On 24.03.2009, at 8:09, Ian Hickson wrote:
(I would expect Firefox, Safari, and Chrome to follow suit; Firefox
for
compatibility, and Safari and Chrome for privacy.)
FWIW, WebKit returns just the file name now.
- WBR, Alexey Proskuryakov
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Alex Henrie wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
I agree. Unfortunately, sometimes we are unable to make choices that
end up with a nice language. :-(
Well, why not? Is HTML5 supposed to be perfectly compatible with HTML4?
No, but
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Jonas Sicking wrote:
And that's not even touching on the stack space limitations that you're
quite likely to run in to when you
Ian Hickson wrote:
That's encouraging.
According to Microsoft:
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2009/03/20/rtm-platform-changes.aspx
...the problem was with a significant number of sites (e.g. education
products, several movie sharing sites, etc) and devices (e.g. popular home
routers).
I've updated the specs as follows:
- removed localStorage from Web Workers for now.
- extended the implicit lock mechanism that we had for storage to also
cover document.cookie, and made the language more explicit about how
it works.
- added navigator.releaseLock().
On Fri, 20 Mar
Ian Hickson wrote:
Maybe someone from Opera could let us know which sites caused them to do
this? Was it many, as with Microsoft?
I did a quick search through our bugs and found this site that breaks if
only the filename is returned because there's an onsubmit script that
checks the value
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
- extended the implicit lock mechanism that we had for storage to also
cover document.cookie, and made the language more explicit about how
it works.
That's basically good. It's possible that people might want to
Which sites? Any site that *requires* a Windows path clearly isn't
interested in inter-operating with other browsers/platforms; heck, it means
they've limited their testing to just Windows/IE. Don't punish the rest of
us for their poor testing/programming.
My friend ! Welcome to the
Hi Emil,
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 1:39 AM, Emil Tin e...@koblo.com wrote:
i understand that SVG is meant for advanced timing etc.
Maybe rather SMIL - that's where SVG got it from.
but it would be very useful to have a simple mechanism in html/javascript
for playing sounds together.
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
https://www.freedfm.com/
Specifically, the following code:
if((strFileName.indexOf(\\) == -1) (strFileName.indexOf(/) == -1))
{
alert(Please do not type your filename. Click Browse and upload your
zip file.);
document.fileupload.UploadFileData.focus();
return
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 15:07:39 +0100, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
Sure it is. You just need a browser that'll allow you to do a firmware
upgrade to fix it. Which means that if one gets such an upgrade shipped
before all browsers stop sending paths, things seem to be ok. I agree
So instead of fixing the web, we're fixing the spec (and thus implementing
fakepath in browsers)?
- Original Message -
From: Lachlan Hunt lachlan.h...@lachy.id.au
To: Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch
Cc: wha...@whatwg.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 11:00 AM
Subject: Re: [whatwg]
Randy Drielinger wrote:
So instead of fixing the web, we're fixing the spec (and thus
implementing fakepath in browsers)?
It's purely a question of what browser makers are prepared to implement.
The spec has to reflect a consensus amongst browser makers so that it
actualy gets implemented,
Am Dienstag, den 24.03.2009, 16:06 +0100 schrieb James Graham:
If you don't
want the fakepath thing (and I agree it is ugly), try convincing the
known-broken sites to change (citing the fact that they may break in
Firefox could give you quite some leverage here).
From what I remember,
Ian Hickson wrote on 3/24/2009 12:09 AM:
The original plan was to just have the filename. Unfortunately, it turns
out that if you do that, there are certain sites that break, because they
expect the path (and they expect a Windows path, no less). This is why
Opera and IE8 return a fake
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 8:15 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 15:07:39 +0100, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
Sure it is. You just need a browser that'll allow you to do a firmware
upgrade to fix it. Which means that if one gets such an upgrade shipped
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 17:23:20 +0100, Alex Henrie alexhenri...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 8:15 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com
wrote:
Microsoft did. And nothing changed in well over a year. (They say so in
a comment on the blog post.)
Perhaps the buggy code was only sent
Bil Corry wrote on 3/24/2009 11:01 AM:
Ian Hickson wrote on 3/24/2009 12:09 AM:
The original plan was to just have the filename. Unfortunately, it
turns out that if you do that, there are certain sites that break,
because they expect the path (and they expect a Windows path, no
less). This
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
Example: A site lets a user upload a file and write some comments
associated with that file. On the browser side, a new input element is
dynamically created with the name and id Notes for
C:\fakepath\upload.txt. On the
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Alex Henrie alexhenri...@gmail.com wrote:
I mean, if the browser used C:\fakepath\upload.txt in both
JavaScript and DOM then there would be no problem in this example. But
mixing C:\fakepath\upload.txt and upload.txt creates additional
complications.
Whoops,
On Mar 24, 2009, at 12:31 AM, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
On 24.03.2009, at 8:09, Ian Hickson wrote:
(I would expect Firefox, Safari, and Chrome to follow suit; Firefox
for
compatibility, and Safari and Chrome for privacy.)
FWIW, WebKit returns just the file name now.
It should also
I'm trying to understand the ApplicationCache spec as it applies to workers,
but I didn't find anything promising when I searched the archives. Is
ApplicationCache intended to apply to workers? The application cache API
isn't available to workers, but I'm guessing the intent is that if an
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
By the way, the spec doesn't yet require the blocking behavior. I
couldn't work out how to do it. Could you elaborate on when exactly in
the process the style sheet is waited on? Does it happen for all
scripts? For example,
23 matches
Mail list logo
