like to solicit others' thoughts on this matter.
My recommendation would be to just use comma separation for numbers
greater than .
Perhaps unrelated, but that would solve the
type=number-for-tcp-ports-looks-kinda-weird problem:
https://cloudup.com/cKEisWEkvjv
--
Mike Taylor
Web Compat
On 2/18/14, 17:55, Mike Taylor wrote:
On 2/18/14, 17:17, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Jonathan Watt wrote:
The question is, should I change Mozilla's implementation to stop
displaying the internal value using grouping separators, or is it wrong
to use input type=number for year
/modernizr.js#L429-436
--
Mike Taylor
Opera Software
On Wed, 16 May 2012 08:40:46 -0500, Matthew Wilcox
m...@matthewwilcox.com wrote:
What's the actual WHATWG proscribed format for conducting conversations
in email
format?
See http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#Should_I_top-post_or_reply_inline.3F
--
Mike Taylor
Opera Software
to believe that all developers would use this proposal for
good, as it were. Experience leads me to believe it will be just another
technique sniffed and served to the regular suspects.
--
Mike Taylor
Opera Software
probably looking for this:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/clipops/clipops.html. A search for
clipboard data API in the archives might bring up some interesting
discussion as well.
Cheers,
--
Mike Taylor
Opera Software
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Philip Jägenstedt phil...@opera.comwrote:
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:58:01 +0200, David Håsäther hasat...@gmail.com
wrote:
It would be more useful if the DOMTokenList methods (contains, add,
remove, toggle) would take a space separated list of tokens. This is
On 3/1/11 1:54 PM, usuario wrote:
According to the spec:
The body element represents the body of a document (as opposed to the
document’s metadata).
I think definition is a bit ambiguous.
Why not propose a better definition then?
On 2/12/10 9:23 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Aryeh Gregorsimetrical+...@gmail.com wrote:
Do you know of any actual authors who would want to use
validationMessage? If there are any authors here who would want to
use the validation API with their own UI, would
Shouldn't this proposal take into account the CSS3 content property? (
http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-content/)
E.g., figure[alt] { content: attr(href, url), attr(alt); }
This was discussed not too long ago, starting in this thread:
Adding a src attribute to all elements (
It's not clear to me that every possible attribute is intended to be in that
table. Autofocus, for example, is missing as well.
However, the first time I read through that table I did do a double-take.
Mike T.
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 1:48 AM, Futomi Hatano i...@html5.jp wrote:
Hi all
Could
PS: Please ease on the JavaScripting on the WHATWG version of the
spec. I've got a quite old computer and Firefox freezes on me when I
visit that page too often. Is all of that needed? Or don't old UAs
matter to such an backwards compatible spec?
Are you aware of the multi-page spec (
12 matches
Mail list logo
