Re: New manifest spec - ready for FPWD?

On Tuesday, December 3, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile wrote: > On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 06:40:43 +0100, Marcos Caceres (mailto:w...@marcosc.com)> wrote: > > > > Yes, the app can detect that it's running "standalone" and display a > > > back button itself. However that was significantly

Re: New manifest spec - ready for FPWD?

On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 06:40:43 +0100, Marcos Caceres wrote: On Tuesday, December 3, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Marcos Caceres (mailto:w...@marcosc.com)> wrote: > The Editors would appreciate if people take a look and see if you agree with the featu

Fwd: Reminder: TPAC 2013 feedback requested by 8 December

Reminder. If you were at TPAC, please fill this survey out. In particular, the format of TPAC meetings is up for discussion, and results from this survey are likely to get a fair bit of weight - in many cases they represent the opinion of people who went out of their way to attend, which is

Re: New manifest spec - ready for FPWD?

On Tuesday, December 3, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Marcos Caceres (mailto:w...@marcosc.com)> wrote: > > The Editors would appreciate if people take a look and see if you agree > > with the feature set. > > > When we did outside-of-browser-UI we

Re: [screen-orientation] Locking to 'current' orientation

On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 9:07 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote: > The whole point is that the API must not allow locking to a particular > orientation at all, only to the current orientation. Allowing web pages to > cause my phone to *switch* orientations is crazy. (You'd end up with half > of the web lock

Re: [screen-orientation] screen orientation angle

On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Mounir Lamouri wrote: > Hi, > > The Screen Orientation API defines an angle relationship between > portrait-primary and landscape-primary. The reason for that is that > developers would know which orientation is at 90 degrees from the > current orientation, which o

Re: [screen-orientation] Locking to 'current' orientation

On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:52 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Nov 26, 2013 9:17 AM, "Mounir Lamouri" wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I got some requests from different organizations to add the ability to > > lock to the 'current' orientation in the Screen Orientation API. > > > > >From Javascript, that

Re: New manifest spec - ready for FPWD?

On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote: > The Editors would appreciate if people take a look and see if you agree with > the feature set. When we did outside-of-browser-UI web apps for FirefoxOS we quickly found that a lot of developers want to be able to rely on UA-provided UI su

Re: [screen-orientation] Locking to 'current' orientation

On Nov 26, 2013 9:17 AM, "Mounir Lamouri" wrote: > > Hi, > > I got some requests from different organizations to add the ability to > lock to the 'current' orientation in the Screen Orientation API. > > >From Javascript, that would allow writing > window.screen.lockOrientation('current'); > inst

Re: [manifest] orientation member

On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 7:41 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote: > Option 1: Provide a list of orientation sets in the manifest. The user agent > uses the first one with a matching media query. The order in which the > orientations are listed by a developer does not imply a preference for > setting the o

[Bug 22093] Consider adding candidatewindowshow/update/hide events and getCandidateWindowClientRect()

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22093 Jianfeng Lin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 22059] Composition dictionary should be changed

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22059 Jianfeng Lin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 22028] Consider adding hasComposition() in InputMethodContext

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22028 Jianfeng Lin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

Re: File API | lastModified and Date attribute change

On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 3:20 PM, pira...@gmail.com wrote: > Why lastModifiedDate being a Date object is bad? Read the linked thread and bug. ^_^ http://esdiscuss.org/topic/frozen-date-objects https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22824 ~TJ

Re: File API | lastModified and Date attribute change

Why lastModifiedDate being a Date object is bad? 2013/12/2 Arun Ranganathan : > Greetings public-webapps, > > I'm interested in feedback from imlementors about the lastModifiedDate > attribute exposed on File objects. The latest draft of the File API spec. > describes an attribute "lastModified

Re: CfC: publish FPWD of Manifest for web apps and bookmarks; deadline December 9

On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 19:27:09 +0100, Arthur Barstow wrote: Marcos proposed in [1] that WebApps publish a First Public Working Draft (FPWD) of "Manifest for web apps and bookmarks" and this is a Call for Consensus to do so, using the following document as the basis for the FPWD:

Re: Fixing appcache: a proposal to get us started

On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 16:38:55 +1000, pira...@gmail.com wrote: Json manifest seems a nice solution to me :-) Blergh! :-) More to the point, it seems that the approach of ServiceWorker discussed at the TPAC meeting, and based on Alex Russell's proposal which is unfortunately lacking an actual s

Re: IndexedDB, Blobs and partial Blobs - Large Files

On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Aymeric Vitte wrote: > This is about retrieving a large file with partial data and storing it in > an incremental way in indexedDB. > ... > This seems not efficient at all, was it never discussed the possibility to > be able to append data directly in indexedDB? >

File API | lastModified and Date attribute change

Greetings public-webapps, I'm interested in feedback from imlementors about the lastModifiedDate attribute exposed on File objects. The latest draft of the File API spec. describes an attribute "lastModified" which is no longer a Date object, but rather an integer representing milliseconds sin

Re: CfC: publish Candidate Recommendation of File API; deadline November 28

On Dec 1, 2013, at 10:24 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: > Since this CfC was started, Arun reopened [23853] on November 28 and [23946] > was filed on November 30. > > Arun - what's the plan here vis-à-vis this CfC? > > -Thanks, ArtB > > [23853]

RE: Browser search API

I really appreciate Mitar's desire to not hijack the browser's native UI, and instead intercept it and supply it with more helpful information. That seems definitely better than preventDefault()ing the normal search UI. From: Mitar Sent: Monday, December

Re: Browser search API

Hi! On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Mounir Lamouri wrote: > I am not sure that telling the webpage what the user is currently trying > to search is a great idea. Firefox and Safari are already doing that. When user searches, you can get what he or she is searching for with window.getSelection().

CfC: publish FPWD of Manifest for web apps and bookmarks; deadline December 9

Marcos proposed in [1] that WebApps publish a First Public Working Draft (FPWD) of "Manifest for web apps and bookmarks" and this is a Call for Consensus to do so, using the following document as the basis for the FPWD: This CfC satisfies the group's requirem

IndexedDB, Blobs and partial Blobs - Large Files

This is related to [1] (Use case) and [2] (Reduced test case) This is about retrieving a large file with partial data and storing it in an incremental way in indexedDB. Instead of maintaining an incremented Blob, the real use case is retrieving the Blob from indexedDB, doing new Blob([Blob, c

[admin] F2F meetings in 2014

Hi All, Although it appears the Technical Plenary and all WG meeting week for 2014 is not formally scheduled, it is my understanding it will be in the Silicon Valley area at the end of October or early November. My recommendation (based on what I know now) is that WebApps should plan to parti

Re: [screen-orientation] Locking to 'current' orientation

On 26 Nov 2013, at 18:49, Mounir Lamouri wrote: [...] > If 'current' is added, I wouldn't say that there is a race condition > issue because if you lock to 'current' you do not really care about the > actual orientation. > > This said, I do not think that 'current' is very useful from the JS AP

[admin] December 7 is last day to start a CfC to publish a spec in December

Because of the upcoming EoY publication `black out`, December 7 is the last day to start a 1-week CfC to publish a document in 2013. As such, if you want a spec published in December (December 17 is the last publication date of the year), please speak up as soon as possible. -Thanks, ArtB

Re: LINK only in HEAD?

On 28/11/2013 23:07 , Ian Hickson wrote: If there are use cases where best practice would involve a in the , we can always change the rules here. I wonder if late loading of secondary style resources (e.g. styles that won't get used in the initial rendering of the page) would qualify here. I

Re: [manifest] orientation member

Hi there On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote: > TLDR; orientation is hard. We've temporarily removed it from the spec. We > have two proposals below. Sounds good to me. > Orientation of an application is dependent on the media features of the > display. For example an applic

Re: Browser search API

On Mon, Dec 2, 2013, at 23:27, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 12/2/13 6:42 AM, Mounir Lamouri wrote: > > a 'findinpage' event could be fired on the > > document when the user initiates a find in page and the page would be > > able to call .preventDefault() on the event in order to show its own UI. > >

Re: [screen-orientation] When window orientation != screen orientation...

On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Mounir Lamouri wrote: > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013, at 23:46, John Mellor wrote: >> How should the Screen Orientation API handle cases where the web page's >> window has the opposite orientation to the device's screen? Examples >> where >> this can occur include: >> >>

Re: Browser search API

On 12/2/13 6:42 AM, Mounir Lamouri wrote: a 'findinpage' event could be fired on the document when the user initiates a find in page and the page would be able to call .preventDefault() on the event in order to show its own UI. I assume with a user option to not fire that event and use the brow

CfC: publish Candidate Recommendation of Pointer Lock; deadline Dec 9

No comments or bugs were submitted against the 31 October LCWD of Pointer Lock. As such, this is a Call for Consensus to publish a Candidate Recommendation of the spec using the LCWD as the basis: This CfC satisfies: a) the group's require

Re: Browser search API

Hi, I am not sure that telling the webpage what the user is currently trying to search is a great idea. However, if a webpage wants its own "find in page" UI I guess a simple solution would be to do something similar to the Forms Validation UI: a 'findinpage' event could be fired on the document w