| 09:21 | <gsnedders> | Hmm, maybe Anolis should give dt ids as well |
| 09:33 | <zcorpan_> | "The WG has CONSENSUS to publish (in XML date space) http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2009/09/xml-stylesheet.html"; - http://www.w3.org/mid/CF83BAA719FD2C439D25CBB1C9D1D30211992D7C⊙Hppc |
| 09:35 | <jgraham> | Is consensus a magic word that means something different in all caps? |
| 09:35 | <zcorpan_> | don't think so, it's just all caps to draw attention to it, like ACTION and ISSUE |
| 09:36 | <annevk> | what does XML data space mean? |
| 09:36 | <annevk> | gsnedders, maybe just dts where the only child is dfn |
| 09:36 | <zcorpan_> | date space |
| 09:36 | <zcorpan_> | dunno |
| 09:38 | <jgraham> | Presumably it means "with a URI of the form http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/YYYY/MM/ |
| 09:38 | <jgraham> | " |
| 09:39 | <zcorpan_> | hmm yeah probably |
| 09:44 | <annevk> | oh, so no FPWD? |
| 09:44 | <annevk> | hmm |
| 09:45 | <zcorpan_> | "... (with minor edits to the SotD and pubrules issues) as a FPWD of this PER." |
| 09:47 | <darobin> | heya |
| 09:47 | <darobin> | does anyone know what license the acid3 test is under? |
| 09:48 | <darobin> | I'm talking to someone who'd like to ship an offline test suite and they'd like to know |
| 09:58 | <annevk> | you'd have to email Hixie_ I think |
| 10:02 | <Philip`> | darobin: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20080507#l-11 - "<Hixie> it's a page for testing interop! as far as i know it can't be copyrighted! anything you do with it is fair use for interop!" |
| 10:05 | <Lachy> | Hixie_, in the Microdata examples section, several examples use itemtype="http://example.org/animals#cat";, but then in the API section, you have another cats example using var cats = document.getItems("http://example.com/feline";); |
| 10:05 | <Lachy> | Is it intentional that these examples use different URLs? |
| 10:28 | <virtuelv> | is there a particular reason why negative values for r0/r1 in createRadialGradient throws instead of being clamped to 0? |
| 10:31 | <Hixie_> | Lachy: off hand, no idea |
| 10:31 | <Hixie_> | virtuelv: off hand, probably that's what browsers did? dunno. |
| 10:32 | <virtuelv> | they don't all, and there is interop problems |
| 10:32 | <virtuelv> | gecko and webkit doesn't throw |
| 10:32 | <Hixie_> | hey, the validator stopped complaining about caption or whatever it was complaining about, sweet |
| 10:32 | <Hixie_> | virtuelv: ah |
| 10:32 | <virtuelv> | Hixie_: also the same for fillRect |
| 10:33 | <Hixie_> | maybe they said they'd follow the spec? i dunno |
| 10:33 | <Hixie_> | see if there's bugs filed on them |
| 10:33 | <Hixie_> | it's been a few weeks since i looked at the canvas stuff |
| 10:35 | <zcorpan_> | does opera throw? |
| 10:37 | Lachy | will file a bug about the differing URLs after lunch, since it makes more sense for readers to keep using the familiar URL, rather than suddenly using a new random and unrelated one |
| 10:39 | <jgraham> | zcorpan_: Yes |
| 10:39 | <jgraham> | Gecko seems to use abs(r) |
| 10:40 | <jgraham> | Webkit seems to clamp to 0 |
| 10:41 | <zcorpan_> | abs seems unexpected |
| 10:41 | <zcorpan_> | or? |
| 10:41 | <jgraham> | Well anything is unexpected really |
| 10:42 | <zcorpan_> | negative value is unexpected, a particular behavior when using a negative value doesn't need to be unexpected :) |
| 10:44 | <jgraham> | I think either the gecko or webkit behaviour is fine. Throwing is evidently not (unless gecko and webkit are both prepared to change) |
| 10:45 | <darobin> | Philip`: thanks for the pointer! |
| 10:45 | <zcorpan_> | 2 out of 3 will have to change regardless |
| 10:47 | <jgraham> | Yeah but the opera behaviour causes sites to just stop working. The gecko + webkit behaviours don't cause hard failure which, for some of the more decorative uses of canvas, is more important than the exact rendering |
| 10:51 | <zcorpan_> | "The behavior of the 'auto' value is user agent-dependent, but should cause a scrolling mechanism to be provided for overflowing boxes." - http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visufx.html#overflow |
| 10:52 | <zcorpan_> | i had forgotten that the css spec sucks |
| 10:59 | Philip` | wonders if Opera is going to start drawing the radial gradient circles at roughly the positions the user specified instead of making up something completely weird :-) |
| 10:59 | <Philip`> | (See e.g. diagram in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-canvas-api/2009OctDec/0022.html) |
| 10:59 | <Philip`> | ((but ignore the "Correct interpretation?" because that's wrong, it should match WebKit)) |
| 11:00 | <Philip`> | s/WebKit/Safari/ |
| 11:04 | jgraham | also notes that it is totally non obvious that "INDEX_SIZE_ERR" would mean "value outside allowed range" |
| 11:04 | <jgraham> | Of course it is probably far too late to change that in general |
| 11:05 | <Philip`> | Seems like the alternative is making up a new exception |
| 11:06 | <Philip`> | which is harder work than reusing one that already has "size" in its name and is therefore not wholly inappropriate for size-related things |
| 11:06 | <Philip`> | and just ignore the bit where it says "index" |
| 11:06 | <Hixie_> | man the ietf submission system is annoying |
| 11:06 | Philip` | would hope browsers would print informative error messages to their error log before throwing the exception |
| 11:08 | <jgraham> | Philip`: Well if you already know to ignore the misleading part then it is hardly misleading |
| 11:08 | <jgraham> | It should really just throw RangeError() but I guess that would be too wasy |
| 11:08 | <jgraham> | *easy |
| 11:10 | <Philip`> | But that wouldn't work with such important cases as using the API from Java |
| 11:12 | <Hixie_> | othermaciej: yt? |
| 11:12 | <othermaciej> | Hixie_: aye |
| 11:12 | <jgraham> | Yes, like I said it would be too easy to have an API that works well with the only language avaliable in web clients |
| 11:12 | <Hixie_> | othermaciej: are the issues on http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html that say "Review Change Proposal" issues that will at some point get a deadline for others to provide change proposals? |
| 11:13 | <Hixie_> | othermaciej: or are they things for which it is too late to provide alternatives? |
| 11:13 | <othermaciej> | Hixie_: they will all at some point get a deadline - and all unlisted issues will get a deadline to submit a Change Proposal in the first place |
| 11:13 | <Hixie_> | ah ok |
| 11:14 | <Hixie_> | so -76 is the only one for which a deadline has passed? |
| 11:14 | <othermaciej> | Hixie_: none of them are too late to act on, though the chairs have not set any firm deadline for counter-proposals on any of them |
| 11:14 | <Hixie_> | any idea what the timeline will be for -76? |
| 11:15 | <othermaciej> | deadlines are about to pass for 7 and 63, which will cause them to be closed without prejudice if no one submits anything by tomorrow |
| 11:15 | <othermaciej> | for 76 a deadline has passed, and we now have two proposals on the table |
| 11:15 | <othermaciej> | I have not yet discussed with the other chairs what to do with the two proposals now |
| 11:16 | <Hixie_> | k |
| 11:17 | <othermaciej> | at the very least we'd probably give the Change Proposal authors some time to update their rationales in response to counter-arguments and each other's proposals |
| 11:59 | <Hixie_> | oh dear, i just remembered i have a noon lunch tomorrow |
| 11:59 | <Hixie_> | time to run to bed. nn. |
| 11:59 | <Lachy> | haha |
| 11:59 | <gsnedders> | "Oh damn. I have to go to bed at a vaguely sensible time." |
| 11:59 | jgraham | wonders if running to bed doesn't just make it harder to sleep |
| 12:00 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: Well, if it tires him out, then it might help. |
| 12:00 | <jgraham> | But if it just releases a bunch of endorphins? |
| 12:00 | <jgraham> | (sp?) |
| 12:01 | <annevk> | just crash land in a coma |
| 12:01 | <annevk> | works all the time |
| 12:01 | <annevk> | :p |
| 12:01 | <gsnedders> | Hey, just because I don't go out to Russian caberets! |
| 12:01 | <gsnedders> | (sp?) |
| 12:16 | <zcorpan_> | "number, for the credit card number and security code" - http://24ways.org/2009/have-a-field-day-with-html5-forms |
| 12:17 | <annevk> | http://twitter.com/lawouach/status/6301296435 what exactly is sad? |
| 12:18 | <zcorpan_> | that the spec wasn't perfect before the edit |
| 12:19 | <annevk> | or it's worse as a result? |
| 12:19 | annevk | hasn't been able to come up with much else either |
| 12:21 | <Philip`> | Or that the spec has to tell you how to write a server? |
| 12:23 | <annevk> | maybe, though it's just non-normative |
| 12:27 | <Philip`> | Or maybe that sockets and servers are being defined in the spec that's meant to be for a document markup language? |
| 12:30 | <Philip`> | Trying to extract understanding from Twitter is fun but, I guess, futile |
| 12:30 | <annevk> | zcorpan_, ouch, using type=number for that is so wrong |
| 12:31 | <zcorpan_> | commented |
| 12:31 | annevk | wonders why there was no technical review |
| 14:22 | foolip | prints TabAtkins reply and frames it |
| 14:23 | <foolip> | (not really) |
| 14:23 | <TabAtkins> | Haha. |
| 14:23 | <foolip> | anyway, I was writing a reply, but a shit one in comparison, so thanks for sparing me the effort |
| 14:23 | <TabAtkins> | You're welcome. I was afraid mine was kind of shit anyway, but I guess my review made it better. |
| 14:24 | <murr4y> | mailing list? :p |
| 14:24 | <Philip`> | "Please think of the environment before printing this email" |
| 14:24 | <foolip> | if this were a forum the moderators would now lock the thread and make a decision |
| 14:25 | Philip` | feels sorry for people who work in an environment where they have to add that kind of comment to their emails |
| 14:25 | <foolip> | Philip`: you've seent that in real mails? |
| 14:25 | <Philip`> | Yes |
| 14:29 | <jgraham> | I think I have seen that, but I am genuinely unsure if it happened to me or if I just remember Philip` talking about it before |
| 14:30 | <Philip`> | http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-comments/2008Dec/0005.html is one |
| 14:31 | <Philip`> | (Most I've seen have been non-public mailing-list ones) |
| 14:31 | <jgraham> | WHat kind of comment syntax is */ /* anyway? |
| 14:32 | <Philip`> | (often preceded by giant disclaimers of copyright and liability, and followed by untrimmed top-posting quoting of the entire thread) |
| 14:32 | <zcorpan_> | jgraham: close multiline comment, open multiline comment |
| 14:32 | <Philip`> | jgraham: Bold and italic and green, converted from HTML to text |
| 14:48 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: are you able to edit any ESW wiki pages yet? |
| 14:49 | <TabAtkins> | Let me check. |
| 14:51 | <TabAtkins> | MikeSmith: Nope. Tried http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ChangeProposals/KeepMicrodata, but it's still marked immutable. |
| 14:51 | <TabAtkins> | As before, I *can* edit MeetingTaxis. |
| 14:57 | <Philip`> | It's not just cached or something? |
| 15:03 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: I have asked the systeam to check into |
| 15:03 | <MikeSmith> | the real solution for this is for me to get a Mediawiki set up for us, and for us to quit using the ESW wiki |
| 15:04 | <MikeSmith> | at this point, the systems team is not enthusiastic about responding to tickets for the ESW Wiki |
| 15:04 | <Lachy> | MikeSmith, can the W3C mirror the WHATWG wiki? |
| 15:04 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: are you in Houston? |
| 15:04 | <TabAtkins> | MikeSmith: Yup. |
| 15:05 | <TabAtkins> | Well, Richmond/Rosenburg, but that's just outside Houston. |
| 15:05 | <MikeSmith> | Lachy: I'm sure it could but I would reckon it wouldn't |
| 15:05 | <karlushi> | annevk, is there a bug in dragonfly or Opera? For HTML resources, when the cache on server side is well done (working with Firefox, safari, etc), Dragonfly displays 200 OK and saying the browser sent Cache-Control: no-cache. (No 304 Not Modified) - Opera/9.80 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X; U; fr) Presto/2.2.15 Version/10.00 |
| 15:05 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: somebody contacted me about speaking about HTML5 at an event in Dallas in May |
| 15:06 | <MikeSmith> | they have a small budget and I think could cover all or part of your travel expenses |
| 15:06 | karlushi | is downloading a more recent version of Opera to check if the problem persists |
| 15:07 | <TabAtkins> | MikeSmith: Hmm. Sounds interesting. When is it? |
| 15:07 | <MikeSmith> | May 2-5 |
| 15:07 | <MikeSmith> | 75-minute slot |
| 15:08 | <Lachy> | MikeSmith, it just sucks to have two wikis, when the WHATWG wiki is already up and running, and should be good enough for the HTMLWG, if it weren't for those who insist on having it under the w3.org domain for political reasons |
| 15:08 | <TabAtkins> | If I could get up in May 2nd, it would be great. Later in the week, I'm trying to conserve vacation for my anniversary. |
| 15:08 | <MikeSmith> | OK |
| 15:08 | <TabAtkins> | And I'm already planning on 'getting sick' during the CSS ftf in March. |
| 15:08 | <MikeSmith> | so I |
| 15:08 | <annevk> | karlushi, likely dragonfly |
| 15:08 | <MikeSmith> | ...will put you in contact with the organizer |
| 15:08 | <TabAtkins> | MikeSmith: Sounds good. |
| 15:09 | <MikeSmith> | OK, will let you know when I hear back from him |
| 15:10 | <karlushi> | oooh http://opera.ca/ looks like Opera. ouch |
| 15:11 | <Madness> | Gh, red O, bad choice. |
| 15:17 | jgraham | is sorely tempted to mock TabAtkins for living in a country where <20 days of vacation a year is normal |
| 15:17 | <TabAtkins> | jgraham: Mock away. I get *10*. |
| 15:18 | <jgraham> | But decides that would be cruel |
| 15:18 | <annevk> | 10? whoa |
| 15:18 | <TabAtkins> | And that's... not unusual. |
| 15:18 | <jgraham> | In all seriousness I don't knoe how you deal with that |
| 15:18 | <TabAtkins> | 2 weeks is pretty standard. |
| 15:19 | <TabAtkins> | I do it by MANNING UP AND BEING 'MURRICAN FUCK YEAH |
| 15:19 | <annevk> | I barely manage with 25days :) |
| 15:19 | <annevk> | I'm told Brazilian gov employees get upwards of 2months |
| 15:20 | <TabAtkins> | I'm thinking of asking for vacation instead of money for my xmas bonus this year. |
| 15:20 | <TabAtkins> | because i'm going to blow a week on my anniversary, and it'll take me *until* my anniversary to earn that much. |
| 15:20 | <Lachy> | 2 weeks is fine in countries where unused days automatically accrue in following years |
| 15:21 | <jgraham> | Lachy: For some definition of "fine" that means "unbearable" |
| 15:22 | <gsnedders> | Lachy: That still means an average of two weeks per year |
| 15:22 | <TabAtkins> | Lachy: Erm, what gsnedders said. |
| 15:22 | <Lachy> | it depends how much you're paid, and whether you can afford to compensate with some unpaid days. |
| 15:22 | <Lachy> | Though, I agree, it's not ideal |
| 15:22 | <TabAtkins> | In many cases, 'unpaid days' aren't really an option either. |
| 15:22 | <jgraham> | Oh well if you are allowed to swap money for vacation that is different |
| 15:22 | <TabAtkins> | That's just... not something you do. |
| 15:23 | <jgraham> | But what TabAtkins said |
| 15:23 | <jgraham> | Presumably this is why so many Americans don't even have a passport (supposedly) |
| 15:23 | <Lachy> | I think I will end up with 2 unpaid days this year, just due to the dates I had to fly to get the cheaper flights |
| 15:24 | <Lachy> | and cause it's a 24 hour flights to Australia, which takes up 2 whole days there and back |
| 15:33 | <TabAtkins> | jgraham: Yup, so few of us get enough vacation to justify traveling outside the country. Also, our country's just so much *bigger* than any of your European countries, there's a ton you can do within the nation that would require you to leave the country. |
| 15:34 | <TabAtkins> | "You" as in you specifically, a european. |
| 15:36 | <jgraham> | (To be fair you can travel between a lot of european countries without a passport but I guess many people have still been outside Europe) |
| 15:36 | <jgraham> | (I don't know how the physical size compares though) |
| 15:36 | <JvA> | I don't remember where I read it, but about a year ago I read in a paper that Europeans and American scientists had concluded that a person need about 3-4 weeks of coherent vacation to 100% relax, and let the body recover from the that year's stress. |
| 15:37 | <JvA> | And that was one of the reason's most of west Europe, China etc have 4-6 weeks vacation. (if people in China always get their 4 weeks is another matter) |
| 15:37 | <jgraham> | In sweden a lot of people take blocks of 3-4 weeks often in the summer |
| 15:38 | <jgraham> | In fact it seems quite common to take four weeks just spend it in your summerhouse |
| 15:38 | <jgraham> | Which I don't really understand |
| 15:38 | <jgraham> | s/often/generally/ |
| 15:39 | <JvA> | jgraham: We have like 2 months of warm sun, so we "måste passa på" when the sun is up ;) |
| 15:39 | <Lachy> | jgraham, http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Area+of+europe+and+USA - USA is much bigger than Europe |
| 15:40 | <Philip`> | But lots of it is big and empty and boring |
| 15:40 | <JvA> | jgraham: I think many families with children do this: 3-4 weeks during the summer, 1 week to some sunny place during the winter. Ever been to Thailand during the winter? You'll find 10% of the Nordic population there. |
| 15:41 | <JvA> | Swedes are probably crazy. |
| 15:41 | <Lachy> | Philip`, Wolfram Alpha can't tell me the area of just the interesting parts of the USA. |
| 15:42 | <jgraham> | JvA: I met a bunch of people who aren't really "families with children" doing the same sort of thing |
| 15:42 | <jgraham> | Lachy: That is less than a factor of 2 |
| 15:42 | jgraham | wonders how it defines "europe" |
| 15:43 | <jgraham> | "Europe with Russia" is much bigger than the USA and also has a large number of boring desert bits :) |
| 15:44 | <Lachy> | only part of Russia is in the continent of Europe though |
| 15:44 | <Lachy> | so I assume the calculation either excluded russia completely, or did it based on the actual size of the continent |
| 15:45 | <JvA> | jgraham: It's called "the industry vacation". Many companies still make 3-4 weeks of vacation mandatory in the summer. |
| 15:45 | <jgraham> | JvA: I noticed that. I would still tend to go somewhere outside Sweden myself (at least for some of the time) |
| 15:46 | <jgraham> | Because y'know Sweden is great, but the world is full of interesting places |
| 15:52 | <JvA> | jgraham: Agreed, but you speak English. Traveling "alone" (everything but charter airlines) might be quite a new concept for many Swedes? |
| 15:53 | <JvA> | + the younger generation probably can't afford it anyhow. 25-35% of the people < 27 is out of work while many of the others study. |
| 15:53 | <JvA> | Anyhow, I should really stop talking about this in #whatwg :p |
| 15:54 | <jgraham> | The sample of Swedes I know is heavily biased toward the young and employed though |
| 16:00 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: Yeah, interesting places? Like Sweden :P |
| 16:07 | <TabAtkins> | Ah, there's nothing like using simulation to decide not to play a game of chance. |
| 16:28 | <Dashiva> | http://news.cnet.com/8301-13577_3-10407330-36.html |
| 16:28 | <Dashiva> | I am disappointed by the lack of "I am as high as a kite" |
| 17:49 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: |
| 17:50 | <MikeSmith> | you should be able to edit now |
| 17:50 | <MikeSmith> | apparently the problem as that your actual Wiki username is "Tab Atkins", not TabAtkins |
| 17:50 | <TabAtkins> | Indeed, now I can. |
| 17:50 | <TabAtkins> | Ah yeah, I keep forgetting about that. |
| 17:51 | <TabAtkins> | Every time I log in I try to do TabAtkins first. |
| 17:51 | <TabAtkins> | IIRC, the signup form wasn't clear that the name it was asking for would be my username, and then I didn't think it was worth it to sign up for another one just to get a WikiText name. |
| 17:59 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: this seems to be a not-uncommon problem with users and MoinMoin |
| 18:00 | <Dashiva> | MoinMoin itself is a problem :) |
| 18:03 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 22:19 | <Hixie> | wait, shelley thinks my opinion of what should be in and not in html5 is a compelling argument? |
| 22:20 | <Hixie> | i thought my opinion was worthless to her |
| 22:20 | <zcorpan_> | http://forums.whatwg.org/viewtopic.php?t=4177 - hmm, what's the attack vector? |
| 22:21 | <zcorpan_> | does it matter that a page can read path cookies from a 404 or 403? |
| 22:22 | <Hixie> | can't see why it would |
| 22:22 | <Hixie> | or how it could |
| 22:22 | <Hixie> | surely 404 pages should be allowed to use cookies? |
| 22:23 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: it would be good to update your change proposal to consisely convey the points made in the recent threads -- let me know if you would like to talk about how to do that |
| 22:23 | <zcorpan_> | yeah, but should a parent page be able to access them if the parent page uses a different path? |
| 22:23 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: don't worry - I still think your opinion is worthless, if not backed by sound technical arguments |
| 22:24 | <Hixie> | me too |
| 22:24 | <Hixie> | i'm just confused that shelley seems to pick and chose when my opinion is "compelling" based purely on whether it matches her own opinion |
| 22:24 | <TabAtkins> | Hixie: Yeah, I'll be doing so. I'm taking the day off of that thread, though, to let things settle. I figure one post per day in contentious threads is a good policy. |
| 22:24 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: sounds far too reasonable for public-html. ;-) |
| 22:24 | <Hixie> | zcorpan_: how could you stop it? |
| 22:25 | <TabAtkins> | You're right. I'll commence spamming with ALL CAPS immediately! |
| 22:25 | <zcorpan_> | Hixie: apparently ie8 blocks reading cookie for 404 (haven't tested myself though) |
| 22:25 | <Hixie> | so 404 pages can't use cookies in IE? |
| 22:25 | <Hixie> | weird |
| 22:30 | <nessy> | really? |
| 22:30 | <nessy> | strange... |
| 22:36 | <othermaciej> | that seems not terribly useful, since the cookies already got sent to the server |
| 22:37 | <othermaciej> | oh I guess the theoretical scenario is different parts of the same origin not trusting each other? |
| 22:38 | <zcorpan_> | yes |
| 22:39 | <zcorpan_> | i'm can't imagine a reasonable attack vector right now, but otoh i'm kind of too tired to think properly right now |
| 23:42 | <Lachy> | othermaciej, how long before we call for a WG vote on this microdata/rdfa issue, so we can hurry up and drop RDFa and move on with more important stuff? |
| 23:45 | <zcorpan_> | ah, so remy implemented sessionStorage with window.name, as i suggested a few months ago that someone should do |
| 23:45 | <zcorpan_> | (in http://24ways.org/2009/breaking-out-the-edges-of-the-browser ) |
| 23:45 | <othermaciej> | Lachy: we already published RDFa as an FPWD - I don't think a vote to end-of-life it and convert it to a Note would be productive at this time (though maybe it will turn out that way eventually) |
| 23:45 | <Lachy> | it seems to me that everyone is already pretty firm on their opinion about whether or not microdata should be split, and so there's little point in letting this drag on much longer |
| 23:46 | <othermaciej> | Lachy: agreed, I don't want the discussion to go forever |
| 23:46 | <Lachy> | othermaciej, I know that. IMHO, the way we'll deal with RDFa is just to block it from getting to CR, and since microdata covers all the use cases, it can go to Note later |
| 23:46 | <othermaciej> | Lachy: but I would at least like to give the authors of the Change Proposals the opportunity to update them in response to counter-arguments |
| 23:47 | <Lachy> | but for now, letting them play around with their own spec for a while doesn't seem to be causing much harm, other than the competition between the two specs |
| 23:47 | <Lachy> | fair enough |
| 23:48 | <Lachy> | othermaciej, it might be nice if you could set some sort of deadline for getting the change proposals finalised. Maybe a week or so. |
| 23:49 | <Lachy> | we should try to avoid having a vote during holiday times while people are away, so sooner rather than later would be better. |
| 23:49 | <othermaciej> | Lachy: I think all of the Chairs are pretty keen to get at least one issue all the way through the end of the process |
| 23:49 | <Hixie> | rdfa will likely get its own wg, as i understand it |
| 23:50 | <Hixie> | so it's very likely to go to REC unless you really want to go out of your way to stop it (which seems pointless) |
| 23:50 | <othermaciej> | they do plan to form their own WG at some point, yes |
| 23:50 | <Lachy> | don't they already have an RDF working group? |
| 23:50 | <Hixie> | RDFa is no more appropriate for the RDF WG than microdata is |
| 23:51 | <Philip`> | Lachy: No, just the XHTML2 WG |
| 23:51 | <Lachy> | huh? Didn't they initally create it? |
| 23:51 | <Hixie> | what? |
| 23:51 | Lachy | isn't too up to date on the history of RDF and RDFa, so never mind |
| 23:51 | Hixie | confoosed |
| 23:52 | <Hixie> | RDF has nothing to do with RDFa, politically, as i understand it |
| 23:52 | <Hixie> | RDFa was an XHTML2 thing |
| 23:52 | <othermaciej> | RDFa was created by a joint task force of the XHTML2 WG and one of the RDF-related WGs |
| 23:52 | <othermaciej> | It is intended that in the future there will be a WG for RDFa specifically which could continue to work on the XHTML and HTML syntaxes for it down the line |
| 23:53 | <Dashiva> | What is the future work supposed to be? Once you have a proper serialization of RDF, isn't that the end of it? |
| 23:53 | <Philip`> | It was intended that work on RDFa will continue after the XHTML2 WG is shut down, regardless of whether it's in a W3C WG or not (though preferably it would be) (as far as I understand) |
| 23:54 | <Philip`> | Dashiva: Errata on old versions, development of new versions with improvements based on past experience, development of test suites, promotion of adoption, etc |
| 23:54 | <Philip`> | I guess |
| 23:55 | <Philip`> | (Specific things that have been discussed include RDFa 1.1 and a DOM interface) |
| 23:55 | <othermaciej> | I think the bottom line is that blocking HTML+RDFa as a spec or as a technology is not likely to be a fruitful avenue to pursue |
| 23:55 | <Hixie> | blocking any spec or technology is pretty pointless and petty |
| 23:56 | <Hixie> | as i learnt from trying to block xforms and then having the w3c try to block html5 :-) |
| 23:56 | <Lachy> | Hixie, the problem with RDFa in HTML ever getting to REC is that it would indicate that implementers have actually bothered to implement it, meaning clueless people could start using it |
| 23:56 | <Hixie> | no it wouldn't |
| 23:57 | <Lachy> | Why? it can't get to REC without having been implemented. |
| 23:57 | <Hixie> | RDFa already has plenty enough implementations to convince the W3C to let it go to REC |
| 23:59 | <Lachy> | but there's no implementations of the HTML specific processing stuff yet, like dealing with namespaces in html |
| 23:59 | <Hixie> | your faith in the w3c following their process is admirable |
| 23:59 | <Philip`> | Almost all the implementations handle non-well-formed-XML content |