On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 11:55 PM, Kristof Zelechovski
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
jar:http://www.example.com/site.jar!/path/inside/foo.html?
What kind of a syntax is that?? JAR is not a protocol, it is a content
type.
In Firefox, jar is a protocol that means retrieve the enclosed URL,
unzip the
Having this URL monster shipped does not preclude replacing it with a more
logical one and deprecating the original one. People make mistakes all the
time and fortunately there are cases where the harm can be undone.
(It is not about withdrawing the support for JAR archives but about changing
the
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 16:16:41 +0200, Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2.3.1.
Since blockquote is so abused that it is useless for AI, allowing
attribution within the blockquote would be practical.
Attribution isn't part of a quote. How would you distinguish quoting an
attribution from
On 28/07/2008 09:22, Kristof Zelechovski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having this URL monster shipped does not preclude replacing it with a more
logical one and deprecating the original one. People make mistakes all the
time and fortunately there are cases where the harm can be undone.
It's not
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008, Adam Barth wrote:
My guess is this mechanism will not be included in HTML 5 because some
of the other browser vendors have expressed their distaste for nested
URL schemes.
I've no intention of adding jar: to HTML5, but more because it seems
completely orthogonal to
Just to clarify, I wanted to point out that my suggestion is related to both
of the suggested alternatives (mhtml and the jar protocol), but is very
different in intention. I think there is a very real need in the area of
deployment for resource intensive web pages/applications. The developer has
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Adam Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suspect
the reason the Firefox developers chose ! to separate the URL to the
JAR from the path within the JAR is that ! is not a valid URL
character.
I think Java invented the syntax, actually.
The main value of using
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 8:56 PM, Adrian Sutton [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
It's also worth noting that the jar: scheme will allow you to target
anchors
in a HTML document that's within the archive where as the fragment
identifier syntax would not, unless you used two fragment identifiers:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 23:31:46 +0200, Elliotte Rusty Harold
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Hi,
Currently when linking to specific places in a document one is limited
to the places the original author made linkable via an anchor a tag.
While this is a nice touch (though
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 23:05:44 +0200, Philipp Serafin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Russell Leggett
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
This is a suggestion that is more helpful to larger single page web
applications, but could also be very helpful to other resource
My complaint was about how the jar URL scheme wannabe conceptually differs
from the schemes we already officially have, not about how ugly it is to
have two consecutive colons. It is ugly but it does not matter. What
matters is that a scheme is being promoted that is specific to one content
Although jar, mhtml, and also the widget spec have some related ideas, I
think all of them are more complex than the solution I'm suggesting as well
off target. I will give a full example.
Let's say I have a large javascript application that is broken into several
files for better organization.
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008, Russell Leggett wrote:
Let's say I have a large javascript application that is broken into
several files for better organization.
But let's say we could zip up all the files, and retrieve them at the
start of an html document:
!-- somewhere in the head tag --
link
FYI
When faced with this question in MPEG (MPEG-21 files are container
files too), we consulted with folks at the W3C (in Cannes, if I
recall correctly) and decided:
a) that a scheme type was wrong, and that 'picking a piece out of an
archive' at the client-side was almost the definition of
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
So what I think we should do is to enforce that 'data' is a JSON
serializable object.
(We need a better term -- and definition -- for this.)
When entering a SH state for which a Document has been destroyed, we
load the URL associated with that SH
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Henri Sivonen wrote:
Based on the 2006-02-24 version.
1.14.1.
The style and script elements in XHTML have a potentially anything goes
content model. Would it be appropriate for a conformance checker to only pass
style and script types it knows about (with the proper
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Matthew Thomas wrote:
I'm suggesting that since it is common for entire menus -- or toolbars
-- to be temporarily irrelevant, such as when focus is in a field or
pane where they do not apply, there should be a disabled=
17 matches
Mail list logo
