On 31 Mar 2011, at 1:01 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Anyhow, I do think that the idea of passing in index values at the
same time as a entry is created/modified is an interesting idea. And I
have said so in the past on this list. It's definitely something we
should consider for v2.
Oh, and if
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Joran Greef jo...@ronomon.com wrote:
On 31 Mar 2011, at 1:01 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Anyhow, I do think that the idea of passing in index values at the
same time as a entry is created/modified is an interesting idea. And I
have said so in the past on this
On 31 Mar 2011, at 9:53 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
I previously have asked for a detailed proposal, but so far you have
not supplied one but instead keep referring to other unnamed database
APIs.
I have already provided an adequate interface proposal for putObject and
deleteObject.
I have
On 31 Mar 2011, at 9:34 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
We have made an effort to understand other contributions to the field.
I'm not convinced that these are essential database concepts and having
personally spent quite some time working with the API in JS and implementing
it, I feel pretty
I was the one that asked for callbacks.
but what do we do if those callbacks don't
return consistent results? Or even do evil things like modify the
stores where data is being inserted?
If the callback maps all values to a sort-order of '1' there could only ever
be one entry in the index...
On 31 March 2011 08:38, Joran Greef jo...@ronomon.com wrote:
On 31 Mar 2011, at 9:34 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
We have made an effort to understand other contributions to the field.
I'm not convinced that these are essential database concepts and having
personally spent quite some time
Hi All,
During the 2011 TPAC meeting, I agreed to an action (action-611) to work
with Chaals and WebApps' Team Contacts to define the group's testing
processes.
To that end, I created the following documents:
1. http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/Testing - some high level goals,
and links
On 31 Mar 2011, at 12:52 PM, Keean Schupke wrote:
I totally agree with everything so far...
3. This requires an adjustment to the putObject and deleteObject interfaces
(see previous threads).
I disagree that a simple API change is the answer. The problem is
architectural, not just a
On 31 March 2011 12:41, Joran Greef jo...@ronomon.com wrote:
On 31 Mar 2011, at 12:52 PM, Keean Schupke wrote:
I totally agree with everything so far...
3. This requires an adjustment to the putObject and deleteObject
interfaces (see previous threads).
I disagree that a simple API
On Mar 31, 2011, at 14:04 , Arthur Barstow wrote:
1. What is the level of uptake of testharness.js within the HTML WG and other
WGs? If any of these groups provide usage information, what are the URIs?
Do any WGs make testharness.js's use Mandatory? Currently, its usage in the
above
On Mar/31/2011 10:04 AM, ext Robin Berjon wrote:
On Mar 31, 2011, at 14:04 , Arthur Barstow wrote:
1. What is the level of uptake of testharness.js within the HTML WG and other WGs? If any of these
groups provide usage information, what are the URIs? Do any WGs make testharness.js's
use
The reason I suggested web messaging is that more and more browser UI
is being built on top of the web platform with things like chromeless
[1] and chrome's WebUI [2], and this will likely include search boxes
at some point. This would give the search box a natural endpoint
browsing context for
On 03/31/2011 05:19 PM, ext Nathan Kitchen wrote:
I've been watching discussions on IndexedDB for a while now, and
wondered if anyone would mind spending a few moments to explain how
IndexedDB is related (or not) to WebSQL. Is IndexedDB seen as replacing
the functionality originally offered by
That's nice, pretty much what I was thinking but somewhat more complete : )
Is there not a w3 group progressing something like this? And if not, who
would need to be lobbied to get one started?!
As an aside, I note you didn't implement date as a supported data type.
Was that a conscious decision,
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Benjamin Poulain
benjamin.poul...@nokia.com wrote:
WebSQL in its current form is pretty dead, see
http://www.w3.org/TR/webdatabase/ :
quoteBeware. This specification is no longer in active maintenance and
the
Web Applications Working Group does not intend to
On 3/31/11 12:06 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote:
This is painful to read. WebSQL development died because SQLite, the
most widely-deployed database software in the world, was too good? That
sounds like a catastrophic failure of the W3C process.
No, it actually sounds like a success; it prevented a
No real reason - just trying to implement a minimal framework. Date objects
would be a definite must have going forward.
I was interested in trying to get something like this standardised, as I
believe it has none of the issues that stopped WebSQL, as it defines a
complete relational API
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Joran Greef jo...@ronomon.com wrote:
On 31 Mar 2011, at 9:34 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
We have made an effort to understand other contributions to the field.
I'm not convinced that these are essential database concepts and having
personally spent quite some
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 5:41 AM, Joran Greef jo...@ronomon.com wrote:
On 31 Mar 2011, at 12:52 PM, Keean Schupke wrote:
I totally agree with everything so far...
3. This requires an adjustment to the putObject and deleteObject
interfaces (see previous threads).
I disagree that a
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Joran Greef jo...@ronomon.com wrote:
On 31 Mar 2011, at 9:53 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
I previously have asked for a detailed proposal, but so far you have
not supplied one but instead keep referring to other unnamed database
APIs.
I have already provided an
On 31 March 2011 18:17, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Keean Schupke ke...@fry-it.com wrote:
On 31 March 2011 17:41, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Joran Greef jo...@ronomon.com wrote:
On 31 Mar 2011, at
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Keean Schupke ke...@fry-it.com wrote:
On 31 March 2011 18:17, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Keean Schupke ke...@fry-it.com wrote:
On 31 March 2011 17:41, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011
On 31 Mar 2011, at 7:27 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
1. Provide the application with a first-class means to manage indexes at
time of putting/deleting objects.
I'm OK with doing this for v1 if the others are. It doesn't seem like that
big of an addition and it would give a decent amount of
On 31 March 2011 18:36, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Keean Schupke ke...@fry-it.com wrote:
On 31 March 2011 18:17, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Keean Schupke ke...@fry-it.comwrote:
On 31 March 2011
This is painful to read. WebSQL development died because SQLite, the most
widely-deployed database software in the world, was too good? That sounds
like a catastrophic failure of the W3C process.
--
Glenn Maynard
Hear.
I am starting to think that Mozilla will step up and provide an
On 31 March 2011 19:08, Joran Greef jo...@ronomon.com wrote:
This is painful to read. WebSQL development died because SQLite, the
most widely-deployed database software in the world, was too good? That
sounds like a catastrophic failure of the W3C process.
--
Glenn Maynard
Hear.
I
This is painful to read. WebSQL development died because SQLite, the most
widely-deployed database software in the world, was too good? That sounds like
a catastrophic failure of the W3C process.
--
Glenn Maynard
Hear.
I am starting to think that Mozilla will step up and provide an
On 3/31/2011 11:47 AM, Joran Greef wrote:
Let those who introduced these design flaws be among the first to take
responsibility and fix them.
You aren't being constructive, and that's a surefire way to be ignored.
You have yet to convince the working group that these are design
flaws in the
Thank you Art.
To clarify, I have heard from a contributor to the specification in question
who referred to LocalStorage himself as little more than a toy, expressing
his frustrations at the specification. It is well known that most LocalStorage
implementations do not support more than 10mb,
On 31 Mar 2011, at 10:07 PM, Shawn Wilsher wrote:
On 3/31/2011 11:47 AM, Joran Greef wrote:
Let those who introduced these design flaws be among the first to take
responsibility and fix them.
You aren't being constructive, and that's a surefire way to be ignored. You
have yet to convince
On Thursday, March 31, 2011 10:19 AM, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
On 3/30/11 2:01 PM, Eric Uhrhane wrote:
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Adrian Batemanadria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
Is there a reason for the current spec text?
I don't know the original rationale, but in the absence of any
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com wrote:
On Thursday, March 31, 2011 10:19 AM, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
On 3/30/11 2:01 PM, Eric Uhrhane wrote:
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Adrian Batemanadria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
Is there a reason for the current
Hi again,
I have in mind several extensions to the ApplicationCache that I think could
address some of the additional desirements from the web developement
community. I'll post them here because people seem to be more willing to
have a discussion on the topic here than over in whatwg.
1. Allow
From: jor...@google.com [mailto:jor...@google.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Orlow
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 11:36 AM
I can find a lot of stuff on collation, but not a lot about why it could not
be done in a library. Could you summerise the reasons why this needs to be
core functionality for
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11269
Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Currently there are no APIs in JavaScript to compare strings using
specific collations
We dont actually need this, just a mapping from UTF-16 string to a
sort-score (binary blob).
Its true that downloading the collation tables might take time, so we could
just provide:
var blob =
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12233
Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
37 matches
Mail list logo
