| 03:43 | <timwis> | hey folks, any suggestions on passing objects/arrays to custom elements via attributes other than serializing/deserializing JSON? |
| 03:43 | <timwis> | (JSX, for example, lets you pass arrays and objects. I know that's a bit different under the hood but just an example.) |
| 03:44 | <MikeSmith> | timwis: wonder how other libraries do it |
| 03:45 | <timwis> | MikeSmith: JSX doesn't actually use custom elements; it just calls JS classes and passes the "attributes" to the class constructor as arguments |
| 03:45 | <timwis> | I believe I read somewhere that polymer serializes/deserializes JSON |
| 03:53 | <MikeSmith> | timwis: yeah polymer was what I was wondering about specifically |
| 03:53 | <MikeSmith> | have to admit I do not know what other libraries there might be out there yet for custom elements |
| 03:57 | <MikeSmith> | hayato: any suggestions? ⬆ |
| 08:03 | <MikeSmith> | zcorpan: I am fine with going ahead and merging that double-dash-in-comment PR |
| 08:03 | <MikeSmith> | under “commit then review” as far as getting more review from any implementors who have not commented so far |
| 08:04 | <MikeSmith> | and I will be doing a new HTML checker release today or tomorrow, so this change would go out in this release |
| 08:05 | <MikeSmith> | and so subsquently get picked up by the grunt-html packager of it, gulp package, etc. |
| 11:35 | <zcorpan> | MikeSmith: ok, i'll merge |
| 11:35 | <zcorpan> | should i merge it as a single commit? Domenic annevk |
| 11:38 | <annevk> | zcorpan: let Domenic merge it I guess? |
| 11:38 | <annevk> | zcorpan: still a little concerned with all the state changed |
| 11:38 | <annevk> | s* |
| 11:39 | <gsnedders> | annevk: what are you up to this afternoon? |
| 11:40 | <zcorpan> | annevk: it's a bit tricky but i think implementors will get it right if they run the tests |
| 11:40 | <annevk> | gsnedders: post 4pm free, maybe earlier |
| 11:41 | <annevk> | gsnedders: storage from 2pm onward |
| 11:42 | <gsnedders> | annevk: k. we should chat either after 4pm or at party tonight about what you wanted to do with tests, possibly with jgraham and ms2ger? |
| 11:50 | <annevk> | gsnedders: sure, nothing seriously planned though, just an idea |
| 13:27 | <tobie> | TabAtkins: we might be able to transform some of those. |
| 14:02 | <gsnedders> | annevk: where do yo uwant to meet? I'll be in the Landmark at 4, at least. |
| 14:02 | <gsnedders> | I guess Ms2ger may well be to, if he wants to come. |
| 14:37 | jgraham | is not in the Landmark fwiw |
| 14:40 | <Ms2ger> | I'm in the Landmark with gsnedders |
| 14:54 | <annevk> | gsnedders: platform home room now… |
| 14:55 | <annevk> | gsnedders: not sure where landmark is |
| 14:57 | <Ms2ger> | Next to Marylebone station |
| 14:57 | <Ms2ger> | I'm stuck here for a while still |
| 15:02 | <gsnedders> | annevk: okay, should we meet on the beanbags in the Metropole west wing? |
| 15:02 | <annevk> | Yeah |
| 15:05 | <gsnedders> | oh, it's already 4 |
| 15:05 | <gsnedders> | yeah, I think yself and Ms2ger aren't going anywhere soon |
| 15:05 | <gsnedders> | may as well just say scrap that and see you tonight |
| 15:06 | <jgraham> | Why are you stuck? |
| 15:06 | <jgraham> | Also, I can see annevk, if that helps |
| 15:07 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: go ahead, you know what I said earlier! |
| 15:07 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: Servo layout talk overrunning |
| 15:38 | <gsnedders> | annevk, jgraham: you still about or talking or? |
| 15:39 | gsnedders | on the whole votes for talking later |
| 15:39 | <caitp> | you're all pretty clever, so how much scrutiny do you give to an "unsubscribe" link in an unsolicited spam email |
| 15:56 | <annevk> | gsnedders: still about |
| 15:57 | <annevk> | gsnedders: jgraham left maybe |
| 15:57 | <timdream> | annevk: so for Storage Standard... what's the reason for calling eTLD+1 a "site"? It sounds generic and confusing... was other names considered (like "origin group" or something) |
| 15:58 | <jgraham> | annevk: I'm behind you |
| 16:03 | <annevk> | timdream: file an issue? |
| 16:03 | <timdream> | annevk: ok will do |
| 16:42 | <stakagi> | Hi, are there those who are investigating this issue of lazy load? |
| 16:42 | <stakagi> | https://www.seroundtable.com/google-mobile-lazy-load-content-mobile-20759.html |
| 16:46 | <stakagi> | It is because this changes src of an img element to data-src for lazy load. |
| 16:46 | <stakagi> | It has broken the semantics of the original img element. |
| 16:46 | <stakagi> | It seems that it has caused it that the way of operating lazy load with src does not exist. |
| 16:49 | <stakagi> | It seems that the investigation about defered loading is not going although I saw many investigation for prefetch in webperf wg. |
| 16:50 | <MikeSmith> | stakagi: igrigorik_ might have some insight |
| 16:51 | <stakagi> | Thanks. |
| 16:53 | <stakagi> | I think that a js library such as lazyload.js should enable it to realize lazy load using src even if it makes deferment the way of realizing it declaratively for a while. |
| 16:57 | <cwilso> | weird, irccloud didn't notify me. annevk: "did he ever contribute" - welp, that was my point. Do I think Chaals' pr was good, or should have been accepted? No, of course not (it was a distraction that can only have downside, and acknowledgements should only be additive imo). At the same time, your premise is that I've never contributed even a small |
| 16:57 | <cwilso> | useful comment in the couple of years I co-chaired the HTML WG or during the previous time. I think my contributions would have reached the bar of "useful comments, both large and small, that have led to changes to this specification over the years." But hey, whatever. Given the personal snub, why would you think I'd have it in me to personally focus about |
| 16:57 | <cwilso> | this? [this is rhetorical, of course.] |
| 16:58 | <annevk> | Is that my premise? |
| 16:58 | <annevk> | I was just asking... |
| 16:59 | <annevk> | Since I have no idea |
| 17:00 | <annevk> | It does seem weird, since the policy is any suggestion that causes a change, including typos |
| 17:00 | <annevk> | I also don't recall if the work was already forked at that point or not |
| 17:01 | <cwilso> | Well, I dunno. I presumed it was, since you asked the question. I'm not particularly proud of my tenure as HTML co-chair, and some of the reasons are certainly my own fault. The logical conclusion of not being in that list is that I made no comments at any time that led to changes in the specification. |
| 17:02 | <cwilso> | But seriously, we don't need to hash this out. You called me on why shouldn't I care; that's why. |
| 17:03 | <annevk> | I'm not sure I understand, if you feel you've been overlooked, we should add you |
| 17:04 | <annevk> | What I didn't understand was you personally not being listed seemingly making it okay for that PR to land |
| 17:04 | <annevk> | To me it seems they are not really related |
| 17:06 | <annevk> | And if memory serves, you added <font>, so there's no real reason not to have you listed even if you didn't contribute directly during your chairing period (mind you, not saying you didn't) |
| 17:08 | <annevk> | cwilso: gotta go pretty soon, but hope that clarifies |
| 17:08 | <MikeSmith> | not to open up this can of worms any wider, but I personally have never thought it was such a brilliant idea to try to include an exhaustive list of every single person who has ever contributed to the spec |
| 17:08 | <MikeSmith> | for just this kind of reason, among other reasons |
| 17:09 | <MikeSmith> | HTML was the first spec to ever have an Acknowledgments section like that I think |
| 17:09 | <annevk> | And it was the first honest acknowledgments section |
| 17:09 | <cwilso> | > What I didn't understand was you personally not being listed seemingly making it okay for that PR to land/To me it seems they are not really relatedNo, I did not mean that (that I approved of landing the PR) - just that I wasn't personally engaged. |
| 17:09 | <annevk> | We should definitely continue that tradition |
| 17:10 | <annevk> | It's important to indicate it's many many many people that make these documents |
| 17:10 | <cwilso> | gah, that formatting messed up. In short - no, I wasn't "approving" the PR. Just saying I wasn't personally going to be vested in that discussion. |
| 17:10 | <annevk> | cwilso: the reason you gave still seems weird |
| 17:10 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: yeah fair enough it does help in that regard |
| 17:11 | <cwilso> | MikeSmith: I think that ship has firmly sailed. You can see what happens when someone (Chaals) tries to recall it to port. :) |
| 17:11 | annevk | files https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/1434 |
| 17:11 | <MikeSmith> | cwilso: yeah |
| 21:13 | <TabAtkins> | Domenic: Did I tell y'all that support for defining/autolinking extended attributes is in Bikeshed now? Doing a <dfn extended-attribute>CEReactions</dfn> should do the right thing automatically now. |