public-web-intents@w3.org from April 2012 by date

Friday, 27 April 2012

• Re: questions on the April 11th draft Greg Billock
• FPWD for web intents, was Re: Face to face with DAP? Dave Raggett

Wednesday, 25 April 2012

• RE: Status of my Actions from Shenzhen meeting (relating to Web Intents for local network service discovery) Sato, Naoyuki (TDG)
• RE: Status of my Actions from Shenzhen meeting (relating to Web Intents for local network service discovery) Sato, Naoyuki (TDG)

Friday, 27 April 2012

• RE: Status of my Actions from Shenzhen meeting (relating to Web Intents for local network service discovery) Sato, Naoyuki (TDG)

Thursday, 26 April 2012

• RE: Status of my Actions from Shenzhen meeting (relating to Web Intents for local network service discovery) Sato, Naoyuki (TDG)

Friday, 27 April 2012

• Re: Status of my Actions from Shenzhen meeting (relating to Web Intents for local network service discovery) Jean-Claude Dufourd

Thursday, 26 April 2012

• Re: Face to face with DAP? Greg Billock
• Re: Status of my Actions from Shenzhen meeting (relating to Web Intents for local network service discovery) Jean-Claude Dufourd
• RE: questions on the April 11th draft SULLIVAN, BRYAN L
• Re: Web Intents on WebApps' May 1-2 f2f meeting agenda? Arthur Barstow
• Re: questions on the April 11th draft KOMATSU Kensaku
• Re: questions on the April 11th draft James Hawkins
• Re: Auxiliary proposal for passing MIME data through web intents Jason Douglas
• Re: Face to face with DAP? James Hawkins
• Re: Face to face with DAP? Robin Berjon
• Re: Face to face with DAP? Arthur Barstow
• RE: Status of my Actions from Shenzhen meeting (relating to Web Intents for local network service discovery) Nilsson, Claes1
• Re: Auxiliary proposal for passing MIME data through web intents Greg Billock
• Face to face with DAP? Robin Berjon
• RE: Status of my Actions from Shenzhen meeting (relating to Web Intents for local network service discovery) Nilsson, Claes1
• Re: Auxiliary proposal for passing MIME data through web intents Robin Berjon
• Re: Status of my Actions from Shenzhen meeting (relating to Web Intents for local network service discovery) Jean-Claude Dufourd
• RE: Proposal for "default services" parameter in IntentParameters dictionary Deepanshu Gautam
• RE: questions on the April 11th draft SULLIVAN, BRYAN L
• Re: questions on the April 11th draft Greg Billock

Wednesday, 25 April 2012

• Auxiliary proposal for passing MIME data through web intents Greg Billock
• Re: Proposal for "default services" parameter in IntentParameters dictionary James Hawkins
• Re: Proposal for "default services" parameter in IntentParameters dictionary Josh Soref
• Re: Proposal for "default services" parameter in IntentParameters dictionary James Hawkins
• Re: Proposal for "default services" parameter in IntentParameters dictionary Josh Soref
• Re: Proposal for "default services" parameter in IntentParameters dictionary James Hawkins
• Re: Status of my Actions from Shenzhen meeting (relating to Web Intents for local network service discovery) Clarke Stevens
• Re: Status of my Actions from Shenzhen meeting (relating to Web Intents for local network service discovery) Jean-Claude Dufourd
• Re: Status of my Actions from Shenzhen meeting (relating to Web Intents for local network service discovery) Clarke Stevens
• Status of my Actions from Shenzhen meeting (relating to Web Intents for local network service discovery) Nilsson, Claes1
• RE: exploration of non-web intent providers Nilsson, Claes1
• RE: exploration of non-web intent providers SULLIVAN, BRYAN L
• RE: Proposal for "default services" parameter in IntentParameters dictionary Deepanshu Gautam

Tuesday, 24 April 2012

• Proposal for "default services" parameter in IntentParameters dictionary Greg Billock
• RE: exploration of non-web intent providers Nilsson, Claes1

Monday, 23 April 2012

• RE: exploration of non-web intent providers SULLIVAN, BRYAN L
• RE: exploration of non-web intent providers Nilsson, Claes1
• Re: Question on object literal syntax and getExtra method Greg Billock
• Re: exploration of non-web intent providers Jean-Claude Dufourd
• RE: exploration of non-web intent providers Nilsson, Claes1
• Re: Question on object literal syntax and getExtra method Paul Kinlan
• Question on object literal syntax and getExtra method Jungkee Song
• RE: questions on the April 11th draft SULLIVAN, BRYAN L
• RE: exploration of non-web intent providers SULLIVAN, BRYAN L

Friday, 20 April 2012

• Re: exploration of non-web intent providers Dave Raggett
• Re: Is discovery good enough for wider use cases Greg Billock
• Re: questions on the April 11th draft Greg Billock
• Re: exploration of non-web intent providers Jean-Claude Dufourd
• Re: exploration of non-web intent providers Dave Raggett
• exploration of non-web intent providers Jean-Claude Dufourd
• Re: questions on the April 11th draft Jean-Claude Dufourd

Thursday, 19 April 2012

• Re: questions on the April 11th draft Greg Billock
• Re: questions on the April 11th draft Jean-Claude Dufourd
• Re: questions on the April 11th draft Greg Billock

Wednesday, 18 April 2012

• RE: Question on registration (tag and JS shim) Jungkee Song
• Re: Question on registration (tag and JS shim) Paul Kinlan
• Question on registration (tag and JS shim) Jungkee Song
• Re: A question about action matching cheng zheng

Tuesday, 17 April 2012

• RE: Registration behavior when action attribute is missing Cathy.Chan@nokia.com
• questions on the April 11th draft Jean-Claude Dufourd
• RE: Is discovery good enough for wider use cases Glenn Jones
• Re: Is discovery good enough for wider use cases Charles Pritchard

Monday, 16 April 2012

• Re: Is discovery good enough for wider use cases Greg Billock
• Re: Registration behavior when action attribute is missing Greg Billock
• Re: Is discovery good enough for wider use cases Charles Pritchard
• Re: Is discovery good enough for wider use cases Greg Billock
• Registration behavior when action attribute is missing Cathy.Chan@nokia.com
• Re: Is discovery good enough for wider use cases Charles Pritchard
• RE: Is discovery good enough for wider use cases Josh Soref
• Re: A question about action matching Greg Billock
• Re: A question about action matching Friedger Müffke

Sunday, 15 April 2012

• RE: Is discovery good enough for wider use cases Glenn Jones

Thursday, 12 April 2012

• Re: Is discovery good enough for wider use cases Greg Billock
• RE: Is discovery good enough for wider use cases Josh Soref
• Is discovery good enough for wider use cases Glenn Jones
• Re: first public working draft in April? Dave Raggett

Wednesday, 11 April 2012

• [admin] Final minutes Shenzhen F2F on 20-22 March 2012 Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com
• Re: first public working draft in April? James Hawkins
• Re: Proposal for incorporating explicit intent invocation into the object literal constructor Greg Billock
• Re: Web Intents on WebApps' May 1-2 f2f meeting agenda? James Hawkins
• Re: Proposal for incorporating explicit intent invocation into the object literal constructor Charles Pritchard
• Re: Proposal for incorporating explicit intent invocation into the object literal constructor Greg Billock
• Re: Web Intents on WebApps' May 1-2 f2f meeting agenda? Arthur Barstow

Tuesday, 10 April 2012

• Re: first public working draft in April? Dave Raggett
• Re: first public working draft in April? James Hawkins
• Re: Web Intents on WebApps' May 1-2 f2f meeting agenda? James Hawkins
• first public working draft in April? Dave Raggett
• Web Intents on WebApps' May 1-2 f2f meeting agenda? Arthur Barstow
• Re: Type matching algorithm for web intents Greg Billock
• Re: Type matching algorithm for web intents James Hawkins
• Re: Type matching algorithm for web intents Jason Douglas

Monday, 9 April 2012

• Type matching algorithm for web intents Greg Billock

Friday, 6 April 2012

• Draft of DAP Shenzhen F2F minutes timeless
• Re: A question about action matching James Hawkins

Thursday, 5 April 2012

• Re: Proposal for incorporating explicit intent invocation into the object literal constructor Charles Pritchard
• Re: Proposal for incorporating explicit intent invocation into the object literal constructor Greg Billock
• Re: Proposal for incorporating explicit intent invocation into the object literal constructor Charles Pritchard
• Re: Proposal for incorporating explicit intent invocation into the object literal constructor James Hawkins
• Proposal for incorporating explicit intent invocation into the object literal constructor Greg Billock

Tuesday, 3 April 2012

• Re: Chrome 18 Web Intents support James Hawkins
• Chrome 18 Web Intents support Nilsson, Claes1

Monday, 2 April 2012

• A question about action matching cheng zheng

Sunday, 1 April 2012

• Re: Proposal to switch to an object-literal Intent constructor James Hawkins

Last message date: Friday, 27 April 2012 19:23:51 UTC