| 06:19 | <annevk> | Dominic Farolino: shadow tree integration with the wider web platform was never really fully finished and I doubt we actually have tests covering all these scenarios, so that seems plausible unfortunately |
| 06:21 | <annevk> | Dominic Farolino: in particular when you see something say "in a document" it hasn't been looked at yet, but a lot of these things could do with more review and tests: https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#document-trees |
| 07:06 | <annevk> | Domenic: look at what you made me do: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11008 (Luke Warlow shares some of the blame, but the suggestion for fancy serialization was yours alone) |
| 07:08 | <Domenic> | Fun times... |
| 07:18 | <annevk> | To be fair, it has been fun figuring out all the C++ primitives in WebKit. The APIs are not always as straightforward as one might like, but there is a way. |
| 07:44 | <Luke Warlow> | To be fair, it has been fun figuring out all the C++ primitives in WebKit. The APIs are not always as straightforward as one might like, but there is a way. |
| 08:51 | <annevk> | I'm planning to put it up later today. I wanted to make sure modifications to the colorspace and alpha attributes were properly reflected, but it seems that ::value() already does the correct thing. (I suppose there is a case to consider about what to do when the picker is open, but I'm not quite there yet.) |
| 09:35 | <annevk> | Luke Warlow: https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/pull/34970 |
| 11:45 | <zcorpan> | jarhar: for reconstructing formatting elements, the interesting cases are
The not-in-select case should reconstruct to match what happens today. I know I suggested not doing that for option-in-select, but maybe it should also reconstruct so that handling of option is a bit more consistent between the two cases. (Same deal for optgroup) |
| 12:43 | <sauceee> | Yall tapn https://t.me/+32cFzLuOiacxZmM0 |
| 13:32 | <Dominic Farolino> | Dominic Farolino: in particular when you see something say "in a document" it hasn't been looked at yet, but a lot of these things could do with more review and tests: https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#document-trees |
| 15:08 | <annevk> | Dominic Farolino: we might have decided, but it also predated writing tests for all changes I suspect |
| 15:08 | <annevk> | Dominic Farolino: please do file issues if you spot mismatches |
| 16:01 | <Dominic Farolino> | Yep, will do! |
| 17:05 | <smaug> | oh, HTML spec doesn't even define focusin? It has only blur and focus. And per UI events, focusout/in are basically just bubbling variants of blur/focus. But what implementations actually do... |
| 17:10 | <annevk> | smaug: there's an issue on adding them, as well as FocusEvent |
| 17:11 | <annevk> | smaug: it was unfortunately not as easy as I hoped, but I last looked at that many years ago, so maybe it's easier today |
| 17:11 | <Luke Warlow> | https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/10235 |
| 17:12 | <annevk> | Ah I forgot about that patch. Hopefully Joey didn't |
| 17:15 | <smaug> | There's been some implementation differences, https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/9f49f28c3b7f53b1a1f47350ed38437d113d1aa6/dom/base/nsFocusManager.cpp#2848-2849 Not sure if webkit still differs |
| 17:21 | <Luke Warlow> | There's been some implementation differences, https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/9f49f28c3b7f53b1a1f47350ed38437d113d1aa6/dom/base/nsFocusManager.cpp#2848-2849 Not sure if webkit still differs |
| 17:23 | <smaug> | ah, Gecko doesn't have event handlers. And webkit has some unusual kinds of event handlers, https://searchfox.org/wubkat/rev/1146c56cb9208244b769da6dc2b7b708a8c4fb5b/Source/WebCore/dom/Element.idl#77-78 |
| 17:30 | <smaug> | I don't see onfocusin webidl attribute in Chrome |
| 17:50 | <Luke Warlow> | Yeah there isn't one yet Joey has a patch to add it which I guess is waiting on the spec pr. |
| 22:39 | <jarhar> | thanks! i used this as an example and asked here: https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/10557#discussion_r1796173325 |
| 22:40 | <jarhar> | i don't have strong opinions on this, but yeah doing the same thing in both cases sounds like a good justification |