public-webapps-github@w3.org from June 2015 by author

Adam Bergkvist

• Re: [webidl-checker] Support for required dictionary member (#16) (Monday, 29 June)
• [webidl-checker] Support for required dictionary member (#16) (Friday, 26 June)

Adria

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Should window.caches be removed (or readonly) for security reasons? (#698) (Wednesday, 10 June)

Albert

• [ServiceWorker] Add name param to Clients.openWindow() method (#711) (Monday, 15 June)

Alex Russell

• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Interception of the fallback requests initiated from a SW for cross-origin resources (#684) (Tuesday, 2 June)

Alice

• [webcomponents] Add notes on forms & script-supporting behaviour. (#116) (Saturday, 13 June)
• [webcomponents] Flesh out Accessibility benefits section (#115) (Saturday, 13 June)
• [webcomponents] Add Type-Extensions.md (#114) (Saturday, 13 June)

allanjuma

• Re: [manifest] A means to control how long a splash screen should remain on screen. (#372) (Saturday, 27 June)
• Re: [manifest] A means to control how long a splash screen should remain on screen. (#372) (Wednesday, 24 June)

Anne van Kesteren

• Re: [fetch] worker request context definition references undefined "serviceworker" context (#68) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [fetch] Add support for federated token binding to fetch (#30) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [fetch] worker request context definition references undefined "serviceworker" context (#68) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [fetch] worker request context definition references undefined "serviceworker" context (#68) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [fetch] worker request context definition references undefined "serviceworker" context (#68) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [dom] Less ambiguous step description for Node.before (#47) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [dom] Less ambiguous step description for Node.before (#47) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [dom] `document.importNode` and `document.adoptNode` should throw exceptions when acting upon ShadowRoots (#46) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [dom] `document.importNode` and `document.adoptNode` should throw exceptions when acting upon ShadowRoots (#46) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [dom] `document.importNode` and `document.adoptNode` should throw exceptions when acting upon ShadowRoots (#46) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [dom] `document.importNode` and `document.adoptNode` should throw exceptions when acting upon ShadowRoots (#46) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [dom] `document.importNode` and `document.adoptNode` should throw exceptions when acting upon ShadowRoots (#46) (Friday, 26 June)
• [storage] Restrict to Secure Contexts (#5) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [streams] Add .bytesRead to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [streams] Add .bytesRead to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [streams] Add .bytesRead to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [dom] `document.importNode` and `document.adoptNode` should throw exceptions when acting upon ShadowRoots (#46) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] importNode and adoptNode should throw with passed a ShadowRoot (#125) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [streams] Add .bytesRead to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Restrict openWindow() to http(s) schemes? (#699) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [streams] Add .bytesRead to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Support restarting download when storing large resources in Cache (#713) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Document the headers being introduced (#717) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Document the headers being introduced (#717) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Support restarting download when storing large resources in Cache (#713) (Sunday, 21 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] HTTP authentication and proxy authentication hook (#119) (Sunday, 21 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] HTTP authentication and proxy authentication hook (#119) (Sunday, 21 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] HTTP authentication and proxy authentication hook (#119) (Sunday, 21 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] HTTP authentication and proxy authentication hook (#119) (Sunday, 21 June)
• Re: [permissions] Barebone definition of permissions.revoke(). (63951c2) (Sunday, 21 June)
• [permissions] Remove object-based permissions (#42) (Sunday, 21 June)
• Re: [dom] Remove unnecessary conditions from the 'traverse children' algorithm. (#45) (Sunday, 21 June)
• [streams-api] Rescind this document (#1) (Saturday, 20 June)
• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [permissions] Add "fullscreen" (#26) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [screen-orientation] "Whenever a top-level browsing context is navigated, the user agent MUST lock the orientation of the document to the document's default orientation. " doesn't deal with fragment navigation (#87) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [encoding] Closes issue 5: Test _code point_ instead of _pointer_ for null when prepending ASCII byte. (#6) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Does a SW control a page outside its scope reached by a redirect? (#706) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Service worker not receiving fetch events from iframe with Blob URL source. (#712) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [permissions] Remove global variables (#35) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [fetch] Abort fetch upon document unload (#53) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [fetch] Abort fetch upon document unload (#53) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] alternate proposal (#120) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Receivers of ranged responses must ensure all ranges come from the same underlying resource (#703) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [dom] Rewrite replaceWith/before/after algorithms (#32) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [dom] Rewrite replaceWith/before/after algorithms (#32) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [storage] Add API to allow origin to purge all storage (#4) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Receivers of ranged responses must ensure all ranges come from the same underlying resource (#703) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [dom] Rewrite replaceWith/before/after algorithms (#32) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [dom] Rewrite replaceWith/before/after algorithms (#32) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] The mutation method macro has undefined behavior when nodes is empty (#44) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] Rewrite replaceWith/before/after algorithms (#32) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] Rewrite replaceWith/before/after algorithms (#32) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] The mutation method macro has undefined behavior when nodes is empty (#44) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] The mutation method macro has undefined behavior when nodes is empty (#44) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] The mutation method macro has undefined behavior when nodes is empty (#44) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] Attributes need case-insensitive matching on getting (#41) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Add "why upgrades" document to proposals section (#112) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Add "why upgrades" document to proposals section (#112) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] Rename replace() to replaceWith() (b7563aa) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [dom] setAttribute() needs to lowercase for HTML nodes in HTML documents. Fixes #31 (afe5b5e) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [fetch] Tests (#62) (Thursday, 11 June)
• [fetch] Moar hyphens (#63) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [fetch] Tests (#62) (Thursday, 11 June)
• [fetch] Tests (#62) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [fetch] Document usage for GET requests with URI parameters (#56) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] spec should be more explicit about accessing internal body on opaque Responses (#710) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Update constraints around stopping events (bugzilla: 20247) (#61) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [dom] setAttribute() needs to lowercase for HTML nodes in HTML documents. Fixes #31 (afe5b5e) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [shadow-dom] [Fix #61] Make Event have isEncapsulated flag and use it in the event path calculation algorithm. (adae25b) (Thursday, 11 June)
• [webcomponents] getDistributedNodes() should return an Array (#108) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• [FileAPI] Blob.close() has several problems (#10) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• [dom] Attributes need case-insensitive matching on getting (#41) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] HTTP/2 server push support (#51) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [shadow-dom] Fix #102, updating Element.createShadowRoot() so that it throws an exception. (9b65780) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [shadow-dom] [Fix #61] Make Event have isEncapsulated flag and use it in the event path calculation algorithm. (adae25b) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Interception of the fallback requests initiated from a SW for cross-origin resources (#684) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Receivers of ranged responses must ensure all ranges come from the same underlying resource (#703) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Receivers of ranged responses must ensure all ranges come from the same underlying resource (#703) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Define the lifetime of a blob URL created inside a service worker (#688) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] ServiceWorker registration fails inside an https-origin IFRAME when the top-level page is not secure (e.g. http or data URI) (#700) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] ServiceWorker registration fails inside an https-origin IFRAME when the top-level page is not secure (e.g. http or data URI) (#700) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] navigator.serviceWorker is not defined (#689) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Restrict openWindow() to http(s) schemes? (#699) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] You don't need any flags in Chrome today :) (#686) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] How to deal with cookie bombing (#704) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Should window.caches be removed (or readonly) for security reasons? (#698) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] Request constructor does not check used flag on null body (#55) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] What's proper SW name? :) (#705) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] What's proper SW name? :) (#705) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] matches, querySelector, etc. shouldn't throw on an unrecognized selector (#39) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] HTTP/2 server push support (#51) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] matches, querySelector, etc. shouldn't throw on an unrecognized selector (#39) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] Proposal: Node#appendSibling/prependSibling (#38) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] Proposal: Node#appendSibling/prependSibling (#38) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] Abort fetch upon document unload (#53) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] Rename `response` in HTTP fetch 3.1.1-2 (#54) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] [Question] Is there any suggested way to tell if we are dealing with a fetch request server-side? (#58) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] [Question] Is there any suggested way to tell if we are dealing with a fetch request server-side? (#58) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [shadow-dom] Fix #102, updating Element.createShadowRoot() so that it throws an exception. (9b65780) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow] investigate if there should be deepRelatedTargets and touch.deepTargets (bugzilla: 28560) (#76) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: The return type of Event.path should leverage WebIDL sequences (bugzilla: 25458) (#101) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Update constraints around stopping events (bugzilla: 20247) (#61) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [shadow-dom] [Fix #61] Make Event have isEncapsulated flag and use it in the event path calculation algorithm. (adae25b) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [xhr] Abandon hope of removing sync XHR from the web platform? (#20) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [FileAPI] Controlling Blob URL's (#8) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [permissions] Tackle origin (#34) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [permissions] Tackle origin (#34) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] Add [TreatNullAs=EmptyString] to Attr.nodeValue/textContent (#36) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] Add [TreatNullAs=EmptyString] to Attr.nodeValue/textContent (#36) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] Add hint that `event.bubbles` is configurable. (#35) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] Add hint that `event.bubbles` is configurable. (#35) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• [dom] Cleanup "equals" usage (#40) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] matches, querySelector, etc. shouldn't throw on an unrecognized selector (#39) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] Proposal: Node#appendSibling/prependSibling (#38) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [xhr] Drastically simplify FormData. Preserve object identity. Remove filename parameter now new File() covers that. (f9d4c25) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [xhr] Remove XMLHttpRequest from ServiceWorkerGlobalScope (#19) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [xhr] Abandon hope of removing sync XHR from the web platform? (#20) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [webstorage] How to handle non-DOMString values? (#4) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] Fix the ID for DOMImplementation (was #interface=domimplementation) (27b9b3c) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [encoding] Benefits of "Legacy" Encodings – Byte Counter (#4) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [dom] Proposal: Node#appendSibling/prependSibling (#38) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [encoding] Benefits of "Legacy" Encodings – Byte Counter (#4) (Monday, 1 June)

Anssi Kostiainen

• Re: [manifest] Address timeless' review comments (#383) (Thursday, 18 June)
• [manifest] Address timeless' review comments (#383) (Wednesday, 17 June)

ArkadiuszMichalski

• Re: [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [dom] Rename replace() to replaceWith() (b7563aa) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [dom] setAttribute() needs to lowercase for HTML nodes in HTML documents. Fixes #31 (afe5b5e) (Thursday, 11 June)
• [dom] Shorter setAttribute() method (#43) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [dom] setAttribute() needs to lowercase for HTML nodes in HTML documents. Fixes #31 (afe5b5e) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [dom] setAttribute() needs to lowercase for HTML nodes in HTML documents. Fixes #31 (afe5b5e) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [dom] =Add hint that `event.bubbles` is configurable. (8d1ef8f) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [dom] Add [TreatNullAs=EmptyString] to Attr.nodeValue/textContent (df9901c) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [dom] Proposal: Node#appendSibling/prependSibling (#38) (Monday, 1 June)

Arthur Barstow

• [ServiceWorker] Is Jake still a `ghost-author`? (#716) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• [IndexedDB] Add link to IDB Feature Request wiki (#25) (Wednesday, 17 June)

balfanz

• Re: [fetch] Add support for federated token binding to fetch (#30) (Tuesday, 30 June)

Bart Calixto

• [fetch] [Question] Is there any suggested way to tell if we are dealing with a fetch request server-side? (#58) (Monday, 1 June)

Ben Kelly

• Re: [fetch] worker request context definition references undefined "serviceworker" context (#68) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [fetch] worker request context definition references undefined "serviceworker" context (#68) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [fetch] worker request context definition references undefined "serviceworker" context (#68) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• [fetch] worker request context definition references undefined "serviceworker" context (#68) (Monday, 29 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] under what conditions should sandboxed iframes be intercepted? (#648) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Support restarting download when storing large resources in Cache (#713) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• [fetch] Response content-length header almost always wrong (#67) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] UA shouldn't be required to invoke Soft Update on every navigation (#715) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Support restarting download when storing large resources in Cache (#713) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Can Cache.add() committing at response resolution lead to duplicate requests? (#361) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Can Cache.add() committing at response resolution lead to duplicate requests? (#361) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Can Cache.add() committing at response resolution lead to duplicate requests? (#361) (Friday, 19 June)
• [ServiceWorker] Support restarting download when storing large resources in Cache (#713) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] spec should be more explicit about accessing internal body on opaque Responses (#710) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [fetch] Tests (#62) (Thursday, 11 June)
• [ServiceWorker] spec should be more explicit about accessing internal body on opaque Responses (#710) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Should window.caches be removed (or readonly) for security reasons? (#698) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Should window.caches be removed (or readonly) for security reasons? (#698) (Monday, 8 June)

Ben Turner

• Re: [IndexedDB] For schema mutations, should InvalidStateError trump TransactionInactiveError? (#23) (Monday, 22 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] For schema mutations, should InvalidStateError trump TransactionInactiveError? (#23) (Wednesday, 17 June)

Benjamin C. Wiley Sittler

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)

Boris Zbarsky

• Re: [webidl] Fix arrays (#52) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [webidl] Fix arrays (#52) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [dom] matches, querySelector, etc. shouldn't throw on an unrecognized selector (#39) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] matches, querySelector, etc. shouldn't throw on an unrecognized selector (#39) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] matches, querySelector, etc. shouldn't throw on an unrecognized selector (#39) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [dom] matches, querySelector, etc. shouldn't throw on an unrecognized selector (#39) (Tuesday, 2 June)

Brad Hill

• [permissions] grammar nits (#38) (Monday, 15 June)

Brendan Long

• Re: [fetch] HTTP/2 server push support (#51) (Sunday, 14 June)

Brenton Simpson

• Re: [dom] matches, querySelector, etc. shouldn't throw on an unrecognized selector (#39) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] matches, querySelector, etc. shouldn't throw on an unrecognized selector (#39) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [dom] matches, querySelector, etc. shouldn't throw on an unrecognized selector (#39) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• [dom] matches, querySelector, etc. shouldn't throw on an unrecognized selector (#39) (Tuesday, 2 June)

bruce lawson

• [webcomponents] alternate proposal (#120) (Monday, 15 June)

Cameron McCormack

• [webidl] Fix arrays (#52) (Monday, 22 June)
• Re: [webidl] typo in the definition of an unrestricted double? (#51) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [webidl] typo in the definition of an unrestricted double? (#51) (Monday, 1 June)

cashinde

• [push-api] How to implement the retry send notification if the confirmation for notification send is missing in API documentation (#151) (Friday, 5 June)

chaals

• Re: [editing] Should Device-Specific Input Events say what Responsive Input Event they will cause? (#25) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] What to do with contentEditableTrue? (#54) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Tuesday, 2 June)

Corey Farwell

• Re: [dom] Less ambiguous step description for Node.before (#47) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [dom] Less ambiguous step description for Node.before (#47) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [dom] Less ambiguous step description for Node.before (#47) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [dom] Less ambiguous step description for Node.before (#47) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• [dom] Less ambiguous step description for Node.before (#47) (Tuesday, 30 June)

Cristian Talau

• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] What browser internals can be exposed to help us move the caret in (and against) the block direction? (#56) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] What browser internals can be exposed to help us move the caret in (and against) the block direction? (#56) (Tuesday, 2 June)

Cătălin Mariș

• Re: [manifest] Manifest format should support some way of including a splash screen (#9) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [manifest] Drop .json as standard file ext. (closes #381) (#382) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [manifest] .json in MIME registration is causing problems. (#381) (Monday, 1 June)

Daniel Appelquist

• Re: [spec-reviews] CSV on the Web (#55) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [spec-reviews] CSV on the Web (#55) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [spec-reviews] CSV on the Web (#55) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [spec-reviews] CSV on the Web (#55) (Tuesday, 2 June)

Daniel Cheng

• Re: [clipboard-apis] Should queryCommandEnabled(cut|copy|paste) trigger onbefore* events? (#4) (Thursday, 4 June)

David Graham

• Re: [fetch] [Question] Is there any suggested way to tell if we are dealing with a fetch request server-side? (#58) (Monday, 1 June)

Dimitri Glazkov

• Re: [webcomponents] Add a proposal md document for ShadowRoot's delegatesFocus flag. (#127) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Add notes on forms & script-supporting behaviour. (#116) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Flesh out Accessibility benefits section (#115) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Add Type-Extensions.md (#114) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Add Type-Extensions.md (#114) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Add "why upgrades" document to proposals section (#112) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Add "why upgrades" document to proposals section (#112) (Friday, 12 June)

Domenic Denicola

• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Revert removal of _controller initialization, and add a comment to explain why it's necessary (a174501) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Don't allow negative-sized chunks (#370) (Monday, 29 June)
• Re: [streams] Should negative chunk size be allowed? (#368) (Monday, 29 June)
• [streams] Don't allow negative-sized chunks (#370) (Monday, 29 June)
• Re: [streams] compile into a single es5 file for polyfilling a browser and add bower.json (#369) (Sunday, 28 June)
• Re: [streams] compile into a single es5 file for polyfilling a browser and add bower.json (#369) (Sunday, 28 June)
• Re: [streams] Should negative chunk size be allowed? (#368) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [streams] Add .bytesRead to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [streams] Add .bytesRead to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [streams] Add .bytesRead to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] importNode and adoptNode should throw with passed a ShadowRoot (#125) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [streams] Add "when are streams appropriate" (#360) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [streams] FAQs that need answers (#126) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [streams] Update FAQ with some extra answers (#365) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [streams] What should we call ReadableByteStream.prototype.getBYOBReader()? (#294) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Potentially simplify callOrScheduleAdvanceQueue (#145) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Potentially simplify callOrScheduleAdvanceQueue (#145) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Make sure promise returning methods don't throw (#342) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Use "perform" for abstract ops that cannot throw (#366) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Use "perform" for abstract ops that cannot throw (#366) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Add .bytesRead to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Thursday, 18 June)
• [streams] Use "perform" for abstract ops that cannot throw (#366) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Never-released lock / getReader({unreleasable: true}) (#358) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Add ReadableByteStream observing API (#362) (Thursday, 18 June)
• [streams] Update FAQ with some extra answers (#365) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] readBatch(), readAllAvailable() or getSyncReader() (#327) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [streams] readBatch(), readAllAvailable() or getSyncReader() (#327) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] ReadableByteStream: pull + pullInto or just pullInto (#363) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Add ReadableByteStream observing API (#362) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• [streams] Consider moving stuff into ReadableStreamController (#364) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Add ReadableByteStream observing API (#362) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113) (Friday, 12 June)
• [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Add "why upgrades" document to proposals section (#112) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] Rewrite replaceWith/before/after algorithms (#32) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Add "why upgrades" document to proposals section (#112) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Proposals directory contains non-Windows-compatible filenames (#111) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Proposals directory contains non-Windows-compatible filenames (#111) (Friday, 12 June)
• [webcomponents] Add "why upgrades" document to proposals section (#112) (Friday, 12 June)
• [webcomponents] Proposals directory contains non-Windows-compatible filenames (#111) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] ReadableByteStream underlying source/controller design: return a promise vs. c.something (#354) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] ReadableByteStream underlying source/controller design: return a promise vs. c.something (#354) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [fetch] Tests (#62) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [streams] Never-released lock / getReader({unreleasable: true}) (#358) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Monday, 8 June)
• [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Monday, 8 June)
• [streams] Add "when are streams appropriate" (#360) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: The return type of Event.path should leverage WebIDL sequences (bugzilla: 25458) (#101) (Friday, 5 June)
• [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [streams] Readable byte streams should support an internal queue (#353) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [streams] Readable byte streams should support an internal queue (#353) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [fetch] Regarding "switch on response's status" (#60) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [fetch] Regarding "switch on response's status" (#60) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [streams] Transform streams and acknowledgement of writes (#329) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [streams] Never-released lock / getReader({unreleasable: true}) (#358) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [streams] Readable byte streams should support an internal queue (#353) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [filesystem-api] Observable is not appropriate for directory listing; async iterable would be better (#4) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [fetch] POST calls - Request Payload is not shown with native fetch (#59) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [fetch] POST calls - Request Payload is not shown with native fetch (#59) (Monday, 1 June)

Dominic Cooney

• Re: [xhr] Remove XMLHttpRequest from ServiceWorkerGlobalScope (#19) (Friday, 12 June)

Dominique Hazael-Massieux

• Re: [webidl-checker] Support for required dictionary member (#16) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [webidl-checker] Support for required dictionary member (#16) (Friday, 26 June)

edwinvanderham

• [xhr] getResponseHeader should work case-insensitive (#21) (Monday, 1 June)

Eric Edens

• [url] Counterintuitive step in `non-relative-url(input)` (#48) (Thursday, 11 June)

Erik Wilde

• [filesystem-api] fixing typo (#5) (Wednesday, 10 June)

Evan Wallace

• Re: [clipboard-apis] Non Recognizable formats (#9) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [clipboard-apis] Non Recognizable formats (#9) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [clipboard-apis] Non Recognizable formats (#9) (Monday, 1 June)

Francisco Jordano

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add name param to Clients.openWindow() method (#711) (Thursday, 18 June)

FrederickDoering

• Re: [clipboard-apis] Non Recognizable formats (#9) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [clipboard-apis] Non Recognizable formats (#9) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [clipboard-apis] Non Recognizable formats (#9) (Monday, 1 June)
• [clipboard-apis] Non Recognizable formats (#9) (Monday, 1 June)

Frederico Caldeira Knabben

• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] What to do with contentEditableTrue? (#54) (Monday, 1 June)

Glen Little

• Re: [xhr] Abandon hope of removing sync XHR from the web platform? (#20) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [xhr] Abandon hope of removing sync XHR from the web platform? (#20) (Thursday, 4 June)

Hadley Beeman

• Re: [spec-reviews] CSV on the Web (#55) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [spec-reviews] CSV on the Web (#55) (Monday, 1 June)

Hallvord R. M. Steen

• Re: [clipboard-apis] Non Recognizable formats (#9) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [clipboard-apis] Should queryCommandEnabled(cut|copy|paste) trigger onbefore* events? (#4) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [clipboard-apis] Should queryCommandEnabled(cut|copy|paste) trigger onbefore* events? (#4) (Thursday, 4 June)

Hayato Ito

• Re: [webcomponents] Links on Introduction to Web Components don't actually take you anywhere (#123) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Links on Introduction to Web Components don't actually take you anywhere (#123) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] importNode and adoptNode should throw with passed a ShadowRoot (#125) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] importNode and adoptNode should throw with passed a ShadowRoot (#125) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] importNode and adoptNode should throw with passed a ShadowRoot (#125) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Event model (bugzilla: 28564) (#77) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Event model (bugzilla: 28564) (#77) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Clean up: refactor event path calculation algorithm and retargeting algorithm (#124) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] importNode and adoptNode should throw with passed a ShadowRoot (#125) (Thursday, 25 June)
• [webcomponents] Clean up: refactor event path calculation algorithm and retargeting algorithm (#124) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Links on Introduction to Web Components don't actually take you anywhere (#123) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Fixing 'slot id' to be 'slot name' (#122) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] alternate proposal (#120) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Enumerate the element names which don't support createShadowRoot(), instead of looking at the binding property (#110) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Enumerate the element names which don't support createShadowRoot(), instead of looking at the binding property (#110) (Monday, 15 June)
• [webcomponents] Migrate the bugs filed for Custom Elements from bugzilla to GitHub Issues, here. (#119) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Style edits to Type-Extensions.md (#118) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Describe focus navigation order for the case with tabindex=-1 (#35) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Describe focus navigation order for the case with tabindex=-1 (#35) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Proposals directory contains non-Windows-compatible filenames (#111) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Proposals directory contains non-Windows-compatible filenames (#111) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Proposals directory contains non-Windows-compatible filenames (#111) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Thursday, 11 June)
• [webcomponents] Enumerate the element names which don't support createShadowRoot(). (#110) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [shadow-dom] Fix #102, updating Element.createShadowRoot() so that it throws an exception. (9b65780) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] getDistributedNodes() shouldn't exclude a node in closed shadow tree. (#109) (Thursday, 11 June)
• [webcomponents] getDistributedNodes() shouldn't exclude a node in closed shadow tree. (#109) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] getDistributedNodes() should return an Array (#108) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] getDistributedNodes() should return an Array (#108) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Update constraints around stopping events (bugzilla: 20247) (#61) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Update constraints around stopping events (bugzilla: 20247) (#61) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [shadow-dom] [Fix #61] Make Event have isEncapsulated flag and use it in the event path calculation algorithm. (adae25b) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [shadow-dom] [Fix #61] Make Event have isEncapsulated flag and use it in the event path calculation algorithm. (adae25b) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [shadow-dom] [Fix #61] Make Event have isEncapsulated flag and use it in the event path calculation algorithm. (adae25b) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [shadow-dom] Fix #102, updating Element.createShadowRoot() so that it throws an exception. (9b65780) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: The return type of Event.path should leverage WebIDL sequences (bugzilla: 25458) (#101) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: The return type of Event.path should leverage WebIDL sequences (bugzilla: 25458) (#101) (Saturday, 6 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Update constraints around stopping events (bugzilla: 20247) (#61) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Update constraints around stopping events (bugzilla: 20247) (#61) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Update constraints around stopping events (bugzilla: 20247) (#61) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Add [TreatNullAs=EmptyString] to ShadowRoot.innerHTML (bugzilla: 28549) (#74) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Add [TreatNullAs=EmptyString] to ShadowRoot.innerHTML (bugzilla: 28549) (#74) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Multiple trees are introduced to explain encapsulation. (bugzilla: 23481) (#83) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Multiple trees are introduced to explain encapsulation. (bugzilla: 23481) (#83) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: elementFromPoint should return the host when you hit a Text node (bugzilla: 24638) (#67) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Have a common interface between Document and ShadowRoot (bugzilla: 28493) (#91) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Distribution needs to not be observable (bugzilla: 27994) (#87) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Distribution needs to not be observable (bugzilla: 27994) (#87) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow] investigate if there should be deepRelatedTargets and touch.deepTargets (bugzilla: 28560) (#76) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Consider removal of multiple shadow roots (bugzilla: 28446) (#90) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Consider removal of multiple shadow roots (bugzilla: 28446) (#90) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: how is the autofocus attribute supposed to be handled? (bugzilla: 27757) (#97) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: how is the autofocus attribute supposed to be handled? (bugzilla: 27757) (#97) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Shadow host with tabindex=-1, all descendent tree should be ignored for tab navigation (bugzilla: 27965) (#86) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Shadow host with tabindex=-1, all descendent tree should be ignored for tab navigation (bugzilla: 27965) (#86) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Add "closed" flag to createShadowRoot (bugzilla: 20144) (#100) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Specify imperative API for node distribution (bugzilla: 18429) (#60) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: The return type of Event.path should leverage WebIDL sequences (bugzilla: 25458) (#101) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Element.createShadowRoot() throws an exception for some elements (bugzilla: 27844) (#102) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Element.createShadowRoot() throws an exception for some elements (bugzilla: 27844) (#102) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow] createShadowRoot() in spec example should be updated to have parameter (#106) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow] createShadowRoot() in spec example should be updated to have parameter (#106) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Define the behavior of *closed* shadow trees. (bugzilla: 27775) (#85) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Define the behavior of *closed* shadow trees. (bugzilla: 27775) (#85) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Define the behavior of *closed* shadow trees. (bugzilla: 27775) (#85) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Distribution needs to not be observable (bugzilla: 27994) (#87) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow] Change the order of insertion points which are involved in a re-distribution in event path (bugzilla: 23887) (#98) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow] Change the order of insertion points which are involved in a re-distribution in event path (bugzilla: 23887) (#98) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Element.createShadowRoot() throws an exception for some elements (bugzilla: 27844) (#102) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Focus navigation in distributed content (#103) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Monday, 1 June)

Henri Sivonen

• Re: [encoding] Big5 decoder fails to prepend ASCII byte when pointer is non-null but code point is null (#5) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• [encoding] Closes issue 5: Test _code point_ instead of _pointer_ for null when prepending ASCII byte. (#6) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• [encoding] Big5 decoder fails to prepend ASCII byte when pointer is non-null but code point is null (#5) (Wednesday, 17 June)

Hiroki Nakagawa

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Navigating clients from the SW context? (#681) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Navigating clients from the SW context? (#681) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Navigating clients from the SW context? (#681) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• [ServiceWorker] updatefound event should be dispatched on ServiceWorkerRegistration (#714) (Friday, 19 June)

Hubert SABLONNIÈRE

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)

Ilya Grigorik

• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Saturday, 27 June)
• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [fetch] HTTP/2 server push support (#51) (Thursday, 18 June)
• [fetch] Observer API for fetch registry (#65) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Thursday, 11 June)
• [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Thursday, 11 June)

Ingvar Stepanyan

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)

István Szmozsánszky

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Support restarting download when storing large resources in Cache (#713) (Sunday, 21 June)

Jack Wilson

• [webcomponents] Links on Introduction to Web Components don't actually take you anywhere (#123) (Saturday, 20 June)

Jake Archibald

• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Navigating clients from the SW context? (#681) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Restrict openWindow() to http(s) schemes? (#699) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Support restarting download when storing large resources in Cache (#713) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Support restarting download when storing large resources in Cache (#713) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Support restarting download when storing large resources in Cache (#713) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] UA shouldn't be required to invoke Soft Update on every navigation (#715) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Is Jake still a `ghost-author`? (#716) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Is Jake still a `ghost-author`? (#716) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Document the headers being introduced (#717) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Is Jake still a `ghost-author`? (#716) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Can we replace event.default() with something less magic? (#607) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add name param to Clients.openWindow() method (#711) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [fetch] Aborting a fetch (#27) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [fetch] Aborting a fetch (#27) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] How to deal with cookie bombing (#704) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] ServiceWorker registration fails inside an https-origin IFRAME when the top-level page is not secure (e.g. http or data URI) (#700) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] ServiceWorker registration fails inside an https-origin IFRAME when the top-level page is not secure (e.g. http or data URI) (#700) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Workers & SharedWorkers within ServiceWorkers (#678) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Workers & SharedWorkers within ServiceWorkers (#678) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Should window.caches be removed (or readonly) for security reasons? (#698) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] What's proper SW name? :) (#705) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] How to deal with cookie bombing (#704) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] What's proper SW name? :) (#705) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Should window.caches be removed (or readonly) for security reasons? (#698) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Should window.caches be removed (or readonly) for security reasons? (#698) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Does a SW control a page outside its scope reached by a redirect? (#706) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Does a SW control a page outside its scope reached by a redirect? (#706) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Interception of the fallback requests initiated from a SW for cross-origin resources (#684) (Monday, 8 June)

James Burke

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Workers & SharedWorkers within ServiceWorkers (#678) (Friday, 19 June)

Jan Miksovsky

• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Wednesday, 10 June)

jan-ivar

• Re: [fetch] Aborting a fetch (#27) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [fetch] Aborting a fetch (#27) (Thursday, 11 June)

Jason Wang

• Re: [fetch] POST calls - Request Payload is not shown with native fetch (#59) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [fetch] POST calls - Request Payload is not shown with native fetch (#59) (Friday, 26 June)

Jeni Tennison

• Re: [spec-reviews] CSV on the Web (#55) (Tuesday, 2 June)

Joey Smith

• [url] Make the textual description for port match the production rule (#49) (Thursday, 18 June)

Johannes Wilm

• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [selection-api] Need to be able to tell if the caret is displayed at the beginning or the end of the line (#32) (Friday, 5 June)
• [selection-api] Make caret displayable before, after and in-between stub-elements as well as non-editable elements within editable contexts (#47) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [selection-api] Need to be able to tell if the caret is displayed at the beginning or the end of the line (#32) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [selection-api] Need to be able to tell if the caret is displayed at the beginning or the end of the line (#32) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] What to do with IME input when typing over a large selection? (#59) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] What to do with IME input when typing over a large selection? (#59) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] What to do with IME input when typing over a large selection? (#59) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] What to do with IME input when typing over a large selection? (#59) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• [editing] What to do with IME input when typing over a large selection? (#59) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] What browser internals can be exposed to help us move the caret in (and against) the block direction? (#56) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] What browser internals can be exposed to help us move the caret in (and against) the block direction? (#56) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] What browser internals can be exposed to help us move the caret in (and against) the block direction? (#56) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] What to do with contentEditableTrue? (#54) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] What browser internals can be exposed to help us move the caret in (and against) the block direction? (#56) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] What browser internals can be exposed to help us move the caret in (and against) the block direction? (#56) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Monday, 1 June)

Jonathan Kingston

• [webcomponents] Fixing 'slot id' to be 'slot name' (#122) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [permissions] What should "retrieve the permission state" do for pickers? (#8) (Saturday, 13 June)

Joris

• Re: [dom] Rewrite replaceWith/before/after algorithms (#32) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [dom] Rewrite replaceWith/before/after algorithms (#32) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [dom] Rewrite replaceWith/before/after algorithms (#32) (Friday, 12 June)

Joshua Bell

• Re: [IndexedDB] Validate exception ordering against implementations (#11) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] For schema mutations, should InvalidStateError trump TransactionInactiveError? (#23) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Make IDBFactory.cmp [ImplicitThis] (#24) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Make IDBFactory.cmp [ImplicitThis] (#24) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• [IndexedDB] Add getKey to IDBObjectStore (#26) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Add openCursor(key, primaryKey) and continuePrimaryKey (#14) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] For schema mutations, should InvalidStateError trump TransactionInactiveError? (#23) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Add openCursor(key, primaryKey) and continuePrimaryKey (#14) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Add link to IDB Feature Request wiki (#25) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Introduce IDBKeySet (#19) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Validate exception ordering against implementations (#11) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Add openCursor(key, primaryKey) and continuePrimaryKey (#14) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [storage] Add API to allow origin to purge all storage (#4) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [dom] The mutation method macro has undefined behavior when nodes is empty (#44) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] The mutation method macro has undefined behavior when nodes is empty (#44) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Add openCursor(key, primaryKey) and continuePrimaryKey (#14) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Add openCursor(key, primaryKey) and continuePrimaryKey (#14) (Saturday, 6 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Add openCursor(key, primaryKey) and continuePrimaryKey (#14) (Saturday, 6 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Add openCursor(key, primaryKey) and continuePrimaryKey (#14) (Friday, 5 June)
• [IndexedDB] Make IDBFactory.cmp [ImplicitThis] (#24) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Validate exception ordering against implementations (#11) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Validate exception ordering against implementations (#11) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Validate exception ordering against implementations (#11) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Validate exception ordering against implementations (#11) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Validate exception ordering against implementations (#11) (Monday, 1 June)
• [IndexedDB] For schema mutations, should InvalidStateError trump TransactionInactiveError? (#23) (Monday, 1 June)

Joshua Peek

• Re: [webcomponents] Add "why upgrades" document. (a042e52) (Tuesday, 16 June)

Jungkee Song

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Document the headers being introduced (#717) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] UA shouldn't be required to invoke Soft Update on every navigation (#715) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Should UUID for unique IDs be mandated? (#647) (Monday, 22 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Can Cache.add() committing at response resolution lead to duplicate requests? (#361) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] updatefound event should be dispatched on ServiceWorkerRegistration (#714) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Can Cache.add() committing at response resolution lead to duplicate requests? (#361) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] caching of importScripts()-scripts (#106) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] What happens if there's an appcache manifest? (#275) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Should an IFRAME without src be controlled by SW when its parent is controlled? (#612) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Does a SW control a page outside its scope reached by a redirect? (#706) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Does a SW control a page outside its scope reached by a redirect? (#706) (Tuesday, 2 June)

karolklp

• [ServiceWorker] Unified naming (#708) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] What's proper SW name? :) (#705) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] What's proper SW name? :) (#705) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] What's proper SW name? :) (#705) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] What's proper SW name? :) (#705) (Monday, 8 June)

Kenneth Rohde Christiansen

• Re: [manifest] Address timeless' review comments (#383) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [manifest] Manifest format should support some way of including a splash screen (#9) (Monday, 8 June)

Kevin Lozandier

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)

Kinuko Yasuda

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Receivers of ranged responses must ensure all ranges come from the same underlying resource (#703) (Thursday, 11 June)

Klim Lee

• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] What to do with execCommand? (#53) (Monday, 1 June)

Koji Ishii

• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] What browser internals can be exposed to help us move the caret in (and against) the block direction? (#56) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] What browser internals can be exposed to help us move the caret in (and against) the block direction? (#56) (Tuesday, 2 June)

Kornel

• Re: [manifest] Manifest format should support some way of including a splash screen (#9) (Thursday, 11 June)

Kyaw Tun

• Re: [IndexedDB] Add openCursor(key, primaryKey) and continuePrimaryKey (#14) (Saturday, 20 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Add openCursor(key, primaryKey) and continuePrimaryKey (#14) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [IndexedDB] Add openCursor(key, primaryKey) and continuePrimaryKey (#14) (Tuesday, 16 June)

Malte Ubl

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Add cookie accessor/setter methods? (#707) (Tuesday, 9 June)

manut06

• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Wednesday, 17 June)

Marcos Caceres

• Re: [manifest] A means to control how long a splash screen should remain on screen. (#372) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [manifest] A means to control how long a splash screen should remain on screen. (#372) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [manifest] Manifest format should support some way of including a splash screen (#9) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [manifest] camelCase more suitable to JSON and JS API (#72) (Monday, 22 June)
• Re: [manifest] camelCase more suitable to JSON and JS API (#72) (Monday, 22 June)
• Re: [screen-orientation] Deal with fragment navigation (#87) (Monday, 22 June)
• Re: [manifest] Address timeless' review comments (#383) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [manifest] Address timeless' review comments (#383) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [manifest] Address timeless' review comments (#383) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [permissions] grammar nits (#38) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [manifest] Manifest format should support some way of including a splash screen (#9) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [manifest] Manifest format should support some way of including a splash screen (#9) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [manifest] Manifest format should support some way of including a splash screen (#9) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [manifest] Manifest format should support some way of including a splash screen (#9) (Sunday, 7 June)
• Re: [manifest] Manifest format should support some way of including a splash screen (#9) (Sunday, 7 June)
• Re: [manifest] Manifest format should support some way of including a splash screen (#9) (Saturday, 6 June)
• Re: [manifest] Drop .json as standard file ext. (closes #381) (#382) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [manifest] .json in MIME registration is causing problems. (#381) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [xhr] Abandon hope of removing sync XHR from the web platform? (#20) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [xhr] Abandon hope of removing sync XHR from the web platform? (#20) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [permissions] Added Editor IDs (#37) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• [permissions] Added Editor IDs (#37) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [permissions] Move to using Echidna (#24) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [manifest] Drop .json as standard file ext. (closes #381) (#382) (Monday, 1 June)
• [manifest] Drop .json as standard file ext. (closes #381) (#382) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [manifest] camelCase more suitable to JSON and JS API (#72) (Monday, 1 June)
• [manifest] .json in MIME registration is causing problems. (#381) (Monday, 1 June)

Mark Giffin

• [webcomponents] Update Type-Extensions.md (#121) (Monday, 15 June)

Mark Nottingham

• Re: [spec-reviews] CSV on the Web (#55) (Monday, 8 June)

Martin Kearn

• Re: [manifest] What's the use case for theme_color? (#356) (Thursday, 25 June)

Martin Thomson

• Re: [permissions] Why "prompt" instead of "default"? (#25) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [push-api] Straw man for encryption (#130) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [fetch] HTTP/2 server push support (#51) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] HTTP/2 server push support (#51) (Tuesday, 9 June)

Matt Falkenhagen

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Restrict openWindow() to http(s) schemes? (#699) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] UA shouldn't be required to invoke Soft Update on every navigation (#715) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• [ServiceWorker] UA shouldn't be required to invoke Soft Update on every navigation (#715) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Limit Cache API to HTTPS (#709) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Does a SW control a page outside its scope reached by a redirect? (#706) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Service worker not receiving fetch events from iframe with Blob URL source. (#712) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Does a SW control a page outside its scope reached by a redirect? (#706) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Does a SW control a page outside its scope reached by a redirect? (#706) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• [ServiceWorker] Does a SW control a page outside its scope reached by a redirect? (#706) (Tuesday, 2 June)

Matthew Bauer

• [webstorage] How to handle non-DOMString values? (#4) (Monday, 8 June)

Matthew Gaunt

• Re: [clipboard-apis] Should queryCommandEnabled(cut|copy|paste) trigger onbefore* events? (#4) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [clipboard-apis] Should queryCommandEnabled(cut|copy|paste) trigger onbefore* events? (#4) (Thursday, 4 June)

Mike West

• Re: [fetch] Allow "manual" redirect fetches with caveats (#66) (Wednesday, 17 June)

Mounir Lamouri

• Re: [permissions] Tackle origin (#34) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [permissions] Tackle origin (#34) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [permissions] Add permissions.revoke() (#40) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• [permissions] Add permissions.request() (#41) (Friday, 19 June)
• [permissions] Add permissions.revoke() (#40) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [permissions] Add persistent storage (#39) (Friday, 19 June)
• [permissions] Add persistent storage (#39) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [permissions] Rename PermissionStatus.status to PermissionStatus.state (#31) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [permissions] Add Promise.all() example for multiple queries (#19) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [permissions] Privacy Considerations (#22) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [permissions] Privacy Considerations (#22) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [permissions] Why "prompt" instead of "default"? (#25) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [permissions] Why "prompt" instead of "default"? (#25) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [permissions] Extensibility: make sure we have it right (#17) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [permissions] Should we have a more explicit enumerating process? (#13) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [permissions] Should we have a more explicit enumerating process? (#13) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [permissions] Move to using Echidna (#24) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [permissions] Remove global variables (#35) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [permissions] Remove global variables (#35) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [permissions] status of this document: reached FPWD (#36) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [permissions] status of this document: reached FPWD (#36) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [permissions] Geolocation API does not leave the page unaware of permission status (#30) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [permissions] Geolocation API does not leave the page unaware of permission status (#30) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [manifest] Manifest format should support some way of including a splash screen (#9) (Sunday, 7 June)
• Re: [manifest] Drop .json as standard file ext. (closes #381) (#382) (Sunday, 7 June)
• Re: [manifest] Drop .json as standard file ext. (closes #381) (#382) (Sunday, 7 June)
• Re: [screen-orientation] Clarify the meaning of "screen orientation angle" (#85) (Sunday, 7 June)
• Re: [screen-orientation] Clarify the meaning of "screen orientation angle" (#85) (Sunday, 7 June)
• Re: [screen-orientation] Use current orientation angle instead of screen orientation angle in normative text. (#86) (Sunday, 7 June)
• [screen-orientation] Use current orientation angle instead of screen orientation angle in normative text. (#86) (Sunday, 7 June)

Ms2ger

• [dom] Remove unnecessary conditions from the 'traverse children' algorithm. (#45) (Saturday, 20 June)
• Re: [xhr] getResponseHeader should work case-insensitive (#21) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [xhr] getResponseHeader should work case-insensitive (#21) (Monday, 1 June)

Noah Freitas

• [ServiceWorker] Service worker not receiving fetch events from iframe with Blob URL source. (#712) (Monday, 15 June)

Norbert Lindenberg

• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] How do we switch the caret between overtype and insert mode? (#55) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Monday, 1 June)

Odin Hørthe Omdal

• Re: [IndexedDB] Validate exception ordering against implementations (#11) (Tuesday, 16 June)

Olivier Forget

• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [editing] spell checking should be able to span multiple Typing Nodes (#50) (Saturday, 13 June)

Peter Beverloo

• Re: [push-api] How to implement the retry send notification if the confirmation for notification send is missing in API documentation (#151) (Friday, 5 June)

Philip Jägenstedt

• Re: [clipboard-apis] The ClipboardEvent constructor is strange (#10) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• [clipboard-apis] The ClipboardEvent constructor is strange (#10) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• [FileAPI] Stop using DOMError (#11) (Friday, 19 June)
• Re: [dom] Rewrite replaceWith/before/after algorithms (#32) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [dom] The mutation method macro has undefined behavior when nodes is empty (#44) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] The mutation method macro has undefined behavior when nodes is empty (#44) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [dom] Rewrite replaceWith/before/after algorithms (#32) (Friday, 12 June)
• [dom] The mutation method macro has undefined behavior when nodes is empty (#44) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [xhr] Abandon hope of removing sync XHR from the web platform? (#20) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [xhr] Remove XMLHttpRequest from ServiceWorkerGlobalScope (#19) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• [FileAPI] Don't use [EnsureUTF16] (gone from Web IDL) (#9) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [dom] Fix the ID for DOMImplementation (was #interface=domimplementation) (27b9b3c) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [dom] Add [TreatNullAs=EmptyString] to Attr.nodeValue/textContent (#36) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [xhr] Drastically simplify FormData. Preserve object identity. Remove filename parameter now new File() covers that. (f9d4c25) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [xhr] Remove XMLHttpRequest from ServiceWorkerGlobalScope (#19) (Monday, 1 June)

Ryosuke Niwa

• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [editing] What caret positions do we need to allow? (#51) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Update Type-Extensions.md (#121) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Add drawbacks to `is=` proposal (#117) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [selection-api] Need to be able to tell if the caret is displayed at the beginning or the end of the line (#32) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [selection-api] Need to be able to tell if the caret is displayed at the beginning or the end of the line (#32) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• [selection-api] Define the interaction with user-select CSS property (#46) (Thursday, 4 June)
• [selection-api] Expand selectstart to cover use cases for contenteditable=typing (#45) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] ContentEditable with UserSelect=None needs to be documented (#20) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] What to do with IME input when typing over a large selection? (#59) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] What to do with IME input when typing over a large selection? (#59) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] What to do with IME input when typing over a large selection? (#59) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] What to do with IME input when typing over a large selection? (#59) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] Should the caret move by default, and should we define this behavior? (#58) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] What to do with IME input when typing over a large selection? (#59) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [editing] What browser internals can be exposed to help us move the caret in (and against) the block direction? (#56) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [editing] What browser internals can be exposed to help us move the caret in (and against) the block direction? (#56) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Monday, 1 June)

Samuel Giles

• Re: [dom] `document.importNode` and `document.adoptNode` should throw exceptions when acting upon ShadowRoots (#46) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [dom] `document.importNode` and `document.adoptNode` should throw exceptions when acting upon ShadowRoots (#46) (Thursday, 25 June)
• [dom] `document.importNode` and `document.adoptNode` should throw exceptions when acting upon ShadowRoots (#46) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] importNode and adoptNode should throw with passed a ShadowRoot (#125) (Wednesday, 24 June)

Sean Lang

• Re: [manifest] camelCase more suitable to JSON and JS API (#72) (Monday, 22 June)
• Re: [manifest] camelCase more suitable to JSON and JS API (#72) (Sunday, 21 June)

sirdarckcat

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Receivers of ranged responses must ensure all ranges come from the same underlying resource (#703) (Saturday, 13 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Receivers of ranged responses must ensure all ranges come from the same underlying resource (#703) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [ServiceWorker] Receivers of ranged responses must ensure all ranges come from the same underlying resource (#703) (Wednesday, 10 June)

sleevi

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Document the headers being introduced (#717) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• [ServiceWorker] Document the headers being introduced (#717) (Tuesday, 23 June)

smaug----

• Re: [screen-orientation] "Whenever a top-level browsing context is navigated, the user agent MUST lock the orientation of the document to the document's default orientation. " doesn't deal with fragment navigation (#87) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• [screen-orientation] "Whenever a top-level browsing context is navigated, the user agent MUST lock the orientation of the document to the document's default orientation. " doesn't deal with fragment navigation (#87) (Wednesday, 17 June)

Stuart P. Bentley

• [uievents] #event-type-input and #event-type-beforeinput appear to have gone missing (#2) (Friday, 5 June)

Tab Atkins Jr.

• Re: [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Tuesday, 23 June)
• Re: [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [dom] Question about references after Bikeshed conversion (#42) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: rename <content> to <slot> (bugzilla: 28561) (#92) (Tuesday, 9 June)

Takayoshi Kochi

• [webcomponents] Add a proposal md document for ShadowRoot's delegatesFocus flag. (#127) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• [webcomponents] Introduce "delegatesFocus" flag to shadow root (#126) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• [webcomponents] [Shadow] createShadowRoot() in spec example should be updated to have parameter (#106) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• [webcomponents] [Shadow] Focus on shadow host should slide to its inner focusable node (#105) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• [webcomponents] [Shadow] Need Document.deepActiveElement (bugzilla:28652) (#104) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] [Shadow]: Focus navigation in distributed content (#103) (Monday, 1 June)

Takeshi Yoshino

• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 30 June)
• Re: [streams] Don't allow negative-sized chunks (#370) (Monday, 29 June)
• Re: [streams] Don't allow negative-sized chunks (#370) (Monday, 29 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [streams] Add .bytesRead to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [streams] Add .bytesRead to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [streams] Add .bytesRead to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Wednesday, 24 June)
• Re: [streams] Use "perform" for abstract ops that cannot throw (#366) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Use "perform" for abstract ops that cannot throw (#366) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Use "perform" for abstract ops that cannot throw (#366) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Add ReadableByteStream observing API (#362) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Add `.bytesRead` to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Thursday, 18 June)
• [streams] Add `.bytesRead` to ReadableByteStream.*Reader (#367) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Add ReadableByteStream observing API (#362) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Transform streams and acknowledgement of writes (#329) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [streams] Add ReadableByteStream observing API (#362) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [streams] Readable stream with ack (#324) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [streams] Identity transform performance and ArrayBufferView ownership (#323) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [streams] Transform streams and acknowledgement of writes (#329) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [streams] Identity transform performance and ArrayBufferView ownership (#323) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [streams] Transform streams and acknowledgement of writes (#329) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [streams] ReadableByteStream: pull + pullInto or just pullInto (#363) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] ReadableByteStream needs reference implementation/tests (#355) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] ReadableByteStream needs reference implementation/tests (#355) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Byte stream update, including reference implementation (#361) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• [streams] ReadableByteStream: pull + pullInto or just pullInto (#363) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Add ReadableByteStream observing API (#362) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Add ReadableByteStream observing API (#362) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Add ReadableByteStream observing API (#362) (Tuesday, 16 June)
• Re: [streams] Add ReadableByteStream observing API (#362) (Monday, 15 June)
• [streams] Add ReadableByteStream observing API (#362) (Monday, 15 June)
• Re: [streams] Transform streams and acknowledgement of writes (#329) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] ReadableByteStream underlying source/controller design: return a promise vs. c.something (#354) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Never-released lock / getReader({unreleasable: true}) (#358) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] Readable byte streams should support an internal queue (#353) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Thursday, 11 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [streams] Never-released lock / getReader({unreleasable: true}) (#358) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [xhr] Remove XMLHttpRequest from ServiceWorkerGlobalScope (#19) (Monday, 8 June)
• Re: [streams] ReadableByteStream needs reference implementation/tests (#355) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Friday, 5 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [streams] What types does ReadableByteStream's reader's read(x) accept and return? (#295) (Thursday, 4 June)
• Re: [streams] Readable byte streams should support an internal queue (#353) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [streams] Readable byte streams should support an internal queue (#353) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [xhr] Remove XMLHttpRequest from ServiceWorkerGlobalScope (#19) (Monday, 1 June)

Tim Schaub

• Re: [fetch] Aborting a fetch (#27) (Thursday, 11 June)

Tobi Reif

• Re: [fetch] Why doesn't `fetch` reject if 400 ≤ status < 600? (#18) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• Re: [fetch] Regarding "switch on response's status" (#60) (Wednesday, 3 June)
• [fetch] Regarding "switch on response's status" (#60) (Wednesday, 3 June)

Tobie Langel

• [webcomponents] Style edits to Type-Extensions.md (#118) (Sunday, 14 June)
• [webcomponents] Add drawbacks to `is=` proposal (#117) (Sunday, 14 June)
• Re: [screen-orientation] Use current orientation angle instead of screen orientation angle in normative text. (#86) (Sunday, 7 June)
• [screen-orientation] Clarify the meaning of "screen orientation angle" (#85) (Saturday, 6 June)

Travis Leithead

• Re: [uievents] #event-type-input and #event-type-beforeinput appear to have gone missing (#2) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113) (Friday, 12 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [webcomponents] isEncapsulated naming (#107) (Friday, 5 June)

Tsuyoshi Horo

• Re: [ServiceWorker] Receivers of ranged responses must ensure all ranges come from the same underlying resource (#703) (Monday, 15 June)

Vignesh Shanmugam

• Re: [fetch] POST calls - Request Payload is not shown with native fetch (#59) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [fetch] POST calls - Request Payload is not shown with native fetch (#59) (Friday, 26 June)
• Re: [fetch] POST calls - Request Payload is not shown with native fetch (#59) (Monday, 1 June)
• [fetch] POST calls - Request Payload is not shown with native fetch (#59) (Monday, 1 June)

Vytautas Jakutis

• [streams] compile into a single es5 file for polyfilling a browser and add bower.json (#369) (Sunday, 28 June)

William

• [webcomponents] importNode and adoptNode should throw with passed a ShadowRoot (#125) (Wednesday, 24 June)

xlaywan

• Re: [dom] Proposal: Node#appendSibling/prependSibling (#38) (Tuesday, 9 June)
• Re: [dom] Proposal: Node#appendSibling/prependSibling (#38) (Monday, 1 June)
• Re: [dom] Proposal: Node#appendSibling/prependSibling (#38) (Monday, 1 June)

Yoav Weiss

• Re: [fetch] Mechanism to indicate "destination context" (#64) (Tuesday, 30 June)

youennf

• [streams] Should negative chunk size be allowed? (#368) (Thursday, 25 June)

Yutaka Hirano

• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Thursday, 25 June)
• Re: [streams] Never-released lock / getReader({unreleasable: true}) (#358) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [streams] Never-released lock / getReader({unreleasable: true}) (#358) (Thursday, 18 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 17 June)
• Re: [fetch] Proposed backward-incompatible change: requiring cloning all requests/responses (#61) (Wednesday, 10 June)
• Re: [streams] Never-released lock / getReader({unreleasable: true}) (#358) (Tuesday, 9 June)

Yves Lafon

• [webidl] typo fix (#53) (Friday, 26 June)

zomp

• Re: [encoding] Benefits of "Legacy" Encodings – Byte Counter (#4) (Tuesday, 2 June)
• Re: [encoding] Benefits of "Legacy" Encodings – Byte Counter (#4) (Monday, 1 June)

Last message date: Tuesday, 30 June 2015 18:42:59 UTC