Hi,
I've moved my draft to W3C repository at
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/undomanager/raw-file/tip/undomanager.html
At this point, I'd like the editing community group to be in charge of this
proposal.
- Ryosuke
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 11:44 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> Greetings all,
>
> As you maybe a
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8406
Sirisian changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|VERIFIED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
I didn't realize this was actually added to the spec:
> The optional options dictionary argument contains a key, oneTimeOnly that
defaults to false. If set to true, then the first time the Blob URI is
dereferenced, user agents MUST automatically revoke that Blob URI without
needing a call to revok
On 3/27/12 4:00 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
Since there are so may places in XHR, HTML5, etc., that interact with
HTTP semantics, it would be better to define this in one place for all
uses
Sounds good to me. It just needs to be defined (and the definition
linked to from the statusText definition,
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 3/27/12 3:36 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>
>> On 3/27/12 3:35 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
>>
>>> The TEXT rule is only used for descriptive field contents and values
>>> that are not intended to be interpreted by the message parser. Words
>>> of
On 3/27/12 3:36 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 3/27/12 3:35 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
The TEXT rule is only used for descriptive field contents and values
that are not intended to be interpreted by the message parser. Words
of *TEXT MAY contain characters from character sets other than ISO-
8859-1 [22
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 3/27/12 2:46 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
>
>> Is this really a problem?
>>
>
> Yes. We've run into bug reports in the past of sites sending some pretty
> random bytes in the HTTP status text, then reading .statusText from script.
> If we wan
On 3/27/12 3:35 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
The TEXT rule is only used for descriptive field contents and values
that are not intended to be interpreted by the message parser. Words
of *TEXT MAY contain characters from character sets other than ISO-
8859-1 [22] only when encoded accord
On 3/27/12 2:46 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
Is this really a problem?
Yes. We've run into bug reports in the past of sites sending some
pretty random bytes in the HTTP status text, then reading .statusText
from script. If we want interop here, we need to define the conversion.
HTTP defines th
Is this really a problem? HTTP defines the form and encoding of the status
text, and WebIDL/ES defines the form and encoding of DOMString. Adding an
explicit conversion definition seems redundant and overspecified. I would
argue the same for all other cases in the spec where it calls out an
explici
Wrong list. But for the sake of web crawlers: send may require an argument in
some implementations. Use null.
Such as: xhr.send(null);
And for other readers, this message I'm replying to may be spam. Intelligent
noise.
-Charles
On Mar 27, 2012, at 1:15 AM, joseph godwin wrote:
> l cannot
The spec says:
Return the HTTP status text.
But the HTTP status text is a sequence of bytes, while the return value
for statusText is a DOMString. The conversion from one to the other
needs to be defined.
-Boris
l cannot access google apps business, l try to check my domain but not responding and it bring out all these Can't connect to server:[Exception... "Not enough arguments [nsIXMLHttpRequest.send]" nsresult: "0x80570001 (NS_ERROR_XPC_NOT_ENOUGH_ARGS)" location: "JS frame :: https://www.google.c
Original Message
Subject:RfC: LCWD of HTML5 Web Messaging; deadline April 3
Resent-Date:Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:40:01 +
Resent-From:
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 10:39:17 -0400
From: ext Arthur Barstow
To: public-webapps
This is a Request for Commentsfor the
Original Message
Subject:RfC: LCWD of Web Workers; deadline April 3
Resent-Date:Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:34:30 +
Resent-From:
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 10:33:38 -0400
From: ext Arthur Barstow
To: public-webapps
This is a Request for Commentsfor the March
Original Message
Subject:RfC: LCWD of Web Workers; deadline April 3
Resent-Date:Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:34:30 +
Resent-From:
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 10:33:38 -0400
From: ext Arthur Barstow
To: public-webapps
This is a Request for Commentsfor the March 1
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16534
Art Barstow changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
On 27.3.2012 11:43, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Ian Hickson mailto:i...@hixie.ch>> wrote:
> Anything's possible, but I think the pain here would far
outweigh the
> benefits. There would be some
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > Anything's possible, but I think the pain here would far outweigh the
> > benefits. There would be some really hard questions to answer, too (e.g.
> > what would innerHTML return? If yo
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Feras Moussa wrote:
> This isn't clear from the spec (And I've made a note to clarify it) but
> URLs for
> streams should be one time use URLs (once used it should be automatically
> revoked).
Is it always possible to define that in a sane way?
For example, w
Ryosuke Niwa skreiv Tue, 20 Mar 2012 18:54:11 +0100
We're trying to figure out inside which element the editing operation
must
be done when a keypress event handler changes the focused element /
selection for https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81661.
Should it be done at wherever focus
21 matches
Mail list logo
