On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 6:27 PM, Adrian Bateman wrote:
> Today we shipped Microsoft Internet Explorer 10 Platform Preview 3 as part of
> the Windows 8 Developer Preview. Alongside this release, we have submitted
> interop tests for several WebApps specs for review by the working group:
>
>
Today we shipped Microsoft Internet Explorer 10 Platform Preview 3 as part of
the Windows 8 Developer Preview. Alongside this release, we have submitted
interop tests for several WebApps specs for review by the working group:
WebSockets API (101 tests/assertions)
Changeset: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 2:18 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Feb 2011, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> >
> > Regarding re-publishing the Web Workers spec [ED] as a new Last Call
> > Working Draft ...
> >
> > Bugzilla shows one open bug [Bugs]:
> >
> > 11818 - As documented in the "Creating workers"
I support this.
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> I think it's a great idea to get your spec more attention in W3C community
> specially because some UA vendors don't participate in discussions on
> whatwg.
>
> - Ryosuke
>
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Aryeh Gregor wro
I think it's a great idea to get your spec more attention in W3C community
specially because some UA vendors don't participate in discussions on
whatwg.
- Ryosuke
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> For the last several months, I was working on a new specification,
> which I
For the last several months, I was working on a new specification,
which I hosted on aryeh.name. Now we've created a new Community Group
at the W3C to host it:
http://aryeh.name/spec/editing/editing.html
http://www.w3.org/community/editing/
Things are still being worked out, but one issue is wha
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14144
Summary: Adding link to resolve the URL
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: PC
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
On 9/13/2011 11:39 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 19:32:03 +0200, Arthur Barstow
wrote:
On September 13, the Web Events WG published a LCWD of the Touch
Events version 1 spec:
Individual WG members are encouraged to provide individual feedback
directly to the Web Events WG. I
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 19:32:03 +0200, Arthur Barstow
wrote:
On September 13, the Web Events WG published a LCWD of the Touch Events
version 1 spec:
Individual WG members are encouraged to provide individual feedback
directly to the Web Events WG. If you have comments, please send them to
the
On September 13, the Web Events WG published a LCWD of the Touch Events
version 1 spec:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-Touch-Events-20110913/
That WG explicitly asked the WebApps WG for comments.
Individual WG members are encouraged to provide individual feedback
directly to the Web Events WG
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14093
Simon Pieters changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WONTFIX |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #2 from Simon Pie
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14138
Simon Pieters changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14137
Simon Pieters changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14116
Simon Pieters changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14138
Summary: Lastly, to make clear. I am not proposing web workers
share the DOM with the main thread. I am proposing
the each web worker has it's own INDEPENDENT DOM. (No
shar
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14137
Summary: Just want to add - don't get hung up on the
process/thread stuff. It is just a metaphor. I don't
really care how it is implemented. One could do it
all in one proc
16 matches
Mail list logo