:48 PM
To: Shiki Okasaka; public-script-coord; public-webapps
Subject: Re: CfC: publish a new Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline October 18
Thanks, Cameron.
[DoNotCheckDomainSecurity] is one of the WebKit IDL's attributes, briefly
described here:
http://www.adambarth.com/papers/2009/barth
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Travis Leithead tra...@microsoft.com wrote:
For IE9, we've adopted this attribute as well [msDoNotCheckDomainSecurity]
It has different meanings for different types of properites (fields vs.
accessors) and causes some proxies to be setup, but generally
Jonas Sicking:
My gut reaction is to leave this out from the spec and not let WebIDL
specify security aspects.
Agreed. It’d be fine even for other specs (HTML5?) to define their own
security-related extended attributes to avoid writing prose that defines
when SECURITY_ERRs get thrown, but I
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Cameron McCormack c...@mcc.id.au wrote:
Jonas Sicking:
My gut reaction is to leave this out from the spec and not let WebIDL
specify security aspects.
Agreed. It’d be fine even for other specs (HTML5?) to define their own
security-related extended attributes
I support this as well.
-Sam
On Oct 11, 2010, at 8:59 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Same here.
On Monday, October 11, 2010, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:56:22 +0200, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
wrote:
In case you didn't know, Cameron is back!
Thanks, Cameron.
[DoNotCheckDomainSecurity] is one of the WebKit IDL's attributes,
briefly described here:
http://www.adambarth.com/papers/2009/barth-weinberger-song.pdf
I think security related attributes like this would be very helpful, too.
- Shiki
2010/10/12 Cameron McCormack
You've been missed, Cameron!
Just a reminder, my wish list is here (this doesn't have to be
reflected in the very next WD, though):
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/2010JanMar/0003.html
A signed 8 bit integer type has been required in WebGL.
Best,
- Shiki
2010/10/12
Hi All,
In case you didn't know, Cameron is back! And he wants to publish a new
Working Draft of Web IDL since he says I’ve finished porting across Web
IDL to target ECMAScript 5th edition (modulo bugs of course!):
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/
As such, this is a Call for Consensus
On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:56:22 +0200, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
wrote:
In case you didn't know, Cameron is back! And he wants to publish a new
Working Draft of Web IDL since he says I’ve finished porting across Web
IDL to target ECMAScript 5th edition (modulo bugs of course!):
Same here.
On Monday, October 11, 2010, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:56:22 +0200, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
wrote:
In case you didn't know, Cameron is back! And he wants to publish a new
Working Draft of Web IDL since he says I’ve finished
-minus various people
Shiki Okasaka:
You've been missed, Cameron!
Just a reminder, my wish list is here (this doesn't have to be
reflected in the very next WD, though):
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/2010JanMar/0003.html
A signed 8 bit integer type has been
11 matches
Mail list logo
