| 06:55 | <Darxus> | I don't like the two syntaxes being referred to as HTML5 and XHTML5. It makes it completely unclear whether I'm talking about the full HTML5 spec, or the html syntax of it. I prefer HTML5/HTML / HTML5/XML. |
| 06:55 | <Hixie> | just call them "XHTML5" and "text/html" |
| 06:57 | <Darxus> | No :P |
| 08:04 | <gsnedders> | Call them "a" and "b" |
| 09:01 | <ray> | anything but slashes, please |
| 09:05 | Hixie | gives ray some parentheses |
| 09:05 | <Hixie> | these ok? |
| 09:05 | <annevk2> | http://imgur.com/DzZdf.jpg :) |
| 09:06 | <annevk2> | (from markp) |
| 09:08 | <Hixie> | gotta love how the ap press release uses the word "microformat" to describe what they're going to do |
| 09:27 | <olliej> | yo gsnedders |
| 09:41 | <Lachy> | Hixie, where is the AP press release you're referring to? |
| 09:41 | <Hixie> | http://www.ap.org/pages/about/pressreleases/pr_072309a.html |
| 09:45 | <Philip`> | Why is "microformat" inappropriate? |
| 09:45 | <Philip`> | http://www.ap.org/media/images/APnewsregistry.jpg mentions hNews which is http://www.valueaddednews.org/technical/techspec which is seemingly intended as a microformat |
| 09:46 | <Hixie> | read the first paragraph of that page |
| 09:46 | <Hixie> | "It is not a formal microformat specification. It is intended that this draft specification will enter the microformats process, but in the meantime it should be considered a poshformat." |
| 09:47 | <tantek> | Hixie - yes - that shows a considerable amount of knowledge/sensitivity to the microformats process. |
| 09:47 | <Hixie> | the valueaddednews.org page does, indeed |
| 09:47 | <Hixie> | the ap press release, not so much |
| 09:47 | <tantek> | press releases typically are not particularly good with details |
| 09:48 | <tantek> | Mark Ng who worked on the hNews brainstorm is going to be at microformatsDevCamp this weekend btw. http://tr.im/ufCE |
| 09:50 | <tantek> | the features in hNews brainstorm will be considered for hAtom 0.2 |
| 09:51 | <Lachy> | I don't understand how they expect to use a microformat to protect anything |
| 09:51 | <tantek> | Lachy - I'm not sure about any kind of "protection" in that context either, but I do think if an organization wants to pursue better semantic markup, that's a good thing. |
| 09:51 | <Lachy> | unless they also intend to get some government regulation to force software to implement it and impose restrictions somehow |
| 09:53 | <tantek> | I think some of this work may also help drive the completion of the licensing microformat that is in development, which allows licensing specific portions of content via links (similar to rel-license). |
| 09:54 | <tantek> | As I mentioned to Hixie earlier in this channel (days ago?) it's likely to be fairly straightforward, similar to the licensing predefined vocab, without any of the undesirable combinatorial complexity of the ccREL schema/model. |
| 09:54 | <Lachy> | http://www.ap.org/media/images/APnewsregistry.jpg - there's apparently also some tracking beacon. Not sure how that could possibly work in practice |
| 09:56 | <tantek> | I don't know of any beacon in the hNews brainstorm and I don't understand how it's supposed to work so I'm not going to speculate on that. The beacon mentioned does not seem to have anything to do with semantic markup. |
| 09:56 | <tantek> | (so it doesn't seem worth worrying about vis-a-vis evaluating the hNews brainstorm) |
| 09:57 | <tantek> | I'm not sure how (from that jpg) '"the sends signals back to the news registry" - e.g. signals using what protocols etc. |
| 09:58 | <Lachy> | yeah, I guess we'll have to wait for more technical details to arise |
| 09:59 | <tantek> | well, as I said, due to the apparent orthogonality of the technologies, I'm going to move forward with evaluating hNews on its own semantic markup merits, regardless of any protocol layer changes that related proposals may seek, and leave those to other technical discussions. |
| 09:59 | <Philip`> | <img src="http://tracking.ap.org/?article=412385"; alt=""> - easy :-) |
| 10:00 | <Lachy> | Philip`, the tracking beacon is somehow supposed to track reuse of the content, so they must be assuming that whatever they include will somehow also be copied along with their content |
| 10:00 | <Lachy> | which is a flawed assumption |
| 10:01 | <Lachy> | unless they only care about services that syndicate their entire rss/atom feed verbatim |
| 11:03 | <shepazu> | it's going to use @ping :) |
| 11:07 | <Hixie> | i wonder why http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2009Jul/0197.html was sent in a member-only forum given the public nature of the referenced group |
| 11:07 | <Hixie> | same with other e-mails around the same time |
| 11:23 | <gsnedders> | 'lo olliej |
| 11:26 | <olliej> | gsnedders: looks to be an interesting GP this weekend |
| 11:56 | <othermaciej> | well, I decided to be honestly impolite after all |
| 12:09 | <gsnedders> | olliej: Sadly, being in Sweden, and without a TV, I have no means of knowing :( |
| 12:10 | <olliej> | :-( |
| 12:10 | <olliej> | othermaciej: ? |
| 12:10 | <othermaciej> | on public-html |
| 12:12 | olliej | doesn't follow that list |
| 12:16 | <Philip`> | olliej: You're missing out on so much excitement |
| 12:16 | <olliej> | ... |
| 12:16 | <gsnedders> | s/much/little/ |
| 12:17 | <olliej> | mailing lists tend to aggravate me more than excite me |
| 12:17 | olliej | is not particularly tolerant of stupidity, idiocy, dogmatic arguments, etc |
| 12:20 | <Philip`> | olliej: Yet you spend all day on IRC? :-) |
| 12:20 | <gsnedders> | olliej: Do you think free practice times for this weekend are real? |
| 12:22 | <olliej> | gsnedders: tricky |
| 12:23 | <gsnedders> | olliej: Hmm, looking at the German GP free practice times I guess they aren't |
| 12:23 | <olliej> | gsnedders: i'd like to know the amount of fuel in in hamilton's car |
| 12:23 | <olliej> | gsnedders: the mp4-24 is vastly improved now |
| 12:24 | <gsnedders> | olliej: I'm guessing nothing. To be top of the times at free practice for two races in a row and not have very good race perf. still… |
| 12:24 | <olliej> | gsnedders: hamiltons times in germany were screwed by a flat in the first corner |
| 12:24 | <gsnedders> | heh. Reminds me of Schumacher's final race |
| 12:24 | <olliej> | i missed that :-( |
| 12:24 | <gsnedders> | (and _that_ was an impressive drive by him) |
| 12:25 | <gsnedders> | I think it was on a restart after SC on about lap 3, him and Fisi came together, giving him a flat |
| 12:25 | <olliej> | bugger |
| 12:25 | <gsnedders> | So, one whole very slow lap round Interlagos, and long pit stop, put him around 70 seconds down from Massa, in the lead |
| 12:25 | <gsnedders> | (a lap is around 83 seconds) |
| 12:26 | <gsnedders> | He came fouth. |
| 12:26 | <gsnedders> | *forth |
| 12:26 | <gsnedders> | (70 seconds down and last) |
| 12:31 | <gsnedders> | olliej: Oh, it was on lap 8 |
| 12:31 | <gsnedders> | (of 71) |
| 12:34 | <olliej> | gsnedders: err |
| 12:34 | <olliej> | gsnedders: did you just incorrect your spelling? |
| 12:34 | <gsnedders> | No, both were wrong |
| 12:34 | <gsnedders> | *fourth |
| 12:34 | <gsnedders> | But forth is at least a word, unlike fouth :P |
| 12:35 | <olliej> | heh |
| 12:35 | <olliej> | fail :D |
| 12:36 | <svl> | Couldn't you as author of the original word just normatively declare it to be equal to "fourth"? |
| 12:37 | <Philip`> | In that case I, as the reader of the word, will normatively declare it to be interpreted as "seventh" |
| 12:37 | <gsnedders> | fouth son of a fouth son? |
| 12:39 | <Philip`> | Yes, who turns out to actually be a daughter, causing all sorts of confusion |
| 12:43 | <olliej> | clearly we need a committee and working group to define an acceptable definition of fouth |
| 12:43 | <gsnedders> | olliej: a public or private WG? |
| 12:44 | <olliej> | gsnedders: it needs to be public |
| 12:44 | <olliej> | gsnedders: so we can get input from the wider web community |
| 12:49 | <svl> | Shouldn't we reach out to established experts on all things fouth? |
| 12:50 | <olliej> | indeed we should |
| 12:53 | <Lachy> | http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fouth |
| 12:54 | <gsnedders> | Ah, we need to get Tom Kuhns involved then. |
| 15:48 | <Darxus> | "Note: The Adobe SVG Viewer recommends that you use the EMBED tag when embedding SVG in HTML pages! However, if you want to create valid XHTML, you cannot use <embed> - The <embed> tag is not listed in any HTML specification." - http://www.w3schools.com/svg/svg_inhtml.asp it would be nice to get HTML5 mentioned in that paragraph. |
| 15:58 | <poe> | Darxus: I find that w3schools is quite unreliable in general. |
| 16:09 | <jcranmer> | I prefer just going to specs myself these days |
| 16:09 | <jcranmer> | MDC is helpful sometimes, though |
| 16:09 | <jcranmer> | I forgot that XSLT has some functions that XPath doesn't have |
| 16:14 | <takkaria> | HTML5 is acutally a pretty good reference for a lot of stuf |
| 16:21 | <annevk4> | if you read spec :) |
| 18:47 | <Darxus> | The spec is kind of hard to read if you're not trying to find full browser implimentation details. |
| 18:48 | <gsnedders> | Darxus: See alternate style sheets |
| 18:49 | <Darxus> | gsnedders: I do not understand. I wasn't actually complaining about the spec, just responding to takkaria / annevk2. |
| 18:50 | <Darxus> | Validators happen, browser implimentors clearly need more help :) |
| 18:50 | <gsnedders> | It's still true and makes it easier to read |
| 18:51 | <Darxus> | What's true? |
| 18:52 | <Philip`> | Darxus: Everything that's not false |
| 18:52 | <takkaria> | Darxus: if you're actually coding javascript, though, you need implementation details to make sure your code works right |
| 18:52 | <Philip`> | unless you're a constructivist, I suppose |
| 18:52 | <takkaria> | Philip`: hm, constructionism |
| 18:52 | <takkaria> | d'oh |
| 18:52 | <inimino> | Darxus: there is an 'author view' style sheet that hides some parts of the spec |
| 18:53 | <Darxus> | inimino: I have not noticed that. |
| 18:53 | gsnedders | blinks |
| 18:53 | <gsnedders> | ChrisWilson? In #whatwg? What's the world coming to? |
| 18:54 | <gsnedders> | Philip`: What about things that cannot be proven, and hence are neither true nor false? |
| 18:55 | <inimino> | things that cannot be proven are neither true nor false? |
| 18:55 | <Philip`> | I think it depends on whether you believe in the law of the excluded middle |
| 18:55 | <Darxus> | Nothing can be proven, not even your own existence. |
| 18:55 | <inimino> | I don't think so |
| 18:56 | <inimino> | lots of things that are either true or false cannot be /proven/ |
| 18:56 | <Darxus> | I'm lacking motivation to do the validation steps after basic nesting :/ |
| 18:56 | <inimino> | for example, every historical fact |
| 18:56 | Philip` | was replying mostly to gsnedders |
| 18:58 | Philip` | only cares about cares about real proof, like in maths, not about anything fuzzy like history :-p |
| 18:59 | <Darxus> | I figure valadation works out to: basic nesting, conditional nesting (including sequence / required elements), and value type enforcement. |
| 18:59 | <Darxus> | Sounds pretty simple. Still. |
| 18:59 | <Philip`> | and many people consider it axiomatic that everything is either true or false, in which case the things gsnedders asked about don't exist |
| 18:59 | <Darxus> | I hate the word "maths". |
| 19:00 | <Philip`> | (regardless of whether everything can be proved) |
| 19:01 | <inimino> | Philip`: ah, but "things that cannot be proven" is what gsnedders asked about |
| 19:02 | <gsnedders> | inimino: It is still possible that those things are either true or false |
| 19:02 | <gsnedders> | inimino: It's just we can't prove it |
| 19:02 | <Philip`> | inimino: They are a subset of things, and if all things are either true or false, then the things in the subset are too |
| 19:02 | <inimino> | gsnedders: agreed |
| 19:03 | <inimino> | Philip`: yes, surely |
| 19:05 | <inimino> | (I think most people will agree that "colorless green ideas sleep furiously" is neither true nor false, though) |
| 19:07 | <Darxus> | inimino: Did you just make that quote up? |
| 19:08 | <inimino> | Darxus: no, it's from Chomsky |
| 19:08 | <Darxus> | Good. |
| 19:08 | Philip` | only cares about proper stuff like maths, so he's not interested in sleeping ideas unless they're expressed in formal logic :-p |
| 19:08 | <Darxus> | I still hate the word "maths". |
| 19:09 | <Philip`> | What word would you prefer? |
| 19:11 | <Darxus> | Philip`: "math". |
| 19:12 | <Philip`> | Darxus: Urgh |
| 19:13 | <takkaria> | bloody americans |
| 19:13 | <gsnedders> | But mathematics is plural, so why should the abbreviation be singular? |
| 19:13 | <takkaria> | (scare quotes implied) |
| 19:13 | gsnedders | heads off |
| 19:14 | <Darxus> | Does the "s" in "mathematics" actually imply plural? |
| 19:15 | <Dashiva> | It's a mass noun |
| 19:15 | <Darxus> | I don't know what a mass noun is. |
| 19:16 | <Philip`> | It's like "kilogram" |
| 19:16 | <gsnedders> | LOL |
| 19:16 | <gsnedders> | A mass noun is uncoutable |
| 19:16 | <gsnedders> | *uncountable |
| 19:16 | <inimino> | it's like "water" or "sand" |
| 19:16 | <Darxus> | gsnedders: So the "s" doesn't imply plural? |
| 19:17 | <inimino> | you don't have waters or sands, (except poetically) |
| 19:17 | <gsnedders> | Darxus: correct |
| 19:17 | <Darxus> | Sweet. I am victorious. |
| 19:18 | inimino | notes that the topic goes double if people are going to try to reason about English |
| 19:19 | <gsnedders> | heh |
| 19:19 | <gsnedders> | "Please leave your sense of logic at the door, thanks! |
| 19:23 | <Dashiva> | Even without a sense of logic we can still apply reasoning rules mechanically |
| 19:34 | <Darxus> | "Element h1 is not allowed in element body (note: schema is not yet completed)." Heh. |
| 20:12 | <Darxus> | Checking attribute values against a perl regex now works. |
| 23:19 | <Darxus> | Woohoo "Element table is not allowed in element h1 (note: schema is not yet completed)." |
| 23:30 | <Darxus> | Oh I guess that was already done. |
