On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 7:13 PM, Ennals, Robert robert.enn...@intel.com wrote:
On Tuesday, October 20, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc
wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Robert O'Callahan
rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Ennals, Robert
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 5:16 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
There are lots of reasons why the browser might deduce that the user is not
paying attention to a document, e.g.
-- the browser window containing the document is minimized
-- the tab containing the document is hidden
-- the document
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:07:47 +0200, Doug Schepers schep...@w3.org wrote:
I don't feel too strongly about having both .children and
.childElements, but I do think that .children is a little problematic
for authors... they will always have to check to see if Comment nodes
are included,
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7938
Ian 'Hixie' Hickson i...@hixie.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||i...@hixie.ch
I like window.hasAttention if you can even vaguely define what it
means... It's pointless to make it so vague that useful things will
work differently in different browsers by accident rather than by
design (for example, it might be ok for mobile devices to work
differently by design, but it would
Right... Not to beat the point - but page or window? :) You said page
again and I'm just trying to get some clarity...
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Ennals, Robert robert.enn...@intel.com wrote:
[my last attempt at an inline reply seems to have interacted strangely with
Maciej's email
@deprecated ? :)
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 8:22 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
I agree. The reason I phrased it as I did was to contrast with my previous
remarks. The children attribute should be part of
So.. I wound up speaking to Robert offline and in our discussion his
comments became much clearer to me and I think that it's at least
worth documenting in case anyone else misunderstands as I did (even
historically via the archive).
There are really a few proposals here which are sort of only
In this particular case, I think anything that's implemented in all of the
major browser engines should be an official standard, not just de facto.
Why only in this particular case? :) As a rule that seems like sound
guidance. If it's implemented everywhere, shouldn't you have to make
a
FYI, Thomas is organizing a bar-BOF during TPAC meeting week re Web
security.
See below for more information including a Doodle registration poll.
-R, Art Barstow
Begin forwarded message:
From: ext Thomas Roessler t...@w3.org
Date: October 20, 2009 1:32:07 PM EDT
Folks,
as a quick
hi there,
if you didn't know, there will be a HyBi BoF on Tuesday 10th November,
at the next IETF in Hiroshima.
The Hypertext-Bidirectional (HyBI) working group will seek
standardization of approaches that can be used
to communicate with one another in both directions.
In particular, the
So... in describing this feature:
Is it really the visibility of the page that is being queried - or the
some kind of state of a window? Maybe it's a silly bit of semantics,
but it seems clearer to me that most of the things discussed here are
about a whole window/tab being minimized (either to
I suppose I should not have used that phrasing... It wasn't really
accurate and it obscures my point... My point was that I actually
wanted it to run in the background... So - does time stop, or just
rendering? I think that you have to be very clear.
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Robert
Below is the draft agenda for the October 22 Widgets Voice Conference
(VC).
Inputs and discussion before the VC on all of the agenda topics via
public-webapps is encouraged (as it can result in a shortened meeting).
Please address Open/Raised Issues and Open Actions before the meeting:
(adding the Device APIs Working Group mailing list in CC:)
Hi John, Web Apps
Le lundi 19 octobre 2009 à 14:12 -0700, John Gregg a écrit :
Apologies for the delay, I've been spending the majority of my time
completing the initial implementation for Chrome, but I've posted a
draft version of a
2009/10/15 Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com:
On Oct 15, 2009, at 13:36 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
The spec currently reads:
If the Zip archive is encrypted, as defined in [Zip], return an error
and terminate this algorithm.
Which effectively results in Zip encrypted widgets being treated as
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux d...@w3.orgwrote:
(adding the Device APIs Working Group mailing list in CC:)
Hi John, Web Apps
Le lundi 19 octobre 2009 à 14:12 -0700, John Gregg a écrit :
Apologies for the delay, I've been spending the majority of my time
[hoping that quoting works better this time]
On Oct 20, 2009, at 7:41 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Oct 20, 2009, at 7:13 PM, Ennals, Robert wrote:
[snip]
I'd even be tempted to risk breaking existing applications a little bit and
make the
*default* behavior for HTML5 pages be that time
As expected, the Media Annotations WG has published a First Public
Working Draft (FPWD) of their API for Media Resource 1.0:
[[
http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-mediaont-api-1.0-20091020/
Abstract
This specification defines a client-side API to access metadata
information related to media
Hi all,
I would like to let you know that we finished the implementation of the widget
signing spec within our open sourced signing server. As an implementaion of the
OASIS DSS spec we focus on server side signature creation. The server side
processing of signing process offers some advantages
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
The editor's response is fine but why is it asking me to escalate the
issue to the HTML WG? The specs are being discussed in the WebApps WG.
My bad, I was just going through all the bugs and didn't notice this one
wasn't part of the HTMLWG list.
21 matches
Mail list logo
