Hi All,
A little over a month ago I got married. My wife and I are planning on
doing an extended honeymoon, starting now and ending sometime early next
year.
I'm not certain where we'll end up after the honeymoon, or what either of
us will work with. Because of this, my last day at Mozilla was
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> No, streams do not solve the problem of "how do you present a
> partially-downloaded JSON object". They handle chunked data *better*,
> so they'll improve "text" response handling,
Also binary handling should be
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Gomer Thomas
wrote:
> but I need a cross-browser solution in the near future
Another solution that I think would work cross-browser is to use
"text/plain;charset=ISO-8859-15" as content-type.
That way I *think* you can simply read
Sounds like you want access to partial binary data.
There's some propitiatory features in Firefox which lets you do this
(added ages ago). See [1]. However for a cross-platform solution we're
still waiting for streams to be available.
Hopefully that should be soon, but of course cross-browser
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Joshua Bell wrote:
> I'm also very interested in hearing from other browser implementers; Chrome
> is in the odd position of having made investments in related areas
> (FileSystem API and FileWriter API) that did not see adoption in other
>
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Florian Bösch <pya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Jonas Sicking <jo...@sicking.cc> wrote:
>>
>> Is the last bullet here really accurate? How can you use existing APIs to
>> listen to file modifications?
>
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 3:32 AM, Florian Bösch wrote:
>
> *What this covers*
>
>- Read one or many files in their entirety in one go (in python that
>would be open('foobar').read())
>- Save a completed binary string in its entirety in one go to the
>download
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 7:45 AM, Chaals McCathie Nevile
wrote:
> Thanks Art for everything you've done for the group for so long.
Hi Art,
Yes, thank you very much for chairing the WG for so long. This group
has under your chairing been one of the W3C WGs that has moved
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 6:55 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
>> On Jan 9, 2016, at 6:25 PM, Olli Pettay wrote:
>>
>> Hard to judge this proposal before seeing an API using StaticRange objects.
>>
>> One thing though, if apps were to create an undo stack of their own,
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Olli Pettay wrote:
> On 11/06/2015 09:28 PM, Justin Fagnani wrote:
>>
>> You can also override addEventListener/removeEventListener on your
>> element. My concern with that, and possibly an event listener change
>> callback, is
>> that it only
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
> This seems ... reasonable, and quite possibly the best we can do. It has a
> several notable rough edges:
>
> - The need to remember to use .promise, instead of just having functions
> whose return values you can await
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Travis Leithead
travis.leith...@microsoft.com wrote:
Recommendations:
·HTML5
·Web Messaging
Other references:
·CSS OM
·Web Sockets
·WebRTC
Note that in practice I would think that most implementations return
objects
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Domenic Denicola d...@domenic.me wrote:
From: Anne van Kesteren [mailto:ann...@annevk.nl]
I think the problem is that nobody has yet tried to figure out what
invariants
that would break and how we could solve them. I'm not too worried about
the parser as it
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Domenic Denicola d...@domenic.me wrote:
From: Jonas Sicking [mailto:jo...@sicking.cc]
Like Anne says, if it was better defined when the callbacks should happen,
and that it was defined that they all happen after all internal
datastructures
had been updated
Yeah, I think a standalone primitive for asynchronous atomics. The
big risk is of course that deadlocks can occur, but there's no real
way to completely avoid that while keeping a flexible platform. These
deadlocks would be asynchronous, so no thread will hang, but you can
easily end up with two
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
One important question though is what would input type=file
directories do on platforms that don't have a directory UI concept?
Like most mobile platforms?
Err.. that should say:
What would input type=directory do
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:39 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On that note, there is actually a 5th option that we can entertain. We could
have three different kinds of file inputs: one type for files, another for
directories, and yet another for handling both files and directories
picker is available?
/ Jonas
Thanks,
Ali
On Friday, May 8, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Ali Alabbas a...@microsoft.com wrote:
I recommend that we change the dir attribute to directories and keep
directory the same as it is now to avoid
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Ali Alabbas a...@microsoft.com wrote:
I recommend that we change the dir attribute to directories and keep
directory the same as it is now to avoid clashing with the existing dir
attribute on the HTMLInputElement. All in favor?
There's no current directory
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 7:57 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Has at-end-of-microtask been debated rather than 1/2? Synchronous
always has the downside that the developer has to deal with
reentrancy.
1/2
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Doug Turner do...@mozilla.com wrote:
The way I would look at this is based on timeframe -- if we're not
implementing the Permissions API until 2017 or something, i'd just leave the
functionality in the PushAPI spec. If the Permission API is right around the
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 2:05 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
1) Synchronous, no flattening of content. A host element's shadow
tree has a set of slots each exposed as a single content element to
the outside. Host elements nested inside that shadow tree can only
reuse slots from
I think mozilla would be fine with taking the permission API as a
dependency and implement that at the same time. Implementing the
permission API should be fairly trivial for us.
But we should verify this with the people actually working on the push API.
/ Jonas
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 3:13 AM,
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 10:42 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
Over in
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2015May/0006.html
Jonas pointed out that having two APIs for doing the same thing is
nuts. We should probably decide whether we go ahead with the
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 8:37 PM, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org wrote:
On Saturday 2015-04-25 09:32 -0700, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
I don't understand why :host is a pseudo-class rather than a
pseudo-element. My mental model of a pseudo-class is that it allows
you to match an element based
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Travis Leithead
travis.leith...@microsoft.com wrote:
Aaron opened an issue for this on GitHub [1] and I agree that it is a
problem and we should definitely rename it to something else! One option
might be to change dir to directory, but we would need a
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 9:45 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Ali Alabbas a...@microsoft.com wrote:
Hello WebApps Group,
Hi Ali,
Yay! This is great to see a formal proposal for! Definitely something
that mozilla is very interested in working
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Travis Leithead
travis.leith...@microsoft.com wrote:
Second, rather than adding a .directory attribute, I think that we should
simply add any selected directories to the .files list. My experience is
that having a direct mapping between what the user does, and
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Kyle Huey m...@kylehuey.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 4/23/15 6:34 PM, Elliott Sprehn wrote:
Have you benchmarked this? I think you're better off just writing your
own clone library.
That requires
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Ali Alabbas a...@microsoft.com wrote:
Hello WebApps Group,
Hi Ali,
Yay! This is great to see a formal proposal for! Definitely something
that mozilla is very interested in working on.
If there is sufficient interest, I would like to work on this within the
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Glen Huang curvedm...@gmail.com wrote:
Intuitively, querySelector('.class') only needs to find the first matching
node, whereas getElementsByClassName('.class')[0] needs to find all matching
nodes and then return the first. The former should be a lot quicker
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Ali Alabbas a...@microsoft.com wrote:
If there is sufficient interest, I would like to work on this within the
scope of the WebApps working group.
It seems somewhat better to just
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Domenic Denicola d...@domenic.me wrote:
I think it's OK for different browsers to experiment with different
non-interoperable conditions under which they fulfill or reject the
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Florian Bösch pya...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Not saying that we can use CORS to solve this, or that we should
extend CORS to solve this. My point is that CORS works because it was
specified
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Domenic Denicola d...@domenic.me wrote:
From: Boris Zbarsky [mailto:bzbar...@mit.edu]
This particular example sets of alarm bells for me because of virtual
hosting.
Eek! Yeah, OK, I think it's best I refrain from trying to come up with
specific examples.
leave that discussion to others.
/ Jonas
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 8:47 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Domenic Denicola d...@domenic.me wrote:
From: Boris Zbarsky [mailto:bzbar...@mit.edu]
This particular example sets of alarm bells for me because
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 5:52 AM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote:
2. http://www.w3c-test.org/webmessaging/without-ports/025.html; this test
failure (which passes on IE) is considered an implementation bug
(MessageChannel and MessagePort are supposed to be exposed to Worker) that
is
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Benjamin Lesh bl...@netflix.com wrote:
What are your thoughts on this idea?
I think it would be more natural
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 3:25 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
If that's the case then I think we'd get most of the functionality,
with essentially none of the risk, by only allowing server-wide
cookie-less preflights.
If we only do it for this, could we combine that feature with
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 7:15 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@hsivonen.fi wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Brad Hill hillb...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it is at least worth discussing the relative merits of using a
resource published under /.well-known for such use cases, vs. sending
pinned
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Martin Thomson
martin.thom...@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 February 2015 at 20:43, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
High-byte of what? A URL is within ASCII range when it reaches
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 1:05 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
An alternative is that we attempt to introduce
Access-Control-Policy
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 7:55 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
A lot websites accidentally enabled cross-origin requests with
cookies. Not realizing that that enabled attackers to make requests
that had side
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 4:49 AM, Dale Harvey d...@arandomurl.com wrote:
so presumably it is OK to set the Content-Type to text/plain
Thats not ok, but may explain my confusion, is Content-Type considered a
Custom Header that will always trigger a preflight? if so then none of the
caching will
Would this be allowed for both requests with credentials and requests
without credentials? The security implications of the two are very
different.
/ Jonas
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 5:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
When the user agent is about to make its first preflight to an
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:30 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Dale Harvey d...@arandomurl.com wrote:
With Couch / PouchDB we are working with an existing REST API wherein every
request is to a different url (which is unlikely to change), the
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Brad Hill hillb...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that POSTing JSON would probably expose to CSRF a lot of things that
work over HTTP but don't expect to be interacted with by web browsers in
that manner. That's why the recent JSON encoding for forms mandates that
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Michaela Merz
michaela.m...@hermetos.com wrote:
Blobs are immutable but it would be cool to have blob
'pipes' or FIFOs allowing us to stream from those pipes by feeding them
via AJAX.
Since it sounds like you want to help with this, there's good news!
There's
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 is the browser
vendors and even companies like Akamai have more say than the users and
On Jan 27, 2015 4:51 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
In general I agree that it feels unintuitive that you can't replace a
node
with a collection which includes the node itself. So the extra line or
two
On Jan 17, 2015 8:20 PM, Glen Huang curvedm...@gmail.com wrote:
Oh crap. Just realized saving index won't work if context node's previous
siblings are passed as arguments. Looks like inserting transient node is
still the best way.
The simplest way to write this method would seem to me to be
\o/
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote:
Congratulations All! This was a job very well done.
On 1/8/15 2:37 PM, Coralie Mercier wrote:
It is my pleasure to announce that Indexed Database API is published as
a W3C Recommendation
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 7:50 AM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On 12/02/2014 02:22 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
To be clear, I'm proposing to remove any and all normative definition
of file:// handling from the spec. Because I don't think there is
interoperability, nor do I think that it's
Just in case I haven't formally said this elsewhere:
My personal feeling is that it's probably better to stay away from
speccing the behavior of file:// URLs.
There's very little incentive for browsers to align on how to handle
file:// handling. The complexities of different file system
to depend on the behavior of
file:// parsing, even if they were to intentionally try.
/ Jonas
From: Jonas Sicking
Sent: 2014-12-01 22:07
To: Sam Ruby
Cc: Webapps WG
Subject: Re: URL Spec WorkMode (was: PSA: Sam Ruby is co-Editor of URL spec)
Just in case I
On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On 12/01/2014 10:22 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Domenic Denicola d...@domenic.me wrote:
What we really need to do is get some popular library or website to take
a
dependency on mobile Chrome
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 11/18/14, 10:26 PM, Michaela Merz wrote:
First: We need signed script code.
For what it's worth, Gecko supported this for a while. See
http://www-archive.mozilla.org/projects/security/components/signed-scripts.html.
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Florian Bösch pya...@gmail.com wrote:
or direct file access
http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/file/filesystem/
This is no more direct file access than IndexedDB is. IndexedDB also
allow you to store File objects, but also doesn't allow you to access
things
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Jake Archibald jaffathec...@gmail.com wrote:
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.
Ok.
I think this comes back to the old problem of that
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Owen Campbell-Moore owe...@google.com wrote:
I think it might make sense to ask for permission to display
notifications/UI at the same time as you ask for permission to run in the
background.
I hope the above explains why we believe that while some sites may
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Erik Corry erikco...@google.com wrote:
* Push doesn't actually need SW's ability to intercept network
communications on behalf of a web page.
* You can imagine a push-handling SW that
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Shijun Sun shij...@microsoft.com wrote:
My understanding here is that we want to leverage the push client in the
OS. That will provide new capabilities without dependency on a direct
connection between the app and the app server.
Yes, this is how the spec is
The hard question is: What do you do if there's an incoming push
message for a given website, but the user doesn't have the website
currently open.
Service Workers provide the primitive needed to enable launching a
website in the background to handle the incoming push message.
Another solution
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 2:28 PM, cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote:
So the question turns on whether the changes would invalidate a patent
review, and my quick guess is that the answer is yes ;(
Really? I would have made the opposite conclusion. Changing the event
source makes a very small
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 7:05 AM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/2/14 2:44 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Though I also agree with Mounir. Changing the event source doesn't
seem like a change that's substantial enough that we'd need to go back
to WD/LCWD.
Does any implementation
Though I also agree with Mounir. Changing the event source doesn't
seem like a change that's substantial enough that we'd need to go back
to WD/LCWD.
Does any implementation actually feel that it would be?
/ Jonas
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 4:15 AM, Mounir Lamouri mou...@lamouri.fr wrote:
Can we
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 8:27 PM, John Mellor joh...@google.com wrote:
This seems to either require a somewhat stronger trust signal from the user,
or a very easy mechanism for revoking the permission if the website does
On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 5:54 AM, Dale Harvey d...@arandomurl.com wrote:
websites can already trivially build editors that use copy and paste within
the site itself, the entire problem is that leads to confusing behaviour
when the user copies and pastes outside the website, which is a huge use
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Hallvord R. M. Steen
hst...@mozilla.com wrote:
It's an interesting idea that partly fixes the main drawback with the current
proposal: that to read clipboard contents, paste must be triggered from the
browser's own UI, not the website's. The current proposal
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Mounir Lamouri mou...@lamouri.fr wrote:
On Fri, 12 Sep 2014, at 08:52, Jonas Sicking wrote:
It's somewhat inconsistent that we use the term natural to indicate
the most natural direction based on hardware, but we use the term
primary when indicating the most
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote:
Mounir and Marcos would like to publish a LCWD of The Screen Orientation API
and this is a Call for Consensus to do using the latest ED (not yet in the
LCWD template) as the basis:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Also, I can't find any normative definition of if orientation.angle
should increase or decrease if the user rotates a device 90 degrees
clockwise?
My bad, I see it now. Given how easy this is to get wrong, it might be
worth
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Hear hear. Indeed, a large part of moving to a living standard model is
all about maintaining the agility to respond to changes to avoid having to
make
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
My only issue is the wording: it doesn't make sense to have normative
language saying you must not use this feature. This should be a
non-normative
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 6:51 AM, Mounir Lamouri mou...@lamouri.fr wrote:
# Straw man proposal #
This proposal is on purpose minimalistic and only contains features that
should have straight consensus and strong use cases, the linked document
[1] contains ideas of optional additions and list of
Yup. Well.. sounds like people, including you, pointed out these
problems. No idea why it was ignored since I wasn't there.
/ Jonas
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:28 PM, Lars Knudsen lar...@gmail.com wrote:
If only someone had pointed out these problems earlier ;)
On Aug 5, 2014 11:17 PM, Jonas
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 1:38 AM, Rich Tibbett ri...@opera.com wrote:
Do you have any thoughts on providing screen-adjusted devicemotion
event data also (i.e. acceleration, accelerationIncludingGravity,
rotationRate)
It's not something I've thought about, but yeah, it sounds like that
would
Hi Mike,
I'm very interested in improving the login experience on websites. In
particular I'd like to create a better flow when federated logins are
used, with at least the following goals:
* Make it easier for websites to use federated login as to discourage passwords.
* Ensure that the
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Mike West mk...@google.com wrote:
* Enable a login flow which is less jarring UX-wise than today's
redirects.
* Don't increase the number of clicks needed to log in. Today two
clicks are usually enough, we shouldn't be worse than that since then
websites won't
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 6:44 AM, Mounir Lamouri mou...@lamouri.fr wrote:
Maybe this feedback should be more for DeviceOrientation than Screen
Orientation. There has been a few discussions there
(public-geolocation).
This is the type of procedural issues that I'd really rather not get
caught in.
Hi All,
I think the current interaction between the screen orientation and
device orientation specs is really unfortunate.
Any time that you use the device orientation in order to render
something on screen, you have to do non-obvious math in order to get
coordinates which are usable. Same thing
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(...)
instead?
/ Jonas
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Joshua Bell jsb...@google.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 9:45 PM, ben turner bent.mozi...@gmail.com wrote:
I think this sounds like a fine idea.
-Ben Turner
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Hi all,
I found
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Marc Fawzi marc.fa...@gmail.com wrote:
Having said that, and speaking naively here, a synchronous .exists() or
.contains() would be useful as existence checks shouldn't have to be
exclusively asynchronous as that complicates how we'd write: if this exists
which is really bad for perf. It's also different from
all other database operations. So if that's your request then the
answer is definitely no.
/ Jonas
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
Hi all,
I found an old email with notes about features that we might want to put in
v2.
Almost all of them was recently brought up in the recent threads about
IDBv2. However there was one thing on the list that I haven't seen brought
up.
It might be a nice perf improvement to add support for a
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Adam Klein ad...@google.com wrote:
While I agree that the original microtask intent would suggest we change
this, and I concur that it seems unlikely to break content, I worry about
the spec and implementation complexity that would be incurred by having to
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 12:33 AM, Domenic Denicola
dome...@domenicdenicola.com wrote:
It seems to me that for both the HeaderMap constructor and any object-literal
processing, the best solution for now is to just do things in prose...
I think the first thing we should decide on is what syntax
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 12:59 PM, Joshua Bell jsb...@google.com wrote:
case 1:
var tx;
Promise.resolve().then(function() {
tx = db.transaction(storeName);
// tx should be active here...
}).then(function() {
// is tx active here?
});
For case 1, ISTM that yes matches
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:46 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:31 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
Does ES define the order of { x: a, y: b } btw?
I believe so, but someone
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Jake Archibald jaffathec...@gmail.com wrote:
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
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com wrote:
Are there any platforms providing the feature? Has the feature gained
any traction among the platform vendors?
The webapps platform that we use in FirefoxOS and Firefox Desktop
allows any website to be an app store. I
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 1:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
For blob URLs (and prolly filesystem and indexeddb) we put the origin
in the URL and define a way to extract it again so new
URL(blob).origin does the right thing.
Yup.
For fetching blob URLs (and prolly filesystem
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 1:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
How do we deal with data URLs? Obviously you can always get a resource
out of them. But when should the response of fetching one be tainted
and when should it not be? And there's a somewhat similar question for
about
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
* The default for this new flag is false
* If the flag is set to false, the origin of the URL is a unique identifier.
* When the origin is a unique
I've provided this input through a few channels already, but I don't
think the user of [SetClass] here is good (and in fact I've been
arguing that SetClass should be removed from WebIDL).
First off you likely don't want to key the list of fonts on the
FontFace object instance like the spec
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Marcos Caceres w...@marcosc.com wrote:
On May 27, 2014 at 9:25:26 AM, Ben Francis (bfran...@mozilla.com) wrote:
As per our conversation in IRC, something else I'd like to highlight
is the fact that in the current version of the spec any web site
can host an
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
Separately, FontFace.loaded seems to fulfill the same purpose as
FontFaceSet.ready(). I.e. both indicate that the object is done
loading/parsing/applying its data. It seems more consistent if they
had the same name,
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
wrote:
Separately, FontFace.loaded seems to fulfill the same purpose
1 - 100 of 1817 matches
Mail list logo