W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2011

Re: Bug 11239

From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 22:56:33 +0100
Message-ID: <BANLkTikHFV3b6Qh97Nn9OB7g_S2VMNKuoA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-html@w3.org
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
> <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com> wrote:


>> I can /imagine/ a concrete scenario. Does that count?
>> What if a visual-rendering UA delegated drawing of widgets (e.g.
>> textareas) to the system and the system did not provide information
>> about caret blink rate back? Then the author would want to draw a caret,
>> but the UA would be unable to provide the correct blink rate to use.
> The UA could just return 500ms and everyone would have an easier time.

That's my feeling (and same for the privacy situation), but not what the
TF or the Chairs went with.

> Though see my previous email about that I think this feature should be
> removed to save everyone time.

Note that, especially when moved from the canvas context to the
navigator interface, it is not limited to faking text editors in
canvas but could also be used when faking text editors in SVG,
if that's any consolation at all.

Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Thursday, 28 April 2011 21:57:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:12 UTC