On Wed, 29 Jul 2009, Fumitoshi Ukai (��~\飼�~V~G�~U~O) wrote:
I'm wondering why send() doesn't raise INVALID_STATE_ERR exception when
readyState is CLOSED and is required to queue up the data after closed.
What is the reason for this behavior?
So that scripts don't get unexpected exceptions
On Wed, 15 Jul 2009, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
In 2.4.4.1:
If position is not past the end of input, return to the top of the
step labeled loop in the overall algorithm (that's the step within
which these substeps find themselves).
Why not just go to step 9?
Which part specifically are you
From: Michael Davidson m...@google.com
Tuesday, July 28, 2009 11:24 PM
Having some sort of desktop presence is important for parity
with desktop apps. Perhaps the install UI could look and feel more
like the UI for installing a native app?
Michael
If you're going to have an installation, why
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Michael
Kozakewichmkozakew...@icosidodecahedron.com wrote:
From: Michael Davidson m...@google.com
Tuesday, July 28, 2009 11:24 PM
Having some sort of desktop presence is important for parity
with desktop apps. Perhaps the install UI could look and feel more
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 4:39 AM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote:
There is value in not changing them unless they are actually broken --
when I edit the spec, there's always a risk I'll break something.
Okay, not a big deal then.
I've required UAs to catch this case and added this example.
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 7:19 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.comwrote:
Firefox's Jetpack addon (essentially Greasemonkey turned up to 11)
exposes a super-convenient jetpack.notifications.show() function for
doing exactly that. It pops up an attractive notification in the
lower
'Named' cache groups under a single manifest url is an interesting idea.
Presumably the webapp would be generating the 'name' in the manifest file
based on a cookie value.
Another possibility is something along the lines of what is proposed in the
DataCache draft: the manifest indicates a cookie
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:32 AM, Michael Kozakewich
mkozakew...@icosidodecahedron.com wrote:
It sounds like the hidden page idea is just the solution you thought up
to the problem of keeping a page running. How many other reasons are there
for it?
Not sure what other motivations there may
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 7:56 PM, Drew Wilsonatwil...@google.com wrote:
What I'd like, as a user, is some way to pin selected apps to run in the
background - whether that's something I initiate through the UI myself, or
via a prompt from the application is really a matter of UX.
in my book,
Maciej, thanks for sending this out. These are great points - I have a few
responses below. The main thrust of your argument seems to be that allowing
web applications to run persistently opens us up to some of the same
vulnerabilities that native (desktop and mobile) apps have, and I agree with
This is a good analysis. I agree that it is important for the web to
maintain some important properties that are in conflict with persistent
background processing:
1. All links are safe to click
2. When a page is closed, the only artifacts left behind are items in
various caches
3. The user
My understanding (when I looked at Prism a while back) was that it was
essentially no different than a desktop shortcut that ran the page in a
separate profile. Has this changed?
-atw
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:21 AM, timeless timel...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 7:56 PM, Drew
I'd agree with #1, for some given value of safe - we've all heard tales of
search engines inadvertently deleting data on people's sites by following
links. Note that web storage violates #2 and #3 (and even cookies could be
viewed as a violation of #2, depending on how broadly you view caches).
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Drew Wilsonatwil...@google.com wrote:
My understanding (when I looked at Prism a while back) was that it was
essentially no different than a desktop shortcut that ran the page in a
separate profile. Has this changed?
It runs a webpage in a separate process, in
From: Drew Wilson
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 11:56 AM
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:32 AM, Michael Kozakewich
mkozakew...@icosidodecahedron.com wrote:
-- Notifications: I don't think I've ever had Outlook notify me of new mail
when it's not running. It usually starts up with Windows, and
Here's something that hidden pages can help with that this solution can't:
Let's say you're watching ten stocks on Google Finance, each in their
own window.
Right now, each page has to have its own connection to the server.
Since these are polling connections, the experience is going to be
very
As another data point, the aforementioned Jetpack addon for Firefox
actually *does* run in a hidden page. about:jetpack is *always*
present while the add-on is installed, but hidden if you haven't
explicitly pointed a tab at that url.
This doesn't allow it to persist outside of the browser, but
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Michael Davidsonm...@google.com wrote:
Here's something that hidden pages can help with that this solution can't:
Let's say you're watching ten stocks on Google Finance, each in their
own window.
Right now, each page has to have its own connection to the
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009, Michael Nordman wrote:
'Named' cache groups under a single manifest url is an interesting idea.
Presumably the webapp would be generating the 'name' in the manifest
file based on a cookie value. Another possibility is something along the
lines of what is proposed in
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Tab Atkins Jr.jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Michael Davidsonm...@google.com wrote:
With a hidden page that's accessible to all Google Finance visible
pages, they could share a connection to the server. Even if the hidden
page is
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:33 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Yes. But that's the case anyway -- events are asynchronous, so consider
the case of receiving two messages. Both are queued up, then eventually
the first is dispatched. If in response to that you close the connection,
that
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, Dean McNamee wrote:
Currently the spec says that if you call lineTo(), quadraticCurveTo(),
bezierCurveTo(), etc without a current point (having called moveTo()
first), they should do nothing.
The spec recently changed lineTo() quadraticCurveTo(), bezierCurveTo(),
and
I intended the resistant to malice and incompetence definition of safe,
not the idempotent definition of safe. Thanks for clarifying.
Even in a world of exceptionally sophisticated applications, now and in the
future, I think it is worth preserving the safe and stateless properties of
the web. The
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Michael Davidson m...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Tab Atkins Jr.jackalm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Michael Davidsonm...@google.com wrote:
With a hidden page that's accessible to all Google Finance visible
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Jeremy Orlowjor...@chromium.org wrote:
I understand that this isn't helpful for existing web apps like Gmail, but I
think a MVC type model will work pretty nicely with shared workers. It's
just the transition phase that's going to be painful.
In most MVC
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Michael Davidson m...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Tab Atkins Jr.jackalm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Michael Davidsonm...@google.com
What happened to my idea for browsers to have a special window containing
tabs for background apps, which save screen real estate by just showing an
icon and title (and a URL or domain?) and no actual tab content? You might
modify the UI so that quitting the normal browser leaves this window open,
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Drew Wilsonatwil...@google.com wrote:
Agreed that this is a big deal, and is a problem I hadn't considered
previously. I would assume that browser malware detection would blacklist
these sites, but I hate to lean on some magical malware detection
infrastructure
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Robert O'Callahanrob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
What happened to my idea for browsers to have a special window containing
tabs for background apps, which save screen real estate by just showing an
icon and title (and a URL or domain?) and no actual tab content? You
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Robert O'Callahanrob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
What happened to my idea for browsers to have a special window containing
tabs for background apps, which save screen real estate by just showing an
icon and title (and a URL or domain?) and no actual tab content? You
From: Robert O'Callahan
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 5:05 PM
What happened to my idea for browsers to have a special window containing
tabs for background apps, which save screen real estate by just showing an
icon and title (and a URL or domain?) and no actual tab content? You might
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Robert O'Callahanrob...@ocallahan.org
wrote:
What happened to my idea for browsers to have a special window containing
tabs for background apps, which save screen real estate by just
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Michael Kozakewich
mkozakew...@icosidodecahedron.com wrote:
How many applications do we expect any one user to have open? I would
imagine one would do fine on the Taskbar or in the Notification Area, like
other programs, but a manager would be good if a user
On Jul 29, 2009, at 3:05 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
What happened to my idea for browsers to have a special window
containing tabs for background apps, which save screen real estate
by just showing an icon and title (and a URL or domain?) and no
actual tab content? You might modify the
From: Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 6:09 PM
Given the risks I cited for the original form of the feature, I think we
need to keep in mind that a lot of the security risks are subtle and
insidious, and we need to be really cautious with any feature of this
On Jul 27, 2009, at 11:50 AM, Michael Davidson wrote:
Hello folks -
I'm an engineer on the Gmail team. We've been working on a prototype
with the Chrome team to make the Gmail experience better. We thought
we'd throw out our ideas to the list to get some feedback.
THE PROBLEM
We would like
It seems that most browsers do some sort of newline and tab removal from URI
attributes. For example, if you have
img src=foo
bar.jpg
browsers will still render the image called foobar.jpg despite the CRLF pair
in the middle of the src attribute. The behavior actually seems a bit more
Ian et al.:
About a year ago, after I wrote the first version of my history
manager, I began the process of looking into the HTML5 history spec
and had a few conversations with folks like Bertrand Le Roy, Brad
Neuberg, and Brian Dillard. Some of my notes from back then have been
For the curves, I don't really get the point of moveTo()ing to one of
the control points.
Thanks
-- dean
On 7/29/09, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, Dean McNamee wrote:
Currently the spec says that if you call lineTo(), quadraticCurveTo(),
bezierCurveTo(), etc
As I am currently writing an implementation for ruby rendering, I wondered
about the exact way white-space is supposed to be handled between runs of
ruby text.
As far as I see it, ruby is fundamentally an inline element, and thus
whitespace would normally be collapsed, but not entirely
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
On Jul 29, 2009, at 3:05 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
What happened to my idea for browsers to have a special window containing
tabs for background apps, which save screen real estate by just showing an
icon and title
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 05:22:56 +0200, Roland Steiner
rolandstei...@google.com wrote:
(aside: an XHTML-like explicit rb container for the ruby base
side-steps
this problem, but is not a real option due to need for legacy support).
For the purposes of the CSS ruby model, runs of descendants
HTML 5 defines input type=date as an input state. This is
implemented in at least one userAgent (Opera). Which other browsers
have implemented that?
It seems like the added value to the programmer for valueAsDate
appears to be convenience method to format to/parse from ISO 8601, but
place on
43 matches
Mail list logo
