| 01:06 | <Hixie> | lachy's post sure has gotten a lot of traction |
| 01:10 | <othermaciej> | on a list apart? |
| 01:10 | <Hixie> | yeah |
| 01:11 | <othermaciej> | it seemed really well geared towards content authors and yet with a lot of technical meat |
| 01:19 | <othermaciej> | people seem to flip out at the time estimate |
| 01:19 | <othermaciej> | I think for PR purposes it may be useful to have time estimates for earlier milestones than REC |
| 01:20 | <MikeSmith> | othermaciej - yeah, definitely. Many seem to assume that browser vendors will just be sitting around waiting for the complete spec to be published as REC |
| 01:20 | <Hixie> | i tried updating the faq recently |
| 01:20 | <Hixie> | and i'm actively working on the spec annotation script |
| 01:20 | <Hixie> | other suggestions welcome |
| 01:21 | <MikeSmith> | I'll try to see if I can add something on http://www.w3.org/html/wg/ |
| 01:25 | <othermaciej> | what time estimates are plausibly possible to generate? |
| 01:25 | <othermaciej> | ideally we should be able to estimate FPWD with high precision in the not too distant future |
| 01:26 | <othermaciej> | "feature complete" would also be a good milestone, however rough |
| 01:26 | <othermaciej> | and "first LC" might be a good one too |
| 01:30 | <Dashiva> | Wasn't feature complete last month? :) |
| 01:32 | <Dashiva> | I thought alistapart was supposed to be part of the semantic faction, but all I see is people glorifying div soup in the comments... |
| 01:32 | <othermaciej> | negative commentary seems to be along the lines of either "omg, 15 years? I'll be dead by then" |
| 01:33 | <Philip`> | Do the stresses of web design have that much of an effect on life expectancy? |
| 01:33 | <othermaciej> | that or "wtf? why new elements instead of div soup?" |
| 01:33 | <Hixie> | my timetable is: |
| 01:33 | <Hixie> | [X] First Working Draft in October 2007. |
| 01:33 | <Hixie> | [ ] Last Call Working Draft in October 2009. |
| 01:33 | <Hixie> | [ ] Call for contributions for the test suite in 2011. |
| 01:33 | <Hixie> | [ ] Candidate Recommendation in 2012. |
| 01:33 | <Hixie> | [ ] First draft of test suite in 2012. |
| 01:34 | <Hixie> | [ ] Second draft of test suite in 2015. |
| 01:34 | <Hixie> | [ ] Final version of test suite in 2019. |
| 01:34 | <Hixie> | [ ] Reissued Last Call Working Draft in 2020. |
| 01:34 | <Hixie> | [ ] Proposed Recommendation in 2022. |
| 01:34 | <Hixie> | (the [X] indicates the milestones that whatwg hit) |
| 01:34 | <Dashiva> | Well, then we should definitely be saying 2012 |
| 01:35 | <Dashiva> | CSS2.1 seems to be doing fine at CR |
| 01:35 | <othermaciej> | I think "Call for contributions to the test suite" could be earlier |
| 01:35 | <othermaciej> | in fact I think it could be now |
| 01:36 | <othermaciej> | (with proviso that parts of the test suite might get invalidated by spec changes) |
| 01:36 | <Hixie> | only if you volunteer to rereview them when the spec changes from underneath them |
| 01:36 | <MikeSmith> | I wonder if what might help is to also show a timeline of implementation status in browsers |
| 01:36 | <Hixie> | (i don't mind getting tests now, i just don't think we should actually _call_ for tests yet) |
| 01:36 | <othermaciej> | the people who were around when we decided to start on the test suite that we thought would make good test suite reviewers agreed to do that |
| 01:36 | <MikeSmith> | e.g., show that canvas has already been implemented, and when |
| 01:36 | <Dashiva> | "The WebKit team has told the HTML WG that they want to implement the entirety of the HTML 5 spec in the very near future." |
| 01:36 | <Dashiva> | Did you actually say that, othermaciej? |
| 01:37 | <othermaciej> | (hsivonen, anne, Lachy, zcorpan, can't remember who else) |
| 01:37 | <Hixie> | (call for tests = going out and getting people on slashdot and reddit and co to volunteer to write tests) |
| 01:37 | <MikeSmith> | video, client-side DB storage in Webkit, etc. |
| 01:37 | <othermaciej> | Dashiva: that would be a bit of an overstatement |
| 01:37 | <othermaciej> | Dashiva: we are indeed implementing large parts, but I don't think I would say "entirety" or "very near future" |
| 01:37 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: the data from the annotation script will be minable to get that kind of view dynamically |
| 01:37 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie - cool |
| 01:38 | <Dashiva> | othermaciej: http://www.alistapart.com/comments/previewofhtml5?page=4#33 |
| 01:38 | <Dashiva> | Maybe you should comment before it becomes fact :) |
| 01:39 | <MikeSmith> | though having a static copy posted prominently might be good too |
| 01:39 | Philip` | wonders why anyone would volunteer to write tests |
| 01:39 | <Philip`> | It's usually kind of hard and takes lots of time and concentration and you don't get anything out of it except the ability to show your immense superiority over browser developers who keep failing your tests |
| 01:39 | <othermaciej> | I guess I should post, but I'm not sure how |
| 01:39 | <othermaciej> | do I need to register for an account first? |
| 01:39 | <Dashiva> | Philip`: That last part is it |
| 01:40 | <Dashiva> | Except it's kinda dual. For some people it's "Haha, I'm smarter than them" and for some it's "I've found a way to help improve the browse" |
| 01:40 | <Dashiva> | +r |
| 01:42 | <Hixie> | i updated the faq again |
| 01:46 | <MikeSmith> | othermaciej - yeah, you need to register first I think |
| 01:50 | <MikeSmith> | ability to do test-case development well seems very underappreciated and under-rewarded relative to its importance |
| 01:51 | <othermaciej> | in WebKit it is so valued that it's mandatory |
| 01:51 | <othermaciej> | (though admittedly regression test generation is not quite the same art as standards compliance test generation) |
| 01:51 | <Philip`> | I think the HTML WG should pay people $10 for every test case they write and have successfully reviewed |
| 01:52 | <Hixie> | and this money would come from...? |
| 01:52 | <Philip`> | That's somebody else's problem ;-) |
| 01:52 | <Hixie> | :-) |
| 01:52 | <Dashiva> | Is it also pink? |
| 01:54 | <MikeSmith> | maybe we should come up with some karma system. ++people who contribute test cases and good LC comments that actually result in improvements to a particular spec |
| 01:54 | <MikeSmith> | --people who [fill in the blank] |
| 01:54 | <Philip`> | We could use Mechanical Turk |
| 01:54 | <MikeSmith> | and we keep a Leader Board |
| 01:55 | <othermaciej> | we're thinking of doing an "HTML5 implementation status in WebKit, plus why we think it's kinda cool" blog post on Surfin' Safari |
| 01:55 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: the html5 acknowledgments list is a list of people who have said at least one thing that has resulted in a change to the spec |
| 01:55 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: (whether they asked for the change or not) |
| 02:02 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie - hopefully later drafts might could also include people who contribute test cases |
| 02:03 | <Hixie> | we'll see. (generally i think it's best to have them acknowledged on the test suite page) |
| 02:03 | <Dashiva> | So does that mean I'll get added retroactively if mouseenter/leave are added sometime? |
| 02:03 | <Hixie> | added retroactively? |
| 02:03 | <Dashiva> | Since I sent the mail like half a year ago, but it's going to take at least another six months before it's at the front of your queue :) |
| 02:03 | <Hixie> | yes, as i respond to mails i add people to the list |
| 02:04 | <Hixie> | but aren't you in the list already? |
| 02:04 | MikeSmith | realizes "might could" is ungrammatical, but lived in Texas where it's used all the time |
| 02:04 | <Hixie> | (as i respond to mails i add people to the list _if their mail results in a change_) |
| 02:04 | <Dashiva> | Don't think so, no |
| 02:04 | <Hixie> | huh |
| 02:05 | <Dashiva> | I've done spelling corrections and such, mostly |
| 02:05 | <Hixie> | oh i haven't gone through those yet |
| 02:06 | <Dashiva> | There are no acknowledgements of the vast browser-wing cabal either, just the regular cabal |
| 02:07 | <Hixie> | there are acknowledgements of the cabal? |
| 02:07 | <Dashiva> | The very last one |
| 02:10 | <Hixie> | oh that's not the cabal you think it is |
| 02:10 | <Hixie> | that's funny |
| 02:11 | <gavin> | is it the cabal that used to hang out on irc.m.o? :) |
| 02:11 | <Hixie> | yeah :-) |
| 02:12 | <Hixie> | well, one of them |
| 02:12 | <Hixie> | there were several over the years |
| 02:12 | <Dashiva> | Is there like a cabal of cabals, I wonder |
| 02:12 | <Hixie> | yes, but they don't know |
| 02:16 | <MikeSmith> | the Illuminati |
| 02:33 | <dglazkov> | mmm.... cabal |
| 02:34 | <Philip`> | Cabal broadband? |
| 02:35 | <dglazkov> | Isn't that the capital of Afghanistan? |
| 02:38 | <dglazkov> | Hixie, have you had a chance to look at the HTML5 player that I built? |
| 02:41 | <Hixie> | no |
| 02:41 | <Hixie> | uri? |
| 02:41 | <dglazkov> | http://attic.glazkov.com/player/ |
| 02:43 | <Hixie> | nice |
| 02:43 | <dglazkov> | I posted on WHATWG about it a while back, so... |
| 02:44 | <dglazkov> | I am wondering if this is needed for anyone |
| 02:44 | <dglazkov> | 'cause it is, there's still plenty of holes to patch |
| 02:44 | <Hixie> | yeah i think that went straight to my sql folder for future reading :-) |
| 02:44 | <dglazkov> | I meant "'cause _if_ it is.." |
| 02:51 | dglazkov | wonders if WebKit folks are breathing down his pioneering neck with their implementation |
| 03:43 | <othermaciej> | I deny any heavy breathing on the part of apple |
| 05:53 | <Hixie> | Gregory's comments frighten me further at the state of AT technology |
| 05:53 | <Hixie> | what's the point of adding semantic markup if AT users key of the _screen media CSS_ ? |
| 18:49 | <dglazkov> | wouldn't it be cool if I could just point my client to the IRC log server and have uninterrupted flow of conversation upon entry? |
| 18:53 | <rubys> | hsivonen: ping? |
| 21:14 | <othermaciej> | this article is so much more positive than the title: http://warpspire.com/features/html5-css3/ |
| 22:45 | <jruderman> | "Recap: It’s 2008. We still don’t have full support for specifications released in 1998 and 2000" |
| 22:45 | <jruderman> | why do so many people think it's 2008? |
| 22:45 | <jruderman> | i saw an "As of 2008" in a wikipedia article the other day |
| 22:45 | <jruderman> | it's still 2007, right? i'm not crazy? |
| 22:46 | <Dashiva> | Well, cars and fashion and whatnot are in 2008 now |
| 22:46 | <mpt> | What's a "developer-developer"? |
| 22:49 | hsivonen | points out that the first release of HTML 4.0 was in 1997 |
| 22:50 | <hsivonen> | so it's already a decade without waiting until 2008 |
| 22:51 | <othermaciej> | jruderman: maybe they're using the Julian calendar? |