Re: [whatwg] Font metrics
On Fri, 2 Apr 2010, Greg Brown wrote: > > In reviewing the current draft API for the element > (http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/the-canvas-element.html), > > I noticed that there is no support for obtaining font metrics such as > ascent, descent, leading, and bounding box. It seems like the most > recent discussion regarding font metrics took place a couple of years > ago: > > http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2008-May/014706.html > > But even that thread refers to discussions from 2006. > > I would personally like to see support for these values added to the > API. Is this something that could be considered for the final spec? What > are the major obstacles to providing such support? I would think that > this information could be easily obtained using the underlying graphics > API, but maybe I am missing something. It's something we'll probably add in due course, but for now we're waiting for the existing canvas API stuff to be implemented properly. We can't add too much stuff at once, because if we do the browser vendors get so far behind that they end up either rushing to catch up (leading to more bugs), or skipping parts in order to get the rest done right (leading to parts of the spec being ignored). -- Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Re: [whatwg] Input color state: type mismatch
On Sat, 3 Apr 2010, TAMURA, Kent wrote:
>
> I found type=number also had no typeMismatch. If a user wants to type a
> negative value, he types '-' first. This state should make typeMismatch
> true because '-' is not a valid floating point number.
The user agent shouldn't update the value until the input is a valid
number. ("User agents must not allow the user to set the value to a string
that is not a valid floating point number.")
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Re: [whatwg] idea for .zhtml format #html5 #web
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 9:41 PM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Eduard Pascual wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:
>> > I don't think it's defined anywhere, but a browser could choose to save
>> > bundled resources as a self-contained Widget ("File > Save as Widget..."),
>> > which would be a great authoring solution for Widgets.
>>
>> Isn't that the same thing, in essence, as MS did with IE? IIRC, IE had
>> an choice, on its save dialog, to "Save full page", which packed the
>> html page + all the CSS, JS, image, and other dependencies within a
>> ".mht" (called meta-HTML) file (which, of course, only IE would be
>> able to open afterwards).
>
> MHTML stands for MIME-encapsulated HTML and is an IETF RFC:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2557.txt
I can't remember for sure where I saw the "meta HTML" name, but I'm
sure I had seen it somewhere.
Anyway, thanks for the correction.
>> The fact is that this feature has been removed from the more recent
>> versions of IE (not sure if it was from IE6 or 7). It would be
>> interesting to know why MS decided why such a feature should be
>> removed.
>
> Selecting Page -> Save as... on IE8 brings the save file dialog with
> the type defaulting to "Web Archive, single file (*.mht)"
My apologies: vague memory + not testing = stupid post from me ^^;
After a bit of research to refresh my memory, I've found that what MS
removed from IE was the "offline favorites" feature, and MHT was
portrayed as a better alternative. I just got a "404 Brain Not Found"
and mixed things up.
So feel free to simply ignore my previous e-mail, since it was
entirely based on a mistaken assumption.
Regards
Eduard Pascual
Re: [whatwg] idea for .zhtml format #html5 #web
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Eduard Pascual wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:
> > I don't think it's defined anywhere, but a browser could choose to save
> > bundled resources as a self-contained Widget ("File > Save as Widget..."),
> > which would be a great authoring solution for Widgets.
>
> Isn't that the same thing, in essence, as MS did with IE? IIRC, IE had
> an choice, on its save dialog, to "Save full page", which packed the
> html page + all the CSS, JS, image, and other dependencies within a
> ".mht" (called meta-HTML) file (which, of course, only IE would be
> able to open afterwards).
MHTML stands for MIME-encapsulated HTML and is an IETF RFC:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2557.txt
> The fact is that this feature has been removed from the more recent
> versions of IE (not sure if it was from IE6 or 7). It would be
> interesting to know why MS decided why such a feature should be
> removed.
Selecting Page -> Save as... on IE8 brings the save file dialog with
the type defaulting to "Web Archive, single file (*.mht)"
> At first glance, the only potential issue I see (both with IE's old
> MHT format and with any possible zhtml) is XSS: when a downloaded file
> is loaded from the local filesystem into the browser, which is its
> domain?
The one from its Content-Location MIME header.
--
Thomas Broyer
/tɔ.ma.bʁwa.je/
Re: [whatwg] idea for .zhtml format #html5 #web
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:
> I don't think it's defined anywhere, but a browser could choose to save
> bundled resources as a self-contained Widget ("File > Save as Widget..."),
> which would be a great authoring solution for Widgets.
Isn't that the same thing, in essence, as MS did with IE? IIRC, IE had
an choice, on its save dialog, to "Save full page", which packed the
html page + all the CSS, JS, image, and other dependencies within a
".mht" (called meta-HTML) file (which, of course, only IE would be
able to open afterwards).
The fact is that this feature has been removed from the more recent
versions of IE (not sure if it was from IE6 or 7). It would be
interesting to know why MS decided why such a feature should be
removed.
At first glance, the only potential issue I see (both with IE's old
MHT format and with any possible zhtml) is XSS: when a downloaded file
is loaded from the local filesystem into the browser, which is its
domain? It may need some same-directory files, but it may be possible
that it tries to fetch something from its original location that has
not been downloaded, it might be trying to load content from a domain
that is not the local system.
This issue should be addressed if something like that is to be usable:
if we face the choice of broken pages vs. security flaw, the idea will
be already a failure. However, I have no idea of how to approach this.
Regards,
Eduard Pascual
Re: [whatwg] Why are form fields without a name barred from constraint validation?
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 04:00:04 -0700, Bruce Lawson wrote: >> >> On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:28:50 -, Futomi Hatano wrote: >>> >>> Because such controls are ignored when the form is submitted. >>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/forms.html#form-submission-algorithm >>> Nameless controls are meaningless in form submission. >>> So, those controls do not need to be validated, I think. >> >> Thanks! > > FWIW, there have been some requests on dropping this since nowadays form > controls are not always associated with a form, but the validity concept can > still be useful in such scenarios. Yeah. I think in the interest of 'least surprise', I think such controls should be validated too. If someone added validation constraints to such a control, I would think it's more likely than not that they wanted to control validated. / Jonas
Re: [whatwg] WebSocket bufferedAmount includes overhead or not
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 3/31/10 6:57 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> I would expect that send() is allowed to start streaming data over the
>> network as soon as it can, but only update bufferedAmount from the
>> event loop.
>
> Maybe I'm not being clear. Let's say bufferedAmount were to reflect the
> number of UTF-8-encoded bytes to be sent, for the sake of argument.
>
> I wait until bufferedAmount is 0, then call send("My text").
>
> What are possible values of bufferedAmount if I examine it right after the
> send() call? Is 0 a valid possible value? What about 1? 2? 3? 4? 5? 6? 7?
>
> Presumably the value will be somewhere in the integer range [0,7], right?
> Or will it always be 7 after that call in that situation?
In order to archive maximum interoperability and predictability I
think it should always be 7. So bufferedAmount is always adjusted
synchronously upwards by the length of the sent message by send(), and
always adjusted downwards from events posted to the main event loop.
Though it's possible that this is overengineering given how people are
likely to use bufferedAmount. Interested to hear opinions.
/ Jonas
[whatwg] Font metrics
Hi all, In reviewing the current draft API for the element (http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/the-canvas-element.html), I noticed that there is no support for obtaining font metrics such as ascent, descent, leading, and bounding box. It seems like the most recent discussion regarding font metrics took place a couple of years ago: http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2008-May/014706.html But even that thread refers to discussions from 2006. I would personally like to see support for these values added to the API. Is this something that could be considered for the final spec? What are the major obstacles to providing such support? I would think that this information could be easily obtained using the underlying graphics API, but maybe I am missing something. Thanks, Greg
Re: [whatwg] idea for .zhtml format #html5 #web
Hi, folks-
Philip Jägenstedt wrote (on 4/2/10 4:36 AM):
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 15:07:25 +0800, narendra sisodiya
wrote:
just a thought ___
You can view the first webpage create on earth. We have saved our file
from
.txt .rtf .doc and now .odt. I love ODF format (.odt and other things)
but
there is a scope for .zhtml format for document and other purpose.
Basically the idea of zhtml format is to create document/webpage using
HTML5
technology. HTML5 technology with client side can create dynamic webpage
with image video and we can actually use JavaScript to create a dynamic
document. So basically we can create a zip out of all the
html,js,css,images
files and put a extension of .zhtml.
There are many advantage of using zhtml format.
* You can create some good web based software and share it using just one
file.
* Any document create using zhtml will be viewable after 100 years too.
* Server must support .zhtml format so that website can autounzip and
provide underlying files Ex http://localhost/myfile.zhtml/test.html
Disadvantage
* There is no standard over web to make a slideshow Or presentation .
There
are 100 possible ways. So zhtml writers will make their own
conventions but
I believe that this will reach into a equilibrium
* do not know !! but there there will be someone.
Sounds like widgets: http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/
Yes, this is exactly the motivation behind W3C Widgets (or HTML5
Widgets, if you prefer more buzzwords).
You can gzip up a set of related content, and run it locally with
special permissions. You can digitally sign it, to ensure the integrity
and provenance of the content. You can even run them on the server
referenced from an element in an HTML page. They might be
suitable as a Firefox-like "extensions" mechanism.
I don't think it's defined anywhere, but a browser could choose to save
bundled resources as a self-contained Widget ("File > Save as
Widget..."), which would be a great authoring solution for Widgets.
Regards-
-Doug
Re: [whatwg] Input color state: type mismatch
I found type=number also had no typeMismatch. If a user wants to type a negative value, he types '-' first. This state should make typeMismatch true because '-' is not a valid floating point number. -- TAMURA Kent Software Engineer, Google
Re: [whatwg] idea for .zhtml format #html5 #web
On Fri, 2010-04-02 at 12:37 +0530, narendra sisodiya wrote: > just a thought ___ > > You can view the first webpage create on earth. We have saved our file > from .txt .rtf .doc and now .odt. I love ODF format (.odt and other > things) but there is a scope for .zhtml format for document and other > purpose. > Basically the idea of zhtml format is to create document/webpage using > HTML5 technology. HTML5 technology with client side can create dynamic > webpage with image video and we can actually use JavaScript to create > a dynamic document. So basically we can create a zip out of all the > html,js,css,images files and put a extension of .zhtml. > > There are many advantage of using zhtml format. > > * You can create some good web based software and share it using just > one file. > * Any document create using zhtml will be viewable after 100 years > too. > * Server must support .zhtml format so that website can autounzip and > provide underlying files Ex http://localhost/myfile.zhtml/test.html > > Disadvantage > > * There is no standard over web to make a slideshow Or presentation . > There are 100 possible ways. So zhtml writers will make their own > conventions but I believe that this will reach into a equilibrium > * do not know !! but there there will be someone. > > > -- > ┌─┐ > │Narendra Sisodiya ( नरेन्द्र सिसोदिया ) > │Society for Knowledge Commons > │Web : http://narendra.techfandu.org > └─┘ Didn't Microsoft already try this with its .mhtml format? Thanks, Ash http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
Re: [whatwg] [html5] r4949 - [giow] (0) The CSS rules need to do attribute value matching consistently across [...]
On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 23:36:16 -0700, L. David Baron wrote: Making attribute values case-insensitive in XHTML seems incompatible with longstanding Gecko behavior (though our handling of input's type attribute is buggy, at least) and with the clear intent of XHTML1, and doesn't seem implementable on top of a conformant CSS selectors implementation. Do we really want to do this? I think we do want case-insensitive attribute values to be case-insensitive in both HTML and XHTML. I think ideally we remove the special casing of certain attributes with Selectors and introduce an ASCII case-insensitive flag for attribute value selectors to deal with this issue. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Re: [whatwg] Why are form fields without a name barred from constraint validation?
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 04:00:04 -0700, Bruce Lawson wrote: On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:28:50 -, Futomi Hatano wrote: Because such controls are ignored when the form is submitted. http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/forms.html#form-submission-algorithm Nameless controls are meaningless in form submission. So, those controls do not need to be validated, I think. Thanks! FWIW, there have been some requests on dropping this since nowadays form controls are not always associated with a form, but the validity concept can still be useful in such scenarios. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Re: [whatwg] Why are form fields without a name barred from constraint validation?
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:28:50 -, Futomi Hatano wrote: Because such controls are ignored when the form is submitted. http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/forms.html#form-submission-algorithm Nameless controls are meaningless in form submission. So, those controls do not need to be validated, I think. Thanks! b
Re: [whatwg] Why are form fields without a name barred from constraint validation?
Hi Bruce, On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:57:04 - "Bruce Lawson" wrote: > "Constraint validation: If an element does not have a name attribute > specified, or its name attribute's value is the empty string, then it is > barred from constraint validation." > > http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/forms.html#naming-form-controls > > > As a matter of interest, why? Because such controls are ignored when the form is submitted. http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/forms.html#form-submission-algorithm Nameless controls are meaningless in form submission. So, those controls do not need to be validated, I think. -- Futomi Hatano http://www.html5.jp/ http://www.futomi.com/ http://twitter.com/futomi
[whatwg] Why are form fields without a name barred from constraint validation?
"Constraint validation: If an element does not have a name attribute specified, or its name attribute's value is the empty string, then it is barred from constraint validation." http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/forms.html#naming-form-controls As a matter of interest, why? -- Hang loose and stay groovy, Bruce Lawson Web Evangelist www.opera.com (work) www.brucelawson.co.uk (personal) www.twitter.com/brucel
Re: [whatwg] idea for .zhtml format #html5 #web
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 15:07:25 +0800, narendra sisodiya wrote: just a thought ___ You can view the first webpage create on earth. We have saved our file from .txt .rtf .doc and now .odt. I love ODF format (.odt and other things) but there is a scope for .zhtml format for document and other purpose. Basically the idea of zhtml format is to create document/webpage using HTML5 technology. HTML5 technology with client side can create dynamic webpage with image video and we can actually use JavaScript to create a dynamic document. So basically we can create a zip out of all the html,js,css,images files and put a extension of .zhtml. There are many advantage of using zhtml format. * You can create some good web based software and share it using just one file. * Any document create using zhtml will be viewable after 100 years too. * Server must support .zhtml format so that website can autounzip and provide underlying files Ex http://localhost/myfile.zhtml/test.html Disadvantage * There is no standard over web to make a slideshow Or presentation . There are 100 possible ways. So zhtml writers will make their own conventions but I believe that this will reach into a equilibrium * do not know !! but there there will be someone. Sounds like widgets: http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/ -- Philip Jägenstedt Core Developer Opera Software
Re: [whatwg] idea for .zhtml format #html5 #web
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Shwetank Dixit wrote: > Hi Narendra, > > I think what you're proposing could be achieved already (at least somewhat) > by the html5 offline applications part > http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/offline.html#offline > > Thanks for hinting , infact I was looking for it. The idea behind this is, my govt is wasting money of making e-learning content they are mainly .exe and swf file http://techfandu.blogspot.com/2010/03/e-learning-modules-tutorials-guidelines.htmlSo Basically I suggested them to use HTML5 also, I told them that content will be able to able to view on mobile (which support html5). Support for ODF is browser is still waiting and take time. http://techfandu.blogspot.com/2010/03/e-learning-modules-tutorials-guidelines.html
Re: [whatwg] idea for .zhtml format #html5 #web
Hi Narendra, I think what you're proposing could be achieved already (at least somewhat) by the html5 offline applications part http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/offline.html#offline On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 12:37:25 +0530, narendra sisodiya wrote: just a thought ___ You can view the first webpage create on earth. We have saved our file from .txt .rtf .doc and now .odt. I love ODF format (.odt and other things) but there is a scope for .zhtml format for document and other purpose. Basically the idea of zhtml format is to create document/webpage using HTML5 technology. HTML5 technology with client side can create dynamic webpage with image video and we can actually use JavaScript to create a dynamic document. So basically we can create a zip out of all the html,js,css,images files and put a extension of .zhtml. There are many advantage of using zhtml format. * You can create some good web based software and share it using just one file. * Any document create using zhtml will be viewable after 100 years too. * Server must support .zhtml format so that website can autounzip and provide underlying files Ex http://localhost/myfile.zhtml/test.html Disadvantage * There is no standard over web to make a slideshow Or presentation . There are 100 possible ways. So zhtml writers will make their own conventions but I believe that this will reach into a equilibrium * do not know !! but there there will be someone. -- Shwetank Dixit Web Evangelist, Site Compatibility / Developer Relations / Consumer Products Group Member - Web Standards Project (WaSP) - International Liaison Group Opera Software - www.opera.com Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
[whatwg] idea for .zhtml format #html5 #web
just a thought ___ You can view the first webpage create on earth. We have saved our file from .txt .rtf .doc and now .odt. I love ODF format (.odt and other things) but there is a scope for .zhtml format for document and other purpose. Basically the idea of zhtml format is to create document/webpage using HTML5 technology. HTML5 technology with client side can create dynamic webpage with image video and we can actually use JavaScript to create a dynamic document. So basically we can create a zip out of all the html,js,css,images files and put a extension of .zhtml. There are many advantage of using zhtml format. * You can create some good web based software and share it using just one file. * Any document create using zhtml will be viewable after 100 years too. * Server must support .zhtml format so that website can autounzip and provide underlying files Ex http://localhost/myfile.zhtml/test.html Disadvantage * There is no standard over web to make a slideshow Or presentation . There are 100 possible ways. So zhtml writers will make their own conventions but I believe that this will reach into a equilibrium * do not know !! but there there will be someone. -- ┌─┐ │Narendra Sisodiya ( नरेन्द्र सिसोदिया ) │Society for Knowledge Commons │Web : http://narendra.techfandu.org └─┘
