| 00:28 | <gsnedders> | Hixie_: Haters gonna hate. |
| 00:29 | <gsnedders> | Hixie_: Also, I believe that's a one line fix in html5lib. ;P |
| 00:36 | GPHemsley | mumbles something about the krijn log being too quick to disable tagging lines |
| 00:36 | <GPHemsley> | s/tag/flag/ |
| 00:40 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie_: Argh, I already have enough email. ;_; |
| 00:40 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie_: Quit being so productive! |
| 00:40 | <gsnedders> | MOAR EMAIL. |
| 04:09 | <Hixie_> | GPHemsley: eh, it doesn't happen that often! |
| 04:37 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie_: wonder what your thoughts are on adding the <shadow> and <content> elements to the HTML spec |
| 05:08 | <Hixie_> | MikeSmith: i'd need to know more :-) |
| 05:12 | <MikeSmith> | the elements are defined in the Shadow DOM spec and implemented in blink and soonish in gecko (there's a patch from wchen for the <content> element waiting or review) |
| 05:12 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie_: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/shadow/index.html#content-element and https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/shadow/index.html#shadow-element |
| 05:13 | <MikeSmith> | as far as I understand, they don't have any special effect on parsing |
| 05:13 | <Hixie_> | where does it go? inside a <template>? |
| 05:14 | <MikeSmith> | no, anywhere |
| 05:14 | <MikeSmith> | flow content |
| 05:14 | <Hixie_> | what does it do? |
| 05:14 | <Hixie_> | i don't understand the spec |
| 05:15 | <Hixie_> | this is like reading an alternate reality version of xbl2 |
| 05:15 | <MikeSmith> | heh |
| 05:16 | <MikeSmith> | anyway, to be clear, it can go inside a <template> but it's not restricted to just that |
| 05:16 | <MikeSmith> | but then I guess anything else can go inside a <template> too |
| 05:16 | <Hixie_> | i'm too tired to figure it out now. i don't understand what this does. send a mail explaining what the element does and where it would make sense, and how it should be defined, assuming the spec is stable enough that it makes sense to integrate yet. |
| 05:17 | <MikeSmith> | ok |
| 05:17 | <Hixie_> | in principle though, sure |
| 05:17 | Hixie_ | is trying to buy glassware |
| 05:17 | <Hixie_> | "features: lead free" |
| 05:18 | <Hixie_> | we're still calling that a feature? |
| 05:18 | <Hixie_> | should i be worried that it doesn't say "mercury free"? |
| 05:18 | <MikeSmith> | hah |
| 06:57 | <annevk> | "ITS 2.0, Selectors 4 and Selectors API 2" o_O |
| 06:57 | <annevk> | There's so many crazy suggestions in that thread I don't even |
| 09:08 | <annevk> | "Deciding to spice up the morning by filling the kettle slightly past the recommended level, then thinking better of it" https://twitter.com/SoVeryBritish/status/351986543797346305 |
| 09:23 | <jgraham> | annevk: Glad you are adjusting to life in the UK :) |
| 09:32 | <sangwhan> | tobie: sorry 'bout that |
| 09:41 | <jgraham> | The "And revert" thing? |
| 09:41 | <jgraham> | Would be nice not to be running tests on production repos where possible |
| 09:41 | <darobin> | wuss :) |
| 09:41 | <jgraham> | In this case I don't see why it is needed |
| 09:42 | <jgraham> | Not wuss, just don't like getting the email :) |
| 09:43 | <jgraham> | I already want to slap the github people until they realise that one email per change is insane |
| 09:43 | <Ms2ger> | I always want to slap github people |
| 09:49 | <sangwhan> | Was trying to get rid of as many PRs as possible to hopefully reduce the amount of mails I get |
| 09:50 | <sangwhan> | And then there is critic, which I should probably try to opt out for some of the stuff |
| 09:50 | <sangwhan> | I wonder how long XHR tests will be getting fixups |
| 09:50 | <jgraham> | Aren't you like 86% of the way there |
| 09:51 | <sangwhan> | Dunno, haven't been reading them |
| 09:51 | <Ms2ger> | I know hallvors has been making a lot of commits |
| 09:54 | <sangwhan> | In my defense I never imagined someone would use the production repo for "testing" things |
| 09:54 | <Ms2ger> | Defense denied |
| 09:56 | <sangwhan> | Bah |
| 10:19 | <annevk> | How do you guys deal with duplicated tests? |
| 10:19 | <annevk> | There's many URL tests though in some sense it seems easier to just start over... |
| 10:21 | <annevk> | The tests I have thus far in https://github.com/annevk/url are mostly from WebKit with adjustments to conform to the spec |
| 10:22 | <darobin> | annevk: by duplicated I mean presumably testing the same thing, but not exactly the same file? |
| 10:22 | <darobin> | annevk: if you have tests which you believe are exhaustive and of better quality, then adding them and removing the old ones seems fine to me |
| 10:23 | <darobin> | though maybe do the removal in a separate PR? |
| 10:23 | <annevk> | Yeah, the same structure in setup. The other problem with URLs is that there's many many tests and grouping them is kinda hard. |
| 10:23 | <darobin> | (and of course, please triple check that you're really removing duplication) |
| 10:23 | <annevk> | I don't think the test repo has URL tests at the moment. |
| 10:23 | <darobin> | I didn't think so either but you said there were dupes so I imagined you'd found some :) |
| 10:23 | <annevk> | And what you just said there is a lot of tedious work. There's thousands of tests... |
| 10:24 | <darobin> | Testing is tedious work. Film 11. |
| 10:24 | <annevk> | Dupes between browser vendors, etc. |
| 10:24 | <darobin> | *at |
| 10:24 | <darobin> | oh that |
| 10:24 | <darobin> | well, tests that aren't in the repo don't exist |
| 10:24 | <annevk> | Well, if you're just gonna repeat what I already know, I guess I'm out of luck |
| 10:24 | <darobin> | what were you hoping for? |
| 10:25 | <annevk> | Some kind of strategy or tactic used to date |
| 10:25 | <darobin> | strategy for what? |
| 10:25 | <darobin> | getting vendors to align on a single suite for a given area? |
| 10:26 | <sangwhan_> | I assume this question has already been asked earlier, but has there been work to do a batch executer that will run everything and collect the results for everything? |
| 10:26 | <jgraham> | The strategy is "duplication is the least of our worries" |
| 10:26 | <jgraham> | Typically people don't write exactly the same test |
| 10:26 | <annevk> | The other problem is that existing tests don't necessarily align with the standard |
| 10:27 | <jgraham> | So having multiple simplar things isn't that high cost. And javascript tests are very fast to run |
| 10:27 | <annevk> | But that the standard might need to change based on those tests |
| 10:27 | <darobin> | sangwhan_: there are plans to make that happen, yes |
| 10:27 | <jgraham> | Right, well tests and/or the standards being wrong is a problem ofc |
| 10:27 | <annevk> | And I feel like my current copy-and-paste approach and adjusting things as I go is somewhat crappy |
| 10:27 | <jgraham> | sangwhan_: Experience suggests that will be harder than you would expect |
| 10:27 | <annevk> | But I can't think of anything that'd work better :/ |
| 10:27 | sangwhan_ | is trying to un-f*up the previous PR merges, but haven't been able to find a nice way to do it so far |
| 10:28 | <sangwhan_> | jgraham: Experience suggests making that work on a non-desktop is going to be a nightmare no matter what |
| 10:28 | <jgraham> | I was only thinking about desktop |
| 10:29 | <tobie> | sangwhan: yes, using webdriver and saucelabs |
| 10:29 | <sangwhan_> | Desktop is bad enough, and I've seen some PRs that don't use testharness so good luck with those |
| 10:30 | <Ms2ger> | sangwhan_, for testharness.js tests, I've already implemented that |
| 10:31 | <sangwhan_> | Ms2ger: generic or Gecko specific? |
| 10:38 | <jgraham> | sangwhan_: Both, I think |
| 10:38 | <jgraham> | Although I think strictly it isn't correct since it uses iframes or something |
| 10:40 | <Ms2ger> | Right, the generic one uses iframes |
| 10:41 | <Ms2ger> | Then again, Mozilla runs them in iframes anyway, so they'd better work that way |
| 10:41 | <sangwhan_> | Yeah, I guess there aren't better ways to do it in a generic way |
| 10:41 | <jgraham> | Really? That seems problematic |
| 10:41 | <jgraham> | You can rather easily write tests that depend on being in a top-level document |
| 10:41 | <sangwhan_> | iframes does reduce the purity of the test runs significantly though (captain obvious reporting) |
| 10:42 | <jgraham> | Or, to put it differently, there are things that require a top-level document to test |
| 10:42 | <Ms2ger> | Then you can window.open() |
| 10:43 | <sangwhan_> | Get a machine with 256GBs of memory and window.open() everything :) |
| 10:45 | <darobin> | hopefully you can window.close() too :) |
| 10:46 | <jgraham> | Ms2ger: Right, but it would be nice if the top level document was window.opened rather than an iframe |
| 10:46 | <Ms2ger> | I dunno |
| 10:47 | <jgraham> | Well actually |
| 10:47 | <Ms2ger> | I haven't hit issues with the iframes as far as I can remember |
| 10:47 | <jgraham> | The Right Thing To Do is to drive the browser from the outside |
| 10:47 | <Ms2ger> | Sure |
| 10:47 | <sangwhan_> | Rather than having this debate wouldn't it make sense to use webdriver? |
| 10:47 | <jgraham> | So that the top level document is a top level document with no opener or parent |
| 10:47 | <Ms2ger> | Webdriver is all fun and stuff |
| 10:48 | <Ms2ger> | But I like being able to run tests without giving more privileges than a website gets |
| 10:48 | <sangwhan_> | Having the window/document as a clean slate if possible is nice, yes |
| 10:48 | <jgraham> | So actually afaict browsers typically use their low-level primitives for implementing webdriver directly |
| 10:48 | <jgraham> | s/browsers/vendors/ |
| 10:49 | <Ms2ger> | There's two goals here, IMO |
| 10:49 | <jgraham> | Ms2ger: Sure |
| 10:49 | <Ms2ger> | One is vendors running tests in automation, the other is comparing browsers |
| 10:49 | <jgraham> | Being able to run the tests from w3c-test.org is a different use case to being able to run them in an automated test system |
| 10:50 | <sangwhan_> | Although not performant nor standardizable just restarting the browser with a test URL every time could even work... |
| 10:50 | sangwhan_ | recalls at least one tool in Opera did this |
| 10:51 | <Ms2ger> | It feels like Opera has a million different test harnesses and runners |
| 10:51 | <jgraham> | Ms2ger: I think you are off by a few orders of magnitude there |
| 10:51 | <sangwhan_> | The one I mentioned has been retired, hence "did" |
| 10:51 | <Ms2ger> | Billion? |
| 10:51 | <jgraham> | Although I hesitate to say in which direction |
| 10:52 | <Ms2ger> | I have to say I wonder what lead(s) to that |
| 10:52 | sangwhan_ | doesn't even know how many, mostly because I've only seen them in bug reports |
| 10:53 | <jgraham> | Well it's not actually that many |
| 10:54 | <jgraham> | One thing that kept multiple systems alive was that people in e.g. TV SDK had much fewer exposed APIs and so made much more basic tools |
| 10:54 | <jgraham> | *many fewer |
| 10:54 | <jgraham> | Partly it's the organisation structure and the culture of course |
| 10:56 | <Ms2ger> | Maybe we have relatively few because it's such a pain to set up a new one |
| 10:56 | <sangwhan_> | But yes, I know a fair amount of systems were born because of platform limitations |
| 10:56 | <jgraham> | But we ended up with one tool that did all testing for core and a lot of testing for desktop, and an evolution of that tool is now used for product testing |
| 11:00 | <jgraham> | Anyway, all browser vendors are strange in their own way |
| 11:01 | <jgraham> | For example Mozilla still use a bugtracker as a review system |
| 11:02 | <jgraham> | And Google think that PNaCl is a swell idea |
| 11:04 | <jgraham> | (I assume no one needs convincing that Apple or Microsoft are odd) |
| 11:05 | <Ms2ger> | Hey, the bugtracker as a review system is actually an excellent idea ;) |
| 11:06 | jgraham | wonders if Ms2ger is on the run from an asylum |
| 11:07 | <Ms2ger> | As usual, yes |
| 11:32 | <GPHemsley> | FTR: The Shadow DOM spec uses a deprecated URL to link to the DOM Parsing and Serialization spec. |
| 11:32 | <Ms2ger> | File a bug? |
| 11:32 | <GPHemsley> | The current URL is: http://domparsing.spec.whatwg.org/ |
| 11:32 | <GPHemsley> | Ms2ger: I use #WHATWG as my bug tracker. >_> |
| 11:37 | <GPHemsley> | The spec actually links to a Wikipedia article on a particular coffee beverage o_0 |
| 11:37 | <Ms2ger> | Which, Java? |
| 11:38 | <GPHemsley> | Green Eye |
| 11:38 | <GPHemsley> | whatever that is |
| 11:38 | <GPHemsley> | it also links to WoW |
| 11:39 | <sangwhan_> | search for n00b |
| 11:40 | <sangwhan_> | Ms2ger: are the pending PRs that on web-platform-tests from you intentionally pending, or has nobody looked at them? |
| 11:41 | <Ms2ger> | Probably the latter |
| 11:41 | <Ms2ger> | I don't know if jgraham has been intentionally ignoring them :) |
| 11:44 | <sangwhan_> | :) |
| 12:32 | <tobie> | sangwhan: you might also want to join #testing on irc.w3.org |
| 14:33 | <Hixie_> | MikeSmith: thanks for the e-mail abotu <shadow> and <content> |
| 14:34 | <Hixie_> | MikeSmith: can you elaborate on when you would use these elements in an HTML document? wouldn't they only be used in the definition of a shadow tree? |
| 15:32 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie_: yeah, only in a shadow tree definition |
| 15:36 | <MikeSmith> | but within that shadow-tree definition, they should be allowed anywhere flow content is allowed |
| 16:10 | <galant> | I have big problem, I insert line feed character into contenteditable text node everything is fine but the caret/cursor position for writing is in previous line, when I write something everything is right, the text is written in new line, but before I write anything the caret/cursor stay in previous line, why is this happening? |
| 16:20 | <Hixie_> | MikeSmith: so what distinguishes a shadow tree definition from anything else? |
| 16:21 | <Hixie_> | galant: are you inserting the line break as a raw U+000A character, or as a <br> element? |
| 16:22 | <galant> | Hixie_, I am trying to make WYSIWYG editor |
| 16:23 | <galant> | contenteditable is inserting divs on pressing enter key, I am deleting those divs and I am inseerting line feed character (im on linux) and caret position is in previous line but when I start writing caret position is going in the next line |
| 16:23 | <jgraham> | galant: In all browsers? |
| 16:24 | <galant> | so everything is fine expect caret position is showing in previous line before I start writing for some reason |
| 16:24 | <galant> | I am trying this in chromium now ill try in iceweasel |
| 16:26 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie_: I guess what distinguishes it is, it's either part of a document fragment created from a <template> or otherwise a node created through script that's not be appended anywhere in the DOM |
| 16:26 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie_: as far as I understand it at least |
| 16:26 | <galant> | hmm |
| 16:26 | <galant> | now this is strange |
| 16:27 | <galant> | in iceweasel (firefox) I see br characters when I insert line feed character |
| 16:27 | <galant> | and everything is fine |
| 16:27 | <galant> | I get new lines and caret position is placed in the new lines |
| 16:27 | <galant> | I am not sure why I see br characters in iceweasel and not in chromium? |
| 16:28 | <Hixie_> | MikeSmith: we should understand this better before adding this to the spec. in particular, it affects where the elements should be allowed. |
| 16:28 | <galant> | after each new line I see one br element and on the end there is <br type="_moz"> |
| 16:29 | <Hixie_> | galant: i wish i could help you, i don't know this stuff well enough :-( |
| 16:29 | <galant> | :S ok |
| 16:34 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie_: yeah, I suppose so. Maybe dglazkov can help. If not, I'm not sure who else could |
| 17:00 | <dglazkov> | good morning, Whatwg! |
| 18:31 | <Hixie_> | i don't suppose anyone has tests for cross-origin use of showModalDialog... |
| 18:45 | <Ms2ger> | Hixie_, maybe... If anyone, it'd be bholley |
| 18:46 | <Ms2ger> | But it doesn't seem that way |
| 18:48 | <Hixie_> | why would <input type=button onclick=close()> not work in a window opened from showModalDialog() ?? |
| 18:51 | <Ms2ger> | I'd ask bz, but he's got a kid |
| 18:52 | <Hixie_> | well that's exciting. showModalDialog() on Safari actually returns the value cross-origin, at least for strings |
| 18:52 | <Hixie_> | so far three browsers, three behaviours. |
| 18:52 | <Hixie_> | firefox is most sane so far. |
| 18:53 | <Ms2ger> | https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=860941 |
| 18:54 | <Hixie_> | yeah that's why i'm looking at this :-) |
| 18:55 | <Hixie_> | four browsers, four behaviours. |
| 18:55 | <Hixie_> | i hate my life. |
| 18:56 | <Ms2ger> | Hixie_, don't test old Firefoxen, you might get five :) |
| 18:57 | <Hixie_> | i'm only testing the flagship product from each rendering engine, and only the most recent build i can run on mac or Windows 7 |
| 18:57 | <Hixie_> | (the last part being why i'm stuck with IE9.) |
| 18:57 | <Hixie_> | (which is rather sad) |
| 18:57 | <Ms2ger> | Virtualization? |
| 18:58 | <Hixie_> | not if i can help it |
| 18:59 | <Ms2ger> | Expense win8? |
| 19:00 | <Hixie_> | and a windows 8 laptop? i've considered it. |
| 19:00 | <Hixie_> | i don't want the extra weight in my backpack though. |
| 19:01 | <Ms2ger> | A win8... tablet? |
| 19:02 | <Hixie_> | hm, that's an idea |
| 19:02 | <Hixie_> | i wonder if i can put win8.1 beta on those somehow |
| 19:03 | <Ms2ger> | I'd ask microsofters, like tantek or Chris Wil... Oh, right |
| 19:03 | <tantek> | lol |
| 19:03 | <Hixie_> | there is a "Windows RT 8.1 Preview" |
| 19:04 | <tantek> | Windows has retweets? |
| 19:08 | <Hixie_> | i guess i could get a "ASUS VivoTab RT" and try to install win 8.1 RT preview on it |
| 19:09 | <jgraham> | Can't you dual boot windows 7 / windows 8? Or do Microsoft prevent that? |
| 19:09 | <jgraham> | I guess that's inconvenient if you are switching often |
| 19:10 | <jgraham> | (is the tablet version of IE identical to the desktop version?) |
| 19:10 | <Hixie_> | my access to windows 7 doesn't involve booting anything, i'm remotely connecting into a test machine |
| 19:11 | <Hixie_> | man, microsoft don't make it easier to compare these devices |
| 19:11 | <jgraham> | Also, I'm sure you can run IE10 on win 7 these days |
| 19:12 | <jsbell> | Yes you can. |
| 19:12 | <jgraham> | I imagine you can't run IE11, but you could be less than one majjor version behind |
| 19:15 | <Hixie_> | oh, interesting |
| 19:56 | <Hixie_> | TabAtkins, abarth: if we could get chrome to match the spec on https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22183 we would be able to avoid adding more craziness and IE would be more willing to change too... any chance that could happen? |
| 20:13 | <Hixie_> | WAT |
| 20:13 | <Hixie_> | <form><img name=a></form> |
| 20:14 | <Hixie_> | document.forms[0].elements.length => 0 |
| 20:14 | <Hixie_> | document.forms[0].elements.a => [object HTMLImageElement] |
| 20:14 | <Hixie_> | (according to chrome) |
| 20:14 | <Hixie_> | (firefox is sane and says undefined for the second one) |
| 20:17 | <Ms2ger> | What version are you testing? |
| 20:17 | <Ms2ger> | Late 24 or 25 probably has 1 / img |
| 20:17 | <Hixie_> | Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_8_4) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/29.0.1547.3 Safari/537.36 |
| 20:17 | <Hixie_> | Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:25.0) Gecko/20130627 Firefox/25.0 |
| 20:18 | <Ms2ger> | Huh |
| 20:18 | <Hixie_> | you're confusing this with document.forms[0].a |
| 20:18 | <Ms2ger> | Er |
| 20:18 | <Ms2ger> | Bah |
| 20:19 | <Ms2ger> | Bah, bah, bah |
| 20:19 | <Ms2ger> | Are you putting those tests somewhere? |
| 20:19 | <Hixie_> | "tests" |
| 20:19 | <Ms2ger> | Yeah, those |
| 20:19 | <Hixie_> | i mention them in the bugs, sometimes. |
| 20:20 | <Ms2ger> | :/ |
| 20:20 | <Hixie_> | writing and maintaining the tests is a separate full-time job |
| 20:21 | <Ms2ger> | Yeah, so |
| 20:21 | <Hixie_> | i simply can't do both that and edit the spec, as much as i'd love to |
| 20:21 | <Hixie_> | (i used to do the tests) |
| 20:21 | <Hixie_> | (but the specs needed work) |
| 20:21 | <Ms2ger> | Coming up with your evil cases is half the work |
| 20:21 | <Hixie_> | yeah, i put that half of the work in the bugs, like i said :-) |
| 20:21 | <Ms2ger> | Hmm |
| 20:21 | <Hixie_> | e.g. https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21771#c4 earlier |
| 20:22 | <Ms2ger> | Could I convince you to stick a keyword or something on bugs with such work? |
| 20:22 | <Hixie_> | they're the ones where i added a comment that includes the keyword "http://www.hixie.ch/tests"; or the keyword "live-dom-viewer". |
| 20:23 | <Hixie_> | :-) |
| 20:23 | <Ms2ger> | Pah :) |
| 20:23 | <Hixie_> | seriously, that should hit all the bugs |
| 20:23 | <Hixie_> | and there'll be very few false positives |
| 20:23 | <Hixie_> | if any |
| 20:23 | <Ms2ger> | What do you do for emails? |
| 20:23 | <Hixie_> | maybe also damowmow.com/playground/ |
| 20:23 | <Hixie_> | dunno, haven't been replying to those for like 6 months. :-P |
| 20:24 | <Hixie_> | i'll let you know when i resume... hopefully this month |
| 20:24 | <abarth> | Hixie_: sure, can you file a bug at crbug.com/new and assign it to me? that way I won't forget |
| 20:24 | <Hixie_> | abarth: on it |
| 20:25 | <Hixie_> | abarth: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=256797 |
| 20:25 | <abarth> | thx |
| 20:26 | <Hixie_> | how the heck am i gonna make <img> form-associated without giving it a form="" attribute |
| 20:26 | <Hixie_> | damnit, this is gonna be a huge mess |
| 20:27 | <Ms2ger> | 245 bugs |
| 20:27 | Ms2ger | sighs |
| 20:31 | <Hixie_> | with those keywords? |
| 20:32 | <Ms2ger> | Yeah |
| 20:32 | <Ms2ger> | That's in all components, though |
| 20:32 | <Ms2ger> | And not just your comments |
| 20:33 | <Hixie_> | yikes, that _is_ low. sorry. i'll try to be better about listing the urls. |
| 20:33 | <Ms2ger> | I've now got 4 saves searches that say something about tests |
| 20:33 | <Hixie_> | heh |
| 20:33 | <Ms2ger> | I would be grateful :) |
| 20:33 | <Ms2ger> | And I also should do something with those searches |
| 20:33 | <Ms2ger> | But not today |
| 20:36 | <Hixie_> | i can't figure out how to make it only comments i wrote, which is annoying |
| 20:37 | <Ms2ger> | Maybe with the boolean tables? |
| 20:37 | Ms2ger | should be off, though |
| 20:38 | <Hixie_> | i was trying with boolean tables |
| 20:39 | <Hixie_> | but it doesn't seem to restrict it to the same comment |
| 20:39 | <Ms2ger> | gsnedders, http://www.verisoft.de/StartPage.html |
| 20:39 | <Hixie_> | ok, bikeshed time. i need a term for "element that has a form="" attribute that allows it to be associated with a different <form> than its ancestor <form>" |
| 20:39 | <Hixie_> | "reassociatable" is the best i have so far. |
| 20:39 | <Hixie_> | spelt reassociateable |
| 20:39 | <Ms2ger> | Fair enough, ship it |
| 20:45 | <jgraham> | That doesn't make grammatical sense |
| 20:45 | <jgraham> | Oh wait it does |
| 20:46 | <jgraham> | I read "allows" as "causes" |
| 21:07 | <Hixie_> | i really love the way that <input type=image> is excluded from the form element's list of form controls, but <img> is included. |
| 22:12 | <Hixie_> | english needs a better scoping mechanism |
| 22:25 | <Hixie_> | GPHemsley: did i hear you were planning on speccing navigator.mimeTypes ? |
| 22:25 | <Hixie_> | or was that something else |