Hi there,
At the last widgets call I agreed to ask OMTP BONDI members if there was
any feedback on viewmodes. We didn't receive a lot of views but one
thing I raised was that as far as I can tell, there is no text to cover
off invisible widgets or widgets of, for example height and width 1x1.
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Marcin Hanclik
marcin.hanc...@access-company.com wrote:
Hi Marcos,
These are my remarks as discussed yesterday on the call.
Comment a)
6.A.If all characters in the extension are outside the two ranges, then go to
step 5 in this algorithm.
Should be
Comments below...
2009/10/21 Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com:
Below is the draft agenda for the October 22 Widgets Voice Conference (VC).
3. Packaging and Configuration spec
a. Potential bug in Rule for Identifying the Media Type of a File
Please try your signed widgets on http://test.webvm.net/
Example signed widget: http://static.webvm.net/example.wgt
Example root CA: http://bondisdk.limofoundation.org/qa/keys/example.pub
http://bondisdk.limofoundation.org/qa/keys/example.p12 with keystore
password 'secret'
The draft minutes from the October 22 Widgets voice conference are
available at the following and copied below:
http://www.w3.org/2009/10/22-wam-minutes.html
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webapps mail list before October 29 (the
Hi Marcos, All,
If any character in the extension is outside the U+0041-U+005A range
and the U+0061-U+007A range, then go to step 7 in this algorithm.
Unfortunately I disagree with that.
Motivation:
a) only ASCII characters are listed
b) no digits are listed. What about file extensions that
2009/10/22 Marcin Hanclik marcin.hanc...@access-company.com:
Hi Marcos, All,
If any character in the extension is outside the U+0041-U+005A range
and the U+0061-U+007A range, then go to step 7 in this algorithm.
Unfortunately I disagree with that.
Motivation:
a) only ASCII characters are
Hi Marcos,
To be clear: All we want to do is check if the file extension of a
file case-insensitively matches one of the extensions in the File
Identification Table. If you can't match it, then the MIME type gets
resolved with SNIFF.
Ok, I understand the intention of this section.
The ranges are
Art and all,
AB: any other comments on this?
... given we don't consensus on this, we will not be able to publish
a new LC until after the TPAC meeting
... any last comments?
... given this is still an open issue, we will not discuss LC
publication today
Given that Marcin
Hi Marcos,
I think we will drink some beer soon :)
I understand the rationale, but I don't see it as necessary. Lets just
cover what is in the spec. In version 2, if we need to support this
later, we can add it easily. It won't break backwards compat because
we will just be expanding the range.
+1
We could continue discussion during the LC period as usual.
I am sorry for my blackout on the call.
Thanks,
Marcin
Marcin Hanclik
ACCESS Systems Germany GmbH
Tel: +49-208-8290-6452 | Fax: +49-208-8290-6465
Mobile: +49-163-8290-646
E-Mail: marcin.hanc...@access-company.com
-Original
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anne van Kesteren writes:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:22:35 +0200, Henry S. Thompson
h...@inf.ed.ac.uk wrote:
One point of clarification: my (admittedly imperfect) understanding
was that the most important parts of CORS have to be implemented
Hi Marcos, All,
It seems more logical to me to not
treat it as an extension. Look at all the .whatever files on your
system. I bet you 2 beers that 99% will be text files. And I bet you
will .whatever.ext will identify a type (like .something.plist).
I actually agree with this argumentation.
Even
This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish the following document
as Last Call Working Draft #3 of the Widgets 1.0: Packaging and
Configuration spec:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/Overview_TSE.html
This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to record the group's
decision to
Hi, Folks-
Maciej Stachowiak wrote (on 10/13/09 10:47 PM):
On Oct 13, 2009, at 5:31 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
2) How well do cross-origin cookies support the simple use cases of
cross-origin
resource sharing?
As we all now know, many simple use cases are supported well by
cross-origin
15 matches
Mail list logo
