[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I had posted this on my personal blog:
http://nczonline.net/blog/2008/2/28/thoughts_on_html_5. Ian requested
I join the mailing list to continue the discussion, so here it is:
Hi there Nicholas. Welcome to the list, and thanks for your comments.
I'll try to explain
Aaron Boodman wrote:
Passing booleans, numbers and strings is trivial using the current API.
Passing arrays of booleans and numbers is trivial too.
Passing objects, or arrays of strings, arrays, or objects, is more
complex, but as you point out, it can be done using JSON libraries. Since
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Given that everyone is now updating their postMessage() code anyway, I
wonder if it's possible to quickly make another minor tweak. The
proposal is to remove the source attribute from MessageEvent and replace
it with a reply()
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
Also, if we're going to be inconsistent in how current browsers and web
pages handle multiple bases, why not simply use the first base for
both href= and target=?
Done.
I realized another limitation. It is very
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 13:29:41 +0100, Jonas Sicking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally it's something I would be very reluctant to do. It would add
a whole lot of code for basically no benefit for web developers. I have
never heard of anyone that actually desired changing the base uri for
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Over the past few days I've been working on something similar:
http://hixie.ch/specs/dom/messages/0.9
So this draft makes one of the two endpoints cross scope, i.e. it is
created in one window, and are then passed over to the other. This
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 10:57 PM, Nicholas C. Zakas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From this description, it seems like the section/ element has little
use. If you're talking about writing articles, most authors consider the
start and end of sections as implicitly defined by headings. Making this
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Over the past few days I've been working on something similar:
http://hixie.ch/specs/dom/messages/0.9
So this draft makes one of the two endpoints cross scope, i.e. it is
created in one window, and are then passed over to the
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 13:29:41 +0100, Jonas Sicking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally it's something I would be very reluctant to do. It would
add a whole lot of code for basically no benefit for web developers. I
have never heard of anyone that actually desired
On Mar 1, 2008, at 4:29 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
Also, if we're going to be inconsistent in how current browsers
and web
pages handle multiple bases, why not simply use the first
base for
both href= and
On Mar 1, 2008, at 4:20 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 13:29:41 +0100, Jonas Sicking
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally it's something I would be very reluctant to do. It
would add a whole lot of code for basically no benefit for web
developers. I
On Saturday 2008-03-01 17:12 -0800, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
I'd propose that resolution is always done against the base in effect at
the time the URI is resolved. So changing the base would never trigger a
reload short of another action.
That means you'd need to define when every URI is
On Saturday 2008-03-01 17:08 -0800, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
How about requiring that the base used is the one in effect when a given
relative URI is resolved, and define that URIs for resource-loading
elements are resolved at the time the relevant attribute is set or parsed
(but for
Thanks, I'm happy to be here. :)
Thanks for a clear explanation of the irrelevant attribute. If you see the
other thread about this, I think we've all now agreed that the purpose for the
attribute makes sense, but the name is another story. It's difficult to spell
for most people and really
Reading your description makes me think that you're more displeased with the
hn/ elements than you are happy with the section/ element. I've never had
issues promoting headers or moving content around, and I'm not clear that
section/ would help in any of these circumstances. Nested sections
On Mar 1, 2008, at 6:18 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
On Saturday 2008-03-01 17:08 -0800, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
How about requiring that the base used is the one in effect when a
given
relative URI is resolved, and define that URIs for resource-loading
elements are resolved at the time the
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
I updated the proposal recently (in response to similar feedback from
Adam or Collin) to say that when you pass an EndPoint through
postMessage(), what happens is that a clone EndPoint is made for
delivery on the other side, and the EndPoint
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Mar 1, 2008, at 6:18 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
On Saturday 2008-03-01 17:08 -0800, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
How about requiring that the base used is the one in effect when a given
relative URI is resolved, and define that URIs for resource-loading
elements are
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
I updated the proposal recently (in response to similar feedback from
Adam or Collin) to say that when you pass an EndPoint through
postMessage(), what happens is that a clone EndPoint is made for
delivery on the other side, and the
19 matches
Mail list logo
