public-script-coord@w3.org from October to December 2012 by date

Monday, 31 December 2012

• [Bug 20535] consider removing indexed property setters, creators and deleters bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20535] consider removing indexed property setters, creators and deleters bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20535] consider removing indexed property setters, creators and deleters bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20535] consider removing indexed property setters, creators and deleters bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20535] consider removing indexed property setters, creators and deleters bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20535] consider removing indexed property setters, creators and deleters bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20535] New: consider removing indexed property setters, creators and deleters bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Sunday, 30 December 2012

• [Bug 20407] allow attributes to have different types for their getter and setter bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20407] allow attributes to have different types for their getter and setter bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20407] allow attributes to have different types for their getter and setter bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Friday, 28 December 2012

• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20528] New: Definition of [[Prototype]] for the interface prototype object is confusing bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20527] New: Comment about NamedPropertiesObject is incorrect bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Saturday, 22 December 2012

• Re: Call for Review: Web IDL Testing document Boris Zbarsky

Friday, 21 December 2012

• RE: Call for Review: Web IDL Testing document Travis Leithead
• RE: Call for Review: Web IDL Testing document Travis Leithead
• RE: Generating random WebIDL fragments from grammar Travis Leithead
• [Bug 20481] New: Grammar Fixes needed: Dominique's feedback + Microsoft's feedback bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Generating random WebIDL fragments from grammar Dominique Hazael-Massieux
• [Bug 20478] New: Grammar allows "static;" as a valid operation bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20477] New: serializer grammar doesn't expose "attribute" as a valid value bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 15765] Replaceable interface bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20475] New: Grammar allows "- Infinity", but not "- 1" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20361] Grammar is wrong for serializers bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Thursday, 20 December 2012

• Re: Partial conclusions on WindowProxy and ES5 invariants David Bruant
• [Bug 20458] New: 4.2.22: converting IDL value to IDL type? bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20456] New: 4.2.24.1: wrong conversion bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20455] New: converting to an ECMAScript value [of a specified type??] bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20453] New: 3.1: two questions re underscore removal bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20452] New: 4.2.16: extraneous "the" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Wednesday, 19 December 2012

• Partial conclusions on WindowProxy and ES5 invariants David Bruant
• [Bug 20444] New: 4.*: "descriptor { ... }" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20443] New: 4.4.6: "is not of the enumeration’s values" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20442] New: 4.2.24: <ul> should be <ol> bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20441] New: algorithms not marked as such bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20440] New: 4.4.1.1: "of it type list" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20439] New: 4.4.6: <span class="desc"> bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Tuesday, 18 December 2012

• Re: [WebIDL] Should stringifiers use [[Get]] and [[Call]] or call the canonical getter/function? Ian Hickson
• [WebIDL] Definition of "single operation interface" questions Boris Zbarsky
• Re: Standardizing Console object Marcos Caceres
• Standardizing Console object Rick Waldron
• [Bug 20422] New: 4.2.21: "then then" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20419] New: 4.2.24.2: missing "then"? bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Monday, 17 December 2012

• [Bug 20407] allow attributes to have different types for their getter and setter bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20407] allow attributes to have different types for their getter and setter bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20407] allow attributes to have different types for their getter and setter bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20407] allow attributes to have different types for their getter and setter bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20407] allow attributes to have different types for their getter and setter bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20407] allow attributes to have different types for their getter and setter bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Sunday, 16 December 2012

• [Bug 20407] allow attributes to have different types for their getter and setter bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: [whatwg] Need to define same-origin policy for WebIDL operations/getters/setters David Bruant
• [Bug 20407] New: allow attributes to have different types for their getter and setter bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: [whatwg] Need to define same-origin policy for WebIDL operations/getters/setters Jonas Sicking

Saturday, 15 December 2012

• Need to define same-origin policy for WebIDL operations/getters/setters Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants David Bruant
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants David Bruant
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants David Bruant
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants David Bruant
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants David Bruant
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants David Bruant
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants David Bruant

Friday, 14 December 2012

• Re: XMLDocument and Document.location and WebIDL spec don't play nice together Cameron McCormack
• Re: XMLDocument and Document.location and WebIDL spec don't play nice together Boris Zbarsky
• Re: XMLDocument and Document.location and WebIDL spec don't play nice together Boris Zbarsky
• Re: XMLDocument and Document.location and WebIDL spec don't play nice together Cameron McCormack
• Re: Interaction of non-configurable attributes and named getters Boris Zbarsky
• Re: Interaction of non-configurable attributes and named getters Mark S. Miller

Thursday, 13 December 2012

• Re: XMLDocument and Document.location and WebIDL spec don't play nice together Boris Zbarsky
• Major WebIDL2.js update Robin Berjon
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Mark S. Miller
• Re: XMLDocument and Document.location and WebIDL spec don't play nice together Cameron McCormack
• Interaction of non-configurable attributes and named getters Boris Zbarsky
• Re: XMLDocument and Document.location and WebIDL spec don't play nice together Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Mark S. Miller
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Mark S. Miller
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Mark S. Miller
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Mark S. Miller
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Mark S. Miller
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Allen Wirfs-Brock
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants David Bruant
• Re: WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants Boris Zbarsky
• Re: WebIDL syntax tests Robin Berjon
• WindowProxy objects violate ES5 invariants David Bruant

Wednesday, 12 December 2012

• Re: WebIDL syntax tests Dominique Hazael-Massieux
• [Bug 20361] Grammar is wrong for serializers bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20361] New: Grammar is wrong for serializers bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: WebIDL syntax tests Arthur Barstow
• WebIDL syntax tests Dominique Hazael-Massieux
• Re: XMLDocument and Document.location and WebIDL spec don't play nice together Cameron McCormack
• Re: XMLDocument and Document.location and WebIDL spec don't play nice together Boris Zbarsky
• Re: XMLDocument and Document.location and WebIDL spec don't play nice together Cameron McCormack

Tuesday, 11 December 2012

• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18909] "File a bug" link bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19936] consider allowing non-matching enums to be converted to a particular value bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19936] consider allowing non-matching enums to be converted to a particular value bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18909] "File a bug" link bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18846] Editorial - 4.2.20 Should 'D' be 'dictionary'? bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Monday, 10 December 2012

• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18878] [[NativeBrand]] of "Function" doesn't seem to exist in current ES6 drafts bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: Call for Review: Web IDL Testing document Boris Zbarsky
• [Bug 18362] Make stringifiers not take into account expandos bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• RE: Call for Review: Web IDL Testing document Travis Leithead
• Re: Call for Review: Web IDL Testing document Boris Zbarsky
• Re: Call for Review: Web IDL Testing document Boris Zbarsky
• Re: Call for Review: Web IDL Testing document Boris Zbarsky
• Call for Review: Web IDL Testing document Arthur Barstow
• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18362] Make stringifiers not take into account expandos bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18362] Make stringifiers not take into account expandos bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18362] Make stringifiers not take into account expandos bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18362] Make stringifiers not take into account expandos bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 17749] [WebIDL] Nit: "unrestricted double type" defined as 32-bit bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 17719] Consider throwing when attribute setter is called without an argument. bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18424] Cannot parse static operation with ReturnType (WebIDL editors draft 10 July 2012) bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18421] Cycle language about dictionaries needs s/interface/dictionary/ bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18420] Cycles via dictionary members should probably be prohibited bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18362] Make stringifiers not take into account expandos bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18362] Make stringifiers not take into account expandos bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18362] Make stringifiers not take into account expandos bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18023] Typo DOMString bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Saturday, 8 December 2012

• [Bug 18878] [[NativeBrand]] of "Function" doesn't seem to exist in current ES6 drafts bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Friday, 7 December 2012

• [Bug 18878] [[NativeBrand]] of "Function" doesn't seem to exist in current ES6 drafts bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: [Bug 17508] Let enum lists end with a comma Tab Atkins Jr.
• Re: [Bug 17508] Let enum lists end with a comma Brendan Eich
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: [Bug 17508] Let enum lists end with a comma David Sheets
• Re: New ES6 draft is available Boris Zbarsky
• Re: New ES6 draft is available Boris Zbarsky
• Re: New ES6 draft is available David Bruant
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: [Bug 17508] Let enum lists end with a comma Anne van Kesteren
• XMLDocument and Document.location and WebIDL spec don't play nice together Boris Zbarsky
• [Bug 19101] consider allowing nested enum definitions bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19571] .length should count optional arguments bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19778] Wrong regex for integer bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: [Bug 17508] Let enum lists end with a comma David Sheets
• [Bug 17508] Let enum lists end with a comma bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18547] Add [ImplicitThis] to EventTarget? bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18547] Add [ImplicitThis] to EventTarget? bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18547] Add [ImplicitThis] to EventTarget? bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Thursday, 6 December 2012

• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Wednesday, 5 December 2012

• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [webidl] Spec for callback interface interface objects is self-contradictory in places Boris Zbarsky

Tuesday, 4 December 2012

• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16604] RFE: add unsigned byte as synonym for octet bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16537] Interface types - Implements is ambiguous bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20008] allow [Unforgeable] on an interface bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19936] consider allowing non-matching enums to be converted to a particular value bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19778] Wrong regex for integer bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18547] Add [ImplicitThis] to EventTarget? bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20020] Support subclassing Array bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 17719] Consider throwing when attribute setter is called without an argument. bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 17749] [WebIDL] Nit: "unrestricted double type" defined as 32-bit bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18023] Typo DOMString bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18352] Note about Object.prototype.toString is unclear bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18421] Cycle language about dictionaries needs s/interface/dictionary/ bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18420] Cycles via dictionary members should probably be prohibited bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19571] .length should count optional arguments bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16455] Using platform object example bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20159] Introduce attributes for DOMString coercion bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16767] Allow user objects for Array[] types bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20158] Unrestricted typed dictionary bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18846] Editorial - 4.2.20 Should 'D' be 'dictionary'? bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18909] "File a bug" link bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 16833] consider always exposing a "length" property for objects with indexed properties bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18362] Make stringifiers not take into account expandos bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18878] [[NativeBrand]] of "Function" doesn't seem to exist in current ES6 drafts bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19101] consider allowing nested enum definitions bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18908] Consider disallowing expandos on objects with a named getter but no named setter bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 17713] Exceptions thrown from event handlers should not be propagated bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20019] Support subclassing ES6 Map bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19988] add a [LenientFloat] to mean "ignore IDL attribute assignment or method call if a non-finite float is passed" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18424] Cannot parse static operation with ReturnType (WebIDL editors draft 10 July 2012) bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20225] don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20225] New: don't allow overridden operations and attribute getters/setters to be invoked on descendant objects bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Monday, 3 December 2012

• [Bug 18547] Add [ImplicitThis] to EventTarget? bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 18547] Add [ImplicitThis] to EventTarget? bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Saturday, 1 December 2012

• RE: RSA blind signatures Anthony Nadalin
• RE: RSA blind signatures Alex Russell
• RE: RSA blind signatures Anthony Nadalin
• RE: RSA blind signatures Alex Russell

Friday, 30 November 2012

• [Bug 20019] Support subclassing ES6 Map bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Thursday, 29 November 2012

• [Bug 20158] Unrestricted typed dictionary bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20158] Unrestricted typed dictionary bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20158] Unrestricted typed dictionary bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20158] Unrestricted typed dictionary bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20159] Introduce attributes for DOMString coercion bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20158] Unrestricted typed dictionary bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 11195] HTMLCollection wants to be an array bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20159] New: Introduce attributes for DOMString coercion bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20158] New: Unrestricted typed dictionary bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19101] consider allowing nested enum definitions bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Tuesday, 27 November 2012

• [Bug 17713] Exceptions thrown from event handlers should not be propagated bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: New ES6 draft is available David Bruant
• Re: New ES6 draft is available Jason Orendorff
• Re: New ES6 draft is available Anne van Kesteren
• [Bug 20086] Exception message bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 17713] Exceptions thrown from event handlers should not be propagated bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 17713] Exceptions thrown from event handlers should not be propagated bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 17713] Exceptions thrown from event handlers should not be propagated bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 17713] Exceptions thrown from event handlers should not be propagated bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19988] add a [LenientFloat] to mean "ignore IDL attribute assignment or method call if a non-finite float is passed" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Monday, 26 November 2012

• [Bug 20086] Exception message bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19988] add a [LenientFloat] to mean "ignore IDL attribute assignment or method call if a non-finite float is passed" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19988] add a [LenientFloat] to mean "ignore IDL attribute assignment or method call if a non-finite float is passed" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19988] add a [LenientFloat] to mean "ignore IDL attribute assignment or method call if a non-finite float is passed" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20086] Exception message bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20086] Exception message bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20086] Exception message bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20086] New: Exception message bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Saturday, 24 November 2012

• New ES6 draft is available Allen Wirfs-Brock

Thursday, 22 November 2012

• Re: ECMAScript and chaining Mark S. Miller
• Re: ECMAScript and chaining Rick Waldron
• Re: ECMAScript and chaining Rick Waldron
• Re: ECMAScript and chaining Mark S. Miller
• Re: ECMAScript and chaining Mark S. Miller
• Re: ECMAScript and chaining Alex Russell
• Re: ECMAScript and chaining Anne van Kesteren
• Re: ECMAScript and chaining Rick Waldron

Wednesday, 21 November 2012

• ECMAScript and chaining Anne van Kesteren
• Re: [Bug 20019] Support subclassing ES6 Map Axel Rauschmayer
• Re: [Bug 20019] Support subclassing ES6 Map Brendan Eich

Tuesday, 20 November 2012

• Re: [Bug 20019] Support subclassing ES6 Map Tab Atkins Jr.
• Re: [Bug 20019] Support subclassing ES6 Map Mark S. Miller
• Re: [Bug 20019] Support subclassing ES6 Map Tab Atkins Jr.
• Re: [Bug 20019] Support subclassing ES6 Map Kris Kowal
• Re: [Bug 20019] Support subclassing ES6 Map Mark S. Miller
• [Bug 20019] Support subclassing ES6 Map bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20019] Support subclassing ES6 Map bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20020] New: Support subclassing Array bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20019] New: Support subclassing ES6 Map bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Monday, 19 November 2012

• [Bug 20008] allow [Unforgeable] on an interface bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 20008] New: allow [Unforgeable] on an interface bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Friday, 16 November 2012

• [Bug 19988] New: add a [LenientFloat] to mean "ignore IDL attribute assignment or method call if a non-finite float is passed" bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Thursday, 15 November 2012

• Re: [WebIDL] Allowing specifications to opt in to throwing on sets of enumerated attributes to invalid values Anne van Kesteren
• Re: [WebIDL] Allowing specifications to opt in to throwing on sets of enumerated attributes to invalid values Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [WebIDL] Allowing specifications to opt in to throwing on sets of enumerated attributes to invalid values Marcos Caceres
• Re: [WebIDL] Allowing specifications to opt in to throwing on sets of enumerated attributes to invalid values Anne van Kesteren
• Re: [WebIDL] Allowing specifications to opt in to throwing on sets of enumerated attributes to invalid values Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [WebIDL] Allowing specifications to opt in to throwing on sets of enumerated attributes to invalid values Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [WebIDL] Allowing specifications to opt in to throwing on sets of enumerated attributes to invalid values Anne van Kesteren
• Re: [WebIDL] Allowing specifications to opt in to throwing on sets of enumerated attributes to invalid values Marcos Caceres
• Re: [WebIDL] Allowing specifications to opt in to throwing on sets of enumerated attributes to invalid values Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [WebIDL] Allowing specifications to opt in to throwing on sets of enumerated attributes to invalid values Marcos Caceres
• [WebIDL] Allowing specifications to opt in to throwing on sets of enumerated attributes to invalid values Boris Zbarsky

Tuesday, 13 November 2012

• [Bug 19936] consider allowing non-matching enums to be converted to a particular value bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19936] consider allowing non-matching enums to be converted to a particular value bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19936] consider allowing non-matching enums to be converted to a particular value bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Sunday, 11 November 2012

• [Bug 19936] consider allowing non-matching enums to be converted to a particular value bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19936] New: consider allowing non-matching enums to be converted to a particular value bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Thursday, 8 November 2012

• Re: RegExp support in WebIDL Cameron McCormack

Wednesday, 7 November 2012

• Re: Support for generators David Bruant
• Re: Support for iterators David Bruant
• Re: Support for generators Jonas Sicking
• Re: Support for generators Allen Wirfs-Brock

Tuesday, 6 November 2012

• Support for generators David Bruant

Monday, 5 November 2012

• Re: CSP 1.1 DOM design Brendan Eich
• Re: CSP 1.1 DOM design David Bruant
• Re: CSP 1.1 DOM design Anne van Kesteren
• Re: CSP 1.1 DOM design Alex Russell
• Re: CSP 1.1 DOM design Thaddee Tyl
• Re: CSP 1.1 DOM design Alex Russell
• Re: CSP 1.1 DOM design David Bruant
• Re: CSP 1.1 DOM design Alex Russell

Thursday, 1 November 2012

• [WebIDL] Typing of integer-token optional argument default values and constant values is unclear Boris Zbarsky
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Anne van Kesteren
• [WebIDL] Callback functions and callback interfaces should allow optional arguments sanely Boris Zbarsky
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Simon Pieters
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Anne van Kesteren

Wednesday, 31 October 2012

• [Bug 18424] Cannot parse static operation with ReturnType (WebIDL editors draft 10 July 2012) bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19777] Grammar issue with qualified operations bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: WebIDL2.js Glenn Adams
• Re: TPAC F2F DOM2 Selectors API review Alex Russell

Tuesday, 30 October 2012

• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Brendan Eich
• WebIDL2.js Robin Berjon
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Anne van Kesteren
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Allen Wirfs-Brock
• Re: Extended attribute grammar too complex? Glenn Adams
• Re: TPAC F2F DOM2 Selectors API review Allen Wirfs-Brock
• Re: TPAC F2F DOM2 Selectors API review Boris Zbarsky
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Brendan Eich
• [Bug 19778] New: Wrong regex for integer bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19777] New: Grammar issue with qualified operations bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Anne van Kesteren
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Jonas Sicking
• TPAC F2F DOM2 Selectors API review Alex Russell
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Anne van Kesteren

Monday, 29 October 2012

• [Bug 17713] Exceptions thrown from event handlers should not be propagated bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Brendan Eich
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Simon Pieters
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Brendan Eich
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Brendan Eich

Sunday, 28 October 2012

• Small grammar problem Robin Berjon

Monday, 29 October 2012

• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Jonas Sicking
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Anne van Kesteren
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Brendan Eich

Sunday, 28 October 2012

• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Simon Pieters
• Extended attribute grammar too complex? Robin Berjon
• Re: IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Robin Berjon

Saturday, 27 October 2012

• [Bug 17713] Exceptions thrown from event handlers should not be propagated bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 17713] Exceptions thrown from event handlers should not be propagated bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Friday, 26 October 2012

• IDL: special DOMString that converts to Unicode Anne van Kesteren

Wednesday, 24 October 2012

• Re: [WebIDL] Would it make sense to add annotations for "creates a new object each time" and "always returns the same object"? Boris Zbarsky

Tuesday, 23 October 2012

• Re: [WebIDL] Would it make sense to add annotations for "creates a new object each time" and "always returns the same object"? Jonas Sicking
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Ian Hickson
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Ian Hickson
• Re: [WebIDL] Would it make sense to add annotations for "creates a new object each time" and "always returns the same object"? Ojan Vafai
• Re: Interaction of dictionaries and platform objects is a bit weird Ojan Vafai
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Adam Barth
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Ian Hickson
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [WebIDL] Would it make sense to add annotations for "creates a new object each time" and "always returns the same object"? Boris Zbarsky
• Re: Interaction of dictionaries and platform objects is a bit weird Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [WebIDL] Would it make sense to add annotations for "creates a new object each time" and "always returns the same object"? Ojan Vafai
• Re: Interaction of dictionaries and platform objects is a bit weird Ojan Vafai

Monday, 22 October 2012

• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Ian Hickson
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Boris Zbarsky
• WebIDL grammar allows "static;", which seems broken Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Ian Hickson
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Ian Hickson
• Re: [whatwg] Document referrer and script entry point Adam Barth
• Re: Document referrer and script entry point Bobby Holley

Saturday, 20 October 2012

• [Bug 19571] .length should count optional arguments bugzilla@jessica.w3.org

Friday, 19 October 2012

• [webidl] Spec is unclear on what it means to support indexed/named properties Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [WebIDL] Would it make sense to add annotations for "creates a new object each time" and "always returns the same object"? Glenn Adams

Thursday, 18 October 2012

• Re: [WebIDL] Would it make sense to add annotations for "creates a new object each time" and "always returns the same object"? Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [WebIDL] Would it make sense to add annotations for "creates a new object each time" and "always returns the same object"? Allen Wirfs-Brock
• RE: [WebIDL] Would it make sense to add annotations for "creates a new object each time" and "always returns the same object"? Travis Leithead
• Re: [WebIDL] Would it make sense to add annotations for "creates a new object each time" and "always returns the same object"? Marcos Caceres
• [WebIDL] Would it make sense to add annotations for "creates a new object each time" and "always returns the same object"? Boris Zbarsky
• [Bug 19571] .length should count optional arguments bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Interaction of dictionaries and platform objects is a bit weird Boris Zbarsky

Wednesday, 17 October 2012

• [Bug 19571] .length should count optional arguments bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19571] .length should count optional arguments bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19571] .length should count optional arguments bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [Bug 19571] .length should count optional arguments bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• Re: [WebIDL][ES6] Include optional arguments in "length" Rick Waldron
• Re: [WebIDL][ES6] Include optional arguments in "length" David Bruant
• [Bug 19571] New: .length should count optional arguments bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
• [WebIDL][ES6] Include optional arguments in "length" Simon Pieters

Tuesday, 16 October 2012

• Re: New ECMAScript Internationalization API Specification draft Alex Russell

Monday, 15 October 2012

• New ECMAScript Internationalization API Specification draft Norbert Lindenberg

Friday, 12 October 2012

• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Jonas Sicking
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Boris Zbarsky
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Jonas Sicking

Thursday, 11 October 2012

• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Boris Zbarsky
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Jonas Sicking
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Jonas Sicking
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Allen Wirfs-Brock
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Jonas Sicking
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Boris Zbarsky
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Jonas Sicking
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Jonas Sicking
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Boris Zbarsky
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Brendan Eich
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Boris Zbarsky
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Brendan Eich
• [WebIDL] Type conversions triggered by "any" can be lossy Boris Zbarsky
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Boris Zbarsky
• Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters Boris Zbarsky

Wednesday, 10 October 2012

• Re: "var" declarations shadowing properties from Window.prototype Maciej Stachowiak

Tuesday, 9 October 2012

• Re: DOMHighResTimeStamp Anne van Kesteren
• RE: DOMHighResTimeStamp Travis Leithead
• Re: Document referrer and script entry point Boris Zbarsky
• Document referrer and script entry point Bobby Holley
• DOMHighResTimeStamp Anne van Kesteren

Saturday, 6 October 2012

• RE: "var" declarations shadowing properties from Window.prototype Travis Leithead
• Re: "var" declarations shadowing properties from Window.prototype Boris Zbarsky
• Re: "var" declarations shadowing properties from Window.prototype Cameron McCormack
• Re: "var" declarations shadowing properties from Window.prototype Boris Zbarsky

Friday, 5 October 2012

• Re: "var" declarations shadowing properties from Window.prototype Cameron McCormack
• Re: [WebIDL] Should stringifiers use [[Get]] and [[Call]] or call the canonical getter/function? Boris Zbarsky
• Re: [WebIDL] Should stringifiers use [[Get]] and [[Call]] or call the canonical getter/function? Ian Hickson
• [WebIDL] Should stringifiers use [[Get]] and [[Call]] or call the canonical getter/function? Boris Zbarsky

Thursday, 4 October 2012

• Re: Usability & Draft Publication Format - HTML? Brendan Eich
• Usability & Draft Publication Format - HTML? Garrett Smith
• New ECMAScript Internationalization API Specification draft Norbert Lindenberg

Monday, 1 October 2012

• Re: In WebIDL, should having a .prototype on interface objects be optional? Rick Waldron
• RE: In WebIDL, should having a .prototype on interface objects be optional? Travis Leithead

Last message date: Monday, 31 December 2012 19:03:14 UTC