[Push] one or many

2014-10-09 Thread Brian Kardell
I'm really confused by what seems to me like contradictory prose... In the interface definition it says Note that just a single push registration is allowed per webapp. But in multiple places it seems to suggest otherwise, for example, in the section on uniqueness it says: webapps that

Re: [Push] one or many

2014-10-09 Thread Brian Kardell
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote: On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote: Can someone clarify why those seem contradictory? Can a webapp have 1 registration, or many? The term webapp also seems wrong. There's no such

Re: [Push] one or many

2014-10-09 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote: They do define it in the spec at least[1], but I don't see how it can mean both things. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/push-api/#dfn-webapp That's not a definition that means anything. As I said, it's not grounded. --

Re: ServiceWorkers and Streams discussion at WebApps WG F2F

2014-10-09 Thread Arthur Barstow
On 10/7/14 2:57 PM, Paul Cotton wrote: I neither see Alex Russell (ServiceWorkers) nor Domenic Denicola (Streams) registered yet for the WebApps WG F2F meeting in Santa Clara, CA https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2014/registrants Do you believe these two specs will be discussed at the

Re: [Push] one or many

2014-10-09 Thread Michael van Ouwerkerk
I filed an issue regarding the term webapp: https://github.com/w3c/push-api/issues/77 /m On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Michael van Ouwerkerk mvanouwerk...@google.com wrote: Indeed, the spec is currently inconsistent about registrations. The current intention is to have one per

RE: [Push] one or many

2014-10-09 Thread SULLIVAN, BRYAN L
This is one of those semantics rabbit-holes that I request we avoid. The term webapp is well-known (5m hits on google in the common forms “webapp” “web app”, etc). In comparison, “web page” is probably a more amorphous and anachronistic term and provides less valuable context for the

RE: [streams-api] Seeking status of the Streams API spec

2014-10-09 Thread Paul Cotton
For concrete timeline: one of my Q3 goals as a Google employee is to publish a polished version of the stream spec + polyfill + test suite. This might be slightly optimistic but still seems doable. Was this Aug goal achieved? It does not look like the W3C Streams API WD has been updated

RE: [streams-api] Seeking status of the Streams API spec

2014-10-09 Thread Domenic Denicola
From: Paul Cotton [mailto:paul.cot...@microsoft.com] Was this Aug goal achieved? Yes: https://streams.spec.whatwg.org/

RE: [streams-api] Seeking status of the Streams API spec

2014-10-09 Thread Paul Cotton
The previous W3C WD [1] identified a large number of specifications that were stream producers and consumers. Is there any kind of mapping of the interfaces in the previous W3C WD to your recent specification to give all of those other specifications some idea of how to change to align with