| 02:24 | <MikeSmith> | Domenic: Do you remember what our current plan is DOM Parsing and Serialization? |
| 02:24 | <MikeSmith> | Is there a tracking issue for it somewhere? |
| 04:25 | <Domenic> | MikeSmith: upstream into HTML, but we haven't made the time :( |
| 04:25 | <Domenic> | No tracking issue I'm aware of |
| 05:19 | <MikeSmith> | Domenic: ok thanks |
| 18:12 | <dtapuska> | first attempt at trying to define something that doesn't queue tasks via implied event loop/implied document... https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/5072/commits/a9b250cce9366cbaa8befb09a246aef5e4525719 |
| 18:22 | <Domenic> | dtapuska: generally looks good; will trust your judgment if you think the extra "queue an element task" saves enough versus just using "queue a task" directly. |
| 19:15 | <domfarolino> | annevk: Question about https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/955#discussion_r340604427. You mention we should skip this check when resp tainting is basic, otherwise we won't perform TAO check for A -> B -> A requests. Isn't the tainted origin flag still set for those requests, therefore we'd not return success, and instead continue the checks? |
| 20:46 | <annevk> | domfarolino: the second A is expected to have the header |
| 23:14 | <domfarolino> | annevk: Right, I guess I just don't see what is lacking by using the tainted origin flag there. For A -> B -> A, the algorithm still continues (doesn't immediately return success)? |
| 23:14 | <domfarolino> | (sorry, just trying to understand this better) |
| 23:37 | <jwalden> | anyone have experience with JS stuff that interacts with web-platform-tests? if a test is written to be runnable in a shell as well as in browser, *but* it requires some special command-line option be specified, how would I do that? *is* that possible in a shell-agnostic fashion in wpt .ini files (assuming such are not a pure Mozilla invention)? |