| 04:02 | <rniwa> | dglazkov: https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/241 is where we track rootNode regression |
| 04:38 | <MikeSmith> | rniwa: oh, so blink did revert it? |
| 04:38 | <MikeSmith> | ah yeah |
| 04:38 | MikeSmith | sees https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/241#issuecomment-217072501 |
| 04:41 | <annevk> | I like radicle |
| 04:43 | <annevk> | I have the feeling though that without root folks will just iterate the parent chain |
| 04:56 | <rniwa> | MikeSmith: yup |
| 04:56 | <rniwa> | @annevk: radicle? |
| 04:58 | <MikeSmith> | what is radicle? |
| 04:58 | <rniwa> | @annevk: I think radicle is a sufficiently unusual word that people outside the English speaking wouldn't even find it |
| 04:58 | <rniwa> | speaking world* |
| 04:58 | <MikeSmith> | and rniwa how come you put @ in front of nicks sometimes? |
| 04:59 | <rniwa> | MikeSmith: I don't know that's how annevk's name show up |
| 04:59 | <rniwa> | oh, wait... I think that's a quirk in my IRC client :( |
| 04:59 | <MikeSmith> | rniwa: I think even people in the English-speaking world do not know what radicle is |
| 04:59 | <rniwa> | ugh... |
| 04:59 | <MikeSmith> | rniwa: ah yeah I think it is just because annevk is an op |
| 04:59 | <MikeSmith> | I thought you were doing it on purpose |
| 05:00 | <MikeSmith> | is radicle some CS term |
| 05:00 | <MikeSmith> | is it not the way the math term is spelled, right? |
| 05:00 | <MikeSmith> | botany wtf |
| 05:02 | <annevk> | I am not seriously suggesting it, I just like the word |
| 05:03 | <annevk> | Blame miketaylr |
| 05:05 | <MikeSmith> | rhizome |
| 05:05 | <rniwa> | annevk: I think we should pick either treeTop or highestNode |
| 05:06 | <MikeSmith> | crux |
| 05:07 | <MikeSmith> | rniwa: the problem with treeTop is that tops of (real) trees are... leaves |
| 05:07 | <MikeSmith> | why not treeRoot |
| 05:08 | <rniwa> | MikeSmith: unfortunately, that name is also quite popular in Github |
| 05:08 | <MikeSmith> | ah OK |
| 05:08 | <MikeSmith> | I guess baseNode probably is too |
| 05:08 | <MikeSmith> | or deepestNode |
| 05:08 | <rniwa> | MikeSmith: 24,242 hits |
| 05:09 | <rniwa> | MikeSmith: deepestNode sounds like a leaf |
| 05:09 | <rniwa> | MikeSmith: we usually say going up a tree to mean going to the root in ADT sense |
| 05:09 | <MikeSmith> | rniwa: I guess I think more in terms of real trees |
| 05:10 | <MikeSmith> | yeah but that is teh opposite of what how we normally look at trees intuitievly, so it is ambiguous |
| 05:10 | <MikeSmith> | anyway, I give up because it seems like all the right terms are already in use |
| 05:10 | <rniwa> | MikeSmith: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_(data_structure)#Terminologies_used_in_Trees |
| 05:11 | <rniwa> | MikeSmith: root is the top node |
| 05:11 | <rniwa> | MikeSmith: but I can understand your sentiment |
| 05:11 | <MikeSmith> | yeah they should call ADT trees upsideDownTrees |
| 05:11 | <miketaylr> | annevk: radical is even better |
| 05:12 | <MikeSmith> | oldestNode |
| 05:12 | <rniwa> | MikeSmith: that sounds like the oldest node in the creation order |
| 05:13 | <MikeSmith> | but I guess that doesn’t work either |
| 05:13 | <MikeSmith> | rniwa: yeah |
| 05:13 | <rniwa> | how about nodeAtRoot! |
| 05:14 | <MikeSmith> | oh |
| 05:15 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 05:15 | <MikeSmith> | Google is nearly completely unaware of that string |
| 05:16 | <MikeSmith> | https://github.com/search?q=%22nodeAtRoot%22&type=Code&utf8=%E2%9C%93 shows only 1 hit |
| 05:16 | <rniwa> | same thing as treeTop |
| 05:16 | <rniwa> | and highestNode |
| 05:17 | <MikeSmith> | I like nodeAtRoot better than those |
| 05:17 | <rniwa> | or treeTopNode? |
| 05:18 | <MikeSmith> | Tree Top sounds like the name of a blues piano player |
| 05:18 | <MikeSmith> | Mike "Tree Top" Taylor at the piano |
| 05:21 | <rniwa> | MikeSmith, annevk: another option is to make a method and rename it to findRootNode or something |
| 05:22 | <rniwa> | MikeSmith, annevk: since this attribute needs to the work of walking up the ancestor chain in many cases, it's not O(1) operation anyway |
| 05:22 | <rniwa> | unlike things like .shadowRoot and .document |
| 05:22 | <annevk> | With a method we could add pierces:true at some point… |
| 05:23 | <rniwa> | annevk: indeed. |
| 05:23 | <annevk> | Not a bad idea |
| 05:26 | <rniwa> | annevk: oh, better yet, we can even find the highest node that matches a given criteria |
| 05:26 | <rniwa> | annevk: like... findRootNode('div .foo') |
| 05:26 | <rniwa> | annevk: or findRootNode(function (node) { return node.contentEditable; }) |
| 05:29 | <rniwa> | annevk: btw, could you update https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/495 if you know of any other issues we need to resolve for v1? |
| 05:29 | <rniwa> | annevk: it's getting harder to track all the issues related to shadow DOM and I don't want to forget fix things in WebKit / write tests |
| 05:30 | <annevk> | rniwa: yeah, will do later today |
| 05:30 | <rniwa> | annevk: thanks |
| 05:31 | <rniwa> | ttyl, guys |
| 05:31 | <annevk> | .closest() exists |
| 05:31 | <annevk> | Maybe .closest(":root") is the way to get root |
| 06:58 | <annevk> | It's not |
| 07:24 | <smaug____> | annevk: https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/242#issuecomment-216115262 |
| 07:24 | <smaug____> | so I'm missing now where someone objects 'composed' |
| 07:25 | <annevk> | earlier today on IRC rniwa mentioned he didn't like composed |
| 07:25 | <smaug____> | aha |
| 07:25 | <annevk> | smaug____: http://logs.glob.uno/?c=freenode%23whatwg&s=4+May+2016&e=5+May+2016#c994215 |
| 07:26 | <smaug____> | I know composed and composition is all a buzz-wordy thing |
| 07:26 | <annevk> | I'm at the point where I have stopped caring and am just getting annoyed, so I should probably take a break |
| 07:33 | <smaug____> | (we should have just used 'composed' consistently everywhere. isInComposedDocument, composedPath ...) |
| 07:33 | <smaug____> | oh well |
| 07:36 | <heycam> | annevk: saw the comment on open ended dictionary but didn't get a chance to think about it properly. commented on the issue, but will see if I get a chance to think about it more tomorrow. |
| 07:37 | <annevk> | heycam: kk |
| 07:38 | <annevk> | smaug____: yeah, naming is hard. Naming when reasonable names break the web is nigh impossible. |
| 07:39 | <annevk> | smaug____: with that naming scheme we would have had composedDocumentInsertedCallback? |
| 07:45 | <smaug____> | why would there need to be such |
| 07:45 | <smaug____> | connectedCallback should have deal with all the ancestor changes, not just binding to document |
| 07:46 | <annevk> | smaug____: that's not how it's defined and agreed upon... |
| 07:46 | <annevk> | smaug____: you were at the meeting |
| 07:47 | <smaug____> | I disagreed wit the resolution, but gave up with fighting |
| 07:47 | <annevk> | Except when we're discussing hypothetical names? |
| 07:50 | <smaug____> | hypothetical names? annevk is cranky today ? :) |
| 07:51 | <annevk> | ding ding ding |
| 07:51 | <smaug____> | though, I can totally see web components making people cranky. After 15 years of web components, we're still in progress to figure out how it all should work. |
| 11:22 | <gsnedders> | does the meta encoding prescan work correctly for ISO-2022-JP? |
| 11:29 | <annevk> | gsnedders: it doesn't account for it, right? |
| 11:33 | <gsnedders> | annevk: no, it doesn't. but ASCII bytes are encoded as ASCII, right? or can they be encoded in other ways too? so it should always pick up a <meta charset>, but it might pick up something bogus too? |
| 11:34 | gsnedders | doesn't have a good memory as to how ISO-2022-JP works |
| 11:34 | <annevk> | gsnedders: it might pick up something bogus, but I haven't verified whether that is the case and I'm not aware of anyone else researching it either |
| 11:34 | <annevk> | gsnedders: https://encoding.spec.whatwg.org/#iso-2022-jp |
| 11:36 | <gsnedders> | annevk: okay, I'll look into this at some point |
| 11:37 | <gsnedders> | annevk: just wondering about how well encoding detection works; UTF-16 can safely be dealt with by BOMs leaving only ISO-2022-JP as the interesting case |
| 11:37 | <annevk> | gsnedders: since 0x20 is required and not a thing for non-ASCII ISO-2022-JP I suspect you cannot really pick up something bogus |
| 11:39 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/37048440/what-is-the-explanation-for-this-inconsistent-behavior-related-to-document-domai |
| 11:39 | <gsnedders> | annevk: ok, therefore it works fine? good to know. |
| 11:40 | <annevk> | gsnedders: I suspect so, you can only have incorrectly identified ASCII bytes in the 0x21-0x5F range for ISO-2022-JP |
| 11:42 | <gsnedders> | annevk: thx! |
| 11:43 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: answered |
| 11:44 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: I've also answered some CORS questions at some point, folks are still upvoting those... |
| 11:44 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: mainly why I now have over a thousand points on stackoverflow I think |
| 11:48 | <MikeSmith> | good |
| 11:48 | <MikeSmith> | people need the help |
| 11:49 | <MikeSmith> | so it’s a measure of real gratitude |
| 11:50 | <MikeSmith> | but yeah in this case I guess part of the answer is just “Don’t use document.domain” |
| 12:25 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: I've clarified the credentials case around CORS a bit btw and just submitted a PR for more examples (based on a contribution by Rory from Akamai) |
| 12:27 | <MikeSmith> | yeah, saw that |
| 12:27 | <MikeSmith> | I think that will really help |
| 12:29 | <MikeSmith> | the biggest problems people actually have on SO with CORS is not CORS itself, but just specific to whatever server-side environment/CMS/whatever they are using, and trying to figure out how to get that send the right headers under the right conditions |
| 12:29 | <annevk> | yeah |
| 12:29 | <annevk> | That was my impression too |
| 12:29 | <annevk> | And sometimes subtle browser bugs |
| 12:30 | <MikeSmith> | yes that too |
| 14:24 | <dglazkov> | \o/ |
| 14:46 | <annevk> | hey dglazkov, I can see now why you quit pushing the components wagon for a bit |
| 14:46 | <annevk> | dglazkov: it can get rather frustrating |
| 14:48 | <annevk> | dglazkov: having said that, we're closer than ever before I think |
| 14:49 | <dglazkov> | 😀 |
| 14:50 | <dglazkov> | Thank you for pushing the train! |
| 15:16 | <TabAtkins> | Domenic: "All new platform properties have to be symbols" yes plz thx |
| 15:18 | <TabAtkins> | Domenic: What IDL change will break Bikeshed? |
| 15:20 | <TabAtkins> | annevk, rniwa: "radicle" is sufficiently unusual *in* the English-speaking world that it shouldn't be used. It's also far too close to "radical", an actually common word. |
| 15:24 | <Domenic> | TabAtkins: if we updated the Console Standard to use new speculative IDL syntax like `namespace Console { ... }` instead of interface, I imagine Bikeshed would barf. We need to update the IDL spec first then the IDL parser Bikeshed uses, then Bikeshed. |
| 17:48 | <TabAtkins> | Domenic: Ah, yes, it would indeed barf. Parser is based on the IDL spec, so update that first. ^_^ My parser is plinss/widlparser |
| 18:21 | <jyasskin> | Domenic: Here's my survey of how we register events that get dispatched to workers. I didn't find many: https://gist.github.com/jyasskin/b44ae6d1cf6c209e063447babee8a764 |
| 18:21 | <Mek> | jyasskin: you're at least missing background sync from that |
| 18:22 | <Mek> | (although it's pretty much the same as push/notifications; by adding stuff to SWRegistration) |
| 18:28 | <Mek> | also SW events aren't generally send to a particular global/service worker, but instead to whatever the active worker is for a particular registration (the "Handle Funcitional Event" algorithm takes a SW registration, not a specific worker) |
| 18:31 | <jyasskin> | Mek: Thanks; I'll add that. And yeah, there's a handle in the main world that's used to identify a set of workers. That'll be true for Worklets too. |
| 19:39 | <rniwa> | smaug____: yt? |
| 19:42 | <smaug____> | rniwa: not really. holiday in Finland like in many other countries. but ask. |
| 19:42 | <rniwa> | smaug____: oh I see |
| 19:42 | <rniwa> | smaug____: https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/242 |
| 19:42 | <rniwa> | smaug____: how about escapingPath, leakingPath, emanatingPath, or exitingPath? |
| 19:44 | <smaug____> | I don't know what escapingPath would mean in this context... or definitely not what emanatingPath means |
| 19:44 | smaug____ | looks for dictionary |
| 19:57 | <rniwa> | smaug____: or we could call it dispatchPath, propagationTargets (can't use path) |
| 19:58 | <smaug____> | rniwa: why not path there? |
| 19:58 | <smaug____> | is propagationPath being used elsewhere? |
| 19:58 | <rniwa> | smaug____: yup, it's quite popular |
| 19:59 | <rniwa> | smaug____: another one i had along that line of naming was bubblingPath |
| 20:00 | <smaug____> | makes no sense, unfortunately |
| 20:00 | <smaug____> | since bubbling is just one phase |
| 20:00 | <smaug____> | which not all the events even have |
| 20:04 | <smaug____> | in Gecko we call the thing eventTargetChain, but I doubt people like that too much |
| 20:08 | <smaug____> | rniwa: ok, perhaps dispatchPath then |