public-script-coord@w3.org from October to December 2010 by date

Monday, 20 December 2010

• Re: a more JavaScripty binding for exceptions Jonas Sicking
• Re: a more JavaScripty binding for exceptions Cameron McCormack
• Re: a more JavaScripty binding for exceptions Ian Hickson

Saturday, 18 December 2010

• 1st CFP: IJCAI-11 Workshop on Discovering Meaning On the Go in Large & Heterogeneous Data (LHD-11) Michael Chan

Friday, 17 December 2010

• a more JavaScripty binding for exceptions Cameron McCormack

Monday, 6 December 2010

• [Bug 11485] New: Properties corresponding to operations should be enumerable bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Sunday, 5 December 2010

• Re: Fwd: [WebIDL] summary of topics discussed at TC39 meeting Cameron McCormack

Friday, 3 December 2010

• RE: Configurable, writable "const" values? Travis Leithead

Thursday, 2 December 2010

• Re: Configurable, writable "const" values? Johnny Stenback
• [Bug 11451] Add a string enum type bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Wednesday, 1 December 2010

• [Bug 11451] Add a string enum type bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: Configurable, writable "const" values? Brendan Eich
• [Bug 11451] Add a string enum type bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 11451] Add a string enum type bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 11451] New: Add a string enum type bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: Configurable, writable "const" values? Maciej Stachowiak
• Configurable, writable "const" values? Travis Leithead

Tuesday, 30 November 2010

• Re: String enum pattern Alex Russell
• String enum pattern Anne van Kesteren

Monday, 29 November 2010

• Re: [WebIDL] summary of topics discussed at TC39 meeting Cameron McCormack

Wednesday, 24 November 2010

• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Anne van Kesteren
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Andrew Oakley
• [WebIDL] summary of topics discussed at TC39 meeting Cameron McCormack

Tuesday, 23 November 2010

• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Anne van Kesteren
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Brendan Eich
• [Bug 11388] Add DOMTimeStamp bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 11388] Add DOMTimeStamp bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Andrew Oakley
• [Bug 11388] New: Add DOMTimeStamp bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Monday, 22 November 2010

• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Jonas Sicking

Sunday, 21 November 2010

• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Ian Hickson

Saturday, 20 November 2010

• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Jonas Sicking
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Jonas Sicking
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Olli Pettay
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Jonas Sicking
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Jonas Sicking
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Boris Zbarsky

Friday, 19 November 2010

• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Ian Hickson
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Ian Hickson
• [WebIDL] prototype chains, multiple inheritance, mixin interfaces Cameron McCormack

Thursday, 18 November 2010

• [Bug 11341] typo in 4.2.10: "[READ_ERROR]" should read "[Replaceable]" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 11341] typo in 4.2.10: "[READ_ERROR]" should read "[Replaceable]" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 11341] typo in 4.2.10: "[READ_ERROR]" should read "[Replacable]" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 11341] New: typo in 4.2.10: "[READ_ERROR]" should read "[Replacable]" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Monday, 15 November 2010

• RE: Omitting prototype objects for some interfaces (was: Re: Thoughts on ES5 binding modifications) Travis Leithead

Wednesday, 10 November 2010

• Omitting prototype objects for some interfaces (was: Re: Thoughts on ES5 binding modifications) Cameron McCormack

Monday, 8 November 2010

• [Bug 11268] New: Make ES5 section number references less confusing bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 11267] New: Add a [NonConfigurable] extended attribute bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Wednesday, 3 November 2010

• RE: Thoughts on ES5 binding modifications (was: RE: Java bindings generated from Web IDL) Travis Leithead
• RE: Thoughts on ES5 binding modifications (was: RE: Java bindings generated from Web IDL) Travis Leithead

Tuesday, 2 November 2010

• [Bug 11195] New: HTMLCollection wants to be an array bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Sunday, 31 October 2010

• Re: Thoughts on ES5 binding modifications (was: RE: Java bindings generated from Web IDL) Olli Pettay
• Re: Thoughts on ES5 binding modifications (was: RE: Java bindings generated from Web IDL) Cameron McCormack
• [Bug 11185] New: Switch the order of checking for Function-ness and a property for [Callback] objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Saturday, 30 October 2010

• [Bug 11175] Point out that the behaviour of assigning to properties corresponding to read only attributes bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 11175] Point out that the behaviour of assigning to properties corresponding to read only attributes bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: [WebIDL] ES5 alignment: IE9's readonly and WebIDL configurable attribute Cameron McCormack
• [Bug 11176] New: Make properties on the global for interface object configurable bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 11175] New: Point out that the behaviour of assigning to properties corresponding to read only attributes bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Friday, 29 October 2010

• [WebIDL] ES5 alignment: IE9's readonly and WebIDL configurable attribute Travis Leithead

Thursday, 28 October 2010

• [Bug 11098] Possible errors in integer and float regular expressions bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: [WebIDL] Prod for T[] Cameron McCormack

Sunday, 24 October 2010

• [Bug 11138] New: Consider adding class/static methods bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Thursday, 21 October 2010

• RE: Thoughts on ES5 binding modifications (was: RE: Java bindings generated from Web IDL) Travis Leithead
• Re: CfC: publish a new Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline October 18 Jonas Sicking
• Re: CfC: publish a new Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline October 18 Cameron McCormack
• Re: CfC: publish a new Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline October 18 Jonas Sicking
• RE: CfC: publish a new Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline October 18 Travis Leithead
• Re: [WebIDL] Prod for T[] Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] Prod for T[] Dominique Hazael-Massieux

Tuesday, 19 October 2010

• [Bug 11098] New: Possible errors in integer and float regular expressions bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Friday, 15 October 2010

• Re: CfC: publish a new Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline October 18 Sam Weinig
• Re: CfC: publish a new Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline October 18 Arthur Barstow

Thursday, 14 October 2010

• [Bug 11056] New: Special operations should be overridable bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: Removal of identifierless getters, setters, etc. Cameron McCormack
• Re: Removal of identifierless getters, setters, etc. Maciej Stachowiak
• Re: Removal of identifierless getters, setters, etc. Ian Hickson
• Re: Removal of identifierless getters, setters, etc. Cameron McCormack
• Re: Removal of identifierless getters, setters, etc. Garrett Smith
• [Bug 11033] New: Specify property enumeration order bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Wednesday, 13 October 2010

• Re: Removal of identifierless getters, setters, etc. Cameron McCormack
• Re: Removal of identifierless getters, setters, etc. Anne van Kesteren

Tuesday, 12 October 2010

• Re: Removal of identifierless getters, setters, etc. Sam Weinig
• Removal of identifierless getters, setters, etc. Cameron McCormack
• RE: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Allen Wirfs-Brock

Monday, 11 October 2010

• Re: CfC: publish a new Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline October 18 Shiki Okasaka

Tuesday, 12 October 2010

• Re: CfC: publish a new Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline October 18 Shiki Okasaka
• Re: CfC: publish a new Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline October 18 Cameron McCormack

Monday, 11 October 2010

• Re: CfC: publish a new Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline October 18 Jonas Sicking
• Re: CfC: publish a new Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline October 18 Anne van Kesteren
• CfC: publish a new Working Draft of Web IDL; deadline October 18 Arthur Barstow
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Garrett Smith

Sunday, 10 October 2010

• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Cameron McCormack

Friday, 8 October 2010

• Re: [webIDL] nullable interface types Anne van Kesteren
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Garrett Smith
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Simon Pieters
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Maciej Stachowiak
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Simon Pieters
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Garrett Smith
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Garrett Smith
• Re: Fw: Web IDL spec nitpick: SHOULD and SHOULD NOT? Cameron McCormack
• Re: Typo in WebIDL? Cameron McCormack
• Re: [webIDL] nullable interface types Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Garrett Smith
• Re: Thoughts on ES5 binding modifications (was: RE: Java bindings generated from Web IDL) Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] interface objects with [Constructor] and [[Call]] Cameron McCormack

Last message date: Monday, 20 December 2010 20:18:20 UTC