| 03:27 | <jmdyck> | Oh, and 4.10.15 has a sentence similar to 4.10.19.5. |
| 03:29 | <jmdyck> | So I'm just wondering if the editors want to avoid these grammatical ambiguities, or are fine with the semantic disambiguation. |
| 03:34 | <jmdyck> | (New topic:) In https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#in-extended-lifetime-worker, step 5.1: "If owner is a Document and the amount of time that owner that has been non-fully active is less than the user agent's extended lifetime shared worker timeout, then return true." The second "that" seems odd to me. Delete it? ("... the amount of time that owner has been non-fully active ...") |
| 04:01 | <annevk> | I don’t think we should use them |
| 04:08 | <jmdyck> | (Added a commit to #12557 to delete "that".) |
| 04:33 | <georgio_androvellli> | hi |
| 04:38 | <annevk> | jmdyck: I think disambiguating is also good btw. Probably makes it easier to comprehend for some |
| 04:42 | <georgio_androvellli> | Domenic: you be lookin like a young epstein |
| 07:41 | <Luke Warlow> | I'm looking at grammatical ambiguity in the HTML spec, found a couple examples. The form is roughly In the fieldset example I've often found it's the Oxford comma that disambiguates for me, but imo it's better to be overly verbose and be sure it's clear than to leave ambiguity. One thing that helps with that is to clearly split the conditions into lists but sometimes that would get you multiple layers of lists. |
| 13:51 | <jmdyck> | Technically, I don't think it's an Oxford comma, because (according to the references I've found), that only arises in a list of 3 or more items. But it is a comma before a conjunction, so I'll go with that. So I think you're saying that the comma-before-and wouldn't be there if the "is specified" and "is not a descendant" were both predicates on "the disabled attribute", and so we can conclude that "is not a descendant" is a predicate on "the element". The problem with that is, the resulting grammatical structure (the intended parse) still has a comma-before-and between two predicates ("is a descendant" and "is not a descendant"), which undermines the premise that it's indicative of an incorrect parse. |
| 13:55 | <jmdyck> | Elsewhere, the spec has other examples of [subject] [predicate], and [predicate], e.g. https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#get-an-element's-target has "If target is not null, and contains an ASCII tab or newline and a U+003C (<), then ..." |