On Jan 13, 2010, at 00:29 , Arthur Barstow wrote:
This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish the First Public Working Draft
(FPWD) of the Uniform Messaging Policy (UMP) spec, latest Editor's Draft at:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/UMP/
This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to record
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Chris Prince cpri...@google.com wrote:
For the record, I'd like to make the read atomic, such that you can
never get half a file before a change, and half after. But it likely
depends on what OSs can enforce here.
I think *enforcing* atomicity is difficult
The next widgets voice conference will be January 21 (there will not
be a call on the 14th).
Among the higher priority work items:
* WARP spec - respond to LC comments and update the LC comment
tracking doc
Marcos; Dec 21:
http://www.w3.org/mid/
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com wrote:
This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish the First Public Working Draft
(FPWD) of the Uniform Messaging Policy (UMP) spec, latest Editor's Draft at:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/UMP/
This CfC satisfies the
Hi Robin,
Le 12/01/2010 18:13, Robin Berjon a écrit :
Hi Cyril,
On Jan 12, 2010, at 17:34 , Cyril Concolato wrote:
Le 11/01/2010 15:41, Robin Berjon a écrit :
Ah, do you have a pointer? I searched for MPEG-U in all the public and member
lists yet only this thread shows up.
The liaison was
Hi, Cyril-
Cyril Concolato wrote (on 1/13/10 10:37 AM):
Yes, you're right, the problem is that liaisons usually are not
considered as public documents so the secretariat or MPEG members are
not allowed to make them public.
...
Anyway, MPEG is meeting next week, I'll
raise your questions and
Atomic read is obviously a nice thing - it would be hard to program against
API that behaves as unpredictably as a single read operation that reads half
of old content and half of new content.
At the same note, it would be likely very hard to program against Blob
objects if they could change
