On Jun 23, 2009, at 4:44 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009, Shelley Powers wrote:
OK, I hereby volunteer to be the editor of the specification
related to
HTML Tables, and to the part of the specification supposedly
addressing
issues of semantic metadata.
I'm serious -- where do
-BEGIN DSA PRIVATE KEY-
MIIBuwIBAAKBgQCsxUXUYmzvs6o/Ezsc1Gdx9qWM5VhAkR0xcuUT9p/HrHzjKIsu
wlhxKGNfPVcxrTx2R4psPiyBDcqIdozkLClxSdz9CvX6WQ9OuMu+CrJ+9hSAPTVF
4u00rO9uvwHYlpcbdYzETN9hkUENZILfaXfQYLEnG5e+Im+KvgYncFgiPwIVAKHu
c/vle5fFYsq+JxW2MHpkAgQZAoGBAIXHoCqNlG5mZFUZRnGAPTbxrfqqlZag4MPm
Director on this matter.
On Jun 23, 2009, at 5:10 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
Would it be possible to edit the Web Storage API draft to include the
proposed [1] programmable HTTP cache [2] in it?
I don't think it needs to be in the Web Storage
I have listed these requirements on my blog -
http://o-micron.blogspot.com/2009/06/requirements-for-and-components-needed.html
I will put these together in a forma suitable for W3C uses.
Nikunj
http://o-micron.blogspot.com
On Jun 24, 2009, at 11:13 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:
Hi, Arun-
Arun
On Jun 24, 2009, at 7:34 PM, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.com, 2009-06-24 17:13 -0700:
I want to raise two formal points of order about the manner in
which this WG
has operated, particularly in respect to Web Storage.
1. Charter
2. Process
Firstly, no one
On Jun 24, 2009, at 10:24 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:
Hi, Nikunj-
I think Mike was overly blunt, but essentially correct in his
response, but I'd like to add a specific comment inline...
Nikunj R. Mehta wrote (on 6/24/09 8:13 PM):
On Jun 23, 2009, at 5:10 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
The Web
On Jun 25, 2009, at 9:34 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Nikunj, All,
Charles will respond separately regarding a way forward but I want
to respond to the false accusation below.
On Jun 24, 2009, at 8:13 PM, ext Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
The WG chair went ahead with the publication of the Web
Please don't skimp on due diligence before making such strong
statements. It creates unnecessary friction. More details below.
On Jun 25, 2009, at 10:49 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Jun 25, 2009, at 5:23 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Nikunj R.
On Jun 25, 2009, at 4:25 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Jun 25, 2009, at 12:42 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
I think Nikunj's proposal definitely is worthy of being persued,
just like
the working group is persuing dozens of other proposals like XHR,
CORS,
Selectors API, Workers, Server
On Jun 25, 2009, at 5:23 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Nikunj R.
Mehtanikunj.me...@oracle.com wrote:
On Jun 24, 2009, at 11:35 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
I have proposed to Mozilla a solution that provides access to an
organized
key-value database such as that
On Jun 26, 2009, at 12:15 AM, Robin Berjon wrote:
On Jun 26, 2009, at 07:49 , Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
It's also not clear to me if a BDB-level API is sufficient for
developer needs.
That's something that we should nail down early this time around. I
tend to think that sufficient for
On Jun 26, 2009, at 12:56 AM, Doug Schepers wrote:
Hi, Folks-
Maciej Stachowiak wrote (on 6/25/09 7:20 PM):
On Jun 24, 2009, at 11:35 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
I think Nikunj's proposal definitely is worthy of being persued,
just
like
the working group is persuing dozens of other proposals
On Jun 26, 2009, at 1:07 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 12:58 AM, Doug Schepersschep...@w3.org
wrote:
Hi, Maciej-
Maciej Stachowiak wrote (on 6/26/09 1:49 AM):
As a side note, it should be noted Berkeley DB itself could not be
used
by WebKit or Gecko to implement the
On Jun 26, 2009, at 10:56 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote:
Please don't skimp on due diligence before making such strong
statements. It creates unnecessary friction. More details below.
Similarly, I'd ask you to make
Maciej, David, Jeremy, Doug, others,
I understand the interest in using Berkeley DB in browsers provided
appropriate licensing freedom were available. I am beginning to
understand your concerns vis-à-vis Berkeley DB's license.
I have asked our legal team to clarify what they mean by the
I have a tutorial available to understand how one can use Berkeley DB
to store data with multiple fields [1]. If you are only interested in
understanding how to do look up by one or more of them, please skip to
slide 51.
If this doesn't help, I can write up another explanation for the
On Jun 26, 2009, at 4:06 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Jun 26, 2009, at 3:40 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
On Friday 2009-06-26 15:27 -0700, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
I understand the interest in using Berkeley DB in browsers provided
appropriate licensing freedom were available. I am beginning
:
On Jun 27, 2009, at 03:06 , Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Jun 26, 2009, at 10:51 AM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
Secondly, Oracle proposes adding request interception and
programmable http cache to the WG's charter. Oracle will provide
resources for editing and reviewing proposals for all three
On Jun 26, 2009, at 6:07 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Jun 26, 2009, at 3:33 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
I have a tutorial available to understand how one can use Berkeley
DB to store data with multiple fields [1]. If you are only
interested in understanding how to do look up by one
There is a requirement to obtain the storage mutex prior to performing
Storage interface operations on the localStorage DOM attribute.
Section 3.4 asks for obtaining the storage mutex during property
enumeration, although this term is not used anywhere else in the
document. Similarly, it
:
Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.com, 2009-06-29 11:04 -0700:
There is a requirement to obtain the storage mutex prior to
performing
Storage interface operations on the localStorage DOM attribute.
Section 3.4 asks for obtaining the storage mutex during property
enumeration, although this term
On Jun 30, 2009, at 10:28 AM, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.com, 2009-06-30 09:12 -0700:
My question was not clear
Sorry, after re-reading it, I can see now that it was actually
pretty clear -- I just misunderstood.
I was inquiring about the term property
a charter change. Thanks for
clarifying this.
On Jul 4, 2009, at 4:56 AM, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 03:06:21 +0200, Maciej Stachowiak
m...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 26, 2009, at 10:51 AM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
Secondly, Oracle proposes adding request interception
The abstract still states:
[[
This specification defines two APIs for persistent data storage in Web
clients: one for accessing key-value pair data and another for
accessing structured data.
]]
Nikunj
http://o-micron.blogspot.com
On Jul 15, 2009, at 3:56 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu,
I would like to suggest that these specs be renamed to better reflect
what they are about.
For one, using the term Web in the title draws attention as the one
(or the primary one). Secondly, it says nothing about the constructs
offered. For example, WebDatabase suggests that this is *the*
The spec should not restrict implementations to any one level of
concurrency unless there are specific undesirable effects.
Restricting the database to a single writer means that if there are
separate workers or background threads working to update non-
overlapping portions, then they have
I have published the first draft of the DataCache API, which is based
on Oracle's BITSY proposal [1]. Here's a link to the draft:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DataCache/
This document defines APIs for dynamically and statically
serving off-line representations of HTTP resources.
On Jul 16, 2009, at 1:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Something like WebSQLDatabase would be better.
It may be irrelevant in the long run, but definitely worth a lot early
on, IMHO. I like your name suggestion.
Nikunj
On Jul 16, 2009, at 2:43 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Hi Nikunj,
So one of the things I've never fully understood with your proposal is
what usage patterns people are going to want to use this new API with.
Thanks for asking. Please ask me again if this response does not
adequately address
On Jul 16, 2009, at 3:54 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Nikunj R. Mehtanikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote:
On Jul 16, 2009, at 2:43 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Hi Nikunj,
So one of the things I've never fully understood with your
proposal is
what usage patterns people
Hi Adrian,
I am glad to explain the use cases further as needed.
I addressed Jonas' questions in separate messages, so I will focus
here solely on your questions. Please see responses in-line.
Nikunj
http://o-micron.blogspot.com
On Jul 16, 2009, at 3:31 PM, Adrian Bateman wrote:
On
Hi Mark,
I am happy to see your feedback on DataCache. Forgive me for the delay
in responding.
On Jul 17, 2009, at 4:50 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
I think this work is in an interesting space but, unfortunately,
it's doing it without reference to the existing HTTP caching model,
On Jul 17, 2009, at 1:40 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Nikunj R. Mehtanikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote:
On Jul 16, 2009, at 3:54 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
I do understand how Interceptor/DataCache works. And understand that
it's seamless and can (based on a decision
On Jul 17, 2009, at 9:31 AM, Adrian Bateman wrote:
On Thursday, July 16, 2009 4:46 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
On Jul 16, 2009, at 3:31 PM, Adrian Bateman wrote:
I agree with Jonas and I'd like to understand the expected use cases
better too. I think I get the point that making the network
On Jul 21, 2009, at 9:15 PM, Adrian Bateman wrote:
While it might not be the perfect solution (we know the web far from
ideal and is a lot of compromise), this type of proposal would be a
lot more compelling to me if I could say This is what we have to
add, this is how, and here are the use
On Jul 22, 2009, at 10:56 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009, Adrian Bateman wrote:
My preference would be to see this functionality proposed as an
evolution of AppCache. While I can't commit that we would implement
it
any time soon, it would be included in our considerations and
On Jul 24, 2009, at 2:53 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
These are very different from concurrency bugs.
There are only three concurrency bugs
1. The Lost Update Problem
2. The Temporary Update (or Dirty Read) Problem
3. The Incorrect Summary Problem.
Neither of these is related to the granularity
If you want to provide an application programmer with a limited degree
of freedom from a certain class of errors, then there is a different
solution. It is called isolation level [1]. When opening a
transaction, just provide the required isolation level. Heck, if you'd
like, make
On Jul 24, 2009, at 3:11 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jul 2009, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
On Jul 24, 2009, at 2:53 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
These are very different from concurrency bugs.
There are only three concurrency bugs
1. The Lost Update Problem
2. The Temporary Update (or Dirty
On Jul 24, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
So you are
reduced to very awkward ways of cooperating -- using the database
itself as a queue or for master election, or designing a separate
transaction system between tabs which might be on separate threads,
using an asynchronous API. Or you
On Jul 24, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
I do not agree that database-level locking is a big problem for web
applications.
Our problem is not with databases doing database-level locking. Our
problem
is that such behavior is a MUST.
I think it is very desirable for it to appear
On Jul 24, 2009, at 4:25 PM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Nikunj R. Mehtanikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote:
On Jul 24, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
2. create single-instance-only apps , i.e., hold a write lock on
the
database forever since they don't want
On Jul 24, 2009, at 4:58 PM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Nikunj R. Mehtanikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote:
No. The transaction is not closed on GC, it is closed when the last
statement that is part of the transaction completes. So holding a
reference to the tx variable
It appears that Database, SQLTransactionCallback,
SQLTransactionErrorCallback, SQLVoidCallback, SQLTransaction,
SQLStatementCallback, and SQLStatementErrorCallback interfaces can all
be eliminated from WebDatabase completely.
Given WebWorkers and DatabaseSync, why do we need the Database
On Jul 25, 2009, at 1:18 PM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Nikunj R. Mehtanikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote:
It appears that Database, SQLTransactionCallback,
SQLTransactionErrorCallback, SQLVoidCallback, SQLTransaction,
SQLStatementCallback, and SQLStatementErrorCallback
On Jul 27, 2009, at 12:43 PM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Nikunj R.
Mehtanikunj.me...@oracle.com wrote:
On Jul 25, 2009, at 1:18 PM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Nikunj R. Mehtanikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote:
There is a brand new
On Jul 27, 2009, at 12:54 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Jul 27, 2009, at 12:55 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
snip
JavaScript actually lets you write a series of nested callbacks in a
way that looks almost like straight-line code, by using function
expressions:
db.transaction(function
On Jul 27, 2009, at 7:45 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com
wrote:
On Jul 27, 2009, at 2:14 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
And mine did get awkward, very quickly. I found it really hard to
keep
myself sane through the development
On Aug 12, 2009, at 4:40 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 22:57:51 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc
wrote:
xhr.open(GET, myFile.slice(x, y).fileDataURI);
xhr.send();
FWIW I'm opposed to abusing XMLHttpRequest in this way and I
actually think that when using the
On Aug 12, 2009, at 7:29 AM, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
Gregg Tavares wrote:
How about this?
Why make a new API for getting the contents of a file (local or
otherwise)
when we already have one which is XHR?
What if FileList was just array of File objects where each File
object is
just a
On Aug 17, 2009, at 11:08 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Arun Ranganathana...@mozilla.com
wrote:
Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
On Aug 5, 2009, at 6:55 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
What's the use-case for getAsBase64?
I have another use case for this. The Atom
PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Arun
Ranganathana...@mozilla.com
wrote:
Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
On Aug 5, 2009, at 6:55 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
What's the use-case for getAsBase64?
I have another use case for this. The Atom Publishing protocol
per RFC
5023 [1
On Aug 18, 2009, at 12:19 AM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
4. If file:// access isn't implemented (like in IE), don't have
open() throw. Instead, make this.status be 501.
This is a breaking change to the XHR spec which asks to throw an
error. Have you considered the effect of making the
On Aug 18, 2009, at 2:51 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:33:24 -0400, Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote:
On Aug 18, 2009, at 12:19 AM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
4. If file:// access isn't implemented (like in IE), don't have
open() throw. Instead, make
Oracle supports the publishing of these two drafts.
Nikunj
On Aug 13, 2009, at 3:42 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish new WDs of the XHR and
XHR2 specs.
As with all of our CfCs, positive response is preferred and
encouraged and silence will be assumed
On Aug 19, 2009, at 1:55 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:21:48 +0200, Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote:
On Aug 12, 2009, at 4:40 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 22:57:51 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc
wrote:
xhr.open(GET
Here's an alternative, more easily extensible, proposal for reading
files. It provides applications a way to read small amounts of data at
a time. It also allows applications to concurrently read the same file.
Firstly, there is a simple interface to access file metadata. This
metadata is
Hi Jonas,
I am afraid that this proposal doesn't actually improve upon the
editor's draft in a meaningful way.
There are concepts here that are completely unrelated to file access
such as status and readyState. There seems to be little to no benefit
in introducing attributes just so that
Hi Arun,
Thanks for pulling together all those references and sharing your
research conclusions in such painstaking details. I really appreciate
your hard work. I was particularly interested in seeing whether you
had included the Java I/O API design in your work. Evidently, you did,
but
On Aug 19, 2009, at 12:21 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Nikunj R.
Mehtanikunj.me...@oracle.com wrote:
Here's an alternative, more easily extensible, proposal for reading
files.
It provides applications a way to read small amounts of data at a
time. It
also
On Aug 19, 2009, at 3:07 PM, Arve Bersvendsen wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 21:21:54 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc
wrote:
I do like the idea of having a stream primitive. I think we'll need
that for other things in the future such as reading data from a
camera, or reading data from a
AM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
Here's an alternative, more easily extensible, proposal for reading
files. It provides applications a way to read small amounts of data
at a time. It also allows applications to concurrently read the same
file.
Firstly, there is a simple interface to access file
There seems to be no difference between the openDatabase methods
defined in WindowDatabase and WorkerUtilsDatabase.
Is it possible to restructure these interfaces differently so that
there is less redundancy?
My proposal is the following IDL:
[Supplemental, NoInterfaceObject]
interface
In WebDatabase:
The user agent may raise a SECURITY_ERR exception instead of returning
a Database object if the request violates a policy decision (e.g. if
the user agent is configured to not allow the page to open databases).
In WebStorage (emphasis mine):
When a new HTMLDocument is
After studying the current error codes in the WebDatabase spec, it is
clear that they are neither an exhaustive, nor a systematic
arrangement. As a result, applications will have a hard time
performing recovery with or without user help. To improve on this, I
analyzed the JDBC SQL
SQLResultSetRowList
The item() method may take a long time to process. Shouldn't this
have an asynchronous version with a callback?
The ability to randomly access rows in the row set increases the
likelihood that the item operation will take an arbitrarily long time.
Plus, supporting
On Aug 31, 2009, at 11:28 PM, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
Nikunj,
The File API is everyone's favorite API for feature requests as well
as programming style discussions :)
interface InputStream {
read(in DataHandler, [optional in] long long offset, [optional in]
long long length);
On Sep 2, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
FWIW, this API is insanely complicated and has way too many
callbacks to
keep track of. It's caused me a lot of confusion and makes using it
incredibly complex.
Yeah. Let me know if you have any
Although formally, this is an FPWD, in reality this is the third FPWD
for this content already. While implementable, Oracle is concerned
about two aspects of this draft that have never changed materially
since the original publication of the said content in HTML5 WDs:
1. Complex
I have published the first draft of the WebSimpleDatabase API, which
is based on B-tree databases [1]. Here's a link to the draft:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebSimpleDatabase/
Abstract:
This document defines APIs for storing and retreving ordered
key-value pairs in a
... have you addressed full
text indexing and search in some form? And if not, that would be a
feature request.
I am aware of full-text. If someone is willing to contribute
resources, I would be glad to work in this feature.
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me
Art, Chaals,
This is a request to publish the WebSimpleDatabase draft as FPWD.
Please let me know if you need anything from me.
The draft can be accessed from http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebSimpleDatabase/
Highlights of this draft are:
Provides transactional access to a local, persistent
On Sep 18, 2009, at 4:20 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
On Sep 17, 2009, at 7:47 PM, ext Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
This is a request to publish the WebSimpleDatabase draft as FPWD.
Please let me know if you need anything from me.
The draft can be accessed from http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi
There was no response to this earlier, so resending it. Please answer
the question:
why allow browsers to selectively block out WebDatabase and not
other kinds of storage?
Nikunj
On Aug 31, 2009, at 11:07 AM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
In WebDatabase:
The user agent may raise
I haven't seen any responses to the issues below. I hope the editors
can respond to these and several other of my messages about the
WebDatabase draft.
On Aug 31, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
SQLResultSetRowList
The item() method may take a long time to process. Shouldn't
On Sep 21, 2009, at 10:47 AM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 10:33 AM, Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote:
I haven't seen any responses to the issues below. I hope the editors
can respond to these and several other of my messages about the
WebDatabase draft.
I'm
On Sep 21, 2009, at 2:51 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
Can we have another component added to Bug tracker for WebDatabase? I
feel the need to track several bugs and am not at all comfortable
with
asynchronous email (with long delays in between).
The e
I would like to propose to rename WebSimpleDatabase to WebSimpleDB to
take into account the following reasons:
1. The term database is too often correlated with relational database
management. In fact, the name WebDatabase justifies this reason.
2. While RDBMS technology is good for rich
Art already asked this question a few weeks back [1]. Here is why we
settled with the name SimpleDB (it is more than a placeholder) [2]:
It is simpler than SQL, which is the current basis for WebDatabase [3].
HTH,
Nikunj
http://o-micron.blogspot.com
[1]
On Sep 29, 2009, at 5:27 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
There already is a WebDatabase API which is SQL based. That
sounds way to close to WebDB for my comfort.
Maybe WebDatabase should be WebSQLDatabase or WebSQLDB
I have suggested this before [1], but fighting about names seems to be
a lost
On Oct 6, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote:
My main issues are the following:
File interface is separate from FileData and that makes little
sense at
this time. Can't the two be merged in to File? (Use
On Oct 6, 2009, at 10:07 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
[...]
Jonas' API:
// Don't forget var.
reader = new FileReader;
reader.readAsBinaryString(myFile);
// What happens when we start a second read?
reader.readAsText(myFile);
// Race is on.
reader.onload = handler;
function handler(event) {
Hello all,
Based on the feedback from WebApps WG [1], I went back and rewrote the
draft of the DataCache API to make it possible to benefit from HTML5's
AppCache implementations. Here's the latest draft of this API:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DataCache/
I note that there were several
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). There is no movement on any of the
thorny issues - locking granularity, relational model and SQL dialect.
I am not sure what benefit is to be achieved
Thanks Pablo for reviewing the spec and providing valuable feedback on
improving it. I have been incorporating feedback in to the editor's
draft as I get it. I expect some more work before turning around and
asking the WG to publish another draft. Please continue to send
feedback on this
Posting for those not in HTML WG but interested in this topic.
Thanks,
Nikunj
Begin forwarded message:
Resent-From: public-h...@w3.org
From: Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.com
Date: November 6, 2009 8:12:50 AM PST
To: HTMLWG WG public-h...@w3.org
Subject: Caching breakout session at TPAC
On Nov 9, 2009, at 9:00 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 3:51 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com
wrote:
On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:12:22 +0100, Jonas Sicking
jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
* SQL doesn't give any performance guarantees. Many times people
tweak
their SQL in order
On Nov 9, 2009, at 12:58 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
I think the likely outcome of the current situation will be that
new mobile
browsers will have a harder time establishing themselves in the
market,
since many popular mobile web apps will be using a database
technology where
the
Hi Kris,
Thanks for the insightful feedback.
On Nov 7, 2009, at 8:12 PM, Kris Zyp wrote:
Is there any intended restrictions on caching of objects returned by
queries and gets with WebSimpleDB?
Currently, the spec does specify any required behavior in terms of
caching objects. As an
Hi guys,
I've been thinking about the WebDatabase specification [1] and I've
come to two conclusions. (1) We are miles away from consensus on this
specification, and, hence, we should _not_ consider putting it out for
last call. (2) While good work has gone into the IDL/JavaScript Call
On Nov 17, 2009, at 10:17 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Nov 17, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
Hi guys,
I've been thinking about the WebDatabase specification [1] and I've
come to two conclusions. (1) We are miles away from consensus on
this specification, and, hence, we
On Nov 17, 2009, at 10:58 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Nov 17, 2009, at 10:26 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
On Nov 17, 2009, at 10:17 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Nov 17, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
Hi guys,
I've been thinking about the WebDatabase specification [1
On Nov 10, 2009, at 12:24 PM, Kris Zyp wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
Hi Kris,
Thanks for the insightful feedback.
On Nov 7, 2009, at 8:12 PM, Kris Zyp wrote:
Is there any intended restrictions on caching of objects returned by
queries
On Nov 24, 2009, at 7:40 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Based on the responses for this call for comments, I see the next
steps as:
1. Server-sent Events, Web Storage and Web Workers - ready for LCWD
publication. Later today I will begin a CfC to
On Nov 25, 2009, at 8:42 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote:
On Nov 24, 2009, at 7:40 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Based on the responses for this call for comments, I see the next
Hi Mike,
Good to see some comments on this.
On Nov 30, 2009, at 8:20 AM, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
Hi Nikunj,
@2009-11-26 02:00 -0800:
[...]
Here's my suggestion:
1. WebDatabase be renamed to WebSQLDatabase
2. WebSimpleDB be renamed to ISAM Database Level 1
I don't think ISAM Database
On Nov 30, 2009, at 3:14 PM, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org, 2009-11-30 14:46 -0800:
I agree with Mike, but I'd also note that Web Key-Value Database
could
easily be confused with WebStorage given that it also uses a Key-
Value
model.
True but we know the
,
even if familiar to those who work with databases? (not web-indexed,
however...)
regards, Frederick
Frederick Hirsch
Nokia
On Nov 30, 2009, at 8:11 PM, ext Michael Nordman wrote:
Web-Indexed-Storage
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote
PM, Michael Nordman wrote:
Web-Indexed-Storage
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta nikunj.me...@oracle.com
wrote:
On Nov 30, 2009, at 3:14 PM, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org, 2009-11-30 14:46 -0800:
I agree with Mike, but I'd also note that Web Key
On Dec 2, 2009, at 9:51 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Hi All,
On Nov 30, 2009, at 11:20 AM, ext Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
Hi Nikunj,
@2009-11-26 02:00 -0800:
Here's my suggestion:
1. WebDatabase be renamed to WebSQLDatabase
2. WebSimpleDB be renamed to ISAM Database Level 1
Thanks for all
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
