Dan Brickley writes:
> Smylers wrote:
>
> > Martin McEvoy writes:
> >
> > > !! rel-author doesn't mean the same as rev-made eg:
> >
> > In which cases doesn't it? If A is the author of B then B was made by
> > A, surely?
>
> Then
Martin McEvoy writes:
> Smylers wrote:
>
> > Martin McEvoy writes:
> >
> > > !! rel-author doesn't mean the same as rev-made eg:
> >
> > In which cases doesn't it? If A is the author of B then B was made by
> > A, surely?
>
> Its
Mike writes:
> Smylers wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >
> > > "... it'd be faster just to send the URL of the page which
> > > contains hypertext links to all the formats; at which point we no
> > > longer care whether those
y rev=stylesheet?
> > We therefore determined that authors would benefit more from the
> > validator complaining about this attribute instead of supporting it.
> >
> > Anything that could be done with rev="" can be done with rel="" with
> > an opposite keyword, so this omission should be easy to handle.
>
> There are some cases where that is just not possible.
Which?
Smylers
if I wanted to mail somebody pointing out a discrepency
> between two versions of the report, and wished to link to both of
> them. That's tricky if they have the same URL. Possibly I could do
> it like you have with the wget command-line above, but that requires
> me knowing which browsers my audience use and the precise syntax for
> them."
>
> - separate versions are separate resources, not separate content
> types. That has nothing to do with conneg..
I was meaning a difference between the HTML version and the PDF version
of the same content (or at least what is supposed to be the same
content) -- how would I link to them?
Smylers
classes and CSS in that
> respect.
But that would be using a styling technology (and an optional one at
that) for conveying meaning.
Anybody without the CSS -- or with a non-graphical user-agent, which
can't render the CSS rules to the user -- will be missing out. Such
users wouldn't be able to distinguish or even
from the surrounding text.
Whereas if or are used, all user-agents can do _something_
with them.
So I completely agree with what you say.
Smylers
about if I wanted to mail somebody pointing out a discrepency
between two versions of the report, and wished to link to both of them.
That's tricky if they have the same URL. Possibly I could do it like
you have with the wget command-line above, but that requires me knowing
which browsers my audience use and the precise syntax for them.
Smylers
rds spell out a secret message?
However, you can only notice this if the words have been distinguished
in some way. With , all user-agents can choose to convey to users
that those words are special.
Smylers
click on the link in the HTML version I'm
looking at, choose 'Copy Link Location' from the menu, and in the remote
shell type wget then paste in the copied link. If the link explicitly
has ?type=PDF in the URL, I get what I want; if the format is specified
out of the URL then I've just downloaded the wrong thing.
Smylers
h that smaller players are at a disadvantage (because they aren't
big enough to warrant doing such things themselves, and they can't
outsource things to a third party because we've blocked such services
from working).
Smylers
Elliotte Harold writes:
> Smylers wrote:
>
> > > That's a sometimes convenient feature for site developers, but
> > > there's nothing you can do with content loaded from two sites you
> > > can't do with content loaded from one.
> >
>
o implement such a restriction would break so many
sites that its users would all switch to a browser that kept the web
working as it has till now.
And, knowing that, why would website authors bother to make the first
move?
Smylers
g at all, and
can provide an error message. Whereas the current proposal has whether
something works changing as it jiggles up and down the page, something
which may seem arbitrary or random to users: they experience the page
sometimes not working but don't know why.
Smylers
wn that URL.)
That suggests that giving users the freedom to use either URIs or any
other prefixes of their choice is superior to forcing them to use URIs,
surely?
Smylers
g updated to
indicate a link's destination in advance of committing to navigate
there.
It may be, given implementers' requirements, that JavaScript solutions
like the above are the best we can do. But let's not pretend they are
as good as links that don't involve scripting.
Smylers
different things
would be confusing. Many people currently pronounce "img" as "image",
so it would be very hard to distinguish between these elements when
talking about images.
Smylers
Kristof Zelechovski writes:
> The element you are describing is effectively a progress bar control.
> It is still not present in HTML
HTML 5 introduces for that:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/text-level.html#the-progress
Smylers
of
> the pre block are computer code is its child. You'd end up having to
> say if you wanted to style pre as well.
Why would you need to -- surely you could just put the styling on the
instead (using pre + code to select only elements inside
-s)?
Smylers
is, why is being weird worse than
creating an implementation burden of something which nobody will use
(except by accident)?
Smylers
nor an exam transcript, nor any
other kind of transcript.
So focusing on the thing being transcribed, the speech, seems more
sensible; that it has been written down is something which will be
readily apparent to anybody reading it!
Smylers
ecific.
> *
I quite like that. It could be misinterpreted as "a speech" rather than
"some speech", but it may be the least-bad.
> *
More commonly it's a verb than a noun, which makes it awkward.
Smylers
happens to be
syntactically permitted in an older standard doesn't seem like a benefit
over any other syntax which browsers currently ignore.
Smylers
ce the reason that expansion-less abbreviations are
permitted in HTML 5 is so that abbreviations may be styled in a
particular way (for example with small caps).
That is therefore a valid thing to do whether or not the abbreviation
happens to be expanded anywhere else in the document.
> &g
t his
audience and whether there are any work-arounds for older browsers
(such as JavaScript which spots 'reversed' attributes and re-orders
s accordingly).
Smylers
But if these are theoretical things which future browsers could do then
a more substantial case has to be made for what would effectively be
creating a new feature.
> Smylers wrote:
>
> > Sure, all instances of just using abbreviations _could_ be marked
> > up. Equally we could
ohibiting (2) from being used ... by disallowing the title
> attribute to be omitted you make things unnecessarily difficult for
> currently valid HTML4 to migrate to valid HTML5.
Can you link to examples of such webpages, which have elements
without title attibutes? What does that mark-up currently achieve?
If it doesn't actually do anything then it seems reasonable for an HTML
5 validator to flag it as problematic; otherwise authors may misguidedly
continue to believe it has a purpose.
Smylers
Patrick H. Lauke writes:
> Smylers wrote:
>
> > Well it's very close to being useless. In that if browsers don't do
> > anything with some mark-up, there's no point in having it (and
> > indeed no incentive for authors to provide it).
>
> Assistive
he italics and up-case the text.
Are mis-pronounced abbreviations really a significant proportion of
mis-pronounced words by speaking browsers?
> and a scent of semantics?
And, what would the point of such a scent be? Why would it be more
useful than the scent provided by tagging all verbs with ?
Smylers
Shannon writes:
> Shannon wrote:
>
> What about this as a possible solution?
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I don't think this would raise any serious implementation issues as
> > the logic is quite simple;
>
> Smyler
he obvious advantage that it already works with
current browsers.
Smylers
since with images enabled both implementations render identically it
follows that alt text appropriate in one implementation is just as
appropriate in the other. So what Simon suggested does make sense: when
several images are combined to convey something as a whole, it should be
a valid alternative to put text conveying the whole on any one of them,
marking the rest with empty alt text.
Smylers
t it's used for.
See this list of web pages has a little bar showing PageRank to the left
of each one:
http://directory.google.com/Top/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/News_and_Media/Newspapers/
That PageRank indicator could be a -- it's indicating a
proportion of a whole.
I hope that helps. Cheers.
Smylers
and acronyms isn't worth
making in mark-up -- but why do you believe that distinguishing
initialisms-and-acronyms (both labelled as "acronyms") from
abbreviations is actually useful?
> However, the distinction between an acronym and an abbreviation is
> clear and intuitive.
The fact that in this thread there are people you're disagreeing with
suggests that however clear it is in your mind, others struggle with it.
Smylers
ant to
support it simply in order to be Wikipedia-compatible (regardless of
whether the spec says browsers should be Wikipedia-compatible).
Smylers
ll be
parsed as number1 in step 4, then steps 6-8 will have no affect (because
there is no denominator character), step 9 will fail to find a second
number, and therefore step 10 will return nothing.
I think that making step 10 instead return number1 will yield the
desired behaviour.
Smylers
t value ignored.
Smylers
.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#structure
That's 3 appendicies, which is more than a couple.
Smylers
be wrong, surely?
Smylers
Spartanicus writes:
> Smylers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > But _requiring_ user agents to offer opt-outs seems excessive, and
> > possibly beyond the jurisdiction of the spec.
>
> Possibly, but then what's the point of making _blank non conforming if
&g
and trust webpages to offer
hints on which links are appropriate for this. As such, the views of
people who never want new windows don't need to be taken into account
here -- because they won't be affected whatever happens!
Smylers
That may not be appropriate for some environments, perhaps:
* terminal-based browsers, such as Lynx
* One Laptop Per Child UI, where everyting runs full-screen
* mobile phone browsers
* televisions with web access
Smylers
rrently doing. If adverts started
using _top and overwriting what's in the current window that could be
confusing.
Smylers
101 - 142 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
