maxlength predates all the other form validation attributes by many
years. Historically, browsers would prohibit users from entering text
beyond the maxlength of an input or textarea, but would not prohibit
form submission. HTML5 changes this:
Constraint validation: If an element has a maximum
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com wrote:
In Drawing model: For shapes, the current fill, stroke, and line
styles must be honored, and the stroke must itself also be subjected
to the current transformation matrix. Also it says (Transformations
affect the
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 3:03 PM, David Flanagan da...@davidflanagan.com wrote:
I'm confused by the term coordinate space units as applied to the canvas
spec. It does not seem to be defined.
It seems clear to me. The 2D context represents a Cartesian plane,
and the units for everything are
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 2:31 AM, Gordon P. Hemsley gphems...@gmail.com wrote:
The particular use case that prompted me to think about this is including a
PDF via iframe. In Firefox (last I checked), one is required to install a
separate add-on in order to support in-browser display of PDF files
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 4:54 PM, John Harding jhard...@google.com wrote:
MySpace is my canonical example - they allow arbitrary SWFs to be embedded
in profiles, but not iframes. Flash added support a while back that
allows containing pages to block SWFs from executing script or accessing the
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Ashley Sheridan
a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk wrote:
Could you explicitly call the _self target in links in the frame? I wasn't
sure if the target attribute was going or not, but I'd expect target=_self
to override the default seamless action.
It doesn't. The
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 4:40 AM, Markus Ernst derer...@gmx.ch wrote:
Thank you and Boris for your examples. I see the security issues. Anyway It
would be very helpful in cases like mine, where security and privacy are not
affected, to get an easy way to do this opt-in without the need of complex
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 6:49 AM, Markus Ernst derer...@gmx.ch wrote:
My problem is this sentence in the spec for seamless: This will cause links
to open in the parent browsing context.
In an application like http://test.rapid.ch/de/haendler-schweiz/iseki.html,
the external page should be able
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com wrote:
The benefit to the user is that they could have less open network
connections while streaming video from server controlled sites and those
sites will have the ability to meter their usage more accurately.
Inserting
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 10:41 PM, Ben Schwarz ben.schw...@gmail.com wrote:
However, as far as my understanding goes, linkrels should not contain
multiple values; eg:
a rel=prefetch nextNext page/a
They can. See the spec:
The types of link indicated (the relationships) are given by the
value
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
Practically, I think the ball is / was in Apple's court to decide this.
While to this day other browser makers have decided to ship two (!)
royalty-free video formats (Theora and VP8),
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Markus Ernst derer...@gmx.ch wrote:
Some content from an external specialized content provider is included in
an existing web site via an iframe. This cannot be seamless, as the links
in the iframe must point to the original domain of the included document.
But
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:09 PM, John Harding jhard...@google.com wrote:
Yes, it's pretty straightforward to offer iframe-based embed code, but it
needs to be coupled with getting sites to accept them, or we end up with a
lot of confused, unhappy users.
This will only happen if the iframe
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer
silviapfeiff...@gmail.com wrote:
All of the image formats that you are pointing out have an image mime
type. I am merely pointing out that to support ogg theora browsers
would need to support a video mime type in an img element. I don't
see that
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Aral Balkan a...@aralbalkan.com wrote:
I just submitted a proposal for a new meta tag to flag that
high-resolution images are available and should be loaded in place of
low-resolution ones for users with high-PPI displays (like the new
iPhone 4's Retina
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 6:59 PM, John Harding jhard...@google.com wrote:
Some of the discussion here seems to have conflated application-controlled
video delivery with content protection, but in an ideal world, the two are
independent. The basic requirements around content protection that we
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Marques Johansson
marq...@displague.com wrote:
For pay-per-minute or pay-per-byte services I believe the HTTP and/or
HTML5 specification needs some minor changes to allow the server to
dictate the amount of data the UA should attempt to fetch from an open
and
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Ashley Sheridan
a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk wrote:
If we all subscribed to that point of view though, everyone would still be
stuck using IE5. As it is, there's a push by developers to use features that
IE has always been slow to implement but other browsers
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Ashley Sheridan
a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk wrote:
I think it's quite a fringe case. What about things that are more used:
* type=number - a browser could aid input with some sort of spinner
type=number has been in the spec for years.
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 6:13 AM, Doug Schepers d...@schepers.cc wrote:
As you are probably aware, some differences have arisen between the W3C
draft of the HTML5 spec and the larger WHATWG version. In my opinion, the
specific technical details of any given feature (which, let's be fair, are
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
bmsch...@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
HTML5 is about making a spec that matches common practice, right? In
practice, no one puts in attribute values.
HTML5 matches common practice when necessary to ensure
interoperability. That doesn't apply to
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 2:29 PM, narendra sisodiya
naren...@narendrasisodiya.com wrote:
Case 1 - Abode can make its flash-player inside canvas API. I know, it will
not be 100% compatible. They can create a CanvasAPI based flash player.
Their are already 2 client side run time engine in
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 3:26 PM, narendra sisodiya
naren...@narendrasisodiya.com wrote:
Yes, sure, I love to advocate adobe/similarcompany and modify my video -
http://tinyvid.tv/show/2dz18ka146nfz , Provided they should do it in Client
side so source can be seen. Providing a server side or
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Garrett Smith dhtmlkitc...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/3/10, TAMURA, Kent tk...@chromium.org wrote:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/association-of-controls-and-forms.html#constraint-validation
If one of the controls is not being
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
No browser depends on you using the body element explicitly. It's
perfectly fine to write your document like this:
!doctype html
titleTest/title
style
aside {border:1px solid #bf;white-space:nowrap;}
/style
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 12:11 PM, TAMURA, Kent tk...@chromium.org wrote:
Oh, I'm sorry. I have found a sentence about visibility in the draft.
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/association-of-controls-and-forms.html#constraint-validation
If one of the controls is not
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 7:33 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer
silviapfeiff...@gmail.com wrote:
I just came across a curious situation in the spec: IIUC, it seems the
@volume and @muted attributes are only IDL attributes and not content
attributes. This means that an author who is creating an audio-visual
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 1:21 PM, David Levin le...@google.com wrote:
We've discussed the leading alternate proposal optimized canvas (plus js to
read the exif information) and then get the bits out of canvas, but there
are several issues with this proposal including
that not all browsers will
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 8:07 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer
silviapfeiff...@gmail.com wrote:
However, what exactly happens with a media fragment URI like
http://example.com/picture.png#xywh=160,120,320,240 is not fully
specified in the Media Fragment URI spec.
One thought was to just highlight the area
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Mike Shaver mike.sha...@gmail.com wrote:
I have to admit, I'd be a little surprised (I think pleasantly, but
maybe not) if I could open ten thousand file descriptors on the latest
shipping Windows CE, or for that matter on an iPhone.
ulimit -n tells me I can
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Juuso Hukkanen juuso_ht...@tele3d.net wrote:
You asked many questions, and unfortunately all you missed the
auth=verisign argument, which _is_ enough to prevent all practical (,even
if they are all theoretical!,) man-in-the-middle attacks.
You haven't explained
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Juuso Hukkanen juuso_ht...@tele3d.net
wrote:
1) Man-in-the-middle problem; which doesn't exists because
a) those are just academic mind games
You don't get to talk about
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 8:44 AM, juuso_ht...@tele3d.net wrote:
meta=encrypt pubkey=ABABAEFEF2626EFEFEF pubtool=EC256-AES|RSA2048-AES
passsalt=no|domainname auth=verisign
Please try to fully decrypt the above meta-encrypt tag and *see* how the
browser-server communication could utilize it.
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 5:34 AM, Steve Dennis ad...@subcide.com wrote:
The other thing to take into consideration is Content Management Systems.
The section model, while technically a much better document model, will be
much much harder for things such as rich text editors to implement I
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Roger Hågensen resca...@emsai.net wrote:
Oh, and could someone on the HTML5 list poke some of the guys over there and
see if a ping attribute for the body tag in a similar vein could be
considered?
This *is* the HTML5 list -- or one of them, anyway. The editor
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Mounir Lamouri
mounir.lamo...@gmail.com wrote:
It looks like the input color state can't suffer from type mismatch
according to the specs but it seems to be the only way to be sure the
value is correct. Email and URL states can suffer from type mismatch for
the
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Mark Frohnmayer
mark.frohnma...@gmail.com wrote:
I was pointed in the spec to
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete.html#devices
and also noticed section 4.11.6.2 Peer-to-peer connections -- both
look like they are works-in-progress. Is
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:18 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
What could a Web page do that a browser couldn't do better in the same
situation? (The browser could offer a PDF, so having the site offer a PDF
when there's no printer doesn't seem like a good solution.)
Indeed, in my
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Ashley Sheridan
a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk wrote:
Ideally I guess then, the browsers would support .tar.gz files as these give
much better compression than .zip.
ZIP and gzip give comparable compression, in my experience. I just
applied both to a random 3.5M
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Ashley Sheridan
a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk wrote:
I think it's perfectly reasonable if they decide to use colours that differ
wildly from the 'norm'. They are used to setting the color value when they
set the background-color (although not always the other way
Okay, I think the requirement for a solution here should be: authors
should not have to worry about their inputs looking bad if they
recolor them without taking placeholders into account. The
placeholder can't just take on the same color as normal user input,
but also can't stay gray when it's
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 5:40 PM, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org wrote:
I think the question is whether, given author style for the input's
text but no specific style for the placeholder, you're better off
falling back to the default style for the placeholder or to the
author style for the
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 1:40 AM, Peter Kasting pkast...@google.com wrote:
I am explicitly opposed to the UA showing validation messages to the user.
I do not think HTML5 should attempt to address use cases where the author
wants the UA to show the messages.
I strongly disagree. Boilerplate
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 9:39 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
2. Getting validation of forms with the UI designed by the author, but
with the actual validation work (including working out what the
messages should be) done by the UA.
. . .
For #2, the author can use validationMessage
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Michal Zalewski lcam...@coredump.cx wrote:
The same argument could be made for not escaping , but I don't think
it's valid in practice - particularly for (hypothetically) constrained
input fields.
The use-cases for srcdoc are only where you expect HTML input.
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Brian Campbell lam...@continuation.org wrote:
This could lead to the problem that Hixie mentions, of training users to
click through security dialogs, even if this is done through a drop-down
asynchronous notification instead of a modal dialog.
I'd hope that
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Adam Barth wha...@adambarth.com wrote:
That depends what information the attacker encodes in the host name.
Recall that we're imaging the attacker gets to run JavaScript within
the sandbox
If we're assuming that, then yes, it's probably hopeless. But are we
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 3:41 AM, Kit Grose k...@iqmultimedia.com.au wrote:
I agree with Aryeh in principle; when you're updating the suggestions on
every keypress, extra processing and DOM manipulation at the Javascript level
would be good to avoid.
I don't think this is a big issue. Users
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 5:52 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
What would the sandbox do, other than require one level of escaping?
i.e. what is it protecting against?
span sandbox$something/sandbox was meant to be more or less the
same as iframe sandbox srcdoc=$something. The latter
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 10:12 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
I haven't reviewed that proposal closely, but I would expect input type=text
list=... on Mac to use the standard Mac combobox control:
Likewise on Windows it should show the standard combobox instead of what is
MediaWiki currently uses a search-suggest feature based on lots of
JavaScript that's used to calculate all sorts of widths and heights to
painstakingly construct an absolutely-positioned div, and reimplement
standard dropdown navigation controls on top of that. It works pretty
well (go to
It's also worth noting that datalist currently seems to be conceived
as a combobox, while search suggestions deserve totally different UI.
Opera's UI is suitable to search suggestions, but WebKit's proposed UI
is inappropriate for them:
http://docs.google.com/View?id=dch3zh37_0cf8kc8c4
There's a
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
I've made it redirect to the spec.
Could you say that the URL *should* provide human-readable information
about the vocabulary? We all know the problems with having
centrally-stored machine-readable data about your specs, but
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 9:53 PM, will surgent will...@gmail.com wrote:
It would be nice if there was a copyright attribute for the HTML 5 img tag.
This would make it easy for users and search engines to filter out images
that can not be used for certain purposes.
This is one of the things
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
I've had design requirements to include a print button in pages.
Apparently many users *expect* such, and don't realize they can print
from the File-Print option (and/or don't realize that this can print
a
2009/12/17 Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc:
I guess that if you enforced that fullscreen could only happen in
response to a click then you are in better shape.
Browsers already have heuristics just like this for opening popup
windows, don't they? They seem to work pretty well to prevent pages
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 3:17 AM, Hugh Guiney hugh.gui...@gmail.com wrote:
Nor should it. But if you're doing something in JavaScript, there
*should* be a functional alternative in plain HTML when it's turned
off.
Functional, sure, except where that's impossible (e.g., a client-side
computer
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 6:16 AM, James May wha...@fowlsmurf.net wrote:
If this change is made, what is the correct (explicit) way to refer to the
current URL? . ?
No, that will return the file in the current directory named ..
This might be the current directory itself. You would have to say
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
I think # should work as well.
Good point.
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
For example not all links are automatically downloaded, such as
link rel=prev. However I suspect that we'll want all links to
behave the same.
I'd say the rule should be that if the type is text/html or unknown,
should
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 2:59 AM, Hugh Guiney hugh.gui...@gmail.com wrote:
JavaScript is a crutch that far too many applications are relying on
for major functionality lately. JavaScript should enhance a Web
experience, not supplant it.
It depends on the application. But in any event, HTML can
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 11:40 PM, Hugh Guiney hugh.gui...@gmail.com wrote:
With the exception that Flash does not need separate components to be
active to sustain that functionality. You can toggle quality in Flash
without any server- or client-side scripts at all. You may need
ActionScript in
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Michal Zalewski lcam...@coredump.cx wrote:
The ability to sandbox SPANs or DIVs using a token-guarded approach
(span sandbox=random_token/span sandbox=same_token) is, on the
other hand, considerably easier on the developer, and probably has a
very similar
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 9:32 PM, Hugh Guiney hugh.gui...@gmail.com wrote:
So, in my first foray into preparing Theora/Vorbis content, for use
with video, I realized that I wasn't sure with what settings to
encode my materials. Should I:
A.) Supply my visitors with the best possible quality at
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
Hugh Guiney hugh.gui...@gmail.com schrieb am Sat, 12 Dec 2009
21:32:30 -0500:
Ideally, I would like to be able to simply encode a few different
quality variations of the same file and
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Nicholas Zakas nza...@yahoo-inc.com wrote:
Presently, HTML5 does provide guidance on the correct behavior for img
src=”” in section 4.8.2, indicating that Firefox 3.5’s and Opera 10’s
behavior in this regard is correct:
“If the base URI of the element is the
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Peter Kasting pkast...@google.com wrote:
The UA can still do things like turn fields red or add warning sign
icons or something if it likes.
What's validationMessage even supposed to return in these cases? For
instance, suppose that a particular UA never
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Bjartur Thorlacius
svartma...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you please explain to me (forgive me, I haven't got much
experience on this topic) why webapps can't either have a specific
element for inbox and sent mail, or even different pages? Why is
it so terrible to
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
I assume you meant mostly as in most of the pages are well-formed, not
pages are mostly well-formed, since the latter is useless, right?
I did a brief survey of obvious sites fitting those descriptions that I had
in my
I already filed a bug
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8268, but figured I'd
copy it here to get more discussion.
Wikipedia just experimented with switching to an HTML5 doctype. A lot
of user tools broke, and after two hours of investigation, we
determined that the problem is
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:39 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
Since it'd fail any time the data is not well-formed XML, I'd actually
expect such usage to be rare. It's not all that common to find XHTML on
the web that happens to be well-formed XML.
A number of popular web apps
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Fabian Freiburg
f.freib...@googlemail.com wrote:
The base element is very helpful. Trouble is that it affects all relative
links and src attributes. Especially for the src attributes it would be
very useful if it could define a context or media type to which it
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 10:54 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
... or as unbiased as you're likely to get, anyway, from a top 10
website of very mainstream interest whose direct interest is serving
the readers:
http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportClients.htm
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 11:39 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, no - readers have *way* outstripped editors since about
2006. It's not even the tech-savvy or web-savvy audience -
Wikipedia is standard fare for people who can't work computers to look
stuff up on.
Granted,
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 5:57 AM, Markus Ernst derer...@gmx.ch wrote:
While experimenting with the validator (at validator.w3.org), I found that
it does actually not complain about h1 src=whatever.gif. Thus, Tab's
example would be perfectly valid. The validator even seems to accept any
custom
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Kit Grose k...@iqmultimedia.com.au wrote:
Can I get some sort of an understanding on why this behaviour (non-
descript error in supported UAs rather than using the fallback content
that can provide alternate access methods) would be preferred?
Suppose browsers
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 4:49 AM, Markus Ernst derer...@gmx.ch wrote:
- If none of the indicated IDs are found, *replace the whole page*. This
makes it possible to prevent e.g. a wiki or forum from being @onlyreplaced
by just using different IDs.
But it breaks progressive rendering, which could
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Markus Ernst derer...@gmx.ch wrote:
Aryeh Gregor schrieb:
But it breaks progressive rendering, which could be extremely
annoying. The user might give up after a second or two of no
response, as the (possibly quite long) page is fetched and parsed
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 1:22 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Also, what should happen if the user presses the 'back' button?
It should be the same as for regular navigation. If the UA usually
stores some page state in a cache when the user navigates, it should
store the same state.
of AJAX. The feature
described here is only useful for simple cases. It's not clear to me
at this point whether it's a good enough tradeoff between simplicity
and power to get significant uptake at all, let alone in sites with
much more complicated needs.
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Aryeh Gregor wrote
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
I think the opposite. If I upgraded my site to this, I'd want nearly
all the links to onlyreplace. There's only a handful of same-origin
links that I'd instead want to trigger a full load.
It's very common for
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:49 AM, Nelson Menezes
flying.mushr...@gmail.com wrote:
As an aside, there is a reason why AJAX has become so popular over the
past few years: it solves the specific UI-reset issue that is inherent
in full-page refreshes.
I'm trying to think what a solution to this
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 7:16 AM, Markus Ernst derer...@gmx.ch wrote:
Interesting idea! Anyway it introduces some consistency problems to solve,
e.g.:
Page1.html contains:
static id=fooI eat meat/static
and links to page2.html, which contains:
static id=fooI am a vegetarian/static
So
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed, script changes should persist. The problem he was
highlighting, though, was the fact that a 'site bug' like that would
be very easy to have happen accidentally. It could even go unnoticed
by the site
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Peter Brawley p...@artfulsoftware.com wrote:
Correct, but excluding frameset from HTML5 increases the likelihood that
browsers will drop support for the feature.
The spec requires all browsers to support framesets. Look:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Michael Enright
michael.enri...@gmail.com wrote:
No matter what display method you use, it sounds like an important
requirement is to keep users from ever viewing the HTML of a row other
than from your display app/page. It seems to me to achieve this you
must
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 7:12 AM, Markus Ernst derer...@gmx.ch wrote:
Also, fieldset has a disabled attribute, but no readonly attribute. Is
there a reason for this?
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
Dunno.
It seems like I'm not the only one confused
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
And the standard would have to describe what it actually does, which would
probably require some input from Microsoft. At some point, to advance on the
IETF standards track, it would need multiple interoperable
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 10:41 PM, Peter Brawley p...@artfulsoftware.com wrote:
Thanks for responding. Perhaps you can show me otherwise, but containing a
browsable tree insided a fixed sidebar does not give us independently
scrolling subwindows side by side on one page, with the possibility of
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Peter Brawley p...@artfulsoftware.com wrote:
Oy, from the fact that users find web page links useful, it does not follow
that all identified content ought to be so linked.
It suggests that not linking is a serious drawback.
A design goal of this use case is to
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Peter Brawley p...@artfulsoftware.com wrote:
It suggests no such thing. Your suggestion, applied to surgery, would be
that primum non nocere implies surgery should never remove hurt or remove
useful tissue. The inference is overinclusive, to put it mildly. W3C's
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Peter Brawley p...@artfulsoftware.com wrote:
Right, the point is that the use case specifies tree navigation to be
entirely independent of navigation to and from the page, that tree and
detail subwindows be independently scrollable resizable, and that tree
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Peter Brawley p...@artfulsoftware.com wrote:
I agree wholeheartedly, esp. when the topic list is long (thousands or
millions of items) and itself editable, and the required interface is for
flexible, independent scrolling of freely choosable bits of the topic
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Alex Russell slightly...@chromium.org wrote:
we'd like to request
that an exception be made to the registered via RFC rule for
http-equiv headers which are prefixed with X-, or, alternately, that
the spec simply declare that unlisted keys and values will not be
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 5:27 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
I've gone through the spec changing unless to except where in a lot of
cases. Let me know if you think it should be better still.
That looks great, as long as something else is actually specified
somewhere in each of those cases.
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 12:13 PM, tjeddo tje...@gmail.com wrote:
Would anyone mind summarizing the design rationale for choosing the 'dt'
element as opposed to a 'caption' element when specifying the caption of a
figure?
Looking through the current draft of the HTML5 spec it appears that the
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
I'm not really sure what you mean here.
- There's the element's value content attribute.
- There's the element's value DOM attribute.
- There's the value mode that the value DOM attribute can be in.
- There's the
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 7:52 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Tool bar appears to be the historically correct term, toolbar seems to
be a new spelling.
I can't recall ever seeing tool bar before. [toolbar] has
177,000,000 hits on Google, [tool bar] has 2,350,000. And most of
the top hits
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 7:29 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Use the min, max, and step attributes to specify the range, then the UA
can automatically determine the size.
I guess. I'm sure there are some cases where you'd have an idea of
likely values but don't want to actually prohibit
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Alex Henrie alexhenri...@gmail.com wrote:
Then for however long we use HTML, we will always remember that we
have to work around fakepath because someone decided that
compatibility with a handful of badly designed pages in 2009 was more
important than having
301 - 400 of 513 matches
Mail list logo
