On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Tue, 18 May 2010 04:38:21 +0200, Shiki Okasaka sh...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 6:27 PM, Kühn Wolfgang wo.ku...@enbw.com wrote:
Hi,
As for the html5 elements, will there be a new package
On Wed, 19 May 2010 08:40:16 +0200, Shiki Okasaka sh...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com
wrote:
Can't they all just use org.w3c.dom? We cannot make the interface names
overlap anyway.
I think one module name for all of the Web platform
On Tue, 18 May 2010 10:52:53 +0200, Bjorn Bringert bring...@google.com
wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 8:02 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com
wrote:
I wonder how it relates to the device proposal already in the draft.
In theory that supports microphone input too.
It would be possible
On Tue, 18 May 2010 11:30:01 +0200, Bjorn Bringert bring...@google.com
wrote:
Yes, I agree with that. The tricky issue, as Olli points out, is
whether and when the 'error' event should fire when recognition is
aborted because the user moves away or gets an alert. What does
XMLHttpRequest do?
I don't really see how the problem is the same as with synchronous
XMLHttpRequest. When you do a synchronous request nothing happens to the
event loop so an alert() dialog could never happen. I think you want
recording to continue though. Having a simple dialog stop video conferencing
for
On Wed, 19 May 2010 10:22:54 +0200, Satish Sampath sat...@google.com
wrote:
I don't really see how the problem is the same as with synchronous
XMLHttpRequest. When you do a synchronous request nothing happens to the
event loop so an alert() dialog could never happen. I think you want
recording
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 12:50 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Tue, 18 May 2010 10:52:53 +0200, Bjorn Bringert bring...@google.com
wrote:
...
Advantages of the speech input element:
- Web app developers do not need to build and maintain a speech
recognition service.
But
Has anyone spent any time imagining what a microphone/video-camera API that
supports the video conference use case might look like? If so, it'd be
great to see a link.
My guess is that it's going to be much more complicated and much more
invasive security wise. Looking at Bjorn's proposal, it
Hi,
In the future, I see a lot of libraries soft-implementing WebIDL interfaces
without binding against a standard interface, may it be Java, C# or C++.
This is not good for many reasons. The most obvious are that consumers cannot
exchange implementations, and that implementors have no tool
Of course, in a theoretical future where we'd add an object above
the Window object, these events would bubble to that object. But
that's not the case today as no such object exists.
This is actually already used nowadays. Whenever you implement a browser
object in another application (like
Forwarding a message 'cause I forgot to CC WHATWG so it got stuck in moderation.
-- Forwarded message --
From: bjartur svartma...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 21:20:30 +
Subject: Re: [whatwg] INCLUDE and links with @rel=embed
To: Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 9:56 PM, Bjartur Thorlacius
svartma...@gmail.com wrote:
Forwarding a message 'cause I forgot to CC WHATWG so it got stuck in
moderation.
-- Forwarded message --
From: bjartur svartma...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 21:20:30 +
Subject: Re:
This all seems way too abstract - I think you are arguing for the
wrong case with the right reasons. But in any case, you should try and
make an example markup with your ideas and check if it really gives
you what you think it will. I have sincere doubts.
Yeah, maybe my crazy idealism
I've been playing with application cache for a while now, and
found the diagnostic information available to be sorely
lacking.
For example, to diagnose user-land errors that occur when using
appcache, this is the only practical tool I have at my disposal:
tail -f /var/log/apache2/access_log
On 5/19/10 5:41 AM, Kühn Wolfgang wrote:
C++
WebCore.html.HTMLCanvasElement (WebKit)
dom.nsIDOMHTMLCanvasElement (Firefox)
Mozilla nsI* interfaces, if they continue to exist, should be treated as
internal. We have little interest in binding to a frozen interface
definition.
I am a little concerned that we are increasingly breaking down a metaphor, a
'virtual interface' without realizing what that abstraction buys us. At the
moment, we have the concept of a hypothetical pointer and hypothetical
keyboard, (with some abstract states, such as focus) that you can
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:38 AM, David Singer sin...@apple.com wrote:
I am a little concerned that we are increasingly breaking down a metaphor,
a 'virtual interface' without realizing what that abstraction buys us.
I'm more than a little concerned about this and hope that we tread
much more
From: David Gerard dger...@gmail.com
Subject: [Wikitech-l] VP8 freed!
To: Wikimedia developers, Wikimedia Commons Discussion List
http://www.webmproject.org/
http://openvideoalliance.org/2010/05/google-frees-vp8-codec-for-html5-the-webm-project/?l=en
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 5:35 AM, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:
The webkit behavior of allowing all scripts makes the most sense to me. It
should be possible to disable scripts, but that capability shouldn't be tied
to editability. The clean solution for the CKEditor developer is to use a
James Salsman jsals...@talknicer.com schrieb am Wed, 19 May 2010
14:58:38 -0700:
Container will be .webm, a modified version of Matroshka. Audio is
Ogg Vorbis.
You mean Vorbis. /pedantic ;)
--
Nils Dagsson Moskopp // erlehmann
http://dieweltistgarnichtso.net
signature.asc
Description:
On 20 May 2010 00:34, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
James Salsman jsals...@talknicer.com schrieb am Wed, 19 May 2010
14:58:38 -0700:
Container will be .webm, a modified version of Matroshka. Audio is
Ogg Vorbis.
You mean Vorbis. /pedantic ;)
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:38 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 20 May 2010 00:34, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
James Salsman jsals...@talknicer.com schrieb am Wed, 19 May 2010
14:58:38 -0700:
Container will be .webm, a modified
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 5:35 AM, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:
The webkit behavior of allowing all scripts makes the most sense to me. It
should be possible to disable scripts, but that capability shouldn't be
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com wrote:
Virtually none of the JavaScript framebusting scripts used by web
sites are effective.
Yes. If anyone would like to see more evidence of this, here's a recent
study of the Alexa Top 500 web sites. None of them were
2010/5/20 Sir Gallantmon (ニール・ゴンパ) ngomp...@gmail.com:
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:38 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 20 May 2010 00:34, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
James Salsman jsals...@talknicer.com schrieb am Wed, 19 May 2010
2010/5/19 Silvia Pfeiffer silviapfeiff...@gmail.com
2010/5/20 Sir Gallantmon (ニール・ゴンパ) ngomp...@gmail.com:
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:38 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 20 May 2010 00:34, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
James
26 matches
Mail list logo
