Anne van Kesteren wrote:
[...] I don't see what baring that has on syntax
highlighting, though.
Highlighting omissions or errors for example...
Do you have an example of this? What would such highlighting look
like for text editing? I'm not sure I see the use case here.
[...] I don't
L. David Baron wrote:
The original use case, as I understand it, was roughly authors want
to disable spell checking on some textareas.
Authors should not have such control. Spell checking is a user agent
feature for the *user* and the UA should allow the user to turn it on or
off whenever
Alexey Feldgendler wrote:
Maybe features like spellckeching, syntax highlighting and so on should
be controlled via CSS?
No, spell checking is a user agent feature that should be controlled by
the UA and the user. Authors should have no explicit control over it.
Besides, spell checking *is
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 20:11:39 +0700, Lachlan Hunt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe features like spellckeching, syntax highlighting and so on should
be controlled via CSS?
No, spell checking is a user agent feature that should be controlled by
the UA and the user. Authors should have no
Quoting Alexey Feldgendler [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
One can also say that authors should not have explicit control
over whether hyperlinks are underlined or not.
The difference is that underlining is presentation, spell checking
is not. The functionality of a link cannot be changed with CSS,
Alexey Feldgendler wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 21:54:16 +0700, Lachlan Hunt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One can also say that authors should not have explicit control over
whether hyperlinks are underlined or not.
The difference is that underlining is presentation, spell checking is
not. The
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:29:39 +0700, Anne van Kesteren
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One can also say that authors should not have explicit control over
whether hyperlinks are underlined or not.
The difference is that underlining is presentation, spell checking is
not. The functionality of
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Quoting Matthew Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If, however, we're really just talking about adding words to the UA
dictionary temporarily and for a specific site, couldn't we just do that
with meta using the same format as we do with keywords?
| meta name=vocabulary
On 10 Jun 2006, at 10:1AM, White Lynx wrote:
Oistein E. Andersen wrote:
traditional French typographical conventions for mathematics require lowercase
variables in italic, but uppercase ones in roman.
Do we need extra values like text-transform:french-italic; and
french-bold-italic;
that would
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006, White Lynx wrote:
Agree. Once conceptual issues will be resolved and WHATWG will clarify
its position regarding math markup, we can return to naming conventions
and if majority prefer brief element names, ISO 12083 element names will
be replaced with shorter ones.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
this may be difficult to achieve in practice, because TeX
conversors reading TeX sources are unable to provide correct MathML markup
for prescripts.
Conversion to MathML is obviously more difficult because the base has to be
found and encoded explicitly. Still, I do _not_ say
Alexey Feldgendler wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:34:00 +0700, Lachlan Hunt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Enabling or disabling spell checking doesn't change the functionality
of an input.
While the core functionality of allowing the user to enter text isn't
changed, I'd consider spell
Alexey Feldgendler wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:29:39 +0700, Anne van Kesteren
I guess it looks like it would fit in CSS because the functionality is
not strictly needed, but I'm unsure if it's really just presentation...
Ok, it's not just presentation. It's about behavior, too. But I
13 matches
Mail list logo
