| 08:37 | <bblfish> | annevk: thanks for answering. Do you have a pointer to work on caching for the whole site? |
| 08:39 | <bblfish> | Also timbl made an interesting point: that if the browser made a HEAD instead of an OPTIONS on a GET preflight, then there would be a need for 1 less connection. |
| 08:40 | <bblfish> | mhh, but perhaps the reason for the 3 calls for me is that the browser first does a GET |
| 08:41 | <bblfish> | It's odd in chrome I always see the GET first, then OPTIONS. But I suppose that is just a display error. |
| 08:44 | <bblfish> | Yes, on my server I first see the GET, then then OPTIONS. Presumably because the GET returned a 401? |
| 08:48 | <bblfish> | but the GET has all the required headers. |
| 09:20 | <bblfish> | annevk: I got the whole order wrong of what was happening. So I rewrote the entry. https://github.com/solid/solid-spec/issues/52#issuecomment-157882202 |
| 09:22 | <bblfish> | It actually looks like things might be perfectly efficient. |
| 09:22 | <bblfish> | at least for a GET, which should be the most usual case. |
| 09:23 | <bblfish> | It's just weird that a GET returning a 401 then is followed by an OPTIONS |
| 09:27 | <MikeSmith> | nice to see patches finally landing in gecko for <details>+<summary> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=591737#c96 |
| 09:40 | <rits_> | hello everyone, i am glad to start working as an outreachy intern in whatwg, thanks for the opportunity :-) |
| 09:40 | <MikeSmith> | hi rits_ |
| 09:41 | <MikeSmith> | your application was accepted? |
| 09:42 | <rits_> | MikeSmith: hello, yes it was accepted, was there any issue related to it? |
| 09:42 | <MikeSmith> | rits_: very cool |
| 09:42 | <MikeSmith> | that's great to hear |
| 09:43 | <MikeSmith> | no, no issues that I know of |
| 09:43 | <rits_> | MikeSmith: great, thanks :) |
| 09:43 | <MikeSmith> | and I didn't have anything to do with helping with it so far, but going forward I'm happy to help you when I can |
| 09:44 | <MikeSmith> | I just had a new baby born about a month ago, and still in the process of trying to figure out some new work-life balance around that |
| 09:44 | <MikeSmith> | right now my baby has mostly been winning :) |
| 09:45 | <MikeSmith> | as far as where I've been spending time |
| 09:45 | <rits_> | MikeSmith: yeah, i wanted to discuss about my further steps, i am starting with bugs according to the timeline i made |
| 09:45 | <MikeSmith> | ok |
| 09:45 | <annevk> | zcorpan: happy b-day! 🎂 |
| 09:45 | <zcorpan> | annevk: thx! |
| 09:45 | <jgraham> | ++ |
| 09:45 | <rits_> | congrats for the baby :) MikeSmith |
| 09:46 | <jgraham> | ++ to that too |
| 09:46 | <MikeSmith> | rits_: thanks :) |
| 09:46 | <MikeSmith> | zcorpan: felix navidad! |
| 09:47 | <rits_> | MikeSmith: baby would be winning around 1year of yours more :D |
| 09:47 | <jgraham> | MikeSmith: Out by about a month there :) |
| 09:47 | <rits_> | zcorpan: Happy b'day :) |
| 09:48 | <MikeSmith> | rits_: yeah but I need to get better skilled at squeezing in more work between baby time |
| 09:48 | <rits_> | MikeSmith: yeah if the baby allows you |
| 09:48 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 09:48 | <MikeSmith> | rits_: as far as next steps I think it's just "more of what you already did" |
| 09:49 | <MikeSmith> | you already landed at least one spec change, right? |
| 09:49 | <rits_> | MikeSmith: yeah i did |
| 09:50 | <zcorpan> | thx. and congrats MikeSmith :-) |
| 09:50 | <MikeSmith> | rits_: ok, so far as I know it's up to you to decide what bugs to work on next or where else to put your time |
| 09:51 | <rits_> | MikeSmith: yes i will resolve the critical issues first, |
| 09:52 | <annevk> | rits_: indeed, you can make up your own schedule, but also, to be clear, at this point you're not expected to do anything |
| 09:53 | <annevk> | rits_: I believe the internships starts with the week in Orlando and will last three months or so from that point |
| 09:53 | <annevk> | rits_: having said that, if you want to contribute now, that's perfectly fine and appreciated :-) |
| 09:54 | <rits_> | annevk: yeah ok, then i will try to learn about solving the issues till then, this time can be utilized for that |
| 09:54 | <annevk> | bblfish: there may or may not be an open issue or bug against Fetch |
| 09:54 | <annevk> | bblfish: not sure |
| 09:55 | <bblfish> | annevk: I rewrote the entry, it looks like everything is fine, except for the weirdness that an OPTIONS follows a GET with CORS headers |
| 09:55 | <rits_> | annevk: i will work both ways :), will contribute in parallel with working according to the timeline, |
| 09:56 | <yoav> | annevk: regarding your "this should not use <code>" comment, did you refer to the "supported tokens"? |
| 09:56 | <annevk> | yoav: yes |
| 09:56 | <yoav> | OK, thanks |
| 09:56 | <annevk> | bblfish: hmm, are you sure something is not cached? |
| 09:56 | <annevk> | bblfish: sounds very fishy |
| 09:56 | <annevk> | rits_: \o/ |
| 09:56 | <bblfish> | I'll make a new resource |
| 09:57 | <rits_> | annevk: :-) |
| 09:57 | <bblfish> | To mee it sounds brillant though :-) |
| 10:01 | <yoav> | annevk: addressed your comments |
| 10:02 | <annevk> | yoav: so instead of <code> you want to use <span> |
| 10:02 | <annevk> | yoav: and the sandbox entry needs to be consistent with that of course |
| 10:02 | <yoav> | Oh, OK |
| 10:03 | <yoav> | that's what I was missing :) |
| 10:03 | <annevk> | yoav: it also seems that the xref for "the sandbox attribute" is wrong |
| 10:04 | <annevk> | yoav: you want to xref just "sandbox", as <code data-x="attr-iframe-sandbox"> |
| 10:05 | <yoav> | annevk: OK, fixed |
| 10:06 | <annevk> | yoav: is the xref for supported tokens not still wrong? |
| 10:07 | <annevk> | yoav: and it's still inconsistent with sandbox, where you use <code> |
| 10:07 | <yoav> | yeah, just saw that |
| 10:07 | <yoav> | fixing it |
| 10:07 | <annevk> | yoav: using a separate paragraph for relList's DOMTokenList's supported tokens might be good too |
| 10:07 | <annevk> | yoav: to make them completely identical |
| 10:08 | <annevk> | yoav: oh, and "the sandbox attribute" is not fixed yet |
| 10:09 | <yoav> | separated relList to its own <p> |
| 10:10 | <yoav> | what is still wrong with the sandbox attribute? |
| 10:10 | <yoav> | annevk: should it be <code>? should it just xref "sandbox"? |
| 10:11 | <annevk> | yoav: yes and yes |
| 10:11 | <yoav> | OK |
| 10:11 | <annevk> | When in doubt, just look at what the rest of HTML does |
| 10:13 | <annevk> | yoav: also, the second 's doesn't seem to make sense for the sandbox sentence... |
| 10:13 | <yoav> | so: |
| 10:13 | <yoav> | <p>The <span data-x="dom-domtokenlist-supported-tokens">supported tokens</span> |
| 10:13 | <yoav> | for <code data-x="sandbox">sandbox</code>'s <code>DOMSettableTokenList</code>'s are |
| 10:13 | <yoav> | the allowed values defined in <code data-x="sandbox">the sandbox attribute</code> |
| 10:13 | <yoav> | and supported by the user agent.</p> |
| 10:14 | <zcorpan> | s/'s are/ are/ |
| 10:15 | <annevk> | yoav: hmm, no |
| 10:15 | <zcorpan> | data-x="attr-iframe-sandbox" i think? |
| 10:15 | <annevk> | yoav: "the <code data-x="attr-iframe-sandbox">sandbox</code> attribute" |
| 10:15 | <annevk> | yoav: is what the rest of HTML does, as far as I can tell |
| 10:16 | <annevk> | Hmm, Twitter is done? |
| 10:16 | <annevk> | down, even |
| 10:17 | <yoav> | <p>The <span data-x="dom-domtokenlist-supported-tokens">supported tokens</span> |
| 10:17 | <yoav> | for <code data-x="attr-iframe-sandbox">sandbox</code>'s <code>DOMSettableTokenList</code> are |
| 10:17 | <yoav> | the allowed values defined in <code data-x="attr-iframe-sandbox">the sandbox attribute</code> |
| 10:17 | <yoav> | and supported by the user agent.</p> |
| 10:20 | <annevk> | yoav: shouldn't the first sandbox reference the IDL attribute? The second is still not as I quoted it |
| 10:22 | <yoav> | <p>The <span data-x="dom-domtokenlist-supported-tokens">supported tokens</span> |
| 10:22 | <yoav> | for <code data-x="dom-iframe-sandbox">sandbox</code>'s <code>DOMSettableTokenList</code> are |
| 10:22 | <yoav> | the allowed values defined in the <code data-x="attr-iframe-sandbox">sandbox</code> attribute |
| 10:22 | <yoav> | and supported by the user agent.</p> |
| 10:22 | <yoav> | OK, sorry for missing that |
| 10:24 | <yoav> | annevk: OK, pushed that latest version. Gotta go now, but let me know if there are any further issues |
| 10:27 | <annevk> | Hmm, I wish I'd know earlier he was in a hurry |
| 10:27 | <annevk> | known* |
| 10:37 | <annevk> | I wonder how html/browsers/origin/cross-origin-objects/cross-origin-objects.html ever landed since it hardcodes domain names |
| 10:37 | <annevk> | Seems like Ms2ger might have reviewed that |
| 10:38 | <annevk> | jgraham: would the best course of action here be to rename the files to include .sub and make the appropriate modifications? |
| 10:38 | <annevk> | jgraham: or first land a rename commit and then make modifications? |
| 10:43 | <annevk> | Well, I'll just do my best to get them fixed... |
| 10:48 | <jgraham> | annevk: Fix and rename in one step seems fine |
| 10:49 | <Ms2ger> | Hrm, I didn't notice that bit |
| 10:53 | <annevk> | jgraham: https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/2360 |
| 10:53 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: ^ |
| 10:53 | <annevk> | Running that locally makes Firefox still pass all tests |
| 10:54 | <annevk> | jgraham: how is it clear btw what is test and what are support files? |
| 10:54 | <annevk> | that doesn't really seem indicated in that test |
| 10:54 | <Ms2ger> | "includes testharness.js" |
| 10:54 | <Ms2ger> | I don't think '//{{domains[www1]}}:' + location.port is right |
| 10:54 | <Ms2ger> | jgraham, ^ |
| 11:04 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: why would that be wrong? |
| 11:23 | <jgraham> | Well I would usually write {{ports[http][0]}} unless that wasn't what was required |
| 11:24 | <zcorpan> | jgraham: {{GET[foo]}} in .sub.html escapes &, but doesn't escape "? |
| 11:25 | <zcorpan> | jgraham: this makes it impossible to use literal " (in attribute value) |
| 11:27 | <jgraham> | zcorpan: Hmm, it uses cgi.escape |
| 11:28 | <zcorpan> | If it is used as cgi.escape(string_to_escape, quote=True), it also escapes ". https://wiki.python.org/moin/EscapingHtml |
| 11:28 | zcorpan | lunch |
| 11:30 | <jochen__> | annevk, is "content attribute" a defined term? |
| 11:30 | <jgraham> | zcSounds reasonable if it doesn't break anything |
| 11:30 | <jochen__> | annevk: i.e. should I reference some spec for it, or just write "content attribute"? |
| 11:31 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: with the changes Hixie made on the whatwg.org host does that now mean it's possible to get https://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org URLs working |
| 11:40 | <Ms2ger> | jochen__, there's a definition you can link to, I believe |
| 11:41 | <Ms2ger> | Hrm |
| 11:42 | <Ms2ger> | jochen__, nevermind, there's a definition, but it doesn't get an ID for some reason |
| 11:42 | <jochen__> | kk |
| 11:42 | <Ms2ger> | https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/infrastructure.html#terminology |
| 11:42 | <Ms2ger> | annevk, ^ |
| 11:52 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: that still depends on DreamHost enabling HTTPS support for hosted email lists |
| 11:52 | <MikeSmith> | ah OK |
| 11:52 | <MikeSmith> | I thought they told you they were going to do that |
| 11:52 | <MikeSmith> | or something |
| 11:53 | <annevk> | jgraham: wouldn't you just want to reflect the port in use typically? |
| 11:53 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: no, unfortunately not |
| 11:53 | <MikeSmith> | ah |
| 11:58 | <jochen__> | annevk, hope I've addressed all your comments on the referrerPolicy IDL thing |
| 11:59 | <jgraham> | annevk: I guess that's also fine if it's what you want |
| 11:59 | <jgraham> | It depends if you already using script or not |
| 11:59 | <jgraham> | If you are then using location.port isn't too bad. If you are trying to write a href attribute or stylesheet or something, that doesn't work |
| 12:00 | <annevk> | jochen__: looks more reasonable now |
| 12:00 | <annevk> | jgraham: this already uses script, I've used {{location[port]}} for the other cases in recently submitted PRs |
| 12:03 | <jgraham> | annevk: Yeah, it isn't a problem afaik |
| 12:30 | <Ms2ger> | Suddenly, <details> support in Gecko |
| 12:37 | <nox> | Interesting. |
| 12:37 | <odinho> | boom |
| 12:54 | <zcorpan> | jgraham: is it https://github.com/w3c/wptserve/blob/b6b082fb70c592c6164c76aa167ae4dc284ebb69/wptserve/pipes.py#L422 ? |
| 13:00 | <jgraham> | zcorpan: Yes |
| 13:04 | <catalinb> | JakeA: ping |
| 13:07 | <JakeA> | catalinb: morning! |
| 13:08 | <catalinb> | JakeA: hey. I need some help understanding something regarding SW registrations. Do you have a few minutes? |
| 13:13 | <JakeA> | catalinb: sure, although I'm on my phone so my debugging is limited |
| 13:14 | <catalinb> | JakeA: okay, so we have a sequence of two register calls for the same scope with two different scripts. The first service worker script will reject the install handler after some. |
| 13:15 | <catalinb> | JakeA: can the following sequence happen? |
| 13:15 | <catalinb> | 1. call register() number two which will invoke Get Registration and find the registration created by the previous call |
| 13:16 | <catalinb> | 2. the install handler from the first sw rejects and ends up clearing the registration and thus removing it from the registration map |
| 13:16 | <catalinb> | 3. continue updating (from the second register call) with a registration that's not in the registration map |
| 13:20 | <catalinb> | JakeA: does it make sense?^ |
| 13:21 | <JakeA> | catalinb: sounds like a bug, which could be a spec bug. Hang on, let me dig into the spec (it's 5am here so expect slowness) |
| 13:23 | <catalinb> | thanks! and sorry for bothering you so early in the morning :) |
| 13:29 | <JakeA> | catalinb: at what point is register 1 at when register 2 is invoked? |
| 13:30 | <zcorpan> | jgraham: https://github.com/w3c/wptserve/pull/68 - it does what i want but i don't know if some existing test relies on not escaping ". it seems unlikely though |
| 13:34 | <catalinb> | JakeA: register 2 is called while waiting for the first sw to reject the install waitUntil promise. |
| 13:36 | <catalinb> | at this point the registration is in the map |
| 13:37 | <catalinb> | We then get to Step 4.1 from Update Algorithm which is called in parallel |
| 13:39 | <catalinb> | I think this can race with steps 13-18 from "Install Algorithm" for the first service worker |
| 13:41 | <JakeA> | catalinb: is the race solved by https://slightlyoff.github.io/ServiceWorker/spec/service_worker/#dfn-registration-queue-adt |
| 13:41 | <smaug____> | oh, I just realized Gecko does something very different to what the spec says with pushState/replaceState. Hmm, spec seems to have yet another bug there, but whether Gecko is sane...dunno |
| 13:43 | <catalinb> | JakeA: well no, because the first service worker's timestamp was already popped from the registration queue |
| 13:43 | <smaug____> | (or maybe it isn't that bad) |
| 13:45 | <JakeA> | catalinb: so 4.2 is hit at https://slightlyoff.github.io/ServiceWorker/spec/service_worker/#update-algorithm - the installing worker is terminated. When is the registration removed from the map? |
| 13:47 | <catalinb> | JakeA: at 16.3 at https://slightlyoff.github.io/ServiceWorker/spec/service_worker/#installation-algorithm |
| 13:47 | <catalinb> | before 4.2 is hit |
| 13:48 | <catalinb> | this is possible since 4.2 from Update is not reached atomically from Register |
| 13:48 | <JakeA> | Ahhhh so registration 1 rejects itself, I thought it was being rejected because reg2 terminated it |
| 13:49 | <JakeA> | Following now |
| 13:50 | <JakeA> | catalinb: yeah, I don't think this should happen. Can you file a bug? |
| 13:50 | <catalinb> | yup. |
| 14:06 | <zcorpan> | argh when will i learn to git add before git commit --amend |
| 14:09 | <roc> | just use -a a lot and try to pretend the index doesn't exist |
| 14:12 | <smaug____> | Why TokenList validation steps convert to lowercase ascii? |
| 14:20 | <smaug____> | in all the cases |
| 14:20 | <smaug____> | looks odd |
| 14:20 | <smaug____> | oh well, not going to care about this |
| 14:52 | <gsnedders> | is there any telemetry for % of users with user stylesheets? |
| 14:53 | <jgraham> | I don't know, but I would guess it's very very low |
| 14:53 | <gsnedders> | This is the obvious answer. :) |
| 15:01 | <Ms2ger> | Does Stylish count? |
| 15:04 | <gsnedders> | Ms2ger: I'm going for yes |
| 15:04 | <Ms2ger> | amo says ~600000 users |
| 15:04 | <Ms2ger> | That's still very low, of course |
| 15:23 | <Ms2ger> | > W3C Invites Implementations of XSL Transformations (XSLT) Version 3.0 |
| 15:24 | <gsnedders> | hey, I'm sure there will be implementations! |
| 15:24 | <gsnedders> | …just not in browsers |
| 15:53 | <caitp> | heycam|away|away / annevk / whoever: is it a good idea to ship DOM @@iterator stuff in the state they're in (with inconsistencies between certain iterable DOM interfaces), or should more time be spent poking and prodding people to make them consistent |
| 15:53 | <caitp> | eg window[@@iterator] vs NodeList.prototype[@@iterator] |
| 15:53 | <annevk> | caitp: I think bz would prefer some more prodding |
| 15:54 | <caitp> | I'd prefer some more modding too it just doesn't look like it's been happening |
| 15:54 | <annevk> | caitp: there's not much folks working actively on IDL |
| 15:54 | <annevk> | so it's always a bit behind the facts |
| 15:54 | <caitp> | :( |
| 15:57 | <caitp> | on the one hand, it would be nice to ship now, on the other hand, might be hard to fix things later if they do ever change |
| 15:57 | <annevk> | maybe run it by bz? |
| 15:57 | <caitp> | does he hang out here? I don't spend a lot of time on public-script-coord etc |
| 15:57 | <annevk> | see /msg |
| 15:58 | <annevk> | jgraham: so can I merge https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/2360? |
| 16:21 | <Ms2ger> | No |
| 16:21 | <Ms2ger> | (I beat you to it :)) |
| 16:23 | <annevk> | ta |
| 17:20 | <annevk> | mkwst: did you look at the latest in https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/323 very recently? |
| 17:20 | <annevk> | mkwst: would appreciate review |
| 19:22 | <mkwst> | annevk: Sorry, was out this afternoon. Will look at the PR tomorrow morning. :) |
| 20:32 | <emerson> | https://gist.github.com/emersonveenstra/f79807307abae9a16401 with this document, would Baz be a subsection of Bar? |