On 7/6/11 10:13 PM, Cameron McCormack wrote:
Hi Arun,
Adrian Bateman:
The spec doesn't seem to state this explicitly and I can't tell if
there is supposed to be an implicit requirement from WebIDL. Perhaps
the expectation is that this falls into the error condition and
should set readyState to
On 7/7/2011 6:38 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Rafael Weinstein wrote:
So yes, my proposal only solves the usecase outside mutation handlers.
However this is arguably better than never solving the use case as in
your proposal. I'm sure people will end up writing buggy
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Israel Hilerio wrote:
> On Thursday, July 07, 2011 1:46 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Jeremy Orlow
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Israel Hilerio
>> >
>> >> We believe an error should be thrown because of the violation
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Rafael Weinstein wrote:
>> So yes, my proposal only solves the usecase outside mutation handlers.
>> However this is arguably better than never solving the use case as in
>> your proposal. I'm sure people will end up writing buggy code, but
>> ideally this will be f
On Thursday, July 07, 2011 1:46 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Jeremy Orlow
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Israel Hilerio
> >
> >> We believe an error should be thrown because of the violation of the
> >> unique value index constraint and the error code
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Eliot Graff wrote:
> Done and pushed to Mercurial.
>
> Updated sync and async versions of openCursor on ObjectStore and Index as
> follows:
> made type of 'range' equal to any
> made 'range' nullable
I think you missed updating one of the cursor opening functions
Done and pushed to Mercurial.
Updated sync and async versions of openCursor on ObjectStore and Index as
follows:
made type of 'range' equal to any
made 'range' nullable
Eliot
> -Original Message-
> From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-
> requ...@w3.org] On Behalf O
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Rafael Weinstein wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire "before mutati
Olli Pettay wrote:
On 07/08/2011 01:43 AM, John J Barton wrote:
Rafael Weinstein wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking
wrote:
I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire "before mutation
notifications" is doable.
I concu
The latest draft of the WebAppSec charter includes a secure cross-domain
framing mechanism as a distinct deliverable from the CSP, it's relation is only
in proposing re-use of same browsing context capability grammar as CSP. So
retaining option #1 is not in conflict with dropping frame-ancestor
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:43 PM, John J Barton
wrote:
In short before spending more time on this, I'd like to see a
comprehensive proposal, including a description of the use cases it
solves and how it solves them. I strongly doubt that this approach is
practical.
>
> There
On Thursday, July 07, 2011 3:55 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Adrian Bateman wrote:
> > 12917 - "deflate-stream" should be an optional extension when establishing
> > a connection
> > Resolved, WontFix
> > MICROSOFT PROPOSAL: We strongly disagree with the API spec overr
On 07/08/2011 01:43 AM, John J Barton wrote:
Rafael Weinstein wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire "before mutation
notifications" is doable.
I concur. Being synchronou
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Adrian Bateman wrote:
> We're keen to resolve the remaining issues with the WebSockets API and have a
> timetable
> to get to Candidate Recommendation. From informal conversations we've had, we
> believe
> other browser vendors share this goal. I think the current
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:43 PM, John J Barton
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>>
>>>
I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire "before mutation
notifications" is doable.
>>> I
On 7/7/11 6:28 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
In gecko you can for example use the nsIMutationObserver notification
to implement this.
Maybe you can, and maybe not. Those fire at "unsafe" times and are
limited in what you can do from them. Arbitrary debugging doesn't fit
the bill.
But yes, in g
Rafael Weinstein wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire "before mutation
notifications" is doable.
I concur. Being synchronous was one of the reasons why t
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:21 PM, John J Barton
wrote:
> Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> We are definitely
>> short on use cases for mutation events in general which is a problem.
>>
>
> 1. Graphical breakpoints. The user marks some DOM element or attribute to
> trigger break. The debugger inserts mutat
For both IDBCursor.continue and IDBCursorSync.continue,
Added one paragraph to the description:
If you call this method multiple times, the cursor throws a NOT_ALLOWED_ERR
exception and does not continue. If you catch the error you can then iterate
through the cursor normally.
Standardized the
My sense from talking with folks is that there isn't a lot of
enthusiasm for supporting this use case in CSP at the present time.
We're trying to concentrate on a core set of directives for the first
iteration. If it helps reduce complexity, you might consider dropping
option (1) for the time bein
Jonas Sicking wrote:
We are definitely
short on use cases for mutation events in general which is a problem.
1. Graphical breakpoints. The user marks some DOM element or attribute
to trigger break. The debugger inserts mutation listeners to watch for
the event that causes that element/attri
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Rafael Weinstein wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire "before mutation
>>> notifications" is doable.
>>
>> I concur. Being sync
We're keen to resolve the remaining issues with the WebSockets API and have a
timetable
to get to Candidate Recommendation. From informal conversations we've had, we
believe
other browser vendors share this goal. I think the current WebSocket API is
feature
complete and meets the requirements fo
On 07/08/2011 12:29 AM, Olli Pettay wrote:
On 07/07/2011 10:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Hi All,
I've finally caught up on all the emails in this thread. Here are my
impressions so far.
I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire "before mutation
notifications" is doable. Trying to make all
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13180
Summary: [Editorial] Causes that lead to failing the WebSocket
connection, which results in an error event, should be
more clearly specified
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unsp
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire "before mutation
>> notifications" is doable.
>
> I concur. Being synchronous was one of the reasons why the existing DOM
> mutation ev
On 07/07/2011 10:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Hi All,
I've finally caught up on all the emails in this thread. Here are my
impressions so far.
I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire "before mutation
notifications" is doable. Trying to make all APIs that would, or
could, mutate the DOM th
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> Right. But on the other hand, if this code were to run inside a mutation
> observer, it won't work in your proposal either. So the questions is
> whether writing a function that depends on state updated by the mutation
> observer without a
(Warning, this is cross-posted widely. One of the lists is the IETF websec
mailing list, to which the IETF NOTE WELL applies:
http://www.ietf.org/about/note-well.html)
Folks,
there appear to be at least three possible specifications addressing this
space, with similar but different designs:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>
> I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire "before mutation
> notifications" is doable.
I concur. Being synchronous was one of the reasons why the existing DOM
mutation events don't work. We shouldn't adding yet-another synchronous
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Israel Hilerio
>> We believe an error should be thrown because of the violation of the
>> unique value index constraint and the error code should be set to
>> CONSTRAINT_ERR. What do you think?
>
> IIRC, we de
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Israel Hilerio wrote:
> What is the expected behavior when calling update() in a cursor index that
> requires unique values. Firefox allows the update, even when it results in a
> duplicate value. Chrome throws an error event with the code set to
> UNKNOWN_ERR
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> It's a pain since it forces us to try to coordinate codes across
>> multiple specifications, working groups and standards organizations.
>
> Anything that allows us to _not_ coordinate is an epic d
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13178
Summary: binaryType should be immutable after connection is
established
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>
> It's a pain since it forces us to try to coordinate codes across
> multiple specifications, working groups and standards organizations.
Anything that allows us to _not_ coordinate is an epic disaster, IMHO.
We absolutely should be coordinating. How el
Microsoft supports publishing a Last Call working draft of the Web IDL spec.
We believe that the spec is feature complete and meets the requirements below.
While we have a few reservations about Exceptions and share some of the concerns
voiced in the separate thread on that topic, we believe that c
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
> Sorry if these have all been discussed before. I just read the File API for
> the first time and 2 random questions popped in my head.
> 1) If I'm using readAsText with a particular encoding and the data in the
> file is not actually in t
Hi All,
I've finally caught up on all the emails in this thread. Here are my
impressions so far.
I don't think John J Barton's proposal to fire "before mutation
notifications" is doable. Trying to make all APIs that would, or
could, mutate the DOM throw or otherwise fail would be much too
complex
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> It's a pain since it forces us to try to coordinate codes across
> multiple specifications, working groups and standards organizations.
> So far this has failed resulting in multiple specifications defining
> their own exception types with ove
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:04 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Jul 2011, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
>>
>> The thing I don't like about this proposal is that it encourages authors
>> to use "e instanceof IndexSizeError" or similar. This will work 98% of
>> the time and then fail in an extremely mysteriou
On Jul 7, 2011, at 10:09 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
>> Gecko is buggy if it is using the dynamic scope. Please file that bug and
>> cc: me.
>
> Gecko says the exception is an instanceof the DOMException object that
> corresponds to *any* window
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
> Gecko is buggy if it is using the dynamic scope. Please file that bug and cc:
> me.
Gecko says the exception is an instanceof the DOMException object that
corresponds to *any* window. So e instanceof window1.DOMException and
also e instanceo
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13172
Summary: The definition for [MessageEvent] is missing.
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: Other
URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#top
OS/Versio
43 matches
Mail list logo
