On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:29 AM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
What are your use-cases where they're not the same? More importantly, what
are the use-cases where they cannot be made the same by the developer?
E.g. embedding a widget for video or audio manipulation. The widget
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 2:13 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Takeshi Yoshino tyosh...@google.com
wrote:
Change on 2010/09/13
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest-2/Overview.src.html.diff?r1=1.138;r2=1.139;f=h
reversed the
On 2013-09-03 01:29, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
What are your use-cases where they're not the same? More importantly,
what are the use-cases where they cannot be made the same by the developer?
E.g. the main page delegating communication to someone else (perhaps via
an iFrame). If the
On 09/03/2013 10:27 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote:
On 2013-09-03 01:29, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
What are your use-cases where they're not the same? More importantly,
what are the use-cases where they cannot be made the same by the developer?
E.g. the main page delegating communication to
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23102
Anne ann...@annevk.nl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
On 2013-09-03 12:01, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
On 09/03/2013 10:27 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote:
On 2013-09-03 01:29, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
What are your use-cases where they're not the same? More importantly,
what are the use-cases where they cannot be made the same by the developer?
E.g.
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Takeshi Yoshino tyosh...@google.com wrote:
In the spec, we have three cancels
- cancel an instance of fetch algorithm
- cancel network activity
These are the same. Attempted to clarify.
- cancel a request
This is the end user terminate, correct?
The spec
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Stefan Håkansson LK
stefan.lk.hakans...@ericsson.com wrote:
I think it should stop playing since the object srcObject references is
gone. (It would work differently with createObjecURL + myVideoTag.src
since that would only be a handle to an underlying resource)
On 2013-09-03 14:02, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Stefan Håkansson LK
stefan.lk.hakans...@ericsson.com wrote:
I think it should stop playing since the object srcObject references is
gone. (It would work differently with createObjecURL + myVideoTag.src
since that
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22958
Robin Berjon ro...@w3.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||public-webapps@w3.org,
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22958
Anne ann...@annevk.nl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:29 AM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org
wrote:
What are your use-cases where they're not the same? More importantly,
what
are the use-cases where they cannot be made the same by the
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
The widget would not only have to be written by a third party, but actually
hosted on their domain. And not just optionally, but for some reason the
widget provider has decided not to allow the author to host it on
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:31 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org
wrote:
The widget would not only have to be written by a third party, but
actually
hosted on their domain. And not just optionally, but for some
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
Yes. For example there are plans to enable some kind of private mode for
WebRTC MediaStreams that protects stream contents from inspection by the
page. I don't know exactly how this is going to work, but if we allow
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23138
Bug ID: 23138
Summary: Make type a ByteString
Classification: Unclassified
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS: All
Status: NEW
Well, https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23138 is to make the
'type' attribute a ByteString. Is that your request here for the name
attribute as well?
It wouldn't be wise to restrict '/' or '\' or try to delve too deep into
platform land BUT the FileSystem API introduces directory
Anne,
This feedback is a bit vague.
I think you should describe the underlying model for Blob/File so
other specifications can more easily hook into it. E.g. if I want to
represent a File object with a name /x/ and type /y/ there's not a
clear way to do that right now. This also leads to
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23140
Bug ID: 23140
Summary: Further Boundary Checking is Necessary on Slice Calls
Classification: Unclassified
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS: All
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote:
Well, https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23138 is to make the
'type' attribute a ByteString. Is that your request here for the name
attribute as well?
I don't think you want those conversion semantics for
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote:
It wouldn't be wise to restrict '/' or '\' or try to delve too deep into
platform land BUT the FileSystem API introduces directory syntax which
might make being lax a fly in the ointment for later.
I wouldn't object to
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
I don't think you want those conversion semantics for name. I do think
we want the value space for names across different systems to be
equivalent,
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote:
This feedback is a bit vague.
Does http://the-pastry-box-project.net/anne-van-kesteren/2013-september-2/
help illustrate it a bit?
I think you should describe the underlying model for Blob/File so
other specifications
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote:
And, restrict separators such as / and \.
I thought we just agreed that \ is a platform-specific thing that
File.name shouldn't restrict. / is a
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote:
Which in fact is how I think we should do File.name. We'll stick to
DOMString, but think it should specify a conversion to a byte sequence using
utf-8. And, restrict separators such as / and \.
That doesn't solve the
On Sep 3, 2013, at 12:28 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
I don't think you want those conversion semantics for name. I do think
we want the value space
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote:
And, restrict separators such as / and \.
I thought we just agreed that \ is a platform-specific thing that
File.name shouldn't restrict. / is a directory separator on just about
every platform, but \ can appear in
The are no messages from Vitya in the public-webapps moderation queue, so I
don't know what the problem might be. I've asked the W3C systems team to
take a look.
--Mike
Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl, 2013-09-03 13:15 +0100:
For some reason Vic9's emails do not reach lists.w3.org.
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23147
Bug ID: 23147
Summary: Describe File API Model
Classification: Unclassified
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS: All
Status: NEW
29 matches
Mail list logo
