Edward Z. Yang:
Sounds good, since HTML4 is a strict subset of HTML5 (correct me if I'm
wrong?)
Ian Hickson:
Mostly, yes. (There are exceptions, but they're not things you'd really
want to be using anyway, e.g. obscure SGML features.)
Note though that it's not possible to write a
Am Dienstag, den 16.12.2008, 14:22 + schrieb Philip Taylor:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
As I said, invalid input should be rejected in the first place. When I
write a blog post, I usually catch errors like
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 8:36 PM, Garrett Smith dhtmlkitc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 8:02 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
You're not Nicholas. We don't know if that is what Nicholas expects
his HTML to do or if he is expecting something else. In absence of an
On Tue, 9 Dec 2008, Douglas Mayle wrote:
I was taking a look at the Web Workers Draft (
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-workers/current-work/ ), and I couldn't
find any mention of cross domain workers. I've read a bit about
relaxing domain restrictions on documents, but worker's don't
Let me suggest a few hints on html5 specs, maybe some hints will be
minor or less important, maybe some others might be useful for a
somewhat next version of these specifications. Let me also apologize if
the following points have been yet discussed and I'm missing such
discussions, or if I've
About the RemoteEventTarget interface
The removeEventSource() method is provided to remove one instance of a
source (one matching URL) per invocation, but no way is defined to know
whether other instances are yet listed, or if the operation succeeded.
Maybe such method could return a boolean
About the cross-document messaging
Let's consider the following scenario. A somewhat productivity suite (or
any sort of web applications collection) is made up of a few different
top-level/auxiliary browsing contexts - let's call each one a module -
eventually from different origins, and
Miscellaneous
The Window interface open method accepts a features argument for
historical (and backward compatibility) reasons, which, as stated, has
no actual effect. I was considering the opportunity, instead, of
maintaining the old functionality as an alternative and redundant
2008/12/16 Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net
Am Dienstag, den 16.12.2008, 14:32 +0100 schrieb Giovanni Campagna:
(The same behaviour can be achieved also with a @namespace rule,
putting non-standard attributes in an application-specific namespace)
Since
Am Dienstag, den 16.12.2008, 14:32 +0100 schrieb Giovanni Campagna:
(The same behaviour can be achieved also with a @namespace rule,
putting non-standard attributes in an application-specific namespace)
Since data attributes do not exist as of yet, I believe people would use
XML for
Am Dienstag, den 16.12.2008, 15:38 +0100 schrieb Giovanni Campagna:
Browser assume that author knows XML because he's put an application/*
+xml mime type.
On the other hand, this assumption cannot be done for blogger, who
aren't expected to know XML / XML 1.1 / XHTML 1.0 / HTML5 specs
2008/12/16 Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net
Am Dienstag, den 16.12.2008, 15:38 +0100 schrieb Giovanni Campagna:
Browser assume that author knows XML because he's put an application/*
+xml mime type.
On the other hand, this assumption cannot be done for
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
Dec 16, 2008, в 9:43 AM, Ian Hickson написал(а):
1) The algorithm assumes that a WorkerGlobalScope exists, and
doesn't specify what happens if it is invoked before
WorkerGlobalScope is created (e.g. if the script is still being
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, ben turner wrote:
I just got around to fixing the error handling in our worker
implementation and realized that the spec is a little vague here,
especially when workers are created within workers. This is what we have
now, and Jonas and I both find it intuitive and
Am Dienstag, den 16.12.2008, 15:02 +0100 schrieb Giovanni Campagna:
2) XML serialization is much more difficlut to implement than old
HTML, and, as i said before, in many cases it is not implementable at
all: probably a company which hosts user-generated content such as
blogs or forums won't
Am Dienstag, den 16.12.2008, 14:14 +0100 schrieb Giovanni Campagna:
Maybe so-called invalid HTML attributes are not the only solution,
but in my opinion it is a simple way to embed metadata within any
element.
What metadata are you talking about ? Microformats already exist.
Personally I
2008/12/16 Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net
Am Dienstag, den 16.12.2008, 14:14 +0100 schrieb Giovanni Campagna:
Maybe so-called invalid HTML attributes are not the only solution,
but in my opinion it is a simple way to embed metadata within any
element.
Maybe so-called invalid HTML attributes are not the only solution, but in
my opinion it is a simple way to embed metadata within any element.
Imagine that such markup is then passed to a web application through XHR. In
that case scripts aren't parsed and executed. In this case you have three
ways
Ian Hickson wrote:
Mostly, yes. (There are exceptions, but they're not things you'd really
want to be using anyway, e.g. obscure SGML features.)
Are these exceptions, by any chance, documented somewhere?
Cheers,
Edward
I tried following this thread but I can't find what I would need to change
in the spec to address the feedback so far. If this feedback relates to
requests for the spec, please elaborate on exactly what it is that should
change -- thanks!
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008, Edward Z. Yang wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
Mostly, yes. (There are exceptions, but they're not things you'd really
want to be using anyway, e.g. obscure SGML features.)
Are these exceptions, by any chance, documented somewhere?
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, ben turner wrote:
I just got around to fixing the error handling in our worker
implementation and realized that the spec is a little vague here,
especially when workers are created within workers. This is what we have
now, and Jonas and I both find it
On Mon, 10 Mar 2008, Antti Koivisto wrote:
WebKit, Firefox and IE all implement a protection mechanism against re-
entering click() on the same element:
input type=checkbox onclick=this.click()
WebKit (and based on testing Firefox) make click() a no-op when invoked
as a result of a
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 09:50:25 +0200, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jul 2008, Aaron Leventhal wrote:
Now that tabindex can be used on any element to make it focusable, it
makes sense that it should be possible to trigger a
24 matches
Mail list logo
