Re: [cors] Ability to read Access-Control-Expose-Headers

2011-09-26 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 00:50:58 +0200, Conrad Irwin conrad.ir...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a reason that Javascript cannot read the Access-Control-* headers in CORS? In particular I was trying to work around a bug in Firefox [1] that means that .getAllResponseHeaders() doesn't get all response

Re: XBL2 is dead.

2011-09-26 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 20:30:24 +0200, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote: Further, instead of packaging Web Components into one omnibus offering, we will likely end up with several free-standing specs or spec addendums: 1) Shadow DOM, the largest bag of with XBL2's donated organs --

Re: [indexeddb] New WebIDL Exception Model for IndexedDB

2011-09-26 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:52:39 +0200, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com wrote: This is our understanding on how the spec needs to change to support the new WebIDL exception handling model. We would start by removing all of the constants from IDBDatabaseException. After that, the only

Re: Mutation Observers: a replacement for DOM Mutation Events

2011-09-26 Thread Olli Pettay
On 09/24/2011 12:16 AM, Adam Klein wrote: Chromium (myself, Rafael Weinstein, Erik Arvidsson, Ryosuke Niwa) and Mozilla (Olli Pettay, Jonas Sicking) have worked together on a proposal for a replacement for Mutation Events. This proposal represents our best attempt to date at making a set of

Re: [indexeddb] New WebIDL Exception Model for IndexedDB

2011-09-26 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:31:36 +0200, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote: On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:52:39 +0200, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com wrote: This is our understanding on how the spec needs to change to support the new WebIDL exception handling model. We would start by

Re: [XHR2] Avoiding charset dependencies on user settings

2011-09-26 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:26 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi wrote: On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 9:54 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: I agree that there are no legacy requirements on XHR here, however I don't think that that is the only thing that we should look at. We should also look

Re: [XHR2] Avoiding charset dependencies on user settings

2011-09-26 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 4:46 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi wrote: On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi wrote: Applying all the legacy text/html craziness Furthermore, applying full legacy text/html craziness involves parser restarts for GET requests. With a

[Bug 14288] New: document.documentElement.insertAdjacentHTML specs WebKit behavior instead of IE behavior

2011-09-26 Thread bugzilla
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14288 Summary: document.documentElement.insertAdjacentHTML specs WebKit behavior instead of IE behavior Product: WebAppsWG Version: unspecified Platform: PC OS/Version: Linux

Re: [widgets] Killing file:// of evil (widget URI ready for pub)

2011-09-26 Thread Marcos Caceres
On Friday, September 23, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote: I've some strong reservations about expanding the scheme into dns-land. I''m still looking into this, but I don't know how we get around that. If you have any suggestions, sure would like to hear them. On Sep

Re: [widgets] Killing file:// of evil (widget URI ready for pub)

2011-09-26 Thread Robin Berjon
On Sep 23, 2011, at 18:26 , Mark Baker wrote: Well, this is progress, but it seems the only difference now between widget: and http: is the authority. And if that's the case, then instead of (from your example); widget://c13c6f30-ce25-11e0-9572-0800200c9a66/index.html why not go with

Re: [widgets] Killing file:// of evil (widget URI ready for pub)

2011-09-26 Thread Marcos Caceres
On Monday, September 26, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Robin Berjon wrote: On Sep 23, 2011, at 18:26 , Mark Baker wrote: Well, this is progress, but it seems the only difference now between widget: and http: is the authority. And if that's the case, then instead of (from your example);

Re: [XHR2] Avoiding charset dependencies on user settings

2011-09-26 Thread Henri Sivonen
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:26 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi wrote: On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 9:54 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: I agree that there are no legacy requirements on XHR here, however I don't think

Re: [widgets] Killing file:// of evil (widget URI ready for pub)

2011-09-26 Thread Mark Baker
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Marcos Caceres marcosscace...@gmail.com wrote: There are however many useful benefits in tying a packaged web application (using whatever packaging) to an origin, not the least of which is same-origin policy and overall just being a regular web app (that may

Re: [widgets] Killing file:// of evil (widget URI ready for pub)

2011-09-26 Thread Marcos Caceres
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Mark Baker dist...@acm.org wrote: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Marcos Caceres marcosscace...@gmail.com wrote: There are however many useful benefits in tying a packaged web application (using whatever packaging) to an origin, not the least of which is

Re: XBL2 is dead.

2011-09-26 Thread Dimitri Glazkov
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote: On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 20:30:24 +0200, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote: Further, instead of packaging Web Components into one omnibus offering, we will likely end up with several free-standing specs or spec

Re: Mutation Observers: a replacement for DOM Mutation Events

2011-09-26 Thread Olli Pettay
On 09/26/2011 11:47 AM, Olli Pettay wrote: On 09/24/2011 12:16 AM, Adam Klein wrote: Chromium (myself, Rafael Weinstein, Erik Arvidsson, Ryosuke Niwa) and Mozilla (Olli Pettay, Jonas Sicking) have worked together on a proposal for a replacement for Mutation Events. This proposal represents our

[Bug 14296] New: sorry, does this work

2011-09-26 Thread bugzilla
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14296 Summary: sorry, does this work Product: WebAppsWG Version: unspecified Platform: Other URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#sco pe-0

[Bug 14296] sorry, does this work

2011-09-26 Thread bugzilla
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14296 Ross Nicoll j...@jrn.me.uk changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

Re: Mutation Observers: a replacement for DOM Mutation Events

2011-09-26 Thread Olli Pettay
On 09/24/2011 12:16 AM, Adam Klein wrote: Chromium (myself, Rafael Weinstein, Erik Arvidsson, Ryosuke Niwa) and Mozilla (Olli Pettay, Jonas Sicking) have worked together on a proposal for a replacement for Mutation Events. This proposal represents our best attempt to date at making a set of

CfI: Progress Events is a W3C Candidate Recommendation

2011-09-26 Thread Arthur Barstow
Below is Call for Implementation for the Progress Events spec. Anne, Ms2ger, what is the status of the Progress Events test suite (e.g. % complete)? http://w3c-test.org/webapps/ProgressEvents/tests/ Original Message Subject: Progress Events is a W3C Candidate

Re: Mutation Observers: a replacement for DOM Mutation Events

2011-09-26 Thread Adam Klein
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Olli Pettay olli.pet...@helsinki.fi wrote: On 09/24/2011 12:16 AM, Adam Klein wrote: Chromium (myself, Rafael Weinstein, Erik Arvidsson, Ryosuke Niwa) and Mozilla (Olli Pettay, Jonas Sicking) have worked together on a proposal for a replacement for Mutation

Re: Mutation Observers: a replacement for DOM Mutation Events

2011-09-26 Thread Adam Klein
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Olli Pettay olli.pet...@helsinki.fi wrote: On 09/24/2011 12:16 AM, Adam Klein wrote: Chromium (myself, Rafael Weinstein, Erik Arvidsson, Ryosuke Niwa) and Mozilla (Olli Pettay, Jonas Sicking) have worked together on a proposal for a replacement for Mutation

Re: [FileAPI, common] UTF-16 to UTF-8 conversion

2011-09-26 Thread Eric U
Thanks Glenn and Simon--I'll see what I can do. On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:34 AM, Simon Pieters sim...@opera.com wrote: On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 01:40:44 +0200, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote: BlobBuilder.append(text) says: Appends the supplied text to the current contents of the

Re: [FileAPI] BlobBuilder.append(native)

2011-09-26 Thread Eric U
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote: native Newlines must be transformed to the default line-ending representation of the underlying host filesystem. For example, if the underlying filesystem is FAT32, newlines would be transformed into \r\n pairs as the text

Re: Mutation Observers: a replacement for DOM Mutation Events

2011-09-26 Thread Olli Pettay
On 09/26/2011 09:09 PM, Adam Klein wrote: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Olli Pettayolli.pet...@helsinki.fi wrote: On 09/24/2011 12:16 AM, Adam Klein wrote: Chromium (myself, Rafael Weinstein, Erik Arvidsson, Ryosuke Niwa) and Mozilla (Olli Pettay, Jonas Sicking) have worked together on a

Re: CfI: Progress Events is a W3C Candidate Recommendation

2011-09-26 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 20:07:12 +0200, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com wrote: Anne, Ms2ger, what is the status of the Progress Events test suite (e.g. % complete)? http://w3c-test.org/webapps/ProgressEvents/tests/ All features are tested, including some complex Web IDL tests. I think

Re: [widgets] Killing file:// of evil (widget URI ready for pub)

2011-09-26 Thread Robin Berjon
Hi Marcos, On Sep 26, 2011, at 16:43 , Marcos Caceres wrote: On Monday, September 26, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Robin Berjon wrote: Well, the advantage of a scheme is that it's solidly in the realm of the implementation to decide how to handle it. We've actually been bouncing ideas like the above

Re: Mutation Observers: a replacement for DOM Mutation Events

2011-09-26 Thread Adam Klein
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Olli Pettay olli.pet...@helsinki.fi wrote: On 09/26/2011 09:09 PM, Adam Klein wrote: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Olli Pettayolli.pet...@helsinki.fi  wrote: On 09/24/2011 12:16 AM, Adam Klein wrote: Chromium (myself, Rafael Weinstein, Erik Arvidsson,

Publishing specs before TPAC; Oct 14 is last day to start a CfC

2011-09-26 Thread Arthur Barstow
The upcoming TPAC meeting (Oct 31 - Nov 01) provides an opportunity for joint WG meetings and lots of informal sharing. As such, some groups make spec publications right before TPAC. Note there is a 2-week publication blackout period around the TPAC week and Oct 24 is the last day to request

Storage Quota API

2011-09-26 Thread Charles Pritchard
Though unstable, Chromium via WebKit has introduced an API for working with storage quotas: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-html5/msg/5261d24266ba4366 In brief: void queryUsageAndQuota( unsigned short storageType, optional StorageInfoUsageCallback

[Bug 14297] New: ja sam manijak iz gimnazijskog parka, već danima sakriven ja gledam te iz mraka

2011-09-26 Thread bugzilla
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14297 Summary: ja sam manijak iz gimnazijskog parka, već danima sakriven ja gledam te iz mraka Product: WebAppsWG Version: unspecified Platform: Other URL:

Re: Storage Quota API

2011-09-26 Thread Jonas Sicking
Please don't use errorCallback/SuccessCallback. That's not used in any other APIs that are part of the cross-browser web platform. Instead return a request object on which events are fired. Don't use enums as the syntax sucks in JS. Use strings instead. We're making the same transition in a lot

Re: Storage Quota API

2011-09-26 Thread Charles Pritchard
The callback style is prevalent in the File API, as well as IndexedDB. It seems quite fitting to me. Am I missing something? They are using vendor prefixing (WebKit). From what I read, WebSQL is temporary: I've not confirmed this. I'm super surprised that Chrome treats IDB as temporary. That

Re: Storage Quota API

2011-09-26 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 9/26/11 7:53 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote: The callback style is prevalent in the File API... The enum style is also borrowed from FileSystem. Those are totally different things. One of them is much saner than the other; it's not clear that either one is worth emulating in other specs in

Re: Storage Quota API

2011-09-26 Thread Michael Nordman
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com wrote: The callback style is prevalent in the File API, as well as IndexedDB. It seems quite fitting to me. Am I missing something? They are using vendor prefixing (WebKit). From what I read, WebSQL is temporary: I've not

Re: Storage Quota API

2011-09-26 Thread Charles Pritchard
On Sep 26, 2011, at 4:58 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote: On 9/26/11 7:53 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote: The callback style is prevalent in the File API... The enum style is also borrowed from FileSystem. Those are totally different things. One of them is much saner than the

Re: Storage Quota API

2011-09-26 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com wrote: What's the alternative to the callback style from the proposal? It should be async, as both requesting and checking quota may require async requests. See IDBRequest.

RE: [indexeddb] New WebIDL Exception Model for IndexedDB

2011-09-26 Thread Israel Hilerio
On Monday, September 26, 2011 2:36 AM Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:31:36 +0200, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote: On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:52:39 +0200, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com wrote: This is our understanding on how the spec needs to change to support