On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Ilya Grigorik wrote:
> A lot of the discussion so far focused on the async analytics beacon +
> unload use case. However, while this is an important case to consider, let's
> not constrain this proposal to "on unload" case only.
Just to be clear. I understand why
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> Adding API to *some* DocumentFragment will likely mean that
> people will need to check just what type of DocumentFragment they
> have.
Although not exposed, because of .contents we now
effectively have a special type of DocumentFragment. Th
Anne,
Both Chrome and Safari support the ping attribute. I am not sure about IE,
I believe Firefox has it disabled by default. FWIW I wouldn't consider this
a huge failure, if anything I'd expect over time people to use ping where
it's supported and fallback where it's not, resulting in the same p
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 9:48 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
> What do you think?
It seems like this still requires "magic" for document.createElement()
and document.createElementNS().
Also, providing two ways of doing the same thing does not seem like a
good approach to standardization and will come
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> Hmm I see what you mean. But the user agent can provide the
> Authorization header too based on a previous visit. That is the
> meaning that is most often meant, but in the particular case of CORS
> the semantics are subtly different. Not
I'm not sure I buy the idea that "two ways of doing the same thing does not
seem like a good approach" - the web platform's imperative and declarative
duality is, by nature, two-way. Having two methods or an option that takes
multiple input types is not an empirical negative, you may argue it is an
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 3:06 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> Just to be clear. I understand why we'd want this. I'm a) wondering
> why it'll be successful this time given it has the same
> characteristics as ping="" b) asking about the desired timeframe given
> the highly likely introduction of a
I worry that overloading the ping attribute here may cause confusion and may
not be well adopted for the use case we have presented.
Let me describe some potential requirements for such an interface. We want an
asynchronous method of sending data. The interface shouldn't return a HTTP
response
On Feb 15, 2013, at 3:51 AM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote:
> Anne,
>
> Both Chrome and Safari support the ping attribute. I am not sure about IE, I
> believe Firefox has it disabled by default. FWIW I wouldn't consider this a
> huge failure, if anything I'd expect over time people to use ping w
On Feb 15, 2013, at 9:21 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> On Feb 15, 2013, at 3:51 AM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote:
>
>> Anne,
>>
>> Both Chrome and Safari support the ping attribute. I am not sure about IE, I
>> believe Firefox has it disabled by default. FWIW I wouldn't consider this a
>>
10 matches
Mail list logo
