Comments for dolphinling's weblog http://blog.dolphinling.net ...whatever goes through my head... Wed, 15 Oct 2008 21:26:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 Comment on Comments reenabled by Chad L. http://blog.dolphinling.net/2008/06/comments-reenabled/#comment-6882 Chad L. Wed, 18 Jun 2008 23:08:25 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/?p=203#comment-6882 Can I raise the average? Can I raise the average?

]]> Comment on Comments reenabled by dolphinling http://blog.dolphinling.net/2008/06/comments-reenabled/#comment-6881 dolphinling Sun, 01 Jun 2008 11:39:29 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/?p=203#comment-6881 And of course, the obligatory test comment... yay! And of course, the obligatory test comment… yay!

]]> Comment on Ad-blocking DNS by Renee Cousins http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/03/ad-blocking-dns/#comment-3288 Renee Cousins Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:12:47 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/03/ad-blocking-dns/#comment-3288 Or better, a publicly available DNS server that localhosts all bad sites. Or better, a publicly available DNS server that localhosts all bad sites.

]]> Comment on Do NOT attach “target” through script! by dolphinling http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/07/do-not-attach-target-through-script/#comment-2493 dolphinling Tue, 17 Oct 2006 06:14:56 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/07/do-not-attach-target-through-script/#comment-2493 <p>The "in memory" document is the one that the user actually sees and interacts with; it's the <em>most</em> important to keep valid. Especially note, for example, assistive software. It's not so much an obvious problem with <code>target</code>, but it's equivalent to, for example, adding a <code>font</code> element inside a paragraph through script. The original markup will be valid, but the resulting DOM will be invalid, and it's the resulting DOM that the assistive software looks at. It'll see the invalid, non-semantic <code>font</code>, and not know what to do with it.</p> <p>PJ, yes, I'm entirely aware of the irony of writing this from wordpress. :-\</p> The “in memory” document is the one that the user actually sees and interacts with; it’s the most important to keep valid. Especially note, for example, assistive software. It’s not so much an obvious problem with target, but it’s equivalent to, for example, adding a font element inside a paragraph through script. The original markup will be valid, but the resulting DOM will be invalid, and it’s the resulting DOM that the assistive software looks at. It’ll see the invalid, non-semantic font, and not know what to do with it.

PJ, yes, I’m entirely aware of the irony of writing this from wordpress. :-\

]]> Comment on Do NOT attach “target” through script! by Rob Cherny http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/07/do-not-attach-target-through-script/#comment-2490 Rob Cherny Mon, 16 Oct 2006 13:07:58 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/07/do-not-attach-target-through-script/#comment-2490 I have to disagree with the content of this post, dolphinling, and agree with Tantek Celik. If you dynamically insert a target attribute your original document is still perfectly valid. The only place the "invalid" document exists is at runtime, in memory, and there's no reasoning that the dynamic document, which doesn't even persist, matters in the world of validation. The page still renders (in standards mode no less), will continue to, and the DOM has added the behavior layer which is actually exactly the way it's supposed to work. I have to disagree with the content of this post, dolphinling, and agree with Tantek Celik. If you dynamically insert a target attribute your original document is still perfectly valid. The only place the “invalid” document exists is at runtime, in memory, and there’s no reasoning that the dynamic document, which doesn’t even persist, matters in the world of validation. The page still renders (in standards mode no less), will continue to, and the DOM has added the behavior layer which is actually exactly the way it’s supposed to work.

]]> Comment on Namespace syntax in HTML by Anne van Kesteren http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/10/namespace-syntax-in-html/#comment-2476 Anne van Kesteren Mon, 09 Oct 2006 23:05:11 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/10/namespace-syntax-in-html/#comment-2476 I don't see why you need namespaces for that. See also the WHATWG mailing list. I don’t see why you need namespaces for that. See also the WHATWG mailing list.

]]> Comment on Namespace syntax in HTML by dolphinling http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/10/namespace-syntax-in-html/#comment-2474 dolphinling Mon, 09 Oct 2006 20:26:57 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/10/namespace-syntax-in-html/#comment-2474 <p>Don't see why what's needed? Namespaces? If you want any sort of extensibility, you'll need them, and people do want extensibility (see the current threads on news://mozilla.dev.tech.mathml about trying to incorporate mathml into html5)</p> Don’t see why what’s needed? Namespaces? If you want any sort of extensibility, you’ll need them, and people do want extensibility (see the current threads on news://mozilla.dev.tech.mathml about trying to incorporate mathml into html5)

]]>