WHATWG
2024-09-19
plaintext logs
prev next
source on github
01:26
<Domenic>
hmm, CloseWatchers kind of work in documents which aren't bound to a browsing context? I guess that is just a mistake (or I'm missing some check somewhere)
The check is in https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-closewatcher step 1
01:27
<Domenic>
OK who is up to date on sequential focus navigation knowledge? I'm reading https://html.spec.whatwg.org/C#sequential-navigation-search-algorithm and I think I've convinced myself that in the algorithm, there is no semantic difference between the "selection mechanism=sequential" and "selection mechanism=DOM" cases. Where am I off? Both seem to get the first (for example) sequentially focusable area in starting point's Document, after starting point, no?
Rakina wrote a good chunk of it, but has been away from that for like 3 years... I can try to page it back in, although it's unclear if I'll get to it before/during TPAC. That stuff is hard.
07:51
<smaug>
Domenic: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-dialog-showmodal step 9
07:52
<Domenic>
smaug: ah yep, there's an assertion failure there... please file an issue and I'll fix!
07:53
<Domenic>
I wonder what other steps are strange with non-fully-active documents.
07:53
<smaug>
keithamus: ^
07:57
<smaug>
https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/10634
13:29
<Dominic Farolino>
Domenic: OK I've added you as the reviewer for https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/10632 instead. Thanks for "volunteering" hehe
15:11
<annevk>
hsivonen: could you also review https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/48240? That's the only tests remaining for GB18030-2022
15:12
<annevk>
hsivonen: I'm thinking I'll give people until after TPAC to comment on the whatwg/encoding PR before merging. Even though I don't really expect any opposition it's still a big change of sorts so it seems kinda warranted. And I'd rather not have to revisit once it lands.
16:35
<hsivonen>
hsivonen: I'm thinking I'll give people until after TPAC to comment on the whatwg/encoding PR before merging. Even though I don't really expect any opposition it's still a big change of sorts so it seems kinda warranted. And I'd rather not have to revisit once it lands.
Makes sense.
18:22
<hsivonen>
annevk: Do you know why some PUA mapping with established glyphs on the 0xFE row remained as PUA? E.g. 0xFE, 0x52 is still PUA.
18:50
<hsivonen>
annevk: Does https://github.com/hsivonen/encoding_rs/pull/108/commits/47071769582e5f73d1a93d937ba59220799e4ffc accurately describe WHATWG GBK and WHATWG GB18030?