Re: [whatwg] Web Storage, Editor's Draft 20 August 2010 - Request for enhancement

2010-09-14 Thread Eric Uhrhane
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Jim Williams wrote: > I see localStorage and sessionStorage as a chance to fix things that weren't > so good with cookies.  So I'd be interested to know what factors actively > promote the failure to come up with a common browser-independent interface > for localSt

Re: [whatwg] Web Storage, Editor's Draft 20 August 2010 - Request for enhancement

2010-09-14 Thread Jim Williams
The application I'm mainly thinking of is courseware, and it indeed does need to obtain server-side copies of students' work.  But, academia being what it is, these systems tend to get overused and bog down and crash, inflicting furor and anguish on students and professors alike.  An ability fo

Re: [whatwg] Web Storage, Editor's Draft 20 August 2010 - Request for enhancement

2010-09-14 Thread Jim Williams
I see localStorage and sessionStorage as a chance to fix things that weren't so good with cookies.  So I'd be interested to know what factors actively promote the failure to come up with a common browser-independent interface for localStorage.  Do browser builders actually have something to gai

Re: [whatwg] ArrayBuffer and ByteArray questions

2010-09-14 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 21:13:46 +0200, Jian Li wrote: Yes, we only need to add it to BlobBuilder so that it can be applied to both FileReader, XHR.send and any other place that take the blob. send() takes everything straight as well. BlobBuilder should not be a prerequisite to transmit bytes,

Re: [whatwg] ArrayBuffer and ByteArray questions

2010-09-14 Thread Jian Li
Yes, we only need to add it to BlobBuilder so that it can be applied to both FileReader, XHR.send and any other place that take the blob. On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Eric Uhrhane wrote: > On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Jian Li wrote: > > Hi, > > Several specs, like File API and WebGL, us

Re: [whatwg] Video with MIME type application/octet-stream

2010-09-14 Thread Roger Hågensen
On 2010-09-14 08:37, Julian Reschke wrote: On 13.09.2010 23:51, Aryeh Gregor wrote: ... And for heavens sake, do not specify any sniffing as "official". Instead, explicitly specify all sniffing as UA specific and possibly suggest that UAs should inform the user that content is broken and the c

Re: [whatwg] Video with MIME type application/octet-stream

2010-09-14 Thread Roger Hågensen
On 2010-09-13 15:55, Nils Dagsson Moskopp wrote: Mikko Rantalainen schrieb am Mon, 13 Sep 2010 16:03:27 +0300: […] Basically, this sounds like all the issues of BOM for all binary files. And why do we need this? Because web servers are not behaving correctly and are sending incorrect Conten

Re: [whatwg] Web Storage, Editor's Draft 20 August 2010 - Request for enhancement

2010-09-14 Thread Eric Uhrhane
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Jim Williams wrote: > I tried out local storage, used it to save the contents of a > content-editable passage.  It worked great in Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and > MSIE.  Only one problem:  Every time I switched browsers, I had to start > over with the original unedi

Re: [whatwg] Web Storage, Editor's Draft 20 August 2010 - Request for enhancement

2010-09-14 Thread Tab Atkins Jr.
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Jim Williams wrote: > I tried out local storage, used it to save the contents of a > content-editable passage.  It worked great in Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and > MSIE.  Only one problem:  Every time I switched browsers, I had to start > over with the original unedi

Re: [whatwg] Suggested enhancement for initialization of mouse events

2010-09-14 Thread Jim Williams
Interesting points.  Possibly, my proposed cure is worse than the original problem. Jim Williams Matthew Kaufman wrote: On 9/14/2010 5:00 AM, Ashley Sheridan wrote: I'm not entirely sure that this is possible. As far as I know (and I could be very wrong) the events start

Re: [whatwg] Suggested enhancement for initialization of mouse events

2010-09-14 Thread Matthew Kaufman
On 9/14/2010 5:00 AM, Ashley Sheridan wrote: I'm not entirely sure that this is possible. As far as I know (and I could be very wrong) the events start with the OS and work their way down the system to eventually reach the Javascript through a user agent, so if the mouse has moved off of the

Re: [whatwg] "Media Accessibility Checklist", please review and comment (relates to "timed tracks" discussion)

2010-09-14 Thread Michael(tm) Smith
"Michael(tm) Smith" , 2010-09-14 19:26 +0900: > So if you can make time to review it, comments and questions on it > are welcome anywhere; for example, as a reply to this message, or > as entries on the related Talk page here: > > http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Talk:Media_Accessibility_Chec

Re: [whatwg] Suggested enhancement for initialization of mouse events

2010-09-14 Thread Ashley Sheridan
On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 07:51 -0400, Jim Williams wrote: > Currently, there appears to be no way of sensing the location of the > mouse cursor without waiting for user-initiated events. The problem > is that there is no way to fill in the real current values for many of > the parameters when execut

[whatwg] Web Storage, Editor's Draft 20 August 2010 - Request for enhancement

2010-09-14 Thread Jim Williams
I tried out local storage, used it to save the contents of a content-editable passage.  It worked great in Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and MSIE.  Only one problem:  Every time I switched browsers, I had to start over with the original unedited passage.  So I have two requests. 1.  I would like th

[whatwg] "Media Accessibility Checklist", please review and comment (relates to "timed tracks" discussion)

2010-09-14 Thread Michael(tm) Smith
The following document has recently been made available for review: http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Accessibility_Checklist It is the product of quite a lot of discussion and work, by a number of people, toward the goal of identifying specific needs of users with disabilities for alter

Re: [whatwg] Timed tracks: feedback compendium

2010-09-14 Thread Philip Jägenstedt
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:30:03 +0200, Simon Pieters wrote: On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:11:16 +0200, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: The point of a header is that browsers can identify WebSRT files and not keep parsing through a 100GB movie file, I don't think we should break SRT compat for this. I do

Re: [whatwg] Timed tracks: feedback compendium

2010-09-14 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:33:42 +0200, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: I don't know, do we need comments anywhere? Putting them between cues might work, but is that useful? Apart from text/plain I cannot think of a "web" text format that does not have comments. Validators should probably recommend a

Re: [whatwg] Timed tracks: feedback compendium

2010-09-14 Thread Philip Jägenstedt
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:27:28 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 15:50:09 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer < silviapfeiff...@gmail.com> wrote: Further, with your analysis, it seemed like the following could be acceptable for

Re: [whatwg] Timed tracks: feedback compendium

2010-09-14 Thread Simon Pieters
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:11:16 +0200, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: The point of a header is that browsers can identify WebSRT files and not keep parsing through a 100GB movie file, I don't think we should break SRT compat for this. I don't think this is a problem at all. We already have this s

Re: [whatwg] Timed tracks: feedback compendium

2010-09-14 Thread Silvia Pfeiffer
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 15:50:09 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer < > silviapfeiff...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Philip Jägenstedt > >wrote: >> >> On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 01:27:48 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer < >>> silviapfeiff...@g

Re: [whatwg] Timed tracks: feedback compendium

2010-09-14 Thread Philip Jägenstedt
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 15:50:09 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 01:27:48 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer < silviapfeiff...@gmail.com> wrote: On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Philip Jägenstedt >wrote: On Thu, 09 Sep 2010