On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Justin Fagnani
justinfagn...@google.com wrote:
How are you supposed to tell if one of your ancestors was removed?
Is that a hook builtin elements have today?
Blink's built-in
On 7 May 2015 at 06:43, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com wrote:
On another thread recent thread, leonie and chaals [3] talked about adding
behaviours to ARIA.
this makes sense, but (unless I'm inventing nonsense because I'm mad,
which is definitely possible), doesn't this describe the
I'm happy to implement some of these proposals in blink to compare the
performance when the time comes, if I or other guys can afford to do.
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 1:20 PM Hayato Ito hay...@chromium.org wrote:
I'm wondering how we should estimate the performance impact of these
proposals.
In
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Justin Fagnani
justinfagn...@google.com wrote:
How are you supposed to tell if one of your ancestors was removed?
Is that a hook builtin elements have today?
--
https://annevankesteren.nl/
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com wrote:
Currently ARIA does not do this stuff AFAIK.
Correct. ARIA only exposes strings to AT. We could maybe make it do
more, once we understand what more means, which is basically figuring
out HTML as Custom Elements...
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Alice Boxhall aboxh...@google.com wrote:
I definitely acknowledge is= may not be the ideal solution to the latter
problem - it definitely has some holes in it, especially when you start
adding author shadow roots to things - but I think it does have potential.
From: Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com
wrote:
Currently ARIA does not do this stuff AFAIK.
Correct. ARIA only exposes strings to AT. We could maybe make it do more,
once we understand what more means, which is
On 7 May 2015 at 07:53, Bruce Lawson bru...@opera.com wrote:
this makes sense, but (unless I'm inventing nonsense because I'm mad,
which is definitely possible), doesn't this describe the current
behaviour in many UAs anyway?
Currently ARIA does not do this stuff AFAIK. There is some limited
The WebAppSec community requests review of Subresource Integrity
http://w3c.github.io/webappsec/specs/subresourceintegrity/, specifically:
[[
Fetch Integration
Privacy and Security Considerations
CORS interactions
Future Considerations regarding broader integration into other HTML elements
On 5/7/15 3:43 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Justin Fagnani
justinfagn...@google.com wrote:
How are you supposed to tell if one of your ancestors was removed?
Is that a hook builtin elements have today?
In Gecko, yes. The set of hooks Gecko builtin elements
On 07/05/2015 08:59, Domenic Denicola wrote:
...
These are my thoughts as well. The proposal seems nice as a
convenient way to get a given bundle of behaviors. But we *really*
need to stop considering these roles as atomic, and instead break
them down into what they really mean.
In other words,
ATSC and CEA are developing standards that include the ability to download
digital signed applications. Their current specifications reference the W3C
Recommendation for XML Digital Signature for Widgets (18 April 2013).
However, the associated Widgets Digital Signature Namespace
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:44 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 7:42 AM, Elliott Sprehn espr...@chromium.org
wrote:
That actually seems pretty similar to what we have, ours is in the form
of:
Node#insertedInto(Node insertionPoint)
Node#removedFrom(Node
Ryosuke, could you file a bug for the spec if you find an uncomfortable
part in the spec?
I want to understand exactly what you are trying to improve.
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 2:21 AM Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote:
On May 6, 2015, at 11:10 PM, Elliott Sprehn espr...@chromium.org
wrote:
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 7:42 AM, Elliott Sprehn espr...@chromium.org wrote:
That actually seems pretty similar to what we have, ours is in the form of:
Node#insertedInto(Node insertionPoint)
Node#removedFrom(Node insertionPoint)
where insertionPoint is the ancestor in the tree where a
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:14 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
In Gecko, yes. The set of hooks Gecko builtin elements have today is,
effectively:
1) This element used to not have a parent and now does.
Is there a timeline for the permission API in Mozilla?
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Miguel Garcia migu...@chromium.org
wrote:
Notifications has it (as a property instead of a method which is a pain).
Notifications
Agreed, I think we need a backwards compatible solution until the
permission API gets some traction but once Mozilla ships it I think new
APIs should just use the permission API.
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Michael van Ouwerkerk
mvanouwerk...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at
Notifications has it (as a property instead of a method which is a pain).
I think that once the permissions API has shipped in both Mozilla and
Chrome we should get future APIs to use it exclusively. Push seems to be a
bit border line given the timeline so I think we should just implement in
both
$(obj).load('***.php');) can't run well,because it make my web music lose
voice.
test url:http://www.wuover.com
20254EA1@06F63601.969B4855
Description: Binary data
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:14 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
In Gecko, yes. The set of hooks Gecko builtin elements have today is,
effectively:
1) This element used to not have a parent and now does.
2) This element has an ancestor that used to not have a parent and now
On 07/05/2015 08:02, Steve Faulkner wrote:
On 7 May 2015 at 07:53, Bruce Lawson bru...@opera.com
mailto:bru...@opera.com wrote:
this makes sense, but (unless I'm inventing nonsense because I'm mad,
which is definitely possible), doesn't this describe the current
behaviour in many
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 6:02 AM, Hayato Ito hay...@chromium.org wrote:
I'm saying:
- Composed tree is related with CSS.
- Node distribution should be considered as a part of style concept.
Right, I think Ryosuke and I simply disagree with that assessment. CSS
operates on the composed tree (and
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 6:02 AM, Hayato Ito hay...@chromium.org wrote:
I'm saying:
- Composed tree is related with CSS.
- Node distribution should be considered as a part of style concept.
Right, I think Ryosuke
Yeah, we, in Google, had several discussion about how the next *Selection
APIs* should be. However we don't have any concrete proposals yet.
We are aware that we need the new APIs because the existing APIs is not
suitable.
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:10 PM Elliott Sprehn espr...@chromium.org wrote:
On May 6, 2015, at 9:48 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 12:23 AM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com wrote:
Are you suggesting that cloning my-button will create a new instance of
my-button by invoking its constructor?
No, I'm saying there would be another
On May 6, 2015, at 11:10 PM, Elliott Sprehn espr...@chromium.org wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 6:02 AM, Hayato Ito hay...@chromium.org wrote:
I'm saying:
- Composed tree is related with CSS.
- Node distribution
27 matches
Mail list logo
