| 07:05 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: I'm here now, but I guess you're still asleep. |
| 11:47 | <gsnedders> | http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2009/11/23/ie8-smartscreen-in-action.aspx --- more codec argument fun? |
| 12:16 | <MikeSmith> | zcorpan: http://qa-dev.w3.org:8888/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.w3.org%2Fhtml5%2Ftests%2Fvalidation%2Ffull%2Finvalid%2Fobsolete%2Fcenter.html |
| 13:16 | <zcorpan_> | MikeSmith: cool |
| 13:18 | <MikeSmith> | zcorpan_: see also http://qa-dev.w3.org:8888/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.w3.org%2Fhtml5%2Ftests%2Fvalidation%2Ffull%2Finvalid%2Fobsolete%2Flang-deprecated.html |
| 13:18 | <MikeSmith> | the "Use ro instead." part is new |
| 13:19 | <MikeSmith> | zcorpan_: if you have any open non-parser v.nu bugs that you want me look at, let me know |
| 13:20 | <MikeSmith> | I've resolved all that I had assigned to myself |
| 14:15 | <MikeSmith> | hendry: w3c is not really responsible for the URL/URI/IRI terminology screwup |
| 14:17 | <timz> | MikeSmith: v.nu == validator.nu ? |
| 14:19 | <MikeSmith> | timz: yep |
| 14:20 | <MikeSmith> | hendry: I wanted to ask you about how come you have that regex replace in you validation script, to remove the quotes .. was wondering if you did that because you ran into problems with the quotes, or just because you were annoyed by them |
| 14:21 | <MikeSmith> | timz: you have any validator.nu bugs in want of fixing? |
| 14:21 | <timz> | dunno if it is a parser thing but : lang="us-EN" gives an error.. bad ISO language ? |
| 14:21 | <timz> | in html5 validation |
| 14:21 | <Philip`> | You want lang="en-US" |
| 14:22 | <timz> | sorry i meant that |
| 14:22 | <timz> | http://depulz.nl/rdfa/city.html |
| 14:22 | <timz> | gives the error |
| 14:23 | <Philip`> | That has lang="us-EN" |
| 14:23 | <Philip`> | You want lang="en-US" |
| 14:23 | <timz> | argh |
| 14:23 | <othermaciej> | MikeSmith: who did cause the terminology screwup? |
| 14:24 | <MikeSmith> | othermaciej: a lot of people I guess |
| 14:24 | <timz> | my bad, it validates now.. |
| 14:27 | <MikeSmith> | the effectiveness of w3c-bashing gets eroded when people misuse it.. it should best be reserved to stuff that w3c is really to blame for -- like the DOM, and like taking 10 years to get around to chartering a working group to deliver a major update to HTML |
| 14:29 | Philip` | blames the W3C for the web |
| 14:30 | <Dashiva> | Can we blame w3c for RDF, or is that just individuals who happen to be associated with w3c? |
| 14:30 | <jgraham> | I thought Steve Jobs was responsible for the RDF |
| 14:31 | <Dashiva> | Wrong RDF |
| 14:31 | <Dashiva> | Besides, he just stole it |
| 14:31 | <Lachy> | huh? |
| 14:31 | <Lachy> | what has Steve Jobs got to do with RDF? |
| 14:32 | <Dashiva> | Reality distortion field |
| 14:32 | <Lachy> | ah |
| 14:32 | <daedb> | Steve Jobs uses his RDF to make the W3C create the other RDF, obviously. |
| 14:33 | <MikeSmith> | Dashiva, well, W3C didn't invent RDF |
| 14:34 | <MikeSmith> | one guy did |
| 14:34 | <timz> | tbl ? |
| 14:34 | <Dashiva> | Yeah, but it takes a village to raise the child |
| 14:34 | <Philip`> | Did Steve Jobs make Wife Swap too? |
| 14:34 | <MikeSmith> | the W3C just sorta built a temple around it, after it was invented |
| 14:34 | <workmad3> | w3c doesn't create anything... it just standardises other creations to give them a thin veneer of respectability and bog down any form of progress... |
| 14:35 | <gsnedders> | I mean, there were 12 year old kids on the RDF WG! :P |
| 14:35 | <Philip`> | workmad3: I think you mean "to encourage cooperation and interoperability between vendors" |
| 14:35 | <workmad3> | Philip`: oh yeah, that's the one |
| 14:35 | <workmad3> | sorry for the typo ;) |
| 14:35 | <Philip`> | Easy mistake to make |
| 14:35 | <MikeSmith> | w3c invented XHTML2 |
| 14:36 | <gsnedders> | So, your employer invented something useless is what you mean? |
| 14:37 | <MikeSmith> | XHTML2 wasn't useless.. it was a necessary step towards enlightenment |
| 14:38 | <MikeSmith> | the child has to stumble before it learns to walk |
| 14:38 | <Philip`> | "I have not failed, I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work." |
| 14:38 | <MikeSmith> | get burned in order to learn to be afraid of fire |
| 14:40 | <Dashiva> | /tweet @MikeSmith is encouraging setting fire to babies |
| 14:41 | <MikeSmith> | Dashiva: no, just burning them a little bit |
| 14:43 | <Dashiva> | A minor loss of accuracy is acceptable in all journalism |
| 14:43 | <MikeSmith> | the zen master asked, "What is the sound of one hand clapping." |
| 14:43 | <MikeSmith> | ... and the answer was, XHTML2 |
| 14:44 | <gsnedders> | MikeSmith: Beauty. |
| 14:45 | <gsnedders> | (and that is truth.) |
| 14:47 | <Philip`> | And then the zen master pulled its eyeball out |
| 14:47 | Philip` | wonders if that's zen or something else |
| 14:48 | <zcorpan_> | MikeSmith: i can clap with one hand |
| 14:53 | <MikeSmith> | there's a whole lot of things can be done with one hand |
| 14:54 | <MikeSmith> | I did a presentation at Reboot once, called Ten Things You Can Do With the Palm of Your Hand |
| 14:55 | <MikeSmith> | it included the word "wank" as well as the work "spank".. which had a nice kind of symmetry to it |
| 14:55 | <Dashiva> | I see. http://8.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ktwekyfFlc1qzschmo1_500.png |
| 14:59 | <MikeSmith> | Dashiva: lovely. And while we're on the subject of wanking, I'm wondering if anybody here has seen the issue of Playgirl with Sarah Palin's non-son-in-law yet |
| 15:02 | danbri | wanders past ... can I ask a question about HTML, or did I get the wrong channel? |
| 15:02 | <jgraham> | You can |
| 15:02 | <danbri> | say I have timed annotations to display over a video, ... can I expect nice APIs from HTML5 eg. call back linked to milliseconds offset? how are people doing subtitles? |
| 15:02 | danbri | doesn't remember seeing anything, googles again |
| 15:06 | <jgraham> | danbri: It is an ongoing discussion; see recent WHATWG threads and |
| 15:06 | <jgraham> | https://wiki.mozilla.org/Accessibility/HTML5_captions_v2 |
| 15:06 | <jgraham> | and |
| 15:06 | <danbri> | thanks for the pointer |
| 15:06 | <jgraham> | http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Video_Overlay |
| 15:07 | <danbri> | do browsers have much implemented already? |
| 15:07 | danbri | working on wiring up remote remote controls... |
| 15:07 | <zcorpan_> | i think the nice api has been specced, redesigned, dropped, redesigned |
| 15:07 | <danbri> | heh |
| 15:07 | <zcorpan_> | but not actually implemented |
| 15:07 | danbri | can use an iphone to create annotations, but that's only fun if there's a way to display 'em |
| 15:07 | <danbri> | ok i'll click around, cheers |
| 15:21 | <miketaylr> | danbri: here's a jquery plugin that you could hack for annotations: http://paulirish.com/demo/annotate |
| 15:24 | <danbri> | ooh thanks |
| 15:25 | <foolip> | danbri: if you have some input (as an author) on how to do this nicely, please do leave feedback |
| 15:25 | <danbri> | will do, if i think of anything! |
| 15:25 | foolip | spent half the weekend writing http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Video_Overlay |
| 15:26 | <foolip> | (the other half on microdata, haha) |
| 15:26 | <danbri> | i tihnk i need to set up an atompub server or similar to receive annotations from phone first... |
| 15:26 | <danbri> | microdata, the lovechild of microformats and rdfa? |
| 15:26 | <foolip> | danbri: I guess what you're asking for is a simple cue range/time range callback API? |
| 15:26 | <foolip> | danbri: yes, that microdata |
| 15:27 | <foolip> | except there's not a whole lotta love involved |
| 15:27 | <danbri> | the rdfa folk are saying 'but it looks nothing like me!'...? ;) |
| 15:28 | <foolip> | they're saying different things, most of which amount to "we have different priorities and values" |
| 15:28 | <danbri> | i think i might be asking for that... basically i expect to have piles of time-offset bits and pieces (eg. tags that relate a bit of a video to metadata expressed with dbpedia/wikipedia URIs, sound clips, ... rdfa/microdata stuff yes) |
| 15:28 | <foolip> | self-promotion: http://blog.foolip.org/2009/08/23/microformats-vs-rdfa-vs-microdata/ |
| 15:28 | <danbri> | what are you making with microdata? |
| 15:29 | <zcorpan_> | i think foolip is just implementing it to annoy rdfa people |
| 15:29 | <danbri> | if he's doing it with neo4j, it should be a good testbed environment for mixing microdata w/ other rdf stuff |
| 15:30 | <foolip> | danbri: I'm just trying to implement the DOM API (http://gitorious.org/microdatajs), then I'll see if it's actually useful for a JavaScript-enhanced neo4j-webservice, basically |
| 15:30 | <foolip> | danbri: you know about neo4j, the coolest database on earth? |
| 15:30 | <gsnedders> | neo4j? |
| 15:31 | gsnedders | hopes that doesn't mean"for Java" |
| 15:31 | <foolip> | it sure does |
| 15:31 | <foolip> | and it's a joy to work with |
| 15:31 | <foolip> | of course I'm biased because it's my best friend's product/company |
| 15:32 | danbri | has seen a few mentions of neo4j but never investigated properly |
| 15:32 | <foolip> | gsnedders: but if you don't like Java, adding a webservice on top of it is exactly what you'd want ;) |
| 15:32 | <danbri> | nice writeup foolip |
| 15:32 | <foolip> | danbri: do read the post by Jeni, it makes many good points "from the other side" |
| 15:33 | <foolip> | I'd mention Shelley too, but then she'd swoop down and say hi |
| 15:33 | gsnedders | may be bias seeming he read that post on a coach with foolip in the seat behind |
| 15:33 | <foolip> | hi Shelley, we all know you're grepping the logs |
| 15:33 | danbri | is on all sides |
| 15:34 | <danbri> | think i saw jeni's at the time |
| 15:51 | <erlehmann> | i want to update my creative commons microdata markup generator |
| 15:51 | <erlehmann> | so are there more examples than http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/microdata.html#examples-1 ?? |
| 15:53 | <erlehmann> | the new synthax is confusing |
| 15:53 | <foolip> | erlehmann: can you elaborate? |
| 15:53 | <erlehmann> | foolip, http://daten.dieweltistgarnichtso.net/src/cc-license-markup/generator2.xhtml |
| 15:53 | <erlehmann> | this generates markup according to an old version of the spec |
| 15:54 | <erlehmann> | when <figure> had <legend> and so on |
| 15:54 | <erlehmann> | i want to update it |
| 15:54 | <foolip> | right |
| 15:54 | <foolip> | is there any part in particular which is confusing? |
| 15:54 | <foolip> | otherwise it's just s/item/itemscope/ and then some, right? |
| 15:55 | <erlehmann> | foolip, itemscope is used for <figure>, right ? |
| 15:56 | <foolip> | yes |
| 15:56 | <foolip> | oh, I see you're not looking at the right spec |
| 15:57 | <foolip> | http://www.whatwg.org/specs/vocabs/current-work/#licensing-works |
| 15:57 | <foolip> | there's an example which is more or less exactly what you want |
| 15:58 | <foolip> | although the <dd>/<dt> issue still seems to be in flux |
| 15:58 | <zcorpan_> | wasn't the conclusion to just add a wrapping div if you care about ie7? |
| 15:59 | <erlehmann> | foolip, flux ? haven't seen any mails on that in a while |
| 15:59 | <foolip> | I haven't been bothered to follow it that closely |
| 15:59 | <foolip> | I'll take zcorpan_'s word for it |
| 16:00 | <zcorpan_> | (and don't do createElement('figure') but style the div instead, iirc) |
| 16:01 | <foolip> | or don't use <dd>/<dt> at all, it isn't *mandatory* is it? |
| 16:02 | <foolip> | I'll probably be doing <figure><img>caption</figure> and letting google figure out what is the image and what is the description |
| 16:03 | <zcorpan_> | it is mandatory |
| 16:03 | <foolip> | meh, but why? |
| 16:03 | <webben> | foolip: since figure isn't just for images |
| 16:03 | <foolip> | so? |
| 16:04 | <Lachy> | we should just drop dt/dd for use in figure. It never made any sense to use those there. |
| 16:04 | <webben> | so one can't reliably conclude caption is caption I guess. |
| 16:04 | <foolip> | webben: so? |
| 16:04 | <zcorpan_> | semantics! |
| 16:04 | <erlehmann> | Lachy, what is the alternative. Legend had DOM issues (though i liked it better) |
| 16:04 | <Lachy> | With the latest hack, people may as well just use <div class="figure"><img><p class="caption">...</p></div> anyway |
| 16:04 | <foolip> | I mean, is it important for it to be unambiguous? |
| 16:04 | <erlehmann> | foolip, yes |
| 16:05 | <erlehmann> | Lachy, latest hack ? |
| 16:05 | <foolip> | because... |
| 16:05 | <erlehmann> | because i want to extract information from pages. i'm looking at the issue from both sides of the fence. |
| 16:05 | <Lachy> | the one where you have to use <div class="figure"> around the figure and style that instead of styling <figure> directly, to avoid having the dt/dd styles leak |
| 16:05 | <webben> | foolip: If you want to provide navigation to the caption or construct a list of figures including the caption, it's important, yes. |
| 16:06 | <foolip> | webben: if the caption is below the img/whatever, why would you want to navigate to it rather than the whole figure? |
| 16:06 | <Lachy> | there's no benefit using <figure> in that way until browsers have support for it, and so we may as well wait for browsers to fix their legend support in a couple of years and implement <figure> properly, rather than trying to hack around the deficiencies with the crappy dt/dd solution |
| 16:07 | <webben> | foolip: In order to read the caption before the figure it captions. |
| 16:07 | <foolip> | webben: screen readers? |
| 16:07 | <webben> | foolip: Well, for example. |
| 16:08 | <Lachy> | (I'm not sure what to do about <details> though. It's not much use till it's implemented anyway, and I'd rather not have JS implementations out there using in ways that could create compat problems for browsers in the future) |
| 16:08 | <foolip> | honestly, sounds like a non-issue in all but edge cases |
| 16:09 | <foolip> | even if the figure isn't an image, it's very likely that the caption is the shortest piece of text |
| 16:09 | <webben> | Is it? |
| 16:09 | <Lachy> | foolip, that sounds like a very bad and unsupported assumption |
| 16:09 | webben | would prefer not to have to depend on that sort of heuristics. |
| 16:10 | <Lachy> | captions can be surprisingly long |
| 16:10 | <zcorpan_> | <figure>Figure 1. A sample program.<pre>print "Hello world"</pre></figure> |
| 16:11 | <erlehmann> | foolip, explicit is better than implicit. also, i like python. |
| 16:12 | <foolip> | I'd rather have dt/dd be optional and only used in edge cases |
| 16:12 | <Lachy> | for web developers, using <div class="figure"><p class="caption"></p> <img> </div> makes things easier, with no hacks and from that to <figure>/<legend> in the future will be much easier without the hacks being there |
| 16:12 | <Lachy> | s/and from/and switching from/ |
| 16:12 | <webben> | it's not even explicit vs implicit; implicit would be an algorithm requiring ua's to treat the child with the shortest text content, at the end or beginning of the element, as a caption. |
| 16:13 | <webben> | I think for the most part, developers are going to want a container for the caption text for styling purposes anyways. |
| 16:13 | <foolip> | I agree with Lachy, making this mandatory will just have me using <div class="figure"> instead (or willfully ignoring the spec and validator) |
| 16:14 | <foolip> | erlehmann: did you figure out the microdata stuff? |
| 16:14 | <erlehmann> | foolip, i'm on it |
| 16:14 | <erlehmann> | thx |
| 16:15 | <foolip> | erlehmann: if you want a JS implementation: http://gitorious.org/microdatajs |
| 16:17 | <foolip> | final word on <figure>. Personally, I can never rembember which is which in dl/dt/dd, it's very likely I'd guess wrong 20% of the time, making the document valid but useless for any client assuming that it's used correctly |
| 16:18 | foolip | would like to see usability testing of this syntax |
| 16:18 | foolip | would not like to pay for it |
| 16:20 | <TabAtkins__> | Really, foolip? You get dt/dd mixed up? |
| 16:20 | TabAtkins__ | boggles. |
| 16:20 | <TabAtkins__> | One would think you'd learn quickly, since one indents and the other doesn't. |
| 16:20 | <zcorpan_> | not with the html5 ua style sheet |
| 16:20 | <zcorpan_> | for figure |
| 16:21 | <foolip> | TabAtkins__: really, I try both each time or look it up in the spec (to my defence, I use it very seldomly) |
| 16:21 | <webben> | foolip: Isn't that a problem with DL/DT/DD anyway? It's not specific to figure. |
| 16:21 | <foolip> | webben: yes, it is |
| 16:21 | <TabAtkins__> | Heh, k. I use <dl> pretty often (more often than I should, actually). |
| 16:21 | <zcorpan_> | but people will use figure more often and have no experience with dl |
| 16:21 | <TabAtkins__> | zcorpan_: True, but if you've learned it from <dl> you can carry the knowledge over. |
| 16:21 | <foolip> | webben: but that cannot be changed |
| 16:22 | <zcorpan_> | TabAtkins__: most people haven't |
| 16:22 | <webben> | foolip: it /could/ be changed. It's just probably not worth changing. |
| 16:22 | <foolip> | well, yeah |
| 16:23 | <webben> | doesn't seem to make sense to fix it in only one place. |
| 16:23 | <ttepass-> | My mnemonic is the naming dl = definition list, dt = definition term, dd = definition definition, insane as that is. Sadly that mnemonic breaks on <figure>. |
| 16:23 | <foolip> | webben: how would you fix it though? |
| 16:24 | <zcorpan_> | dd = digure dontents, dt = digure daption |
| 16:24 | <zcorpan_> | there |
| 16:24 | <zcorpan_> | er |
| 16:24 | <zcorpan_> | digure taption |
| 16:24 | <gsnedders> | digure? is that like digger? |
| 16:24 | <foolip> | zcorpan_: great, post that to the list and we're done |
| 16:25 | <webben> | foolip: I'd lean towards not reusing dd and dt in figure, personally. |
| 16:25 | <foolip> | webben: I would agree |
| 16:25 | <jgraham> | I still think that having a new element would be the best solution. But <figure> and <details> are so useful that a suboptimal solution is better than no solution |
| 16:25 | <ttepass-> | We should rename <figure> to <digure>, which is like <figure> but awesomer. |
| 16:26 | <foolip> | shouldn't a single element (reused or not) for the caption be enough? |
| 16:27 | <webben> | foolip: Legacy parsing constraints aside, I think so - though in practice I think people will often use a second element for styling purposes. |
| 16:27 | <foolip> | webben: probably, but likely not for <img> which is the most common case |
| 16:28 | <jgraham> | <figure><content><img></content><annotation>An image</annotation></figure> |
| 16:28 | <jgraham> | That was not a suggestion btw |
| 16:28 | <foolip> | jgraham: without <content> it could be |
| 16:28 | <zcorpan_> | hey that's not a bad idea |
| 16:29 | <foolip> | why not just use an attribute like <time pubdate>? |
| 16:29 | <foolip> | <figure><img><p caption>An image</p></figure> |
| 16:30 | <erlehmann> | ach bernd |
| 16:31 | <foolip> | if the main problem is that we can't find a free name for an element, I mean... |
| 16:32 | <webben> | works for me. it's not pretty, but seemingly nothing that will work (in the short term) is pretty. |
| 16:34 | <foolip> | has it been proposed and rejected already? |
| 16:34 | <foolip> | it seems most things have |
| 16:34 | <zcorpan_> | i think <p caption> has been suggested on the list, but not really rejected |
| 16:35 | <zcorpan_> | though you couldn't select it in ie6 |
| 16:35 | <foolip> | ie6 can't do *[caption] ? |
| 16:35 | <zcorpan_> | but i guess that's not an issue since you could use a class or something |
| 16:35 | <zcorpan_> | nope |
| 16:35 | <foolip> | yes, each workaround for that |
| 16:36 | <foolip> | /s/each/easy/ |
| 16:37 | <jgraham> | So in IE6 cou could have <div class=figure><figure><img><p class=caption caption>An image</p></figure></div> |
| 16:37 | <foolip> | jgraham: why the outer wrapping div? |
| 16:37 | <jgraham> | DRY++ |
| 16:38 | <jgraham> | foolip: Oh wait that's only needed for <dt>/<dd> isn't it |
| 16:38 | <foolip> | so is there a CSS selector that works in IE6 that could select the first, last or second child elemnet? |
| 16:38 | <jgraham> | OK, add an extra document.createElement("figure") if you don't want the <div> |
| 16:39 | <foolip> | in that case it'd be really easy to style without class="figure" as long as a page doesn't wildly mix captions with different order |
| 16:39 | <foolip> | figures with different order of captions/content that is |
| 16:39 | <zcorpan_> | it doesn't |
| 16:39 | <zcorpan_> | i mean, there isn't |
| 16:40 | <danbri> | ooh http://www.annodex.net/~silvia/itext/elephant_no_skin_v2.html is great, and a CC-licensed movie to play with too :) |
| 16:40 | <foolip> | anyway, a script-only solution could be used to fix IE6 to, getElementByTagName("figure") and so on... |
| 16:41 | <foolip> | probably good enough until IE6 dies for good |
| 17:36 | <yael> | Hi, Does HTML5 have a solution for a case that is opposite of ifrmae "sandbox" attribute? Meaning to allow others to include my content in an iframe, but preventing them from manipulating my content, even if we use the same web hosting service? |
| 18:02 | <othermaciej> | yael: prevent in what way? |
| 18:02 | <othermaciej> | yael: oh - you mean even if your content is same-origin? |
| 18:03 | <othermaciej> | yael: there is no way to do that afaik |
| 19:32 | <erlehmann> | TabAtkins__, i see now what you were meaning, mea culpa. cheers if you received this, so i do not need to send a mail on the list |
| 19:36 | <TabAtkins__> | No problem, erlehmann. Probably good to be a little less confrontational next time. ^_^ Or hey, hit me up on the chat first to clarify. |
| 19:37 | <erlehmann> | TabAtkins__, well, I really thought you had read my question as hushed as i had your reply ;) |
| 19:38 | <TabAtkins__> | It's cool. Side benefit: I now know who you are on the list. |
| 19:39 | <erlehmann> | well, "erlehmann" is in my sig |
| 19:40 | <TabAtkins__> | For some reason gmail always tucks your sig into a hidden block, assuming it's quoted. |
| 19:41 | <erlehmann> | well, sigs are separated with "-- ", arent they ? |
| 19:42 | <jcranmer> | -- \n |
| 19:43 | <erlehmann> | right |
| 20:55 | <erlehmann> | foolip, does that look right ? http://github.com/erlehmann/cc-figure/raw/master/cc-figure-generator.xhtml |
| 20:56 | <foolip> | erlehmann: do you have it served as text/html or do I have to download it? :) |
| 20:56 | <erlehmann> | foolip, it is github. download it, use it locally. |
| 21:00 | <foolip> | looking... |
| 21:02 | <foolip> | http://foolip.org/microdatajs/demo/json.html |
| 21:03 | <foolip> | temporarily pasted the output of it into my JSON extractor |
| 21:03 | <foolip> | looks right to me |
| 21:04 | <erlehmann> | good, then i will continue styling it |
| 21:04 | <TabAtkins__> | Your beautiful picture! It is broken. |
| 21:05 | <foolip> | TabAtkins__: sorry to disappoint you ;) |
| 21:05 | <TabAtkins__> | ;_; |
| 21:05 | <erlehmann> | foolip, what is your page trying to do with it ? |
| 21:06 | <foolip> | erlehmann: it just runs the JSON extraction algorithm on the page and pretty-prints the result |
| 21:06 | <erlehmann> | document.querySelectorAll is not a function |
| 21:06 | <erlehmann> | i see, my browser is too old |
| 21:06 | <erlehmann> | ff3.0 here |
| 21:06 | <foolip> | hehe, only tested on Opera, basically |
| 21:07 | TabAtkins__ | steals your pretty-printer, because he couldn't get his to work last Tuesday. |
| 21:07 | <foolip> | TabAtkins__: it's just json2.js |
| 21:07 | <foolip> | I take no credit |
| 21:07 | <erlehmann> | foolip, works in webkit. |
| 21:08 | <TabAtkins__> | Ah, kk. I was trying to write my own, but I kept getting in an infinite-object loop for some reason. It was very strange. And hard to debug, because I had to manually kill FF each time. |
| 21:08 | <TabAtkins__> | Oh and yeah, works in Chrome fine. |
| 21:08 | <foolip> | TabAtkins__: try a browser with an interruptable javascript engine ;) |
| 21:08 | <TabAtkins__> | Yes, probably would be best. |
| 21:09 | <TabAtkins__> | Sudden subject change: I just did my pre-interview with Google! Yay! |
| 21:09 | <jgraham> | TabAtkins__: For what job? |
| 21:09 | <TabAtkins__> | Basically Hixie's job, only for CSS. |
| 21:09 | <foolip> | master of the universe, of course |
| 21:10 | <jgraham> | foolip: He beat you |
| 21:10 | <foolip> | lol |
| 21:10 | <TabAtkins__> | I WIN AT TYPING. |
| 22:10 | <othermaciej> | So is anyone going to write a counter-proposal for "keep microdata in the main spec"? |
| 22:10 | <othermaciej> | deadline is in 2 days |
| 22:10 | <foolip> | what happens if we don't? |
| 22:10 | <othermaciej> | or I can extend it if anyone volunteers to do it and names a specific deadline |
| 22:11 | <othermaciej> | chairs will likely post a CfC resolution to split it out |
| 22:11 | <foolip> | won't that just be forced to a vote? |
| 22:11 | foolip | has not read any of the process documents |
| 22:12 | <foolip> | do you think a counter-proposal is likely to change the outcome of the chairs' decision? |
| 22:14 | <foolip> | and can we expect that the chairs will provide actual arguments for the decision? |
| 22:18 | <TabAtkins__> | If necessary, I volunteer for it. But I'd like to see the answers to foolip's questions too. |
| 22:18 | <TabAtkins__> | ^^^ othermaciej |
| 22:19 | <othermaciej> | foolip: if the CfC draws no objections, it will stand |
| 22:19 | <foolip> | othermaciej: but it will, and then what? |
| 22:20 | <othermaciej> | foolip: if there are objections that do not have rationale, or have only weak rationale, then we will decide based on which position has the stronger rationale if that seems clear |
| 22:20 | <othermaciej> | foolip: voting would be a last resort if the arguments on both sides seem well-balanced |
| 22:21 | <foolip> | ok, so basically the end result is going to be a vote, because neither side is going to give up |
| 22:21 | <othermaciej> | I think if there is a good rationale for keeping it in, it's worth writing it up now rather than expressing it piecemeal as objections to a consensus resolution |
| 22:21 | <hober> | so what's the difference between emailing rationale for keeping microdata in the spec before the deadline as a counter-proposal vs. afterwards as a CfC objection? |
| 22:23 | <othermaciej> | one possible difference is that if you plan ahead, you may come up with something more coherent |
| 22:23 | <foolip> | sigh |
| 22:23 | <Hixie_> | othermaciej: while we're on the topic, what's the practical difference between an issue getting no change proposals, and an issue getting one change proposal requesting the status quo? |
| 22:24 | <othermaciej> | another possible difference is that it may be more persuasive to observers to write something up front than to object at the last minute |
| 22:24 | <foolip> | this process isn't very spam-proof if it forces people to do lots of work to fend off any proposal |
| 22:24 | <othermaciej> | Hixie_: getting no change proposals, it would be closed without prejudice |
| 22:25 | <othermaciej> | Hixie_: getting one requesting the status quo would keep the issue open, and may result in that Change Proposal getting adopted, unless its existence motivates somebody to write one requesting an actual change |
| 22:25 | <othermaciej> | Hixie_: if a status quo Change Proposal does get adopted though, then it would be a decision of the working group and not merely a closed-without-prejudice situation |
| 22:25 | <othermaciej> | i.e. at that point the issue would be closed with prejudice |
| 22:26 | <Hixie_> | so if an issue is not getting any change proposals it's better to wait til the last minute and then submit a status-quo change proposal than to not do anything, because that would automatically force a decision to keep the spec as is? |
| 22:26 | <othermaciej> | foolip: I think the chairs will review quality of Change Proposals before insisting on replies - I think the requirement to do a significant chunk of writing is a sufficient spam deterrent |
| 22:26 | <Hixie_> | (assuming one supports the status quo) |
| 22:27 | <othermaciej> | Hixie_: once an issue has a Change Proposal, it stays open until the chairs take some action, with no specific deadline |
| 22:27 | <Hixie_> | oh |
| 22:27 | <Hixie_> | so what's the dec 2 deadline about for microdata? |
| 22:27 | <othermaciej> | Hixie_: so doing that would extend the deadline for anyone else to write a different Change Proposal |
| 22:28 | <Hixie_> | man i miss the days of not having the w3c involved in html5 |
| 22:28 | <foolip> | hypothetically, if the RDFa crowd have their way and get microdata removed, I trust the WHATWG would ignore it and keep it in our version of the spec? |
| 22:28 | <othermaciej> | Hixie_: in that case, the chairs have stated an intent to move on if we don't get any alternate proposals by that date |
| 22:29 | <Hixie_> | foolip: it'd be in the complete.html file, for sure |
| 22:29 | <Hixie_> | foolip: it'd probably not be in html5 unless the w3c versin of html5 starts deviating too much from sanity |
| 22:29 | <othermaciej> | I think the W3C would be happy to publish it as a separate spec (afaik no one has objected to that, not even the TAG), and the WHATWG would be welcome to keep it in the WHATWG copy of the HTML5 main spec if that is their preference |
| 22:30 | <foolip> | TabAtkins__, Hixie_, are either you interested in investing some time writing a counter-proposal? |
| 22:31 | <TabAtkins__> | foolip: Yeah, I'll write one. |
| 22:31 | <foolip> | I can certainly spend some time too, but if you take ownership of the action (or whatever) that'd be great |
| 22:31 | <othermaciej> | my personal expectation is that if it gets split, the browser bits will still get implemented (I certainly want to see it in WebKit) and the default mode of the validator would likely be HTML+SVG+MathML+Microdata |
| 22:32 | <foolip> | are there any other specs which add elements/attributes on top of HTML5 except RDFa? |
| 22:32 | <othermaciej> | there's the proposed profile spec, though that has not made it to FPWD yet |
| 22:32 | <foolip> | it seems quite a strange way to write specs |
| 22:33 | <othermaciej> | HTML5 explicitly allows other specs to add elements and attributes |
| 22:33 | <foolip> | yes I know |
| 22:33 | <foolip> | but so far nothing stable does? |
| 22:33 | <othermaciej> | what counts as "stable"? |
| 22:34 | <foolip> | don't know :) |
| 22:34 | <othermaciej> | a truly stable spec could not depend on HTML5 yet |
| 22:34 | <othermaciej> | if the bar is FPWD, then RDFa is the only example I know of |
| 22:34 | <foolip> | anything except specs that exist only because the feature was rejected from HTML5 |
| 22:36 | <othermaciej> | arguably SVG and MathML also define elements and attributes that extend HTML5, albeit somewhat involuntarily |
| 22:36 | <othermaciej> | (since HTML5 doesn't define the valid set of elements for those languages) |
| 22:36 | <foolip> | TabAtkins__: so you'll write a full proposal before dec 2 or just take the action to extend the deadline? |
| 22:36 | <TabAtkins__> | Write a full proposal. |
| 22:36 | <foolip> | ok |
| 22:37 | <TabAtkins__> | Since I just want to keep the status quo, nothing complex is necessary. |
| 22:37 | <foolip> | mind if I have a look when you're done and leave feedback? |
| 22:37 | <TabAtkins__> | Sure. |
| 22:37 | <TabAtkins__> | I'll write it tonight and email you. |
| 22:37 | <othermaciej> | most of what you'd need to do is to collect and organize the rationale |
| 22:37 | <Hixie_> | personally i think everything should be in html5 if we think it's good, including microdata and rdfa and profile="" and version=""... i just don't think rdfa, profile="", and version="" are good. :-) |
| 22:38 | <foolip> | should we spend time rebutting the points made by the other proposal? |
| 22:38 | foolip | tries to find the proposal |
| 22:38 | <othermaciej> | that would be useful information, sure |
| 22:38 | <TabAtkins__> | I don't think we need to do so directly, though certainly pointing our rationales in those directions would be good. |
| 22:38 | <foolip> | certainly |
| 22:39 | <othermaciej> | you don't have to make it point-counterpoint but if you feel it makes any strong arguments for which you have a rebuttal, then it would be good to say so |
| 22:39 | <othermaciej> | btw http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Oct/0773.html |
| 22:40 | <foolip> | thanks! |
| 22:40 | <othermaciej> | and earlier thread here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Oct/0420.html |
| 22:40 | <othermaciej> | (that thread included a number of arguments both pro and con) |
| 22:40 | <foolip> | othermaciej: what mail client do you use to keep organized? |
| 22:41 | foolip | can't ever find anything that fast |
| 22:41 | <TabAtkins__> | I suspect he's got a listing of issues. ^_^ |
| 22:41 | <foolip> | clever, you! |
| 22:47 | <othermaciej> | foolip: I use Mail.app, the search is pretty good |
| 22:47 | <othermaciej> | but I also made an organized issues list |
| 22:48 | <othermaciej> | http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html |
| 22:48 | <foolip> | thanks |
| 23:55 | <foolip> | TabAtkins__: just sent you a long mail |
| 23:55 | <TabAtkins__> | foolip: Yeah, just read it. thanks! |
| 23:56 | <foolip> | it's past bedtime here, but I'll get to reading your reply tomorrow |
| 23:59 | <TabAtkins__> | kk |
