| 00:03 | <Lachy> | Hixie, "Anyone who helps [...] will get their name in the acknowledgements section." - So what's in it for those of us who's name is already in there? I didn't see any other incentives, why should I bother ;-). |
| 00:03 | <Lachy> | (aside from the fact that I already get paid to do this as part of my job) |
| 00:04 | <Hixie> | so many possible replies |
| 00:04 | <Hixie> | i'm torn between "if your name is already in there, you already know the rush that comes from sending feedback, and so you don't need any other incentive" and "if your name is already in there, i don't want more of your damn e-mails". :-P |
| 00:07 | <Niictar24> | Wow, that thing is long |
| 00:08 | <Niictar24> | 839 pages (!) |
| 00:08 | <Hixie> | the html5 spec? yeah |
| 00:10 | Lachy | wonders how many people are going to try printing that |
| 00:10 | <Hixie> | everyone at microsoft, i expect |
| 00:10 | <Hixie> | other than that, i hope nobody! |
| 00:10 | Niictar24 | was planning on it before he finished downloaded it |
| 00:10 | <Niictar24> | downloading* |
| 00:10 | <Niictar24> | Not so much now |
| 00:10 | <Lachy> | wow, the acknowledgement section takes up 2 pages on its own. |
| 00:11 | <Hixie> | and that's after extracting the websockets, eventsource, and webstorage sections, too |
| 00:11 | <Niictar24> | After this invite, that will probably get much bigger |
| 00:11 | <Hixie> | i'm going for the award for "most community involvement in a web specification's development" |
| 00:11 | <Hixie> | :-P |
| 00:12 | <Lachy> | I'm not so sure it will get too much bigger. The invite has so far only reached the limited number of people who are already following the spec development in some capacity. |
| 00:13 | <Niictar24> | I read somewhere there are over 800 subscribers |
| 00:13 | <Niictar24> | If each one of them finds and reports a typo? |
| 00:13 | <Niictar24> | Subcsribers to the WHATWG mailing list, I mean |
| 00:13 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: people who submit more feedback should get their names in a bigger point size |
| 00:13 | <MikeSmith> | like tag clouds |
| 00:14 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: hah |
| 00:14 | <Hixie> | Niictar24: 950 last i checked |
| 00:14 | <Niictar24> | And coloured, too! |
| 00:14 | <Dashiva> | What if you gave points per submission, and people could use those points to pimp their name in a custom way |
| 00:15 | <Lachy> | Hixie, it's really nice when you win one of those self-created and self-awarded awards. It'll make you feel really proud. |
| 00:15 | <Hixie> | help vote this up so we get more input :-) http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/89lgh/get_your_name_in_the_html5_acknowledgements_help/ |
| 00:15 | <Hixie> | Dashiva: that'd be hilarious |
| 00:16 | <Niictar24> | Hixie: When the PDF references page numbers, were those generated dynamically? |
| 00:16 | <Hixie> | yes |
| 00:16 | <Niictar24> | Ok |
| 00:22 | <Lachy> | I hope other ISPs in the US don't follow Time Warner's lead and start introducing ridiculously low bandwidth caps of 40GB/month |
| 00:22 | MikeSmith | wants to read rsayre whatwg blog posting |
| 00:22 | <Lachy> | I thought I left that nonsense behind in Australia. Not looking forward to being stuck with that again when I move to the US |
| 00:22 | <MikeSmith> | Lachy: you moving to the US? |
| 00:23 | <Lachy> | yes |
| 00:23 | <MikeSmith> | where to? |
| 00:23 | <Lachy> | I'm transferring to the Mountain View office |
| 00:23 | <Lachy> | I thought I'd told everyone that already. |
| 00:24 | <MikeSmith> | Lachy: you didn't tell me. I feel left out |
| 00:24 | <MikeSmith> | hmm, maybe annevk42 told me earlier |
| 00:24 | <MikeSmith> | Lachy: congrats on that |
| 00:24 | <MikeSmith> | great place in the world to work |
| 00:24 | <MikeSmith> | Tatsuki is great too |
| 00:25 | <Lachy> | where's Tatsuki? |
| 00:25 | <MikeSmith> | the head of the office there |
| 00:25 | <Hixie> | lachy will presumably become opera's rep to all the clandestine whatwg cabal meetings now |
| 00:25 | jcranmer | has to keep track of too many cabals these days |
| 00:26 | <MikeSmith> | Lachy: or head of the consumer business at least |
| 00:26 | <MikeSmith> | he used to run the Japan office |
| 00:26 | <MikeSmith> | great guy, from Kyushu. crazy about outdoors, hiking and stuff |
| 00:26 | <Lachy> | MikeSmith, oh, I thought you meant Tatsuki was a place, not a person. That's a weird name. |
| 00:26 | <MikeSmith> | normal name in Japan |
| 00:26 | <MikeSmith> | I hear there's a few more people there now too |
| 00:27 | <Lachy> | sure, but Japan isn't a normal place. :-) |
| 00:27 | <MikeSmith> | Opera in Mountain View, I mean |
| 00:27 | <Dashiva> | uh-oh, incoming rathole |
| 00:27 | <MikeSmith> | Lachy: you should come to Japan for a working visit when you can |
| 00:27 | <Lachy> | I first need to make up some bogus reason for me to be there |
| 00:28 | <Lachy> | or a real reason, if there is one |
| 00:28 | <Dashiva> | If you find one, let me know |
| 00:29 | <MikeSmith> | a real reason is that you can learn about the part of the business that involves product dev for getting browsers preinstalled on millions of devices |
| 00:29 | <MikeSmith> | dev, testing, deployment for that |
| 00:30 | <MikeSmith> | customer requirements and functional-spec development for that |
| 00:32 | <blooberry> | for as close as I am, I hardly ever visit the Opera Mt.View office |
| 00:33 | <MikeSmith> | blooberry: did you and kaz ever meet up much? |
| 00:34 | <MikeSmith> | I guess he's moved elsewhere now |
| 00:34 | <MikeSmith> | blooberry: you are in Seattle area, right? |
| 00:34 | <Hixie> | man, abarth has the patience of a saint |
| 00:34 | <Lachy> | Hixie, is abarth still debating with Roy? |
| 00:34 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: indeed |
| 00:35 | <blooberry> | mikesmith: we meet up as often as we can, but he's moved out of the area. But I live in the SF bay area |
| 00:35 | <MikeSmith> | blooberry: ah, OK |
| 00:35 | <Hixie> | blooberry should move up to the peninsula |
| 00:35 | <MikeSmith> | Lachy: lots of fun recently on http list again |
| 00:35 | <blooberry> | MikeSmith: kaz is in Japan right now even |
| 00:35 | <MikeSmith> | blooberry: yeah, I ran into him last week |
| 00:36 | <blooberry> | way? cool. 8-} |
| 00:37 | <blooberry> | hope you don't have too many bruises. ;-} |
| 00:37 | <MikeSmith> | heh |
| 00:37 | <Niictar24> | Hixie: can IRC be used to point out possible corrections? Or should it be sent to your email address or to the WHATWG mailing list? |
| 00:38 | <Hixie> | Niictar24: any of the places mentioned on the blog post would be fine, IRC will lead to the comments being lost though |
| 00:38 | <Hixie> | Niictar24: unless you can get someone (you maybe!) to volunteer to track IRC comments and send them as e-mail each day! |
| 00:38 | <Hixie> | Niictar24: which would be awesome btw! |
| 00:39 | <Hixie> | Niictar24: especially since anne and zcorpan keep insisting on sending IRC comments and grumble when i ask them to send mail :-) |
| 00:39 | <Niictar24> | lol |
| 00:39 | <MikeSmith> | need bot |
| 00:39 | <Niictar24> | I thought you had all the time in the world to read the IRC chat logs |
| 00:40 | <Hixie> | i read them, but i don't do anything with them and usually i'm in the middle of edits when i see the comments |
| 00:40 | <Hixie> | so i can't deal with them straight away |
| 00:41 | <Lachy> | Hixie, it would be nice if there was an IRC bot that could help track IRC comments for you |
| 00:42 | <MikeSmith> | Niictar24: one way that some people use is to first discuss on IRC, then just copy-paste the IRC discussion into an e-mail message or new bugzilla issue |
| 00:42 | <Niictar24> | Fair enough |
| 00:43 | <Niictar24> | So anyway, the example on page 170 of the letter format PDF for the <nav> element could be cleaned up I think |
| 00:44 | <Hixie> | Lachy: that would be cool too |
| 00:44 | <Hixie> | Lachy: find a volunteer to run one :-) |
| 00:44 | <jcranmer> | well, I have some python code for a dynamically-reconfigurable bot |
| 00:45 | <Niictar24> | But its just clean up so I'll just email it away |
| 00:46 | <Philip`> | I'm guessing PDF page numbers aren't very useful, since they'll change after every edit |
| 00:47 | <Philip`> | Lachy: Write a script to scrape krijnh's logs once a day and look for specially-marked comments |
| 00:47 | <Niictar24> | Actually, yea |
| 00:47 | <Niictar24> | What's the best way to reference something? |
| 00:48 | <jcranmer> | see! |
| 00:48 | <jcranmer> | oh, right |
| 00:48 | <Philip`> | Niictar24: Maybe the section title and a quote |
| 00:48 | <jcranmer> | the quit message is broken |
| 00:48 | <Hixie> | Niictar24: copy and paste text from that area, along with the section title |
| 00:48 | <Hixie> | what Philip` said |
| 00:49 | <Philip`> | What Hixie said |
| 00:49 | <Niictar24> | Ha |
| 00:49 | <Niictar24> | Kay |
| 00:50 | <Niictar24> | On another sort of half-way-related note, the image/figure/bubble kind of thing under "3.4.1 Kinds of content" is just a black blob in Acrobat Reader 7 |
| 00:51 | jcranmer | wonders how acceptable python's XML/DOM stuff is with whatwg specification |
| 00:51 | <Hixie> | Niictar24: prince might not support SVG properly |
| 00:51 | <Niictar24> | Somehow I could imagine that one being likely |
| 00:51 | Niictar24 | wishes SVG was fully supported everywhere |
| 00:52 | <Niictar24> | Which is silly, I know |
| 00:54 | <Philip`> | Even in Lynx? |
| 00:54 | <jcranmer> | duh |
| 00:54 | <jcranmer> | who doesn't want SVG in Lynx? |
| 00:55 | <jcranmer> | "Lynx... supporting SVG in a terminal before IE supported it!" |
| 00:56 | <heycam> | hmm does cairo have an aalib backend? |
| 00:58 | <Niictar24> | Sigh, I keep forgetting about that one |
| 00:58 | <jcranmer> | how hard could it be? |
| 00:59 | <Niictar24> | Someone should be creative and make it happen. Convert the SVG image to ASCII art. Simple! |
| 01:00 | <Niictar24> | Completely practical, too |
| 01:00 | <jcranmer> | apparently |
| 01:01 | <jcranmer> | someone was actually working on it |
| 01:01 | <Niictar24> | What? Really? |
| 01:02 | <jcranmer> | judging from the mailing lists, yes |
| 01:02 | <MikeSmith> | lynx is a pager, not a browser |
| 01:03 | <Niictar24> | "Pager"? |
| 01:04 | <MikeSmith> | Niictar24: like more(1) or less(1) |
| 01:09 | <heycam> | but you can press enter to follow a link, is that not browsing? |
| 01:09 | <heycam> | i like that w3m lets me click on links in my xterm |
| 01:18 | <olliej> | Hixie: i've been thinking about the cookies, etc issue chrome folk brought up |
| 01:18 | <olliej> | Hixie: i'm not sure why the spec needs to change |
| 01:18 | <olliej> | Hixie: the correct behaviour is for the browser to do the right thing |
| 01:19 | <olliej> | Hixie: and make sites on the same domain not run javascript concurrently |
| 01:19 | <olliej> | Hixie: that avoids spec changes, it doesn't add artificial complexity to all webpages to deal with one browser |
| 01:20 | <MikeSmith> | heycam: it's a kind of browsing, but not lacking |
| 01:21 | <MikeSmith> | so maybe we need another word |
| 01:21 | <MikeSmith> | subbrowser |
| 01:21 | <MikeSmith> | like subgenius |
| 01:21 | <MikeSmith> | s/but not lacking/but lacking/ |
| 01:22 | <MikeSmith> | webpager |
| 01:23 | <MikeSmith> | heycam: vim has a way to follow links too |
| 01:23 | <heycam> | with a plugin? |
| 01:23 | <MikeSmith> | heycam: nah, I mean in :help stuff |
| 01:23 | <MikeSmith> | ^] or whatever it is |
| 01:23 | <heycam> | yeah |
| 01:24 | <heycam> | seems to be a help file syntax specific thing tho |
| 01:24 | <heycam> | not sure i would class vim as a webpager from that :) |
| 01:24 | <MikeSmith> | true |
| 01:24 | <MikeSmith> | lynx doesn't even implement the DOM, right? |
| 01:25 | <heycam> | :r! lynx -dump http://www.google.com/ |
| 01:25 | <heycam> | no i don't think it does script |
| 01:25 | <MikeSmith> | I don't see how it could rightly do CSS to any degree eiterh |
| 01:25 | <heycam> | w3m does reasonable table layout |
| 01:26 | <heycam> | don't know if it looks at css tho |
| 01:26 | <MikeSmith> | I don't mean just the rendering, but internally how it could deal with managing it |
| 01:26 | <MikeSmith> | I use w3m (and w3mmee) and elinks and lynx a lot |
| 01:27 | <MikeSmith> | but calling them browsers is like calling Amaya a browser |
| 01:27 | <heycam> | :) |
| 01:29 | <dave_levin> | olliej: ping |
| 01:29 | <MikeSmith> | [[ |
| 01:29 | <MikeSmith> | First Murderer: We are men, my liege. |
| 01:29 | <MikeSmith> | Macbeth: Ay, in the catalogue ye go for men, |
| 01:29 | <MikeSmith> | As hounds and greyhounds, mongrels, spaniels, curs, |
| 01:29 | <MikeSmith> | Shoughs, water-rugs, and demi-wolves are clipt |
| 01:29 | <MikeSmith> | All by the name of dogs. |
| 01:29 | <olliej> | dave_levin: pong |
| 01:29 | <MikeSmith> | ]] |
| 01:30 | <dave_levin> | olliej: I was just reading the cookie stuff. Is the problem there for any mutlithreaded UA? |
| 01:30 | <olliej> | dave_levin: only if the multithread UA doesn't actually put any effort into ensuring correct semantics |
| 01:30 | <olliej> | dave_levin: multiple sites on the same domain cannot run js concurrently |
| 01:31 | <dave_levin> | olliej: But a worker can run concurrently with the page and I thought that was the problem. |
| 01:31 | <olliej> | dave_levin: workers are a special class of problem |
| 01:31 | <olliej> | dave_levin: and cookie access can be controlled |
| 01:32 | <olliej> | dave_levin: standard js running in the main page context doesn't have any such luck |
| 01:33 | <olliej> | dave_levin: i think it would be easy to get the correct semantics |
| 01:33 | <olliej> | without having pages on the same domain running synchronously all the time |
| 01:34 | <olliej> | dave_levin: basically when js references the cookie list (or local storage, etc) that js takes a lock that is not released until js has finished executing |
| 01:34 | <dave_levin> | olliej: Ok, I haven't been following that very closely. I had thought the issue came up due to trying to get workers to have access to the cookies. |
| 01:34 | <dave_levin> | olliej: And the workers may execute for a long time (like a ray tracer). |
| 01:35 | <olliej> | dave_levin: nope, workers are a different kettle of fish |
| 01:35 | <dave_levin> | olliej: thx for your time. I was simply curious. |
| 01:35 | <olliej> | dave_levin: while there are isues, you can actually control access (as they don't just have access to the cookies from get go) |
| 01:41 | <dave_levin> | olliej: Oh I see. It came out of the worker discussion but then became this other thing. And you simply want the spec to be less demanding about the specifics of how this should be done. Instead the spec should simply say what the guarantee is and leave it up to the UA to figure out how to satisfy that. |
| 01:41 | <olliej> | dave_levin: yes |
| 01:41 | <dave_levin> | olliej: fwiw, that sounds reasonable to me :) |
| 01:41 | <dave_levin> | olliej: But I not involved in that. |
| 01:42 | <olliej> | dave_levin: yeah, the proposal i saw earlier in the list before i just started ignoring it felt technically unsound |
| 02:45 | <Hixie> | olliej: all pages in a browsing context have to be in one serialisable scripting unit, and all pages in one origin have to be in one serialisable scripting unit. |
| 02:45 | <Hixie> | olliej: so it's more than just per-origin |
| 02:49 | <roc> | yeah |
| 02:49 | <roc> | but olliej is still right -) |
| 02:55 | <Hixie> | about what? |
| 02:59 | <roc> | about the big issue |
| 03:06 | <Hixie> | not sure i understand. are you agreeing with a particular proposal? |
| 03:06 | <Hixie> | i agree that concurrency is a big issue, that's why the spec has all this prose in it about making sure things like cookies and localstorage work :-) |
| 03:19 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: does the current spec disallow blockquote as a descendant of header? |
| 03:19 | <MikeSmith> | and as a descendant of address? |
| 03:36 | <roc> | Hixie: I think what you have is great |
| 03:37 | <roc> | it seems some Chrome people aren't happy about it |
| 03:53 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: not currently |
| 04:36 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: did the spec previously disallow blockquote as a descendant of header? |
| 05:25 | <olliej> | roc_: i think S3.1 had local storage |
| 05:25 | <roc_> | yeah? |
| 05:25 | <olliej> | but conceivably there could have been api changes since that original version |
| 05:25 | <olliej> | definitely had the sql db apis |
| 05:25 | <roc> | yeah |
| 05:25 | <olliej> | i may have 3.1 around |
| 05:25 | <olliej> | one mo |
| 05:26 | <roc> | the DB APIs are all async (aren't they?) and transactional so they may not be a problem |
| 05:27 | <roc> | apart from the orthogonal "what SQL dialect is it anyway" problem |
| 05:27 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: i don't think so |
| 05:28 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: OK |
| 05:28 | <olliej> | roc: hmmm, doesn't look like it, just sqldb |
| 05:28 | <Hixie> | roc: there is a sync DB API (as of today), for Workers, but that one is still transactional |
| 05:28 | <MikeSmith> | I'm wondering if hsivonen maybe added the blockquote constraints because of the outlining algorithm |
| 06:34 | <Hixie> | abarth keeps outclassing me |
| 06:56 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: I like the part where other dude says "Your rants are getting irritating." |
| 08:27 | <hsivonen> | hmm. why don't simple element selectors in text/html match non-http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml element in Opera? |
| 08:28 | <hsivonen> | do style sheets in text/html in Opera have an implicit http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml @namespace rule? |
| 09:20 | <annevk42> | hsivonen, interesting find |
| 09:58 | <annevk42> | "But your rants are getting irritating." some guy addressing abarth |
| 09:58 | <annevk42> | wtf |
| 09:59 | <Hixie> | holy crap, the call for reviews is bringing in a lot of reviews! |
| 09:59 | <Hixie> | excellent! |
| 09:59 | <Hixie> | and now to bed! |
| 10:29 | <zcorpan> | hsivonen: http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/59 - matches for me |
| 10:41 | <hsivonen> | zcorpan: http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/60 |
| 10:41 | <hsivonen> | I smell a magic list :-) |
| 10:42 | <annevk42> | whoa, that's bad |
| 10:44 | <annevk42> | hsivonen, if nobody does XLink for MathML maybe they can just zap it? |
| 10:45 | <annevk42> | hsivonen, I have the feeling they're considering that |
| 10:45 | annevk42 | would prefer that tbh |
| 10:45 | <zcorpan> | i'm wondering whether it's feasible to use <a href> in the html namespace mixed with mathml |
| 10:46 | <annevk42> | that sounds like layout trouble |
| 10:46 | <annevk42> | though where MathML allows variables I think HTML content can be inserted |
| 10:46 | <jgraham> | href everywhere for mathML sounds appealing. But it sounds appealing in HTML too… |
| 10:47 | <zcorpan> | <a href> could either wrap the whole <math> element or be inside <mi> etc |
| 10:47 | <jgraham> | Although s/everywhere/a well defined set of places where it makes sense/ |
| 10:47 | <zcorpan> | <a href> has the advantage that it works with legacy UAs (and search engines) |
| 10:48 | <zcorpan> | disadvantage is that it's less flexible -- you can't link an mrow etc |
| 10:48 | <zcorpan> | though you can't link <tr> in html, either |
| 10:48 | <jgraham> | Being able to link parts of expressions seems useful |
| 10:48 | <jgraham> | like larger than single tokens but smaller than the whole thing |
| 10:49 | <annevk42> | MathML doesn't really have the compat issue as it's not widely deployed yet |
| 10:50 | <jgraham> | Does it have the implementation issue? It seems like href everywhere is no worse than xlink |
| 10:50 | <jgraham> | Also, isn't there some layout funkiness in MathML that could break if you insert random extra elements in the DOM? |
| 10:53 | <annevk42> | XLink is mostly bad because it is not well defined and we do not really need the additional namespace |
| 10:57 | <annevk42> | I don't really see why MathML could not have an href= attribute on several elements |
| 10:58 | <annevk42> | other than maybe the inconsistency it gives with HTML and SVG |
| 11:04 | <annevk42> | oh, MathML did change back to id="" |
| 11:05 | <annevk42> | http://www.w3.org/TR/MathML3/appendixh.html still has some pointers to usage of xml:id="" though |
| 11:27 | <annevk42> | hsivonen, twitter creates the tinyurls |
| 11:27 | <Philip`> | <a href> presumably doesn't help much when MathML is being used outside of HTML |
| 11:30 | <hsivonen> | annevk42: the twitterific tweet character limit seems to look at whatever URL I paste there--not a tinyurl version of it |
| 11:35 | <annevk42> | hsivonen, that wasn't the question :) |
| 11:37 | <hsivonen> | annevk42: ok. still wondering about non-tinyurl.com short urls on twitter |
| 11:38 | <hsivonen> | seems like the SMS gateway is only useful as an excuse to keep the microblogging micro |
| 11:38 | <hsivonen> | I imagine it would be extremely annoying to actually receive tweets as SMS |
| 11:44 | <Philip`> | More useful for sending, probably |
| 11:45 | <Lachy> | hsivonen, it can also be expensive if you're on a plan that makes you pay to receive SMSs |
| 11:56 | <jgraham> | There are plans that may you pay to recieve SMS? That seems… open to abuse |
| 11:58 | <Lachy> | jgraham, AIUI, that's how the system commonly works in the USA |
| 11:58 | <Philip`> | I thought that was how it always worked in the US (and nowhere else) |
| 11:59 | <jgraham> | So, what happens if I send someone 10,000 SMS messages? |
| 11:59 | <Lachy> | I don't know of any other contries that have such a backwards system |
| 11:59 | <Philip`> | Then the phone company is laughing all the way to the bank |
| 12:00 | <Philip`> | (particularly since you have to pay to send too) |
| 12:01 | <jgraham> | Horray for free market capitalism |
| 12:01 | <Lachy> | the USA also makes you pay to receive calls on a mobile too |
| 12:02 | <hsivonen> | EU operators also laugh all the way to the bank when the customer is roaming |
| 12:03 | <hsivonen> | the Commission really should do something about data roaming, too |
| 12:03 | <Lachy> | hsivonen, excessive roaming costs seem to be charged worldwide, not just in the EU |
| 12:04 | <jgraham> | Paying to recieve calls is marginally less silly since you can lways choose not to answer the call |
| 12:04 | <jgraham> | (it is still pretty silly though) |
| 12:05 | <Lachy> | the only reasonable exception is for premium rate subscription services, cause if you're stupid enough to subscribe, then you deserve to pay |
| 12:06 | <Lachy> | but then, at least in Australia, they charge $0.55 AUD to receive, which is nearly triple the cost of sending a normal SMS |
| 12:07 | <Lachy> | (actually, they can charge more cause it's up to the service to set the fee) |
| 12:23 | Philip` | wonders how the cost per megabyte of SMSs compares to e.g. a floppy disk carried by a limousine |
| 12:32 | <hsivonen> | does the spec lack document.all definition or am I bad at reading? |
| 12:36 | <annevk42> | it lacks it |
| 12:36 | <hsivonen> | I filed a bug |
| 12:36 | <hsivonen> | as it happens, I broke document.all locally |
| 12:37 | <annevk42> | document.all is such a pain |
| 12:37 | <hsivonen> | it would be nice to know how it is supposed to work in order to unbreak it the right way |
| 12:37 | <hsivonen> | fixing Gecko to use the XHTML namespace in text/html breaks all sorts of interesting things |
| 12:39 | <hsivonen> | sigh. document.all is quirks-mode-only in Gecko but works in the standards mode in Opera and WebKit |
| 12:40 | <jgraham> | Philip`: It seems like a floppy disk full of SMS messages would be about 1000 pounds which is roughly 8 hours of limo hire. Unless I am wrong by a factor of 1000 somewhere |
| 12:42 | <hsivonen> | sigh. document.all isn't interoperable to begin with |
| 12:43 | <annevk42> | did you see what I just wrote on document.all? :) |
| 12:43 | <hsivonen> | Opera puts name=x in document.all["x"] but Gecko and WebKit don't |
| 12:44 | <hsivonen> | aaargh. IE8 XSS protection on live dom viewer strikes again |
| 12:45 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: could you turn the XSS protection off, please? |
| 12:47 | <hsivonen> | looks like IE8 agrees with Gecko and WebKit |
| 12:47 | hsivonen | decides Opera behavior is a bug here |
| 12:50 | <annevk42> | IE8 in quirks mode? |
| 12:50 | <hsivonen> | standards mode |
| 12:51 | <hsivonen> | quirks, too |
| 12:52 | <annevk42> | also for elements like <input name=x> or <img name=x>? |
| 12:58 | <hsivonen> | aargh. are those magic? |
| 12:58 | <hsivonen> | sigh. |
| 13:00 | <annevk42> | https://bugs.opera.com/browse/CORE-8133 |
| 13:00 | <annevk42> | oops |
| 13:00 | <annevk42> | meant to copy http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/dom.html#dom-document-getelementsbyname |
| 13:00 | <annevk42> | which lists magic elements |
| 13:01 | <hsivonen> | thanks |
| 13:03 | <hsivonen> | ah. Gecko changed here earlier this month, so I was wrong to use the latest release as my baseline of sane behavior |
| 13:50 | <Philip`> | "Woohoo, I'm gonna be famous!" - who's going to break the news to them that that typo was already reported on Bugzilla? :-) |
| 13:51 | <Lachy> | Philip`, where is that quote from? |
| 13:52 | <Philip`> | Lachy: WHATWG list |
| 13:52 | <jgraham> | Philip`: I think you are focusing on the wrong misapprehension |
| 13:56 | Dashiva | wonders how many of those typos could be fixed with a spell checker |
| 14:01 | <Lachy> | Dashiva, http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/single-page/,spell |
| 14:03 | <Fyrd> | Philip`: That would have been me. Bah, knew that had to be too easy. :) |
| 14:03 | <Fyrd> | Guess I'll just have to work harder for immortality. |
| 14:04 | <jgraham> | Lachy: or, alternatively M-x flyspell-mode |
| 14:04 | <Lachy> | jgraham, what? |
| 14:05 | <jgraham> | Lachy: Inline spellchecking in Emacs. It seems more useful as a solution since it allows the errors to be corrected |
| 14:06 | <Lachy> | there's something weird about that W3C spell checker, since it's freezing Minefield |
| 14:11 | <Philip`> | Fyrd: You could also hope that Hixie gets confused by timezones and thinks your email was sent before the Bugzilla bug was filed |
| 14:13 | <annevk42> | that spell checker should ignore <code> |
| 14:14 | <Philip`> | That wouldn't help with typos in code comments |
| 14:14 | <annevk42> | grmbl |
| 14:14 | <annevk42> | I wrote getElementsByClassName |
| 14:14 | <annevk42> | hopefully people can read over that |
| 14:15 | <Fyrd> | Philip`: Ooh, yeah, maybe! :) |
| 14:15 | <Fyrd> | Actually I have some other errors up my sleeve. |
| 14:20 | <annevk42> | Fyrd, you'll now be known as the guy that tried to get his name in HTML5 by reporting a spelling error... and failed! :D |
| 14:21 | <Fyrd> | annevk42: :( |
| 14:21 | <Dashiva> | That's probably better fame-wise than being one among hundreds of acks in the spec |
| 14:21 | <Fyrd> | annevk42: Oh well, I'll take it. |
| 14:22 | <annevk42> | Fyrd, I can see how this might not be funny to you. Fortunately you were planning on doing more review :) |
| 14:24 | <Fyrd> | It is funny, I just like making sad faces. |
| 14:25 | <Fyrd> | Besides, I'm sure the XHTML2 group would be more than happy to receive my spellcheck powers! Ha! |
| 14:27 | <Philip`> | But they won't make you famous unless you join their WG |
| 14:28 | <jgraham> | You can get famous in the XHTML2 WG? I thought you languished in academic obscurity |
| 14:28 | <Fyrd> | Ah well. Never mind then. |
| 14:28 | <Philip`> | HTML5 is happy to give equal fame to cats as to browser developers |
| 14:28 | <Fyrd> | Maybe I should have my cats report typos then. |
| 14:29 | <Fyrd> | My time-travelling cats, that is. |
| 14:29 | <jgraham> | Yeah it true that the acknowledgements list is too long. Maybe I should train some cats to kill the other people on it |
| 14:29 | <Fyrd> | Anyway, back to work now. I guess I'll report future stuff in Bugzilla. |
| 14:31 | <Philip`> | I don't think there's much value in using Bugzilla rather than the list |
| 14:32 | <Philip`> | I suppose there might be a bit of value in checking both Bugzilla and the list for duplicates before posting, but that's not too important since we'll let Hixie deal with it :-) |
| 14:32 | <Philip`> | so it's probably best to just do whatever's easier |
| 14:32 | <Fyrd> | Well, at least I can try to be less redundant by seeing what's already been reported there. |
| 14:33 | <Fyrd> | Okay, thanks! |
| 14:35 | <annevk42> | hsivonen, where you put the dual tokens leaks in one way or another |
| 14:35 | <Lachy> | using bugzilla for reporting spec bugs is useful because it keeps the volume of traffic on the mailing list lower |
| 14:36 | <annevk42> | hsivonen, so the spec will have to dicate something |
| 14:36 | <Philip`> | Lachy: Why is lowering volume on the mailing list a goal? |
| 14:37 | <jgraham> | For typos it generates the same amount of mail |
| 14:37 | <Lachy> | because it means discussions like that on bug 6684 don't generate too much noise |
| 14:37 | <hsivonen> | annevk42: It doesn't leak if you make createElementNS lowercase and throw upon importing non-lowercase node from an XML doc |
| 14:38 | <hsivonen> | annevk42: but I'm not convinced that plugging the leak is worthwhile |
| 14:38 | <Lachy> | jgraham, that's because bugzilla has been misconfigured to send new bugs to public-html instead of just public-html-bugzilla |
| 14:39 | <Philip`> | Lachy: Almost the entire purpose of the mailing list is to have discussions, so it seems discussions should go there |
| 14:39 | <annevk42> | hsivonen, what exactly is your strategy? |
| 14:39 | <hsivonen> | annevk42: do you mean implementation strategy? |
| 14:39 | <Philip`> | (Bugzilla might be more useful for things there's no point in anyone except the editor reading and no need for discussion, like typos) |
| 14:40 | <Lachy> | Philip`, in principle, yet. But experience with public-html suggests that it's useful to try and keep as much unproductive discussion off the list as possible, so that the little bit of productive discussion that goes on there doesn't get drowned out in the noise |
| 14:41 | <annevk42> | hsivonen, what is the alternative to what I posted for getElementsByTagName? |
| 14:43 | <hsivonen> | annevk42: the alternative is that each element node has a pointer to an interned compound name struct (aka. node info in Gecko and qualified name in WebKit) and this struct has pointers to four interned items: |
| 14:43 | <hsivonen> | namespace, local name, prefix and ASCII-lowercased local name |
| 14:44 | <hsivonen> | then in XML, selectors preserve case and match against local name |
| 14:44 | <hsivonen> | and in HTML selectors are lower-case and match against ASCII-lowercased local name |
| 14:45 | <hsivonen> | making SVG-in-text/html nodes give the appearance of case-insensitive selector matching |
| 14:46 | <annevk42> | that's not just a different strategy, that gives different results |
| 14:46 | <hsivonen> | and the third alternative is using a single local name atoms on both sides and magic fixup lists that can't support textArea |
| 14:46 | <hsivonen> | annevk42: different results |
| 14:47 | <annevk42> | i think what bz said makes the most sense |
| 14:47 | <annevk42> | that's also what i said on IRC yesterday... :) |
| 14:47 | <hsivonen> | so, yeah I guess there's no way around the spec forcing which side you put the dual atoms on |
| 14:48 | <hsivonen> | annevk42: yesterday I didn't know that bz would be OK with HTMLness compare plus pointer compare instead of just pointer compare :-) |
| 14:48 | <Fyrd> | Hey, shouldn't this page: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/ include the newly separated specs? Or are they listed somewhere else? |
| 14:49 | <annevk42> | they moved to the W3C |
| 14:49 | <annevk42> | http://dev.w3.org/html5/ |
| 14:51 | <Fyrd> | Ah, okay, thanks. |
| 16:24 | gsnedders | wonders about a !feedback bot |
| 17:52 | <gsnedders> | <h1>foo</h1><section><h1>bar</h1></section><p>where — what section is "where" associated with? |
| 18:40 | <jgraham> | gsnedders: Foo |
| 18:40 | <jgraham> | asasuming the spec makes sense |
| 18:42 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: That's what I'd logically expect. I'm not entirely convinced the spec makes sense though. |
| 18:46 | Philip` | is concerned about overuse of the terms "logic" and "sense" |
| 19:07 | <mpilgrim> | man, that HTTPbis thread is epic |
| 19:08 | <mpilgrim> | it's like arguing with a toddler |
| 19:08 | <mpilgrim> | "Would you like an apple or an orange?" |
| 19:08 | <mpilgrim> | "I want a pony!" |
| 19:08 | <mpilgrim> | "No. Would you like an apple, or would you like an orange?" |
| 19:08 | <mpilgrim> | "I want a pony!" |
| 19:08 | <mpilgrim> | "All right, I'll make the choice for you." |
| 19:08 | <mpilgrim> | "NOOOOOOO!" |
| 19:10 | <mpilgrim> | "Would you like browsers to behave according to a documented algorithm or an undocumented algorithm?" |
| 19:10 | <mpilgrim> | "I want a pony!" |
| 19:11 | <mpilgrim> | "No. Would you like browsers to behave according to a documented or undocumented algorithm?" |
| 19:11 | <mpilgrim> | "I want a pony!" |
| 19:11 | <mpilgrim> | "Would you like me to make the choice for you?" |
| 19:11 | <mpilgrim> | "NOOOOOOOO!" |
| 19:11 | <Dashiva> | It's a sneaky way to say "I want neither of those", maybe |
| 19:12 | <gavin_> | it seems to me that the most productive way forward is to push for Adam's option a) (remove content-type restrictions) rather than b) (add the sniffing algorithm to the HTTP spec) |
| 19:12 | <gavin_> | the argument that "http forbids us from doing this" isn't a very strong one in my mind |
| 19:12 | <gavin_> | it should be fixed, but it's hardly the critical problem some people are making it out to be |
| 19:13 | <mpilgrim> | I predict the actual solution will be c) HTTPbis continues to ignore reality, and HTML5 or some sub-spec will contain the phrase "The following algorithm is a willful violation of blah blah blah" |
| 19:14 | <gavin_> | I think an a) solution is possible with a small phrasing change... but maybe even that's being optimistic |
| 19:14 | <gavin_> | I don't think your option c) is a huge problem |
| 19:15 | <mpilgrim> | nor do i |
| 19:15 | <mpilgrim> | note that i am not actually a fan of content-sniffing |
| 19:15 | <mpilgrim> | at all |
| 19:15 | <mpilgrim> | but documented crap is better than undocumented crap |
| 19:15 | <gavin_> | indeed |
| 19:17 | <annevk2> | having it documented will hopefully discourage additional sniffing |
| 19:17 | <mpilgrim> | hahaha |
| 19:17 | <mpilgrim> | no, that won't happen either |
| 19:18 | <annevk2> | I'm still hoping :) |
| 19:18 | <mpilgrim> | there are whole new avenues of sniffing yet to come |
| 19:18 | <mpilgrim> | audio formats |
| 19:18 | <mpilgrim> | video formats |
| 19:19 | <annevk2> | fonts |
| 19:19 | <mpilgrim> | fonts, indeed |
| 19:19 | <annevk2> | admittedly media types suck |
| 19:20 | <jcranmer> | x-cabal/x-html |
| 19:21 | <annevk2> | doing the right thing for fonts (getting font/otf) is apparently very hard so we really went ahead with the draft |
| 19:21 | <annevk2> | so we never really* |
| 19:33 | gsnedders | predicts mpilgrim is right and solution c prevails… again |
| 19:34 | <mpilgrim> | somebody should add my prediction to http://wrongtomorrow.com/ |
| 19:39 | <Philip`> | It's kind of hard to *not* implement content-sniffing for fonts when nobody's bothered registering a type, even if everyone has the best of intentions and doesn't want sniffing |
| 19:40 | <Philip`> | Someone should set up wrongtoday.com and put the HTTP spec on it |
| 19:40 | <annevk2> | yeah, we should have just forced people to use font/ttf or font/otf and then bother about registration later |
| 19:40 | <annevk2> | it's too late now though, I think |
| 19:41 | <Philip`> | The TTF/OTF distinction is a bit meaningless, which makes things confusing |
| 19:41 | <Philip`> | (since OTF is a backward-compatible extension to TTF, and can still use .ttf files) |
| 19:41 | <Philip`> | (unless you use the non-backward-compatible parts of OTF, in which case you can use .ttf or .otf) |
| 19:41 | <Philip`> | (I think) |
| 19:42 | <Philip`> | Hmm, that reminds me, http://fonts.philip.html5.org/ is still breaking the law |
| 19:43 | <Philip`> | since it sets the font names to "Subset of [original name]", and the Open Font License says you mustn't use any part of the original name for your new font, and I forgot to implement that |
| 19:43 | <Philip`> | but nobody has complained yet, so that's okay |
| 19:47 | <annevk2> | Philip`, the idea would be that they would both be handed to the same processor. I wasn't quite convinced by this part of the story but the other people involved in the discussion thought that having a distinct mapping for both .ttf and .otf was worth it even though in practice it would be meaningless. |
| 19:48 | <Philip`> | As long as you can use either extension and either content-type and it will work without needing to understand the distinction, that sounds fair enough |
| 21:05 | <Hixie> | http://www.w3.org/mid/ee0b30dd0904030511w559c76bey3a6ddb4a95b5d90c⊙mgc would be grounds for banning in the whatwg, i wonder what the w3c did about it |
| 21:06 | <Hixie> | (of course the e-mail it is replying to would be grounds for permanent banning on the grounds that it's a linkspam bot) |
| 21:07 | <Hixie> | (but that's another story) |
| 21:11 | <gavin_> | why would that be grounds for banning? |
| 21:12 | <Hixie> | oh i guess i misread it and didn't realise he was using the word "spammer" literally as opposed to as an insult |
| 21:12 | <Hixie> | never mind |
| 21:29 | <Philip`> | Is Ojan Vafai just trying to make clickjacking attacks far easier? |
| 21:30 | <ojan> | Philip`: how so? |
| 21:30 | <ojan> | Philip`: if you meant that as a serious question, the answer is no :) |
| 21:37 | <Philip`> | ojan: Because one of the difficulties with clickjacking is positioning and scrolling the target page so the link or button or whatever is in the right place, and your proposal was to provide a feature that lets you much more easily scroll the target page to wherever you want |
| 21:37 | <Philip`> | ojan: Also, it wasn't an entirely serious question ;-) |
| 21:46 | <ojan> | Philip`: the use case i gave is actually the one that inspired the idea. things like image search (e.g. MS image search or google image search) would work a lot better if they could scroll the image into view |
| 21:50 | <Hixie> | philip is right that it would make clickjacking easier |
| 21:50 | <Hixie> | but i think in practice it doesn't make it significantly easier |
| 21:50 | <Hixie> | in that it's already possible to "scroll" an iframe by just making it high enough |
| 22:31 | <jwalden> | Philip`: that's not exactly hard, is it? iframe in an iframe with the outer of the two abspos-ing the inner one to produce exactly the pixels desired |
| 22:39 | <Philip`> | jwalden: It's harder to get decent cross-browser cross-platform support that way, since the absolute positioning will depend on fonts and layout and stuff |
| 22:39 | <jwalden> | eh...hitting the 2/3 case is good enough if that's what you're trying to do |
| 22:40 | <Philip`> | Not if you're using it to target a specific individual, and don't know what browser they're going to be using |
| 22:40 | <jwalden> | the money in attacks is in affecting a large audience |
| 22:40 | <jwalden> | anyway, it's like buffer overflows, once you have one you know you're pretty much hosed, even if it might take a lot of effort and potentially be machine-specific |
| 22:41 | <Philip`> | Not if you're tricking one person into clicking the "send one million dollars to this bank account" button on their online banking ystem |
| 22:41 | <jwalden> | or heap smashes |
| 22:41 | <Philip`> | s//s/ |
| 22:42 | <Philip`> | Anyway, yes, if you're vulnerable to normal clickjacking then that should be fixed, and it doesn't matter if the attack is made easy, so this doesn't seem like a real problem :-) |
| 22:42 | <Philip`> | s/easy/easier/ |