everything is within a text/html document, and XML syntax for the cases
like the ones I brought up, where you
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Daniel Glazman
daniel.glaz...@disruptive-innovations.com wrote:
Le 10/03/11 16:46, Cameron McCormack a écrit :
We should think of XBL as being a DOM-based thing, rather than an XML-
based thing. Then we can have HTML syntax for the cases where
everything is
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
CDNs of various sorts, dedicated hostnames for different sorts of content
(a la existing images.something.com setups), that sort of thing.
If we want to not allow cross-site loading at all, those cases break. If we
want
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 3/9/11 7:30 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
From the perspective of the component, the isolation is unfairly
punishing -- you can't use the outside DOM or even DOM element on
which you're hoisted, you can't add methods to
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:59 AM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
1) Cross-site components are safe to use.
2) You can't screw up and depend on implementation details of a
component, because if you're
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
CDNs of various sorts, dedicated hostnames for different sorts of content
(a la existing images.something.com setups), that sort of thing.
If
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 3/10/11 4:58 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
We want to be useful and not in the way for this use case.
Agreed-ish.
For the cases where isolation is necessary, be that mashups or
browser's implementation of HTML elements
Le 10/03/11 16:55, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit :
The HTML serialization of an ordinary web page isn't usable in a user
agent having no knowledge of HTML, either. Why is this different?
Do you have different serializations for another helper technology
called CSS ? No. Why should it be different
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Daniel Glazman
daniel.glaz...@disruptive-innovations.com wrote:
Le 10/03/11 16:55, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit :
The HTML serialization of an ordinary web page isn't usable in a user
agent having no knowledge of HTML, either. Why is this different?
Do you have
On Fri, 11 Mar 2011, Cameron McCormack wrote:
Anne van Kesteren:
Lets at least remove sequenceT from the draft then.
Cameron McCormack:
Other specifications use it, and it really serves a different
purpose from things like NodeList, like passing in native Array
objects to DOM
On 03/10/2011 02:56 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
serialization, but it's easy to imagine it also having an XML
serialization for use directly in SVG or similar.
~TJ
Certainly, we'd prefer to have an XML representation of the component
language for use with XForms for similar reasons. XForms
This is a Request for Comments for the March 10 Last Call Working Draft
of Progress Events:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-progress-events-20110310/
If you have any comments, please send them to the following list by 1
June 2011 at the latest:
public-webapps@w3.org
-Art Barstow
This is a Request for Comments for the March 10 Last Call Working Draft
of Server-sent Events:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-eventsource-20110310/
If you have any comments, please send them to the following list by 21
April 2011 at the latest:
public-webapps@w3.org
-Art Barstow
This is a Request for Comments for the March 10 Last Call Working Draft
of Web Workers:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-workers-20110310/
If you have any comments, please send them to the following list by 21
April 2011 at the latest:
public-webapps@w3.org
-Art Barstow
Ian Hickson:
Web Apps 1.0 will change if you need it to. Don't constrain on my account
here. I'll do whatever you think we should do. The only places I use it
are in an argument to a method because I want to allow authors to pass in
literal JS Arrays of values, and on a NodeList descendant
On Fri, 11 Mar 2011, Cameron McCormack wrote:
Ian Hickson:
Web Apps 1.0 will change if you need it to. Don't constrain on my account
here. I'll do whatever you think we should do. The only places I use it
are in an argument to a method because I want to allow authors to pass in
literal
Ian Hickson:
Makes sense. What I really want is a NodeList-like interface, but ideally
one that supports all the Array accessors, but I don't want to have to
redefine it each time. Is there some way we could get a macro for that
kind of thing?
See also:
Summary: There is no need to build another type of inheritance into
the component model, since all DOM already has an inheritance
mechanism.
Another set of thoughts around use cases
(http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Component_Model_Use_Cases)
A large part of complexity of the current XBL2 draft comes
On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 01:02:25 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 11 Mar 2011, Cameron McCormack wrote:
Anne van Kesteren:
Lets at least remove sequenceT from the draft then.
Cameron McCormack:
Other specifications use it, and it really serves a different
purpose from things
22 matches
Mail list logo
