Hi Marcos,
The latest PC test results for Apache Wookie (incubating) are:
165 tests
16 ignored
17 failures
132 passes
Failed: dc,d4,an,co,za,bv,rd,b2, ao,cp,cj,af,e8,bl,bm,bn,zz (though
the last four test cases may be in error; see previous email)
Ignored (not automatically tested - doesn't
Hi Scott
Scott Wilson wrote:
Hi Marcos,
The latest PC test results for Apache Wookie (incubating) are:
165 tests
16 ignored
17 failures
132 passes
Failed: dc,d4,an,co,za,bv,rd,b2, ao,cp,cj,af,e8,bl,bm,bn,zz (though the
last four test cases may be in error; see previous email)
Ignored (not
On Nov 25, 2009, at 15:52 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
If the http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-apis/#the-preferences-attribute was
mandatory, which I think it should be since many widgets I've come across
rely
on **setPreferenceForKey** and **preferenceForKey** conventions, wouldn't it
be
sensible
On Nov 26, 2009, at 15:07 , Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Jonathan Watt wrote:
Nevertheless, that doesn't mean that Web
content shouldn't be able to process XML that uses xml:id using script and
present the processed information to the user using content and semantics
that
*does* belong on the Web.
On Nov 27, 2009, at 15:50 , Arthur Barstow wrote:
As with all of our CfCs, positive response is preferred and encouraged and
silence will be assumed to be assent. The deadline for comments is December 2.
We support publishing this document.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Hi Cyril,
On Nov 27, 2009, at 11:29 , Cyril Concolato wrote:
As a clarification can you tell me what would be the name value for the
following config documents assuming the user locale is en only (no *)
Note that if the user locale (by which I assume you mean what the user agent
starts with,
Robin Berjon wrote:
On Nov 26, 2009, at 15:07 , Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Jonathan Watt wrote:
Nevertheless, that doesn't mean that Web content shouldn't be
able to process XML that uses xml:id using script and present the
processed information to the user using content and semantics
that *does*
On Nov 27, 2009, at 20:55 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Cyril Concolato
cyril.concol...@enst.fr wrote:
I'm trying to implement the element-based localization and I found the spec
unclear with regards to the inheritance of th xml:lang attribute and I would
like to
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
On Nov 27, 2009, at 15:50 , Arthur Barstow wrote:
As with all of our CfCs, positive response is preferred and encouraged and
silence will be assumed to be assent. The deadline for comments is December
2.
We support
On Nov 30, 2009, at 15:38 , Lachlan Hunt wrote:
The lack of namespace resolution in selectors is extremely annoying
because it means that one has to switch between selectors (if only
for classes support) and the XPath APIs for namespace support
whenever one tries to do, you know, one of those
Robin Berjon wrote:
There are quite a few services out there that return XML — it would
be disingenuous to pretend otherwise. The addition of x-site requests to
the stack makes these even more available. XHR supports XML natively,
including namespace. Selectors support namespaces natively.
From: ext Ian Jacobs i...@w3.org
Date: November 30, 2009 12:08:22 PM EST
Subject: PAG Launched for WebApps Working Group Regarding Widgets
1.0: Access Requests Policy
...
In accordance with the W3C Patent Policy [0], W3C has launched a
Patent Advisory Group (PAG) to advise the W3C on a
On 20 Nov 2009, at 17:12, Marcin Hanclik wrote:
As discussed on the yesterday's call, I committed to CVS the WARP spec with
the section about local network (required for UPnP use cases) at:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-access-upnp/
Clearly there are usage scenarios based on technologies
Hi Stephen,
On Nov 30, 2009, at 19:13 , Stephen Jolly wrote:
On 20 Nov 2009, at 17:12, Marcin Hanclik wrote:
As discussed on the yesterday's call, I committed to CVS the WARP spec with
the section about local network (required for UPnP use cases) at:
Hi Marcin,
On Nov 20, 2009, at 18:12 , Marcin Hanclik wrote:
As discussed on the yesterday's call, I committed to CVS the WARP spec with
the section about local network (required for UPnP use cases) at:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-access-upnp/
What we discussed on the call was
On Nov 25, 2009, at 21:32 , Arthur Barstow wrote:
During the November 19 widget call [Nov-19], we spent considerable time
discussing how to handle requests for new requirements/features but did not
reach consensus. There a couple of options to address new requirements and
features and we
December 8 is the deadline for comments regarding the Last Call
Working Draft of the Widget Interface spec:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-widgets-apis-20091117/
Comments should be sent to: public-webapps@w3.org
-Art Barstow
Begin forwarded message:
From: ext Marcos Caceres
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
On Nov 27, 2009, at 20:55 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Cyril Concolato
cyril.concol...@enst.fr wrote:
I'm trying to implement the element-based localization and I found the spec
unclear with
Hi Nikunj,
@2009-11-26 02:00 -0800:
[...]
Here's my suggestion:
1. WebDatabase be renamed to WebSQLDatabase
2. WebSimpleDB be renamed to ISAM Database Level 1
I don't think ISAM Database Level 1 is an improvement.
As an alternative title, I suggest Web Key-Value Database.
As far as
I agree with Mike, but I'd also note that Web Key-Value Database could
easily be confused with WebStorage given that it also uses a Key-Value
model.
Which brings up another point: Maybe WebStorage should be renamed as well?
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Michael(tm) Smith m...@w3.org wrote:
Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org, 2009-11-30 14:46 -0800:
I agree with Mike, but I'd also note that Web Key-Value Database could
easily be confused with WebStorage given that it also uses a Key-Value
model.
True but we know the distinction is that Web Storage does not use
a database. Or I
On Nov 30, 2009, at 8:20 AM, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
Hi Nikunj,
@2009-11-26 02:00 -0800:
[...]
Here's my suggestion:
1. WebDatabase be renamed to WebSQLDatabase
2. WebSimpleDB be renamed to ISAM Database Level 1
I don't think ISAM Database Level 1 is an improvement.
As an alternative
On Thu, 26 Nov 2009, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
The CSS WG relatively recently dropped this requirement. Developer
builds are now sufficient. I was not really in favor, but most of the
group was.
I'm not really in favour of dropping this requirements either. The whole
point of beta builds
Hi Mike,
Good to see some comments on this.
On Nov 30, 2009, at 8:20 AM, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
Hi Nikunj,
@2009-11-26 02:00 -0800:
[...]
Here's my suggestion:
1. WebDatabase be renamed to WebSQLDatabase
2. WebSimpleDB be renamed to ISAM Database Level 1
I don't think ISAM Database
On Nov 30, 2009, at 3:14 PM, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org, 2009-11-30 14:46 -0800:
I agree with Mike, but I'd also note that Web Key-Value Database
could
easily be confused with WebStorage given that it also uses a Key-
Value
model.
True but we know the
Web-Indexed-Storage
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.comwrote:
On Nov 30, 2009, at 3:14 PM, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org, 2009-11-30 14:46 -0800:
I agree with Mike, but I'd also note that Web Key-Value Database could
Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.com, 2009-11-30 16:49 -0800:
[...]
A generic term could mean something too broad and a specific term might be
arcane. To the extent that the arcane term is the most used for a certain
meaning and can be easily understood by readers with minimal help,
On Mon, 31 Aug 2009, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
SQLResultSetRowList
The item() method may take a long time to process. Shouldn't this have an
asynchronous version with a callback?
The ability to randomly access rows in the row set increases the likelihood
that the item operation will take an
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009, João Eiras wrote:
Hi everyone.
1) Currently, SqlResultSet.insertId is defined as a integer. This would
prevent user agents to use an underlying database engine that does not
rely on integers for rowids. For instance, both SQLite, MS Access,
Informix use integers it
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Hi,
In step 10 of the processing model, it states:
Queue a task to invoke the error callback, if it is not null, with a
newly constructed SQLError object that represents the last error to
have occurred in this transaction. Rollback the
On Fri, 4 Sep 2009, João Eiras wrote:
Database.changeVersion expects oldVersion and newVersion arguments. The
Database also specifies a version attribute.
The transaction steps tell to fail the transaction due to the failed preflight
condition if oldVersion does not match the current
On Fri, 4 Sep 2009, Dumitru Daniliuc wrote:
When talking about statement error callbacks (point #6, section 4.3.2), the
spec says:
1. If the error callback returns false, then move on to the next statement,
if any, or onto the next overall step otherwise.
2. Otherwise, the error callback
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
On Sep 21, 2009, at 2:51 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
Can we have another component added to Bug tracker for WebDatabase?
I feel the need to track several bugs and am not at all comfortable
with
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009, João Eiras wrote:
In section 4.2 Parsing and processing SQL statements, point 2 starts as
Replace each ? placeholder but then says later Note: Substitutions for
? placeholders are done at the literal level, not as string
concatenations.
By using the word replace, that
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (ATTCINW) wrote:
Re The API is designed such that it can be extended to work with other
push notification schemes such as Push SMS.: what is meant by Push
SMS? Does this refer to OMA Push, i.e. the service enabler defined by
the Open Mobile Alliance
I like the name, except the Web part. Why is it necessary? I argued
that it will not be limited to user agents only.
Would it really be bad to call it Index Sequential Database?
On Nov 30, 2009, at 5:34 PM, Frederick Hirsch wrote:
how about Indexed Sequential Web Database, losing the
Since this API is about a transactional database, it is better to call
it a database instead of storage. Storage also means that there is no
automated index maintenance since it is only about storage and not
about arrangement of records or their indexing.
Nikunj
On Nov 30, 2009, at 5:11
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009, Jonas Sicking wrote:
I know we had this conversation before, and I'm not even sure which side
of the issue I was on at the time, but given the amount of confusion at
the TPAC meeting yesterday, I think we should consider renaming the Web
Database spec.
It seems clear
38 matches
Mail list logo
