On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010, Michael Nordman wrote:
In section 6.6.6 Changes to the networking model which applies to sub
resource loads, step 3 prevents returning fallback resources for
requested urls that fall into a network
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Patrick Mueller wrote:
On 8/12/10 6:29 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Wed, 19 May 2010, Patrick Mueller wrote:
I've been playing with application cache for a while now, and found
the diagnostic
On 2/1/11 11:47 AM, Adam de Boor wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Patrick Mueller wrote:
On 8/12/10 6:29 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Wed, 19 May 2010, Patrick Mueller wrote:
I've been playing with application cache for a while now,
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Patrick Mueller wrote:
On 8/12/10 6:29 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
XML would be much too complex for what is needed. We could possibly
remove the media type check and resort to using the CACHE MANIFEST
identifier (i.e.
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, David John Burrowes wrote:
I can understand wanting to do things right, in terms of using
Content-Type for the file. I can also attest that it can be a royal
pain to diagnose when this is set wrong.
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, David John Burrowes wrote:
I can understand wanting to do things right, in terms of using
Content-Type for the file. I can also attest that it can be a
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
That's far too generic for servers to default to mapping *.manifest to
text/cache-manifest. For example, Windows uses *.manifest for SxS
assembly manifests.
Do they have a MIME type? If not, it doesn't much matter.
It
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
That's far too generic for servers to default to mapping *.manifest
to text/cache-manifest. For example, Windows uses *.manifest for
SxS assembly manifests.
Do they have a
* Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
That's far too generic for servers to default to mapping *.manifest to
text/cache-manifest. For example, Windows uses *.manifest for SxS
assembly manifests.
Do they have a MIME type? If not, it
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
In definitions of application cache entry categories, it's mentioned
that an explicit entry can also be marked as foreign. This contrasts
with fallback entries, for which no such notice is made.
It still appears that the intention was for
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
That's far too generic for servers to default to mapping *.manifest
to text/cache-manifest. For example,
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Given that SxS manifests don't seem like they'd ever be something
you'd want to make available to download standalone, and that if you
were going to expose them to a user you'd
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
In definitions of application cache entry categories, it's mentioned
that an explicit entry can also be marked as foreign. This contrasts
with fallback entries, for which no such
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:43 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
It appears you're actually talking about ClickOnce manifests, not SxS
manifests (though they use the same format).
(In that particular case, SxS manifests distributed standalone for people to
drop into application installations
On 8/12/10 6:29 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
XML would be much too complex for what is needed. We could possibly
remove the media type check and resort to using the CACHE MANIFEST
identifier (i.e. sniffing), but the HTTP gods will get angry.
Yeah,
On 8/12/10 6:29 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Wed, 19 May 2010, Patrick Mueller wrote:
I've been playing with application cache for a while now, and found the
diagnostic information available to be sorely lacking.
For example, to diagnose user-land errors that occur when using
appcache, this is
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 15:02:01 +0200, Patrick Mueller
pmue...@muellerware.org wrote:
On 8/12/10 6:29 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
XML would be much too complex for what is needed. We could possibly
remove the media type check and resort to using the CACHE
On 2010/8/13, at 上午6:42, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 15:02:01 +0200, Patrick Mueller pmue...@muellerware.org
wrote:
On 8/12/10 6:29 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
XML would be much too complex for what is needed. We could possibly
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
There seems to be a race condition in how application cache groups are
marked obsolete. Consider the following scenario:
1. A document is loaded from server, an appcache is fully created.
2. Appcache update is initiated (e.g. by calling
On Aug 12, 2010, at 3:29 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
These quotas are often global, some kind of user setting, or are
per-origin. Application Caches are missing such a quota.
The entire Disk Space section of Web SQL Databases could equally apply
to Application Caches:
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009, Joseph Pecoraro wrote:
We could delay the application cache download process so that it
doesn't start until after the 'load' event has fired. Does anyone have
an opinion on this?
It seems pointless to provide hooks in the API that allow for a custom
interface,
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 22:44:01 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
We could delay the application cache download process so that it doesn't
start until after the 'load' event has fired. Does anyone have an opinion
on this?
On Dec 17, 2009, at 5: 24PM, Michael Nordman wrote:
I don't think
On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Joseph Pecoraro wrote:
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 22:44:01 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
We could delay the application cache download process so that it doesn't
start until after the 'load' event has fired. Does anyone have an opinion
on this?
On Dec 17, 2009,
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 22:44:01 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
We could delay the application cache download process so that it doesn't
start until after the 'load' event has fired. Does anyone have an opinion
on this?
I believe we (Opera) found this is what at least some implementations
On Fri, 4 Dec 2009, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
Recently, a new step was prepended to the application cache update
algorithm:
1. Optionally, wait until the permission to start the application cache
download process has been obtained from the user and until the user
agent is confident
On Dec 17, 2009, at 4: 44PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
Another conforming sequence of events would be:
1. The parser's first parsing task begins.
2. As soon as the manifest= attribute is parsed, the application cache
download process begins. It queues a task to dispatch the 'checking'
event.
3.
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Joseph Pecoraro joepec...@gmail.comwrote:
On Dec 17, 2009, at 4: 44PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
Another conforming sequence of events would be:
1. The parser's first parsing task begins.
2. As soon as the manifest= attribute is parsed, the application cache
27 matches
Mail list logo
