On Thu, 14 May 2009 22:58:20 +0200, Erik Arvidsson erik.arvids...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 00:30, Kristof Zelechovski
giecr...@stegny.2a.pl wrote:
If a token list represented an ordered set, it could not be sorted to
get an
item because the host would have to preserve the
On May 15, 2009, at 19:20, Manu Sporny wrote:
There have been a number of people now that have gone to great lengths
to outline how awful link rot is for CURIEs and the semantic web in
general. This is a flawed conclusion, based on the assumption that
there
must be a single vocabulary
On May 14, 2009, at 23:52, Eduard Pascual wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com
wrote:
It doesn't matter one syntax or another. But if a syntax already
exists (RDFa), building a new syntax should be properly justified.
It was at the start of this
Henri Sivonen wrote:
On May 18, 2009, at 09:36, Brett Zamir wrote:
Section 10.1, Writing XHTML documents observes: According to the
XML specification, XML processors are not guaranteed to process the
external DTD subset referenced in the DOCTYPE.
While this is true, since no doubt the
Henri Sivonen wrote:
There's no indirection. A decade of Namespaces in XML shows that both
authors and implementors have trouble getting prefix-based indirection
right.
It's true that people get this wrong again and again. But it's also true
that lots of developers understand it once for
AFAIK, WebKit is not going to validate XML, they say it makes page load too
slow. Besides, entities introduce a security risk because it can contain
incomplete syntax fragments and they can open a path to XML injection into,
say, ![DANGER[span title=malicious-entity; sweet kittens/span ]].
So XML
Kristof Zelechovski wrote:
AFAIK, WebKit is not going to validate XML, they say it makes page load too
slow.
Yes, I can see validation would be a problem, and see little use for
that except local file testing. But I'm just talking about using the DTD
to access entities, not to do validation.
While this may be too far in the game to bring up, I'd very much be
interested (and think others would be too) to have a standard means of
representing not only individual files, but also groups of files on the web.
One application of this would be for a web user to be able to do the
On May 18, 2009, at 11:50, Brett Zamir wrote:
Henri Sivonen wrote:
On May 18, 2009, at 09:36, Brett Zamir wrote:
Section 10.1, Writing XHTML documents observes: According to
the XML specification, XML processors are not guaranteed to
process the external DTD subset referenced in the
On May 18, 2009, at 12:18, Julian Reschke wrote:
Henri Sivonen wrote:
There's no indirection. A decade of Namespaces in XML shows that
both authors and implementors have trouble getting prefix-based
indirection right.
It's true that people get this wrong again and again. But it's also
On 18/5/09 10:34, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On May 15, 2009, at 19:20, Manu Sporny wrote:
There have been a number of people now that have gone to great lengths
to outline how awful link rot is for CURIEs and the semantic web in
general. This is a flawed conclusion, based on the assumption that
Henri Sivonen wrote:
The interesting question here is whether there's a better system.
1) Centralized allocation of short names.
Sounds like urn: to me. Registry is defined in RFC 3406.
2) Prefixing a short name by (an abbreviation of) the name of the
vocabulary, which makes the
On May 18, 2009, at 14:45, Dan Brickley wrote:
On 18/5/09 10:34, Henri Sivonen wrote:
It seems to me that the positions that RDF applications should
Follow
Their Nose and that link rot is not dangerous (to RDF) are
contradictory positions.
That's a strong claim. There is certainly a
One more thought...
While it is great that innerHTML is being officially standardized, I'm
afraid it would be rather hackish to have to use it for parsing and
serializing dynamically created content which wasn't destined to make it
immediately into the document, if at all.
Has any thought
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi wrote:
On May 14, 2009, at 23:52, Eduard Pascual wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com
wrote:
It doesn't matter one syntax or another. But if a syntax already
exists (RDFa), building a new
On May 18, 2009, at 6:05 AM, Eduard Pascual wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi
wrote:
On May 14, 2009, at 23:52, Eduard Pascual wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com
wrote:
It doesn't matter one syntax or
Being unable to deal with all use cases sometimes is a feature. For
example, regular expressions are unable to recognize all recursive
languages; it is a feature. As a compensation for that loss, they do not
suffer from the halting problem.
HTH,
Chris
Using entities in XSL to share code was my mistake once too; it is similar
to using data members not wrapped in properties in data types. XSL itself
provides a better structured approach for code reuse.
Being able to use localized programming language constructs is at the same
time trivial
As I have mentioned earlier, there are some devices that will be unable to
render video faithfully inline, due to the limitations of hardware video
accelerators. However, it occurs to me that there are two essentially
different uses for video
1. Important content for the webpage. An example
On Mon, 18 May 2009 16:22:29 +0200, Benjamin M. Schwartz
bmsch...@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
As I have mentioned earlier, there are some devices that will be unable
to
render video faithfully inline, due to the limitations of hardware
video
accelerators. However, it occurs to me that there
On May 18, 2009, at 16:05, Eduard Pascual wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi
wrote:
(If we were limited to reasoning about something that we don't have
experience with yet, I might believe that people can't be too inept
to use
prefix-based indirection.
Simon Pieters wrote:
Is there a problem with always falling back to the poster image and just
play the video (full-screen or on-top) when the user indicates he wants
to see the video?
If every menu button has a video tag associated with it to show a little
3D animation, then (a) how do you
On Mon, 18 May 2009 16:59:03 +0200, Benjamin M. Schwartz
bmsch...@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
Simon Pieters wrote:
Is there a problem with always falling back to the poster image and just
play the video (full-screen or on-top) when the user indicates he wants
to see the video?
If every menu
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 00:18, Simon Pieters sim...@opera.com wrote:
Immagine if it is specified that the order is not relevant and
implementations can use any order (so long as it's stable). So one UA uses
one order and another uses another. Then one of those UAs becomes very
popular. Web
Simon Pieters wrote:
If there is a controls attribute or if scripting is disabled, show
controls, else use author-provided scripted button (if any) to play the
video.
Consider a webpage in which a side-effect of clicking on some scripted
button is to trigger a small animation (using video)
DOMTokenList, as an object, is semantically unordered, therefore an
arbitrary ordering can be used for enumeration. The item method of
DOMTokenList provides an enumerator and imposes such an ordering.
Since no other enumerator is available to counter the claim, it may be
tempting to say, as a
On Mon, 18 May 2009 18:59:01 +0200, Benjamin M. Schwartz
bmsch...@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
Simon Pieters wrote:
If there is a controls attribute or if scripting is disabled, show
controls, else use author-provided scripted button (if any) to play the
video.
Consider a webpage in which a
Simon Pieters wrote:
On Mon, 18 May 2009 18:59:01 +0200, Benjamin M. Schwartz
bmsch...@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
Simon Pieters wrote:
If there is a controls attribute or if scripting is disabled, show
controls, else use author-provided scripted button (if any) to play the
video.
Consider a
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
bmsch...@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
Authors who are only testing on modern desktops will, as you say, likely
ignore this issue. I therefore fully expect that they will never set this
attribute.
Isn't that like saying that authors who are only
In the ~0.1% of images where
longdesc= is used, it's misused literally over 99% of the time:
http://blog.whatwg.org/the-longdesc-lottery
Responding for the archive; that blog bost keeps getting cited, but it
isn't up to Mark's usual standards. longdesc is not a success story,
but neither is
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Jim Jewett jimjjew...@gmail.com wrote:
The 99% misused is at best debatable. I'm pretty sure that using a
longer human-readable description instead of an URL was once
(admittedly long ago) recommended.
In HTML 3.2, longdesc didn't exist:
In order to comply with XML ID requirements in XML, and facilitate
future transitions to XML, can HTML 5 explicitly encourage id attribute
values to follow this pattern (e.g., disallowing numbers for the
starting character)?
Also, there is this minor errata:
Hello,
I don't want to go too far off topic here, but I'll respond to the
points as I do think it illustrates one of the uses of entities
(localization)--which would apply to some degree in XHTML (at least for
entities) as well as in XML.
Kristof Zelechovski wrote:
Using entities in XSL
33 matches
Mail list logo
