On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Andrew Wilson atwil...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
Chrome currently does not seem to do any of this particularly well,
but when you click a notification from say the notification center
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Andrew Wilson atwil...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
This seems problematic for shared workers as it is not clear which
window the notification would be for. For normal workers this seems
like less
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
n...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
The simplest solution (by far) would be to stop storing “information
that is used by JS” in a hash. Even Internet Explorer has pushState()
these days: http://caniuse.com/history.
Applying private
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 10:10 PM, Thomas Fétiveau tfetiv...@tokom.fr wrote:
My point is : Shouldn't the DOMImplementation.createHTMLDocument() just
create a Document object with content type set to text/html and nothing
else ?
createHTMLDocument() is a convenience method. We don't really
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
You could do this today anyway, manually, right? (That is, the page could
provide an API that it vends as a port that just proxies the notification
API.) How necessary is it to do this natively?
Not entirely clear yet. It would
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
2) Define a method on Navigator, getNotifications(), that returns a
Future which is resolved with an array of Notification objects. Once
the Future is resolved, a task is queued to fire a click event on the
appropriate
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Rik Cabanier caban...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:23 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
1. That assumes tainted cross-origin as a fetching mode.
http://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-request-mode Whereas you assume
it uses CORS.
What
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Rik Cabanier caban...@gmail.com wrote:
Reading the Origin spec [1]:
For fonts:
The origin of a downloadable Web font is an alias to the origin of the
absolute URL used to obtain the font (after any redirects). [CSSFONTS]
The origin of a locally installed
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
The text at
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-fonts/#default-same-origin-restriction and
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-fonts/#allowing-cross-origin-font-loading
predates your introduction of the mode values, but clearly corresponds
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 4:48 PM, alonn alonis...@gmail.com wrote:
1. Having a way to check for the current permission without initiating a
new Notification object first. something like webkit has (I'm not sure it's
not deprecated) window.webkitNotification.checkPermission()
I saw this isn't in
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Rik Cabanier caban...@gmail.com wrote:
Does anyone know what this is? It seems to us, that if the font is
available to CSS (depending on if the browser supports CORS for fonts), it
should be fine to call measureText.
In that case the font's origin would be the
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Elliott Sprehn espr...@chromium.org wrote:
fwiw WebKit (and Blink) implement this through CSS inheritance since you
need to know the lang for all kinds of things and walking up the DOM
repeatedly would be expensive.
-webkit-locale is inherited by default and
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
Interesting. Certainly at the point when Gecko implemented the current
behavior I recall it matching the spec...
Changed in: http://html5.org/r/4841
Context:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 6:49 AM, Peter Occil pocci...@gmail.com wrote:
While a language attribute on Node may also be useful to
HTML+RDFa processors in JavaScript, I have no plans to implement
such a processor in JavaScript, though.
There's https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16489
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Peter Occil pocci...@gmail.com wrote:
Why is the replacement encoding called replacement and not x-replacement?
As far as I can tell there is no character set or alias called replacement
in the IANA character
sets list, so accordingly, the replacement
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Simon Pieters sim...@opera.com wrote:
My knee-jerk reaction is to tie it to MessagePorts, so that if you make a
notification on a port, the window that owns the entangled port displays the
notification. If there isn't an entangled port or if it's not in a window,
There are a couple of scenarios http://notifications.spec.whatwg.org/
does not address at the moment.
A) User navigates to chat site. Chat site creates a notification from
a chat with P while the user does something else. User closes chat
site and then navigates to chat site at a later point.
B)
There is some interest in exposing Notification objects in a worker so
creating one does not require a postMessage() roundtrip.
This seems problematic for shared workers as it is not clear which
window the notification would be for. For normal workers this seems
like less of a concern.
If we go
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:46 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
The question is whether it's more important for document.referrer to match
the HTTP header (so the note will actually be true) or location.href and
.URL... Well, and the other question is what .URL and location.href should
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 7:52 PM, pocci...@gmail.com wrote:
Accordingly, should this rule and/or the percent decoding algorithm be
redefined to allow Unicode characters here?
The host parser is only given Unicode input where the string has code
points in the range U+ to U+007F.
(A
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Peter Occil pocci...@gmail.com wrote:
I see, the IDNA issue is still unsettled. So do you have advice for how
implementers should parse and validate domain names in the meantime? Should
the implementation convert domain names to punycode, validate their length,
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 3/21/13 7:01 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
as the Unicode form is very much a UI decision and
we do not want to leak that detail to web developers.
You mean the decision as to when exactly to use the Unicode and when
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
Not if the referring URL was a capability, which I think might have
been the point.
I don't understand what that means. Could you explain?
If you
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
By not including cookies or other login information you are already
forcing the capability model since you can't tell the connection from
one that is server-to-server.
Including the referrer header, at least by default,
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
I don't think that that is a particularly convincing argument since there is
no confused deputy problem here, and if a website is making security
decisions based on referrer headers even when there are no other identifying
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 2:16 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
I tried to address both by pointing to UMP which wants both a) and b).
The alternative would be to use iframe sandbox=allow-scripts which
exhibits
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 1:10 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
Preceded the specification? I doubt that. When was it added? The
specification was done start of 2010 somewhere based on the
requirements coming
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.net wrote:
http:test is already absolute, so per RFC 3986 the absolute form is
http:test regardless of the base reference. The relevant case there
is rather when the base scheme is http, because then some implemen-
tations treat
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 3/5/13 3:30 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
I'd be fine with having a Document descendant that is used for Documents
that have global scopes / browsing contexts / the works, and one that is
used for Documents that don't (e.g.
So if the server replies with status 401 and a WWW-Authenticate header
that is properly formatted (I did not do detailed syntax checks but
e.g. WWW-Authenticate: basicerror does not work) is present, we prompt
the user. We do this for img, script, new Worker(),
XMLHttpRequest, workers'
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Robin Berjon ro...@w3.org wrote:
On 14/03/2013 15:59 , Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Is there anything we should do here? Prompting the end user for
requests they did not explicitly initiate via navigation seems very
confusing. On the other hand maybe creating
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
In gecko all fetch activity is always asynchronous, independent of URL
scheme. Furthermore, the network layer can chunk up the data available
callbacks however it wants to ease implementation. Nothing requires it to
keep
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
It doesn't matter how many network tasks there are, though. We can just say
that if the old state is (eg.) OPENED, and we're now in DONE, that we
iterate through all of the intermediary states, setting readyState and
firing
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
What exact behavior are you proposing for the XHR implementation when it
gets the callbacks described above? It sure sounds to me like you're
presupposing that the some data available callbacks indicate whether there
might
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.net wrote:
* Boris Zbarsky wrote:
If you assume that this is a hierarchical scheme and that the hierarchy
is in some particular place, no? Why is that assumption being made?
Turning relative references into absolute ones is a
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Alex Russell slightly...@google.com wrote:
Thoughts?
My main thought is that it's a pita to change the API at this time now
it's unprefixed everywhere and we've been encouraging developers to
use it in favor of mutation events. If Adam/Rafael/Olli/Jonas are
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
I was going to mention this the other day - it works inter-operably today,
so it seems like you probably don't want to break that. Simultaneously it
does seem to me that the API is more sensible and less confusing - is
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
Does it make sense? Do you feel like I am hand-waving away any of your
concerns? I hope not because the idea there is precisely to help address
concerns like these (as well as many others).
It makes sense and is doable,
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Why do we want the a) and b) behavior? That's not implemented in the
gecko implementation of XHR({ anon: true }) (which precedes the spec
version, so i'm preemptively putting an end to complaints about us not
following the
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com wrote:
I don't have strong feelings one way or another. Generally, I think
it's a good idea if the presence of the Origin header isn't synonymous
with the request being a CORS request because that could limit our
ability to use the
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com wrote:
I would recommend including an Origin header in every non-GET request
(and, of course, in some GET requests because of CORS).
That sounds fairly straightforward. Thanks!
--
http://annevankesteren.nl/
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
Unless PHP does not expose Origin under HTTP_ORIGIN in $_SERVER as one
would expect...
(It does btw.)
So I also tested the fetch from an origin in the specification
http://dump.testsuite.org/fetch/form.html and it turns
It seems we have a bunch of different policies for setting the Origin header :-(
XMLHttpRequest always sets it to the given value.
HTML's fetch only sets it to a non-null value if a from parameter is passed.
HTML's potentially CORS-enabled fetch seems to never invoke fetch
with a from parameter
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
So HTML's potentially CORS-enabled fetch is incompatible with
XMLHttpRequest.
Turns out the wonderful browsers are not implementing XMLHttpRequest!
So XMLHttpRequest could do the same as HTML's potentially
CORS-enabled
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Mon, 4 Mar 2013, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
1) How does HTML distinguish for which fetch the tasks are queued?
How do you mean?
What I meant was that when loading a page, various APIs will start
invoking fetch. That in turn
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
I'm trying to understand why Document and HTMLDocument got merged. In
practice, UAs don't do that, and doing it imposes a performance penalty on
manipulating, say, XMLHttpRequest response documents (because the name
getter
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
I don't care about the methods. Putting all of those on Document is fine by
me, I think.
I care about the named getter being forced onto all documents.
Okay, so that is slightly different from how this thread started out.
So in the grand rewrite of fetch I wonder:
1) How does HTML distinguish for which fetch the tasks are queued?
2) How do we deal with tasks for uploading data? Currently fetch only
deals with processing incoming data, not outgoing.
In both these cases, how do we either allow the caller to filter
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Kenneth Russell k...@google.com wrote:
Are you referring to the crossOrigin attribute on HTMLImageElement and
HTMLMediaElement? Those are implemented in WebKit. It should be fine
to change crossOrigin=anonymous requests to satisfy (a) and (b). Any
server that
There's an unfortunate mismatch currently. new
XMLHttpRequest({anon:true}) will generate a request where a) origin is
a globally unique identifier b) referrer source is the URL
about:blank, and c) credentials are omitted. From those
crossorigin=anonymous only does c. Can we still change
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 4:30 AM, Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com wrote:
I don't think there is a security problem with that. It's just a
question of how much it complicates the model.
Well currently for http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/cgi/data/data
Chrome generates a network error if you hit
Say img does a cross-origin request. The response to that request is
a redirect with the appropriate CORS headers set. The new location is
a data URL. Should that URL be tainted or not? I tend to think we
should make that work.
(By the way, if you're interested. I'm working on a new specification
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 7:42 PM, Cameron Jones cmhjo...@gmail.com wrote:
I've just committed an initial draft of HTTP extensions for Forms:
http://cameronjones.github.com/form-http-extensions/index.html
The document can be considered within the public domain for integration.
I'd recommend
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Cameron Jones cmhjo...@gmail.com wrote:
The HTTP headers are restricted using a copy-paste of those in XHR which is
included in the form submission process. Happy to hear any suggestions to
improve the structure or general authoring.
You are not making the same
I think currently the specification assumes FontLoader is the solution
to fonts in workers. However, 1) FontLoader as currently designed does
not work in workers. 2) Even if slightly modified it would not work in
shared workers as FontLoader is pretty much tied to the document that
has the
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
Since we have a real URL parser now, I think we have a reasonable way to do
this: capture the blob in the parser, returning it as part of the parsed
URL.
Although this might theoretically work, I suspect it'll take a while
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
cloneNode() won't work for autorevoked URLs, because it is defined to only
clone attributes and children, not internal state (with a few exceptions
for Web compatibility). (Don't tell me that it shouldn't work that
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 12:32 AM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
That's strange. I'd expect case to round-trip.
Why?
Where does this happen for the hostname? I only see case related to ipv6
and scheme.
Host parsing is not defined yet: http://annevankesteren.nl/2012/11/idna-hell
--
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Alex Russell slightly...@google.com wrote:
But if I've been vended a URL object from some API, I first have to compare
the bases. I'd like a way to ask something like is the full URL
up-to-and-including this component the same? E.g., if I have an API that's
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
A compare method is probably useful, since you'd also want case-insensitive
comparisons for some parts and not others (eg. lowercase protocol and host
before comparing).
Scheme and host are normalized by the parser already.
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Alex Russell slightly...@google.com wrote:
It appears that WebIDL-ese has afflicted DOMError and DOMException:
http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#interface-domerror
These should be constructable, with a single name DOMStrong parameter or
an argument bag which allows
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Cameron McCormack c...@mcc.id.au wrote:
Does it make sense to move HTMLElement.dataset up to Element, so that all
elements can benefit from it? If not, could this attribute be split out on
to a separate interface that we could have SVGElement implement?
Idea:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 9:55 PM, Mounir Lamouri mou...@lamouri.fr wrote:
Regarding 'month', I mostly don't understand the use case. I can't find
any situation where I am asked to input a { month, year } information.
Credit cards.
This type would solve the use cases of people trying to find a
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:41 PM, Olli Pettay olli.pet...@helsinki.fi wrote:
WebSocket, EventSource etc ctors do have side effects.
Exactly. And if we designed XMLHttpRequest from scratch it would have them too.
--
http://annevankesteren.nl/
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Robert O'Callahan
rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
In fact, he cited you in his argument against src! Now that's ironic :-).
:-)
Context:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-capture/2012Aug/0077.html
I think overloading could work here actually, if
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:19 AM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
I think this would be a worthwhile addition to the Web platform.
It's somewhat ironic this happened, especially with Mozilla leading! I
advocated this approach from the start:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Markus Ernst derer...@gmx.ch wrote:
The allow-seamless mechanism is to be triggered at the side of the embedded
resource, which would also be the one affected by possible security risks
(if I get this right). The developer of this resource will have to be aware
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
except for niggling issues around code that uses location.href to determine
origins. :(
Sounds like you'd also have to trust that the page you're seamlessly
embedding is not going to do anything malicious on your origin.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:39 AM, Nasko Oskov na...@chromium.org wrote:
Based on the existing security concerns listed in the proposal and the fact
that it might prevent a useful new security architecture in browsers, I
would suggest this not be added to the web platform.
FWIW, I think that
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 8:26 AM, Matt Falkenhagen fal...@chromium.org wrote:
The Fullscreen spec says, for an element in the top layer:
If its specified position property is static, it computes to absolute.[1]
I think this is to make top layer elements out of flow. But then shouldn't
position
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
Yeah, I did not carefully review the suggestion from
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012AprJun/0970.html
it seems. :-(
Fixed:
https://github.com/whatwg/fullscreen/commit
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
My bad, I actually meant if a's associated shadow tree had an
insertion point through which a's child, which is b, would go and
then the event
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote:
Can you elaborate on this a bit more. Note, you don't need to compute
offsetX/Y until they are actually requested (which is what WebKit does
anyway).
I see. That would change matters indeed.
Is that the case for all
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org
wrote:
Okay, so event path would be (in tree order):
a -- [shadow
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
Is that the case for all non-target/relatedTarget attributes that need
adjustment? That they do not actually need to be adjusted
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote:
Sure. Where are you seeing this list being mentioned? In Shadow DOM
spec or in DOM Core spec? I am happy to help, just not sure what
exactly I need to be doing :)
I want you to create a list :-) Which attributes are
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:17 AM, Mike West mk...@google.com wrote:
Adam explained that WebKit currently treats the 'origin' attribute as
the origin of the document's location, not the origin of the
document[1]. This is generally benign, but surprised me in the
sandboxed case.
What should
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
Actually, that's not enough. You have to security-check arguments too.
Otherwise this:
document.createTreeWalker(crossFrameDoc, etc);
would be bad. (Note that right now the DOM spec fails to handle this, which
is
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote:
1) For a tree a -- [shadow root] - b -- [shadow root] - c
(where - denotes child-parent relationship and -- denotes
host-root relationship)
2) if an event is dispatched on c
3) where is the event target's adjusted?
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 10:48 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote:
Okay. Here is all the shadow DOM-related monkeypatching:
1) When dispatching events (http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#dispatching-events),
on step 4, the event path is built using
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 8:36 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote:
So I wouldn't call this exactly vaporware :)
I cannot get it to work for select. But this is certainly
interesting. It would require details to be defined in terms of
shadow trees, or not? As otherwise the triangle in
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Like most widgets, I think the answer is Web Components.
As far as I can tell styling form controls is an unsolved problem and
Components does not seem to be tackling it. We always play the
Components card (and before that the XBL
Is there not some way we can have a lineDash attribute that returns a
manipulatable object that inherits from Array rather than the current
Java-like API? I remember this was discussed when getLineDash() and
setLineDash() were added, but I think it's worth taking another look
at this.
(For URLs I
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Cameron McCormack c...@mcc.id.au wrote:
Does it need to inherit from Array? I think we can do this as long as the
canvas context object does not need to watch the Array object for changes.
(This is technically already possible by just using object as the type,
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Cameron McCormack c...@mcc.id.au wrote:
On 23/12/12 12:40 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
I guess dashList is somewhat simpler, but I think it would be nice if
it still did type coercion.
In that case, I guess we are reliant on whatever ES-allowed Array extending
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Cameron McCormack c...@mcc.id.au wrote:
If we don't have the type checking of array elements, and also don't need
any noticing of individual element assignments, then we can just have a
reference to a plain Array object and look at its elements at the time the
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Evert Van dansen
evertvandan...@ymail.com wrote:
I am sorry, perhaps I misunderstand, but I do not see what the advantage is
over using regular hooks (like id) in this case? Surely adding the
name-attribute must have been a decision based on something
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 1:23 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
Well, eventually we might want to merge the whole DOM part of Shadow
DOM and DOM I think, but for now my proposition was that dispatch
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote:
The basic idea here is that some events, when they are dispatched in a
shadow tree, are more likely implementation details that aren't useful
outside of this tree. For example, if an img with an image of a volume
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Simon Kaegi simon_ka...@ca.ibm.com wrote:
1) query is a read-only and not nullable. I could do this of course
but just want to understand the intent.
It's nullable because query manipulation in this manner does not make
sense for a whole lot of URL schemes. It's
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
I've done the HTML side of this (a paragraph), but the heavy lifting for
this will be in DOM. Anne and I spoke about this earlier in #whatwg if you
want to see the discussions. Some pointers to the logs can be found in the
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Hayato Ito hay...@chromium.org wrote:
Shadow DOM's event retargeting in WebKit uses one Event object for
every shadow trees.
When crossing shadow boundaries, an Event object's target (or
relatedTarget) is set to the appropriate one, but the event object
itself
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Hayato Ito hay...@chromium.org wrote:
Some kinds of events should be always stopped at the shadow boundaries.
See
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/shadow/index.html#events-that-are-always-stopped
It's not entirely clear to me what that
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote:
Yes, the intent is that in the the events from nodes, distributed to
insertion points should feel as if there wasn't any shadow tree around them.
Right, but if img is inside the shadow tree (rather than distributed
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com wrote:
The definitive answer is that we discussed this at the TC39 in-person this
past week and the collection mutation methods will return |this|. I will be
publishing the meetings notes on Monday and the next draft will
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 10:14 PM, Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com wrote:
The HTTP server would then break script.js into chunks that are safe
to execute sequentially and provide each chunk as a separate MIME part
in a multipart/mixed response.
Is it expected that SPDY will take much longer than
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
If we do stick with the method-based map, I strongly feel we should
match the JS Map API, and have a has() method as well. *Ideally*,
this would be a subclass of Map.
This is now done:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
Only feedback left is the return types of set(), append(), and delete().
In Maps, set() returns the map, so you can chain more easily. TC39
hasn't yet made delete() return the map, but they plan to (baby steps,
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Alexandre Morgaut
alexandre.morg...@4d.com wrote:
Maybe remove() would be better than delete() as delete is a reserved JS
keyword ;-)
We use it because ES6's Map uses it. It should be no problem, except
with syntax highlighting, but that is already broken by
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
Thoughts?
URLQuery uses this model. But I reckon that for DOMStringMap it is a
bit trickier since it is actually mostly about manipulating DOM
attributes through a simpler interface. It's not a map that is
serialized to
401 - 500 of 1655 matches
Mail list logo
