Jeremy Orlow wrote:
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 1:52 AM, Marcos Caceres marc...@opera.com
mailto:marc...@opera.com wrote:
Keeping in line with the design goals to enable Widget-related
technologies to be used on the Web, I'm wondering if we should spawn
a separate specification for
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Marcin
Hanclikmarcin.hanc...@access-company.com wrote:
Hi Marcos,
Unless it's broken (?), I would prefer to leave it as is.
I think that PC should either change the grammar (as suggested in my email)
or specify that the zip-rel-path operates on characters.
2009/7/25 Marcin Hanclik marcin.hanc...@access-company.com:
Hi Marcos, All,
Regarding the usage of IRI in the widget configuration document, I do not
know which speicification is responsible for mandating the IRI normalization.
It is possible that I simply have not yet found the proper
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Marcin
Hanclikmarcin.hanc...@access-company.com wrote:
Hi Marcos,
Yeah, that seems reasonable. I've added it.
I have not seen your change, I do not know where to look for it.
See http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/Overview_TSE.html#iri-attribute
Anyway, I
On further consideration, Opera has decided this is not a bug. We
would like to leave the behavior as is in the spec. What do others
think?
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Marcos Caceresmarc...@opera.com wrote:
Opera QA has found the following bug in the Widgets 1.0: Packaging and
Hi there,
I've been looking through the widget specifications specifically
'Widgets 1.0: The Widget Landscape (Q1 2008)' - Figure 1 at http://
dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-land/
I wonder if there is any concept of an accessibility bridge in either
the widget of web application
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Simon
Harpersimon.har...@manchester.ac.uk wrote:
Hi there,
I've been looking through the widget specifications specifically 'Widgets
1.0: The Widget Landscape (Q1 2008)' - Figure 1 at
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-land/
I wonder if there is any concept of
I'm wondering, for the sake of testing, should we mandate the that in
order to run the test suite a user agent support the widgets AE
specification? This would kinda sucks because we say in the spec that
a UA is not required to support of the Widgets AE spec. However,
without the AE spec, testing
Hmm, well as you really can only test observable behaviour - and the
behaviour of a widget is really what the AE spec is concerned with...
I can see the problem we have here.
If we completed the widget catalogue Atom feed profile we mooted a
while back that would also give us another
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 4:04 AM, Anne van Kesterenann...@opera.com wrote:
Thanks for the update to the draft! Below some feedback:
In the table of contents the link to the filedata URL scheme is broken.
The Web IDL
agreed... slice() seems more appropiate
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Adam de Boor adeb...@google.com wrote:
this is a minor point, but I'm finding the name of the splice method to
be odd. To me splice means to join, and slice would seem a more
appropriate name. The Array object has both
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Michael Nordmanmicha...@google.com
wrote:
I think getAsURL() should become an attribute instead. E.g.
readonly attribute DOMString localURL;
Since it is just a reference there
I updated HTML5 to use the new Web IDL stuff. Here's what's missing, and
how I've used it:
* Some interfaces need multipler callers. I've assumed that I can
specify caller on multiple operations and have the overloading behaviour
handle it automatically.
* Some interfaces need the caller and
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Jul 16, 2009, at 8:04 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
HTML5 just says that new History, Location, etc, objects are
created for each (inner) Window object. Is this not accurate? What
do
Cameron McCormack:
I’ll think about it. :-) HTMLAppletElement can always have
readonly attribute DOMString _object;
to avoid conflicting with the reserved word.
Ian Hickson:
It's many years too late for that.
The underscore is just an escaping mechanism. The identifier is still
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, Cameron McCormack wrote:
Cameron McCormack:
I’ll think about it. :-) HTMLAppletElement can always have
readonly attribute DOMString _object;
to avoid conflicting with the reserved word.
Ian Hickson:
It's many years too late for that.
The underscore
On Aug 7, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Cameron McCormack wrote:
Cameron McCormack:
I’ll think about it. :-) HTMLAppletElement can always have
readonly attribute DOMString _object;
to avoid conflicting with the reserved word.
Ian Hickson:
It's many years too late for that.
The underscore is just
Maciej Stachowiak:
Wouldn't that get in the way of the possibility of underscores in
identifiers in the future?
The underscore-escaping is a feature from OMG IDL. I don’t know if
it’s worth changing to a different character like a backslash. If you
want an identifier to actually begin with an
18 matches
Mail list logo
