| 00:10 | <zcorpan> | MikeSmith: hmm. yes. https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/webappapis.html#update-the-rendering - rendering is skipped, and scroll events happen from there |
| 01:39 | <MikeSmith> | zcorpan: thanks |
| 11:48 | <hsivonen> | annevk: AFAICT, it's all responses that are proxied by nginx from Apache as opposed to being served by nginx directly or proxied by nginx from Jetty. |
| 11:52 | <annevk> | hsivonen: yeah, but that's all fairly high-level, no? Surely there's detail that Safari trips over that it would always trip over, regardless of which server did it |
| 11:52 | <annevk> | a detail, even |
| 12:12 | <hsivonen> | There has to be some detail, but Safari does not surface it to me. Filed https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218560 |
| 12:12 | <hsivonen> | This interferes with interoperability testing. |
| 15:03 | <zcorpan> | hsivonen: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/51266188/nsposixerrordomain100-error-on-safari-when-try-to-open-https |
| 15:46 | <annevk> | Which links https://megamorf.gitlab.io/2019/08/27/safari-nsposixerrordomain-100-error-with-nginx-and-apache/ |
| 15:47 | <annevk> | Ah, Safari is actually conforming and other browsers are more like "whatever" |
| 15:47 | <annevk> | I guess H/2 didn't get the test suite it deserved |
| 16:20 | <hsivonen> | zcorpan: Thanks. That resolved the issue. |
| 16:20 | <hsivonen> | Not the best error message from Safari... |
| 16:25 | <hsivonen> | Also seems like a bad idea for nginx to pass on headers that are hop-specific. |
| 16:42 | <MikeSmith> | I guess even for H/2 the HTTP WG is still not following the practice of going back and updating their specs to align with how they actually ended up getting implemented |
| 16:49 | <MikeSmith> | if the possibility that Safari is going to end up being non-conforming in the same way as other UAs seems more likely than that other UAs will change to become more strictly conforming, then I would naively think the group would be considering to change the spec |
| 18:19 | <Bakkot> | annevk: are you going to take up maintainership of the CSP spec? because if so I have a bunch of issues I would like to see addressed :D |
| 18:19 | <annevk> | Bakkot: nope |
| 18:19 | <Bakkot> | alas |
| 18:19 | <annevk> | Bakkot: I just happen to have commit access |
| 18:32 | <annevk> | TabAtkins: somehow I borked my Bikeshed installation, it complains about html5lib being the wrong version and to do the pip3 install thing, but that gives success... |
| 18:33 | <annevk> | TabAtkins: this was after pulling the most recent 30 or so commits |
| 18:36 | <TabAtkins> | Hm, usually this means your Bikeshed executable is pointing to some different path. If you run `type bikeshed`, do you get a hashed path? |
| 18:36 | <annevk> | "bikeshed is hashed (/usr/local/bin/bikeshed)" |
| 18:37 | <TabAtkins> | try deleting, then running the pip install again? |
| 18:43 | <annevk> | TabAtkins: thanks, I have it working now |
| 18:44 | <TabAtkins> | cool. that's a really annoying problem that several people have run into, where bash caches an executable and you can't update it to the newer thing |
| 18:44 | <annevk> | Bakkot: want to review https://github.com/w3c/webappsec-csp/pull/445 though? :-) |
| 18:44 | <TabAtkins> | i don't understand how i can avoid it :( |
| 18:46 | <annevk> | I guess the only suggestion I have is to maybe document it, but I wouldn't have found it |
| 18:47 | <annevk> | Maybe the follow-up suggestion would be to put that in the pip3 install command suggestion |
| 19:21 | <Bakkot> | annevk: I'm not familiar enough with bikeshed to review that one, I'm afraid |
| 19:21 | <Bakkot> | also I'm not a maintainer or anything |
| 19:22 | <annevk> | I might just merge it unless Domenic feels curious |
| 19:22 | <annevk> | That way I can update Fetch tomorrow |
| 23:00 | <Domenic> | Wow, still finding interop bugs in the foundations of event dispatch in 2020? https://github.com/jsdom/jsdom/issues/3070 |
| 23:43 | <jyasskin> | MikeSmith/hsivonen: The HTTPWG may just not know about the issue. They're starting an http2bis effort, described at https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2020OctDec/0064.html. I'll raise the question there. |
| 23:44 | <MikeSmith> | jyasskin: cool, thanks |
| 23:47 | <jyasskin> | https://github.com/httpwg/http2-spec/issues/789 |
| 23:49 | <jyasskin> | Outside of an update cycle, an errata is probably the right feedback mechanism. |
| 23:49 | <jyasskin> | Or just an email, I guess. |