| 15:28 | <ru_funnynick> | hey, how apply border-radius on inner side? |
| 15:28 | <nimbupani> | you cant ru_funnynick |
| 15:30 | <ru_funnynick> | ok, here http://madebyelephant.com how add border-radius effect on inner side of border ? |
| 15:31 | <nimbupani> | but its not on the "inner side" ru_funnynick |
| 15:32 | <nimbupani> | are you talking about the border radius on the card which has box-shadow? |
| 15:38 | <annevk> | still kind of a pain that sshfs not works nicely on Mac |
| 15:39 | <annevk> | I guess on the positive side I learned to use nano and scp, but they're not that great |
| 15:47 | <annevk> | what is the use of rel="author"? |
| 15:50 | <annevk> | I also have rel=prev, rel=first and such on individual posts |
| 15:51 | <annevk> | I never use them |
| 15:54 | <matjas> | annevk: me neither, but doesn't opera have a setting where it adds clickable rel-based buttons to the browser chrome? |
| 15:55 | <matjas> | that's the only ‘useful’ implementation i've seen tbh |
| 15:55 | <gsnedders> | matjas: With a non-default toolbar enabled, and the impl is buggy |
| 15:55 | <gsnedders> | (it doesn't split on spaces) |
| 15:56 | <annevk> | matjas, Opera does and I have long thought we should kill it |
| 15:56 | <annevk> | well, improving it was something I thought initially, but then I learned, or something |
| 15:56 | <matjas> | annevk: /s/kill/fix/ ;) |
| 15:56 | <annevk> | beat you ;p |
| 15:57 | <matjas> | I blame the time zone difference |
| 15:57 | <annevk> | omg, I actually have attachEvent on my site |
| 15:57 | <annevk> | *did not realize* |
| 15:57 | <gsnedders> | annevk: EPIC FAIL |
| 15:57 | annevk | removes |
| 15:58 | matjas | refreshes http://annevankesteren.nl/js/global like a madman |
| 16:11 | <annevk> | maybe I should try to inline the first and last links somehow |
| 16:16 | <annevk> | although really they're not that useful |
| 16:16 | <annevk> | if you really want the first post you can find it easily via the archives |
| 16:16 | <annevk> | and the last one is on the homepage... |
| 16:38 | <thiessenp> | canvas question: is using translate more browser efficient that using the clear/draw rect functions of say a small moving square? |
| 16:39 | <Philip`> | thiessenp: Don't quite understand the question - if you use translate then you still have to clear/draw the rect yourself, it doesn't change any of the image data that's previously been drawn |
| 16:40 | <thiessenp> | Philip': hmm so translate doesn't "animate" an object - what is its purpose? (canvas newb here) |
| 16:43 | <Philip`> | thiessenp: Instead of doing e.g. "fillRect(x+10, y+10, 20, 20)" you can do "translate(x, y); fillRect(10, 10, 20, 20)" |
| 16:43 | <Philip`> | which is more useful if you're drawing a complicated shape instead of a single rectangle |
| 16:44 | <Philip`> | Also you can then do e.g. "rotate(a); translate(x, y); fillRect(10, 10, 20, 20)" to draw a rotated shape at the given position |
| 16:45 | <thiessenp> | Philip': oh ok but hmmm no function to move an object? Though maybe the idea of moving an object is anti-canvas with its one state. I've never done pixel pushing before - it seams odd. But I gather over time you create a bunch of your own utility functions to do things like move stuff around? |
| 16:45 | <Philip`> | It's not technically necessary, since you could do the maths to compute the position of every point yourself, but it's a convenient way to move/rotate/scale objects before you draw them |
| 16:46 | <thiessenp> | I just started playing around with have many canvasas - 1 for each moving thingy |
| 16:46 | <thiessenp> | It seams a pain to have to create a sort of virtual/logical DOM of all canvas objects |
| 16:46 | <thiessenp> | but then again I'm sure this makes sense just not to a newb |
| 16:47 | <Philip`> | It's rarely useful to copy regions of the image you've already drawn to - usually you clear the whole canvas and then draw the whole thing again, for the next frame in the animation |
| 16:47 | <Philip`> | and usually a single canvas is sufficient (and much simpler) :-) |
| 16:48 | <thiessenp> | Here's what I'm trying to do: create a JS/Canvas based space invaders game - really just to learn canvas. |
| 16:48 | <thiessenp> | So I've chopped the canvas up into about 4 peaces: score bar, invaders, player, and background |
| 16:48 | <thiessenp> | the idea/assumption was that redrawing a smaller canvas would be more efficient than a big one |
| 16:49 | <thiessenp> | (assumption = newb assumption) |
| 16:51 | <Philip`> | Have you tried a single big canvas and measured it and found it to be too slow? Canvas performance often seems counter-intuitive so it's probably best to stick with the simplest approach until you find it really doesn't work |
| 16:54 | <thiessenp> | Philip': I haven't noticed a difference in performance writing to a small vs. larger canvas. Also, I agree that having N canvasas definitely adds complexity. One canvas it is from now on :D (thanks for the help +1 Philip') |
| 16:54 | <annevk> | I wonder if I should ditch my <ul> in favor of a <nav> with just three links in it |
| 16:55 | <annevk> | hmm, in theory the <h1> would need to be in it too maybe |
| 16:55 | <annevk> | but then the <h1> is no longer the heading of the page |
| 16:56 | <annevk> | semantics |
| 16:56 | <annevk> | bah |
| 17:05 | <annevk> | sometimes I wish cmd+q would fail |
| 17:06 | <annevk> | I have added rel=top and rel=author to the nav section |
| 17:07 | <annevk> | not sure if that was worth it |
| 17:07 | <thiessenp> | :) |
| 17:10 | <matjas> | annevk: for great semantic justice, you should add <link rel="up up" href="/2010/" title="Archives 2010"> to individual blog posts |
| 17:10 | matjas | runs |
| 17:11 | <annevk> | yeah, I've been thinking about doing that |
| 17:11 | <annevk> | it's either that or we should remove this concept from HTML ;p |
| 17:12 | <annevk> | not eating dogfood is uncool |
| 17:12 | annevk | gets hungry |
| 17:13 | <matjas> | annevk: QMS has this kind of stuff built-in, you know… |
| 17:14 | <annevk> | maybe one day |
| 17:14 | <annevk> | once I get tired of finetuning my HTML |
| 17:15 | <annevk> | I have actually thought of moving to something like WordPress even |
| 17:15 | <matjas> | NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO |
| 17:16 | <annevk> | the thing is though, preserving all the links, markup, weird structures, is just not going to work without a lot of hacking |
| 17:24 | <annevk> | I could do away entirely with <link>... |
| 17:25 | <matjas> | I propose /s/<link>/<blink>/ |
| 17:25 | <annevk> | but I guess most software doesn't support Link: </feeds/weblog>; rel="alternate" ... yet |
| 17:26 | <annevk> | well, "yet", not sure if we should |
| 17:32 | <matjas> | i’m still pissed that Google Reader doesn’t recognize <link href="/feed.atom" rel="alternate" type="application/atom+xml"> without the type attribute |
| 17:33 | <annevk> | I was hoping rel=feed would catch on |
| 17:33 | <annevk> | but it did not |
| 17:42 | <MikeSmith> | for anybody interested, the validator.nu sources are all mirrored at github now |
| 17:42 | <MikeSmith> | https://github.com/validator |
| 17:42 | <MikeSmith> | except for the htmlparser sources |
| 17:42 | <MikeSmith> | which are only in the mozilla repo |
| 17:46 | <JonathanNeal> | MikeSmith, nice. |
| 17:47 | <MikeSmith> | maybe this will help to encourage some other contributors to get involved |
| 17:47 | <MikeSmith> | and maybe can eventually make those the actual source repos instead of just being mirrors |
| 17:50 | <JonathanNeal> | What's the license? |
| 17:50 | <MikeSmith> | MIT |
| 17:59 | <JonathanNeal> | well groovy pie |
| 18:55 | <ru_funnynick2> | is there padding edge radius in css ? |
| 20:43 | <Dashiva> | http://xmltoday.org/2010/11/five-myths-about-xforms/ |
| 20:51 | <annevk> | "Myth #1: XForms is Dead" |
| 20:51 | <annevk> | the only articles I ever see about XForms are written by him... |
| 20:52 | <Dashiva> | It seems like the author considers XML to be primarily its syntax, rather than the infoset it serializes |
| 20:53 | <annevk> | scanning further |
| 20:53 | <annevk> | "HTML5, the massive updating of the HTML specification given a decade of changes in the browser world, has provided an opportunity to rethink a great deal of the underlying way that we build web content." |
| 20:53 | <annevk> | rethinking? not so much... |
| 20:54 | <annevk> | "but any time you reach a point where you need to work with XML content (a growing requirement over time)" [citation needed] |
| 20:55 | <Dashiva> | There's an interesting comment: |
| 20:55 | <Dashiva> | One thing that I must add is the durability of XForms. I have XForms that I wrote over five years ago and with a few modifications they run just fine today on XSLTForms and they now run even faster and on almost every browser. |
| 20:55 | <Dashiva> | I compare this with no totally unusable web apps I wrote with JavaScript frameworks that seem to come and go every year or so and I am very glad I have stuck with W3C standards! |
| 20:56 | <annevk> | wait what |
| 20:56 | <annevk> | "XForms isn't going away. Indeed, the Web forms group recently chartered the XForms 1.2 working group in great part because it was evident that the need which XForms has evolved to meet" |
| 20:56 | <annevk> | what does this mean? |
| 22:13 | <MikeSmith> | "Web forms group"? |
| 22:14 | <annevk> | apart the that, the sentence just does not compute |
| 22:14 | <annevk> | apart from that* |
| 22:15 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 22:19 | <MikeSmith> | I wonder of XForms uses Canonical XML |
| 22:37 | <Dashiva> | Does Canonical XML have anything to do with Canonical? |
| 22:42 | <MikeSmith> | heh |
| 22:45 | <MikeSmith> | do we really need a separate "valid date string with optional time" definition? |
| 22:46 | <MikeSmith> | it is really just "A valid date string or a valid global date and time string." |
| 22:46 | <MikeSmith> | http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/common-microsyntaxes.html#valid-date-string-with-optional-time |
| 22:48 | <MikeSmith> | hmm |
| 22:48 | <MikeSmith> | and I just now notice "A string is a valid date or time string in content if it consists of zero or more White_Space characters, followed by a valid date or time string, followed by zero or more further White_Space characters." |
| 22:48 | <MikeSmith> | which we are not currently allowing |
| 22:49 | <MikeSmith> | that is, validator doesn't allow date/time strings in attribute values to have surrounding whitespace at all |
| 23:11 | <MikeSmith> | hmm, it seems like the value of an input/@type=date attribute is not allowed to contain surrounding whitespace |
| 23:12 | <MikeSmith> | oh, value of an input/@type=datetime attribute is also not allowed to contain surrounding whitespace |