00:32
<BenMillard>
krijn, I've refined and added to my IRC log ideas: http://projectcerbera.com/!dev/irc-logs/
00:33
<BenMillard>
krijn, I've only tested those demos in Firefox 2, but I can do cross-browser testing if you like
00:35
<BenMillard>
krijn, the "day" demo is not finished...I plan to make status messages more consistent with normal message and identify them using class to avoid lots of string checking in the JS
00:58
<billyjackass>
hsivonen: thanks for pointer regarding date/time microsyntaxes
02:49
<Hixie>
hsivonen: if you have questions re mutation events that you can't determine an answer to, let me know and i'll give you an answer for now -- but in general i'm blocked on mutation events and svg getting their specs fixed to be more clearly defined
02:53
<ajnewbold>
this html5, it's lucious
03:03
<Hixie>
i am not familiar with that word
03:03
<Hixie>
unless you're referring to the stargate character
03:06
<ajnewbold>
hmm, well, it helps if you spell it correctly
03:06
<billyjackass>
ludicrous?
03:06
<ajnewbold>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/luscious
03:07
<Hixie>
aah, luscious
03:07
<Hixie>
glad you think so :-)
03:08
<ajnewbold>
:)
03:50
<ajnewbold>
erm, I don't understand this error. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fneatnik.net%2F&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&ss=1&group=0&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.606#line-6
03:50
<ajnewbold>
I'm not providing any attributes on <body>, so either I'm overlooking something simple or the validator's having a bad day
05:47
MikeSmith
finds himself wishing he had the equivalent of a JS minifier for dealing with messages from certain recent posters to the whatg list
08:17
Hixie
sets up his network so that the neighbour's machine that keeps trying to do bittorrents has all HTTP traffic redirected to a simple page that tells the guy that his torrenting is bottlenecking the connection
08:18
<Hixie>
(i am also running a program that kills any non-port-80 tcp/ip traffic from that host)
08:33
<jwalden>
why not just set up wpa?
08:39
<Hixie>
i want an open network
08:39
<Hixie>
i use open networks all over the place
08:39
<Hixie>
i feel i should give back
08:39
<Hixie>
wpa also makes it a pain to connect the devices to the network (like the wii, the ipod, the ps3) and makes it harder for guests to connect
08:40
<jwalden>
suit yourself :-)
09:24
<zcorpan>
ajnewbold: http://html5.validator.nu/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fneatnik.net%2F gives no errors so it has to be something they screwed up in the integration
11:50
<hsivonen>
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/html5-gecko-build/
11:57
<Lachy>
hsivonen, cool. I'll try it out later
12:12
<jgraham>
hsivonen: Cool
12:12
jgraham
wishes he had a convenient way to try it out
13:11
<rubys>
hsivonen: ping?
13:18
<annevk3>
congrats hsivonen!
13:54
<tthorsen>
looks like livedom.validator.nu does not like the following markup: <!DOCTYPE html><html><head></br>
15:13
<zcorpan>
http://parsetree.validator.nu/?parser=html5&content=%3C%21DOCTYPE+html%3E%3Chtml%3E%3Chead%3E%3C%2Fbr%3E&submit=Print+Tree
15:15
<zcorpan>
hsivonen: ^ doesn't give expected result
15:40
<rubys>
annevk3: http://intertwingly.net/blog/2008/12/03/HTML5-in-Gecko?#c1228319123
15:42
<annevk3>
rubys, since we do not implement SVG or MathML inside text/html there is no such thing as a "foreign element" for Opera
15:43
<annevk3>
rubys, just like in <div><foo><bar/></foo></div> <bar/> is not actually self-closed per HTML5
15:49
<annevk3>
rubys, also, yeah, WebKit does it incorrectly afaict
15:50
<zcorpan>
annevk3: </foo> should close the bar, though, shouldn't it?
15:51
<annevk3>
yeah
15:51
<annevk3>
not the best example
15:51
<zcorpan>
annevk3: how is it not a good example? sam has <svg><circle></svg>
15:52
<zcorpan>
we put everything after </svg> in the circle element
15:52
<annevk3>
oh really?
15:52
<zcorpan>
afaict
15:52
<annevk3>
mea culpa
15:58
<rubys>
it is a pity that HTML5 doesn't treat non-recognized HTML elements as foreign.
16:00
<rubys>
actually, isn't the spec ambiguous? <p> is an allowed HTML element. <math> is an element from the MathML namespace. What does this make <svg>?
16:00
<annevk3>
it's a pity we're stuck with HTML :)
16:00
<annevk3>
<svg> is currently not allowed
16:01
<rubys>
ok, so it is not normal, and not foreign, and not RCDATA, and not CDATA, and not Void. Is it a sixth kind of element?
16:02
<zcorpan>
rubys: i guess the secion you're reading only deals with elements that are allowed in html5
16:02
<annevk3>
the syntax and language are intertwined
16:02
<zcorpan>
section
16:03
<rubys>
so, what does the spec say about how to handle <foo/>?
16:03
<zcorpan>
rubys: in the parsing section it would go under "Any other start-tag token" or what it says
16:49
<zcorpan>
aha... PFWG's approach to get past CR is to remove 'must's from the spec
16:49
<zcorpan>
that's interesting
16:49
<zcorpan>
(actually a whole conformance class)
16:54
<jgraham>
I didn't think they had any MUSTs to begin with...
16:55
<zcorpan>
they had some
16:58
<jgraham>
Oh well
17:00
<jgraham>
I guess eventually they will have none at all any any behaviour will be considered both conforming and therefore accesible
19:31
<gsnedders>
ECMA has no semantic index of standards
19:35
<gsnedders>
Nor does the ISO
19:36
<jcranmer>
IETF?
19:36
<jcranmer>
ANSI?
19:38
<gsnedders>
jcranmer: IETF does of RFCs, dunno about other docs
19:38
<gsnedders>
s/docs/series/
19:38
<gsnedders>
And ANSI I don't really care about :)
19:38
<jcranmer>
IANA?
19:38
<jcranmer>
ICANN?
19:39
<gsnedders>
how often do people want to reference them? :)
19:39
<jcranmer>
IANA protocol registries are actually fairly useful
19:39
<jcranmer>
for example, MIME content types
19:39
<jcranmer>
official extensions for protocols with extensioning mechanisms
19:39
<jcranmer>
default TCP ports
19:40
<gsnedders>
To my knowledge not really
19:41
<gsnedders>
(have an index)
19:41
<jcranmer>
IANA has a master list, alphabetacized by protocol name that I usually just Ctrl-F
19:41
<gsnedders>
jcranmer: That isn't very semantic though
19:41
<gsnedders>
jcranmer: And can't be easily scrapped
19:42
<gsnedders>
(well, it can be easily scrapped, but not in a generic way)
19:42
<jcranmer>
I know it has a master list, I was wondering if it had a semantic one
19:42
<gsnedders>
It doesn't
19:42
<jcranmer>
:-(
19:42
<gsnedders>
RFCs and W3C TRs are all that do of major tech. publications as far as I can see
19:43
<jcranmer>
you know what sucks... just how much one has to search to get around documentation
19:43
<jcranmer>
trying to navigate to the DOM or CSS specs from www.w3.org is a bit frustrating
19:43
<gsnedders>
Just guess that it is w3.org/TR/CSS/ :P
19:44
<jcranmer>
I normally stick with CSS21
19:44
<gsnedders>
I just guess shortname
19:44
<gsnedders>
*the shortname
19:44
<jcranmer>
some of the DOM specs are annoying
19:44
<gsnedders>
Yeah, they are.
19:44
<jcranmer>
even worse is trying to get to the Windows SDK reference from msdn.microsoft.com
19:45
<jcranmer>
you pretty much have to either search or be psychic
21:45
<gsnedders>
Philip`: Where should we meet up on Monday?
21:59
<yecril71>
A valid URL with a valid fragment identifier constitutes a broken link only if the resource referenced cannot be found.
22:00
<yecril71>
Referring to a fragment identifier that is not defined in the resource does not make it broken.
22:01
<yecril71>
href="#foo bar" does not match id="foo%20bar" but you can have it vice versa.
22:02
<yecril71>
That is because an identifier is not an URL and it is not subject to decoding.
22:04
<yecril71>
An identifier containing spaces makes the document invalid, and the document
22:04
<yecril71>
validator should behave accordingly.
22:05
<yecril71>
A disconnected subtree need not be a whole document.
22:06
<yecril71>
I do not believe DOM Core should ever reinvent what a subtree is.
22:09
<yecril71>
Since the identifier is guaranteed to be the same in the document and in a disconnected subtree, there is really no room for any ambiguity.
22:11
<yecril71>
The DOM mechanisms and the CSS mechanisms, if the latter are ever defined for scripting, have different purposes.
22:11
<yecril71>
I do not think a full consistency is required here; otherwise one of them seems to be redundant.
22:32
<Philip`>
gsnedders: I don't have any especially good ideas on novel locations
22:47
<gsnedders>
Philip`: Should we say the same as before, then?
22:54
<Philip`>
gsnedders: I suppose that would be reasonable
22:55
<Philip`>
gsnedders: I hope you'll be on IRC on Monday to remind me :-)