| 00:03 | <Dashiva> | I'm sure someone, somewhere made an image that creatres SVG images by converting each pixel into a 1x1 quad |
| 00:03 | <Dashiva> | *made a program |
| 07:10 | <hsivonen> | Any suggestions of which <canvas>-based game I should demo for the maximal "wow" effect? |
| 07:14 | <roc> | maybe whatever the latest Wolf3D/DOOM one is |
| 07:16 | heycam | remembers running along the wall, pressing Enter, hoping to find secret doors |
| 07:16 | <roc> | now we can create a Greasemonkey script for that |
| 07:21 | <heycam> | heh |
| 07:50 | <hsivonen> | is this the state of the art in DOOM: http://www.benjoffe.com/code/demos/canvascape/textures |
| 07:53 | hsivonen | finds http://www.benjoffe.com/code/demos/canvascape/textures |
| 08:07 | <annevk> | hmm, rel=canonical |
| 08:07 | <annevk> | didn't Atom already have something like that? |
| 08:08 | <gavin_> | rel=self |
| 08:10 | <annevk> | yeah |
| 08:11 | <annevk> | so much for developing new features in the open |
| 08:29 | <roc> | annevk: who? |
| 08:30 | <gavin_> | |
| 08:30 | <gavin_> | http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/02/specify-your-canonical.html |
| 08:35 | <roc> | why are they using Firefox 2 in their screenshots? |
| 08:41 | <Philip`> | hsivonen: http://canvex.lazyilluminati.com/ |
| 08:50 | <hsivonen> | Philip`: sorry, I couldn't figure out how to shoot the other guys in Canvex, so I used nihilogic's wolfenstein |
| 08:51 | <hsivonen> | you gotta shoot in a demo involving and FPS! |
| 08:51 | <Philip`> | hsivonen: Canvex is an intentionally non-violent game |
| 08:51 | <Philip`> | Also, I never bothered implementing weapons or gameplay logic |
| 10:02 | <yecril71> | Even if explicit dependencies were allowed, the authors are unlikely to get it right. |
| 10:02 | <yecril71> | And it cannot be validated that the script does not rely on the stylesheet. |
| 10:03 | <yecril71> | So browser vendors will have to decide whether they prefer accuracy over efficiency. |
| 10:04 | <yecril71> | I think they will choose accuracy, meaning that they will have to ignore explicit dependencies. |
| 10:04 | <yecril71> | Houk. |
| 10:12 | <annevk> | browsers could just run the script and block it when they encounter a dependency |
| 10:14 | <jgraham> | annevk: Isn't that supposed to be quite difficult? |
| 10:16 | <Philip`> | particularly when the user or other scripts could interact with the document while it's blocked inside a script during loading |
| 12:52 | <Philip`> | With the exciting discussion about normalising strings, did anyone already point out that http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210 defines "match" saying "processors may normalize such characters to some canonical form", whereas the next version seemingly removes that language? |
| 12:54 | <hsivonen> | Philip`: I don't recall anyone pointing that out. |
| 12:56 | <Philip`> | http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-19980210-errata#E85 |
| 13:09 | <Lachy> | while I don't recall that point being explicitly raised, I believe it was pointed out that it would cause interop problems with having different implementations disagreeing about well-formedness |
| 13:12 | <hsivonen> | are there easy-to-install Mac OS X binaries of thusnelda available? |
| 13:23 | <Lachy> | what is thusnelda? |
| 13:25 | <Philip`> | http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=thusnelda |
| 13:25 | <Lachy> | I just googled it |
| 13:25 | <hsivonen> | fwiw, I already googled, found source, not OS X binaries |
| 13:25 | <Lachy> | it's a theora encoder, apparently |
| 13:27 | <jgraham> | Philip`: But that just tells me that Thusnelda was the daughter of the Cheruscan prince Segestes |
| 13:28 | <Philip`> | jgraham: Move your eyes downards a bit |
| 13:28 | <Philip`> | s//w/ |
| 13:29 | <jgraham> | Holy Crap! There's more than one result on Google? Who knew? |
| 13:31 | <Philip`> | jgraham: You could be forgiven for not noticing, if you browse the web at 320x240 with large fonts and don't know how to use scrollbars |
| 13:31 | <jgraham> | (actually the top result on Google isn't right that often. It's more like there's no point in having more than one page of results because people look at the second page so rarely) |
| 13:32 | <hsivonen> | more XML errors coming soon to a browser near you: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=174351 |
| 13:33 | <hsivonen> | It's amusing to see what kind of Gecko bugs I (and annevk) filed circa 2002 |
| 13:36 | <Philip`> | "With this patch applied it is no longer possible to view the following URL: http://wiki.mozilla-russia.org/index.php/Mozilla%20Firefox"; - sounds like a highly beneficial patch |
| 14:01 | <hsivonen> | http://realtech.burningbird.net/comment/reply/604/1144 |
| 14:08 | <Lachy> | LOL |
| 14:08 | hsivonen | is surprised to see Shelley Powers use a pharse like " most pedantic specification ever derived by man" |
| 14:08 | <hsivonen> | (the "by man" part) |
| 14:09 | <Lachy> | that seems like something Mr Last Week would normally have commented on. I wonder what's taking him so long |
| 14:11 | <annevk> | didn't he already? |
| 14:11 | <annevk> | http://lastweekinhtml5.blogspot.com/2009/02/we-hear-you-sister.html ? |
| 14:12 | <Lachy> | annevk, no, I meant the comment hsivonen linked to about the spec writing being an asshole |
| 14:13 | <annevk> | hsivonen, what is special about that part? |
| 14:14 | <hsivonen> | annevk: she has a history of pointing out sexism, and expressions like "by man" where 'man' means humans in general are generally frowned upon by English-language feminists |
| 14:21 | <annevk> | oh, didn't know that |
| 14:35 | <hsivonen> | I fail to understand the utility of http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6525 |
| 14:37 | <hendry> | why is the whatwg twitter account printing garbage out like iilomijokud0? |
| 14:37 | <hsivonen> | hendry: anyone can update the status |
| 14:42 | <hendry> | hsivonen: eh? i assumed it would only be updated by the cabal :) |
| 14:43 | <Philip`> | hendry: "Update status" on http://www.whatwg.org/ |
| 14:49 | <hendry> | seems a little too ripe for abuse. |
| 14:49 | <Lachy> | hendry, it seems to get relatively little abuse |
| 14:50 | Philip` | looks for an anonymous proxy from which he can abuse it |
| 14:50 | <Lachy> | although given that all legitimate updates do seem to come from Hixie anyway, there seems to be little practical benefit of having it open. |
| 14:51 | <hendry> | Lachy: why is that? I had a feedback form that just got nuts over a month. |
| 14:52 | <Lachy> | I don't know why. I'm only commenting based on my observation of the amount of garbage compared with legitimate messages |
| 14:53 | <Philip`> | Someone needs to set the status to "HTML5: Remove tag soup support; XML is the future. http://tinyurl.com/(...)"; and link it to a fake version of the (X)HTML5 Tracking page with the appropriate patch |
| 14:53 | <Dashiva> | Link the HTML6 blog post? :) |
| 14:54 | <Philip`> | Linking to a blog would make it obvious that it's not one of the usual automatic status updates |
| 14:54 | <hsivonen> | lots of posts here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa/2009Feb/ |
| 14:55 | <Lachy> | Philip`, that sounds like a good idea for an April fools joke in about 6 weeks |
| 14:55 | <Philip`> | Lachy: But it's a bad idea now that I've revealed it here :-( |
| 14:55 | <hsivonen> | I wonder if Brad Neuberg's suggestion was serious or a joke based on Really Simple Syndication removing RDF: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa/2009Feb/0003.html |
| 14:56 | <Lachy> | it's alright. No-one reads the logs here anyway :-) |
| 14:57 | <Dashiva> | Except our friend |
| 14:58 | <Lachy> | do you mean Mr Last Week? |
| 14:59 | <Dashiva> | Yes |
| 14:59 | <Lachy> | I wouldn't really consider him a friend. But I suspect he's actually hanging out in the channel himself, rather than just reading the logs |
| 15:01 | Philip` | tries to look entirely not suspicious |
| 15:04 | Lachy | 's no. 1 suspect for the identity of Mr Last week is now Philip` for looking suspicious |
| 15:07 | <Philip`> | Whoops, maybe I shouldn't have said anything |
| 15:10 | Philip` | really likes having a single XML file listing all the attribute names/values from 130K pages, which he can just grep through |
| 15:11 | <Lachy> | Philip`, well, you are also one of the few members of the cabal who isn't regularly picked on by Mr Last Week ;-) |
| 15:11 | <Philip`> | That's because I'm just too awesome |
| 15:11 | <Dashiva> | Philip already has one alter ego (the other Philip) so there is a precedent |
| 15:13 | <hsivonen> | http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Feb/0117.html |
| 15:15 | <Lachy> | ah, right. It's all starting to add up now. On one hand, he's 1337 haxor doing a PhD, and on the other, he's a retired web developer/bureaucracy troll |
| 15:16 | <Philip`> | If I was going to have an alter ego, would I really choose one with the same name as me? That's really quite unsubtle |
| 15:17 | <Dashiva> | On the contrary, it's so unsubtle nobody would suspect it (except me) |
| 15:19 | <Philip`> | Sure, but I'd know you'd see through my plan to choose an alter ego with the same name as me so that I could argue it's implausible I'd do something so unsubtle, so clearly I would have chosen a different name to avoid this eventuality |
| 15:20 | <Dashiva> | And that's the clincher |
| 15:20 | <Dashiva> | You did choose a different name, Mr. Last Week, and you _also_ kept the original one |
| 15:21 | <Dashiva> | This way (you thought) you would keep at least one of them if the other was unmasked |
| 15:23 | <Philip`> | Grrr, meddling kids |
| 16:28 | <yorick> | I'd like the drag&drop api to have some kind of "unsecure" prop, that makes you able to access the data on a dragover event |
| 16:28 | <yorick> | so I can change the cursor when dragging over something that can't be dropped there |
| 16:53 | Philip` | suggests that if one is working on a large informally-organised project for which there is even a slight possibility one might eventually decide to relicense it as open source, it's a pretty good idea to get everyone to agree to that from the start, or at least to maintain a list of contributors and contact details so you can ask them later if they're okay with it |
| 16:54 | Philip` | is, on a somewhat related note, looking through an SVN repository with about seven thousand revisions and 75 committers to work out who's actually contributed anything significant |
| 17:05 | <jgraham> | Philip`: If you just had the foresight to tag all the data with RDF then you could point your Semantic Web tools at the repository, get a list of the committers, the significance of their changes and, by interacting with the extensive network of RDF data on the web locate the contributer's current email address position on open source and favourite brand of beer (the last being so that you could get any dissenters drunk enough to agree to relicensin |
| 17:06 | <jcranmer> | Philip`: only 7K revisions |
| 17:06 | <jcranmer> | ? |
| 17:06 | <Philip`> | jcranmer: 6669 |
| 17:07 | jcranmer | notes that mozilla-central is over 25K now |
| 17:07 | <Philip`> | Oops |
| 17:07 | <Philip`> | 6674 |
| 17:07 | <jcranmer> | 24990 when I pulled it on friday |
| 17:07 | <Philip`> | jcranmer: This project isn't anywhere near as large as Mozilla :-) |
| 17:07 | <Philip`> | but it's large enough to be a bit of a headache to deal with |
| 17:07 | <jcranmer> | actually, I guess it was Saturday |
| 17:09 | <Philip`> | (Most people joined the project, made a handful of changes, and then vanished) |
| 17:10 | <Philip`> | (and a few people made loads of changes over loads of years, and then went to university and didn't have any more time but some are still kind of hanging around trying to stop the project dying) |
| 17:10 | <jcranmer> | which project? |
| 17:10 | <Philip`> | Some RTS game thing |
| 21:04 | <roc_> | grrr |
| 21:04 | <roc> | looks like I have to subscribe to public-html |
| 21:04 | roc | girds loins |
| 21:05 | <Dashiva> | You can camp the archive page instead |
| 21:06 | annevk | would welcome roc; the more sensible people write to public-html, the less I have to :p |
| 21:06 | <roc> | Dashiva: no, I may need to contribute |
| 21:06 | <Dashiva> | That's still possible |
| 21:06 | <roc> | besides I'd rather have it in gmail so I can kill threads etc |
| 21:08 | <gsnedders> | That means having time to actually deal with more emails coming in. |
| 21:09 | <roc> | it's not much time, but yes, that's why I've tried to avoid this step |
| 21:09 | gsnedders | made the mistake of subscribing when he had vastly more time |
| 21:09 | <Hixie> | roc: what do you want to contribute to? |
| 21:09 | Hixie | wonders if he missed a productive thread recently |
| 21:09 | <gsnedders> | productivity? peh! |
| 21:10 | <roc> | I should probably follow the video-related stuff at least |
| 21:10 | <Hixie> | ah, yes, the video stuff |
| 21:11 | gsnedders | wonders whether he should go to Edinburgh and do the degree that Hixie wants him to do :P |
| 21:12 | <Hixie> | hey hey |
| 21:12 | <Hixie> | do what YOU want to do |
| 21:12 | <Hixie> | i just said that physics would give you a better set of career options than compsci, that's all :-P |
| 21:12 | <gsnedders> | Hixie: Issue: I don't know what that is :) |
| 21:13 | <Dashiva> | Do one, then the other |
| 21:13 | <Hixie> | certainly don't do something you don't want to do :-) |
| 21:13 | <gsnedders> | Part of me really does want to go and do comp.phys., but part of me really wants to go to somewhere like Cambridge for comp.sci. |
| 21:13 | <gsnedders> | Meh. |
| 21:14 | <gsnedders> | Issue with the latter is it would mean re-applying having been rejected on legally dubious grounds |
| 21:42 | <roc> | physics a better set of career options than compsci??? |
| 21:43 | <Philip`> | Computer science sets you up for a good job in investment banking |
| 21:43 | <Philip`> | or at least it did a year ago - maybe things have changed a bit now |
| 21:44 | <Dashiva> | roc: I think it was comp.phys., not theoretical physics |
| 21:45 | <roc> | Philip`: well, the high-end quant jobs also go to physicists |
| 21:45 | <gsnedders> | roc: Better insofar as more diverse, certainly |
| 21:46 | <gsnedders> | roc: What counts as better is awfully subjective :) |
| 21:46 | <gsnedders> | Dashiva: computational physics, theoretical physics… There isn't much difference nowadays |
| 21:46 | <roc> | I doubt it's more diverse |
| 21:47 | <roc> | everyone needs good compsci people, whether they say so or not |
| 21:54 | <Hixie> | roc: you can get any job a compsci job will get you with a phys degree if you have computer experience, in my experience |
| 21:54 | <Hixie> | roc: the reverse is not the case |
| 21:54 | <roc> | maybe |
| 21:54 | <roc> | but why not study in the area you're actually going to work in? |
| 21:55 | <roc> | I don't know if your experience is typical; I hope you're not just talking about yourself :-) |
| 21:59 | <gsnedders> | roc: It is typical |
| 21:59 | <gsnedders> | Hixie may be egoist and self-centered, but… :P |
| 21:59 | <Philip`> | You should go to university for the pleasure of learning, or for being with likeminded individuals, or for having three hours of work a day and six months of holiday a year, not simply for optimising your job prospects :-p |
| 22:00 | <roc> | if you go to university entirely for pleasure, I hope you're paying the full cost of your education |
| 22:01 | <Dashiva> | You'll be working 40 years afterwards, you might as well enjoy life while you can :P |
| 22:19 | <roc> | sure, as long as taxpayers aren't paying for it |
| 23:33 | <Dashiva> | There doesn't seem to be any discussion at all in the xhtml2 list about the namespace issue |
| 23:35 | <annevk> | that discussion is just painful and not going anywhere |
| 23:36 | <annevk> | besides the fact that nobody is really bringing up any arguments browser vendors haven't heard before |
| 23:37 | <annevk> | so it just feels like a waste of time |
| 23:37 | <annevk> | but so far I have invested like one minute in it two write an example and delete a bunch of e-mails, so nothing too bad |
| 23:37 | <annevk> | s/two/to/ |
| 23:38 | <annevk> | (admittedly, probably half an hour, to also be able to read/skim the e-mails) |
| 23:40 | <Dashiva> | Nobody has brought up xhtml1 yet, like Hixie suggested |
| 23:44 | <Lachy> | Dashiva, I thought I broght it up |
| 23:44 | <annevk> | RB did too though he would like to be pointed out specifics |
| 23:45 | <Lachy> | RB has already has specifics pointed out to him (<input>, <select>, <textarea>, <label>). He just chooses to ignore them |
| 23:47 | <annevk> | maybe that's not detailed enough for him |
| 23:47 | <annevk> | https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=478665 is interesting |
| 23:47 | <Lachy> | I just don't get how he can ignore such elements with vastly different, incompatible processing requirements, and yet still focus on elements like <small> with minor refinements to their semantics, but with no change to their processing requiements |
| 23:49 | <annevk> | he studies something close to philosophy; from that perspective it might not matter much |
| 23:51 | <roc> | alright, who's stalking me |
| 23:52 | annevk | might be; forgot who he follows |
| 23:54 | <othermaciej> | I have this vague recollection that David Baron once wrote a fairly detailed piece on chameleon namespaces and why they are a problem |
| 23:54 | <othermaciej> | does anyone know where to find it? |
| 23:54 | <othermaciej> | (or is my recollection incorrect?) |
| 23:55 | <annevk> | I don't have the original, but http://dev.w3.org/2006/cdf/cdi-framework/#importing has bits |
| 23:55 | annevk | hunts for the original |
| 23:56 | <othermaciej> | I did find that - was hoping to find the original |
| 23:58 | <Hixie> | the whole discussion is a waste of time |
| 23:58 | <Hixie> | xhtml5 can't change to another namespace, because if it did the browser vendors would ignore it |
| 23:58 | <othermaciej> | I know |
| 23:59 | <Hixie> | whether xhtml2 uses the same namespace or not is really neither here nor there -- if it uses the same namespace, then it won't ever be implemented by web browsers |
| 23:59 | <othermaciej> | but I'd like to also explain to Larry why the idea of changing namespaces as a versioning mechanism is a bad idea even compared to other proposed versioning mechanisms |