-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix issues #5 and #13 #23
base: gh-pages
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
…ude, html:link and html:anch Closes OscarGodson#13 Closes OscarGodson#5
…erence, it's path to the source.
@m93a without a target tho how would JavaScript know the target of the element? A common use case: http://www.ajaxf1.com/tutorial/ajax-file-upload-tutorial.html |
|
||
This links external documents and scripts such as CSS, JavaScript, RSS, favicons, etc. to the current document. Equivalent to the current `<link>` tag. This tag takes the following attributes: | ||
This links document's alternatives in other formats, eg. PDF, RTF, RSS or Atom feed. It's similar to the current HTML `link` tag. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why would you have a different link just for documents? Why shouldn't the browser handle the displaying of these like it does now? What's considered an "alternative document" and how would you know what is and isn't one?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Current "link" was made to do that but little by little it became more of "include" than a real link. If you use as a reference to RSS, the browser just shows feed button and doesn't even download the file. But if you use it as a link to css stylesheet, browser downloads the file, includes it to the page and changes its content.
In layman's terms: include
changes the document, alter
doesn't
Or maybe we can use meta
instead of alter
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So, basically this link just forces a download?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm assuming, yes? If so there's no need for an entirely different element for that. Just have a like download
attribute that's already in HTML now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
include = make it a part of this document
Now, my pull request should point to |
- `name` | ||
- `target` (can be `blank`, `parent`, `top` or `self`) | ||
- `href`: The link to the target document, can be relative or absolute. | ||
- `target`: Which window will open the document (can be `blank`, `parent`, `top` or `self`, default is `self`). **This attribute is obsolete**. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OscarGodson:
@m93a without a target tho how would JavaScript know the target of the element?
A common use case:
http://www.ajaxf1.com/tutorial/ajax-file-upload-tutorial.html
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@OscarGodson
I would make a <button>
with onclick and use JavaScript XMLHttpRequest and File API.
A common use case:
http://www.matlus.com/html5-file-upload-with-progress/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If you only have to support new browsers, that'd be fine :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Old browsers won't support HTML6 :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oscar HTML6 doesn't have to worry about backwards compatibility because that would be up to the browsers.
@OscarGodson would you merge it to the master, please? |
I'm still waiting on responses from you in the PR :) I'm not sold on your explanation of link and removing |
Oh, that's a reaction to #5. It's about splitting |
</html:html> | ||
``` | ||
|
||
##### `<html:anch>` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You could make this into it's own PR and ask people how they like it, but I don't see any benefit to this over just allowing a
/link
. In both cases it makes semantic sense. If we had a link
element it'd mean link to this page, and this section
. You'd also need links like http://someothersite.com/#foo
to work anyway so making them totally different links seems confusing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think if you remove this and make it it's own PR and get feedback I'll accept the PR :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, rollback to html:a done. Adding "for" attribute to it so you can link elements using css selectors. It would be great to have a possibility to link somebody to the third div.rc
of google.com/#q=foo
.
As OscarGodson said: You could make this into it's own PR and ask people how they like it, but I don't see any benefit to this over just allowing a/link. In both cases it makes semantic sense. If we had a link element it'd mean link to this page, and this section. You'd also need links like http://someothersite.com/#foo to work anyway so making them totally different links seems confusing.
@OscarGodson is there anything you don't agree with? :) |
"This begins an HTML's head. Equivelent to the current <html> tag." Should read: "This begins an HTML's head. Equivelent to the current <head> tag." |
@risenomore True story :)
Update html:meta, split html:link and html:a to html:alter, html:include, html:link and html:anch
Closes #13
Closes #5