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,
Further comments after attending a talk at an IEEE security workshop (where
Ian's proposal was presented to various security experts):
1) I take back my suggestion about considering div sandbox=... versus
Ian's original iframe sandbox=... /. Ian's original approach, although
more restrictive,
FYI - We have had some discussion in and around the topic of better iframes
at OpenAjax Alliance:
http://www.openajax.org/runtime/wiki/Better_IFrames_Better_Sandboxing
However, people see shortcomings with all proposals listed on that page.
Our hope was that the HTML5 leaders would figure out a
)
public-webapi@w3.org
04/14/2008 09:34 cc
AMJon Ferraiolo/Menlo Park/[EMAIL
PROTECTED],
Close, Tyler J
I understand what Mark is getting at regarding multiple WGs, but I have
also observed that many of the same folks participate across the various
WAF and WebAPI activities, and there will likely be an information exchange
and participation benefit by having a single WG addressing multiple
I agree with Stewart that it would be a mistake to put innerHTML and other
such things on the Element interface. The Core XML DOM also supports XML
data files and should not include features that are specific to user
interface languages such as HTML.
I am not sure what the motivation is for
Hi Anne,
These names are fine with me.
Jon
ps - I can certainly sympathize with you having to make an editorial change
with which you disagree. I had to do this hundreds of time during my
editorial stints in W3C committees. The worst one of all was when the SVG
working decided against my very
Ian,
Editors are in charge of the words in a spec and simply make sure that the
will of the WG is reflected in the spec. I don't understand where there is
bad precedent in this. On the other hand, it would be very bad precedent if
editors attempted to override the will of the WG to make specs
how decisions are made:
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#Consensus. Maybe
these sections can be changed in the future, but until those changes occur,
WGs should follow W3C rules, not Ian's opinions (or anyone else's opinion)
about what the rules should be.
Jon
Jon Ferraiolo
that
the method name somehow include the letters Selector or CSS.
Jon Ferraiolo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web Architect, Emerging Technologies
IBM, Menlo Park, CA
Mobile: +1-650-926-5865
Dave Massy
(...); }
Jon
Jon Ferraiolo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web Architect, Emerging Technologies
IBM, Menlo Park, CA
Mobile: +1-650-926-5865
Bjoern Hoehrmann
[EMAIL
11 matches
Mail list logo
