Hello,
since when is obsolete the same as work in progress?
How does HTML4 (can be considered obsolete) the same as HTML5(in
progress)? It only means that new features are added to HTML5 not to
HTML 4 and any error in HTML 4 is ignored...
This discussion is about using word obsolete in simple
Hello
Just to be perfectly clear here...
I do not think we should phrase document statuses according to some
external needs, because in this case we may end up with phrasing fitting
Glenns needs, but it may not be fitting other legislatures or other
companies internal needs and then what?
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com wrote:
On Tuesday, January 24, 2012 2:46 AM Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com
wrote:
On Friday, January 20, 2012 2:31 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012
Hi All - I just chatted with Ms2ger in IRC about his proposal [1].
Ms2ger will submit proposed text to the list so we should probably hold
off on additional comments until we get that proposal.
(I agree rescinding is not what we want to do for these specs.)
-AB
[1]
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
What happens if a value higher up in the keyPath is not an object:
store =
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Hi All,
Joshua reminded me of another thing which is undefined in the
specification, which is key generation. Here's the details of how we
do it in Firefox:
The key generator for each objectStore starts at 1 and is increased by
1 every time a new key is generated.
Each objectStore has its own
On Wednesday, January 25, 2012 1:47 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Israel Hilerio
isra...@microsoft.com
wrote:
On Tuesday, January 24, 2012 2:46 AM Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Israel Hilerio
isra...@microsoft.com
wrote:
On
On Wednesday, January 25, 2012 12:25 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Hi All,
Joshua reminded me of another thing which is undefined in the specification,
which is key generation. Here's the details of how we do it in Firefox:
The key generator for each objectStore starts at 1 and is increased by
Should we allow the creation of READ_ONLY or READ_WRITE transactions inside the
oncomplete event handler of a VERSION_CHANGE transaction?
IE allows this behavior today. However, we noticed that FF's nightly doesn't.
In either case, we should define this behavior in the spec.
Israel
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15717
Summary: Adding TransactionInactiveError to
IDBObjectStore.count and IDBIndex.count
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: PC
OS/Version: All
Status:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15719
Summary: Under section Disk Space, there seems to be a word
missing in the sentence (see part in parens): User
agents should guard against sites storing data (under
the
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com wrote:
Should we allow the creation of READ_ONLY or READ_WRITE transactions inside
the oncomplete event handler of a VERSION_CHANGE transaction?
IE allows this behavior today. However, we noticed that FF's nightly doesn't.
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.comwrote:
On Wednesday, January 25, 2012 12:25 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Hi All,
Joshua reminded me of another thing which is undefined in the
specification,
which is key generation. Here's the details of how we do it in
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15721
Summary: [IndexedDB] Specify when calling transaction() should
throw due to being called too early
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: PC
OS/Version: All
On Wednesday, January 25, 2012 4:26 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com
wrote:
Should we allow the creation of READ_ONLY or READ_WRITE transactions
inside the oncomplete event handler of a VERSION_CHANGE transaction?
IE allows this
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com wrote:
On Wednesday, January 25, 2012 4:26 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com
wrote:
Should we allow the creation of READ_ONLY or READ_WRITE transactions
inside
17 matches
Mail list logo
