On Dec 14, 2009, at 3:06 PM, ext Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
On Dec 3, 2009, at 10:02 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
Right now, there's a no for atomicity, concurrency-error-free
operation, etc. I think this at least deserves a * that explains
this is only a problem with browsers that have multiple event l
On Dec 3, 2009, at 10:02 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
Right now, there's a no for atomicity, concurrency-error-free
operation, etc. I think this at least deserves a * that explains
this is only a problem with browsers that have multiple event loops
and there is a solution that's spec'ed but
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
>
> On Dec 3, 2009, at 9:19 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
>
> Thanks Art and Nikunj!
>
> Overall, I think it looks great. There are a few things I'd suggest we
> change for WebStorage:
>
> StorageEvents should be mentioned. They're actually one of
On Dec 3, 2009, at 9:19 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
Thanks Art and Nikunj!
Overall, I think it looks great. There are a few things I'd suggest
we change for WebStorage:
StorageEvents should be mentioned. They're actually one of the
greatest strengths of the WebStorage API.
You are right.
Thanks Art and Nikunj!
Overall, I think it looks great. There are a few things I'd suggest we
change for WebStorage:
StorageEvents should be mentioned. They're actually one of the greatest
strengths of the WebStorage API.
Right now, there's a no for atomicity, concurrency-error-free operation,
A few weeks ago, WebApps' was asked "to rationalize and explain how
the [various Database-related] APIs fit together".
Thanks to some good work by Nikunj, we now have a wiki for this purpose:
[[
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/Database
The purpose of this document is to provide a short su
