On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 06:49, Olli Pettay olli.pet...@helsinki.fi wrote:
On 05/10/2011 01:44 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Boris Zbarskybzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
This does mean firing tens of thousands of events during load on some
pages
(e.g. wikipedia article
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Olli Pettay olli.pet...@helsinki.fi wrote:
Something like that might be better. Do you have the exact API in mind?
Well, just the same as I originally proposed, except with arrays
instead of scalars. But Hironori Bono's reply has mooted this idea
anyway.
2011/5/11 Aryeh Gregor simetrical+...@gmail.com:
Here's an alternative suggestion that addresses the issues I had
above, while (I think) still addressing all your use-cases. Create a
new interface:
interface SpellcheckRange {
readonly unsigned long start;
readonly unsigned long length;
2011/5/11 timeless timel...@gmail.com:
With this model, i'd want the UA to provide instances for words which
are misspelled according to its standard dictionary but which are in
its user's custom dictionary. The web page can try to make
suggestions, but generally the UA will choose to ignore
On 05/12/2011 01:29 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
2011/5/11 timelesstimel...@gmail.com:
With this model, i'd want the UA to provide instances for words which
are misspelled according to its standard dictionary but which are in
its user's custom dictionary. The web page can try to make
suggestions,
Greetings Aryeh, et al,
Thank you for your alternative suggestion.
In my honest opinion, I do not stick to my interfaces so much if there
are better alternatives. My proposal is just based on my prototype,
which has been uploaded to http://webkit.org/b/59693, and I wish
someone in this ML
On 05/10/2011 01:44 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Boris Zbarskybzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
This does mean firing tens of thousands of events during load on some pages
(e.g. wikipedia article edit pages) Maybe that's not a big deal.
If that's too many events,
On 05/10/2011 08:33 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Olli Pettayolli.pet...@helsinki.fi wrote:
Just a quick test on Nokia N900 (which is already a bit old mobile
phone) using a recent browser:
dispatching 1 events to a deep (depth 100) DOM (without
listeners for the
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Olli Pettay olli.pet...@helsinki.fi wrote:
Just a quick test on Nokia N900 (which is already a bit old mobile
phone) using a recent browser:
dispatching 1 events to a deep (depth 100) DOM (without
listeners for the event - for testing purposes) takes about
On 05/10/2011 08:33 PM, Adam Shannon wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 06:49, Olli Pettayolli.pet...@helsinki.fi wrote:
On 05/10/2011 01:44 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Boris Zbarskybzbar...@mit.eduwrote:
This does mean firing tens of thousands of events during
Greetings all,
Thank you so much for all of your comments.
Even though I cannot answer all of them, I have added my responses to
some comments.
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Hironori Bono (坊野 博典) hb...@google.com wrote:
function CheckText(text) {
var result = new Array;
var app = new
On 05/09/2011 11:58 AM, Hironori Bono (坊野 博典) wrote:
Greetings,
I'm Hironori Bono, a software engineer for Google Chrome.
We recently received requests from web-application developers (and
extension developers) that they would like to use the spellchecker
Quite different targets.
integrated
This is the privacy violation, and not acceptable as such.
I wonder how to not expose native spellchecker data to web page, yet
support this use case. Or do we need yet another permission, which user
has to give to the page before the spellchecker API fully working.
In general permission
2011/5/9 Hironori Bono (坊野 博典) hb...@google.com:
function CheckTextOfNode(node) {
// Remove all the previous spellchecking results.
window.spellCheckController.removeMarkers(node);
// Check the text in the specified node.
var result = CheckText(node.innerText ? node.innerText :
On 5/9/11 3:39 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
* Every time the UA would normally invoke its spellchecker on a word,
it fires a spellcheck event at the element in question
This does mean firing tens of thousands of events during load on some
pages (e.g. wikipedia article edit pages) Maybe that's
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
This does mean firing tens of thousands of events during load on some pages
(e.g. wikipedia article edit pages) Maybe that's not a big deal.
If that's too many events, couldn't the browser optimize by not
spellchecking
16 matches
Mail list logo
