Samuel Santos wrote:
I don't think this is a valid argument since you can change it anyway [1].
[1] http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/inputfile.html
I should note that some consider this a (low priority, low severity) security
bug that should just be fixed (e.g. by disallowing opacity styling on
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Antti Koivisto wrote:
Some comments about the media elements:
3.14.9.4. Loading the media resource
The user agent must then set the begun flag to true and fire a progress
event called begin at the media element.
The progress event draft calls this event
On Sun, 27 Jan 2008, Charles wrote:
The video element supports width and height. Does this include the
additional area needed (if necessary) by the controls? It strikes me
that it shouldn't, since it would be odd for the video width and height
to change when non-video decorators are
On May 14, 2008, at 9:55 AM, Křištof Želechovski wrote:
I do not feel like having the file submission control styled and
customized in any way; submitting a file poses a serious security
and privacy risk so I would not like to see this control disguised
as something else. Just like an
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007, Henri Sivonen wrote:
Shouldn't iframe keep its width and height attributes just like the
other embedded content elements?
Documents don't have intrinsic dimensions, and the user's default font
size is likely to vary from user to usr. How would you know what height
and
On May 15, 2008, at 12:57, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007, Henri Sivonen wrote:
Shouldn't iframe keep its width and height attributes just like the
other embedded content elements?
Documents don't have intrinsic dimensions, and the user's default font
size is likely to vary from user
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
What do you guys think about this -- and this is just theoresizing and
hypothizing :)
Print representation, if defined, should probably not be viewed as the
byproduct of the screen presentation.
For instance, if script modified DOM properties
Ernest Cline wrote:
The only synonym of dialog that is anywhere near as general seems to be discourse/.
And I accidentally replied off list:
Discourse is too general.
In philosophy and theology a discourse can mean teaching, as in
Levinas' discourse about 'the other' has made alterity a
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
My personal favorite alternate suggestion so far has
been cl.
Yes, I also quite like the analogy with dl/ul/ol. But it may
be confusing when using dt and dd as child elements (as in
the current spec for dialog):
cl
dt
dd
...
/cl
That could be resolved by
On 14 May 2008, at 12:11 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 13 May 2008, Křištof Želechovski wrote:
Removing @rev is harmful for Lynx because that is how it decides
who the
author is.
Removing rev= from the spec doesn't preclude Lynx still supporting
it
for legacy documents, and for new
On Wed, 14 May 2008 01:46:32 + (UTC)
Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED]さん wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Toshirou Takahashi wrote:
about 2.12. Scripting
http://whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-script
interface HTMLScriptElement : HTMLElement {
attribute DOMString
The method to disguise a file input control as described is and should
remain a dirty trick; if the user agent allows it, some add-on should detect
it and offer a warning. Allowing semantic customization could be
interpreted as encouragement.
Chris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 1:23 AM, Boris Zbarsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Samuel Santos wrote:
I don't think this is a valid argument since you can change it anyway [1].
[1] http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/inputfile.html
I should note that some consider this a (low priority, low severity)
On Thu, 15 May 2008, Nicholas Shanks wrote:
For what it's worth, I always press 'c' before going hunting for a
contact address. It usually doesn't work, but that's life I guess.
Ian: would it be too much to have the spec say that @rev is valid if and
only if its value is made or owner?
On Thu, 15 May 2008, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:
I thought the rev attribute was being added back? (Someone... I can't
remember who... came on the Microformats mailing list, a while ago, and
said something to that effect.)
I have no plans to, evidence showed it was causing authors all
Getting suport from Lynx is the easy part; the hard part is to get the
supporting Lynx to all those BBS out there. This is very much different
from the personal browser the user can control.
Chris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On May 14, 2008, at 9:55 AM, Křištof Želechovski wrote:
I do not feel like having the file submission control styled and
customized in any way; submitting a file poses a serious security and
privacy risk so I would not like to see this control disguised as
something
-Original Message-
From: Mike Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: May 15, 2008 8:02 AM
To: 'WHATWG' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on HTML 5 - dialog
Yes, I also quite like the analogy with dl/ul/ol. But it may
be confusing when using dt and dd as child elements (as in
the
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Ernest Cline [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Mike Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: May 15, 2008 8:02 AM
To: 'WHATWG' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Thoughts on HTML 5 - dialog
Yes, I also quite like the analogy with
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Matthew Paul Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Imagine that there is a popular mobile device with a Web browser. Imagine
further that this browser is widely used, despite having no support for
Flash, no support for W3C File Upload, and not even any support for
20 matches
Mail list logo
