Re: [whatwg] HTML5 History Management

2009-08-05 Thread Mike Wilson
Nathan Hammond wrote: I should have stated this one with a goal: the ability to ensure that the popstate event always fires with a full understanding of the (app/page) state when navigating through history. This would be lost when a user manually changes the hash. [...] Any other

Re: [whatwg] Spec comments, sections 1-2

2009-08-05 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 02:01:59 +0200, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote: I'm pretty sure that character encoding support in browsers is more of a collect them all kind of thing than really based on content that requires it, to be honest. Really? I think a lot of them are actually used. If you know

[whatwg] Editorial section 4.8.7

2009-08-05 Thread Elliotte Rusty Harold
so that legacy video plugins can be tried, or to show text to the users of these older browser informing them of how to access the video contents. these older browser -- these older browsers -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elh...@ibiblio.org

Re: [whatwg] Section 3.3.3.2 Attribute value normalization and title attributes

2009-08-05 Thread Ian Hickson
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:18 AM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote: I don't really see why the minor difficulties in the XML syntax would affect the semantics here. Could you elaborate on your concern? What problem would changing this solve?

[whatwg] AppCache online whitelist wildcard bypasses restriction on scheme

2009-08-05 Thread 胡慧鋒
Hi, In the AppCache section of the HTML5 spec, the new wildcard value '*' for the online whitelist section allows one to 'whitelist all' regardless of scheme. However, the spec requires a URL in the online whitelist section to have the same scheme as the manifest URL. Seems like the new wildcard

[whatwg] Reading spec without boxes

2009-08-05 Thread Elliotte Rusty Harold
I suspect I'm missing something obvious but is there a way to turn off the little status boxes in the left margins on the draft spec? They seem to cover some of the text I'd like to read. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elh...@ibiblio.org

Re: [whatwg] Reading spec without boxes

2009-08-05 Thread Ian Hickson
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: I suspect I'm missing something obvious but is there a way to turn off the little status boxes in the left margins on the draft spec? They seem to cover some of the text I'd like to read. If they cover up any of the text, that is a bug. What

[whatwg] Section 1.4: Editorial: Avoid passive voice

2009-08-05 Thread Elliotte Rusty Harold
Section 1.4 currently states: Work on HTML 5 originally started in late 2003, as a proof of concept to show that it was possible to extend HTML 4's forms to provide many of the features that XForms 1.0 introduced, without requiring browsers to implement rendering engines that were incompatible

Re: [whatwg] Reading spec without boxes

2009-08-05 Thread Elliotte Rusty Harold
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote: On Wed, 5 Aug 2009, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: I suspect I'm missing something obvious but is there a way to turn off the little status boxes in the left margins on the draft spec? They seem to cover some of the text I'd like

[whatwg] Editorial, section 1.5

2009-08-05 Thread Elliotte Rusty Harold
I suggest simply deleting It must be admitted that many aspects of HTML appear at first glance to be nonsensical and inconsistent. I would disagree with nonsensical, and in any case this sentence adds nothing to the text. However if this sentence is retained, at least deleted It must be admitted

[whatwg] Editorial section 1.5.1 serialising

2009-08-05 Thread Elliotte Rusty Harold
completely serialising the execution of all scripts. -- serializing (i.e. use the American spelling used throughout the rest of the document.) -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elh...@ibiblio.org