On Oct 12, 2011, at 4:12 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> Given that Gecko is implementing the unprefixed getItems (see
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=591467), I don't see benefits in
> implementing with webkit prefix. Also, it's still under a compile-time flag
> so we can prefix it b
On 10/12/2011 4:12 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
Given that Gecko is implementing the unprefixed getItems (see
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=591467), I don't see
benefits in implementing with webkit prefix. Also, it's still under a
compile-time flag so we can prefix it before enabling
Given that Gecko is implementing the unprefixed getItems (see
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=591467), I don't see benefits
in implementing with webkit prefix. Also, it's still under a compile-time
flag so we can prefix it before enabling the flag by default if we strongly
feel like it
Hi All,
Thanks for your valuable inputs regarding Microdata implementation.
I have uploaded the patch for basic implementation of document.getItems()
DOM API.
Bug id: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68610
Could someone please review the patch, and let me know the review comments.
Thanks
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
> On 9/22/2011 2:13 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 23 Sep 2011, Dean Jackson wrote:
>>
>>> However, isn't prefixing designed to avoid incompatibilities in spec
>>> changes, not incompatibilities between implementations? Ensuring no
>>
On 9/22/2011 2:13 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 23 Sep 2011, Dean Jackson wrote:
However, isn't prefixing designed to avoid incompatibilities in spec
changes, not incompatibilities between implementations? Ensuring no
conflicts in implementations doesn't matter too much if the spec
changes.
It
On Fri, 23 Sep 2011, Dean Jackson wrote:
>
> However, isn't prefixing designed to avoid incompatibilities in spec
> changes, not incompatibilities between implementations? Ensuring no
> conflicts in implementations doesn't matter too much if the spec
> changes.
It's designed to ensure that aut
On 23/09/2011, at 5:59 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Sep 2011, Charles Pritchard wrote:
>>
>> Regardless of an ENABLE flag, be certain to use the webkit prefix.
>> document.getItems(typeNames) turns into
>> document.webkitGetItems(typeNames)
>>
>> Note that it's easy to implement this in
On Thu, 22 Sep 2011, Charles Pritchard wrote:
>
> Regardless of an ENABLE flag, be certain to use the webkit prefix.
> document.getItems(typeNames) turns into
> document.webkitGetItems(typeNames)
>
> Note that it's easy to implement this in pure javascript as a prototype.
Assuming the patch imp
Regardless of an ENABLE flag, be certain to use the webkit prefix.
document.getItems(typeNames) turns into
document.webkitGetItems(typeNames)
Note that it's easy to implement this in pure javascript as a prototype.
-Charles
On 9/22/2011 8:00 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
Just so I understand, you'r
Just so I understand, you're talking about the DOM APIs for
interacting with microdata, right? I know there was some controversy
in the HTML working group about Microdata versus RDFa. It's not 100%
clear to me which of those technologies will "win out" in the end, but
it seems valuable to impleme
Hi,
I have been looking at HTML5 Microdata implementation in Webkit.
Microdata is a specification used to nest semantics within existing content
on web pages. Search engines, web crawlers, and browsers can extract and
process Microdata from a web page and use it to provide a richer browsing
expe
12 matches
Mail list logo
