I'm sorry if I'm not familiar with all the details of how the widgets spec
is going but the specs encourage comment so I'm commenting :-)
It seems like widgets have 2 uses
#1) As a way to package an HTML5 app that can be downloaded similar to a
native
executable
#2) As a way to package an HT
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Darin Fisher wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 1:33 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Darin Fisher
> wrote:
> >> >> It would be nice to be able to allow streaming such th
Ugh, sent this originally to just Darin. Resending to the list.
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Darin Fisher wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Darin Fisher wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 1:33 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Robin Berjon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Apr 26, 2010, at 20:49 , Nebojša Ćirić wrote:
>> We have a first draft at
>> http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dhttrq5v_0c8k5vkdh (it has view/edit
>> permissions).
>
> That's interesting; personally I agree that this would be very usef
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> Ugh, sent this originally to just Darin. Resending to the list.
>
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Darin Fisher wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Darin Fisher
>
Referring to the process:
Trying to get effective and useful internationalization supported in
ECMAScript has been a fruitless process (see Markus's memo of some seven or
eight years ago). It might be possible to get needed changes if one were to
spend enough (a huge amount of) time with the ECMA
I agree (and am empowered by the I18N WG to say so). I don’t think we need to
saddle the I18N efforts with the TC39 process but rather that what we do be
compatible and consistent with internationalization changes in ES6.0 that TC39
eventually really *MUST* take up---that we push forward with th
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Michael Nordman wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>
>> Ugh, sent this originally to just Darin. Resending to the list.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Darin Fisher
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Jonas Si
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 12:45 PM, Darin Fisher wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Michael Nordman
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>>
>>> Ugh, sent this originally to just Darin. Resending to the list.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Darin Fis
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 12:45 PM, Darin Fisher wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Michael Nordman
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>>
>>> Ugh, sent this originally to just Darin. Resending to the list.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Dar
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Gregg Tavares wrote:
> I'm sorry if I'm not familiar with all the details of how the widgets spec
> is going but the specs encourage comment so I'm commenting :-)
>
> It seems like widgets have 2 uses
>
> #1) As a way to package an HTML5 app that can be downloaded
shawn, did you have a chance to give this some thought? how would mozilla
like to handle cases like the ones jeremy and robin mentioned? how would you
like to manage quotas?
thanks,
dumi
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Shawn Wilsher wrote:
> On 4/23/2010 7:39 AM, Nikunj Mehta wrote:
>
>> Co
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 2:28 PM, timeless wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Gregg Tavares wrote:
> > I'm sorry if I'm not familiar with all the details of how the widgets
> spec
> > is going but the specs encourage comment so I'm commenting :-)
> >
> > It seems like widgets have 2 uses
>
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 2:28 PM, timeless wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Gregg Tavares wrote:
> > I'm sorry if I'm not familiar with all the details of how the widgets
> spec
> > is going but the specs encourage comment so I'm commenting :-)
> >
> > It seems like widgets have 2 uses
>
On 4/28/2010 2:54 PM, Dumitru Daniliuc wrote:
shawn, did you have a chance to give this some thought? how would mozilla
like to handle cases like the ones jeremy and robin mentioned? how would you
like to manage quotas?
We chatted yesterday, but I haven't had a chance to get it down into
writing
We had some discussions about this at mozilla yesterday. I think the
summary is something like this:
* We'd like to expire data in IndexDB after some time. This will
likely be based on heuristics, such as haven't visited the site for an
extended period of time, though possibly keep the data a bit
This thinking resonates with what we've been thinking too (I think).
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> We had some discussions about this at mozilla yesterday. I think the
> summary is something like this:
>
> * We'd like to expire data in IndexDB after some time. This will
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> We had some discussions about this at mozilla yesterday. I think the
> summary is something like this:
>
> * We'd like to expire data in IndexDB after some time. This will
> likely be based on heuristics, such as haven't visited the site for
cool.
thankfully the way the standards stuff works, it's too late to change
any of this.
e.g. the standards group has already selected a signing mechanism to
which mozilla objects, but it can't be changed. similarly, zip can't
be replaced in widgets.
people are free to write replacement standard
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Michael Nordman wrote:
> This thinking resonates with what we've been thinking too (I think).
>
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> We had some discussions about this at mozilla yesterday. I think the
>> summary is something like this:
>>
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Eric Uhrhane wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> We had some discussions about this at mozilla yesterday. I think the
>> summary is something like this:
>>
>> * We'd like to expire data in IndexDB after some time. This will
>> likely
We probably want to have different policies for different kinds of devices.
For mobile, pruning unused storage is definitely important, but for modern
desktops with >1TB drives most users probably won't ever need to "free up
disk space" unless they're hit with some kind of denial-of-service attack,
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Michael Nordman wrote:
>> We have in mind that the incentives for developers to not always utilize the
>> most permanent storage option are...
>> 1) Non-permanent storage is accessible w/o explicit user opt-i
I've been going through this thread trying to figure out how to make
FileWriter [1] work cleanly for the various use cases presented, and I
think the reason I've been having so much trouble is that it's just a
bad idea to do so. Its original design constraints rule out some of
the use cases. I th
On Tue, 27 Apr 2010, Simon Pieters wrote:
> >
> > Fine, fine. I've updated HTML5 to rename WebSocket.URL,
> > EventSource.URL, and Stream.URL to be lowercase.
>
> Can you change it back? We've implemented and written tests for
> WebSocket.URL. WebKit has implemented EventSource.URL and WebSocke
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010, Simon Pieters wrote:
>> >
>> > Fine, fine. I've updated HTML5 to rename WebSocket.URL,
>> > EventSource.URL, and Stream.URL to be lowercase.
>>
>> Can you change it back? We've implemented and written tests for
>> WebSocket
On Thu, 29 Apr 2010 05:27:44 +0200, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Can you change it back? We've implemented and written tests for
WebSocket.URL. WebKit has implemented EventSource.URL and
WebSocket.URL.
Do you plan to implement the File API attribute as .URL also?
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Publ
27 matches
Mail list logo
