As, still, module owner of RDF, I think that's the right thing for us to do.
I haven't actually followed the development of the specs, but I'm
positive that the development of those specifications doesn't impact us
as a browser vendor. The impact of RDF is in the web application and
addons sys
There are eight W3C Proposed Recommendations for RDF 1.1 (two of
which are actually Proposed Edited Recommendations):
RDF Schema 1.1: W3C Proposed Edited Recommendation 09 January 2014
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/
RDF 1.1 XML Syntax: W3C Proposed Edited Recommendation 09 January 2014
On Wednesday 2013-12-18 12:50 +, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Kyle Huey wrote:
> > Should we be explicitly voting in favor of this one too?
>
> I suppose. We implement it :-)
OK, I've done so (without further comments).
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron
On 1/14/2014 3:17 PM, ajvinc...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd like to get a clarified list of requirements for the Firefox SDK:
* Will we support a stub executable?
If somebody writes a patch to include a stub executable in the SDK, I
will accept that patch. If you include automated tests for it, I'll
On Sunday, January 12, 2014 4:34:54 PM UTC-8, Mike Hommey wrote:
> - We could include the xulrunner and xulrunner-stub executables as part
> of firefox. xulrunner-stub is small and self-contained, and xulrunner
> could be replaced by something that calls firefox -app. Or we could
> make the f
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 1:40:13 PM UTC-6, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
> On 1/14/2014 2:30 PM, mka...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 1:06:19 PM UTC-6, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
> > If we could solve the stub problem, I don't see why this can't be a perfect
> > replacement for
On 1/14/2014 2:30 PM, mka...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 1:06:19 PM UTC-6, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
Or
do a repack to remove the Firefox-specific files from a Firefox install.
Certainly without branding issues it's not a problem anyway, right?
So in my testing, this worked per
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 1:06:19 PM UTC-6, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
> Or
> do a repack to remove the Firefox-specific files from a Firefox install.
> Certainly without branding issues it's not a problem anyway, right?
So in my testing, this worked perfectly.
If we could solve the stub probl
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 12:08:23 PM UTC-5, Kartikaya Gupta wrote:
> That sounds pretty reasonable to me.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> kats
>
>
>
> On 14-01-14 10:59 , dklaw...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > After some discussion with other BMO devs, how about this proposal?
>
> >
>
> > We add a (info
On 1/14/2014 12:34 PM, mka...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a couple concerns.
1. It makes it much more difficult to ship a site specific browser that can be installed
alongside Firefox (especially if that browser might need to be different than the
installed Firefox, like based on the ESR). It woul
One more thought.
How will updating work?
If you are running an app with application.ini, it's not going to get it's
updates through the Firefox update service, even though you have Firefox
installed.
So you'll have to somehow rebundle Firefox with your application and send that
as an update?
Guys, I get it. I'm not happy about it, especially having wasted a lot of
the last two years on it, but I get it.
"One day, the beast cast its eye on its unruly cousin, and lost his
patience. Many fine people tried to spare the cousin, but the beast
swallowed its cousin whole. Its belch was lik
I have a couple concerns.
1. It makes it much more difficult to ship a site specific browser that can be
installed alongside Firefox (especially if that browser might need to be
different than the installed Firefox, like based on the ESR). It would seem
that the best method would be to take a f
That sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Cheers,
kats
On 14-01-14 10:59 , dklaw...@gmail.com wrote:
After some discussion with other BMO devs, how about this proposal?
We add a (info) link next to the Milestone label on the show_bug.cgi page that
has some custom documentation explaining the purpo
After some discussion with other BMO devs, how about this proposal?
We add a (info) link next to the Milestone label on the show_bug.cgi page that
has some custom documentation explaining the purpose of the field for the
selected product? We can make the text different for different products as
On Friday, January 10, 2014 4:56:45 PM UTC-5, David Lawrence wrote:
> Currently Bugzilla does not support relabeling of fields in the UI based
> on some criteria. They are pretty well hard coded with the names. It would
> be a non-trivial amount of work to add the support and it would definitely
>
On 14/01/14 12:45, Neil wrote:
Indeed, the XML parsing didn't "block" when I switched to serving the
reftest from the HTTP server, and I had to add a dummy progress listener
to restore blocking behaviour.
Progress listeners blocking onload is a bug. Please don't rely on it in
tests (or outsid
- Original Message -
> > I don't know. Maybe building an SDK based on Firefox is the right
> > thing; honestly, I just want something that works. But I put a lot of
> > effort into this over the last two years.
> FWIW, I packaged xulrunner in Debian in 2006 and have been maintaining
> it
Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Neil wrote:
Ah, but it makes a subtle difference to the way XHR works; from a server, it
will parse according to the MIME type, which was HTML in my case, but from a
file:// URL, it always parses in XML, even if the document would norma
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Neil wrote:
> Ah, but it makes a subtle difference to the way XHR works; from a server, it
> will parse according to the MIME type, which was HTML in my case, but from a
> file:// URL, it always parses in XML, even if the document would normally
> load as HTML (i.e.
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 12:55:03AM -0800, ajvinc...@gmail.com wrote:
> Wow. All this just as I'm trying to get XULRunner repaired and
> stabilized for good with automated tests. I put a lot of effort into
> reviving the damn thing, and I'm close to getting it working again on
> the Mac. (More to
Wow. All this just as I'm trying to get XULRunner repaired and stabilized for
good with automated tests. I put a lot of effort into reviving the damn thing,
and I'm close to getting it working again on the Mac. (More to the point, I'm
obsessed with getting it working on the Mac again - and I
22 matches
Mail list logo
