On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 19:05:56 -0400, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com
wrote:
On Sep 10, 2010, at 5:35 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Hi,
I thought I'd email some people directly to figure out what we can do
with Attr as it is one of the last bits not defined yet in Web DOM Core
and I
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:39:14 -0400, Per-Erik Brodin
per-erik.bro...@ericsson.com wrote:
Michael A. Puls II wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:37:24 -0400, Per-Erik Brodin wrote:
When parsing an event stream, allowing carriage return, carriage return
line feed, and line feed to denote line
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:37:24 -0400, Per-Erik Brodin
per-erik.bro...@ericsson.com wrote:
When parsing an event stream, allowing carriage return, carriage return
line feed, and line feed to denote line endings introduces unnecessary
ambiguity into the spec. For example, the sequence \r\r\n\n
On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 06:13:22 -0400, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
Hi,
On Aug 18, 2009, at 04:37 , Michael A. Puls II wrote:
I think it'd be great to have a *simple to use* API specifically for
loading local files on local pages (file://).
The DAP WG is just getting started
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 23:50:18 -0400, Michael A. Puls II
shadow2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:18:03 -0400, Michael A. Puls II
shadow2...@gmail.com wrote:
However note that I'm not sure that failing to parse should fire an
error event. For someone only caring about responseText
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:25:09 -0400, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Michael A. Puls
IIshadow2...@gmail.com wrote:
But, it seems the error progress event doesn't give any error info.
Well, it does give error information, but in the cryptic form of
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:18:03 -0400, Michael A. Puls II
shadow2...@gmail.com wrote:
However note that I'm not sure that failing to parse should fire an
error event. For someone only caring about responseText things loaded
just fine. (I think I actually changed firefox from what you describe
Currently, xhr's this.status model doesn't work too well with file://.
One big reason for this is that browser implementations don't simulate
HTTP status codes for file:// operations. In short, this.status always
equals 0, which means you have to do something like this:
var req = new
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 06:22:49 -0400, timeless timel...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd rather we formally indicate that using file urls in
XMLHttpRequests is not expected to work with an explanation that there
are security concerns which prevent XMLHttpRequest safely exposing
arbitrary file urls.
Saying
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 05:50:13 -0400, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com
wrote:
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 09:19:03 +0200, Michael A. Puls II
shadow2...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not saying file: support should be added to the XHR spec, but there
should be some 'file:// for XHR' guidelines that browsers
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:25:35 -0400, Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Michael A. Puls
IIshadow2...@gmail.com wrote:
However, 3 out of the 4 main browsers support it. Behavior and security
could be aligned and improved.
We should tread carefully here. The
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 16:27:29 -0400, Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Michael A. Puls
IIshadow2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:25:35 -0400, Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com
wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Michael A. Puls
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:13:20 -0400, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Without commenting on the results in other browsers:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Michael A. Puls
IIshadow2...@gmail.com wrote:
Things that could be improved:
1. For Firefox and file_that_does_not_exist.txt,
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:08:25 -0400, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Michael A. Puls
IIshadow2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:09:53 -0400, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc
wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Michael A. Puls
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 22:34:47 -0400, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 7:13 PM, Michael A. Puls
IIshadow2...@gmail.com wrote:
Or is there another reason you end up
using file:// urls?
Yes, one thing I'm doing is loading a local xspf file from a local web
page
(via
that mean that
if the document was loaded using file: uri, then the XHR could be used
for loading a file?
Currently, this behavior is not standard, and there are interoperability
issues across user agents. Michael Puls II did ran some tests some time
ago and posted these on this listserv:
http
I think it'd be great to have a *simple to use* API specifically for
loading local files on local pages (file://).
There's already DOM3 Load and Save, but few want anything to do with that
(it's not simple for one).
There's also the previous document.load, but it's half broken in Opera,
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:46:35 -0400, Glen lonedesign...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi,
Why are XML and Http capitalized differently? Shouldn't it be
XmlHttpRequest?
I don't know. I have a habit of typing XMLHTTPRequest.
--
Michael
On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 06:35:16 -0400, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com
wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 19:57:20 +0200, Erik Arvidsson
erik.arvids...@gmail.com wrote:
The HTML5 spec says to fire the input event when the user changes a
radio
button or a checkbox. However, the spec says When the
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Michael A. Puls II
shadow2...@gmail.com wrote:
I think file:// should be a first class citizen when it comes to xhr (local
page loading local .xml file for example).
However, currently, there are some interoperability problems.
1. XHR doesn't work on local
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 23:20:16 -0400, Boris Zbarsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Garrett Smith wrote:
I have created a demo which expects that setting textContent to null
will have no effect, as per DOM Core 3.
Except that's not what DOM Core 3 says. Please do read what it says.
Carefully:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 08:34:03 -0400, Boris Zbarsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael A. Puls II wrote:
'textContent' takes a DOMString, null is not one
Uh... Except null IS a DOMString according to the DOM specs. Certainly
they implicitly treat it as one, and one of the clarifications
22 matches
Mail list logo
