[Bug 14677] New: Hey, There! =D My name is Felipe. And I'm looking around this new tecnology. I'm really enjoying it.

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14677 Summary: Hey, There! =D My name is Felipe. And I'm looking around this new tecnology. I'm really enjoying it. Product: WebAppsWG Version: unspecified Platform: Other UR

[Bug 14677] Hey, There! =D My name is Felipe. And I'm looking around this new tecnology. I'm really enjoying it.

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14677 Simon Pieters changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 13786] Drop the charset parameter or made it non-conforming. Other MIME types introduced by this specification do not allow the charset parameter.

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13786 Anne changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|WONTFIX

[Bug 14199] IDBVersionChangeEvent still uses DOMString for version

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14199 Eliot Graff changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 14412] IDBFactorySync should have .cmp too

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14412 Eliot Graff changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 14488] [IDBObjectStore|IDBIndex].count description should specify optional argument behavior a little better

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14488 Eliot Graff changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 14384] "upgradeneeded" event should set request.readyState to DONE

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14384 Eliot Graff changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 14199] IDBVersionChangeEvent still uses DOMString for version

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14199 Ms2ger changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED CC|

Re: Spec changes for LCs and later maturity levels [Was: Re: RfC: LCWD of Web Socket API; comment deadline October 21]

On 2011-10-14 15:14, Julian Reschke wrote: On 2011-10-11 00:30, Ian Hickson wrote: On Sun, 9 Oct 2011, Arthur Barstow wrote: On 10/7/11 8:32 AM, ext Julian Reschke wrote: As far as I recall, we agreed in the IETF WG that parsing of web socket URIs should work exactly the same way as for any ot

Re: Spec changes for LCs and later maturity levels

On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:33:00 -0700, Julian Reschke wrote: So can anybody explain (1) why this text is in the spec, and (2) what it means? It just moved from the protocol to the API. It was in the protocol before: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-01#section-3

Re: Spec changes for LCs and later maturity levels

On 2011-11-02 17:39, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:33:00 -0700, Julian Reschke wrote: So can anybody explain (1) why this text is in the spec, and (2) what it means? It just moved from the protocol to the API. It was in the protocol before: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-

Re: [FileAPI] FileReader.abort() and File[Saver|Writer].abort have different behaviors

On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >>> >>> 1. Make "loadend" not fire in case a new load is started from >>> onabort/onload/onerror. Thus "loadend" and "loadstart" isn

Re: [File API] Calling requestFileSystem with bad filesystem type

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Mark Pilgrim wrote: > What should this do? > > requestFileSystem(2, 100, successCallback); // assume successCallback > is defined properly requestFileSystem doesn't throw, so you should get an errorCallback call. You haven't provided an errorCallback, so you shou

Re: Spec changes for LCs and later maturity levels

On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:49:08 -0700, Julian Reschke wrote: On 2011-11-02 17:39, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:33:00 -0700, Julian Reschke wrote: So can anybody explain (1) why this text is in the spec, and (2) what it means? It just moved from the protocol to the API. It w

Re: Spec changes for LCs and later maturity levels

On 2011-11-02 19:17, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:49:08 -0700, Julian Reschke wrote: On 2011-11-02 17:39, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:33:00 -0700, Julian Reschke wrote: So can anybody explain (1) why this text is in the spec, and (2) what it means? It

Re: Spec changes for LCs and later maturity levels

On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:32:30 -0700, Julian Reschke wrote: The mail thread that lead to the change starts here: I clicked through that thread and could not find anything where a decision was made and on what grounds. How

Re: Spec changes for LCs and later maturity levels

On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:59:14 -0700, Julian Reschke wrote: On 2011-11-02 19:46, Anne van Kesteren wrote: If you are confused about the terms, they are defined in HTML. But they aren't linked, as far as I can tell. It would be good if they were, and then we can review that text again. They

Re: Spec changes for LCs and later maturity levels

On 2011-11-02 19:46, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:32:30 -0700, Julian Reschke wrote: The mail thread that lead to the change starts here: I clicked through that thread and could not find anything where a dec

[Bug 14660] [Editorial] Clarification for CLOSING in Garbage Collection

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14660 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

Re: [FileAPI] FileReader.abort() and File[Saver|Writer].abort have different behaviors

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Eric U wrote: > On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: 1. Make "loadend" not fire in case a new load is started from onab

Re: [FileAPI] FileReader.abort() and File[Saver|Writer].abort have different behaviors

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Eric U wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote: On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > > 1. Make "l

Component Model f2f: Actionable things

You can see the minutes here: http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-webapps-minutes.html First of all, thank you all for coming and participating. It was exhausting, and we just ran out of time. Stupid time! There was also a great conversation post-meeting, but unfortunately no minutes :( Things to act o

CfC: publish a Candidate Recommendation of WebSockets API; deadline Nov 9

During the October 31 meeting [1], there was agreement to publish a Candidate Recommendation of the WebSockets API and this is a Call for Consensus to do so: http://dev.w3.org/html5/websockets/ The remaining open editorial bug [13700] will be fixed before publication. I propose the CR exit

"We just ran out of time ..." [Was: Re: Component Model f2f: Actionable things]

On 11/2/11 6:41 PM, ext Dimitri Glazkov wrote: You can see the minutes here: http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-webapps-minutes.html Thanks Dimitri. First of all, thank you all for coming and participating. That goes for me and Chaals too re Monday and Tuesday! It was exhausting, and we just ra