Ted Mielczarek wrote:
Especially with something like MSVC, where some contributors have actually paid
for Pro versions of the suite and telling them to upgrade involves spending
actual money that can be a huge deterrent.
That's unfortunate since the professional VC2005, VC2008, VC2010 and
I wanted to shared publicly the projects and areas of focus that the
Firefox Desktop Platform team in Q1.
*Video quality issues, especially Flash video:* We have market data
which indicates that one of the most important pain points for Firefox
users is problems with video. We have several
I just landed bug to remove support for building with Visual C++ 2012 as
per the previous dev-platform thread.
This will make the following C++11 features available to use in Mozilla
code:
* variadic templates
* initializer lists
* =delete (we can probably remove MOZ_DELETE now)
* =default
*
W3C recently published the following proposed recommendation (the
stage before W3C's final stage, Recommendation):
Server-Sent Events
http://www.w3.org/TR/eventsource/
There's a call for review to W3C member companies (of which Mozilla
is one) open until this Friday, January 9.
If there are
W3C recently published the following proposed recommendation (the
stage before W3C's final stage, Recommendation):
http://www.w3.org/TR/vibration/
Vibration API
There's a call for review to W3C member companies (of which Mozilla
is one) open until January 20.
If there are comments you think
W3C recently published the following proposed recommendation (the
stage before W3C's final stage, Recommendation):
http://www.w3.org/TR/pointerevents/
Pointer Events
There's a call for review to W3C member companies (of which Mozilla
is one) open until January 16.
If there are comments you
On 2015-01-06 6:13 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
(I'm not happy about this spec; for a good description of why, see
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Aug/0028.html .
I'm also under the impression that they're using Mozilla's
implementation of it as support for the spec, which
W3C recently published the following proposed recommendation (the
stage before W3C's final stage, Recommendation):
http://www.w3.org/TR/html-longdesc/
HTML5 Image Description Extension (longdesc)
There's a call for review to W3C member companies (of which Mozilla
is one) open until January
The current Firefox implementation via a context-menu item (presumably
available to screen readers) seems innocuous to me. While I agree with many
of the points objecting to the spec, I don't see much upside for us (and
plenty of downside) to deprecating the feature without a counter-proposal.
What downsides do you see?
Gavin
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 5:43 PM, Jet Villegas jville...@mozilla.com wrote:
The current Firefox implementation via a context-menu item (presumably
available to screen readers) seems innocuous to me. While I agree with many
of the points objecting to the spec, I
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Jet Villegas jville...@mozilla.com wrote:
The main downside I see is a potential Mozilla removes features used by
disabled people... PR fiasco. I think we can avoid that with a better
proposal that we do support.
Maybe Marco Zehe would be interested in
On 1/6/15 6:37 PM, Jet Villegas wrote:
The main downside I see is a potential Mozilla removes features used by
disabled people... PR fiasco. I think we can avoid that with a better
proposal that we do support.
I'd be really curious to see if this is actually being used by anyone.
We're
The main downside I see is a potential Mozilla removes features used by
disabled people... PR fiasco. I think we can avoid that with a better
proposal that we do support.
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Gavin Sharp ga...@gavinsharp.com wrote:
What downsides do you see?
Gavin
On Tue, Jan 6,
13 matches
Mail list logo
