| 01:01 | <jamesr_> | Hixie: for posterity, it's useful if you want to tear down things that a pending animation frame wants to reference |
| 01:03 | <jgraham> | zewt: That sounds like tree-style tabs or Opera 9 era UI |
| 01:03 | <jgraham> | Well I guess it was still possible up to 12 |
| 01:44 | <TabAtkins> | As much as target=_blank is occasionally annoying, it's useful in enough cases that I still think it's worthwhile. For example: Twitter. |
| 03:06 | <zewt> | but 99/100 uses are abusive |
| 03:07 | <zewt> | and really, middle clicking isn't a challenge of dexterity |
| 06:01 | <Manishearth> | Hixie: around? |
| 06:18 | <Manishearth> | filed https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27333 , nvm |
| 11:10 | <annevk> | rektide: neither |
| 11:41 | <Ms2ger> | zewt, I don't have a middle mouse button on my touchpad |
| 11:46 | <annevk> | TabAtkins: that Twitter breaks the back button due to its infinite scrolling is what is bad, I think |
| 13:31 | <jgraham> | gsnedders: You seem to have 3 r+d reviews for html5lib that were never merged |
| 14:16 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: which? |
| 14:17 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: also I'd rather sort out expected failures before merging anything |
| 14:33 | <Ms2ger> | MikeSmith, can you update the link at https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/enter_bug.cgi?product=WebAppsWG&component=DOM ? |
| 15:12 | <MikeSmith> | Ms2ger: ok, changed |
| 15:20 | <Ms2ger> | 有難う |
| 16:17 | <smaug____> | how do I see older changes to the HTML spec than what https://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker lists? |
| 16:18 | <smaug____> | ah, manually changing the rev number |
| 16:24 | GPHemsley | pokes Ms2ger with Bugzilla |
| 16:48 | <zewt> | Ms2ger: that's your/your browser's UI problem |
| 16:50 | <zewt> | (shift-click, right-click/open in tab, etc. are usually the same thing) |
| 16:55 | <jsx> | Why is fragid 'top' defined in the spec to denote the top of the document, when already just # did that? |
| 16:55 | <TabAtkins> | zewt: Middle clicking is a challenge when you're using a touchpad. Even right-clicking (to hit "Open In New Window" from the menu) is occasionally chancy; I've accidentally single-clicked plenty of times. |
| 16:56 | <TabAtkins> | jsx: # doesn't do that. |
| 16:56 | <TabAtkins> | # does *nothing*. It doesn't take you to the top. |
| 16:57 | <jsx> | But it does :( |
| 16:58 | <jsx> | TabAtkins: Clicking a link with just # takes you to the page top, right? |
| 16:58 | <jsx> | Am I missing something? |
| 16:58 | <TabAtkins> | Oh, so it does. |
| 16:58 | <zewt> | TabAtkins: the random-new-tab disease is so rampant I'd take a one-time permission thing for the 1% web-app-like applications where it makes sense to the nonsensical, basically random behavior today |
| 16:59 | <zewt> | a strange case: amazon.com's search results open normally ... but amazon.co.jp's search results open new tabs. o_O |
| 17:02 | <zewt> | "#" is pretty commonly used as a "don't care" placeholder in script-driven links (commonly causing that problem where a broken script won't cancel and lands you at the top); i assume there's some benefit to having one that explicitly means top |
| 17:06 | <jsx> | Oh, so in the future, browsers might just ignore #? I was hoping to know why the spec writers thought defining top was beneficial. |
| 17:06 | <zewt> | don't know, just conjecturing |
| 17:08 | <gsnedders> | jsx: do browsers currently implement top? have they done for a while? it may well simply be de-facto expected behaviour, and that's why it's speced |
| 17:08 | <zewt> | IE9 does it, so it's probably just defining what browsers do |
| 17:09 | <jsx> | oh, is that what 'normative' means to in specs? |
| 17:09 | <jsx> | *means |
| 17:10 | <TabAtkins> | "normative" means "these are actual rules", as opposed to "informative", which means "we're just explaining stuff here, don't try to get implementation rules out of this section". |
| 17:11 | <jsx> | ok |
| 17:11 | <jsx> | thanks :) |
| 17:48 | <Ms2ger> | GPHemsley, ? |
| 18:27 | <GPHemsley> | Ms2ger: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=568516 |
| 18:29 | <annevk_> | Why do we have a bug tracking an out-of-date fork of HTML? |
| 18:37 | <GPHemsley> | annevk: Because until today no one had edited it for a while. |