On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 19:23:29 +0100, Daniel Cheng dch...@chromium.org
wrote:
Also, what does it mean to be supported? In new versions of Chrome, any
kind of MIME type is supported in the sense that you can set data for any
arbitrary type, and it can be understood by any browser that uses the
WHEN I registered a media-type on the ietf list I have been quite much hit as
the first comment one says media-type nowadays. And indeed MIME is meant for
email originally.
So I guess politically media-type is a requirement.
Should I dig for a formal requirement?
paul
Le 18 févr. 2012 à
On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 10:15:28 +0100, Paul Libbrecht p...@hoplahup.net
wrote:
WHEN I registered a media-type on the ietf list I have been quite much
hit as the first comment one says media-type nowadays. And indeed MIME
is meant for email originally.
So I guess politically media-type is a
WHEN I registered a media-type on the ietf list I have been quite much hit
as the first comment one says media-type
sorry for the capitalization
nowadays. And indeed MIME is meant for email originally.
So I guess politically media-type is a requirement.
Should I dig for a formal
Does this include an ability for a page to say that a media-type is supported?
(does it not appear natural?)
I won't brag about native type names.
I still find they're good but they're really not well ruled so it's ok.
paul
Le 18 févr. 2012 à 01:16, Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen a écrit :
On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 13:47:08 +0100, Paul Libbrecht p...@hoplahup.net
wrote:
WHEN I registered a media-type on the ietf list I have been quite much
hit as the first comment one says media-type
nowadays.
Well, on one hand it's probably polite and correct to let the group that
defines a
On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 13:48:52 +0100, Paul Libbrecht p...@hoplahup.net
wrote:
Does this include an ability for a page to say that a media-type is
supported?
(does it not appear natural?)
Hm.. you mean a page should be able to say Hello web browser, I just
lve processing
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 19:23:29 +0100, Daniel Cheng dch...@chromium.org
wrote:
Also, what does it mean to be supported? In new versions of Chrome,
any kind of MIME type is supported in the sense that you can set data
for any arbitrary type, and it can be understood by any browser that
uses
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 14:35:50 +0100, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com
wrote:
The processing model is about how to deal with a copy/paste/cut
operation it is not about firing an event (that is mainly part of it).
..it happens to be *the* part of the processing this spec is all about
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 17:05:23 +0100, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
* The Process the default action step should instead talk about
whether
or not the
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcore/**raw-file/tip/Overview.html#**
On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 13:47:08 +0100, Paul Libbrecht p...@hoplahup.net
wrote:
Well, I think it's the duty of the W3C to use the vocabulary of the
people that define this kind of thing.
FWIW, the duty of the W3C is to bring the web to its full potential, not
quibble over terminology.
--
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16025
Summary: Re: Web Storage Editor's Draft 28 November 2011 The
use of the storage mutex to avoid race conditions is
currently considered by certain implementors to be too
high
Le 18 févr. 2012 à 16:25, Hallvord R. M. Steen a écrit :
Does this include an ability for a page to say that a media-type is
supported?
(does it not appear natural?)
Hm.. you mean a page should be able to say Hello web browser, I just lve
processing application/pdf data from the
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15998
Arun a...@mozilla.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
Ms2ger,
Many thanks for the detailed review.
== 1. Introduction ==
Binary Large Object -- a name originally introduced to web APIs
in Google Gears
should use an en dash (—, U+2013) instead of two hyphens.
Done.
This paragraph is inconsistent about linking File and Blob to
Anne,
On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:18:35 +0100, Arun Ranganathan
aranganat...@mozilla.com wrote:
I think per https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15359
we
want to let the BOM checking happen before the other
considerations.
Really? Does that mean, favoring BOM checking over the
16 matches
Mail list logo
