On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 12:05 AM, fantasai
fantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
This second part is a fragment, not a sentence, so I'd suggest rewording,
maybe like this
| ... for an element in the top layer's stack (such as a fullscreen
element).
But otherwise it seems fine to me.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:14 PM, fantasai fantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
Also, to be precise, you're not actually clear about what happens to e.g.
'color', which is an inheritable property. If it doesn't inherit from
anything, what is it's value? This is not defined, because currently in
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:36 PM, fantasai
fantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
Hm, so if I scroll with a fullscreened dialog, the dialog scrolls
out of view, but if I scroll with a fullscreened img, the image
stays in view?
If dialog itself was fullscreened it would be fixed I think. If it
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:48 PM, fantasai
fantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
You could just work in the explanation I sent in
http://www.w3.org/mid/4fc64100.3060...@inkedblade.net
Added a note.
The reason this is not very elaborated is that this really belongs in
a CSS specification that
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Sylvain Galineau
sylva...@microsoft.com wrote:
I don't think people who don't live in WHATWG/W3C mailing lists
and/or make browsers for a living can read a document like this one -
or, say, CORS - and hope to figure
out what problems they are/aren't trying to
On 6/21/12 5:16 AM, ext Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:48 PM, fantasai
fantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
You could just work in the explanation I sent in
http://www.w3.org/mid/4fc64100.3060...@inkedblade.net
Added a note.
The reason this is not very elaborated is
Le 21/06/12 13:18, Arthur Barstow a écrit :
Daniel, Fantasai - please confirm whether or not Anne's latest changes
([1],[2]) address the #2 issue ([3]) that is blocking FPWD:
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/fullscreen/raw-file/tip/Overview.html#::backdrop-pseudo-element
Fine by me. Thanks.
/Daniel
[Anne van Kesteren:]
I don't really see how this is a helpful contribution. I fully realize
everything is not as good as it can be (and you know I do), but we have
limited resources and many problems worth solving. If you know someone
that can do a better job on CORS or Fullscreen please
On 06/21/2012 04:18 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
On 6/21/12 5:16 AM, ext Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:48 PM, fantasai
fantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
You could just work in the explanation I sent in
http://www.w3.org/mid/4fc64100.3060...@inkedblade.net
Added a note.
On 06/21/2012 02:11 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Why? It has no children.
Sure, that's fine. Might make it explicit, but really the issue is what
element does the ::backdrop element inherit from?
Clarified.
That's an interesting approach, you probably want someone familiar with
the style
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:31 AM, fantasai fantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
On 06/01/2012 05:02 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM, fantasaifantasai.li...@inkedblade.net
wrote:
Though it seems likely that 'fixed' is required here, no?
The top layer concept is
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:45 AM, fantasai fantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
It looks like you missed #2.
I think ::backdrop is clear enough. Not entirely sure what you would
expect seeing there more than what it already says.
--
Anne — Opera Software
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Le 19/06/12 09:41, Anne van Kesteren a écrit :
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:45 AM, fantasaifantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
It looks like you missed #2.
I think ::backdrop is clear enough. Not entirely sure what you would
expect seeing there more than what it already says.
Well, the
Le 18/06/12 13:09, Arthur Barstow a écrit :
On 5/30/12 10:38 AM, ext Daniel Glazman wrote:
Le 30/05/12 14:43, Arthur Barstow a écrit :
Chris, Daniel, Peter - when will the CSS WG make a decision on the FPWD?
We'll try to make one today during our weekly conf-call. Please note
that we're
On 6/19/12 3:52 AM, ext Daniel Glazman wrote:
Le 18/06/12 13:09, Arthur Barstow a écrit :
On 5/30/12 10:38 AM, ext Daniel Glazman wrote:
Le 30/05/12 14:43, Arthur Barstow a écrit :
Chris, Daniel, Peter - when will the CSS WG make a decision on the
FPWD?
We'll try to make one today during
Le 19/06/12 14:10, Arthur Barstow a écrit :
Given this interpretation - and of course, please correct it if it is
wrong - it appears the only remaining FPWD Showstopper is #2 in the
first set of comments. Is that correct?
Yes.
/Daniel
On 6/19/12 3:49 AM, ext Daniel Glazman wrote:
Le 19/06/12 09:41, Anne van Kesteren a écrit :
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:45 AM,
fantasaifantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
It looks like you missed #2.
I think ::backdrop is clear enough. Not entirely sure what you would
expect seeing there
On 06/19/2012 12:40 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:31 AM, fantasaifantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
On 06/01/2012 05:02 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM, fantasaifantasai.li...@inkedblade.net
wrote:
Though it seems likely that 'fixed'
On 06/19/2012 12:49 AM, Daniel Glazman wrote:
Le 19/06/12 09:41, Anne van Kesteren a écrit :
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:45 AM, fantasaifantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
It looks like you missed #2.
I think ::backdrop is clear enough. Not entirely sure what you would
expect seeing there
Le 19/06/12 22:48, fantasai a écrit :
You could just work in the explanation I sent in
http://www.w3.org/mid/4fc64100.3060...@inkedblade.net
e.g.
| Each element in the top layer's stack has a ::backdrop pseudo-element,
| which can be styled to create a backdrop that hides the underlying
|
[Daniel Glazman:]
That's also the reason why I asked to explain requestFullscreen(). It can
sound obvious, but it's not. And in fact, we should _never_ introduce a new
syntax, API, whatever w/o saying _what it does_ from a functional point of
view before explaining how it works.
To the
On 6/20/12 12:05 AM, Sylvain Galineau sylva...@microsoft.com wrote:
[Daniel Glazman:]
That's also the reason why I asked to explain requestFullscreen(). It
can
sound obvious, but it's not. And in fact, we should _never_ introduce a
new
syntax, API, whatever w/o saying _what it does_ from
On 5/30/12 10:38 AM, ext Daniel Glazman wrote:
Le 30/05/12 14:43, Arthur Barstow a écrit :
Chris, Daniel, Peter - when will the CSS WG make a decision on the FPWD?
We'll try to make one today during our weekly conf-call. Please note
that we're going to review the bits of this document
Sorry, looks like I accidentally dropped webapps from the CC list. Sending
again...
On 06/01/2012 05:02 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM, fantasaifantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
Though it seems likely that 'fixed' is required here, no?
The top layer concept
On 06/18/2012 04:09 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
On 5/30/12 10:38 AM, ext Daniel Glazman wrote:
Le 30/05/12 14:43, Arthur Barstow a écrit :
Chris, Daniel, Peter - when will the CSS WG make a decision on the FPWD?
We'll try to make one today during our weekly conf-call. Please note
that we're
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
I assumed we were talking about the stacking context of the root element,
not just the one that the dialog's parent is in. Otherwise there
wouldn't need to be anything about how the parent's stacking context has
no effect, etc.
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM, fantasai fantasai.li...@inkedblade.net wrote:
On 05/30/2012 07:38 AM, Daniel Glazman wrote:
1. position: center in section 6.1 refers to an Editor's Draft that is
not actively discussed at this time. Only normative references
should be made to CSS specs or the
On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 11:02:43 +0200, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl
wrote:
| If its specified 'position' is 'static', it computes to 'absolute'.
What if position is not specified?
Everything's specified.
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/cascade.html#specified-value
Other comments:
#
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Øyvind Stenhaug oyvi...@opera.com wrote:
4. layer and layer 10 in section 6.1 are unclear. Layer is used
nowhere in CSS references used in this spec. This must be clarified.
This section also seems to assume that the list in CSS 2.1's appendix E is
for the
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Simon Pieters sim...@opera.com wrote:
Everything's specified.
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/cascade.html#specified-value
Great!
Do you mean object-fit? I guess it would be nice for images to be
object-fit:contain in fullscreen. (Videos already are.)
Yup,
On Fri, 1 Jun 2012, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Øyvind Stenhaug oyvi...@opera.com wrote:
4. layer and layer 10 in section 6.1 are unclear. Layer is used
nowhere in CSS references used in this spec. This must be
clarified.
This section also seems to
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM, fantasai fantasai.li...@inkedblade.net
wrote:
| If its specified 'position' is 'static', it computes to 'absolute'.
What if position is not specified?
All elements have specified
On 5/17/12 10:00 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
During WebApps' May f2f meeting, the participants agreed [1] to
publish a First Public Working Draft of the Fullscreen spec and this
is a Call for Consensus to do so, using the following document as the
basis (note that the document does not yet
On 05/30/2012 07:38 AM, Daniel Glazman wrote:
Le 30/05/12 14:43, Arthur Barstow a écrit :
Chris, Daniel, Peter - when will the CSS WG make a decision on the FPWD?
We'll try to make one today during our weekly conf-call. Please note
that we're going to review the bits of this document falling
On 05/30/2012 08:47 AM, fantasai wrote:
Other comments:
Oh, also, you need a reference to CSS2.1, otherwise your rendering section
isn't defined. :)
~fantasai
On Wed, 30 May 2012 16:38:30 +0200, Daniel Glazman
daniel.glaz...@disruptive-innovations.com wrote:
4. layer and layer 10 in section 6.1 are unclear. Layer is used
nowhere in CSS references used in this spec. This must be clarified.
This section also seems to assume that the list in
36 matches
Mail list logo
