http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14677
Summary: Hey, There! =D My name is Felipe. And I'm looking
around this new tecnology. I'm really enjoying it.
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: Other
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14677
Simon Pieters sim...@opera.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13786
Anne ann...@opera.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14199
Eliot Graff eliot...@microsoft.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14412
Eliot Graff eliot...@microsoft.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14488
Eliot Graff eliot...@microsoft.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14384
Eliot Graff eliot...@microsoft.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14199
Ms2ger ms2...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
CC|
On 2011-10-14 15:14, Julian Reschke wrote:
On 2011-10-11 00:30, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011, Arthur Barstow wrote:
On 10/7/11 8:32 AM, ext Julian Reschke wrote:
As far as I recall, we agreed in the IETF WG that parsing of web
socket URIs
should work exactly the same way as for any
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:33:00 -0700, Julian Reschke julian.resc...@gmx.de
wrote:
So can anybody explain (1) why this text is in the spec, and (2) what it
means?
It just moved from the protocol to the API. It was in the protocol before:
On 2011-11-02 17:39, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:33:00 -0700, Julian Reschke
julian.resc...@gmx.de wrote:
So can anybody explain (1) why this text is in the spec, and (2) what
it means?
It just moved from the protocol to the API. It was in the protocol before:
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
1. Make loadend not fire in case a new load is started from
onabort/onload/onerror.
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Mark Pilgrim pilg...@google.com wrote:
What should this do?
requestFileSystem(2, 100, successCallback); // assume successCallback
is defined properly
requestFileSystem doesn't throw, so you should get an errorCallback
call. You haven't provided an
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:49:08 -0700, Julian Reschke julian.resc...@gmx.de
wrote:
On 2011-11-02 17:39, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:33:00 -0700, Julian Reschke
julian.resc...@gmx.de wrote:
So can anybody explain (1) why this text is in the spec, and (2) what
it means?
It
On 2011-11-02 19:17, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:49:08 -0700, Julian Reschke
julian.resc...@gmx.de wrote:
On 2011-11-02 17:39, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:33:00 -0700, Julian Reschke
julian.resc...@gmx.de wrote:
So can anybody explain (1) why this text
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:32:30 -0700, Julian Reschke julian.resc...@gmx.de
wrote:
The mail thread that lead to the change starts here:
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi/current/msg07377.html
I clicked through that thread and could not find anything where a decision
was made and on
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:59:14 -0700, Julian Reschke julian.resc...@gmx.de
wrote:
On 2011-11-02 19:46, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
If you are confused about the terms, they are defined in HTML.
But they aren't linked, as far as I can tell. It would be good if they
were, and then we can review
On 2011-11-02 19:46, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:32:30 -0700, Julian Reschke
julian.resc...@gmx.de wrote:
The mail thread that lead to the change starts here:
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi/current/msg07377.html
I clicked through that thread and could not find
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14660
Ian 'Hixie' Hickson i...@hixie.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Eric U er...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
1. Make loadend not
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Eric U er...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at
You can see the minutes here: http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-webapps-minutes.html
First of all, thank you all for coming and participating. It was
exhausting, and we just ran out of time. Stupid time!
There was also a great conversation post-meeting, but unfortunately no
minutes :(
Things to act
During the October 31 meeting [1], there was agreement to publish a
Candidate Recommendation of the WebSockets API and this is a Call for
Consensus to do so:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/websockets/
The remaining open editorial bug [13700] will be fixed before publication.
I propose the CR exit
On 11/2/11 6:41 PM, ext Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
You can see the minutes here: http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-webapps-minutes.html
Thanks Dimitri.
First of all, thank you all for coming and participating.
That goes for me and Chaals too re Monday and Tuesday!
It was exhausting, and we just
24 matches
Mail list logo
