Re: File API for Review

2013-02-13 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Feb 6, 2013 8:59 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote: Greetings WebApps WG! Review on the File API is encouraged: http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/ A few substantial changes that might need particular attention before we initiate a call for LCWD or something comparably

Re: [shadow-dom] Event Retargeting

2013-02-13 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com wrote: As you can see, no details about the shadow tree have leaked. This is a simple example, but once you get into nested trees, you'll see that the algo still works. Thanks, I misread pop STACK as clear STACK. My bad.

Beacon API

2013-02-13 Thread Jatinder Mann
The Web Performance working group has been tracking a known poor performance pattern involving XHRs. We have seen cases where analytics code will block the unloading of the document in order to send data. To guarantee that the data is sent to their servers, analytics will typically register a

Re: File API for Review

2013-02-13 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Feb 6, 2013 8:59 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote: http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/#convenienceAPI Given how recent this addition is, and given that it's fairly easy to implement in JS directly, I

Re: File API for Review

2013-02-13 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote: 3. Progress events have been clarified. You're still using the old IDL syntax for event handlers. Specification bugs still exist I think we should rename URI to URL. That's what everyone is converging on. I'm also not

Re: Beacon API

2013-02-13 Thread Julian Aubourg
I'd personally be in favour of an optional parameter that would ask the browser to keep on with the request even after the page has been unloaded (which would be the only solution not to block unloading while ensuring data is delivered even for asynchronous requests). I'm not sure how feasibly

Re: Beacon API

2013-02-13 Thread Tab Atkins Jr.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 8:03 AM, Jatinder Mann jm...@microsoft.com wrote: The Web Performance working group has been tracking a known poor performance pattern involving XHRs. We have seen cases where analytics code will block the unloading of the document in order to send data. To guarantee

Re: Beacon API

2013-02-13 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Jatinder Mann jm...@microsoft.com wrote: How interested is this working group in taking on such work in the XHR Level 2 specification? There's plans to develop a better API for XMLHttpRequest, that would be somewhat more object-oriented, use DOMFuture, etc., but

Re: Beacon API

2013-02-13 Thread Dave Methvin
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. I started a thread last year in WHATWG about this subject, though from a slightly different angle: http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2012-May/035686.html . A new simple API sounds like the best solution. Adding a