On Tue Oct 21 09:36 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
1.1 Use cases (3. Audio/Photo editor with offline access or local
cache for
speed)
* Edited files should be accessible by other client-side
applications
- Having the sandboxed file system share its contents between all
apps
I don't see a contradiction.
Each *web* app sees only files accessible from its domain (so your two
apps have distinct pic.jpeg).
Each *native* app has access to whatever the operating system says.
Or am I missing something in your message?
Cheers,
David
On 22/10/14 12:23, Jonathan Bond-Caron
22.10.2014, 12:32, David Rajchenbach-Teller dtel...@mozilla.com:
I don't see a contradiction.
Each *web* app sees only files accessible from its domain (so your two
apps have distinct pic.jpeg).
Each *native* app has access to whatever the operating system says.
There are a lot of use cases
On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
If you are an Editor and you did not register for the meeting please
note:
a) If you can join the meeting via the teleconf bridge, please: 1) add
your spec to the Potential Topics list and identify high priority
discussion points; 2) plan to
On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
If you are an Editor and you did not register for the meeting please
note:
a) If you can join the meeting via the teleconf bridge, please: 1) add
your spec to the Potential Topics list and identify high priority
discussion points; 2) plan to
On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
If you are an Editor and you did not register for the meeting please
note:
a) If you can join the meeting via the teleconf bridge, please: 1) add
your spec to the Potential Topics list and identify high priority
discussion points; 2) plan to
On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
If you are an Editor and you did not register for the meeting please
note:
a) If you can join the meeting via the teleconf bridge, please: 1) add
your spec to the Potential Topics list and identify high priority
discussion points; 2) plan to
On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
The [Agenda] page for the October 27-28 meeting now includes a list of
Potential Topics and other than a one hour block on Monday for the
Editing TF plus IndieUI group (to discuss Editing and Selection API
specs), currently, all other time slots are
On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
If you are an Editor and you did not register for the meeting please
note:
a) If you can join the meeting via the teleconf bridge, please: 1) add
your spec to the Potential Topics list and identify high priority
discussion points; 2) plan to
On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
If you are an Editor and you did not register for the meeting please
note:
a) If you can join the meeting via the teleconf bridge, please: 1) add
your spec to the Potential Topics list and identify high priority
discussion points; 2) plan to
Hi Arthur,
OK. Since I hurried, there're some odd texts left. Fixed:
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/streams-api/rev/891635210233
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 10:53 PM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 10/14/14 11:06 PM, Takeshi Yoshino wrote:
Not to confuse people, too late but I replaced
Ali,
First, thanks for your timely comments :) I’m in the process of editing the
FileSystem API.
Responses inline:
On Oct 21, 2014, at 4:36 PM, Ali Alabbas a...@microsoft.com wrote:
1.1 Use cases (3. Audio/Photo editor with offline access or local cache for
speed)
* Edited files
Art, WebAppsWG:
THIS IS A STATIC STATUS SNAPSHOT EMAIL AND THUS MAY BE OUT OF DATE.
PLEASE REFERENCE THE LIVING STATUS HERE:
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/PubStatus/Fullscreen
= STATIC SNAPSHOT 2014-295 =
Status of Fullscreen:
Just as the CSSWG already resolved[1], the
Hi folks,
Based on our UX studies for Chrome, we’ve found the clearest way to do
permissions UX for the Push API will be to have one prompt[1] that grants
both full push messaging and background sync[2], and a separate prompt[3]
that grants notifications plus a restricted form of push where each
On Wednesday, October 22, 2014 8:41 AM. John Mellor wrote:
See https://github.com/w3c/push-api/issues/74 and
https://github.com/w3c/push-api/issues/82 for more details on when and why
registrations might expire in a typical push service.
Thanks John for the pointers!
I have a few more
given the magnitude of the changes in [changeset], a new WD should be
published.
Can we please wait until after the TPAC week to publish the proposed Streams
heartbeat? Given the substantive changes being made here I think it would be
best to have a WebApps WG discussion as proposed by Art
On Wednesday, October 22, 2014 9:33 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
A UA needs to be made aware of expiration or invalidation. This can be one
of two ways: an explicit, prior commitment to a definite expiration, or -
because I've been told that time-based expiration has issues - an explicit
17 matches
Mail list logo
