06:42
<Templarian1>
So, reading through the latest draft I've noticed that letter-spacing isn't explained for the drawText function of the canvas object? Anyone know if this was intentional?
06:46
<Templarian1>
Oh, just looked at it and it hit me it's only showing CSS1 font properties.
13:41
<Lachy>
haha, Microsoft "enables Silverlight on iPhones" by sending a QuickTime compatible file (presumably MP4) and the <video> element. :-) http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2009/11/microsoft-enables-silverlight-video-streaming-to-iphones.ars
13:42
<Philip`>
Old news :-p
13:42
<Lachy>
how old?
13:42
<Philip`>
It was discussed here a couple of days ago or something
13:43
<Lachy>
oh
13:44
<Philip`>
It's streaming (not a plain MP4 file), and supported by the new IIS media server or something, and Microsoft isn't claiming they've done anything with Silverlight on iPhones
13:44
<Philip`>
but news stories are getting things a bit confused
13:44
<Philip`>
(probably since it was being discussed at the same time as new Silverlight was being discussed)
13:46
<Lachy>
yeah, that's why I thought it was so funny, cause the article made it sound like it had something to do with silverlight beyond just providing an alternative for it for streaming
13:47
<Philip`>
Does anybody use Silverlight for any purpose other than video?
13:47
<Philip`>
At least Flash is used for games too
13:50
<Lachy>
Microsoft tries to for some things on their site, though I'm not sure exactly what cause I refuse to install it
13:58
annevk2
wonders what the context is for http://twitter.com/KennyL/statuses/6141544733
13:58
<annevk2>
anyone?
13:59
<Lachy>
ask @KennyL
14:01
<annevk2>
good point, done
14:19
<Huvet>
html5lib: bug 113 and bug 125 seems to be duplicates
14:19
<Huvet>
I think
15:11
<annevk2>
iPhone does MPEG-2?
15:11
<annevk2>
did not know that
15:11
annevk2
thought it was MPEG4
15:15
<Philip`>
annevk2: Microsoft's thing is H.264 video and AAC audio in an MPEG-2 transport stream
15:17
<annevk2>
k
15:17
<annevk2>
tha
15:17
<annevk2>
hmm, Oslo is cold :/
15:18
<annevk2>
at least here it's above 5
15:18
<annevk2>
btw, if anyone has tips for a short hiking trip somewhere in Europe next month let me know
15:20
<annevk2>
going away in January to Patagonia and I should prolly do a somewhat lengthy walk before that :)
15:22
<ttepasse>
The classic is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Way_of_St._James
15:23
<ttepasse>
for some definition of "short" or "lengthy"
15:26
<annevk2>
ah yeah, hmm
15:27
<jgraham>
How long is "somewhat lengthy"? And over what type of terrain?
15:27
<ttepasse>
Apart from the main road in northern spain there is this network of ways through europe - maybe there is a sub-path in .nl?
15:29
<jgraham>
There are things like the pennine way in the UK
15:29
<jgraham>
Or costal paths in e.g. corsica
15:30
<annevk2>
somewhat lengthy is 40k or so
15:30
<annevk2>
well, a day
15:30
<annevk2>
though it depends on the terrain of course
15:31
<annevk2>
and short is a couple of days, like 2-3 or so
15:31
annevk2
isn't really sure yet
15:31
annevk2
thinks about flying to bilbao
15:32
<jgraham>
Well there are probably some reasonably interesting bits of England that are not totally inaccessible in January. But maybe further south would be better
15:32
<annevk2>
still want to see the guggenheim there
15:32
<annevk2>
ah, next month means December :)
15:33
<annevk2>
but yeah, England might be fun
15:33
<jgraham>
Then too :)
15:33
<annevk2>
Scotland or Wales maybe?
15:33
<jgraham>
Scotland in the winter can be farly tough, at least the mountainous parts
15:34
<annevk2>
fairly though sounds compelling :)
15:34
<annevk2>
maybe I should ask Tarquin
15:34
<annevk2>
though that'd be in Wales
15:38
<jgraham>
Well I think you would want crampons and so on for Scotland at least
15:40
<jgraham>
(at least in the mountains)
15:40
<annevk2>
interesting
15:40
<annevk2>
I don't have those
15:40
<annevk2>
I do have sufficient clothing prolly
15:43
<jgraham>
I'm not really too sure because I haven't done that much winter walking.
15:45
<annevk2>
me neither
15:46
<annevk2>
well, once in Nikko
15:46
<annevk2>
on normal shoes and too cold clothing, hah
17:07
<Lachy>
annevk2, looks like that quote from @KennyL earlier comes from here http://www.webmonkey.com/blog/Tim_Berners-Lee_Sees_Promise__Challenges_in_HTML5
17:24
<annevk2>
nice
17:30
<annevk2>
my MacBook completely froze
17:30
<annevk2>
scary
17:30
<annevk2>
had to reboot
18:20
<hsivonen>
http://standardssuck.org/what-devs-want-from-html5 breaks badly with the latest HTML5 parser changes :-(
18:22
<Philip`>
hsivonen: It looks horrendously broken in Opera too
18:23
<Pure>
IE8 too
18:23
<Pure>
though, that's not html5
18:24
<Philip`>
hsivonen: Breaking in HTML5-enabled Firefox is just increasing interoperability with other browsers
18:24
<hsivonen>
standards must suck interoperably
18:26
<Philip`>
<li class="commentbody"altid="comment-1258" <div class="com_info">
18:26
<Philip`>
That can't be good
18:26
<Pure>
Nope
18:26
<hsivonen>
ok. so the problem is tokenizing < inside a tag like IE
18:27
<hsivonen>
maybe aligning with IE here isn't the best solution
18:28
<Philip`>
Getting the site fixed is the best solution
18:29
<Philip`>
since it's broken for almost everyone
18:29
<hsivonen>
IE's tokenization is considered to be axiomatically maximally Web compatible
18:29
<hsivonen>
byt parts of Gecko and WebKit might be more Web compatible
18:29
<hsivonen>
*but
18:31
<TabAtkins_>
Not broken in Chrome, as far as I can tell. At least, it all looks fine. Definitely not "horrendously broken".
18:32
<annevk2>
i think i've seen sites depend on both
18:32
<annevk2>
so you can't win
18:43
<hsivonen>
who can fix it? Marcos?