RE: Custom Elements: is=

. Apologies if I've missed it somewhere obvious, but is there any information/detail about the proposed sub-classing feature available anywhere? Léonie. -- Léonie Watson - Senior accessibility engineer, TPG @LeonieWatson @PacielloGroup

RE: Making ARIA and native HTML play better together

://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css4-ui?s[]=appearance -- Léonie Watson Senior accessibility engineer, TPG @LeonieWatson @PacielloGroup PacielloGroup.com

RE: Custom Elements: is=

? That aside, concentrating efforts on styling native HTML elements makes a lot of sense. Léonie -- Léonie Watson - Senior accessibility engineer @LeonieWatson @PacielloGroup PacielloGroup.com

RE: Custom Elements: is=

From: Bruce Lawson [mailto:bru...@opera.com] Sent: 13 June 2015 16:34 On 13 June 2015 at 15:30, Léonie Watson lwat...@paciellogroup.com wrote: why not use the extends= syntax you mentioned? my-button extends=button attributesPush/my-button because browsers that don't know about web

RE: Custom Elements: is=

From: Tobie Langel [mailto:to...@codespeaks.com] Sent: 12 June 2015 21:26 On Fri, Jun 12, 2015, at 19:41, Léonie Watson wrote: Is there a succinct explanation of why the is= syntax is disliked? The info on the WHATWG wiki explains where is= breaks, but doesn’t offer much on the syntax issue

RE: Custom Elements: is=

as though the attributes relate to button rather than the element indicated in the extendedby= attribute. Léonie. -- Léonie Watson - Senior accessibility engineer @LeonieWatson @PacielloGroup PacielloGroup.com

RE: Custom Elements: is=

Is there a succinct explanation of why the is= syntax is disliked? The info on the WHATWG wiki explains where is= breaks, but doesn’t offer much on the syntax issue [1]. Léonie. [1] https://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Custom_Elements#Subclassing_existing_elements -- Léonie Watson - Senior

RE: Shadow DOM and SVG use elements

> From: Travis Leithead [mailto:travis.leith...@microsoft.com] > Sent: 24 October 2015 04:42 > Well, since SVG 'use' is mostly about replicating the composed tree anyway, > it seems that is should probably render the composed tree--e.g., this seems > natural, because use would "replicate" the host

RE: Notes from the future of HTML session at TPAC

> From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.bars...@gmail.com] > Sent: 28 October 2015 20:35 > > Thanks! > > Would someone with write privs to these minutes please commit to at least > identifying the folks attributed in the minutes (f.ex. who is "DS")? It would > also be useful if the "Present" list

RE: [Web Components] proposing a f2f...

> From: Chaals McCathie Nevile [mailto:cha...@yandex-team.ru] > Sent: 28 October 2015 13:20 > it would be good to have a face to face meeting, and wrap up loose ends. > At the TPAC meeting times suggested were December and late January. [...] > I would propose a day between 10 and 14 December as

Notes from the future of HTML session at TPAC

Thanks to everyone for a useful and informative discussion. Minutes available from the following palces: Web: http://www.w3.org/2015/10/28-html-minutes.html Text: http://www.w3.org/2015/10/28-html-minutes.html,text Léonie -- Senior accessibility engineer @PacielloGroup @LeonieWatson

RE: [Web Components] proposing a f2f...

Quick reminder to please complete the ballot on proposed F2F meeting times. The feeling seems to be to meet sooner rather than later, so getting a decision ASAP would probably be a good thing to do (especially for those of us with travel plans to make):

RE: Publish WD of HTML Accessibility API Mappings (AAM) 1.0

The WP WG approves publication of the HTML AAM WD. Léonie, Ade, Chaals and Art (WP co-chairs) > -Original Message- > From: Léonie Watson [mailto:lwat...@paciellogroup.com] > Sent: 19 November 2015 09:20 > To: public-webapps@w3.org > Cc: 'Michael Cooper' <coo...@w3.o

RE: Meeting date, january

> From: Chaals McCathie Nevile [mailto:cha...@yandex-team.ru] > Sent: 26 November 2015 01:55 > it appears that there are some people may not be able to attend a meeting > on the 29th - although Apple has generously offered to host that day. > > Is there anyone who would only be able to attend if

PSA: Publish WD of HTML Accessibility API Mappings (AAM) 1.0

Hello WP, This is notice of intent to publish a new Working Draft of HTML Accessibility API Mappings on/around 19th November [1]. It is a joint publication of the Web Platform and ARIA WGs. Léonie. [1] http://w3c.github.io/aria/html-aam/html-aam.html -- Senior accessibility engineer

Holding WP meetings

Hello WP, Finding the balance between rapidity and process can be challenging. WP continues the work mode established by WebApps, where flexible and agile collaboration is encouraged, and the W3C process respected. Whenever people meet (formally or informally) to discuss a spec, there is a good

RE: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

> From: Sangwhan Moon [mailto:sangw...@iki.fi] > Sent: 03 June 2016 02:45 > I believe Marcos is raising a valid concern here - while I'm not in full > agreement that only objections matter, most of the people get enough mail > already and it does make it easy to get important feedback lost in a

RE: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

Hello WP, This CFC passed with many expressions of support. Thank you to everyone who responded and gave feedback. Léonie on behalf of the WP chairs and team, and HTML editors > -Original Message- > From: Léonie Watson [mailto:t...@tink.uk] > Sent: 02 June 2016 13:48 >

CFC: Republish Pointer Lock as CR

Hello WP, This is a Call For Consensus (CFC) to request that W3C republish Pointer Lock as a Candidate Recommendation (CR). Extensions to the MouseEventInit Dictionary [1] constitute substantive changes to the specification that were made after the current CR was published in 2013 [2]. Please

RE: Self-introduction from Wanming Lin

> From: Lin, Wanming [mailto:wanming@intel.com] > Sent: 31 May 2016 08:46 > Hello WP, Hello Wanming, and welcome. [...] > I am proud to represent my team to join in this group, I am a newbie but I will > try my best. > Looking forward to working with you all. Thank you. We are looking

CFC: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

Hello WP, This is a call for consensus to request that W3C publish the current HTML Working Draft (WD) as a Candidate Recommendation (CR). It has been posted to public-webapps@w3.org as the official email for this WG. Please reply to this thread on public-webapps@w3.org no later than end of day

RE: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

> From: Léonie Watson [mailto:t...@tink.uk] > Sent: 02 June 2016 13:48 > This is a call for consensus to request that W3C publish the current HTML > Working Draft (WD) as a Candidate Recommendation (CR). It has been > posted to public-webapps@w3.org as the official email for this

RE: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

> From: mar...@marcosc.com [mailto:mar...@marcosc.com] > Sent: 02 June 2016 17:15 > Can we please kindly stop the +1s spam? It greatly diminishes the value of > this mailing list. We mention in the CFC that positive responses are preferred and encouraged (which they are), so this is an appeal to

RE: CFC: Republish Pointer Lock as CR

Important: This CFC is extended for 48 hours. Please provide comments by end of day on Thursday 23rd June 2016. From: Vincent Scheib [mailto:sch...@google.com] Sent: 21 June 2016 05:09 “I've discussed more with Xiaoqian and Léonie and support a CR now with this proposal: Move to a CR

RE: CFC: Republish Pointer Lock as CR

From: Takayoshi Kochi [mailto:ko...@google.com] “I'm fine without Shadow DOM changes, because no one yet implemented the intended change to the spec yet, and so it could be immature to include in a "CR". (Does CR require at least 2 implementors exist?)” Yes, CR requires at least

RE: CFC: Republish Pointer Lock as CR

From: Léonie Watson [mailto:t...@tink.uk] Sent: 21 June 2016 11:18 Yes, CR requires at least two implementations in shipping browsers. Once Pointer Lock is at Recc, hopefully the Shadow DOM content will be stable enough to include in Pointer Lock next. Correction: A CR doesn’t require 2

RE: CFC: Republish Pointer Lock as CR

:mich...@agosto.nl> > wrote: Looks good, +1 —Michiel On 13 Jun 2016, at 18:12, Léonie Watson <t...@tink.uk <mailto:t...@tink.uk> > wrote: Hello WP, This is a Call For Consensus (CFC) to request that W3C republish Pointer Lock as a Candidate Recommendation (CR). Extensions

Re: CFC: Republish Pointer Lock as CR

On 21/06/2016 13:14, Léonie Watson wrote: Important: This CFC is extended for 48 hours. Please provide comments by end of day on Thursday 23^rd June 2016. With thanks to those who responded, this CFC passes. We will begin the process of transitioning Pointer Lock to CR. Léonie

FW: HTML plan

-Original Message- From: Léonie Watson [mailto:t...@tink.uk] Sent: 19 January 2016 19:21 To: public-h...@w3.org Subject: HTML plan Dear all, We've put a new draft of the HTML specification into GitHub: http://github.com/w3c/html. You can read the editor's draft: http://w3c.github.io

FW: New W3C publication requirements as of March 1

-Original Message- From: Philippe Le Hegaret [mailto:p...@w3.org] Sent: 18 February 2016 22:03 To: Chairs ; spec-prod Subject: New W3C publication requirements as of March 1 All, We adopted back in May 2015 [1] a project to update our style sheets

HTML editors meeting

Hello, There will be an HTML editors meeting on 10 - 11 May 2016, at Microsoft in Redmond. Info here: https://github.com/w3c/WebPlatformWG/blob/gh-pages/meetings/10-11mayHTML.md If you are interested in joining the HTML editorial team, we would like to hear from you. Whilst anybody can submit a

RE: Telecon / meeting on first week of April for Web Components

Glazkov [mailto:dglaz...@google.com] Sent: 15 March 2016 04:30 To: Ryosuke Niwa <rn...@apple.com> Cc: Léonie Watson <t...@tink.uk>; Chaals McCathie Nevile <cha...@yandex-team.ru>; public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org> Subject: Re: Telecon / meeting on first week of April

RE: Telecon / meeting on first week of April for Web Components

For a telecon, we can create a WebEx instance if that would be useful? Let me know the date/time (UTC), and we'll get it sorted. For an F2F, we'll need to post notice of the date/venue at least eight weeks in advance [1]. Let me know the date(s)/venue, and we can do that too. Léonie. [1]

[Web Components] Editor for Custom Elements

Hello WP, We're looking for a new editor for the Custom Elements spec [1]. Dimitri Glazkov has stepped down as editor and will be greatly missed in the role. Thank you for all your hard work Dimitri, you helped make Custom Elements happen and it's very much appreciated. Domenic Denicola briefly

Last call for TPAC meeting space

Hello, We need to request meeting space at TPAC by the end of this month. As Chaals previously noted, we will be focusing meeting time on particular areas rather than holding multiple plenary days [1]. If you would like time/space to meet to work on a particular spec, please let us know how much

CFC: Publish as W3C Notes

Hello, At the AC meeting in March 2016 the WP co-chairs indicated that the following two specifications would benefit from further incubation before continuing along the Recommendation track: Quota Management API [1] Input Method Editor API [2] This is a CFC to publish each of these

RE: New Web Components editor

> From: Domenic Denicola [mailto:d...@domenic.me] > Sent: 26 April 2016 19:06 > Thanks Léonie. One correction: > > From: Léonie Watson [mailto:t...@tink.uk] > > > > The WP co-chairs and team are happy to announce that Domenic Denicola > > will be the new editor

New Web Components editor

Hello, The WP co-chairs and team are happy to announce that Domenic Denicola will be the new editor of the Custom Elements and Shadow DOM specifications at W3C. With thanks to Google for their time and support, we're looking forward to working with Domenic - and to the continued evolution of

CFC

Hello WP, At the AC meeting in March 2016 the WP co-chairs indicated that the Packaging on the Web specification [1] would benefit from further incubation before continuing along the Recommendation track. This is a CFC to publish Packaging on the Web as a W3C note. If the CFC passes, the

RE: CFC: Convert Packaging on the Web to a W3C note

With the subject line repaired this time... > -Original Message- > From: Léonie Watson [mailto:t...@tink.uk] > Sent: 24 May 2016 18:54 > To: public-webapps@w3.org > Subject: CFC > > Hello WP, > > At the AC meeting in March 2016 the WP co-chairs indicated that

WP meetings at TPAC

Hello WP, We have meeting space available throughout TPAC week [1]. The plan is to focus on a different area of work each day, to help everyone schedule their time a bit more easily. We've posted meeting pages for each day: https://github.com/w3c/WebPlatformWG/blob/gh-pages/Meetings.md Monday

Re: CFC: Publish a FPWD of IndexedDB 2.0

With thanks to everyone who responded. This CFC received only positive responses, and so passes without objection. Léonie. -- @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem On 03/08/2016 15:46, Léonie Watson wrote: Hello WP, This is a Call For Consensus (CFC) to publish a First Public Working Draft

Re: Service Workers meeting info

On 11/08/2016 11:41, Jake Archibald wrote: Notes were taken in IRC, here's a log https://gist.github.com/jakearchibald/c65009efa2ed9dbe3ad38f5fef5a4ef1. Here's my run-down of the headlines https://jakearchibald.com/2016/service-worker-meeting-notes/. Thanks Jake. Both added to the WP meetings

CFC: Publish a FPWD of IndexedDB 2.0

Hello WP, This is a Call For Consensus (CFC) to publish a First Public Working Draft (FPWD) of IndexedDB 2.0 [1]. We are still exploring different ways of responding to a CFC. Please choose one of the following methods: 1. Reply by email to this thread (on public-webapps@w3.org). 2. Reply

WPWG meetings at TPAC

Hello WP, Instead of asking the whole WG to meet on all four meeting days at TPAC, we had requests from editors and other active contributors to focus each day on a different area of work [1]. Monday - Web Components Tuesday - Service Workers Thursday - Editing TF and Selection API Friday -

Re: Meeting between Web platform and ARIA at TPAC

On 04/08/2016 15:00, Rich Schwerdtfeger wrote: I would like to request a 90 minute meeting on Friday at TPAC. Thanks Rich. We've taken a different approach to meeting at TPAC this year. Instead of the whole WG meeting on each of the four meeting days, each day is focused on a specific area

Re: CFC on referencing the Image Description (longdesc) extension

A quick reminder that this CFC closes at the end of day tomorrow (Friday 12th August). Thanks. Léonie. -- @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem On 05/08/2016 18:17, Léonie Watson wrote: Hello WP, This is a Call For Consensus (CFC) on the following proposal for referencing the Image Description

Service Workers meeting info

Hello WP, Information for the meeting on 28/29 July is here: https://github.com/w3c/WebPlatformWG/blob/gh-pages/meetings/16-07-28-29SW.md If you plan to attend, it would be helpful if you could create a PR to add yourself to the attendees list (or let me know and I'll add you). Thanks.

Re: Call for Consensus: Publish HTML 5.2 FPWD?

Reminder that this CFC closes on Thursday 14th July (end of day). If you can take a few minutes to respond through one of the three proposed channels, it will help us identify the work mode that suits the WG best. Thanks. Léonie. On 05/07/2016 15:15, Chaals McCathie Nevile wrote: This is a

CFC on referencing the Image Description (longdesc) extension

Hello WP, This is a Call For Consensus (CFC) on the following proposal for referencing the Image Description (longdesc) extension specification [1]. The CFC is posted to public-webapps@w3.org because this is the official WP email list, and copied to public-h...@w3.org. The proposal: 1.

Re: CFC: Publish a FPWD of IndexedDB 2.0

Quick reminder that this CFC closes at the end of day tomorrow (Wednesday 10th August). Thanks. Léonie. -- @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem On 03/08/2016 15:46, Léonie Watson wrote: Hello WP, This is a Call For Consensus (CFC) to publish a First Public Working Draft (FPWD) of IndexedDB 2.0

Re: Leaving Mozilla

On 06/08/2016 02:12, Jonas Sicking wrote: A little over a month ago I got married. My wife and I are planning on doing an extended honeymoon, starting now and ending sometime early next year. Congratulations! [...] Working on the web with you all has been an amazing experience. Please keep

Re: CfC: Pointer Lock to Proposed Recommendation; deadline August 20

Quick reminder that this CFC closes tomorrow, Saturday 20th August. Thanks. Léonie. -- @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem On 14/08/2016 00:01, Xiaoqian Wu wrote: Hello, Web Platform WG, This is a Call for Consensus to publish a Proposed Recommendation of Pointer Lock using the [PR] as the

CFC to publish WebIDL-1 as a Proposed Recommendation

Hello WP, This is a Call For Consensus (CFC) to publish WebIDL-1 as a Proposed Recommendation (PR) [1]. Some editorial changes were made to the specification during the Candidate Recommendation (CR) period, but none that affects conformance. The CR implementation report is available [2].

Re: CfC: Pointer Lock to Proposed Recommendation; deadline August 20

On 14/08/2016 00:01, Xiaoqian Wu wrote: This is a Call for Consensus to publish a Proposed Recommendation of Pointer Lock using the [PR] as the basis. Agreement with this CfC means you consider the test results shows interoperability and the changes since CR are not substantive. This CFC

Re: CFC to publish WebIDL-1 as a Proposed Recommendation

On 16/08/2016 07:46, Léonie Watson wrote: This is a Call For Consensus (CFC) to publish WebIDL-1 as a Proposed Recommendation (PR) [1]. This CFC received positive messages of support and no objections, and so it passes. Thank you to Yves and Travis for their work on this specification

Re: CfC: Pointer Lock to Proposed Recommendation; deadline August 20

+1 Great for this to be progressing. Léonie. -- @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem On 14/08/2016 00:01, Xiaoqian Wu wrote: Hello, Web Platform WG, This is a Call for Consensus to publish a Proposed Recommendation of Pointer Lock using the [PR] as the basis. Agreement with this CfC means you