Hi,
It looks like IE10 supports File.slice() using the new spec.
Is it safe to use the new File.slice() spec, or should IE be using a vendor
prefix like Firefox and Chrome are currently doing.
Thanks,
Andy
On 2012-06-18 15:57, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Lachlan has made some changes to the Selectors API Level 1 spec (last
published as a CR) and we consider the changes sufficient to require the
spec be published as a Working Draft (see the [1] thread). As such, this
is a Call for Consensus to publish a
On 2012-06-18 15:41, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Lachlan would like to publish a new Working Draft of the Selectors API
Level 2 spec and this is a Call for Consensus to do so using the
following Editor's Draft as the basis
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api2/.
If you have any comments or
I think I'm not understanding the implications of your argument.
You're making a principled argument about future pitfalls. Can you
help me get my head around it by way of example?
Perhaps:
-pitfalls developers fall into
-further dangerous points along the slippery slope you think this
opens up
What should the behavior be in the following calls?
db.createObjectStore('storename', null);
db.createObjectStore('storename', undefined);
store.createIndex('storename', 'keypath', null);
store.createIndex('storename', 'keypath', undefined);
As a reminder, the IDL for the final argument in both
On 6/26/12 12:59 PM, Joshua Bell wrote:
All that said, this seems like a common pattern. Is there something in
WebIDL I'm not seeing that implies this behavior for dictionaries already?
No, but there have definitely been proposals (from me and Jonas at
least) that WebIDL treat null,
On 06/26/2012 07:15 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 6/26/12 12:59 PM, Joshua Bell wrote:
All that said, this seems like a common pattern. Is there something in
WebIDL I'm not seeing that implies this behavior for dictionaries
already?
No, but there have definitely been proposals (from me and
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17125
Arun a...@mozilla.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17125
Max Lohrmann p...@wickenrode.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Hi All - Arun is back to actively editing the File API spec and this is
a Call for Consensus to publish a new WD of the spec. Please note that
Arun will be committing some changes during this CfC and that the ED
does not yet use the WD template:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16726
Arun a...@mozilla.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
Silly question but why not specify the template element as if it's contents
were PCDATA, and the document fragment is the value. Then this whole
thing isn't really any different than a textarea.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Rafael Weinstein rafa...@google.comwrote:
I think I'm not
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Elliott Sprehn espr...@gmail.com wrote:
Silly question but why not specify the template element as if it's contents
were PCDATA, and the document fragment is the value. Then this whole thing
isn't really any different than a textarea.
Because you can't nest
Hmm, I might be in agreement with Henri then. Having all these parallel
trees in the DOM is getting kind of out of control. Now there's the shadow
DOM trees on every node, and also this nested tree of document fragments
from template. There's a lot of simplicity in the DOM design that's lost
from
(Please bottompost! Being a Googler teaches you bad email habits. ^_^)
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Elliott Sprehn espr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Elliott Sprehn espr...@gmail.com wrote:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17609
Summary: [IndexedDB] Events fired after transaction abort
should not set active flag
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nlwrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:52 PM, Olli Pettay olli.pet...@helsinki.fi
wrote:
end-of-microtask or end-of-task everywhere. And yes, some parsing /
networking details may unfortunately be exposed,
but in a way which
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi wrote:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:48 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Does anyone object to me adding template, content, and shadow to
the HTML parser spec next week?
I don't object to adding them if they create normal
18 matches
Mail list logo
