... found it:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V7ci1-lBTY6AJxgN99aCMwjZKCjKv1v3y_7WLtcgM00/edit?pli=1
:DG
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@google.com
wrote:
Yep. Elliott (cc'd) had a proposal like this a while back. It was coolly
received (can't remember the
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Travis Leithead
travis.leith...@microsoft.com wrote:
Ah, thanks Dimitri.
After reading that, I'm also receiving it rather coolly. It's a very
interesting idea, but as it relates to web components, its errs strongly on
the side of isolation to the degree
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Unless the SVG WG is willing to drop support for
script![CDATA[...]]/script. But that seems like it'd break a lot
of content.
Like, on the same line? Because I recall that sort of thing showing up
in old HTML tutorials,
Ah, thanks Dimitri.
After reading that, I'm also receiving it rather coolly. It's a very
interesting idea, but as it relates to web components, its errs strongly on the
side of isolation to the degree that the component would be more isolated than
an iframe today; at least in same-domain,
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Benjamin Lesh bl...@netflix.com wrote:
What are your thoughts on this idea?
I think it would be more natural (HTML-parser-wise) if we
special-cased SVG elements, similar to how e.g.
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28211
Bug ID: 28211
Summary: [Shadow]: A syntax for loading/parsing shadow trees
directly from HTML
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Benjamin Lesh bl...@netflix.com wrote:
I agree completely, Tab, but it's actually too late to stop forcing authors
to think about namespaces, the fact I currently have to think about it is
the source of this suggestion.
You have to think about it today *because
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Benjamin Lesh bl...@netflix.com wrote:
What are your thoughts on this idea?
I think it would be more natural
I agree completely, Tab, but it's actually too late to stop forcing authors
to think about namespaces, the fact I currently have to think about it is
the source of this suggestion.
The merging of namespaces is the ideal solution, no doubt, but it's
probably not a realistic solution in the short
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Benjamin Lesh bl...@netflix.com wrote:
Tab,
The only conflicts in the namespaces are font
(deprecated in SVG2), script and style (harmonizing with HTML so
there's no difference), and a (attempting to harmonize API surface).
*If* I didn't make any mistakes
(I quickly did and didn't check everything.)
The intersection seems to be:
12 matches
Mail list logo