Re: [w3c/IndexedDB] Horizontal review… (#112)

@@aphillips sorry #38 was dropped, it wasn't intentional. The rest weren't included because they're closed.

Was your suggestion about the code point sort intended for inclusion in the current version, or as a way of resolving it in a future version?

Pending the answer to that question and @inexorabletash's response, and your review of the response to #180, we're ready to move to CR with this spec (and of course would like to do so sooner rather than later).

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/IndexedDB/issues/112#issuecomment-318318642

Received on Thursday, 27 July 2017 10:05:29 UTC