[whatwg] ThePirateBay.org take advantage of HTML5's
Word just came in from TorrentFreak that ThePirateBay.org have been working on a streaming video website for countless months that takes advantage of the free media formats OGG, Theora and Vorbis. While filesharing in itself is a controversial subject, this will place HTML5's and tag--and more importantly the OGG Theora+Vorbis multimedia format--in the spotlight of countless people. This is also convenient for FireFox (and GNU IceCat) as the new point release version is getting closer to its official public release. Congratulations to ThePirateBay.org team for making this possible. Related links: TorrentFreak's coverage on the subject: http://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-launches-youtube-competitor-090627/ The Video Bay: http://thevideobay.org/ --Sam
Re: [whatwg] Reverse ordered lists
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 17:18:56 +0100 "Simon Pieters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:54:23 +0100, Siemova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> I can only disagree with using negative numbers in a reverse order > >> list, since I communicate to many people in non-english countries > >> that use brackets to display negative numbers in their locale. So a > >> list would appear as: > >> > >>1 : Red > >>0 : Green > >> (1): Blue > >> (2): Violet > >> (3): ...etc... > >> > >> and if a long list is printed out on paper, all anybody would see > >> is: > >> > >> (120): Insert a really long paragraph of text here. > >> ... > >> (121): And one here too > >> ... > >> > >> which, to someone outside of their locale, would appear confusing. > > Not a valid reason to ban negative numbers, IMHO. On the contrary, I have found that working with people that use a different locale occasionally frustrating. When I copy text from a document that uses a different numbering system, I'm frequently reformatting its text, making work unproductive and time-consuming. For that reason, I constantly try to avoid negative numbers wherever it is unnecessary.
Re: [whatwg] Reverse ordered lists
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 17:18:56 +0100 "Simon Pieters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:54:23 +0100, Siemova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> I can only disagree with using negative numbers in a reverse order > >> list, since I communicate to many people in non-english countries > >> that use brackets to display negative numbers in their locale. So a > >> list would appear as: > >> > >>1 : Red > >>0 : Green > >> (1): Blue > >> (2): Violet > >> (3): ...etc... > >> > >> and if a long list is printed out on paper, all anybody would see > >> is: > >> > >> (120): Insert a really long paragraph of text here. > >> ... > >> (121): And one here too > >> ... > >> > >> which, to someone outside of their locale, would appear > >> confusing. > > Not a valid reason to ban negative numbers, IMHO. On the contrary, I have found that working with people that use a different locale occasionally frustrating. When I copy text from a document that uses a different numbering system, I'm frequently reformatting its text, making work unproductive and time-consuming. For that reason, I constantly try to avoid negative numbers wherever it is unnecessary.
Re: [whatwg] Reverse ordered lists
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 09:54:23 -0600 Siemova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 23, 2008 9:32 AM, Sam Arthur Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 09:07:02 -0600 > > Siemova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > But then what would someone do in order to begin a list but not > > > end it? For instance, if they wanted to say: > > > > > > "10. Blah > > > 9. Blah > > > 8. Blah > > > > > > And so forth..." > > > > Then in this situation, a start value would be necessary. > > > > > You're right! My apologies for misreading. Earlier I thought for a > moment you were advocating having no start attribute at all. > *sheepish grin* That's ok, I should have made myself clear from the start. > > Personally, I don't see any problem with allowing list items to be > > > numbered 0 or negatively, so I think the "1, 0, -1, -2" default > > > approach would work fine. > > > > I can only disagree with using negative numbers in a reverse order > > list, since I communicate to many people in non-english countries > > that use brackets to display negative numbers in their locale. So a > > list would appear as: > > > >1 : Red > >0 : Green > > (1): Blue > > (2): Violet > > (3): ...etc... > > > > and if a long list is printed out on paper, all anybody would see > > is: > > > > (120): Insert a really long paragraph of text here. > > ... > > (121): And one here too > > ... > > > > which, to someone outside of their locale, would appear confusing. > > > > > Aha. Well, your intended audience will understand anyway, right? And > if any other reader looks at the beginning of the list, or is > familiar with the context (surely the author would explain the list > in some fashion), they'll know what's going on. Is that scenario > really dire enough to prevent negative numbering, particularly given > how troublesome and unintuitive it might be to figure out how to > number items that should be negative but aren't allowed to display > that way? It's difficult to say, since I can't give any real world situations where a decremental list has been used with negative numbers. However, I've talked to quite Indonesians who use brackets for numbering. Australia has approximately 20,000,000 people, where Indonesia has around 234,500,000. In Australia, it's a fact that 1 out of 3 families have access to the internet -- in Indonesia, it's more like 9 out of 10. Simply put, Indonesians outnumber Australians when it comes to reading websites. Asian countries are technologically advanced in areas like that. And that's just one situation. With the advent of OLPC and the likes, we'll be seeing more non-english cultures accessing the internet, especially African and Middle-East countries where their numbering system is exotic when compared to our own.
Re: [whatwg] Reverse ordered lists
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 09:07:02 -0600 Siemova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But then what would someone do in order to begin a list but not end > it? For instance, if they wanted to say: > > "10. Blah > 9. Blah > 8. Blah > > And so forth..." Then in this situation, a start value would be necessary. > > I guess I'm asking, why recommend artificial and unnecessarily > narrow constraints? We don't want UAs to force unexpected behaviors > which would frustrate the end user and make them search (vainly) > for a workaround if that's not what they wanted, do we? What I'm looking for, is a _logical_ reverse order list that would be displayed by default when the site designer or whoever uses it can't be bothere setting specific list values, which AFAIK is from X to 1. Also, nobody has to be constrained to anything as defaults should alwalys be overridden when needed. > Personally, I don't see any problem with allowing list items to be > numbered 0 or negatively, so I think the "1, 0, -1, -2" default > approach would work fine. I can only disagree with using negative numbers in a reverse order list, since I communicate to many people in non-english countries that use brackets to display negative numbers in their locale. So a list would appear as: 1 : Red 0 : Green (1): Blue (2): Violet (3): ...etc... and if a long list is printed out on paper, all anybody would see is: (120): Insert a really long paragraph of text here. ... (121): And one here too ... which, to someone outside of their locale, would appear confusing. > With both "reverse" and "step" we could > still accomplish what you're talking about, but the spec would > remain both simpler for UAs to implement and more flexible for > content creators' use. > > - Jason > > > > > On Jan 23, 2008 8:23 AM, Sam Arthur Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:03:42 +0100 > > > Lachlan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Actually, the best route I can see is to not have a start > > > attribute at all but to rely on the browser to automatically > > > detect the amount of tags within an > > > container and decrement from there. ie: > > > > > > <-- Start count from here. > > > Red > > > Orange > > > Yellow > > > Green > > > Blue > > > <-- Close tag detected, 5 tags counted. > > > > > > is rendered as starting from 5: > > > > > >5. Red > > >4. Orange > > >...etc... > > > > > > and using a "step" value, for example, all the browser would need > > > to do is multiply the total at the tag, and decrement that > > > multiplied total by the "step" amount, making: > > > > > > > > > > > > render the list as: > > > > > > 25. Red > > > 20. Orange > > > 15. Yellow > > > ...etc... > > > > > > It might mean more work for the browsers, but by experience > > > something like this isn't too hard to implement. > > >
Re: [whatwg] Reverse ordered lists
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:03:42 +0100 Lachlan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Simon Pieters wrote: > > > > > > The lack of start='' would make the numbers update as the list is > > filled with s. This allows both for simplicitly for short lists > > and correct incremental rendering for large lists. > > No, the lack of an explicit start attribute would make it start from > the default value: 1. It would then count down from there: > > 1. A > 0. B > -1. C > -2. D > Actually, the best route I can see is to not have a start attribute at all but to rely on the browser to automatically detect the amount of tags within an container and decrement from there. ie: <-- Start count from here. Red Orange Yellow Green Blue <-- Close tag detected, 5 tags counted. is rendered as starting from 5: 5. Red 4. Orange ...etc... and using a "step" value, for example, all the browser would need to do is multiply the total at the tag, and decrement that multiplied total by the "step" amount, making: render the list as: 25. Red 20. Orange 15. Yellow ...etc... It might mean more work for the browsers, but by experience something like this isn't too hard to implement.
