I would like to make another plug for
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/fileio/fileIO.htm
This had the notion of writing files, file streams, directories, and
being able to integrate into the host filesystem. All of these are
important for reasons I outlined in
We are in the middle of implementing in WebKit and in Chromium, so yes we
are still interested in pursuing. John Gregg (johnnyg@) has been leading the
effort from our end.
Beyond an implementation that people can experiment with, what sort of
resources are you looking for?
2009/9/4 Marcos Caceres
I also support publishing a new WD on all of these.
2009/10/23 Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com
On Oct 23, 2009, at 7:30 AM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
Fine for all except WebDatabase.
I notice that its present ED is virtually the same as its FPWD (modulo a
new section on data sensitivity).
This is really getting into fantasy-land... Writing a file and hoping that
the user actually opens up explorer/finder/whatever and browses to some
folder deep within the profile directory, and then double clicks something?
Telling a user click here and run blah to get a pony is so much easier.
2009/11/12 Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc
2009/11/12 Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) ife...@google.com:
This is really getting into fantasy-land... Writing a file and hoping
that
the user actually opens up explorer/finder/whatever and browses to some
folder deep within the profile directory
It's interesting to note that on most modern OSes (Mac OS X, Vista, Win 7
...) the OS actually does create a pre-computed high quality icon for many
files, e.g. images, PDF, Word, Photoshop, It is almost free to get this
from the OS, and the OS also has 3 default sizes for it. It would be
2010/1/28 Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com
On Jan 28, 2010, at 8:39 PM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote:
It's interesting to note that on most modern OSes (Mac OS X, Vista, Win 7
...) the OS actually does create a pre-computed high quality icon for many
files, e.g. images, PDF, Word, Photoshop
, 2010, at 10:29 AM, Pierre-Antoine LaFayette wrote:
2010/1/29 Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) ife...@google.com
2010/1/28 Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com
On Jan 28, 2010, at 8:39 PM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote:
It's interesting to note that on most modern OSes (Mac OS X, Vista, Win 7
...) the OS
This thread seems to have languished, and I'm trying to figure out how to
move forward here.
My understanding, grossly simplified, of the current state of the world is
this:
1. Some people have a desire to show HTML / interactive notifications, to
support use cases like remind me of this
Schepers
W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote (on 2/23/10 1:06 PM):
This thread seems to have languished, and I'm trying to figure out how
to move forward here.
My understanding, grossly simplified, of the current state of the world
is this:
1. Some people have
Am 23. Februar 2010 12:11 schrieb Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com:
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 20:20:13 +0100, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ)
ife...@google.com wrote:
CreateInteractiveNotification(in DOMString text-fallback, [Optional] in
DOMString MimeType1, [Optional] in DOMString NotificationFormat1
Am 23. Februar 2010 13:44 schrieb Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc:
2010/2/23 Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) ife...@google.com:
Am 23. Februar 2010 12:11 schrieb Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com:
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 20:20:13 +0100, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ)
ife...@google.com wrote
http://www.w3.org/TR/file-writer-api/
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Cristiano Sumariva sumar...@gmail.comwrote:
I have been reading the specification on file section.
I would like to ask why not propose that File interface allow a create
method to let user save data for his use?
Resume:
...
/ Jonas
2010/6/2 Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) ife...@google.com:
http://www.w3.org/TR/file-writer-api/
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Cristiano Sumariva sumar...@gmail.com
wrote:
I have been reading the specification on file section.
I would like to ask why not propose that File interface allow
and attention from browser companies on WebApps. Apple
isn't on DAP at all, and everyone from mozilla that works on related
APIs are not on the DAP list (I don't have time to join another list,
I imagine the same holds true for others though I'm not sure).
/ Jonas
2010/6/2 Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ
Also, for the sake of keeping things together, when we move this over we
should probably move FileSystem over as well.
-Ian
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) ife...@google.comwrote:
I'm reaching out to some W3C team contacts to figure out logistics.
-Ian
On Wed, Jun 2
Were it not for file* I, and perhaps Google as a whole, would likely leave
DAP (though I cannot speak for everyone). Nothing else there is of interest
to me right now.
On Jun 3, 2010 4:13 AM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
On Jun 2, 2010, at 23:02 , Jonas Sicking wrote:
I don't know who
Actually, I should take that back. Some of the device specs are definitely
relevant, though I have concerns about the direction they are heading.
Either way though, it seems strange for the filesystem apis to be split.
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 8:22 AM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) ife...@google.comwrote
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
On Jun 3, 2010, at 19:29 , Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote:
Actually, I should take that back. Some of the device specs are
definitely relevant
Right, and some of your colleagues just submitted Powerbox there, which
seems like
I think recursive copy/remove is a very valid use case. As for overwrite, is
a flag necessary? On most OSes you already get overwrite as the default
behaviour (at least from APIs, many interactive UAs such as Explorer on
windows will prompt), is there a compelling argument why it should be
I'm not sure FileSystem is necessarily any trickier from a user's
perspective -- it's all storage that is taking up space on my HD (at least,
for now the filesystem is just a directory under the user's profile in
Chrome). I think it fits fine in the unified quota model. (And FWIW we are
looking at
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:07 PM, Charles Pritchard ch...@visc.us wrote:
On 2/3/2011 9:39 PM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote:
I'm not sure FileSystem is necessarily any trickier from a user's
perspective -- it's all storage that is taking up space on my HD (at least,
for now the filesystem
Ian,
I understand this point of view. That said, there is a lot of disagreement
in the IETF WG about deflate-stream. The extension basically breaks all
other extensions, framing, etc. It's a bit of a mess and a lot of us want to
just yank it out entirely. There was a much better proposal by
We are talking about it at IETF81 this week.
That said, I think either way browsers should not require deflate-stream. I
am hoping we can make forward progress on deflate-application-data (
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tyoshino-hybi-websocket-perframe-deflate-01).
If we can get that through
document as opposed to being the only extension included in the core
specification as a known extension.
-Ian
2011/7/27 James Robinson jam...@google.com
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ)
ife...@google.comwrote:
We are talking about it at IETF81 this week.
That said, I
of extensions
that are well tested, such as compression and multiplexing). I don't think
we should put the cart before the horse.
-Ian
2011/7/27 James Robinson jam...@google.com
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ)
ife...@google.comwrote:
I don't think we want to forbid any
I'm forwarding this on behalf of a colleague whose message seems caught up
in a moderation queue. Apologies if it results in a duplicate message for
anyone.
-- Forwarded message --
From: James Hawkins jhawk...@google.com
Date: Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 1:27 PM
Subject: Adding Web
With all due respect, I think that if we have to re-charter or create a new
working group each time a new API comes up we are all doomed. The overhead
of creating and monitoring so many WGs is not appealing to many of us.
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
Hi
and be a
hell of a lot lower overhead, while effectively offering as much (or rather,
as little) benefit as we get from being forced to start a new group for each
API.
-Ian
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 7:21 AM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
Hi Ian,
On Sep 20, 2011, at 16:04 , Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
Hi Charles,
On Sep 20, 2011, at 17:15 , Charles Pritchard wrote:
There is certainly some overlap between DAP and WebApps. Is that the
issue here, Robin?
If you ask me, there isn't any issue at all :) James suggested
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Marcos Caceres w...@marcosc.com wrote:
On Tuesday, September 20, 2011 at 7:09 PM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com (mailto:
ro...@berjon.com) wrote:
Hi Charles,
On Sep 20, 2011, at 17:15
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Marcos Caceres w...@marcosc.com wrote:
On Tuesday, September 20, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote:
While issuing a ton of patent exclusions for something like this would be
rather poor, I would frankly rather have that then a spec that doesn't get
Circling back to the original topic, it seems like there's a good amount of
interest and opinions, and that the spec would probably benefit from the
input of the people in this WG, especially since multiple platforms are all
shipping something similar in approach (android intents, contracts in
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Jean-Claude Dufourd
jean-claude.dufo...@telecom-paristech.fr wrote:
On 29/5/12 17:56 , Julian Reschke wrote:
On 2012-05-29 16:53, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Karl Dubost ka...@opera.com wrote:
Le 29 mai 2012 à 12:59, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) a écrit :
And your modified reply causes GMail not to collapse the replied-to text
seems to be a GMail issue.
[…]
resolved by using an up-to-date MUA.
Dare putting a list
Anne,
Both Chrome and Safari support the ping attribute. I am not sure about IE,
I believe Firefox has it disabled by default. FWIW I wouldn't consider this
a huge failure, if anything I'd expect over time people to use ping where
it's supported and fallback where it's not, resulting in the same
I seem to recall we contemplated people writing libraries on top of IDB
from the beginning. I'm not sure why this is a bad thing. We originally
shipped web sql / sqlite, which was a familiar interface for many and
relatively easy to use, but had a sufficiently large API surface area that
no one
To be honest this always drove me nuts when we were trying to do
WebSockets. Having code is great for conformance tests, but a spec IMO
should do a good job of setting out preconditions, postconditions,
performance guarantees (e.g. STL algorithms specifying runtime complexity)
and error handling.
38 matches
Mail list logo
