Hi Ted,
On 21.01.2011 23:49, Ted Hardie wrote:
This rationale isn't in the draft, nor is the token legacy-compat.
...because HTML5 defines it... (I think)
But the question with this how you will get interoperability. If there is a
token registry, then these should populate that registry
On 21.01.2011 18:37, Julian Reschke wrote:
...
That said, I note that HTML5 has a number of what it calls willful
violations
of the URI spec, in which it counsels the reading who actually knows what
Sadly.
...
BTW: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/56. We should try to
improve this,
My thought right now is perhaps of an OS update that includes a background
client which tries very hard to reduce the effect of breakage or delay caused
by IPv6 routes that are dead, DNS queries that don't go anywhere, and delays
caused by slow transition techniques. It couldn't be
What nightmare? I find IPv6 dual stack works just fine.
However, see draft-wing-v6ops-happy-eyeballs-ipv6
Regards
Brian Carpenter
On 2011-01-23 04:34, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
My thought right now is perhaps of an OS update that includes a background
client which tries very hard to
On 22 Jan 2011, at 18:48, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
What nightmare? I find IPv6 dual stack works just fine.
It does, when your connectivity is working. Unfortunately, the 0.1% (or
whatever it is) of users whose connectivity isn't working seem to be sufficient
in number to prevent large sites
Hi,I agree with Brian. What nightmare? It only seems as a nightmare until you don't have it in place.It is not about the transition itself, rather about the conceptual fact. First off all, the common belief is for 0.05% of brokenness (most of it coming from old version of Mac OS X, some from old
