On 15/03/2014 18:44 , Johannes Wilm wrote:
yes btw -- where should one go to lobby in favor of the editing spec? I
have been communicating with several other browser-based editor
projects, and there seems to be a general interest of more communication
with the browser creators and spec writers.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/#originOfBlobURL
LGTM. Assuming that UAs implement this, that makes Workers automatically
support blob: URLs, too.
I don't think this is the
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24998
Anne ann...@annevk.nl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Hallvord R. M. Steen
hst...@mozilla.com wrote:
So, the story so far is that the spec has added something it labels
semi-trusted events - that is an event triggered from a trusted event of a
whitelisted type. The precedence here is popup blocking - browsers
* Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/#originOfBlobURL
LGTM. Assuming that UAs implement this, that makes Workers automatically
support blob: URLs, too.
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 6:59 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/#originOfBlobURL
LGTM. Assuming that UAs implement this, that
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25081
Bug ID: 25081
Summary: Make read operation really async
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23346
Anne ann...@annevk.nl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 2/13/14 5:35 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Also, Type 2 can be used for built-in elements
Built-in elements need Type 4.
Well, Chrome does not have Type 4, yet is implementing parts of the
their elements using shadow
On 3/17/14 12:08 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Well, Chrome does not have Type 4, yet is implementing parts of the
their elements using shadow DOM constructs.
What makes you say Chrome doesn't have Type 4?
They do in fact have it for the case in question, as far as I can tell
(inaccessible
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 2/13/14 5:35 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Also, Type 2 can be used for built-in elements
Built-in elements need Type 4.
Well, Chrome does not
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 4:59 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/#originOfBlobURL
LGTM. Assuming that UAs implement this, that makes
On Mar 17, 2014, at 4:59 AM, Robin Berjon ro...@w3.org wrote:
On 15/03/2014 18:44 , Johannes Wilm wrote:
yes btw -- where should one go to lobby in favor of the editing spec? I
have been communicating with several other browser-based editor
projects, and there seems to be a general interest of
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25088
Bug ID: 25088
Summary: 'orientationchange' should fire on Window so that
there can be a body event handler for it
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
14 matches
Mail list logo
