| 00:06 | <midgard> | Hixie I like that way to change html to an unversioned markup language |
| 01:48 | <jamesr> | does silvia pfeiffer hang out here? |
| 01:48 | <nessy> | yes, hi! |
| 01:49 | <jamesr> | nessy: hi! |
| 01:49 | <nessy> | wassup? :) |
| 01:49 | <jamesr> | nessy: i think a source of confusion in the volume thread is that your TV does not really increase the volume past what the video says. it attenuates the volume down (from some maximum that it supports) |
| 01:50 | <jamesr> | in fact more sophisticated systems always express volume controls in terms of negative dB |
| 01:50 | <nessy> | are you trying to tell me that the video that comes over the air is encoded as loud as the maximum setting of my TV? |
| 01:50 | <jamesr> | think about it this way |
| 01:51 | <jamesr> | if you put the volume on your TV at 100% that's the same as setting it to -0dB |
| 01:51 | <nessy> | sure, if we go with dB - but the video and audio elements don't go with dB |
| 01:51 | <jamesr> | well it's the same thing |
| 01:51 | <Hixie> | volume=1.0 means "play at maximum volume" |
| 01:51 | <jamesr> | it's a % of the max |
| 01:52 | <jamesr> | 1.0 or 100% = -0dB |
| 01:52 | <jamesr> | 0.5 or 50% = whatever that is in dB |
| 01:52 | <jamesr> | i dunno what that is, bad at logs |
| 01:52 | <nessy> | how come then that most videos on the web are so quiet that they all the max settings on my computer cannot make them audible when my TV is easily able to go louder than my vacuum cleaner |
| 01:52 | <jamesr> | i think that's around -60dB |
| 01:53 | <Hixie> | nessy: your speakers are turned down :-) |
| 01:53 | <jamesr> | nah that can't be right. i dunno what 50% would be |
| 01:53 | <nessy> | Hixie: now, everything is cranked all the way up |
| 01:53 | <Hixie> | jamesr: wouldn't 0 be -infinity? |
| 01:53 | <Hixie> | nessy: how loud are system sounds? |
| 01:54 | <nessy> | I'm on a MacBook |
| 01:54 | <jamesr> | Hixie: the mapping isn't really mathematical because perceived loudness doesn't map linearly to energy output |
| 01:54 | <jamesr> | or it's not a strict interpretation |
| 01:54 | <Hixie> | jamesr: ah ok |
| 01:54 | <Hixie> | nessy: right so does the system beep beep loudly? |
| 01:54 | <Hixie> | nessy: do is that quiet too? |
| 01:54 | <Hixie> | s/do/or/ |
| 01:54 | <nessy> | yes, very much so |
| 01:55 | <nessy> | I get a little shock every time :) |
| 01:55 | <jamesr> | what that means is that the browser (or flash) is attenuating the audio down more than system sounds |
| 01:55 | <Hixie> | and when you hit the red button on http://instantrimshot.com/ does it play as loudly? |
| 01:55 | <nessy> | yeah, that's fairly loud |
| 01:56 | <Hixie> | what videos play quietly for you? |
| 01:56 | <nessy> | it's not all of them obviously - but a lot are encoded too quietly |
| 01:56 | <nessy> | that's not something that happens on TV, where 0dB seems fairly standardised |
| 01:57 | <jamesr> | my TV at 0dB is unbearably loud |
| 01:57 | <Hixie> | welcome to the web, where anyone and their dog can publish content |
| 01:57 | <nessy> | what I am saying is that a volume setting of 1 isn't 0dB |
| 01:57 | <Hixie> | including people who know jack about audio engineering |
| 01:58 | <jamesr> | Hixie: we should make it go to 11 |
| 01:58 | <jamesr> | that'd be one louder |
| 01:58 | <jamesr> | problem solved! |
| 02:00 | <nessy> | the problem is that 0dB on TV refers to a standard reference level, but our 0-1 volume range doesn't |
| 02:00 | <jamesr> | i don't think that's true and i'm not sure how else to explain it |
| 02:01 | <Hixie> | 0 means muted. 1 means do not attenuate. |
| 02:01 | <jamesr> | do not attentuate is by definition the same thing as attenuate by 0dB |
| 02:01 | <Hixie> | exactly |
| 02:01 | <nessy> | that means 0dB in reference to the SPL at which the video or audio file were encoded |
| 02:02 | <nessy> | it doesn't mean in reference to a SPL of human perception, e.g. where 0dB would equate to 20 Pa |
| 02:03 | <nessy> | think of the Web as a radio station where every song is played back at a different level - so every Web page you go to with a video will play back at a different level |
| 02:04 | <nessy> | it would make a lot more sense to define the 0-1 range as a SPL range |
| 02:04 | <Hixie> | we're not saying 0dB volume, we're saying 0dB relative attentuation |
| 02:04 | <Hixie> | it's further attenuated (or amplified) by your system volume control(s), amplifier(s), speaker(s), etc |
| 02:04 | <nessy> | and I am saying relative attenuation is the wrong thing to optimise on |
| 02:05 | <nessy> | assuming all other things are fixed - volume controls, amplifiers, speakers - I would expect any video set at 0.5 volume to play back at the same perceived loudness |
| 02:05 | <nessy> | that's what my radio station does (unless they screw up) |
| 02:06 | <Hixie> | oh you're saying you want the browser to do volume normalisation? |
| 02:06 | <nessy> | exactly :) |
| 02:06 | <jamesr> | that's orthogonal to the 'volume' attribute |
| 02:06 | <Hixie> | oh, well |
| 02:06 | <Hixie> | that's a whole different ball of wax |
| 02:06 | <nessy> | but volume 0-1 is what the user / web developer sees |
| 02:06 | <Hixie> | has nothing to do with the .volume IDL attribute |
| 02:07 | <jamesr> | CDs can be encoded at different volume levels as well which results in the exact same issue |
| 02:07 | <jamesr> | in fact some labels have historically tried to jack up the encoded volume to make their albums sound louder or cooler. which hurts the dynamic range and quality, etc |
| 02:07 | <nessy> | indeed, jamesr, the Web is more like a CD collection than a radio station - and I don't think that makes any sense at all |
| 02:08 | <Hixie> | can you even do volume normalisation on streams? |
| 02:08 | <Hixie> | i thought you needed the whole track to do it |
| 02:08 | <jamesr> | Hixie: you can't do it very well |
| 02:08 | <Hixie> | how would you do it in real time? |
| 02:08 | <jamesr> | itunes volume normalization scans the whole track and figures out the dynamic range |
| 02:09 | <jamesr> | it kind of sucks too |
| 02:09 | <jamesr> | because i have CDs with quiet and loud tracks. itunes would make the quiet ones louder |
| 02:09 | <nessy> | you can do a heuristic with the distribution of volume ranges |
| 02:09 | <jamesr> | i don't want The Great gig in The Sky to be as loud as Money |
| 02:09 | <nessy> | fair enough :) |
| 02:10 | <nessy> | but something should be possible - it really is a horrendous situation to not be able to turn some audio tracks even up into the audible range |
| 02:11 | <jamesr> | but you wouldn't expose that to the author. the author (presumably) controls the encoding process |
| 02:11 | <nessy> | when I stick in external speakers, it's a lot better - so if they can increase the volume, so should we - and often people don't care about the loss in quality if it's something important they want to catch |
| 02:12 | <nessy> | jamesr, the web page author is most of the time not the same person that creates the content |
| 02:12 | <nessy> | just like a radio station isn't most of the time the one who creates the content |
| 02:13 | <jamesr> | yeah, but radio stations control the volume of what they broadcast at transmission time |
| 02:13 | <nessy> | exactly - so why can't the browser do that for us |
| 02:14 | <Hixie> | the browser is a radio, not a transmission tower |
| 02:14 | <Hixie> | the server is the tower |
| 02:14 | <Hixie> | anyway, gotta go. bbl! |
| 02:14 | <nessy> | I would have thought that's the purpose of the volume attribute to normalise to a certain SPL range and then the original setting can be the one at which the volume bar starts - but I'd be happy with an extra attribute for normalization |
| 02:15 | <nessy> | Hixie: I am aware that the browser is the radio, that's where the comparison falls down - it doesn't change the user perception issue though :) |
| 02:17 | <jamesr> | well, i guess you could propose that as a separate feature |
| 02:19 | <nessy> | on high-tech receivers your volume know also goes above 0dB |
| 02:21 | <nessy> | anyway - seems like this is going back to the list :) |
| 05:53 | <MikeSmith> | nimbupani: I think Deepak Chopra should have mated with Mother Theresa when he had the chance |
| 05:53 | <MikeSmith> | big opportunity missed there |
| 05:53 | <nimbupani> | ROFLLLL |
| 05:54 | <nimbupani> | i do not even want to think of what calamity would have been unleashed |
| 05:54 | <MikeSmith> | heh |
| 05:54 | <MikeSmith> | well, it would have given him some serious street cred in the self-help guru community |
| 05:55 | <nimbupani> | lolzzzzz along with "celebrate the poor" celebrities. |
| 05:55 | <nimbupani> | i sorta experimented with Gandhi quotes https://twitter.com/standardsgandhi |
| 05:55 | <nimbupani> | :) |
| 05:56 | <nimbupani> | it got harder to make his quotes fit webdev :P |
| 05:57 | MikeSmith | reads |
| 05:59 | <MikeSmith> | I like https://twitter.com/standardsgandhi/status/14068177858 |
| 05:59 | <MikeSmith> | that's a keeper |
| 05:59 | <nimbupani> | LOL :D |
| 06:00 | <nimbupani> | i know there are tonnes of people who would beat me up for that :P |
| 06:01 | <MikeSmith> | finding a way to simultaneously mock Ghandi and XHTML in less than 140 characters is worthy goal |
| 06:02 | <nimbupani> | :D |
| 06:02 | <MikeSmith> | my favorite Ghandi quote is the one where he asks, "Is there anything funnier in the world than depictions of familiar cartoon characters have sex with each other?" |
| 06:02 | <MikeSmith> | 'cause that's a profound one |
| 06:02 | <nimbupani> | I bet he never said it :P |
| 06:03 | <nimbupani> | profanely profound. |
| 15:02 | <MikeSmith> | you hipsters in Sweden are lucky to have some of the best record labels in the world there |
| 15:07 | <MikeSmith> | http://www.hybrism.com/about/ |
| 15:07 | <MikeSmith> | "…situated in Sweden; in the royal capital of Stockholm; and in the not so royal city of Malmö." |
| 15:45 | <Dashiva> | Heh, I'm reading the link registry saga |
| 15:46 | <Dashiva> | Whose idea was it to suggest the HTML use a global link registry and then reject any link relation that was specific to HTML? |
| 15:47 | <MikeSmith> | Dashiva: some might say it as maybe the idea of those who were acting in bad faith from the beginning |
| 15:47 | <MikeSmith> | without naming any names |
| 15:48 | <MikeSmith> | of either the people who might say that, or the people they might say it about |
| 15:48 | <MikeSmith> | anyway, if the link registry is not going to be useful in the way it was supposed to be, everybody will just do an end run around it |
| 15:49 | <MikeSmith> | and spec out mechanisms that violate the link-relations RFC |
| 15:49 | <MikeSmith> | and it will be hard to blame them for doing so |
| 15:54 | <Dashiva> | Yeah, hopefully there won't be too much wasted effort as a result |
| 16:02 | <Dashiva> | I'm somewhat amused by the @longdesc comic having an obviously invalid @alt |
| 16:11 | <MikeSmith> | the continuing lack of explicit depictions of sex between cartoon characters in those comics is depressing |
| 16:15 | <Dashiva> | The crossdressing wasn't enough for you? |
| 16:15 | <Dashiva> | Haha, this is great |
| 16:16 | <Dashiva> | Julian demands large changes to existing specs to register link relations, but we can't fix the registry because the RFC defining it is almost final |
| 17:05 | <Dashiva> | Julian: The pingback specification has been final for almost a decade. Didn't stop you from requiring that it was rewritten as a RFC. |
| 17:07 | <Dashiva> | You seem to miss the point about HTML-specific link registrations. If everything can't fit in the IANA registry, then we need a second registry to handle the rest, and then we might as well use the second registry for everything and save massive overhead. |
| 17:38 | <JulianReschke> | I found the earlier exchanges about the link relations stuff not helpful. Apparently it's not trivial to understand what was and what is going on. |
| 17:38 | <JulianReschke> | rather t |
| 17:38 | <JulianReschke> | Rather than talking 2 each other, I'd recommend that you include those into the conversation who actually were part of the discussion. |
| 17:39 | <JulianReschke> | The best place to do so would be the HTML WG mailing list. |
| 17:39 | <JulianReschke> | That being said: if there's a question regarding the link relation stuff, I'm listening. |
| 18:40 | <Speeder> | what is this channel? |
| 18:41 | <Speeder> | iti s related to HTML? (I am seeking someone, or a channel to seek someone, to set-up a video player that supports expanding itself to native resolution, without javascript or flash hackery...) |
| 18:59 | <Moo^_^> | Speeder: whatwg is working group working on html5 spec |
| 18:59 | <Moo^_^> | Speeder: there won't be such a video player so you can stop searching |
| 18:59 | <Speeder> | that is not w3c ? |
| 18:59 | <Moo^_^> | Speeder: see topic |
| 18:59 | <Speeder> | Moo^_^ and WITH javascript, posible? |
| 19:00 | <Moo^_^> | Speeder: only for very latest browsers support html5 <video> |
| 19:00 | <Speeder> | Moo^_^: I know that |
| 19:00 | <Moo^_^> | Speeder: let's say "it will be better in the future if you don't want to use flash" |
| 19:00 | <Moo^_^> | Speeder: if you want to support all browsres |
| 19:00 | <Speeder> | Moo^_^ I will add a fallback to youtube :P |
| 19:00 | <Moo^_^> | the tube is yours |
| 19:01 | <Moo^_^> | :) |
| 19:06 | <JulianReschke> | Speeder: WHATWG = W3C |
| 19:06 | <JulianReschke> | Speeder: if you want the W3C HTML WG, the channel is irc://irc.w3.org:6665/html-wg |
| 19:10 | <Hixie> | man, don't let the w3c hear you say that, they'll have an aneurism :-) |
| 19:17 | <JulianReschke> | != |
| 19:17 | <JulianReschke> | oops |
| 19:18 | <MikeSmith> | "sh: =: command not found" |
| 19:19 | <MikeSmith> | looks like the "=" command is missing on my system |
| 19:19 | <MikeSmith> | I guess I should fix that |
| 19:19 | <MikeSmith> | I think I'm missing the "." command |
| 19:19 | <MikeSmith> | as well |
| 19:20 | <Dashiva> | MikeSmith: Did you put whitespace around it? |
| 19:20 | <MikeSmith> | I put a return after it |
| 19:20 | <JulianReschke> | what, no dot command? |
| 19:20 | <MikeSmith> | heh |
| 19:21 | <MikeSmith> | I got a deficient shell |
| 19:21 | <JulianReschke> | command.com? |
| 19:21 | JulianReschke | ducks |
| 19:21 | <Dashiva> | The first error sounds like vanilla sh |
| 19:21 | <Dashiva> | But surely that's extinct by now |
| 19:23 | <MikeSmith> | 。should do the same thing as . |
| 19:23 | <MikeSmith> | that was the problem |
| 19:23 | <MikeSmith> | stupid shell |
| 19:23 | <MikeSmith> | I prefer to type my dot as a reverve-video do |
| 19:23 | <MikeSmith> | dot |
| 19:23 | <MikeSmith> | and the shell should just understand that |
| 19:23 | <MikeSmith> | it should learn all my personal idiosyncracies |
| 19:23 | <Dashiva> | Yeah, and should support full-width characters too |
| 19:23 | <MikeSmith> | and it should love them |
| 19:24 | <MikeSmith> | yes |
| 19:24 | <JulianReschke> | what, and not allowing to make this a *different* command? |
| 19:24 | MikeSmith | kicks his crappy shell |
| 19:24 | <MikeSmith> | hey, maybe I will write a new shell |
| 19:24 | <Dashiva> | MikeSh |
| 19:24 | <MikeSmith> | because clearly we don't have enough of those already |
| 19:24 | <MikeSmith> | heh |
| 19:24 | <MikeSmith> | jackassh |
| 19:25 | <JulianReschke> | please add whitespace overloading |
| 19:26 | <Dashiva> | Maybe make a javascript-based shell |
| 19:27 | <JulianReschke> | http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/whitespace98.pdf |
| 19:30 | <Dashiva> | krijnh: So how's that open sourcing of the logs page going? :) |
| 19:43 | <MikeSmith> | threads in ruby? |
| 19:43 | <MikeSmith> | ruby has a thread library? |
| 19:44 | <MikeSmith> | wow |
| 19:44 | <MikeSmith> | who thought this was a good idea? |
| 19:44 | <MikeSmith> | is this some attempt at compensating for poor overall performance? |
| 19:45 | <MikeSmith> | err, I now see python has threads too |
| 19:45 | <MikeSmith> | sign |
| 19:45 | <MikeSmith> | of problems elsewhere |
| 19:46 | <MikeSmith> | I suppose people really do use it |
| 19:46 | <Moo^_^> | MikeSmith: threads don't work well in python |
| 19:46 | <MikeSmith> | ok |
| 19:46 | <Moo^_^> | MikeSmith: global interpreter locks allows just on thread to execute python code once |
| 19:46 | <Moo^_^> | MikeSmith: if you are doing IO it is ok |
| 19:46 | <Moo^_^> | MikeSmith: otherwise you do processes |
| 19:46 | <MikeSmith> | hmm |
| 19:46 | <MikeSmith> | I see |
| 19:47 | <MikeSmith> | why don't people just use C++ or C instead, I wonder |
| 19:47 | <MikeSmith> | but oh well |
| 19:47 | <MikeSmith> | I mean, for applications that benefit from having lots of threads |
| 19:48 | <Moo^_^> | MikeSmith: I could have many arguments for that but I don't want to start flamewar before I drink the first beer of saturday :) |
| 19:48 | <MikeSmith> | heh |
| 19:49 | <MikeSmith> | cheers |
| 19:49 | MikeSmith | reads about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Interpreter_Lock |
| 19:49 | <Moo^_^> | MikeSmith: personally I hate it |
| 19:49 | <Moo^_^> | MikeSmith: it prevents creating low resource python web servers |
| 19:50 | <Moo^_^> | MikeSmith: because if you need processes |
| 19:50 | <Moo^_^> | MikeSmith: you go out of mem really fast |
| 19:50 | <MikeSmith> | yeah, I would think |
| 19:50 | <Moo^_^> | OTOH the set-up is more fault tolerant |
| 19:50 | <Moo^_^> | but still |
| 19:50 | <Moo^_^> | not good for shared hosting |
| 19:50 | <Moo^_^> | low end hosting |
| 19:50 | <Moo^_^> | for masses |
| 19:51 | <MikeSmith> | I thought the world had decided that message passing was the way to go these days |
| 19:51 | <MikeSmith> | for concurrency and other reasons |
| 19:52 | <Moo^_^> | MikeSmith: it's the way of the future :) |
| 19:52 | <Moo^_^> | MikeSmith: we haev a lot of legacy to deal with |
| 19:52 | <Moo^_^> | MikeSmith: Python also has lots of "tasklet" implementations |
| 19:52 | <Moo^_^> | or whatever they call them, depending on the implementation |
| 19:52 | <MikeSmith> | ok |
| 19:52 | <Moo^_^> | eventlets |
| 19:52 | <Moo^_^> | the stuff erlang is good at |
| 19:53 | <MikeSmith> | ok |
| 19:53 | <MikeSmith> | erlang sets the bar pretty high |
| 19:53 | <Moo^_^> | the thing with python, ruby et. al. is that you can get open source libaries for them |
| 19:54 | <Moo^_^> | like "rss reader" |
| 19:54 | <Moo^_^> | for erlang, you need to build everything by hand |
| 19:54 | <Moo^_^> | so the scope of the use is limited |
| 19:54 | <MikeSmith> | ah yeah |
| 19:54 | <MikeSmith> | true |
| 20:55 | <Cesarino> | someone? |
| 21:04 | <MikeSmith> | Cesarino: everybody is hiding from you |
| 21:41 | <hdhoang> | the Diaspora guys are "having problems between Websockets and Rails.", as a Mozilla guy mentioned in passing |