On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:59:53 +0100, Doug Schepers schep...@w3.org wrote:
On another topic, I would like to use Widgets with pure SVG content,
rather than including HTML... I didn't see a clear way to do this, nor
was it explicitly disallowed. I'll review the spec more to see if there
are
According to overview of event types
http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-Events/events.html#Events-EventTypes-complete
the Document node is a valid target for mousewheel/mousemultiwheel events.
However, this seems to be wrong to me since other MouseEvent interface events
do not have Document as
Hi,
Here are a few comments on the 28 January 2009 version of the Widgets
1.0: Packaging and Configuration located in:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/
They are mostly triggered by the Content Localization section and the
associated mechanisms to search for files. The following comments
The minutes from the January 29 Widgets voice conference are
available at the following and copied below:
http://www.w3.org/2009/01/29-wam-minutes.html
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webapps mail list before 5 February 2009
Hi all, about the widget windows modes, I wanted to share the following
points:
*** Wording ***
In the wordings of the modes, I think that the wording used in some of the
modes are too specific to existing platforms, therefore I propose the
following names:
* Icon: I¹m not sure this one is really
Indeed; however as the difference is so small in practice, we thought
it worthwhile to pursue a solution based on the W3C work, rather than
use a proprietary solution. At the spec level, it only really requires
one extra API method.
S
On 28 Jan 2009, at 13:30, Marcos Caceres wrote:
Hi
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Scott Wilson
scott.bradley.wil...@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed; however as the difference is so small in practice, we thought it
worthwhile to pursue a solution based on the W3C work, rather than use a
proprietary solution. At the spec level, it only really requires
Hi Jon,
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Jon Ferraiolo jfer...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
It would be good if the Widgets spec was careful to study potential
conflicts with similar attributes in Google/OpenSocial Gadgets and OpenAjax
Metadata. Google Gadgets has:
OpenSocial/Google
Hi Doug,
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Doug Schepers schep...@w3.org wrote:
Hi, Marcos-
Marcos Caceres wrote (on 1/29/09 7:53 AM):
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 6:59 PM, Doug Schepers schep...@w3.org wrote:
I think that rather than specifying a particular spec or profile, the
Widgets spec
Hi Marcos, Art, All,
Please find below Vodafone's comments on the Widgets 1.0: Packaging and
Configuration specification. I have divided them into what I consider to
be substantive comments and editorial comments.
Thanks,
Mark
Marcos Caceres wrote:
Hi Doug,
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Doug Schepers schep...@w3.org wrote:
Hi, Marcos-
Marcos Caceres wrote (on 1/29/09 7:53 AM):
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 6:59 PM, Doug Schepers schep...@w3.org wrote:
I think that rather than specifying a particular spec or
Marcos Caceres wrote:
I'm not sure I agree. I think for security reasons, we should tell
implementors how to treat SVG icons (no script, no interactivity). They
won't have to strip down the SVG viewer, just set up constraints (which
they need to do anyway).
Ok, I tend to agree with you that
12 matches
Mail list logo
