I think we should be really reluctant to add a synchronous interface to an
API that has to communicate cross-process.
Feedback from your Inter-App communication and Web Activities folks would
be really great!
Jeffrey
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 11:04 PM, Jake Leichtling
wrote:
> As the draft API sp
Isn't that the same issue as Web Activities/Web Intents?
On 10/12/14 20:55, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
>> This seems like a solvable problem.
>>
>> We could enable website A to hint to the UA that website B has a SW
>> that would be useful for A to interact with. Then the UA could somehow
>> give B an o
On 2014-12-11 2:03 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Alex Russell wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Ehsan Akhgari
wrote:
On 2014-12-10 7:45 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:02 PM, wro
On 2014-12-11 11:12 AM, David Rajchenbach-Teller wrote:
Isn't that the same issue as Web Activities/Web Intents?
Not really. The use cases around web activities/intents are mostly
around user facing interactions (for example, opening a file in a web
application, or using a web application to
On 2014-12-11 2:17 PM, Alex Russell wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Ehsan Akhgari mailto:ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 2014-12-11 2:03 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Alex Russell
mailto:slightly...@google.com>> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> So I guess my biggest question so far is: what will we gain by adding
> another API specifically for connecting to the service worker? Do you think
> we can avoid doing that and focus on making XHR/fetch work with cross origin
> SWs?
One id
Ok, that makes sense.
I like your proposal.
Cheers,
David
On 11/12/14 20:09, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> Not really. The use cases around web activities/intents are mostly
> around user facing interactions (for example, opening a file in a web
> application, or using a web application to send an em
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Alex Russell wrote:
> For the purposes of API composition, either this (or navigator.connect())
> will do.
One thing that we'll need to solve in a lot of the scenarios discussed
in this thread, including navigator.connect(), cross origin SW fetch()
and WebActivit
Summary: We've already got the performance resource timing API implemented
(https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=822480), but never got around to
implementing the user timing API. This would allow users to set unique marks
for profiling events in their own code, and most of the objects a
Yes!
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Kyle Machulis wrote:
> Summary: We've already got the performance resource timing API implemented
> (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=822480), but never got around
> to implementing the user timing API. This would allow users to set unique
> ma
Small correction, the preference should be dom.enable_user_timing, not
dom.enable_performance
- Original Message -
> From: "Jonas Sicking"
> To: "Kyle Machulis"
> Cc: "dev-platform" , "dev-webapi"
>
> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 5:15:22 PM
> Subject: Re: Intent to Implement: Us
Yes! The marks could be used by SPS or Tasktracer!
Kyle Machulis writes:
> Small correction, the preference should be dom.enable_user_timing, not
> dom.enable_performance
>
> - Original Message -
>
>> From: "Jonas Sicking"
>> To: "Kyle Machulis"
>> Cc: "dev-platform" , "dev-webapi"
>
Nice!
Eli was looking into this recently as well, not sure if you guys have
talked about this, if not, you should. :-)
On 2014-12-11 8:11 PM, Kyle Machulis wrote:
Summary: We've already got the performance resource timing API implemented
(https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=822480)
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Alex Russell wrote:
>> One solution would be to at that point allow the SW from the other
>> origin to install itself, which means that you can then just talk to
>> it as a normal installed SW. However installing a SW could take
>> significant amount of time. On th
Yup, this is all Eli's fault. :)
- Original Message -
> From: "Ehsan Akhgari"
> To: "Kyle Machulis" , dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org,
> dev-web...@lists.mozilla.org, "Eli Perelman"
> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 5:57:44 PM
> Subject: Re: Intent to Implement: User Timing API
> Nic
Just an hour or so ago, support landed on mozilla-central which gives us
the ability to use the devtools debugger to debug xpcshell tests \o/
To use this, simply add "--jsdebugger" to the xpcshell/mach command-line
- eg:
./mach xpcshell-test --jsdebugger path/to/a/test.js
then wait for the
The W3C is proposing a revised charter for:
Web of Things Interest Group
http://www.w3.org/2014/09/wot-ig-charter.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2014Nov/.html
Mozilla has the opportunity to send comments or objections through
next Monday, December 15.
Please r
17 matches
Mail list logo
