| 08:22 | <rniwa> | annevk: yt? |
| 08:23 | <annevk> | rniwa: yeah |
| 08:23 | <rniwa> | annevk: hello |
| 08:23 | <annevk> | morning |
| 08:23 | <rniwa> | annevk: so my colleague is interested in finalizing ES6 module semantics in HTML |
| 08:24 | <rniwa> | annevk: which W3C WG would be appropriate for that? |
| 08:24 | <rniwa> | (basically, I'm trying to recruit more people into standards work ;) ) |
| 08:24 | <Ms2ger> | WHATWG |
| 08:25 | <rniwa> | Ms2ger: does that mean it'll be HTML WG in W3C? |
| 08:25 | <Ms2ger> | Ding dong, the HTML WG is dead |
| 08:25 | <rniwa> | (i know the irony of asking this question on #whatwg) |
| 08:25 | <rniwa> | Ms2ger: I'm trying to figure out which meeting he can attend at TPAC if any |
| 08:26 | <annevk> | rniwa: W3C is not involved |
| 08:26 | <rniwa> | annevk: oh |
| 08:26 | <annevk> | rniwa: https://github.com/whatwg/loader is where the work happens |
| 08:26 | <rniwa> | annevk: that seems really bad from IP perspective... |
| 08:26 | <annevk> | rniwa: I'm not a lawyer |
| 08:26 | <rniwa> | annevk: I understand |
| 08:27 | <rniwa> | annevk: alright, let me bring that up somewhere sane so that we can get patent protection. |
| 08:27 | rniwa | is always paranoid |
| 08:27 | <JonathanC> | where can I promote my proposed working group and find people wanting to help implement the specification? and make my coffee and lunch? |
| 08:28 | <rniwa> | JonathanC: you can do that at TPAC! |
| 08:28 | <rniwa> | JonathanC: join us on hallway conversasions |
| 08:29 | <JonathanC> | thanks |
| 08:30 | <rniwa> | annevk: btw, is anyone at Mozilla implementing that spec? |
| 08:30 | <rniwa> | annevk: at least module part? |
| 08:30 | <annevk> | rniwa: well, it isn't really done yet |
| 08:31 | <annevk> | rniwa: so we're mostly blocked on design |
| 08:31 | <rniwa> | annevk: oh I see |
| 08:31 | <rniwa> | annevk: http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/190272 |
| 08:31 | <rniwa> | annevk: we're pretty much done introducing all the hooks there |
| 08:31 | <rniwa> | and we've been waiting for the spec to stabilize but it seems like we need to figure out all the dtails |
| 08:32 | <annevk> | I think everyone is at that point now |
| 08:32 | <annevk> | well, seems like it, but nobody has taken the time to write up the details |
| 08:33 | <rniwa> | okay :( |
| 08:33 | <rniwa> | annevk: will you be interested in talking about it at TPAC? |
| 08:33 | <rniwa> | unfortunately, I won't know enough about details myself but I might be able to convince someone to along with us ;) |
| 08:35 | <annevk> | rniwa: sure, that seems worthwhile |
| 08:35 | <rniwa> | annevk: great! |
| 08:36 | rniwa | is really excited about modules |
| 08:36 | <rniwa> | although I'm also very scared of its perf impact |
| 08:51 | <JonathanC> | rniwa: are you saying the event? or is there a channel I can also join |
| 08:51 | <rniwa> | JonathanC: http://www.w3.org/2015/10/TPAC/ |
| 08:52 | <JonathanC> | I dont meet requirments :( |
| 08:52 | <rniwa> | oh oops :( |
| 08:53 | <JonathanC> | have to work on that first then. |
| 08:54 | <JonathanC> | or silently check in some new code into the browser source |
| 08:55 | <annevk> | JonathanC: which specification are you talking about? |
| 08:56 | <JonathanC> | Just the idea: DataSheets https://www.w3.org/community/blog/2015/10/08/proposed-group-datasheets-community-group |
| 09:03 | <botie> | calvaris, at 2015-10-12 18:09 UTC, Domenic said: Hey, any thoughts on the licensing issues for https://github.com/whatwg/streams/pull/397 ? |
| 14:35 | <gsnedders> | SimonSapin_: any chance of getting access to Template-Python on PyPi to fix https://github.com/gsnedders/Template-Python/issues/2? |
| 14:36 | <SimonSapin_> | gsnedders: same username? |
| 14:36 | <gsnedders> | SimonSapin_: yeah |
| 14:36 | <SimonSapin_> | done :) |
| 14:39 | <gsnedders> | SimonSapin_: takk |
| 14:47 | <gsnedders> | SimonSapin_: and pushed a 0.1post1, with a fixed MANIFEST |
| 14:47 | <gsnedders> | SimonSapin_: if you care at all |
| 14:48 | <SimonSapin_> | good to know that you’re improving this, but yeah I only care as far as building the css2 test suite |
| 14:48 | <SimonSapin_> | which I think Ms2ger automated to happen on Travis-CI |
| 14:49 | <gsnedders> | SimonSapin_: that's all I really care, too |
| 14:49 | <gsnedders> | SimonSapin_: but the broken MANIFEST meant that it wouldn't work for building the CSS testsuites |
| 14:50 | <JakeA> | Domenic: probably stupid question, could the readable stream controller be piped to? |
| 14:53 | <SimonSapin_> | ok, thanks for fixing it |
| 14:54 | <Ms2ger> | gsnedders, the bogus names are what's being tested :) |
| 14:55 | <gsnedders> | Ms2ger: ohhh |
| 14:55 | <Ms2ger> | gsnedders, I sure hope nobody would come up with those accidentally :) |
| 14:55 | <gsnedders> | Ms2ger: I really didn't investigate closely :) |
| 15:10 | <Domenic> | JakeA: no, the RSC is just a holder for a few methods, think of it like just an object literal. |
| 15:10 | <JakeA> | gothca, cheera |
| 15:10 | <JakeA> | and cheers |
| 15:55 | <wanderview> | MikeSmith: do you know about the w3c validator? |
| 15:58 | <wanderview> | MikeSmith: does the feed validator have a different tls deployment? it seems to fail on tls for my blog feed here: https://validator.w3.org/feed/check.cgi?url=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.wanderview.com%2Fatom-mozilla.xml |
| 16:00 | <gsnedders> | wanderview: AFAIK they're entirely different, just with a vaguely common front-end |
| 16:00 | <wanderview> | hmm, but I get success if I enter the URL on validator.w3.org/ : https://validator.w3.org/check?uri=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.wanderview.com%2Fatom-mozilla.xml&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0 |
| 16:01 | <wanderview> | hmm |
| 16:01 | <wanderview> | gsnedders: thanks |
| 16:03 | <gsnedders> | wanderview: notably, the feed validator uses http://feedvalidator.org, presumably with some Python HTTP library and whatever TLS setup that uses (likely OpenSSL in some configuration or other) |
| 16:12 | <MikeSmith> | wanderview: what gsnedders said |
| 16:12 | <wanderview> | ok, thanks |
| 16:12 | <MikeSmith> | I know the feed validator at least has problems wish SNI |
| 16:13 | <MikeSmith> | I believe that's because python 2.7 doesn't do SNI |
| 16:14 | <MikeSmith> | it may also have other TLS problems beyond that |
| 16:15 | <MikeSmith> | last I knew, Sam Ruby was the one maintaining the feed-validator code |
| 16:18 | <jgraham> | 2.7.9 supports SNI |
| 18:30 | <JakeA> | wanderview: is there a comment in the streams centithread that explains why a revealing constructor (even if it's called straight away) is bad, and your transform stream / pipe solution is good? |
| 18:31 | <wanderview> | JakeA: you mean in issue 30? |
| 18:31 | <JakeA> | wanderview: or #59, yeah |
| 18:32 | <JakeA> | wanderview: https://github.com/yutakahirano/fetch-with-streams/issues/59#issuecomment-147773920 - I get that one of the bodyWriters here will be used, and 2 of them won't, but I don't get why that's bad, or why creating 3 pipes would work around the badness |
| 18:33 | <wanderview> | JakeA: you don't create 3 pipes... just one pipe... and you can then later pick which ReadableStream to write into the pipe |
| 18:36 | <wanderview> | JakeA: not sure there is a good summary comment in issue 30, but I think this one somes up a lot of my opinions: https://github.com/yutakahirano/fetch-with-streams/issues/30#issuecomment-93039367 |
| 18:37 | <wanderview> | JakeA: also note, a lot of the issues in comment 30 were more about Request than Response... |
| 18:46 | <JakeA> | cheers! |
| 18:48 | <JakeA> | wanderview: so why can't new Response(writableStream => cacheResponse.pipeTo(writableStream)) be optimised in the same way (done off thread), or is it just API preference? |
| 18:52 | <frewsxcv> | https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/#ask-for-a-reset |
| 18:52 | <wanderview> | JakeA: well, I was thinking more for Request... with a pipe you can move the pipe off thread immediate on fetch(request)... with the writer revealer function I have to go back to javascript once I have the tcp connection established and the outgoing upload stream ready to write to... this is an extra round trip to js |
| 18:52 | <frewsxcv> | "If the multiple attribute is present..." |
| 18:52 | <frewsxcv> | is that paragraph part of the 'ask for a reset' section? |
| 18:53 | <wanderview> | JakeA: I would be happy to allow the revealer function if it just implied "automatically create a pipe and caller revealer function with writer side of pipe" |
| 18:53 | <wanderview> | I think its unnecessary API contortions, though |
| 18:54 | <wanderview> | JakeA: Request and Response are inherently time-disconnected from the event that consumes them... so I think a buffered pipe is the correct representation for their body streams |
| 18:55 | <wanderview> | because time-disconnected effectively requires buffering |
| 18:56 | <JakeA> | thanks! I think I get it now |
| 18:57 | <Domenic> | The time-disconnected => writable stream revealer does not work argument makes a lot of sense to me |
| 18:57 | <Domenic> | That led me to the idea of putting the writable stream somewhere else |
| 18:57 | <Domenic> | But the pipe version also looks nice and simple |
| 18:57 | <Domenic> | So if tyoshino and yhirano_ are OK with it then it sounds good to me |
| 18:58 | <JakeA> | what's the difference between this pipe thing and a null transform stream? |
| 18:58 | <Domenic> | JakeA: pipe is what wanderview likes to call identify transform stream |
| 18:59 | <Domenic> | POSIX has a similar concept called pipe |
| 18:59 | <wanderview> | pipe is shorter |
| 18:59 | <JakeA> | hah, gotcha |
| 19:02 | <JakeA> | not that it matters, but wanderview's pipe idea sounds great to me |
| 19:03 | <wanderview> | I guess we also call it a pipe in gecko |
| 19:03 | <JakeA> | Domenic: wanderview: is it worth having a Pipe() constructor, or would it just be TransformStream with no transform specified? |
| 19:04 | <Domenic> | JakeA: I am not sure yet but I would prefer the latter. I think in theory that should work given that the reader and writer and pipeThrough/pipeTo design is all locked down to allow optimizations... |
| 19:04 | <Domenic> | this means i'm going to have to get my stuff together and finish writable streams/transform streams, eek. |
| 19:05 | <Domenic> | i was hoping that getting author-constructed readable streams in chrome would be enough |
| 19:05 | <JakeA> | Domenic: wanderview: just so you know I've been telling everyone that streams will be the major web platform addition of 2016 so you better not fuck this up |
| 19:05 | <JakeA> | :D |
| 19:05 | <Domenic> | (almost done with that patch) |
| 19:05 | <Domenic> | haha |
| 19:05 | <Domenic> | 2016 we can manage |
| 19:06 | <wanderview> | JakeA: well, at the right things are going... no promises |
| 19:06 | <JakeA> | Well, even with readable streams I can prototype the perf benefits from within a service worker |
| 19:06 | <Domenic> | that's true |
| 19:07 | <JakeA> | If it beats the current client render strategy of https://wiki-offline.jakearchibald.com/ *before* optimisation, that's pretty big news |
| 19:08 | <Domenic> | It seems like there would be some cost in evangelizing one pattern only to later evangelize the better one though |
| 19:09 | <Domenic> | I guess that's life on the bleeding edge... |
| 19:10 | <JakeA> | Well… it depends where you're coming from. If you're starting with a JS client driven SPA, the shell approach works with little modification |
| 19:10 | <JakeA> | If you're a server driven site, the streaming approach is less invasive than having to create a client-driven thing |
| 19:11 | <JakeA> | I wouldn't change https://jakearchibald.github.io/svgomg/ for instance. |
| 19:31 | smaug____ | assumes wpt doesn't have too many session history tests |
| 20:36 | <gsnedders> | smaug____: mostly the ones jgraham wrote while at Opera that finally got merged. from memory, the number isn't massive, but they're quite evil. |
| 20:38 | <smaug____> | I'm in process of hacking push/replaceState handling when called during page load |
| 20:43 | <jgraham> | smaug____: I'm not sure I wrote tests for that specific case |
| 20:43 | <jgraham> | But we will see |
| 20:43 | <jgraham> | Also if I didn't you should :) |
| 20:43 | <jgraham> | Also if I did you should |
| 20:46 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: I'm pretty sure you did. |
| 20:48 | <jgraham> | Maybe! But smaug still should. |
| 20:49 | <smaug____> | iik |
| 20:49 | <smaug____> | but yes, I should |
| 20:50 | <smaug____> | session history is after all this nice piece of web platform which isn't specified nor implemented properly anywhere |
| 20:50 | <jgraham> | And whiuch servo still has to implement |
| 20:50 | <jgraham> | So there's a very clear payoff there |
| 20:50 | <jgraham> | Also lag |
| 20:50 | <jgraham> | Can't see anything I'm typing |
| 20:51 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: can you remember what happened with all the Core 3 feedback, or did it just all fall into the category of "we need to rewrite all of this, because who knows what we need, halp"? |
| 20:53 | <jgraham> | I filed some bug reports |
| 20:53 | <jgraham> | I don't know what happened to them |