Re: [whatwg] Link.onload; defer on style, depends

On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > Ian Hickson wrote: > > The spec requires the page 'load' event to be fired asynchronously. > > (There's no black-box way to distinguish this from the case of waiting > > for the other 'load' events to have fired, as far as I can tell.) > > Phrased that

Re: [whatwg] "C:\fakepath\" in HTML5

On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Randy Drielinger wrote: > > With the risk of not being compliant with other OS's, but isn't using > file://localpath/ (so using file://localpath/ > by default) the solution for the original suggestion? > > This ensures not breaking anything on existing websites and is a far

[whatwg] Image.src and file://

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, ddailey wrote: > > If we make a puzzle of 2n-squared minus 1 (e.g. a puzzle of 15) in which > web site visitors can slide tiles around through a grid, we might wish > to detect, through script, when the puzzle has been "solved." This means > interrogating the value of Image

Re: [whatwg] Link.onload; defer on style, depends

Boris Zbarsky wrote: Ian Hickson wrote: The spec requires the page 'load' event to be fired asynchronously. (There's no black-box way to distinguish this from the case of waiting for the other 'load' events to have fired, as far as I can tell.) Phrased that way, yes. Or did I misunderstand

Re: [whatwg] Link.onload; defer on style, depends

Ian Hickson wrote: The spec requires the page 'load' event to be fired asynchronously. (There's no black-box way to distinguish this from the case of waiting for the other 'load' events to have fired, as far as I can tell.) Phrased that way, yes. But maybe I wasn't clear on the exact behavior

Re: [whatwg] registerProtocolHandler() in HTML 5 is not sufficient for real use

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Mithgol the Webmaster wrote: > > For a real web application dealing with non-standard URL schemes, having > just registerProtocolHandler() is not enough for effective management of > URLs, there should be some other function (or, better, an HTTP request > header) to provide

Re: [whatwg] Link.onload; defer on style, depends

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Sean Hogan wrote: > Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Sun, 15 Mar 2009, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > > Sean Hogan wrote: > > > > > > > > > > This is a request for the link element to be given an onload > > > > > attribute. > > > > > > > > And presumably a readyState property. > > > > > >

Re: [whatwg] Link.onload; defer on style, depends

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > On Sat, 14 Mar 2009, Greg Houston wrote: > > > On a side note, I can actually attach a functioning onload event to > > > a link element in Internet Explorer. Firefox, Safari, and Chrome > > > ignore my attempt, and Opera will fire the onload event but

Re: [whatwg] Web Addresses vs Legacy Extended IRI

On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Julian Reschke wrote: > Ian Hickson wrote: > > > > Note that the Web addresses draft isn't specific to HTML5. It is > > intended to apply to any user agent that interacts with Web content, > > not just Web browsers and HTML. (That's why we took it out of HTML5.) > > Be care

Re: [whatwg] Web Addresses vs Legacy Extended IRI

On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, Giovanni Campagna wrote: > > > > As far as I can tell the LEIRI requirements aren't actually an > > accurate description of what browsers do. > > My question was more specific: what are the *techical differences* > betwen LEIRI and Web Addresses? I don't think there's a com

[whatwg] Toggling Attributes

On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, Christoph P�per wrote: > Ian Hickson (2009-02-13): > > There are three of these attributes so far: > > > > autocomplete = on/off > > contenteditable = true/false > > draggable = true/false > > It would be nice, actually, from an author perspective at least, if all > of

Re: [whatwg] Worker and message port feedback

On Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: > > > > I do not think there is a problem with providing self.cookie in > > workers, exposing the cookie of the script. However, currently there > > doesn't seem to be much support for this. > > > > W

Re: [whatwg] size attribute

On Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Kristof Zelechovski wrote: > > For implementors: > The size attribute gives the average number of glyphs that the reader of the > page will be able to see when the control is rendered and completely filled > with text. (This depends on the language of the control and the curre

Re: [whatwg] MAP should be transparent

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Kristof Zelechovski wrote: > > The MAP element should be transparent. > > If it contains only AREA elements, it is invisible and it can belong to > phrasing content; it is best placed alongside the IMG element that uses > it; even the example >

Re: [whatwg] Reconstructing formatting elements (8.2.5)

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 01:15:30 + (UTC), Ian Hickson wrote: > > The behavior HTML5 requires is thus intentional for compat with IE. > > We could avoid cloning quite as many by eating whitespace after a > table-related tag (, , etc) by resetting the table taint flag at > those points... would

Re: [whatwg] multiple s in

On Thu, 19 Mar 2009, ddailey wrote: > > I recall a while back trying to figure out how to style columns of a > complex table that occured below the nth row of a table. I discovered > that if I just used and moved those 's down to the > appropriate row, IE was okay with that and did what I wante

Re: [whatwg] several messages

On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Rikkert Koppes wrote: > > The example presented at the section element definition [1]. The given > markup could be ok, however, with a look at the actual contents (a nice > essay about apples), the h1 elements found in the section elements > should actually be h2 elements, gi

Re: [whatwg] Out-of-document media elements delaying the load event

On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > > Should media elements that are loading, haven't reached > HAVE_CURRENT_DATA, but are not actually in the document delay the load > event for their owner document? Yes. > The spec doesn't say elements that delay the load event have to be in > th

Re: [whatwg] /RemoteEventSource wierdness

On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, Michael Nordman wrote: > > > One key feature that IMHO is needed in this area is sharing of events > > between pages/windows > > A cross-page event broadcast facility is co-mingled with the DOMStorage > corner of the spec (see 5.11.1.5 The storage event). > > It may be nice

Re: [whatwg] dl definition issue

On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, Rikkert Koppes wrote: > > At the dl element definition [1] > > a) "The order of the list of groups, and of the names and values within each > group, may be significant." > b) The |dl > | element > is inappropria

Re: [whatwg] Reconstructing formatting elements (8.2.5)

On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, Kartikaya Gupta wrote: > > I have a question about how formatting elements are reconstructed when > dealing with tainted tables. Specifically, the fine folks running > westjet.com stuck some malformed HTML on their site that I've boiled > down to the following snippet: > >

Re: [whatwg] Parsing RFC3339 constructs

On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:59:11 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote: >> - the literal letters T and Z must be uppercase > > Any technical reason why they have to? Any reason why they don't? > It would help people understand what the difference to RFC 3339 is. Indeed, and this is exactly what we did in

Re: [whatwg] Usage "one of more" v. "one or more" (was: Re: Editorial for application/x-www-form-urlencoded encoding algorithm)

On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Corprew Reed wrote: > > This section also contains "one of more characters" and should be "one or more > characters." > > This occurs in 2.4.3.1, 2.4.3.2, and 4.10.15.3[.6] in > http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/ > > "One of more resources" occurs in 5.8.2 and

Re: [whatwg] When closing the browser

Ian Hickson schrieb: > One option would be to have an attribute, say , Maybe is more suitable? > which > causes the user agent to ping the site when the window is closed and there > are no other windows open to the same origin. > > Of course this would break if the other window in question w

Re: [whatwg] Editorial for application/x-www-form-urlencoded encoding algorithm

On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Kristof Zelechovski wrote: > > Regarding 4.10 > > Forms - HTML 5: > > Is: > > 1. For each character in the entry's name and value that cannot be > expressed using the selected character encoding, re

Re: [whatwg] When closing the browser

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: > One option would be to have an attribute, say , which > causes the user agent to ping the site when the window is closed and there > are no other windows open to the same origin. > > Of course this would break if the other window in question wa

Re: [whatwg] When closing the browser

On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Bil Corry wrote: > Ian Hickson wrote on 4/24/2009 6:36 PM: > >>> > >>> Why do session cookies not address this already? > >> > >> I think there are still scenarios where it would be valuable for the > >> server to know *exactly when* the user logged out. One example would >

Re: [whatwg] Script/parser interaction bug?

On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Kartikaya Gupta wrote: > On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 04:01:12 + (UTC), Ian Hickson wrote: > > > > It seems the problem is that when the pending external script is executed, > > the pause flag isn't set to false afterwards. I've put the > > increment/decrement steps around that

Re: [whatwg] Script/parser interaction bug?

On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 04:01:12 + (UTC), Ian Hickson wrote: > > It seems the problem is that when the pending external script is executed, > the pause flag isn't set to false afterwards. I've put the > increment/decrement steps around that too, so that the flag becomes false > earlier. This s

Re: [whatwg] When closing the browser

Ian Hickson wrote on 4/24/2009 6:36 PM: >>> Why do session cookies not address this already? >> I think there are still scenarios where it would be valuable for the >> server to know *exactly when* the user logged out. One example would be >> those "XY is online" badges you see in many internet

Re: [whatwg] Parsing RFC3339 constructs

Michael(tm) Smith wrote: > Ian Hickson , 2009-04-25 05:35 +: > >> On Fri, 2 Jan 2009, Asbjørn Ulsberg wrote: >>> Reading the spec, I have to wonder: Does HTML5 need to specify as much >>> as it does inline? Can't more of it be referenced to ISO 8601 or even >>> better; RFC 3339? I really fan