[whatwg] [Web Forms 2.0] autofocus attribute

Hello folks, I just read a bit of the spec on w3.org and soon found a point to complain. How nice that I can do so immediately. "Authors should avoid setting the autofocus attribute on multiple enabled elements in a document. If multiple elements with the autofocus attribute set are inserted into

[whatwg] Update to the Adoption Agency Algorithm

Just a note to those of you who reviewed the new parsing rules yesterday: I changed them today to take into account some feedback from Hyatt. Basically the old algorithm was creating too many nodes. This is now fixed, the algorithm only moves the nodes that are being closed, not the other inli

Re: [whatwg] Adoption Agency Algorithm

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > Ok, I think the noframes case can be handled something like this and the > noscript can probably be handled in a similar way. > > and

Re: [whatwg] Adoption Agency Algorithm

I'm Putting this back on the list, my last reply was sent off-list by mistake. Ian Hickson wrote: On Sat, 28 Jan 2006, Lachlan Hunt wrote: e.g. ... Foo Bar ...the "Bar" musn't be in italics, the

Re: [whatwg] Adoption Agency Algorithm

Ian Hickson wrote: On Sat, 28 Jan 2006, Lachlan Hunt wrote: Why can't it just be defined that noframes and noscript content gets parsed exactly as regular markup Because there are a _lot_ of side-effects of parsing as regular markup. e.g. ... Foo Bar ...the "Bar" musn'

Re: [whatwg] Adoption Agency Algorithm

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > Why can't it just be defined that noframes and noscript content gets > parsed exactly as regular markup Because there are a _lot_ of side-effects of parsing as regular markup. e.g. ... Foo Bar ...the "Bar" musn't be in italics,

Re: [whatwg] Adoption Agency Algorithm

Ian Hickson wrote: 8. I don't think it's right to define a parsing algorithm that only works for UAs that support scripts and frames, and then do define variations for those who need the noscript and noframes content. The parsing algorithm should be uniform and produce the same DOM no matter i

Re: [whatwg] Adoption Agency Algorithm

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006, Alexey Feldgendler wrote: > > > > Sadly, that's not compatible with the Web. > > > > UAs that support frames treat as CDATA. That mea, e.g., > > that

Re: [whatwg] Content Restrictions

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006, Gervase Markham wrote: > > I'd like to present to the group for comment my "Content Restrictions" > proposal. http://www.gerv.net/security/content-restrictions/ My first impression is that it is far too complex and over-engineered. The problem with security is that people do

Re: [whatwg] Content Restrictions

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:29:47 +0600, Gervase Markham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'd like to present to the group for comment my "Content Restrictions" proposal. http://www.gerv.net/security/content-restrictions/ 1. "create". The options aren't very useful because one can add nodes by clonin

Re: [whatwg] Adoption Agency Algorithm

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:36:46 +0600, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 2. With the described algorithm it's possible to build DOM with, for example, two TITLE nodes, which is invalid. At what point should it be handled? Not sure what you are asking. The parsing is fully defined in the pa

[whatwg] [wf2] addition and attributes of type ID

I was wondering if 13 of perhaps could be changed to say that all attributes where isId returns true should be removed instead of just the one that was chosen as name of the repetetition template. This to avoid duplicate IDs in the document

Re: [whatwg] List archives

Lachlan Hunt wrote: > I'm sure it's just a temporary outage, there's another copy of the > archive here. > > http://www.mail-archive.com/whatwg@lists.whatwg.org/ Brilliant - thank you :-) Gerv

Re: [whatwg] List archives

Gervase Markham wrote: The list archives seem to have gone AWOL. Anyone know where? http://www.whatwg.org/mailing-list links to http://listserver.dreamhost.com/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/ which is a 404. I'm sure it's just a temporary outage, there's another copy of the archive here. http:

[whatwg] Content Restrictions

I'd like to present to the group for comment my "Content Restrictions" proposal. http://www.gerv.net/security/content-restrictions/ In a nutshell, it's a new HTTP header (or perhaps also an http-equiv meta tag) which allows a web page to ask the user agent to place restrictions of various sorts on

[whatwg] List archives

The list archives seem to have gone AWOL. Anyone know where? http://www.whatwg.org/mailing-list links to http://listserver.dreamhost.com/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/ which is a 404. http://lists.whatwg.org/listinfo.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org links to http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org

Re: [whatwg] The element and "display: meta"

At 14:50 + UTC, on 2006-01-22, James Graham wrote: [...] > If I understood correctly, the problem that is being solved is loosely > "websites all look different and so are hard to navigate". Am I correct? Yes. [...] > 1. It doesn't make sites consistent. Even if we only consider > display:

Re: [whatwg] The element and "display: meta"

At 05:32 -0500 UTC, on 2006-01-22, Matthew Raymond wrote: > Sander Tekelenburg wrote: >> At 09:12 -0500 UTC, on 2006-01-17, Matthew Raymond wrote: [...] >To be honest, even if I agreed with "display: meta" in principle, I > would not want the "display" property used for this purpose. In fact