On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 11:10 PM, Nils Dagsson
Moskopp wrote:
>> So in browsers, we need a UNIFIED UI for plugin security settings.
>
> Actually, do we ? I don't think so. Like with UI for and
> , implementors can very well compete on this.
I mean UNIFIED security settings UI different plugins run
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
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 HT
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Giovanni Campagna wrote:
> 2009/6/10 Ian Hickson :
> > 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
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
fir
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Mike Weissenborn wrote:
>
> 1) I've usedframes in many web pages, and I see this is being dropped.
> I typically have a selection frame and a result frame. So links clicked
> on in the 1st frame show up in the second frame. I then never have to
> worry about managing what
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 strateg
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
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
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
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
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 9:30 PM, Ian Hickson 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 a web
On 7/7/09 1:10 PM, Philip Jagenstedt wrote:
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:52:29 +0200, Charles Pritchard
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:
"data:audio/wav;base64,UklG
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:52:29 +0200, Charles Pritchard
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:
"data:audio/wav;base64,UklGRigAAABXQVZFZm10IBABAAEARKwAAIhYAQACAB
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:41:51 +0100, Tab Atkins Jr.
wrote:
Majority doesn't matter, unless Moz and Opera team up to send
mercenaries to Apple headquarters and make the Webkit team implement
Theora support at gunpoint.
Apparently, it's illegal, so we've sent themj all back home
Hang loose
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 9:37 AM, SA Alfonso Baqueiro 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.
>
> In this case Ogg Theora will
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 11:37 AM, SA Alfonso Baqueiro 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, browsers don't g
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. Th
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 cur
Kristof Zelechovski wrote:
Audible mouse feedback is an OS thing, not an HTML thing.
While users will certainly have applications and os-level accessibility
tools,
web designers may have their own unique methods of presenting feedback,
and I believe, given enough easy-access, innovative inte
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Kornel wrote:
> Similarly, authors publishing 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 intranet), or if you do
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 realist
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 6:01 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/7/6 Jim Jewett :
>
>> "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 following example"
>
>
> A sp
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 MUST implement at least one of Theora or H.264. All
vendors can comply with tha
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 tro
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 01:42:57 +0200, Øistein E. Andersen 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 us
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, 07 Jul 2009 03:44:25 +0200, Charles Pritchard
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 don't really want
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
document.write("something");
In IE this will in
29 matches
Mail list logo
