On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:26 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 22:51:19 +0200, Darin Fisher
> wrote:
>
>> If instead, we had an API for auditing redirects (perhaps an "onredirect"
>> event), then we could let developers handle that event and call
>> preventDefault if they want t
On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 10:03:49 +0200, Darin Fisher
wrote:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:26 PM, Anne van Kesteren
wrote:
This does not work for synchronous requests in a worker.
Hmm, good point. An alternative design might be a flag that causes
.send() to complete once a redirect response is r
Below is the draft agenda for the September 2 Widgets Voice Conference
(VC).
Inputs and discussion before the VC on all of the agenda topics via
public-webapps is encouraged (as it can result in a shortened meeting).
Please address Open/Raised Issues and Open Actions before the meeting:
ht
On 01.09.2010 10:16, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
...
I thought of another reason to want the original XHR object to be
responsible for following the redirect: the value of a Location header
may be a relative URL. It would be nice if application authors did not
have to take care of resolving that ma
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10527
Summary: [IndexedDB] Result of IDBCursor.remove and update
unspecified.
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: PC
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 1:16 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 10:03:49 +0200, Darin Fisher
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:26 PM, Anne van Kesteren > >wrote:
>>
>>> This does not work for synchronous requests in a worker.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm, good point. An alternative desig
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 5:19 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 01.09.2010 10:16, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>
>> ...
>>
>> I thought of another reason to want the original XHR object to be
>>> responsible for following the redirect: the value of a Location header
>>> may be a relative URL. It would be
* Darin Fisher wrote:
>>> Though note that relative URLs are forbidden in theory.
>> They are in RFC 2616, but not in HTTPbis ...
>
>What does it mean for them to not be part of HTTPbis? Relative URLs in
>Location headers are not uncommon.
You missed the double negative.
--
Björn Höhrmann · mail
On 02.09.2010 00:00, Darin Fisher wrote:
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 5:19 AM, Julian Reschke mailto:julian.resc...@gmx.de>> wrote:
On 01.09.2010 10:16, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
...
I thought of another reason to want the original XHR object
to be
resp
-Original Message-
From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Arthur Barstow
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 4:32 AM
>> The WebApps WG will meet face-to-face November 1-2 as part of the W3C's
>> 2010 TPAC meeting week [TPAC].
>>
>> I created a
I'm hoping to be there yes. Especially if we'll get a critical mass of
IndexedDB contributors.
/ Jonas
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Pablo Castro wrote:
>
> -Original Message-
> From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Arthur Barstow
>
I might attend if there are enough IndexedDB people there.
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> I'm hoping to be there yes. Especially if we'll get a critical mass of
> IndexedDB contributors.
>
> / Jonas
>
> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Pablo Castro
> wrote:
> >
> > -O
12 matches
Mail list logo
