01:17
<Hixie>
this forms task force isn't moving very fast
01:20
<othermaciej_>
indeed
08:00
<hsivonen>
"Blindly following
08:00
<hsivonen>
standards is being "enterprise" but bowing to a different master. "
08:00
<hsivonen>
(from the Rails discussion)
08:01
<hsivonen>
for context "I don't care if the browser is really treating my xhtml as invalid
08:01
<hsivonen>
html4. That has had zero impact on my work."
13:57
<zcorpan>
hsivonen: do you have a pointer as to why the html 4.0 transitional doctype with url has to trigger quirks mode?
13:58
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: yeah. one of the bug numbers I remember. :-) https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42525
13:59
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: it was needed for apple.com before the Almost Standards Mode existed
14:00
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: when the Almost Standards Mode was introduced, changing the quirkiness of the 4.0 doctype was seen as unnecessary and something that would just shake the stability of sniffing
14:02
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=154683
14:34
<zcorpan>
hsivonen: thanks
16:12
<ROBOd>
hey guys
16:13
<ROBOd>
what's up with the Window specification? the one being worked on by the Web API group http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/webapi/Window/publish/Window.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8
16:14
<ROBOd>
it seems as a duplicate of the Browsing contexts section from HTML 5 (and not only, there's session history and navigation in HTML 5 as well)
16:16
<othermaciej>
ROBOd: it was an attempt to spec the Window object independently of HTML5 so it could be sensibly used for non-HTML languages and such
17:15
<YaaL>
http://42.pl/u/utb
17:15
<YaaL>
Oops
17:24
<ROBOd>
othermaciej: is the spec "abandoned"? Window 1.0
17:25
<othermaciej>
ROBOd: not explicitly, although I'm not sure if it's worth continuing effort with HTML5 under w3c auspices now
17:27
<ROBOd>
othermaciej: that's what i was thinking... what's now defined in the HTML 5 spec is more mature (and better) than the Window 1.0 spec
17:30
<othermaciej>
ROBOd: I haven't read over what HTML5 says lately
17:30
<othermaciej>
ROBOd: if I or anyone else worked on that spec, I would recommend plagiarizing HTML5
17:32
<ROBOd>
i'm reading the entire html5 spec - i want to get know all of it. of course, not in minute details, but i want to be aware of the entire set of functionality, how it works, etc
17:32
<ROBOd>
while doing that, i also contribute with comments, reporting errors and such
17:32
<zcorpan>
and write test cases? :)
17:32
<ROBOd>
othermaciej: what do you mean by ... "recommend plagiarizing html5"?
17:33
<othermaciej>
zcorpan: I actually already wrote a bunch of test cases
17:33
<othermaciej>
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/WindowTestSuite/
17:33
<ROBOd>
zcorpan: hehe, that's next. ;) after i'm "done" with review the spec, i'm interesting in writing test cases and/or implementations for various algorithms
17:33
<othermaciej>
there's html, xhtml and svg versions of all the tests autogenerated from a common source
17:33
<ROBOd>
(i'm talking of html5)
17:34
<ROBOd>
*i'm interested
17:34
<zcorpan>
othermaciej: nice!
17:34
<othermaciej>
in theory it could also make versions of all those that use other scripting languages too
17:34
<othermaciej>
(at one point it seemed interesting to have Java versions)
17:35
<othermaciej>
here's an example of what the test output looks like: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/webapi/WindowTestSuite/publish/html/ecmascript/browsing-contexts/Window-window.html?rev=1.1&content-type=text/html;%20charset=iso-8859-1
17:35
<othermaciej>
btw I highly recommend my test framework for anyone who wants to make DOM tests
17:35
<ROBOd>
working on TCs and implementations of some stuff will allow me to provide more in-depth comments on the html5 spec
17:35
<ROBOd>
othermaciej: i'll look into that
17:36
<othermaciej>
the test framework is here: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/ReTest/
17:37
zcorpan
bookmarks to his del.icio.us
18:34
dglazkov
was looking at pushState spec and it looked strangely familiar
18:35
<dglazkov>
in a good way
19:09
<krijnh>
Philip`: shh ;)
23:13
<aa>
othermaciej: Did you decide on a time to come visit?
23:14
<aa>
michael would like to join, but he is out wed-fri next week, so he would prefer the monday after, or else monday or tuesday next week.
23:14
<Hixie>
monday is no good for me next week
23:18
<aa>
tuesday?
23:18
<Hixie>
wfm
23:52
<othermaciej>
aa: I might be able to do Tuesday
23:52
<othermaciej>
(meeting right now though)