Re: (aside) MIME type
On Saturday, February 18, 2012, 7:02:45 PM, Anne wrote: AvK On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 13:47:08 +0100, Paul Libbrecht p...@hoplahup.net AvK wrote: Well, I think it's the duty of the W3C to use the vocabulary of the people that define this kind of thing. AvK FWIW, the duty of the W3C is to bring the web to its full potential, not AvK quibble over terminology. So just call it 'Internet Media Type' like the IETF and IANA do, and quit quibbling. An informative aside (previously called MIME type) can be added for folks not up to speed. -- Chris Lilley Technical Director, Interaction Domain W3C Graphics Activity Lead, Fonts Activity Lead Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG Member, CSS, WebFonts, SVG Working Groups
Re: Initial feedback on XBL2
On Sunday, September 5, 2010, 4:00:20 AM, Adam wrote:
body { binding: url(example.xbl#nav-then-main); }
AB Adding active content via CSS is bad for security. For example, IE
AB has removed support for CSS expressions (which execute script) and
AB Mozilla has removed support for XBL bindings, which, like this
AB proposal, would allow for script execution from CSS. Perhaps we
AB should consider a more secure mechanism for invoking the binding.
In the light of that browser implementor feedback about the drawbacks of using
CSS to add active content, maybe another method should be chosen. XPath for
example might be useful here.
--
Chris Lilley Technical Director, Interaction Domain
W3C Graphics Activity Lead, Fonts Activity Lead
Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Member, CSS, WebFonts, SVG Working Groups
