On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 4:06 AM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
On May 22, 2010, at 3:58 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
Even though no one is currently considering implementing this outside of
JavaScript land and even though it'll limit us some and making speccing
harder, I think it'd be
In IE, we only support Access-Control-Allow-Origin and combining with other
values (albeit optional ones) that we don't support might be misleading. It
also introduces some additional parsing that changes the behaviour from a
simple comparison to a more complex parse and then compare.
We
On May 24, 2010, at 3:30 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 4:06 AM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
On May 22, 2010, at 3:58 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
Even though no one is currently considering implementing this outside of
JavaScript land and even though it'll
Adam Barth wrote on 7/16/2009 10:38 AM:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Bil Corryb...@corry.biz wrote:
I think you mean everything will NOT be privacy-sensitive except non-XHR
GETs.
I don't think we've quite settled on exactly what will be privacy
sensitive. It's most likely that POSTs
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Kris Zyp k...@sitepen.com wrote:
or to use something like
put(record, {forbidOverwrite: true}); // don't overwrite
put(record, {onlyOverwrite: true}); // must overwrite/update
put(record, {}); or put(record); // can do either
or some such.
However
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 3:58 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:42 PM, bugzi...@jessica.w3.org wrote:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9793
Summary: Allow dates and floating point numbers in keys
Product: WebAppsWG
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
As for the keyPath issue. The way the spec stands now (where I think
it intends not to allow full expressions), I don't think it really
depends on Javascript. It does depend on the language having some way
to represent
On 4/20/2010 11:46 AM, bugzi...@jessica.w3.org wrote:
The spec is unspecified as to what we should do when a database is opened with
a different description than it was previously opened. I'd assume we'd want to
update the description.
Does anybody else have thoughts on what the right behavior
On Mon, 24 May 2010, Bil Corry wrote:
Adam Barth wrote on 7/16/2009 10:38 AM:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Bil Corryb...@corry.biz wrote:
I think you mean everything will NOT be privacy-sensitive except non-XHR
GETs.
I don't think we've quite settled on exactly what will be
Hi, Folks-
Sorry to jump in on this thread so late; I've been busy and traveling.
As W3C Team Contact for this group, I strongly agree with Ian here
regarding the tone of some of the responses. Technical comments on this
list should be treated with the respect they are due. If you feel
10 matches
Mail list logo
