On Wed, 18 Jun 2008, Zhenbin Xu wrote:
>
> In the case there isn't clear technical differences, I don't think we
> should pick the right solution based on implementer's cost. Rather We
> should base it on customer impact. A bank with 6000 applications built
> on top of IE's current APIs simply
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008, Zhenbin Xu wrote:
>
> [Zhenbin Xu] Regardless what different browser does today, rich parsing
> error is an important feature for developers. I have found it can
> pinpoint the exact problem that otherwise would have been difficult to
> identify when I sent incorrectly con
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 8:41 PM, timeless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/18/08, Marcos Caceres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> R28. Network State Change Events
>>
>> A conforming specification must specify a means that allows authors to
>> check if the widget resource is connected to Web. A co
It seems we are in agreement, mostly :-)
The point of a fictional browser is that it has no market share, no application
built on top of it and thus would not cause customer pain when it changes
implementation.
In the case there isn't clear technical differences, I don't think we should
pick
t
Inline...
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonas Sicking [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 3:37 PM
> To: Anne van Kesteren
> Cc: Zhenbin Xu; Sunava Dutta; IE8 Core AJAX SWAT Team; public-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: responseXML/responseText exceptions and parseErr
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>
> Most of the feedback I got from my previous proposal was in regards to
> the nested uri scheme solution, which wasn't really a critical part of
> the proposal. So here is an alternative proposal which doesn't use the
> nested schemes but rather a s
Hi All,
Most of the feedback I got from my previous proposal was in regards to
the nested uri scheme solution, which wasn't really a critical part of
the proposal. So here is an alternative proposal which doesn't use the
nested schemes but rather a separate flag.
Only the second paragraph i
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 7:42 AM, SUZANNE Benoit RD-SIRP-ISS
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Comparing 1 and 2, I'd go for 1
>
> About the inner html, it is a good thing to allow, but if there are lots of
> changes do we need this for this round or can it be added in later?
>
Yeah. I thought I would
Comparing 1 and 2, I'd go for 1
About the inner html, it is a good thing to allow, but if there are lots of
changes do we need this for this round or can it be added in later?
>
> Benoit Suzanne
> Widget Factory Project Manager - Orange Labs - FT/RD/SIRP/SOL/SLAM
> t. +33 (0)145 298 198 - m.
Doug Schepers wrote:
Hi, Olli-
Olli Pettay wrote (on 6/18/08 4:40 PM):
And that causes problems like
http://mozilla.pettay.fi/moztests/pixelscrolling.mov
Can you provide some context for what is going on in that video? What is
the problem that illustrates? Does it relate to the scrolli
Hi, Olli-
Olli Pettay wrote (on 6/18/08 4:40 PM):
And that causes problems like
http://mozilla.pettay.fi/moztests/pixelscrolling.mov
Can you provide some context for what is going on in that video? What
is the problem that illustrates? Does it relate to the scrolling vs.
zooming of the
Olli Pettay wrote:
Hi all,
...
So there are (at least) 5 options
1. only pixel delta
- Web app can't know what delta value means a "line scroll"
2. events with both line and pixel scroll information (maybe also page
scroll etc?)
- Web apps would get all the needed information in one event
ISSUE-9 (Wheeling Units): How should wheel events represent pixel/line wheeling
units? [DOM3 Events]
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/
Raised by: Doug Schepers
On product: DOM3 Events
Olli Pettay raised an issue about there being different types of
wheeling/scrolling units; perhaps
Hi all,
there has been some discussion about how wheel event should work, and
what kind of information it should expose.
The current DOM 3 Events (editor) draft has the legacy mousewheel event
and also the new wheel event which has deltaX/Y/Z. The problem is
that what delta means (especially in
Doug Schepers wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote (on 6/18/08 5:27 AM):
Krijn Hoetmer volunteered for logging our IRC channel (#webapps on
irc.w3.org:80) similarly to how he logs for the HTML WG, CSS WG, and
WHATWG. (Also the public ARIA discussion channel I believe.) If you
have any objections to
Hi, WebApps Fans-
Here are the minutes for the DOM 3 Events telcon of 18 June 2008:
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/18-webapps-minutes.html
Or as text below, for those who don't need elitist, schmancy HTML-formating:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT
Hey Marcos,
I totally understand why you would be frustrated by our behavior here.
I owe you, Anne, Art and the rest of the WAF group an apology for falling off
the radar without telling you where I was going. I am definitely sorry for that.
I remember having good conversations with you and ot
Hi,
few comments,
to make it easier to integrate the testsuite to other test systems
(like mochitest), it might be useful to use some prefix in function and
global variable names. Maybe w3c_ or dom3event_ ?
Also, tests should be as automatic and as autonomic as possible - so
shouldn't depend on
Hi, Anne-
Anne van Kesteren wrote (on 6/18/08 5:27 AM):
Krijn Hoetmer volunteered for logging our IRC channel (#webapps on
irc.w3.org:80) similarly to how he logs for the HTML WG, CSS WG, and
WHATWG. (Also the public ARIA discussion channel I believe.) If you have
any objections to this ple
Hi all,
I think it would be better to use unsigned long long for
..loaded and for .total. That way progress events could be more useful
for streaming and file transfer applications. unsigned long isn't
big enough.
br,
Olli
Hi WebApps Fans-
This is a reminder that we will have a DOM 3 Events telcon today, 18
June. Please reply to public-webapps@w3.org to express regrets if you
cannot attend.
The regular time is Wednesdays, 18:30-20:00 UTC. See the DOM3 Events
wiki page for timezones adjustments. [1]
The tentativ
On 6/18/08, Marcos Caceres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> R28. Network State Change Events
>
> A conforming specification must specify a means that allows authors to
> check if the widget resource is connected to Web. A conforming
_the_ Web
However would you please explain what it means?
I've
Hi,
Krijn Hoetmer volunteered for logging our IRC channel (#webapps on
irc.w3.org:80) similarly to how he logs for the HTML WG, CSS WG, and
WHATWG. (Also the public ARIA discussion channel I believe.) If you have
any objections to this please say so before the weekend.
If people find it
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:47:51 +0200, Jonas Sicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It makes no sense to me to for HTTP say that the total number of bytes
should include HTTP headers. It would be similar to including the TCP
headers in the IP packets IMHO.
However, ideally the spec should be proto
24 matches
Mail list logo
