Hi Matthew,
The idea behind XForms-Tiny is to build on the strengths of both Web
Forms 2.0 and XForms, and to incorporate ideas from both. I took a
very practical approach to that by seeing how far I could get with a
cross-browser library that works on as many as possible of today's
browsers
Henri Sivonen wrote:
My point was that BibTeX/LaTeX/TeXlipse users are already receptive
to the idea that they have to provide rich metadata for citations, so
a UI test would not be a matter of testing *if* they provide the data
but about *how* they like to provide it.
Oh I see: you
On 1/19/07, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Henri Sivonen wrote:
My point was that BibTeX/LaTeX/TeXlipse users are already receptive
to the idea that they have to provide rich metadata for citations, so
a UI test would not be a matter of testing *if* they provide the data
but
Leons Petrazickis wrote:
On LibraryThing, I use book title or sometimes author + book title. I
only pull out ISBN for disambiguation with old books that have too
many editions, but where I want the right cover to show up.
People may vary. I use ISBN in such cases every time. If you were
The following would match Internet Explorer (and Opera's current
implementation):
- The empty string
- true (case-insensitive match)
- Content of the element is editable.
- false (case-insensitive match)
- Content of the element is *not* editable.
- Any other value
- Equivalent
contenteditable - contentEditable
tabindex - tabIndex
tabIndex content attribute - tabindex content attribute
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
http://www.opera.com/
I second Anne's opinion about a new attribute isContentEditable. Both
Internet Explorer and Safari have implemented this already although
Safari's support for inherit has a few bugs. It really is needed for
compatibility.
The empty string indeed causes the element to be contentEditable in
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Sam Ruby wrote:
People often code things like the following:
pre
one
two
three
/pre
Visually, this ends up looking something like
+---+
| |
| one |
| two |
| three |
+---+
with the following CSS rule:
pre { border: solid 1px #000; }
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Sam Ruby wrote:
[in standards mode]
I couldn't reproduce this. In Firefox trunk, with:
http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3C%21DOCTYPE%20html%3E%3Cstyle%3Epre%20%7B%20border%3A%20solid%3B%20%7D%3C/style%3E%0A%3Cpre%3E%0Ax%0A%3C/pre%3E
