03:30
<nessy>
Hixie - are you there?
03:33
<nessy>
the ruby markup in WebSRT uses <ruby> and <rt> elements, but as I am trying to learn about ruby, I am crossing examples that look like this: <ruby><rb>xxx</rb><rt>yyy</rt></ruby> and also <rp>, <rbc> and <rtc> elements - what's up with all that?
03:47
<karlcow>
nessy: I had the impression that complex ruby was not supported (yet?)
03:47
<nessy>
karlcow: I have no idea what complex ruby is and or is not, and even less whether it is implemented or even standardised
03:48
<nessy>
I am trying to understand why <ruby> is specified the way it is in WebSRT :)
03:48
<karlcow>
rtc, rbc are elements of "complex ruby"
03:48
<nessy>
so, are <ruby> and <rt> the common ruby markup in Web pages right now and all implemented and supported?
03:48
<karlcow>
http://www.w3.org/TR/ruby/#rbc
03:49
<nessy>
yeah, I saw that, which is why I am asking - so <rbc> and <rtc> are not implemented and I can safely ignore them - good to know
03:49
<nessy>
what about <rb> ?
03:51
<karlcow>
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/text-level-semantics.html#the-ruby-element it seems it has not been added to the spec either (for now)
03:51
<karlcow>
http://html5doctor.com/ruby-rt-rp-element/
03:52
<karlcow>
at this last uri, there is a table for browser support
03:52
<nessy>
I found <rb> on the relevant wikipedia page, which got me wondering
03:53
<nessy>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_character
03:53
<nessy>
and indeed <rp>
03:54
<nessy>
thanks for helping me understand - seems there are three levels of markup with increasing complexity and the lowest is the only implemented one
03:55
<nessy>
the html5doctor page is really awesome, thanks!
03:55
<karlcow>
nessy: another article which is good to understand http://my.opera.com/tagawa/blog/the-html5-ruby-element-in-words-of-one-syllable-or-less
04:05
<nessy>
thanks
04:51
<MikeSmith>
so if I were to attempt to draft some implementation requirements for the console object, I'm wondering if there's something spec'ed somewhere already that I can crib from
04:51
<MikeSmith>
not the IDL I mean
04:51
<MikeSmith>
that part I have
04:52
<MikeSmith>
a start on at least
04:52
<MikeSmith>
but instead the UA requirements around what the UA should actually do with it
05:41
<infid>
how do you pronounce whatwg? 'what w.g.'?
05:42
<MikeSmith>
infid: yeah, that works
05:42
<MikeSmith>
some people say what wee gee
05:42
<infid>
it makes me wanna say 'whatwig'
05:54
<boogyman>
If it hasn't already been discussed can we add placeholder color in CSS4 for form controls :)
06:14
<Hixie>
infid: i say "what wuh jee"
07:51
<zcorpan>
Web application analysis and debugging - WAAAD
07:51
<zcorpan>
pretty good acronym
07:59
annevk
says what-wii-jee
08:15
zcorpan
says what working group
08:16
<annevk>
no wonder everyone knows the W3C better ;p
08:16
<zcorpan>
should have gone with whattf
08:26
<MikeSmith>
how can I figure out what type of exception a console.assert implementation is throwing?
08:26
<MikeSmith>
and does the spec need to define what type of exception it's supposed to throw?
08:26
<Peter`>
console.log in a try/catch block?
08:27
<MikeSmith>
ok
08:30
<annevk>
don't we wanna leave the details up to the implementations mostly?
08:30
<annevk>
but just define that .console needs to exist as well as several methods on it?
08:34
<MikeSmith>
annevk: would be fine by me but
08:34
<MikeSmith>
I notice http://getfirebug.com/wiki/index.php/Console_API#console.assert.28expression.5B.2C_object.2C_....5D.29
08:34
<MikeSmith>
"Tests that an expression is true. If not, it will write a message to the console and throw an exception."
08:35
<MikeSmith>
which led me to wonder about exactly what kind of exception current implementations actually throw
08:35
<annevk>
fair enough
08:36
<MikeSmith>
but yeah, agreed in principle that we want to leave the details up to the implementation
08:36
<MikeSmith>
that wiki page already goes to far into implementation detail
08:36
<MikeSmith>
I thinki
08:37
<annevk>
wow, console.log() is complicated
08:37
<MikeSmith>
e.g., it says, "Writes a message to the console with the visual "error" icon and color coding and a hyperlink to the line where it was called"
08:37
<MikeSmith>
which seems not righ
08:37
<MikeSmith>
seems like it should just say that it writes a message with a flag set to indicate it's an error message
08:38
<MikeSmith>
and maybe that it also include the line number
08:38
<MikeSmith>
but then it's up to the implementation to decide what it does with that data
08:38
<MikeSmith>
whether to display an icon or hyperlink or whatever
08:39
<annevk>
but this is not a spec
08:39
<MikeSmith>
what is it?
08:39
<annevk>
or maybe it is, but at a different level than W3C specs, if you can say such a thing :)
08:39
<MikeSmith>
yeah sure
08:39
<annevk>
I mean, for a particular UA you can write a specification that includes UI requirements
08:40
<MikeSmith>
true
08:40
<MikeSmith>
but the scope of this is just the api
08:41
<MikeSmith>
or really the definition of object itself i guess
08:42
<MikeSmith>
and I would think it should be precise enough and thorough within that scope enough to give whatever level of interoperability
08:42
<MikeSmith>
anyway
08:42
<MikeSmith>
my goal is just to have some initial draft that somebody else can pick up on
08:43
<MikeSmith>
seems like we have enough people interested in this
08:43
<MikeSmith>
and it will be a relatively small document
08:47
<sroussey>
I think error, uncaught exceptions, and assertions all log to the console, but also provide backtrace information
08:48
<sroussey>
That is the reference to the hyperlink. We actually have a twisty thing that opens up a backtrace and then each function is a hyperlink
08:48
<sroussey>
You could also set breakpoints from the error message in the console
08:49
<sroussey>
But I don't know how much of that is needed for a spec. You could conceivably have a stack trace for a console.log but that doesn't make too much sense, and the UI can determine that
09:23
<MikeSmith>
another thing with all the console methods is, they don't actually write messages to the console
09:24
<MikeSmith>
because the stuff you can have them log is not just strings
09:24
<MikeSmith>
it can be any kind of object
09:24
<MikeSmith>
and any number of objects
09:24
<MikeSmith>
so it's not a "message"
09:24
<MikeSmith>
except in some abstract sense
09:25
<MikeSmith>
it's more like just "log content" or even just "content"
09:26
<MikeSmith>
e.g., instead of "Writes a message to the console" it should be "Outputs some content to the console"
09:35
<MikeSmith>
annevk: anyway, it would seem that the spec should define at least one conformance class and target itself to that
09:35
<MikeSmith>
otherwise I can't see any point in having it all
09:35
<annevk>
which spec?
09:36
<annevk>
I was talking about the wiki page earlier...
09:36
<MikeSmith>
console object spec
09:36
<annevk>
makes sense to me
09:55
<jgraham>
MikeSmith: The stuff you can log is just strings, no? It's just that you get implicit type conversion
09:55
<MikeSmith>
no
09:55
<MikeSmith>
not as far as I can see
09:55
<MikeSmith>
like console.dir()
09:56
<MikeSmith>
well, all the methods, really
09:57
<MikeSmith>
if you pass, say, a node as an argument
09:57
<MikeSmith>
then the console shows the same kind of tree view of that node as it does in the DOM inspector
09:57
<MikeSmith>
not a string representation
09:57
<jgraham>
From a spec point of view that seems like an implementation detail
09:58
<jgraham>
I mean presumably it would be conforming for a UA to represent it as a single string
09:59
<jgraham>
But yes, I see that some methods could optionally log something more rich
11:11
<annevk>
hsivonen, fwiw, I do enjoy your "Blogish Notes"
11:12
<hsivonen>
annevk: thanks. I'm going to post this but I'm still uphappy about the time it has so far taken to write up my Galaxy Tab thoughts as a post
11:12
<hsivonen>
compared to writing a series of tweet
11:14
<hsivonen>
s
12:53
<Philip`>
karlcow: I assume it's because most people aren't sociopaths
12:54
<karlcow>
Philip`: which is kind of good. The main issue being that when "aggressed" online, there is little way to know that it happened for most people.
12:54
<karlcow>
*ways
13:53
<annevk>
http://simonwillison.net/2010/Oct/25/bleach/ html5lib in production use
13:53
<annevk>
guess nobody cares about speed
13:53
<asmodai>
Speed is for pussies!
13:54
<asmodai>
http://coffeeonthekeyboard.com/bleach-html-sanitizer-and-auto-linker-for-django-344/ <-- boxes around the highlighted terms too big for others as well?
13:55
<jgraham>
annevk: If you are doing sanitization maybe correctness is important. Most blog comments aren't multimegabyte anyway
13:55
<annevk>
i was not actually being serious
14:07
<annevk>
oh help
14:07
<annevk>
someone mentioned xml:dir
14:08
<annevk>
not sure I'm ready for another lang/xml:lang clusterfuck
14:09
<asmodai>
http://feedbackroulette.com/info/howitworks XD
14:09
Philip`
wonders if anyone's going to bother replying to the <h7>..<h9> proposal on public-html to say we already have infinitely many levels of heading elements, all called <h1>
14:11
<annevk>
If people don't even bother reading the drafts...
14:26
karlcow
doesn't see the mail on public-html
14:27
<annevk>
public-html-comments
14:29
<karlcow>
annevk: thanks.
14:41
<annevk>
W3C is being DDOS'ed again because of DTD fetching...
14:43
<miketaylr>
are there uas that actually fetch dtds?
14:56
<MikeSmith>
annevk: indeed
14:57
<MikeSmith>
miketaylr: there are
14:57
<miketaylr>
O_o
14:57
<MikeSmith>
yeah :(
14:57
<MikeSmith>
asshats…
14:57
<miketaylr>
haha
14:59
Philip`
recently saw http://www.virtualdub.org/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=320 - "If you just enable DTD support and use the validating reader though, the .NET Framework will happily go and download the XHTML DTD from the W3 every single time, without caching."
15:00
<zcorpan>
i wonder what should happen with <video poster> for a media stream with no video data
15:00
MikeSmith
keeps quiet about that
15:01
<zcorpan>
maybe i should file a new bug about that
15:04
<zcorpan>
Hixie: "An error occured while submitting your comment. Please let ian⊙hc know."
15:09
<MikeSmith>
zcorpan: that error is because of bugzilla being inaccessible due to the latest DDOS
15:09
<zcorpan>
oh
15:09
<zcorpan>
i could access bugzilla though
15:14
<MikeSmith>
zcorpan: I think it's improving now
15:14
<MikeSmith>
and I think it depends on which mirror you happen to hit
15:19
karlcow
has been ddos by MS Outlook a few times to the point where I have denied any requests from this user agent.
15:20
<karlcow>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2006Nov/0011
15:23
<jgraham>
karlcow: How does that story end? Presumably that wasn't part of the stock outlook but some extension or so? Otherwise the numbers would presumably be much higher
15:23
<karlcow>
I never had a reply from Microsoft. never.
15:24
<karlcow>
I don't know if MS Outlook is still trying. I could check. I never look at the stats of my Web site.
15:31
<karlcow>
jgraham: a lot better… only 16 requests (403) on October 24 for Outlook
16:48
<TabAtkin1_>
gsnedders: I'm here *now*. You still need anything?
16:53
jgraham
decides it would be cruel to list all the things that gsnedders needs ;)
17:16
gsnedders
wonders what mean things jgraham is thinking of now…
17:28
<infid>
is OSMF a competitor to html5 or a separate thing
17:28
<infid>
as far as media
17:28
TabAtkin1_
doesn't even know what OSMF is. Googling...
17:29
<TabAtkin1_>
It's just a flash framework for developing media players. Irrelevant to HTML.
17:37
<infid>
adobe led, open-source actionscript 3 framework for playing and displaying media
17:38
<infid>
supports any type of media that can be loaded by Flash, including (streaming audio) mp3, AAC, Speex, and Nellymoser; (streaming video) FLV, F4V, MP4, MPEG-4: MP4, M4V, F4V, 3GPP; (audio) mp3; (video) FLV, F4V, MP4, MP4V-ES, M4V, 3GPP, 3GPP2, QuickTime; (images) PNG, GIF, or JPG; and SWF files.
17:41
<infid>
it's completely code based, doesn't require flash or flex is why i ask if it's a competitor, seems like it'd just be an alternative way to create video but should be usable inside of your html5. just saw some code and it just looks like javascript
17:50
<TabAtkins_>
Yeah, but it's for messing with Flash-based components.
17:50
<TabAtkins_>
I guess theoretically it could be used with <video> as well. In any case, it's a library at a higher level than HTML5.
17:53
<TabAtkins_>
Hmm, showing a poster for <audio> seems like a common use-case.
17:53
<TabAtkins_>
That should probably be done by putting the audio in a <video>, I guess.
19:12
<karlcow>
since I removed flash from my computer, I spent a lot less time watching videos :)
19:13
<gsnedders>
This worked fine for me. Then YouTube started with their WebM encoding of videos. Then it went downhill again.
19:15
<karlcow>
I haven't downloaded Opera 11 yet. Not sure I want to cope right away with the crashes
19:15
<gsnedders>
It shouldn't be any more unstable than 10.6x.
19:16
<gsnedders>
(Stability shouldn't really differ, what really differs is the amount of pre-release testing.)
19:17
<karlcow>
ok let's give it a try and curse gsnedders for centuries ;)
19:18
<gsnedders>
Bah, you'll find some other excuse to do it anyway :)
19:18
<karlcow>
heh
19:18
<gsnedders>
*you'd
19:21
<karlcow>
ok 1st bad karma, all my tabs are gone
19:21
<jgraham>
gsnedders: I woudln't expect 11 alpha to be as stable as 10.63
19:22
<gsnedders>
karlcow: Oh, yeah, it'll use a different profile folder
19:23
<karlcow>
renaming old opera as opera10.63 and the new one as opera11
19:23
<Workshiva>
operall
19:24
<kamathln>
Hi.. how offtopic a discussion is tolerable on this channel?
19:24
<TabAtkins_>
We tend to like keeping things about web technologies, but there's isn't any real topic.
19:24
<jgraham>
kamathln: Generally quite
19:24
<Workshiva>
Depends on how much people like you
19:24
<TabAtkins_>
So technically nothing is off-topic, by definition.
19:24
<Workshiva>
Also, how much you're willing to stand for when other people find the logs
19:24
<jgraham>
But I guess people won't be too happy if you start trying to sell penis enhancement products
19:25
<Workshiva>
Yeah, that's MikeSmith's racket
19:25
<Workshiva>
He doesn't like competition
19:25
<kamathln>
lol
19:25
<kamathln>
just wanted input on http://creator.zoho.com/kamathln/browserbenchmarks
19:26
<kamathln>
its a zoho app I mashed up this evening so please be gentle on the looks
19:26
<kamathln>
that would be zoho's dept
19:26
<TabAtkins_>
I'm getting no data.
19:26
<kamathln>
there is no data
19:26
<kamathln>
but you can add
19:26
<TabAtkins_>
Ah, kk.
19:26
<kamathln>
i am asking about the concept
19:26
<karlcow>
kamathln: people here have poor taste in visual layouts. So no risk of bad comments
19:27
<jgraham>
I would be scared of getting into the benchmarks business
19:27
<kamathln>
lemme throw some data in there
19:27
<TabAtkins_>
I'm of the opinion that there are only two useful colors on the web - #fff and #222.
19:27
<kamathln>
jgraham: but why?
19:27
<TabAtkins_>
(#000 is so gauche)
19:27
<jgraham>
Unless you have a *really* strong grip on what you are doing
19:27
<kamathln>
Well, I am not designing the benchmarks themselves
19:28
<Workshiva>
TabAtkins_: How will you write test cases without red, green and blue?
19:28
<kamathln>
I am jsut providing a place to share benchmarks
19:28
<jgraham>
kamathln: Because most benchmarks, even popular ones, are not that well thought out. And yet people try to read lots into them
19:28
<jgraham>
Encouraging people to read lots into poorly thought out things doesn't strike me as a great idea
19:28
<kamathln>
thats up to people to decide
19:28
<gsnedders>
And statistically quite a few of them really aren't very good.
19:28
<TabAtkins_>
Workshiva: I'll write out "red".
19:28
<jgraham>
kamathln: People are very bad at deciding though
19:29
<gsnedders>
kamathln: People don't decide. They look, see x > y, and conclude product b is better than a as a result.
19:29
<Workshiva>
But why would you use a color that isn't useful? :P
19:29
<jgraham>
Most benchmarks that are quoted in reviews and so on are not that meaningful
19:29
<kamathln>
good for them
19:30
<jgraham>
To turn this on its head: why do you thing this is a useful thing to do?
19:30
<kamathln>
browser wars
19:30
<gsnedders>
Spreading information that is not meaningful is not productive.
19:30
<kamathln>
I love them
19:30
<kamathln>
:D
19:30
<gsnedders>
kamathln: Hint: browsers aren't going to fight over more than a very small number of benchmarks, and those are ones people have heard of already.
19:32
<jgraham>
If you end up making a benchmark from a combination of prewritten benchmarks then you fall foul of my first point; you need to be an expert to determine what the things that are worth including are
19:32
<jgraham>
If you are an expert or are willing to become one, that is fine
19:32
<gsnedders>
Yet alone to balance them fairly
19:32
<jgraham>
Most people, even people who write benchmarks, are not
19:33
<jgraham>
(FWIW I think chosing a browser because it does sunspider in n ms whereas some other browser does it in n+10 is silly)
19:33
<kamathln>
did you know about http://dromaeo.com/
19:33
<gsnedders>
e.g., there are things on sunspider where a 50% speed increase doesn't matter that much, but other things 50% is very significant, because some tests take 3ms and other tests take 300ms.
19:33
<jgraham>
Yes
19:33
<gsnedders>
kamathln: It's not particuarly good.
19:34
<jgraham>
gsnedders: (that is just bad design in sunspider though)
19:34
<jgraham>
gsnedders: (because they didn't update it fast enough when some parts were optimised in new engines)
19:35
<MikeSmith>
unless there's a way to add data to the page by using some talking teddy bears, I'll probably just spent the time lighting up and making more xtranormal movies instead
19:35
<jgraham>
(which is the only reasonable thing to do because there is no good way to weight things that differ by orders of magnitude, especially when some of them are below your timer resolution)
21:11
<othermaciej>
Hixie: ayt?
21:11
<Hixie>
here
21:12
<othermaciej>
can you either remove the comment form in the w3c draft or add some better spam protection? (preferably just the former unless the latter can be done quickly)
21:12
<annevk>
lhttp://www.marketwatch.com/story/wary-of-google-street-view-move-ceo-says-2010-10-22 o_O
21:12
<annevk>
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/wary-of-google-street-view-move-ceo-says-2010-10-22
21:13
<annevk>
'“Street View, we drive exactly once,” Schmidt said, referring to the vehicles mounted with cameras sent out to take photos for the service. “So, you can just move, right?”'
21:13
<annevk>
that guy is a tool when it comes to statements about privacy
21:13
<annevk>
joking or not
21:15
<Hixie>
othermaciej: we added better spam protection last week
21:16
<Hixie>
is it still a problem?
21:16
<annevk>
Peter`, "actual rendering" ;p
21:17
<annevk>
Peter-, might actually add that rule now
21:17
<Peter->
works for me!
21:18
<Peter->
changed it to "vertical" :)
21:26
<othermaciej>
Hixie: when was the better protection added?
21:26
<Hixie>
i don't recall exactly. We were talking about it on IRC though. Friday maybe?
21:26
<othermaciej>
Hixie: last spammy bug I see is 10/20
21:27
<Hixie>
pretty sure it was after the 20th
21:27
<othermaciej>
if you let the WG list know that there is better protection I think that will cover it, right now the public-html thread is dangling
21:27
<Hixie>
*shrug*
21:27
<Hixie>
they'll figure it out
21:27
<TabAtkins_>
Hixie: You seem to be contradicting yourself in the css testsuite thread.
21:27
<annevk>
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/10/france_on_strike.html o_O
21:27
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: how so?
21:27
<annevk>
gonna be fun next week
21:28
<TabAtkins_>
Hixie: Wait, never mind, I was *completely* misreading what you wrote. I flipped a "not".
21:28
<Hixie>
hehe
21:28
<Hixie>
ok good :-)
21:28
<Hixie>
annevk: wow, that first picture is gold
21:28
<jgraham>
/me wishes he remembered to look at The Big Picture more often
21:29
<annevk>
The Big Picture is one of the best things on the internet
21:29
<annevk>
right up there with reddit.com :)
21:29
<Hixie>
i wish there was a better way to experience the big picture photos
21:29
<Hixie>
scrolling with a browser doesn't work well
21:29
<Hixie>
it's a perfect candidate for media=projection
21:30
<annevk>
yeah, you need to have some crazy ass timing skills for scrolling to work
21:30
<Hixie>
othermaciej: (most if not all the thread actually happened after it was fixed, iirc)
21:31
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: ping
21:31
<AryehGregor>
volkmar, pong
21:31
<AryehGregor>
I've been meaning to look at your patch . . . bogged down in schoolwork right now.
21:31
<volkmar>
will you have time for the feedback on bug 601061 (mozilla) ?
21:32
<AryehGregor>
Okay, I should be able to get to that in a few minutes.
21:32
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: great :)
21:36
<jgraham>
annevk: reddit? I can't tell if that is sarcasm or not
21:38
<jgraham>
Also, France is awesome
21:38
<AryehGregor>
volkmar, what's the range of a PRUint32? 0 to 2^31 - 1?
21:39
<jgraham>
Particularly the people who protest in high heels
21:40
<othermaciej>
Hixie: there does seem to be some slightly less blatant spam getting through
21:40
<othermaciej>
e.g. 5 instances of http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Oct/0353.html
21:40
<othermaciej>
2 instances of http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Oct/0370.html
21:40
<Hixie>
othermaciej: those are from the whatwg spec's one
21:40
AryehGregor
guesses he'll comment on the bug
21:40
<othermaciej>
I see
21:40
<Hixie>
you can tell because their URL isn't #top
21:40
<Hixie>
(the w3c version always uses #top for the URL's fragid)
21:41
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: 0 -> 2^32-1, 0 -> 2^31-1 is the positive part of a PRInt32
21:42
<AryehGregor>
volkmar, so what prevents GetUnsignedIntAttr() from returning something greater than 2^31-1?
21:42
<AryehGregor>
It's not allowed to per spec (since no browser currently does).
21:42
<AryehGregor>
Unfortunately, I don't understand exactly what a lot of the code is doing, so it's hard to comment . . .
21:42
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: because the value is stored as a PRInt32 so we can't have something greater than 2^31-1
21:43
<AryehGregor>
Okay.
21:44
<AryehGregor>
What does the PR_MIN(aValue, PR_INT32_MAX) do? Clamp it to 2^31 - 1? If so, does that mean if I set it to 3000000000 then it will return 2^31 - 1 on getting? The spec says it should return the default value in that case.
21:45
AryehGregor
puts his comments on the bug instead
21:45
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: i think what you say applies for setAttribute('size') but not for .size
21:46
<AryehGregor>
They should work identically here, no?
21:47
<volkmar>
"On setting, the given value must be converted to the shortest possible string representing the number as a valid non-negative integer and then that string must be used as the new content attribute value."
21:47
<AryehGregor>
Right, so value.size = 3000000000; is the same as value.setAttribute("3000000000"), right?
21:47
<AryehGregor>
Er.
21:48
<AryehGregor>
Or whatever.
21:48
<AryehGregor>
input.size.
21:48
<AryehGregor>
But then we should have input.size == 20 or such.
21:48
<Hixie>
well don't forget WebIDL might fiddle with the new value before it gets there
21:48
<Hixie>
but yes, in principle
21:48
<AryehGregor>
Not if it's in the range of an unsigned int, like 3000000000 is.
21:48
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: when you call input.size = <foo>, a valid value will be saved in the content attribute
21:48
<volkmar>
or i'm missing something :/
21:49
<Hixie>
right, i didn't know if you meant 3000000000 specifically or if that was a generic poorly-named variable :-)
21:49
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: a valid non-negative integer is < 2^31, right?
21:49
<AryehGregor>
No.
21:49
<AryehGregor>
"A string is a valid non-negative integer if it consists of one or more characters in the range U+0030 DIGIT ZERO (0) to U+0039 DIGIT NINE (9)."
21:50
<volkmar>
hmm
21:51
<volkmar>
i should have click on that link
21:51
<volkmar>
i was assuming it was 0 to 2^31
21:51
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: thanks :)
21:55
<TabAtkins_>
gsnedders: Oh geez, the <code> backgrounds on the bleach site are horribly large!
22:18
<gsnedders>
TabAtkins_: Yeah. :(
22:28
<annevk>
MikeSmith, you might need to step in as new co-host for Standards Suck next week
22:29
<annevk>
if there is enough time and space to record a few
22:29
<MikeSmith>
annevk: excellent
22:29
<annevk>
I was hoping you would say that :)
22:30
<MikeSmith>
we can add new segment where people have to show viewers their dance moves
22:30
<MikeSmith>
and viewers rate them
22:30
<heycam>
TabAtkins_, othermaciej, do you know about http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/adobe_html5_for_digital_publishing_collaborates_with_jquery_webkit.php and whether this text-in-arbitrary-shapes work is going to result in some standards (and if so -- CSS and/or SVG)?
22:31
<gsnedders>
MikeSmith: You have to add some random segment to each episode.
22:33
<MikeSmith>
the possibilities are endless
22:33
<TabAtkins_>
heycam: Hadn't heard about it, but yeah, we always propose anything that we think is half-worthwhile to the appropriate standards groups.
22:40
<heycam>
TabAtkins_, cool. yeah first i'd heard of this too.
22:43
<jgraham>
MikeSmith: I thought you would be using your shot at internet fame to pimp your "male enhancement" line
22:52
<othermaciej>
heycam: I have heard nothing about it
22:52
<othermaciej>
heycam: Adobe has done a lot of "working with" WebKit which I only ever became aware of through their press releases
22:52
<MikeSmith>
jgraham: I'm multitasking
22:52
<heycam>
othermaciej, i see
22:53
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: still there ?
22:58
<TabAtkins_>
heycam: Also, I have the "flow text in arbitrary shapes" thing on my list of CSS things to work on, so if no one else gets to it I'll address it in the medium future.
22:58
<heycam>
TabAtkins_, ok
23:00
<Hixie>
othermaciej: i have the same problem with them and contributing to / supporting html
23:13
<AryehGregor>
volkmar, still here.
23:15
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: if you have time, i've updated the patch
23:15
<volkmar>
in addition, i was looking more carefuly to your reflection test and it seems to have some mistakes
23:16
<volkmar>
do you have a repository so i can provide patches ?
23:16
<AryehGregor>
volkmar, I gave the link to the repository. :)
23:17
<AryehGregor>
It's in the W3C HTMLWG's hg test repo.
23:17
<AryehGregor>
I haven't looked over the failures in various browsers carefully for a while, but last I did, I'm pretty sure they were all correct per spec.
23:17
<AryehGregor>
Happy to hear feedback.
23:17
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: input.autocomplete seems wrong
23:18
<volkmar>
and you are looking for attribute that do not exist on output
23:20
<AryehGregor>
volkmar, what's wrong about input.autocomplete?
23:21
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: it looks like you are assuming it's working like form.autocomplete
23:21
<volkmar>
which is not the case
23:21
<AryehGregor>
In what way?
23:21
<volkmar>
AFAIUI, if i do input.autocomplete = "foo"; input.autocomplete should return "", not "on"
23:23
<AryehGregor>
Okay, you're right, they're different.
23:23
<AryehGregor>
Yay consistency.
23:23
<volkmar>
yep :(
23:40
<TabAtkins_>
Hixie: What's the meaning of @-rules specified in a <style scoped>? Does @scoped only have an effect on selector matching, so @-rules (like @keyframes) still apply globally?
23:42
<Hixie>
@rules are scoped to the current sheet, aren't they?
23:42
<Hixie>
or at most the current sheet and anyone that imported the sheet?
23:42
<TabAtkins_>
Um... dunno?
23:42
<Hixie>
making them polute a global scope would be pretty bad
23:42
<Hixie>
so we should definitely not make that mistake again :-)
23:43
TabAtkins_
isn't sure where in 2.1 he'd find anything about that, since the at-rules section doesn't say anything.
23:43
<Hixie>
assuming any declarations in a sheet X are scoped to the sheet that @imported the sheet X and the sheet X itself, the answer to your question is "it doesn't matter"
23:43
<TabAtkins_>
Right.
23:44
<Hixie>
however if that assumption is wrong then i need to fix something
23:44
<Hixie>
css2.1 doesn't have nany declaration @rules
23:44
<Hixie>
any
23:44
<Hixie>
so it's not an issue there
23:44
<Hixie>
i'm only aware of two types of declaration @-rules, the variable stuff and the animation stuff
23:44
<Hixie>
so i guess that should be fixed there
23:45
<TabAtkins_>
Yeah. I have @counter-style in my unpublished Lists rev, too.
23:45
<TabAtkins_>
I can't find anything that talks about it. I'll ask on the list.
23:49
<AryehGregor>
volkmar, both bugs should be fixed. (I only commented out input.autocomplete entirely for now, since my test framework can't yet handle what the spec demands.)
23:53
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: great :)
23:55
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: and your button.formAction / form.action test seems wrong
23:56
<volkmar>
you seems to duplicate the wrong behavior from Gecko 1.9.*
23:58
<AryehGregor>
volkmar, how so?
23:58
<AryehGregor>
It's supposed to reflect as a URL per spec AFAICT.
23:59
<volkmar>
AryehGregor: i think it should reflect the content attribute
23:59
<AryehGregor>
volkmar, it does, as a URL.
23:59
<volkmar>
which is a DOMString