On Oct 2, 2012, at 8:17 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> Charles,
>
> Your whole message here is bizarre and disruptive:
>
> - Your claims about the data gathering capabilities of varying browser
> vendors are arbitrary, incorrect (in the cases I know of), and off-topic for
> this list.
Mo
Charles,
Your whole message here is bizarre and disruptive:
- Your claims about the data gathering capabilities of varying browser vendors
are arbitrary, incorrect (in the cases I know of), and off-topic for this list.
- Your reference to "the Hixie-Atkins draft" is unwarranted and strange.
- T
Yes,
our friends from Google and maybe MS (through Bing?) should be able to run
a query on their database.
Rik
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 8:12 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> Can we get data on prevalence of such pages?
>
> - Maciej
>
> On Oct 2, 2012, at 4:58 PM, Elliott Sprehn wrote:
>
> > Wha
Can we get data on prevalence of such pages?
- Maciej
On Oct 2, 2012, at 4:58 PM, Elliott Sprehn wrote:
> What of the fact that this breaks existing pages with id="Path"> that access it as just Path? Historically this has been a
> non-starter for new APIs.
>
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 3:00 PM
On Oct 2, 2012, at 6:45 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
>> On Oct 2, 2012, at 6:25 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
I wanted vendors to solidify consensus on a version close to w
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
> On Oct 2, 2012, at 6:25 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
>>> I wanted vendors to solidify consensus on a version close to what currently
>>> exists, with minor changes for accessibi
On Oct 2, 2012, at 6:25 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
>> I wanted vendors to solidify consensus on a version close to what currently
>> exists, with minor changes for accessibility. The WHATWG and W3C have chosen
>> instead to make broad
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
> I wanted vendors to solidify consensus on a version close to what currently
> exists, with minor changes for accessibility. The WHATWG and W3C have chosen
> instead to make broad changes, as proposed in version 5/the Hixie-Atkins
> draf
On Oct 2, 2012, at 6:05 PM, Elliott Sprehn wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Elliott Sprehn wrote:
What of the fact that this breaks existing pages with >>> id="Path"> that access it as just Path? Historically this has been a
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Elliott Sprehn wrote:
>> > What of the fact that this breaks existing pages with > > id="Path"> that access it as just Path? Historically this has been a
>> > non-starter for new APIs.
>
>
> Surely it's not a
On Oct 2, 2012, at 5:09 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Elliott Sprehn wrote:
>> What of the fact that this breaks existing pages with > id="Path"> that access it as just Path? Historically this has been a
>> non-starter for new APIs.
>
> It would have been useful
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Elliott Sprehn wrote:
> What of the fact that this breaks existing pages with id="Path"> that access it as just Path? Historically this has been a
> non-starter for new APIs.
It would have been useful to bring this up as a problem in your
original email. ^_^
I h
On Oct 2, 2012, at 3:00 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Elliott Sprehn wrote:
>> I was looking at the canvas Path API and had some concerns. In
>> particular it's inconsistent with the rest of canvas:
>>
>> We already have CanvasGradient and CanvasPattern in the g
What of the fact that this breaks existing pages with that access it as just Path? Historically this has been a
non-starter for new APIs.
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Elliott Sprehn wrote:
>> I was looking at the canvas Path API and ha
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Elliott Sprehn wrote:
> I was looking at the canvas Path API and had some concerns. In
> particular it's inconsistent with the rest of canvas:
>
> We already have CanvasGradient and CanvasPattern in the global
> namespace, so this should probably be called CanvasPa
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 6:41 AM, Jer Noble wrote:
> On Sep 17, 2012, at 12:43 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 9 Jul 2012, adam k wrote:
>>>
>>> i have a 25fps video, h264, with a burned in timecode. it seems to be
>>> off by 1 frame when i compare the burned in timecode to the calculated
>>>
On Sep 17, 2012, at 12:43 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jul 2012, adam k wrote:
>>
>> i have a 25fps video, h264, with a burned in timecode. it seems to be
>> off by 1 frame when i compare the burned in timecode to the calculated
>> timecode. i'm using rob coenen's test app at
>> http:
On Tue, 2 Oct 2012, James Graham wrote:
> On 10/02/2012 02:34 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> > On 10/1/12 6:10 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > > On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> > > > On 6/19/12 1:56 PM, Charlie Reis wrote:
> > > > > That's from the "[if] the user agent determines that the two
>
On 10/02/2012 02:34 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 10/1/12 6:10 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 6/19/12 1:56 PM, Charlie Reis wrote:
That's from the "[if] the user agent determines that the two browsing
contexts are related enough that it is ok if they reach ea
On Mon, 1 Oct 2012, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> >
> > Primary goals:
> > + have the new page use a different event loop if possible (new process)
> > + have the window of the new page not be able to reach the opener via
> > a named window.open() or target=""
> >
> > As a result, I think these are
20 matches
Mail list logo
