For what it's worth, I think this is a useful draft and a useful technology.
Hotlinking prevention is of considerable interest to Web developers, and doing
it via server-side Referer checks is inconvenient and error-prone. I hope we
can fit it into Web Apps WG, or if not, find another goo home
On Feb 26, 2011, at 7:15 AM, Doug Schepers wrote:
>
> I will remove my objection to publish DOM Core if: 1) conflicts (rather than
> extensions) are removed from the draft, or reconciled with changes in DOM3
> Events; and 2) for those changes that have broad consensus, we can integrate
> them
On Feb 24, 2011, at 5:21 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:
> Hi, Anne-
>
> I object to publishing a Working Draft of the DOM Core spec that includes DOM
> Events.
>
> Introducing conflicting specifications that cover the same materials
> dramatically harms interoperability, and the idea of "competing
Hi,
The WebFonts WG is looking for a way to prevent cross-origin embedding of
fonts as certain font vendors want to license their fonts with such a
restriction. Some people think CORS is appropriate for this, some don't.
Here is some background material:
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roc
On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 18:47:54 +0100, Garrett Smith
wrote:
Your example is simple. But some common cases of synth events are
complicated. UI Events aren't so bad but MouseEvents and especially
TouchEvents are a lot of work to synthesize.
Most cases for synth events are for testing -- feature tes
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 7:41 PM, Eric Uhrhane wrote:
> Sorry--I meant to push this over to public-webapps, as Ian suggested.
> [+cc public-webapps, whatwg->BCC]
>
Currently (reviewing for context), the spec tries to reach "filename
consistency" (only allowing filenames to be used which can be us
On 2/28/2011 4:10 PM, Eric Uhrhane wrote:
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
I'd like some clarification on the intent of the FileSystem API:
requestFileSystem permanent, getDirectory and getFile.
...
They're not particularly easy to use, compared to the IndexedDB data
Sorry--I meant to push this over to public-webapps, as Ian suggested.
[+cc public-webapps, whatwg->BCC]
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Eric Uhrhane wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
>> I'd like some clarification on the intent of the FileSystem API:
>> requestF
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
> Are there any plans of reviewing/visiting efficient File/Blob support in
> indexeddb?
Support for File and Blob is technically in the spec already, though I
don't think any implementations support it.
The more controversial part is supp
On 2/28/2011 3:50 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011, Charles Pritchard wrote:
I'd like some clarification on the intent of the FileSystem API:
requestFileSystem permanent, getDirectory and getFile.
Are they intended to directly pass through to the host operating system, or
are they jus
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12206
Ian 'Hixie' Hickson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12206
Summary: Please enter your feedback, carefully indicating the
title of the section for which you are submitting
feedback, quoting the text that's wrong today if
appropriate. I
Hixie, All,
Is the HTML5 Web Messaging spec ready for Last Call Working Draft?
http://dev.w3.org/html5/postmsg/
If not, what must be done before it is ready for LC and what is the time
frame to complete the work?
Bugzilla [1] reports one bug for this component without a Resolution and
tha
On 2/28/11, Adrian Bateman wrote:
> On Friday, February 25, 2011 1:54 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> >> The idea is to provide a better definition of the events model at a
>> >> more
>> >> appropriate location. I do not think DOM Level 3 Events is the right
>> >> way
>> >> forward, but I am happy
Le 28 févr. 2011 à 17:59, Adrian Bateman a écrit :
> My preference is to not have two drafts in the WebApps working group with
> conflicting specification of the same feature.
Looking at
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcore/raw-file/tip/Overview.html#events
and
http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-Events
On Friday, February 25, 2011 1:54 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> >> The idea is to provide a better definition of the events model at a more
> >> appropriate location. I do not think DOM Level 3 Events is the right way
> >> forward, but I am happy to work in parallel to see which turns out
> >> bet
> 10 Garbage collection
> If an EventSource object is garbage collected while its connection is
still open, the connection must be closed.
Multiple EventSource instances may share the same underlying connection. If
this happens, and just one EventSource object is collected (eg. a tab
closed), the
This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish a new Last Call Working
Draft of the Web Workers spec based on the following version of the spec
(copied from ED version 1.276):
http://dev.w3.org/html5/workers/publish/LCWD-workers-201103TBD.html
This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to "re
This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish a new Last Call Working
Draft of the Server-sent Events spec based on the following version of
the spec (copied from ED version 1.161):
http://dev.w3.org/html5/eventsource/publish/LCWD-eventsource-201103TBD.html
This CfC satisfies the group's r
Hello Makoto,
(Cc+ public-webapps)
(11/02/25 15:16), Makoto Kato wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is simple sample. This behavior is different on all web browsers
> when input element has composition/preedit string for IME.
A relevant question here, I think, is where the cursor should go when
the value of
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12202
Ms2ger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
21 matches
Mail list logo
