| 00:28 | <MikeSmith> | manu: I strongly agree with others here about WHATWG URL everywhere — but if you want a different point of view, https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2017/01/30/one-url-standard-please/ is worth reading, if you haven’t already |
| 00:29 | <MikeSmith> | and https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2016/05/11/my-url-isnt-your-url/ for more of the context |
| 00:32 | <MikeSmith> | fundamentally I guess Daniel’s argument is the “URLs shouldn’t be defined by what browsers do” argument |
| 00:34 | <MikeSmith> | and maybe the most-common counter argument to that is, consider if you want to be interoperable with what browsers do, and why doing that might be a good ide |
| 00:34 | <MikeSmith> | *idea |
| 01:31 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: about https://github.com/tabatkins/bikeshed/pull/1710#pullrequestreview-456858488 are the "omit" an "no" directives synonyms, or instead is there some difference? |
| 01:31 | <MikeSmith> | which should we be using there? |
| 02:00 | <TabAtkins> | They're identical. |
| 02:16 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: OK, thanks |
| 02:21 | <MikeSmith> | changed it to "omit" for consistency with the other Boilerplate stuff there |
| 02:21 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: with that, I think https://github.com/tabatkins/bikeshed/pull/1710 is OK to merge |
| 02:29 | <MikeSmith> | ah no, CI failing.. I guess I need to update some tests too maybe |
| 03:09 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: tests updated, now all green |
| 04:47 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: thanks! |
| 13:56 | <lindalap> | sorry I don't have a patch or a GitHub account to report this, I'll leave a note although both are valid behavior / case-insensitive |
| 13:57 | <lindalap> | FAQ recommendation is <!DOCTYPE html>: https://github.com/whatwg/html/blob/master/FAQ.md#what-is-the-doctype-for-modern-html-documents |
| 13:57 | <lindalap> | WHATWG HTML spec has multiple examples of different capitalization, case-insensitive again |
| 13:59 | <lindalap> | likewise, the FAQ says uppercase "UTF-8" for encoding and the spec says lowercase "utf-8" (case-insensitive). It was always in IETF RFCs as uppercase UTF-8, some email MIMEs may have had it lowercase but referred to IANA's registration (which is uppercase). |
| 13:59 | <lindalap> | https://github.com/whatwg/html/blob/master/FAQ.md#how-do-i-specify-the-character-encoding |
| 14:00 | <lindalap> | RFC 2231: charset := <registered character set name> |
| 14:00 | <lindalap> | RFC 5987: charset = "UTF-8" / "ISO-8859-1" / mime-charset |
| 14:00 | <lindalap> | case-insensitive in RFC 2616 |
| 14:01 | <lindalap> | RFC 3629 for the UTF-8 RFC itself |
| 14:13 | <lindalap> | It's been common confusion for me, because the following URI starts by saying "requires use of the "utf-8" encoding label": https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/semantics.html#charset |
| 14:15 | <lindalap> | not confusion, but misinterpretation by relatives |
| 14:17 | <andreubotella> | lindalap: The requirements for authors allow any capitalization of both the doctype and the encoding label |
| 14:18 | <andreubotella> | Even the sentence after 'requires use of "utf-8"' specifies that authors must use an ASCII case-insensitive match for it. |
| 14:18 | <lindalap> | Correct. I'm not meaning to change the recommendation to be case-sensitive, but the appropriate examples given to be... what's as best practice, or to be aligned with the FAQ. |
| 14:18 | <andreubotella> | Right |
| 14:19 | <MikeSmith> | the examples are that way intentionally |
| 14:19 | <andreubotella> | I suppose the "default" for the doctype would be "<!DOCTYPE html>", as by the FAQ |
| 14:19 | <lindalap> | andreubotella: Agreed. |
| 14:20 | <andreubotella> | but both the HTML and Encoding standards have the default for the encoding label as the lowercase "utf-8" |
| 14:21 | <andreubotella> | https://encoding.spec.whatwg.org/#names-and-labels |
| 14:21 | <MikeSmith> | the FAQ is not the source of truth about anything |
| 14:50 | <Domenic> | Indeed, the examples intentionally show a multitude of capitalization styles, since all are valid and all follow the spec's requirements. |