On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Rik Cabanier caban...@gmail.com wrote:
http://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#cors-same-origin contains the following:
A response is either CORS-same-origin or CORS-cross-origin. Unless
otherwise
indicated a response is CORS-same-origin.
but it doesn't say what the
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nlwrote:
I think something like
interface ImageBitmap {
static Promise create(ImageBitmapSource image, optional long sx,
long sy, long sw, long sh);
};
would be much nicer.
I agree it would be nicer, but it seems less
On 6/19/13 5:27 PM, Paul Irish wrote:
I agree that supportsContext is only useful if it's more accurate that
!!window.WebGLRenderingContext.
So that's an interesting question. Should UAs simply not have
window.WebGLRenderingContext in situations in which supportsContext
would return false?
On 6/19/13 6:04 PM, Kenneth Russell wrote:
supportsContext() can give a much more accurate answer than
!!window.WebGLRenderingContext. I can only speak for Chromium, but in
that browser, it can take into account factors such as whether the GPU
sub-process was able to start, whether WebGL is
On 11/06/13 23:46, Albert Bodenhamer wrote:
Address CEDEX codes:
Problem: They don't fit well into the postal-code field and are often
handled as a separate entity.
Proposal: Add a field name for CEDEX code.
As far as I can tell, CEDEX is never explicitly asked in French web
forms. Likely
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013 17:31:42 +0200, Mounir Lamouri mou...@lamouri.fr
wrote:
On 11/06/13 23:46, Albert Bodenhamer wrote:
Address CEDEX codes:
Problem: They don't fit well into the postal-code field and are often
handled as a separate entity.
Proposal: Add a field name for CEDEX code.
As far
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Charles McCathie Nevile
cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013 17:31:42 +0200, Mounir Lamouri mou...@lamouri.fr
wrote:
On 11/06/13 23:46, Albert Bodenhamer wrote:
Address CEDEX codes:
Problem: They don't fit well into the postal-code field and
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Justin Novosad ju...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nlwrote:
I think something like
interface ImageBitmap {
static Promise create(ImageBitmapSource image, optional long sx,
long sy, long sw, long sh);
};
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Albert Bodenhamer wrote:
I'm a bit concerned about the inconsistency of it. I don't think we
need a separate field for it, but it would be nice to be explicit about
how it'll be handled if the browser is aware of it.
I updated the spec to be explicit about this. Let
What are the use cases for a figure without a figcaption ?
--
Regards
SteveF
HTML 5.1 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/
An illustration of a font name, in its respective font?
--Xaxio
On Jun 20, 2013 11:24 AM, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com wrote:
What are the use cases for a figure without a figcaption ?
--
Regards
SteveF
HTML 5.1 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/
An illustration of a font name, in its respective font?
why is figure better in this case than p (for example) ?
--
Regards
SteveF
HTML 5.1 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/
On 20 June 2013 19:27, Xaxio Brandish xaxiobrand...@gmail.com wrote:
An illustration of a font name, in
The figures could be in a document talking about fonts, yet easily moved to
the side of the page and still maintain relevance if referenced within the
document. I think something important about figures is placement
irrelevance as long as they can be referenced, whereas paragraphs don't
have the
OK so how do you reference
figure
arial
/figure
for example?
--
Regards
SteveF
HTML 5.1 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/
On 20 June 2013 20:16, Xaxio Brandish xaxiobrand...@gmail.com wrote:
The figures could be in a document talking about fonts, yet easily moved
to the side
pFonts come in many different varieties. The Arial font, for example,
does not have serifs./p figurearial/figure
pHowever, font varieties go beyond simple serif and sans-serif
distinctions. The Old English font is neither of these, instead being
considered a decorative font./pfigureOld
Steve Faulkner writes:
What are the use cases for a figure without a figcaption ?
If a work has only one figure (or graph, map, code listing, whatever) in
it, then the surrounding text could say something like see the graph
and it'd be obvious what it's referring to, without the need for any
Am 19.06.2013 um 20:53 schrieb Ian Hickson:
[...]
I've changed the spec to make figure applicable to your use case as
well, and added more text to explain various use cases and whether they
apply to figure. Let me know if the new text is still problematic for
your use case. I agree that
Hi Xaxio,
pFonts come in many different varieties. The Arial font, for example,
does not have serifs./p divarial/div
pHowever, font varieties go beyond simple serif and sans-serif
distinctions. The Old English font is neither of these, instead being
considered a decorative font./pdivOld
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Justin Novosad ju...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl
wrote:
I think something like
interface ImageBitmap {
static
Hi Steve,
The fact that they are enclosed in the figure elements means that they
are referenced somewhere, I believe.
so if not referenced somewhere, they should not be in a figure?
Probably they should not, as figures are typically referenced as a single unit
from the main flow of the
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Kenneth Russell k...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 3:06 PM, James Robinson jam...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Kenneth Russell k...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Brandon Benvie bben...@mozilla.com
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
wrote:
There's really no consistency here anyway, and the
Interface.create() idiom is pretty easy and nice.
I wonder - perhaps we can call the
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 6/19/13 5:27 PM, Paul Irish wrote:
I agree that supportsContext is only useful if it's more accurate that
!!window.WebGLRenderingContext.
So that's an interesting question. Should UAs simply not have
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 11:08 PM, Justin Novosad ju...@google.com wrote:
I agree it would be nicer, but it seems less consistent with other existing
APIs.
The factory methods we have thus far should probably not be taken as
precedent. Almost nobody likes them. URL.createObjectURL() is somewhat
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 6:44 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 11:08 PM, Justin Novosad ju...@google.com wrote:
I agree it would be nicer, but it seems less consistent with other existing
APIs.
The factory methods we have thus far should probably not be
On 6/20/13 9:40 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote:
I've suggested that in the past, and the response was that it's harder
to do (don't recall in which engine, probably WebKit). It would seem
pretty weird if the interface appears and disappears from window over
the life of the page, as WebGL support comes
26 matches
Mail list logo
