On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 20:32:33 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
There of course places where XHR is used and there is no
cross-sitescripting security needed
1) in a browser extension
2) in node.js code trusted apps
These aren't the Web,
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Mike Taylor mi...@opera.com wrote:
Yes, synthetic keypress have multiple problems--which is why we all use
libraries to not have to author them by hand.
Regardless, this doesn't change the fact that window.URL.createObjectURL(*
*file, true) is more opaque
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 5:59 AM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Mike Taylor mi...@opera.com wrote:
Yes, synthetic keypress have multiple problems--which is why we all use
libraries to not have to author them by hand.
Regardless, this doesn't change the
(Sorry for top-posting; I'm dealing with a sub-par mail client due to ongoing
mail server issues).
Tab:
You've handsomely made the point to replace the existing optional boolean with
a dictionary (which is what we do for the Blob constructor). I suppose I
thought the dictionary was overkill
Glenn points out that the issues raised in this thread weren't totally taken to
the mat. Once again, sorry for bad nesting in my response:
We can certainly talk through some of these issues, though the
amount
of
work we'd need to do doesn't go down. Our proposal is a small
change
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Adrian Bateman wrote:
I will wait to see the proposed text but in the meantime point out that
Microsoft has regulatory obligations that require us to direct customers
to these specifications until such time as there is a completed
Recommendation that succeeds them. As
I do not think you should be in the business of brute-forcing authors
into converting their applications to use async XHRs. As far as I
understand it, it is the application's UI that may be unresponsive
during a sync XHR. In that case it should be the app. authors choice
which to use. If it is the
2012/1/26 Mark Callow callow_m...@hicorp.co.jp:
I do not think you should be in the business of brute-forcing authors into
converting their applications to use async XHRs. As far as I understand it,
it is the application's UI that may be unresponsive during a sync XHR. In
that case it should
On 1/26/12 1:21 PM, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
Greetings public-webapps,
I'd like to encourage some review of File API:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/
You can send comments to this listserv, or file a bug, since this spec. now has
a Bugzilla component.
Here are some notable changes:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.comwrote:
...yes? It can be. I made the general argument above - if an
optional argument has *no relation* to expected future optional
arguments, then it shouldn't be an optional argument at all, it should
be a keyword
On 1/26/12 1:21 PM, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
Yes, this is nicer. There's no way to create a new File object: I
can't
set name and lastModifiedDate.
These can't be done, but there is FileSaver/FileWriter).
There's an error in the blob constructor code. It uses object
notation
for the
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Arun Ranganathan aranganat...@mozilla.com
wrote:
I'd expect making this fully interoperable to be a complex problem. It
makes fetch order significant, where it currently isn't.
For example, if two images have their @src attribute set to a URL one
after
On 1/27/12 3:58 PM, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
On 1/26/12 1:21 PM, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
Yes, this is nicer. There's no way to create a new File object: I
can't
set name and lastModifiedDate.
These can't be done, but there is FileSaver/FileWriter).
It's a minor thing, but there are items
The spec for Pointer Lock has been moved[1]. It was also renamed from the
previous Mouse Lock.
While landing the initial implementation in WebKit Darin Fisher pointed out
that the Fullscreen API[2] had strong overlap with the pointer lock spec in
dealing with entering and exiting a state
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Darin Fisher da...@chromium.org wrote:
I'm not sure what a concrete proposal would look like. Maybe
Element.URL.createObjectURL or just Element.createObjectURL?
Wouldn't returning an object (which can be GCd) be a better solution?
- Kyle
15 matches
Mail list logo
