| 03:33 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: nice |
| 03:40 | <MikeSmith> | caitp: merged |
| 03:42 | <caitp> | thanks |
| 03:45 | <MikeSmith> | caitp: about https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/974 I think you don't want to be looking at https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/xhr/raw-file/default/xhr-1/Overview.html but instead just at http://xhr.spec.whatwg.org/ |
| 03:47 | <caitp> | if you consider what is on http://xhr.spec.whatwg.org/ to be canonical, then the test should have different assertions. but it's kind of weird because the dcvs.w3.org page and the xhr.spec.whatwg.org are different, and even though the xhr.spec.whatwg.org draft is newer, I can't see in its history where it ever said TypeError |
| 03:48 | <MikeSmith> | yeah I looked too and I don't find anything either |
| 03:48 | <MikeSmith> | I think you need to get annevk's attention about that one |
| 03:48 | <caitp> | so that PR is all about matching what is in xhr.spec.whatwg.org, but one of the editors should make the call about that and maybe update the specs to match |
| 03:49 | <MikeSmith> | that responsibility is on the W3C editors I think |
| 03:50 | <MikeSmith> | because the W3C version is just supposed to be a copy of the upstream spec iirc |
| 03:50 | <MikeSmith> | for the case of the XHR spec |
| 05:15 | <Guest54867> | hello ... excuse me .. what is the best way to make transitions between iframe? |
| 22:06 | <caitp> | you know what would be useful, if the MouseEvent interface could tell you what kind of "role" a click would play in a UI interaction |
| 22:07 | <caitp> | like, for a click event, if (event.role !== "navigate") dontPushState(); or something |
| 22:07 | <SamB> | ... what if it's actually going to be part of a double click or something? |
| 22:08 | <caitp> | well, that part of the story sucks too, but it would work a lot better than MouseEvent.button I think |
| 22:22 | <caitp> | I guess presumably if you want to care about dblclick events you need to defer action, and cancel if you get a dblclick event. that isn't very good, but it seems better than worrying about button numbering, since different user agents and configurations could assign different interactions to different buttons |
| 22:22 | <SamB> | caitp: indeed |
| 23:59 | <Hixie> | so now that an AT user has commented on this controversial heading bug, basically agreeing with me that the problem may be minor, i wonder if faulkner is going to be insulted the way i was, accusing him of hating AT users... |