Re: [whatwg] notation for typographical uncertainty

2009-09-20 Thread Brian Campbell
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

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Garrett Smith
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

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Garrett Smith
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.

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Juriy Zaytsev
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

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Joseph Pecoraro
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:

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Garrett Smith
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,

Re: [whatwg] notation for typographical uncertainty

2009-09-20 Thread Chris Cressman
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.

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Jonas Sicking
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,

[whatwg] notation for typographical uncertainty

2009-09-20 Thread ddailey
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

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Michael A. Puls II
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

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Juriy Zaytsev
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

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Yehuda Katz
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

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Joseph Pecoraro
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

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Juriy Zaytsev
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

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Joseph Pecoraro
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

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Juriy Zaytsev
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

Re: [whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Michael A. Puls II
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

Re: [whatwg] behavior

2009-09-20 Thread Michael A. Puls II
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

Re: [whatwg] behavior

2009-09-20 Thread Boris Zbarsky
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

[whatwg] document.head

2009-09-20 Thread Joseph Pecoraro
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

Re: [whatwg] the cite element

2009-09-20 Thread Smylers
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

Re: [whatwg] the cite element

2009-09-20 Thread Smylers
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

Re: [whatwg] fyi: Strict Transport Security specification

2009-09-20 Thread Giorgio Maone
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).