| 12:20 | <MikeSmith> | I somehow missed the news from earlier in the month about the alpha release of Servo being targeted for Jun |
| 12:21 | <MikeSmith> | *June |
| 12:45 | <annevk> | Interesting, hadn't heard about that either |
| 12:55 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: I guess https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.servo/dcrNW6389g4 where it’s mentioned just sorta in the context of giving a goal/deadline for getting those 4 sites working in Servo |
| 12:56 | <MikeSmith> | so maybe others are making a bigger deal out of it than was intended |
| 12:56 | <MikeSmith> | anyway, that’s a somewhat odd set of sites to target |
| 12:56 | <MikeSmith> | github, duckduckgo, hackernews, reddit |
| 12:58 | <MikeSmith> | I guess the pattern is clear enough but other than github it’s not exactly set of sites that are essential even to developers as a target for testing |
| 12:59 | <MikeSmith> | at least I think it would be better to target, say, stackoverflow, rather than hackernews or reddit |
| 13:00 | <MikeSmith> | or maybe they already have stackoverflow working |
| 14:31 | <smaug____> | Why is there "Elements" class? |
| 14:33 | <smaug____> | hmm, I guess no one supports queryAll |
| 14:43 | <wanderview> | annevk: JakeA: is case 4 of step 3.3 here correct? https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#http-fetch |
| 14:44 | <wanderview> | can a service worker do evt.respondWith(fetch(someUrlThatRedirects)) for a navigation request? |
| 14:44 | <annevk> | wanderview: how would url list have more than one item in that case? |
| 14:44 | <wanderview> | I mean, can a service worker really not do an evt.requestWith(fetch(someUrlThatRedirects)) for a navigation... that seems like a change from previous behavior |
| 14:45 | <annevk> | wanderview: oh, you don't pass redirect mode along |
| 14:45 | <wanderview> | annevk: the inner fetch() performed by the service worker gets redirected |
| 14:45 | <annevk> | wanderview: right, that wouldn't work |
| 14:45 | <wanderview> | annevk: why not? this seems to have changed at some point |
| 14:45 | <wanderview> | annevk: why can't the service worker pass any response it pleases back? |
| 14:46 | <wanderview> | the manual mode stuff was added just to make pass through requests work |
| 14:46 | <annevk> | wanderview: that was a security issue I thought |
| 14:46 | <wanderview> | annevk: link? |
| 14:47 | <annevk> | wanderview: https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/commit/e54f6bd1e75f46cd4b8202f5ee3bfa68e9ded906 |
| 14:48 | <wanderview> | annevk: thanks! |
| 14:49 | <smaug____> | annevk: do you recall where queryAll was designed/discussed? Just wondering about the Elements class |
| 14:50 | <annevk> | smaug____: www-dom? |
| 14:50 | <annevk> | smaug____: long time ago |
| 14:51 | <smaug____> | thanks. will look at there then (could not find anything in bug trackers) |
| 14:52 | <smaug____> | hmm, long ago. Somehow the API hasn't got much interest since then then, given that it hasn't been implemented, afaik |
| 14:52 | <annevk> | smaug____: it requires subclassing which we're waiting on |
| 14:53 | <annevk> | smaug____: I think generally people are pretty keen on having it, once that is there |
| 14:53 | <annevk> | smaug____: but it'll require some changes to IDL too and I should probably tweak a couple of aspects before this lands, maybe later this year all the infrastructure will be in place |
| 14:53 | <smaug____> | might be better to have implementable stuff in specs, and put ideas to some other document |
| 15:04 | <annevk> | yeah |
| 15:04 | <annevk> | Should probably remove it for now until the machinery is in place |
| 15:07 | <wanderview> | annevk: JakeA: do you have any opinion on this? https://github.com/slightlyoff/ServiceWorker/issues/859 |
| 15:07 | <wanderview> | we need to implement something soon here... we have the empty string behavior while chrome returns a real origin... causing a compat issue on a large site |
| 15:18 | <annevk> | wanderview: empty string is only the default for synthetic events |
| 15:18 | <annevk> | wanderview: when the specification creates and dispatches that event hopefully it sets it to a serialized origin? |
| 15:18 | <wanderview> | annevk: no, it doesn't as far as I can tell |
| 15:19 | <annevk> | wanderview: that sounds like a bug |
| 15:19 | <annevk> | wanderview: that description you quoted however is fine |
| 15:19 | <annevk> | wanderview: although these days defaults like that can go into IDL |
| 15:20 | <wanderview> | annevk: oh, it does set it |
| 16:08 | <tantek> | MikeSmith: by what criteria are those sites being proposed as "getting working" ? popularity? relevance? adherence to web standards? good examples of best practices? |
| 16:10 | <MikeSmith> | tantek: no idea |
| 16:10 | <MikeSmith> | suggest asking Paul |
| 16:10 | <MikeSmith> | Rouget |
| 16:11 | <tantek> | I guess I'd suggest alternatives to sites that seem to encourage toxic commentary (HN/Rdit) |
| 16:11 | <tantek> | but yeah, odd set |
| 17:29 | <dekiss> | can someone tell me which is the most recent tcp/ip adn http 1.11 specifications |
| 17:30 | <dekiss> | 1.1 |
| 17:31 | <annevk> | dekiss: someone gave you a pointer already for HTTP/1.1 |
| 17:31 | <dekiss> | um? |
| 17:31 | <dekiss> | yesterday? |
| 17:31 | <annevk> | dekiss: yeah, Domenic pointed to https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#refsHTTP |
| 17:32 | <dekiss> | I am reading this but I wonder if there is newer http 1.1 spec https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616 |
| 17:32 | <annevk> | dekiss: did you follow the link? |
| 17:32 | <annevk> | dekiss: anyway, TCP is https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc793 |
| 17:32 | <dekiss> | yesterday some guys said that this link that I provided or rfc 2616 is most recent but they weren't sure |
| 17:33 | <annevk> | dekiss: that's not the most recent, see the link I gave |
| 17:33 | <dekiss> | I mean everything there is ok with today standards? because the spec is from 1999 |
| 17:33 | <dekiss> | thanks man |
| 17:33 | <dekiss> | also I found a typing error in one w3 rfc document where to report it? |
| 17:34 | <annevk> | dekiss: also, at the top of the 2616 document you should see "Obsoleted by: 7230, 7231, 7232, 7233, 7234, 7235" which gives you an indication that it's not the latest |
| 17:34 | <annevk> | dekiss: it should say at the top |
| 17:35 | <dekiss> | I don't understand this https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#refsHTTP |
| 17:35 | <dekiss> | is http 1.1 spec now divided into more specs? |
| 17:35 | <annevk> | yes |
| 17:35 | <dekiss> | aham |
| 17:35 | <dekiss> | ok |
| 17:36 | <dekiss> | what is obsoloete by adn updated by |
| 17:36 | <annevk> | update is an amendment, obsolete is a replacement |
| 17:36 | <dekiss> | obsolete by means it is replaced by and update by means updates to the current doc? |
| 17:36 | <dekiss> | ye ok thanks |
| 17:48 | <dekiss> | I guess no one readed so they divided it by smaller parts hahah |
| 17:48 | <dekiss> | too big man :S |
| 17:50 | <annevk> | Domenic: so, I've been thinking a little bit about how to tackle navigate |
| 17:50 | <dekiss> | but it seems now the content is much bigegr |
| 17:50 | <annevk> | Domenic: my thinking is to slowly rewrite it, e.g., as a first step, introduce /browsingContext/ and /resource/ variables |
| 17:51 | <annevk> | Domenic: then make "exceptions enabled" an argument (probably an optional flag), etc. |
| 17:52 | <annevk> | Domenic: I guess the idea is to make it easier to grasp first, and fix second |
| 17:52 | <annevk> | in lots of tiny steps |
| 17:56 | <Domenic> | annevk: I don't actually remember navigate being broken... Lack of Fetch integration? |
| 17:56 | <annevk> | Domenic: it integrates with Fetch, but poorly, it accepts lots of different types as "new resource", none well explained |
| 17:57 | <annevk> | Domenic: the way it ends up creating new documents is done rather poorly editorially and the details of such creation acts are spread across the document |
| 17:57 | <Domenic> | annevk: could use some review of custom elements BTW. Custom element reactions (nee callbacks) are mostly good, just need to add IDL integration but it's very isolated. I'd like to start moving the DOM+ patches into DOM next week. |
| 17:57 | <annevk> | Domenic: afaik nobody implements it as written, though I'm not sure what the specific issues are |
| 17:58 | <annevk> | Domenic: okay, I looked through custom elements and it seemed mostly good |
| 17:58 | <Domenic> | Ah yeah the lack of explanation for navigating to non-HTML documents is not great, I remember that now. |
| 17:58 | <annevk> | It seems things have shifted around a bit again |
| 17:59 | <Domenic> | Yeah just consolidating everything into patches of existing specs. |
| 17:59 | <annevk> | Domenic: well, you can navigate to a URL, a response, a request, a history entry |
| 17:59 | <annevk> | Domenic: but navigate talks about them as if they're all identical |
| 17:59 | <Domenic> | Hmm I see. |
| 18:00 | <annevk> | Domenic: so is "create an element" the hook everyone is supposed to be using to create elements? If it is we might want it to be more convenient for other specifications to call |
| 18:00 | <Domenic> | Yeah it is. But not many specs should be creating elements. What were you thinking? |
| 18:01 | <annevk> | Mostly that document, prefix, and typeExtension could be defaulted |
| 18:01 | <Domenic> | How document? |
| 18:01 | <annevk> | global object's document |
| 18:02 | <annevk> | something similar to new Text() and new "PlatformObject" basically |
| 18:02 | <Domenic> | Mmm not a fan the global object stuff is too confusing already. I'd rather keep that one explicit. |
| 18:03 | <annevk> | Yeah I guess that one is fine |
| 18:03 | <annevk> | DOM also started using "If ..., then ..." |
| 18:04 | <Domenic> | Seems reasonable to default the others I guess, although again there shouldn't be too many callers. |
| 18:04 | <Domenic> | When submitting the PR I'll try to match all the editorial stuff |
| 18:05 | <annevk> | Hmm so I gotta go, but I can do another look first thing tomorrow |
| 18:05 | <annevk> | If there's particular things you want me to look at let me know, apart from everything DOM+ |
| 18:06 | <Domenic> | DOM+ will be first so that should be good for now. It's feeling pretty solid overall... |
| 19:22 | <gsnedders> | I'm getting an HSTS error on hitting https://www.whatwg.org/C |
| 19:23 | <gsnedders> | unknown issuer of the cert |
| 19:27 | <IZh> | Hi! My PDF making script currently fails because of: https://images.whatwg.org/robots.jpeg: warning: SSL certificate problem: unable to get local issuer certificat |
| 19:27 | <IZh> | e |
| 19:27 | <IZh> | The browser also says that a connection is untrusted. |
| 19:27 | <IZh> | The problem happens only with this image. |
| 19:28 | <gsnedders> | Hixie_: ^^ |
| 19:28 | <IZh> | The other iimages are loading from html.spec.whatwg.org. |
| 19:29 | <IZh> | Domenic: ^ |
| 21:05 | <annevk> | gsnedders: IZh: DreamHost hardcoded the intermediate Let's Encrypt certificate so now things are failing |
| 21:06 | <annevk> | gsnedders: IZh: https://community.letsencrypt.org/t/certificates-issued-by-lets-encrypt-authority-x3-not-valid-in-mozilla/13320 |
| 21:22 | <IZh> | annevk: Hmm... I thought that Let's Encrypt works well. |
| 21:22 | <IZh> | annevk: Anyway, why only that image is hosted on other site? |
| 21:23 | <IZh> | annevk: Could it be moved for a while to html.spec.whatwg.org? |
