Re: [whatwg] Feedback on a variety of elements

2013-01-18 Thread Steve Faulkner
On 19 January 2013 01:41, Ian Hickson wrote: > I don't see any useful explanation of how to use aria-haspopup here. suggest you look at definition of aria-haspopup in the ARIA spec HTH SteveF

Re: [whatwg] Feedback on a variety of elements

2013-01-18 Thread Ian Hickson
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013, Steve Faulkner wrote: > On 18 January 2013 23:55, Ian Hickson wrote: > > Doesn't it differ from platform to platform? How is the author supposed to > > know what it is on the user's platform? > > There are some platform differences for some controls. > Design patterns for a r

Re: [whatwg] Feedback on a variety of elements

2013-01-18 Thread Steve Faulkner
On 18 January 2013 23:55, Ian Hickson wrote: > Doesn't it differ from platform to platform? How is the author supposed to > know what it is on the user's platform? There are some platform differences for some controls. Design patterns for a range of widgets are provided in the ARIA authoring guid

Re: [whatwg] Forms-related feedback

2013-01-18 Thread Ian Hickson
On Mon, 14 Jan 2013, Jonas Sicking wrote: > > > > It's probably simple enough for authors to check valueAsNumber is not > > NaN and then have them set it to the value they want as the default, > > if they're calling the stepUp/stepDown methods. I've left this as > > throwing if the value isn't a

Re: [whatwg] Feedback on a variety of elements

2013-01-18 Thread Ian Hickson
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013, Steve Faulkner wrote: > > On 17 January 2013 18:59, Ian Hickson wrote: > > How does the user agent know how the user is to interact with it? > > menus like most controls have a defined standard interaction pattern Doesn't it differ from platform to platform? How is the auth

Re: [whatwg] Implementation issue: step mismatch handling for

2013-01-18 Thread Ian Hickson
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013, L. David Baron wrote: > On Thursday 2013-01-17 20:13 +, Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2013, Jonathan Watt wrote: > > > If the step base considered the 'minimum' instead of the 'min' > > > content attribute, then the step base would be zero, and thus the > > > valu

Re: [whatwg] AllowSeamless feedback

2013-01-18 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > except for niggling issues around code that uses location.href to determine > origins. :( Sounds like you'd also have to trust that the page you're seamlessly embedding is not going to do anything malicious on your origin. Seems pretty dang

Re: [whatwg] AllowSeamless feedback

2013-01-18 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 1/18/13 8:40 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Markus Ernst wrote: The allow-seamless mechanism is to be triggered at the side of the embedded resource, which would also be the one affected by possible security risks (if I get this right). The developer of this re

Re: [whatwg] AllowSeamless feedback

2013-01-18 Thread Markus Ernst
Am 18.01.2013 14:40 schrieb Anne van Kesteren: On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Markus Ernst wrote: The allow-seamless mechanism is to be triggered at the side of the embedded resource, which would also be the one affected by possible security risks (if I get this right). The developer of this

Re: [whatwg] AllowSeamless feedback

2013-01-18 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Markus Ernst wrote: > The allow-seamless mechanism is to be triggered at the side of the embedded > resource, which would also be the one affected by possible security risks > (if I get this right). The developer of this resource will have to be aware > of these ri

Re: [whatwg] AllowSeamless feedback

2013-01-18 Thread Markus Ernst
Am 15.01.2013 00:39 schrieb Nasko Oskov: Hi whatwg, I recently became aware of the proposal to add AllowSeamless attribute that will permit cross-origin seamless iframes ( http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/AllowSeamless). We are currently working on a new security policy in Chrome, which will separate

[whatwg] value sanitization algorithm

2013-01-18 Thread Jonathan Watt
In addition to the value sanitization algorithm, some input types specify actions that the user agent must take when the element's value is suffering from underflow/overflow or a step mismatch. To make it clearer that these actions will also be run when the value sanitization algorithm is run, c

Re: [whatwg] Implementation issue: step mismatch handling for

2013-01-18 Thread L. David Baron
On Thursday 2013-01-17 20:13 +, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jan 2013, Jonathan Watt wrote: > > If the step base considered the 'minimum' instead of the 'min' content > > attribute, then the step base would be zero, and thus the value would > > settle at zero. > > Right, but that would be

Re: [whatwg] Make the files attribute of the input element writable

2013-01-18 Thread Fred Andrews
> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 20:45:59 + > From: i...@hixie.ch ... > > >> 1) This would make it possible to write JavaScript libraries that > > >> seamlessly scan the current page for and add > > >> integration with Dropbox / Google Drive / Sky Drive etc. I claim that > > >> changing the va

Re: [whatwg] Feedback on a variety of elements

2013-01-18 Thread Steve Faulkner
On 17 January 2013 18:59, Ian Hickson wrote: > How does the user agent know how the user is to interact with it? menus like most controls have a defined standard interaction pattern -- with regards Steve Faulkner