Re: Model-driven Views

2011-05-02 Thread Garrett Smith
On 5/2/11, Rafael Weinstein wrote: > Apologies. I feel like I have failed to properly contextualize this issue. > > Let me back up and see if I can't help create a different frame of > reference. This email is already too long so I've avoided examples. > Please let me know what isn't apparent and

Re: Model-driven Views

2011-05-02 Thread Rafael Weinstein
Apologies. I feel like I have failed to properly contextualize this issue. Let me back up and see if I can't help create a different frame of reference. This email is already too long so I've avoided examples. Please let me know what isn't apparent and I'll explain further. 1) Imperative templat

Re: [Indexeddb} Bug # 9653 - nullable violations on parameters

2011-05-02 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Israel Hilerio wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >> Excellent! I think that should mean that no changes are needed to the >> IndexedDB spec at all. I can't think of any instances where we use specific >> interface names while still acce

Re: paste events and HTML support - interest in exposing a DOM tree?

2011-05-02 Thread João Eiras
On , Hallvord R. M. Steen wrote: Hi, a question related to the evolving draft on http://www.w3.org/TR/clipboard-apis/ (which actually is slightly better styled on http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/clipops/clipops.html - I should figure out why ;-)) We want to enable some sort of access to HTML cod

Re: [widgets] Dig Sig spec

2011-05-02 Thread timeless
It's pretty much impossible for me to figure out which things are new or which i've missed in previous rounds. (It's also possible that I didn't review this spec, in which case, I'm sorry.) I don't believe these comments significantly affect the document, i.e. they're mostly editorial, although som

Re: paste events and HTML support - interest in exposing a DOM tree?

2011-05-02 Thread Paul Libbrecht
Hallvord, Le 2 mai 2011 à 09:00, Hallvord R. M. Steen a écrit : >> I am not at all against your proposal but I tend to see two reasons >> "against" it: >> - I expect mostly the server to be providing the HTML, the javascript code >> does probably not need to process it further (they trust each

RE: [Indexeddb} Bug # 9653 - nullable violations on parameters

2011-05-02 Thread Israel Hilerio
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > Excellent! I think that should mean that no changes are needed to the > IndexedDB spec at all. I can't think of any instances where we use specific > interface names while still accepting null values. > > / Jonas This implies the bug can be

Re: paste events and HTML support - interest in exposing a DOM tree?

2011-05-02 Thread Frederico Caldeira Knabben
I see this as a possibly useful feature, even if it may not bring a sensible difference for CKEditor. In CKEditor we do clipboard data manipulation through the following steps: 1. Take the data string and send it to the browser, so it can clean up things a bit (we set innerHTML for a ). 2.

Re: [IndexedDB] Closing on bug 9903 (collations)

2011-05-02 Thread Aryeh Gregor
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Keean Schupke wrote: > As long as we have a binary mode I am happy. Something I didn't think to mention: what exactly is "binary mode" for DOMStrings? I guess it means you encode as big-endian UTF-16, then sort bytewise? This is kind of evil, but it matches what

[indexeddb] result attribute for IDBRequest is set to undefined when calling IDBObjectStore.clear()

2011-05-02 Thread Israel Hilerio
After calling the clear() method on IDBObjectStore, the result of the IDBRequest is set to undefined according to the "steps for clearing an object store". However, the result property in IDBRequest says that the result value is undefined when the request results in an error: "This is undefined

Re: Proposal for a web application descriptor

2011-05-02 Thread Glenn Maynard
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 4:04 AM, Simon Heckmann wrote: > There is a new version of the proposal out: > http://www.simonheckmann.de/proposal/draft2 > This gets problematic when a browser has to ask for several permissions at > the same time. Figure 1 illustrates this behaviour as seen in Google Ch

Re: [widgets] Dig Sig spec

2011-05-02 Thread Marcos Caceres
On Friday, April 29, 2011 at 8:19 PM, frederick.hir...@nokia.com wrote: > Marcos > > I'd suggest you first send an email with the top 10 substantive changes to > the list, e.g. which algorithms change from mandatory to optional or optional > to mandatory etc, which processing rules you are re

Re: [workers] Processing comments from 10-Mar-2011 LCWD

2011-05-02 Thread Arthur Barstow
Hi Tab, All - can you Tab, or someone else, commit to processing the comments and bugs for the Workers LCWD? Given Hixie's bug list [1], perhaps we shouldn't wait for him. -Art [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011AprJun/0385.html On Apr/28/2011 1:35 PM, ext Arthur Barst

public-webapps@w3.org

2011-05-02 Thread Arthur Barstow
Marcos, All - re processing comments submitted against the 22-Mar-2011 P&C LCWD, FYI, below are the comments I noted. Are there any other comments, bugs, etc. that need to be considered? -AB Original Message Subject: [widgets] Reminder: Last Call Working Draft of Widgets P&C

Re: paste events and HTML support - interest in exposing a DOM tree?

2011-05-02 Thread Benjamin Poulain
On 05/02/2011 04:50 AM, ext Hallvord R. M. Steen wrote: event.clipboardData.getDocumentFragment() which would return a parsed and when applicable sanitized view of any markup the implementation supports from the clipboard. Rich text editors could now use normal DOM methods to dig through the con

Re: [IndexedDB] Closing on bug 9903 (collations)

2011-05-02 Thread Keean Schupke
On Sunday, 1 May 2011, Aryeh Gregor wrote: > On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >> I agree that we will eventually want to standardize the set of allowed >> collations. Similarly to how we'll want to standardize on one set of >> charset encodings supported. However I don't thin

Re: Proposal for a web application descriptor

2011-05-02 Thread Simon Heckmann
Am 02.05.2011 um 10:28 schrieb Charles McCathieNevile: > On Mon, 02 May 2011 10:04:58 +0200, Simon Heckmann > wrote: > >> There is a new version of the proposal out: >> http://www.simonheckmann.de/proposal/draft2 > > You're thinking along very similar lines to the way we are thinking inside

Re: Proposal for a web application descriptor

2011-05-02 Thread Charles McCathieNevile
On Mon, 02 May 2011 10:04:58 +0200, Simon Heckmann wrote: There is a new version of the proposal out: http://www.simonheckmann.de/proposal/draft2 You're thinking along very similar lines to the way we are thinking inside Opera about this problem, in terms of UI. However, I'm not so sur

Re: Proposal for a web application descriptor

2011-05-02 Thread Simon Heckmann
There is a new version of the proposal out: http://www.simonheckmann.de/proposal/draft2 Am 29.04.2011 um 15:33 schrieb Simon Heckmann: > Hello everyone, > > I have read a lot in the last month about the future of html and web > applications and I am very impressed by the progress this makes.

Proposal for a web application descriptor

2011-05-02 Thread Simon Heckmann
Hello everyone, I have read a lot in the last month about the future of html and web applications and I am very impressed by the progress this makes. However, I have come across some thing that annoys me: Permissions. I know they are important and I know they are needed but currently I find th

Proposal for a web application descriptor

2011-05-02 Thread Simon Heckmann
Hello everyone, I have read a lot in the last month about the future of html and web applications and I am very impressed by the progress this makes. However, I have come across some thing that annoys me: Permissions. I know they are important and I know they are needed but currently I find th