Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Nikhil Marathe wrote: > There is no bug number yet, because I have about 15 lines of additional > code :) > There is now! https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=903441 -- Ehsan ___ dev-

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On 08/08/13 23:52, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > I think you forgot the bug number. :-) Ehsan: any chance you could trim your responses? I had to page-down 9 times in my mail client just to read this one line... Thanks :-) Gerv ___ dev-platform mailing list

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

There is no bug number yet, because I have about 15 lines of additional code :) On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > On 2013-08-08 12:20 PM, Nikhil Marathe wrote: > >> On Wednesday, August 7, 2013 7:02:51 PM UTC-7, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Nik

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On 2013-08-08 12:20 PM, Nikhil Marathe wrote: On Wednesday, August 7, 2013 7:02:51 PM UTC-7, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Nikhil Marathe wrote: On Monday, August 5, 2013 10:01:06 AM UTC-7, Mounir Lamouri wrote: On 26/07/13 18:29, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: We're p

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On Wednesday, August 7, 2013 7:02:51 PM UTC-7, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Nikhil Marathe wrote: > > > > > On Monday, August 5, 2013 10:01:06 AM UTC-7, Mounir Lamouri wrote: > > > > On 26/07/13 18:29, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > > > > > > > > > We're planning to implemen

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 3:17 PM, wrote: > On Monday, August 5, 2013 10:01:06 AM UTC-7, Mounir Lamouri wrote: > > On 26/07/13 18:29, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > > > > > We're planning to implement a prototype of the NavigationController > > > > > interface (see bug 898524). We will try to get feedback

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On Monday, August 5, 2013 10:01:06 AM UTC-7, Mounir Lamouri wrote: > On 26/07/13 18:29, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > > > We're planning to implement a prototype of the NavigationController > > > interface (see bug 898524). We will try to get feedback from web > > > developers on the prototype and wil

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On 26/07/13 18:29, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > We're planning to implement a prototype of the NavigationController > interface (see bug 898524). We will try to get feedback from web > developers on the prototype and will use that feedback to change the spec > and the implementation and iterate on the A

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On 2013-07-30 4:14 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote: On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Gavin Sharp wrote: Indeed. Somewhat off-topic for this thread, but I think this "let's provide primitives and let other people build higher-level libraries" tr

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Gavin Sharp wrote: >> Indeed. Somewhat off-topic for this thread, but I think this "let's >> provide primitives and let other people build higher-level libraries" >> trend for Web platform features is pr

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Gavin Sharp wrote: > Indeed. Somewhat off-topic for this thread, but I think this "let's > provide primitives and let other people build higher-level libraries" > trend for Web platform features is pretty dangerous. > On the other hand, I think that the approach

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote: > On 29/07/13 21:53 , Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> The current thinking is >> that offering developers the primitives will give us a better higher >> level API longer term. > > Isn't that reasoning part of why we are now in the position where

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

We desperately need to get a better offline story. The counter proposal to this that I had is going to take a lot longer to hammer out and get to a state where we can ship. Or rather, it'll take longer to get to a point where we're confident it's not repeating a lot of the mistakes of appcache-v1.

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On Tuesday, July 30, 2013 8:16:48 AM UTC+12, Doug Turner wrote: > My issue wasn't if we were going to work on the 'off-line' problem or > > not. It was mostly around stating we're going to implement > > prematurely. It might be I don't really understand what the "Intent to > > implement" bl

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On 29/07/13 21:53 , Anne van Kesteren wrote: The current thinking is that offering developers the primitives will give us a better higher level API longer term. Isn't that reasoning part of why we are now in the position where we have indexeddb and nobody uses it, instead preferring localstora

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Doug Turner wrote: > Do you think that NC is the right soluction here? At a high level it seems like the kind of low-level API we want to expose. The details are still muddy, we need implementation experience and developer feedback for that. > Anne van Kesteren

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

Implementation detail, but I presume that you will also replace the existing appcache impl with NC, right? Ehsan Akhgari wrote: Offline not working seems like the #1 problem of the web platform, so working on this API does not really feel premature to me. __

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

Do you think that NC is the right soluction here? Anne van Kesteren wrote: Offline not working seems like the #1 problem of the web platform, There are lots of problems with the web platform. Offline support is one of them, yes. :) so working on this API does not really feel premature t

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Doug Turner wrote: > I would feel much better if we "continued to monitor" this api and not rush > here. Let Google do the rushing, lets implement later. > > Didn't Jonas have a proposal for the 'offline' use case? We did discuss at the last meeting. This API is

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On 2013-07-29 2:46 PM, Doug Turner wrote: Intent to implement seems premature. Why wouldn't we wait to see how this goes and let Google do that. I really dislike the idea of rushing into this API. What is the reason you think we should not implement this? We're not exactly rushing into *shi

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

Intent to implement seems premature. Why wouldn't we wait to see how this goes and let Google do that. I really dislike the idea of rushing into this API. A programatic API that does something like AppCache is a good idea -- only in that it is better than the declarative shit AppCache is. W

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Ehsan Akhgari > wrote: > > We're planning to implement a prototype of the NavigationController > > interface (see bug 898524). We will try to get feedback from web > > developers on the prototype and will us

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > We're planning to implement a prototype of the NavigationController > interface (see bug 898524). We will try to get feedback from web > developers on the prototype and will use that feedback to change the spec > and the implementation and i

Re: Intent to implement: NavigationController

+1 that is awesome! I can see some "interesting" use cases for us in gaia where this would be helpful. On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > We're planning to implement a prototype of the NavigationController > interface (see bug 898524). We will try to get feedback from web

Intent to implement: NavigationController

We're planning to implement a prototype of the NavigationController interface (see bug 898524). We will try to get feedback from web developers on the prototype and will use that feedback to change the spec and the implementation and iterate on the API. Our major goal for now is coming up with a