Re: [service_worker] Notification constructor

On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 12:28 AM, Conrad Irwin wrote: > I've been implementing some things with service workers, and it's a little > bit frustrating to have to use > > self.registration.showNotification("hi!") > > instead of the more normal: > > new Notification("hi!") > > Is there a technical

[Bug 20257] IDBCursor should walk on secondary ordering of index value

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20257 Joshua Bell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 17681] [IndexedDB] Operations that raise multiple exceptions types should define order

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17681 Joshua Bell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

Re: PSA: Web Components vs Extract Widget patent

We have made a comparison between the Components model and the patent here: https://gist.github.com/Ayms/bf6a9f121e1ebd93cf22 >From the end-2011 Components Model we have added some properties/thoughts/proposals from the patent and our past projects. Each time we read something about the component

Re: [Clipboard] Web API for clipboard changes.

Thank you for your interest Arthur. I have drafted up a more detailed implementation doc and shared it with you and Hallvord. Please feel free to take a look and comment. Kelvin On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 3:57 AM Arthur Barstow wrote: > On 6/2/15 4:05 PM, Kelvin Poon wrote: > > > > Hi public-weba

[service_worker] Notification constructor

Hey All, Apologies if this isn't the right place to ask about the service worker spec. I've been implementing some things with service workers, and it's a little bit frustrating to have to use self.registration.showNotification("hi!") instead of the more normal: new Notification("hi!") Is

DOMError -> DOMException

Per previous discussions [1][2] highlighted in spec issues, we'd like to remove DOMError from the platform in favor of using DOMException. Sanity check: web-compat allowing, should we just swap DOMException in any place DOMError is currently used? I've done this (among other unvetted things) in t

Re: Custom Elements: is=""

I agree with Anne. A stopgap could hinder cross browser development significantly (with regards to backwards compatibility & browser needs of clients). Does it gain enough for us to justify one? I am just joining the conversation now so please correct me if I missed something on 'is'. As far as na

RE: Custom Elements: is=""

From: Bruce Lawson [mailto:bru...@opera.com] Sent: 15 June 2015 09:46 On 14 June 2015 at 01:41, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: > it makes more sense to work on stylability of standard elements. I'd like to keep the is="" construct (or better name) in the knowledge that it's a stopgap for v1, and put

Re: Custom Elements: is=""

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Bruce Lawson wrote: > On 14 June 2015 at 01:41, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: >> it makes more sense to work on stylability of standard elements. > > I'd like to keep the is="" construct (or better name) in the knowledge > that it's a stopgap for v1, and put our energi

Re: Custom Elements: is=""

On 14 June 2015 at 01:41, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: > it makes more sense to work on stylability of standard elements. I'd like to keep the is="" construct (or better name) in the knowledge that it's a stopgap for v1, and put our energies we're currently expending debating this into styling standar