Anne pointed out to me that Yehuda had already proposed a very similar
change to the spec on November 4th, 2011:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14694
The only difference appears to be new proposal handles head, body, SVG, and
MathML elements.
Also, I think Anne convinced me that
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:39:53 +0200, Rafael Weinstein rafa...@google.com
wrote:
Here's the approach for picking the implied context element:
Let the first start tag token imply the context element. The start tag
= implied context element is as follows:
caption, colgroup, thead, tbody, tfoot
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:05:28 +0200, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
Also, I think Anne convinced me that it's better to deduce the insertion
mode from the first element than inventing a new insertion mode (I've
asked him to post his reasoning).
1) You cannot look at various elements and
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 20:07:57 +0200, Bronislav Klučka
bronislav.klu...@bauglir.com wrote:
FormData can be useful not only to be sent via XHR, but essentially to
hold form values easily, e.g. you can have settings form (that you do
not need to send any where = you do not need to store it or
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 15:04:48 +0200, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
wrote:
Anne, Brad, All - does it appear it would be useful for WebApps and
WebAppSec to schedule some joint meeting time on May 2 re CORS (the LC
deadline is May 1 http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-cors-20120403/)?
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 14:40:33 +0200, Hobbs, Timothy timothy.ho...@ca.com
wrote:
Is my interpretation of the XMLHttpRequest specification flawed, is
there a need for the browser behavior to change, or is my requirement
just not serious enough?
The idea is that if you provide user/password,
On 26.4.2012 13:55, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 20:07:57 +0200, Bronislav Klučka
bronislav.klu...@bauglir.com wrote:
FormData can be useful not only to be sent via XHR, but essentially
to hold form values easily, e.g. you can have settings form (that you
do not need to send
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16866
Anne ann...@opera.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||public-webapps@w3.org
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:29:44 +0200, Bronislav Klučka
bronislav.klu...@bauglir.com wrote:
On 26.4.2012 13:55, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Why would you not simply use a JavaScript object for this?
Of course you want to use JS object for this in case of storing in e.g.
IDB... the point is, how
This is a Request for Comments for the April 26 Last Call Working Draft
of Server-sent Events:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-eventsource-20120426/
The comment deadline is May 17 and all comments should be sent to the
public-webapps@w3.org list.
On 26.4.2012 16:15, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:29:44 +0200, Bronislav Klučka
bronislav.klu...@bauglir.com wrote:
On 26.4.2012 13:55, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Why would you not simply use a JavaScript object for this?
Of course you want to use JS object for this in case
The comment deadline for the Widget Updates LCWD ended April 19. No
comments were submitted for that document so this is a Call for
Consensus to publish a Candidate Recommendation of the spec using the LC
as the basis http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-widgets-updates-20120322/.
The Exit Criteria
I totally misread the purpose of templates beforehand -- template/s act
more like a mixin rather than a fill-in. It also reflects in what Tab wrote
that it's still vague how the two notions - that of text templates and that
of mixins for building components - are to be mixed together, if at all.
-Original Message-
From: Anne van Kesteren [mailto:ann...@opera.com]
Sent: 26 April 2012 14:38
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 14:40:33 +0200, Hobbs, Timothy
timothy.ho...@ca.com
wrote:
Is my interpretation of the XMLHttpRequest specification flawed, is
there a need for the browser behavior
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Yuval Sadan sadan.yu...@gmail.com wrote:
I totally misread the purpose of templates beforehand -- template/s act
more like a mixin rather than a fill-in. It also reflects in what Tab wrote
that it's still vague how the two notions - that of text templates and
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 19:00:45 +0200, Hobbs, Timothy timothy.ho...@ca.com
wrote:
Does this mean that if we had tests we could get the browsers to follow
the spec or does this mean that the spec is going to describe the
existing (imo incorrect) behaviour?
I'm interested in having the behaviour
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Simon Pieters sim...@opera.com wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:39:53 +0200, Rafael Weinstein rafa...@google.com
wrote:
Any other HTML tagName = HTMLBodyElement
Isn't this one redundant with the last step?
No, this captures known HTML tagnames, so that HTML can
James, Greg, All - FYI, the meeting host reports a voice conference
bridge may not be available but regardless, we will use the #webapps
channel for the meeting.
Web Intents: May 1 13:30-14:30 (US West Coast time).
-AB
On 4/11/12 2:33 PM, ext James Hawkins wrote:
Great, thanks!
On Tue, Apr
On Apr 24, 2012, at 7:00 PM, David Herman wrote:
On Apr 24, 2012, at 3:53 PM, David Herman wrote:
On Apr 12, 2012, at 2:48 PM, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
I intend to add ArrayBufferView as a parameter to the Blob constructor .
Would it be possible also to allow passing an ArrayBuffer with
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14086
Ian 'Hixie' Hickson i...@hixie.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Henri,
Does this address the concerns you raised earlier?
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Simon Pieters sim...@opera.com wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:39:53 +0200, Rafael Weinstein rafa...@google.com
wrote:
Any
On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 00:13:42 +0200, Arun Ranganathan
aranganat...@mozilla.com wrote:
The constructor will switch to use ArrayBufferView in lieu of
ArrayBuffer, but the read method exposed on FileReader and
FileReaderSync will read files into memory as ArrayBuffers.
Since the constructor is
22 matches
Mail list logo
