WF2 can be put in an HTML document. Both, IMO, have very
different use-cases.
- Geoffrey Sneddon
with semantic meaning, like m is far more relevant
(although it may well be a good idea to suggest it be rendered as
highlighted).
- Geoffrey Sneddon
To take this from a discussion last month on atom-syntax:
What is meant to happen if you set innerHTML of a div where the set
value has both a base and an a?
- Geoffrey Sneddon
On 11 Feb 2007, at 11:37, Jorgen Horstink wrote:
On Feb 11, 2007, at 12:01 PM, Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
To take this from a discussion last month on atom-syntax:
What is meant to happen if you set innerHTML of a div where the
set value has both a base and an a?
first of all the base
On 11 Feb 2007, at 15:11, Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
The point is whether it:
a) Gets inserted into the head, and changes all the links in the
document.
b) Appears in some magic place, and changes the links in the HTML
fragment.
c) Gets ignored.
I'm personally in favour of b
this would not
really change anything but the spec.
XHTML 1.0/1.1 doesn't allow xml:base, though, so base is the only
way to set a base URL within the document.
- Geoffrey Sneddon
off by needing to support a single format
that (almost) nobody uses.
- Geoffrey Sneddon
On 4 Mar 2007, at 14:31, Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
On 4 Mar 2007, at 14:08, Maik Merten wrote:
- MPEG4: This is most common in forms of DivX and XviD.
Predecessor of
H.264. As usual there's patent pool licensing involved. This means
that
albeit XviD is open sourced it's not really free due
On 5 Mar 2007, at 21:07, Keryx Web wrote:
Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
XHTML 1.0/1.1 doesn't allow xml:base, though, so base is the
only way to set a base URL within the document.
In what way would the XHTML 1.0/1.1 spec **disallow** the use of
this element from the xml namespace? It's
completely wrong.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2000Sep/0024.html –
that's the post Anne is referring to (I know of no other time that
the HTML WG have said anything on this issue).
- Geoffrey Sneddon
will not be able to use !DOCTYPE
html.
Then you're still relying on the UA reading the DTD, which it doesn't
have to. What use is a DTD if it doesn't need to be read and has no
nominative value?
- Geoffrey Sneddon
the
position forward, so when we move onto step 12 we add it again.
- In step 3 of the very inner set of steps for a content attribute
in a meta tag, is charset case-sensitive?
- Again there, shouldn't we be given unicode codepoints for that (as
it'll be a unicode string)?
- Geoffrey Sneddon
[1
– what's to say that won't happen here, so that other browsers
have an IE/Win DOM mode, which would therefore require a switch?
- Geoffrey Sneddon
conformace.
I think forcing browsers to support a codec when it is outdated is
wrong. I don't want WA 1.0 to end up like RSS 2.0, having multiple
versions incompatible with one another (in WA1.0's case different
versions requiring different codecs).
- Geoffrey Sneddon
Looking through the spec again, there is nothing about backslashes in
URI's path being treated as a forward slash, behaviour needed for
compatibility for quite a few websites.
- Geoffrey Sneddon
On 1 May 2007, at 20:21, Brenton Strine wrote:
However, if I then wanted to add additional special
styling to the first and third div, (e.g.. a border and
background color) it is less graceful. I could add style
attributes, but that would be wasteful if I want to do
this on a large scale.
that has absolutely no public documentation? Also, a large
part of this topic has been around H.264, Apple holds no known
patents affecting H.264.
- Geoffrey Sneddon
/WMV]?
- Geoffrey Sneddon
it
themselves.
- Geoffrey Sneddon
when there are issues with it) at http://
geoffers.no-ip.com/svn/php-html-5-direct/tests/numbersTest. Results
for currently shipping UAs (esp. browsers) would be greatly welcomed.
- Geoffrey Sneddon
with IPv6 addresses. RFC 2732 is noted as
obsoleted by RFC 3986.
- Geoffrey Sneddon
consistency (even if that goes against being consistent with other
contexts).
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
of the spec
if you wish, and pay any patent charges due. You still, as with
anything invented within the last 20 years (including Ogg/Vorbis/
Theora), run the risk of a submarine patents.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
. You should at least have talked to Monty @ Xiph before
jumping to rash
conclusions.
So undisclosed patents have been looked at? How?
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
not support MPEG-4 out of the box (except for Zune), despite the huge
amount of MPEG-4 content already out there.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
DRM-encumbered standards.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
list of games that use them on
Wikipedia or elsewhere).
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
. I wonder why
that is.
Do you have enough money to pay a fine a similar size to what MS got
last year? If you don't have enough money, they won't sue you. It
isn't worth their time.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
On 12 Dec 2007, at 17:44, David Gerard wrote:
On 12/12/2007, Geoffrey Sneddon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12 Dec 2007, at 14:23, David Gerard wrote:
FWIW, Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons only allow unencumbered
formats
on the site. Video MUST be Ogg Theora. Compressed audio better
On 12 Dec 2007, at 19:30, Maik Merten wrote:
Geoffrey Sneddon schrieb:
Apart from those two, the others I can think of are those that are in
excess of twenty years old (and therefore their patents have
expired),
such as H.260.
I couldn't find anything insightful about H.260. Sure you
on the mailing list archives. There's been plenty of
discussion about this before, and it's always ended up in the same
loop: A group of people wanting nothing but Ogg/Theora/Vorbis, and
another wanting one standard that all major implementers will support.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http
for
national or industry standards organisations (similar to the ISO owner
identifier), and unique codes that may have been assigned to
organisations by other standards.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
the sites, specs be damned. If RFC 3986
defined what to do with non-conformant URIs, we wouldn't have this
issue.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
On 14 Jan 2008, at 05:45, ianh wrote:
Add a subtitle to clarify the scope of the document for people who
don't read the spec. (W3C version only.)
Is there any reason for this not to be in the WHATWG version as well?
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
-4 out of the box, and AFAIK only supports MPEG-1 and WMV (for
video)). There's also still a large amount of content that relies on
the QuickTime container format (.mov), even if the content is MPEG-4
(whose own container is based on the QT one).
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
else. Inserting a Flash file into a video element is similar
to inserting an HTML file that happens to have a link to video: sure,
it links to a video, but it does a billion other things too — it isn't
in itself the video.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
look in @name. They serve identical purposes, so
there's no reason to allow both in a document, but parsers must
support both for compatibility.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
On 29 Feb 2008, at 16:33, Julian Reschke wrote:
Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
It seems like the HTTP spec should define how to handle that, but
the HTTP working group has indicated a desire to not specify
error handling behaviour, so I guess it's up to us.
IE and Safari use the first one
On 29 Feb 2008, at 01:29, Shannon wrote:
Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
While yes, you could rely on something like that, it totally
breaks in any user agent without scripting support. Nothing else, to
my knowledge, in HTML 5 leads to total loss of functionality without
JavaScript whatsoever
converting between different encoding
schemes…UTF-8 byte sequences is not recommended by the Unicode
Standard.).
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
to actually do what we say to
be in any better situation than we already are. One group can't
implement specifications with known patents, and the other is
unwilling to implement specifications with no known patents, due to
submarine patent risks.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
it
should be the body element. That really is rather odd.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
On 15 Jun 2008, at 04:06, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008, Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
Having implemented the creating an outline algorithm (see
http://pastebin.ca/1048202), I'm getting some odd results (the only
TODO won't affect HTML 4.01 documents such as the following issues).
Using
be
more appropriately given as an attribute.
Why go against what HTML 4.01 does? It seems needless to change.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
an abbreviation, such as the Referer header in HTTP? Not that
that can actually be changed, because things rely upon it…
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
to be HTTP (FTP
should work fine too in browsers IIRC), so all it really is is a
generic request object.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
) is a
paragraph, much like an explicit one created by the p element. http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#paragraphs
details this in-depth.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
ask why it has not been considered (yet)?
Because there's an issues list of several thousand issues, and as such
not all issues have been considered. If we could do everything at once
we'd have a spec instantly. :)
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
(which currently contains
Python and Ruby implementations) as MIT licensed — there are also a
fair number of test cases there.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
) to
Windows-1252. http://bugs.simplepie.org/repositories/entry/sp1/trunk/create.php
does that (the only dependancy is for getting the file via HTTP,
that can just be replaced with cURL if you wish to just require that).
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
?php
/**
* Converts a Windows
), as well as with PHP6's Unicode support.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
.
If
there is more interest in this feature, please speak up.
This seems stupid. If I want to have spell-checking, let me. Don't
force it off. I don't see any reason to have it forced off, ever.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
/a
UTF-16BE BOM
FF FF 00 00
FF FE 00 00
text/plain
n/a
UTF-16LE BOM
?
Yes.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
define parsing.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
On 21 Feb 2009, at 12:37, mikemi...@verizon.net wrote:
If the doctype is !DOCTYPE HTML5 instead
Then Gecko-based UAs would be in quirks mode.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/dom.html#content-models
[2]
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/forms.html#the-input-element
It is intended that such a thing be part of the as-of-yet unwritten
index.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
of arguments were made to the ISO before
ISO8601 was published, yet that still supports only the Gregorian
calendar, having been revised twice since it's original publication in
1988. Is there really any need to go beyond what ISO 8601 supports?
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
);
Correct one should look like [1]:
@namespace http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml;;
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-namespace/#declaration
According to that document both are correct.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
On 16 May 2009, at 07:08, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
Geoffrey Sneddon Fri May 15 14:27:03 PDT 2009
On 15 May 2009, at 18:25, Shelley Powers wrote:
One of the very first uses of RDF, in RSS 1.0, for feeds, is
still in existence, still viable. You don't have to take my
word, check
I think this is a bit of a misnomer, as the current token can be an
end tag token (although it will throw a parse error whatever happens
once it reaches this state). I suggest renaming it to self-closing
tag state.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
that you expect to only appear once (i.e., a mix of behaviours).
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
On 31 May 2009, at 12:55, Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
IE use the first header in all cases where it doesn't expect the
header to appear more than once (i.e., a header like X-Foobar
appearing twice returns the value of the first one).
I don't think this is quite true, actually. It doesn't
be able to redistribute that in
either binary or source form. I would, however, get in trouble for not
having paid patent fees for doing so. Hence, as that example
concludes, you cannot distribute ffmpeg whatsoever.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
, it is a
blatant and knowing lie.
How is it incredible? Who has looked at the submarine patents? They by
definition are unpublished! Yes, certainly, published patents are well
researched, but this is not the objection that anyone has made to it.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
Although charsets are case insensitive, it'd probably be best to be
consistent with the IANA registry. The only change this means makes is
changing Windows-* to windows-*.
parsing.
How do we tell apart foo.html (a relative URL) and example.com (a
host name)?
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
sort of UI we could
use for it.
My proposal, on the whole, would be to have some box appearing upon
selecting text. Then, in that box, give space for both an email address
and a comment, and send that along with the selected text to the list.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon — Opera Software ASA
http
.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon — Opera Software
http://gsnedders.com/
http://www.opera.com/
Manu Sporny wrote:
Cameron McCormack wrote:
Manu Sporny:
3. Running the Anolis post-processor on the newly modified spec.
Geoffrey Sneddon:
Is there any reason you use --allow-duplicate-dfns?
I think it’s because the source file includes the source for multiple
specs (HTML 5, Web Sockets
with. Then you have varying
names in different languages, disagreement about what kilobyte means,
and so much more… Sounds like a whirlwind of fun.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon — Opera Software
http://gsnedders.com/
http://www.opera.com/
amounts of input that they are almost always free-form text. Why allow
the pattern attribute?
--
Geoffrey Sneddon — Opera Software
http://gsnedders.com/
http://www.opera.com/
not cause JS
to execute in one browser but not in another.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon
http://gsnedders.com/
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 7 Sep 2009, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Geoffrey Sneddon
foolistbar at googlemail.com wrote:
Apparently Hixie had previously said he didn't want to change this as it
will become a non-issue over time. I think it does matter due to the
security
when
creating the token name and when adding them to the buffer.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon — Opera Software
http://gsnedders.com/
http://www.opera.com/
will become character tokens. This is true of both the
script data state and the RAWTEXT state: the latter is probably
preferably due to its far lower complexity.)
--
Geoffrey Sneddon — Opera Software
http://gsnedders.com/
http://www.opera.com/
and those mostly aren't valid XHTML? MediaWiki is
unreasonably difficult to reskin, so that's not much of a problem for
us . . .
Even with the default skin it's easy to break (e.g., search for U+).
That'll be output to the page and make it not well-formed.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon — Opera Software
uses.
Is this something that's a reasonable requirement for browsers in future?
HTML5 through WebIDL and its ECMAScript binding already does require this.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon — Opera Software
http://gsnedders.com/
http://www.opera.com/
On 27/04/10 20:23, David Bruant wrote:
Le 27/04/2010 03:54, Geoffrey Sneddon a écrit :
On 26/04/10 19:50, And Clover wrote:
David Flanagan wrote:
Rather that trying to make DOM collections feel like arrays,
how about just giving them a toArray() method?
I like that, as a practical
you release Internet Explorer 9 with
all dhtml collections implemented as native EcmaScript objects?
As far as I am aware, none of them are on this list.
--
Geoffrey Sneddon — Opera Software
http://gsnedders.com/
http://www.opera.com/
On 06/09/2013 04:05, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote:
(2013/09/06 6:08), Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
The phrasing content section states:
Text nodes and attribute values must consist of Unicode characters,
must not contain U+ characters, must not contain permanently
undefined Unicode characters
It would aid programmatic conversion of the spec, and confuse me when
reading the spec less thereby avoiding bugs like 25871, if these states
matched the model of the rest of the tokenizer.
Thus I propose the bogus comment state becomes:
Consume the next input character:
U+003E GREATER-THAN
83 matches
Mail list logo
