On Sep 20, 2009, at 8:43 PM, ddailey wrote:
Ya'll probably have dealt with this already but here is the usage case
My son and I are are typing my recently deceased Dad's memoirs from
the Manhattan project.
I'm saying to son: "if you can't figure out what it says, type the
characters you a
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 9:42 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Juriy Zaytsev wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 20, 2009, at 10:29 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Michael A. Puls II
>>> wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:15:11 -0400, Joseph Pecora
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Juriy Zaytsev wrote:
>
> On Sep 20, 2009, at 10:29 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Michael A. Puls II
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:15:11 -0400, Joseph Pecoraro
>>> wrote:
>>>
On Sep 20, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Michael A.
On Sep 20, 2009, at 10:29 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Michael A. Puls II
wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:15:11 -0400, Joseph Pecoraro >
wrote:
On Sep 20, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
I think it'd be cool to have to complement
document.documentE
On Sep 20, 2009, at 10: 29PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:15:11 -0400, Joseph Pecoraro >
Something like this almost always works:
var head = document.documentElement.firstChild
The documentElement.firstChild cannot be expected to be head. It could
be a text node. For example:
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Michael A. Puls II
wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:15:11 -0400, Joseph Pecoraro
> wrote:
>
>> On Sep 20, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
>>>
>>> I think it'd be cool to have to complement document.documentElement and
>>> document.body.
>>
>> On Sep 20,
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 8:43 PM, ddailey wrote:
...
> Question: what markup will be least cumbersome (and hence most recommended)
> within a plain text document that may ultimately be converted
> (automagically) to HTML5, assuming, in the meantime, that we may stoop so
> low as to put it in HTML4.
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Michael A. Puls II
wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:15:11 -0400, Joseph Pecoraro
> wrote:
>
>> On Sep 20, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
>>>
>>> I think it'd be cool to have to complement document.documentElement and
>>> document.body.
>>
>> On Sep 20,
Ya'll probably have dealt with this already but here is the usage case
My son and I are are typing my recently deceased Dad's memoirs from the
Manhattan project.
I'm saying to son: "if you can't figure out what it says, type the characters
you are sure about. Use '?' marks for the letters that
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:15:11 -0400, Joseph Pecoraro
wrote:
On Sep 20, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
I think it'd be cool to have to complement document.documentElement and
document.body.
On Sep 20, 2009, at 4: 00PM, Juriy Zaytsev wrote:
Surely better than abominable – `docum
On Sep 20, 2009, at 5:20 PM, Joseph Pecoraro wrote:
On Sep 20, 2009, at 4: 24PM, Juriy Zaytsev wrote:
Speaking of `document.head`, I think Mootools does exactly that.
Good thinking. I took a look at some JavaScript Libraries /
Frameworks. Here are some quick counts of how many times I c
Yep! So what's the reason not to do it ;)
-- Yehuda
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Joseph Pecoraro wrote:
> On Sep 20, 2009, at 4: 24PM, Juriy Zaytsev wrote:
>
>> Speaking of `document.head`, I think Mootools does exactly that.
>>
>
>
> Good thinking. I took a look at some JavaScript Libraries
On Sep 20, 2009, at 4: 24PM, Juriy Zaytsev wrote:
Speaking of `document.head`, I think Mootools does exactly that.
Good thinking. I took a look at some JavaScript Libraries /
Frameworks. Here are some quick counts of how many times I could see
that they use the "getElementsByTagName" met
On Sep 20, 2009, at 4:15 PM, Joseph Pecoraro wrote:
On Sep 20, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
I think it'd be cool to have to complement document.documentElement
and document.body.
On Sep 20, 2009, at 4: 00PM, Juriy Zaytsev wrote:
Surely better than abominable – `document.getEl
On Sep 20, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
I think it'd be cool to have to complement document.documentElement
and document.body.
On Sep 20, 2009, at 4: 00PM, Juriy Zaytsev wrote:
Surely better than abominable – `document.getElementsByTagName
('head')[0]` :)
I agree. Unfortunate
On Sep 20, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 14:22:38 -0400, Joseph Pecoraro > wrote:
Was there any discussion for including "document.head" in HTML5?
I think it'd be cool to have to complement document.documentElement
and document.body.
Surely better than
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 14:22:38 -0400, Joseph Pecoraro
wrote:
Was there any discussion for including "document.head" in HTML5?
I think it'd be cool to have to complement document.documentElement and
document.body.
--
Michael
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 14:49:11 -0400, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 9/18/09 6:35 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
With when
the page is parsed (or added to the document), what would happen?
Would it be something like this?:
1. Create the plug-in instance.
2. fetch file.swf
3. Give the file.swf strea
On 9/18/09 6:35 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
With when
the page is parsed (or added to the document), what would happen?
Would it be something like this?:
1. Create the plug-in instance.
2. fetch file.swf
3. Give the file.swf stream to the plug-in when it requests it.
4. Fetch file.flv whe
Was there any discussion for including "document.head" in HTML5?
Searching the mailing list shows document.head show up a few times in
example code [1][2]. However, there has been no proposal, and it is
not mentioned in the document's IDL [3] in the Spec.
Developers often do the following
Erik Vorhes writes:
> A use-case for "person's name" in the context of :
>
> In reference to many Classical texts one will often refer to the
> author in lieu of the title (or in some cases that author's corpus).
That isn't an argument for people's names _in general_ being marked up;
it's an arg
Jim Jewett writes:
> In
> http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-September/023005.html,
> Ian quoted Erik Vorhes as writing:
>
> > > Put another way, if you had no prior knowledge of the current
> > > HTML5 definition of (and perhaps any other specification's
> > > definition o
Hi,
fwiw, NoScript 1.9.8.9 (next stable release, to be published during the
incoming week), will support STS according to the current specification.
I had heard just yesterday from a leader Asian e-commerce player who
wants to deploy it as soon as possible (even in the beginning of October).
23 matches
Mail list logo