On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:48 PM, Michal Zalewski wrote:
>> Can a frame in @sandbox ever navigation the top-level frame? If not,
>> that would make it hard to use @sandbox to contain advertisements,
>> which want to navigate |top| when the user clicks on the ad.
>
> Ads would want to be able to d
> Can a frame in @sandbox ever navigation the top-level frame? If not,
> that would make it hard to use @sandbox to contain advertisements,
> which want to navigate |top| when the user clicks on the ad.
Ads would want to be able to do that, but user-controlled gadgets
shouldn't. I suppose the top
Can a frame in @sandbox ever navigation the top-level frame? If not,
that would make it hard to use @sandbox to contain advertisements,
which want to navigate |top| when the user clicks on the ad.
Adam
ASYNC should not block the onload event. Thinking of the places where
ASYNC will be used, they would not want onload to be blocked.
-Steve
On 2/12/2010 11:50 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
It's a good point. Curious to hear what other people are thinking.
/ Jonas
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:10 AM,
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 1:40 AM, Peter Kasting wrote:
> I am explicitly opposed to the UA showing validation messages to the user.
> I do not think HTML5 should attempt to address use cases where the author
> wants the UA to show the messages.
I strongly disagree. Boilerplate browser-provided U
It's a good point. Curious to hear what other people are thinking.
/ Jonas
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:10 AM, Nicholas Zakas wrote:
> To me “asynchronous” fundamentally means “doesn’t block other things from
> happening,” so if async currently does block the load event from firing then
> that see
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 5:49 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> 4) Disparity with document.createElement("isindex");
> 5) Disparity with XHTML.
For what it's worth, I couldn't really care less about these two.
Making these work isn't a goal to me, people should be using s
instead.
/ Jonas
To me "asynchronous" fundamentally means "doesn't block other things
from happening," so if async currently does block the load event from
firing then that seems very wrong to me.
-Nicholas
__
Commander Lock: "Damnit Morpheus, not everyone believ
At the moment an input element needs to part of a form and have a name
attribute for the CSS pseudo classes :valid and :invalid to be
applied. [1] These limitations forces people to make their DOM more
complicated just to be able to use these pseudo classes. It might have
made sense to have these l
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Dean Edwards wrote:
> http://html5.validator.nu/?doc=http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/
Oops, looks like a consequence of moving the multipage script to a
server with a different version of lxml. Fixed.
--
Philip Taylor
exc...@gmail.com
http://html5.validator.nu/?doc=http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/
-dean
Right. Async scripts aren't really asynchronous if they block all the
user-visible functionality that sites currently tie to window.onload.
I don't know if we need another attribute, or if we just need to change the
behavior for all async scripts. But I think the best time to fix this is
now; be
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> Do you know of any actual authors who would want to use
> validationMessage? If there are any authors here who would want to
> use the validation API with their own UI, would you want to use
> validationMessage or write your own messages? I
On Feb 12, 2010, at 15:49, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Problems with the parser macro include:
> 1) Special memory management cases due to generated attributes (done and
> broken several times).
> 2) Form submission changes required (not done yet).
> 3) Incompatibility with the W3C DOM Level 2 HTML te
Given that all the top 4 engines generate a different DOM for isindex and
arguably Gecko (with the old parser) is the most sane, why does the spec align
with IE instead of Gecko? Could the spec please align with Gecko (with the old
parser)?
Problems with the parser macro include:
1) Special me
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010, Bruno Harbulot wrote:
>
> Whilst I'm very supportive of having a key-generation mechanism in the
> browser, I'm now not entirely sure the tag, at least as a
> legacy of the Netscape tag, is the correct approach.
Indeed. It's only in the spec because that's what browsers i
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010, Futomi Hatano wrote:
>
> There is a example which shows how to mark up fallback contents of the
> datalist element.
>
>
>
> Enter a breed:
>
>
>
>
>or select one from the list:
>
> (none selected)
> Abyssinian
> Alpaca
>
>
>
>
Hi,
I recently studied the "Offline Web app" section to investigate
whether HTML5 is a viable replacement for the gears plugin.
Sadly it is lacking a lot of functionality that we need to bring our
application offline. Following things I miss most from the spec:
1) Enable/Disable applicationCache(g
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 08:05:54 +0100, Peter Kasting
wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Would be great if you could provide a reason why you feel this way.
Did the previous messages in the thread not say enough reasons? Ian's
response was basically "then how would w
On Sun, 13 Dec 2009, TAMURA, Kent wrote:
>
> What should happen to selected files in a case that a user selects
> multiple files for and then a script code
> removes the multiple attribute from the input element?
>
> - nothing, no change to the selected files and they will be submitted,
> - cle
This thread (of which some especially salient points are included below)
requested the addition of a feature or the codifying of a convention for
uploading directory tree structures in .
I think that including relative directory paths with uploads is a quite
reasonable feature. However, I don'
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 03:10:32 +0100, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 2/11/10 3:07 AM, Biju wrote:
the text inside<% and %> may contain any number of percentage sign or
greater than sign,
as long as they dont make a "%>" pair.
OK
If you see treat it like a HTML comment.
Again for this also a c
22 matches
Mail list logo