>
> The Webkist engine afaik is licensed under the GPL, because of the use
> of the code from the original KHTML. I'm not sure how this fits with M$
> proprietary plan however...
>
Webkit is licensed under LGPL and BSD licenses.
> You say that, have you heard the latest for IE9? They're already
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ashley Sheridan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 1:43 PM
> To: Boyd, Todd M.
> Cc: PHP General Mailing List
> Subject: RE: [PHP] Re: anchor name on URL
>
---8<---
> > > Don't forget Konquero
On Wed, 2008-11-19 at 08:27 -0600, Boyd, Todd M. wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ashley Sheridan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 5:58 PM
> > To: Richard Heyes
> > Cc: Yeti; Boyd, Todd M.; PHP General Mailing List
> >
On Wed, 2008-11-19 at 01:57 -0800, Yeti wrote:
> > Now I tend only to use it now for file management, FTP and testing
> > websites.
> Beware that Konqueror has changed with KDE4. Now its main purpose is
> to be a web browser, whereas the new program "Dolphin" is used for
> file management etc.
>
I
> -Original Message-
> From: Ashley Sheridan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 5:58 PM
> To: Richard Heyes
> Cc: Yeti; Boyd, Todd M.; PHP General Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [PHP] Re: anchor name on URL
>
> On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 23:51 +0
> -Original Message-
> From: Ashley Sheridan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 5:09 PM
> To: Yeti
> Cc: Boyd, Todd M.; PHP General Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [PHP] Re: anchor name on URL
>
> On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 14:58 -0800, Yeti wrote:
Richard Heyes wrote:
>> although the crapness of firefox 3 may change that a bit..
>
> Keh? FF3 is great IMO.
>
FF2 and FF# are not 100% compatible which made some of our web
interfaces look wrong in FF3. I haven't been able to find the problem
yet:
FF2: http://jessen.ch/images/sam-menu-ff2.
Richard Heyes wrote:
although the crapness of firefox 3 may change that a bit..
Keh? FF3 is great IMO.
I thought that at first as well, then I noticed it was a bit unstable on
windows xp/media center/tablet edition, on all my machines, then
talked to workmates, friends, partner etc and th
> although the crapness of firefox 3 may change that a bit..
Keh? FF3 is great IMO.
--
Richard Heyes
HTML5 Graphing for FF, Chrome, Opera and Safari:
http://www.rgraph.org (Updated November 15th)
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
Per Jessen wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
Per Jessen wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
i never understand this, if i was makign a browser I'd be "where's
the rfc's" then code it to implement those rfc's - why people choose
not to is beyond me?
World domination is part of the reasoning ...
/Per Jes
On 19 Nov 2008, at 12:01, Nathan Rixham wrote:
from some of my sites:
Browser % visits
Firefox 88.43%
Internet Explorer 9.99%
Firefox 46.89%
Internet Explorer 37.66%
Opera 7.36%
Safari 5.39%
Chrome 2.17%
Firefox 46.80%
Internet Explorer 42.45%
Safari 5.36%
Opera 3.07%
Mozilla 1.22%
although th
Nathan Rixham wrote:
> Per Jessen wrote:
>> Nathan Rixham wrote:
>>
>>> i never understand this, if i was makign a browser I'd be "where's
>>> the rfc's" then code it to implement those rfc's - why people choose
>>> not to is beyond me?
>>
>> World domination is part of the reasoning ...
>>
>>
Per Jessen wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
Though I always script to W3 Standards, I could care less if
browsers follow those standards, so long as we wind up closer and
closer to a general set of rules we can obide by.
Uh, only as long as that general set of rules is well documented.
/Per Jesse
Nathan Rixham wrote:
>>> Though I always script to W3 Standards, I could care less if
>>> browsers follow those standards, so long as we wind up closer and
>>> closer to a general set of rules we can obide by.
>>
>> Uh, only as long as that general set of rules is well documented.
>>
>>
>> /Per
Per Jessen wrote:
Craige Leeder wrote:
Micah Gersten wrote:
I'd rather all the engines follow the W3C standards so that you just
have to make sure your web page is compliant.
Thank you,
Micah Gersten
onShore Networks
Internal Developer
http://www.onshore.com
Though I always script to W3
Yeti wrote:
Just battling that fiasco myself. Konqueror and Dolphin combination just
does not work for me which is a pity - and KDE4 . I was pointed to xfce
which seems to be much more practical :)
Having ditched the Windows 'development machine' everything is now on a nice
linux box, but I
Craige Leeder wrote:
> Micah Gersten wrote:
>> I'd rather all the engines follow the W3C standards so that you just
>> have to make sure your web page is compliant.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Micah Gersten
>> onShore Networks
>> Internal Developer
>> http://www.onshore.com
>>
>>
> Though I always scri
> Now I tend only to use it now for file management, FTP and testing
> websites.
Beware that Konqueror has changed with KDE4. Now its main purpose is
to be a web browser, whereas the new program "Dolphin" is used for
file management etc.
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubs
Micah Gersten wrote:
I'd rather all the engines follow the W3C standards so that you just
have to make sure your web page is compliant.
Thank you,
Micah Gersten
onShore Networks
Internal Developer
http://www.onshore.com
Though I always script to W3 Standards, I could care less if browsers
f
Ashley Sheridan wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 23:51 +, Richard Heyes wrote:
>
>>> Yeah, but it will mean that there will still be about 3 different
>>> rendering versions of IE out there by the time it comes out; 7, 8 and 9
>>> (I'm fairly sure 6 will have gone to that good ol' web in the s
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 19:01 -0500, Daniel P. Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Ashley Sheridan
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> > Don't forget Konqueror in that list ;) It's not exactly the same engine
> > after Apple forked it from KHTML, but it's quite close, and both
> > Konquer
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Ashley Sheridan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
> Don't forget Konqueror in that list ;) It's not exactly the same engine
> after Apple forked it from KHTML, but it's quite close, and both
> Konqueror and Safari are said to be working a little more closely than
> befo
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 23:51 +, Richard Heyes wrote:
> > Yeah, but it will mean that there will still be about 3 different
> > rendering versions of IE out there by the time it comes out; 7, 8 and 9
> > (I'm fairly sure 6 will have gone to that good ol' web in the sky by
> > that time)
>
> Sure
> Yeah, but it will mean that there will still be about 3 different
> rendering versions of IE out there by the time it comes out; 7, 8 and 9
> (I'm fairly sure 6 will have gone to that good ol' web in the sky by
> that time)
Sure, but depending on how closely it follows WebKit, could make
testing
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 23:44 +, Richard Heyes wrote:
> > You say that, have you heard the latest for IE9? They're already
> > planning it, and apparently it's going to use the Webkit engine!
>
> That would be nice, if only for the rather good canvas support, which
> I kinda have a vested intere
> You say that, have you heard the latest for IE9? They're already
> planning it, and apparently it's going to use the Webkit engine!
That would be nice, if only for the rather good canvas support, which
I kinda have a vested interest in.
--
Richard Heyes
HTML5 Graphing for FF, Chrome, Opera an
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 6:29 PM, Ashley Sheridan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
> I'd really rather you didn't, please.
And I'd rather you had a sense of humor. So in hindsight, we both
learned something.
--
http://www.parasane.net/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] || [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ask me about our cu
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 18:21 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Ashley Sheridan
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> > I don't think you fixed it, so much as wrote something else and made it
> > look like I wrote it...
>
> Yes.
>
> --
>
> http://www.parasane.net/
>
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Ashley Sheridan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
> I don't think you fixed it, so much as wrote something else and made it
> look like I wrote it...
Yes.
--
http://www.parasane.net/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] || [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ask me about our current hosting/dedicat
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 18:09 -0500, Daniel P. Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 6:09 PM, Ashley Sheridan
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> > You say that, have you heard the latest for IE9? They're already
> > planning it, and apparently it's going to use Microsoft's own
> > version of the We
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 6:09 PM, Ashley Sheridan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
> You say that, have you heard the latest for IE9? They're already
> planning it, and apparently it's going to use Microsoft's own
> version of the Webkit engine!
Fixed your post, Ash.
--
http://www.parasane.net/
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 14:58 -0800, Yeti wrote:
> > I look forward to the day when markup isn't so bloated
> > due to the inability of certain web browser franchises to "get it right."
>
> Although I usually look at the future through an optimistic point of
> view, that day may never come.
>
You s
> I look forward to the day when markup isn't so bloated
> due to the inability of certain web browser franchises to "get it right."
Although I usually look at the future through an optimistic point of
view, that day may never come.
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscrib
> -Original Message-
> From: Ashley Sheridan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 2:34 PM
> To: Stan
> Cc: php-general@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP] Re: anchor name on URL
>
> On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 14:21 -0600, Stan wrote:
> >
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 14:21 -0600, Stan wrote:
> Well ... you got me thinking ...
>
> I moved the placement of the named anchor to inside the first tag in
> the row and it works (instead of inside the tag.
>
> Sorry.
>
>
>
Ah, it seems that the doctype might have been to blame then, as an
t
Well ... you got me thinking ...
I moved the placement of the named anchor to inside the first tag in
the row and it works (instead of inside the tag.
Sorry.
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Stan wrote:
If I had a page written in HTML and I had a named anchor on that page
I could position the user at the anchor by
http://myPage.com/myHTML.htm#myAnchor
but I can't seem to make this work if the page is generated
http://mypage.com/myPHP.php#myAnchor
I've tried both FireFox
37 matches
Mail list logo
