Re: [whatwg] What should the value attribute be for multi-file upload controls in WF2?

2008-06-24 Thread Jonas Sicking
Adele Peterson wrote: Hi all, I'm looking at the Web Forms 2 specification for the multi-file upload control that uses the min/max attributes. When multiple files are selected, its unclear what the value attribute should contain. It could contain just the first filename, or a comma

Re: [whatwg] TCPConnection feedback

2008-06-24 Thread Philipp Serafin
(Sorry if this counts as thread necromancy. The discussion just didn't seem to have come to an end yet.) On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Frode Børli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would manage, but i do not like the implementation (it is much more complex than it needs to be). I would basically

[whatwg] Canvas tests updated

2008-06-24 Thread Philip Taylor
I've recently updated my canvas tests at http://philip.html5.org/tests/canvas/suite/tests/ so they ought to be up-to-date with the latest version of the spec, and have greater coverage than before. (Text rendering is the only thing that's intentionally untested, though I may have missed some

Re: [whatwg] TCPConnection feedback

2008-06-24 Thread Frode Børli
It is worth spending months improving the implementation here, if it saves only one minute of work for each of the millions of web developers out there, in the future. Alright, point taken. You're of course absolutely right with that :) I agree, it would be very convenient to basically set

Re: [whatwg] What should the value attribute be for multi-fileupload controls in WF2?

2008-06-24 Thread Frode Børli
Because it breaks the common interface that the value property returns a scalar? Doesn't renaming the .value property to for example .files also break the common interface? Frode

Re: [whatwg] What should the value attribute be formulti-fileupload controls in WF2?

2008-06-24 Thread Kristof Zelechovski
Breaking the interface means changing the semantics without introducing new syntax. For example, if x is int[10] and you decide you need 20 of them afterwards, you say x2 is int[20] and you throw x away. Afterwards you have to accommodate the code using x, which is now undefined, to the new