| 01:29 | <Hixie> | am i right that XHR never uses CORS if the url to be fetched is same-origin, even if it redirects to a cross-origin resource? |
| 01:42 | <abarth> | Hixie: redirect handling in CORS implementations is somewhat nutty |
| 01:42 | <abarth> | and depends on whether the requests are synchronous |
| 01:42 | <abarth> | i suspect (hope!) the spec is less nutty |
| 01:43 | <Hixie> | i'm adding cors to <img> and <video> |
| 01:44 | <Hixie> | the way i've added it, if the url is same-origin, CORS doesn't kick in even if the url points to a redirect that is itself cross-origin |
| 01:47 | <zewt> | http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest-2/#infrastructure-for-the-send-method looks like it switches to cross-origin on a cross-origin redirect? |
| 01:50 | <Hixie> | ah, indeed |
| 01:50 | <Hixie> | well that's a pain |
| 01:50 | <Hixie> | i wish CORS had a codepath for same-origin requsts |
| 01:50 | <Hixie> | that would take care of this |
| 01:50 | <Hixie> | maybe i'll just wait for anne to get back and he can fix me up some simpler way of hooking in |
| 01:51 | <zewt> | reminds me: anyone know if there's any reliable (implemented) way to force preflight in XHR2, without adding a header to the main request? looks like hooking to progress events will do it, not sure how implemented that is... |
| 01:52 | <zewt> | doesn't look like it |
| 02:44 | <erlehmann> | gsnedders, with <http://warumnicht.so/test.html>;, is your outliner broken or am i doing something terribly wrong? |
| 02:47 | <erlehmann> | did not close title element. ignore it. -_- |
| 02:47 | <erlehmann> | IRC should put me less in reach with people so I think before annoying them. |
| 04:03 | <zewt> | ugh, i miss the days when you could reliably stop obnoxious animations by pressing escape; now everything's scripted and harder to get rid of |
| 04:04 | <wolfman2000> | How much scripting is involved with WhatWG anyway? I don't think I ever understood that part. |
| 05:26 | <wirepair> | why in the world do dom events decode entities from the attributes? |
| 05:27 | <wirepair> | https://blog.whitehatsec.com/its-a-dom-event/ |
| 05:27 | <wirepair> | that just seems crazy |
| 06:34 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: "The link types that contain no U+003A COLON characters (:), including all those defined in this specification, are ASCII case-insensitive values, and must be compared as such." |
| 06:34 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: which seems to imply that link types that do have a colon are compared code point for code point |
| 06:55 | <Akilo> | hop |
| 07:07 | <ifette> | Hixie: Why can a client continue to send on a websocket after calling close()? |
| 07:08 | <ifette> | The API says that if the connection is established and the closing handshake has not yet started, then the uaser agent must send data.... |
| 07:09 | <ifette> | why isn't it just defined in terms of "the closing handshake has started" |
| 07:09 | <ifette> | erm... sorry... i meant defiend in terms of the readyState |
| 07:10 | <ifette> | In an earlier email you said you wanted send() to bail if called after a server-initiated closing handshake, and that the current "start the websocket closing handshake" definition in the protocol is endpoint agnostic |
| 07:10 | <ifette> | I'm not sure why the initiating endpoint matters? |
| 08:08 | <hyungrok> | In the HTML5 parsing algorithm, when the parser sees </body> in the in-body insertion mode [§8.2.5.4.7] *without* <body> being in scope, does it still switch to the after-body insertion mode? |
| 08:16 | <Ms2ger> | hyungrok, I read "no" |
| 08:17 | <hyungrok> | And why would you read it that way? |
| 08:17 | <Ms2ger> | "Ignore this token" |
| 08:18 | <Ms2ger> | If you switch the mode, you haven't ignored it, no? |
| 08:18 | <hyungrok> | Yes. But then there's no "otherwise" around the "Switch the insertion mode..." bit. |
| 08:19 | <hyungrok> | For instance, a couple paragraphs below ("a start tag that's one of ‘address’ &c.), |
| 08:19 | <hyungrok> | it says: "If the stack of open elements has a p element in button scope, then act as if an end tag with the tag name "p" had been seen. |
| 08:19 | <hyungrok> | Insert an HTML element for the token." |
| 08:20 | <hyungrok> | Clearly it's meant that the parser should "insert an HTML element" regardless of the if above. |
| 08:22 | <Ms2ger> | (AFAICT, Gecko doesn't switch the mode) |
| 08:22 | <Dashiva> | hyungrok: The otherwise part is because it's another way to trigger a parse error (while not ignoring the token) |
| 08:25 | <Dashiva> | If you look at cases like 'A start tag whose tag name is "frameset"' having 'ignore the token' clearly implies stopping processing immediately |
| 08:25 | <hyungrok> | Okay. Thanks for the clarification. |
| 08:51 | <Hixie> | hsivonen: hm yeah, i should strip that. i'll file a bug. |
| 08:51 | <Hixie> | ifette: i don't have a strong opinion on that one way or the other, happy to spec it either way |
| 08:52 | <Hixie> | hyungrok: if the spec isn't clear on this, please don't hesitate to file a bug and i'll look at it more closely (use the widget in the bottom left of the spec to do that) |
| 08:53 | <ifette> | Hixie: I have added (in svn) a definition for "The WebSocket Closing Handshake is Started" |
| 08:53 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: good to know. Fortunately, I didn't get around to implementing that bit just yet |
| 08:53 | <ifette> | Upon either sending or receiving a Close control frame, it is said |
| 08:53 | <ifette> | that <spanx style='emph'>The WebSocket Closing Handshake is |
| 08:53 | <ifette> | Started</spanx>. |
| 08:53 | <Hixie> | hsivonen: done, filed as bug http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12677 |
| 08:53 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: btw, is it intentional to allow stuff like rel=stylesheet on <link> that appears in <body> as microdata? |
| 08:53 | <ifette> | i'm going through your email and trying to make sure i add all the hooks you need. if you want, I can also send you a patch for the api spec |
| 08:54 | <Hixie> | ifette: nah, i can do the api side. there's a bunch of other stuff i need to fix anyway. |
| 08:54 | <ifette> | Hixie: great |
| 08:54 | <Hixie> | ifette: awesome news on the protocol side update though, i look forward to it |
| 08:54 | <Hixie> | hsivonen: iirc that's not allowed, let me recheck |
| 08:55 | <ifette> | Hixie: I'm in Tokyo working with the WS guys. There's a ton of editorial stuff that has been brought up by editorial reviews, but I'm hoping to at least have your hooks done tonight. Will be able to send you a copy that includes that stuff in the next 24h. We're aiming to publish -08 early next week. |
| 08:55 | <Hixie> | ifette: i'm out til friday, so likely won't get to it til monday (i expect friday will be 100% dealing with e-mail... you know the drill) |
| 08:55 | <ifette> | Hixie: as for errors, I think there's very few errors left anymore, and most trigger a connection close -- let me talk with tyoshino et al, but i think it's probably safe to remove this.) |
| 08:56 | <Hixie> | hsivonen: wow, weird, i wonder why we allow both rel="" and itemprop="" |
| 08:57 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: anyway, as long as <link> and <a> have different allowed rels, this smells like a bug |
| 08:57 | <Hixie> | hsivonen: i think we should disallow rel="" outside <head> for <link>, and make itemprop and rel mutually exclusive -- what do you think? |
| 08:58 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: in principle, I think that makes sense |
| 08:58 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: however, I can see why someone might want to use both on <a> for backwards compat with tools that only scrape rel |
| 08:58 | <hsivonen> | if such tools are real anyway |
| 08:58 | <Hixie> | yeah i only mean for <link> |
| 08:58 | <Hixie> | agreed on <a> |
| 08:58 | <Hixie> | i filed http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12678 for <link> |
| 08:59 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: thanks |
| 09:00 | <Hixie> | ifette: just saw your mail; does our discussion above clarify the issue sufficiently? |
| 09:08 | <zcorpan> | hey ifette |
| 09:08 | zcorpan | goes to read backlog |
| 09:10 | <ifette> | hey |
| 09:12 | <zcorpan> | [10:03] <ifette> Hixie: as for errors, I think there's very few errors left anymore, and most trigger a connection close -- let me talk with tyoshino et al, but i think it's probably safe to remove this.) |
| 09:12 | <zcorpan> | ifette: what does that refer to? |
| 09:12 | <ifette> | websocket onError event |
| 09:12 | <zcorpan> | got a link to your latest draft? |
| 09:13 | <ifette> | http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/hybi/trac/browser/websocket - still being worked on, will have a new draft next week |
| 09:14 | <ifette> | http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/hybi/trac/browser/websocket/draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol.xml rather |
| 09:15 | <zcorpan> | thanks |
| 09:17 | <zcorpan> | ifette: where does it define when onerror is to be invoked? |
| 09:28 | <ifette> | it doesn't |
| 09:37 | <zcorpan> | Hixie: why the hyphen in cross-origin? |
| 09:37 | <Hixie> | why not? |
| 09:40 | <zcorpan> | because we generally try to avoid hyphens in element and attribute names |
| 09:41 | <Hixie> | we do? |
| 09:42 | <zcorpan> | c.f. event-source |
| 09:42 | <Hixie> | what was our reasoning on that one again? |
| 09:42 | <Hixie> | for attributes we have several precedents |
| 09:43 | <Hixie> | accept-charset, http-equiv |
| 09:43 | <jgraham> | Consistency, I thought |
| 09:43 | <Hixie> | i guess for elements it makes sense |
| 09:43 | <Hixie> | i don't really mind either way, i just thought crossorigin="" looked worse than cross-origin="" |
| 09:43 | <Hixie> | but it's a trivial matter really |
| 09:44 | <Hixie> | if you think it should be crossorigin="" then mail the list, i can change it |
| 09:44 | <Hixie> | right now though, i must go sleep |
| 09:44 | <Hixie> | nn |
| 09:51 | <zcorpan> | i can find http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/commit-watchers-whatwg.org/2008/001052.html but not the email where Hixie argues for the rename |
| 09:54 | <erlehmann> | zcorpan, i think “cross-origin” is better. easier to read. |
| 09:54 | <jgraham> | We tend to use - in author-supplied things |
| 09:55 | <jgraham> | Like -data- |
| 09:55 | zcorpan | also finds http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6153 which is the date of the rename i think |
| 09:56 | <zcorpan> | uh, no it wasn't |
| 09:59 | <zcorpan> | http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20080707#l-26 |
| 10:01 | <hsivonen> | Should the validator warn about <meta name> or <link rel> values that are in the "proposal" state? |
| 10:01 | <hsivonen> | or should proposals count as silently OK? |
| 10:02 | hsivonen | observes that http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions lacks links to more details |
| 10:04 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: any plans to delegate meta extensions to microformats.org, too? |
| 10:05 | hsivonen | observes that the MetaExtensions page has some registrations that are invalid because they claim a space of tokens instead of enumerating tokens |
| 10:08 | <zcorpan> | Philip`: video is still on iframe.html |
| 10:10 | <zcorpan> | heh, click on cross-origin definition in http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete/the-iframe-element.html#attr-media-cross-origin |
| 10:10 | <hsivonen> | Do the meta name extensions that Nick Levinson added have any specs at a URL? |
| 10:10 | <hsivonen> | Should registry entries that fail to link to a spec be removed from the registry? |
| 10:18 | <zcorpan> | ok so video is now same-origin by default? is that gonna fly? |
| 10:19 | <zcorpan> | "Otherwise, fetch the current media resource, from the media element's Document's origin, with the force same-origin flag set." http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete/the-iframe-element.html#concept-media-load-resource |
| 10:19 | <zcorpan> | foolip: ^ |
| 10:20 | <foolip> | zcorpan, no, I don't think it's a good idea at all, and intended to complain about it |
| 10:20 | <foolip> | but please do it for me |
| 10:20 | <zcorpan> | what were you going to say? :) |
| 10:20 | <foolip> | actually, the spec already said something along these lines before the recent cross-origin attribute change, but I've ignored the spec on that point |
| 10:21 | <zcorpan> | oh? |
| 10:21 | <foolip> | I haven't read the diff yet, so I'm not sure what it's trying to do |
| 10:21 | <foolip> | but I don't think that the cross-origin attribute should be needed to load <video> elements cross-origin |
| 10:22 | <foolip> | IIUC, the current spec suggests that a network error should be the result |
| 10:22 | <zcorpan> | ah yeah video had force same-origin before too |
| 10:23 | <foolip> | yes, which I ignored, and I think everyone else too |
| 10:23 | <foolip> | not sure what the overall philosophy here is |
| 10:25 | <zcorpan> | ok filed a bug |
| 10:25 | <foolip> | thanks |
| 13:18 | <hsivonen> | I curated http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions . Please review. |
| 13:28 | <karlcow> | hsivonen: what is the list of requirements? |
| 13:28 | <karlcow> | " Proposals that don't meet the requirements for a registration" |
| 13:29 | <hsivonen> | karlcow: see the link in the first paragraph of the page |
| 13:30 | <hsivonen> | karlcow: now the word "requirements" is also a link in the heading |
| 13:30 | <karlcow> | hmm I see. Thanks. :) ah thanks for the modification too. |
| 13:37 | <jgraham> | hsivonen: Remind me what was decided about filtering of innerHTML input into the parser and whether it made it into the spec or not |
| 13:38 | <hsivonen> | jgraham: no filtering. Not sure if it made into the spec. |
| 13:39 | <jgraham> | For anything including CR and so on? |
| 13:39 | <hsivonen> | jgraham: oh, CR and CRLF normalization happens |
| 13:39 | jgraham | seems to remember that being the case |
| 13:40 | <jgraham> | OK. So no filtering but CR normalization happens |
| 13:40 | <jgraham> | I will see if the spec agrees :) |
| 13:40 | <hsivonen> | jgraham: let's change the spec if it doesn't :-) |
| 13:40 | <jgraham> | Indeed |
| 13:41 | <jgraham> | I'm all in favour of this approach |
| 13:44 | <hsivonen> | I wonder if I should bother to implement validation for the value of the content attribute when the value of the name attribute is viewport, robots or one of the robot-specific synonyms for robots... |
| 13:46 | <zcorpan> | hsivonen: do the robot-specific synonyms have the same syntax and no extensions? |
| 13:47 | <hsivonen> | zcorpan: at least when extensions are supported, documentations says they are supported for "robots", too |
| 13:47 | <hsivonen> | zcorpan: not sure if some bot-specific synonyms allow a narrower set of tokens only |
| 13:48 | <hsivonen> | probably |
| 13:48 | <hsivonen> | I'd expect <meta name=googlebot content=NOYDIR> not to be supported by Google |
| 13:50 | hsivonen | wonders how many people use Teoma as their search engine |
| 13:51 | <hsivonen> | wow. this is uncool: whenever a Teoma result should point to wikipedia, it points to wiki.ask.com instead |
| 13:51 | <hsivonen> | which is just a copy of the wikipedia article |
| 13:51 | <hsivonen> | allowed by the license of course. |
| 13:51 | <hsivonen> | but still not cool |
| 13:52 | <hsivonen> | at least Google didn't go there with Knol |
| 14:11 | <roc> | Google didn't go anywhere with Knol |
| 14:11 | <roc> | there are quite a few copies of wikipedia floating around trying to get traffic |
| 14:15 | <mpilgrim> | it turns out true experts aren't well-motivated by the prospect of earning a few pennies on ads writing on someone else's site |
| 14:16 | <mpilgrim> | but content spammers are |
| 14:16 | <mpilgrim> | go figure |
| 14:23 | <hsivonen> | ok. Validator.nu now checks the value of rel="" and <meta name="">. |
| 14:23 | <hsivonen> | enjoy the new strictness |
| 14:23 | <hsivonen> | or if you don't enjoy it, please get your unregistered tokens registered! |
| 14:32 | mpilgrim | furiously checks his own sites |
| 14:33 | <mpilgrim> | rel="shortcut icon" is invalid now? |
| 14:33 | <mpilgrim> | @hsivonen |
| 14:41 | <hsivonen> | mpilgrim: not registered according to the requirements set forth in the spec! |
| 14:42 | <hsivonen> | also, it appears that no one has registered google-site-verification so far for <meta name> |
| 14:42 | <mpilgrim> | does rel="icon" actually work without "shortcut"? |
| 14:43 | <hsivonen> | mpilgrim: I don't know. I sure hope Hixie knows and tested before leaving "shortcut" out of the spec! |
| 14:43 | <hsivonen> | clearly, having "shortcut" be invalid is not going to be practical |
| 14:47 | <jgraham> | Hmm, I assumed that the LC CfC was per-Member, but it seems to be set up as per-individual |
| 14:47 | wilhelm | slaps whoever came up with urn: schemes. |
| 14:47 | <hsivonen> | jgraham: it's per-individual |
| 14:47 | <jgraham> | hsivonen: Where did the chairs say that? |
| 14:47 | <jgraham> | (and why? That doesn't make much sense) |
| 14:48 | <matjas> | hsivonen: is validator.nu supposed to error for `rel=me` and `rel=nofollow`? aren’t those registered? |
| 14:49 | <hsivonen> | matjas: for rel=me, it's supposed to err until someone fixes the registry |
| 14:49 | <hsivonen> | matjas: for rel=nofollow, not supposed to err |
| 14:49 | hsivonen | checks |
| 14:50 | <hsivonen> | matjas: <a rel=nofollow> WFM |
| 14:50 | <hsivonen> | matjas: <link rel=nofollow> is an error per spec, though |
| 14:51 | <hsivonen> | matjas: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011May/0213.html |
| 14:51 | <matjas> | my bad, I was testing `rel="me nofollow"` and it just threw an error for `nofollow` |
| 14:51 | <hsivonen> | matjas: on which element? |
| 14:52 | <matjas> | hsivonen: for `me`, sorry |
| 14:52 | matjas | needs more sleep |
| 14:52 | <matjas> | thanks for that link |
| 15:04 | <zcorpan> | hmm, i guess whining about rel="shortcut icon" is mostly a time waster |
| 15:04 | <zcorpan> | hsivonen: ^ |
| 15:05 | <hsivonen> | zcorpan: yes, indeed |
| 15:08 | <hsivonen> | zcorpan: let's get it registered. |
| 15:08 | <hsivonen> | First, gotta find a spec for it. |
| 15:09 | zcorpan | finds http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms537656(v=vs.85).aspx#Associate_the_Icon_with_Your_Web_Page |
| 15:11 | <hsivonen> | zcorpan: thanks |
| 15:11 | <matjas> | “HTML5” standardizes /favicon.ico anyways |
| 15:12 | <hsivonen> | the microformats.org wiki is slow today |
| 15:12 | <matjas> | no need to register `shortcut` IMHO |
| 15:12 | <zcorpan> | matjas: still a time waster |
| 15:12 | <matjas> | most people don’t seem to know about /favicon.ico |
| 15:12 | <matjas> | so it may just be helpful |
| 15:13 | <zcorpan> | what if you want to use different icons for different pages, or want to locate the icon somewhere else? |
| 15:14 | <matjas> | sure |
| 15:14 | <matjas> | if oldIE support is a must then you would still use rel="shortcut icon" |
| 15:15 | <matjas> | although IMHO /favicon.ico could be considered as graceful degradation for that |
| 15:15 | <matjas> | so you could just use `icon` |
| 15:16 | <hsivonen> | registering "shortcut" would be easier if the wiki wasn't so slow |
| 15:16 | <matjas> | it’s a sign! |
| 15:17 | matjas | runs |
| 15:20 | <karlcow> | https://github.com/wireghoul/htshells |
| 15:23 | <hsivonen> | aargh. the microformats wiki is completely unusable right now |
| 15:25 | <hsivonen> | now there's an FO to advancing HTML5 to REC. that's more like an HTML WG poll. |
| 15:31 | <jgraham> | Only from someone who objected to everything |
| 15:32 | <mpilgrim> | in retrospect, migrating a 300 MB repository to new hosting while sitting in an internet cafe was not the brightest decision i've ever made |
| 15:32 | <mpilgrim> | though it is by no means the dumbest, either |
| 15:33 | <Jon47> | lol |
| 15:35 | <hsivonen> | jgraham: still, it wouldn't feel like an HTML WG poll without an FO |
| 15:37 | <hsivonen> | I sure hope the slowness of the microformats.org wiki is transient. otherwise, the experience for registering stuff is not going to be good. |
| 15:37 | <mpilgrim> | tantek can probably fix it once he wakes up |
| 15:38 | <mpilgrim> | ironically, the administration of the microformats site is not distributed |
| 15:39 | <hsivonen> | hooray, now we have one registration: http://microformats.org/wiki/existing-rel-values#HTML5_link_type_extensions |
| 15:39 | <hsivonen> | time to implement it in software |
| 15:39 | <jgraham> | This is not news, but occasionally I read emails from a11y taskforce people and get visions of a strange and distressing world. What on earth could a "Text Subteam" possibly be? |
| 15:41 | <hsivonen> | jgraham: is there an org chart for the a11y TF? |
| 15:43 | <jgraham> | hsivonen: Who knows |
| 15:43 | <mpilgrim> | hsivonen: they talked about making one, but it got bogged down in discussions of how to make it accessible |
| 15:43 | <jgraham> | I imagine reading it would be like staring into the void |
| 15:44 | <hsivonen> | bitbucket is also being slow today |
| 15:44 | <jgraham> | Worryingly I can't tell if mpilgrim is serious or not |
| 15:44 | <hsivonen> | I wonder if there's something wrong with my connection |
| 15:46 | <mpilgrim> | jgraham: what you're experiencing is the a11y version of Poe's Law |
| 15:46 | <jgraham> | hsivonen: Microformats wiki seems fine to me |
| 15:46 | <mpilgrim> | which states that it's impossible to distinguish between parodies of religious extremism and religious extremism itself |
| 15:46 | <mpilgrim> | (and i was kidding, btw) |
| 15:47 | <karlcow> | a FO for a wrong dated link… |
| 15:47 | <karlcow> | I don't understand |
| 15:48 | <karlcow> | I think there is a misunderstanding about what is FO |
| 15:49 | <hsivonen> | mpilgrim: rel="shortcut icon" is now valid |
| 15:50 | <mpilgrim> | that was quick. i haven't even finished migrating my repository yet (which i was doing so i could check in that fix) |
| 15:50 | <jgraham> | karlcow: Since the chairs have propogated the idea that a FO is the only kind of dissent that they will pay attention to, it is not surprising that people use it for trivia |
| 15:51 | <karlcow> | specifically when the dated URI is the URI of 24 May WHEN the spec will enter Last Call. Any pub request is always like that |
| 15:51 | <karlcow> | it is silly |
| 15:54 | <karlcow> | ah MikeSmith has answered. good good http://www.w3.org/mid/20110518134400.GB59744@sideshowbarker |
| 15:55 | <MikeSmith> | yeah, I think I've also resolved this problem with the drafts not being static |
| 15:55 | <MikeSmith> | by making copies of them and setting up some temporary redirects |
| 16:00 | <zcorpan> | hsivonen: rel="shortcut" without icon validates too |
| 16:00 | <karlcow> | hsivonen: suggestion for validator.nu (just thoughts), for the values which are not yet accepted but identified in a page would it be interesting to have a Warning text saying "this value is in the list but not formally accepted or rejected. You may [Help](link to the wiki) to fix it." |
| 16:00 | <jgraham> | hsivonen: Your msdn link is 404 for me |
| 16:02 | karlcow | thinks poor hsivonen… 3 opera persons bothering him in a row :p |
| 16:02 | <hsivonen> | karlcow: there's already a link to the wiki registry. do you mean I should rephrase it? |
| 16:02 | <karlcow> | let me check again. |
| 16:03 | <hsivonen> | zcorpan: sure, the spec doesn't support co-occurrence constraints for validitity |
| 16:03 | <hsivonen> | zcorpan: even though alternate and stylesheet are magic together |
| 16:03 | <hsivonen> | jgraham: the link was supposed to be http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms537656%28v=vs.85%29.aspx#Associate_the_Icon_with_Your_Web_Page |
| 16:04 | <hsivonen> | did the wiki mangle it? |
| 16:05 | <hsivonen> | if someone else has a faster connection to the wiki, feel free to paste in the correct link from IRC |
| 16:05 | <hsivonen> | I'm going to go deal with dishes in the kitchen while the wiki loads |
| 16:07 | <karlcow> | s/is not registered./is [proposed|rejected]./ |
| 16:07 | <karlcow> | and when in the category proposed: "You may help get it rejected or accepted… and then the prose with links" |
| 16:08 | <hsivonen> | karlcow: for practical purposes, "Proposed" has to count as valid |
| 16:08 | <hsivonen> | karlcow: since most things will sit in the "Proposed" state for years |
| 16:09 | <zcorpan> | hsivonen: i thought about alternate stylesheet but they can be used alone while shortcut is meaningless alone |
| 16:09 | <karlcow> | so I just tried with name="creator" and it says Error |
| 16:09 | <hsivonen> | karlcow: otherwise, this would be just another IANA exercise with the designated expert denying validity |
| 16:09 | <hsivonen> | karlcow: creator is not registered according to the requirements for registration |
| 16:09 | <hsivonen> | (I'm starting to sound like a Designated Expert. Hmm.) |
| 16:09 | <karlcow> | ah sorry I might be using the wrong vocabulary |
| 16:10 | <karlcow> | I'm talking about this list in which creator is for example |
| 16:10 | <karlcow> | http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions#Proposals_that_don.27t_meet_the_requirements_for_a_registration |
| 16:11 | <hsivonen> | karlcow: that's a list of stuff that doesn't meet the requirements, so the validator doesn't know about that list |
| 16:11 | <karlcow> | This I understood. |
| 16:12 | <hsivonen> | zcorpan: it seems a spec amendment would be required for making shortcut without icon invalid |
| 16:12 | <karlcow> | What I'm proposing is that the validator knows about it, to speed up rejection or adoption by inviting people to give information on the wiki. |
| 16:12 | <karlcow> | As I said just thoughts. |
| 17:02 | <hsivonen> | krijnh: it seems the yellow highlights don't get saved |
| 18:32 | <linclark> | is this a good channel for asking questions about microdata? or is there another channel for that |
| 18:35 | <TabAtkins> | Go ahead. |
| 18:47 | <linclark> | is there a list of known consumers of microdata yet? I see that there are notes that parts are ready for first implmentation, I'm not sure whether there have been any |
| 18:48 | <TabAtkins> | Google consumes at least some Microdata. |
| 18:48 | <TabAtkins> | Dunno if there's a comprehensive list. |
| 18:49 | <hsivonen> | TabAtkins: has Google's consumption been investigated for spec compliance? |
| 18:55 | <TabAtkins> | hsivonen: Not to my knowledge, but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened. |
| 19:02 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: data point: After I added rel and name checking to Validator.nu, 5 people gave me feedback almost immediately |
| 19:03 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: 4 of the 5 people were concerned about rel="shortcut icon" |
| 19:04 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: considering how popular "shortcut icon" is and considering that Microsoft was the first to mint it before other implemented just "icon", it would make sense to grandfather "shortcut icon" |
| 19:04 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: right now, to make the validator not suck, I have to register "shortcut" |
| 19:04 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: which means that rel="shortcut" becomes valid |
| 19:04 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: which is bogus |
| 19:04 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: but the closest approximation that the registration mechanism provides |
| 19:05 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: also, the 5th person was interested in the registration of "shortcut" afterwards |
| 19:11 | <hsivonen> | btw, bonus points to anyone who can dig up Microsoft documentation that says that Bing pays attention to <meta name=msnbot> |
| 23:22 | <AryehGregor> | Did anyone file a bug/make a whatwg post on <http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ieinternals/archive/2011/05/17/url-fragments-and-redirects-anchor-hash-missing.aspx>;? |
| 23:22 | <AryehGregor> | Oh, it looks like HTTP is being updated to fix it or something? |