05:43
<annevk>
MikeSmith: even percent encode on its own would have a hyphen? I guess I should try that and see what people think
05:46
<MikeSmith>
annevk: yeah I think “percent-encode”, always, would make sense in this case
05:46
<MikeSmith>
see also https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/percent-encoding, which has a hyphen
05:46
<MikeSmith>
well and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percent-encoding too
05:47
<annevk>
MikeSmith: I would kinda expect conditionally-UTF-8 percent-encode then though (but I'm not going for that name anymore I think)
05:47
<annevk>
MikeSmith: yeah, but that's a tad different from "To percent-encode, ..." but fair
05:48
<annevk>
Oh no, Wikipedia has percent-encode in that way. Great, let's do that
05:49
<MikeSmith>
more data points: “percent-encode” throughout https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-2.4
05:50
<MikeSmith>
https://metacpan.org/pod/URI::Escape
05:50
<MikeSmith>
etc
05:52
<MikeSmith>
annevk: why “conditionally-UTF-8 percent-encode”?
05:52
<MikeSmith>
oh, that means it *might* be UTF-8?
05:52
<MikeSmith>
if so then yeah
05:53
MikeSmith
reads the spec/PR
05:54
<MikeSmith>
ah, that’s not in the spec or PR yet — just a comment?
05:54
<MikeSmith>
I guess that’s why I didn’t read it in context
06:01
<annevk>
MikeSmith: yeah, sorry
06:01
<annevk>
MikeSmith: I could have presented the questions a bit clearer, but your and Domenic's feedback has helped a lot in figuring out an "ideal" end state
08:48
<annevk>
MikeSmith: could you maybe review https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/5537?
15:31
<annevk>
Domenic: so looking at that file URL fix in Chrome I noticed this line
15:31
<annevk>
> FAIL Parsing: <//d:> against <file:///C:/a/b> assert_equals: href expected "file:///d:" but got "file:///D:"
15:31
<annevk>
But there's no uppercasing for https://jsdom.github.io/whatwg-url/#url=ZmlsZTphOlx0ZXN0&base=YWJvdXQ6Ymxhbms=
15:41
<annevk>
https://jsdom.github.io/whatwg-url/#url=Ly9kOg==&base=ZmlsZTovLy9DOi90ZXN0 hmm
16:02
<Domenic>
You mean there's no uppercasing in the standard? yeah, that was interesting.
16:04
<Domenic>
Jeez Edge doesn't even have TextEncoder
16:04
<annevk>
Domenic: well but I can't reproduce in Chrome
16:04
<Domenic>
Oh I can, on Windows
16:04
<annevk>
Oh Windows
16:04
<Domenic>
Yeah most of this is behind an #ifdef
16:04
<annevk>
I should have tested on Windows
16:05
<annevk>
This would be easy to add to normalized-windows-drive-letter
16:06
<annevk>
I gotta go for a bit, might not get back to this until tomorrow
16:06
<Domenic>
I'm going to add the test cases from that crbug to urltestdata.json
22:14
<MikeSmith>
so from https://github.com/validator/validator/issues/958 I become aware that we have on* event-handler IDL attributes defined in the CSS Transitions spec rather then the HTML spec
22:14
<MikeSmith>
do we have some consistent policy of dealing with those kinds of cases?
22:14
<MikeSmith>
*policy for dealing with
22:16
<MikeSmith>
ah I see now that spec does at least also define the corresponding content attributes
22:17
<MikeSmith>
https://drafts.csswg.org/css-transitions/#event-handlers-on-elements-document-objects-and-window-objects
22:18
<MikeSmith>
so anyway is it fine for those attributes to not be incorporated into the HTML spec but just continue to remain only in a separate spec?
22:18
<MikeSmith>
do we have a policy for this written down somewhere? guidance for editors of other specs?