https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26713
Bug ID: 26713
Summary: DOMFocusIn/DOMFocusOut in ShadowDOM spec should be
renamed to focusin/focusout
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 2:54 AM, Robert Hanson hans...@stolaf.edu wrote:
I respectively request that the wording of the warning on the pages
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/xhr/raw-file/default/xhr-1/Overview.html
and
http://xhr.spec.whatwg.org/
be changed from
Warning: Developers must not pass
TL;DR:
Permissions API would be a single entry point for a web page to check if
using API /foo/ would prompt, succeed or fail.
You can find the chromium.org design document in [1].
# Use case #
The APIs on the platform are lacking a way to check whether the user has
granted them. Except the
02.09.2014, 10:55, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 2:54 AM, Robert Hanson hans...@stolaf.edu wrote:
I respectively request that the wording of the warning
[...]
Warning: Developers must not pass false for the async argument when the
JavaScript global environment
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014, Alan deLespinasse wrote:
Thanks. Apparently I did a lousy job of searching for previous discussions.
I just found this later, longer thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/0965.html
In the document: http://www.w3.org/TR/service-workers/
Should:
Existing palyground services (e.g. github.io) now work with HTTPS
read as:
Existing playground services (e.g. github.io) now work with HTTPS
-Brent
Seems likely :)
I'd recommend reading the editor's draft, which is more up to date:
https://slightlyoff.github.io/ServiceWorker/spec/service_worker/
On 2 September 2014 18:45, Brent Shambaugh brent.shamba...@gmail.com
wrote:
In the document: http://www.w3.org/TR/service-workers/
Should:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 6:51 AM, Mounir Lamouri mou...@lamouri.fr wrote:
# Straw man proposal #
This proposal is on purpose minimalistic and only contains features that
should have straight consensus and strong use cases, the linked document
[1] contains ideas of optional additions and list of
On 9/2/14, 9:51 AM, Mounir Lamouri wrote:
required PermissionName name;
Glad to see required being put to good use. ;)
interface PermissionManager {
IDL nit: This needs Exposed=(Window,Worker)
[NoInterfaceObject, Exposed=Window,Worker]
And parens.
-Boris
As before I'm cross-posting this IndieUI agenda As part of IndieUI's
continuing open invitation continuing our conversation about working
jointly. Allow me to invite you to the next Indie-UI teleconference as
detailed below. Please feel free to join us on this call, or any
following call.
Hi Mounir,
Have you considered making this return a promise, as per Nikhil's proposal:
https://github.com/w3c/push-api/issues/3#issuecomment-42997477
p.s. I will bring your idea to the trust permissions in the open web
platform meeting, we're holding in Paris this week, see:
cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote:
Sorry. As with showModalDialog() we would really like to make this
feature disappear. I realize this makes some forms of code generation
harder, but hopefully you can find a way around that in time.
Perhaps we should set some sense of expectation about*when*
I welcome this proposal because the permission dialog creep is certainly
worrying.
Opponents of some kind of permission management have pointed out that
collated dialogs tend to just get ignored by users and blindly approved (as
an example they list Android permission handling).
While that may
13 matches
Mail list logo
