Re: [whatwg] WebWorkers vs. Threads

2008-08-14 Thread Kristof Zelechovski
Sorry, I do not get it. Where does the value of (la) make it into (e.message)? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Aaron Boodman Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 10:04 PM To: Shannon Cc: WHAT working group; Kristof Zelechovski; Jonas Sicking

Re: [whatwg] .localName shouldn't change case

2008-08-14 Thread timeless
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:11 AM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The spec requires the localName-is-real behaviour now (by virtue of not requiring it to do anything else). It seems the compat issue isn't very serious, based on the bug cited above having not changed in over a year, and the

Re: [whatwg] Scripted querying of video capabilities

2008-08-14 Thread timeless
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Tim Starling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Or have I been shot down already? I'd like to shoot you down. javascript should not be required to play media. sniffing apps are historically bad, and shouldn't be encouraged. there should be no harm in using multiple

Re: [whatwg] HTML 5 : Misconceptions Documented

2008-08-14 Thread timeless
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:53 AM, Kristof Zelechovski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have considered inline response. I have two options: do it by hand (I am rather busy) and do it for every reply (which makes business people angry). err. i didn't realize you were using outlook.

Re: [whatwg] Scripted querying of video capabilities

2008-08-14 Thread Henri Sivonen
On Aug 14, 2008, at 11:14, timeless wrote: We'd probably be forced to lie and claim every codec imaginable. Would the situation be any different for the source element fallback? If MicroB.next ships without Gecko's built-in liboggplay video back end but ships with the GStreamer back end and

Re: [whatwg] WebWorkers vs. Threads

2008-08-14 Thread Shannon
Aaron Boodman wrote: There are a bunch of examples that Ian has kindly written at the very top of the document. What was unhelpful about them? After reading this I went back to look for them. What happened originally was that I followed one of the links and seeing only a single line of

Re: [whatwg] WebWorkers vs. Threads

2008-08-14 Thread Shannon
Shannon wrote: Think about the kind of applications that use parallel compute nodes and you'll realise that 98% don't exist outside of academia and laboratories due to synchronisation, network latencies and other issues that implementing Javascript workers won't solve. More importantly though

Re: [whatwg] WebWorkers vs. Threads

2008-08-14 Thread Robert O'Callahan
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 10:06 PM, Shannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On second thoughts I withdraw these claims. I don't have the statistics to know one way or the other why portable threads are more prevalent than share nothing ones. There may be many reasons but latencies probably isn't one

[whatwg] Disabled attribute for iframes

2008-08-14 Thread Greg Houston
I would like to propose a disabled attribute for iframes. Disabled would make the iframe read-only, i.e., you cannot highlight text, click on forms, or scroll the iframe content. I don't know what the correct terminology is for the behavior that happens when you mouseover an iframe, but

Re: [whatwg] Disabled attribute for iframes

2008-08-14 Thread Ian Hickson
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, Greg Houston wrote: 1. You have a fluid layout where the columns are resizable via javascript by dragging the borders. The content of one of the columns is an iframe. You begin dragging the border between it and the column to the left, but as soon as the cursor goes

Re: [whatwg] Scripted querying of video capabilities

2008-08-14 Thread Charles
The spec mandates both video element support + ogg theora support. No, that's incorrect. -- Charles

Re: [whatwg] Disabled attribute for iframes

2008-08-14 Thread Cameron McCormack
Ian Hickson: This seems like a bug. It seems like we would want to address this directly rather than requiring authors to disable iframes when doing drags (especially since that wouldn't help with things like plugins or whatever). Wouldn't the better solution be to provide some sort of

Re: [whatwg] Disabled attribute for iframes

2008-08-14 Thread Greg Houston
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, Greg Houston wrote: 1. You have a fluid layout where the columns are resizable via javascript by dragging the borders. The content of one of the columns is an iframe. You begin dragging the border

Re: [whatwg] Disabled attribute for iframes

2008-08-14 Thread Neil Deakin
Greg Houston wrote: On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, Greg Houston wrote: 1. You have a fluid layout where the columns are resizable via javascript by dragging the borders. The content of one of the columns is an iframe. You

Re: [whatwg] HTML 5 : Misconceptions Documented

2008-08-14 Thread Garrett Smith
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 13 Aug 2008, Kristof Zelechovski wrote: While we are at collections and arrays, it is worth noting that the {coll.length} attribute is a misnomer. I would always ask for {coll.count} when I was learning and

Re: [whatwg] Disabled attribute for iframes

2008-08-14 Thread Greg Houston
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 7:50 PM, João Eiras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi ! 1. You have a fluid layout where the columns are resizable via javascript by dragging the borders. The content of one of the columns is an iframe. You begin dragging the border between it and the column to the left,

Re: [whatwg] WebWorkers vs. Threads

2008-08-14 Thread Robert O'Callahan
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 7:54 AM, Maksim Orlovich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's actually a lot worse in this case, since the ECMAScript runtime must be able to enforce the sandbox properly even in face of incorrectly threaded programs. In particular, if two threads are accessing properties of