On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
Are there any situations that this doesn't handle where it would be
legitimate to omit a title element?
Perhaps the simplest case is an HTML document that is only meant to be
displayed inside an inline frame and containing, say, just a
2012-10-19 19:33, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
Are there any situations that this doesn't handle where it would be
legitimate to omit a title element?
Perhaps the simplest case is an HTML document that is only meant to be
displayed inside an inline frame
On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
2012-10-19 19:33, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
Are there any situations that this doesn't handle where it would
be legitimate to omit a title element?
Perhaps the simplest case is an HTML
Jukka K. Korpela jkorp...@cs.tut.fi schrieb am Fri, 19 Oct 2012
20:49:16 +0300:
Anyone who bookmarks a document that was not meant to be bookmarked
should accept the consequences.
What makes the web – and collaboration between entities in general –
tremendously useful is that information can
On Fri, 13 Jul 2012, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
2012-06-29 23:42, Ian Hickson wrote:
Currently you need a DOCTYPE, a character encoding declaration, a
title, and some content. I'd love to be in a position where the empty
string would be a valid document, personally.
Is content really
2012-10-19 2:09, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jul 2012, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
[...]
It might be better to declare title optional but strongly recommend
its use on web or intranet pages (it might be rather irrelevant in other
uses of HTML).
That's basically what the spec says -- if
2012-06-29 23:42, Ian Hickson wrote:
I consider all boilerplate to be a significant burden. I think there's a
huge win to making it trivial to create a Web page. Anything we require
makes it less trivial.
It's a win, but I'm not sure of the huge. When learning HTML, it's an
important aspect,
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 1:28 AM, Faruk Ates faruka...@me.com wrote:
We like to think that “every web developer is surely building things in UTF-8
nowadays” but this is far from true. I still frequently break websites and
webapps simply by entering my name (Faruk Ateş).
Firefox 12 whines to
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012, Simon Pieters wrote:
On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 00:44:22 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Wed, 7 Dec 2011, Henri Sivonen wrote:
I believe I was implementing exactly what the spec said at the time
I implemented that behavior of Validator.nu. I'm particularly
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 18:22:13 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Hm, that's an interesting point. Can we make a list of features that rely
on the character encoding and have the spec require an encoding if any of
those are used?
If the list is long or includes anything that it's
Anne van Kesteren, Mon Feb 13 12:02:53 PST 2012:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 20:46:57 +0100, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
The list starts with a and the moment you do not use UTF-8 (or UTF-16,
but you really shouldn't) you can run into problems. I wonder how
controversial it is to just require UTF-8
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 18:22:13 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
I think this is like saying that requiring !DOCTYPE HTML is an undue
burden on authors...
It is. You may recall we tried really hard to make it shorter. At the end
of the day, however, !DOCTYPE HTML is the best we could do.
On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 00:44:22 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Wed, 7 Dec 2011, Henri Sivonen wrote:
I believe I was implementing exactly what the spec said at the time I
implemented that behavior of Validator.nu. I'm particularly convinced
that I was following the spec, because I
On Mon, 6 Jun 2011, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
You can detect other effects by seeing what unescape() does in the
resulting document, iirc.
Doesn't seem like it:
http://junkyard.damowmow.com/499
http://junkyard.damowmow.com/500
In both cases, unescape() is assuming Win1252, even though in
14 matches
Mail list logo
