Let's just leave the sharing out of this. There is no data as to *why* it
is being shared. All that is is a red-herring to the technical discussion.
Web Components are what you are looking for. Problem is, JS required.
However that isn't a deal-breaker in most projects. You make a custom
element
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Bobby Mozumder mozum...@futureclaw.com
wrote:
On Mar 23, 2015, at 7:04 AM, Jonathan Garbee jonat...@garbee.me wrote:
The buzz mostly comes from throwing of HTML6 into the title. HTML5 is a
buzzword and this creates new buzz for the next version to act as
On Mar 23, 2015, at 7:04 AM, Jonathan Garbee jonat...@garbee.me wrote:
The buzz mostly comes from throwing of HTML6 into the title. HTML5 is a
buzzword and this creates new buzz for the next version to act as
click-bait for ad views. It also went viral from the mention since people
were
My idea started from considerations about the picture element itself, so
I agree with Martin, a native feature to resize image maps should wrk with
the picture/img scenario. IE11 doesn't scale SVG as noticed about
previous versions.
As a side note, I have to notice that selecting areas in SVG
On Mar 23, 2015, at 7:04 AM, Jonathan Garbee jonat...@garbee.me wrote:
The buzz mostly comes from throwing of HTML6 into the title. HTML5 is a
buzzword and this creates new buzz for the next version to act as
click-bait for ad views. It also went viral from the mention since people
were
The buzz mostly comes from throwing of HTML6 into the title. HTML5 is a
buzzword and this creates new buzz for the next version to act as
click-bait for ad views. It also went viral from the mention since people
were mocking the idea of HTML6 (and the single-page app system proposed.)
As far as I
People are freaking out about the proposal idea of using SQL statements
directly to populate the browser’s internal model data store, when I mentioned
using A href=sql:select from *”
a few things about this:
1. The security issues aren’t as big when operating on local data for a local
app,
On 3/21/15, Jake Archibald jaffathec...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd rather we did that by introducing promises to HTMLCanvasElement.
Returning a promise from toBlob is easy, making the callback arg optional
by checking the type of the first arg is hacky but possible (and is done in
js libs).
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Bobby Mozumder mozum...@futureclaw.com
wrote:
On Mar 23, 2015, at 10:15 AM, Sandro Paganotti sandro.pagano...@gmail.com
wrote:
well, yes; but once it's done accordingly to the behaviour required it
could be released and then used by everybody. So it is
On Mar 23, 2015, at 8:46 AM, Sandro Paganotti sandro.pagano...@gmail.com
wrote:
To me it sounds a quite elegant solution to use web components to extend
the existing elements, for example by using the is attribute, to allow them
to actually fetch a specific resource from web as you
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Bobby Mozumder mozum...@futureclaw.com
wrote:
On Mar 23, 2015, at 8:46 AM, Sandro Paganotti sandro.pagano...@gmail.com
wrote:
To me it sounds a quite elegant solution to use web components to extend
the existing elements, for example by using the is
On Mar 23, 2015, at 9:35 AM, Jonathan Garbee jonat...@garbee.me wrote:
Let's just leave the sharing out of this. There is no data as to *why* it
is being shared. All that is is a red-herring to the technical discussion.
Web Components are what you are looking for. Problem is, JS required.
On Mar 23, 2015, at 10:15 AM, Sandro Paganotti sandro.pagano...@gmail.com
wrote:
well, yes; but once it's done accordingly to the behaviour required it could
be released and then used by everybody. So it is just a matter of creating a
new catalog of components that anyone can import
On 3/23/15, Garrett Smith dhtmlkitc...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/21/15, Jake Archibald jaffathec...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2015Mar/0059.html
Sorry, this was the actual post:
Bobby Mozumder mozum...@futureclaw.com writes:
On Mar 20, 2015, at 12:10 PM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
A few things worth noting: First, we've actually tried a bunch of
this before, and you're not using it now so I think we can say that at
some level it was unsuccessful.
I'd rather Firefox did a small hack under hood for compatibility than we
hack the spec with a separate method.
We shouldn't be adding async APIs to browsers that use callbacks. Only one
browser implements the callback version here, and they can maintain compat
easily remove the callback when
On Mar 20, 2015, at 12:10 PM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
A few things worth noting: First, we've actually tried a bunch of
this before, and you're not using it now so I think we can say that at
some level it was unsuccessful.
Thanks for the feedback here. I just had a
On Mar 23, 2015, at 5:33 AM, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
n...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
XForms, Microdata and XSLT all do different things. Note that no widely
used browser supports XForms in its default configuration; while Chrome,
Firefox, Internet Explorer, Safari and Opera all support
Which is why more browsers shouldn't adopt it. If we have an opportunity to
switch it for a promise-based API, we should take it.
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 at 17:21 Garrett Smith dhtmlkitc...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/23/15, Jake Archibald jaffathec...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd rather Firefox did a small
On 3/23/15, Jake Archibald jaffathec...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd rather Firefox did a small hack under hood for compatibility than we
hack the spec with a separate method.
We shouldn't be adding async APIs to browsers that use callbacks.
Not sure what you mean. Method toBlob is async and uses a
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:44 AM, Bobby Mozumder mozum...@futureclaw.com wrote:
[snip]
Thanks for the feedback here. I just had a quick look at some of the past
proposals (XForms, Microdata, XSLT), and they all had clear usability
design issues to me. For this, I focused on presenting the
On Mar 23, 2015, at 2:18 PM, Brian Kardell bkard...@gmail.com wrote:
At some level, you can safely say that you will tend to like your own
design and find others a bit harder to understand.. Having experience
with a whole lot of previous attempts, but not yours, for example, I
can't say
Andrea Rendine master.skywalker...@gmail.com writes:
Besides that, the spec says that UAs may expose the time (and other
aspects) for a refresh event of the document and it also refers to the
possibility for a user to cancel the redirect, while as of now users
aren't even informed, let alone
Hi everybody!
A request starting from meta element and its refresh state: why doesn't
the document interface expose the refresh timeout? The ideal would be to
expose it in read/write mode, as authors have evolved several variants of
location.href/replace/refresh/reload. And for several I mean 534:
24 matches
Mail list logo
