On 04/26/2011 09:16 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
On 04/26/11 00:27, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 22 Apr 2011, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
On 04/22/11 00:27, Ian Hickson wrote:
What is HTTP-in-SDP?
I misquoted - you said Currently, the HTML spec includes instructions
on how to identify the
Wouldn't it be possible to abstract this away for the web developer? I.e.
the send method should, like for WebSockets, not have a max size. Instead
the sending UA would be responsible for chopping up (the receiving UA for
re-assembling) the message into packets not larger than the minimum
On Tue, 7 Dec 2010, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 12/7/10 5:10 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
Per spec, currently document.open() replaces the current page rather
than allow navigation.
I believe there are cases where that would cause us to break compat.
Note that neither IE nor Gecko does a replace
On Tue, 7 Dec 2010, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Sun, 12 Sep 2010, Mounir Lamouri wrote:
The current state of the specifications do not mention fieldset elements
for the :enabled and :disabled pseudo-classes but fieldset can be
On Tue, 7 Dec 2010, Andy Estes wrote:
I recently implemented HTML5's IDL definition for marquee in WebKit
(https://webkit.org/b/49786) and noticed a few differences between how
HTML5 specs marquee and how IE implements it. I noticed the following
two discrepancies:
1) For scrollAmount,
On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Simon Pieters wrote:
On Tue, 07 Dec 2010 23:13:13 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, Simon Pieters wrote:
Maybe select requiredoption value selected disabledChoose one...
should be allowed?
I considered that, but since disabled
Back in December there was a discussion about a tab visibility API.
I haven't added this feature to the HTML specification at this time, for
a couple of reasons: first, it seems like something we'd really want to
have implementation experience before deciding on a specific API, and
second, it
On Thu, 9 Dec 2010, Roger Hågensen wrote:
On 2010-12-08 20:44, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 20 Sep 2010, Roger Hågensen wrote:
It would be better to define this as explicitly indicating which
resources are NOT valid any longer, with most sites/web applications
this would only be a select
On Thu, 9 Dec 2010, Roger H�gensen wrote:
This has irked me lately...
* a uses /href/ (outbound)
* link uses /href/ (inbound and outbound)
* img uses /src/ (inbound)
* iframe uses /src/ (inbound)
* script uses /src/ (inbound)
* embed uses /src/ (inbound)
* object
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Back in December there was a discussion about a tab visibility API.
I haven't added this feature to the HTML specification at this time, for
a couple of reasons: first, it seems like something we'd really want to
have
There are likewise annoying things in SVG. xlink:href=#Q ,
attributeName=url(#Q) etc. Every time I go to use a gradient, a pattern, a
use, a filter, a clipPath, or a mask, I have to look up, in the manual, which
notation happens to be used for this particular thing. I'm sure there may have
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, David Dailey wrote:
There are likewise annoying things in SVG. xlink:href=#Q ,
attributeName=url(#Q) etc. Every time I go to use a gradient, a
pattern, a use, a filter, a clipPath, or a mask, I have to look up, in
the manual, which notation happens to be used for this
On Thu, 9 Dec 2010, Martin Janecke wrote:
What is your opinion on enabling the HTTP POST method for the img
element?
This would unfortunately be somewhat impractical, due to the
idempotency-assuming nature of img: it's generally assumed to be safe
for images to be fetched an arbitrary
On Sat, 11 Dec 2010, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
An UA can support the scheme used without supporting the source
element. If A was used, they just had to support A and the scheme.
It's still not clear to me what problem this would solve. I see what it
would do, but why would we want that?
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010, Richard Summers wrote:
I was wondering, is there any plan to implement a comment element
within the HTML5 spec? I�m suggesting this as a complimentary element to
the article element.
There already is one: article! We defined it such that if you nest them,
the nested
On 4/28/11, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Sat, 11 Dec 2010, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
An UA can support the scheme used without supporting the source
element. If A was used, they just had to support A and the scheme.
It's still not clear to me what problem this would solve. I see
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
The CSSElementMap object defined in
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete/dom.html#dom-document-csselementmap
allows an author to map an element to an identifier that CSS can then
use to refer to the element. However, it
On Tue, 21 Dec 2010, Kenny Graham wrote:
Just curious: What is the reasoning behind the option element not being
able to contain abbr elements? I know current UAs wouldn't do anything
with it, but it doesn't break anything either, and IMHO allowing more
information is always better than
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
On 4/28/11, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Sat, 11 Dec 2010, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
An UA can support the scheme used without supporting the source
element. If A was used, they just had to support A and the scheme.
It's still
Bjartur Thorlacius svartma...@gmail.com schrieb am Thu, 28 Apr 2011
21:52:47 +:
I, for one, can't find any sign of source support in wget, and a few
other non-mainstream UAs.
Why not better patch those, then?
--
Nils Dagsson Moskopp // erlehmann
http://dieweltistgarnichtso.net
Just curious: What is the reasoning behind the option element not being
able to contain abbr elements?
What problem would this solve?
I think this question came up a few times, also in the context of the
“title” element; to try a very quick abstraction, it seems logical
that the content
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, Jens O. Meiert wrote:
Just curious: What is the reasoning behind the option element not
being able to contain abbr elements?
What problem would this solve?
I think this question came up a few times, also in the context of the
“title” element; to try a very
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
The CSSElementMap object defined in
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete/dom.html#dom-document-csselementmap
allows an author to map an element to an identifier
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Thu, 9 Dec 2010, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
I don't believe there are any declarative ways to trigger involuntary
POSTs, are there?
test.html on this page has no script:
http://damowmow.com/playground/demos/http/002/
That's
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010, Richard Summers wrote:
I was wondering, is there any plan to implement a comment element
within the HTML5 spec? I¹m suggesting this as a complimentary element to
the article element.
There already is one:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010, Richard Summers wrote:
I was wondering, is there any plan to implement a comment element
within the HTML5 spec? I¹m suggesting this as
James Robinson jam...@google.com, 2011-04-28 13:08 -0700:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Back in December there was a discussion about a tab visibility API.
I haven't added this feature to the HTML specification at this time, for
a couple of reasons:
27 matches
Mail list logo
