jaffathecake

8 ms·

91.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
Generally means "selected text". I've pitched <selectedcontent>, since it's the content of the selected option.
92.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
It does. An <a> doesn't work as usual when it's within a <button> for instance. <button> already behaves differently depending on the type of form it's in, or whether it's in a form at all. Let me put i
93.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
I agree it's new and different, but I disagree that it needs a whole new framework. Whether it's synchronous or not is part of the debate. There are already things like SVG's <use> element that 'clone' content
94.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
Wait, you're proposing that <input type="text"> shouldn't work when you type into it by default, since that's a reactive UI and should be done with a framework? Wait, you're proposing that CSS shouldn&#x2
95.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41912960 - the custom ones are almost universally bad. https://extensiblewebmanifesto.org/ - I think this is a good template for how the platform should grow. Folks
96.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
> Correct if I'm wrong, but this still doesn't allow us to define the dropdown content and selected content for each option separately? There are a few different cases worth considering: # I want to display the option content i
97.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
What does "distinguish the user interface actions" mean here? The browser knows the <button> that's a child of <select> is special, and activates the popover on click. This is handled automatically, as is the acce
98.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
> Is this a path towards a fully style-able select element that still operates correctly with keyboard and accessibility features? That's one of the main driving forces behind this effort - to allow developers to style <select&gt
99.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
It's valid in this latest proposal. It becomes the item displayed on the page rather than the browser-controlled 'button'. In browsers that don't support customisable select, the button is ignored. https://cod
100.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
The aim of <selectedoption> is to provide a DOM placeholder to contain a clone of the contents of the selected <option>. It isn't there as a style hook for the selected option in the popover - that already exists via option
101.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
> now we are going to have a `button` in `select` with a `selectedoption` tag? Can you detail why this is such an awful thing? > The CSS for the style of the element belongs with the `select` tag That isn't even true today. A sel
102.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
> With that in mind, I'm inclined toward the middle option (changes are synced automatically, but batched in the next microtask) fwiw, this is relatively easy to do yourself. Set up a mutation observer, and clone when the callback f
103.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
> the `input` event would have the default behavior of full cloning Hm, it feels like, when the selected option is changed via user interaction, the <selectedoption> should be populated before the event fires. But this is really be
104.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
Those sound like bugs but I'm not really familiar with the implementation. I haven't played with it much either. I'm just an outsider interested in the feature design.
105.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
Thanks for the feedback! Fwiw, there's no point populating <selectedoption> yourself. Just don't use <selectedoption>. It's optional. That's probably what I'd do in most cases where I'm using a fram
106.
How should the new <selectedoption> element work?(jakearchibald.com)
65 points by jaffathecake 2y ago|48 comments
107.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
The results might be totally different now, but back in 2014 I looked at how browsers behave if the resource is different to the content-length https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/issues/362#issuecomment...
108.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
I didn't mention it in the article, but the web component supports premultiplied alpha https://github.com/jakearchibald/stacked-alpha-video?tab=rea...
109.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
They do know about avconvert (I am the article author). avconvert gives you almost no control over the output. You'll end up with a file orders of magnitude bigger than the alternatives covered in the article. Compressor is the next be
110.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
fwiw, Firefox is the browser that get this closest to ok.
111.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
It's worth reading the section of the article that details why this isn't a great solution: https://jakearchibald.com/2024/video-with-transparency/#vp9-...
112.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
When using this technique, this comment and the accompanying article are a must-read https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41232070
113.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
Yep, that second stream is the alpha channel. Lossy alpha channels have been used since VP8 (~15 years I think). They seem pretty well tested. You can also see examples in the article.
114.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
Yep, in Flash it was done with VP6.
115.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
It's restricted to constant QP rate, and I haven't managed to get it to produce a playable file yet. Maybe I'm holding it wrong. But anyway, it's exciting seeing bits of this land.
116.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
The folks at Wix experimented with this (although I couldn't get their demo working) https://twitter.com/YDaniv/status/1820558358648435020 They say it works in Chromium, it's buggy in Firefox, and slow i
117.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
It's a good 'original' format to feed to ffmpeg.
118.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
This is a great article!
119.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
Ohhhh! I totally missed this. Thanks for the heads up! I wonder if it was triggered by this article, or a weird coincidence.
120.
by jaffathecake 2y ago
PNG is a lossless format, so you file sizes will be huge. Although it can build upon previous frames, it can only do so in a really simple GIF-like way (drawing over the top). For example, the bouncing ball example on Wikipedia is 62 kB ht

More ›