| 00:02 | <Hixie> | volkmar: some just are, dunno if there's a good reason for it, it's just what browsers do |
| 00:07 | <volkmar> | Hixie: then we agree there are no reasons for new attributes ? |
| 00:08 | <volkmar> | Hixie: btw, with smaug we were wondering how 'autocomplete' (for input element) should behave |
| 00:09 | <volkmar> | when autocomplete is not set, for example, input.autocomplete should return 'default' or the resulting autocompletion state ? |
| 00:13 | <Hixie> | volkmar: i'd have to look at each attribute to say for sure one way or the other -- feel free to file bugs for any you want me to consider |
| 00:13 | <Hixie> | volkmar: looking at input.autocomplete |
| 00:14 | <Hixie> | volkmar: .autocomplete just reflects the content attribute, so it's just whatever the content attribute's value is |
| 00:15 | <volkmar> | Hixie: so if the content attribute is 'foo', input.autocomplete should return 'foo' ? Why not 'on', 'off' or 'default' ? |
| 00:19 | <Hixie> | volkmar: "default" isn't a valid value, for one |
| 00:23 | <sicking> | volkmar: did you raise the issue of ignoring empty <option>s in <datalist>? |
| 00:24 | <volkmar> | sicking: i don't think i've open a bug for it at the moment |
| 00:32 | <sicking> | volkmar: ok |
| 00:34 | <volkmar> | sicking: i'm going to do that |
| 00:35 | <sicking> | volkmar: awesome, thanks |
| 00:36 | <TabAtkins> | Hmm, <details> doesn't show up in the list of implied ARIA sematnics. Is ARIA too weak to express <details>, or is this an oversight? |
| 00:44 | <TabAtkins> | Hixie: ^^^ |
| 00:44 | <Hixie> | no idea off hand |
| 00:44 | <TabAtkins> | kk |
| 00:49 | <roc> | yay, W3C supports Mercurial now |
| 00:58 | <AryehGregor> | Supports in what sense? |
| 00:58 | <TabAtkins> | In the sense that we have a mercurial server that WGs can use. |
| 00:59 | <kennyluck> | where? just curious |
| 00:59 | <TabAtkins> | The announcement was on the w3c blog. |
| 00:59 | kennyluck | googled but found nothing |
| 01:00 | <roc> | there was a post in public-webapps |
| 01:01 | <TabAtkins> | Ah, that's where it was. I was certain I'd seen it in my twitter feed. |
| 01:03 | <remysharp> | Can anyone tell me what situation a SharedWorker would really be used? I understand more than one window can access it, but I can't see why |
| 01:03 | <kennyluck> | http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/0389.html |
| 01:05 | <Hixie> | remysharp: consider e.g. gmail with multiple windows open, all interacting with the server |
| 01:06 | <Hixie> | remysharp: without a shared worker, they'd each be fighting with each other to update the local database view of the user's e-mail |
| 01:07 | <remysharp> | okay, is there another example? Just thinking outside of google for the moment. No meaning to be rude of course :) |
| 01:07 | <remysharp> | I can see and understand that use case tho |
| 01:07 | <Hixie> | any app that has client-side user data, multiple tabs/windows, and a server component |
| 01:07 | <remysharp> | except that none of the workers have implemented access to openDatabase - but I understand that's coming too |
| 01:08 | <Hixie> | openDatabase() is basically dead, actually, but there's a non-sql alternative coming up in theory |
| 01:08 | <Hixie> | web indexed db or something |
| 01:08 | <remysharp> | the indexeddb |
| 01:08 | <remysharp> | okay, yeah |
| 01:08 | <remysharp> | that spec - oh man - couldn't get my head around it yet. probably best to wait until there's something I can play with |
| 01:08 | <remysharp> | I know there was someone looking at a FF plugin |
| 01:09 | <Hixie> | facebook would be another example, so that, say, they could show you their IM client in all the facebook windows you have open, and have the messages routed to the right window, without having to have N connections to the server open |
| 01:09 | <Hixie> | yeah web indexed db went way over my head too |
| 01:09 | <kennyluck> | Hixie: do you have a pointer to the web indexeddb thing? very interesting |
| 01:09 | <remysharp> | okay - that's cool |
| 01:09 | <remysharp> | Shit, a spec that goes over Hixie's head - that's a spec I'm afraid of! |
| 01:10 | <dave_levin> | remysharp: fyi, soon db and workers will get along better in WebKit -- Add async bindings for Worker access to DB -- https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34992 |
| 01:10 | <erlehmann> | Steve Jobs anti-Flash tirade is quite funny: "Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary.", then "Apple […] creates open standards for the web.", finally "a more modern format, H.264, […] viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads" |
| 01:10 | <remysharp> | dave_levin: yeah - someone mentioned that here earlier on in the week - good to know, cheers. |
| 01:10 | <Hixie> | kennyluck: http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebSimpleDB/ |
| 01:10 | <remysharp> | Hixie: I love that it has the word "simple" in the title! |
| 01:10 | AryehGregor | got a FOUC there, hasn't seen one of those in ages |
| 01:10 | <kennyluck> | thanks, Hixie |
| 01:10 | <othermaciej> | the SQL DB is currently much more widely implemented and much more widely used than IndexedDB |
| 01:11 | <othermaciej> | despite the fact that it is kind of stalled on the standards track due to MS and Moz not wanting to implement |
| 01:11 | <AryehGregor> | The problem with Web SQL DB is that it more or less says "use SQLite", doesn't it? |
| 01:11 | <othermaciej> | a *lot* of mobile-targeted sites use it |
| 01:11 | <AryehGregor> | Something like that? |
| 01:11 | <Hixie> | AryehGregor: we could fix that |
| 01:11 | <othermaciej> | that's what it says right now, yeah |
| 01:11 | <Hixie> | AryehGregor: that's not a real problem |
| 01:11 | <othermaciej> | but the implementors who refuse to implement it would not change their minds if that change was made |
| 01:11 | <Hixie> | we've specced html parser, how hard can sql be :-P |
| 01:12 | <othermaciej> | so it kinda seems like busywork to do it |
| 01:12 | <Hixie> | yeah |
| 01:12 | <AryehGregor> | Sad. |
| 01:12 | <othermaciej> | at least, that is what I concluded, otherwise I would make an Apple employee do it |
| 01:12 | <AryehGregor> | Why are they against it, again? |
| 01:13 | <othermaciej> | Mozilla says it's because the SQL dialect isn't spec'd, and also because they think SQL would be bad in general, even if spec'd |
| 01:14 | <othermaciej> | because some developers supposedly told them they want anything but SQL |
| 01:14 | <remysharp> | dave_levin: do you know if there's a fix planned for Workers starting (sub) Workers? |
| 01:14 | <remysharp> | so far, no browsers I've seen support this |
| 01:14 | <AryehGregor> | SQL is admittedly complicated and hard to understand. |
| 01:14 | <othermaciej> | Microsoft also said it's because the SQL dialect is de facto SQLite |
| 01:15 | <kennyluck> | Why are they opposing SQLite? |
| 01:15 | <othermaciej> | it is, but the alternative ends up being that you have to invent your own query language, and it is less efficient since it has to work on a lower-level substrate |
| 01:15 | <othermaciej> | depending on specifically the SQLite implementation, with no formal spec, I can see how that is kind of bad |
| 01:15 | <othermaciej> | since it makes truly independent implementations impractical |
| 01:15 | <AryehGregor> | othermaciej, are you aware that in the Wikipedia article on you, someone went to the trouble of recording a pronunciation of your name? |
| 01:15 | AryehGregor | wonders if it's at least correct |
| 01:15 | <othermaciej> | AryehGregor: I saw that |
| 01:15 | <dave_levin> | remysharp: I thought Firefox supported it. As far as WebKit, it was started but then aborted because it made the code more complicated and it was unclear how many folks wanted to use it.... If there are known use cases that it is blocking, then maybe the work would get restarted.... |
| 01:16 | <othermaciej> | my wikipedia article is way too detailed |
| 01:16 | <remysharp> | dave_levin: crap, you're right, it does. |
| 01:16 | AryehGregor | was just stalking othermaciej by reading it |
| 01:16 | remysharp | so many browsers, so little time! |
| 01:16 | AryehGregor | now knows about his sister who's faculty at MIT, and exactly which Maciej forced othermaciej to be "othermaciej" instead of "maciej" |
| 01:17 | AryehGregor | isn't sure whether to hope he never has a Wikipedia article on him, or not. |
| 01:17 | <othermaciej> | the link to that faculty page is dead |
| 01:17 | <kennyluck> | lol |
| 01:17 | <othermaciej> | I think my sister is technically staff, not faculty |
| 01:18 | <AryehGregor> | You could propose your article for deletion on the grounds of non-notability. |
| 01:18 | <othermaciej> | AryehGregor: the Maciej who stole my preferred nick on FreeNode is Maciej Ceglowski |
| 01:18 | <othermaciej> | also mjs was taken by someone else, that's the other username I like to use |
| 01:18 | <AryehGregor> | So it says, except it puts a little line through the l. |
| 01:19 | <othermaciej> | yeah, I didn't feel like digging that character out of Character Pallette :-) |
| 01:19 | <Hixie> | wow, maciej's entry is long |
| 01:19 | <Hixie> | and has a way better photo of him than mine does of me :-P |
| 01:20 | <othermaciej> | I am embarassed about how much content it has |
| 01:20 | <othermaciej> | I think the IPA is wrong |
| 01:20 | <Philip`> | Are there guidelines against nominating yourself for deletion? |
| 01:20 | <Hixie> | on an unrelated note, i finally got to the part of my e-mail where i see Nick Levinson has escalated bugs to issues |
| 01:20 | <othermaciej> | though I don't know enough IPA to be sure |
| 01:20 | <Hixie> | that ought to be fun |
| 01:21 | <AryehGregor> | Hixie, you should upload a better photo of yourself, then! |
| 01:21 | <AryehGregor> | Your photo on Wikipedia does look pretty awful. |
| 01:21 | <AryehGregor> | Philip`, nope, people do it all the time. |
| 01:21 | <othermaciej> | the pronounciation file seems right-ish |
| 01:21 | <othermaciej> | AryehGregor: doesn't wikipedia frown on adding content to one's own article? |
| 01:22 | <AryehGregor> | Somewhat, but not if it's as clear-cut as adding a better-quality image. |
| 01:22 | <AryehGregor> | There's no hard policy, really. |
| 01:22 | <AryehGregor> | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:COI |
| 01:22 | <Hixie> | AryehGregor: my partner tried to find a better picture of me once but it turns out i just look like a goofball :-P |
| 01:22 | <AryehGregor> | "This page in a nutshell: Do not edit Wikipedia to promote your own interests, or those of other individuals or of organizations, including employers, unless you are certain that a neutral editor would agree that your edits are in the best interest of Wikipedia." |
| 01:25 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: Nick Levinson has some... singular ideas |
| 01:25 | <Hixie> | AryehGregor: gotta be hard to find a "neutral editor" for some topics (like theism) |
| 01:26 | <AryehGregor> | Hixie, oh, then the various biased parties just fight it out and we hope a more or less moderate position emerges from the rubble. |
| 01:26 | <Hixie> | indeed |
| 01:26 | <AryehGregor> | Kind of the only thing you could do on any subject more interesting than . . . actually I can't think of a totally uncontroversial topic. |
| 01:26 | <AryehGregor> | I mean, like a Wikipedia page. |
| 01:27 | <AryehGregor> | The fact that the sky is often blue is uncontroversial, but you can't make an article out of that one fact. |
| 01:27 | <Hixie> | um |
| 01:27 | <Hixie> | i beg to differ |
| 01:27 | <Hixie> | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffuse_sky_radiation |
| 01:28 | <othermaciej> | *why* the sky is blue is definitely interesting |
| 01:49 | <roc> | boy, I wish "canvas" wasn't so overloaded in the Web universe |
| 01:56 | <erlehmann> | roc, someone should make a html5 game called canvas. using canvas. |
| 02:03 | <remysharp> | The closing flag on a worker, I'm right in saying there's no way to get this in JS is there? |
| 02:03 | <remysharp> | i.e. if my worker dies, I can't logically work out that it's died using code |
| 02:03 | <CoJaBo-Aztec> | lolwiki |
| 02:04 | <Hixie> | remysharp: yeah we tried pretty hard to not expose any of that |
| 02:04 | <Hixie> | remysharp: (since it exposes garbage collection details) |
| 02:04 | <Hixie> | remysharp: how do you mean "die"? |
| 02:04 | <remysharp> | shame there's not a terminated event or something |
| 02:04 | <Hixie> | remysharp: you can get worker.onerror |
| 02:04 | <remysharp> | is that on the outside of the worker |
| 02:05 | <Hixie> | yeah |
| 02:05 | <remysharp> | hmm- then perhaps that's enough. |
| 02:05 | <TabAtkins> | Hixie: Any interest in helping me debug tircd and irssi? |
| 02:05 | <Hixie> | in non-error cases, the worker won't die unless you call close() iirc |
| 02:05 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: sure, wassup? |
| 02:06 | <remysharp> | Hixie: if it's a sharedworker, is there any way for the SharedWorker to give heads up to all the connected ports on close? |
| 02:06 | <TabAtkins> | Installed tircd, got it started, no errors. I can point a web browser at it (tircd barfs on the attempted GET, but still, it's *there*). I can call /connect localhost 7000, and it says that it's connected, but then if I try any commands it claims I'm not connected to a network. |
| 02:07 | <TabAtkins> | That last "it" being irssi, obviously. |
| 02:07 | <remysharp> | Hixie: ignore me, the close is from within the worker, so it would send the message out before it manually closed itself. |
| 02:09 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: hmm |
| 02:11 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: i always just change the config file when i add a new network... |
| 02:12 | <TabAtkins> | Let me try just doing that. |
| 02:12 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: do other irc clients work? |
| 02:12 | <Hixie> | oh also i think you have to give tircd a password maybe |
| 02:12 | <TabAtkins> | Argh. Answer: I dunno, haven't tried them yet. |
| 02:13 | <Hixie> | an irc password, that is, as part of connecting |
| 02:13 | <Hixie> | see /help connect for the syntax |
| 02:13 | <Hixie> | dunno what the password is though |
| 02:13 | <Hixie> | probably is set in the tircd config |
| 02:14 | <remysharp> | okay, last question then I'll leave you all alone: importScripts - does this run synchronously? It's not clear from the spec, but if it "creates a script" that would imply async: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-workers/current-work/#importing-scripts-and-libraries |
| 02:15 | <dave_levin> | remysharp: Doesn't step #3 imply a sync execution? |
| 02:15 | <remysharp> | dave_levin: "If any fail, throw a SYNTAX_ERR exception" ? |
| 02:15 | <remysharp> | hmm - no |
| 02:15 | <dave_levin> | remysharp: sorry, ignore me |
| 02:15 | <remysharp> | because well |
| 02:15 | <remysharp> | ... |
| 02:15 | <Hixie> | remysharp: "Create a script" is sync |
| 02:15 | <remysharp> | it's real late for me right now :-) |
| 02:15 | <Hixie> | remysharp: what makes you think it's not sync? |
| 02:16 | <remysharp> | Hixie: because creating a script in a normal doc loads the script async |
| 02:16 | <Hixie> | oh, you're looking at the workers spec |
| 02:16 | <Hixie> | look at complete.html |
| 02:16 | <remysharp> | aaah. |
| 02:16 | <Hixie> | it links to what "create a script" means |
| 02:16 | <remysharp> | ah, cool. |
| 02:16 | <Hixie> | we really need cross-doc xrefs |
| 02:17 | <Hixie> | i wonder if gsnedders knows how much he will be reveered and how many songs will be written about him once he's done that |
| 02:18 | <Hixie> | remysharp: (Specifically, http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete.html#create-a-script ) |
| 02:19 | <remysharp> | it's weird to read: "create an impotent script" feels like it should be a typo, but then it makes sense. |
| 02:19 | <remysharp> | but it still looks like a dick joke in the spec :) |
| 02:19 | <Hixie> | heh |
| 02:19 | <Hixie> | the one that people keep reporting as a typo is "outlinee" |
| 02:19 | remysharp | dick jokes in html5 specs - think it's time for bed :-\ |
| 02:20 | <Hixie> | (i really should find a better way to express outlinee) |
| 02:20 | <Hixie> | remysharp: there are lots and lots of jokes in the spec... but not dick jokes :-P |
| 02:20 | <remysharp> | :) |
| 02:20 | <remysharp> | easter eggs hopefully! |
| 02:20 | <Hixie> | there really are a ton of easter eggs |
| 02:20 | <Hixie> | from the very obscure to the very obvious |
| 02:21 | <othermaciej> | maybe GuestXHR could be named ImportntRequest |
| 02:21 | <othermaciej> | er |
| 02:21 | <othermaciej> | ImpotentRequest |
| 02:21 | <remysharp> | I've honestly never seen any of them :( |
| 02:21 | <remysharp> | ...or maybe I have... |
| 02:30 | <annevk> | jgraham is in Sweden :) |
| 02:30 | annevk | fixes wiki |
| 02:32 | <Hixie> | yeah i couldn't tell where on earth y'all were |
| 02:32 | <Hixie> | so i took a few guesses :-P |
| 02:43 | <annevk> | http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2010/04/29/html5-video.aspx -- "The future of the web is HTML5" |
| 02:43 | <annevk> | his remark about developers not having to pay royalty seems wrong though; pretty sure you have to for any commercial usage |
| 02:44 | <theMadness> | Yeah, that was quite insulting. |
| 02:44 | <theMadness> | I mean, the rethoric. MS saying "you don't have to pay because... because... hey, there's a bunny there!" |
| 02:45 | <theMadness> | Not to mention that no reason is given for a lack of double support a la chrome. |
| 02:46 | <theMadness> | Sorry for the rant, I just hate when people assumes that me (or actually us, readers) are too dumb to get it. |
| 02:47 | <wirepair> | interesting onmousemove in FF 3.6.3 only seems to fire when it's over the element... if that is the case why have an onmouseover event? |
| 02:47 | <roc> | it's actually highly misleading and dangerous for a Microsoft blog to say "Of course, developers can rely on the H.264 codec and hardware acceleration support of the underlying operating system, like Windows 7, without paying any additional royalty. " |
| 02:47 | <roc> | since the Windows 7 codec is only for non-commercial use |
| 02:48 | <theMadness> | Ditto. |
| 02:48 | jcranmer | prays for bilski |
| 02:48 | <jcranmer> | (for SCotUS to reject all software patents on the spot) |
| 02:49 | theMadness | rtfms http://endsoftpatents.org/bilski |
| 02:49 | <gavin> | wirepair: doesn't onmouseover fire only once? |
| 02:51 | <wirepair> | sometimes once or twice heh |
| 02:51 | <theMadness> | Nice, there's no mission statement or anything. |
| 02:51 | <wirepair> | actually looks like twice |
| 02:52 | <gavin> | (for a given "mouseover and move", I mean) |
| 02:52 | <wirepair> | ah |
| 02:55 | <wirepair> | nevermind looks like all browsers do that |
| 02:55 | <wirepair> | weird i thought it was while the mouse was over the document, not the element that it would fire |
| 02:56 | wirepair | makes note |
| 03:06 | <erlehmann> | That is some really bad hand-waving. Microsoft should probably try to get a PR guy for IE with a bit more FUD talent. |
| 03:07 | <erlehmann> | roc, interesting. so if you sell an app, it cannot hook legally into windows 7 h.264 decoder ? |
| 03:08 | <roc> | that is unclear |
| 03:08 | <roc> | read the terms yourself: http://download.microsoft.com/Documents/UseTerms/Windows%207_Ultimate_English_c44ca3df-8338-4a2f-a176-39d2e68986c4.pdf |
| 03:08 | <roc> | I presume it's there so that apps can hook into it |
| 03:08 | <roc> | but the language about OTHER PRODUCTS is confusing |
| 03:09 | <roc> | NONE OF THE LICENSES EXTEND TO ANY OTHER PRODUCT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SUCH PRODUCT IS INCLUDED WITH THIS PRODUCT IN A SINGLE ARTICLE. |
| 03:20 | <roc> | haha |
| 03:20 | <roc> | this is rich |
| 03:21 | <roc> | MPEG-LA suing Apple |
| 03:21 | <roc> | http://thepriorart.typepad.com/the_prior_art/2010/04/mobilemedia-ideas-v-apple.html |
| 03:23 | <Hixie> | "it let the world know that it would "make available" its innovations, (which is, of course, generally considered to be patent-speak for, "We will be suing people shortly")" lol |
| 03:23 | <erlehmann> | roc, would be pretty ironic. lulz may ensue. |
| 03:24 | <roc> | it's thin humour |
| 06:11 | <collinjackson> | whatwg.org is not responding for me |
| 06:28 | <collinjackson> | Hixie: I tried from several IPs, no response from whatwg.org (69.163.222.251) |
| 06:46 | <annevk> | aah, roc is already up on Ajaxian :) |
| 06:46 | <annevk> | lot can happen over lunch |
| 07:06 | <annevk> | ImpotentRequest is too hard to spell |
| 07:06 | <annevk> | imo |
| 07:06 | <annevk> | and it's also unclear |
| 07:06 | <annevk> | but please keep trying! |
| 07:06 | <othermaciej> | annevk: wasn't a serious suggestion |
| 07:06 | <annevk> | I'm not exactly in a rush here :) |
| 07:07 | <othermaciej> | annevk: I'd actually really like it if the context-free / drop-privileges / whatever mode had a defined API |
| 07:07 | <othermaciej> | we would want to implement it in WebKit |
| 07:07 | <annevk> | either Anon or Guest is still my favorite |
| 07:07 | <annevk> | really? |
| 07:07 | <annevk> | surprises me a little to be honest |
| 07:07 | <othermaciej> | why? |
| 07:07 | <othermaciej> | I think I've always said we'd like to implement the no-credentials mode of CORS |
| 07:07 | <othermaciej> | only blocker has been lack of a defined API for it |
| 07:08 | <annevk> | because WebKit actually gave quite a bit of pushback to having things like withCredentials |
| 07:08 | <annevk> | well, ap did (and I still agree with him that it was prolly a dumb idea to do it this way) |
| 07:08 | <othermaciej> | I think the ability to drop privileges is useful |
| 07:09 | <othermaciej> | that's how I think of this, anyway - as a tool for privilege sepration |
| 07:09 | <othermaciej> | though I guess if you want to go hardcore on that, you can run the untrusted part of your site code in a sandboxed iframe |
| 07:09 | <othermaciej> | I agree the withCredentials mode is inelegant |
| 07:09 | <othermaciej> | and having three modes will also kinda suck |
| 07:10 | <annevk> | in retrospect we should've had this anon API and the one that works just like <img> <form> etc. |
| 07:10 | <annevk> | without the Mozilla compromise |
| 07:10 | <othermaciej> | you mean, sends full credentials always? |
| 07:11 | <othermaciej> | in retrospect, yes, it would be better if those were the only two modes |
| 07:11 | <annevk> | yeah, not change the defaults for cross-origin |
| 07:11 | <annevk> | maybe we can phase out withCredentials somehow |
| 07:11 | <annevk> | not implemented by IE/Opera after all |
| 07:12 | <annevk> | oh hey, maybe I'll try out to install this Ubuntu release |
| 07:13 | <annevk> | see how much will burn :) |
| 07:13 | <othermaciej> | it seems like particularly bad design that XHR has different behavior cross-origin and same-origin (besides just the actual access control issues) |
| 07:13 | <othermaciej> | is it allowed to turn off withCredentials for a same-origin request? |
| 07:13 | <annevk> | it has no effect at the moment |
| 07:13 | <annevk> | didn't see worth it |
| 07:14 | <annevk> | i should've brought a book :/ |
| 07:20 | <Hixie> | someone wants to try writing a rationale explanation for some simple part of html5 to see if they like doing them... anyone got a suggestion of a good thing to start with? |
| 07:21 | <annevk> | why <image> ends up as <img> ? |
| 07:22 | <annevk> | (whenever I talk about HTML5 history I find it somewhat funny to bring that up) |
| 07:23 | <annevk> | (shocks the crowd :p ) |
| 07:23 | <Hixie> | k :-) |
| 07:24 | <zcorpan> | and <plaintext> |
| 07:56 | <annevk> | http://twitter.com/joehewitt/status/13091031807 ? |
| 07:57 | annevk | wonders what that is about; apparently retweeted by cwilso |
| 07:57 | <othermaciej> | annevk: joehewitt has been tweeting a bunch on that theme |
| 07:57 | <othermaciej> | he thinks browsers should innovate outside of standards more |
| 07:57 | <othermaciej> | each does its own thing, and then whatever becomes popular maybe becomes a standard eventually |
| 07:58 | <othermaciej> | he said only WebKit has done enough of this, and some Mozilla guy replied and bragged about how much they ignored the standards process |
| 07:59 | <othermaciej> | whereas my response was http://twitter.com/othermaciej/status/13106723840 |
| 07:59 | <othermaciej> | which I hope is mostly true |
| 07:59 | <zcorpan> | i ignore standards more! |
| 08:00 | <annevk> | it seems he forgot it took about 10 years to clean up the mess IE made |
| 08:01 | <annevk> | having implementations of new features is good of course, but having a wider group discussing them before everything is finalized helps a lot I think |
| 08:01 | <othermaciej> | that's what I think too |
| 08:02 | <othermaciej> | although sometimes you have to just implement something to be able to show why it has value |
| 08:02 | <annevk> | yeah, and not everything works as well as the WHATWG |
| 08:03 | <annevk> | or the WebApps WG for that matter |
| 08:03 | <annevk> | CSS for instance... |
| 08:04 | <jgraham> | His idea of forcing peopleto open different browsers based on which website they want to use seems pretty unlikely to work |
| 08:04 | <othermaciej> | the Web Apps WG hasn't managed to finalize a whole lot of anything yet |
| 08:05 | <othermaciej> | but we do at least manage to write down specs for useful features without huge flamewars |
| 08:05 | <Hixie> | i think there are definitely areas where we've standardised maybe a little too soon |
| 08:05 | <Hixie> | storage for example |
| 08:06 | <othermaciej> | with storage the problem may have been more about implementing too soon |
| 08:06 | <othermaciej> | if those standards didn't have implementations and sites using them, they wouldn't be a problem |
| 08:06 | <annevk> | if we knew about cookies we could have avoided the storage issue |
| 08:07 | <annevk> | shows that documenting the past is important for future decisions |
| 08:07 | <othermaciej> | the lameness of cookies was a big driver for making something better |
| 08:07 | <annevk> | I'm mostly talking about the storage mutex, something we realized was needed too late |
| 08:08 | <othermaciej> | I'm not sure studying cookies would have revealed that we needed it |
| 08:08 | <othermaciej> | since it's essentially driven by non-single-threadedness |
| 08:09 | <annevk> | true |
| 08:09 | <othermaciej> | I kinda wish we hadn't jumped on implementing SQL so soon, but there wasn't really a better alternative and I'm still not sure there is one now |
| 08:09 | <annevk> | is the SQL API that bad? |
| 08:09 | <annevk> | sicking claims developers don't like it, but I haven't had that reaction much |
| 08:09 | <othermaciej> | a surprising number of sites are using it now in their mobile versions (GMail, Yahoo Mail, foxnews.com surprisingly...) |
| 08:10 | <othermaciej> | the API is not bad |
| 08:10 | <annevk> | only from CouchDB guys really |
| 08:10 | <othermaciej> | the claim that developers don't like it is BS |
| 08:10 | <othermaciej> | people who are on an anti-SQL crusade don't like it, and that is a minority of web developers |
| 08:10 | <othermaciej> | people actually developing web content that works offline like it fine |
| 08:10 | <othermaciej> | like I said, it has lots of use in the one niche where it has high penetration |
| 08:11 | <annevk> | I wonder if Mozilla's Indexed DB implementation is going on top of SQLLite |
| 08:11 | <annevk> | SQLite* |
| 08:11 | <othermaciej> | the reason I regret it is that Mozilla and Microsoft are potentially limiting its utility |
| 08:11 | <othermaciej> | I'm not sure it would make sense to implement Indexed DB on top of SQLite |
| 08:12 | <annevk> | the reason I'm wondering is that Mozilla already ships with SQLite |
| 08:12 | <othermaciej> | it really needs a more Berkeley-DB style substrate (though I am not sure BDB itself would actually work) |
| 08:12 | <othermaciej> | Google folks seem interested in it, so WebKit may end up with the first available implementation |
| 08:12 | <othermaciej> | which would be really really weird |
| 08:13 | <othermaciej> | since Indexed DB seems to be primarily a reaction against SQL DB |
| 08:13 | <annevk> | heh yeah, I saw that |
| 08:14 | <annevk> | so much redundant APIs :/ |
| 08:14 | <othermaciej> | basically my opinion on the matter is similar to this: http://teddziuba.com/2010/03/i-cant-wait-for-nosql-to-die.html |
| 08:14 | <othermaciej> | but I don't feel like arguing with MS and Moz |
| 08:15 | <othermaciej> | maybe they will change their minds if they ever decide to be relevant on mobile |
| 08:15 | <Hixie> | othermaciej: implementations and specs have to happen at the same time |
| 08:16 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: in the case of the SQL Storage spec, that is kinda what happened, except for the plural part of "implementations" |
| 08:16 | <Hixie> | othermaciej: i think what we should have done is had more experimentation first, we clearly didn't have enough implementation experience since in the space of like a year we came up with three radically different suggestions and specced all three |
| 08:17 | <Hixie> | and within another year people were already suggesting more (filesystem) |
| 08:17 | <othermaciej> | the real problem is that those things are implemented and used (and thus hard to change), not that it was written down in the form of a spec |
| 08:17 | <Hixie> | if they had all just been UA experiments i don't think they'd have been used as much |
| 08:17 | <othermaciej> | it's easier to rescind a spec than an implementation |
| 08:18 | <othermaciej> | people would have used whatever they could get to make offline web apps work on iPhone OS devices |
| 08:18 | <othermaciej> | even if it was WebKitEvilHackIfYouUseThisYouAreDumbStorage |
| 08:18 | <Hixie> | hm, yes, offline, make that five solutions in the one space :-) |
| 08:18 | <Hixie> | oh which i specced three :-/ |
| 08:18 | <othermaciej> | appcache isn't really an alternative to the others |
| 08:19 | <Hixie> | not as designed, no |
| 08:19 | <othermaciej> | (though I have lost count of which specs you have in mind) |
| 08:19 | <Hixie> | webstorage, websqldb, indexeddb, appcache, and filesystem |
| 08:19 | <Hixie> | they're all about storing data on the client |
| 08:19 | <Hixie> | one could easily imagine solutions that sliced and diced the space differently |
| 08:19 | <othermaciej> | and of course we have the legacy technology of cookies |
| 08:20 | <othermaciej> | maybe Gears gave the impression of being more proven a design than it was |
| 08:20 | <Hixie> | and i feel that at least the ones i was involved with of those 5 were all a little rushed, e.g. appcache isn't exactly ideal, web storage of course has the dreaded storage mutex, and websqldb died |
| 08:20 | <othermaciej> | there's also still the DataCache proposal, though I think those capabilities should just be folded into AppCache |
| 08:20 | <Hixie> | datacache doesn't count imho because it doesn't have implementations, so it's not a real spec |
| 08:21 | <othermaciej> | I bet 2-3 years from now websqldb will have more use on real sites than indexeddb |
| 08:21 | <othermaciej> | so it has only "died" in a very technical standards-process sense |
| 08:21 | <Hixie> | it's died in the sense that the two biggest UAs aren't implementing it |
| 08:22 | <othermaciej> | once mobile devices are more browsing volume than desktop that won't really matter any more |
| 08:22 | <othermaciej> | (not that I expect that to happen in as little as 3 years) |
| 08:25 | <annevk> | if we spec the SQL dialect Mozilla would be more interested |
| 08:27 | <othermaciej> | if that were true, it would be worth speccing it |
| 08:27 | <othermaciej> | though Mozilla claims that is not the case |
| 08:28 | Hixie | grumbles about the new weird styles in the change proposal status page while he looks for the new issues |
| 08:28 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: what weird styles? |
| 08:28 | <othermaciej> | whoah, it has weird styles |
| 08:28 | othermaciej | wonders who did that |
| 08:28 | <Hixie> | wait that wasn't you? |
| 08:28 | <Hixie> | i assumed it was you |
| 08:29 | <Hixie> | it's all rounded corners and fancy :nth-child stuff |
| 08:29 | <othermaciej> | it was Sam |
| 08:29 | <othermaciej> | coloring every third row is weird |
| 08:30 | <annevk> | othermaciej, I think they also wanted an independent impl of SQLite, but it seemed less important |
| 08:30 | <othermaciej> | every second, I could understand (that might actually help legibility) |
| 08:30 | <Hixie> | the rounded corners are very 2000s |
| 08:30 | <othermaciej> | the mouseover effects on links make the columns shift |
| 08:30 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: true, clearly it needs drop shadows, reflections and gradients |
| 08:31 | <annevk> | SVG filters! |
| 08:36 | <zcorpan> | which page? |
| 08:37 | <zcorpan> | found it |
| 08:47 | <jgraham> | That gives the misleading impression that some rows are being highlighted for some reason |
| 08:48 | <othermaciej> | jgraham: alternate rows would be more conventional |
| 08:48 | <othermaciej> | but also that background color is a bit too close tothe link color |
| 08:48 | <othermaciej> | too tired to tweak it right now though |
| 08:48 | <othermaciej> | see y'all tomorrow |
| 08:50 | <jgraham> | Well yes, a subtle colour would be more conventional too |
| 08:50 | <jgraham> | Like a light grey |
| 08:54 | <wycats> | Hixie: I'm writing up a response to Sachin's article and ran into an article you wrote on <canvas> in 2004 |
| 08:54 | <wycats> | kind of funny |
| 08:55 | <wycats> | the entire argument about browsers failing to innovate because of the standards process is just demonstrably false |
| 08:55 | <wycats> | it's almost the web equivalent of death panels |
| 09:00 | <boblet> | hey all, anyone used display:table-header-group in an inline-table with Chrome? doesn’t seem to be working |
| 09:09 | <othermaciej> | wycats: with Safari/WebKit almost all our innovation used to be outside the standards groups, I think WHATWG was by far the major thing that reversed that |
| 09:09 | <othermaciej> | now we try to take stuff to standards groups as early as possible at least for discussion, if not immediate standardization |
| 09:10 | <wycats> | othermaciej: even today, it's not like any browser is sitting around waiting for standards bodies to approve things |
| 09:10 | <othermaciej> | it does seem like bigger features often need a proof of concept |
| 09:10 | <othermaciej> | wycats: well maybe IE... |
| 09:10 | <wycats> | haha |
| 09:10 | <wycats> | even them ;) |
| 09:10 | <wycats> | more often, there's partially implemented features that form the basis for WHAT-WG discussion |
| 09:10 | <wycats> | (from an outsider's perspective) |
| 09:10 | <annevk> | IE did XDomainRequest and a few other things |
| 09:10 | <wycats> | yep |
| 09:10 | <wycats> | XDR is what comes to mind |
| 09:10 | <wycats> | where did CORS come from? |
| 09:11 | <othermaciej> | true |
| 09:11 | <othermaciej> | CORS was sorta designed by committee |
| 09:11 | <wycats> | ha ;) |
| 09:11 | <othermaciej> | back when it was access-control |
| 09:11 | <othermaciej> | and then redesigned by committee to get browser vendors to agree |
| 09:11 | <annevk> | CORS was mostly based on input from Mozilla |
| 09:11 | <annevk> | regrettably and much to my fault I guess |
| 09:12 | <othermaciej> | was the original access-control spec based on their ideas? |
| 09:12 | <annevk> | I just wanted to see it implemented which given where we are today should not have been a very high priority |
| 09:12 | <annevk> | no, CORS was |
| 09:12 | <wycats> | I made a pretty big list of external ideas: canvas, <input type="search">, <video>, flexbox, JS 1.8, CSS transitions/animations/transforms, WebGL, Local Storage, SQLite, font-face, NodeList, Touch events, orientation, accelerometer, geolocation |
| 09:12 | <othermaciej> | I am glad we got rid of the processing instruction at least |
| 09:12 | <wycats> | othermaciej: amen brother |
| 09:12 | <annevk> | the original access-control stuff came from VoiceXML plus some stuff Hixie drafted |
| 09:12 | <othermaciej> | I don't think anyone implemented <video> before it went in the spec |
| 09:13 | <annevk> | Opera did |
| 09:13 | <othermaciej> | though Opera and Apple both made fairly extensive proposals |
| 09:13 | <annevk> | we had a build supporting <video> and some simple methods |
| 09:13 | <wycats> | Opera claims to have |
| 09:13 | <annevk> | what do you mean claims? |
| 09:13 | <wycats> | I mean I wasn't around back then |
| 09:13 | <wycats> | but their site has good evidence that they did |
| 09:13 | <wycats> | primary sources |
| 09:14 | <annevk> | http://labs.opera.com/ -- search for "A call for video on the web" |
| 09:14 | <annevk> | also http://people.opera.com/howcome/2007/video/op950_8762_video_repack_with_lgpl_signed.exe |
| 09:15 | <doublec> | Opera definitely did, I remember trying it. |
| 09:15 | <annevk> | I also proposed <video> on the WHATWG list |
| 09:15 | <doublec> | yep |
| 09:15 | <annevk> | after howcome convinced me that <object> was not the way to go |
| 09:15 | <doublec> | if <video> had kept that api all the implementations would be finished by now :) |
| 09:15 | <othermaciej> | I think the original Opera <video> proposal was here: http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-February/009702.html |
| 09:15 | <annevk> | took some XHTML2 extrapolation argument iirc :) |
| 09:15 | <wycats> | annevk: yeh I found your post |
| 09:16 | <wycats> | annevk: this is in my outline: |
| 09:16 | <wycats> | <video> |
| 09:16 | <wycats> | * Originally by Opera (Feb. 2007) |
| 09:16 | <wycats> | * http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-February/009702.html |
| 09:16 | <wycats> | * http://people.opera.com/howcome/2007/video/ |
| 09:16 | <wycats> | I have the originator of all the items on that list |
| 09:16 | <boblet> | IE5 did ruby proof of concept 3 years before W3 specced it |
| 09:16 | <wycats> | ruby w00t |
| 09:16 | <othermaciej> | Apple's more elaborate proposal here: http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-March/010386.html |
| 09:16 | <wycats> | if you include IE4-6 there's a list about double the size |
| 09:16 | <boblet> | annevk: still in Japan or back home? |
| 09:17 | <annevk> | still here |
| 09:17 | <annevk> | at a Starbucks in Ebisu with Mike |
| 09:17 | <boblet> | wycats: back when they were trying eh :| |
| 09:17 | <wycats> | IE4 had data bindings ;) |
| 09:17 | <wycats> | hardcore |
| 09:17 | <boblet> | heh, nice |
| 09:17 | <boblet> | say hi to Mike for me. hope things are going ok for him |
| 09:18 | <wycats> | is there anything else that comes to mind? |
| 09:18 | <wycats> | it looks like ARIA was designed by committee but came out of real concerns |
| 09:18 | <othermaciej> | it looks like <video> first went in the spec sometime before Apple's proposal in March, based on what I wrote |
| 09:19 | <wycats> | yah |
| 09:19 | <othermaciej> | the opera video release was not til November of that year |
| 09:19 | <wycats> | "We started work on these documents before the <video> element was added to the spec and indeed before Opera made their original proposal" |
| 09:20 | <wycats> | it seems clear that there was "real" effort on both Apple's and Opera's part |
| 09:20 | <othermaciej> | I was just trying to figure out spec timing relative to Opera's experimental implementation |
| 09:20 | <boblet> | looks like Chrome’s implementation of table display CSS never made it to inline-table, unlike Webkit or Safari. strange |
| 09:20 | <wycats> | weird |
| 09:21 | <wycats> | I'm going to say in my post that sachin's argument is like the death panels of web standards ;) |
| 09:21 | <wycats> | it's completely made up, transparently false, and yet a ton of people believe it |
| 09:21 | <boblet> | wycats: link? |
| 09:21 | <othermaciej> | I'm surprised Hewitt made the argument for ignoring standards more |
| 09:22 | <othermaciej> | and that in response Mozilla bragged about how much they ignore standards |
| 09:22 | <wycats> | http://sachin.posterous.com/the-web-sucks |
| 09:22 | <boblet> | nice positive title :) |
| 09:22 | <othermaciej> | there are many false statements there |
| 09:22 | <othermaciej> | "Browsers aren't innovating." |
| 09:22 | <wycats> | othermaciej: to put it bluntly, I agree with the argument |
| 09:22 | <othermaciej> | "Browsers are forced to implement every "standard" that is agreed on, even if it's not the best decision for the platform." |
| 09:23 | <wycats> | but it's wrong on the facts |
| 09:23 | <wycats> | I agree that browsers shouldn't wait for standards to finish before implementing |
| 09:23 | <wycats> | but they DON'T |
| 09:23 | <othermaciej> | wycats: I don't think we need to ignore standards more because they are not really an impediment to innovation |
| 09:23 | <wycats> | otherwise there would be no HTML5 support |
| 09:23 | <wycats> | othermaciej: it's not about ignoring standards |
| 09:23 | <wycats> | "Web applications don't have threading, GPU acceleration, drag and drop, copy and paste of rich media, true offline access, or persistence" |
| 09:23 | <wycats> | total utter bullshit |
| 09:24 | <wycats> | WebWorkers, WebGL, HTML5 D&D |
| 09:24 | <wycats> | CSS animations, transitions |
| 09:24 | <wycats> | HTML5 offline |
| 09:24 | <wycats> | Web Storage |
| 09:24 | <wycats> | total bullshit |
| 09:24 | <zcorpan> | ie9 has shown that gpu acceleration is possible with web 2.0 style apps |
| 09:24 | <othermaciej> | see Joe Hewitt's recent tweets though http://twitter.com/joehewitt/ |
| 09:24 | <wycats> | othermaciej: yeah |
| 09:24 | <wycats> | he's wrong too |
| 09:25 | <othermaciej> | he definitely did argue that browsers should do more nonstandard stuff, and web developers, should make more browser-specific sites |
| 09:25 | <annevk> | othermaciej, our initial video release was in April actually |
| 09:25 | <annevk> | othermaciej, public release that is, it's the .exe I pointed to above |
| 09:25 | <wycats> | othermaciej: I make browser specific sites |
| 09:25 | <annevk> | othermaciej, but we demonstrated it publicly before that; there was just not a public build |
| 09:25 | <wycats> | I'm currently working on a webkit-only enhanced version of a mobile site I maintain |
| 09:26 | <annevk> | othermaciej, would be nice to know where Mozilla is ignoring standards |
| 09:26 | <annevk> | every now and then I notice some feature going in and try to encourage people to bring it up on some list, but I don't see it too often |
| 09:27 | <annevk> | (though there's also not much follow-up on those suggestions usually...) |
| 09:27 | <wycats> | annevk: is there new accelerometer support a standard? |
| 09:27 | <othermaciej> | wycats: in mobile people are more willing to do it because advanced smartphones are too much of a WebKit monoculture |
| 09:27 | <wycats> | othermaciej: I'm keeping around the old client-server model |
| 09:27 | <annevk> | wycats, not sure, not really up to speed with those APIs |
| 09:27 | <wycats> | but I'm leveraging everything Webkit on mobile gives me to the hilt if you're on a webkit browser |
| 09:28 | <wycats> | so old blackberries can still see the site |
| 09:28 | <othermaciej> | I wish there were more decent phones out with non-WebKit browsers shipping by default |
| 09:28 | <othermaciej> | monoculture is not healthy for the Web |
| 09:28 | <wycats> | othermaciej: if fennec was shipping, I'd make sure I supported it |
| 09:28 | <Rik`> | I wish there were more ways to test mobile browsers |
| 09:28 | <wycats> | I hage no problem supporting anything but IE mobile |
| 09:28 | <othermaciej> | wycats: didn't you hear? the pre-alpha is out |
| 09:29 | <wycats> | Rik`: jQuery's working on stuff with testswarm |
| 09:29 | <wycats> | othermaciej: LoLz |
| 09:29 | <zcorpan> | "IE9 will support playback of H.264 video only" http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2010/04/29/html5-video.aspx |
| 09:29 | <othermaciej> | Fennec is pretty far from being a real product still |
| 09:29 | <wycats> | "We're about to find out: see the growth and fragmentation of mobile app stores, which exist only because the web blows." |
| 09:29 | <wycats> | ^^ bullshit |
| 09:29 | <wycats> | othermaciej: indeed |
| 09:29 | <othermaciej> | and I doubt any handset manufacturers will bundle it |
| 09:29 | <wycats> | "And really, how screwed would we be if the WebKit team weren't so god damn competent? Ok, signing off now, thanks for listening. :)" <= where "the webkit team" is about 10 companies |
| 09:29 | <annevk> | zcorpan, old news :) |
| 09:29 | <wycats> | othermaciej: who knows... maybe Apple will let them ship it ;) |
| 09:30 | <annevk> | zcorpan, see logs for some comments |
| 09:30 | <othermaciej> | wycats: most of the core work is done by 2 companies, and before very recently only 1... |
| 09:30 | <Rik`> | wycats: last time I checked, testswarm was only for JS lib |
| 09:30 | <wycats> | othermaciej: absolutely |
| 09:30 | <wycats> | othermaciej: not that recently |
| 09:30 | <wycats> | Google's been contributing for quite some time now |
| 09:30 | <wycats> | "As someone who has tried to do both cutting edge native and web iPhone apps, iPhone Safari is a joke compared to iPhone Cocoa." <= he tried it 2 years ago and freely admits he hasn't really looked since |
| 09:30 | <othermaciej> | yes, but for a while all their contribution was mostly porting work |
| 09:30 | <annevk> | still having a single engine is bad |
| 09:31 | <othermaciej> | not work to enhance the web platform |
| 09:31 | <annevk> | not sure it matters much how many companies develop it |
| 09:31 | <wycats> | annevk, othermaciej: bad for whom? |
| 09:31 | <annevk> | wycats, for the web ecosystem |
| 09:31 | <wycats> | annevk: because? |
| 09:31 | <othermaciej> | it's good for mobile web developers today |
| 09:31 | <annevk> | you need competition on implementation, speed, etc. |
| 09:31 | <othermaciej> | and it's good for the vendors today |
| 09:31 | <wycats> | annevk: having extremely incompetent alternatives with a lot of market share would blow |
| 09:32 | <othermaciej> | in the long run, it could be bad for everyone |
| 09:32 | <wycats> | it sounds like you'd like to see IE mobile pick up market share |
| 09:32 | <wycats> | I'd kill myself :P |
| 09:32 | <othermaciej> | look at how painful it is for IE to converge with standards because they spent so long as a monoculture |
| 09:32 | <wycats> | othermaciej: bad analogy |
| 09:32 | <othermaciej> | I'd like to see it get better enough that it deserves some market share |
| 09:32 | <annevk> | wycats, i'm saying WebKit could end up as IE6 if something happens |
| 09:32 | <wycats> | annevk: bullshit argument |
| 09:32 | <mut> | boo. |
| 09:33 | <othermaciej> | iPhone web apps are much more likely to depend on WebKit bugs than desktop web apps |
| 09:33 | <othermaciej> | it has not yet gotten to the point where it is a huge burden though |
| 09:33 | <mut> | im attempting to convert something ive drawn in canvas to a dxf (ascii cad file) |
| 09:33 | <wycats> | othermaciej, annevk: I would love to see a webkit-caliber alternative emerge |
| 09:33 | <annevk> | wycats, I don't see why; Microsoft invested hugely in the Web and when they became dominent they just let it go for a decade |
| 09:33 | <annevk> | wycats, they had a killer engine with IE6 |
| 09:33 | <mut> | i just wondered if anyone knew of a project that could help :P |
| 09:33 | <wycats> | annevk: and it was closed source, so MS was *able* to do it |
| 09:33 | <annevk> | but no competition |
| 09:34 | <wycats> | in this case, if Apple gave up on it, Google would keep it going |
| 09:34 | <wycats> | or vice versa |
| 09:34 | <wycats> | a bunch of companies are invested in Webkit |
| 09:34 | <wycats> | unlike closed-source IE |
| 09:34 | <wycats> | in fact, if IE was OSS, I bet we'd have seen improvements |
| 09:34 | <wycats> | instead of stagnation |
| 09:34 | <wycats> | see: Mozilla |
| 09:34 | <annevk> | Mozilla and WebKit is actually a good example of why open source also needs competition |
| 09:35 | <wycats> | annevk: I'd love to see a webkit caliber competitor |
| 09:35 | <wycats> | but if IE mobile gets market share without being quality, I will cry |
| 09:35 | <annevk> | I think we are |
| 09:35 | <annevk> | but I'm not really sure what you mean |
| 09:35 | <wycats> | annevk: is it really unclear? |
| 09:35 | <othermaciej> | I doubt IE mobile will go much of anywhere |
| 09:36 | <othermaciej> | certainly not by usage share |
| 09:36 | <annevk> | all I'm saying is that software-monoculture is bad, even if it's open source |
| 09:36 | <wycats> | "monoculture is bad" is a meta-argument |
| 09:36 | <annevk> | wycats, yes |
| 09:36 | <wycats> | a culture of one awesome browser beats a culture of one awesome browser and 5 crappy ones |
| 09:36 | <othermaciej> | since on mobile, how much people use the browser is extremely sensitive to differences in browser quality |
| 09:37 | <annevk> | wycats, whatever man |
| 09:37 | <wycats> | annevk: what do you mean whatever? |
| 09:37 | <wycats> | I'm postulating a scenario where IE mobile gets market share (let's say via Windows Mobile 7 actually getting a bunch of sales) |
| 09:37 | <wycats> | we'd lose the monoculture |
| 09:38 | <wycats> | and gain having to deal with IE6(7) on the phone |
| 09:38 | <wycats> | if you think that's a good tradeoff... |
| 09:38 | <annevk> | I'm not sure why you think that I would think that so I'm not really interested in going further |
| 09:38 | <wycats> | :( |
| 09:39 | <wycats> | I wasn't trying to troll, I promise |
| 09:39 | <wycats> | annevk: like I said before, I'd *love* to see a Fennec/Webkit world |
| 09:40 | <doublec> | Except you mean Gecko since Fennec is a browser and Webkit isn't. And add in Opera's engine. |
| 09:41 | <othermaciej> | Presto is a good engine |
| 09:42 | <doublec> | Everyone is getting good engine's - it's hard to choose :) |
| 09:42 | <othermaciej> | it would be good if one of the sgnificant smartphone OSes shipped a browser based on Gecko or Presto by default |
| 09:42 | <Rik`> | in the original argument, I think the cycle "implement new feature, let it be tested with nightly/beta, refine it, propose it to standards" is used a lot more these days than say 2 years ago and so everything is moving faster, even standardization |
| 09:42 | <othermaciej> | unfortunately there seems to be a herd instinct |
| 09:42 | <annevk> | wycats, sounds like we're in agreement then |
| 09:42 | <wycats> | doublec: I guess I mean Gecko if there was the prospect of a multi-gecko browser landscape |
| 09:43 | <wycats> | Rik`: exactly |
| 09:43 | <wycats> | othermaciej: I think it's less of a herd instinct and more a desire to pool resources |
| 09:43 | <wycats> | if say RIM decided to ship Gecko, they'd be going it alone |
| 09:43 | <doublec> | wycats, microb on the n900 is a gecko based browser |
| 09:44 | <othermaciej> | Nokia did the first mobile port of WebKit, before Apple |
| 09:44 | <wycats> | doublec: you know what I'm saying |
| 09:44 | <othermaciej> | they were going it alone at the time |
| 09:44 | <wycats> | othermaciej: yep |
| 09:44 | <wycats> | and few people do that |
| 09:44 | <wycats> | it's reasonable to not want to |
| 09:44 | <wycats> | I wouldn't call it a "herd instinct" |
| 09:44 | <wycats> | but at the same time, it would be good for the web if someone broke ranks |
| 09:44 | <wycats> | I agree |
| 09:44 | <wycats> | as long as it's not MS :P |
| 09:44 | <othermaciej> | now they are switching from their fork to QtWebKit which is up to date with trunk and everything |
| 09:45 | <boblet> | oook, not a Chrome inline-table issue. something to do with default ruby styles… |
| 09:45 | <wycats> | othermaciej: sweet |
| 09:45 | <Rik`> | to help choosing who won this argument : http://people.opera.com/danield/css3/lightsaber/ |
| 09:45 | <wycats> | sachin lost :P |
| 09:46 | <doublec> | haha, nice |
| 09:46 | <othermaciej> | Rik`: that is totally sweet! |
| 09:47 | <Rik`> | othermaciej: now I want WebKit on iPhone to have the same orientation events than Gecko to use this |
| 09:47 | <Rik`> | (and I want WebKit nightlies on iPhone to test it right now :) ) |
| 09:48 | <othermaciej> | I wish Gecko hadn't used "orientation" as event names since iPhone WebKit uses "orientationchange" for a different purpose |
| 09:49 | <zcorpan> | othermaciej: QtWebKit doesn't have this bug? https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9677 |
| 09:49 | <annevk> | -> public-webapps⊙wo |
| 09:50 | <othermaciej> | zcorpan: I dunno - WebKit trunk certainly doesn't, and I don't think we have a mode flag to enable it |
| 09:53 | <Rik`> | cool : http://robertnyman.com/css3/css-transitions/css-transitions-mac-os-x-stacks.html via http://robertnyman.com/2010/04/30/using-css3-transitions-and-transforms-to-mimic-mac-os-x-stacks-behavior/ |
| 09:54 | <wycats> | Rik`: +1 |
| 09:54 | <wycats> | Rik`: I'm more interested in the accelerometer ;) |
| 09:54 | <othermaciej> | Rik`: very cool! |
| 09:57 | <Hixie> | joehewitt's complaint seems almost like a tautology to me... anything that involves multiple vendors agreeing on what the platform should be is naturally going to evolve more slowly than something where the platform is decided by a single vendor |
| 09:57 | <Hixie> | that's the cost of not having vendor lock-in |
| 09:57 | <Hixie> | equivalently, the cost of having fast platform development is vendor lock-in |
| 09:57 | <wycats> | Hixie: well |
| 09:57 | <wycats> | it's not happening! |
| 09:57 | <wycats> | see my list above |
| 09:58 | <Hixie> | what's not happening? |
| 09:58 | <wycats> | browsers sitting around waiting for agreement before implementing things |
| 09:58 | <othermaciej> | the Web definitely evolves slower than the faster-moving proprietary platforms |
| 09:59 | <Hixie> | wycats: i didn't say that |
| 09:59 | <wycats> | othermaciej: Sachin's post lists technologies that "the web doesn't have" that were in browsers in like 2006 |
| 10:00 | <Hixie> | "the platform" != what 15% of deployed browsers support |
| 10:00 | <othermaciej> | true, his post seems misinformed |
| 10:00 | <wycats> | Hixie: he's explicitly NOT complaining about 100% of browsers |
| 10:00 | <wycats> | he's saying "nobody is implementing useful things" |
| 10:00 | <Creap> | hsivonen: validator.nu fails to accept role="menuitem" inside role="menubar" |
| 10:00 | <wycats> | which is just bull |
| 10:01 | <Creap> | An element with role=menuitem requires role=menu on the parent. |
| 10:01 | <Creap> | which is incorrect |
| 10:01 | <wycats> | also, IE only has 60'ish% these days |
| 10:01 | <wycats> | so 15% isn't exactly correct |
| 10:02 | <Hixie> | wycats: maybe he has multiple complaints. What I was talking about e.g. "I am ranting because I want to drop Cocoa and go back to the web, but I am upset about how much power I have to give up to do that." |
| 10:02 | <Hixie> | by 15% i meant one browser's latest version |
| 10:02 | <Creap> | hsivonen: W3C validator does the same though, but http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/roles#menuitem clearly states menuitem is allowed inside menubar |
| 10:02 | <wycats> | Hixie: I'm mostly looking at Sachin's argument |
| 10:02 | <wycats> | not Joe's |
| 10:03 | <Hixie> | wycats: i was just talking about joehewitt's |
| 10:03 | <wycats> | Joe is unfocused... he appears to not have looked at the web platform in a couple years |
| 10:03 | <wycats> | Hixie: ha |
| 10:04 | <wycats> | http://posterous.com/getfile/files.posterous.com/sachin/qce6grV5S6PiTCvtEkmRiqRAJXP4a28SpIMTbng1rMX2T6v192UOuonHr8PP/pastedGraphic.png |
| 10:04 | <wycats> | ^^ is just patent nonsense |
| 10:07 | <mut> | hey, if i draw something to scale (1px = 1mm) in canvas, how can i output that to an ascii file, so i can parse it and use it with other programs? |
| 10:09 | <othermaciej> | to the extent that joehewitt wants to do web development, I think he wants it mobile-targeted and maybe even a-specific-subset-of-mobile-devices-targeted |
| 10:09 | <othermaciej> | so latest version of one implementation would be good enough for him |
| 10:10 | <othermaciej> | as long as it's the right implementation |
| 10:11 | <wycats> | othermaciej: and... Mobile Webkit is pretty far ahead of the game |
| 10:11 | <wycats> | where's the Touch events spec? |
| 10:11 | <othermaciej> | I can't talk about that without presence of counsel |
| 10:14 | <wycats> | ;) |
| 10:14 | <wycats> | give me a damn accelerometer :P |
| 10:15 | <wycats> | it definitely is detrimental that the mobile bits of Webkit are mostly closed source and maintained by Apple |
| 10:15 | <othermaciej> | depends on which bits |
| 10:15 | <wycats> | othermaciej: can the OSS community add accelerometer support to iPhone? |
| 10:17 | <othermaciej> | would probably be a challenge |
| 10:18 | <wycats> | mainly because dev. on those sorts of features is happening outside the OSS codebase |
| 10:24 | <Philip`> | mut: The only output you can get is the bitmap image data |
| 10:24 | <Philip`> | It doesn't save any information about the sizes of the shapes you draw onto it |
| 10:26 | <wycats> | good night folks |
| 10:43 | <mut> | ok |
| 10:43 | <mut> | Philip` but the bitmap image data is basically a pixel map yea |
| 10:45 | <mut> | ah im gonna have to rewrite/emulate all the canvas functions to output to dxf |
| 10:45 | <mut> | :P |
| 10:45 | <mut> | thats a job for this weekend :) |
| 10:47 | <Philip`> | mut: If you can generate your output file from just the pixel values, then getImageData or toDataURL would be sufficient |
| 10:48 | <mut> | hmm i could do, but it would be half assed. |
| 10:48 | <mut> | im all about half assed though |
| 10:48 | <mut> | getImageData will make it like a uri thing yea |
| 10:50 | <Philip`> | toDataURL makes it like a URL, getImageData makes it like an array of RGBA values |
| 10:51 | <mut> | hmm |
| 10:51 | <mut> | ok :) |
| 10:51 | <mut> | researchtime i think |
| 10:51 | <mut> | thanks |
| 10:55 | <mut> | nah thats not gonna work for me |
| 10:55 | <mut> | Ill have to sit down and recreate the canvas functions to create my file |
| 10:56 | <mut> | nm :P |
| 11:23 | <gsnedders> | http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3C!DOCTYPE%20html%3E%0D%0A%3Ciframe%20src%3D%22data%3Aapplication%2Fxml%2Cfoobar%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E%0D%0A%3Cscript%3E%0D%0Aw(document.getElementsByTagName(%22iframe%22)%5B0%5D.contentDocument.documentElement)%3B%0D%0A%3C%2Fscript%3E |
| 11:23 | <gsnedders> | That's kinda interesting. |
| 11:26 | <zcorpan> | wonder if the web depends on that by now |
| 11:26 | <gsnedders> | Minefield and Chrome give about:blank, Opera gives the parse error page |
| 11:32 | <jgraham> | (which seems bad) |
| 11:32 | <gsnedders> | Buggy test |
| 11:32 | <gsnedders> | http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3C!DOCTYPE%20html%3E%0A%3Ciframe%3E%3C/iframe%3E%0A%3Cscript%3E%0Aw(%22loading%22);%0Avar%20iframe%20%3D%20document.getElementsByTagName(%22iframe%22)[0];%0Aiframe.onload%20%3D%20function(){%0Aw(%22loaded%22);%0Aw(iframe.contentDocument);%0A}%0Aiframe.src%20%3D%20%22data:application/xml,foobar%22;%0A%3C/script%3E |
| 11:33 | <gsnedders> | Chrome gives undefined for contentDocument, which I think is against HTML 5 |
| 11:33 | <gsnedders> | Opera and Minefield gives the error page |
| 16:14 | <tabatkins> | Argh, snarky comment successfully redacted before sending. |
| 16:15 | <Philip`> | How boring |
| 16:16 | <tabatkins> | Hey, I'm already violating a rule by directly responding. I was doing fine just ignoring emails, but got tired of patent lies being spread. |
| 17:41 | lazni | started to listen to Public Enemy when mpilgrim quoted them "if you don't own the master, the master control you" in context of package signing in Chrome OS |
| 20:12 | <AryehGregor> | I keep seeing Google ads for ie8optimized.com. It's a complete fraud. |
| 20:12 | <AryehGregor> | I'm pretty sure I already reported it. |
| 20:26 | <othermaciej> | what is it? |
| 20:27 | <boogyman> | AryehGregor: why would a channel formed by WHATWG care about an ad on google? |
| 20:27 | <AryehGregor> | I dunno, nobody else seemed to be talking, so why not? It's about browsers and Google, and there are a bunch of people here who are interested in one or the other. |
| 20:27 | <Philip`> | The channel would be boring if it was on topic all the time |
| 20:28 | <boogyman> | so if this channel had 10 users, you wouldn't have posted it? |
| 20:28 | <AryehGregor> | If people here usually cared about topicality when nothing interesting was happening, I wouldn't have posted it. |
| 20:28 | lazni | 's first sentence here today is offtopic |
| 20:29 | <AryehGregor> | Anyway, it poses as an official Microsoft page, and tries to get you to download some IE8 add-on. But the whois is a Portuguese anonymization service. |
| 20:29 | <boogyman> | is/was? |
| 20:31 | <boogyman> | You can't cure gullibility. Think about it... MS marketing a plugin for their most recent browser? Doesn't sound too official to me |
| 20:32 | <Philip`> | I'm sure Microsoft markets Silverlight |
| 20:32 | <boogyman> | what's that? |
| 20:32 | <Philip`> | It's a plugin for their most recent browser |
| 20:32 | <AryehGregor> | You can't cure gullibility, but I'd expect that Google should be filtering out plainly fraudulent ads. |
| 20:32 | <boogyman> | and is the product name outside of their domain... eg sub.microsoft.com? |
| 20:33 | <AryehGregor> | Especially since I reported it before. |
| 20:33 | <AryehGregor> | Yes, it's ie8optimized.com. I already said. Do a whois. |
| 20:33 | <AryehGregor> | That's what got me suspicious. |
| 20:33 | <boogyman> | was talking about silverlight |
| 20:33 | <AryehGregor> | Oh. |
| 20:33 | <AryehGregor> | I bet it's under microsoft.com. |
| 20:33 | <Philip`> | It's silverlight.net |
| 20:33 | <AryehGregor> | Okay, wrong. |
| 20:33 | <AryehGregor> | http://www.silverlight.net/ |
| 20:33 | <AryehGregor> | You can verify that it's actually Microsoft by doing a whois, though. |
| 20:34 | <Philip`> | I can, but I'm not the target audience for fraudulent IE8 add-ons |
| 20:49 | <sicking> | tabatkins: ping |
| 20:49 | <tabatkins> | sicking: pong |
| 20:51 | <sicking> | tabatkins: I'd like to add wording to the change proposal to say that there are two browsers that have committed to supporting the new elements |
| 20:51 | <tabatkins> | Go for it, just throw a note on the list about it. |
| 20:51 | <sicking> | tabatkins: how would you feel about adding that as a new section under "rationale"? |
| 20:51 | <tabatkins> | official deadline isn't until next friday. |
| 20:51 | <sicking> | yup |
| 21:02 | <sicking> | Lachy: ping |
| 21:14 | <lazni> | teamviewer sucks big time |
| 21:14 | <lazni> | the concept is neat, implementation, sucks |
| 21:33 | <cardona507> | is this http://apirocks.com/html5/html5.html#slide45 telling me that you no longer need someone using IE to install chrome frame? |
| 21:46 | <AryehGregor> | No? |
| 21:51 | <Lachy> | sicking, pong |
| 22:20 | <sicking> | Lachy: do you know what Operas stance on the new semantic elements in HTML5 are? |
| 22:21 | <sicking> | Lachy: or rather, the stance on the ones that are being debated in the HTML5 WG right now |
| 22:21 | <sicking> | Lachy: wondering if I can put Opera in the "interested in implementing" column |
| 22:22 | <Hixie> | man i can't believe how much time and effort you're all putting into this issue |
| 22:23 | <tabatkins> | I stopped putting effort into it some time ago, at least. I'm done with it. |
| 22:24 | <sicking> | most of the time is speant marking all the excessive emails read |
| 22:24 | <othermaciej> | honestly - there's nothing wrong with having rationale documents for parts of the spec |
| 22:25 | <Hixie> | rationale documents would be fantastic |
| 22:25 | <Hixie> | i've been looking for volunteers to write some for years |
| 22:26 | <othermaciej> | what tabatkins, sicking, hober et all wrote is a rationale document for some of the new elements, though an oddly formed one |
| 22:26 | <Hixie> | it's one of the most prominently positioned tasks in the list of things we're looking for volunteers to do on the wiki |
| 22:26 | <othermaciej> | still, would be nice to have even that level of written-down rationale for, say, the sectioning elements or the new form controls |
| 22:27 | <othermaciej> | I guess what I'm saying is, the work on this has definitely not been a waste, even though people may have prioritized their time differently if these were not tracker issues |
| 22:27 | <othermaciej> | that being said, those with Member access may want to look here http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2010Apr/0154.html |
| 22:28 | <Hixie> | holy cow, my home page is glowing green |
| 22:28 | <sicking> | in all fairness, i shouldn't get much credit for what's in the wiki. The other guys did most of the work |
| 22:28 | <Hixie> | it hasn't done that in like 6 months |
| 22:28 | <boogyman> | is that a good thing? |
| 22:29 | <Hixie> | boogyman: in-joke |
| 22:29 | boogyman | jumps out |
| 22:29 | <sicking> | Hixie: what a coincidence, the mozilla-central tree was the greenest i've seen it in months |
| 22:29 | <sicking> | until it went up in flames due to network issues :( |
| 22:30 | <Hixie> | anyway, it would be great if the rationale-providing text could be put in a wiki somewhere in a form suitable for a rationale document, that way we could point people to that and they would have a better chance of doing more |
| 22:30 | <Hixie> | it's always easier to add than to begin |
| 22:31 | <othermaciej> | unfortunately this page is also showing a lot of green: http://damowmow.com/playground/htmlwg/chart.html |
| 22:31 | <Hixie> | yikes |
| 22:34 | <othermaciej> | speaking of which.... |
| 22:35 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: can you look at this (and the prior few messages): http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Apr/1248.html |
| 22:35 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: if you strike or suitably adjust the requested clause, we can close ISSUE-82 |
| 22:36 | <Hixie> | yeah it's on my huge pile of mail to read |
| 22:36 | <Hixie> | i'm about 24 hours behind right now |
| 22:37 | <othermaciej> | ok |
| 22:37 | <othermaciej> | thanks |
| 23:05 | <Lachy> | sicking, if you're referring to things like meter, progress, hidden="", etc. then I am personally in favour of retaining them. I also believe the rest of us are too |
| 23:05 | <Lachy> | at least, I've not heard anything from anyone at Opera arguing that the elements or attributes should be dropped. |
| 23:06 | <sicking> | Lachy: are "the rest of us" enough for me to put on the wiki that "opera has indicated interest" in supporting them? |
| 23:07 | <Hixie> | wasn't i working for opera when some of those were originally added? |
| 23:07 | <Lachy> | well, obviously, I can't make an official statement on behalf of opera, but yeah, I think it's fairly safe to say that. |
| 23:08 | <Lachy> | I think you were |
| 23:08 | <Hixie> | (not that that really means anything) |
| 23:09 | <Lachy> | I've been meaning to provide some feedback about the zero-edit change proposal, but haven't got around to it yet |
| 23:10 | <Lachy> | my problem with it is that it fails to adequately describe the use cases for many of the elements. |
| 23:12 | <sicking> | Lachy: cool |
| 23:27 | <Lachy> | sicking, what's mozilla's status with implementing <meter> and <progress>? Are there any plans for those in the near future? |
| 23:28 | <Lachy> | Or are there plans to implement XBL first, which is somewhat essential for applying advanced styles to those elements.? |
| 23:29 | <Lachy> | we also need psudo-elements for them, or styling limitations will be one of the biggest problems with them. |
| 23:31 | <tabatkins> | I need to spend a few hours thinking about the pseudoelems to expose on <progress>, so that later XBL can expose them in a non-magical way. |
| 23:34 | <tabatkins> | (or someone else can, of course, but I'll probably do it sometime soon) |
| 23:34 | <Hixie> | <progress> doesn't really need much, it's <meter> that really needs something |
| 23:34 | <Hixie> | <progress> you're more likely to do using <canvas> or some such |
| 23:35 | <tabatkins> | Not necessarily. There are plenty of good, simple uses that are roughly equivalent to the styling needs of <meter>. |
| 23:37 | <Lachy> | I think progress only needs 1 pseudo-element the highlighted portion. |
| 23:38 | <Lachy> | meter needs a lot to handle all the different components, from the low point, high point, mid point, highlighted region, optimal point and maybe more. Haven't really thought about it in detail though. |
| 23:40 | <Hixie> | the more i think of it the more i think both are likely to just be done programmatically (e.g. using canvas) |
| 23:40 | <Hixie> | rather than with css |
| 23:40 | <Hixie> | though one might want to parameterise it via css somehow |
| 23:43 | <Lachy> | My original thoughs were that authors would use XBL templates to replace them with scripted/animated SVG |
| 23:43 | <Lachy> | but canvas is another likely alternative |
| 23:44 | <tabatkins> | That would just be <canvas><progress/></canvas>, right? |
| 23:48 | <boogyman> | tabatkins you're using xhtml syntax |
| 23:48 | <tabatkins> | No, I'm using pseudocode. ^_^ |
| 23:53 | <Lachy> | tabatkins, I don't think that's the best way of dealing with it because doing that way doesn't create a nice, easily reusable component |
| 23:56 | <Lachy> | rather, I think it would be something like this <xbl xmlns=...><template><canvas/></template><script>onprogress = function() {...}</script></xbl> (ignore errors in XBL, done from memory), and then that template would be bound to all progress elements in the page |
| 23:57 | <tabatkins> | Kk. |
