On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Garrett Smith wrote:
Please be patient. There are literally thousands of e-mails that will need
to be dealt with before yours.
I am being patient.
There may very well be a list subscriber who has the
I dare remind you that the recommended place for RDFa-related arguments is
the wiki. This is a large topic with various diverging opinions and it is
hard to track issues without looping in a mailing list discussion.
Chris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
Go and move that stuff yourself. A wiki is for editing, not for complaining
about its content.
Chris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Hickson
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 10:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [whatwg] Generic
I wrote:
I happened to look over this page just now:
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Generic_Metadata_Mechanisms
Here is some feedback:
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Kristof Zelechovski wrote:
Go and move that stuff yourself. A wiki is for editing, not for
complaining about its content.
If I
I think the main problem here is that we want to package two different
functions into one event. The legitimate use of hash change where it is
used to reveal a bookmark should trigger an event named reveal dispatched
to the target anchor and bubbling, where the handler for the Window object
can
You know the problem with the current content is that it is misplaced. I
would just move the current content where it belongs, leaving the
requirements section empty.
Chris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Hickson
Sent: Wednesday,
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Kristof Zelechovski wrote:
You know the problem with the current content is that it is misplaced. I
would just move the current content where it belongs, leaving the
requirements section empty.
Fair enough. I've updated the wiki page.
If people who understand this stuff
Ian Hickson wrote:
If people who understand this stuff better could fill in the blanks that
would be great.
Ian, we'll take some time in the coming months to fill in the details
and reorganize the page a bit. What you are asking for is in line with
what the Microformats community requires for
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Garrett Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 4:09 PM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Garrett Smith wrote:
and what if you have:
body onhashchange=alert(document.body.ohashchange);
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Garrett Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 4:09 PM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Garrett Smith wrote:
and what if you have:
body onhashchange=alert(document.body.ohashchange);
Dear all,
In the current HTML5 draft, section 4.4.6 The blockquote
elementhttp://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#the-blockquote
states, If a blockquote element is preceded or followed by a single
paragraph that contains a single cite element and that is itself not
preceded or followed by another
Dear all,
For some reason, the email set-up I used to send my previous message
(Gmail via Chrome) inserted whitespace:pre values into each
paragraph's style attribute. Depending upon your email client, this
may have rendered my email difficult/unpleasant to read.
My apologies for this. Quoted
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Manu Sporny wrote:
There will, of course, be many more examples of the problem following
the same format as shown above. Is this what you had in mind for the
problem description? If so, give us some time and we'll be able to
refine that page in the coming months.
Ian Hickson wrote:
...
That's indeed the kind of thing that would be helpful. It's also important
to indicate why we think that authors will want to actually indicate the
information here. For example, in the music case, do authors want to
expose that information, or are we merely hoping they
I would like to restore the pros and cons. Although they are not as
consise as you would like there was still a considerable amount of time
put into them and they do reflect the arguments put forward on both
sides of the RDF discussions. You are asking for more detail and then
removing the
On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Shannon wrote:
I would like to restore the pros and cons.
I just merged the non-obvious ones into the text and removed the obvious
ones. (Saying Con: Proposal may be more complex isn't helpful.) I don't
think I removed any non-trivial ones, which ones did you have in
Hi,
I'd like to comment on Notifications part of the spec:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#notifications
In short, I think those notifications should be more like a balloon popups
or toasts with content rendered by the user agent in HTML form. Currently,
they are spec'ed as 3
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Shannon wrote:
I would like to restore the pros and cons.
I just merged the non-obvious ones into the text and removed the obvious
ones.
Merging pros and cons into the opening paragraph is a poor design
choice. It makes it more difficult for
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:26 PM, Dmitry Titov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So instead of:
script
function callback() { ... }
...
window.showNotification(You've got mail!,
From: Santa Claus,
What's in your
On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Shannon wrote:
I just merged the non-obvious ones into the text and removed the
obvious ones.
Merging pros and cons into the opening paragraph is a poor design
choice. It makes it more difficult for contributers to flesh out each
point without breaking paragraph
20 matches
Mail list logo
