| 00:44 | <Domenic> | The platform is highly inconsistent on timeStamp vs. timestamp 😠|
| 06:29 | <annevk> | Domenic: yeah, just a section following Ack |
| 06:30 | <Domenic> | But purposefully not putting them back in the headers? Hmm. I don't have strong feelings either way, I guess. |
| 06:30 | <annevk> | I'm not sure what you mean by that :-) Gotta go for a bit |
| 06:53 | <Domenic> | I mean, if the goal is to make maintainers more prominent, the obvious thing to do is go back to W3C-style/default Bikeshed style, and have a headers line item alongside Participate / Commits / Tests / Translations. |
| 06:53 | <Domenic> | But I guess your suggestion is something less prominent than that, but more prominent than our current practice of putting them first in Acks |
| 07:26 | <annevk> | I was more thinking along the lines of clarity |
| 07:45 | <annevk> | Domenic: can you rubberstamp https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/8889? |
| 09:06 | <regina_hallad> | Hi 👋 Most people would love to get started online working from home... ...but they don't know what to do or where to start. Here's a simple solution: CLICK HERE to be take to the site which will change your life. 👇 👇 👇 https://t.me/Stevecoldham001 |
| 13:33 | <Noam Rosenthal> | Domenic: I've received this script deferred question you might have some historical insight on... is there a spec/compatibility reason to run all deferred scripts in the same task like we do? Splitting them to a-task-per-script can remove some blockage |
| 13:36 | <Noam Rosenthal> | In the spec we "spin the event loop" before each script, which IIUC is the equivalent of an async await, so adding a task barrier between steps would still be per spec (though perhaps should become the standard). |
| 14:20 | <annevk> | Noam Rosenthal: spinning means other tasks can already go inbetween |
| 14:22 | <annevk> | TabAtkins: CI is still failing on the ID stuff |
| 14:23 | <Noam Rosenthal> | annevk: yes, that's how I understand it spec-wise. But seems like all implementations execute those scripts in the same task if they're ready |
| 14:42 | <Noam Rosenthal> | Jake Archibald: you probably have some context about ^^^ |
| 14:48 | <Ms2ger> | annevk: could you take a look at https://github.com/WebAssembly/spec/pull/1537? |
| 15:03 | <TabAtkins> | TabAtkins: CI is still failing on the ID stuff |
| 15:09 | <annevk> | TabAtkins: yeah, when I wrote that https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/1564 had just completed again |
| 15:10 | <TabAtkins> | That's quite bizarre, I'll check it out in about an hour. |
| 15:10 | <annevk> | TabAtkins: if you want to play there's also https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/1605, I can give you write access if that would help |
| 15:11 | <TabAtkins> | Okay you're not actually running the new code. |
| 15:12 | <TabAtkins> | Ah I haven't cut the new version yet, duh, I was waiting on my own CI |
| 15:13 | <TabAtkins> | Looks like we are indeed passing now, gimme five seconds, then the server a few minutes to update. |
| 15:19 | <annevk> | An okay, so krosylight was correct |
| 15:19 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: done |
| 15:23 | <Ms2ger> | Damn, now I need to think :) |
| 15:27 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: in retrospect Wasm being so strict was maybe not the best idea, but changing it now is likely involved as well |
| 15:28 | <Ms2ger> | I decline to have an opinion on that :) |
| 15:39 | <annevk> | At this point I also suspect that it would be better if header list's get always did an isomorphic decode, but I don't wanna drive that change |
| 20:54 | <TabAtkins> | OKAY, I don't know why Bikeshed's 3.11.8 didn't work (it has all the files, and my local version finds the paths as expected) but 3.11.9 DOES work, and is installed on the API server now. |