Toolkit:XUL looks likethe best component for this one. (at least to start)
Assignee: asa → trudelle
Component: Browser-General → XP Toolkit/Widgets: XUL
QA Contact: doronr → jrgm
I guess I'll take this since I've been doing it in files I touch anyways... This isn't a toolkit problem, it really spans every component...
Assignee: trudelle → blakeross
Component: XP Toolkit/Widgets: XUL → Browser-General
QA Contact: jrgm → doronr
Component: Browser-General → XP Apps
QA Contact: doronr → sairuh
See bug 7834 for background on a similar change that took place in our tree.
Interesting, because the type attribute must be used for HTML. But then the MIME is not registered. So why not use a deprecated attribute, because it's not obsolute, in combination with the required type attribute?
Leaving aside IANA for now, what is implemented is here: http://lxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/rdf/content/src/nsXULContentSink.cpp#15 58
John, that's even more interesting starting from line 1582. If type= specified, then Mozilla looks for version=. But after looking at the W3C specs, I can't find an attribute called 'version='! I'm missing something, can you help me out?
That's because the MIME type that we'd propose if we got around to proposing it would have an optional version parameter. (And, BTW, that code only applies to XUL.) Since there's no registered MIME type, you can't say that the registered MIME type doesn't allow a version...
This bug appears to be rehashing a good deal of well-trodden ground. Folks, please read bug 27912.
I'm going to be a pain and point out that the SVG specs define a script element whose type attribute has a default of "text/ecmascript" (http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/script.html) Also see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2000Sep/0020.html which doesn't really come to a conclusion either.
Bradley: Quite simply, the W3C is not an authority on this issue.
Great stuff! firstname.lastname@example.org
i collapsed two <script ...></script>'s to <script .../> per kerz. r=kerz
Assignee: blakeross → timeless
It is a common courtesy to: * ask a person before you take a bug from them * ask a person if they've already patched all the files before you do it (duplicated effort, and all that) * at least cc the person if you're going to take the bug * announce when you're touching lots and lots of files somewhere (especially at a time when some of us have large xul syntax changes in our trees waiting to land in three days) I appreciate the patch (!), just wish that the first time I heard about this wasn't on Bonsai.
this is -absolutely- not my bug(QA). sending back to sairuh....
QA Contact: shrir → sairuh
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
bindu, preshant...? *shrug*
QA Contact: sairuh → bsharma
looks good to me.. (big patch) email@example.com
i think braden would love to qa.
QA Contact: bsharma → braden
I would like to ask why you checked in another patch to this bug after I specifically requested that you wait until those of us who have had mass xul syntax changes in our tree for two weeks land or, at the very least, let us know first. Mark and I told you yesterday that this caused us many conflicts. We'd like to land these changes immediately after .8.1 branches and freezes (3/14-3/16, since we couldn't before that point); your touching 55 xul files in the interim certainly isn't going to help, and nothing about this patch is so critical that it had to be checked in immediately.
r=fabian trivial indentation problem in messageWindow.xul
timeless asked me to pick this one up. Targeting to 0.9.3 and reassigning to myself. See bug 70857 for details and a patch.
Assignee: timeless → andersma
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla0.9.3
Fix checked in for trunk on July 9.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 17 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.