00:03
<TabAtkins>
Ah, but bless you, details. Trivial to hack support for, and just the right element for my needs.
00:12
<Philip`>
TabAtkins: Aha, it works if I do a transparent-PNG-fix style thing
00:12
<Philip`>
without needing an actual PNG
00:12
<Philip`>
just using filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.Alpha(opacity=80);
00:12
<Philip`>
(at least in IE8, I assume it'll work in IE6/7 too)
00:19
<Hixie>
hm
00:19
<Hixie>
i don't say how to handle <link type=""> if the type can't be parsed
00:19
<Hixie>
wonder what the spec should say for that case
00:23
<Philip`>
Fatal error, YSOD
00:25
<Hixie>
mmhm
00:26
<Hixie>
webkit seems to ignore type="" altogether
00:54
<TabAtkins>
Philip`: Oh, duh. I knew MS had a plain opacity filter. Silly me.
01:23
<TabAtkins>
roc: Specced repeating gradients. Let me know if something doesn't match your implementation.
01:23
<roc>
ta
01:38
<roc>
TabAtkins: looks great
01:41
<Hixie>
watcha guys working on that has all these gradient thingies?
01:42
<roc>
CSS gradients spec
01:42
<roc>
sorry, off topic
01:42
<Hixie>
oh, cool
01:42
<Hixie>
not at all off topic, don't worry
01:42
<Hixie>
this channel has no topic
01:42
<Hixie>
the only thing that's off-topic is logic
01:50
<Hixie>
anyone remember what IE's equivalent of event.target is?
01:53
<miketaylr>
event.srcElement?
01:54
<Hixie>
thanks
01:54
<miketaylr>
np
02:52
<TabAtkins>
roc: Oh man, gradient support looks beautiful. Thanks so much.
02:52
<roc>
pleasure
02:52
<roc>
thanks for writing a decent spec
02:53
<roc>
a good spec, atually
02:54
<TabAtkins>
Woo!
02:54
<TabAtkins>
/spec high-five
04:53
<othermaciej>
we should update WebKit's gradient implementation
05:00
<Hixie>
what does an HTTP client do when an HTTP _server_ (not proxy) replies with 407?
05:01
<weinig>
othermaciej: how different is the new spec?
05:02
<othermaciej>
weinig: different (arguably better) syntax from what we had I think
05:02
weinig
should take a look
05:02
<othermaciej>
Hixie: I would assume either "get really confused" or "report an error"
05:03
<othermaciej>
oddly, it's not something we've tested
05:04
<othermaciej>
weinig: if I'm well enough to come in tomorrow I may borrow you part of the day to work on some standards stuff - we need to give feedback on File API and maybe you can help me, and maybe I can take a whack at helping you update Web IDL to ES5
05:04
<weinig>
othermaciej: I would very much like that
05:04
<othermaciej>
that being said, my throat still feels like it's full of razor blades duct taped to angry badgers, so I have my doubts about being in tomorrow
05:05
<weinig>
othermaciej: :(
05:06
<othermaciej>
weinig: it sound like a lot of our team is out of action with something possibly similar, so I'm hesitant to go into the office til I'm confident that I am not contagious
05:08
<weinig>
othermaciej: yeah, it does seem like there is a hit out on the safari team, flu wise
05:16
<Hixie>
0 e-mails
05:16
<Hixie>
1 XXX marker (which I am not fixing this year, it's "define WebSQL")
05:16
<Hixie>
22 bugs!
05:16
<Hixie>
where did they come from!
05:16
<Hixie>
we were at zero!
05:16
<Hixie>
man, this never ends
05:51
<JoePeck>
Where would I go to find out about all the html node list / collection types? NodeList, HTMLCollection, HTMLOptionsCollection. Are there others?
05:55
<MikeSmith>
fyi: error messages for obsolete messages now patched in v.nu source to include suggestions about what to use instead
05:55
<MikeSmith>
e.g., http://qa-dev.w3.org:8888/?doc=http://dev.w3.org/html5/tests/validation/full/invalid/obsolete/acronym.html
05:55
<MikeSmith>
"The acronym element is obsolete. Use the abbr element instead."
05:57
<MikeSmith>
still need to add reporting for obsolete attributes
05:59
<Hixie>
JoePeck: HTML5 defines some of them, the rest are probably in DOM Core
05:59
<JoePeck>
Hixie: thanks, bdash pointed me to http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#collections-0
06:09
Hixie
tries to remember why we need a secondary insertion mode at all
06:12
<Hixie>
oh it's so that <table><tr><td><svg></table> closes the table
08:36
<Hixie>
well
08:36
<Hixie>
technically i'm at 0,1,0
08:36
<Hixie>
i guess it's time to find out what i'm supposed to do to go to last call with all these specs
08:38
<Philip`>
Quick, somebody file more bugs!
08:39
<Philip`>
"If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED." - does that need to be done by the reporter even for ones reported anonymously through the spec comment box?
08:40
<Hixie>
othermaciej said no, i think
08:41
<Hixie>
not sure though
08:41
<othermaciej>
no one *has* to do it
08:41
<othermaciej>
but if it's not done, then eventually the bug times out into NoReply
08:41
<Philip`>
Is it something that preferably should be done?
08:42
<othermaciej>
it would be nice to have a record of agreement for some comments, at least once HTML WG Last Call begins
08:42
<othermaciej>
and also, I like it when the bug system accurately reflects reality
08:42
<othermaciej>
so I personally prefer it
08:42
<othermaciej>
but no one will yell at you if you don't do it
08:44
<Hixie>
Philip`: if you agree with all of them, just search for your IP and mass-close them :-)
08:44
<Philip`>
Reflecting reality sounds like a worthwhile goal
08:44
<Hixie>
oh, hey, it turns out the whatwg charter doesn't have a "last call" stage
08:44
<Hixie>
we just keep doing call for comments until we're done
08:44
<Hixie>
that's pretty sensible
08:44
<Philip`>
Hixie: Mass-closing doesn't help much when I have to individually read every one to work out if I agree or not :-)
08:45
<Hixie>
Philip`: well you can read them in your e-mail client
08:45
<Hixie>
Philip`: but if you go to the bug, then sure
08:45
<Philip`>
Oh
08:45
<Philip`>
Problem: I can't close the bugs
08:45
<Philip`>
since I'm not the owner or anything
08:47
<Hixie>
zcorpan has rights to give you rights to give yourself the rights to close the bug, iirc
08:47
<Hixie>
(i do not, again iirc)
08:52
<Philip`>
Seems like a flaw in the LC process if reporters can't close their bugs without asking zcorpan
09:02
<Philip`>
MikeSmith: Can somebody like you give me bug-editing privileges?
09:06
<othermaciej>
Philip`: MikeSmith almost certainly can give you the privileges and probably will be willing to if you are a heavy bug filer
09:09
<MikeSmith>
Philip`: I will give you editbugs now
09:09
<Philip`>
I have something like a dozen that I mostly want to close now, and will probably have more in the future since I only read up to about p30 out of 654 :-)
09:11
<Philip`>
MikeSmith: Thanks!
09:11
<Philip`>
MikeSmith: (Do you need to know my email address or anything?)
09:12
<MikeSmith>
Philip`: excors one, right?
09:12
<Philip`>
MikeSmith: Yep
09:14
<Philip`>
MikeSmith: Seems to work fine
09:15
<Philip`>
Don't know if I really need the "member of the XSL or XQuery WG" permission bit but I won't complain
09:16
<MikeSmith>
Philip`: yeah, it does that for everybody .. I have no idea why
09:16
<Philip`>
Sounds like they're even more open than the HTML WG
09:16
<Philip`>
since anybody can become a member, whether they want to be or not
09:16
gsnedders
stretches and goes back to html5lib work
09:36
<Philip`>
"omitting tags doesn't lead to people dying" - but what if you're using HTML to control a nuclear power station?
09:36
<Hixie>
aw man, are you really gonna make me rewrite that algorithm using position/input
09:37
<MikeSmith>
or to control an electric chair
09:38
<MikeSmith>
(another use case to consider)
09:39
<Philip`>
Hixie: Feel free to rewrite it however you want, as long as it's not more ambiguous than the rest of the spec :-)
09:39
<Hixie>
i was at zero bugs for 30 minutes
09:40
<Hixie>
30 minutes!
09:40
<Philip`>
MikeSmith: Then errors in the markup might accidentally lead to not killing somebody, which seems like exactly the opposite problem
09:40
<Hixie>
admittedly i was rather lost for those 30 minutes, not sure what to do with myself
09:40
<Hixie>
i mean, i've had things on this pile for 6 years now
09:40
<Hixie>
and suddenly there was no pile
09:40
<Hixie>
so it's reassuring to know the pile grows back so fast
09:40
<Hixie>
but still
10:11
<gsnedders>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLICa> throws two parse errors in the DOCTYPE
10:11
<gsnedders>
Both at the "a"
10:11
<gsnedders>
Firstly, in "anything else" in After DOCTYPE public keyord state
10:11
<gsnedders>
Then a second parse error in the Before DOCTYPE public identifer state when it is reconsumed there
10:12
<Philip`>
Does that matter?
10:12
<gsnedders>
Normally we've tried to avoid a single error giving multiple parse errors, no?
10:12
<Hixie>
file a bug
10:13
<Hixie>
telling me how to fix it
10:13
<gsnedders>
Hixie: You never used to require that!
10:13
<Hixie>
i'm lazier now :-P
10:13
gsnedders
is too
10:13
Hixie
just changed the status of all the sections that were in pre-LC to LC
10:14
<gsnedders>
So WHATWG is in LC now?
10:14
<Hixie>
not yet
10:15
<Hixie>
actually technically as i discovered earlier, whatwg doesn't have an lc state :-)
10:15
<gsnedders>
s/an/a/
10:15
<Hixie>
"an ell sea"
10:15
<Philip`>
"a lick"
10:16
<gsnedders>
"a last call"
10:16
<Hixie>
should i add section markers to all <h3>s and <h4>s that don't have one?
10:16
<Hixie>
i mean, status markers
10:16
gsnedders
grumbles at being unable to change the email address in the W3C bug tracker
10:24
<gsnedders>
Hixie: The space characters cases within the before DOCTYPE public/system identifier states can never be reached. To fix that, remove those cases.
10:25
<Hixie>
type that into the box and hit "send review comments" :-)
10:25
<gsnedders>
8018
10:25
<Hixie>
ta
10:29
<erlehmann>
Hixie, what is the next state called then ? waiting for implementations ?
10:30
<Hixie>
yeah
10:31
gsnedders
is trying to get html5lib shipped in around a week
10:31
<Hixie>
cool
10:32
<gsnedders>
(I got to the point where the impl passes all TCs yesterday)
10:32
<gsnedders>
It's just neither the TCs nor the impl are entirely up to date :)
10:33
<Hixie>
i know _that_ feeling
10:34
<Philip`>
gsnedders: At least the spec is up to date, so the situation is not all bad
10:34
<Philip`>
Well, up to date except for the bug you just filed
10:34
<Hixie>
he filed 2! :-)
10:35
<gsnedders>
Well, it seemed easier to fix all the failing tests first
10:38
<gsnedders>
I also got stuff properly tested in both namespaced and non-namespaced mode
11:46
<Philip`>
I'm glad we have a relatively regular calendar system now, and don't have to make do with datetime strings like "nine months after the death of Tiberius, on the eighteenth day before the Kalends of January, just as the sun rose"
12:15
<Dashiva>
Philip`: You still have to deal with it if you're a classical scholar
12:15
<Philip`>
Dashiva: Fortunately I'm not
12:15
<Dashiva>
Although wouldn't 18 days before kalends be referenced relative to ides instead?
12:16
<Philip`>
http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/cal/jansas.htm says no
12:16
<Dashiva>
Or nones, for that matter. Just not kalends.
12:17
<Dashiva>
Oh, right, december has ides on the 13th
12:17
<Philip`>
I don't quite understand why the 3rd day before Kalends of January is the day before the day before Kalends of January
12:19
<Dashiva>
It's a translation issue
12:19
<Dashiva>
There was a special word for the day before
12:19
<Philip`>
Anyway, you probably shouldn't disagree with C. Suetonius Tranquillus about Roman calendars :-p
12:20
<gsnedders>
Hixie: Does http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8019 look all right?
12:20
<Hixie>
yeah
12:20
<Dashiva>
"Pridie"
12:20
<Philip`>
Dashiva: Even with a special word, why is it "3rd"?
12:20
<Dashiva>
I've forgotten so much
12:21
Philip`
didn't even know so much
12:21
<Dashiva>
Philip`: They count inclusively
12:23
<Dashiva>
You see the same with easter
12:23
<Dashiva>
Jesus is supposed to be dead three days, but he cheats and gets up on the second day because he's counting inclusively
12:25
<Philip`>
kalends, pridie kalendas, tertio kalendas (going backwards) it seems
12:25
<Philip`>
I suppose it makes sense if you don't translate as "day before"
12:28
<gsnedders>
Philip`: You have any intention to update your generated tests soon?
12:28
<Philip`>
gsnedders: The tokeniser ones?
12:29
<gsnedders>
Philip`: Yeah
12:30
<gsnedders>
Philip`: With my proposed edit to the spec in 8019 404 tests fail, almost all because of DOCTYPE changes at end of Sept
12:30
<Philip`>
gsnedders: No, unless I run out of other things to work on first, or someone gives me lots of money to do it :-p
12:31
<Philip`>
(I think it'd involve lots of rewriting the OCaml tokeniser to match years of spec changes)
12:31
<Philip`>
(which is a bit tedious)
12:37
<bogphanny>
Can someone please give me an example of how the <keygen> tag would typically be used in a real life example?
12:55
<gsnedders>
Philip`: OK, I've manually updated them now
13:00
<gsnedders>
Hixie: you still there?
13:00
<Hixie>
yup
13:01
<gsnedders>
RCDATA state when it comes to & goes to character reference in data state, and then after parsing entity it goes to data state. bug, right?
13:01
<Hixie>
yeah
13:02
gsnedders
files yet another bug
13:03
<Hixie>
good lord
13:04
<murr4y>
you miss those 30 minutes now, eh? :D
13:05
gsnedders
has only filed three bugs today :P
13:06
<Hixie>
http://www.whatwg.org/issues/data.html?period=0 is depressing
13:06
<Hixie>
(well ok not really)
13:06
<Hixie>
(it's pretty awesome really)
13:06
<Hixie>
but still!
13:07
gsnedders
just sees yellow block in all browsers
13:07
murr4y
too :p
13:07
<murr4y>
(all 2, ff3/opera10)
13:09
<Hixie>
y'all need better browsers
13:09
<gsnedders>
Estimated date for last e-mail based on the data above: 2009-10-23
13:12
<gsnedders>
Hixie: If you can fix 8029 soon…
13:12
<Hixie>
i expect to bring the bug list to 0 tomorrow again
13:13
<gsnedders>
yay!
13:13
gsnedders
generally just wants to get html5lib out ASAP
13:13
<gsnedders>
(Last release was in Jun 2008)
13:14
<Hixie>
i'm preparing the blog post for when we go to last call
13:14
<Hixie>
anything i should mention?
13:15
<gsnedders>
"We need a test suite, kthxbai"
13:16
<Hixie>
i don't plan to start looking at the test suite til 2011, according to the time table
13:16
<Philip`>
Got to leave plenty of time for untested buggy implementations to establish legacy for future generations
13:17
<Philip`>
Then we can write test suites and say "ha ha you got it all wrong" and it'll be too late to change anything
13:17
<Hixie>
well there are plenty of bits of testsuite all over the place
13:17
<Philip`>
Sounds like a good plan to me
13:18
<Hixie>
what we really need is someone who can do this as a fulltime job
13:20
<annevk42>
chaals talks about standards: "WHAT-WG: Hacking with friends"
13:20
<Philip`>
Hixie: What we really need is employers who let people do it as a fulltime job
13:21
<Hixie>
ok i think i'm ready to go to cfc/lc as soon as the bug list is back to zero again
13:22
<Hixie>
i just need to change the web workers, vocab, html5, and complete.html drafts to class=cfc instead of class=draft and post the blog post
13:24
<annevk42>
a stable copy would be nice
13:24
<annevk42>
like we did with Web Forms back in the days when it was in Last Call
13:24
<Hixie>
yeah
13:24
<Hixie>
the scripts won't work in that though
13:24
<Hixie>
at least the status and bug reporting ones won't
13:24
<annevk42>
makes sense
13:24
Philip`
will have to keep filing new bugs
13:25
<Philip`>
Someone needs to set up an IRC bot that alerts everyone when there's only one bug left
13:25
<Hixie>
Philip`: your bugs are starting to get so editorial that they're almost trivial to deal with, you need to find more serious problems if you want to slow me down. :-)
13:25
<Philip`>
so we can all rush and add more
13:25
gsnedders
has found three technical issues today, hence he > Philip`
13:26
<Hixie>
oh gsnedders did the change to the 'reset' algorithm fix the foreign content stuff?
13:26
<gsnedders>
Hixie: What where?
13:27
<Hixie>
the "reset the insertion mode" algorithm changed earlier today
13:27
<gsnedders>
Oh, I've not changed html5lib for that yet
13:27
Philip`
probably shouldn't have started reading the spec from the beginning, if he wanted to find serious issues
13:28
<gsnedders>
I just got the tokenizer up to the end of September (excluding things that have changed this month too)
13:28
<Hixie>
ah ok
13:28
<annevk42>
so Philip` finally got bored with finding bugs in XML tools and is now taking on the full HTML5 spec? :)
13:28
<Hixie>
i'd love to know if the reset change i did earlier today actually fixes the problem
13:28
<Hixie>
i wasn't 100% convinced it would
13:29
<Hixie>
btw to fix the entity stuff i'm just gonna have to create a new state for entities in rcdata, right?
13:29
<gsnedders>
Hixie: right
13:29
<Hixie>
k that'll be easy then
13:30
<gsnedders>
I didn't say I was finding hard technical issues :)
13:32
<Philip`>
annevk42: I wouldn't say "full", because I'm sure I'll stop before I get to the end of it :-p
13:35
<Hixie>
right. I'm gonna go to bed so that the 13 bugs can become 50 bugs and give me some stuff to do tomorrow
16:07
<gsnedders>
"script data escaped dash dash state"… oh dear…
19:46
<TabAtkins>
Quick question: In C, do variable names and function names live in separate namespaces? (Unrelated to current namespace-related discussion. ^_^)
19:47
<boogyman>
hola
19:47
<Philip`>
TabAtkins: No
19:48
<Philip`>
TabAtkins: or yes
19:48
<TabAtkins>
Hrm. So I can't have a function named "add" and a variable named "add"?
19:48
<Philip`>
You can have a global function called "add" and a local variable called "add" (which will shadow the function)
19:48
<TabAtkins>
Damns, I thought they were separate. Kk.
19:49
<TabAtkins>
How does that not cause problems? ::boggles::
19:49
<Philip`>
The syntax lets you write stuff like &add which will apply to both functions and variables
19:49
<boogyman>
can someone please explain the functionality http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#ping
19:50
<Philip`>
TabAtkins: Why would it cause problems?
19:50
<TabAtkins>
boogyman: If a user clicks on a link with @ping, the UA will do a normal navigation to whatever the @href is, but it will *also* fire off GET requests to all the urls in @ping.
19:50
<Philip`>
If you have a function and say "int add = 2;" then 'add' (in that scope) will refer to that variable, regardless of what's defined in global scope, which seems quite sensible
19:51
<TabAtkins>
Philip`: Well, you basically have a big set of global variables you have to manage, and be careful not to shadow.
19:51
<TabAtkins>
Because then you can't go "add(add,3)"
19:51
<Philip`>
POST, not GET
19:51
<Philip`>
(for ping)
19:51
<Philip`>
TabAtkins: You can just rename the local variable in that case
19:52
<Philip`>
(C++ lets you write ::add to refer to the global scope, but that's ugly)
19:53
<TabAtkins>
Philip`: Maybe the C-likes don't have the same problems with names that Lisps do. We name a lot of functions with words that also are useful as argument names.
19:53
<TabAtkins>
Like the word "list", which shadows the "list" function in Scheme. (In CL it doens't shadow, because they live in different namespaces.)
19:53
<boogyman>
TabAtkins: so @ping provides a method to multi-submit the corresponding node?
19:54
<TabAtkins>
boogyman: If "node" means what I assume it does, then yes?
19:54
<TabAtkins>
It's meant to allow you to, frex, track how often a particular link is clicked.
19:54
<Philip`>
TabAtkins: C-like languages don't have the problem of dynamic scoping, which makes it more easily manageable
19:55
<TabAtkins>
Lexical, you mean. C-likes *do* use dynamic scoping. ^_^
19:55
<Philip`>
TabAtkins: I think you've got it precisely the wrong way round
19:55
<boogyman>
so not necessarily multi-submit the node for processing, but submit the node to @href for processing and @ping for "tracking" purposes?
19:56
<TabAtkins>
boogyman: Yes.
19:56
<boogyman>
ok, thx
19:56
<Philip`>
There's nothing dynamic about scoping in C, it's just based on the nesting in the syntax, hence being lexical scoping
19:57
<TabAtkins>
Philip`: No, you've got it wrong way round. Lexical scoping is what allows closures - you resolve free variables based on what's present at the time the function is defined. Dynamic means you resolve based on what's present at call-time.
19:58
<TabAtkins>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scope_(programming)
19:58
<TabAtkins>
Rather, not at the time the function is defined, but simply at what's present in the surrounding text where the free variable occurs.
19:59
<Philip`>
TabAtkins: No, *you've* got it the wrong way round :-p
19:59
<Philip`>
http://foldoc.org/lexical+scope vs http://foldoc.org/dynamic+scope etc - C does lexical (static) scoping
20:00
<TabAtkins>
In C:
20:00
<TabAtkins>
int x = 0;
20:00
<TabAtkins>
int f() { return x; }
20:00
<TabAtkins>
int g() { int x = 1; return f(); }
20:00
<TabAtkins>
What does g() return?
20:00
<Philip`>
20:00
<Philip`>
because it's not dynamic scoping
20:01
<Philip`>
and the references to x are resolved statically at compile-time
20:01
<Philip`>
based on lexical information, not dynamic run-time information
20:01
<TabAtkins>
I could have *sworn* C-likes used dynamic scoping. Guess I'm misremembering my high-school days.
20:02
<TabAtkins>
In any case, CL and Scheme are both lexical-scope languages, except for their special variables.
20:02
<Philip`>
It would be really weird if C did dictionary lookups on every variable reference
20:03
<TabAtkins>
It doesn't need dictionary lookups to implement dynamic scope. You just keep a stack around for each binding, pushing and popping as you move between scopes.
20:06
<TabAtkins>
Man, what is *up* with that foldoc article. I *assure* you that "(setf x 0) (defun f () x) (defun g () (let ((x 1)) (f))) (g)" returns 0. Emacs-lisp is a dynamic-scope language, and a number of early lisps were as well, but *all* modern lisps are lexical.
20:07
<Philip`>
What's "modern"?
20:07
<Philip`>
That page was last updated 13 years ago
20:08
<TabAtkins>
Common Lisp and anything created after it.
20:08
<TabAtkins>
Wow, no wonder. CL was a new guy at that point.
20:08
<TabAtkins>
Jeezus.
20:09
<TabAtkins>
So in conclusion: I had it the right way round, I was just misremembering my C.
20:13
<TabAtkins>
Unrelated: Just got my first "Good Answer" badge on SO with a question about <video>. ^_^
21:20
and`
finds it ironic that his last e-mail on character encoding problems is affected by that very issue.
21:20
<Dashiva>
That's not ironic
21:21
<Dashiva>
Ironic would be if your email was about having fixed the character encoding problems :)
21:23
<and`>
Right. I actually tried to fix a problem with missing curly quotes by adding ASCII quotes and ended up with both.
22:06
<Hixie>
Philip`: the "sets of..." are all strings
22:31
<Philip`>
Hixie: Indeed, but they're called sets and it says they're sets
22:32
<Philip`>
when they're actually just strings that represent sets
22:51
<inimino>
Philip`: as opposed to being just bytes in some datatype that represent a set? ;-)
22:54
<Philip`>
inimino: As opposed to being a mathematical construct that is a set, and that can be manipulated in a normal set-based way and can be parsed from strings and serialised to strings
22:59
Philip`
happily manages to get his C++ code call JS code that calls C++ code, but unhappily realises he implemented infinite recursion
23:05
<Hixie>
where does it say they are sets?
23:05
<Hixie>
oh, i see
23:07
<Philip`>
I don't think it's worth changing the spec, since it's easy enough to work out they're strings
23:07
<Hixie>
i changed the "is a set" bit
23:07
<Hixie>
i didn't change the names of the things
23:07
<Hixie>
the names are opaque!
23:07
<Hixie>
or so i shall claim
23:08
<Hixie>
ok, e-mail is back to zero
23:08
<Hixie>
17 bugs!
23:08
<Hixie>
man
23:09
Philip`
quite likes RDF's clear separation of lexical spaces and value spaces
23:09
<Philip`>
Hixie: It's not the 50 that you asked for :-(
23:09
<Hixie>
heh
23:10
<Hixie>
(agreed about lexical vs value being a useful seggregation -- i'll know better for next time, i guess)
23:11
<Hixie>
ok shower, meeting, bbl.
23:17
<othermaciej>
I have some bugs I need to file
23:17
<othermaciej>
maybe now is a good time