05:03
<dubzer>
haiii. is this step missing an explicit return statement? since state machine would not move after it
05:06
<dubzer>
oh, sorry, it'll just check the next character with the same state
07:19
<hsivonen>
Are there general principles for how the input element is meant to behave in terms of user-entered values, .value values, and submitted values? Notably, the spec text for email very much goes in the direction of non-Punycode forms of the domain being an UI presentation issue only. Dates and times clearly are supposed to submit in the ISO format. Yet, url seems to submit what the user entered instead of submitting serialization after URL parsing.
07:29
<annevk>
hsivonen: I think the more we can move towards submitting and exposing (to script) a normalized form, the better
07:33
<hsivonen>
https://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/12675
07:34
<hsivonen>
Looks like in Chrome setting email value via JS doesn't immediately normalize the value, but attempting to submit still catches a prohibited value.
07:35
<hsivonen>
smaug: ^
07:37
<hsivonen>
When editing email manually (not via JS), if the entered value is failing constraint validation, the .value is unnormalized. If the value passes constraint validation, the .value is normalized.
07:37
<hsivonen>
in Chrome that is.
07:40
<hsivonen>
Sigh. Chrome uses UTS 46 transitional=true for input type=email despite using transitional=false for URL handling.
07:40
<hsivonen>
Bugs. Bugs everywhere.
07:43
<annevk>
Yeah, I wouldn't want to enshrine what is shipped today and I think we have some room for changes here.
08:40
<hsivonen>
I tried to be as brief as I could while still covering all the points, and I still ended up with a megacomment: https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/4562#issuecomment-2084725431
08:41
<hsivonen>
(I think we need to list the questions that need answering, because without specific questions that issue doesn't appear to be converging.)
11:43
<annevk>
Thanks for writing that Henri. Hopefully you're more successful in getting people to make constructive comments in that issue.
23:05
<christianmx>
Hi! Is there an official site for the latest updates of the HTML standard? Or how do I find out the latest changes that are being included in the HTML living standard? Please don't tell me to read GitHub commits because it's not a good idea. I'm looking for a site that tells me something like this: "24/4: the following changes were added..." Thanks
23:10
<TabAtkins>
Hi! Is there an official site for the latest updates of the HTML standard? Or how do I find out the latest changes that are being included in the HTML living standard? Please don't tell me to read GitHub commits because it's not a good idea. I'm looking for a site that tells me something like this: "24/4: the following changes were added..." Thanks
There used to be a "Last Week in HTML..." blog post series, but that stopped being maintained years ago. Nowadays reading the commit history is indeed the only way to track things.
23:13
<bkardell>
Do you want specifically that or are you looking for what's new to the web platform more generally, and maybe even specifically has multiple implementations?
23:18
<christianmx>
Do you want specifically that or are you looking for what's new to the web platform more generally, and maybe even specifically has multiple implementations?
I'm looking for that: some site that shows the latest changes added to the living standard
23:19
<TabAtkins>
Well wait, what bkardell just described is very different from what you just described.
23:19
<TabAtkins>
"Latest changes to the specs" and "new things in browsers, perhaps with multiple impls" can be distinct by quite a large amount of time
23:20
<bkardell>
In some rare cases things will leave the HTML standard after a long long time of failing to get that even
23:21
<bkardell>
The process should now prevent that but, it still can happen
23:23
<christianmx>
Well wait, what bkardell just described is very different from what you just described.
You're right, sorry for my confusion, it's "Latest changes to the specs"
23:25
<bkardell>
And you're looking for like.. the evening news version that summarizes that for in prose and not just some diffs or something?
23:31
<christianmx>
Yes, and if it doesn't exist, then some help to read the GitHub commits that tells me what were the last changes added to the standard, avoiding commits that belong to bugs or other things
23:39
<bkardell>
Hmmm yeah I'm not aware of anything like that. I know Rachel Andrew has been doing a nice monthly recap for devs at web.dev but it's wider than the HTML standard. It also gets mixed a little with chrome stuff that's somewhat unfortunate, but it's very good for keeping up. There are a few newsletters like that too. I've been developing a thing with Eric Meyer: that's not that either but of similar use - but it summarizes some things in bcd which is also wider than the html spec
23:41
<bkardell>
I think specifically what you're looking for, asTabAtkins said I'm not sure exists anywhere at the moment
23:43
<christianmx>
Hmmm yeah I'm not aware of anything like that. I know Rachel Andrew has been doing a nice monthly recap for devs at web.dev but it's wider than the HTML standard. It also gets mixed a little with chrome stuff that's somewhat unfortunate, but it's very good for keeping up. There are a few newsletters like that too. I've been developing a thing with Eric Meyer: that's not that either but of similar use - but it summarizes some things in bcd which is also wider than the html spec
Ok, thank you for the info, I'll look that
23:46
<christianmx>
Returning to GitHub commits: are the latest changes added to the standard that appear on Github only those that say Upstream? Or should I see other commits?
23:49
<bkardell>
Idk if it were me i would probably follow things merged in the last week in PRs https://github.com/whatwg/html/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed
23:49
<bkardell>
That'll be a relatively small list and there's previews generated which highlight the diffs
23:51
<bkardell>
Unless for some reason you want the stuff that is being worked on actively, rather than what's actually made it into the spec, or you care about individual commits (a pr can have tons of commits before it's merged)