00:53
<erlehmann>
hey what
00:53
<erlehmann>
what is the problem with <source @media> ?
00:53
<erlehmann>
:(
00:54
<erlehmann>
why did you take it away? :(
01:00
<erlehmann>
this is not funny https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19619#c31
01:01
<erlehmann>
i use that attribute myself
01:01
<erlehmann>
i used it here! http://news.dieweltistgarnichtso.net/talks/music-c-compiler.html
01:02
<erlehmann>
[[zz]] what is your name, when you are sleeping? [[zzz]]zzz ?
01:03
<[[zz]]>
erlehmann, [[zzz]] :p
02:17
<erlehmann>
http://daten.dieweltistgarnichtso.net/src/css-pie-chart-form.html
02:26
<jamesr__>
sent an intent-to-remove for window.showModalDialog() in blink
02:27
<jamesr__>
unless our instrumentation is broken it shows up on < 0.006% of page visits
02:34
<erlehmann>
jamesr__ can you tell me why chrome is the only browser to not display the actual feed when navigated to one?
02:34
<erlehmann>
safari, firefox, even IE display the feed.
02:36
<jamesr__>
not sure i understand
02:36
<jamesr__>
you're asking why chrome does not have a built-in RSS reader?
02:37
<jamesr__>
or maybe we're talking about a different type of feed
02:42
<erlehmann>
jamesr__ more like why does it not show the xml of the feed, possibly styled?
02:42
<erlehmann>
jamesr__ there must be some reason for this because every other browser – on desktop at least – is able to.
02:43
<erlehmann>
jamesr__ also why did the chrome team state that it remove h.264 support and then did not remove it? do you know about that?
02:44
<erlehmann>
i never found a further post
02:44
<erlehmann>
(just asking that because you seem to know more about chrome than me)
02:44
<erlehmann>
jamesr__ is there an instrumentation thing for link rel=alternate type=application/atom+xml ?
02:46
<erlehmann>
jamesr__ can i see the chrome instrumentation data somewhere?
06:13
<bhanu>
dglazkov: hi, I am not quite clear of the terminologies host, inclusive ancestor, host-including inclusive ancestor, could you please help me understand?
06:21
<zcorpan>
erlermann: http://news.dieweltistgarnichtso.net/talks/music-c-compiler.html - this doesn't work. the <source> with the media attribute will never be loaded. this is why it was removed.
06:53
<zcorpan>
miketaylr: can you grep for 'showModalDialog' pls?
08:14
<Hixie>
bhanu: see dom.spec.whatwg.org
08:40
<bhanu>
Hixie: I couldn't quite understand it from the spec, I would like to understand it, if possible with example
08:57
<zcorpan>
bhanu: i think something like <template id=t><span></span></template> <script> t.shadowRoot.firstChild.appendChild(t) </script>
11:42
<annevk-cloud>
There is a note explaining it…
11:43
<annevk-cloud>
File a bug if it needs to be clearer I suppose
11:54
<roc>
public-media-capture is making me crazy
11:58
<Ms2ger>
Which one is that? WebRTC?
11:58
<jgraham>
roc: Surely not? All W3C lists, especially those with -media- in the name, are places of Zen-like peace and serenity.
11:58
<roc>
getUserMedia, MediaRecorder
11:59
<Ms2ger>
Ah
11:59
Ms2ger
reads WebRTC
13:28
<Ms2ger>
<p><b>400.</b> <ins>That�s an error.</ins>
13:28
<Ms2ger>
<p>Your client has issued a malformed or illegal request. <ins>That�s all we know.</ins>
13:28
<Ms2ger>
ins, eh, Google
13:34
<zcorpan>
it's more semantic than <u>
13:34
<zcorpan>
<ins>That's all I know.</ins>
13:35
Ms2ger
glares at zcorpan
13:36
<zcorpan>
not you also :-(
13:37
Ms2ger
slowly turns into gsnedders
13:37
jgraham
buys zcorpan a mirror so he can glare at himself
13:42
<Ms2ger>
O hey, addHitRegion in Gecko
14:24
<GPHemsley>
Google loves <ins>
14:24
<GPHemsley>
they use it everywhere
17:51
SamB
wonders how to cite http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html ...
17:52
<gsnedders>
Cite HTML4 as a technical report or standard (depending on your citation style), and then reference the Forms section.
18:53
<Hixie>
taijeen: i think something's broken with your internet connection.
19:06
<Hixie>
whatever happened to the thing about how <br> shouldn't be styleable?
19:09
<Hixie>
oh there it is
19:15
<jcgregorio>
W3C BNF question: are BNF rules 'first match wins'?
19:16
<Hixie>
probably depends on the spec that uses it
19:16
<Hixie>
which spec?
19:16
<jcgregorio>
in particular: http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/paths.html#PathDataBNF
19:17
<Hixie>
do you have a case that's otherwise ambiguous?
19:17
<jcgregorio>
the rule for nonnegative-number looks like it would never match a float
19:17
<jcgregorio>
because it would pick out the leading int part first
19:17
<Hixie>
i would imagine it's "if you can match then it's valid", that's all. i mean, BNF can't describe parsing behaviour, so it doesn't really matter which matches first.
19:17
<Hixie>
you just try them each in turn.
19:18
<jcgregorio>
yeah, building a parser for that and I had to rearrange that rufloating-point-constant before integer-constant to get it to workle to put
19:18
<jcgregorio>
wasn't sure if it was a bug in the parser generator, or the BNF
19:18
<Hixie>
well the bnf isn't describing how to parse
19:18
<Hixie>
i assume they have another spec somewhere that describes how you parse
19:19
<Hixie>
oh, maybe not. weird.
19:19
<Hixie>
wow this really is their parsing spec?
19:19
<jcgregorio>
yeah, appears to be it
19:20
<Hixie>
that shows an unfortunate lack of understanding about what BNF does
19:20
<Hixie>
there's a paragraph after the BNF that implies that this is indeed how you parse it, though
19:20
<jcgregorio>
I also had to flip the order for 'number'
19:20
<jamesr__>
#lolsvg
19:21
<Hixie>
this can't possibly be the parsing spec
19:21
<Hixie>
it doesn't say how to interpret the rules even if they do match
19:22
<jamesr__>
Hixie: but it says "W3C Recommendation" right on the side
19:22
<Hixie>
now you're just trolling me :-P
19:22
<Hixie>
jcgregorio: i'd try to see if there's a more recent svg spec that defines this better
19:23
<jamesr__>
svg2 is identical
19:23
<jamesr__>
as of feb 14th 2014 WD
19:23
<jamesr__>
sorry, feb 11
19:23
<Hixie>
ok then.... jcgregorio: ...i'd file a bug saying "the spec doesn't actually define how to parse this".
19:25
<jamesr__>
Hixie: i'm mostly amused at your surprise at how bad this is
19:26
<Hixie>
i don't understand how we can still be writing bad specs after all this time
19:26
<Hixie>
i mean, CSS 2.1 started what, 15 years ago?
19:27
<jcgregorio>
Hixie: will do... actually, where do I file such a bug?
19:27
<Hixie>
jcgregorio: no idea. there should be a link at the top of the spec if there isn't an inline one making it trivial.
19:27
<Hixie>
jcgregorio: (most modern specs have scripts that make filing bugs trivial... try selecting text and see if a link to file a bug appears in the bottom left)
19:40
<jcgregorio>
"modern specs" you keep using that word...
19:40
<jcgregorio>
Hixie: no such luck with the highlighting, did find their bug tracker, filed as:
19:40
<jcgregorio>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24769
19:41
<jcgregorio>
not sure if you want to add anything to that
19:41
<SimonSapin>
jcgregorio: I don’t know about SVG, but the tokenizer in CSS 2.1 is "longest match wins"
19:42
<jcgregorio>
SimonSapin: yeah, and ABNF is longest match wins but only for rules grouped in (), but there's no guidance in the SVG spec that I could find
19:46
<SteveF>
hixie: re your recent additions to the aria mapping table http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2014Feb/thread.html#msg91 thread may be of interest if you want the whatwg spec to reflect implementation reality
19:49
<Hixie>
SteveF: yeah, i agree with alex's comment. unfortunately the ARIA spec doesn't, so... I'm just trying to match the ARIA spec.
19:50
<SteveF>
Hixie: your call
19:50
<Hixie>
SteveF: btw, do you think it makes sense to take the ARIA mappings for HTML entirely out of the HTML/HTML5 specs? I know you're maintaining that other doc, which is more detailed already... seems like it'd be better to just have this in one place.
19:57
<SteveF>
hixie: maybe there are plans to create an acc implementation guide encompassing aria/html/svg see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2014Jan/0018.html for details
20:04
<Hixie>
SteveF: what's an "implementation guide"?
20:08
<SteveF>
Hixie: its the term used to refer to the spec that tells implementers how to implement stuff, for example WAI-ARIA 1.0 User Agent Implementation Guide http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-implementation/ (apologies for the tr url)
20:08
<Hixie>
as opposed to specs that... do what?
20:08
<Hixie>
not tell implementors how to implement stuff?
20:09
<SteveF>
hixie: so yeah its another term for specification I didn't decide the name
20:11
<Hixie>
yeah i don't really understand what the WAI-ARIA 1.0 User Agent Implementation Guide is about
20:11
<Hixie>
it vaguely looks like a spec, but it seems to not invent anything new, it's like it's trying to patch another spec or something
20:12
<Hixie>
its normative status doesn't make much sense to me
20:12
<Hixie>
what i was suggesting wasn't something like that. i meant more something like fetch.spec.whatwg.org, a spec that defines its own thing, owns it, and is referenced by other specs normatively.
20:13
<Hixie>
so, in this case, it would just be a spec that defines the default mapping of HTML elements to ARIA.
20:13
<SteveF>
who is the intended audience
20:13
<Hixie>
browser vendors
20:15
<SteveF>
suggest you ask the people who work on implementing acc in browsers, they are the ones who see use the aria implementation guide (for example)
20:16
<Hixie>
the implementation guide seems like a distraction to this discussion
20:16
<Hixie>
right now we have the ARIA mappings in the HTML spec, right?
20:16
<SteveF>
yes
20:16
<Hixie>
i'm just saying, what do you think of maintaining a spec outside of HTML that has those, instead of putting it in HTML.
20:17
<SteveF>
it sounds reasonable
20:18
<Hixie>
k
20:18
<Hixie>
well if you decide to move the aria default mappings for html into its own spec, let me know. i'd be happy to move them out on the WHATWG side too and point to that spec.
20:19
<SteveF>
OK will think on it
20:20
<Hixie>
k
21:36
<Hixie>
anyone with IE around?
21:36
<Hixie>
if so, please paste the log from http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?saved=2837
21:42
<miketaylr>
Hixie: https://gist.github.com/anonymous/9144121
21:42
<miketaylr>
(from IE11)
22:02
<Hixie>
miketaylr: thanks!
22:48
<Hixie>
miketaylr: you mind testing http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/2831 on IE? i'm trying to find out if either iframe in the "rendered view", or the iframe right at the bottom under the log, mentions HTTP_REFERER
22:49
<miketaylr>
Hixie: hang on, firing up VM
22:51
<miketaylr>
Hixie: the iframe on the right in the rendered view does, as well as the one below the log
22:51
<Hixie>
thanks
22:54
<heycam>
jcgregorio, it should be match or not, as Hixie guessed
22:55
<heycam>
jcgregorio, if the attribute value doesn't entirely match the grammar, then it's invalid and no path will be rendered
23:00
<Hixie>
heycam: the problem is right now there's nothing that says how to parse it.
23:02
<heycam>
Hixie, I don't think there needs to be a description of how to parse, if "parses unambiguously or not" is sufficient. but we don't say explicitly that the d="" attribute must match the grammar and what happens when it doesn't, so that needs to be added at least.
23:02
<Hixie>
bloody hell, feedback from microsoft on the security bug
23:03
<Hixie>
i must be dreaming
23:03
gsnedders
slaps Hixie hard to wake him up
23:03
<Hixie>
heycam: nothing i see says that "10" means ten vs sixteen, for example.
23:03
<Hixie>
heycam: or that the first number is the x coordinate and the second the y coordinate
23:04
<Hixie>
heycam: or indeed that "3,2" is not the same, semantically, as "32" or, indeed, "56" or "turtles"
23:04
<Hixie>
abarth: ping https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24684
23:04
<heycam>
Hixie, that's true, I could add a sentence saying that particular grammar symbols correspond to the commands described in the previous secitons
23:05
<Hixie>
heycam: well it needs _something_.
23:05
<abarth>
not that bug :(
23:05
<Hixie>
lol
23:05
<Hixie>
heycam: i dunno that i'd do anything that involves mapping BNF to anything, but even that would be better than nothing
23:05
<heycam>
Hixie, yeah ok. doesn't need a description of parsing though imo (i.e. consume this character/symbol, move to this state, ...)
23:05
<abarth>
i'm sorry, but I don't have the attention to spend on this issue. please make whatever decision you all think is best
23:07
<abarth>
I promise not to complain later (at least not out loud :) )
23:12
<Ms2ger>
abarth, dangerous... :)
23:14
<abarth>
more or less dangerous than https://codereview.chromium.org/174073007/ ?
23:14
<abarth>
:)
23:16
<Ms2ger>
abarth, oh, that's not dangerous at all, go ahead and land it ;)