| 00:01 | <Hixie> | volkmar: here |
| 00:02 | <volkmar> | i've posted a message about [PutForwards=value] for htmlFor attribute in output element |
| 00:02 | <volkmar> | i've been told you can explain this choice |
| 00:03 | <Hixie> | yeah, it's on my pile of feedback |
| 00:03 | <Hixie> | in short though the answer is that it makes the authoring experience better |
| 00:05 | <TabAtkins> | othermaciej: Yeah, I just talked to TV and he said he did. |
| 00:08 | <volkmar> | Hixie: does it make the authoring experince so much better ? |
| 00:09 | <volkmar> | Hixie: i think it's a bit odd to set a string to a DOM object to access directly to an attribute |
| 00:09 | <volkmar> | i'm not sure it worths it |
| 00:11 | <Hixie> | volkmar: it's how window.location works |
| 00:12 | <Hixie> | volkmar: i think it's a heck of a lot easier to say foo.className = 'x y z'; foo.htmlFor = 'a b c'; than to have to make them different as in foo.className = 'x y z'; foo.htmlFor.value = 'a b c'; |
| 00:23 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: I'll check now |
| 00:24 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: so I see two accounts for you in the database |
| 00:25 | <MikeSmith> | both affiliated correctly |
| 00:25 | <MikeSmith> | one of those accounts shows you as an active participant in the CSS WG |
| 00:26 | <MikeSmith> | but it doesn't show you as a participant in the HTML WG |
| 00:26 | <MikeSmith> | the other account doesn't have any working groups associated with it at all |
| 00:30 | <volkmar> | Hixie: ok, then let's go with that |
| 00:30 | <volkmar> | Hixie: thanks :) |
| 00:35 | <Hixie> | volkmar: np |
| 00:48 | <othermaciej> | TabAtkins: I guess poking MikeSmith is the right next step then |
| 00:48 | <othermaciej> | ah, I see MikeSmith is on it already |
| 00:50 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 00:51 | <MikeSmith> | I can't find any record of Tab being re-added, so I've asked the systems team to look into it |
| 00:57 | <hober> | TabAtkins: re: your email, I'll go ahead and convert my ISSUE-95 zero-edit CP from Markdown to MediaWiki syntax & I'll get it up on one of the WGs' wikis. We can work on generalizing it from there |
| 01:07 | <TabAtkins> | hober: kk |
| 01:07 | <TabAtkins> | MikeSmith: Thanks. |
| 01:51 | <Hixie> | maciej, you should configure your mail client to alert you when you include the string "file://" in it. :-P |
| 02:07 | <annevk> | blahdieblah |
| 02:07 | <annevk> | just because |
| 02:08 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: d'oh! |
| 02:08 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: maybe you should configure yours to automatically translate to http://dev.w3.org/ URLs :-) |
| 06:22 | <Hixie> | i like how shelley thinks styling controls is some new topic that's never come up before |
| 06:22 | <Hixie> | given that i've written entire specifications (e.g. xbl2) on the topic |
| 06:27 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: I didn't even mention XBL2 as part of the story for deep styling of custom controls, but of course it is a potential part of the toolset |
| 06:27 | <othermaciej> | maybe I am just embarrassed that we haven't implemented it yet |
| 06:27 | <Hixie> | xbl2 is even designed to be extended to have predefined control bindings, much like what html5 references in the rendering section |
| 06:28 | <Hixie> | and supports the pseudos that people are suggesting |
| 06:28 | <Hixie> | these are all essentially solved problems at the theoretical level... it's all coding from now on, if y'all agree with my approach. :-P |
| 06:30 | <othermaciej> | I don't think XBL2 solves the problem of minting brand new pseudos... or does it let you make up arbitrary new ones? |
| 06:31 | <othermaciej> | also doesn't define all the right appearance property values |
| 06:31 | <othermaciej> | I think XBL2 is a good tool, but shouldn't be the only way to style form controls |
| 06:31 | <Hixie> | we'd need some pseudos from the csswg, and yeah, appearance needs rewriting |
| 06:31 | <othermaciej> | nor should form controls have to be implemented with XBL2 to be stylable, although it may turn out to be a convenient implementation technique at some point |
| 06:31 | <Hixie> | well, depends what you mean by "only way" |
| 06:32 | <Hixie> | i think conceptually it makes sense to pretend the form control is a binding, for expository purposes if not necessarily implementation purposes |
| 06:32 | <Hixie> | but anyway |
| 06:32 | <Hixie> | i think all the concepts are in place, though some polishing may be needed in various places |
| 06:33 | <othermaciej> | well one thing I'd like to see defined is have clear conformance requirements for simply putting CSS properties on <input type=text> and <input type=submit> |
| 06:34 | <Hixie> | if we had a conceptual binding combined with a well-defined 'appearance' property, that would be one solution that would work pretty well |
| 06:34 | <Hixie> | and would extend well to a world with xbl2 |
| 06:34 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: let me be clear about the basic level I am talking about |
| 06:34 | <othermaciej> | the styling that <http://www.google.com/>; applies to the text field and two buttons... |
| 06:35 | <othermaciej> | I would like the result of that to be interoperable and defined by spec |
| 06:36 | <othermaciej> | per spec, the effect of the CSS properties put on those controls is completely implementation-defined |
| 06:36 | <Hixie> | anyone who tries to write a spec to do that will fail to prevent scope creep all the way to defining every property, unless they are _extremely_ resistant to feedback |
| 06:36 | <Hixie> | hence why i'd just go all the way and just define it in a way that uses conceptual bindings and true 'appearance' work |
| 06:36 | <othermaciej> | yes, you have to define how every property works |
| 06:37 | <othermaciej> | I don't see how appearance helps |
| 06:37 | <othermaciej> | that page doesn't set the appearance property |
| 06:37 | <Hixie> | it's set by the UA sheet |
| 06:37 | <othermaciej> | nor do I see how "conceptual bindings" help, because that page does not use them either |
| 06:37 | <Hixie> | they're used by the UA sheet |
| 06:38 | <Hixie> | if you define how setting a property overrides 'appearance', and how setting a property affects specific parts of a binding, you ground your definition in something useful |
| 06:38 | <Hixie> | it's not the only solution, certainly |
| 06:38 | <othermaciej> | overriding 'appearance', I see your point |
| 06:38 | <Hixie> | but i think other solutions are far less likely to be sanely scalable or workable in the future |
| 06:38 | <othermaciej> | 'specific parts of a binding', I don't see how that is relevant to text fields or buttons |
| 06:38 | <othermaciej> | I can see how it is relevant to compound controls |
| 06:38 | <Hixie> | for text fields and buttons, maybe not |
| 06:38 | <othermaciej> | that need to have subparts individually styled |
| 06:39 | <Hixie> | but e.g. for <input type=file>, you need to say what the element's styles apply to |
| 06:39 | <Hixie> | anyway |
| 06:39 | <Hixie> | i'm not planning on doing this work |
| 06:39 | <Hixie> | and if others want to do it in a different way, i'm certainly not going to stop them |
| 06:39 | <boblet> | annevk: you there? |
| 06:42 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: yeah, for <input type=file> we have a separate pseudo for the button |
| 06:43 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: I hope at some point we can find a person with the skills and experience to specify this. |
| 06:43 | <Hixie> | add it to the list |
| 06:52 | <othermaciej> | it's a big list! |
| 06:53 | <othermaciej> | I'm thinking a bit less about the big list these days because I want to focus on getting HTML5 through the W3C meat grinder |
| 06:53 | <othermaciej> | cause that's gonna be some delicious sausage when it's done |
| 07:09 | <othermaciej> | TabAtkins: lol at "CSS T&A" |
| 07:45 | <JonathanNeal> | hello all |
| 07:45 | <estellevw> | hi |
| 07:47 | <JonathanNeal> | what's new? |
| 07:47 | <estellevw> | In terms of the discussion from last hour, i think generally the appearance of input elements should be left out of the HTML5 spec, other than most general specifications. The appearance, other than box, checkbox, radio button, button and button with box is all that should be stated in the spec... |
| 07:48 | <estellevw> | i would like to see the input type file enable styling of the button and box too |
| 07:50 | <JonathanNeal> | left out, okay. |
| 07:50 | <estellevw> | in terms of "Hixie: i'm not planning on doing this work", I am fairly new here, but willing to do the work... need guidance on what to do though |
| 07:51 | <estellevw> | sorry JonathanNeal... nothing new, other than dealing with a skunk spray this evening... but that has noting to do with HTML5 |
| 07:55 | <Hixie> | estellevw: TabAtkins would be the guy to coordinate with -- he works with the css working group more than most of us here |
| 07:55 | <estellevw> | thanks. |
| 07:57 | <estellevw> | But putting that the element should have two components does not seem to be in the spec. |
| 07:58 | <estellevw> | There is more description of appearance in the spec for other imputs, like 'image' stating it's an image or a button |
| 07:58 | <estellevw> | but i'll check the css wg archives |
| 08:59 | <JonathanNeal> | what's the current status of microformatting in html5? Can I set the profile in head or something? |
| 08:59 | <zcorpan> | you can use microformats, but you can't use the profile attribute |
| 09:00 | <JonathanNeal> | do i have to wrap everything in a class="vcard" still? |
| 09:03 | <JonathanNeal> | I'm interested in adopting the hcard h* microformats, but it seems unnecessary to always wrap everything in a vcard |
| 09:05 | <zcorpan> | why are you interested? what are you trying to do? |
| 09:08 | <JonathanNeal> | zcorpan, I'm interested because it pleases me, you know me by now? Always trying to adopt and standardize. :) |
| 09:09 | <JonathanNeal> | I would have made a great pharisee. |
| 09:17 | <zcorpan> | JonathanNeal: personally i wouldn't adopt anything without a clear reason, i.e. trying to solve a problem or enabling something cool |
| 09:17 | <JonathanNeal> | Well, it would be cool to have Google picking up my content mo' betta. |
| 09:18 | <JonathanNeal> | It would allow me to standardize some classnames now and again, making my development mo' readable to other developers. |
| 09:18 | <zcorpan> | i doubt that adding microformats will make it more readable |
| 09:21 | <JonathanNeal> | Well, if there is a popularized verbatim of classnames, then using said classnames would more-than-not make the content more readable to other readers, especially when those readers are fellow developers or search engines. |
| 09:22 | <JonathanNeal> | more readable for readers, yo |
| 09:26 | <annevk> | boblet, am now |
| 09:27 | <boblet> | hey. Just want to check how to pronounce your name for katakana-ization |
| 09:27 | <boblet> | anne or an-nay? |
| 09:28 | <boblet> | (or should that be ann or an-nay) |
| 09:28 | <boblet> | I guess van is as expected. Kesteren too? |
| 09:31 | <annevk> | an-nuh or some such |
| 09:32 | <annevk> | the rest is as expected, yay |
| 09:32 | <annevk> | an-nuh-san, even :p |
| 09:32 | <svl> | annevk: don't you think "as expected" with "van" would be the vehicle? |
| 09:32 | <zcorpan> | it's annö |
| 09:32 | <boblet> | aah, nice |
| 09:33 | <annevk> | svl, true, but I care less :) |
| 09:33 | <boblet> | thought I didn’t have it quite right |
| 09:34 | <boblet> | svl: unless you were enquiring about pronunciation |
| 09:34 | <boblet> | :| |
| 09:34 | <zcorpan> | van is like 'fun' |
| 09:34 | <boblet> | heh |
| 09:34 | <svl> | like the "an" in the latin word "anno" |
| 09:34 | <boblet> | ohrly. svl, my apologies |
| 09:35 | <svl> | :) |
| 09:35 | <boblet> | hrm, I guess アンヌ・ヴン・ケステレン |
| 09:36 | <boblet> | かな？ |
| 09:36 | <boblet> | MikeSmith: yt? |
| 09:36 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 09:36 | <boblet> | that look right to you? |
| 09:36 | <MikeSmith> | yep |
| 09:36 | <boblet> | cool |
| 09:36 | <annevk> | アンヌ・ヴン・ケステレン is me in Japanese? |
| 09:37 | <boblet> | yep |
| 09:37 | <annevk> | sweet |
| 09:37 | <boblet> | badass huh ;-) |
| 09:37 | <annevk> | I need to get a tattoo now |
| 09:40 | <jgraham> | Maybe stick with a t-shirt? |
| 09:47 | <svl> | google translate back says Susan Anne Kesteren; I'm assuming susan is anne, and anne is van? |
| 09:48 | <MikeSmith> | svl: that's somewhat bizarre |
| 09:50 | <svl> | アン ファン ケステレン is its translation the other way round |
| 09:51 | <estellevw> | jonathanNeal are you the one who did http://www.iecss.com/whatwg.css |
| 09:52 | <MikeSmith> | svl: which is "Ann Fan Kesteren" |
| 09:53 | <payman> | annevk: http://dev.w3.org/csswg/cssom/#introduction : s/where/were ? |
| 09:57 | <annevk> | o_O thanks |
| 10:02 | <myakura> | I would spell like アナ・ヴァン・ケステレン but I'm not sure if this sound as expected. |
| 10:04 | <MikeSmith> | myakura: zcorpan said the "van" part is pronounced more like "fun" |
| 10:04 | <MikeSmith> | schwa sound, I guess |
| 10:05 | <myakura> | MikeSmith: Ah. |
| 10:05 | <MikeSmith> | but there is no schwa sound in Japanese |
| 10:05 | <myakura> | right. |
| 10:05 | <MikeSmith> | but I guess ヴン is more like "foon", not "fun" |
| 10:05 | <MikeSmith> | boblet: so maybe ヴァン is better |
| 10:06 | <svl> | The starting letter is definitely a "v", not an "f"; the a is the problem when trying to find an English equivalent |
| 10:06 | <svl> | maybe like "varsity" |
| 10:09 | <annevk> | it's somewhat like fun, but with a really weak f |
| 10:11 | <MikeSmith> | myakura's ヴァン suggestion is the closest approximation in Japanese, I think |
| 10:12 | <MikeSmith> | dammit |
| 10:12 | <MikeSmith> | my skype on Mac appears to be making a quacking noise |
| 10:12 | <MikeSmith> | I have no idea why |
| 10:13 | <MikeSmith> | help |
| 10:13 | <MikeSmith> | please help me stop the quacking |
| 10:16 | <myakura> | Ah. I remember that the "van" part in Pieter van den Hoogenband is spelled as ファン so the Japanese could live with that :) |
| 10:17 | <annevk> | ah, that would at least be consistent :) |
| 12:11 | <jgraham> | Am I blind or is window.stop missing from HTML5? Is that deliberate (does IE support it?) |
| 12:13 | <Lachy> | jgraham, it does appear to be missing |
| 12:13 | <Lachy> | do you know if it's supported in webkit and opera? |
| 12:14 | <jgraham> | Lachy: Well w(window.stop) in the ldv shows function() {/* native code*/} so I guess yes |
| 12:14 | <jgraham> | but I haven't actually compared behaviour |
| 12:17 | <Lachy> | IE8 doesn't support window.stop() |
| 14:34 | <annevk> | what is window.stop()? |
| 14:34 | <jgraham> | I think it interrupts parsing |
| 14:35 | <jgraham> | Beyond that I don't know; I hadn't heard of it untill this morning |
| 14:35 | <annevk> | funnest |
| 14:36 | <jgraham> | There are a few bugs in our bug tracker about it at least |
| 14:36 | <jgraham> | Although some of them are userjs and similar non-web things |
| 14:49 | <Lachy> | AIUI, window.stop() basically behaves like the browser's stop button |
| 14:50 | <Lachy> | I'm not really sure what the use case for the method is though |
| 14:56 | <annevk> | seems vital for implementing a browser in a browser |
| 14:56 | <gsnedders> | And we all know the browser OS is the future |
| 14:56 | <annevk> | and what's an OS without a browser? |
| 14:57 | <annevk> | it's going to be so recursive it hurts |
| 15:00 | <zcorpan> | we should implement a browser in flash, to implement flash |
| 15:01 | <JonathanNeal> | estellevw, yes |
| 15:02 | <JonathanNeal> | Hii! :) |
| 15:05 | <annevk> | ok, epic after-lunch-e-mail overload |
| 15:05 | gsnedders | has epic after-Easter e-mail overload |
| 15:05 | <gsnedders> | I don't dare start on it though, even if I am working a bit today :P |
| 15:28 | <JonathanNeal> | gsnedders, I just realized I use your outliner :) |
| 15:28 | JonathanNeal | gives him a paper and pen for the ol' autograph |
| 15:43 | <Dashiva> | So "resource" is short for "representation of resource" when convenient. How convenient. |
| 15:43 | <Philip`> | Abbreviate it to "re'source" |
| 15:44 | <Philip`> | That should avoid any potential ambiguity |
| 15:46 | <jgraham> | Is it too obvious to suggest namespaces? |
| 15:50 | <jgraham> | Actually I don't understand this sentence at all: """a URI can identify a |
| 15:50 | <jgraham> | resource that is an SVG document which has a representation |
| 15:50 | <jgraham> | that is also and SVG document. |
| 15:50 | <jgraham> | """ |
| 15:50 | <jgraham> | How (in the HTTP sense) can a resource be a concrete type? |
| 15:50 | <jgraham> | e.g. "a resource that is a SVG document" |
| 15:51 | zcorpan | wonders how jgraham pronounces SVG |
| 15:53 | <jgraham> | I think that was more like a typo than anything deep |
| 15:53 | <jgraham> | I mean I pronounce it ess-vee-gee. That's what everyone does, right? |
| 15:53 | <jgraham> | What else could you do? svug? |
| 15:54 | <zcorpan> | soovge |
| 15:55 | <zcorpan> | like doovde and ready for de hud |
| 15:55 | <jgraham> | I can't even say that with it written out |
| 15:56 | <annevk> | the transition and animation thread should take a break |
| 16:05 | <gsnedders> | JonathanNeal: *signs* |
| 16:05 | <JonathanNeal> | woooow |
| 16:05 | <JonathanNeal> | Are microformat and HTML5 microdata mutually exclusive? |
| 16:06 | <jgraham> | No |
| 16:06 | <annevk> | is the native elements vs scripted thread a rehash of older debates? |
| 16:08 | <JonathanNeal> | jgraham, it seems like it would be a lot of clutter to follow both --- is there a preference? I really like that microformat has its own active community, but I'm just learning about this all. I'm not sure how the two work together. |
| 16:09 | <jgraham> | JonathanNeal: Well you have sort of decided on clutter if you do either |
| 16:09 | <Dashiva> | The idea is that new (or updated old) microformats would be layered on top of microdata |
| 16:10 | <JonathanNeal> | jgraham, they're not TERRIBLY cluttered. The documentation for microdata feels cluttered (especially after reading microformats), but Dashiva that makes sense --- oi but to learn microdata doesn't seem as friendly. |
| 16:11 | <Dashiva> | If you ignore the parts added to support RDF use cases, it's pretty simple |
| 16:11 | <jgraham> | JonathanNeal: I guess microdata hasn't been through all the blogs and round the conference circuit until the explainations are smoothly polished yet |
| 16:14 | <jgraham> | But it shouldn't be that hard. You should become an expert and get invited to do well paid speaking gigs or something |
| 16:16 | <JonathanNeal> | jgraham, har har :) |
| 16:18 | <JonathanNeal> | Except Google has posted about it- so I imagine someone else has. |
| 16:21 | gsnedders | doesn't like it when people try and bully him into speaking on stages |
| 16:22 | <JonathanNeal> | in that case we'll just bully you into including the multiple headings in the hgroup in the outliner, at least optionally :) |
| 16:22 | gsnedders | is amazed at how much use people get out of something he hacked together in 30 mins |
| 16:23 | <gsnedders> | And how much more time people want me to spend on it :P |
| 16:23 | <JonathanNeal> | Well, it's not as easy to write in php, so we love you for it. |
| 16:23 | <gsnedders> | It wouldn't be that hard to write in PHP |
| 16:24 | <JonathanNeal> | ... I tried :\ |
| 16:24 | JonathanNeal | hangs his head low. awww |
| 16:24 | <gsnedders> | You just need, to do something very basic, DOMDocument::loadHTML and some method of iterating over the DOM |
| 16:24 | <gsnedders> | Like http://github.com/gsnedders/complexpie/blob/master/src/domiterator.php |
| 16:26 | <gsnedders> | Then you just need to create some basic structure to store the classes in |
| 16:27 | gsnedders | thinks the challenge of PHP is as much knowing the language well enough to do stuff in reasonable ways as well as learning how to write clean PHP |
| 16:30 | <JonathanNeal> | Is <address /> really only meant for article and body, not just any sectioning element? |
| 16:30 | <JonathanNeal> | "The address element represents the contact information for its nearest article or body element ancestor" |
| 16:31 | <zcorpan> | JonathanNeal: it is, but you can put it in any sectioning element |
| 16:32 | <zcorpan> | or indeed pretty much anywhere |
| 16:34 | <JonathanNeal> | That seems like something that should be clarified or decided upon. |
| 16:34 | <miketaylr> | would you want a seperate <address> for a <nav>? |
| 16:35 | <miketaylr> | s/seperate/separate/ |
| 16:35 | <JonathanNeal> | Well, would you distribute the nav as independant content? |
| 16:36 | <miketaylr> | of course not |
| 16:36 | <JonathanNeal> | s/independant/independent |
| 16:36 | <miketaylr> | :) |
| 16:37 | <JonathanNeal> | Well, I believe <nav> is sectioning content, which is why gsnedders goes as far as to "untitled section" it when its left out, so an optional <address /> allowed in any sectioning element means that yes, it would be allowed in <nav /> |
| 16:37 | <miketaylr> | right |
| 16:37 | <JonathanNeal> | Maybe <nav> shouldn't be a sectioning element :) |
| 16:38 | <miketaylr> | but the way its defined now, that wouldn't imply that the <address> content denotes the author of the <nav> |
| 16:38 | <miketaylr> | but the body or article its found in |
| 16:38 | <JonathanNeal> | Sure, so what is the benefit of <nav /> being its own section? |
| 16:39 | <JonathanNeal> | Because if its sectioning content because you can include other copy or independent |
| 16:39 | <JonathanNeal> | s/its/it's |
| 16:40 | <JonathanNeal> | ... document-ish stuff, then <address /> actually works. |
| 16:41 | <miketaylr> | sure, you can stick an <address> in there |
| 16:42 | <miketaylr> | but i don't see how that affects its representation of "the contact information for its nearest article or body element ancestor" |
| 16:44 | <JonathanNeal> | it doesn't, so maybe it's a potential yet impractical bug (still find nav impractical as sectioning content) ... I should continue this discussion in my nice, cool office. |
| 16:45 | <JonathanNeal> | Be back in 20 or so, miketaylr thank you very, very much for the discussion. |
| 16:45 | miketaylr | waits in his stuffy office |
| 17:26 | <volkmar> | the current implementation of the keygen elements are all based on the Netscape keygen element ? |
| 17:27 | <jgraham> | volkmar: AFAIK it is that and a wing and a prayer |
| 17:28 | <volkmar> | :) |
| 17:28 | <JonathanNeal> | back! |
| 17:28 | <volkmar> | i was reading carefuly the keygen element specs this morning and it sounds weird to have an interactive element with the autofocus attribute which has no mandatory UI |
| 17:29 | <gsnedders> | JonathanNeal: Don't blame me, I just implemented the spec. |
| 17:29 | <jgraham> | JonathanNeal: fingers! |
| 17:31 | <JonathanNeal> | knees and toes, knees and toes |
| 17:33 | <annevk> | volkmar, is there no UI suggested in the rendering section? |
| 17:34 | <volkmar> | annevk: oups, i did not check |
| 17:34 | annevk | did not either |
| 17:38 | <volkmar> | annevk: "the element is expected to render as an 'inline-block' box containing a user interface to configure the key pair to be generated." |
| 17:39 | <volkmar> | that is quite similar to what we have in the keygen element spec |
| 17:43 | <annevk> | not much indeed |
| 17:45 | <volkmar> | at the moment, all UA implementing the keygen element have a list to select the key length and a text field |
| 17:45 | <volkmar> | but the text field looks to be read only on opera |
| 17:46 | <volkmar> | and I suppose it is used for the algorithm |
| 17:46 | <volkmar> | should that be added to the specs ? |
| 17:54 | <annevk> | well, it really depends on the UA how they expose it |
| 17:56 | <annevk> | could just be a selectbox, the field could be completely readonly i suppose |
| 17:56 | <annevk> | if the ua doesn't allow for picking sizes |
| 18:08 | <JonathanNeal> | Microdata, Microformats, RDFa --- a sordid tale |
| 18:36 | <TabAtkins_> | Anyone know if gradient support was removed from FF 3.5? I know it was working before, but now my wife can't see any gradients in her 3.5.7. |
| 18:36 | <TabAtkins_> | And now the MDC page says it's a 3.6 feature. |
| 18:36 | <miketaylr> | hmm, i didn't even know it was in 3.5 at all |
| 18:38 | <TabAtkins_> | Yeah, as -moz-linear-gradient() and -moz-radial-gradient() |
| 18:38 | <miketaylr> | do you have a test page? |
| 18:39 | <TabAtkins_> | I know it was working a month ago when I added it to my old company's main site. |
| 18:39 | <miketaylr> | i suppose i could find one myself :P |
| 18:39 | <TabAtkins_> | miketaylr: www.xanthir.com/etc/gradient.html |
| 18:39 | <miketaylr> | i'll start with 3.5.0 : http://mac.oldapps.com/firefox.php |
| 18:39 | <miketaylr> | :) |
| 18:39 | <JonathanNeal> | hey speaking of gradients, opera :) |
| 18:40 | <TabAtkins_> | Does Opera do gradients now? Prefixed, hopefully? |
| 18:40 | <estellevw> | I tested these just last months |
| 18:40 | <estellevw> | let me see if i can find my sandbox |
| 18:40 | <estellevw> | i mean, browser results |
| 18:40 | <annevk> | we don't |
| 18:41 | <TabAtkins_> | That's what I thought, annevk. |
| 18:41 | <annevk> | we were waiting for syntax to stabilize |
| 18:43 | <daedb> | Has it stabilized now? |
| 18:43 | <JonathanNeal> | annevk, by stabilize do you mean for moz / webkit to support a uniform pattern? |
| 18:43 | <miketaylr> | TabAtkins_: is it supposed to look like this? http://miketaylr.com/post/f30cd6ac.png |
| 18:43 | <TabAtkins_> | miketaylr: No, the background is supposed to fade from white at the top to gray at the bottom. |
| 18:44 | <estellevw> | FF and webkit use differnt syntax |
| 18:44 | <TabAtkins_> | daedb: There's only one place where I might still change the syntax, and I doubt I will there. |
| 18:44 | <TabAtkins_> | (The one place is precisely how to handle angles.) |
| 18:44 | <estellevw> | IE can do gradients too, but completely different syntax than the spec |
| 18:44 | <daedb> | TabAtkins_: ok, thanks |
| 18:45 | <annevk> | JonathanNeal, the spec |
| 18:45 | <miketaylr> | maybe i'm missing something then, TabAtkins_. it looks the way i just pasted in chromium/mac, safari, ff 3.6, ff3.5, etc |
| 18:45 | <miketaylr> | oh wait. scratch that. |
| 18:45 | <miketaylr> | :/ |
| 18:45 | JonathanNeal | scratches that |
| 18:45 | <TabAtkins_> | Does it work in one of the FF versions? |
| 18:46 | <miketaylr> | not in 3.5.0 or 3.5.8 |
| 18:46 | <TabAtkins_> | Wtf. I *know* that it was working a month ago when I redid my company's site template to use gradients. |
| 18:46 | <estellevw> | background: -moz-linear-gradient(top, yellow, red); |
| 18:46 | <estellevw> | background: -webkit-gradient(linear, 0 top, 0 bottom, color-stop(0, yellow), color-stop(1, red)); |
| 18:47 | <TabAtkins_> | I could *see* it working, before I slotted in fallback images for other browsers. |
| 18:47 | <estellevw> | produce the same thing. |
| 18:47 | <TabAtkins_> | roc, dbaron, anyone else from Moz? |
| 18:47 | <miketaylr> | it's the drugs, man. |
| 18:47 | <dbaron> | TabAtkins_, eh? |
| 18:47 | <TabAtkins_> | Any clue what happened to gradient support in FF? |
| 18:47 | <dbaron> | it's in 3.6 |
| 18:47 | <dbaron> | not 3.5 |
| 18:48 | <TabAtkins_> | 3.6 is public, right? |
| 18:48 | <dbaron> | yes |
| 18:48 | <estellevw> | yeah |
| 18:48 | <TabAtkins_> | Argh, I'm all sorts of crazy, then. |
| 18:48 | <estellevw> | Moz is at 3.6.3 right now |
| 18:48 | <JonathanNeal> | It didn't work until 3.6. |
| 18:49 | <JonathanNeal> | They wouldn't let me put in the 3.6 css until 3.6 was out, had to use images. |
| 18:49 | <estellevw> | https://developer.mozilla.org/en/CSS/-moz-linear-gradient |
| 18:49 | <estellevw> | Firefox 3.6+ supported it |
| 18:49 | <TabAtkins_> | I was confused because my wife's comp was on 3.5, but that's just because she uses Chrome as her primary, and so hadn't gotten an auto-update in a while. |
| 18:49 | <TabAtkins_> | I figured she was on the latest. Shrug. |
| 18:49 | TabAtkins_ | is on 3.0 on this comp, unfortunately. |
| 18:49 | <dbaron> | (and, for the record (in response to "anyone else from Moz", I see 9 Mozilla employees currently on the channel, not counting those who are on twice... though roc and I are the ones who'd be most likely to know about gradients) |
| 18:50 | <estellevw> | http://standardista.com/sandbox/linear_gradient.html if interested |
| 18:50 | <JonathanNeal> | annevk or anyone, how are consolidation efforts going between the camps in regards to gradients? |
| 18:50 | <TabAtkins_> | dbaron: Heh, I totally don't know who all works in Moz. But yeah, I figured you and roc were the most knowledgeable to ask anyway. |
| 18:50 | <dbaron> | (and I'm probably missing a few... er, make that 10) |
| 18:50 | <JonathanNeal> | http://css3please.com/ also has gradients for ff, saf, chrome, ie6+ |
| 18:51 | <dbaron> | (never mind other community members) |
| 18:52 | TabAtkins_ | heads back to his desk anyway, so he can work on getting his Windows machine to let him log in. |
| 18:52 | <annevk> | JonathanNeal, I think it's pretty much done now |
| 18:52 | <JonathanNeal> | So, which format won? bluray or h...... moz of webkit? |
| 18:53 | <JonathanNeal> | s/of/or |
| 18:53 | <TabAtkins_> | Moz implements the spec version. I created that version in response to webkit's version. |
| 18:56 | JonathanNeal | points! |
| 18:56 | <JonathanNeal> | IT WAS YOOOOOUERRRR FAULT |
| 19:26 | <TabAtkins_> | JonathanNeal: Yes, it was my fault. Webkit's original syntax sucked. ^_^ |
| 19:27 | JonathanNeal | agrees with you too. |
| 19:28 | <JonathanNeal> | So, sounds like annevk needs to go back and add gradient support to Opera today. |
| 19:28 | <JonathanNeal> | Get a new version out Friday. |
| 19:29 | <JonathanNeal> | Meanwhile I'm going to invent wings for flying. |
| 19:31 | <AryehGregor> | I'm fairly sure wings were already invented some billions of years ago. |
| 19:31 | <AryehGregor> | It's conventional to focus effort on inventing things that do not, in fact, already exist. |
| 19:32 | <annevk> | TabAtkins_, when you say alpha before winter, does that mean about three to five months? |
| 19:33 | <annevk> | I guess more like five, but that seems a pretty long wait :/ |
| 19:36 | <hober> | Despite the 'keephidden' URL, http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/User:Eoconnor/keephidden is evolving into a zero-edit CP for several of the "remove this new feature" CPs that have come in in the last few weeks. Any and all contributions welcome. |
| 19:38 | <hober> | In particular, it'd be great to get the <figure>, <aside>, <details>, <progress>, and <meter> rationales fleshed out. |
| 19:38 | <TabAtkins> | annevk: alpha is expected out in August. |
| 19:38 | <hober> | And, by "fleshed out," I mean "written at all," since those sections are currently empty. :) |
| 19:38 | <TabAtkins> | It's my main project at work besides spec work. |
| 19:38 | <TabAtkins> | But I have to learn a *lot* of new things to do it. |
| 19:43 | <KaOSoFt> | http://www.thewhitehouse.gov/ uses RDFa :o |
| 19:43 | <AryehGregor> | TabAtkins, alpha of what? |
| 19:44 | <JonathanNeal> | RDFa, arrrrr |
| 19:47 | <KaOSoFt> | ._. |
| 19:50 | JonathanNeal | waves the microformats banner that he just picked up a few hours ago. |
| 19:55 | <JonathanNeal> | Looks like yelp isn't using the address element correctly. Time to dispatch the httPolice |
| 19:56 | <TabAtkins> | AryehGregor: The Cross-Activity Testing System, for automated handling of test-suites for various important web technologies across all browsers. |
| 19:56 | <AryehGregor> | Interesting. |
| 19:57 | <TabAtkins> | The alpha will just handle manually running tests, and reporting success/failure. |
| 20:01 | <miketaylr> | sounds neat. |
| 20:08 | <TabAtkins> | Well, in addition to all the framework. It'll take until August because I have to build the entire framework first, from collection to reviewing to running to reporting. |
| 20:09 | <TabAtkins> | And I really don't know how to do most of that yet. |
| 20:19 | <jgraham> | TabAtkins: Interesting |
| 20:20 | <jgraham> | How does that compare to the W3C browser test harness thing? |
| 20:21 | <jgraham> | And why do you care about manual tests |
| 20:27 | jgraham | has a strong interest in test automation and that sort of thing |
| 20:36 | <KaOSoFt> | JonathanNeal- Are you the author of cms.txt? |
| 20:44 | <jgraham> | gsnedders: Got/heard the new Rufus Wainwright album? |
| 20:46 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: no |
| 20:46 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: I totally forgot about it since, uh, the middle of lst month |
| 20:47 | <gsnedders> | Oh, it's out here but not there |
| 20:47 | <gsnedders> | I should get it. |
| 20:47 | gsnedders | is rambling now |
| 20:50 | <estellevw> | In understanding <section> versus <article> I think of it like the SUnday Paper. The newspaper had sections & within the sections there are articles. Those articles can have sections too. Is that a correct understanding? |
| 20:58 | gsnedders | wonders about the origins of thinking of life as a hand dealt by Fate |
| 21:00 | <gsnedders> | Also, "Would?" is an awesome song |
| 21:01 | <KaOSoFt> | estellevw- That's exactly my view of it so far. |
| 21:02 | <KaOSoFt> | I'm currently doing a HTML5 (and CSS3) template, and that's how I'm making it. |
| 21:02 | <KaOSoFt> | If there is a text with an explanation of something, preferable with a heading line, to me, that's an article. |
| 21:03 | KaOSoFt | looks up for "article" definition on dictionary.com |
| 21:14 | <jgraham> | gsnedders: "Would?"? |
| 21:17 | <KaOSoFt> | estellevw- This is the layout I'm currently starting with: http://pastebin.com/CuX6Qs4z |
| 21:17 | <KaOSoFt> | ._. |
| 21:18 | <KaOSoFt> | estellevw- This is the layout I'm currently starting with: http://pastebin.com/CuX6Qs4z |
| 21:23 | <estellevw> | KaOSoft: I think you could do the same with less: unsure of the need for small in the footer or if encapsulating your logo in a <figure> is needed. Did you want to add more semantics to those two elements? |
| 21:25 | <KaOSoFt> | Well, I recently read about <small>, and it kind of mentioned to be used for license stuff. I don't remember where I read that, though. I think it was in http://html5doctor.com |
| 21:25 | <KaOSoFt> | I think it shouldn't exist, but oh well. |
| 21:25 | <KaOSoFt> | At least not with that name. |
| 22:15 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: Alice in Chains |
| 22:16 | <Philip`> | Is that the missing book in Lewis Carroll's trilogy? |
| 22:17 | <daedb> | Alice in Chains is awesome. |
| 22:18 | <gsnedders> | daedb: Totally |
| 22:19 | <gsnedders> | http://twitter.com/gsnedders/status/11781964799 |
| 22:23 | <TabAtkins> | jgraham: Who manages the w3c browser test harness? Is that plh? |
| 22:25 | <TabAtkins> | If so, then it's not directly related, but I may be looking at it for some inspiration. fantasai and arronei and I spent all last Thursday talking about the design, and about similar efforts that preceded this. |
| 22:26 | <annevk> | yeah, you should contact plh |
| 22:26 | <annevk> | there's a testing IRC channel on irc.w3.org too, or some such |
| 22:26 | <TabAtkins> | Already planning on it. |
| 22:29 | <annevk> | would be nice if it was done already :) |
| 22:29 | <TabAtkins> | Too bad! |
| 22:30 | <annevk> | sort of interested in working on tests again, but I'm not going to before something is deployed |
| 22:30 | <TabAtkins> | Yeah, don't worry about it for now. |
| 22:41 | <TabAtkins> | Hehe, it's fun using a substantially different default font-color than most people, because then you can sometimes see exactly where an email was edited before being forwarded to you. |
| 22:41 | <TabAtkins> | (Since some email programs naturally change the font-color of text types in a forward/reply, and the sender changes that to their own font-color, rather than to 'automatic'.) |
| 22:42 | <murz> | lol, that is funny |
| 22:43 | <annevk> | first advantage ever for HTML-based email |
| 22:43 | annevk | is impressed |
| 22:43 | <TabAtkins> | For realz. |
| 22:43 | gsnedders | sighs at his own IM conversations |
| 22:44 | <gsnedders> | Alternating between quoting Romeo and Juliet, making both characters himself... |
| 22:44 | <TabAtkins> | Wherefore art thou, gsnedders? |
| 22:45 | <gsnedders> | Shall I hear more, or shall I speak at this? |
| 22:45 | <TabAtkins> | I'm not going any further as Juliet. |
| 22:46 | <gsnedders> | You only had the first line of the three she says there |
| 22:46 | <gsnedders> | And you missed the start of the line |
| 22:46 | gsnedders | checks that's right |
| 22:46 | <gsnedders> | Oh, she says four lines there |
| 22:46 | TabAtkins | doesn't actually know R&J, especially not at the level of accurate quoting. |
| 22:46 | <TabAtkins> | Were you at least communicating between two different IM contacts of yourself, so they came from different speakers? |
| 22:47 | gsnedders | ended up having a dicussion about the foreshadowing in R&J earlier, and hence can remember a lot of the quotes |
| 22:47 | <gsnedders> | No, both from the infamous gsnedders |
| 22:47 | <annevk> | watch Curb Your Enthusiasm |
| 22:47 | <annevk> | much better use of time imo |
| 22:48 | <gsnedders> | Nah, I have shit vampire books to read |
| 22:48 | gsnedders | = teenage girl |
| 22:48 | <annevk> | oh well, at least I tried |
| 22:49 | <gsnedders> | Speaking of TV shows, I should finally get around to the second series of Californication |
| 22:50 | <annevk> | oh wow, your priorities are backwards |
| 22:50 | <annevk> | :p |
| 23:36 | <abarth_> | Hixie: is there a reason not to have the following work: |
| 23:36 | <abarth_> | <frameset> |
| 23:36 | <abarth_> | <frame src="sf.html" sandbox> |
| 23:36 | <abarth_> | </frame> |
| 23:36 | <TabAtkins> | Other than "why are you caring about frames?"? |
| 23:36 | <abarth_> | apparently someone inside google wants to use @sandbox |
| 23:36 | <abarth_> | but they're using framesets |
| 23:36 | <abarth_> | instead of iframes |
| 23:37 | <TabAtkins> | Interesting. Could you point me to them so I can help them not use framesets? |
| 23:37 | <abarth_> | haha |
| 23:37 | <abarth_> | ok |
| 23:38 | <abarth_> | done |
| 23:40 | <TabAtkins> | Ah yes, hmm. I'll play with this for a sec and see what we can do about it. |
| 23:41 | <TabAtkins> | In any case, I don't see any particular reason it shouldn't be supported, other than that <frameset> and <frame> are obsolete elements. |
| 23:42 | <abarth_> | we're getting close to shipping @sandbox |
| 23:43 | <abarth_> | but we can add it to other kinds of frames later |
