| 00:00 | <volkmar> | oh, damn |
| 00:00 | <AryehGregor> | http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/urls.html#reflecting-content-attributes-in-idl-attributes |
| 00:00 | <volkmar> | this reflect section is a mess :/ |
| 00:01 | <AryehGregor> | :) |
| 00:01 | <AryehGregor> | It's a lot saner than what browsers actually do. |
| 00:11 | <TabAtkins_> | Hixie: Where did you get the "4 of 18 specs we reference are PR or REC" number? |
| 00:11 | <TabAtkins_> | I assume you were referring to > |
| 00:11 | <TabAtkins_> | > ~fantasai |
| 00:11 | <TabAtkins_> | > |
| 00:11 | <TabAtkins_> | Argh, not that. |
| 00:11 | <TabAtkins_> | http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/refs.html |
| 00:12 | <Hixie> | i was reading the internal one, but yes |
| 00:12 | <Hixie> | the only w3c specs are HTML4, PNG, UAAG and XML |
| 00:13 | <Hixie> | and there are 18 specs |
| 00:13 | <Hixie> | in the normative section |
| 00:14 | <Hixie> | personally these days i just always reference the editor's drafts |
| 00:14 | <Hixie> | solves the versioning issue altogether |
| 00:14 | <TabAtkins_> | Yeah, definitely. |
| 00:21 | <Hixie> | 5 points to anyone who can work out why the HTML spec says "except when stated otherwise in the algorithms given in the sections below" at http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete.html#dropEffect-initialization |
| 00:21 | <TabAtkins_> | Because an implementor made it "none" at all times after reading the version of that line without the qualification? |
| 00:22 | <Hixie> | as far as i can tell, there are no cases where it is stated otherwise |
| 00:22 | <Hixie> | i'm very confused |
| 00:22 | <Hixie> | for those events it should always be "none", no? |
| 00:23 | <TabAtkins_> | Oh, you're wondering why *you* wrote it that way. |
| 00:23 | <Hixie> | yeah |
| 00:23 | <Hixie> | sorry, it wasn't a quiz :-) |
| 00:23 | <Hixie> | i'm actually trying to work it out |
| 00:23 | <TabAtkins_> | Don't give out points, then |
| 00:23 | <Hixie> | heh |
| 00:23 | <Hixie> | the table has "none" for all three of those events, without qualification |
| 00:33 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins_: if the csswg decides to test fewer things (as seems likely), submit the tests that are removed to the htmlwg's test suite :-) |
| 00:33 | <TabAtkins_> | kk! |
| 00:34 | <Hixie> | we really should just have one "web" test suite |
| 00:34 | <Hixie> | but that's another story |
| 00:34 | <TabAtkins_> | Agreed. The web is constructed out of solid interactions, so trying to treat those interactions as out-of-scope is both fruitless and dangerous. |
| 00:35 | <Hixie> | yeah |
| 00:36 | <Hixie> | ok. for the record, the html spec right now has most of its drag and drop engine on the garage floor, but i'll have it back together either later today or tomorrow. |
| 00:36 | <Hixie> | for now though... afk. |
| 01:00 | <TabAtkins_> | Heh, howcome just got called an "incompetent developer". |
| 01:00 | <TabAtkins_> | (Though he's not a developer at all, far as I know.) |
| 01:08 | <gsnedders> | TabAtkins_: Where? |
| 01:08 | <TabAtkins_> | www-style, writing-mode thread. |
| 01:16 | <AryehGregor> | TabAtkins_, it's kind of ridiculously disingenuous to say that because ISO standards or RFCs are not technically called "Recommendations", they're comparable to HTML5. |
| 01:16 | <AryehGregor> | Every normative reference in CSS2.1 is basically fixed and unchanging, HTML5 is not. |
| 01:16 | <TabAtkins_> | I agree. HTML5 is more stable and mature than most of either. |
| 01:16 | <AryehGregor> | HTML5 is more stable than an RFC? |
| 01:17 | <TabAtkins_> | "stable and mature". |
| 01:17 | <TabAtkins_> | Many RFCs aren't both. |
| 01:17 | <AryehGregor> | Stable and mature implies, in particular, stable. |
| 01:17 | <AryehGregor> | HTML5 is not stable by anyone's standards. |
| 01:17 | <TabAtkins_> | The part we were testing certainly is. |
| 01:17 | <TabAtkins_> | And if it's not, it's because the browser landscape changed, and tests should be updated accordingly. |
| 01:18 | <AryehGregor> | You're acting like you're trying to challenge the entire W3C REC process. |
| 01:18 | <AryehGregor> | In rejecting the necessity of fixed snapshots. |
| 01:18 | <TabAtkins_> | No, I'm trying to fight the ridiculous assertion that it's okay to test for behavior that's specified in HTML4 incorrectly, but in HTML5 correctly, because HTML5 isn't a REC. |
| 01:19 | <AryehGregor> | I'm all for that, but the process revolves around fixed snapshots, and HTML5 is not a fixed snapshot. You could suggest we reference the WD of a particular date . . . |
| 01:19 | <TabAtkins_> | That's still not a Rec, which is the criterion being used to suggest that we can't reference HTML5. |
| 01:19 | <AryehGregor> | Yes, I know. |
| 01:20 | <AryehGregor> | The problem is in saying that tests have to correspond to CSS 2.1, not in the fact that CSS 2.1 doesn't normatively reference HTML5. |
| 01:20 | <AryehGregor> | There should be a "CSS test suite" that includes tests for all CSS-related stuff. Or just one big "web test suite". |
| 01:20 | <AryehGregor> | You should just agree that the tests don't have to go with CSS2.1's tests. What difference does it make anyway where they're put? |
| 01:21 | <TabAtkins_> | That's not the problem either, unless you're suggesting that doing so would let us get around the "must reference RECs" because it's not tied to something trying to achieve REC. |
| 01:21 | <TabAtkins_> | AryehGregor: None at all, but it does matter that it's tested *somewhere*. Just saying that it's out of scope and dropping the test doesn't help. |
| 01:21 | <AryehGregor> | Well, obviously. So test it somewhere else. |
| 01:22 | <gsnedders> | IMO it's not that interesting from a CSS POV, as CSS should just reflect whatever is in the DOM, and that's just as well covered by less contraversial tests. |
| 01:23 | <TabAtkins_> | gsnedders: It's important to know that browsers correctly reflect the value of minimized boolean attributes to the CSS engine. |
| 01:24 | <TabAtkins_> | AryehGregor: I've got no problem with that. I just don't want it dropped, which, without any current work on another test suite, is what I fear will end up happening. |
| 01:24 | <gsnedders> | TabAtkins_: If we want to test that we need way more tests, for where it's empty, and where it's not equal to the attribute name |
| 01:25 | <TabAtkins_> | Yes...? |
| 01:32 | <TabAtkins_> | ... |
| 01:32 | <TabAtkins_> | "The best-known commercial brand is Mr Brain's Faggots..." |
| 01:33 | <TabAtkins_> | From the wikipedia entry for "Faggot (food)" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faggot_(food) |
| 02:49 | <jcranmer> | there is an HTML5 parser for Java, is there not? |
| 02:52 | jcranmer | goes to find the Java parser that mozilla uses |
| 03:48 | <jcranmer> | I underestimate Debian |
| 03:49 | <jcranmer> | apt-get install libhtmlparser-java |
| 03:51 | <jcranmer> | hmm, that's not the HTML 5 parser |
| 05:49 | <Hixie> | AryehGregor: fwiw, i _am_ trying to challenge the entire W3C REC process |
| 05:50 | <Hixie> | AryehGregor: i think it's an archaic and obsolete practice that is stunting the development of the web |
| 06:02 | <JonathanNeal> | does anyone in this code write js in hungarian notation? |
| 06:02 | <JonathanNeal> | and by code i mean room |
| 06:36 | <jacobolus> | Hixie: you know about using the J key in The Big Picture, right? |
| 06:51 | <Hixie> | jacobolus: the j key? |
| 06:52 | <jacobolus> | Hixie: yes. it scrolls down whole pictures at a time |
| 06:52 | <jacobolus> | k goes up |
| 06:52 | <Hixie> | i did not |
| 06:52 | <Hixie> | still doesn't really help, the captions are all under the fold |
| 06:52 | <jacobolus> | (you'd mentioned a few hours ago that scrolling was annoying) |
| 06:52 | <Hixie> | at least on my laptop |
| 06:53 | <Hixie> | also, that's pretty undiscoverable :-P |
| 06:53 | <jacobolus> | it has it written at the top of every post :) |
| 06:53 | <Hixie> | ...and doesn't interact well with normal scrolling |
| 06:53 | <jacobolus> | (Hint: Use 'j' and 'k' keys to move up and down) |
| 06:53 | <Hixie> | i don't tend to read that boilerplate :-) |
| 06:53 | <jacobolus> | it is true that the interaction with normal scrolling sucks |
| 06:53 | <Hixie> | but thanks |
| 06:53 | <jacobolus> | they could fix that |
| 06:54 | <Hixie> | that certainly does make it mildly more readable |
| 06:54 | <jacobolus> | if you zoom your whole browser out you could maybe get the captions |
| 06:54 | <Hixie> | fullscreening first seems to help |
| 06:54 | <jacobolus> | though the pictures wouldn't be as "big" |
| 06:54 | <Hixie> | though then it's kind of off-centered and still not really what i'm looking for |
| 06:54 | <Hixie> | anynay |
| 06:54 | <Hixie> | way |
| 06:54 | <Hixie> | thanks |
| 06:54 | <jacobolus> | yeah, not perfect |
| 06:54 | <jacobolus> | I'm not sure there's really a perfect answer though |
| 06:55 | <jacobolus> | I haven't ever seen a browser picture show that I liked |
| 06:55 | <jacobolus> | flickr's somewhat recent thing is obnoxious I think |
| 06:59 | <jacobolus> | I wonder if someone fixed their javascript to move up/down based on the current scroll position if they'd apply the change |
| 06:59 | <jacobolus> | that is, the big picture's |
| 06:59 | <jacobolus> | shouldn't be too hard to do, I wouldn't think |
| 09:00 | <zcorpan> | how do you explain this http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11145 ? NoScript? |
| 09:01 | <zcorpan> | Hixie: ^ spam protection didn't bite for the above bug |
| 09:07 | <othermaciej> | maybe the form should be disabled or missing on systems w/o script? |
| 09:08 | <othermaciej> | though I'd be surprised if people running NoScript were both common and likely to submit junk |
| 09:09 | <zcorpan> | people in general are apparently likely to submit junk |
| 09:09 | <zcorpan> | and some people have scripting disabled... |
| 09:09 | <hsivonen> | why doesn't whatever script receives the submission have server-side filtering? |
| 09:09 | <annevk> | it does |
| 09:10 | <annevk> | it's us |
| 09:25 | <annevk> | public-pfwg-comments list setup sucks enormously |
| 09:25 | <annevk> | "black hole setup" |
| 09:28 | <zcorpan> | it sucks like a black hole? |
| 09:28 | <annevk> | not quite that bad :) |
| 09:29 | <annevk> | but basically there's no discussion there whatsoever |
| 09:30 | <annevk> | your email is sort of taken apart in a Member-only teleconference and then you get answers back that are often woefully inadequate after months |
| 09:30 | <annevk> | that does not at all foster mutual understanding |
| 09:33 | <zcorpan> | to get mutual understanding with pfwg you need to explain your comment in a telecon |
| 09:33 | <zcorpan> | i've had to do that twice for my DTD comment |
| 09:34 | <annevk> | I have found that being on a telecon is about as productive as watching an episode of Twin Peaks |
| 09:35 | <zcorpan> | probably |
| 09:35 | <annevk> | except the latter is way more fun |
| 10:13 | <annevk> | oh hey look at that |
| 10:13 | <annevk> | we published |
| 10:13 | <annevk> | http://www.w3.org/News/2010.html#entry-8937 |
| 10:13 | <annevk> | actually seven days ago, but really yesterday |
| 10:13 | <annevk> | or something like that |
| 12:09 | <Philip`> | jcranmer: http://about.validator.nu/htmlparser/ |
| 12:15 | <zcorpan> | annevk: yeah i noticed that too |
| 12:18 | jcranmer | sucks himself into parsing webpages |
| 12:18 | <jcranmer> | it would be nice if ads could be required to all be in, say, <div class="ad"> or something |
| 12:20 | <annevk> | contact your congressman! |
| 12:21 | <zcorpan> | hmm http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-xml-proc-profiles-20101021/ |
| 12:32 | <annevk> | getting 503 for /TR/WebIDL/ |
| 12:32 | <annevk> | working now |
| 12:32 | <annevk> | very slow though |
| 12:37 | <slartsa> | I'm working slowly as well! |
| 12:58 | <webr3> | annevk, anyone - using an XHR request with followRedirects = true; and where /A 3xx's to /B - how do you get the URI "/B" back out from XHR? |
| 12:59 | <webr3> | it's not set or used in the responseXML, it's not in any of the properties of xhr, and not in any of the returned headers and a getResponseHeader("Location") =s null |
| 12:59 | <annevk> | hmm, I should remove followRedirects |
| 13:00 | <annevk> | but euh, I'd guess xhr.responseXML.URL or some such has it |
| 13:00 | <webr3> | well followRedirects is very useful.. but would be useful to have a .url or .location property on there that shows the URL of the final get request |
| 13:00 | <annevk> | useful and incomplete, yes |
| 13:00 | <annevk> | and the complete sultion is a whole bit more complicated |
| 13:00 | <webr3> | annvk, no it doesn't.. xhr.responseXML.URL and documentURI and all other properties are set to "/A" not "/B" |
| 13:00 | <annevk> | solution, even |
| 13:01 | <annevk> | that seems like a bug |
| 13:01 | <webr3> | could be, there's def no way to get "/B" back out though, tried everything |
| 13:02 | <webr3> | annevk, see: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Oct/0126.html for full details and corresponding TAG issue where it came up |
| 13:02 | <annevk> | I'm on that list |
| 13:03 | <annevk> | as I said, seems like a bug, is it the same in every browser? |
| 13:05 | <webr3> | will just check (re every browser) |
| 13:08 | <annevk> | it's pretty obvious that relative URLs in the resulting document need to be resolved against the URL of the resulting document |
| 13:08 | <annevk> | I guess we could test that in the XMLHttpRequest test suite... |
| 13:24 | <webr3> | annevk, tested and send response on list, cc'd you and public-webapps, turns out Firefox only exposes "/B" and Opera+Chrome only expose "/A" - and all 3 only expose as part of responseXML (so can't be used for non-dom-based responses) |
| 13:28 | <annevk> | sure, at some point we might need something special |
| 13:33 | <annevk> | and please don't cc me if you already cc a list I'm subscribed to |
| 13:33 | <annevk> | now I get 3 emails from Julian... |
| 13:34 | <annevk> | and three from you, come to think of it |
| 13:34 | <annevk> | sigh |
| 13:40 | <webr3> | lol apologies annevk - I get that often myself |
| 13:51 | <jgraham> | hybi died again :( |
| 14:44 | <volkmar> | when the content attribute is the empty string (or not set), the IDL attribute reflecting an URL should return the current URL ? |
| 15:02 | <annevk> | volkmar, depends I think |
| 15:02 | <annevk> | volkmar, I think for <a> there's no link in that case |
| 15:03 | <annevk> | volkmar, however for <form> there is |
| 15:03 | <volkmar> | annevk: but the reflection algorithm should be the same in both case according to the specs |
| 15:05 | <annevk> | hmm |
| 15:05 | <annevk> | does that reflect implementations? |
| 15:05 | <annevk> | (no pun intended) |
| 15:08 | <volkmar> | annevk: Gecko is returning the empty string if the content attribute isn't set |
| 15:08 | <volkmar> | i can check with other UA's but I don't know what should be done per specs |
| 15:12 | <volkmar> | annevk: webkit and gecko returns the empty string and opera returns the domain name (at least "localhost" locally... that's weird) |
| 15:15 | <annevk> | that does sound weird |
| 15:16 | <annevk> | my reasoning was based on <a>test</a> *not* creating a link and <form><input type=submit></form> creating a form |
| 15:17 | annevk | looks in HTML5 |
| 15:18 | <annevk> | volkmar, HTML5 says "If the content attribute is absent, the IDL attribute must return the default value, if the content attribute has one, or else the empty string." |
| 15:20 | <volkmar> | annevk: damn, i missed that... it's after the setting part |
| 15:21 | <volkmar> | annevk: thanks :) |
| 15:21 | annevk | finds that <base>.href is special per HTML5 |
| 15:21 | <karlcow> | interesting, I think because of FireSheep, we will see a new set of tools (bad and good) on awareness - http://jonty.co.uk/idiocy |
| 15:22 | <Rik`> | and this one is far better for awareness |
| 15:22 | <annevk> | volkmar, "http://a b/" gives you an invalid URL |
| 15:22 | <Rik`> | less prone to "easy hacking" |
| 15:23 | <karlcow> | Rik`: but more difficult to install for people who are not tech-savy. |
| 15:23 | <volkmar> | annevk: how did you know i was looking for that? :) |
| 15:24 | <karlcow> | At least, a stone to pave the path |
| 15:24 | <annevk> | volkmar, your thinking is exposed to the public it seems |
| 15:26 | <Rik`> | karlcow: It's a quick hack, but something could be easily built on top of Firesheep to do just the same |
| 15:27 | <karlcow> | Rik`: yep not the same impact on the [social contract], |
| 15:29 | karlcow | is checking how English wikipedia defines the social contract and has the feeling that English and French notions are slightly different |
| 15:33 | <karlcow> | Locke, Hobbes and Rousseau had very different ways of looking at it. :) |
| 15:42 | <Rik`> | but Firesheep is having a lot of press today |
| 15:43 | <turbalan> | read about it today too |
| 15:44 | <Rik`> | I'm just worried the reception will be "internet is dangerous" instead of "be careful" |
| 15:44 | <justinhjohnson> | it will be mixed |
| 15:45 | <justinhjohnson> | my aunt is convinced there is a van parked across the street waiting to steal her credit card info when she buys online |
| 15:45 | <turbalan> | i have had "internet is dangerous (for your children)" on the news for 2months now |
| 15:45 | <justinhjohnson> | i should be a van and park it there |
| 15:45 | <justinhjohnson> | buy* |
| 15:45 | <turbalan> | with her stolen credit card |
| 15:46 | <zcorpan> | justinhjohnson: you need to steal her credit card info first to buy the van |
| 15:46 | <justinhjohnson> | -_^ |
| 15:46 | <turbalan> | did anyone catch any cookies with Firesheep? |
| 15:47 | <turbalan> | and get into acc's |
| 15:48 | <jgraham> | Seems like it would be pretty poor to admit that you did here, unless they were your own cookies |
| 15:49 | <turbalan> | yea i tried the wifi in the office but didnt catvh anything |
| 15:49 | <turbalan> | so i actually don't know if it works and was curious :) |
| 15:50 | <Rik`> | turbalan: the wifi in your office is not open |
| 15:50 | <Rik`> | so you can't sniff the traffic of other users |
| 15:51 | <turbalan> | aha, i thought it might be that |
| 16:20 | <annevk> | "Firefox implements IndexedDB on top of SQLite." -- ironic, in a way |
| 16:21 | <jgraham> | Moreso if someone implements SQL on top of indexeddb |
| 16:22 | <annevk> | but it's better for the web |
| 16:22 | <annevk> | don't stop believing yadayadayada |
| 16:23 | <jgraham> | Well it is a tradeoff of speed vs defined semantics I guess |
| 17:11 | <gsnedders> | http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=revision&revision=304705 |
| 17:16 | <TabAtkins_> | annevk: Our implementation is currently built on SQLite as well, actually. But we'll be swapping that out in the future - it was just done because, hey, storage model we don't have to think about too much. |
| 17:17 | <Philip`> | "Note that, in HTML5, U+000D is a valid literal character, but the entity 
 is not valid and is therefore not decoded." - it's not? |
| 17:21 | <jgraham> | Well it's not valid |
| 17:21 | <jgraham> | It is decoded |
| 17:23 | <jgraham> | (also it is a valid literal character but doesn't actually appear in the DOM) |
| 17:23 | <jgraham> | (since it is replaced by LF) |
| 17:30 | gsnedders | responds, waits to gets flamed like, he normally does every time he touches PHP development… |
| 17:42 | <annevk> | that they're looking at HTML5 is great though |
| 17:42 | <annevk> | or to put it more mildly, a start |
| 17:43 | <gsnedders> | :) |
| 17:46 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: you around? |
| 17:46 | <MikeSmith> | can you remind me how I can get wifi access at schipol without paying the asshattedly expensive KPN fees? |
| 18:12 | <annevk> | in the lounge? |
| 18:13 | <annevk> | password: klm20101026 |
| 18:21 | <gsnedders> | Yay, looks like the behaviour will be fixed (wrt PHP/HTML5) |
| 19:42 | <TabAtkins_> | Hixie: @-rules that establish name-value mappings (like @keyframes) are document-global, not stylesheet-import-graph-local. So you'll have to add some stuff to @scoped. |
| 19:42 | <Hixie> | that's dumb |
| 19:42 | <Hixie> | it means that style sheets can interfere with each other even without knowing each other |
| 19:42 | <TabAtkins_> | Well, if it's just sheet-local, then you can't, say, use an animation in @style. |
| 19:43 | <TabAtkins_> | But yes, it does mean that. |
| 19:43 | <Hixie> | what's the use case for that? |
| 19:43 | <TabAtkins_> | The use-case for setting an animation in @style? |
| 19:43 | <Hixie> | for setting an animation in style="" when you know you have to also declare it elsewhere |
| 19:43 | <Hixie> | why not just do it all in the same place |
| 19:44 | <Hixie> | use a class or some such |
| 19:44 | <Hixie> | style=""'s use case is rapid prototyping and exceptions, i.e. for doing things when you're not editing a style sheet |
| 19:44 | <TabAtkins_> | Heh, but the class name could clash with other things as well. ^_^ |
| 19:44 | <Hixie> | if you have to edit a style sheet anyway, its use case is gone |
| 19:44 | <Hixie> | the class names are owned by the document |
| 19:44 | <Hixie> | not the sheets |
| 19:44 | <Hixie> | so that's fine |
| 19:44 | <TabAtkins_> | Another use, though, is declaring a lot of animations in one sheet, then using it elsewhere. |
| 19:45 | <Hixie> | @import the sheet |
| 19:45 | <Hixie> | @import should definitely get the declarations |
| 19:45 | <TabAtkins_> | The class name that would be required to add the animation could clash with the class name needed for another feature in another sheet, same as, say, keyframe names in one sheet could clash with keyframe names in another sheet. |
| 19:46 | <TabAtkins_> | Same failure point. |
| 19:46 | <Hixie> | no, not at all |
| 19:46 | <Hixie> | the class names are an interface presented by the document to the sheets |
| 19:46 | <Hixie> | a contract if you will |
| 19:46 | <TabAtkins_> | I fail to see how you get any additional protection from clobbering. |
| 19:46 | <Hixie> | while the key frames are for use within a sheet |
| 19:46 | <TabAtkins_> | Your definitions are well and good, but in terms of clobbering potential they're still identical. |
| 19:46 | <Hixie> | two sheets can both have a contract with a document and thus use its styles, while both using animations and not knowing about each other |
| 19:47 | <Hixie> | anyway, y'all do what you want, i just think it's silly :-) mail me or file a bug if the html spec needs to change |
| 19:48 | <TabAtkins_> | Will do. |
| 19:48 | <Hixie> | (as i see it it's basically duplicating the mistake we've made many times in the web platform, with e.g. variables in JS) |
| 19:48 | <Hixie> | (global scope is almost always a design failure, imho) |
| 19:49 | <TabAtkins_> | I don't disagree in general. |
| 19:49 | <Hixie> | (a symptom of which is that the scoped style sheet feature has to define how it works -- it really should Just Work in such situations, imho) |
| 19:53 | <TabAtkins_> | Done: |
| 19:53 | <TabAtkins_> | Done: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11149 |
| 20:02 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins_: ta |
| 22:46 | <Hixie> | hm |
| 22:47 | <Hixie> | sequence<File> has a type name of FileSequence per WebIDL |
| 22:47 | <Hixie> | but FileAPI has a typedef of FileList to sequence<File> |
| 22:47 | <Hixie> | that's just confusing |
| 22:48 | <heycam> | "type name" is irrelevant for javascript |
| 22:48 | <Hixie> | except for the [[Class]] of Array<T>, yes |
| 22:49 | <heycam> | it's currently only used to give a java class name for such sequences |
| 22:49 | <heycam> | Hixie, oh! |
| 22:49 | <heycam> | :) |
| 22:49 | <Hixie> | i agree that the sequence<File> issue is not a real issue for JS |
| 22:49 | <Hixie> | it was just confusing while i was following links around :-) |
| 22:49 | <heycam> | yeah i don't think anyone is using array types yet |
| 22:49 | <heycam> | or want to... |
| 22:50 | <Hixie> | we really need to find a solution to making things like HTMLCollection have the Array stuff in JS |
| 22:50 | <heycam> | what is the problem? |
| 22:50 | <Hixie> | you can't do document.links.forEach() |
| 22:50 | <heycam> | ah |
| 22:50 | <Hixie> | and people bug me about this on a nearly monthly basis |
| 22:50 | <heycam> | hmm |
| 22:51 | <heycam> | is there a bug or an red box issue for that? |
| 22:51 | <Hixie> | i don't think so |
| 22:51 | <heycam> | please do then |
| 22:51 | <heycam> | (bug) |
| 22:51 | <Hixie> | it mostly comes up in whatwg mail |
| 22:51 | <Hixie> | k |
| 22:51 | <Hixie> | not right now but will do when i next remember :-) |
| 22:52 | <heycam> | does it mostly come up from garrett? :) |
| 22:52 | <Hixie> | he's one of the many people to have brought it up |
| 22:52 | <Hixie> | but he's certainly not the only one |
| 22:53 | <TabAtkins_> | *Definitely* not the only one. |
| 22:53 | <Hixie> | ok, afk for now. bbiab. |