| 02:24 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: I’ve closed all teh components there to new bugs |
| 06:31 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: ta |
| 06:31 | annevk | landed the big cross-origin-objects patch |
| 09:30 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: nice work, that patch |
| 12:28 | <annevk> | Hopefully it's correct 😊 |
| 12:30 | <annevk> | JakeA: heard in your podcast animations got promises wrong |
| 12:30 | <annevk> | JakeA: this makes me worried about Houdini |
| 12:33 | <JakeA> | annevk: https://github.com/w3c/web-animations/issues/141 I think so. Hasn't shipped to stable yet so there's a possibility of fixing |
| 12:36 | <annevk> | JakeA: oh good |
| 12:37 | <annevk> | Hopefully the third state stuff becomes reality soonish |
| 13:33 | <nox> | annevk: I don't compute your "seems fine". Should I make a new change to WebIDL or not? |
| 13:34 | <annevk> | nox: you should, if you don't want it to appear on any derived interfaces |
| 13:34 | <nox> | Ok. |
| 13:34 | <nox> | Will do today or tomorrow. |
| 13:36 | <annevk> | nox: can I land the HTML stuff meanwhile? |
| 13:37 | <nox> | annevk: If you remove the annotation you mean? |
| 13:37 | <annevk> | nox: yeah |
| 13:37 | <annevk> | nox: that's already done |
| 13:37 | <nox> | Oh, LGTM. |
| 13:38 | <annevk> | done |
| 13:46 | <annevk> | nox: did you look into DOMTokenList's replace() method? https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1224186 |
| 13:46 | <nox> | annevk: To implement it in Servo you mean? |
| 13:46 | <annevk> | nox: yeah |
| 13:46 | <nox> | Yeah, we have some tests, I think. |
| 13:46 | <annevk> | nox: thought you might have an idea about tests and such |
| 13:47 | <nox> | Also I have a spec question related to it, |
| 13:47 | <nox> | classList.add() creates an empty class attribute if there was none, |
| 13:47 | <nox> | classList.replace("foo", "bar") doesn't. |
| 13:47 | <nox> | Should it? |
| 13:48 | <annevk> | Probably not |
| 13:48 | <nox> | annevk: Ok, that's good for me. |
| 16:36 | <annevk> | Domenic: so when I xref Boolean, I guess it should go to the object's constructor? |
| 16:46 | <Domenic> | annevk: hmm there are a rather lot of possibilities for that aren't there :(. looking... |
| 16:46 | <annevk> | Domenic: also, since we say we use ECMAScript language and terminology and ECMAScript doesn't xref, why should I? |
| 16:47 | <annevk> | Domenic: feels a bit like above and beyond what was there before |
| 16:47 | <Domenic> | annevk: well, ES's xrefs are a work in progress... but maybe it is OK to not for these... |
| 16:47 | <annevk> | I mean, I'm okay to add them once they add them and figure out how that should work |
| 16:47 | <annevk> | or perhaps decide they should all go through an abstract operation |
| 16:48 | <annevk> | I'm involved in a brand discussion too that might change how we look for slots, but I'm not sure I'd want to block on that either |
| 16:48 | <annevk> | This was kinda supposed to be a two-day thing, but it's taking much more than that now |
| 16:49 | <Domenic> | brand discussion? |
| 16:49 | <annevk> | I'll try to figure out how to put some kind of commit in between where I move the section, seems tricky |
| 16:50 | <Domenic> | that would be lovely :) |
| 16:50 | <annevk> | Domenic: https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/issues/354#issuecomment-187830045 |
| 16:50 | <Domenic> | ah right yeah |
| 16:51 | <Domenic> | So I guess I would link "Boolean object" to https://tc39.github.io/ecma262/#sec-boolean-object |
| 16:51 | <Domenic> | but I guess we could omit it |
| 16:52 | <annevk> | I see |
| 17:15 | <annevk> | Domenic: I'm always afraid with this rewriting that things go horribly wrong and I delete a bunch of things |
| 17:15 | <annevk> | And that happened... |
| 17:15 | <annevk> | Not sure how major it is |
| 17:27 | <annevk> | Domenic: about the blog post, I did want to write something on my personal blog about, as a follow up to the same-origin policy one |
| 17:27 | <annevk> | Domenic: last couple posts on the WHATWG blog haven't really inspired anyone to write there yet |
| 17:32 | <Domenic> | annevk: hmm I was thinking WHATWG blog, as the first of a kind of "major recent changes" thing... I could do modules at some point |
| 17:33 | <annevk> | You know what, if you do modules, I'll do this one after |
| 17:33 | <annevk> | If we're going to a major changes series it better be chronological :-p |
| 17:37 | <Domenic> | haha fair :) |
| 17:47 | <annevk> | Domenic: section 6.2.1 The List and Record Specification Type |
| 17:47 | <Domenic> | annevk: wow that's special, OK. Inclined to think it's a typo... |
| 17:52 | <annevk> | Yeah maybe, I guess I can try fix it upstream and see what happens |
| 17:52 | <annevk> | Oh well, time to make dinner |
| 17:52 | <Domenic> | https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pull/421 |
| 17:53 | <annevk> | ta! |
| 20:13 | <IZh> | Hi current spec refers to non-existent anchors #refsSVG11, #refsSVGTiny12 and #refsSVG2. |
| 20:21 | <IZh> | The images /images/sample-bdi.png and /images/sample-not-bdi.png has no alt attribute, which is mandatory if I understand correctly. |
| 20:21 | <IZh> | Hixie: ^ |
| 20:22 | <IZh> | Oh, yes. Bugzilla. |
| 20:27 | <IZh> | Filled in github. |