Boris Zbarsky, 2013-07-03 17:50 (Europe/Helsinki):
On 7/3/13 3:58 AM, Mikko Rantalainen wrote:
Boris Zbarsky, 2013-06-29 05:02 (Europe/Helsinki):
On 6/28/13 6:51 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
querySelector is simply a more powerful querying function than the old
DOM methods,
And somewhat slower
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 12/19/12 12:55 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > On Wed, 19 Dec 2012, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> > > On 12/19/12 12:37 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > > > Yes, just not an active one.
> > >
> > > OK. I don't think we want to activate links in unloaded documents,
> >
On browser preloading:
There seems to an inherent conflict between 'indiscriminate' Pre-parsers/
PreloadScanner and "responsive design" for mobile. Responsive designs
mostly implies that everything needed for a full screen desktop is
provided in markup to all devices.
Isn't the Pre-parsers/Prel
Regarding elements that are draggable by default:
The spec says:
> img elements and a elements with an href attribute have their draggable
attribute set to true by default.
I've noticed that in IE and Firefox, an tag embedding an image
also defaults to draggable. It does not default to draggable
> I am interested to see how the above use-cases would be met in your
> counter proposal(s) to see if it would be simpler/faster. If LabJS is
> a requirement, it must be factored in as a unit of complexity and
> load-step.
>
> Please do this rather than declare anything to be insufficient without
> How is this any different from the case today when
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Kyle Simpson wrote:
> I'm still going to respond, in detail, with code comparisons, to Jake's
> suggestions that the other proposals besides mine handle all my stated
> use-cases.
>
> However, before I do that, just to document for posterity, I just recalled
> ano
I'm still going to respond, in detail, with code comparisons, to Jake's
suggestions that the other proposals besides mine handle all my stated
use-cases.
However, before I do that, just to document for posterity, I just recalled
another use-case which is a feature very frequently requested of L
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Justin Novosad wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, 10 Jul 2013, Kenneth Russell wrote:
>> > >
>> > > ImageBitmap can cleanly address all of the desired use cas
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Ian Melven wrote:
>
> while working on https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=785310
> (block setting window.top.location from a document sandboxed without
> 'allow-top-navigation') and discussing the correct behavior with Bobby
> Holley, I found some interesting diff
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Justin Novosad wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, 10 Jul 2013, Kenneth Russell wrote:
>> > >
>> > > ImageBitmap can cleanly address all of the desired use cas
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 10 Jul 2013, Kenneth Russell wrote:
> > >
> > > ImageBitmap can cleanly address all of the desired use cases simply by
> > > adding an optional dictionary of options.
> >
> >
Here's the Plus URL without the googler cruft:
https://plus.google.com/u/1/+IlyaGrigorik/posts/8AwRUE7wqAE
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Jake Archibald wrote:
> On 10 July 2013 17:37, Jake Archibald wrote:
> > On 10 July 2013 16:39, Kyle Simpson wrote:
> >> I personally don't care abou
On 11 July 2013 15:59, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Jake Archibald
> wrote:
>> http://url.spec.whatwg.org/
>>
>> How would I create a URL relative to the page, but taking into account
>> (and anything else that may affect relative urls on the page)?
>
> document.b
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Jake Archibald wrote:
> http://url.spec.whatwg.org/
>
> How would I create a URL relative to the page, but taking into account
> (and anything else that may affect relative urls on the page)?
document.baseURI?
> It feels like the 2nd constructor parameter shoul
On 10 July 2013 17:37, Jake Archibald wrote:
> On 10 July 2013 16:39, Kyle Simpson wrote:
>> I personally don't care about scripts being discoverable by pre-parsers. I
>> have done testing and am not convinced that something appearing earlier (in
>> markup) leads to better performance than allowi
On Wednesday, 10 July 2013, Kyle Simpson wrote:
>
> You know, I keep relying on the fact that the body of work on this topic for
> almost 3 years … I've spent more time over the last 4+ years obsessing on
> script loading than any other developer … I am saying the same things I've
> been saying
http://url.spec.whatwg.org/
How would I create a URL relative to the page, but taking into account
(and anything else that may affect relative urls on the page)?
It feels like the 2nd constructor parameter should default to the page's
base url, and you could pass window.location.href in if you w
18 matches
Mail list logo
