On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 1:48 AM, Ben Peters ben.pet...@microsoft.comwrote:
5. There should be no native toolbars in cE=minimal (and other native
UI
interfering) like the one Safari opens on iOS if you have non-empty
selection.
I haven't yet checked exactly what's in the iOS toolbar, but
I've provided this input through a few channels already, but I don't
think the user of [SetClass] here is good (and in fact I've been
arguing that SetClass should be removed from WebIDL).
First off you likely don't want to key the list of fonts on the
FontFace object instance like the spec
On 27/05/2014 01:47 , Ben Peters wrote:
-Original Message- From: Robin Berjon
On 26/05/2014 05:43 , Norbert Lindenberg wrote:
Were any speakers of bidirectional languages in the room when
this was discussed?
I don't know what languages the others speak. That said, my
recollection was
Hi Ben,
On 27/05/2014 02:07 , Ben Peters wrote:
From: Robin Berjon [mailto:ro...@w3.org] Even without accounting
for touch screens, you really want the platform to be the thing
that knows what Ctrl-Shift-Left means so you don't have to support
it yourself (and get it wrong often).
Agree. One
On 25/05/2014 20:40 , Piotr Koszuliński wrote:
Making some things unselectable might also be useful. IE has
unselectable, there's also -moz-user-select and friends. But this is
small fries for later I'd reckon.
There are also nested non-editable islands. We built very important
On 27/05/2014 01:52 , Ben Peters wrote:
Composition Events for IMEs, CommandEvents with type insertText for
all text input (including after Composition Events for IMEs)
I think we should be careful not to mix up composition events and IMEs.
They may happen together, but IMEs have their own
On 27/05/2014 01:52 , Ben Peters wrote:
From: Robin Berjon [mailto:ro...@w3.org] On 23/05/2014 01:23 , Ben
Peters wrote:
As I said I am unsure that the way in which composition events
are described in DOM 3 Events is perfect, but that's only
because I haven't used them in anger and they aren't
On 27/05/2014 09:19 , Piotr Koszuliński wrote:
Yes, it should be possible to disable whichever feature you don't need.
In some cases you don't need lists (because e.g. you're editing a text
that will become a content of a paragraph). And in some cases you don't
want bold/italic because your use
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25423
Hayato Ito hay...@chromium.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25895
Bug ID: 25895
Summary: [imports]: LinkImport definition could use some
cleaning up
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
On May 27, 2014 at 9:25:26 AM, Ben Francis (bfran...@mozilla.com) wrote:
As per our conversation in IRC, something else I'd like to highlight
is the fact that in the current version of the spec any web site
can host an app manifest for any web app.
I'm really sorry, seems I wasn't very
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 6:24 PM, marc fawzi marc.fa...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is a jsfiddle showing how .advance behaves when the range is
restricted by .only
Create new e.g. 7 items with names like marc and tags like w1 w3 w5 w2
(random selection of tags with some tags appearing across
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Marcos Caceres w...@marcosc.com wrote:
Where this could become a problem in the future is if manifests start
granting elevated privileges (e.g., access to specific APIs or unlimited
storage). However, the security model could then be refined so that, for
I strongly agree on the SetClass matter. A conventional set of method names is
fine, but that should not necessitate a misleading subclass relationship.
From: Jonas Sickingmailto:jo...@sicking.cc
Sent: 2014-05-27 04:22
To: Daniel
+Gary and Masayuki
--This seems very related to the discussion we are having regarding when to
fire beforeinput. beforeinput might be duplicating some of the use-cases
that the insertText command event might be supporting.
-Original Message-
From: Robin Berjon [mailto:ro...@w3.org]
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 1:22 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
I've provided this input through a few channels already, but I don't
think the user of [SetClass] here is good (and in fact I've been
arguing that SetClass should be removed from WebIDL).
Yes, there's an issue in the spec
+Gary/Masayuki who can help with deciphering DOM L3 Events :-)
-Original Message-
From: Robin Berjon [mailto:ro...@w3.org]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 2:15 AM
To: Ben Peters; Jonas Sicking
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Subject: Composition events (was: contentEditable=minimal)
On 27/05/2014
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Marcos Caceres w...@marcosc.com wrote:
On May 27, 2014 at 9:25:26 AM, Ben Francis (bfran...@mozilla.com) wrote:
As per our conversation in IRC, something else I'd like to highlight
is the fact that in the current version of the spec any web site
can host an
On Wed, May 21, 2014, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been in several discussions on this topic over the past months, a
good example of which is:
https://twitter.com/tobie/status/457075677851037696
This is a great point.
In reaction to that, I'm running an experiment
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
Separately, FontFace.loaded seems to fulfill the same purpose as
FontFaceSet.ready(). I.e. both indicate that the object is done
loading/parsing/applying its data. It seems more consistent if they
had the same name,
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
Separately, FontFace.loaded seems to fulfill the same purpose as
FontFaceSet.ready(). I.e. both indicate that the object is done
On May 27, 2014 at 9:19:45 AM, Ben Francis (bfran...@mozilla.com) wrote:
I think a particular problem with having no defined scope for
apps is when you want to hyperlink from one web app to another.
A hyperlink with no specified target window will always open
in the browsing context
On May 27, 2014 at 2:30:32 PM, Jonas Sicking (jo...@sicking.cc) wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
The only way that gmail would allow my own app store to use its manifest
would be for
Google to include the HTTP header:
Access-Control-Allow-Origin:
On May 27, 2014 at 3:31:15 PM, Ben Francis (bfran...@mozilla.com) wrote:
To be clear, this is the case I was talking about. The benefit
is that it makes it much easier to build a large app store of tailored
app experiences for sites that lack manifests without the involvement
of app
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25895
Morrita Hajime morr...@google.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
wrote:
Separately, FontFace.loaded seems to fulfill the same purpose as
On Tuesday, May 27, 2014, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Marcos Caceres
w...@marcosc.comjavascript:;
wrote:
On May 27, 2014 at 2:30:32 PM, Jonas Sicking (jo...@sicking.cc) wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
The
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
28 matches
Mail list logo
