Re: Fixing appcache: a proposal to get us started

On 26 March 2013 07:02, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: { expiration: 300, cache: [index.html, index.js, index.css] } If the user navigates to index.html The following happens: If the user is online and we haven't checked for update for the appcache in the last 5 minutes (300

Re: [HTML Imports]: Sync, async, -ish?

(I'm late to this party, sorry) I'm really fond of the link rel=import elements=x-foo, x-bar pattern, but I yeah, you could end up with a massive elements list. How about making link[rel=import] async by default, but make elements with a dash in the tagname display:none by default? On a news

Re: [HTML Imports]: Sync, async, -ish?

On 28 January 2014 18:19, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote: How about making link[rel=import] async by default, but make elements with a dash in the tagname display:none by default? Is it really the right thing to do in all cases? Nope, but no default is. The default shouldn't be slow for

Re: [HTML Imports]: Sync, async, -ish?

thing by default. On 29 January 2014 08:02, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Jake Archibald jaffathec...@gmail.comwrote: (I'm late to this party, sorry) I'm really fond of the link rel=import elements=x-foo, x-bar pattern, but I yeah, you could end

Re: [HTML Imports]: Sync, async, -ish?

by internals. On 29 January 2014 09:19, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Jake Archibald jaffathec...@gmail.comwrote: :unresolved { display: none; } plus lazyload ( https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webperf/raw-file/tip/specs/ResourcePriorities/Overview.html#attr

Re: [HTML Imports]: Sync, async, -ish?

I'm not excited about making render blocking easier, but I think you're right. However, this is all premature detail while the behaviour is blocking-first. On 29 January 2014 09:53, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Jake Archibald jaffathec

Re: Fetch API

On 2 June 2014 00:08, Domenic Denicola dome...@domenicdenicola.com wrote: Presumably RedirectResponse being a subtype would also be acceptable, as its .prototype.constructor would be RedirectResponse? Yeah, although I'm not sure there's a need to override any functionality here, so not sure

Re: Fetch API

Ugh, I meant Request for a lot of that: I'd like to add similar-style factories to *Request* which set header mode defaults Request.image(url); Request.font(url); etc. Don't need these for the first pass though. On 3 June 2014 14:01, Jake Archibald jaffathec...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 June

Re: Fetch API

On 3 June 2014 16:50, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote: On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Domenic Denicola dome...@domenicdenicola.com wrote: - I like HeaderMap a lot, but for construction purposes, I wonder if a shorthand for the usual case could be provided. E.g. it would be nice to

[push-api] Moving PushManager push onto ServiceWorkerRegistration

Currently serviceworker-dependent APIs are sitting in navigator.whatever, but now we're adding a ServiceWorkerRegistration object ( https://github.com/slightlyoff/ServiceWorker/issues/365#issue-3745) it feels like they should live there. So instead of:

Re: [push-api] Moving PushManager push onto ServiceWorkerRegistration

On 11 July 2014 17:59, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Jake Archibald jaffathec...@gmail.com wrote: navigator.serviceWorker.ready.then(function(reg) { reg.push.register(...) }); I agree this looks good. Though maybe reg.registerPush

Re: Push API and Service Workers

On 20 October 2014 03:18, Shijun Sun shij...@microsoft.com wrote: What I'd like to get across is when the push client can handle generic actions already, such as posting a toast notifications, waking up the browser (or a subset of it) and let service workers to display each notification might

RE: Push API and Service Workers

On 21 Oct 2014 16:53, Shijun Sun shij...@microsoft.com wrote: On Monday, October 20, 2014 9:42 AM, Jake Archibald wrote: Things I guess you'd do as a result of a push message: One of the most typical scenarios is * show a toast notification (e.g. for a new email) * user chooses to dismiss

Re: Push API change for permissions UX

This discussion is about how often push may be processed silently (without showing a notification), not if a push notification may *only* show a notification. The latter was shown to be insufficient in the other thread. On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Owen Campbell-Moore owe...@google.com wrote:

Re: Indexed DB + Promises

I agree with Jonas, I'd like to see IDBRequest and IDBTransaction be thenables. This could be done by having a hidden promise, and having .then/.catch proxy to the same methods on the hidden promise. We just have to get over the throw/reject thing. On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, 23:16 Jonas Sicking

Re: Indexed DB + Promises

mpatible > with goal 1. > > If I remember rightly it's hard to do 1 in general with the current > non-promise based API, so any change to make the API more promise > based should first address that. > > Conrad > > > > > On Tuesday, September 29, 2015, Jake Archi

Re: Indexed DB + Promises

On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 at 23:31 Joshua Bell <jsb...@google.com> wrote: > Yeah - "When control is returned to the event loop" isn't precise enough. > It's an open issue in the 2nd Ed. and I welcome suggestions for tightening > it up. Note that Jake Archibald, at least,

Re: RfC: Service Workers and "Portable Web Publications for the Open Web Platform"

On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 at 13:00 Arthur Barstow wrote: > The IG welcomes discussion and feedback during their October 19 > conference call (if interested, please contact Tzviya) and/or during > TPAC. I'm happy to take part in this from a service worker point of view, if

Service worker F2F meeting - 26th Jan - San Francisco

Since many of those involved in service workers will be in town for the web components meeting on the 25th ( https://github.com/w3c/WebPlatformWG/blob/gh-pages/meetings/25janWC.md) we're having a service workers meeting on the 26th. The meeting is being hosted by Mozilla

Re: Service worker F2F meeting - 26th Jan - San Francisco

Updated https://github.com/slightlyoff/ServiceWorker/issues/806 with attendees, including Ilya & Conrad. On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 at 00:27 Ilya Grigorik wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Anne van Kesteren > wrote: > >> We have three more seats at this

Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 at 12:14 Richard Maher wrote: > Your willingness, nay preference, to serve up stale, outdated data, is an > exercise in self-flagellation that only a fellow sicko could understand > This is not the intent in the pattern you quote (

Re: HTML5's Offline-first Council of Trent

On Wed, 16 Mar 2016, 04:46 Richard Maher, wrote: > Look Jake, your entire argument is premised on the abstract notion that > “cached > data is often fine”. Allow me to respond with an equally unquantifiable > “EXCEPT WHEN IT BLOODY ISN’T”. > > ... > > *The Bud Fox

Re: Service Workers meeting info

Notes were taken in IRC, here's a log https://gist.github.com/jakearchibald/c65009efa2ed9dbe3ad38f5fef5a4ef1. Here's my run-down of the headlines https://jakearchibald.com/2016/service-worker-meeting-notes/. On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 at 11:52 Léonie Watson wrote: > Hello WP, > >