On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 22:33:38 +1100, David Håsäther hasat...@gmail.com
wrote:
* Charles McCathieNevile @2008-10-21 12:27:
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/webapi/progress/Progress.html?rev=1.24
Hopefully this draft is ready for last call. So please have a look
through it
There
* Charles McCathieNevile @2008-10-21 12:27:
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/webapi/progress/Progress.html?rev=1.24
Hopefully this draft is ready for last call. So please have a look
through it
There are two instances of XMLHTTPRequest, which should be
XMLHttpRequest.
--
David
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 8:05 AM, Charles McCathieNevile
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 09:08:56 +0200, Jonas Sicking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Garrett Smith wrote:
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 5:51 AM, Jonas Sicking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Garrett Smith wrote:
I agree. Not sure
Garrett Smith wrote:
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 5:51 AM, Jonas Sicking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Garrett Smith wrote:
I agree. Not sure if that is what you want to do before or after getting the
load/error/abort event though?
I should mention that I'm not particularly married to having things
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 5:51 AM, Jonas Sicking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Garrett Smith wrote:
I agree. Not sure if that is what you want to do before or after getting the
load/error/abort event though?
I should mention that I'm not particularly married to having things one way
or another.
Garrett Smith wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Garrett Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 3:27 AM, Charles McCathieNevile
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/webapi/progress/Progress.html?rev=1.24
Hopefully this draft is ready for last
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 15:38:45 +0200, Jonas Sicking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do remember that we talked about it that way, and also talked about
having the default action of the loadend event be to fire the
appropriate abort/error/load event.
However I'm not sure why that way is better?
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 7:01 AM, Anne van Kesteren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 15:38:45 +0200, Jonas Sicking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do like the symmetry in the current proposal where loadstart is the
first thing that fires, and loadend is the last thing. Seems very
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Jonas Sicking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Garrett Smith wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Garrett Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 3:27 AM, Charles McCathieNevile
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/webapi/progress/Progress.html?rev=1.24
Hopefully this draft is ready for last call. So please have a look through
it, and if you have any test cases we can set up I would be very grateful
(as would anyone trying to test something as a way of figuring
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Garrett Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 3:27 AM, Charles McCathieNevile
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/webapi/progress/Progress.html?rev=1.24
Hopefully this draft is ready for last call. So please
11 matches
Mail list logo
