On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 09:18:18 +0200, Matthew Raymond
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ROBO Design wrote:
<...>
I think the idea is that the element is defining the icon
to appear for any element that has a |command| attribute defined. That
said, you could probably replace it with the following
On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:31:51 +0600, Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What is or what isn't technically simple to implement in existing
implementations should perhaps not be what decides how specifications
are
written. It is clear that it is possible to implement p
Flow of events:
- When the page is loaded, and an anchor event listener exists, the
anchor event will be fired after the load event. If there is no anchor
in the URL, the event.anchorName property will be an empty string.
- When an anchor link is clicked, the anchor event listener (if exists)
On Mar 2, 2006, at 9:21 AM, ROBO Design wrote:
...
I'd highly recommend not to define the icon attribute, or any other
attribute with possible relation to presentation. This fuels
accusations that what this specification defines is not "as semantical
as" the XHTML 2 specification
If that'
Le Thu, 02 Mar 2006 17:03:43 +0200, Matthew Paul Thomas
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit:
On Mar 2, 2006, at 9:21 AM, ROBO Design wrote:
...
I'd highly recommend not to define the icon attribute, or any other
attribute with possible relation to presentation. This fuels
accusations that what th
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>
> Would it be possible to use (public) CVS or Subversion for the drafts
> that are created so its easier to track changes in the document?
Sure.
http://svn.whatwg.org/
Please remind me to check stuff in if I forget.
> Best thing would be if ther
Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
The difference between and ... type="radio"> is purely presentational. The difference between multiple> and ... is
purely presentational. ... That doesn't mean they shouldn't all exist.
They *shouldn't* all exist. There should only be and multiple>, stylable wit
