WHATWG on 2026-08-13

05:12	<Mark Larah>	Hi folks! First timer to whatwg here. At the risk of trudging up ancient history, I'm interested in https://github.com/whatwg/console/issues/222 I note that the spec clarifies that "the printer operation is implementation-defined" - my understanding is that this is where the pushback comes from, given that `console.json` would be strictly normative in its output, as defined by rfc8259 (perhaps with exception for syntax highlighting and decorations and such) So my question is: is `console.json` something we could special case and finagle some wording in the spec, at least in principle? Or am I still barking up the wrong tree? (Happy to take a stab at this if so) Thanks!
10:52	<annevk>	keithamus: does Gecko now support https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/9546 given your comment? If so, I can rebase it. The a11y issue is already filed. Will see about updating OP so it's linked.
10:54	<keithamus>	I don’t think so. I just had a look given Microsoft are looking into it for chromium; it came up in an open-ui meeting.
10:55	<annevk>	I see. Well I don't think there's much point in me doing additional work if there's not more support since it might just get out-of-sync again.
11:01	<annevk>	Updated OP at least. Happy to do more once it has a better chance of landing.
11:29	<keithamus>	Noam Rosenthal: I am getting confused about the sanitizer & adoption agency algo interplay. `data:text/html,<!DOCTYPE html><body><div id=d></div><script>d.setHTMLUnsafe('<i>a<p>b</i>c', { sanitizer: { replaceWithChildrenElements: ['i'] } });</script>` What is the right output here? Without sanitizer, adoption means: `<div><i>a</i><p><i>b</i>c</p></div>`. If sanitizer ran before adoption then this would perhaps be `<div>a<p>bc</p></div>`? Or if after maybe `<div><p>c</p></div>`? Chrome says: `<div>a<p>c</p></div>` which... seems wrong?
11:29	<keithamus>	I can ofc make a WPT for this and similar.
11:30	<Noam Rosenthal>	We're currently fixing this in chrome. see https://chromium-review.git.corp.google.com/c/chromium/src/+/8250959
11:30	<keithamus>	Ahh there we go
11:30	<Noam Rosenthal>	(It's fixed in the spec PR)
11:30	<keithamus>	Thanks Noam Rosenthal! I guess the spec PR will need updating for this also?
11:30	<keithamus>	Oh it is? I need to refresh 😂
11:31	<Noam Rosenthal>	I fixed it in the spec PR yesterday. So your question is quite timely
11:31	<keithamus>	Hmm. Build error on https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/12756; would you kindly try pushing again or something? I kind of rely on the diff preview.
11:32	<Noam Rosenthal>	Oh will do. Wattsi has been really moody recently
11:32	<keithamus>	Maybe the heat is getting to Wattsi like it is the rest of us 😠
11:35	<Noam Rosenthal>	The AAA is kind of mind-bending, but I think it works nicely with the sanitizer... since mostly "Replace with children" means "don't AAA this element" or some such.
11:35	<Noam Rosenthal>	try now
12:32	<zcorpan>	Noam Rosenthal: that seems right I think. Demo https://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/14819 I'm my canary (153.0.8005.0) the "foo" is removed. With the new spec text it should not be removed IIUC
12:46	<Noam Rosenthal>	Yea, as I told keithamus above, there is a chromium fix that hasn't landed yet specifically for AAA+streaming sanitizer, matching the new spec text. I've verified that it fixes this scenario and it matches the WPTs added in that CL
15:49	<annevk>	Noam Rosenthal: it seems https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/6401 got reverted in Chrome but not in the HTML standard. Can you or someone else from Chrome create the patch to revert it in the standard too?
15:50	<annevk>	Oh I was partially misled. That's not the only relevant change. There's one more that added the early return requirement.
16:00	<Noam Rosenthal>	I'll dig about this, sure
16:02	<Noam Rosenthal>	What is "got reverted in chrome"? Is that a particular revert, or some WPTs that doesn't pass, what is the observation?
16:05	<annevk>	Noam Rosenthal: https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40051855
16:05	<annevk>	Noam Rosenthal: in particular cross-origin `alert()` and friends appear to still work in all browsers, but the specification says they should not work.
16:32	<Noam Rosenthal>	Yea seems like we're not doing this. Other browsers never implemented this?
16:34	<Noam Rosenthal>	(If so, I'm happy to remove it next week)
16:35	<annevk>	Noam Rosenthal: that's my understanding, yes.
16:41	<annevk>	keithamus: any chance you're willing to give the `focusgroup` PR another go? I'm doing an AI review to start. I suspect it still needs somewhat significant work.
16:42	<keithamus>	Just looking over it now.
20:19	<Luke Warlow (ooo till 17th Aug)>	keithamus: does Gecko now support https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/9546 given your comment? If so, I can rebase it. The a11y issue is already filed. Will see about updating OP so it's linked. it's being implemented in chromium and I think Microsoft are pretty on board with this. So we should be able to get that checkbox filled in. Is there something specific we need? I can probably get Greg to comment?