| 00:31 | <zcorpan_> | Hixie: re http://forums.whatwg.org/viewtopic.php?t=51 , i don't see "custom bbcodes" in the admin ui... |
| 00:31 | <zcorpan_> | perhaps my permissions are restricted? |
| 00:32 | <Hixie> | you're the highest level i can set |
| 00:32 | <Hixie> | where would the custom bbcodes be? |
| 00:33 | <zcorpan_> | dunno |
| 00:33 | <Hixie> | i don't see anything called custom bbcodes |
| 00:33 | <Hixie> | maybe it's in a new version |
| 00:34 | <Hixie> | we've got 2.0.22 |
| 00:34 | <zcorpan_> | could be |
| 00:34 | <Hixie> | that's the latest stable release, though, so who knows |
| 00:34 | Hixie | doesn't really know about phpBB |
| 00:35 | <Hixie> | i just clicked the "install phpBB" button on the dreamhost panel :-) |
| 00:35 | <zcorpan_> | "DOWNLOAD LATEST RELEASE Version 2.0.22" says phpbb.com |
| 01:03 | <zcorpan_> | http://forums.whatwg.org/viewtopic.php?t=51#280 |
| 01:04 | zcorpan_ | wonders if that will result in stray <code> tags if the input isn't balanced |
| 01:04 | <Hixie> | if i do that, we'll have to redo it every time we update |
| 01:05 | <zcorpan_> | yeah, i don't think it's robust either |
| 01:05 | <zcorpan_> | probably better to upgrade to phpbb3 later on and see if it has a custom bbcodes section |
| 01:08 | <Hixie> | k |
| 01:23 | <Lachy> | Hixie, http://returnable.org/ is another attempt at creating custom tooltips, this time using a custom element and strangely abusing URIs for a non-URI purpose |
| 01:24 | <Lachy> | we really need to find a sensible way to address the problem in HTML, CSS, etc. |
| 01:26 | <Hixie> | o_O |
| 01:26 | <Hixie> | HTML5 says newlines in tooltips are real newlines |
| 01:29 | <Lachy> | ok. I didn't realise that. it's a shame only IE supports it though |
| 01:30 | <zcorpan_> | safari too iirc |
| 01:30 | <othermaciej> | I'd take a patch for that |
| 01:30 | <othermaciej> | if we don't do it already |
| 01:31 | <Hixie> | i don't get this tina person |
| 01:31 | <Hixie> | i'm actively trying to get her input and make the spec work for her |
| 01:32 | <Hixie> | but every e-mail she asserts that i'm going to ignore her and that i shouldn't worry as she won't join the wg and so on |
| 01:32 | <othermaciej> | can't you see that HTML5 is /not/ an appropriate specification because it /allows/ things that are /wrong/ and should be /forbidden/? |
| 01:33 | <Hixie> | yeah, it doesn't help that what she's advocating for doesn't even handle the e-mails she's writing |
| 01:33 | <Lachy> | but she's writing plain text emails |
| 01:35 | <othermaciej> | it's ok to use presentational markup in plaintext, because it conveys information |
| 01:35 | <othermaciej> | at least that's the explanation someone gave me |
| 01:35 | <othermaciej> | plaintext, like email, is for iformation |
| 01:35 | <othermaciej> | but HTML is for semantics, not information |
| 01:35 | <Lachy> | oh, do you mean the way she's /emphasising/ /everything/ /she/ /says/? |
| 01:37 | <Hixie> | it's not all emphasis |
| 01:37 | <Hixie> | as in, <em> would not be appropriate for all her /markup/ |
| 01:37 | <Hixie> | but whatever |
| 01:37 | Hixie | throws her e-mail onto the "phrasing" pile for now |
| 01:37 | <bewest> | Hixie: that's because she saw some teasing in the logs here and didn't like it |
| 01:37 | <Hixie> | uh huh |
| 01:37 | <Lachy> | I couldn't be bothered replying her any more. She's in the XHTML2 group, so she's got her own spec to mess up |
| 01:38 | <bewest> | Hixie: you could talk to her in #web |
| 01:38 | <Hixie> | i think i'll watch my latest fix of atlantis instead |
| 01:38 | <othermaciej> | she uses both *stars* and /slashes/, which one normally takes to be bold and italic in plaintext |
| 01:38 | <zcorpan_> | she'll probably read today's log too, so, hi, tina! :) |
| 01:39 | <Lachy> | Hi Tina Holomboe (she won't see it unless we mention her full name) |
| 01:39 | <Lachy> | now it will turn up in searches ;-) |
| 01:39 | <zcorpan_> | oh right |
| 01:39 | <Philip`> | Lachy: That would work better if you used the correct spelling |
| 01:40 | <zcorpan_> | Tina Holmboe |
| 01:40 | <Lachy> | oops |
| 01:43 | <bewest> | I will probably now be banned from #web |
| 01:43 | <bewest> | oh well |
| 01:43 | <zcorpan_> | why? |
| 01:43 | <Philip`> | For an entertaining reason? |
| 01:43 | Lachy | joins #web to see what's going on |
| 01:44 | <Lachy> | ... nothing yet. |
| 01:45 | zcorpan_ | is tempted to say "can anyone help me with a javascript problem?" |
| 01:48 | <Dashiva> | You just did |
| 01:49 | <zcorpan_> | in #web, that is |
| 01:57 | <Dashiva> | It's probably a spiderman channel anyhow |
| 02:00 | <Lachy> | zcorpan_, about that quote you just pasted in #web, where did that come from? |
| 02:01 | <zcorpan_> | topic |
| 02:03 | <Lachy> | woah! looks like David Dorward set that topic last. I can't believe he would have said that, I thought he had more sense than that |
| 02:03 | Philip` | wonders what it says, but is too lazy to go and look |
| 02:04 | <zcorpan_> | "Rules: http://hashweb.sekrit.co.uk/ | Validate FIRST: http://validator.w3.org/ | Ask first, PM later | Don't use XHTML unless you understand it: http://www.webdevout.net/articles/beware-of-xhtml | #web is for authoring web pages, not a replacement for google or an index of irc channels | WA1 accepted as HTML 5 - R.I.P. HTML" |
| 02:05 | <Philip`> | Aha |
| 02:06 | <Philip`> | If people disagree with the direction of HTML, they could always form their own group and develop a Web Document Semantics 1.0 specification |
| 02:06 | <Lachy> | Philip`, they have. It's called XHTML 2.0 |
| 02:06 | <zcorpan_> | or join the xhtml2 wg |
| 02:09 | <Dashiva> | I'm confused |
| 02:09 | <Dashiva> | Beware of XHTML, but RIP HTML? |
| 02:11 | <zcorpan_> | probably different people who wrote that |
| 02:12 | <Lachy> | Dashiva, that's because authors should use WML or cHTML instead |
| 02:25 | <Hixie> | wow, that link is somewhat rough on the xhtml guys http://www.webdevout.net/articles/beware-of-xhtml |
| 02:32 | <zcorpan_> | http://www.thewebcreator.net/2007/04/16/why-you-should-be-using-html-401-instead-of-xhtml/#comment-23 (same article) |
| 02:52 | <Hixie> | the last comment on that blog entry highlights one of the weirdest things i've repeatedly seen on the web |
| 02:52 | <Hixie> | "HTML 5.0 vs XHTML 2.0 (commercials companies vs W3C)" |
| 02:54 | <Hixie> | the idea that the W3C, which you have to pay thousands of dollars to to become a member, and which is entirely member-driven, is somehow less "commercial" than the WHATWG, which can be joined by anyone |
| 02:57 | <ianloic> | hehe |
| 03:23 | <zcorpan_> | Hixie: the spec says that <a>.href must reflect the href content attribute. but browsers return the resolved uri on getting |
| 03:24 | <zcorpan_> | oh, nevermind |
| 03:24 | <Hixie> | heh |
| 03:31 | <zcorpan_> | ok, for boolean attributes, it says that setting must remove or set the content attribute, but afaict none of safari, firefox or opera do that. (ie7 does because the content attribute === the dom attribute) |
| 03:34 | <zcorpan_> | although i only tested with <input checked> |
| 03:35 | <Hixie> | checked is a special case |
| 03:35 | <Hixie> | it doesn't reflect the content attribute |
| 03:35 | <Hixie> | defaultChecked is the DOM attribute that reflects the checked content attribute |
| 03:35 | <zcorpan_> | oh |
| 03:39 | <zcorpan_> | for .disabled, opera returns "disabled", mozilla and safari return "", and ie7 returns "true" |
| 03:40 | <Hixie> | in what context? |
| 03:40 | <zcorpan_> | when setting to .disabled to true and then reading getAttribute("disabled") |
| 03:40 | <Hixie> | and what do they do when you set it to fals? |
| 03:40 | <Hixie> | false? |
| 03:41 | <Hixie> | (afk brb) |
| 03:41 | <zcorpan_> | all return null |
| 03:43 | <zcorpan_> | which means that they remove the content attribute |
| 03:44 | <zcorpan_> | and that DOM3 Core is incompatible with the real world |
| 03:50 | <zcorpan_> | or wait, ie7 returns "false", but the content attribute is absent in ie's web developer toolbar (and live dom viewer) |
| 03:52 | <zcorpan_> | uploaded to LDV |
| 03:52 | <Hixie> | so in conclusion, the spec is close enough to reality, right? :-) |
| 03:53 | <zcorpan_> | yeah. except perhaps that it should set the value to the empty string instead (to match two implementations instead of one) :) |
| 03:53 | <Hixie> | *shrug* |
| 03:54 | <Hixie> | we'll see what the implementors say when they start implementing this stuf |
| 03:54 | <Hixie> | so in other news |
| 03:54 | <Hixie> | how are we supposed to distinguish <h1>s that represent site-wide headers, from <h1>s that are the header of the page only? |
| 03:54 | <Hixie> | or do we need to? |
| 03:57 | <zcorpan_> | if there's exactly one <article> (ignoring nested <article>s), then the heading of that <article> is the page's heading, and the <body>'s heading is the site-wide heading. otherwise, the <body>'s heading is the page's heading |
| 04:02 | <Hixie> | oo, good call |
| 04:03 | <zcorpan_> | :) |
| 04:05 | <zcorpan_> | and yes, i think it needs to be distinguished, given how much this issue has been discussed at different forums |
| 04:05 | <zcorpan_> | if only for the sake of content producers |
| 04:20 | <zcorpan_> | should i mail that to the list? |
| 04:35 | <Hixie> | nah, i got it |
| 04:35 | <zcorpan_> | ok |
| 04:36 | zcorpan_ | will go to bed now |
| 04:37 | <zcorpan_> | nn |
| 04:38 | <Hixie> | nn |
| 05:04 | Hixie | nukes the predefined class names |
| 05:50 | Philip` | wonders why commit-watchers hasn't seen r823 |
| 06:22 | <Philip`> | r284 is there, but 283 hasn't come through email or into the archives :-( |
| 06:25 | <Hixie> | weird |
| 06:26 | <Hixie> | maybe the script crashed when i submitted it |
| 06:56 | <Hixie> | othermaciej: assuming you could iterate over classList |
| 06:56 | <Hixie> | othermaciej: would you want to see dupes, or would you want them collapsed? |
| 06:58 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: hmm, haven't thought about it |
| 07:14 | <Hixie> | sorted it is |
| 07:27 | <hendry> | i'm going to try it... |
| 07:27 | <hendry> | woops, wrong channel |
| 07:45 | <jruderman> | lol at Hixie's twitter status "Dashed lines are so Web 1.0. <canvas> is Web 2.0. Solid colours and transparency!" |
| 07:46 | <Hixie> | :-) |
| 07:53 | <othermaciej> | where are the rounded corners and reflections? |
| 07:54 | <Hixie> | reflections are here: http://cow.neondragon.net/stuff/reflection/ |
| 07:55 | <Philip`> | http://www.netzgesta.de/corner/ - rounded corners |
| 07:55 | <Philip`> | What more could you want? |
| 07:55 | <othermaciej> | that reflection thing is pretty hot |
| 07:56 | <Hixie> | wow i hadn't seen the corners |
| 07:56 | <Hixie> | that's pretty awesome |
| 07:56 | <Hixie> | ok |
| 07:56 | <Hixie> | we're set! |
| 07:56 | <Hixie> | web 2.0 compliance! check! |
| 08:02 | <othermaciej> | does that use canvas? |
| 08:03 | <othermaciej> | I suppose adding NEW! and BETA badges can be an excercise to the reader |
| 08:03 | <Hixie> | yeah |
| 08:03 | <Hixie> | they both use canvas |
| 08:04 | <othermaciej> | that's pretty hot |
| 08:04 | <Hixie> | http://h-master.net/web2.0/index.php will add the BETA badge, but that's not canvas |
| 08:05 | <Philip`> | You can do nice animated rippley reflective water with the 3D canvas, but I guess that's probably a bit too distracting for use on normal web pages |
| 08:06 | <othermaciej> | cool, I just made the logo for Specr |
| 08:06 | <othermaciej> | it even colored the r red |
| 09:52 | <mikeday> | Prince 6.0 has been released at long last |
| 09:53 | <mikeday> | be the first kid on the block to download it, try it out, find bugs, and complain to us, today! :) |
| 10:13 | <mikeday> | hmm, quiet in here. You're all at XTech, aren't you. |
| 11:15 | <jdandrea> | Yipe: http://www.thewhir.com/blogs/Paul-Hirsch/index.cfm/2007/4/17/HTML-5-the-next-generation-or-largely-a-pointless-effort |
| 11:17 | jdandrea | sees others have already commented. ahh. |
| 11:28 | <Lachy> | does anyone have any stats on how often blockquote is actually used for indenting these days? I've never seen any, it seems to be taken as axiom |
| 11:41 | <ROBOd> | Lachy: i have some experience with cleaning up HTML documents saved with OpenOffice Writer and Microsoft Word |
| 11:42 | <ROBOd> | Lachy: based on this experience, yes, blockquote is used for indenting, but definition lists are the champions |
| 11:43 | <ROBOd> | almost any document i've worked with contains definition lists wrongly used for indenting text. blockquote is not really often |
| 11:49 | <mikeday> | blockquote is used a lot on blogs, for... block quoting :) |
| 12:16 | <mikeday> | hi zcorpan_ |
| 13:35 | <met_> | http://my.opera.com/hallvors/blog/2007/05/16/quick-spec-for-ies-document-activeelement |
| 16:09 | <zcorpan_> | Hixie: hmm, does the #distinguishing text look for <section>s that are descendants of <aside> and <nav>? surely they should be ignored? |
| 17:53 | <zcorpan_> | Hixie: why does it look for <section>s in the first place? |
| 17:58 | <Dashiva> | Hixie: The links in DOMTokenList interface are kinda messed up. add links to remove, and remove doesn't link |
| 18:01 | <Dashiva> | Personally I would define toggle in terms of has, add, remove, since that's kind of what it does |
| 18:03 | <clotman> | :bn |
| 18:08 | <Lachy> | does anyone remember what the use cases for class="warning" were? |
| 18:09 | <Lachy> | I remember one for class="error", which was for indiciating error messages, such as for form controls, which has benefits particularly for ATs |
| 18:45 | zcorpan_ | continues to test bgcolor handling |
| 18:46 | <zcorpan_> | everyone do slightly different things. i wonder what is sanest, and what is required |
| 18:50 | zcorpan_ | is amused by the insanity |
| 19:11 | <Philip`> | Hmm, the spec currently seems to have the thin green SCS line down pretty much its entire length, but only in Opera and not Firefox |
| 19:15 | <zcorpan_> | yeah |
| 19:16 | <zcorpan_> | the status xml file needs an update |
| 19:19 | <ddfreyne> | Is there a feed for the specs' recent changes? |
| 19:20 | <zcorpan_> | http://twitter.com/WHATWG |
| 19:20 | <met_> | or mailing list |
| 19:21 | <Philip`> | http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker and http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/commit-watchers-whatwg.org/2007/date.html have information on changes too |
| 19:21 | <Dashiva> | Sign up for the commit-watchers |
| 19:21 | <ddfreyne> | thanks! |
| 19:23 | <Philip`> | Also http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/html5/spec/Overview.html |
| 19:24 | <Philip`> | It's hard to avoid accidentally running into a list of recent changes :-) |
| 19:24 | <ddfreyne> | yeah, but there still is no rss feed. :P |
| 19:25 | <ddfreyne> | (or atom) |
| 19:25 | <zcorpan_> | there is for twitter |
| 19:25 | <zcorpan_> | though you'll only get the messages |
| 19:25 | <ddfreyne> | true, but that doesn't include the diff |
| 19:26 | <zcorpan_> | we can add a feed to web-apps-tracker. contributors welcome: http://html5.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/web-apps-tracker/web-apps-tracker |
| 20:50 | <Philip`> | http://tapper-ware.net/canvas3d/ - I hadn't seen that before, but it seems to work fairly nicely |
| 21:27 | <Hixie> | aww, how cute |
| 21:27 | <Hixie> | public-html is still arguing about whether we should have predefined classes |
| 21:29 | <gsnedders> | awwwwww… so sweet, isn't it? :P |
| 21:30 | <met_> | Hixie you sent the notice about classes only to whatwg list |
| 21:32 | <Philip`> | Maybe commit-watchers could be forwarded to public-html so people don't get lost arguing about points that were already addressed weeks ago |
| 21:32 | <Philip`> | (Well, that's not actually a sensible idea, but maybe something to make sure people stay up to speed) |
| 21:37 | <Hixie> | that's Dan's problem, IMHO |
| 23:04 | <zcorpan_> | Hixie: yt? |
| 23:21 | <Hixie> | zcorpan_: yo |
| 23:22 | <zcorpan_> | why does #distinguishing look for <section> elements? |
| 23:24 | <Hixie> | it looks for anything that can be considered "in flow" |
| 23:24 | <zcorpan_> | but a <section> in an <aside> shouldn't make a difference, should it? |
| 23:25 | <zcorpan_> | or <nav> |
| 23:25 | <Hixie> | true |
| 23:31 | <zcorpan_> | btw, Roger said that the links made the text in the spec harder to read. this might make it easier to read: [href^="#"] { color: inherit; text-decoration: underline; } |
| 23:33 | <Hixie> | maybe |
| 23:35 | <Hixie> | ugh, there are so many things wrong with the #distinguishing thing |
| 23:35 | <Hixie> | how to fix |
| 23:35 | <Hixie> | how to fix |
| 23:37 | <Hixie> | what i want to say is that if the structure is 1 top level header and 1 header below that, ignoring headers in <nav> and <aside>, and that the header below it is in an <article>, then that's the site/page case |
| 23:37 | <Hixie> | and all other cases are standalone pages |
| 23:38 | <othermaciej> | what's #distinguishing? |
| 23:38 | <zcorpan_> | othermaciej: http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=825&to=826 |
| 23:40 | <Lachy> | othermaciej, see the spec. it's a fragment identifier for the section |
| 23:40 | <Lachy> | http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#distinguishing |
| 23:40 | <zcorpan_> | Hixie: perhaps phrase it as "for the purposes of finding the page's heading..." or so, instead of having it as authoring conformance requirements |
| 23:40 | othermaciej | looks |
| 23:40 | <Hixie> | zcorpan_: i want it as both authoring and ua reqs |
| 23:41 | <zcorpan_> | ok |
| 23:41 | <Hixie> | othermaciej: it's basically an experimental solution to an issue that has caused many arguments |
| 23:41 | <Hixie> | othermaciej: i'm trying to see if i can make the spec clear it up once and for all |
| 23:41 | <Lachy> | the way it is right now, it's extremely complex. I don't even understand it |
| 23:42 | othermaciej | is confused reading that |
| 23:43 | <zcorpan_> | wouldn't it clear up the issue even if it didn't actually contain authoring conformance requirements? |
| 23:43 | <Hixie> | yeah don't worry about the text there now |
| 23:43 | <Hixie> | zcorpan_: there's no point having the author be allowed to do things that the UA will interpret as something else |
| 23:44 | <zcorpan_> | well, you can't check the author's intent anyway, right? |
| 23:44 | <Hixie> | actually in this case you could |
| 23:45 | <Hixie> | if you validated multiple pages at once |
| 23:45 | <zcorpan_> | oh |
| 23:45 | <zcorpan_> | right |
| 23:45 | <Hixie> | (somewhat) |
| 23:45 | <Hixie> | anyway there are plenty of requirements that can't be checked |
| 23:45 | <zcorpan_> | indeed |
| 23:56 | <Hixie> | ok, redid it |
| 23:56 | <Hixie> | is it any better? |
| 23:57 | zcorpan_ | checks |
| 23:58 | <Hixie> | (eventually i'll have examples of course) |
| 23:59 | <Lachy> | in the first paragraph, shouldn't it say "must be nested as the heading of an article [or section] element,"? |