On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com
wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 8:44 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org
wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com
wrote:
Nevertheless, I am optimistic. I would like to have
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com
wrote:
Nevertheless, I am optimistic. I would like to have this discussion and
hear your ideas.
OK. The following ideas are somewhat half-baked so don't judge me too
harshly :-).
Rapid deployment of experimental APIs in
I still don't see how exposing an API via MessagePorts is in any way better
than exposing an API via WebIDL. Can you describe with concrete examples
how this makes life better for implementors or authors? I've read your
presentation but I did not see the answer there.
Furthermore I don't see any
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 6:24 AM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com
wrote:
Given any capability on a modern computing device and a developer who
wants to use it, what is a) the acceptable delay between when this
capability becomes available on the web platform vs. first being available
on a
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:29 AM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org
wrote:
What are your use-cases where they're not the same? More importantly,
what
are the use-cases where they cannot be made the same
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:31 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org
wrote:
The widget would not only have to be written by a third party, but
actually
hosted on their domain. And not just optionally, but for some
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 11:19 PM, Stefan Håkansson LK
stefan.lk.hakans...@ericsson.com wrote:
On 2013-09-02 01:44, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 1:14 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK
stefan.lk.hakans...@ericsson.com
mailto:stefan.lk.hakans...@ericsson.com wrote:
One need
On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 1:14 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK
stefan.lk.hakans...@ericsson.com wrote:
One need I can see is when you want to display the video in another
window. Let's say you want to have the video in a popout window -
something I think we should definitely support - handing that
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 3:48 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux d...@w3.orgwrote:
We are thus looking for input on the use cases for createObjectURL as
used for the File API, and whether these use cases would also apply to
our MediaStream case. In general, is there a need for any object
readable
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com wrote:
It's not clear to me from the spec how the allowfullscreen attribute
works. It appears to be mentioned only in the security and privacy
considerations section. For example, suppose I have three frames:
Main frame: a.html
What do you do when element A goes fullscreen and then element B in the
same document goes fullscreen on top of it? Do you fire a single
fullscreenchange event at B? Or do you fire a fullscreenchange event at A
and then at B? Or something else?
Rob
--
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Jer Noble jer.no...@apple.com wrote:
Actually, in WebKit, we explicitly also message the document from which
the element was removed in that case. I don't see why this behavior
couldn't be standardized.
Did you inform the spec editor(s) when you decided to
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Jer Noble jer.no...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 1, 2012, at 6:45 PM, Chris Pearce cpea...@mozilla.com wrote:
Because we exit fullscreen when the fullscreen element is removed from
the document, so if you dispatch events to the context element, the
That sounds like a reasonable approach to me. One thing missing is that
Workers would need something like requestAnimationFrame.
Any proposal that requires passing messages to the main thread to get
something on the screen fails to satisfy the huge need for games to be able
to get steady frame
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:36 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
oneTimeOnly (a poor name in this proposal) would simply queue a microtask
to revoke the URL.
This is simpler, and answers a lot of questions. It means you can use the
URL as many times as you want synchronously, since
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Feras Moussa fer...@microsoft.com wrote:
This isn't clear from the spec (And I've made a note to clarify it) but
URLs for
streams should be one time use URLs (once used it should be automatically
revoked).
Is it always possible to define that in a sane
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Anything's possible, but I think the pain here would far outweigh the
benefits. There would be some really hard questions to answer, too (e.g.
what would
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 2:14 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Thu, 08 Dec 2011 23:16:37 +0100, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc
wrote:
I think Microsoft's stream proposal would address this use case.
So that would be: http://html5labs.interoperabilitybridges.com/streamsapi/
On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.orgwrote:
The offsetWidth query could've triggered an event
handler execution
I don't think offsetWidth should be able to trigger synchronous execution
of an event listener in the content. How would that happen?
Rob
--
If we
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Vincent Scheib sch...@google.com wrote:
Re Rob:
Is there a need to provide mouse-locking on a per-element basis? It seems
to
me it would be enough for mouse-locking to be per-DOM-window (or
per-DOM-document) and deliver events to the focused element. This
A few comments:
Is there a need to provide mouse-locking on a per-element basis? It seems to
me it would be enough for mouse-locking to be per-DOM-window (or
per-DOM-document) and deliver events to the focused element. This simplifies
the model a little bit by not having to define new state for
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Hill, Brad bh...@paypal-inc.com wrote:
What are the use cases where a user is better off if their browser obeys
From-Origin than if it does not?
Bandwidth theft? The user wants to see the image. The problem, such
that one exists, is for the hosting server.
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
I can't remember getting a single bug filed on Geckos current
behavior. There probably have been some which I've missed, but it's
not a big enough problem that it's ever been discussed at mozilla as
far as I can remember.
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Peter Glasten peter.glas...@gmail.comwrote:
Some benchmarks of pure JS crypto (AES) are available here:
http://support.threetags.com/docs/client-side-encryption/threetags-browser-speed-test/
Those benchmarks are extremely out-of-date.
Rob
--
Now the Bereans
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
CDNs of various sorts, dedicated hostnames for different sorts of content
(a la existing images.something.com setups), that sort of thing.
If we want to not allow cross-site loading at all, those cases break. If we
want
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Brandon Andrews
warcraftthre...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
Actually this would be used for both fullscreen and non-fullscreen
applications.
The reason for this is because it's often CPU intensive to run a complex
canvas
application in fullscreen.
Looking forward
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
It applies to non-game uses, too. For example, a common annoyance with
Google Maps is when you're dragging the map and your mouse cursor hits the
side of the screen, the map stops moving; you have to release the button and
IE has a setCapture DOM API. We've implemented it in Gecko:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/DOM/element.setCapture
Rob
--
Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for
they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures
every day to see if what
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 9:12 AM, João Eiras joao.ei...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org
wrote:
The :full-screen-document pseudo-class could be replaced with a media
query,
and that's probably a good idea. Thanks! The :full-screen pseudo
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Drew Wilson atwil...@google.com wrote:
I wanted to point out that many of these use cases are covered adequately
by document.focus()/document.blur(), which is what we currently use in Gmail
to decide whether to mark the user as away, decide whether to display
STM is not a panacea. Read
http://www.bluebytesoftware.com/blog/2010/01/03/ABriefRetrospectiveOnTransactionalMemory.aspxif
you haven't already.
In Haskell, where you have powerful control over effects, it may work well,
but Javascript isn't anything like that.
Rob
--
Now the Bereans were of
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:28 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Mon, 27 Dec 2010 06:24:39 +0100, Robert O'Callahan
rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
The sanitization algorithm needs to consider style elements and 'style'
content attributes. Some browsers, e.g. IE, support CSS
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Hallvord R. M. Steen hallv...@opera.comwrote:
On Mon, 27 Dec 2010 14:24:39 +0900, Robert O'Callahan
rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
The sanitization algorithm needs to consider style elements and 'style'
content attributes. Some browsers, e.g. IE, support CSS
The sanitization algorithm needs to consider style elements and 'style'
content attributes. Some browsers, e.g. IE, support CSS features that allow
script execution.
Rob
--
Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for
they received the message with great eagerness and
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 5:12 AM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.comwrote:
We definitely have use-cases that require the shadow DOM to be
dynamically
updated when an element that expands to a template instance has its
subtree
changed. Almost every application that combines dynamic DOM
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.comwrote:
Then there's no problem. You don't need the templates to be live to
make child changes work. You just need to maintain some record that
any normal-DOM elements which match * should appear as children of
the shadow
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.comwrote:
Looking at the use cases, I couldn't think of anything that would
require this type of functionality -- at least not at the cost of its
complexity and performance implications.
Perhaps something simpler, forward-only
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Gregg Tavares (wrk) g...@google.comwrote:
requestAnimationFrame though is generally designed to be used for updating
a canvas (2d or 3d) which will likely be heavy both in terms of CPU usage
(drawing lots of lines/curves/images into the canvas) and in terms of
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.net wrote:
Obviously
that does not address your question, since couldn't never applies
here, you could always just use setTimeout and setInterval and burn
cycles, or whatever else gurantees your script runs even when the tab
is
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Gregg Tavares (wrk) g...@google.comwrote:
On (a)
Take this page (http://boingboing.net) At the time I checked it today
(6:55pm PST) it had 10 instances of flash running. O page load 3 were
animating continuallty, 7 were idle. The 7 idle ones were all video
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 8:21 AM, Gregg Tavares (wrk) g...@google.comwrote:
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:45 AM, Robert O'Callahan
rob...@ocallahan.orgwrote:
I think there needs to be a guarantee that the callback is eventually
called even if the element never becomes visible. People sometimes
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Darin Fisher da...@chromium.org wrote:
I agree. What's the use case for animating hidden tabs (or canvases that
are hidden)?
One of the big problems with JavaScript based animations is that they have
no way of knowing they should go idle when their window
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.orgwrote:
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Darin Fisher da...@chromium.org wrote:
I agree. What's the use case for animating hidden tabs (or canvases that
are hidden)?
One of the big problems with JavaScript based
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Gregg Tavares (wrk) g...@google.comwrote:
I totally see that some bad code could be error prone if we don't guarantee
the callback is eventually fired. On the other hand, guaranteeing it gets
fired even if it's offscreen seems to have all the other
I suppose we could have a variant API that explicitly means I don't care if
the callback never gets called. I don't know what to call it, though.
Rob
--
Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for
they received the message with great eagerness and examined the
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Cameron McCormack c...@mcc.id.au wrote:
Incidentally, I wonder if the beforepaint/animationTick event could be
dropped altogether. Why isn’t just the callback sufficient?
For animation, it is sufficient. We should drop the beforePaint event from
the spec for
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Gregg Tavares (wrk) g...@google.comwrote:
Think about this some more. the point if the previous suggestion is
that updating keeping a JS animation in sync with a CSS animation has
nothing to do with painting or rendering. The fact that apparently firefox
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Gregg Tavares (wrk) g...@google.comwrote:
So if the JS on the beforePaint takes a while to complete what happens to
the browser? For example if you are resizing the browser? Is the browser
forced not to be able to actually paint until JS returns?
Not
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Gregg Tavares (wrk) g...@google.comwrote:
One is, how should this api be used if I want an app to update at 10hz. It
seems to be designed to assume I want the maximum frame rate. If I want to
run slower would I just use
setInterval(function() {
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Gregg Tavares (wrk) g...@google.comwrote:
I've seen proposals for something more like
element.setInternvalIfVisible(func, internval);
Which is the same as setInterval but only gets called if the element is
visible. With that kind of API there is no
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Gregg Tavares (wrk) g...@google.comwrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Robert O'Callahan
rob...@ocallahan.orgwrote:
If you really want to animate in 10Hz steps, then I suggest you do
something like
var start = window.animationTime;
var rate = 10; // Hz
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Gregg Tavares (wrk) g...@google.comwrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Robert O'Callahan
rob...@ocallahan.orgwrote:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Gregg Tavares (wrk) g...@google.comwrote:
I've seen proposals for something more like
Oops, that was of course meant for Cameron, not for the list. Sorry.
Rob
--
Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for
they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures
every day to see if what Paul said was true. [Acts 17:11]
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Cameron McCormack c...@mcc.id.au wrote:
Art,
Arthur Barstow:
* Web IDL - Cameron - will you attend this meeting?
At this stage I won’t be attending. I believe list discussion should be
sufficient for progressing the spec at this point, and a scheduling
We probably want to have different policies for different kinds of devices.
For mobile, pruning unused storage is definitely important, but for modern
desktops with 1TB drives most users probably won't ever need to free up
disk space unless they're hit with some kind of denial-of-service attack,
We ran into this issue when mapping our own browser notifications to
platform notification APIs. For ambient notifications, you can't rely on the
user being able to click on the notification, because the notification might
time out and disappear on its own before the user has had a chance to
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.orgwrote:
We ran into this issue when mapping our own browser notifications to
platform notification APIs. For ambient notifications, you can't rely on the
user being able to click on the notification, because
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Drew Wilson atwil...@google.com wrote:
One of the suggestions made previously on this thread was to coalesce
createNotification() and createHTMLNotification() into a single API with an
optional HTML parameter - this would allow UAs on systems with
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Drew Wilson atwil...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Robert O'Callahan
rob...@ocallahan.orgwrote:
I think a better way to go would be to support a restricted subset of
HTML, and then consider how the UA should extract text
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
I agree with Maciej. I have a hard time seeing a use case that doesn't
originate in File objects, so being able to get the icon directly
there seems like a safer way to go.
It can still expose which application the user
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 5:38 AM, Juan Lanus juan.la...@gmail.com wrote:
Quite right Bob. But still the lock is the way to go. At least as of today.
HTML5 might be mainstream for the next 10 years, starting rather soon.
In the meanwhile OSs will also evolve, in a way that we can't tell
now.
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Juan Lanus juan.la...@gmail.com wrote:
** Locking
What's wrong with file locking?
One problem is that mandatory locking is not supported on Mac or most Linux
installs.
Rob
--
He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;
the
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:48 AM, Sebastian Andersson bof...@gmail.comwrote:
If the client is sending too much data to the server, I don't want it
to be disconnected just because some buffer is temporarily full, but
that is the required semantics of the API. If my application must send
out a
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Dan Forsberg dfors...@gmail.com wrote:
Just standardize the interface to the (SQL) database and let DB vendors
create browser plugins. This interface you need to define anyway. Plus,
allow DB specific language passing to the plugin (e.g., like SQL). Simple
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux d...@w3.orgwrote:
Le jeudi 19 novembre 2009 à 22:39 +1300, Robert O'Callahan a écrit :
There are usually no third parties to delegate to.
That’s true to a certain extent, but a reason for that might well be
that the Web platform
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 11:54 PM, David Rogers david.rog...@omtp.orgwrote:
*From:* rocalla...@gmail.com [mailto:rocalla...@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of
*Robert
O'Callahan
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux d...@w3.org
wrote:
Le jeudi 19 novembre 2009 à 22:39 +1300
Some HTTP clients may wish to treat certain HTTP errors, for example 416
Requested Range Not Satisfiable errors, as non-fatal. For example, you may
initiate a download, abort it, then try to resume it using a Range request,
but it turns out that you'd already reached the end of the resource and
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
On Nov 8, 2009, at 11:12 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Indeed. I still personally wouldn't call it multiple independent
implementations though.
Would you call multiple implementations that use the standard C library
supported one format and that
format wasn't specified anywhere.
On Nov 9, 2009, at 3:12 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
You're right that precedent is weak here, but I think database APIs aspire
to work with larger data sets than the DOM does, so big-O guarantees are
more important.
Is SimpleDB going
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:56 AM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
I agree that your Gecko example would be questionable. But to give an
example on the other side of the fence, WebKit uses a copy of Mozilla's
image decoding code, and yet I think our implementation of the img element
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Ennals, Robert robert.enn...@intel.comwrote:
Should we also consider the case where a web site wants to keep its
interface up to date with some server state and is using up CPU time and
network resource to do so?
You could abuse my proposal to do this, by
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
On Oct 20, 2009, at 7:13 PM, Ennals, Robert wrote:
One thing I like about the requestAnimationFrame approach is that it
makes it easy to do the right thing. If the simplest approach burns CPU
cycles, and programmers
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it really the visibility of the page that is being queried - or the
some kind of state of a window? Maybe it's a silly bit of semantics,
but it seems clearer to me that most of the things discussed here are
about a
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
I agree. The reason I phrased it as I did was to contrast with my previous
remarks. The children attribute should be part of a standard, even though
it creates what I think is a poor design pattern (mix of previous/next
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
For example, I recently the Image Evolution demo from
http://www.canvasdemos.com/2009/07/15/image-evolution/ as a kind of a
performance test and let it run for three days - during which it was
not visible 99.999% of the
I have a proposal for solving this here:
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.platform/browse_thread/thread/527d0cedb9b0df7f/57625c94cdf493bf
The gist is very simple:
1) window.requestAnimationFrame(): Signals that an animation is in progress,
and requests that the browser schedule a
76 matches
Mail list logo
