Ok.
Want to write up a proposal for how to implement this (presumably in a bug)?
J
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 6:38 AM, ben turner wrote:
> I would also point out that throwing exceptions at the call site makes
> debugging much easier in my opinion. Our error events currently don't
> include inform
No, it is in webapps (all the widgets work is there) - try:
public-webapps@w3.org
Cheers!
David.
-Original Message-
From: Ricardo Varela [mailto:pho...@gmail.com]
Sent: 02 July 2010 09:02
To: David Rogers
Subject: Re: question about number of occurrences of author and content
element
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 22:39:48 +0200, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 6/29/10 2:36 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
See, this is exactly why we asked the question - because it seems that
behavior is inconsistent, we're not sure what the expectation is.
Note that the Firefox behavior I described is irrelevant t
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 22:39:48 +0200, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>>
>> On 6/29/10 2:36 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>>
>>> See, this is exactly why we asked the question - because it seems that
>>> behavior is inconsistent, we're not sure what the ex
I think I would be happy just removing the _NO_DUPLICATE directions.
As Jeremy noted it is quite easy to emulate and it would then be up to
the webapp author whether she wanted the first or last duplicate
value.
-Ben
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 11:56 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 a
I think I would be happy just removing the _NO_DUPLICATE directions.
As Jeremy noted it is quite easy to emulate and it would then be up to
the webapp author whether she wanted the first or last duplicate
value.
-Ben
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 11:56 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 a
I would also point out that throwing exceptions at the call site makes
debugging much easier in my opinion. Our error events currently don't
include information like filename and line number where the failing
request was generated (though I think we should add that eventually).
Exceptions are much
I would also point out that throwing exceptions at the call site makes
debugging much easier in my opinion. Our error events currently don't
include information like filename and line number where the failing
request was generated (though I think we should add that eventually).
Exceptions are much
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10064
Summary: Modifying functions should throw when called under
invalid conditions
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: PC
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Filed http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10064 if you want
help with the editing, or this is unclear, let me know.
/ Jonas
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 12:56 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
> Ok.
> Want to write up a proposal for how to implement this (presumably in a bug)?
> J
> On Fri, Jul 2, 201
Hi Ricardo,
(moving discussion to public-webapps)
On 7/2/10 5:56 AM, Ricardo Varela wrote:
hallo all, hallo Marcos,
We have a small question regarding what we interpret may be an
inconsistency in the behaviours for parsing a config file as commented
in the W3C widget packaging spec [1]
Accord
On Jul 2, 2010, at 00:31 , Eric Uhrhane wrote:
> The biggest unknown in the current BlobWriter spec [1] is how you
> obtain one in the first place.
> There are two current proposals, which I've summarized below. I've
> heard only a few voices on this topic, and would love to get more
> opinions.
* Jonas Sicking wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 22:39:48 +0200, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>>> I think Anne answered the question, in any case: the XHR event target
>>> chain only contains the XHR object itself and nothing else. If the spec
>>> d
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:03:30 +0200, Bjoern Hoehrmann
wrote:
Well let's see: if you want to know what the XHR event flow is, then you
have to read the XHR specification to see whether it specifies something
different from the "default" regardless of whether it does or does not.
If it does specif
On Jul 2, 2010, at 01:34 , Jonas Sicking wrote:
> Actually, i realized that I have second thoughts on some details here.
>
> It would be great if the "save as" functionality provided by the
> SimpleBlobWriter worked such that at the time the "where do you want
> to save a file" dialog pops up, the
Hi members of the i18n WG,
During implementation, Opera found that I had made a mistake with the
way I has specified how the dir attribute is applied (I had applied it
to all attributes, and then left it up to the user agent to display
the attribute values properly). The problem was that what I h
* Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:03:30 +0200, Bjoern Hoehrmann
>wrote:
>> Well let's see: if you want to know what the XHR event flow is, then you
>> have to read the XHR specification to see whether it specifies something
>> different from the "default" regardless of whether i
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:57:08 +0200, Bjoern Hoehrmann
wrote:
* Anne van Kesteren wrote:
You have to read DOM Events either way.
Not to answer the particular question. Sure, you might have read the DOM
Events specification, say, to figure out what Event.currentTarget is but
what it means when
* Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>You'd have to read it to figure out what the "event flow" is, for instance.
Which is something that is much more likely to stick with you, yes.
>I disagree. Only Node objects have event flow and the Window object
>interacts with those in a particular way. All other o
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:17 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>
> Additionally, the structured clone algorithm, which defines that an
> exception should synchronously be thrown if the object is malformed,
> for example if it consists of a cyclic graph. So .add/.put/.update can
> already throw under certain
Jonas Sicking [mailto:jo...@sicking.cc] wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 22:39:48 +0200, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>>> On 6/29/10 2:36 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
See, this is exactly why we asked the question - because it seems
that behavi
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 18:21:31 +0200, Chris Wilson
wrote:
BTW, the XHR spec does not say anything about capture, iirc, just
bubbling - leaving it somewhat ambiguous.
It is actually quite explicit as far as I can tell.
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:17 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> Additionally, the structured clone algorithm, which defines that an
>> exception should synchronously be thrown if the object is malformed,
>> for example if it consists of a cyclic
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:03 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
> * Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>>> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 22:39:48 +0200, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
I think Anne answered the question, in any case: the XHR event target
chain only cont
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10064
Andrei Popescu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> Filed http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10064
Fixed. Please have a look, in case I missed or got anything wrong. Thanks!
Andrei
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> Filed http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10064
>
> Fixed. Please have a look, in case I missed or got anything wrong. Thanks!
For add and put you should not throw DATA_ERR
On Jun 30, 2010, at 10:29 AM, Eric Uhrhane wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> May I propose FileWriter in place of BlobWriter? ;-)
>> You are actually always writing to files, so it would make a lot of sense
>> IMO.
>
> We renamed BlobReader based on the per
Can you point me to where? XHR L2 spec says "To dispatch a readystatechange
event means that an event with the name readystatechange, with no namespace,
which does not bubble and is not cancelable, and which uses the Event
interface, is to be dispatched at the XMLHttpRequest object." (end of s
Hi All,
We ran into an complicated issue while implementing IndexedDB. In
short, what should happen if an object store is modified while a
cursor is iterating it? Note that the modification can be done within
the same transaction, so the read/write locks preventing several
transactions from access
From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Jonas Sicking
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 4:00 PM
>> We ran into an complicated issue while implementing IndexedDB. In short,
>> what should happen if an object store is modified while a cursor is
>> iterat
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Pablo Castro wrote:
>
> From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Jonas Sicking
> Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 4:00 PM
>
>>> We ran into an complicated issue while implementing IndexedDB. In short,
>>> what should hap
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 1:14 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Pablo Castro
> wrote:
>>
>> From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org]
>> On Behalf Of Jonas Sicking
>> Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 4:00 PM
>>
We ran into an complicated i
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 9:45 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>> Filed http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10064
>>
>> Fixed. Please have a look, in case I missed or got anything wr
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 1:14 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Pablo Castro
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org]
>>> On Behalf Of Jonas Sicking
>>> Sent: Fri
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> On Jun 30, 2010, at 10:29 AM, Eric Uhrhane wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>>
>>> May I propose FileWriter in place of BlobWriter? ;-)
>>> You are actually always writing to files, so it would make a
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 1:14 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Pablo Castro <
> pablo.cas...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> From: public-webapps-requ..
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 1:14 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Pablo Castro <
> pablo.cas...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> From: public-webapps-requ..
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
>> > On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 1:14 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Pablo Castro
>> >> wrote:
>> >
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Eric Uhrhane wrote:
> The biggest unknown in the current BlobWriter spec [1] is how you
> obtain one in the first place.
> There are two current proposals, which I've summarized below. I've
> heard only a few voices on this topic, and would love to get more
> opini
40 matches
Mail list logo