On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 2:41 AM Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> I feel like I saw some discussions of also differentiating based on
> protocol (treating http://webkit.org and https://webkit.org
> differently). Do you know you've already had such a discussion and if
> so what the outcome of that discussion
On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Ricky Young wrote:
> I read the report and still find it hard to understand, if "User Agent
> sniffing is a terrible way to determine whether a browser supports certain
> features", what is the correct way of doing it?
On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> It'd still be great to get some details about your strategy for mitigating
> user tracking via HSTS.
FWIW, some were posted by John Wilander at
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Aishwarya Nirmal wrote:
> I am working on a Touch Bar Web API that would allow websites to customize
> touch bar controls. There is currently no web standard for an interface like
> the touch bar, so my plan is to experiment with this feature
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 5:11 PM, youenn fablet wrote:
> When a spec gets updated, the WPT tests will ideally be updated at the same
> The updated tests will no longer ensure non-regression until the browser
> implements the new behavior.
Ideally if importing test
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> Given we're talking about how these tests are ran inside WebKit,
> whether there is an agreement about this or not is sort of irrelevant.
> If a test doesn't run as expected, we can run it inside a HTTP server.
I was just
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 5:45 AM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>> I think the main problem with not running a server is that behavior
>> for file URLs is not defined. And browsers tend to impose different
>> restrictions there. So you might end up debugging something only to
On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> For the engineer use case, we can make a command-line tool to launch the
> server and load the test. But it's kind of sad that in ~95% of cases, the
> only value provided by the server is resolving the path to
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 11:49 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> It seems like there's two unusual things about WPT:
> - At least according to Alexey, WPT tests are somewhat prone to flakiness in
Although they haven't always been working perfectly, changes to
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 6:46 AM, Simon Fraser wrote:
> I was under the impression that tests upstreamed from vendor repositories
> would land in WPT tests
> with minimal review, based on the fact that they had been reviewed when
> landed in the vendor repo.
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 8:27 PM, Simon Fraser wrote:
> I'm also concerned that with 4 vendors upstreaming their WPT tests, the WPT
> repo will just become a morass of partially overlapping tests that takes 4x
> longer to run than a curated repo.
Why do you think WPT is not
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Alexandre GOUAILLARD
> that s great to have now chrome AND webkit doing it. I hope mozilla and the
> other will follow, as discussed on the side of BlinkOn last year.
FWIW, Mozilla already periodically synchronizes with WPT. Think we
The WHATWG is considering removing mediagroup/MediaController from
HTML, since other than WebKit no browser project has expressed
interest in this feature.
https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/192 is the corresponding issue.
I would recommend following up in the issue itself if this is
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Gyuyoung Kim firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
I also don't want to support the content handler feature at the moment.
The feature might be more clear and mature. The patch of Bug 92749 only
and unregisterProtocolHandler and
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 6:43 PM, Gyuyoung Kim email@example.com wrote:
Current implementation doesn't hook to HTML's navigation directly. We
delegate the html navigation(or call native application) to application.
Application is able to decide to navigate the given html page or execute
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:25 AM, Anders Carlsson ander...@apple.com wrote:
Sam Weinig 2015-05-15 10:12:54 PDT:
Support for navigator.registerProtocolHandler/unregisterProtocolHandler is
not something we want to support in WebKit2 at this time as we are not
confident it is a good Web API.
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
(I am more dubious of the content handler aspect.)
Agreed, especially as it requires the service to download the resource
again. For that use case we need something smarter where you can pass
along an object/stream of
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 2:56 PM, youenn fablet youe...@gmail.com wrote:
Meaning that only the fetch API would at some point support streams?
If so, I wonder why we should postpone a small but useful feature to a
nice but future API.
I suspect there will be many APIs that support streams. It's
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Benjamin Poulain benja...@webkit.org wrote:
Any opinion for or against Streams? Do you know if Mozilla intends to
I'm in favor of having IO streams :-) There's so many features that
could be made better by having them. I don't think anyone from
Could this thread maybe be moved to es-discuss?
webkit-dev mailing list
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
I think Phil and Ben are suggesting to implement these types in JSC like we
did for typed arrays.
If you were to do that you probably want to ping TC39 this time around.
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
performance and we still make it look like a regular DOM object with
wrappers to preserve the semantics.
I understand that, but given that it is in the
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
I understand your concern and sentiment but I'm having a hard time imagining
what kind of problems/concerns would TC39 have with these interfaces that
are clearly prefixed with DOM.
That if they end up as objects in
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 10:33 AM, youenn fablet youe...@gmail.com wrote:
While looking at http://webkit.org/b/126619, a question came to my mind on
user credentials prompting for cross-origin resources.
WebKit allows prompting users for credentials in case of loading
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
HTMLTemplateElement has been shipped by Chrome and Firefox for a while
and the specification has been quite stable at this point:
That specification has issues and is effectively
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Geoffrey Garen gga...@apple.com wrote:
Anne, can you help me get those comments sent to the w3 list? I sent them
myself, but they seem to be held up or bounced?
Hey, I think they did make it, and Boris replied:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20567 could use input
recommend reading through
In general I think versioning is a bad idea, but out-of-band is even
worse. We'd have to change Web Workers (both constructors and
importScripts() would need to take some kind version-related
information) and everyone on the platform would instead of simply
using script have to resort back to
FWIW, Opera is planning to ship this unprefixed.
webkit-dev mailing list
on changes to the specification really
ought to happen on public-weba...@w3.org.
Anne van Kesteren
webkit-dev mailing list
them. The only reason the W3C is not hosting this test suite at the
moment is because they cannot handle server-side scripts on the test
server at the moment. PLH is looking into a solution on their side as
I understand things.
Anne van Kesteren
Mail list logo