| 06:58 | <necttocon> | Philip`: I did not succeed :( |
| 06:59 | <necttocon> | http://js.pastebin.com/RhJUY9KU |
| 06:59 | <necttocon> | The rectangle is not rotating correctly |
| 07:00 | <necttocon> | Anyone mind checking out what I'm doing wrong? |
| 07:14 | <necttocon> | :-( |
| 07:32 | <zcorpan> | Philip`: http://canvex.lazyilluminati.com/survey/2007-07-17/analyse.cgi/index says software error |
| 07:44 | <othermaciej> | good evening |
| 07:44 | <othermaciej> | er, morning |
| 07:44 | othermaciej | is confused about local time |
| 07:45 | <zcorpan> | morning |
| 07:46 | <zcorpan> | http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/ie9_outperforms_other_browsers_for_html5_complianc.php |
| 07:50 | <hsivonen> | It's completely bogus to report results of a woefully incomplete test suite as news. Did the W3C advertise the results? |
| 07:52 | <zcorpan> | http://www.w3.org/QA/2010/09/how_do_we_test_a_web_browser_o.html |
| 07:53 | <hsivonen> | zcorpan: I think that blog post shouldn't have been posted |
| 07:53 | <hsivonen> | well, not with the result table |
| 08:49 | <annevk> | Hixie, dropzone should accept image/* stuff like stuff |
| 08:49 | <annevk> | Hixie, just like <input type=file> |
| 08:56 | <erlehmann> | hehe, dropzone sounds like a web storage startup name ;) |
| 08:58 | <micheil> | hey, is the stuff mozilla's doing with capturing audio/video part of any spec? |
| 09:04 | <smaug____> | micheil: what capturing? |
| 09:04 | <micheil> | hmm,, one sec |
| 10:14 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: would it be feasible to add a close/collapse box to the warning, same as the WHATWG bug box has? |
| 10:44 | <Philip`> | zcorpan: That page has intentionally not worked for ages (since moving to a new server) |
| 10:45 | <zcorpan> | Philip`: oh. i was following links from philip.html5.org |
| 11:38 | <Lachy> | "Note that this means XHTML documents cannot be loaded into frames unless the parent page is also running in IE9 Standards Mode. These versioning rules also apply to SVG documents received as "image/svg+xml"." -- http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2010/11/01/xhtml-in-ie9.aspx |
| 11:39 | <Lachy> | that seems like a really stupid restriction. |
| 11:40 | <Lachy> | but I guess that probably has something to do with them not being able to run multiple rendering engines simultaneously in the some tab or something. |
| 11:41 | <Lachy> | though, that doesn't make sense either. How would they handle any regular quirks mode HTML page with an iframe containing a standards mode HTML, or vice versa. |
| 12:44 | <virtuelv> | Hixie: seen http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/dzww6/who_edits_the_w3c_specs_they_look_like_a_ransom/c146krx ? |
| 12:46 | <jcranmer> | I don't find them that unreadable |
| 12:49 | <zcorpan> | "It's not only the HTML5 spec. All of the W3C specs, ever since the nineties, have been written in a very inaccessible style. They are just not very good at writing accessible specs." |
| 12:51 | <jcranmer> | try reading some of MS's published specs |
| 13:17 | <virtuelv> | I sort of understand those people, though |
| 13:18 | <virtuelv> | reading the HTML5 spec isn't easy, and it could be made easier |
| 13:18 | <virtuelv> | then again, I'm not entirely certain their proposed fixes are what I would want either |
| 13:21 | <Workshiva> | It's written for spec lawyers by spec lawyers, if anything it's not verbose and specific enough. |
| 13:21 | <karlcow> | virtuelv: The readers audience is very diverse, but the specification target audience is becoming smaller. More and more focused on implementers and a lot less on Web developers and Integrators |
| 13:21 | <annevk> | we're not opposed to making changes though |
| 13:21 | <annevk> | though the style sheet is sort of out our control when it comes to the W3C version |
| 13:22 | <annevk> | if the reddit people want us to reword, they can file bugs and we will |
| 13:22 | <annevk> | don't wanna write incomprehensibly on purpose |
| 13:23 | <karlcow> | annevk: not sure the css alone will change anything. It might help for readability, but not really for understandability for web dev/int. |
| 13:24 | <Philip`> | I doubt the spec is written as absolutely clearly as it possibly could be written without comprising verbosity/specificity/etc |
| 13:24 | <othermaciej> | the font changes can make it painful to scan the text, but on the other hand are useful for calling out key terms when close reading |
| 13:24 | <Philip`> | so it's probably good to welcome suggested improvements |
| 13:25 | <Philip`> | as long as they're sufficiently improved to balance the risk of introducing bugs due to changing the text |
| 13:34 | <slinkcoding> | re |
| 14:36 | <MikeSmith> | slinkcoding: hey |
| 15:24 | <hober> | Interesting point about punycoded urls in comments |
| 15:25 | <hober> | ( http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2010-November/028937.html ) |
| 15:30 | <zcorpan> | i guess we could make -- valid now that firefox is going to ship with html5 parser |
| 15:31 | <hober> | I'm reminded that vendor-specific attributes were once foo--bar-baz |
| 15:35 | Philip` | would guess that JS code like "i--;" would be more likely to occur in commented-out code than Punycoded URLs |
| 15:36 | <zcorpan> | or html comments |
| 15:36 | <zcorpan> | which do break if you try to comment them out, but might not give any validation errors |
| 15:36 | <zcorpan> | if we make -- valid |
| 15:37 | <Philip`> | Like "<!-- foo <!-- bar --> baz -->"? |
| 15:37 | <Philip`> | Maybe the rendering of "baz -->" on the screen would make it obvious enough |
| 15:46 | <zcorpan> | yes |
| 16:01 | <Workshiva> | Comments in comments could be solved by looking for <!-- instead of -- |
| 16:01 | <zcorpan> | yes |
| 16:17 | <hober> | well, mr last week has woken up; i guess (s)he's at tpac again |
| 16:19 | <Philip`> | Or just making stuff up |
| 16:26 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: how come you are not at TPAC? |
| 19:12 | <gsnedders> | Gah, having an address with heading content within it makes sense for a CV where the header can just be the person's name… |
| 19:38 | <hober> | indeed |
| 19:40 | <Philip`> | http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/01/w3c_html5_conformance_tests/ / http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/11/02/1851255 |
| 19:41 | <Philip`> | Those results are spreading quite a bit |
| 19:41 | <annevk> | yeah, oops |
| 19:42 | <Hixie> | guess the other browser vendors should start contributing more tests :-) |
| 19:43 | <Hixie> | i love the last two sentences of http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/11/02/1851255 |
| 19:46 | <annevk> | that's /. for ya |
| 19:47 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: that's awesome |
| 19:48 | <cardona507> | please other browser vendors submit tests :) |
| 19:58 | <annevk> | Hixie, should I file a bug on allowing image/* in dropzone=""? |
| 19:58 | <Hixie> | i'd rather you filed bugs on use cases than solutions :-) |
| 19:58 | <Hixie> | when would you want to accept an image/tiff file? |
| 19:59 | <Hixie> | or image/x-proprietary-3d-bitmap ? |
| 19:59 | <annevk> | why do we have <input type=file accept=image/*>? |
| 19:59 | <gsnedders> | Am I right thinking there are no event handlers that when set on Window should actually get set on Document? |
| 19:59 | <annevk> | yes |
| 20:00 | <annevk> | Hixie, I think they should be consistent, mainly |
| 20:00 | <Hixie> | annevk: because we need a way to say "display an image-based UI" |
| 20:00 | <Hixie> | but that doesn't make sense for DND |
| 20:00 | <Hixie> | since you already have the image when doign the drop |
| 20:00 | <annevk> | Hixie, you can display an image-based UI for accept=image/png,image/jpeg etc. too now? |
| 20:01 | <annevk> | s/now?/no?/ |
| 20:01 | <zcorpan> | http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Implementations_in_Web_browsers is pretty out of date |
| 20:01 | <annevk> | but I guess it is less intuitive |
| 20:01 | <Hixie> | annevk: you could |
| 20:01 | <annevk> | but the UI problem seems the same for dropzone="" |
| 20:01 | <Hixie> | annevk: it would be a bit weird though |
| 20:02 | <annevk> | if you want to indicate something to AT |
| 20:03 | <Hixie> | annevk: you don't look at the dropzones until after you've started the drag, typically |
| 20:03 | <Hixie> | annevk: i mean, i suppose a UI could expose this info, but it'd be pretty unusual |
| 20:04 | <annevk> | fair point |
| 20:04 | <annevk> | alright |
| 20:57 | <karlcow> | http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2010/11/02/changes-to-bird-s-eye-and-3d-maps.aspx |
| 20:57 | <karlcow> | "As a consequence, we are also announcing that we will be discontinuing investment in the Bing Maps 3D control plug-in. " |
| 20:59 | <aho> | "Silverlight" pfeh... *spit* |
| 20:59 | <aho> | <: |
| 21:24 | <zcorpan> | where's mikesmith's html version of es5 again? |
| 21:24 | <Philip`> | http://sideshowbarker.github.com/es5-spec/ |
| 21:25 | <zcorpan> | thanks |
| 21:35 | <karlcow> | i have a mail blocked in the public-html-testsuite :) |
| 21:35 | <karlcow> | to add a boilerplate to the page. :) |
| 22:02 | <Hixie> | can someone explain the http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10808 use case to me and in particular explain how it is different than inserting spans of text from another language (the use case in bug 10807)? |
| 22:02 | <Hixie> | AryehGregor? |
| 22:12 | <Steve^> | Can't they have the same use case? |
| 22:14 | <Hixie> | then they'd be the same bug |
| 22:14 | <Steve^> | 10808's benefit comes more from user inputted content |
| 22:15 | <Hixie> | but when i marked them as duplicates of each other, people said they had different use cases |
| 22:15 | <Hixie> | (without saying how) |
| 22:16 | <Steve^> | I don't see a problem with them being a single bug, but with 2 proposed changes |
| 22:16 | <Steve^> | except maybe for ease of discussion |
| 22:23 | <Hixie> | i don't care about hte proposed changes yet |
| 22:23 | <Hixie> | i just want to understand what the problem is |
| 22:37 | <Steve^> | The use cases are (1) Being able to display arbitrary content in a mixed rtl/ltr site. (2) Having user input respond better when rtl is typed in an ltr environment and visa versa |
| 22:37 | <Hixie> | http://www.w3.org/2010/Talks/1102-html-plh/#(5) is funny, given that almost all the "resolved lc" ones were due to the brief lack of spam filtering |
| 22:37 | <Steve^> | I couldn't say which bug is which case, it seems to have blurred slightly |
| 22:37 | <Hixie> | Steve^: ok (1) is clearly bug 10807. Can you explain (2) a little? |
| 22:39 | <Steve^> | I tried it out on jsbin, typing in a textarea set to rtl is funky. The site would currently need to choose whether input is ltr or rtl, they couldn't accept both |
| 22:40 | <Hixie> | that sounds like the problem in bug 10821 |
| 22:47 | <Steve^> | agreed |
| 22:55 | <Hixie> | actually comment 20 does give some good use cases in bug 10808 |