On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 09:50:29 +0200, wha...@whatwg.org wrote:
Author: ianh
Date: 2009-09-13 00:50:28 -0700 (Sun, 13 Sep 2009)
New Revision: 3820
Modified:
index
source
Log:
[e] (0) step/min/max examples.
Modified: index
===
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009, Simon Pieters wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 09:50:29 +0200, wha...@whatwg.org wrote:
Author: ianh
Date: 2009-09-13 00:50:28 -0700 (Sun, 13 Sep 2009)
New Revision: 3820
Modified:
index
source
Log:
[e] (0) step/min/max examples.
Modified: index
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 10:52:18 +0200, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
s/2000/1999/
Since when?
Oops. I thought the 21st century started 2000, but it seems I was wrong.
--
Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Quoting Simon Pieters sim...@opera.com:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 10:52:18 +0200, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
s/2000/1999/
Since when?
Oops. I thought the 21st century started 2000, but it seems I was wrong.
Since almost everyone uses the zero-based-century convention it would
be much
Boris wrote:
I'm not sure where this list of (extension,type) pairs comes from,
but it looks like the plug-in provides it somehow (possibly even in that
form, looking at
http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/modules/plugin/base/src/nsPluginsDirUtils.h#53).
plugins register tripples:
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Jens Alfkes...@google.com wrote:
The first statement implies that a web-app on your platform cannot implement
the algorithm you recommend.
Sure it can. The user is effectively idle, in that they are not using
your web application period.
That they might be
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 12:08 PM, Jens Alfke s...@google.com wrote:
That is not what idle means to an instant-messaging/presence service like
AIM or Jabber. The idle state means the user is not at the device, to the
best of its knowledge. If the user is capable of receiving messages but does
On Sep 13, 2009, at 9:51 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
As far as I know, web
apps have no way to get the user's attention if they aren't using the
web app, do they?
GMail 'blinks' by alternating the window title between two states,
which can be effective even if the animation in the window
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
Consider the following test page:
!doctype html
titletest/title
scriptdocument.location = #frag/script
div style=margin-top: 100em/div
p id=fragJump to me!/p
Observed behavior in both Chrome 4 and Opera 9.6 is that the browser
jumps to the given
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, Alex Henrie wrote:
I would like to revisit HTML5 section 4.10.4.3, as circumstances have
changed since it was last discussed. For those of you not familiar with
the issue, section 4.10.4.3 defines the value property of input
type=file/ elements. This behavior is not
On Sep 7, 2009, at 3:53 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 3:56 AM, Aryeh Gregor Simetrical
+...@gmail.com wrote:
Browser vendors cannot sacrifice compatibility for long-term goals,
because their users will rebel.
We can sacrifice *some* compatibility for *some* long-term
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 11:50 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
There are basically only two arguments:
Aesthetics: Having the fake path is ugly and poor language design.
Compatibility: Having it increases compatibility with deployed content.
In HTML5's development, compatibility is
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Eduard Pascual herenva...@gmail.com wrote:
I already posted an example showing how fakepath can easily break
compatibility with well-written sites. I explicitly asked for
counter-arguments to it and none has been provided, but the argument
doesn't seem to be
I've filed a bug:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=516293
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
In HTML5's development, compatibility is a stronger argument than
aesthetics. Therefore the path stays.
This is a very minor issue and I'm fine with adding this to Gecko,
personally, except that first I really would like to see
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Eduard Pascual wrote:
I already posted an example showing how fakepath can easily break
compatibility with well-written sites. I explicitly asked for
counter-arguments to it and none has been provided, but the argument
doesn't seem to be taken in consideration at all.
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Here are some bug reports that I believe are caused by this issue:
http://forums.linksysbycisco.com/linksys/board/message?board.id=Wireless_Routersmessage.id=135649
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Robert O'Callahan
rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
I guess we should just suck it up.
Cant we wait some more time before we change current behavior in Mozilla.
I believe once IE8 is popular enough the firmware people will make
change in their code and they will also
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Biju bijumaill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Robert O'Callahan
rob...@ocallahan.org wrote:
I guess we should just suck it up.
Cant we wait some more time before we change current behavior in Mozilla.
Also it wont solve all the path
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Jens Alfkes...@google.com wrote:
That is not what idle means to an instant-messaging/presence service like
AIM or Jabber. The idle state means the user is not at the device, to the
best of its knowledge. If the user is capable of receiving messages but does
not
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 5:25 AM, Bijubijumaill...@gmail.com wrote:
Cant we wait some more time before we change current behavior in Mozilla.
I believe once IE8 is popular enough the firmware people will make
change in their code and they will also test it in Firefox.
Err, you're missing a key
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 5:31 AM, Bijubijumaill...@gmail.com wrote:
Also it wont solve all the path problem with Firefox. As many intranet
sites expect to get user chosen network path. Which I believe IE8 is
still providing, and Firefox is not.
OK, for this I'd like to have real data. Can you
22 matches
Mail list logo
