| 02:14 | <GPHemsley> | SimonSapin: Maps everything to the sad-face emoticon |
| 03:21 | <MikeSmith> | SimonSapin: for those they're all using code points in the "user-defined" ranges of Shift-JIS |
| 03:22 | <MikeSmith> | SimonSapin: that is, the ranges in Shift-JIS that were intentionally set aside for private use, and not for interchange |
| 03:26 | <MikeSmith> | SimonSapin: so if the Encoding spec already says anything specific about how to process Shift-JIS code points in those "user defined" ranges, then I'd think the spec already has them covered |
| 03:27 | <MikeSmith> | SimonSapin: I wouldn't think the Encoding spec should do anything much beyond that -- certainly it shouldn't specify that they must be mapped to something else |
| 03:29 | <MikeSmith> | SimonSapin: because, e.g., UAs running within some system that consumes them need for them to stay just as what that system expects |
| 03:30 | <MikeSmith> | SimonSapin: e.g., at least for e-mail, some user sending a message within a Docomo network to another Docomo user needs for them to not be changed in between |
| 03:32 | <MikeSmith> | SimonSapin: it's a different thing of course for Web documents -- but authors should not be using those Shift-JIS-variant emoji in Shift-JIS Web documents anyway -- because they already can't expect any kind of interchange if they do |
| 03:37 | <MikeSmith> | SimonSapin: anyway, I think that at this point attempting to change any of the Web UA handling of those characters will just risk breaking existing (legacy) content |
| 06:22 | <MikeSmith> | the styling of https://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HTML_derivatives seems broken |
| 06:23 | <MikeSmith> | e.g., not login link at the top |
| 06:23 | <MikeSmith> | oh I guess it's the whole wiki that's borked styling |
| 06:35 | <tantek> | MikeSmith, FYI: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2014Sep/0061.html |
| 06:55 | <annevk> | SimonSapin: yup, it has the same PUA mapping they require |
| 06:55 | <annevk> | Hixie: I thought the idea was to wait with that bug for a couple of months |
| 08:18 | <foolip> | Hixie: sorry I'm slow to react to IRC, I've commented on the two bugs you pinged about |
| 08:18 | <MikeSmith> | tantek: thanks |
| 08:19 | <annevk> | JakeA: response.clone() in Chrome, it copies each field of the response and sets body to a tee? |
| 08:19 | <annevk> | JakeA: I haven't really figured out what the best way to define it is, without enumerating all request/response fields, which is going to be a maintenance hassle |
| 08:20 | <JakeA> | annevk: I haven't dug into the implementation, but in terms of the body, doesn't the original request also need to become a tee? |
| 08:21 | <annevk> | JakeA: request's body, yes |
| 08:21 | <JakeA> | annevk: gotcha. Not sure what we're doing with the other properties, I assume they're copies |
| 08:23 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: is there a plan to un-bork the mixed-content situation with the wiki styling? |
| 08:24 | <MikeSmith> | whatwg wiki |
| 08:27 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: GPHemsley should know |
| 08:27 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: I didn't notice a problem for the TLS page |
| 08:27 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: is it only cached pages? |
| 08:27 | <MikeSmith> | seems to be everything |
| 08:27 | <MikeSmith> | ah wait |
| 08:27 | <annevk> | I don't get a mixed content warning for that page |
| 08:28 | <MikeSmith> | https://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HTML_derivatives |
| 08:28 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: what about that one |
| 08:28 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: when I'm logged out I do |
| 08:29 | <MikeSmith> | ah yeah |
| 08:29 | <MikeSmith> | I'm logged out |
| 08:29 | <MikeSmith> | weird that it matters whether you're logged in or not |
| 08:30 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: old pages are cached with the wrong link for the style sheet and such |
| 08:30 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: but only cached for users that are logged out |
| 08:30 | <MikeSmith> | ah |
| 08:30 | <annevk> | E.g. FAQ had this problem, but now https://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ renders fine, even when logged out, because we updated it recently |
| 08:31 | <MikeSmith> | I see |
| 08:31 | <annevk> | I don't know why GPHemsley can't clear the cache |
| 09:54 | <smaug____> | ++foolip |
| 09:54 | <smaug____> | "sync XHR one could artificially make it slower to the point where people will notice." |
| 09:54 | <smaug____> | mean, but might work |
| 10:03 | <zcorpan> | increase the delay with half a millisecond per day |
| 10:03 | <annevk> | JakeA: beverloo: ETA on notifications in service workers email? |
| 10:04 | <GPHemsley> | annevk: Because I'm having trouble logging in. Once I can do that, I'll clear the cache and upgrade and whatnot. |
| 10:04 | JakeA | reads |
| 10:05 | <annevk> | GPHemsley: logging in to the server? |
| 10:05 | <GPHemsley> | yes |
| 10:05 | <annevk> | GPHemsley: you can ask Hixie to reset your credentials |
| 10:05 | <GPHemsley> | I have |
| 10:06 | <annevk> | GPHemsley: and you're using the correct username? (always trips me up with SSH) |
| 10:06 | <GPHemsley> | As far as we've been able to determine. |
| 10:07 | <annevk> | odd |
| 10:13 | <MikeSmith> | anybody know if there is yet a web-based feed reader that's actually usable in mobile browsers |
| 10:14 | <MikeSmith> | unlike, say, the web version of feedly, which is pretty much unusable on mobile |
| 10:19 | <annevk> | I'm using newsblur.com at the moment, but I haven't checked out the mobile version since I read enough stuff on mobile as it is |
| 10:20 | <jgraham> | MikeSmith: "feed reader"? Is that like some way to check your Facebook, or something? |
| 10:27 | <annevk> | jgraham: it's how you Twitter on G+ |
| 10:27 | <annevk> | jgraham: you wouldn't understand |
| 10:28 | <annevk> | zcorpan: thanks for reviewing my patch to web-platform-tests! |
| 10:28 | <zcorpan> | annevk: welcome |
| 12:37 | <zcorpan> | annevk: pls review https://github.com/whatwg/web-apps-tracker/commit/66f7dfa4e32623157aa7c47618e09d621a5be008 |
| 12:37 | <annevk> | please don't review newlines at end of files |
| 12:38 | <annevk> | zcorpan: not sure I'm competent enough to review that regular expression |
| 12:38 | <MikeSmith> | jgraham: roc isn't on twitter so I otherwise dunno how to fine out when he posts to his blog |
| 12:38 | <zcorpan> | oh my editor does that for me. can remove the newline though |
| 12:39 | <zcorpan> | annevk: i tested the regexp |
| 12:39 | <annevk> | zcorpan: oh you added a newline? |
| 12:39 | <MikeSmith> | I vote for please leave the newline in |
| 12:39 | <annevk> | zcorpan: that's fine, my editor works the same, thought it was removed |
| 12:40 | <zcorpan> | annevk: yeah i added it |
| 12:41 | <zcorpan> | MikeSmith: ended up making a new browser icon |
| 12:41 | <MikeSmith> | oh boy |
| 12:42 | <MikeSmith> | does it have a skull? |
| 12:42 | <zcorpan> | no, but it has a back button |
| 12:43 | <MikeSmith> | oh that's actually pretty clever |
| 12:43 | <zcorpan> | that is 1x1 CSS px. that has a radial gradient. :-) |
| 12:44 | <MikeSmith> | man that just looks like a box |
| 12:44 | <MikeSmith> | it's too tiny |
| 12:44 | <MikeSmith> | it looks like a placeholder thing, img missing |
| 12:45 | <MikeSmith> | but with a white bar |
| 12:46 | <annevk> | zcorpan: turns out browsers.svg needed to be without extension |
| 12:46 | <annevk> | zcorpan: just committed that |
| 12:46 | <zcorpan> | annevk: oops |
| 12:47 | <annevk> | zcorpan: some SVG files specify width/height, others don't |
| 12:47 | <zcorpan> | MikeSmith: hmm, maybe i can make the toolbar bigger |
| 12:47 | <MikeSmith> | christ we need an actual designer in this club |
| 12:49 | <annevk> | zcorpan: so is this to reduce the amount of icons? |
| 12:50 | <zcorpan> | annevk: Hixie always lumps the browsers together in commit messages so it seemed like it makes sense to use one icon |
| 12:50 | <annevk> | maybe we should ask Unicode if they can mint some emojis for us |
| 12:51 | <MikeSmith> | zcorpan: maybe could just use the reload icon? |
| 12:56 | <zcorpan> | MikeSmith: i don't associate that with a browser really |
| 12:57 | <zcorpan> | annevk: pushed an update |
| 13:02 | <zcorpan> | Hixie: you can use "b" instead of "giow" in commit messages now |
| 13:17 | <MikeSmith> | zcorpan: http://www.famfamfam.com/lab/icons/silk/ might provide some further inspiration |
| 13:17 | <MikeSmith> | "Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License" |
| 13:17 | <MikeSmith> | whatever that is |
| 13:18 | <MikeSmith> | not cc0 |
| 13:19 | <zcorpan> | MikeSmith: i've made the toolbar bigger now |
| 13:19 | <MikeSmith> | ah ok |
| 13:19 | MikeSmith | looks |
| 13:20 | <zcorpan> | annevk: can you deploy again? :-) |
| 13:20 | <MikeSmith> | ah that's better yeah |
| 13:20 | <zcorpan> | MikeSmith: great |
| 13:22 | <MikeSmith> | hmm but when I look at https://html5.org/tools/icons/browsers it doesn't look different |
| 13:22 | <MikeSmith> | not that it really matters what it looks like big |
| 13:23 | <zcorpan> | MikeSmith: that's the old version |
| 13:23 | <MikeSmith> | oh ok |
| 13:27 | <MikeSmith> | anyway for future reference as far as other symbol ideas for representing a browser, http://www.famfamfam.com/lab/icons/silk/icons/application_view_tile.png kind of looks like speed dial (or whatever other browsers call the similar thign they have) |
| 14:56 | <Domenic> | JakeA: annevk: +1 for keeping close for the use case JakeA outlined. |
| 15:50 | <hsivonen> | I like the way https://w3c.github.io/webappsec/specs/subresourceintegrity/ defines "MIME type". |
| 15:51 | <hsivonen> | I wonder how many opposing comments the editors end up getting over an unorthodox definition like that. |
| 15:53 | <darobin> | hsivonen: lol, that's brilliant |
| 16:32 | <Domenic> | We need to come up with a living dead standard to publish on halloween |
| 16:32 | <Domenic> | something about zombie service workers |
| 16:33 | <Domenic> | maybe resurrecting finalized objects or something |
| 16:58 | <Hixie> | annevk: wait with which bug? |
| 17:19 | <tantek> | for any future dated WHATWG snapshots, I propose two things in combination: 1) a shorter title, without reference to any specific constituents. AND 2) for the first sentence to make it clear Implementers should reference the living specification. |
| 17:21 | <Ms2ger> | For any such snapshots, I propose a small script that makes all necessary alterations |
| 17:21 | <tantek> | Ms2ger - as long as it's server-side. As people do View Source without scripts running on the client. |
| 17:22 | <tantek> | And yeah, automating that on the server via a script is a good suggestion |
| 17:22 | <Ms2ger> | I was thinking generate in python and upload the result |
| 17:22 | <Ms2ger> | But any way that doesn't involve me doing anything :) |
| 17:22 | <tantek> | SGTM |
| 17:23 | <tantek> | e.g. right now the dated URL spec snapshot has the first sentence "For the current version of the URL Living Standard, including significant errata to the contents of this specification, please see: http://url.spec.whatwg.org/"; |
| 17:23 | <tantek> | whereas I'd suggest something more like this for the first sentence: "Implementors should reference the URL Living Standard, including significant errata to the contents of this specification: http://url.spec.whatwg.org/"; |
| 17:23 | <tantek> | so there's a concrete example of a transform |
| 17:29 | <Domenic> | I like the existing sentence |
| 17:29 | <Domenic> | As ideally *everyone* should reference the living standard |
| 17:31 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: you saw http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2014Sep/0002.html ? |
| 17:31 | <MikeSmith> | about file: |
| 17:32 | <Domenic> | I have been bugging annevk about file:, and specifically file:///, for probably a year now :) |
| 17:35 | <Hixie> | yeah the only people who should reference the snapshots are lawyers, for patent purposes, since the snapshot is what the patent license covers, and government officials who for reasons beyond my understanding are required to reference unchanging documents in their references, and where it would be illegal to do otherwise. |
| 17:36 | <Hixie> | everyone else should just use the living standard |
| 17:36 | <annevk> | Hixie: the events bug |
| 17:36 | <Hixie> | using the snapshot for a reference e.g. from a w3c spec, is a fantastically bad idea. |
| 17:36 | <annevk> | zcorpan: will deploy now |
| 17:37 | <Hixie> | annevk: what did I do instead of waiting? |
| 17:37 | <annevk> | Hixie: you pinged me |
| 17:38 | <Hixie> | wait, which events bug. https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12230 ? |
| 17:38 | <MikeSmith> | Domenic: looks like that guy is actually working On that i-d https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kerwin-file-scheme-11 |
| 17:38 | <annevk> | zcorpan: deployed: https://html5.org/tools/icons/browsers |
| 17:39 | <annevk> | zcorpan: I don't get why you would put height/width in the icon |
| 17:39 | <annevk> | zcorpan: that seems to defeat the purpose of it being scalable |
| 17:39 | <annevk> | Hixie: no, the IDL one |
| 17:40 | <annevk> | Domenic: MikeSmith: browser vendors have not been interested in revamping their URL parsers thus far, much less in revamping the file URL part of it I suspect |
| 17:42 | <Hixie> | annevk: oh... why are we waiting again? sorry, i'm apparently confused about some of these bugs. |
| 17:42 | <annevk> | Hixie: mostly because it was not high priority for you and I have other things to shift through |
| 17:43 | <annevk> | Hixie: there's also a thing with event objects that we don't really define the internal slots that well, so we could fix them but it would be a larger effort |
| 17:44 | <Hixie> | annevk: k. i'll punt it to 2015 on my side. feel free to bring it closer if you have time for it. |
| 17:45 | <Hixie> | can't find the bug |
| 17:45 | <Hixie> | do you remember what it's called? |
| 17:46 | <annevk> | Hixie: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25099 |
| 17:47 | <Hixie> | thanks |
| 17:57 | <zcorpan_> | annevk: i put it there so they would have the same intrinsic dimensions as the pngs in case someone uses them without giving width height. but i guess it doesn't really matter |
| 18:05 | <annevk> | Hixie: the only change to https://whatwg.org/specs/url/2014-07-30/ that would be good would be to change http to https for both <img> references |
| 18:05 | <annevk> | Hixie: that would also ensure the images keep loading into the future |
| 18:07 | <Hixie> | i'm not changing it. it's not important enough to violate the principle of the snapshot. |
| 18:13 | <tantek> | in order to keep with the principle of the snapshot, may I then suggest a new snapshot with the fixes I proposed above, and changing http to https for the <img> references |
| 18:14 | <Domenic> | TabAtkins: lol @ bikeshed + git bisect :D |
| 18:15 | <TabAtkins> | Why lol? |
| 18:16 | <Domenic> | your enthusiasm was funny :) |
| 18:16 | <Hixie> | tantek: given that we only got 5 patent commitments to the last one, it seems a bit premature to already be making another patent snapshot. Also, see above regarding why I disagree with the change you're proposing. |
| 18:16 | <TabAtkins> | Domenic: Ah, kk. ^_^ I've been meaning to use it anyway, and it looks cool. |
| 18:31 | <TabAtkins> | Yay, bisect is great! |
| 18:31 | <TabAtkins> | Confirmed that the problem was in the commit I thought it was, so I can look more closely at what's going wrong here. |
| 18:33 | <tantek> | Hixie, I'd like to iterate on snapshots to get *more* patent commitments. Including making changes like a shorter title that omits references to specific audiences. |
| 18:35 | <Hixie> | tantek: why do you think changing the title would get more companies on board the FSA? |
| 18:35 | <tantek> | Hixie, because in-person several representatives (AC even) of companies reacted poorly *just to the title* |
| 18:36 | <tantek> | whereas they seemed to otherwise like or be ok with the whole CG way of getting patent commitments etc. |
| 18:36 | <Hixie> | who? |
| 18:37 | <tantek> | unfortunately it was in the context of a private w3c meeting :( so I don't think I can say who. |
| 18:37 | <tantek> | you may accept that as weak data if you wish |
| 18:37 | <Hixie> | and did they react poorly because they thought "stale drafts should be referenced by more than lawyers!" or "we would never sign a license to commit patents to a draft made for that purpose!" or what? |
| 18:38 | <tantek> | in short it was a purely emotional reaction AFAIK, without any additional actual rational thought |
| 18:38 | <tantek> | I realize that may be a human bug but there you have it. |
| 18:38 | <Hixie> | that's the entire point of the title |
| 18:38 | <Hixie> | to make people not want to read that version of the spec |
| 18:38 | <Hixie> | so, working as intended |
| 18:39 | <Hixie> | one would assume that a company's lawyers don't, however, base what they will sign or not sign on emotional reactions |
| 18:40 | <tantek> | not want to read and not want to patent commit are not the same thing. |
| 18:41 | <Hixie> | [24~exactly |
| 18:41 | <tantek> | but to get to a company's laywers, typically there are intermediate humans that make decisions |
| 18:41 | <tantek> | fortunately not all decisions are made by lawyers :P |
| 18:41 | <tantek> | or rather, if that's what you're looking for, you may find exactly that in the "government officials" you refer to ;) |
| 18:42 | <Hixie> | if you can find me a company who would commit to signing the license based on nothing more than a title change, let me know. |
| 18:42 | <Hixie> | until then, this is just a distraction from more important issues, like actual bug fixing. |
| 18:50 | <tantek> | Apologies for the distraction. I'm hoping others can help with silly things like static snapshots for external referencers so you can keep focusing on actual more important issues like bug fixing (agreed about importance). |
| 19:20 | <annevk> | tantek: it would help if we had on black and white that it is what is blocking progress I think |
| 19:21 | <annevk> | tantek: I'm willing to help out create another snapshot, but to be fair we already published one, it seems kind of weird to put rules on titles after the fact |
| 19:22 | <jsbell> | annevk: how close are you to yanking the Errors stuff out of dom? i.e. is IDL covering it all yet? Someone was bugging me that DOM's DOMException IDL fragment doesn't have `name` |
| 19:22 | <annevk> | jsbell: that's because it's an exception and not an interface... |
| 19:22 | <annevk> | jsbell: I can do it today, but it would help if IDL actually covered it |
| 19:22 | <jsbell> | Not urgent at all. |
| 19:23 | <annevk> | jsbell: so far nobody updated IDL... there's open bugs and all, but we don't have a person writing IDL full time |
| 19:23 | <annevk> | jsbell: if you happen to have a spare six months or so |
| 19:23 | <annevk> | (or anyone else in this channel for that matter) |
| 19:24 | <jsbell> | I know how much fun others have working on the IDL spec. So tempting. ;-) It looked like there was at least some blather in IDL about DOMException and general exception attributes. |
| 19:24 | <jsbell> | Anyway... thanks (as always) |
| 19:51 | <tantek> | annevk - no rules, just suggestions for increasing the chance of getting more support, and fewer emotionally negative reactions which aren't helpful to anybody. |
| 19:51 | <tantek> | never going to get black and white about this kind of thing - it's a process of iteration. we try something, see what breaks, fix it, iterate. |
| 19:51 | <tantek> | the usual |
| 19:52 | <TabAtkins> | Domenic: When I said "should be fixed", I of course meant "When I push, which won't happen yet because I just found a bug". |
| 19:53 | <annevk> | tantek: understood, but I've the feeling that if we did iterate the same people would find something else |
| 19:54 | <tantek> | annevk, that's not my impression. rather, there are *some* who would see iterations as good faith listening / response and be supportive. and unfortunately there are likely others who would not be satisfied by any changes. |
| 19:54 | <tantek> | important to distinguish those two sets of people. I have specific examples in mind for each set but have no desire to call out specific names in public (yet) |
| 19:55 | <annevk> | no need |
| 19:55 | <tantek> | in addition, by addressing the concerns of set 1, they often see the stubbornness of set 2 as *bad faith* and will turn right around and call them out for it |
| 19:58 | <annevk> | tantek: if these are in-person meetings btw, did you try telling them they could ask us directly? |
| 19:58 | <annevk> | tantek: I don't think either Hixie or I heard about this until it broke on public-html |
| 19:59 | <annevk> | (well a bit before, but from other people than proxies I mean) |
| 20:01 | <annevk> | tantek: comment-by-proxy is a huge pain in the ass |
| 20:01 | <tantek> | annevk - am I not part of "us" in the "ask us directly"? ;) |
| 20:02 | <annevk> | tantek: well you didn't publish this doc |
| 20:02 | <tantek> | ah, ask the editors/publishers directly |
| 20:02 | <tantek> | that's a very reasonable request |
| 20:02 | <tantek> | I'll keep asking for such direct communication over comment-by-proxy |
| 20:02 | <annevk> | ta |
| 20:02 | <tantek> | but I'll continue facilitiating until the communication improves |
| 20:03 | <tantek> | more than that I'll probably start a wiki page collecting every little minor complaint anyone has about any such external normative references |
| 20:03 | <tantek> | for future guidance for such static snapshots |
| 20:04 | <tantek> | I'm giving public-html another 48-72 hours to collect reactions |
| 20:04 | <tantek> | treating it kind of like snail-mail, seems to be a reasonable model. |
| 20:06 | <annevk> | tantek: I'm happy to make another snapshot, not a big deal to me |
| 20:06 | <annevk> | not sure how Hixie feels about it though |
| 20:10 | <tantek> | annevk - sounds like Hixie has more important things to focus on, which I'm cool with. |
| 20:11 | <annevk> | http://www.economist.com/news/international/21620221-translating-technological-terms-throws-up-some-peculiar-challenges-cookies-caches-and-cows is rather beautiful |
| 20:11 | <annevk> | 'Ibrahima Sarr, a Senegalese coder, led the translation of Firefox into Fulah, which is spoken by 20m people from Senegal to Nigeria. “Crash” became hookii (a cow falling over but not dying);' |
| 20:11 | <Ms2ger> | Nice comparison |
| 20:13 | <tantek> | thus causing a crash is cow-tipping? |
| 20:17 | <tantek> | annevk - cool - re: happy to make another snapshot, not a big deal to me |
| 20:18 | <tantek> | let's give folks some time to dump their current set(s) of objections publicly, I'll collate and document on a wiki and we can try to fix a bunch in a new snapshot. |
| 20:18 | <tantek> | I don't want to spend a lot of your or Hixie's time on this. So, fewer iterations with more things fixed in each. |
| 20:19 | <annevk> | I wonder if HSTS can be abused for tracking |
| 20:20 | <annevk> | E.g. if we offered the network error on redirect feature, you could see whether someone visited a HSTS site before |
| 20:20 | <annevk> | Not a huge deal now perhaps, but might soon be |
| 20:29 | <Ms2ger> | "CVE-2014-6271 looks like a variant of a problem we fixed ~30 years ago in Research UNIX sh(1)." |
| 20:29 | <Ms2ger> | Now if only they'd written tests |
| 20:40 | <tantek> | famous last words |
| 20:43 | <TabAtkins> | Domenic: Okay, *now* fixed and pushed. |
| 20:53 | <annevk> | Hixie: I just cleared cache in a browser and still can't open e.g. https://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-March/018888.html |
| 20:53 | <annevk> | that I copied that prolly means the cache is not cleared completely |
| 20:54 | <Hixie> | try http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-March/018888.html |
| 20:55 | <Hixie> | tantek: if you have a concrete commitment from someone that their patent-rich company will sign the FSA for a snapshot with reasonable changes, then i'm interested. |
| 20:56 | <tantek> | Hixie, noted. |
| 20:56 | <Hixie> | ("reasonable" being the main vague word in that sentence, of course) |
| 20:56 | <tantek> | I don't expect to see "concrete" commitments about anything usually. There's more room to make progress than that I think. |
| 20:57 | <Hixie> | we had a concrete commitment from three companies before we published the last one, fwiw. |
| 20:57 | <Hixie> | (and they followed through) |
| 20:57 | <tantek> | good! hopefully no changes to put any of that into jeopardy then. |
| 20:57 | <Hixie> | well those commitments are done, so it's moot :-) |
| 21:34 | <annevk> | zcorpan++ for https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/introduction.html#abstract |
| 21:34 | <annevk> | Hixie: yeah made it work |
| 21:35 | <Ms2ger> | zcorpan++ |
| 21:36 | <Ms2ger> | in general |
| 21:46 | <Hixie> | made what work? what? |
| 21:46 | <Hixie> | and yeah, zcorpan++ in general |
| 21:47 | <Hixie> | oh, the link |
| 21:48 | <tantek> | that picture is amazing. |
| 22:30 | <Hixie> | hsivonen: ping https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26804 |
| 22:48 | <jwalden> | Hixie: I see the URL in source, but does https://html5.org/r/8821 probably want some sort of inline attribution link, and perhaps an addition to acknowledgments or so? |
| 22:48 | <Hixie> | it's already in the acknowledgements, no? |
| 22:48 | <jwalden> | oh, I probably missed that |
| 22:49 | <Hixie> | nothing changed except that it became a jpeg+svg instead of a png |
| 22:49 | <Hixie> | (and a few words changed) |
| 22:49 | <jwalden> | ah, right |
| 22:49 | <jwalden> | carry on! |
| 22:49 | jwalden | figured there was some stupid explanation like that :-) |
| 22:51 | <Hixie> | :-) |
