http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9989
Simon Pieters sim...@opera.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10546
Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
On 27 September 2010 15:18, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
I think redirects might not work yet in Gecko but yeah... I guess I should
start on a test suite for this at some point...
Ouch! My CORS servlet filter is complete now, made a few tests against
Firefox. CORS support seems
The widget element's id attribute says An IRI attribute that denotes
an identifier for the widget. and is silent on the value of the IRI's
scheme.
What, if anything, do vendors recommend for the scheme?
What are the advantages and disadvantages of using the widget: URI
scheme [ignoring
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 11:18:08 +0200, Vladimir Dzhuvinov
vladi...@dzhuvinov.com wrote:
On 27 September 2010 15:18, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
I think redirects might not work yet in Gecko but yeah... I guess I
should start on a test suite for this at some point...
Ouch! My CORS
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 03:22:13 +0200, Michael Nordman micha...@google.com
wrote:
A couple of us have been looking at webkit's XHR impl and realized that
to support performant access to the response via responseArrayBuffer and
responseText would cause us to keep two copies of the data around, a
On 9/28/10 8:09 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 03:22:13 +0200, Michael Nordman
micha...@google.com wrote:
A couple of us have been looking at webkit's XHR impl and realized
that to support performant access to the response via
responseArrayBuffer and
responseText would cause
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 14:37:30 +0200, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
I'm not sure. But you could just lazily construct the data based on what
the author requests. If there are no use cases it is unlikely they will
use both.
You can't lazily construct the original byte stream from the
On 9/28/10 9:25 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 14:37:30 +0200, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
I'm not sure. But you could just lazily construct the data based on what
the author requests. If there are no use cases it is unlikely they will
use both.
You can't lazily
On Sep 27, 2010, at 6:22 PM, Michael Nordman wrote:
A couple of us have been looking at webkit's XHR impl and realized that to
support performant access to the response via responseArrayBuffer and
responseText would cause us to keep two copies of the data around, a raw data
buffer and the
What do we want to do if the user calls window.indexedDB.open(myDB, some
description) twice and stores the result as db1 and db2, calls
db1.setVersion(), and then in the success handler does
db2.createObjectStore? In other words, is the setVersion transaction tied
to the database instance that
On 9/28/2010 7:42 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
What do we want to do if the user calls window.indexedDB.open(myDB, some
description) twice and stores the result as db1 and db2, calls
db1.setVersion(), and then in the success handler does
db2.createObjectStore? In other words, is the setVersion
I guess I should have mentioned that I too am in favor of it being tied to
an instance. I think this matches the model we use elsewhere in terms of
transactions being tied to specific objectStore and index instances.
J
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Shawn Wilsher sdwi...@mozilla.com wrote:
Yes, let's have it tied to the instance on which setVersion() was called.
As Shawn pointed out that is consistent with the behavior that
database instances from different windows will observe. As Jeremy
pointed out that is consistent with the way object stores and indexes
are tied to a
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10794
Summary: [IndexedDB] Clarify
createObjectStore/removeObjectStore's tie to the
database setVersion was called on
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform:
Is it possible to schedule IndexedDB for Tuesday? I'm pretty sure that I
can be there then, but Monday is more up in the air at this moment.
Thanks!
Jeremy
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 3:28 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
I'm hoping to be there yes. Especially if we'll get a critical mass
I'm not 100% sure that I'll make TPAC this year, but if I do, I likely
won't make monday. So a tuesday schedule would fit me better too.
/ Jonas
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:36 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@google.com wrote:
Is it possible to schedule IndexedDB for Tuesday? I'm pretty sure that I
can
On 9/28/10 10:32 AM, Chris Marrin wrote:
I'd hate the idea of another flag in XHR. Why not just keep the raw bits and
then convert when responseText is called? The only disadvantage of this is when
the author makes multiple calls to responseText and I would not think that is a
very common use
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 9/28/10 10:32 AM, Chris Marrin wrote:
I'd hate the idea of another flag in XHR. Why not just keep the raw bits
and then convert when responseText is called? The only disadvantage of this
is when the author makes
It looks like there will be good critical mass for IndexedDB discussions, so
I'll try to make it as well. Tuesday would be best for me as well for an
IndexedDB meeting so I can travel on Sunday/Monday.
-pablo
-Original Message-
From: Jonas Sicking [mailto:jo...@sicking.cc]
Sent:
Hi All,
Currently, no one has requested a specific day + time slot for any of
the proposed topics:
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/TPAC2010
When our IndexedDB participants agree on a time slot on Tuesday the 2nd,
I'll add it to the agenda. Pablo, Jonas, Jeremy - please propose a
I'm OK with any time slot.
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:57 PM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.comwrote:
Hi All,
Currently, no one has requested a specific day + time slot for any of the
proposed topics:
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/TPAC2010
When our IndexedDB participants agree
On 9/28/10 4:37 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
I'm OK with any time slot.
This year, I am also not sure whether I'll attend, but I'd like to
request File API moved to Tuesday, particularly to a dial-in friendly
time. It seems likely that I'll dial-in and participate via IRC from
the East Coast
The later the better for me. If we can make it after noon I'll be
there for sure.
/ Jonas
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@google.com wrote:
I'm OK with any time slot.
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:57 PM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
wrote:
Hi All,
Currently, no
Works fine for me. I'll be there all of Monday and Tuesday. Due to
jetlag morning vs. afternoon's probably irrelevant to me, as I won't
have any idea what time it is ;'.
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
The later the better for me. If we can make it after
I've now made this change.
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Eric Uhrhane er...@google.com wrote:
The abort sequence in FileWriter looks like this:
If readyState is DONE, throw a FileException with error code
INVALID_STATE_ERR and terminate this overall series of steps.
Set readyState to
Based on these constraints, it sounds like we either have to live with the
fact that we'll keep both a binary copy and a text copy around as we're
receiving XHR bytes. Or, we need a way to specify up-front that we're
interested in loading as binary (before calling send()) and not handle
binary in
2010/9/16 Eric Uhrhane er...@google.com:
How about this?
For a move/copy of a file on top of existing file, or a directory on
top of an existing empty directory, you get an automatic overwrite.
A move/copy of a file on top of an existing directory, or of a
directory on top of an existing
fwiw, specifying up front is what FileReader appears to do:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/#dfn-filereader
Of course, there are different methods in that case.
dave
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 3:12 PM, Chris Rogers crog...@google.com wrote:
Based on these constraints, it sounds like we
29 matches
Mail list logo
