On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 10:04 AM, David Flanagan
da...@davidflanagan.com wrote:
Erik Arvidsson wrote:
[snip]
Rather that trying to make DOM collections feel like arrays, how about just
giving them a toArray() method? This makes it clear that a collection is
not an array, but clearly
Hi Rob, all,
Fair enough :-) I'll have to try better. Rob you give some good examples
(WebGL and CSS3) of how an application could be built which correctly
renders two views with stereopsis. However, with the exception of Anaglyph
methods, a user will need specialised display hardware to properly
The WebSocket spec allows leading 0x80 bytes in the length of a binary
frame. Such bytes do not change the value of the length. In order to not
have to deal with ridiculous cases such as when there are 50k such bytes,
we would want to fail the connection if the first byte in length is 0x80.
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Eoin Kilfeather ekilfeat...@dmc.dit.iewrote:
If we take the case of the Blu-Ray 3D specification it is neutral about how
the hardware is implemented, but the hardware is expected to respect the
flags indicating whether a frame is for the left or right virtual
Le 28/04/2010 00:03, Garrett Smith a écrit :
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 10:04 AM, David Flanagan
da...@davidflanagan.com wrote:
Erik Arvidsson wrote:
[snip]
Rather that trying to make DOM collections feel like arrays, how about just
giving them a toArray()
On 27/04/10 20:23, David Bruant wrote:
Le 27/04/2010 03:54, Geoffrey Sneddon a écrit :
On 26/04/10 19:50, And Clover wrote:
David Flanagan wrote:
Rather that trying to make DOM collections feel like arrays,
how about just giving them a toArray() method?
I like that, as a practical and
Well, I agree that the web author shouldn't worry about how it is achieved,
but would it not be the case that the author needs to indicate which view is
for which display? That is to say the author would be required to flag the
output for correct routing to the virtual display. Is it beyond the
On 04/28/2010 10:39 AM, Eoin Kilfeather wrote:
Well, I agree that the web author shouldn't worry about how it is
achieved, but would it not be the case that the author needs to indicate
which view is for which display? That is to say the author would be
required to flag the output for correct
On 04/28/2010 10:27 AM, David Bruant wrote:
When I started this thread, my point was to define a normalized way
(through ECMAScript binding) to add array extras to array-like objects
in the scope of HTML5 (HTMLCollection and inheriting interfaces).
I don't see any reason yet to try to find a
This is an idea I've had in my head for a while and I think it might
make an useful addition to HTML5 standard.
As this is just an idea I didn't work out all the details. I'm just
looking to see if this is something that might be accepted.
Use case 1:
A document author wants to provide a link to
On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 12:45 +0300, Eitan Adler wrote:
This is an idea I've had in my head for a while and I think it might
make an useful addition to HTML5 standard.
As this is just an idea I didn't work out all the details. I'm just
looking to see if this is something that might be accepted.
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-img-element
The img must not be used as a layout tool. In particular, img
elements should not be used to display transparent images, as they
rarely convey meaning and rarely add anything useful to the document.
An img with a given transparent image
On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 13:31 +0200, Ingo Chao wrote:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-img-element
The img must not be used as a layout tool. In particular, img
elements should not be used to display transparent images, as they
rarely convey meaning and rarely add anything useful
I believe the spec is trying to stigmatize old-times spacer images used
to layout other HTML elements, like
img src=spacer.gif width=100 height=1
which are overly ugly and meaningless now that there's nothing you can't
layout by CSS.
-- G
Ingo Chao wrote, On 28/04/2010 13.31:
On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 13:41 +0200, Giorgio Maone wrote:
I believe the spec is trying to stigmatize old-times spacer images used
to layout other HTML elements, like
img src=spacer.gif width=100 height=1
which are overly ugly and meaningless now that there's nothing you can't
layout by
On 2010-04-27 00:59, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
I think it's interesting to think about what browsers could do with stereo
output.
We already have three features that could produce useful stereo output
today:
1) WebGL
2) CSS 3D Transforms
3)video (assuming there was some kind of 3D video format
On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 10:15:13 +0200, Simon Pieters sim...@opera.com wrote:
The WebSocket spec allows leading 0x80 bytes in the length of a binary
frame. Such bytes do not change the value of the length. In order to not
have to deal with ridiculous cases such as when there are 50k such
Also, I do believe the ability to upload a whole directory is important for
some good use-cases, e.g. upload a directory of photos to a photo site while
maintaing directory structure.
I can't really say that I can think of any very urgent use cases for
this. However only a minor tweak to
On 28/04/2010, at 7:43 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:31 AM, Ingo Chao i4c...@googlemail.com wrote:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-img-element
The img must not be used as a layout tool.
I think this may be a little vague/broad. I understand the intention,
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Steve Dennis ad...@subcide.com wrote:
On 28/04/2010, at 7:43 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:31 AM, Ingo Chao i4c...@googlemail.com wrote:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-img-element
The img must not be used as a layout tool.
2010/4/28 Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Steve Dennis ad...@subcide.com wrote:
On 28/04/2010, at 7:43 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:31 AM, Ingo Chao i4c...@googlemail.com wrote:
fwiw, some platforms don't intend to support exposing folders to
users at all...
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 2:12 AM, James Graham jgra...@opera.com wrote:
On 04/28/2010 10:27 AM, David Bruant wrote:
When I started this thread, my point was to define a normalized way
(through ECMAScript binding) to add array extras to array-like objects
in the scope of HTML5 (HTMLCollection
I think the new section and heading model in HTML 5 is a welcome
development. I've actually essentially been doing it that way for years --
eschewing H2-H6 and using DIV as a stand in for SECTION. I've always
considered the H1-H6 concept a mess, and thankfully that seems to have been
24 matches
Mail list logo
