On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Tobie Langel tobie.lan...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 3:35 AM, Michael[tm] Smith m...@w3.org wrote:
Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com, 2015-02-02 08:47 -0500:
Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/54cf7fe0.6090...@gmail.com
On 2/2/15 7:14 AM,
Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com, 2015-02-02 08:47 -0500:
Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/54cf7fe0.6090...@gmail.com
On 2/2/15 7:14 AM, Tobie Langel wrote:
Heads-up that the link to the Editor's Draft of the IndexedDB spec is now
a 404.
Thanks for reporting this Tobie. I've asked
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 3:35 AM, Michael[tm] Smith m...@w3.org wrote:
Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com, 2015-02-02 08:47 -0500:
Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/54cf7fe0.6090...@gmail.com
On 2/2/15 7:14 AM, Tobie Langel wrote:
Would recommend redirecting to the ED of the next
Hi,
Heads-up that the link to the Editor's Draft of the IndexedDB spec is now a
404.
Not sure whether that is on purpose or an accident.
Would recommend redirecting to the ED of the next version of the spec.
Thanks,
--tobie
On 2/2/15 7:14 AM, Tobie Langel wrote:
Hi,
Heads-up that the link to the Editor's Draft of the IndexedDB spec is
now a 404.
Thanks for reporting this Tobie. I've asked Joshua and Mike Smith to
address this problem.
Not sure whether that is on purpose or an accident.
This is a side
