Re: [Bug 10302] New: Introduce exception handlers at the transaction/database scope

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 5:50 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote: > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 2:07 AM, wrote: >> >> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10302 >> >>           Summary: Introduce exception handlers at the >>                    transaction/database scope >>           Product: WebAppsWG >>  

Re: ACTION-568: Create an alternative mechanism for openURL and send it to the mail list (Web Applications Working Group)

On 8/5/10 3:30 PM, Web Applications Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: ACTION-568: Create an alternative mechanism for openURL and send it to the mail list (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/568 On: Marcos Caceres Due: 2010-08-12 If you do not wan

[Bug 10307] New: [indexedDB] The default version string is not specified

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10307 Summary: [indexedDB] The default version string is not specified Product: WebAppsWG Version: unspecified Platform: PC OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severit

Re: [IndexedDB] Implicit transactions

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 8:06 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote: > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >> >> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 6:52 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote: >> > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Jeremy Orlow >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >>

Re: [IndexedDB] Implicit transactions

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 6:52 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Jeremy Orlow > wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > >>> > >>> Ok, I'm going to start by taking a step back here. > >

Re: [IndexedDB] Implicit transactions

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 6:52 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote: > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote: >> >> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >>> >>> Ok, I'm going to start by taking a step back here. >>> >>> There is no such thing as implicit transactions. >>> >>> db.obje

Re: [IndexedDB] Implicit transactions

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote: > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >> >> Ok, I'm going to start by taking a step back here. >> >> There is no such thing as implicit transactions. >> >> db.objectStore("foo", mode) >> >> is just syntactic sugar for >> >> db.t

Re: [IndexedDB] Implicit transactions

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote: > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > >> Ok, I'm going to start by taking a step back here. >> >> There is no such thing as implicit transactions. >> >> db.objectStore("foo", mode) >> >> is just syntactic sugar for >> >> db.t

[Bug 10305] New: [IndexedDB] Transactions need to be clarified

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10305 Summary: [IndexedDB] Transactions need to be clarified Product: WebAppsWG Version: unspecified Platform: PC OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority:

Re: [IndexedDB] Implicit transactions

On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > Ok, I'm going to start by taking a step back here. > > There is no such thing as implicit transactions. > > db.objectStore("foo", mode) > > is just syntactic sugar for > > db.transaction(["foo"], mode).objectStore("foo") > > so it always star

Re: [Bug 10302] New: Introduce exception handlers at the transaction/database scope

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 2:07 AM, wrote: > http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10302 > > Summary: Introduce exception handlers at the >transaction/database scope > Product: WebAppsWG > Version: unspecified > Platform: All >

[Bug 10304] New: Rename "remove" method on object store to "delete"

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10304 Summary: Rename "remove" method on object store to "delete" Product: WebAppsWG Version: unspecified Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows XP Status: NEW Severity: normal

[widgets] Test Suites

Hi All, Hari, from Opera, has cleaned up the P&C test suite. We removed some redundant tests (that were not part of the test-suite.xml) and corrected a few i18n tests. We are still validating the i18n tests, but hope to finish soon. We also have WARP tests about to be submitted and Dig Sigs t

Re: [IndexedDB] Need a method to remove a database

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Pablo Castro > wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto: > public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonas Sicking > > Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 2:12 P