-work/#lang
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
http://GetFirefox.com/ Rediscover the Web
http://GetThunderbird.com/ Reclaim your Inbox
,
because UAs may apply differing semantics, depending on the profiles
they do and do not know.
Remove the note from the end of the section entirely (or rewrite it)
because the reason given does not match the recommendation to avoid
multiple profiles, which is confusing.
--
Lachlan Hunt
http
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
It should be stated that lang is for HTML only and xml:lang is
for X(HT)ML only.
Done.
Thank you, but now there's just one more issue.
# If both the xml:lang attribute and the lang attribute are set, user
# agents must use the xml:lang
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
1. There are no reasons there to avoid multiple profiles all together,
only reasons to avoid profiles with conflicting definitions.
Imagine you use publicly available profiles A and B.
A has definitions foo and bar.
B has definitions
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
# If both the xml:lang attribute and the lang attribute are set, user
# agents must use the xml:lang attribute, and the lang attribute must be
# ignored for the purposes of determining the element's language.
Is that the case for both
an error?
I don't think it should be an error. A warning like the WDG validator
issues is appropriate.
What about foo/?
Same as foo /.
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
http://GetFirefox.com/ Rediscover the Web
http://GetThunderbird.com/ Reclaim your Inbox
the URI in some way to pass
additional confirmation information (eg. appending a ...confirmed=1
parameter). In the absence of that confirmation, the server could then
send a page with a form requesting confirmation.
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
http://GetFirefox.com/ Rediscover the Web
methods.
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/types.html#h-6.12
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
http://GetFirefox.com/ Rediscover the Web
http://GetThunderbird.com/ Reclaim your Inbox
a templateid
attribute.
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
. That is how HTML 4 validators currently work.
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Quoting Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I think conformance checkers should not allow '/' in elements whose
content model in HTML 4 was CDATA.
Agreed. That is how HTML 4 validators currently work.
And also how no browser works.
That's irrelevant in this case
David Håsäther wrote:
On 2005-07-26 03:33, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
!
...
The only real use I've ever seen for a null comment declaration is to
suppress markup as in !amp;
Why not just do it properly as amp;amp;? That way it works for both
HTML and XHTML, whereas your version is only valid
attribute, yet wouldn't have the same effect when used in some kind of
pattern hint attribute, regardless of how it's displayed to the user?
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
;
/textarea
That would be a far better option than using contentEditable, which is
not only conceptually broken, but *all* implementations of it are so
incredibly broken, that trying to standardise it is like dragging a dead
horse through mud.
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
Olav Junker Kjær wrote:
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
How is that any different from a text area form control with a
specified accept type of text/html, which would allow a UA to load any
external editor (eg. XStandard) or degrade to a regular text area?
The point of contentEditable is that some areas
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
How is [contentEditable] any different from a text area form control
with a specified accept type of text/html, which would allow a UA to
load any external editor (eg. XStandard) or degrade to a regular text
area?
contentEditable
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
contentEditiable is not semantic, it's behavioural and belongs in the DOM
interface only, not the markup.
How is it not semantic?
How is it semantic?
It's not behavioural...
It's behavioual because it specifies how content
Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Aug 28, 2005, at 11:02, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Although some editors do also provide some semantic options, they're
usually limited in their abilities. Some have some semantic block
level elements like headings, paragraphs, lists and maybe blockquote.
However, few have
.
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
Jim Ley wrote:
On 9/5/05, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, as already demonstrated, #2 does return matches in some cases.
Surely that's just an implementation bug? rather than indicative of
any underlying problem in the spec.
Yes, it was a bug, but I didn't think the spec
these:
section div, section p, ... { /* ... */ }
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
Jim Ley wrote:
On 9/5/05, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I may not be understanding what you mean, but if optional parameters
aren't language independant, shouldn't it be defined in a more language
independant way, so that any non-ECMAScript languages can still
implement this?
Yes, DOM
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sun, 4 Sep 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
It also includes Element.hasClassName(), Element.addClassName() and
Element.removeClassName(), which I think should also be added to WA1.
I envisage somehow making className implement the DOMTokenString
interface:
http
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
http://whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#domtokenstring
Cool, I'll see what I can do about implementing that. I think I may be
able to extend the String() object quite easily for that, though I'll
have to think about
the first time I see apply method used. I couldn't find it in
ECMA262-3 nor in WA1.0. Can you give me a hint where it's defined?
Why is that better than using string?
It's a method of Function().
http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Core_JavaScript_1.5_Reference:Objects:Function:apply
--
Lachlan
bar quux
[1] http://lachy.id.au/dev/script/examples/DOM/DOMTokenString.js
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
care about standards
that much. The site uses an HTML 4.0 Transitional DOCTYPE that triggers
quirks mode.
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
Offline
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
301 - 328 of 328 matches
Mail list logo
