Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen revision I

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Jeremy Apthorp wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Robert O'Callahan > wrote: > >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Jeremy Apthorp wrote: >> >>> One problem with the existing implementation in WebKit of fullscreen is >>> that it is possible to focus with T

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen CSS

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. > wrote: >> Hm, why would it require stacking-level changes?  One obvious way to >> get it to act "correctly" is to make it wrap around the element, like >> the old ::outside pseudo-elemen

Re: [whatwg] HTML5 video seeking

On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 00:49:32 +0100, Aaron Colwell wrote: Hi, I was looking at the seeking algorithm and had a question about step 10. 10. Wait until the user agent has established whether or not the

Re: [whatwg] HTML5 video seeking

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14/11/11 03:49 PM, Aaron Colwell wrote: > Does this mean the user agent must resume playback at the exact > location specified? Maybe you can muck with the 'media.seekable' TimeRanges object to only show keyframes? Otherwise, it kind of sounds li

[whatwg] HTML5 video seeking

Hi, I was looking at the seeking algorithm and had a question about step 10. 10. Wait until the user agent has established whether or not the media data for the new playback position is available, and, if

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen CSS

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > Hm, why would it require stacking-level changes? One obvious way to > get it to act "correctly" is to make it wrap around the element, like > the old ::outside pseudo-element proposal. Then it's trivial. > The CP says "The dialog and its

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen CSS

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. > wrote: >> >> I think we should go the route that the element did in Ted's >> change proposal and have a pseudo-element that gets created when an >> element is fullscreened.  Simple and

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen CSS

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > I think we should go the route that the element did in Ted's > change proposal and have a pseudo-element that gets created when an > element is fullscreened. Simple and easy, and trivial for the author > to manipulate to get most effects

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen revision I

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Jeremy Apthorp wrote: > >> One problem with the existing implementation in WebKit of fullscreen is >> that it is possible to focus with Tab elements that are not contained >> within the fullscreened eleme

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen revision I

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Jeremy Apthorp wrote: > One problem with the existing implementation in WebKit of fullscreen is > that it is possible to focus with Tab elements that are not contained > within the fullscreened element. This is a problem for assistive devices in > particular. > >

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen CSS

On 11/15/11 11:25 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: UA does not have an important level. In Gecko it actually does: it's a level that overrides the user important level. Such a level is sort of needed in some cases, no matter what you actually choose to call it. -Boris

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen CSS

On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 21:25:38 +0100, Robert O'Callahan wrote: On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: I have removed background:black as the way the rendering is defined at the moment is that it cannot be overridden unless !important is used. That's not ideal for backgro

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen revision I

One problem with the existing implementation in WebKit of fullscreen is that it is possible to focus with Tab elements that are not contained within the fullscreened element. This is a problem for assistive devices in particular. Perhaps we should specify that elements outside the fullscreened sub

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen CSS

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Robert O'Callahan > wrote: > >> Having the rest of the page visible under the fullscreen element is not >> expected and I think we should default to avoiding it. background:black >> seemed like the right

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen CSS

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > Having the rest of the page visible under the fullscreen element is not > expected and I think we should default to avoiding it. background:black > seemed like the right thing for video and a reasonable default for other > kinds of elemen

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen revision I

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 1:27 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > Sorry for the late reply. Getting to and from TPAC and TPAC itself is > basically the reason. I hope you understand. Yeah no worries mate. About your nested-fullscreen proposal, I do not see how > > To fix the nested cases, I suggest

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen CSS

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > I have removed background:black as the way the rendering is defined at the > moment is that it cannot be overridden unless !important is used. That's > not ideal for backgrounds. Can you elaborate on this? > Since no color was define

[whatwg] Fullscreen CSS

I have removed background:black as the way the rendering is defined at the moment is that it cannot be overridden unless !important is used. That's not ideal for backgrounds. Since no color was defined that did not help either. I added margin:0; box-sizing:border-box so the height/width dec

[whatwg] and tags need to have volume attribute.

I know that it's possible to manipulate the volume attribute with javascript. Many internet forums allow HTML tags but prohibit javascripts, however. If I was able to set the initial volume with volume attribute of those tags, I would be able to set the volume without javascript.

Re: [whatwg] Fullscreen revision I

Sorry for the late reply. Getting to and from TPAC and TPAC itself is basically the reason. I hope you understand. On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 04:06:28 +0200, Robert O'Callahan wrote: When you say "No longer any attempts at integrating with "F11 fullscreen"", do you mean to rule out the possibilit