Re: [cssom-view] Adding elementsFromPoint() to Document

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Alan Stearns wrote: > On www-style [1] I've suggested adding an elementsFromPoint() method to > cssom-view that returns all the elements under a particular point sorted > in paint order. It was suggested at our face to face meeting last week > that I should ping we

Re: [IndexedDB] Inform script of corruption recovery

Filed https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22370 to track this. On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Kyle Huey wrote: > On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 4:09 PM, David Grogan wrote: > >> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 4:01 PM, David Grogan wrote: >> >>> jsbell pointed out an annoyance with this approach. I

[Bug 22370] Inform script of corruption-induced data loss

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22370 dgro...@chromium.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 22370] New: Inform script of corruption-induced data loss

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22370 Bug ID: 22370 Summary: Inform script of corruption-induced data loss Classification: Unclassified Product: WebAppsWG Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: All

[cssom-view] Adding elementsFromPoint() to Document

Hey all, On www-style [1] I've suggested adding an elementsFromPoint() method to cssom-view that returns all the elements under a particular point sorted in paint order. It was suggested at our face to face meeting last week that I should ping webapps to see if you all had feedback on the idea. T

Re: Bringing other Web Components specs into HTML

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013, Dirk Schulze wrote: > > On Jun 14, 2013, at 6:41 AM, "Robin Berjon" wrote: > > > > now that is in HTML, I was wondering if some of the other > > specs needed the same treatment. > > Some of the specs can be relevant for other specifications as well. > Unless you don't wan

Re: Bringing other Web Components specs into HTML

On 14/06/2013 16:05 , Dirk Schulze wrote: Some of the specs can be relevant for other specifications as well. Unless you don't want to integrate the whole web stack (SVG, MathML, ...) into the HTML spec, some things should be separated from HTML. Which is why I included details focusing on the

Re: Bringing other Web Components specs into HTML

Hi, Some of the specs can be relevant for other specifications as well. Unless you don't want to integrate the whole web stack (SVG, MathML, ...) into the HTML spec, some things should be separated from HTML. Greetings, Dirk Sent from my iPhone On Jun 14, 2013, at 6:41 AM, "Robin Berjon" wr

Re: CfC: LCWD of HTML Templates; deadline June 18

>> When this would be spected to be implemented on browsers? >> > > Well, I think that's a bit of a loaded question and some could argue < http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/templating.html> provides a sufficient specification for implementation. > I've only read the polyfill docs and see

Bringing other Web Components specs into HTML

Hi, now that is in HTML, I was wondering if some of the other specs needed the same treatment. Shadow DOM: I reckon definitely not the case, it doesn't really do much monkey patching. Custom Elements: Does some monkey patching. What do you reckon is the best option here? Leave the monkey

Re: CfC: LCWD of HTML Templates; deadline June 18

On 6/14/13 9:22 AM, ext pira...@gmail.com wrote: When this would be spected to be implemented on browsers? Well, I think that's a bit of a loaded question and some could argue provides a sufficient specification for implementati

Re: CfC: LCWD of HTML Templates; deadline June 18

When this would be spected to be implemented on browsers? Any knows of at least partial implementation except the mdv polyfill? El 14/06/2013 15:18, "Arthur Barstow" escribió: > On 6/14/13 9:02 AM, ext Robin Berjon wrote: > >> On 11/06/2013 17:59 , Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Jun 11,

Re: CfC: LCWD of HTML Templates; deadline June 18

On 6/14/13 9:02 AM, ext Robin Berjon wrote: On 11/06/2013 17:59 , Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: This is a Call for Consensus to publish a Last Call Working Draft of the HTML Templates spec using the following document as the basis (it does not

[file-api] What's left before LCWD?

Hi Arun, Now that bug 21833 is closed, I am wondering what else must be done before File API is ready for LCWD? I noticed there are three open [Bugs]. Which of these are blocking LC? Also, I couldn't tell if one of the open bugs is for the `blob URL lifetime` issue you mentioned during our A

Re: CfC: LCWD of HTML Templates; deadline June 18

On 11/06/2013 17:59 , Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: This is a Call for Consensus to publish a Last Call Working Draft of the HTML Templates spec using the following document as the basis (it does not yet use the LC template):