| 07:59 | <annevk> | mkwst: I like those referrer policy changes, will check with others to make sure we'd follow Chrome shipping those, but I don't really see why not |
| 13:40 | <annevk> | Domenic: what's the story for <label> pointing to a FACE? |
| 13:43 | <Ms2ger> | To a what now? |
| 13:45 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: form-associated custom element |
| 13:46 | <Ms2ger> | Ugh |
| 13:46 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: why the sad FACE? |
| 13:47 | Ms2ger | eyes annevk beadily |
| 13:50 | <annevk> | Domenic: ooh I see |
| 14:00 | annevk | files https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/5009 since although it's somewhat addressed, it's not great |
| 19:24 | <ondras> | so... trying to extend HTMLTableElement; `get tBodies' does not seem to work (Firefox: called on object that does not implement interface HTMLTableElement) |
| 19:24 | <ondras> | is this *supposed* to work? :) |
| 19:26 | <ondras> | https://jsfiddle.net/xa7z5grq/ |
| 19:30 | <annevk> | ondras: no, https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/484#issuecomment-349373116 |
| 19:32 | <ondras> | annevk: okay, thanks. I basically have no idea what the linked issue/comment means, but I take that as a confirmation that it is not supposed to work :) |
| 19:33 | <annevk> | ondras: a subclass has a different brand, basically |
| 19:34 | <ondras> | okay |
| 19:34 | <ondras> | my initial idea was "get tBodies() { return super.tBodies; }" but this failed as well :/ |
| 19:35 | <annevk> | You can maybe bind a call with an instance of an actual table |
| 19:36 | <annevk> | It might be worth raising this use case somewhere to see if we should reprioritize |
| 19:37 | <ondras> | this is the most-useless-hobby-experimental-timewaste ever; probably not a reason to reprioritize |
| 19:38 | <annevk> | Fair |
| 19:38 | <ondras> | it all started well with simple sublcasses to learn customelements v1. but unfortunately the project's nature then required to sublass <table> |
| 19:38 | <ondras> | also, I still have no idea why {extends:"table"} is necessary for the construction |
| 19:38 | <ondras> | but the spec is probably going to explain that to me |
| 19:40 | <annevk> | It should explain brand checks too |
| 19:41 | <annevk> | IDL does anyway, though might not use the term brand |