| 08:00 | <smaug> | Looks like many (all?) agenda+ items for WHATNOT got the label well before WHATUP, and most of them were discussed last week. |
| 09:25 | <smaug> | Hmm, some pages are getting mad with cross site iframes (mostly ads etc.). Easily 50 different sites, and if implementation uses separate process per site and process overhead + ad page is ~20MB (which seems to be the case in couple of browsers), one has ~1GB overhead from ads. Easily. |
| 09:32 | <smaug> | We should limit the number of sites a tab can contain simultaneously. Let's say 5 🙂 |
| 14:06 | <annevk> | If anyone has any opinion on specification singleton types (success, failure, etc.) that is different from what https://github.com/whatwg/infra/pull/687 attempts to do please speak up now. |
| 15:14 | <Dominic Farolino> | emilio: What do you make of the tests in https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/html/interaction/focus/processing-model/focusVisible.html#L59-L60? It seems like they expect focusVisible: false to force :focus-visible to not match, but the spec text only indicates that focusVisible: true forces :focus-visible, but can't unforce it? Am I right in thinking there's a mismatch here? |
| 15:38 | <cwilso> | Gah. I have failed to get back ahead of the curve. I don't see anything new agenda+ for today; cancel? |
| 15:44 | <annevk> | cwilso: that would work for me. I wanted to share that Fetch might hold its own call dedicated to cookies (a more formalized version of an informal call we have today), but that can wait. |
| 15:50 | <annevk> | Kaiido: FYI: https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/11529 |
| 15:54 | <Luke Warlow> | emilio: What do you make of the tests in https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/html/interaction/focus/processing-model/focusVisible.html#L59-L60? It seems like they expect It doesn't change focus indication on that call of focus(), so if the element already has focus indication then it keeps it. But this test resets focus between each test. So the test is correct imo. I implemented this in WebKit and remember getting slightly confused but the test did seem correct in the end. Edit: Oh oops looks like this reply didn't link properly. @domfarolino:matrix.org: |
| 16:28 | <Dominic Farolino> | Luke Warlow: Ahh I see. OK so HTML only sets the focus ring if focusVisible is true, or missing. It never calls into CSS's "indicate focus" if it's false, and that's the "force-invisible" mechanism I guess. |
| 16:29 | <Luke Warlow> | Luke Warlow: Ahh I see. OK so HTML only sets the focus ring if |
| 16:33 | <Dominic Farolino> | I think I recall seeing tests that exercise that calling focus on an already-focused element has no effect, so I guess that would implicitly catch this case? Not sure really |
| 17:02 | <annevk> | cwilso: if you have time I think it would be good to open the issue for next week now and maybe close the last meeting issue (and the WHATUP one?) |
| 21:15 | <foolip> | I've updated https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/11631 today and would like to move https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/2142 to stage 2. @jakea:matrix.org WDYT? |