| 06:43 | <annevk> | hayato: I think I'll create an event tracking bug for Shadow DOM |
| 06:44 | <annevk> | hayato: to enumerate the various changes we discussed last week and have some kind of overview of that |
| 06:45 | <hayato> | annevk: you'll file a bug? I'm fine with it. Let's summarize what are required. |
| 06:54 | <annevk> | hayato: yeah will do in a bit |
| 07:01 | MikeSmith | waves from Tokyo |
| 07:02 | <MikeSmith> | lots hotter here today than it was in San Francisco yesterday |
| 07:15 | <Ms2ger> | annevk, is https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/commit/02ac3d372060393f4c0a6a0f29a95dd9f0ee8fda still on your radar? |
| 07:54 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: the reason I pushed it is mostly so that others can take it and finish it |
| 07:54 | <Ms2ger> | Ah |
| 07:54 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: but maybe at some point I can get back to it |
| 07:54 | <Ms2ger> | Not it :) |
| 09:26 | annevk | wonders what mistake smaug saw in https://gist.github.com/annevk/e9e61801fcfb251389ef |
| 10:10 | annevk | wonders if Domenic still wants an example of how to replace .matches(getAttribute("select")) with .localName == ... |
| 11:26 | <annevk> | hayato: for parent/child across boundaries I suggest we introduce "composed parent/child", "deep parent/child", etc. and all their friends |
| 12:45 | <jgraham> | OK, this is bothering me. Does anyone remember where that Hixie quote about going to fix something and ending up having to rebuild the foundations of the (house? city?) is? |
| 13:03 | <MikeSmith> | sorta vaguely remember that but don't remember the specifics (except that I do think it was about ending up rebuilding the whole house) |
| 13:45 | <MikeSmith> | hallvors: so is http://jsfiddle.net/670s9usk/ in fact a solution for feature-detecting Clipboard API support? |
| 13:54 | <hallvors> | MikeSmith: yes, it might be *a* solution. Not sure if it's perfect.. |
| 13:56 | <hallvors> | one of the flaws is that it can't run really early on - it needs a document where you can create some selection. |
| 14:00 | <hallvors> | but it might be a workable solution.. |
| 14:25 | <MikeSmith> | hallvors: ok |
| 14:45 | <Domenic> | jgraham: "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe."? Carl Sagan |
| 14:45 | <Ms2ger`> | Not quite that :) |
| 14:46 | <Ms2ger`> | More like "if your apple pie is slightly too big for your oven, invent a new universe" |
| 14:49 | <jgraham> | s/invent a new universe/realise that the underlying problem is a poor choice of fundamental physical constants/ |
| 14:49 | <jgraham> | and I geuss s/if /find / |
| 17:00 | <annevk> | smaug____: wouldn't components want to dispatch events for internal usage? |
| 17:07 | <smaug____> | annevk: well, so far they haven't wanted that |
| 17:07 | <smaug____> | I'm not really against the flag being exposed |
| 17:07 | <annevk> | baby steps I guess |
| 17:07 | <smaug____> | but let's just not expose random stuff we think might be needed |
| 17:07 | <smaug____> | yeah |
| 17:08 | <annevk> | the main thing people have asked for that isn't there is no retargeting |
| 17:08 | <smaug____> | (odd flight, only ~20% of the seats were taken) |
| 17:08 | <annevk> | there's workarounds in the form of deep* but not quite the same since a bunch of events end up never reaching the top |
| 17:08 | <annevk> | (I had a spare seat which was nice, but mostly full) |
| 17:09 | <smaug____> | I think we may want to rethink the "let's always retarget " |
| 17:09 | <annevk> | Assuming we go with visible/hidden/isolated terminology, I would kind of prefer that in visible there is no retargeting by default, but the Polymer guys don't seem to enjoy that idea |
| 17:09 | <smaug____> | though, if we weren't retargeting always, wouldn't some scripts still possibly want the deep stuff in case they do use retargeting |
| 17:10 | <annevk> | So Polymer wants retargeting + deep* |
| 17:10 | <smaug____> | sure |
| 17:10 | <smaug____> | well, so far apparently only deepPath |
| 17:10 | <annevk> | But Polymer is just a match of Web Components so it's hard to take it for granted... |
| 17:10 | <annevk> | Yeah also weird |
| 17:12 | <annevk> | Domenic: visible to the light DOM |
| 17:13 | smaug____ | needs to find some food here at Heathrow |
| 17:16 | <Domenic> | annevk: I think "visible" describes non-shadow DOM (light DOM), it doesn't describe any kind of shadow DOM |
| 17:16 | <Domenic> | Indeed "hidden" describes it better since it's hidden from selectors and behind .shadowRoot. |
| 17:32 | <annevk> | Domenic: shadow / hidden / isolated kind of works |
| 17:32 | <annevk> | Domenic: shadowPath might even be okay then |
| 17:39 | <annevk> | maybe hiddenShadow / isolatedShadow since they're all shadow tree in some way... |
| 17:53 | <Domenic> | yeah i dunno was just trying to come up with something that makes it clear it's not business as usual |
| 17:53 | <Domenic> | I still like censored since it's descriptive of what's actually happening instead of trying to be an abstract concept |
| 17:57 | <SimonSapin_> | Is SVG Tiny relevant to the web? |
| 18:03 | <MikeSmith> | SimonSapin_: I think most people would answer that no it is not |
| 18:03 | <SimonSapin> | ok, thanks |
| 18:27 | <gsnedders> | How do I get Blink people to notice a site-compat bug? |
| 18:27 | <gsnedders> | Namely, https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=481591 |
| 18:33 | <caitp> | pinging some of the blink guys in here might be a start |
| 18:35 | <gsnedders> | I'm assuming a several of the Google people will ntoice. And not bothering to disturb them. Yet. |
| 18:56 | <MikeSmith> | also there's always the #blink and #chromium channels here |
| 18:56 | <MikeSmith> | that's what I use |
| 18:56 | <gsnedders> | tbf I feel a bit bad doing that because if everyone who reported bugs did that… |
| 18:57 | <MikeSmith> | well, not everybody does |
| 18:57 | <MikeSmith> | and also, you're not just everybody |
| 18:57 | <MikeSmith> | and also, that's what I do, so axiomatically it must be OK |
| 18:57 | <gsnedders> | MikeSmith: fine, you win |
| 18:58 | MikeSmith | awards himself a beer |
| 18:58 | <caitp> | triagers would probably get to it over night anyways |
| 18:58 | <caitp> | but getting someone in here to look at it quick might get the right people CC'd quickly |
| 18:58 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 19:00 | <Ms2ger`> | MikeSmith, but what if everyone did that? |
| 19:01 | MikeSmith | gets Ms2ger`'s point and buys stock in beer before everybody else starts to realize what's going to happen |
| 19:02 | <Ms2ger`> | :D |
| 19:02 | <caitp> | hah |
| 21:21 | <jgraham> | jsbell: https://critic.hoppipolla.co.uk/r/4822 https://critic.hoppipolla.co.uk/r/4823 |
| 21:23 | <TabAtkins> | SimonSapin: SVG Tiny is definitely *not* web-relevant. It was never implemented anywhere except maybe one of the weirder Opera variants. |
| 21:24 | <jsbell> | jgraham: thx. will take a look |
| 21:24 | <pdr> | A few of the svg tiny features were pulled into svg2 such as vector-effects: non-scaling-stroke |
| 21:24 | <jgraham> | https://critic.hoppipolla.co.uk/r/4825 |
| 21:24 | <wanderview> | jsbell: I am writing a bunch of these? want me to email you or just add to the review somehow? |
| 21:24 | <wanderview> | I mean... I am writing a bunch of these |
| 21:24 | <jsbell> | wanderview: both? |
| 21:25 | <wanderview> | jsbell: I expect to have 8 or 9 PRs when I am done |
| 21:25 | <wanderview> | jsbell: summary of them is in the bug list here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1154325#c19 |
| 21:25 | <wanderview> | you can hover over the links to see the summary |
| 21:26 | <wanderview> | I'll add you to the future reviews |
| 21:28 | <jgraham> | jsbell: You should set up a critic filter for /service-workers/ |
| 22:39 | <trevnorris> | Domenic: in es7 will it be possible to set static class properties that aren't methods or getters/setters? |
| 22:42 | <caitp> | jeffmo has a stage 0 proposal (is it still stage 0?), and typescript and others follow in those footsteps |
| 22:42 | <caitp> | it's anyones guess :> |
| 22:43 | <caitp> | but i guess, hopefully |
| 23:06 | <aklein> | rniwa: ping? |
| 23:06 | <rniwa> | aklein: pong |
| 23:06 | <rniwa> | ark: thanks for all the bugs! |
| 23:07 | <aklein> | rniwa: just a quick clarification about your response re: timing and shadow dom distribution |
| 23:08 | <aklein> | rniwa: when you say timing is "deferred", you mean that there's no need for the spec to explain timing? |
| 23:08 | <aklein> | the explanation is "the distribution happens when you call distribute()"? |
| 23:09 | <aklein> | rniwa: in other news, re: static data properties, what caitp said above: it's part of jeffmo's proposal at https://gist.github.com/jeffmo/054df782c05639da2adb |
| 23:13 | <rniwa> | aklein: right. |
| 23:14 | <rniwa> | aklein: the idea is to let other APIs define the timing. |
| 23:14 | <aklein> | rniwa: got it, you can understand that the term "deferred" is a bit overloaded in this context |
| 23:14 | <rniwa> | aklein: instead of baking it into the distribution API. |
| 23:14 | <rniwa> | aklein: yeah i know :( |
| 23:15 | <rniwa> | aklein: our industry is horrible at overloading words with many meanings. |