when navigating makes
sense to me.
+1
This has the added benefit of getting rid of the second argument wart.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
(which can
easily matter a fair bit on mobile) only to fail anyway.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
pen it's hardly a set of "rules that have not been disclosed in detail".
https://github.com/validator/validator
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
work.
Isn't that just moving the problem though? If the CSS uses display-box:
contents (or whatever else might get added next) for some reason then
hidden won't work either. Less likely, but still.
Maybe having the default style use both display and display-box might fly?
--
Robin Ber
be found at:
http://www.w3.org/mid/eaf52201-ecaf-4f7f-839e-0585c085c...@anselm-hannemann.com
If your mail client can be somehow scripted to take advantage of this,
you can have it grab the MID to generate a link.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
On 13/09/2013 13:31 , Jirka Kosek wrote:
On 13.9.2013 12:10, Robin Berjon wrote:
I would rather we figured this out without , but apart from the
indirection I reckon this approach has some nice properties and might
work if more direct ones don't.
Also don't forget that while link
I wonder if we couldn't just use the query part for this: src="/foo.zip?!zip/dahut.png">. No stripping is needed (as far as I know
servers would normally just serve foo.zip in this case), which
simplifies the model.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
neral.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
m the
indirection I reckon this approach has some nice properties and might
work if more direct ones don't.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
On 04/06/2013 12:24 , Simon Pieters wrote:
On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 12:03:58 +0200, Robin Berjon wrote:
I've seen quite a few. One recent example is bug-assist.js — a script
that makes it easy for readers of a document to file bugs about it —
that looks for all metadata names that start with
t's doing something useful in your document?
If so, please tell me its purpose here, then I'll know what it's for
and I won't complain about it again: __
Then the validator could add a wiki entry for it.
Going that far might be a bit much, b
)?
Opening a blob URL in a new tab from a link works in at least Firefox
and Chrome, I guess they'd work just the same for those frame UIs.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
On 14/03/2013 16:57 , Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:
People who *do* rely on this (assuming they exist — in this case they
probably do somewhere) will find their services broken if we change it. So
on the face of things, I get the impression that
On 14/03/2013 15:59 , Anne van Kesteren wrote:
So if the server replies with status 401 and a WWW-Authenticate header
that is properly formatted (I did not do detailed syntax checks but
e.g. WWW-Authenticate: basicerror does not work) is present, we prompt
the user. We do this for ,
m the
XML planet in APIs with specific performance characteristics. They would
obviously be a lot simpler for JSON; I wonder how well that experience
translates.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
you could
transition your library into being a shim for seamless iframes.
That involves more than inclusion though (see
http://benvinegar.github.com/seamless-talk/) so you should probably
double-check that seamless is what your use case calls for.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
x/notes.html#h-B.2.2
Of course another option is to just not parse that into key-value pairs
in the first place.
By the way, it would also be nice for the query part of this API to be
usable in isolation.
+1
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
On 11/09/2012 10:15 , Elliott Sprehn wrote:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
This would be a lot easier if I could somehow invoke the CSS box model
inside of SVG, ...
This tightly binds the list of element names in SVG to HTML
Which isn't that big of a problem. It's a
>>
>> If we are going to have Node.contains implementations surely could
>> optimize document.contains(node) which seems as clear as node.inDocument
>> to me.
>
> They are different in the case of multiple documents though.
But node.ownerDocument.contains(node) isn'
eliminate all other
sources — accessing would be sweet.
I don't much care about the syntax, but I guess we could be looking at
something like
navigator.getUserMedia("video multiple", function (devices) {
// ... show each different view
});
And I guess that's enough braindump for today :)
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
rotocol and format noodling would go. Personally, I think that that
distinction makes sense.
Note that going forward you'll probably want to look at
http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/camera/ rather than the TR snapshots.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
On Apr 12, 2006, at 14:25, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Apr 4, 2006, at 19:35, fantasai wrote:
That seems odd. You should be able to say "the content model of
this element
is anything".
http://books.xmlschemata.org/relaxng/relax-CHP-12-
SECT-2.html#relax-CHP-12-SECT-2.1
From the spec:
"Thus, a R
on the WHAT WG specifications. So make
sure your voice is heard over there by joining those lists and
expressing your opinions!
--
Robin Berjon
Senior Research Scientist
Expway, http://expway.com/
hods, much less in a standards-producing
environment like the W3C.
I doubt the W3C can do much to legislate language, but I also doubt that
people in the WG (when formed) will need reminding of that. The terms
may be used in elevator pitches, but I'd expect that would be about it.
--
Robin
24 matches
Mail list logo
