RE: [IndexedDB] Processing 16-May-2013 LC comments

I am on vacation this week and my time's pretty scarce documenting our next release. However, if people help me not miss important data, I can create (next week) and maintain a list similar to the one I did for LC1.


From: Joshua Bell []
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 9:43 AM
To: Arthur Barstow
Cc: Eliot Graff; Jonas Sicking; public-webapps
Subject: Re: [IndexedDB] Processing 16-May-2013 LC comments

Without volunteering (I'm slammed this week and next...)

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 4:59 AM, Arthur Barstow <<>> wrote:
Hi All,

Since the May 16 LCWD of IDB [LC2] ends June 7, I am wondering who is going to process the LC comments.

Here is the list of IDB e-mails and bugs I have logged since the LC was published:

* Files on IndexedDB ; ; 30-May-2013;<>
^^^ May merit a clarifying comment in the spec that blobs/files/filelist are stored by value (i.e. a copy of the bytes) rather than by reference. I didn't think the spec was ambiguous here but we can let the thread play out.

* Bug 22130 ; Modification for IDBObjectStore's clear and delete method ; 21-May-2013 ; Kyaw Tun

^^^ A feature request, backwards compatible. No need to include in V1 spec.

* IDBRequest.onerror for DataCloneError and DataError ; ; 20-May-2013 ; Kyaw Tun <<>>

^^^ Essentially a feature request; doesn't match current implementations. Could consider for a future spec.

* request feedback on IDBKeyRange.inList([]) enhancement ; ; 17-May-2013 ; Ben Kelly <<>>

^^^ A feature request, backwards compatible. No need to include in V1 spec.

* Inform script of corruption recovery ; ; thread started 11-Feb-2013

^^^ A feature proposal, backwards compatible. No need to include in V1 spec.

Joshua, Eliot, Jonas - who is going to track LC#2 comments?

(For reference, the comment tracking document for the first LC is [LC1-Comments] and the IDB feature list is [IDB-features].)

-Thanks, AB

[LC2] <>
[LC1-Comments] <>
[IDB-Features] <>

Received on Thursday, 30 May 2013 19:06:06 UTC