01:31
<Hixie>
i mentioned the address hedral⊙dc on the html5 spec in december last year
01:31
<Hixie>
it's received hundreds of e-mails of spam
12:24
gsnedders
wonders who Bibbi Svärd is
12:25
jgraham
wonders how to most usefully answer that question
12:25
<jgraham>
She is the HR person and general enabler of all things in Sweden
12:25
<gsnedders>
Ah
12:26
<gsnedders>
jgraham: Is she evil?
12:26
<jgraham>
gsnedders: No
12:26
<gsnedders>
That's good then.
12:26
<jgraham>
In other news: I value my job ;)
12:26
<gsnedders>
:)
12:27
<jgraham>
(but seriously Bibbi is pretty wonderful)
12:27
gsnedders
heads off to lunch, and ponders the prospect of his third ever interview
12:31
<jgraham>
gsnedders: Phone interview? Or f2f?
12:32
Philip`
thinks interviews should all be conducted on IRC
12:35
<mpt>
That would be much less useful for the interviewer
12:36
<mpt>
Er ... don't mind me, it's Friday and my sense of humor has gone on holiday
12:38
<jgraham>
mpt: I hope it has gone somewhere nice. My sense of humor once spent two weeks in a caravan in North Wales and it rained every day. On the upside, it was happy to come home.
12:39
<mpt>
So you ended up with a wealth of sheep jokes?
12:45
<Lachy>
gsnedders, does this mean you'll be doing your internship in the Swedish office if you get accepted?
12:58
<jcranmer>
Sveden
14:01
<gsnedders>
jgraham: Phone
14:01
<gsnedders>
Lachy: I assume so
14:26
<jgraham>
gsnedders: Cool
16:08
<kanchan_Tripathi>
hi, can anyone tell me why this simple POST via telnet is'nt working
16:09
<kanchan_Tripathi>
http://pastebin.com/d36e8e302
16:12
<Philip`>
Maybe it needs "Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded"?
16:14
<Philip`>
kanchan_Tripathi: Maybe it needs "Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded"?
16:15
<kanchan_Tripathi>
Philip can you elaborate it.
16:16
<Philip`>
kanchan_Tripathi: You might need to include that header in your telnet POST request
16:24
<kanchan_Tripathi>
Philip i did that its not working
16:24
<kanchan_Tripathi>
??
17:04
gsnedders
is way too tempted to collapse asleep in bed
17:43
<smedero>
Philip`: http://boston.lti.cs.cmu.edu/Data/clueweb09/ -- just in case you'd like a lot more web data and have someone willing to pay for it
17:43
<smedero>
if i recall, you're at a Uni... so you might have access to it already through a partnership.
20:03
<takkaria>
"I think that real openness is often much easier to get in a closed forum", hmm
20:04
<Dashiva>
real openness or apparent openness?
20:04
<gavin_>
presumably he means "openness" in the "honesty" sense
20:51
jgraham
wonders what takkaria was quoting
20:55
<takkaria>
http://annevankesteren.nl/2009/04/html5-wai-aria#comment-6762
21:28
<Hixie>
i'm baffled by the people who actually want working groups to work in a closed manner, ignoring external input
21:29
<Hixie>
(i've heard several people criticize the whatwg development model, but i've yet to hear anyone propose anything that actually results in a better spec)
21:33
Philip`
wonders how one would judge whether a proposal would result in a better spec
21:34
<gsnedders>
The score of "The Matrix Revolutions" is awesome.
21:35
<Hixie>
Philip`: i've yet to hear anyone propose anything that even they think results in a better spec
21:35
<Philip`>
gsnedders: I thought its score was about 5 out of 10, which doesn't sound that good
21:35
<jgraham>
Philip`: Presumably you do it like astrophysics and just look at lots of examples and try to infer the common proprties and so on
21:36
<gsnedders>
Philip`: The score has far better reviews than the film itself :)
21:36
<Philip`>
gsnedders: Oh, you mean the score scores highly?
21:37
<gsnedders>
Philip`: s/score/soundtrack/g if that makes you understand better
21:37
<Philip`>
gsnedders: That removes the fun of misunderstanding
21:39
<Philip`>
jgraham: In astrophysics there's like a trillion trillion examples you can look at, but for HTML specs there's like one (to the nearest couple of orders of magnitude)
21:40
<Philip`>
which I guess makes any conclusions much less reliable
21:41
<richb_>
just read the article about link-is rel=shorter the same idea as rev canonical?
21:42
<smedero>
rel=short|shorter|shortlink|shorturl|short_url
21:42
<smedero>
what fun!
21:43
<richb_>
great! thought there was meant to be some sort.of spec...
21:44
<richb_>
any ua implement any usage of any?
22:03
<takkaria>
richb_: no, no-one implements any of them as yet
22:10
<richb_>
heard lots more about html5 recently - what happened to xhtml2.0?
22:11
<Hixie>
nothing particularly, it still exists and is being developed:
22:11
<Hixie>
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/
22:12
<Hixie>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/latest/ is where development happens
22:12
<richb_>
is it still relevant? seems html5 is making more progress
22:12
<Hixie>
depends who you ask
22:13
<Hixie>
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#relationships-to-other-specifications might help
22:13
<richb_>
guess that's just an outsiders view
22:14
<Hixie>
well the people working on xhtml2 presumably think html5 will go nowhere, an the people working on html5 by and large think the same about xhtml2 :-)
22:14
<Hixie>
hence why there are two groups :-)
22:14
<Hixie>
though i hear there's work underway to merge the two groups and just have one language
22:14
<Hixie>
dunno how that's gonna work
22:18
<takkaria>
Hixie: do you ever regret having large portions of Yes Minister on your website under /bible? :)
22:18
<Hixie>
no
22:18
<Hixie>
i use it the same way i used the text on ian.hixie.ch/'s main page
22:18
<Hixie>
it's a bogofilter
22:19
<takkaria>
fair play
22:19
<Hixie>
(people self-identify as feeling unable to argue their case by pointing to the page as evidence that i am not arguing fairly)
22:21
<takkaria>
it also seems blatanly unfair to assume that because something's on your website that's clearly quoted from somewhere else, that you agree with it and use it on a daily basis
22:21
<Hixie>
right -- people who claim that are self-identifying as candidates for my mail filters
22:21
<Hixie>
it's pretty awesome
22:23
<Hixie>
i had the sentence "I am always ready to reassess my core assumptions in the light of new evidence" on that site's home page before that i used in the same way
22:23
<Hixie>
i knew that if people quoted that sentence at me that arguing with them was likely a waste of time
22:35
<Dashiva>
So xhtml2 is slowly adding more and more of html4 back as deprecated? Or?
22:39
<Hixie>
no idea, you'd have to ask the xhtml2 wg
22:40
<Hixie>
the end is in sight with the <code>datagrid</code> rewrite
22:40
<annevk2>
is someone going to implement it that you're doing that now?
22:43
<Hixie>
chrome almost has someone to implement it but i had to tell them to stop given the big problems with the design
22:43
<Hixie>
that was in jan or feb
22:44
<Hixie>
it's pretty late to be doing changes like this at all; when would you want me to do it?
22:44
<annevk2>
i'm just curious :)
22:45
<Hixie>
rdfa is next, after a brief pause for websocket stuff and to fix the typos people found
22:45
<Hixie>
oh and making the specs ready to publish
22:46
<Lachy>
is rdfa actually going to make it into HTML5?
22:46
<Hixie>
depends what the use cases are and how well they are a match for them
22:47
<Lachy>
oh, ok. So you haven't made a final decision yet?
22:47
<Hixie>
"final"?
22:47
<Hixie>
i haven't made any decisions yet, if i had i wouldn't have to do anything :-)
22:48
<Hixie>
and decisions i make are hardly final, after all, the wg has to agree to them before the spec is done
22:48
<Lachy>
I meant, you haven't decided whether or not you will be adding any RDFa to the spec yet
22:48
<Hixie>
i decided not to at least once before
22:49
<Hixie>
but there are new use cases that have been introduced to the discussion
22:49
<takkaria>
I wish people would stop harping on about this "invalid code in HTML5 has no negative consequences" thing, since s/5/4/ and you're just as accurate
22:50
<Hixie>
"people"? i thought it was just one person
22:50
<Hixie>
and yeah i don't understand what they mean by "no negative consequences"
22:50
<Hixie>
isn't a page being inaccessible a pretty serious negative consequence?
22:50
<Lachy>
who said there's no negative consequences?
22:50
<takkaria>
maybe it is just John Foliot getting around
22:50
<Hixie>
john foliot keeps saying that making pages inaccessible has no serious negative consequences, or something along those lines. I don't fully understand what he's saying exactly.
22:51
<annevk2>
John Foliot has been touting it lately
22:51
<Lachy>
invalid code doesn't inherently mean inaccessible though.
22:51
<Lachy>
Hixie, I assume you mean s/inaccessible/invalid/
22:51
<Hixie>
Lachy: no but he's talking about invalid code in terms of not providing <canvas> fallback, and things along those lines, as i understand it
22:51
<annevk2>
his point is that since HTML5 defines error handling making errors is not a problem
22:51
<Hixie>
clearly i don't understand what he's saying
22:52
<Hixie>
but that's nothing new
22:52
<annevk2>
and that therefore using ARIA (which is invalid) is fine
22:52
<Hixie>
aria is invalid?
22:52
<Lachy>
ok
22:52
<othermaciej>
sicking: I'm glad I'm not the only one to fail to communicate with Anders Rundgren
22:52
<annevk2>
Hixie, the validator complaints about bits I believe
22:52
<Hixie>
is this a bug in the validator? or is he saying that violating aria's own rules is fine?
22:53
<Hixie>
i'm even more confused now than i was before!
22:53
<annevk2>
Hixie, I don't really understand what his aim is either; validation seems useful regardless of whether you use some extensions that not validate currently
22:53
<annevk2>
Hixie, hsivonen doesn't support e.g. landmark roles
22:55
<Hixie>
ok...?
22:57
<annevk2>
I had nothing else. (Could also be that it's not about validators and just about the HTML5 spec not "blessing" WAI-ARIA I suppose.)
22:57
<Hixie>
well yeah, we haven't done that yet
22:57
<Hixie>
we can't very well do that until aria is ready for it
22:57
<Hixie>
i even sent feedback on that very topic recently
22:59
<annevk2>
yeah, me too
23:00
<annevk2>
I suppose I should just stop reading rants from John Foliot because they are indeed confusing and not very nice. E.g. "I am dismissing many of your arguments based upon the process and procedure that Ian applies (deny, ignore, stall)."
23:01
<Hixie>
q.v. the earlier discussion of how to tell who's actually acting in good faith and who isn't. :-)
23:01
<annevk2>
Irrespective of whether what he says about you is true, it would be nice if he and I could converse normally, but I guess that's not possible.
23:22
gsnedders
realizes why backup has failed… the server is off.
23:23
inimino
notes that it's always better to realize why your backup failed than why your restore failed
23:35
<gsnedders>
Oh dear… Someone using PHP 4.3.3RC2