This should be useful for webcrawlers as well. I see the implementations list for runtimes and I believe Node.js 21.1.0 also implements the standard. Are there any implementations available via libraries for various programming languages? Is that something the open source community might do later or something the doesn’t make sense?
]]>If specifying new/updated semantics is in order, I would love it if the blur/focus event had an asynchronous counterpart.
Focus (change) is somewhat unique in that two elements will change state (one becomes unfocused while another becomes focused)
Something like input validation might take non-trivial amounts of time, and during this time we might want to defer the focus change,
but not cancel it, only defer it until we validate whatever needs to be validated.
Underrated. I for one and am excited about this new focus on focussing on focus.
]]>In the `-webkit-appearance` sample code, what is the effect of the `legend: none` property declaration? I would have expected this to be `-webkit-appearance: none`?
]]>Hasn’t there always been resistance against DRM? Why add it? Why push it down everyone’s throat? I believe that you, Ian, had written back in 2012 or 2013 how DRM was harmful 1), and that many in the community spoke out against it too – what happened?
1) http://news.softpedia.com/news/Google-s-Ian-Hickson-the-Father-of-HTML5-Hates-the-DRM-that-Google-Is-Pushing-340214.shtml
2) http://meiert.com/en/blog/20131122/drm-and-html/
3) https://www.defectivebydesign.org/selfie-against-drm-in-web-standards
There was an uproar when the MPAA joined W3C in 2014. Letting them interfere in the same way they are getting chummy with domain registrars to censor the net, needs to be stopped.
DRM is one of many fronts that need to be fought when it comes to the media corporations shaping the internet in to their own closed content delivery system.
]]>@anon – Researchers should be able to publicly share their work without fear of reprisals. If research happened in a vacuum, maybe anonymous “drops” of research results would be fine, but for active discourse, acting in secret is a burden that shouldn’t be necessary for communication about entirely legitimate activities.
]]>Just perform the security research and release it anonymously or under a pseudonym unique for the work done. This measure only affects the egotistical hackers.
]]>Hi, I was hand and leg cuffed by #TPAC at the entrance this year as an allegory to DRM, with the keys by my side but unable to use them.
In Portugal, the owners of the DRM tech don’t have to sue and one can go up to one year to the prison.
So even that promise is not enough.
]]>Meh, perhaps it’s a good thing and will lead to the fact that the DRM modules are so unsecure that the browsers will need to remove them.
]]>