On Tue, 27 May 2008, Doug Schepers wrote:
We have discussed adding consideration for event handler DOM
attribute in the DOM3 Events spec, such that a host language can
define what that means in its context
That would be great, I'd love to offload this part of HTML5. Do you
On May 27, 2008, at 11:56 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
(In particular, I think we really need to get over the concept of but
that's a host language issue or that doesn't belong in my spec
and so
on -- we're defining a single platform here, it isn't useful for us
to be
declining responsibility
FWIW - I generally agree with Maciej's perspective. In the early days of
SVG when I was authoring many of the proposals that (after discussion and
subsequent modification) ended up in the SVG spec, what I was thinking was
that HTML and SVG shared all of the same infrastructure (e.g., scripting,
Hallvord R. M. Steen wrote:
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EVENT TYPES
There are two types of key events:
* Hardware reference events. The keydown and keyup events report that a
key was pressed down and released. These events include keyboard
reference information but do not confirm what character(s)
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Hi,
Yesterday someone contacted me on IRC about implementing
XMLHttpRequest.upload from XMLHttpRequest Level 2.
It was me :)
I'll go through XHR2 and PE tomorrow and give possibly more comments.
It turns out that the
Progress Events specification is not
On May 28, 2008, at 12:47 PM, Hallvord R. M. Steen wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2008 16:32:22 +0200, Olli Pettay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
* Text insertion events. The keypress and textInput events include
complete information about the character the input is generating
textInput isn't DOM0
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 23 May 2008, Olli Pettay wrote:
So I'm not sure the errata for this issue is actually needed.
It seems to me that everyone agrees that insertNode() was always intended
to insert a node _into_ the range, and that the collapsed case was simply
lost between the cracks
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Jonas Sicking wrote:
There's a big difference to that and to what I'm proposing. With what's
in bug 80713 you're still limited to a box that basically doesn't take
part of the outer page at all. For example in the table example in my
original post the headers of the
