00:05
<Hixie>
heycam: you haven't done anything to do with callbacks yet right? other than [NativeObject]? (just checking, not complaining or anything -- there's no rush, i just happened to run into the issue again today)
00:09
<heycam>
Hixie, that's right
00:09
<Hixie>
k
00:10
<Hixie>
i updated html5 to use the constructor stuff today
00:10
<Hixie>
it seems to work well
00:10
<heycam>
cool
01:51
<heycam>
where is window.parent defined?
02:19
<Hixie>
heycam: it's not yet, iirc
02:19
<Hixie>
heycam: do you need it?
02:20
<heycam>
i was just going to make some comments about the Global stuff in svg tiny 1.2, and make a reference to parent in html5
02:20
<heycam>
but then i realised it wasn't there
02:21
<heycam>
(since there's a 'parent' attribute on the SVGGlobal interface)
02:22
<heycam>
ah i see it's in www.w3.org/TR/Window
02:22
<Hixie>
i'm treating that draft as obsolete, fwiw
02:22
<heycam>
yeah i'm wondering what's going to happen with it
02:22
<Hixie>
i really should define 'parent' at some point
02:22
<heycam>
will you fold it in to html5?
02:22
<Hixie>
not sure if it has any complications
02:22
<Hixie>
it's already folded in, for the most part
02:23
<heycam>
i would rather it be a separate spec, but i know othermaciej mentioned intricate dependencies with other stuff in html 5
02:23
<Hixie>
is 'parent' just the parent browsing context's default view's Window object, or is there more to it?
02:23
<Hixie>
Window is probably the most integrated part of HTML5
02:24
<othermaciej>
or self if there is no parent
02:24
<Hixie>
factoring out Window from HTML5 would be like factoring out the nervous system from a human being
02:25
<heycam>
i don't think it's impossible, or even necessarily a bad idea. it might be a lot of effort, though.
02:28
<Hixie>
ok, defined window.parent
03:09
<Hixie>
wow, <embed src=""> processing is so far from what http requires as to be stupid
09:50
<Hixie>
if anyone has any good ideas on how to resolve http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5859 please write them in the bug
09:52
<hsivonen>
Hixie: can there ever be a window object and a scripting context whose origin is a URI scheme that the browser doesn't support?
09:52
<hsivonen>
or does this issue have a wider scope than examining the document's own origin port?
09:53
hsivonen
searches for default port
09:54
<hsivonen>
the only non-Origin-related "default port" I see is under parsing URLs
10:07
<Philip`>
http://www.sitepen.com/blog/2008/07/22/windowname-transport/ seems kind of crazy
10:09
<hsivonen>
Philip`: does postMessage do anything that can't be emulated on top of window.name?
10:18
<hsivonen>
hendry: now that OpenJDK is in Debian, it should be feasible to get all sort of server-side Java stuff in Debian and have it run with reasonable effort. (e.g. latest Jetty)
10:19
<hendry>
hsivonen: from what i gather openjdk is exactly the same as the old sun-java6 package
10:20
<hendry>
hsivonen: are all the other deps coming in too now?
10:20
<hsivonen>
hendry: I thought some parts were removed or rewritten
10:20
<hsivonen>
hendry: but as far as non-GUI stuff goes, yeah it should be the same code
10:21
<hsivonen>
hendry: dunno. I supposed each package maintainer needs to be poked
10:21
<hsivonen>
like getting Jetty upgraded from legacy 5.x to 6.x etc.
10:21
<hendry>
hsivonen: i'm not super keen on java as you know ;)
10:22
<hendry>
hsivonen: couldn't you shed some depedencies somehow? or migrate to C? ;)
10:22
<hsivonen>
hendry: It Free now. What's not to be keen about? :-)
10:22
<hsivonen>
hendry: I can shed some of the gratuitous build deps when Saxon 9.1 is out
10:22
<hendry>
hsivonen: it's bloatware. i'm a patron of the "lesscode movement" like http://www.suckless.org/ project
10:22
<hsivonen>
(then I no longer need to maintain my own fork of Saxon)
10:23
hendry
wonders if the css validator also have tons of Java deps
10:23
<hsivonen>
hendry: I like the JVM and I like java.lang and java.util. There's lot of bloat in the class library
10:25
hsivonen
discovers Jetty 7.0
10:26
<hendry>
so saxon is XSLT? what do you need XSLT for?
10:27
<hsivonen>
btw, the RAM on validator.nu is now updated. It should take about 8 hours for the DNS to point to the higher spec server
10:27
<hendry>
couldn't you have a simple light PHP interface and pipe results to a JVM
10:27
<hsivonen>
hendry: the Schematron engine compiles the Schematron schema into an XSLT program
10:28
<hendry>
hsivonen: why has the service been down? has load increased?
10:28
<hsivonen>
hendry: isn't mod_jk that light interface? :-)
10:28
<hsivonen>
hendry: http://hsivonen.iki.fi/downtime/
10:28
<hendry>
hsivonen: mod_jk, no :)
10:28
<hendry>
hsivonen: think less code, think drops deps
10:28
<hendry>
PHP is like air nowadays
10:29
<hsivonen>
hendry: dropping deps means forking intermediate deps :-(
10:29
<hsivonen>
hendry: most of the deps just satisfy latent kitchen sink deps that don't actually load at runtime
10:29
<hsivonen>
like Ant
10:30
<hsivonen>
don't get me started on depending on Ant
10:30
<hendry>
hsivonen: i'll look at your build.xml and see if it can re-written as a Makefile
10:30
<hsivonen>
hendry: I don't have build.xml
10:30
<hsivonen>
hendry: no XML situps!
10:31
<hendry>
hsivonen: oh that's right... well I am just trying to think of ways to dropping deps. I guess your deps require ant
10:31
<hendry>
anyway, ant isn't too bad.
10:31
<hsivonen>
(and yes, I have now verified that additional swap survives a reboot)
10:31
<hsivonen>
hendry: some deps provide an ant task
10:31
<hendry>
but Makefiles are *so* much better
10:31
<hsivonen>
hendry: and to compile that, ant has to be present
10:32
<hsivonen>
and ant inself has ballooned into being huge
10:33
<roc_>
Makefiles are better than someting? how astonishing
10:34
<hendry>
i used to hate Makefiles. Now I think they're great. :)
10:34
<hendry>
hsivonen: did I ever show you http://getacue.dabase.com/ ?
10:35
<hsivonen>
hendry: you didn't
10:36
<hendry>
hsivonen: take a look at it and tell me what you think. it's ongoing mind
10:39
<hsivonen>
hendry: so one is supposed to learn to remember the border color?
10:46
<hendry>
hsivonen: yes over repeated use over time of course
10:46
<hendry>
hsivonen: it was initially an android proposal
10:47
<hendry>
so imagine picking up a device and every form was coloured on input
10:47
<hendry>
if you have a rediculous long phone number, you can "cue" it by telling the reciepient it's dark green on input or something :)
10:50
<hsivonen>
did Ubuntu comment out Apache2 AddDefaultCharset for Hardy? I'm pretty sure it was on by default in Feisty.
12:10
<tusho>
Which is correct:
12:10
<tusho>
<cite>extract from Some Book by Author</cite>
12:10
<tusho>
or
12:10
<tusho>
extract from <cite>Some Book by Author</cite>
12:10
<hsivonen>
tusho: extract from <cite>Some Book</cite> by Author
12:11
<tusho>
OK, thanks :)
12:11
<tusho>
What if I wanted to style 'Author' a certain way? what tag would it go in?
12:11
<tusho>
Just a span?
12:11
<hsivonen>
tusho: <span> or <b> depending on the conventions of your publication's style manual, I guess
12:12
tusho
nods
12:12
<tusho>
I've always wondered which is more semantic, though: since this is going to be the only span in the paragraph and ostensibly just used for styling, should I give the span a class?
12:13
<tusho>
My thoughts say yes when thinking about, e.g. programmatical manipulation of the document.
12:14
<hsivonen>
tusho: are you planning to manipulate your documents programmatically right way or is this an investment in case you want to do it later?
12:14
<tusho>
Not really planning to do it, but I'd like to keep open the possibility, obviously.
12:15
<tusho>
(If I wasn't aiming for a good level of semantics I'd just be using tag soup, wouldn't I?)
12:15
<tusho>
I'll give it a class, an unadorned span seems out of place.
12:17
<Philip`>
Writing <span class=author> doesn't seem any harder than writing <span>, and CSS like "foo .author" seems much easier to read than "foo span", and it means you have less to worry about if you add some other unrelated <span>s in the future since you won't have to rewrite all the existing ones
12:18
<hsivonen>
tusho: "good level of semantics" has an opportunity cost just like everything else that takes effort
12:18
<tusho>
Philip`: That was pretty much my deduction.
12:18
<tusho>
hsivonen: Well, yes, but giving elements a span doesn't seem very difficult ;)
12:22
<Philip`>
(Hmm, someone replaced my telephone with a Cisco VOIP one)
12:23
Philip`
guesses it won't be quite as reliable as the old phone system
12:23
<hsivonen>
is there any harm in running 'apache2ctl start' from cron every minute or so?
12:25
<tusho>
hsivonen: Why would you need to?
12:25
<tusho>
If Apache is crashing every minute, well ...
12:26
<hsivonen>
tusho: to restart apache if the kernel kills it on OOM
12:26
<tusho>
hsivonen: Ah - are you using worker or prefork?
12:26
<tusho>
If it's prefork, switch to worker. I find memory problems instantly disappear. Unfortunately, you can't use mod_php any more, but you can run PHP via CGI/FastCGI.
12:28
<hsivonen>
tusho: I use the Ubuntu default and it isn't immediately obvious where it is set
12:28
<tusho>
hsivonen: Do this-
12:28
<tusho>
$ sudo apt-get install apache2-mpm-worker
12:28
<tusho>
It'll uninstall mod_php (if installed) and the current one, and install worker.
12:28
<tusho>
(Your config files will stay.)
12:28
<hsivonen>
tusho: I don't need PHP. I need CGI for Bugzilla and mod_jk for Java
12:28
<tusho>
Tjat
12:28
<tusho>
*That's OK.
12:28
<tusho>
Both will work fine.
12:28
<tusho>
Well, look at what apache2-mpm-worker says it'll uninstall.
12:28
<tusho>
If it doesn't mention either of those, then you're OK.
12:29
<hsivonen>
tusho: thanks
12:29
<tusho>
I know for a fact CGI works, though
12:29
<tusho>
hsivonen: No problem :)
12:29
<Philip`>
I suggest not running out of memory :-)
12:30
<Philip`>
Can't you just limit the JVM heap size and limit the number of concurrent processes Apache will spawn?
12:30
<hsivonen>
Philip`: I don't know what # on concurrent processes I should limit Apache to
12:31
<hsivonen>
Philip`: It dies like thrice a year and leaves no diagnostic dump of what provoked the unusual memory allocation
12:31
<Philip`>
hsivonen: (Total RAM - amount used by OS and services - some spare) / (maximum heap size allocated to each JVM)
12:33
<Philip`>
hsivonen: Can you run something like ApacheBench to stress test it and make it break reproducibly?
12:34
<hsivonen>
Philip`: I suppose I could. Except I already started the process of pointing the DNS to the real server that is the one needing testing...
12:34
<hsivonen>
and DNS changes take 8 hours
12:36
<Philip`>
They take no time if you just modify /etc/hosts :-)
12:37
<hsivonen>
Philip`: my point is that stress testing the real server now affects real users
12:38
<Philip`>
hsivonen: How many real users are there?
12:38
<zcorpan>
Hixie: + attribute may be left blank if there is another <code>area<code>
12:39
<zcorpan>
Hixie: should be </code>
12:39
<hsivonen>
Philip`: does the number matter if the people who care about the service are inconvenienced?
12:40
Philip`
is glad he doesn't have anything with users, since then he'd have to worry about them
12:42
<tusho>
Just use -worker, seriously ;)
12:42
<tusho>
-prefork is deprecated.
12:43
<Philip`>
hsivonen: If the only users are people in this channel, you could say "please be aware that the validator will be slow and/or crashed while I'm testing it over the next few hours" and probably nobody would mind, which would make it easy :-)
12:43
<hsivonen>
tusho: at least aptitude didn't complain about installed modules...
12:44
<tusho>
hsivonen: Yay—then you can just install it and be happy.
12:44
<tusho>
(Hopefully. I've never had any problems with worker.)
12:44
<Philip`>
tusho: Do you have a pointer to something saying it's deprecated?
12:44
<tusho>
Philip`: Certainly.
12:45
<tusho>
Just a sec.
12:45
<tusho>
Hm, can't find it - wait, let me ask #apache for the link.
12:46
<hsivonen>
are mpm_* modules special under Ubuntu/Debian in that they don't show up in mods-available?
12:47
<Philip`>
MPMs apparently have to be compiled into the server, so you can't load them as runtime modules
12:48
<hsivonen>
how do I check which MPM is actually active?
12:48
<Philip`>
"it is possible to determine which MPM was chosen by using ./httpd -l"
12:48
<Philip`>
says http://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/mpm.html
12:49
hsivonen
assumes worker.c means successful install
12:49
<tusho>
Huh, you're already on worker.
12:50
<tusho>
Then yes, you have a problem.
12:50
<hsivonen>
indeed, aptitude install apache2-mpm-worker didn't install anything
12:56
gsnedders
works his way up through flagged emails
13:27
<hsivonen>
I reduced the Apache Timeout value significantly and added a cron job to kick Apache back up when it gets killed
13:27
<hsivonen>
let's see how it goes
14:37
<hsivonen>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2008Jul/0068.html
14:39
<hsivonen>
http://codinginparadise.org/weblog/2008/07/what-heck-is-open-web.html
14:40
<hsivonen>
"If Adobe were to open source Flex/Flash, or Microsoft Silverlight, would that be the Open Web? If so, why? If not, why not?"
14:40
hsivonen
notes that Java is now Open Source but Hixie still rejects <applet>
14:41
hsivonen
suspects that multiple independent implementations at least one of which is open source is required
14:41
<hsivonen>
although Java approximately has that, too
14:48
<Philip`>
Java give the impression of being big and slow and ugly, which is a major failure of marketing, so we don't want to associate that with our The Open Web
14:48
<Philip`>
s/give/gives/
14:49
<hsivonen>
sure. Applets totally suck.
14:50
<hsivonen>
(but Java being slow is no longer true except for the JVM startup)
14:51
<hsivonen>
(that said, I use the Web with Java disabled and am quite unhappy when I run into an applet requirement to get information out of a site)
14:52
<hsivonen>
(recently, I actually ran across a site that had a superbly bad map hidden inside an applet)
14:52
<Philip`>
(For applets, JVM startup time is more significant than its runtime performance - when I visit a site that uses Java applets, and it freezes my browser and crunches my disk for ten seconds, it encourages me to hate Java)
14:52
<hsivonen>
(apparently whoever runs the site doesn't have the clue to link to Google Maps)
14:53
<Philip`>
(And anyway I said "gives the impression of being [...] slow", not "is slow", and the impressions are what matter when trying to convince people that the Open Web consists of all the cool stuff and none of the rubbish stuff)
14:54
<hsivonen>
(I didn't enable Java on the site in question. Instead, I searched for the place on Google Maps)
14:55
<hsivonen>
btw, does JavaFX somehow sweep AWT and Swing out of the view?
14:56
<Philip`>
(Well, maybe it doesn't actually give that impression, but people have that impression because the JVM used to give that impression and then everyone propagated it even when it untrue. Or something like that)
14:57
<hsivonen>
hmm. the JavaFX site is all ajaxy
14:57
<hsivonen>
have I misunderstood what JavaFX is?
14:58
Philip`
has never understood what it is
14:59
<hsivonen>
"Sun is not replacing Swing with JavaFX Script. Instead, JavaFX Script makes Swing easier to use."
14:59
hsivonen
intends to stay away from it
14:59
<hsivonen>
quote from http://www.javafx.com/htdocs/javafxfaq.html
15:00
<Philip`>
Why stay away from it?
15:00
<hsivonen>
Philip`: Swing suck. Or at least that's the impression I have. :-)
15:01
<hsivonen>
sucks even
15:01
<Philip`>
For reasons other than it being hard to use?
15:01
<hsivonen>
Philip`: for the default PLAF being hideous and the other PLAFs not feeling native
15:02
<hsivonen>
the entire concept of a PLAF doesn't make sense
15:02
<hsivonen>
as if you could just plug in the Mac *feel*
15:02
Philip`
has written a total of one small Swing application in his life, and didn't think it was entirely great, mostly because its Win32 L&F font renderer had a bug that made the default font unacceptably hideous
15:04
<Philip`>
(Also I've got used to how wxWidgets does layouts, and get confused by anything that's different)
15:07
<MikeSmith>
Qt
15:08
Philip`
used wxWidgets instead of Qt since he didn't want to have to be GPL
15:09
<hsivonen>
what's happening with the licensing of Qt? Before Nokia acquired TrollTech, Nokia was all about a 'level playing field' and LGPL.
15:10
<hsivonen>
(in rhetoric that is)
15:12
<MikeSmith>
Qt is dual license
15:12
<MikeSmith>
no changes in that afaik
15:13
<hsivonen>
ok. I guess the playing field looks different when they own the tollbooth :-)
15:15
<MikeSmith>
there's now an open-source Webkit-based browser UI based on Qt port of Webkit
15:15
<MikeSmith>
Arora
15:15
<MikeSmith>
http://code.google.com/p/arora/
15:16
<MikeSmith>
(not that this has anything to do with the Java, applets Swing, etc. discussion)
15:16
<MikeSmith>
just with wxWidgets
15:16
<MikeSmith>
(there's also a wxWidgets port of WebKit)
15:20
Philip`
thought about embedding WebKit in his program (an OpenGL-based game), but then realised that'd be stupid because there seems to be no existing support for rendering into OpenGL and seemingly no decent cross-platform port :-(
15:22
<MikeSmith>
Philip`: Qt is cross-platform and have some kind of build-in OpenGL support
15:27
<Philip`>
MikeSmith: I assume you mean support for rendering GL content into a panel on a Qt window? That doesn't seem to be a problem - the difficulty is rendering the WebKit view (no external GUI, but probably buttons and scrollbars and stuff) onto an OpenGL surface, so it can be drawn onto the game's fullscreen window
15:27
<MikeSmith>
ah
15:28
<Philip`>
(and hooking it into the game's mouse/keyboard event system, etc)
15:28
MikeSmith
re-reads what Philip` actually said before
15:35
<zcorpan>
it appears that the processing rules of aria have changed so now it's again undefined what "whitespace" is for instance
16:59
<gDashiva>
Here's the magic line: A JSON parser MAY accept non-JSON forms or extensions.
16:59
<gsnedders>
Yay!
17:00
<smedero>
huh.
17:00
<gDashiva>
But: A JSON generator produces JSON text. The resulting text MUST strictly conform to the JSON grammar.
17:00
<Philip`>
That's just Postel's Law
17:01
<gDashiva>
Sure, but it throws out probably over 90% of all json implementations
19:02
<sidda>
This is a question regarding data framing in the WebSockets protocol. The protocol draft says the contents of the DataFrame should be UTF8 encoded. Can 2 strings (each null terminated) be sent in one dataframe?
19:03
<sidda>
Also, can one large string straddle across 2 dataframes?
19:06
gsnedders
finally bothers to write docs
19:29
gsnedders
should probably copy the CSS stylesheet and not just hotlink the WHATWG copy :P
19:52
<Lachy>
http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2008/07/23/any-element-linking-demo/
20:47
<Hixie>
hsivonen: open source != non-proprietary. q.v. xul.
20:52
<gavin_>
xul isn't proprietary in the common sense of the word
20:52
<gavin_>
(as in, it isn't "exclusively owned")
21:05
<hsivonen>
XUL is single-implementation technology, though
21:06
<gavin_>
yes
21:06
<mpt>
XCF is open source and proprietary
21:09
<hsivonen>
If bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22942 is any indication, pleople are wedding intranet apps with XUL
21:09
<Hixie>
gavin: xul is exclusively owned by mozilla
21:09
<hsivonen>
s/pleople/people/
21:09
<Hixie>
gavin: i'm not in any way saying this is inappropriate or bad
21:09
<Hixie>
gavin: it's perfectly reasonable for groups to invent technologies that they use for their own purposes
21:11
<gavin_>
I'm not arguing because I think it being "proprietary" is bad
21:11
<gavin_>
I'm arguing because I think it's innaccurate :)
21:12
<gavin_>
but I suppose that definition of proprietary is pretty common
21:12
<gavin_>
not sure what "owned by mozilla" means
21:13
<gavin_>
if IE implemented it would they have 50% ownership?
21:13
<hsivonen>
I try to use "product-specific" instead of proprietary when referring to Inkscape cruft to avoid debates about the opensourciness of Inkscape
21:14
<Hixie>
gavin: if IE implemented it, and implemented it slightly differently, would mozilla have any interest whatsoever in converging on what IE did? (i'm guessing no.)
21:14
<gavin_>
well now we're getting into pretty crazy "ifs"
21:14
<Hixie>
that's my point
21:14
<Hixie>
:-)
21:15
<gavin_>
mozilla does want to converge on an interoperable xul-like box model
21:16
<Hixie>
a technology is "proprietary", imho, if the group that defines it is more concerned about its own needs and the needs of its users than about the needs of all competing implementations and their users
21:16
<Hixie>
yes, the flexbox stuff isn't proprietary
21:17
<gavin_>
ok
21:17
<hsivonen>
I think XUL box model together with HTML5 would be Good fo the Web
21:17
<Hixie>
yes
21:17
<gavin_>
that seems like a weird definition of "proprietary"
21:17
<gavin_>
but I won't argue that it doesn't apply to XUL
21:17
<Hixie>
wikipedia says "A proprietary format is a file format which is covered by a patent or copyright which is intended to give the license holder exclusive control of the technology to the (current or future) exclusion of others"
21:18
<Hixie>
which imho is basically saying the same thing
21:19
<Hixie>
but if someone has a better word i'm all for using that
21:19
<gavin_>
if other people started implementing xul and promoting it's use on the web, mozilla would certainly want to encourage interoperability
21:19
<gavin_>
but that's not where we are
21:19
<gavin_>
(and arguably that isn't a very good plan)
21:20
<hsivonen>
We should have some Venn diagrams and theory about the feature set overlap of Gecko, WebKit and Opera and when stuff becomes part of the open Web platform
21:20
<gavin_>
I mean, there's no reason why we would care about more than just our users if only our users are using it :)
21:24
<hsivonen>
Hixie: there are at least 3 independent open-souce implementations of Java.
21:25
<hsivonen>
Hixie: what would ti take for <applet> not ot be considered an integration poit for proprietary technology?
21:25
<Hixie>
sure, just like there's an open source implementation (or two!) of Win32 and an open source implementation of .NET
21:25
<Hixie>
doesn't make it an open standard
21:25
<Hixie>
it would take Sun giving up control over the language
21:25
<hsivonen>
ok
21:25
<Hixie>
and turning it over to an actual open standards committee that wasn't beholden to their interests
21:26
<Hixie>
ODF and OOXML are other examples of "standards" that are still effectively proprietary
21:27
<hsivonen>
personally, I'd prefer to see the language frozen at 5, cutting down the "standard library" and letting innovation happen in open-souce libs that aren't part of the "standard" java platform
21:30
<Hixie>
takkaria: did you implement the commented out svg stuff in hubbub? or am i misremembering
21:31
<Hixie>
hsivonen: there are plenty of things that are interesting in newer versions of java (i don't know if this is <=5 or >5), like generics, lambdas, etc
21:31
<Hixie>
hard to do those in libraries
21:33
<hsivonen>
Hixie: generics are 5
21:34
<hsivonen>
Hixie: as I understand it, lamdbas aren't in a release version of Java
21:34
<hsivonen>
(the idea seems a bit like lipstick on a pig in the case of java)
21:36
<Hixie>
could have sworn they'd been added to the standard
21:36
Hixie
shrugs
21:36
<Hixie>
i don't know java
21:37
<Hixie>
i just like watching the java talks we have at work because they're given by really good presentators :-)
21:38
<jcranmer>
Hixie: lambdas aren't in Java
21:38
<jcranmer>
you're referring to closures, I'm guessing
21:39
<jcranmer>
most of the interesting stuff is in 5
21:39
<Hixie>
closures were another feature that was added later, yes
21:39
<Hixie>
maybe lambdas got cut
21:39
<jcranmer>
it's not added yet
21:39
<Hixie>
ah ok
21:39
<Hixie>
well like i said, i don't know jack shit about java, so i'll shut up now :-)
21:40
<jcranmer>
I oppose closures personally for various reasons, most notably because "too much syntax and too much catering to corner cases for too little benefit"
21:40
<jcranmer>
someone referred to making "return" and "return;" do *entirely* different things
21:41
<jcranmer>
fortunately, the closures people are still fighting over the some of the more egregious additions
21:54
<sidda>
Hixie: This is a question regarding data framing in the WebSockets protocol. The protocol draft says the contents of the DataFrame should be UTF8 encoded. Can 2 strings (each null terminated) be sent in one dataframe? Also, can one large string straddle across 2 dataframes?
21:55
<Hixie>
a dataframe defines a single string. A string can contain NULLs. You can't straddle two dataframes because then they would be two strings.
21:58
<sidda>
Thanks Hixie
22:00
<sidda>
Wait, if String can contain a null, then existing decoders would stop at that null right. So, NULL can only occur in the end correct?
22:03
<Hixie>
why would a decoder stop at null?
22:20
<roc>
I think XUL is proprietary, in that control over its evolution is governed by Mozilla alone
22:21
<roc>
but it's better than other similar proprietary technologies by being based as much as possible on open standards (DOM, CSS, etc)
22:22
<Hixie>
xul was just used as an example -- the original debate was over whether java was proprietary now that it "is open source"
22:22
<roc>
and hopefully eventually all its functionality will be supported in open standards and then it can go away (remaining in Mozilla products as a compatibility layer only) and we can all breathe a sigh of relief
22:22
<roc>
oh
22:22
<roc>
Java's not proprietary
22:23
<roc>
stakeholders other than Sun have significant input into its evolution
22:23
<jcranmer>
like Google
22:23
<roc>
that's one
22:23
<jcranmer>
IBM
22:23
<roc>
another
22:23
<jcranmer>
I'd have to look at the JSPs to know others off the top of my head
22:24
<jcranmer>
I think Apple has some say as well
22:25
<jcranmer>
I'd quite likely say that Java is less proprietary than XUL
22:27
<Hixie>
it's certainly billed that way, yes.
22:28
<roc>
maybe Sun has undue influence. It's a question of degree
22:28
<roc>
ostensibly C# is governed by an ISO committee but in practice all decisions are made by Microsoft
22:29
<jcranmer>
WP has at least 16 JVM impls
22:29
<Hixie>
and win32 and .NET have multiple implementations too
22:29
<Hixie>
as has flash
22:30
<jcranmer>
GCJ, Sun's JVM, and IBM's are three major implementations
22:30
<Hixie>
i don't think anyone is arguing java doesn't have multiple implementations :-)
22:30
<roc>
the situation with Java is a bit better since people take implementations other than Sun's seriously
22:31
<jcranmer>
right
22:31
<jcranmer>
I've seen code that checks for at least three or four different JVM versions
22:35
<jcranmer>
so I'd claim it's not quite under the category of "propiterary"
22:36
<jcranmer>
even if I spelled that right
22:37
<gsnedders>
proprietary
22:50
<hdh>
Philip`: webkit in OpenGL http://www.atoker.com/blog/2008/06/12/webkit-meta-a-new-standard-for-in-game-web-content/
23:16
<Philip`>
hdh: Oh, nice, that sounds like what I was looking for
23:17
<Philip`>
I guess I didn't see it because it didn't exist when I looked :-)
23:17
<Philip`>
although it looks like it doesn't yet exist in a downloadable form :-(
23:19
<roc>
Philip`: what exactly do you need?
23:22
<Philip`>
roc: Something to render the in-game GUI of a 3D OpenGL RTS game
23:23
<Philip`>
(and to handle scripted interaction, respond to user input, etc)
23:24
<Philip`>
(and to work on Windows/Linux/OSX, and to be open source but not GPL, etc)
23:24
<Philip`>
(Also the scripting has to be JavaScript, to be consistent with the rest of the game's scripts)
23:25
<Philip`>
(I don't need to base it on HTML, but it'd seem kind of nice if I could)
23:26
<roc>
for some reason I thought you worked on Opera
23:26
<roc>
Alp's thing does sound like what you want
23:27
<Philip`>
All I do with Opera is use it and find bugs in it :-)
23:28
<Philip`>
and then usually complain about the bugs, because I've got nothing better to complain about
23:29
<wilhelm>
Much appreciated. (c;
23:30
<roc>
looks OK to me
23:30
<roc>
sorry wrong channel
23:43
<virtuelv>
hm
23:43
<virtuelv>
http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2008/07/the-death-of-go.html
23:45
<roc>
we can only hope
23:46
<Philip`>
Hmm, the URL made me think someone had patented Go and was going to prevent anyone from playing it
23:47
<jcranmer>
woah, the PTO is proposing making software patents unpatentable?
23:48
<roc>
no
23:48
<jcranmer>
530 comments on /. in 7.5 hrs
23:48
<jcranmer>
roc: ?
23:48
<roc>
the PTO is still saying that software is patentable, but this person is saying recent PTO rules are incompatible with that
23:48
<roc>
note that the blogger there is a very pro-software-patents person
23:49
<jcranmer>
"the PTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences has now supplied an answer to that question: A general purpose computer is not a particular machine, and thus innovative software processes are unpatentable if they are tied only to a general purpose computer."
23:49
<jcranmer>
roc: I noted that
23:49
<roc>
it's written not to make nerds happy but to make patent attourneys unhappy
23:49
<jcranmer>
it's made nerds happy, though
23:50
<roc>
my brother says that his analysis is reasonable but that nothing will change in practice until courts have to rule on the issues, and that will override the PTO's decisions anyway
23:50
<roc>
(my brother is a patent attourney)
23:50
<jcranmer>
well, I am against software patents on the basis that mathematical algorithms should not be patented and software is essentially a mathematical algorithm
23:51
<jcranmer>
cf. LZW
23:53
<zcorpan>
jcranmer: why shouldn't mathematical algorithms be patented?
23:53
<jcranmer>
zcorpan: why should they be?
23:53
<jcranmer>
besides, mathematical algorithms are expressly unpatentable under US patent law
23:54
<zcorpan>
jcranmer: dunno, a lot of things are patented and i don't know why they should be
23:54
<zcorpan>
jcranmer: ok
23:55
<Hixie>
software patents would be ok if it wasn't for two things, one, their insane lifetime in an industry that moves as fast as IT, and two, patent troll companies that aren't actually using the patents, just preventing other people from using them
23:55
<jcranmer>
well, the basic idea IMHO is that software is better protected by copyright
23:55
<Hixie>
i'd feel much better about patents if the people suing were actually using patents for what they're intended, making money on the basis of a temporary monopoly
23:56
<jcranmer>
if I had to write patent law over again, I would include a stipulation that if the company actually isn't provably acting on its patent, its patent becomes invalid
23:56
<Hixie>
right
23:57
<Hixie>
patents shouldn't be licensable either, inventing something and then making money by making other people pay you if they come up with the same idea is just not the point of the invention
23:57
<jcranmer>
but even the patentability of sofware is questionable, IMO
23:57
<jcranmer>
Hixie: I disagree about the licensability
23:58
<jcranmer>
if I come up with a process to (hypothetically speaking, of course) turn water into oil, but I don't have the resources to actually make the machine that does that
23:59
<jcranmer>
I should be able to ask other companies if they would like to use the technology themselves for a fee
23:59
<Hixie>
if you came up with a process to turn water into oil, finding vc funding would be the LAST of your problems
23:59
<Hixie>
you'd be turning DOWN vc funding
23:59
<gavin_>
heh
23:59
<jcranmer>
bad example then
23:59
<Hixie>
:-)
23:59
<jcranmer>
but you get the gist
23:59
<Hixie>
if you came up with an algorithm to compress moving pictures slightly better
23:59
<roc>
there's another thing, which is that in software we've got this great possibility for people can create products and give them away for zero marginal cost, and patents can destroy that