On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Jochen Eisinger joc...@chromium.orgwrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:19 PM, Elliott Sprehn espr...@chromium.orgwrote:
This seems like a badly designed API, constructors shouldn't have side
effects and not having show() means after calling close() the
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Jon Lee jon...@apple.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 2012, at 5:41 PM, John Gregg wrote:
3. Use static functions on the notification constructor for permissions
checks.
By moving them there, it allows us to remove window.webkitNotifications
and the NotificationCenter
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Jon Lee jon...@apple.com wrote:
Hi WebKit!
I am interested in refactoring the API for web notifications, and would
like your feedback. We are working on getting permission to join the Web
Notifications working group, but thought that while doing that I could
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Xan Lopez x...@gnome.org wrote:
Hi,
we are adding all the Notification related objects to the GTK+ DOM
bindings, and also adding the necessary APIs to WebKitGTK+ to interact
with the UA. One thing we have noticed is that although the
constructors for the
out existing behavior, not arguing for/against
the zip file format.
Dave
--
*From:* Sam Weinig sam.wei...@gmail.com
*To:* David Kilzer ddkil...@webkit.org
*Cc:* John Gregg john...@google.com; webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org; Adele
Peterson ad...@apple.com
*Sent:* Wed
will the directory structure and all the files therein be represented
in the form submission?
-Sam
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 3:17 PM, John Gregg john...@google.com wrote:
Hi WebKit,
I recently proposed adding directory upload support to HTML via a new
input attribute to whatwg@, and the discussion
I also have a patch (https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28930) that's
awaiting a resolution of this for desktop notifications. Does anyone object
to putting experimental in the name of the setting as a good solution?
-John
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Eric Seidel e...@webkit.org wrote:
I think that makes sense for now as well.
I expect we'll get to this sort of generic permissions system in the future,
but for the time being I am adding to my current patch some methods:
// internal methods implemented by the embedder
int
What's a good strategy for testing WebKit code that calls out to the
ChromeClient interface or some other abstract interface? I can't find
anything obvious in the codebase-- is there any way to mock out those calls
for unit tests?
Thanks,
-John
___
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
On May 22, 2009, at 10:19 AM, John Gregg wrote:
Sure. We have the following plan for how to handle opt-in:
- Use of the feature by script, if permission isn't granted to the origin,
should throw an exception
I circulated a proposal several weeks ago which specified a notifications
API for workers (desktop toasts), and the feedback was that (a) persistent
workers are still far away, (b) is a notifications api necessary given it's
basically a new window?, and (c) have we thought through the security
:
On Thu, 21 May 2009, John Gregg wrote:
On the security question, a substantial amount of thought has gone into
how to prevent unwanted popups (and in general how to control access to
HTML5 application features). We think user opt-in on an origin-basis is
the best policy and it's what we
) It appears that Notifications can be used for unwelcome advertising
spam, much as pop-up windows before the advent of browser pop-up blocking.
On Apr 30, 2009, at 2:05 PM, John Gregg wrote:
Hi WebKit,
I'm working on a Notifications API for Web Workers, with the idea that a
user agent could
Hi WebKit,
I'm working on a Notifications API for Web Workers, with the idea that a
user agent could receive these from script and route them in a
platform-appropriate user-configurable way (desktop HTML toasts, Growl
calls, status bar on mobile browsers, etc.). Permission controls would be
14 matches
Mail list logo
