| 02:24 | Lachy | updates HTML authoring guide. Now that I'm using anolis to generate it, I've begun converting the document itself to use HTML5 |
| 03:33 | <Lachy> | http://www.themaninblue.com/experiment/JS-909/ |
| 09:33 | <Hish> | Hixie: ping |
| 09:38 | <Hixie> | Hish: vaguely here |
| 09:41 | <Hish> | short question regarding representing a spreadsheet in html5: currently I display a cell like this: <td><div>(html content)</div></td>. Regarding formula cells I consider doing something like this: <td><output>(html content)</output></td>. Does this make sense? |
| 09:42 | <Hixie> | why the <div>? |
| 09:42 | <Hixie> | <output> makes sense there if you are serialising the spreadsheet, sure |
| 09:43 | <Hixie> | you could even use <input> everywhere else and use onforminput="" to do form value recalculation |
| 09:43 | <Hixie> | in html5 |
| 09:44 | <Hish> | the div because I want to be able to rotate cell content using CSS SVG transform. |
| 09:44 | <Hish> | for both, inout and output I need to display rich text html content. so value attributes don't work here |
| 09:45 | <annevk3> | <td contenteditable> |
| 09:46 | <Hixie> | k |
| 09:46 | <Hish> | annevk3: sure. that's what I use instead of input or textarea elements. |
| 09:47 | <hsivonen> | Hish: <output> makes sense if its value is computed from from controls and this is declared for future AT or is a plain string set using .value. otherwise, there's no point in using it |
| 09:49 | <Hixie> | or if you want to style calculated fields specially |
| 09:49 | <Hish> | hsivonen: the nice part about output is the "for" tag which allows me to track dependencies very easily. The only missing part is a definition for ranges. I try to avoid listing all cells ID rather than just list a start and end offset within the "for" tag |
| 09:49 | <Hixie> | but that's about it |
| 09:52 | <Hish> | ok. seems that I'll try the output approach. thx for your help. |
| 09:59 | <hsivonen> | I now have a build of Minefield with an HTML5 parser that works on some pages but fails to start layout if there's document.write |
| 10:19 | <hsivonen> | is the initial containing block for HTML documents 'html' or 'body'? |
| 10:23 | Lachy_ | wonders if Thanksgiving is the reason for the sudden drop in traffic on public-html. If so, I'm thankful for that :-) |
| 10:24 | <krijn> | zcorpan: would setting the cookie again on each request solve that? |
| 10:24 | <hsivonen> | if one calls document.open() on a document hosted by an iframe, should the open() call zap the children of the document or should the first document.write() zap them? |
| 10:27 | <hsivonen> | hmm. the spec says open() zaps the children |
| 10:32 | <hsivonen> | Gecko's document.open impl doesn't conform |
| 10:36 | <ap> | hsivonen: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=325352 ? |
| 10:38 | <hsivonen> | ap: yes. thanks. |
| 10:40 | <hsivonen> | the comments in the source say that the old root element is put back there in order to avoid confusing scrollbars |
| 10:49 | <krijn> | krijn: Test |
| 11:01 | <zcorpan> | krijn: dunno |
| 11:04 | <zcorpan> | krijn: do you use whois for the logs? or a hard-coded list of names? |
| 11:04 | <krijn> | For the nicknames you mean? |
| 11:04 | <krijn> | A hard-coded list |
| 11:04 | <zcorpan> | what's up with the spacing? |
| 11:04 | <krijn> | I've only got 71 nicknames listed |
| 11:05 | <krijn> | Spacing? |
| 11:05 | <zcorpan> | each line seems to have 1em bottom padding or so |
| 11:05 | <krijn> | Not anymore |
| 11:05 | <krijn> | When I take of the </li>'s |
| 11:05 | <zcorpan> | ah |
| 11:06 | <krijn> | Probably because of white-space: pre-wrap |
| 11:09 | <zcorpan> | krijn: what regexp do you use for linkification? |
| 11:10 | <krijn> | You don't want to know :) |
| 11:19 | <zcorpan> | actually i do, that's why i asked :) |
| 11:26 | <pergj> | Is there any spec that defines the allowed range of an integer length? CSS 2.1 does not appear to do that. |
| 11:26 | <pergj> | I guess a signed 32 bit value should be sufficient? |
| 11:27 | <jmb> | I believe that's implementation defined |
| 11:28 | <pergj> | problem is that some pages set position for instance to -200000 to be absolutely sure that something does not appear on the screen. |
| 11:28 | <pergj> | So if you have only 16 bits......... |
| 11:28 | <jmb> | uhuh |
| 11:28 | <jmb> | so clamp that to INT_MIN |
| 11:29 | <pergj> | would work most of the time. But what if a script does fancy arithmetics to get it back again. |
| 11:29 | <krijn> | zcorpan: test |
| 11:29 | <krijn> | http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ - new feature! :) |
| 11:29 | <jmb> | pergj: good question. badness, I guess :) |
| 11:30 | <jmb> | I'd be interested to know if anyone actually does that, though |
| 11:31 | <krijn> | BenMillard: hope this is handy for you |
| 11:32 | <zcorpan> | krijn: nice |
| 11:37 | <krijn> | Almost time for Google Ads now :) |
| 12:21 | MikeSmith | wonders of tthorsen is around and if he perhaps knows anything about CE-HTML or Web4CE |
| 12:24 | <tthorsen> | I'm around, but I hadn't heard of CE-HTML until now |
| 12:26 | <MikeSmith> | tthorsen: OK. was just asking because it relates to embedded browsers for certain kinds of devices |
| 12:27 | <MikeSmith> | wondering what browsers actually support it |
| 12:27 | <MikeSmith> | the spec's unfortunately no freely available |
| 12:27 | <MikeSmith> | have to pay 210 USD for the privilege of reading it |
| 12:28 | <tthorsen> | what kind of devices? If it's a real subset of normal internet standards, then I guess all browsers support it |
| 12:28 | <MikeSmith> | it's not a subset -- it adds new elements and new browser/scripting APIs |
| 12:28 | <MikeSmith> | as far as what devices, I think stuff like set-top boxes |
| 12:28 | <MikeSmith> | and other home electronics |
| 12:29 | <MikeSmith> | not so much mobile, as far as I can tell |
| 12:29 | <Philip`> | It sounded like it was a non-web thing, and wasn't expected to interoperate with any other content or other browsers |
| 12:30 | <MikeSmith> | well, some of the new markup and APIs it introduces seems to possibly overlap with parts of HTML5 |
| 12:30 | <jmb> | MikeSmith: certainly, ANT and Oregan's markets are largely STBs, so that sounds reasonable |
| 12:30 | <MikeSmith> | e.g., I think video API |
| 12:30 | <MikeSmith> | jmb: OK |
| 12:30 | <MikeSmith> | I don't know much about ANT |
| 12:30 | <MikeSmith> | I don't know much about the set-top box market |
| 12:31 | <tthorsen> | so, for 210 USD I'm allowed to implement a browser for which I have to create all the content myself? |
| 12:31 | <MikeSmith> | heh |
| 12:31 | <MikeSmith> | pretty much, i guess |
| 12:31 | <tthorsen> | I can write up such a spec for half the price -- just let me know :-) |
| 12:32 | <Lachy_> | tthorsen, wow, you must be really cheap if you can write a spec for just $105 worth of work. That's barely 2 or 3 days worth on even a low salary |
| 12:33 | <MikeSmith> | I wasn't even aware that the Consumer Electronics Association was a standards-development org |
| 12:33 | <MikeSmith> | but it apparently they produce a truckload of them |
| 12:33 | <MikeSmith> | http://www.ce.org/Standards/2502.asp |
| 12:33 | <MikeSmith> | mostly hardware stuff |
| 12:34 | <MikeSmith> | but I guess they have decided to venture forth into producing standards for Web technologies |
| 12:34 | <Lachy_> | it does seem a little silly to make an HTML profile and charge money to give access to the spec, when vendors can access the full HTML spec freely, as well as content authors |
| 12:35 | <MikeSmith> | Lachy_: well, it's not a profile. it seems to introduce a number of new elements and browser APIs |
| 12:35 | <Lachy> | what documentation have you found that says it introduces new features? |
| 12:36 | <Philip`> | MikeSmith: They probably aren't producing standards for web technologies - they're standards for their particular markets, which happen to reuse web technologies because that gives them a solid base (of specs and browsers and tools and knowledge etc) to build on |
| 12:37 | <MikeSmith> | Lachy: peruseth thou that PDFs linked to from http://www.ce.org/Standards/browseByCommittee_2757.asp |
| 12:37 | <Lachy> | Philip`, that sounds like the kind of argument that led to the development of nonsense like WAP and the HTML mobile profile |
| 12:37 | <Philip`> | Lachy: http://www.ce.org/Standards/CEA-2014-A_Preview.pdf - the XHTML profile is 10 pages out of ~167 |
| 12:37 | <Lachy> | *XHTML mobile profile |
| 12:37 | <tthorsen> | If they're introducing new features, the success of this spec does depend on whether someone will bother to implement these features in a browser. |
| 12:39 | <MikeSmith> | Philip`: I guess that some of what they're adding might be generalized, or generally useful |
| 12:39 | <MikeSmith> | not saying that is, just that it might be |
| 12:39 | <MikeSmith> | and would be disappointing if they were reinventing wheels that are better built in other places |
| 12:40 | <tthorsen> | Could be they have some good ideas, but if they aren't merged into html5 I bet they will all be forgotten in a few years time. |
| 12:40 | <Philip`> | MikeSmith: I guess it's hard to tell if we're too cheap to buy a copy of the spec and they're not willing to tell us what their features are |
| 12:40 | <Philip`> | s/ if/, if/ |
| 12:43 | <Lachy> | apparently Opera is a member of CEA http://www.ce.org/Membership/Directory/default.aspx?alpha1=o |
| 12:43 | <MikeSmith> | I wonder if I buy a copy of the spec and write a comparison or overview of the markup and API extensions, would that count as a violation of the license... |
| 12:43 | <tthorsen> | I don't think this is a matter of us being cheap -- I think it's a matter of them being crazy for charging money for stuff they should be begging implementors to implement. |
| 12:43 | <MikeSmith> | Lachy: cool, I didn't know Opera made loudspeakers also |
| 12:44 | <Lachy> | what? |
| 12:44 | <MikeSmith> | just a joke |
| 12:44 | <MikeSmith> | "Opera Loudspeakers/Unison Research" listed there too |
| 12:45 | <Lachy> | oh |
| 12:45 | <MikeSmith> | notable that ACCESS isn't a member |
| 12:48 | tthorsen | wonders what the advantages to being a member are |
| 12:49 | <tthorsen> | other than being able to brag about it, of course |
| 12:49 | <MikeSmith> | tthorsen: you get a 20% discount off the price of anything they publish :)~ |
| 12:49 | <tthorsen> | awesome |
| 12:53 | <pergj> | so, apparently, only one Browser vendor is into this market |
| 12:54 | <Lachy> | pergj, Microsoft is also a member |
| 12:55 | <Lachy> | and Apple |
| 12:55 | <Lachy> | so that's 3 browser vendors |
| 12:57 | <Lachy> | MikeSmith, you could contact CEA and ask them if there is any overlap between their work on CE-HTML and HTML5, and whether it's worth getting them to work with us on HTML5 |
| 12:58 | <MikeSmith> | Lachy: yeah, I would like to get in touch with some of the people who have actually participated in the work, or even those who edited the spec. I'm working on it |
| 12:58 | <Lachy> | ok |
| 13:06 | <hsivonen> | what's ANT's product like? |
| 13:06 | <jmb> | never seen it |
| 13:10 | <MikeSmith> | hmm, didn't know that ANT actually made their own browser |
| 13:10 | <MikeSmith> | http://www.antlimited.com/ant_galio_browser.asp?menu=153 |
| 13:10 | <MikeSmith> | interesting bullet point: "Remote Event Support (HTML 5)" |
| 13:13 | <MikeSmith> | http://oregan.net/tv_web_browser_and_ui.php also maybe worth perusing |
| 13:14 | <MikeSmith> | ..or maybe not |
| 13:15 | <MikeSmith> | not a lot of details there |
| 15:43 | <mookid> | err... |
| 15:43 | <mookid> | I missed the RTF drama cos I ignored the thread |
| 15:43 | <mookid> | epic. |
| 15:51 | <Philip`> | RTF? |
| 15:53 | <mookid> | fielding |
| 15:53 | <mookid> | it's interesting because I honestly had no idea that was going on |
| 15:53 | <mookid> | infact I can't even find the thread in my mailbox for some reason |
| 15:54 | <Philip`> | Ah |
| 15:54 | <mookid> | but it's interesting that he gets the same amount of pissed off I do at idiots who seem to have this jihad against architecture |
| 15:54 | <Philip`> | The one in public-html? |
| 15:54 | <mookid> | oh it's a different one to the one I'm on? |
| 15:54 | <mookid> | Am I on some beardy one then? |
| 15:54 | <mookid> | shiiiiiit I fked that up |
| 15:55 | <mookid> | maybe I'll forward all of that thread to the right list then.. |
| 15:55 | <mookid> | :D |
| 15:55 | <mookid> | I'm not suprised most of whatwg didn't have a clue what I was getting at |
| 15:55 | <mookid> | there's even guys on rest-discuss who dont get it |
| 15:55 | <takkaria> | hmm, mozilla's bugzilla instance looks different from a few weeks ago |
| 15:55 | <Philip`> | public-html is the W3C's HTML WG list |
| 15:55 | <mookid> | ahhh I see ok |
| 15:56 | <mookid> | I might post to that list then |
| 15:56 | <mookid> | :D |
| 15:56 | <Philip`> | It's largely the same group of people as the WHATWG |
| 15:56 | <mookid> | yeah i know but I can mop the floor with some of you dummies mroe publicy |
| 15:56 | <Philip`> | and if you didn't convince the relevant parties on the WHATWG, you probably won't convince the same people with the same arguments on a different list |
| 15:57 | <Philip`> | s/on the WHATWG/on the WHATWG list/ |
| 15:57 | <mookid> | apart from the fact that most of the people on that list have demonstrated a complete lack of understanding |
| 15:57 | <mookid> | evidenced by the fact that they make counter-points which I've already covered in previous posts |
| 15:57 | <MikeSmith> | mookid: you're not allowed to use the word "architecture" here, nor "namespaces". unless you put cursewords in front of them. or otherwise heap abuse on them in some way. and you're allowed to use "extensibility" but not if you put "decentralized" or "distributed" in front of it |
| 15:57 | <mookid> | it's this rediculous thing where small minded people who've got used to a certain way of looking at things |
| 15:57 | <mookid> | are incapable of changing their perspective |
| 15:57 | <mookid> | so they attack you as 'wrong' |
| 15:58 | <mookid> | and 'misunderstanding' 'how it works in practice' |
| 15:58 | <Philip`> | mookid: That may be because people don't read all the previous posts, which is unhelpful but probably inevitable given the volume of mail that is often generated |
| 15:58 | MikeSmith | plays "Oh god, please don't let me be misunderstood" for mookid |
| 15:58 | <MikeSmith> | mookid: are you a Morrisey fan? |
| 15:59 | <Dashiva> | So did anything change, or is it still appeal to architecture/authority? |
| 15:59 | <mookid> | are you deliberately coming across as a simpleton or is that unintentional? |
| 15:59 | <mookid> | I guess working on some irrelevant numpty spec is your best way to look important to non-techies |
| 15:59 | <mookid> | no offence. |
| 16:00 | <mookid> | offense |
| 16:00 | <MikeSmith> | what's numpty? |
| 16:00 | <mookid> | mentally challenged |
| 16:00 | <mookid> | but hey - who cares about this silly billy 'architecture' stuff - We've got VIDEO TAGS |
| 16:00 | <MikeSmith> | I'm mentally "differently abled" |
| 16:00 | <Dashiva> | Well, if HTML5 is irrelevant, surely you can just ignore us |
| 16:01 | <mookid> | you 'architects' can get lost with your solutions to problems that are already solved - we're gonna work on VIDEO TAGS |
| 16:01 | <mookid> | bwahahahaha. |
| 16:01 | <takkaria> | at some point I think you stepped from being someone who has a point and is trying to get other people to believe it into being a rude and offensive troll |
| 16:01 | <mookid> | it's hard to take you people seriously when the best you can do is attack my position as a developer |
| 16:02 | <mookid> | as 'cloud 9' or whatever retarded nonsense you use to describe it |
| 16:02 | <mookid> | it's cloud 9 to you because its above you, most likely |
| 16:02 | <mookid> | which would explain why you cant see any value in it |
| 16:02 | <mookid> | because you dont understand it |
| 16:02 | <mookid> | but I'm sure beigna code monkey is really mind bending Neo-from-the-matrix style stuff |
| 16:03 | <MikeSmith> | mookid: you clearly seem to have something against retarded people. and nonsense |
| 16:03 | <mookid> | not retarded people |
| 16:03 | <mookid> | retarded nonsense |
| 16:03 | <MikeSmith> | ah |
| 16:03 | <MikeSmith> | that clears things up |
| 16:03 | <mookid> | look it up |
| 16:04 | <MikeSmith> | you got anything against plain nonsense, or is it just retarded nonsense in particular? |
| 16:04 | <mookid> | both - you tick both boxes so you're a full house |
| 16:05 | MikeSmith | tries to pat himself on the back but finds that he lacks the proper motor skills |
| 16:05 | <mookid> | It's nonsensical politics like this that is dragged up because your fear caused by lack of understanding drags everything down |
| 16:05 | <mookid> | every time I had a conversation on here |
| 16:05 | <mookid> | broke it down |
| 16:05 | <mookid> | line by line |
| 16:06 | <mookid> | someone goes afk |
| 16:06 | <mookid> | never comes back |
| 16:06 | <mookid> | apart from Philip` who was honest enough to find it worth considering |
| 16:07 | <MikeSmith> | mookid: sorry, I got to go afk for a while |
| 16:07 | <MikeSmith> | bbiab |
| 16:07 | <mookid> | when people look back through these logs in 40 years time |
| 16:07 | <mookid> | you'll be the bad guy with his head up his arse |
| 16:07 | <mookid> | :) |
| 16:08 | <MikeSmith> | I feel sorry for anybody who looks back through these logs in 40 years time |
| 16:08 | <takkaria> | lolwut |
| 16:08 | <Dashiva> | They should just read the lastweek archives instead |
| 16:08 | <MikeSmith> | and I'm already the bad guy with his head up his arse. ask anybody. we don't need to wait 40 years for people to agree about that. |
| 16:09 | <Dashiva> | MikeSmith: I don't agree! |
| 16:09 | <Dashiva> | You're the guy who takes beer breaks |
| 16:09 | <Philip`> | Dashiva: They're not just beer any more |
| 16:09 | <mookid> | Crack aswell no doubt |
| 16:10 | <Dashiva> | It's interesting to see that @accept got the exact same response on rest-discuss |
| 16:12 | <mookid> | they'll look through these logs to try and work out how anyone could possibly be so incompetant as to not get Hypertext working with the protocol |
| 16:12 | <Philip`> | Dashiva: Was there less sarcasm on there? |
| 16:12 | <mookid> | that takes high levels of stupidity it really does |
| 16:12 | <mookid> | 'oh well HTML is used in emails' |
| 16:12 | <mookid> | 'and in help documents' |
| 16:14 | <mookid> | just the most ridiculous exchange I've had - and the stubborness of that kind of small mindedness astonishes me |
| 16:14 | <Dashiva> | Philip`: Less sarcasm, more technical beatdown |
| 16:15 | <mookid> | Dashiva: actually, it didn't - it got that response from abuot 4 people who clearly dont understand the implications or what I'm getting at |
| 16:15 | <mookid> | one of the first responses basically said |
| 16:15 | <mookid> | "your looking for the right solution but yuo need to take into account all of HTTP conneg" |
| 16:15 | <mookid> | "WHATWG are a lost cause, but your intentions are noble" |
| 16:16 | <mookid> | then the idiots chimed in with their regurgitated scripture they think they understand |
| 16:16 | <mookid> | if you notice.. no one with any calibre has told me to stand down |
| 16:16 | <Dashiva> | There we go with the authority again |
| 16:17 | <mookid> | well presumably smoeone with some weight would step in and put an end to it if I didnt have a point |
| 16:17 | <mookid> | here we go with the little man's lament: everyone's equal |
| 16:17 | <mookid> | the world can be fair |
| 16:17 | <mookid> | no it can't. |
| 16:17 | <mookid> | some people are good at some stuff and bad at other stuff |
| 16:17 | <mookid> | that's life |
| 16:18 | <mookid> | HTML guys are good at doing dirty work no one else does |
| 16:18 | <Dashiva> | And you're good at alienating everyone who doesn't agree with you |
| 16:18 | <mookid> | well what exactly do you expect |
| 16:18 | <mookid> | I've had no constructive exchange with any of you other than Philip` |
| 16:19 | <mookid> | just arguing in circles ignoring previous posts |
| 16:19 | Philip` | doesn't remember being constructive |
| 16:19 | <mookid> | liar. |
| 16:19 | <mookid> | asking good questions is constructive |
| 16:19 | <mookid> | :P |
| 16:20 | <mookid> | the problem here is that URI's have been totally raped for such a long time |
| 16:20 | <mookid> | that all the UA's and stuff arent geared up to use HTTP properly |
| 16:20 | <mookid> | and so you guys wont budge |
| 16:20 | <mookid> | because you cant see any other alternative |
| 16:20 | <mookid> | even though, realistically, the markup is going to have to be the thing that moves first |
| 16:21 | <mookid> | and I'm providing a way to make that move without disturbing the old URI-based way of doing it |
| 16:21 | <mookid> | you *still* resist it on the basis that "the costs to the internet will be too high - we much protect netizens" |
| 16:22 | <mookid> | when I talked with Hix about it it basically came down to that |
| 16:22 | <mookid> | "I dont see it that way, and if we allow developers to do things differently it could make some stuff not work very well. It is my job to protect the internet" |
| 16:23 | <mookid> | and whilst that is incredibly amusing |
| 16:23 | <mookid> | it's also epically stupid |
| 16:23 | <mookid> | it's a markup language. |
| 16:23 | <mookid> | cmon. |
| 16:23 | <mookid> | I know it's nice for everyone to feel important and it helps the work get done but seriously |
| 16:23 | <Dashiva> | When one of your use cases is "I want to host images with .htm extensions", then yes, protection is in order |
| 16:23 | <mookid> | let's no kid ourselves here |
| 16:23 | <mookid> | er |
| 16:24 | <mookid> | what? |
| 16:24 | <mookid> | that's not an extension anyway that's just a URI pattern |
| 16:24 | <mookid> | and I'm saying the opposite |
| 16:24 | <mookid> | when you put a '.' in a URI |
| 16:25 | <mookid> | that doesnt actually mean anything |
| 16:25 | <Dashiva> | People are used to working with files. They are used to extensions having meaning. So while your abstract view may ignore it, .htm does suggest it's a HTML document |
| 16:25 | <mookid> | URIs are not file paths |
| 16:25 | <mookid> | I dont care what people are used to |
| 16:25 | <mookid> | I care what the web can be |
| 16:25 | <mookid> | and how the web can (and will eventually) work |
| 16:25 | <mookid> | ok ok |
| 16:25 | <mookid> | just read this please |
| 16:25 | <mookid> | MY PROPOSAL |
| 16:26 | <mookid> | DOES NOT STOP YOU |
| 16:26 | <mookid> | FROM DOING THINGS |
| 16:26 | <mookid> | THE SAME WAY |
| 16:26 | <mookid> | IT JUST ALLOWS ME |
| 16:26 | <mookid> | TO DO IT MAY WAY |
| 16:26 | <mookid> | ASWELL |
| 16:26 | <mookid> | get it? |
| 16:26 | <Dashiva> | And your way is redundant, while being confusing in addition |
| 16:26 | <mookid> | it's not redundant and it's not confusing |
| 16:27 | <mookid> | URI based conneg is confusing if the developers an idiot |
| 16:27 | <mookid> | there's nothign sotpping me from setting up /index.html and serving an executable |
| 16:27 | <Dashiva> | There is one thing: Common sense |
| 16:27 | <mookid> | what the hell would yuo know abuot that? |
| 16:27 | <Philip`> | Common sense? On the internet? You can't be serious |
| 16:28 | <mookid> | Common sense would tell me that people need to learn what URI's actually mean |
| 16:28 | <mookid> | and how HTTP works |
| 16:28 | <mookid> | and that all applications talk HTTP |
| 16:28 | <mookid> | and that you dont need to go throgh a browser to use HTTP |
| 16:28 | <mookid> | but you dont understand that |
| 16:28 | <mookid> | so you think I'm wrong |
| 16:28 | <Dashiva> | Right, so you push a huge burden on everyone in the world, just so you can have your attribute |
| 16:28 | <mookid> | FOR MY APP |
| 16:28 | <mookid> | AS A DEVELOPER |
| 16:28 | <mookid> | THAT IS MY CHOICE |
| 16:28 | <mookid> | ITS MY APPLICATION |
| 16:29 | <mookid> | if I want to use HTTP properly |
| 16:29 | <mookid> | why should I not be able to just because idiots like you dont |
| 16:29 | <Dashiva> | hsivonen, you could teach mookid about externalities? |
| 16:29 | <mookid> | I know more abuot economics and market forces than you do |
| 16:30 | <Dashiva> | Then you should apply that knowledge |
| 16:30 | <mookid> | I have. |
| 16:30 | <mookid> | let the market decide |
| 16:30 | <mookid> | allow both |
| 16:30 | <mookid> | see which applications survive |
| 16:30 | <Philip`> | Currently the market is deciding to not implement the feature you want |
| 16:30 | <Dashiva> | And the marked decides it doesn't want to waste resources implementing something that already works |
| 16:30 | <mookid> | because the idiots in control of the markup dont allow it |
| 16:30 | <mookid> | not because it's not possible |
| 16:30 | <mookid> | that's a governance problem |
| 16:30 | <Dashiva> | Go make your own browser then |
| 16:31 | <mookid> | government inefficiencies taking effect |
| 16:31 | <mookid> | WHATWG is the bush admiinistration of teh web |
| 16:31 | <mookid> | "dont worry world you are free (to do as we tell you)" |
| 16:31 | <Philip`> | Browser developers do loads of things that the "[people] in control of the markup" don't allow, if they think it's a worthwhile thing to add to their browser |
| 16:31 | <mookid> | here's have some freedom |
| 16:31 | <hsivonen> | Dashiva: I'm not going to teach Econ 101 right now, but I can suggest Wikipedia |
| 16:32 | <mookid> | Philip`: that's not really a fair argument since there's very little incentive to attempt that if it isn't backed by standards |
| 16:32 | <Dashiva> | eh? |
| 16:32 | <mookid> | particularly something like this which is 'already achievable' but just in an inferior way |
| 16:32 | <mookid> | so you have to explain to peopel who dont understand you |
| 16:32 | <mookid> | why it's really great |
| 16:32 | <mookid> | and that's hard |
| 16:32 | <Dashiva> | "very little incentive to attempt that if it isn't backed by standards" <-- Is this referring to the real world? |
| 16:32 | <mookid> | where as if everyone just accepted HTTP conneg existed |
| 16:33 | <mookid> | and it would be great to allow browsers to actually make decent use of it |
| 16:33 | <mookid> | we could let developers decide |
| 16:33 | Philip` | discovers that Trac now has blame support, and is happy |
| 16:33 | <mookid> | it's such a simple mechanism to implement anyway |
| 16:33 | <mookid> | browsers already have accept headers |
| 16:33 | <mookid> | one optional attribute.. |
| 16:33 | <Dashiva> | Browsers negotiate on their own behalf, not yours |
| 16:33 | <mookid> | your an idiot |
| 16:34 | <Dashiva> | If you want to force a request to accept only X, you make a separate URL that only provides X |
| 16:34 | <Dashiva> | Problem solved |
| 16:34 | <mookid> | jesus fucking christ |
| 16:34 | <mookid> | give me strength |
| 16:34 | <hsivonen> | mookid: are you Mike from http://mykanjo.co.uk/ ? |
| 16:34 | <mookid> | no |
| 16:36 | <hsivonen> | mookid: oh. what's your From address in the email thread you referred to? |
| 16:36 | <mookid> | wow yuo caught me |
| 16:36 | <mookid> | well done inspector |
| 16:36 | <mookid> | why ask the question then |
| 16:37 | <hsivonen> | I just wanted to make sure I connect the right email and IRC names |
| 16:37 | <mookid> | why? |
| 16:38 | <mookid> | Dashiva: if you think what you just said is a valid point then you really dont have a clue what I'm saying |
| 16:38 | <hsivonen> | mookid: connecting the names helps me follow discussion |
| 16:38 | <Dashiva> | It's not what you're saying, it's the consequences of what you're proposing |
| 16:39 | <mookid> | hsivonen: you dont discuss anything you just leap in if you think yuo can be pedantic about something |
| 16:39 | <mookid> | Dashiva: and what would those be exactly? |
| 16:39 | <mookid> | that there would be 2 different, co-existing solutions to a problem |
| 16:40 | <Dashiva> | That there would be added work for anyone implementing HTML5 |
| 16:40 | <mookid> | no sht |
| 16:40 | <mookid> | It's more important than bloody video tags |
| 16:41 | <Dashiva> | Video provides something that's not already supported. (Flash is not native video, before you try to say it.) |
| 16:41 | <mookid> | but.. I can have flash in a page |
| 16:41 | <mookid> | video works already |
| 16:41 | <mookid> | problem solved |
| 16:41 | <mookid> | right? |
| 16:41 | <mookid> | :) |
| 16:42 | <Dashiva> | No, that's not native video |
| 16:42 | <mookid> | so? |
| 16:42 | <mookid> | it still works |
| 16:42 | <mookid> | youtube's not done too badly |
| 16:42 | <Dashiva> | We don't want the web to be dependent on proprietary technology, y'know |
| 16:42 | <mookid> | ? |
| 16:42 | <mookid> | so I can't write my own youtube? |
| 16:43 | <mookid> | I think I probably can and you're talking out of where your poo poo comes from |
| 16:43 | <Philip`> | mookid: Flash doesn't work on all platforms, and you presumably have to pay Adobe if you want them to port it to yours, which is a problem |
| 16:44 | <mookid> | errr.. |
| 16:44 | <mookid> | I'm not even going to bother carrying this on it's so obvious how conflicting these 2 approaches are |
| 16:44 | <Philip`> | (where "platforms" includes iPhones and Wiis and that kind of thing, which want to be able to access the web) |
| 16:44 | <mookid> | we dont need video tags. |
| 16:44 | <mookid> | video works |
| 16:45 | <mookid> | you're doing aload of work for something that no one really needs |
| 16:45 | <mookid> | according to your logic at least |
| 16:45 | <mookid> | because it already works |
| 16:45 | <mookid> | there already are methods for providing video |
| 16:47 | <mookid> | they work perfectly well |
| 16:47 | <mookid> | no improvement for end users |
| 16:47 | <mookid> | not substantial ones anyway |
| 16:47 | <Philip`> | Those existing methods have significant practical problems (cost, non-portability, dependence on a particular company, etc), which are sufficient to make at least three major browser developers quite eager to implement it |
| 16:48 | <mookid> | ooooooh |
| 16:48 | <mookid> | the browser develoeprs |
| 16:48 | <mookid> | gee |
| 16:48 | <mookid> | they've done a real good job so far |
| 16:48 | <mookid> | what with CSS and everything |
| 16:49 | <mookid> | I'm sure that won't turn out to be another 5 year long mess of inconsistency and mud slinging |
| 16:49 | <Philip`> | It doesn't matter how good a job they've done - what matters is that they decide what they're going to implement (and so they decide what features users will have access to, and what problems authors will have to put up with, etc) |
| 16:49 | <mookid> | video works. |
| 16:49 | <gsnedders> | mookid: You realize browsers are going to implement such things regardless of whether there's a spec or not? |
| 16:49 | <mookid> | it's works fine |
| 16:49 | <mookid> | right.. but browsers have INVESTED interest |
| 16:49 | <mookid> | in making everyone thing |
| 16:49 | Philip` | disagrees that video works fine, since he can't actually see any of it in his main browser, because the Flash plugin is broken and keeps crashing |
| 16:49 | <mookid> | think |
| 16:49 | <gsnedders> | mookid: There will be even more inconsistency if we rely on everything reverse-engineering everything else. |
| 16:50 | <mookid> | that you ned to go through a browser |
| 16:50 | <mookid> | to suse HTTP |
| 16:50 | <mookid> | use^ |
| 16:50 | <gsnedders> | mookid: The way to get the most consistency is to write a spec. |
| 16:50 | <mookid> | why the hell should I have to click a link that opens up a link to a pdf and then opens that after being downloaded from the browser in acrobat? |
| 16:51 | <mookid> | that's so stupid it's unreal |
| 16:51 | <mookid> | why not just.. open it in acrobat.. |
| 16:51 | <mookid> | DUN DUN DUUUUUH! |
| 16:51 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Security? PDF is scriptable. |
| 16:51 | <mookid> | security |
| 16:52 | <mookid> | seriously? |
| 16:52 | <mookid> | what do you know about security |
| 16:52 | <mookid> | explain the difference in security between those two procedures |
| 16:52 | <mookid> | infact |
| 16:52 | <gsnedders> | mookid: One relies upon specific user interaction, the other does not |
| 16:52 | <mookid> | er.. right. |
| 16:52 | <gsnedders> | mookid: (to actually open it as well as naviagting to it) |
| 16:53 | <gsnedders> | mookid: it is quite easily possible to fool users into navigating to things |
| 16:53 | <mookid> | why the hell should I use a browser to get to a pdf dcument though? |
| 16:53 | <gsnedders> | mookid: What makes you? |
| 16:53 | <mookid> | er.. |
| 16:53 | <mookid> | well the use case I'm being given is |
| 16:53 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Nothing stops you from using another HTML parser to get the URL of the PDF and using some other application to download it |
| 16:53 | <mookid> | someone sends me an email |
| 16:53 | <mookid> | to a URI |
| 16:53 | <mookid> | unless the pdf is explicitly in the URI |
| 16:54 | <mookid> | if I click it it will only get me the html |
| 16:54 | <gsnedders> | mookid: So you want your email client to make an HTTP request to see what sort of file it is? |
| 16:54 | <mookid> | see what content types are available yeah |
| 16:54 | <mookid> | content negotiation |
| 16:54 | <mookid> | it's genius. |
| 16:55 | <mookid> | resources + representations |
| 16:55 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Sure, but the resources should be identical. What difference does it make? |
| 16:55 | <gsnedders> | (in terms of content) |
| 16:55 | <mookid> | well nothing other than just representation |
| 16:55 | <mookid> | that's how it should be |
| 16:55 | <mookid> | that's why they're at the same URI |
| 16:55 | <gsnedders> | So why does it matter? |
| 16:55 | <gsnedders> | I don't get this. |
| 16:55 | <mookid> | what? |
| 16:55 | <gsnedders> | Why does it matter you get HTML and not the PDF? |
| 16:56 | <mookid> | if the resources are the *same* they should be indentified by the same resource identifier |
| 16:56 | <mookid> | not two seperate ones |
| 16:56 | <mookid> | because the only difference is the representation |
| 16:56 | gsnedders | still doesn't get the problem here |
| 16:56 | <mookid> | which HTTP provides a way to negotiate |
| 16:56 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Yeah, sure. Where's the disagreement? |
| 16:56 | <mookid> | well if I have /report serving html and pdf |
| 16:57 | <mookid> | and I want to link to it in my HTML application |
| 16:57 | <mookid> | a browser will only ever be able to get hold of the HTML |
| 16:57 | <mookid> | I cant make a link to the pdf |
| 16:57 | <mookid> | there's no way of overriding the accept header |
| 16:57 | <mookid> | so HTTP content negotiaition doesnt work |
| 16:57 | <gsnedders> | Linking to the PDF is avoiding the entire point of the content-negotiation. The entire point of the content negotiation is to get a copy that the current HTTP client understands. |
| 16:58 | <gsnedders> | How do you know the HTTP client will understand what you put in the accept header? |
| 16:58 | <mookid> | no |
| 16:58 | <mookid> | it's not just UA |
| 16:58 | <mookid> | read the RFC |
| 16:58 | <mookid> | it's UA and user preference |
| 16:58 | <gsnedders> | I'm well aware of what the RFC says. |
| 16:58 | <gsnedders> | This isn't UA preference. |
| 16:58 | <mookid> | well clearly you arent |
| 16:58 | <gsnedders> | This is the server preference. |
| 16:58 | <mookid> | no it's USER preference |
| 16:58 | <gsnedders> | You want server preference. |
| 16:58 | <gsnedders> | This isn't the user making a choice. |
| 16:59 | <mookid> | that's the user preference.. they dont have to click that link do they? |
| 16:59 | <gsnedders> | No, but how do they get the version they would be sent with their normal accept header then? |
| 16:59 | <gsnedders> | They have already specified their preference in their normal accept header. |
| 17:00 | <gsnedders> | Why do you want to provide a UI to change it within the link itself? |
| 17:00 | <mookid> | well that link should only be a link to one representation |
| 17:00 | <mookid> | just that one link |
| 17:00 | <mookid> | for that one request |
| 17:00 | <mookid> | I could provide the standard link and the pdf link next to each other |
| 17:00 | <gsnedders> | What you want is a means for a user to choose a different file format preference for one request. That shouldn't be done _in the link_. |
| 17:00 | <mookid> | one with no @accept set and the with pdf type specified |
| 17:01 | <mookid> | it IS done in the link |
| 17:01 | <mookid> | even if it's in the URI |
| 17:01 | <mookid> | it's still IN THE LINK |
| 17:01 | <mookid> | it's just SHOEHORNED server control |
| 17:01 | <mookid> | so you can feel ok abuot it |
| 17:01 | <mookid> | that criticism doesnt make any sense at all |
| 17:02 | <mookid> | your alternative is to have a link to report.pdf.. what is that if it's not server specified and 'in the link' ? |
| 17:02 | <gsnedders> | If the user wants to override their ready made preference about preferred formats, they should do it within their HTTP client. We don't need to extend RFC26616's section on HTTP urls to do this at all |
| 17:02 | <mookid> | That's not an extension it's completely within the bounds of it |
| 17:03 | <gsnedders> | Where do you want the override of the accept header to be specified? |
| 17:03 | <mookid> | in the markup of the link.. |
| 17:03 | Philip` | didn't know they had written that many RFCs yet |
| 17:03 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Then you've only solved your problem for HTML, and not for anything like PDF. |
| 17:04 | <mookid> | because BROWSERS |
| 17:04 | <mookid> | HTML BROWSERS |
| 17:04 | <mookid> | are a special case |
| 17:04 | <mookid> | I've already explained this |
| 17:04 | <gsnedders> | WHY!? |
| 17:04 | <mookid> | THEY ACCEPT */* |
| 17:04 | <gsnedders> | So? |
| 17:04 | <mookid> | NAME ANOTHER UA THAT IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO DO THAT |
| 17:04 | <Dashiva> | wget |
| 17:04 | <gsnedders> | curl, wget, GET? |
| 17:04 | <mookid> | er... |
| 17:04 | <mookid> | they all have configurable accept headers |
| 17:04 | <mookid> | good point though. |
| 17:04 | <gsnedders> | so do some browsers. |
| 17:04 | <mookid> | no they dont |
| 17:05 | <mookid> | not in the context of an application |
| 17:05 | <mookid> | it needs to be dynamic |
| 17:05 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Then that is an issue for their UI, not for HTML. |
| 17:05 | <mookid> | because I could have 3 links all next to each other to /report one for deafult, one specifically for xml and one for pdf |
| 17:05 | <mookid> | what? |
| 17:05 | <mookid> | Hyper text |
| 17:05 | <mookid> | markup |
| 17:06 | <mookid> | if yuo're marking up the hyper text |
| 17:06 | <mookid> | then surely it's a good idea to have hyper text actually able to hyper link properly |
| 17:06 | <mookid> | and content negotatiate over the transfer protocol |
| 17:06 | <gsnedders> | mookid: If the user wants to override their ready made choice about what format they prefer, they should make it within their UA. It should not be done from a link. |
| 17:07 | <gsnedders> | mookid: It should content negotiate and give it what the user prefers, and the user has already made their preference. |
| 17:07 | <mookid> | and they can.. but if a developer wants to be specific |
| 17:07 | <mookid> | the developer should eb able to be specific |
| 17:07 | <mookid> | for a given link |
| 17:07 | <mookid> | it's his/her link in his/her application |
| 17:07 | <Dashiva> | And all of this just because you don't want to make a URL |
| 17:07 | <mookid> | well the implication of doing things this way are far reaching |
| 17:08 | <mookid> | but I dont expect you to even begin to understand any of that |
| 17:08 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Then you have no content negotiation. You are requesting a specific format of a specific file. The accept header isn't for that. |
| 17:08 | <mookid> | what? |
| 17:08 | <mookid> | that's still content negotiation |
| 17:08 | <mookid> | do you know what content negotiation means? |
| 17:08 | <Dashiva> | content ultimatum |
| 17:08 | <gsnedders> | mookid: IT'S NOT THE USER'S CHOICE ANYMORE. |
| 17:08 | <mookid> | WHAT@:? |
| 17:08 | <mookid> | HOW IS IT THEIR CHOICE |
| 17:08 | <mookid> | IF YOU GIVE THEM FUCKING LINK |
| 17:08 | <krijn> | -_- |
| 17:08 | <mookid> | TO REPORT.PDF |
| 17:08 | <mookid> | YOU CRETIN |
| 17:08 | <mookid> | THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING |
| 17:09 | <mookid> | jesus |
| 17:09 | <gsnedders> | If you're going to start calling me a cretin, I'm leaving. There's no use in arguing this with you. |
| 17:09 | <mookid> | ohhhh |
| 17:09 | <mookid> | good move |
| 17:09 | <mookid> | probably for the best this is going badly for you |
| 17:09 | Dashiva | chuckles |
| 17:09 | <Dashiva> | Yeah gsnedders, you totally got schooled! :P |
| 17:10 | <Dashiva> | Now that I know I can win all debates by calling people cretins, nothing will stand in my way |
| 17:10 | <mookid> | well seriously I mean.. if you exspect me to just listen to you say that and not get irritated by yuor blatant lack of consideration for what you're actually saying |
| 17:10 | <mookid> | well go on |
| 17:11 | <mookid> | ignoring that I said cretin |
| 17:11 | <mookid> | want to respond? |
| 17:11 | <mookid> | no. becuase you cant |
| 17:11 | <gsnedders> | mookid: I'm not the one making ad hominem attacks. |
| 17:11 | <mookid> | well go on |
| 17:11 | <mookid> | be the bigger man |
| 17:11 | <mookid> | ignore it |
| 17:11 | <mookid> | and respond to what I actually sai |
| 17:11 | <mookid> | said |
| 17:11 | <mookid> | how is a link to /report.pdf giving the user a choice? |
| 17:11 | <gsnedders> | mookid: No, there is no point in arguing with people who revert to such attacks. You're ignoring everything I say. |
| 17:12 | <mookid> | no I'm processing it, understanding it, and then pointing out how you're apparently superior alternative has exactly the same 'problem' |
| 17:12 | <mookid> | so |
| 17:12 | <mookid> | how is a link to /report.pdf giving the user a choice? |
| 17:12 | <krijn> | "You can either open this, or not" |
| 17:12 | <mookid> | ^ |
| 17:12 | <Dashiva> | Because report.pdf also implies report.html |
| 17:13 | <mookid> | er |
| 17:13 | <mookid> | no it doesnt |
| 17:13 | <Dashiva> | Sure it does, otherwise you wouldn't need @accept on the link |
| 17:13 | <mookid> | er |
| 17:13 | <mookid> | lol |
| 17:14 | <mookid> | dont you think my way of just having /report is a *tiny bit* more clear on that? |
| 17:14 | <Dashiva> | No, it's less clear |
| 17:14 | <Dashiva> | Users can relate to .pdf and .html |
| 17:14 | <mookid> | how are they supposed to know they are the same resource/ |
| 17:14 | <Dashiva> | They don't need to |
| 17:14 | <mookid> | what happens if one part of my appication they are |
| 17:14 | <mookid> | what? |
| 17:14 | <mookid> | but this guy is saying |
| 17:15 | <Dashiva> | It's your job as a developer to not confuse the users |
| 17:15 | <mookid> | 'this link with the accept header specified is not giving the user the choice' |
| 17:15 | <mookid> | I'm saying |
| 17:15 | <mookid> | neither is a link to /report.pdf |
| 17:15 | <mookid> | because it's not |
| 17:15 | <gsnedders> | I am saying that control over the accept header lies with the UA and the user. Nothing on the server, or from the server, should have any control. That is all. |
| 17:15 | <mookid> | why? |
| 17:15 | <mookid> | when browsers accept all types anyway |
| 17:16 | <mookid> | and when the only alternative is to do it in the URI |
| 17:16 | <mookid> | in exactly the same 'controlling' 'choiceles' way |
| 17:16 | <krijn> | BenMillard: I took some of your ideas, not yet all |
| 17:16 | <gsnedders> | It isn't over ruling content negotiation doing it that way though, mookid |
| 17:16 | <mookid> | what? |
| 17:17 | <mookid> | putting .pdf in the URI if it's actually a representation |
| 17:17 | <mookid> | and not a seperate resource |
| 17:17 | <mookid> | *IS* content negotiation |
| 17:17 | <gsnedders> | if you request /report.pdf where only one resource exists you expect to get that resource. |
| 17:17 | <mookid> | it's URI-BASED CONTENT NEGOTIATION |
| 17:17 | <krijn> | And it's great! |
| 17:17 | <krijn> | Better than sliced bread |
| 17:17 | <mookid> | :) |
| 17:17 | <gsnedders> | if you request /report where both HTML and PDF exist, and you prefer HTML, you should get HTML. |
| 17:18 | <mookid> | yeah.. |
| 17:18 | <gsnedders> | if you want to make a request for a PDF version of /report, you shouldn't be using the /report URI. |
| 17:18 | <mookid> | what? |
| 17:18 | <Dashiva> | gsnedders: He's had that explained many times, it doesn't get through |
| 17:19 | <mookid> | it doesnt make sense |
| 17:19 | <gsnedders> | mookid: the /report URI gives what I prefer. I prefer HTML. Give me that when I request it. |
| 17:19 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Therefore, you can't use that URI if you want to give me a PDF. |
| 17:19 | <mookid> | NO |
| 17:19 | <mookid> | YOUR RIGHT |
| 17:19 | <mookid> | THATS WHAT THIS PROPOSAL IS FOR |
| 17:20 | <krijn> | lol |
| 17:20 | <mookid> | if it already worked |
| 17:20 | <mookid> | why would I be proposing something? |
| 17:20 | <mookid> | were you dorpped on your head as a child or something? |
| 17:20 | <Dashiva> | (It does work, if you aren't silly enough to insist on putting everything into a single URL) |
| 17:20 | <krijn> | Why is URI based conneg bad, but HTML based conneg good? |
| 17:20 | <mookid> | silly enough? |
| 17:20 | <mookid> | it's not HTML based conneg |
| 17:20 | <mookid> | it's HTTP based conneg |
| 17:20 | <gsnedders> | mookid: You don't want to use the same URI. I've already said I prefer HTML. I don't want something in an HTML page to overrule what I've said I prefer. |
| 17:20 | <krijn> | Ow, I thought you were still talking about accept="" |
| 17:21 | <krijn> | Or something |
| 17:21 | <gsnedders> | mookid: No, you're having HTML over rule HTTP conneg |
| 17:21 | <mookid> | I am but that's not the html doing it that's the html telling the browser to use HTTP |
| 17:21 | <mookid> | it's http conneg not html conneg |
| 17:21 | <mookid> | NO IM NOT |
| 17:21 | <gsnedders> | mookid: You're changing HTTP conneg via HTML. |
| 17:21 | <mookid> | I'm having html make use of HTTP |
| 17:21 | <krijn> | And how would you hand over that PDF version via IM? Or mail? |
| 17:22 | <krijn> | Exactly, using the URI |
| 17:22 | <mookid> | I'm changing the client request via html so it's appropriate for the request inidcated by the link - what th hell is wrong with that? |
| 17:22 | <Philip`> | krijn: We are still talking about accept="", I think :-) |
| 17:22 | <krijn> | Ow |
| 17:22 | <gsnedders> | mookid: You already can. With a different URI. What's wrong with that? |
| 17:22 | <mookid> | oh for fucks sake |
| 17:22 | <gsnedders> | mookid: You still won't solve the problem for IM or email? |
| 17:22 | <mookid> | I KNOW THAT |
| 17:22 | <mookid> | you think I dont know that? |
| 17:23 | <gsnedders> | mookid: How do you link directly to the PDF from IM? |
| 17:23 | <mookid> | you tell someone to open the URI in pdf viewer |
| 17:23 | <mookid> | why should a URI have to go through a brower? |
| 17:23 | <mookid> | browser |
| 17:23 | <Dashiva> | Actually, wouldn't your proposal entrench this practice and actively hurt people using IM and email |
| 17:23 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Then why can't you tell someone from your HTML page, "hey, open this URI in a pdf viewer"? |
| 17:23 | <gsnedders> | mookid: (if you want the PDF version and not the HTML one) |
| 17:24 | <mookid> | no because if the IM clients talk HTTP properly they can get a list of the content types and give the user a right click menu that lists all the UAs on their system they can open the URI with |
| 17:24 | <mookid> | there is |
| 17:24 | <mookid> | NO GOOD REASON |
| 17:24 | <mookid> | EVERY HTTP REQUEST |
| 17:24 | <mookid> | NEEDS TO GO |
| 17:24 | <mookid> | THROUGH AN HTML BROWSER |
| 17:24 | <gsnedders> | Who's arguing it does? |
| 17:24 | <Philip`> | How can an IM client get a list of available content types when it's given a URI? |
| 17:25 | <mookid> | options |
| 17:25 | <Dashiva> | And now we're updating all the IM clients in the world too |
| 17:26 | <Dashiva> | What else needs fixing? |
| 17:26 | <krijn> | I'm convinced. This is just brilliant. |
| 17:26 | <krijn> | Now let's go shopping. |
| 17:26 | <mookid> | if you want to continue doing it your URI-based way you can |
| 17:26 | <mookid> | and if I want to do it my way I can |
| 17:26 | <krijn> | Ow, darn |
| 17:26 | <mookid> | at the moment there's only your way |
| 17:26 | <mookid> | dont you think it would be better to start allowing applications to work that way? |
| 17:27 | <krijn> | No |
| 17:27 | <mookid> | and start using URIs as they were intended |
| 17:27 | <mookid> | ok well you're an idiot then |
| 17:27 | <gsnedders> | mookid: What makes you think they were intended that way? |
| 17:27 | <krijn> | (That's a fact btw) |
| 17:27 | <mookid> | UNIFORM |
| 17:27 | <mookid> | RESOURCE |
| 17:27 | <mookid> | IDENTIFIER |
| 17:27 | <mookid> | resources are nothing to do with representations |
| 17:27 | <mookid> | YEs |
| 17:27 | <mookid> | you can use them to do that |
| 17:27 | <mookid> | that's not how they were intended |
| 17:28 | <mookid> | that's like saying a news paper is a weapon |
| 17:28 | <Philip`> | mookid: Should browsers do the same kind of right click menu to let you see all the content types of a URI? |
| 17:28 | <krijn> | mookid: shouldn't you be telling browser vendors to do something about */* |
| 17:28 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Why should IM clients use OPTIONS and HTML UAs not? |
| 17:28 | <mookid> | Philip`: yes - but there are situations in an HTML applications where you would want to be specific |
| 17:28 | <mookid> | but yeah I take your point that would minimize it |
| 17:29 | gsnedders | was beat by Philip`, again :\ |
| 17:29 | <mookid> | krijn: no - that's the correct default they just GET pretty much any content |
| 17:30 | <mookid> | so if I give you example.com/somethinginteresting - your browser should just go there and be able to download it or view it or something |
| 17:30 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Why do you want to link to a representation of a resource using a URI? |
| 17:30 | <BenMillard> | Krijn, fast changes :) |
| 17:30 | <krijn> | :) |
| 17:30 | <mookid> | gsnedders: I dont |
| 17:30 | <gsnedders> | mookid: That seems backwards to me. |
| 17:30 | <mookid> | erm |
| 17:30 | <mookid> | LOL |
| 17:30 | <gsnedders> | mookid: That's exactly what you're trying to do. |
| 17:30 | <Dashiva> | mookid: If browsers can get all representations with options, couldn't the user just right-click and choose pdf himself? |
| 17:30 | <BenMillard> | Krijn, my name was already entered and the lines directed at me count is working, but the message telling me to enter my name is still present |
| 17:30 | <mookid> | no it's exactly the OPPOSITE |
| 17:30 | <mookid> | of what I'm doing |
| 17:31 | <mookid> | the representation of /report is pdf |
| 17:31 | <Philip`> | krijn: It's strange how sans-serif fonts make sites look much more modern :-) |
| 17:31 | <mookid> | putting the representation in the URI |
| 17:31 | <mookid> | is creating /report.pdf |
| 17:31 | <krijn> | BenMillard: doh, good point |
| 17:31 | <BenMillard> | Philip`, Verdana is teh pwn for digital screens. |
| 17:31 | <mookid> | Dashiva: yes but some applications have links that need to be to a specific representation |
| 17:32 | <gsnedders> | mookid: No, you want to get a specific representation by a URI. |
| 17:32 | <mookid> | negotiate |
| 17:32 | <mookid> | is the word you're looking for |
| 17:32 | <mookid> | :) |
| 17:32 | <gsnedders> | mookid: I've said what I want. I want HTML. |
| 17:32 | <mookid> | ? |
| 17:32 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Stop trying to force me to do something different. |
| 17:32 | <mookid> | idiot. |
| 17:32 | <mookid> | I'm not |
| 17:32 | <Philip`> | krijn: \ and " in the nickname field gets backslash-escaped |
| 17:32 | <mookid> | you can do what you are doing now |
| 17:32 | <mookid> | I just can't do it my way |
| 17:32 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Can you stop insulting people? |
| 17:33 | <Philip`> | krijn: and \" in the CSS fields gets unescaped |
| 17:33 | <gsnedders> | mookid: The answer would appear to be "No". |
| 17:33 | <mookid> | well it's frustrating.. you fail to give me a reason why I shouldn't be allowed to do it my way |
| 17:33 | <krijn> | Philip`: why would you want those in a nickname |
| 17:33 | <gsnedders> | mookid: I've given you plenty of reasons. |
| 17:33 | <mookid> | no you havent. |
| 17:33 | <Philip`> | krijn: I don't want those in a nickname, I just want to find bugs in your code ;-) |
| 17:33 | <krijn> | There are a lot |
| 17:33 | <mookid> | Philip`: has he given me any decent reasons? |
| 17:33 | <mookid> | cos I missed them |
| 17:34 | <BenMillard> | Krijn, I like how much narrower each channel is :) |
| 17:34 | <krijn> | Me too |
| 17:34 | <Philip`> | mookid: Probably, but I don't know since I was trying to not pay any attention |
| 17:34 | <BenMillard> | Krijn, if you allow any sensible separator in the "Nicknames" field, you could remove the note saying how to separate them |
| 17:34 | <mookid> | haha cop out :P |
| 17:35 | <BenMillard> | ;, | etc |
| 17:35 | <krijn> | It's in the title as well |
| 17:35 | <krijn> | Agreed |
| 17:35 | <Philip`> | I still want to know why live.com sends requests with random search keywords in the Referer |
| 17:36 | <Philip`> | (I've seen the same on my own sites, and it does appear to be live.com's crawlers sending those Referers) |
| 17:36 | <krijn> | Who googled for 'krijn html5'? :\ |
| 17:36 | <BenMillard> | Krijn, I also like how you use empty <td> instead of <td>0 |
| 17:36 | <krijn> | I don't want anything to do with this sinking ship! |
| 17:36 | <krijn> | (Trying to make Last Week again here) |
| 17:37 | <mookid> | this is a prime example of why your group is percieved with such contempt: |
| 17:37 | <mookid> | 17:33 < gsnedders> mookid: I've said what I want. I want HTML. |
| 17:38 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Well, I've specified in my UA what format I want it to get if possible when it makes an HTTP request. |
| 17:39 | <gsnedders> | mookid: I don't want any page to change my preference without my consent when my preferred choice is available. |
| 17:39 | <mookid> | your browsers preferences are */* |
| 17:39 | <mookid> | when it comes down to it |
| 17:39 | <mookid> | so.. |
| 17:40 | <gsnedders> | mookid: No, my preferences are given through quality values |
| 17:40 | <gsnedders> | mookid: The fact that I will accept anything is a different question. I've given a preference. |
| 17:40 | <BenMillard> | Henny Swan (Opera) on ActiveX in Google Chrome: http://www.iheni.com/dont-go-spoiling-the-party-google-chrome-to-support-activex-in-korea/ |
| 17:40 | <mookid> | so your browser doesn't have a */* in its default Accept header |
| 17:40 | <mookid> | ? |
| 17:40 | <gsnedders> | mookid: It does. |
| 17:40 | <mookid> | well then |
| 17:40 | <gsnedders> | mookid: But it prefers other MIME types. |
| 17:40 | <mookid> | uyeah... |
| 17:40 | <gsnedders> | mookid: I've sent a preference. The fact that I accept anything is irrelevant. |
| 17:41 | <gsnedders> | mookid: quality values exist for a reason. |
| 17:41 | <mookid> | what if a link in my application is to a sepcific representation (content type) of a resource |
| 17:41 | <mookid> | (URI) |
| 17:41 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Why do you want to override my preference? |
| 17:42 | <mookid> | well seen as though your preference includes everything |
| 17:42 | <mookid> | I think it's safe to override it in the markup |
| 17:42 | <gsnedders> | No, my preference doesn't. |
| 17:42 | <mookid> | yeah |
| 17:42 | <annevk3> | krijn, "Your nicknames" doesn't specify a format for entering multiple |
| 17:42 | <mookid> | YOUR PREFERENCE IS IRRELEVANT FOR THAT LINK |
| 17:42 | <gsnedders> | LOOK AT QUALITY VALUES. I HAVE A PREFERENCE. |
| 17:42 | <mookid> | ITS PART OF THE APPLICATION |
| 17:42 | <gsnedders> | mookid: No, it isn't. |
| 17:42 | <mookid> | HOW IS THAT ANY DIFFERENC |
| 17:42 | <mookid> | IF ITS IN THE URI |
| 17:42 | <krijn> | annevk3: check title="" |
| 17:42 | <mookid> | IF ITS IN THE URI ITS EXACTLY THE SAME 'PROBLEM' |
| 17:42 | <krijn> | That's what HTML5 says I should use :) |
| 17:42 | <gsnedders> | mookid: If I request a URI and it has the format I prefer, I REALLY WANT THAT FORMAT. |
| 17:43 | <mookid> | no you dont |
| 17:43 | <gsnedders> | mookid: If I request a URI and it doesn't have the format I prefer in it, THEN GIVE ME SOMETHING. |
| 17:43 | <BenMillard> | Krijn, if people use | in their names, I guess that can't be a seperator |
| 17:43 | <mookid> | you look at Accept header as fixed |
| 17:43 | <mookid> | it's not |
| 17:43 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Yes, I do want what I prefer. Honestly. |
| 17:43 | <mookid> | it's just a header |
| 17:43 | <krijn> | Nope, only , |
| 17:43 | <krijn> | Which is okay enough |
| 17:43 | <BenMillard> | krijn, ; as well? |
| 17:43 | <gsnedders> | mookid: It's not fixed. But I've said what I prefer already. Stop trying to make me change what I prefer. |
| 17:43 | <BenMillard> | krijn, space should be supported as a seperator, I think |
| 17:44 | <krijn> | BenMillard: there are literally 5 people using this ;) |
| 17:44 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Any changes should be made by an option in my UA, not by a link. |
| 17:44 | <BenMillard> | krijn, oh lol |
| 17:44 | <mookid> | gsnedders: I'm not changing what you prefer I'm telling you the appropriate preference for that request |
| 17:45 | <gsnedders> | mookid: You're telling me what you think the appropriate preference is for that request, so that I may reconsider my preference. |
| 17:45 | <gsnedders> | mookid: By having it as an attribute, it is likely that I will be forced you use what you think is the appropriate preference. |
| 17:45 | krijn | finds out about a new function.. http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20081128#l-949 |
| 17:45 | <krijn> | *feature |
| 17:46 | <BenMillard> | krijn, you'll get better alignment down each column by using td { align: right; } and th { text-align: center; } |
| 17:46 | <gsnedders> | mookid: Get some browser to implement what you want. Then we might look at it again. |
| 17:47 | <Philip`> | HTML needs a <shout> element, which is like <strong> but makes you think the author is getting too emotional |
| 17:47 | <krijn> | text-transform: uppercase; |
| 17:48 | <KrocCamen> | krijn: beat me to it :P |
| 17:48 | <Philip`> | krijn: But it's semantic, not stylistic |
| 17:48 | <KrocCamen> | or caps-lock: cruise-control; |
| 17:48 | <krijn> | Philip`: for the default stylesheet :) |
| 17:48 | <krijn> | voice: crybaby; |
| 17:48 | <Philip`> | krijn: I don't see the new feature there :-/ |
| 17:48 | <BenMillard> | Krijn, table rows are 16px tall but list items are 14px tall. Making them both 14px tall would be more consistent. |
| 17:49 | <annevk3> | http://mykanjo.co.uk/ toally fails in Opera |
| 17:49 | <hsivonen> | annevk3: it's all Flash |
| 17:49 | <annevk3> | that explains things |
| 17:50 | <Philip`> | krijn: Oh, yes I do, my browser had just cached a five hour old version which didn't have the last nine hundred lines of productive discussion |
| 17:50 | <krijn> | productive should be in <strong> there |
| 17:50 | <krijn> | annevk3: you're really missing something :) |
| 17:50 | <Philip`> | I think that's a use case for <sarcasm>, actually |
| 17:50 | <annevk3> | krijn, nice |
| 17:51 | <annevk3> | (the new irc-logs) |
| 17:53 | <BenMillard> | annevk3, glad they are proving popular (krijn took a subset of my ideas and figured out lots of other changes himself): http://projectcerbera.com/!dev/irc-logs/front |
| 17:53 | <Philip`> | gsnedders: Your problem could be satisfied if @accept accepted a q argument, and the 0-1 limit was removed, so people would write <a href=... accept=application/pdf;q=100.0> and you could change your UA preferences to have text/html;q=101.0 and then you'd get what you want |
| 17:53 | <gsnedders> | Philip`: Where are we meeting up, BTW? |
| 17:53 | <Philip`> | and if the author really wants you to still get the PDF, they can set q=1000.0, and if you really want the HTML then you can set q=1001.0 |
| 17:54 | <Philip`> | gsnedders: I have no idea, and I can't even remember when it's meant to be |
| 17:54 | <krijn> | Also truncated my referrer database a lot, which made it faster |
| 17:54 | <jmb> | Philip`: and thus have an arms race to UINT_MAX? :) |
| 17:54 | <Philip`> | jmb: Of course not, that'd be silly - use DBL_MAX |
| 17:54 | <jmb> | aha. my mistake |
| 17:56 | <gsnedders> | Philip`: 20081208T190000Z/PT5M |
| 17:57 | <Philip`> | gsnedders: Could you say that in English? |
| 17:57 | <krijn> | svl: wow, you too! ;) |
| 17:57 | <gsnedders> | Philip`: :) |
| 17:57 | <Philip`> | I'm too lazy to separate digits mentally :-p |
| 17:57 | <gsnedders> | Philip`: 2008-12-08T19:00:00Z/PT5M |
| 17:57 | <gsnedders> | :P |
| 17:57 | <Philip`> | gsnedders: Ah, good, so it's not today |
| 17:58 | <gsnedders> | Philip`: No, it's not. |
| 17:58 | <svl> | well, y'know, have to use it if I'm going to try to find ways to break it. ;P |
| 17:58 | <BenMillard> | Krijn, when an entire column would be empty, perhaps you could avoid generating that column? for example, #wai-aria and #webapps have no lines marked as important, so that column has nothing in it |
| 17:58 | <BenMillard> | oh, same for #css |
| 17:59 | <gsnedders> | What is some good styling for lines to/from you? |
| 17:59 | <gsnedders> | I wants suggestions! |
| 17:59 | <svl> | krijn: why isn't the number under ? linked to the first line in which you were addressed? |
| 17:59 | <krijn> | That's on my todo |
| 17:59 | <svl> | idem for ! I guess... |
| 17:59 | <BenMillard> | gsnedders, from me: background: #efe; |
| 17:59 | <krijn> | Yeh |
| 18:00 | <BenMillard> | gsnedders, at me (using CSS injection sneakyness): background: #eeeae0; } li.flagged { background: #bcc; } li:target { background: #bdd; } ol { font: 0.625em verdana, sans-serif; |
| 18:00 | <krijn> | Oh, so sneaky ;) |
| 18:00 | <Philip`> | gsnedders: Usually at that kind of time I will be located somewhere on the route between the CL and just-above-King's and around Midsummer Common, so anywhere on that route would be easiest for me :-) |
| 18:00 | <krijn> | Another proof of user stylesheets failing |
| 18:00 | <gsnedders> | Philip`: I'm staying in Memorial Court, FWIW |
| 18:01 | <BenMillard> | krijn, I have a similar user stylesheet for HTML5 (Verdana text, Rockwell headings, smaller text sizes, no vertical gaps between items in lists, etc) |
| 18:01 | gsnedders | waits for Philip` to ask where that is |
| 18:01 | <gsnedders> | BenMillard: That's uselessly light :) |
| 18:01 | <Philip`> | gsnedders: I asked Google where it was, and got a handy map :-p |
| 18:02 | <BenMillard> | gsnedders, on a laptop screen that may well be true. on this CRT it passes the "squint test" |
| 18:03 | <BenMillard> | gsnedders, maybe you'd prefer some WHATWG colours |
| 18:03 | <Philip`> | gsnedders: Looks like it's a place I've walked past pretty much every day for the past three years |
| 18:03 | Philip` | hadn't quite noticed it during that period |
| 18:03 | <gsnedders> | Philip`: :) |
| 18:03 | <krijn> | lol @ referrers |
| 18:03 | <BenMillard> | gsnedders, from me/to me using the bright green left border colour from the green boxes in HTML5: background: #9f9; |
| 18:04 | <gsnedders> | krijn: Wow, it says "Welcome back, Geoffrey." :D |
| 18:04 | <krijn> | It's magic! |
| 18:04 | <krijn> | Omg! |
| 18:04 | <gsnedders> | krijn: Database of IRC nicks to names? |
| 18:04 | <krijn> | Yeah |
| 18:04 | <BenMillard> | Krijn, vertical gaps have gotten even bigger. :( |
| 18:05 | <BenMillard> | krijn, numbers have been centered instead of right-aligned |
| 18:05 | <Philip`> | Hmph, your referers are boringly XSS-proof |
| 18:05 | <annevk3> | ah, an actual database |
| 18:05 | <annevk3> | I thought it just uppercased my first nick |
| 18:05 | <krijn> | Nah |
| 18:06 | <krijn> | Philip`: I know a tiny bit, thank you |
| 18:06 | <Philip`> | krijn: "It's now: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:14:15 +0100 (CET)" - oh no it's not |
| 18:06 | <BenMillard> | krijn, the addition of green for headings and heading-like text is nice, imho |
| 18:07 | <BenMillard> | Philip`, that seems a few minutes fast to me, too |
| 18:07 | <BenMillard> | but dude, why Arial? :( |
| 18:07 | <krijn> | Hrhr |
| 18:08 | <Philip`> | Hmm, I think broke view-source on the logs page in Opera |
| 18:09 | <BenMillard> | krijn, title="Number of lines flagged as important" seems unnecessarily verbose compared to title="Important lines" |
| 18:15 | <BenMillard> | krijn, th abbr { display: block; } makes it easier to put the mouse over shortened table headers |
| 18:21 | <krijn> | Fixed & fixed |
| 18:22 | <BenMillard> | Krijn, cool :) |
| 18:23 | <BenMillard> | what about vertical gaps? table rows are now 18px high (which seems far too much) when list items are 14px high |
| 18:23 | <krijn> | (And nicks are case sensitive btw :) |
| 18:23 | <BenMillard> | krijn, bah |
| 18:23 | <krijn> | Yeah |
| 18:24 | <krijn> | Fixed |
| 18:34 | <krijn> | Enough for today |
| 18:34 | <BenMillard> | krijn, thanks for all the updates! it's more usable and prettier than before |
| 18:35 | <krijn> | Np, I hope all 4 users like it ;) |
| 18:39 | <BenMillard> | krijn, do you have AWstats or Analog or some stats package running on the server? |
| 18:57 | <annevk3> | "Mr. Obama, however, seems intent on pulling the office at least partly into the 21st century on that score; aides said he hopes to have a laptop computer on his desk in the Oval Office, making him the first American president to do so." o_O |
| 18:57 | <annevk3> | http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/16/us/politics/16blackberry.html |
| 19:02 | <Philip`> | He'll just end up wasting all his time on IRC |
| 19:03 | <gavin> | it would be interesting to know more about how they will manage IT security |
| 19:03 | <gavin> | I bet some people aren't happy with the idea |
| 19:15 | <Philip`> | I would suppose the government already has some experience with needing IT security |
| 19:15 | <Philip`> | It's not exactly a unique new challenge |
| 19:17 | <gavin> | computers in the oval office is, I think |
| 19:18 | <gavin> | though presumably there are other computers in the white house that need to be just as secure, I guess |
| 19:18 | <Lachy> | what would be wrong with having a computer in the oval office? I assumed that would have been a fairly common thing for the president to have in there |
| 19:19 | <gavin> | apparently not! |
| 19:19 | <Dashiva> | The President has some rather extreme documentation requirements |
| 19:19 | <Dashiva> | And security on top of that |
| 19:20 | <Lachy> | so? Surely the president uses a computer at least some of the time. What difference would it make where it's located? |
| 19:21 | <Dashiva> | He's got vice presidents for that :) |
| 19:22 | <Philip`> | How does he upload his videos to Youtube if he doesn't have computer access? |
| 19:26 | <gavin> | Lachy: the oval office is one of a handful of places where highly secretive discussions are held |
| 19:26 | <gavin> | bringing any type of electronic device into such places is not something that's taken lightly |
| 19:27 | <gavin> | let alone a networked computer |
| 19:29 | <Lachy> | Philip`, I guess one of his staff does it for him |