https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22018
Bug ID: 22018
Summary: Consider adding getCompositionAlternatives() in
InputMethodContext
Classification: Unclassified
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
On Mon, 13 May 2013 04:34:32 +0100, Charles McCathie Nevile
cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote:
Hi,
to close ACTION-693 I scribbled some stuff into a very preliminary draft
of a URL spec:
I made a couple of updates, including a pointer to the readable
incarnation of the latest version:
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile
cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote:
So far I have done nothing at all about an API, and am waiting for some
formal confirmation from people who implement stuff that they would like to
standardise an API for dealing with URLs. It seems to be a
On 13/05/2013 05:34 , Charles McCathie Nevile wrote:
So far I have done nothing at all about an API, and am waiting for some
formal confirmation from people who implement stuff that they would like
to standardise an API for dealing with URLs. It seems to be a common
task, judging from the number
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile
cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote:
Hi,
to close ACTION-693 I scribbled some stuff into a very preliminary draft of
a URL spec:
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webapps/raw-file/81f24bfc5970/url/url.html
In the end I didn't copy Anne's spec beyond
Yes. It was added to address: http://www.w3.org/TR/UMP/
We could revisit
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/thread.html#msg171
I suppose. Apparently at least Jonas changed his mind since then.
I didn't know the UMP spec. Reading it, it seems to me that the
Small question regarding these tests:
open-send-open.htm
open-sync-open-send.htm
Test topic: how many readystatechange events are sent if a script in one single
script thread does xhr.open(...);xhr.send();xhr.open(...)?
Test expectation: one single event, with readyState 1. Both Opera
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen
hallv...@opera.com wrote:
Firstly, the test tests a race condition - it is unlikely to cause problems
in practice though (the result of the request *might* just come quickly
enough that it has changed to for example readyState
Secondly, by reading the spec I'd expect the second open() call
to fire another event. The open() method, steps 15 and 16:
15 Change the state to OPENED.
16 Fire an event named readystatechange.
Doesn't imply that if the state is already OPENED, no new event
is expected to
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen
hallv...@opera.com wrote:
I have not tested IE - do you have an IE version that can handle ...
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20130513#l-984
--
http://annevankesteren.nl/
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen
hallv...@opera.com wrote:
Does anyone have real, non-contrived use cases for the anonymous flag?
The basic idea was preventing confused deputy attacks by not exposing
any information that could be used as such. So no credentials
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen
hallv...@opera.com wrote:
Does anyone have real, non-contrived use cases for the anonymous flag?
The basic idea was preventing confused deputy attacks
12 matches
Mail list logo
