As the Eolas or RIM cases show, patent trolls can wait for a very long time
until they are sure that their victim has no way out. It does not prove
that Theora is clean that Google has not been sued yet.
IMHO,
Chris
A clean way to insert extraneous elements into SGML is to use NOTATION
entities. This does not work for HTML and it has never worked, although TBL
did have such an idea for images at the very beginning. It cannot be done
because it is extremely inconvenient for the author/publisher and very
Hi all!
I wanted to share some experiences with implementing the defer
attribute on scripts.
After the initial implementation[1] one of the problems that we
quickly ran in to was pages going blank [2][3][4] due to pages
containing markup like
script defer
document.write(something);
/script
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 03:44:25 +0200, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com
wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009, Charles Pritchard wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009, Charles Pritchard wrote:
This is on the list of things to consider in a future version. At
this point I
Hi,
In section 3.4.1.5 Phrasing Content, the text reads:
a (if it contains only phrasing content), abbr (if it is a descendant
of a map element), area, audio,...
I believe it should read:
a (if it contains only phrasing content), abbr, area (if it is a
descendant of a map element), audio,...
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 01:42:57 +0200, Øistein E. Andersen li...@coq.no wrote:
Le 5 juin 09, Anne van Kesteren écrivit :
Is the implication here that Shift_JIS and Shift-JIS are distinct
[...]?
No, Shift-JIS and Windows-932 are commonly used
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Frank Hellenkamp wrote:
I agree entirely. I actually tried to find a workable solution to
address this but unfortunately the only general solutions I could come
up with that would allow this were selector-based, and in practice
authors are still having trouble
I'm arguing that it does matter what's in the spec, insofar that it
should
match what implementations do.
Can we agree to disagree?
We've narrowed codecs down to two. The spec could say that UA which
supports video MUST implement at least one of Theora or H.264. All
vendors can comply
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 6:01 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/7/6 Jim Jewett jimjjew...@gmail.com:
As of 2009, there is no single efficient codec which works on all
modern browsers. Content producers are encouraged to supply the video
in both Theora and H.264 formats, as per the
Five days ago I wrote:
No META value will *ever* become a microformat; the very concept of
invisible metadata is anathema to microformats—it's impossible for a
META keyword value to pass the microformats process.
Should everything on the wiki page be marked as unendorsed or,
more
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Kornelkor...@geekhood.net wrote:
Similarly, authors publishing video MUST put at least one source in Theora
or H.264
This isn't future-proof. It's also not reasonable if you happen to
know that all of your clients' browsers support some third format
(e.g. on an
Philip Jagenstedt wrote:
For all of the simpler use cases you can already generate sounds
yourself with a data uri. For example, with is 2 samples of silence:
data:audio/wav;base64,UklGRigAAABXQVZFZm10IBABAAEARKwAAIhYAQACABAAZGF0YQQA.
Yes you can use this method, and with the
In the lack of agreement.
Instead of removing the video section from the spec, we should be
DEMOCRATIC, the codec that more vendors support should get in the spec, like
the goverments are elected.
In this case Ogg Theora will be suported by 3 vendors except Safari, so 3 vs
1, it should get in.
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 11:37 AM, SA Alfonso Baqueiroabaque...@gmail.com wrote:
In the lack of agreement.
Instead of removing the video section from the spec, we should be
DEMOCRATIC, the codec that more vendors support should get in the spec, like
the goverments are elected.
Unfortunately,
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 9:37 AM, SA Alfonso Baqueiro abaque...@gmail.comwrote:
In the lack of agreement.
Instead of removing the video section from the spec, we should be
DEMOCRATIC, the codec that more vendors support should get in the spec, like
the goverments are elected.
In this case
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:52:29 +0200, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com
wrote:
Philip Jagenstedt wrote:
For all of the simpler use cases you can already generate sounds
yourself with a data uri. For example, with is 2 samples of silence:
On 7/7/09 1:10 PM, Philip Jagenstedt wrote:
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:52:29 +0200, Charles Pritchard
ch...@jumis.com wrote:
Philip Jagenstedt wrote:
For all of the simpler use cases you can already generate sounds
yourself with a data uri. For example, with is 2 samples of silence:
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 9:30 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009, James Robinson wrote:
0) postMessage() looks as if it is intended to mimic
MessagePort.postMessage(), but the arguments and error conditions are
different. While it would be conceptually nice to treat
On Tue, 7 Jul 2009, Kornel wrote:
I'm arguing that it does matter what's in the spec, insofar that it
should match what implementations do.
Can we agree to disagree?
I'm not trying to convince you; I'm just explaining why the spec doesn't
require Theora support right now.
We've
On Tue, 7 Jul 2009, Michael Nordman wrote:
I think when we add support for file upload, we'll make it so that it
automagically supports this case. That is, you'll say upload this
file in small bits and then if you later say send this text
message, the text message will be sent before
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Ric Hardacre wrote:
Essentially the proposal is for a static DOM object which has read only
settings exposed to javascript (ultimately one day sendable via HTTP to
the web server to superceed UserAgent sniffing), the browser would be
left with the task of presenting the
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Jeff Walden wrote:
On 8.6.09 17:33, Ian Hickson wrote:
- Search engines shouldn't be the gatekeeper when it comes to valid
and invalid licenses. New licenses shouldn't be discouraged as
they're vital to keep up with ever changing laws around the world. I
I include below, for the record, a set of e-mails on the topic of settings
limits on Workers to avoid DOS attacks.
As with other such topics, the HTML5 spec allows more or less any
arbitrary behaviour in the face of hardware limitations. There are a
variety of different implementations
Based on the feedback below, I've removed the BibTeX vocabulary from
HTML5. The primary use case -- enabling drag-and-drop in a manner that the
target document could automatically add a reference to the source document
-- can still be done between cooperating sources, it's just no longer a
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Giovanni Campagna wrote:
2009/6/10 Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch:
On Tue, 19 May 2009, Brett Zamir wrote:
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
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Brett Zamir wrote:
On Mon, 18 May 2009, Brett Zamir wrote:
Has any thought been given to standardizing on at least a part of DOM
Level 3 Load and Save in HTML5?
DOM3 Load and Save is already standardised as far as I can tell. I
don't see why HTML5 would have
Am Samstag, den 04.07.2009, 16:55 -0400 schrieb Biju:
A web browser with plugin is supposed to work as a seamless integrated
single system.
But they are not for security setting UI. Each comes up with their own
UI to confuse users.
I'd recommend directly talking to implementors about their
27 matches
Mail list logo
