- please use public-webapps for IDB discussions ]
On 5/20/14 7:46 PM, marc fawzi wrote:
Hi everyone,
I've been using IndexedDB for a week or so and I've noticed that
cursor.advance(n) will always move n items forward regardless of cursor
direction. In other words, when the cursor direction
, May 23, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Joshua Bell jsb...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 9:40 AM, marc fawzi marc.fa...@gmail.com wrote:
I thought .continue/advance was similar to the 'continue' statement in a
for loop in that everything below the statement will be ignored and the
loop would
Excuse my unsolicited comment here, being new to the webapps mailing list,
but here is my two cents feedback as a web developer...
I think the idea behind Web Components is good regardless of the flaws on
the spec. The idea is to create a standard built into the browser that will
allow
Another question about the subject
https://developers.google.com/chrome/apps/docs/developers_guide
This says that they can also run in the background, which is huge.
I'm not sure if they support content scripts like extensions and packaged
apps do. I would love to find out if the spec says
Hi Joshua, IDB folks,
I was about to wrap up work on a small app that uses IDB but to my absolute
surprise it looks that the number of indexed values in a MultiEntry index
is limited to 50. Maybe it's not meant to contain an infinite number but 50
seems small and arbitrary. Why not 4096?
or is a
simple count() enough?) and for implementors to track down actual bugs. If
you do find browser bugs, please report them - crbug.com,
bugzilla.mozilla.org, etc.
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:15 PM, marc fawzi marc.fa...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Joshua, IDB folks,
I was about to wrap up work on a small
I think the same thought pattern can be applied elsewhere in the API design
for v2.
Consider the scenario of trying to find whether a given index exists or not
(upon upgradeneeded). For now, we have to write noisy code like
[].slice.call(objectStore.indexNames()).indexOf(someIndex) Why couldn't
Joshua,
you're on, and I'll be happy to make suggestions once I've thought them
through... At least to some extent :)
Jonas,
There is a small performance difference between them though when
applied to indexes. Indexes could have multiple entries with the same
key (but different primaryKey),
was wondering what about a synchronous .exists() (the same proposal you
had but synchronous as opposed to asynchronous)
Makes any sense?
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 23, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Marc Fawzi marc.fa...@gmail.com
We can do synchronous tests against the schema as it is feasible for
implementations to maintain a copy of the current schema for an open connection
in memory in the same thread/process as script. (Or at least, no implementer
has complained.)
Oh cool. So I could have a 3rd party component in
Probably a naive comment, but I'm curious and interested in learning since
it's one thing that's been missing from browsers:
Does your last comment mean that you'd be baking in dependency on a certain
auth standard in the user agent? What happens when the part of the
authentication model that is
Hmm. I thought that's part of the purpose of Web Component, i.e. to
encapsulate CSS and JS? Is it not so?
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 1:42 AM, Henrik Haugberg henrik.haugb...@gmail.com
wrote:
I am hoping it will be possible to have root em like font size based
values, but based on the shadow root
n/m ... the request is more specific than the email subject... the JS
solution to the problem is certainly less appealing than a CSS only
solution.. .will be watching this :)
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Marc Fawzi marc.fa...@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm. I thought that's part of the purpose
Allowing this script to run may open you to all kinds of malicious attacks
by 3rd parties not associated with the party whom you're trusting.
If I give App XYZ super power to do anything, and XYZ gets
compromised/hacked then I'll be open to all sorts of attacks.
It's not an issue of party A
that the code is actually from the the certificate owner .. and
has not been altered without the signers consent.
Michaela
On 11/19/2014 06:14 AM, Marc Fawzi wrote:
Allowing this script to run may open you to all kinds of malicious
attacks by 3rd parties not associated with the party
So there is no way for an unsigned script to exploit security holes in a
signed script?
Funny you mention crypto currencies as an idea to get inspiration
from...Trust but verify is detached from that... a browser can monitor
what the signed scripts are doing and if it detects a potentially
...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Marc Fawzi marc.fa...@gmail.com wrote:
So there is no way for an unsigned script to exploit security holes in a
signed script?
Of course there's a way. But by the same token, there's a way a signed
script can exploit security holes in another signed
/06/2015 12:28 PM, Marc Fawzi wrote:
I have several 8-track tapes from the early-to-mid 70s that I'm really
fond of. They are bigger than my iPod. Maybe I can build an adapter with
mechanical parts, magnetic reader and A/D convertor etc. But that's my job,
not Apple's job.
The point is, old
I have several 8-track tapes from the early-to-mid 70s that I'm really fond
of. They are bigger than my iPod. Maybe I can build an adapter with
mechanical parts, magnetic reader and A/D convertor etc. But that's my job,
not Apple's job.
The point is, old technologies die all the time, and people
part of the journey... Relax.
On a more serious basis, please provide us with clarity or point us to
discussions on this topic that might help us understand how to get _to_
there!
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 7:19 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@secure.meer.net
wrote:
Marc Fawzi wrote:
I've recently
strong. Work there, above
the standards. De-jure standardization will follow, and we'll all be better
off for that order of work.
/be
Marc Fawzi wrote:
How about a thread-safe but lock-free version of the DOM based on something
like Clojure's atom? So we can manipulate the DOM from web
, and we'll all be better
off for that order of work.
/be
Marc Fawzi wrote:
How about a thread-safe but lock-free version of the DOM based on something
like Clojure's atom? So we can manipulate the DOM from web workers? With
cursor support?
How about immutable data structures for side-effect
support),
adds up to noise in this list. What good purpose does noise to signal serve?
/be
Marc Fawzi mailto:marc.fa...@gmail.com
February 10, 2015 at 6:24 PM
What? a good cop bad cop routine? Jonas asks for a constructive contribution
or ideas for missing functionality in the web platform
Here is a really bad idea:
Launch an async xhr and monitor its readyState in a while loop and don't exit
the loop till it has finished.
Easier than writing charged emails. Less drain on the soul.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 10, 2015, at 8:48 AM, Michaela Merz michaela.m...@hermetos.com
If readyState is async then have set a variable in the readyState change
callback and monitor that variable in a while loop :D
What am I missing?
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Elliott Sprehn espr...@chromium.org
wrote:
On Tuesday, February 10, 2015, Marc Fawzi marc.fa...@gmail.com wrote
Async xhr with callback let's you manage the flow such that you don't do
anything until a successful response from the server. Promises make it even
nicer.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 10, 2015, at 9:15 AM, George Calvert george.calv...@loudthink.com
wrote:
Ashley,
Isn't it for the
this backward compatibility stuff is making me think that the web is
built upon the axiom that we will never start over and we must keep piling
up new features and principles on top of the old ones
this has worked so far, miraculously and not without overhead, but I can
only assume that it's at
Can someone shed light at why Scoped Style Element was removed from Chrome
experimental features?
http://caniuse.com/#feat=style-scoped
In suggesting @isolate declaration, I meant it would go inside a scoped
style element. If there are nested scope style elements and each have
@isolate then it
If the goal is to isolate a style sheet or several per a DOM sub tree then why
not just use scoped style element that has imports that apply the stylesheet(s)
only to the sub tree in scope? Obviously, you are talking about preventing
stylesheets applied at a higher level from leaking in. So
my iPhone
On Feb 10, 2015, at 1:09 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Marc Fawzi marc.fa...@gmail.com wrote:
i agree that it's not a democratic process and even though some W3C/TAG
people will engage you every now and then the end result
think maybe aside from the thread-safe DOM idea, everything below that
should belong to the ES7 discussion list.
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Marc Fawzi marc.fa...@gmail.com wrote:
How about a thread-safe but lock-free version of the DOM based on
something like Clojure's atom? So we can
AM, Aryeh Gregor a...@aryeh.name wrote:
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 4:45 AM, Marc Fawzi marc.fa...@gmail.com wrote:
how long can this be sustained? forever? what is the point in time where
the
business of retaining backward compatibility becomes a huge nightmare?
It already is, but there's
Travis,
That would be awesome.
I will go over that link and hopefully have starting points for the
discussion.
My day job actually allows me to dedicate time to experimentation (hence
the ClojureScript stuff), so if you have any private branches of IE with
latest DOM experiments, I'd be very
-webapps. I cited
roc's blog post about custom view scrolling, which seems to fall under
Travis's (1) above.
Please don't feel rejected about any of these work items.
/be
Marc Fawzi mailto:marc.fa...@gmail.com
February 13, 2015 at 12:45 PM
Travis,
That would be awesome.
I will go over
think of is a timeout that is configurable
on waitUntil, e.g. waitUntil(new Promise()).maxTime(30s)
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Joshua Bell <jsb...@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Marc Fawzi <marc.fa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Have you looked at ES7 as
fig.
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Marc Fawzi <marc.fa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, sorry.
>
> < underlying issue of mixing IDB+Promises remains. >>
>
> That's for implementors such as yourself to work through, I had assumed.
>
> I just went over the Readme fro
Have you looked at ES7 async/await? I find that pattern makes both simple as
well as very complex (even dynamic) async coordination much easier to deal with
than Promise API. I mean from a developer perspective.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 28, 2015, at 10:43 AM, Joshua Bell
How about using ES7 decorators, like so:
@idb_promise
function () {
//some code that uses the IDB API in Promise based way
}
and it would add .promise to the IDB APIs
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 1:26 PM, David Rajchenbach-Teller <
dtel...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> On 28/09/15 22:14, M
38 matches
Mail list logo
