Re: [WebIDL] Exceptions

2011-07-07 Thread Aryeh Gregor
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote: Gecko is buggy if it is using the dynamic scope. Please file that bug and cc: me. Gecko says the exception is an instanceof the DOMException object that corresponds to *any* window. So e instanceof window1.DOMException

Re: [WebIDL] Exceptions

2011-07-07 Thread Brendan Eich
On Jul 7, 2011, at 10:09 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote: Gecko is buggy if it is using the dynamic scope. Please file that bug and cc: me. Gecko says the exception is an instanceof the DOMException object that corresponds to

Re: [WebIDL] Exceptions

2011-07-07 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:04 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote: On Wed, 6 Jul 2011, Aryeh Gregor wrote: The thing I don't like about this proposal is that it encourages authors to use e instanceof IndexSizeError or similar.  This will work 98% of the time and then fail in an extremely

Re: [WebIDL] Exceptions

2011-07-07 Thread Aryeh Gregor
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: It's a pain since it forces us to try to coordinate codes across multiple specifications, working groups and standards organizations. So far this has failed resulting in multiple specifications defining their own exception

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Jonas Sicking
Hi All, I've finally caught up on all the emails in this thread. Here are my impressions so far. I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire before mutation notifications is doable. Trying to make all APIs that would, or could, mutate the DOM throw or otherwise fail would be much too complex

Re: [FileAPI] Updates to FileAPI Editor's Draft

2011-07-07 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote: Sorry if these have all been discussed before. I just read the File API for the first time and 2 random questions popped in my head. 1) If I'm using readAsText with a particular encoding and the data in the file is not

RE: publish Last Call Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline July 7

2011-07-07 Thread Adrian Bateman
Microsoft supports publishing a Last Call working draft of the Web IDL spec. We believe that the spec is feature complete and meets the requirements below. While we have a few reservations about Exceptions and share some of the concerns voiced in the separate thread on that topic, we believe that

Re: [WebIDL] Exceptions

2011-07-07 Thread Ian Hickson
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Jonas Sicking wrote: It's a pain since it forces us to try to coordinate codes across multiple specifications, working groups and standards organizations. Anything that allows us to _not_ coordinate is an epic disaster, IMHO. We absolutely should be coordinating. How else

[Bug 13178] New: binaryType should be immutable after connection is established

2011-07-07 Thread bugzilla
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13178 Summary: binaryType should be immutable after connection is established Product: WebAppsWG Version: unspecified Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW

Re: [WebIDL] Exceptions

2011-07-07 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote: On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Jonas Sicking wrote: It's a pain since it forces us to try to coordinate codes across multiple specifications, working groups and standards organizations. Anything that allows us to _not_ coordinate is an

Re: [indexeddb] Calling update on a cursor index with a unique value constraint

2011-07-07 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com wrote: What is the expected behavior when calling update() in a cursor index that requires unique values.  Firefox allows the update, even when it results in a duplicate value.  Chrome throws an error event with the code

Re: [indexeddb] Calling update on a cursor index with a unique value constraint

2011-07-07 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com We believe an error should be thrown because of the violation of the unique value index constraint and the error code should be set to CONSTRAINT_ERR.  

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Ryosuke Niwa
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire before mutation notifications is doable. I concur. Being synchronous was one of the reasons why the existing DOM mutation events don't work. We shouldn't adding yet-another

Frame embedding: One problem, three possible specs?

2011-07-07 Thread Thomas Roessler
(Warning, this is cross-posted widely. One of the lists is the IETF websec mailing list, to which the IETF NOTE WELL applies: http://www.ietf.org/about/note-well.html) Folks, there appear to be at least three possible specifications addressing this space, with similar but different designs:

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Ryosuke Niwa
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote: Right. But on the other hand, if this code were to run inside a mutation observer, it won't work in your proposal either. So the questions is whether writing a function that depends on state updated by the mutation

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Olli Pettay
On 07/07/2011 10:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: Hi All, I've finally caught up on all the emails in this thread. Here are my impressions so far. I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire before mutation notifications is doable. Trying to make all APIs that would, or could, mutate the DOM

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Rafael Weinstein
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire before mutation notifications is doable. I concur.  Being synchronous was one of the reasons why the

[Bug 13180] New: [Editorial] Causes that lead to failing the WebSocket connection, which results in an error event, should be more clearly specified

2011-07-07 Thread bugzilla
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13180 Summary: [Editorial] Causes that lead to failing the WebSocket connection, which results in an error event, should be more clearly specified Product: WebAppsWG Version:

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Olli Pettay
On 07/08/2011 12:29 AM, Olli Pettay wrote: On 07/07/2011 10:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: Hi All, I've finally caught up on all the emails in this thread. Here are my impressions so far. I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire before mutation notifications is doable. Trying to make all

[websockets] Getting WebSockets API to Last Call

2011-07-07 Thread Adrian Bateman
We're keen to resolve the remaining issues with the WebSockets API and have a timetable to get to Candidate Recommendation. From informal conversations we've had, we believe other browser vendors share this goal. I think the current WebSocket API is feature complete and meets the requirements

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Rafael Weinstein rafa...@google.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire before mutation notifications

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread John J Barton
Jonas Sicking wrote: We are definitely short on use cases for mutation events in general which is a problem. 1. Graphical breakpoints. The user marks some DOM element or attribute to trigger break. The debugger inserts mutation listeners to watch for the event that causes that

Re: Frame embedding: One problem, three possible specs?

2011-07-07 Thread Adam Barth
My sense from talking with folks is that there isn't a lot of enthusiasm for supporting this use case in CSP at the present time. We're trying to concentrate on a core set of directives for the first iteration. If it helps reduce complexity, you might consider dropping option (1) for the time

RE: [indexeddb] Behavior when calling IDBCursor.continue multiple times

2011-07-07 Thread Eliot Graff
For both IDBCursor.continue and IDBCursorSync.continue, Added one paragraph to the description: If you call this method multiple times, the cursor throws a NOT_ALLOWED_ERR exception and does not continue. If you catch the error you can then iterate through the cursor normally. Standardized

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:21 PM, John J Barton johnjbar...@johnjbarton.com wrote: Jonas Sicking wrote:  We are definitely short on use cases for mutation events in general which is a problem. 1. Graphical breakpoints. The user marks some DOM element or attribute to trigger break. The

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread John J Barton
Rafael Weinstein wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire before mutation notifications is doable. I concur. Being

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/7/11 6:28 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: In gecko you can for example use the nsIMutationObserver notification to implement this. Maybe you can, and maybe not. Those fire at unsafe times and are limited in what you can do from them. Arbitrary debugging doesn't fit the bill. But yes, in

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Ryosuke Niwa
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:43 PM, John J Barton johnjbar...@johnjbarton.comwrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire before mutation

Re: [websockets] Getting WebSockets API to Last Call

2011-07-07 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com wrote: We're keen to resolve the remaining issues with the WebSockets API and have a timetable to get to Candidate Recommendation. From informal conversations we've had, we believe other browser vendors share this goal. I

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Olli Pettay
On 07/08/2011 01:43 AM, John J Barton wrote: Rafael Weinstein wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire before mutation notifications is

RE: [websockets] Getting WebSockets API to Last Call

2011-07-07 Thread Adrian Bateman
On Thursday, July 07, 2011 3:55 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com wrote: 12917 - deflate-stream should be an optional extension when establishing a connection Resolved, WontFix MICROSOFT PROPOSAL: We strongly disagree with the

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:43 PM, John J Barton johnjbar...@johnjbarton.com wrote: In short before spending more time on this, I'd like to see a comprehensive proposal, including a description of the use cases it solves and how it solves them. I strongly doubt that this approach is practical.

RE: Frame embedding: One problem, three possible specs?

2011-07-07 Thread Hill, Brad
The latest draft of the WebAppSec charter includes a secure cross-domain framing mechanism as a distinct deliverable from the CSP, it's relation is only in proposing re-use of same browsing context capability grammar as CSP. So retaining option #1 is not in conflict with dropping

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread John J Barton
Olli Pettay wrote: On 07/08/2011 01:43 AM, John J Barton wrote: Rafael Weinstein wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire before mutation

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Rafael Weinstein
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Rafael Weinstein rafa...@google.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: I don't

RE: [indexeddb] openCursor optional parameters issue

2011-07-07 Thread Eliot Graff
Done and pushed to Mercurial. Updated sync and async versions of openCursor on ObjectStore and Index as follows: made type of 'range' equal to any made 'range' nullable Eliot -Original Message- From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps- requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of

Re: [indexeddb] openCursor optional parameters issue

2011-07-07 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Eliot Graff eliot.gr...@microsoft.com wrote: Done and pushed to Mercurial. Updated sync and async versions of openCursor on ObjectStore and Index as follows: made type of 'range' equal to any made 'range' nullable I think you missed updating one of the

RE: [indexeddb] Calling update on a cursor index with a unique value constraint

2011-07-07 Thread Israel Hilerio
On Thursday, July 07, 2011 1:46 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com We believe an error should be thrown because of the violation of the unique value index

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Rafael Weinstein rafa...@google.com wrote: So yes, my proposal only solves the usecase outside mutation handlers. However this is arguably better than never solving the use case as in your proposal. I'm sure people will end up writing buggy code, but ideally

Re: [indexeddb] Calling update on a cursor index with a unique value constraint

2011-07-07 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com wrote: On Thursday, July 07, 2011 1:46 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com We believe an

Re: Mutation events replacement

2011-07-07 Thread John J. Barton
On 7/7/2011 6:38 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Rafael Weinsteinrafa...@google.com wrote: So yes, my proposal only solves the usecase outside mutation handlers. However this is arguably better than never solving the use case as in your proposal. I'm sure people will

Re: [FileAPI] FileReader.readAsXXX when pased null

2011-07-07 Thread Arun Ranganathan
On 7/6/11 10:13 PM, Cameron McCormack wrote: Hi Arun, Adrian Bateman: The spec doesn't seem to state this explicitly and I can't tell if there is supposed to be an implicit requirement from WebIDL. Perhaps the expectation is that this falls into the error condition and should set readyState to