01:10
<Hixie>
content-types for binary formats baffle me
01:10
<Hixie>
or rather, the way people defend them baffles me
01:10
<Hixie>
(re: the e-mail i'm about to send out replying to a long thread about video mime types last august)
01:11
<boogyman>
it's taken you this long to formulate a response, or you wished to see the opinion(s) of others
01:15
<Hixie>
neither
01:15
<micheil>
Hixie: hey, did you ever say anything about kaazing and how they supposedly invented websockets as they stand at present?
01:15
<Hixie>
no idea
01:16
<Hixie>
not sure how they stand at present, in fact :-)
01:16
<micheil>
"Kaazing basically invented the protocol as it stands now." - Ian Hickson, Google & HTML5 Author
01:16
<micheil>
http://www.kaazing.com/about/index.html
01:17
<Hixie>
micheil: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20100131#l-223
01:17
<micheil>
looks like they like their patents too; as they seem to be pushing for one relating to using backwards compat. protocols with websockets
01:17
<Hixie>
(later, http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20100131#l-241 )
01:18
<micheil>
Hixie: right, so, it's a pretty big mis-guided quote
01:18
<Hixie>
how so?
01:18
<Hixie>
note that the hybi group has basically totally revamped the protocol, so it's kind of a moot point now
01:18
<Hixie>
as the protocol is nothing like it was then
01:18
<micheil>
well, the way it reads on their site it's like they are claiming to have invented the protocol as it is at present
01:19
<micheil>
but there's really a heap more people who have contributed to it
01:19
<Hixie>
oh, yeah, their site might be misleading *shrug*
01:19
<Hixie>
really at this point i don't know what the spec looks like
01:19
<Hixie>
but there aren't that many people who have contributed
01:19
<Hixie>
er, who had contributed
01:19
<Hixie>
at the time
01:20
<Hixie>
isn't the group basically going to do the design abarth proposed now?
01:20
<micheil>
Hixie: i think so, there are still some against it
01:20
<Hixie>
as i understand it there are three realistic handshake designs: tls-only, the one i designed based on mcarter's design, and abarth's design
01:20
<Hixie>
but i'm not really following the work closely, so don't take my word for it
01:23
<Hixie>
anyone know if annevk is still worknig on the fullscreen cssom thing?
01:24
<othermaciej>
Hixie: at this point, I don't think the one you designed is secure
01:24
<othermaciej>
and therefore not realistic
01:24
<Hixie>
the one with the eight bytes is still secure according to abarth (i spoke to him just earlier today about it)
01:24
<Hixie>
what his group tested was the upgrade without the 8 bytes
01:25
<gsnedders>
What eight bytes?
01:25
<Hixie>
(which we knew wasn't secure; the 8 bytes were mitigation for that)
01:25
<Hixie>
gsnedders: key3
01:25
<Hixie>
and the server's response
01:26
<othermaciej>
I wouldn't interpret that as "still secure"
01:26
<othermaciej>
they didn't test one way or the other whether the 8 bytes help, or whether there is a way to work around whatever they do
01:27
<othermaciej>
however, I still think it is less robust against a variety of threat models than the adam+eric proposal
01:27
<othermaciej>
at this point I wouldn't really trust it
01:28
<Hixie>
well i am not advocating it one way or the other
01:28
<Hixie>
so that's fine :-)
01:28
<Hixie>
i'm not aware of any attack though, even theoretical
01:33
<othermaciej>
its security against this intercepting proxy attack depends completely on whether the 8 random bytes break the ability to get intercepting proxies to see subsequent data on the connection as new requests
01:34
<othermaciej>
(something that Adam et al didn't test but probably should have)
01:39
<Hixie>
othermaciej: yes
01:40
<Hixie>
othermaciej: note that for there to be any subsequent data, the 8 bytes have to make it to the server and back to the client; note also that there's no way to distinguish the 8 bytes from the subsequent bytes, so if the 8 bytes get to the server, it seems highly unlikely that the remainder don't either. But indeed, we don't know without testing.
01:40
<Hixie>
It's academic, anyway, since the group isn't going to use this handshake.
01:40
<othermaciej>
well, it's still the handshake in current drafts
01:41
<othermaciej>
what's surprisingly hard is convince the group of the merits of the CONNECT handshake
02:57
<Hixie>
maybe December 156h refers to December 342?
02:57
<Hixie>
not sure what that means either tohugh
02:58
<jcranmer>
obviously, it's base 36
02:59
<jcranmer>
so it's December 53,369₁₀
03:01
<heycam>
156 hours into december. i.e. 6:30am on decemeber 1. that's at least a valid date.
03:01
<heycam>
well, december 1 is a valid date. not sure about decemember.
03:02
<jcranmer>
since a day is 24 hours, last I checked
03:02
<jcranmer>
how can 156 hours into December be on December 1?
03:07
<oojacoboo>
jcranmer: it's called crack cocaine
03:09
<jcranmer>
<insert politically incorrect joke here>
03:25
<heycam>
wow, i have no idea
03:26
<heycam>
more like 12noon on the 7th
03:26
<oojacoboo>
technically, if you had a time machine...
03:26
<heycam>
must be all these svg tests o_O
03:27
<jcranmer>
or maybe we finally invented the 240-hour day
04:09
<jamesr_>
sounds like websockets is in need of an UPGRADE
04:09
<jamesr_>
*rimshot*
04:33
<wirepair>
hehe
04:34
<wirepair>
jamesr_ i'm assuming you're referring to the issues adamb et. all found? :)
04:34
<jamesr_>
yeah
04:34
<wirepair>
yeah i just read the paper, interesting attack
06:02
<TabAtkins>
MikeSmith: Yo, let's work out where dinner is being had tonight. I know basically nothing about tokyo, so I rely on you suggesting a good place.
06:02
<MikeSmith>
I can come meet out the Mori Tower
06:03
<MikeSmith>
either meet you in the lobby downstairs
06:03
<MikeSmith>
or I can come up to the 26th floor reception
06:03
<TabAtkins>
lobby downstairs is fine.
06:03
<MikeSmith>
hai
06:03
<MikeSmith>
any time is OK for me
06:04
<MikeSmith>
I tend to eat kind of late-ish usually
06:04
<TabAtkins>
6:30?
06:04
<paul_irish>
go back to that Indian place.
06:04
<MikeSmith>
heh
06:04
<MikeSmith>
that place was not too bad
06:04
<paul_irish>
that cheese appetizer was tremendous.
06:04
<MikeSmith>
yeah, true
06:04
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins: you vegetarian?
06:05
<TabAtkins>
I've got someone I haven't met before coming to dinner, too, so if we can decide beforehand so I can tell him where to go, that would be nice. Alternately, I just tell him to get to Mori Tower.
06:05
<TabAtkins>
MikeSmith: Jeezus no.
06:05
<MikeSmith>
heh
06:05
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins: tell him to come to Mori Tower
06:05
<MikeSmith>
then we can go wherever from there
06:06
<MikeSmith>
there is a place only two stops away which is great for self-barbecue meat
06:06
<MikeSmith>
yaki-niku
06:06
<MikeSmith>
that would be my recommendation
06:06
<MikeSmith>
it's in Nakameguro
06:06
<TabAtkins>
Heh, had yaki-niku last night.
06:06
<MikeSmith>
ah
06:07
<MikeSmith>
well, this place is better than wherever you went :)
06:07
<TabAtkins>
What sort of price?
06:08
<MikeSmith>
around 2200 yen
06:08
<MikeSmith>
iirc
06:08
<MikeSmith>
for a course thing
06:08
<MikeSmith>
deer meat
06:08
<MikeSmith>
boar meat
06:08
<MikeSmith>
pheasant
06:08
<MikeSmith>
other stuff
06:09
<MikeSmith>
and the manager knows me so she always gives me extra stuff
06:09
<MikeSmith>
plus they have Ebisu draft
06:09
<MikeSmith>
plus it's right next to the Meguro river
06:10
<MikeSmith>
and there's another place nearby that serves the best craft beer in Tokyo by a wide margin
06:10
<MikeSmith>
Baird's Taphouse
06:10
<TabAtkins>
Ooh, sounds great.
06:11
<TabAtkins>
Alex Russell is saying he doesn't want yaki-niku tonight, so if we hit that he won't join us.
06:11
<MikeSmith>
well, we can find another place
06:12
<TabAtkins>
Know any good sushi places?
06:12
<MikeSmith>
sure
06:12
<MikeSmith>
will cost us a lot more though
06:12
<TabAtkins>
Eh, dinners are expensed.
06:12
<TabAtkins>
For us, at least.
06:12
<MikeSmith>
OK
06:13
<TabAtkins>
So whatever you're comfortable with.
06:13
<MikeSmith>
OK
06:24
<hober>
MikeSmith: had much Hitachino Nest beers?
06:24
<MikeSmith>
hober: have not heard of that one
06:24
<hober>
some of the best .jp microbrew I've managed to find in .us
06:24
<hober>
keep an eye out
06:25
<MikeSmith>
cool
06:25
<MikeSmith>
I'll have to figure out where I can find some
06:25
<MikeSmith>
http://bairdbeer.com/en/taproom/nakameguro-taproom
06:26
<hober>
oooh
06:26
<annevk>
Hixie, working on fullscreen got delayed a bit
06:33
<annevk>
Hixie, at least for another month or so most likely as I have some vacation time I need to use
06:33
<annevk>
heycam, so if you got time meanwhile... ^^
06:35
<annevk>
oh lol, there's an issue on the acknowledgment section of the spec
06:39
<Hixie>
annevk: k, sounds good
07:07
<annevk>
http://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/eia6l/us_takes_break_from_attacking_wikileaks_to/ hahaha
07:08
<annevk>
"There certainly is an irony here."
07:27
<annevk>
hmm, did Bjoern Hoehrmann just state he's going to fix CSS' grammar problem?
07:27
<annevk>
where "just" is about six hours ago
07:42
<heycam>
annevk, I'll see if I get time...
07:45
<heycam>
TabAtkins, when my Linux machine used to shut down due to overheating, there was usually about 2 seconds between it walling "system is going down now" and my processes starting to get killed. :)
07:45
<hsivonen>
http://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/12/websockets-disabled-in-firefox-4/comment-page-1/#comment-295447
07:47
<othermaciej>
Flash and Java do in fact have the cache poisoning vulnerability (at least as far as I can tell from the paper)
07:48
<othermaciej>
I believe the vendors are not interested in fixing
07:48
<othermaciej>
annevk: what grammar problem does CSS have?
07:49
<annevk>
it being split between prose and productions and not being very clear over all
07:49
<TabAtkins>
heycam: Heh, kk. Still an invalid bug, of course.
07:50
<TabAtkins>
heycam: Still seems unlikely that the dude was able to type as much as he did and submit it if they have a similar 2-second warning.
07:50
<heycam>
TabAtkins, yeah
07:50
<heycam>
TabAtkins, it's like when you're in primary school doing creative writing, and you write a letter / diary entry where at the end you die and the pen ink trails off the page
07:52
<TabAtkins>
Hopefully when you do that you don't actually write out "Oh god I'm dying AAAAAaaaaaaaa........."
07:52
<othermaciej>
ah, now I see
07:53
<heycam>
TabAtkins, something like that :p
07:56
<TabAtkins>
annevk: That's what he implied, yeah.
08:45
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins: on my way over to the tower
08:45
<MikeSmith>
see you in the lobby at 6;30
08:46
<MikeSmith>
if we fail to find each other somehow, my mobile number is 080-5009-8161
08:50
<TabAtkins>
kk
09:16
<phrearch>
hi
09:16
<annevk>
hoi
09:17
<phrearch>
hoi :)
09:17
<boogyman>
what up doc
09:17
<phrearch>
i just read about the websocket insecurity problem. any idea how long it will take to fix it?
09:17
<annevk>
well, the plan always has been to change the handshake
09:18
<annevk>
it's just that the IETF is slow making up its mind
09:18
<phrearch>
aha, so the ietf has to approve it first?
09:19
<annevk>
I think the idea at this point is to wait for rough consensus on the IETF hybi list, yes
09:19
<annevk>
not sure about approving
09:20
<phrearch>
how serious is this bug really? all i understood of it was its possible to serve an attacker's version of a js file, instead of the one expected
09:20
<annevk>
you don't think that's serious?
09:20
<phrearch>
trying to think of worse-case-scenarios :)
09:20
<phrearch>
yea, thats serious enough
09:23
<phrearch>
i guess it makes it possible to send form data to an arbitrary site, without the user noticing it
09:24
<annevk>
e.g. stealing all your online email
09:29
<jgraham>
Yeah, the deal is that it's a hugely serious hole if you happen to be behind an affected proxy
09:29
<jgraham>
The bad news is that there is nothing you can do to protext yourself apart from not being behind such a proxy
09:29
<jgraham>
*protect
09:31
<jgraham>
Disabling websockets is good because it reduces the number of attack vectors, but it doesn't close the hole entirely, since flash and java are both vectors and you can be affected if another user behind the same proxy is used as the vector
09:31
<jgraham>
s/as/to provide/
09:39
<phrearch>
what kind of proxys are vulnerable?
09:42
<phrearch>
i read that its about proxys that dont interpret the update handshake correctly, but doesnt that append on the implementation?
09:42
<phrearch>
just trying to understand it. im a bit of a noob to networking tech
09:44
<jgraham>
Yeah, aiui it is a bug in the proxies that makes them vunerable
09:45
<phrearch>
so suppose i have a server at some provider, then all the proxies in between can introduce this security risk?
09:46
<phrearch>
is it possible to know how many proxies are in between, and what kind?
09:46
<othermaciej>
regular proxies that are actually configured in your browser don't have this issue
09:47
<othermaciej>
only certain intercepting/transparent proxies, which catch http traffic without clients knowing about it
09:47
<phrearch>
aha
09:47
<othermaciej>
typically they exist only in "enterprise" setups with a firewall
09:49
<phrearch>
ah well, by the time this websocket app is finished, it'll be fixed already a long time :)
09:50
<phrearch>
i read that ff4 still can have ws enabled by switching it on manually
09:50
<phrearch>
im trying to come up with a sane routing system for my websocket calls.
09:50
<phrearch>
like applying the same kind of urls as for regular http calls
09:51
<jgraham>
Yes, it will also be pref-enabled (default:off) in Opera
09:51
<phrearch>
well, glad it can be re-enabled for devving
09:58
<annevk>
do browsers have javascript array limits of some kind?
09:58
<annevk>
I noticed there are some problems with the encoding data I'm getting back
09:59
<annevk>
it seems the array of objects is losing members along the way or something like that
09:59
<jgraham>
What kind of limits did you have in mind?
10:00
<jgraham>
You can only have 2**32 - 1 items in the array
10:01
<jgraham>
But I guess that is not the limit you are hitting
10:05
<annevk>
not at all :/
10:05
<annevk>
I guess there is a bug in the code somewhere
10:14
<annevk>
oops lol, found it
10:14
<annevk>
data is correct, made an error with printing
10:45
<Workshiva>
I'm trying to think of an example of a required attribute, but I can't think of any
10:45
<annevk>
<meta> requires at least one right?
10:45
<Workshiva>
Yeah, but not a specific one in all cases
10:45
<annevk>
maybe <map> requires ID?
10:46
<moo_>
not related, but does <script> allow class="" ?
10:46
<annevk>
would make sense to me
10:46
<annevk>
moo_, it does
10:46
<Workshiva>
Everything allows class, doesn't it?
10:46
<moo_>
annevk: thx
10:46
<annevk>
Workshiva, right
10:46
<Workshiva>
annevk: You were right about map, thanks
11:04
<hsivonen>
kudos to david_carlisle for being the first to mention CORS on xml-dev
11:09
<hsivonen>
annevk: is there some kind of Cross-Site Requests for Dummies publication that explain the threat model, related issues and solutions related to cross-origin loads?
11:09
<annevk>
no, but there should be
11:10
<hsivonen>
If there was one, I'd drop the link on xml-dev, but I don't have the time to write one right now
11:10
<annevk>
didn't realize until yesterday that list was still active
11:16
<david_carlisle>
hsivonen: well only 'cause i was hanging around here and thought you lot would would be too scared to stick your head above the xml-dev parapet
11:17
<david_carlisle>
I think it was annevk who mentioned it here?
11:17
<hsivonen>
david_carlisle: I'm not scared. I'm just usually too busy to delurk or even read what's going on there.
11:18
<david_carlisle>
:-)
11:21
<david_carlisle>
By the way is the cors aware xmlhttpwhatever implemented in the current round of browsers, ie could someone put up a demo of xml being loaded cross site and have it work?
11:24
<Philip`>
http://www.w3.org/Security/wiki/Comparison_of_CORS_and_UMP#Implementation_Data may be relevant
11:25
<david_carlisle>
thanks
12:12
<hsivonen>
was this pasted here already: http://markmail.org/message/taujq5vzj7ttlrh2 ?
12:14
<jgraham>
hsivonen: Don't feed the troll?
12:16
<jgraham>
Although maybe if he tried using a web browser rather than just bitching about how they are holding back all that is good and holy and XML, he would be able to get a correct definition for "script kiddie"
12:16
<beowulf>
that's a nice thing to say, who is this chap?
12:23
<annevk>
Kurt Cagle -- XForms fanboy
12:23
<annevk>
or something like that
12:27
<annevk>
hober, http://www.mysociety.org/2010/12/08/job-advert-developers/ via berjon on twitter
13:01
<karlcow>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/info/developer-blog/2010/nov/25/six-development-lessons
13:23
<annevk>
"And would solution A or B require the least changes?"
13:23
<annevk>
or... there's no problem, no changes required!
13:55
<annevk>
omg JSON requires double quotes?!
13:55
<annevk>
lolz
13:55
<zcorpan>
what?
13:55
<zcorpan>
oh
13:56
<zcorpan>
yes
13:57
<annevk>
trailing space was also too much
14:03
<annevk>
gotta love JSON
14:05
<Philip`>
Getting interoperability on the current format is hard enough, so it's good they didn't add additional redundant syntax like different quotes
16:31
<karlcow>
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7991991/
16:31
<karlcow>
We are the first to implement the WebSockets
16:39
<hober>
annevk: that sounds cool, but requires UK residency
17:02
<jgraham>
hober: Nothing wrong with being a UK resident.
17:02
<jgraham>
Well apart from the government of course
17:05
<Philip`>
And the weather
17:05
<Philip`>
And the people who continually talk about the weather
17:06
<david_carlisle>
http://xkcd.com/831/
17:38
<annevk>
encodings are terrible
17:38
<annevk>
terrible
17:38
<annevk>
terrible oh so terrible
17:38
<annevk>
and this only covers 8bit
17:38
<annevk>
5 browsers, 300 labels, 155 distinct mappings from bytes to characters
17:39
<annevk>
187 groups of label aliases
17:39
<annevk>
107 if I ignore labels that a browser would normally not recognize
17:40
<annevk>
I guess the other word here is insane
17:40
<annevk>
and a visualization problem
17:48
<AryehGregor>
"Your suggestion is founded on aesthetical reasoning. HTML is ugly."
17:48
<AryehGregor>
I vote that we adopt that as a WHATWG motto.
17:49
<annevk>
krijnh, ^^
18:04
<annevk>
http://www.nrc.nl/economie/article2647862.ece/Wikipedia_pionnen_Shell_op_alle_niveaus_politiek_Nigeria -- Wikileaks is now known as Wikipedia...
18:05
<annevk>
only in headlines, for now ;p
18:06
<annevk>
from the feed it seems they got it right originally and then someone "fixed" it
18:08
<othermaciej>
I think I would be creeped out by a "Personal Appeal from Julian Assange"
18:08
<annevk>
he lacks the stare for that to work
18:08
<annevk>
though the new site included a picture of him
18:09
<Rik`>
it's really silly that when you give to wikipedia, they don't close the banner
18:10
<AryehGregor>
It's really silly that when you close it every single time, it still pops up again.
18:10
<Rik`>
it doesn't for me
18:10
<AryehGregor>
I must have donated thousands of dollars' worth of volunteer programming time to Wikipedia, stop bothering me.
18:10
<Rik`>
I had to close it on en.w.o and fr.w.o but only once
18:10
<AryehGregor>
Maybe I'm seeing it on multiple sites, or browsers, but I've sure closed it an awful lot more than once.
18:10
<annevk>
now I get "Please read: A personal appeal from Wikipedia author Lilaroja"
18:10
<annevk>
she looks more friendly
18:11
<annevk>
I usually just scroll down...
18:11
<AryehGregor>
The Jimmy Wales ones were better, I think.
18:11
<hsivonen>
Rik`: it they closed it, you'd miss Jimbo's next photo or the new non-Jimbo person
18:11
<Philip`>
Lilaroja wrote Wikipedia?
18:11
<Philip`>
Must have taken him/her a long time
18:11
<jgraham>
AryehGregor: You could donate a few more dollars of time to fix it :)
18:12
<annevk>
Philip`, couple of monkeys and infinite time
18:12
<AryehGregor>
I'm getting Sue Gardner. They could have used a better picture.
18:12
<AryehGregor>
The Jimbo pictures are great. He's really photogenic.
18:12
<jamesr_>
i use https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/idkjdjficifbfjjkdkiimioljbloddpl
18:12
<AryehGregor>
Plus he's famous and rich.
20:20
<zcorpan>
gsnedders: i got an error from your outliner, <type 'exceptions.TypeError'>: argument to reversed() must be a sequence
20:20
<gsnedders>
zcorpan: known bug…
20:21
<gsnedders>
zcorpan: I am frequently reminded of this, and frequently forget and do something more interesting than fix it :P
20:21
<zcorpan>
does the bug manifest itself also with the other input method?
20:23
<gsnedders>
no
20:23
<gsnedders>
This is why I didn't panic and fix it straight away :P
20:24
<zcorpan>
not convinced you would have fixed it anyway :P
20:24
<gsnedders>
Yeah, true.
20:26
<gsnedders>
zcorpan: You know me too well.
20:26
<gsnedders>
It's kinda sad. :P
20:28
<alohci>
Hi. If the formOwner of a label doesn't match the formOwner of the a submit button that it labels, and the user clicks on the label on a platform that would cause the submit button to fire, which form would be submitted, the owner of the label or the owner of the submit button
20:56
<zcorpan>
alohci: clicking a label activates the label's associated control
20:57
<zcorpan>
though buttons shouldn't have <label>s since the button text is the label
20:58
<alohci>
that's not invalid though, is it?
20:59
<alohci>
I'm trying to establish what use the form content attribute is on the label element. It doesn't seem to do anything.
21:02
<zcorpan>
yeah it might not be useful for anything
21:07
<zcorpan>
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi/current/msg05083.html - what do y'all think, should we kill cookies in websockets? (opera supports cookies for websockets, haven't checked other browsers)
21:08
zcorpan
goes to eat a cookie
21:08
<Hixie>
i'm fine with killing cookies in websockets, but then i basically never use cookies anyway :-)
21:08
<Hixie>
localStorage + custom channel is fine imho
21:10
<zcorpan>
seems likely that cookies will just bloat the handshake 99% of the time
21:12
<zcorpan>
(and you don't need to use cookies yourself for cookies to bloat everything, you just need to use some ads or statistics service or a number of other things)
21:34
<annevk>
Discovery Channel is using the slogan "Ignorance is bliss"
21:34
<annevk>
color me surprised
21:49
<oojacoboo>
are there any plans to introduce things like min-top: for positioning
21:50
<oojacoboo>
this would be an awesome style for fixed positioned elements!
21:52
<oojacoboo>
or even something like... margin: min(10%, 2em); padding: max(5%, 20px); width: calc(80% - 2em);
21:52
<oojacoboo>
that's suffice for most all uses
21:58
<Ms2ger>
oojacoboo, http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-values/#the-calc-min-and-max-functions
21:59
<oojacoboo>
doooooood
21:59
<oojacoboo>
any support yet?
22:03
<oojacoboo>
Ms2ger?
22:03
<Ms2ger>
I doubt it
22:03
<oojacoboo>
:/
22:04
<oojacoboo>
it's always the good stuff that lacks support
22:13
<annevk>
hmm, no more encoding stuff after all I guess
22:13
<annevk>
my brain is fried
22:13
<annevk>
I wonder if that was the reason I stopped looking into it a year ago
22:18
<karlcow>
annevk: Accept your mime type.
22:20
<annevk>
this stuff is deeper than mime man
22:21
<annevk>
hmm, I fail at completing this pun
22:21
<annevk>
but encodings are distinct
22:51
<jgraham>
zcorpan: Die cookies, die!
22:51
<jgraham>
Or "yes I am happy to kill them with WS", if you prefer
22:51
<karlcow>
https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_asf_resigns_from_the
22:52
<jgraham>
gsnedders: I was going to own that outliner code bu you never gave it to me. Not that I have a great track record of long term maintainance of side projects
23:12
<gsnedders>
jgraham: it's a side-project of a side-project
23:12
<gsnedders>
Just the most successful part of the projects collectively
23:13
<mgdm>
gsnedders: outliner? /me is interested if it means what he thinks it means
23:13
<gsnedders>
mgdm: http://gsnedders.html5.org/outliner/
23:13
<mgdm>
ah, not quite what I had in mind, but cool
23:14
mgdm
is apparently the lead dev on http://gnome-outliner.sf.net, but that's by virtue of being the last to commit
23:14
<mgdm>
s/-//
23:30
<zcorpan>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2010Dec/0015.html
23:45
<saba>
when would you guys say that HTML5 is supported by all major browsers' latest versions?
23:45
<Rik`>
one day
23:46
<saba>
Rik`: probably, let's hope. Any date? :-)
23:46
<saba>
or rather month.
23:46
<Dashiva>
It's more interesting to ask that question for each feature
23:46
<Rik`>
who cares?
23:46
<Rik`>
like Dashiva said
23:47
<saba>
Dashiva: yes, why I ask here is because I believe (or want to find out) that there would be some knowledgeable speculations in this channel
23:48
<zcorpan>
an extended subset of html5 is already supported by all major browsers' latest versions
23:48
<saba>
zcorpan: interesting, do you know if that includes web storage features?
23:48
<Rik`>
saba: http://caniuse.com might help you
23:49
<zcorpan>
saba: it includes localStorage
23:49
<saba>
Rik`: wonderful, thanks :-)
23:50
<saba>
zcorpan: ok, I'll read more about that. Thanks!
23:51
<zcorpan>
saba: 'extended subset' is a subtle magic phrase which can mean anything since the subset can be the empty set ;)
23:51
<zcorpan>
saba: so it was true in 2004 as well