Is it really the responsibility of HTML to be told about this? I wouldn't
think so. My initial thoughts are that all such information should be
encoded in the file format of the image. I am not saying such information
exists (maybe partially though), but that's where I think it should reside.
Che
On 17 November 2014 13:10, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> These are just alternate image formats, yes? In that case, browsers
> can expand their support to allow pointing to these kinds of
> files. They'd need some sort of native controls on the element,
> I suppose.
I see image taken using differen
On 17 November 2014 03:11, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> Why would we replace one form of bad UI with an equivalent other?
> can be used.
Thanks, I tried in google chrome, It will be good for many case.
But there is no way for user to resize, or move the dialog on the screen.
ie, some times user ma
On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Biju wrote:
> New cameras/phone cameras comes with Panorama, Photo Sphere, Surround
> shot options. But there is no standard way to display the image on a
> webpage. Can WHATWG standardize it and provide HTML tags.
>
>
> Photo Sphere https://www.google.com/maps/abo
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 1:34 AM, Biju wrote:
> If an iframe have "controls" attribute it should be behave/displayed
> like a MDI child window.
Why would we replace one form of bad UI with an equivalent other?
can be used.
--
https://annevankesteren.nl/
