| 01:39 | <erlehmann> | “The message's content type was not explicitly allowed” |
| 01:44 | <erlehmann> | It would help to include which content types would be allowed. And no, I was not trying to send text/html. |
| 02:03 | <erlehmann> | seems multipart/mixed is not allowed. so much for PGP signatures. |
| 08:28 | <matjas> | As per HTML 4.01, the first occurrence of the character sequence </ (ETAGO or end-tag open delimiter) is treated as terminating the end of the <script> element’s content: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/types.html#h-6.2 |
| 08:29 | <matjas> | Has this changed since? |
| 08:29 | <Ms2ger> | That has never been true |
| 08:29 | <Ms2ger> | (Like most of HTML4) |
| 08:29 | <matjas> | It may have since no browser seems to enforce it; the de facto standard seems to be </script: http://kangax.github.com/jstests/etago_delimiter_test/ |
| 08:30 | <matjas> | Ms2ger: Do you know if it was excluded from HTML5^H? |
| 08:31 | <Ms2ger> | script parsing is an awful mess |
| 08:32 | <Ms2ger> | Try <script><!--<script></script> |
| 08:34 | <matjas> | Mind = blown |
| 08:49 | <hsivonen> | matjas: if you are trying to sanitize html, you need an html parser |
| 08:49 | <hsivonen> | the tree builder is needed to tell apart html and svg scripts |
| 08:49 | <hsivonen> | which tokenize differently |
| 08:50 | <hsivonen> | Ms2ger: script parsing is a well-defined mess now! |
| 08:51 | <Ms2ger> | hsivonen, still an awful mess |
| 09:41 | <matjas> | hsivonen: I’m not trying to do anything like that; just curious what’s specced and what isn’t |
| 09:41 | <matjas> | so, the </ isn’t treated as terminating the end of the <script> element’s content in any browser |
| 09:42 | <matjas> | but "</script" is |
| 09:42 | <matjas> | perhaps that should be standardized / included in the spec then |
| 09:47 | <Ms2ger> | It's all in the spec |
| 09:47 | <Peter-> | http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/tokenization.html#script-data-end-tag-open-state |
| 09:48 | <matjas> | That’s what I was looking for, thanks! |
| 09:51 | <hsivonen> | matjas: note that the string </script inside a script doesn't always go through that state |
| 09:52 | <hsivonen> | matjas: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/tokenization.html#script-data-escaped-end-tag-open-state |
| 11:31 | <karlcow> | >Quoting standards is just stupid, when there's |
| 11:31 | <karlcow> | >two simple choices: "it works" or "it doesn't work because bugs happen". |
| 11:31 | <karlcow> | >Standards are paper. I use paper to wipe my butt every day. That's how much |
| 11:31 | <karlcow> | >that paper is worth. |
| 11:31 | <karlcow> | >Reality is what matters. |
| 11:31 | <karlcow> | — Linus Torvalds, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638477#c129 |
| 12:04 | <ktoss> | any one use flexiejs here? |
| 14:39 | <MikeSmith> | anybody know any details about the Web browser that Baidu has supposedly developed? |
| 14:40 | <Ms2ger> | Not me, but I'm sure Fx is better :) |
| 14:44 | <MikeSmith> | what's Fx? |
| 14:44 | <MikeSmith> | Firefox? |
| 14:44 | MikeSmith | is listening to Invasion of the Reverb Snatchers by Bambi Molesters from Intensity! (✮✮✮✮✮) |
| 14:51 | <karlcow> | and for a depressing moment http://vimeo.com/21197696 |
| 15:01 | <MikeSmith> | karlcow: I feel impressed rather then depressed |
| 15:01 | MikeSmith | wonders if gsnedders is around |
| 15:04 | <MikeSmith> | oh |
| 15:04 | karlcow | wonders if gsnedders still wears his make-up |
| 15:04 | <MikeSmith> | I got to the more depressing part |
| 15:05 | MikeSmith | is listening to Lands End by Laika & The Cosmonauts from Cosmopolis (✮✮✮✮✮) |
| 15:10 | <MikeSmith> | http://hacks.mozilla.org/2011/03/nocomply/ is nice |
| 15:13 | <erlehmann> | MikeSmith, Sputnik 2 was not designed to be retrievable, and Laika had always been intended to die. Depressed now? |
| 15:19 | <MikeSmith> | Laika died a hero and will remembered forever |
| 15:22 | MikeSmith | reaches the point in his macports reinstall where it's rebuilding atlas… whatever the hell atlas is… decides to check back in a few days to see if it's completed yet |
| 15:37 | <erlehmann> | MikeSmith, so you are saying … Laika died to become a meme? 4chan is not amused. |
| 15:37 | <MikeSmith> | I'm sorry for 4chan |
| 15:39 | <MikeSmith> | ok, this is pretty interesting: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110325102008.htm |
| 15:39 | <MikeSmith> | "The many hundreds of scales, however, seem to possess a deeper commonality: if their tones are compared in a two- or three-dimensional way by means of a coordinate system, they form convex or star-convex structures." |
| 15:41 | <MikeSmith> | http://www.english.uva.nl/news/news.cfm/9DEDC76E-E021-4F6E-AE9F0A55E899FC22 |
| 15:41 | <MikeSmith> | http://staff.science.uva.nl/~ahoningh/publicaties/convex_scales.pdf |
| 15:42 | <MikeSmith> | "investigating the humanities from a computational perspective" |
| 15:45 | <MikeSmith> | 100% of traditional musical scales form a star-convex pattern |
| 15:47 | <MikeSmith> | it would be interesting to do the reverse -- construct something in a star-convex pattern and generate a scale from it and see what it sounds like |
| 15:51 | <karlcow> | about laika, well like millions of cows, chicken that we raise to die :) still yummy |
| 15:56 | <MikeSmith> | dogs taste pretty good too |
| 15:56 | <MikeSmith> | whales also |
| 15:58 | <karlcow> | dogs I do not know |
| 15:59 | <karlcow> | or maybe I do not know if I had already one |
| 16:03 | <karlcow> | http://pmuellr.github.com/weinre/ remote debugging coming to webkit like Opera Dragonfly |
| 16:05 | <MikeSmith> | yeah, Patrick been working on that for a while now, I think |
| 16:08 | <karlcow> | I wish scope was standardized and implemented everywhere, so you could use any tools for debugging any devices |
| 16:24 | <karlcow> | http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150103900258920 |
| 16:24 | <karlcow> | >To accomplish this, we had to engineer a system that could process over 20 billion events per day (200,000 events per second) with a lag of less than 30 seconds. |
| 16:50 | <matjas> | Okay, I’m having some trouble understanding http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/tokenization.html#script-data-end-tag-open-state and http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/tokenization.html#script-data-escaped-end-tag-open-state |
| 16:50 | <matjas> | Can somebody translate it for me into human language? :) |
| 16:50 | <Ms2ger> | matjas, that's a sign of sanity |
| 16:51 | <matjas> | Specifically, I’m wondering what happens when you use <script>document.write('<foo></foo>')</script> — is that alright as per that algorithm or not? |
| 16:51 | <Ms2ger> | What is alright? |
| 16:51 | <matjas> | The “</foo” part |
| 16:52 | <Ms2ger> | What do you mean by alright? |
| 16:52 | <matjas> | Does it not trigger the end of the <script> element? |
| 16:52 | <matjas> | (I’d assume it would not) |
| 16:52 | <zewt> | on a quick read, it's ignored because it's not an "appropriate end tag token", right? |
| 16:53 | <Ms2ger> | You can test in Fx4, latest Chrome or Opera's test build |
| 16:53 | <matjas> | Well it works fine there |
| 16:53 | <Ms2ger> | Well, they do what the spec requires |
| 16:53 | <matjas> | Their HTML5^H parsers follow the spec perfectly? :) |
| 16:53 | <matjas> | Good to know |
| 16:53 | <matjas> | HTML 4.01 said the character sequence “</” is treated as terminating the end of the <script> element |
| 16:54 | <matjas> | I know that was never really enforced/implemented by browsers |
| 16:54 | <Ms2ger> | HTML4 is like a cake |
| 16:54 | <Ms2ger> | It's a lie |
| 16:54 | <matjas> | :) |
| 16:54 | <matjas> | Okay, so it seems HTML5^H rectifies this (although I couldn’t understand that from reading the spec) |
| 16:55 | <Ms2ger> | Our bus factor for the HTML parser is pretty low |
| 16:57 | <matjas> | So <script>document.write('<script></script>');alert(1)</script> shouldn’t alert(1) as per HTML5^5 |
| 16:57 | <matjas> | → Same in HTML 4.01 |
| 16:58 | <matjas> | But <script>document.write('<div></div>');alert(42)</script> should alert(42) just fine |
| 16:58 | <matjas> | Even though HTML “Cake” 4.01 said it shouldn’t |
| 16:58 | <matjas> | (Tested and verified using Fx 4’s wonderful HTML5 parser) |
| 16:58 | <zewt> | why do people keep calling FF4 "Fx4"? heh |
| 16:59 | <zewt> | firefox = FF, it's waaaay too late to try to change that abbreviation |
| 16:59 | <matjas> | I’ve always used Fx |
| 16:59 | <zewt> | i've only seen it in like the last week |
| 16:59 | <matjas> | FF started to sound lame ever since the invention of Follow Friday |
| 16:59 | <matjas> | I know krijnhoetmer always uses Fx |
| 16:59 | matjas | blames him |
| 17:00 | <zewt> | "fx" is applied to so many countless things it's a terrible abbreviation, too |
| 17:00 | <zewt> | "FF", not nearly so much |
| 17:00 | <matjas> | The capital F makes it stand out IMHO |
| 17:05 | <Ms2ger> | Fx has always been the official abbreviation, afaik |
| 17:06 | <zewt> | nobody really gets to "pick" abbreviations; ultimately the language decides, and I've only seen FF, for many many years |
| 17:07 | <Ms2ger> | Not anymore :) |
| 17:07 | <zewt> | just was curious why suddenly I was seeing a few people going "Fx" in the last week or so--it's just confusing |
| 17:08 | <tw2113> | i think the version number helped out |
| 17:08 | <tw2113> | Fx4 |
| 17:17 | <erlehmann> | “64-bit Cubic Flash debunks 32-bit AS WITCHCRAFT!” |
| 17:55 | <gsnedders> | karlcow: Well, apart from nail varnish, no. |
| 18:50 | <Yuhong> | "I know that was never really enforced/implemented by browsers" |
| 18:51 | <Yuhong> | FYI, this is another artifact of HTML being based on SGML. |
| 18:51 | <Yuhong> | HTML4, that is. |
| 18:52 | <Yuhong> | In fact, this artifact applies to all elements that was declared in HTML4 as being CDATA, including for example the XMP element too. |
| 18:57 | <Yuhong> | The history: while the earliest libwww did not parse HTML as SGML, DanC were going to transition HTML to being based on SGML in 1992. |
| 18:58 | <Yuhong> | But then came Mosaic which didn't parse HTML as SGML, and it got so popular that... |
| 19:03 | jgraham | wonders why gsnedders is still banging on about nail varnish |
| 19:47 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: because karlcow mentioned it! |
| 21:44 | <GPHemsley> | Are there any live use cases of @hidden? I'm having trouble understanding why the spec isn't self-contradictory about @hidden. What's the intended usage and what isn't? |
| 21:44 | <GPHemsley> | And what about the fact that browser implement @hidden simply by setting 'display: none;"? |
| 21:56 | <jgraham> | GPHemsley: The intended use case is for cases where you want something to be removed from all renderings of the page (inc. audio, etc.) because it is not part of the currently relevant content |
| 21:57 | <GPHemsley> | but what is the definition of "relevant content" that allows this while disallowing, e.g., a tabbed interface? |
| 22:00 | <jgraham> | The idea is that a tabbed interaface could be linearized so that it was all visible at once |
| 22:02 | <jgraham> | I'm not clear if this is really a useful distinction or not |
| 22:08 | <zewt> | are you saying that !hidden also implies audio elements are inactive? that's not clear to me from the spec--it says that hidden elements are still active |
| 22:08 | <jgraham> | No, I meant an audio presentation of the webpage e.g. via some AT |
| 22:09 | <zewt> | i've never been able to find any purpose to that attribute--that is, any reason to ever use it instead of display: none |
| 22:14 | <jgraham> | The theory is that you can always disable CSS without changing the meaning, but you can't remove @hidden without changing the meaning |
| 22:14 | <jgraham> | Like I say this may be a purely theoretical concern |
| 22:14 | <zewt> | that sounds like a theory that doesn't hold up in real world use |
| 22:15 | <jgraham> | It certainly isn't universially true that removing CSS leaves sites functional |
| 22:15 | <zewt> | eg. most nontrivial pages have display: none's that you can't simply disable--things tied to scripts and so on |
| 22:16 | <jgraham> | On the other hand one can argue that we should be trying to make the web more media-independent, not less |
| 22:18 | <zewt> | personally, rather than trying to make CSS purely presentational, which I think is entirely academic, it seems more useful to distinguish (at an authoring POV) between functional and presentational rules |
| 22:19 | <zewt> | just as my elements very often have functional class names (for scripts to detect) next to presentational ones (for CSS) |
| 22:25 | <GPHemsley> | so... would a multi-step installation process (e.g.) be a valid use case for @hidden? |
| 22:26 | <GPHemsley> | where all steps other than the one you're currently on are marked with @hidden |
| 22:26 | <Ms2ger> | I'd say yes |
| 22:28 | <GPHemsley> | interesting |
| 22:32 | <zewt> | i suppose the main use case is making pages not break in no-style mode, which is probably one of the few cases where functional CSS actually causes a problem |
| 22:32 | <GPHemsley> | ah; hmm |
| 22:32 | <zewt> | of course, the only time anyone does that is when a page's style is really, really bad, heh |