| 00:22 | <Hixie> | woah, weird. a number of bugs have ended up in the canvas component for no apparent reason. |
| 00:22 | <Hixie> | oh, i see why |
| 00:23 | <Hixie> | in other news, i'm an idiot |
| 01:00 | <Hixie> | anyone have an opinion on http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11487 ? (comment on the bug if so) |
| 01:00 | <Hixie> | er wait, wrong bug |
| 01:01 | <Hixie> | i meant http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11487 |
| 01:01 | <Hixie> | er |
| 01:01 | <Hixie> | wtf |
| 01:01 | Hixie | pokes at his clipboard |
| 01:01 | <Hixie> | http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11482 |
| 01:01 | <Hixie> | there we go |
| 01:07 | <MikeSmith> | time to create a registry for file extensions |
| 01:07 | <TabAtkins> | Hrm. File extensions *tend* to be meaningful, so that's a nice thing. |
| 01:11 | <jcranmer> | really? |
| 01:11 | <TabAtkins> | Oh, wait, I thought this was talking about DnD. |
| 01:12 | <TabAtkins> | Well, wait, though. @accept with a mimetype doesn't need to care about what the type of the file is, just the actual extension on the filename. I don't see what the possible interop problems are. |
| 01:14 | <jcranmer> | basically, I think he wants to let people do extensions instead of mime-types for upload |
| 01:14 | <TabAtkins> | Yeah. So what's the issue? I say <input type=file accept=docx>. |
| 01:14 | <TabAtkins> | It doesn't matter what type of files use the docx extension, just that they *do* use it |
| 01:15 | <TabAtkins> | Having multiple applications using the same extension isn't a problem. It's non-optimal, in that the UA will expose files that the author probably doesn't want to receive, but shrug. |
| 01:17 | <MikeSmith> | would be nice if we could just add comments to bugs directly from this channel |
| 01:18 | <MikeSmith> | or specify a line range from krijnh logs to be copy-pasted as a comment to a bug |
| 03:24 | <oojacoboo> | does <button> not inherit font-face ? |
| 05:00 | <jwalden> | does anyone know if there are any UAs which support, or claim to support, background-size and SVG images as CSS backgrounds? |
| 05:00 | <oojacoboo> | anyone know why I am having trouble applying margin-top to an element directly following a <legend> ? |
| 05:01 | <oojacoboo> | jwalden: presto |
| 05:02 | <jwalden> | oojacoboo: that's opera, right? |
| 05:02 | <oojacoboo> | si |
| 05:02 | jwalden | is sorely tempted to say, "that's yes, right?" ;-) |
| 05:02 | <oojacoboo> | you must be an Aussie |
| 05:03 | <jwalden> | no, just someone with a poor (read: awesome) sense of humor and a taste for horrible puns |
| 05:03 | <oojacoboo> | :P |
| 05:03 | <jwalden> | this is good, tho, should give me something to test against (I'm slowly working at implementing that in Gecko) |
| 05:04 | <jwalden> | right now it's write-a-bunch-of-tests madness |
| 05:04 | <jwalden> | then try to implement, then see which tests I screwed up horribly |
| 05:04 | <oojacoboo> | jwalden: it's experimental with gecko and webkit |
| 05:04 | <jwalden> | oojacoboo: which is experimental? |
| 05:04 | <oojacoboo> | although, I don't know, the latest builds might have decent support |
| 05:05 | <jwalden> | I implemented background-size in Gecko, and I *tried* to leave a test that would start failing when SVG support got added, but I did so incompetently, so it continued to fail |
| 05:05 | <oojacoboo> | try them with prefixes |
| 05:05 | <jwalden> | Firefox 4 supports background-size without prefix |
| 05:05 | <oojacoboo> | -moz-background-size |
| 05:05 | <jwalden> | and SVG backgrounds |
| 05:05 | <oojacoboo> | -webkit, etc |
| 05:05 | <oojacoboo> | jwalden: nice |
| 05:05 | <jwalden> | but it doesn't do any special handling for vector image display with anything other than background-size: auto |
| 05:06 | <jwalden> | at least, not if the SVG image is missing an intrinsic dimension, or things like that |
| 05:06 | <oojacoboo> | ah, well, that's kinda sucky |
| 05:06 | <jwalden> | contain and cover are the most interesting cases for that, I think |
| 05:06 | <jwalden> | *shrug* you get vector images, which is a start |
| 05:07 | <oojacoboo> | I assume this is just experimental anyway? |
| 05:07 | <jwalden> | not sure how often people would want to, or will come to, depend on the arcana of background-size negotiation with vector images missing intrinsic width, height, or ratio |
| 05:07 | <jwalden> | well, it's conceivable the patch could make 4.0 |
| 05:07 | <jwalden> | my mess of tests can only help that |
| 05:07 | <jwalden> | but it's probably not worth betting on it |
| 05:08 | <oojacoboo> | yea, I just mean your project, just an experiment, right |
| 05:08 | <jwalden> | no, it'd be to ship it |
| 05:08 | <jwalden> | I have an aversion to leaving things half-finished :-) |
| 05:08 | <oojacoboo> | gotcha |
| 05:09 | <oojacoboo> | I want to beat webkit with a stick for this bug |
| 05:09 | <oojacoboo> | or at least I think it's a bug |
| 05:10 | <oojacoboo> | jwalden: you wouldn't know why on http://dev.rentpost.com/signup the margin-top: isn't being applied to the <ol> inside each fieldset, would you? |
| 05:10 | <oojacoboo> | in webkit* |
| 05:10 | <oojacoboo> | well, chrome at least. I assume it's all webkit |
| 05:11 | jwalden | looks |
| 05:13 | <jwalden> | dunno for sure, but fieldset and legend are fairly hackneyed elements, and they might not play well with restyling |
| 05:13 | <oojacoboo> | jwalden: yea, that's what I figured |
| 05:14 | <oojacoboo> | but seems pretty messed up, if you ask me |
| 05:15 | <jwalden> | sure |
| 05:37 | <jwalden> | guh, Opera only has the horribly un-ergonomic Ctrl+Tab for tab-switching |
| 05:45 | <jwalden> | okay, I'm not buying Opera's rendering here |
| 05:45 | jwalden | uploads some files |
| 05:58 | <jwalden> | I claim http://whereswalden.com/files/mozilla/testcases/tall--auto-16px--percent-width-percent-height.html and http://whereswalden.com/files/mozilla/testcases/ref-tall-16x8.html should render identically, which is not how Opera renders them |
| 05:59 | <jwalden> | sigh, and http://whereswalden.com/files/mozilla/background-size/bg-position.html still isn't fixed |
| 05:59 | <jwalden> | (entirely separate issue from vector images and background-size) |
| 07:29 | <benschwarz> | Hixie: !Ping |
| 07:53 | <hsivonen> | is abarth now the editor of the Web Socket protocol? |
| 07:53 | <abarth> | nope |
| 07:53 | <abarth> | fette is the editor |
| 07:53 | <abarth> | i just wrote a draft to try to help the process along |
| 07:53 | <abarth> | the IETF is strange that way |
| 07:53 | <abarth> | anyone can write a draft at any time |
| 07:53 | <abarth> | in their own private namespace |
| 07:55 | <hsivonen> | oh. ok. |
| 08:04 | <hsivonen> | weird. Totem plays Apple Animation and uncompressed audio in a mov container |
| 08:04 | <hsivonen> | but arista and transmageddon don't like it |
| 08:05 | <hsivonen> | I wonder why. Isn't gstreamer codec detection the same for all gst apps? |
| 08:16 | <zcorpan> | wow, no new hybi emails this morning |
| 08:29 | <zcorpan> | oh, they were just a bit delayed |
| 08:47 | <annevk> | so much email |
| 08:55 | <annevk> | http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2011JanMar/0011.html -- "The above doesn't change the image in my Netscape 7.2 on Windows98 platform." |
| 08:58 | <hsivonen> | annevk: that's more recent than Netscape 3 or OS/2 that one IETF guy was using |
| 08:58 | <hsivonen> | s/or/on/ |
| 08:59 | <annevk> | heh |
| 08:59 | <annevk> | but IETF hasn't realized Unicode exists |
| 08:59 | <zcorpan> | or HTML |
| 09:52 | <Dashiva> | annevk: They know it exists, but they think it's too hard to get right |
| 09:53 | <jgraham> | Why would anyone use Netscape 7.2? It's not like it was that great when it was released… |
| 09:57 | <annevk> | wasn't Netscape 7.2 some Firebird clone? |
| 09:57 | <annevk> | I thought Netscape died after 6 |
| 10:00 | <hsivonen> | annevk: It continued to 9: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape_Navigator_9 |
| 10:07 | <annevk> | http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/ezub3/type_to_shoot_html5_game_my_entry_for_mozillas/ is pretty sweet |
| 10:07 | <annevk> | hsivonen, wow |
| 10:12 | <Rik`> | annevk: really cool but no pause :( |
| 10:14 | <annevk> | yeah, and a bit too simple |
| 10:14 | <annevk> | but the comments have tips |
| 10:15 | <Lachy> | Rik`, read the instructions when you load |
| 10:15 | <Lachy> | it said Esc to pause |
| 10:16 | <Rik`> | oh, we're supported to read instructions now ? :D |
| 10:16 | <Lachy> | also, it's very adictive. But a bit too simple |
| 10:19 | <Lachy> | it's addictive. But doesn't really get difficulty till levels past 20 |
| 10:22 | <hsivonen> | the game works in IE9 but the audio is bad. I wonder if that's IE9's fault or VirtualBox's fault |
| 10:35 | <jgraham> | Filed a bug on <hgroup>/<subhead> btw |
| 10:41 | <annevk> | good good |
| 11:05 | <beowulf> | fwiw on hgroup/subhead I would suggest it subline rather than subhead, historically/in print headlines are broken into mainline, subline, etc. subhead sounds like it should be used in header. to me h1-h6 are about headlines, not headers (as headers are described in html5) |
| 11:07 | <jgraham> | beowulf: Sure, <subhead> might not be the best name |
| 11:07 | <jgraham> | Would you also call it a subline if it came before the main heading? |
| 11:08 | <Evet> | what is your favourite auth* method between application and API? |
| 11:09 | <beowulf> | yeah, well, as i understand it the mainline is the one with the name rather than the other way round |
| 11:09 | <jgraham> | beowulf: Yeah, I think that works poorly in markup though |
| 11:09 | <beowulf> | yeah |
| 11:10 | <jgraham> | On an entirely diffferent topic, can anyone explain contentEditable to me? Does it ever change the innerHTML of the contentEditable element? |
| 11:10 | <jgraham> | It doesn't seem to in the live dom viewer... |
| 11:10 | <beowulf> | jgraham: in ie yes |
| 11:10 | <beowulf> | anything that matches foo@bar will become a link |
| 11:11 | <jgraham> | Hmm, the spec suggests that it should change the innerHTML |
| 11:12 | <beowulf> | and maybe other link like text too, but i know it happens with email like text |
| 11:12 | <jgraham> | Hard to see how it would work otherwise, really |
| 11:13 | jgraham | gets something working a little |
| 11:17 | <benschwarz> | jgraham: hi :) |
| 11:20 | <jdeisenberg> | is there a good way to get the text ascent and descent from a context2d? It would help greatly in positioning text vertically. |
| 11:26 | <Philip`> | jdeisenberg: There isn't any way |
| 11:27 | <annevk> | jgraham, just press ctrl+b or some such |
| 11:27 | <annevk> | jgraham, contenteditable is very much live |
| 11:27 | <annevk> | jgraham, e.g. http://annevankesteren.nl/test/contenteditable-style.htm :) |
| 11:27 | <jgraham> | annevk: Right. I am just having cross-browser issues and weird behaviour |
| 11:28 | <jgraham> | trying to script it |
| 11:28 | <jdeisenberg> | Philip` : that is unfortunate, wouldn't you say? |
| 11:28 | <jgraham> | benschwarz: hi |
| 11:28 | <annevk> | jgraham, ah yeah, it does not really work that well |
| 11:29 | jgraham | now has a testcase that fails to reproduce the original bug :( |
| 11:29 | <benschwarz> | jgraham: I'm the whatwg styles dude… |
| 11:30 | <jdeisenberg> | is there a compelling reason to not expose the font ascent & descent? |
| 11:30 | <jgraham> | benschwarz: Yeah. Is this re: the request for a prettier implementor spec? |
| 11:31 | <Philip`> | jdeisenberg: Yeah - probably extra fields will be added to TextMetrics, but the plan was to wait until browsers had better support for all the current features before adding even more, I think |
| 11:31 | <benschwarz> | jgraham: I saw you talking to paul_irish, I was more just saying whatup than anything else |
| 11:31 | <Philip`> | jdeisenberg: I don't think there's a reason to not expose it, except for the usual complexity involved with adding features and the desire not to do too much at once |
| 11:32 | <jdeisenberg> | ah OK. I am attempting to write a game in HTML5 using canvas, and positioning text gets a bit tricky. |
| 11:32 | <benschwarz> | jgraham: but basically, I want to get the developer spec further along, then—totally |
| 11:32 | <jdeisenberg> | For now, I'll just figure out the ascent by hand and hard-code it. |
| 11:32 | <jgraham> | benschwarz: Great :) |
| 11:33 | <Philip`> | jdeisenberg: If you need more vertical control than textBaseline gives, hardcoding sizes is the only way |
| 11:36 | <jdeisenberg> | yeah, that seems to be it. |
| 11:36 | <jdeisenberg> | OK thanks. |
| 11:55 | <hsivonen> | the html5lib sanitizer hasn't had its white lists updated in a long time |
| 11:55 | <hsivonen> | event-source and m are allowed. mark and track aren't. |
| 11:56 | <hsivonen> | the MathML and SVG element whitelists look suspiciously short |
| 12:01 | <jgraham> | hsivonen: Correct |
| 12:01 | <jgraham> | (that it hasn't been updated for a long time) |
| 12:02 | <david_carlisle> | hsivonen: something I could look at? I didnt understand the context of your comment) |
| 12:03 | <david_carlisle> | (I don't mind if the answer is no:-) |
| 12:03 | <jgraham> | david_carlisle: http://code.google.com/p/html5lib/source/browse/python/html5lib/sanitizer.py?r=0f459d1384d64e579fa9a3887cd5a9bf94f497f1 |
| 12:05 | <david_carlisle> | jgraham: this is sanitize as in make safe for comment input etc? |
| 12:06 | <jgraham> | david_carlisle: Yes |
| 12:06 | <david_carlisle> | ta |
| 12:06 | <hsivonen> | david_carlisle: the context is that I'm gathering requirements for the HTML sanitizer for Firefox 4.next |
| 12:07 | <hsivonen> | david_carlisle: we want to allow safe MathML, so I will need a whitelist of safe MathML elements |
| 12:10 | <david_carlisle> | hsivonen: just looking over list by eye, if its immediate use is firefox then you don't want mml3 elements yet so I'll hold back on that comment, you should perhaps allow href as well as xlink:href (depending on outcome of that open mozilla bug) oh menclose is missing from the elements |
| 12:11 | <hsivonen> | david_carlisle: it's unclear to me if I should want to drop mml3 presentation elements or any semantic elements |
| 12:13 | <hsivonen> | the html5lib white lists have odd stuff. e.g. attributes ch and pqg for HTML |
| 12:17 | <david_carlisle> | hsivonen: well yes mathml doesn't include anything like script so pretty much any of it is safe, just some of it doesn't work in some browsers, so it depends what the intention behind the whitelist is. I wouldn't argue too much if firefox whitelist just presentation mathml2 and so by implication blacklisted content mathml and all of mathml3 new stuff, if it is just restricting things like form input, rather than restricting what's in the body of |
| 12:17 | <david_carlisle> | the page., on the other hand if you allow all of mathml3 presentation and content then I don't think that is unsafe? |
| 12:17 | <hsivonen> | david_carlisle: can MathML do form input? |
| 12:17 | <david_carlisle> | no |
| 12:18 | <hsivonen> | david_carlisle: the goal for Firefox is to drop stuff that's not safe to transfer across an Origin boundary |
| 12:18 | <david_carlisle> | people often request it, but now the idea would be to use mtext containing an html form element (and pray it works:-0 |
| 12:19 | <david_carlisle> | the only mathml element that can do anything interesting (other than displaying interesting characters in intersting layouts) is maction |
| 12:19 | <david_carlisle> | whose behaviour is largely implementation defined |
| 12:20 | <hsivonen> | "implemetation defined" always sounds bad for Web specs |
| 12:20 | <david_carlisle> | :-) |
| 12:20 | <david_carlisle> | I only said that to wind you up |
| 12:21 | <david_carlisle> | to add to the pain, i'll mention that the implementation behaviour is thus controlled by namespaced attributes in a vendor namespace |
| 12:21 | <zcorpan> | in my impl, <maction> sends an email to david_carlisle with viagra spam |
| 12:21 | <david_carlisle> | oh please, i hope it's not too expensive |
| 12:21 | <hsivonen> | is <maction actiontype="input"> like contenteditable? |
| 12:22 | <david_carlisle> | I'd have to check what firefox makes of it, but to be honest if you wanted to not worry about it i'd zap maction |
| 12:22 | <hsivonen> | david_carlisle: the four built-in maction actiontypes look harmless enough |
| 12:22 | <david_carlisle> | yes |
| 12:23 | <hsivonen> | david_carlisle: vendor-namespace stuff is not going to be allowed |
| 12:23 | <hsivonen> | by the sanitizer |
| 12:23 | <david_carlisle> | OK then you should be OK |
| 12:24 | <hsivonen> | david_carlisle: does MathML have attributes whose content is passed to a CSS parser? |
| 12:26 | <david_carlisle> | not by definition, but some parts of the mathml implementation work internally by the browser applying a css stylesheet matching certain attribute values (I think) |
| 12:26 | <hsivonen> | david_carlisle: ok. thanks |
| 12:27 | <david_carlisle> | if you go <mi mathcolor="...."> the .... is a css compatible color so "red" or #123456 or something, but whether it actually goes through the css parser you are in a better position to check |
| 12:27 | <hsivonen> | btw, the main reason I can think of against white listing Semantic MathML is code footprint, since there's no other reason for the product to contain the names of Semantic MathML elements (as long as rendering isn't supported) |
| 12:27 | <hsivonen> | david_carlisle: I'm mostly worried about stuff that can use the CSS url(...) expression |
| 12:27 | <david_carlisle> | yeas as i say. I don't think it would be unreasonable for firefox to restrict to what works as well as what is safe |
| 12:28 | <david_carlisle> | no only colours and lengths have any resemblance to css |
| 12:29 | <hsivonen> | ok |
| 12:36 | <hsivonen> | The requirement doc is https://wiki.mozilla.org/Platform/HTML5_sanitizer |
| 13:39 | <hsivonen> | https://wiki.mozilla.org/Platform/HTML5_sanitizer |
| 13:39 | <hsivonen> | does anyone see defects in that requirement list? |
| 13:40 | <hsivonen> | in particular, are there any wishlist items for using the parser outside Gecko that aren't covered? |
| 13:52 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: oh well, even Microdata is too hard for Google: http://www.google.com/sidewiki/entry/philip.jagenstedt/id/fJs_CWCuHHLWa1MkT8EEIpkK3qQ |
| 13:55 | <david_carlisle> | hsivonen: as we just discussed I think the choice to restrict mathml (and presumably svg) to the subset that works is general, but the exact list of what works is gecko-specific of course, which affects the 2nd "open qn" on that page |
| 14:30 | <annevk> | hsivonen, roc says whitelists are hard for copy & paste of Word |
| 14:30 | <annevk> | hsivonen, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011JanMar/0004.html |
| 14:35 | <annevk> | hsivonen, also, if we are going to offer native sanitizing the more options the more brittle it becomes (and harder to use) |
| 14:38 | <Philip`> | If you offer fewer options than people want to use, they'll use non-native possibly-poor-quality alternatives that do provide the options |
| 14:39 | <hsivonen> | annevk: for sanitizing CSS, I was planning on using the same code the Gecko uses now, so the new code should be no worse and no better than the old code as far as -mso- CSS goes |
| 14:39 | <annevk> | Philip`, that is not a given |
| 14:40 | <hsivonen> | annevk: Gecko already not only offers but forces a native sanitizer upon pasting into contenteditable. |
| 14:40 | <annevk> | Philip`, e.g. <input> does not give everything everyone wants either, but this does not make people resort to contenteditable= or custom code directly |
| 14:41 | <annevk> | hsivonen, hmm, yay for interop? |
| 14:42 | <jgraham> | annevk: Yes it does. See also: the number of custom date pickers |
| 14:43 | <hsivonen> | annevk: how do other browsers deal with cross-origin copy and paste? |
| 14:45 | <hsivonen> | lolz. it looks like I believed in metadata in the 1990s. check out the source of http://hsivonen.iki.fi/refl-light/ |
| 14:45 | <annevk> | jgraham, in some cases it does, yes |
| 14:45 | <annevk> | hsivonen, no idea |
| 14:46 | <annevk> | hsivonen, I never looked into copy & paste, but now that you mention it Hallvord does have some notes on it already so maybe everyone does it to some extent |
| 14:46 | <annevk> | hsivonen, Dublin Core! superimportant |
| 14:47 | <annevk> | hsivonen, I remember having similar amounts of metadata and wondering what more I could add |
| 14:47 | <annevk> | <meta name="DC.Language" scheme="RFC1766" content="en"> -- nice :) |
| 14:47 | <annevk> | for when <html lang=en> is not clear enough |
| 14:48 | <hsivonen> | I also have lang=en! |
| 14:48 | <hsivonen> | curiously, I must have updated that metadata some time in the 2000s, because it has the iki.fi email address in it |
| 14:49 | <jgraham> | global S&R? |
| 14:49 | <hsivonen> | jgraham: maybe |
| 14:51 | <hsivonen> | even though I never jumped on the XHTML-as-text/html bandwagon, it looks like I've done some DC bandwagon jumping on the gurus' sayso |
| 14:51 | <Philip`> | If you don't know when you changed the file, you should have added more metadata to preserve that history information |
| 14:52 | <hsivonen> | Philip`: good point! I need metadata for metadata. |
| 14:53 | <hsivonen> | cool. font tags in http://hsivonen.iki.fi/source/reflect.html |
| 15:03 | <jgraham> | Is there some way I can't thinki of right now to run some code in the context of a different (same-origin) window? |
| 15:03 | <jgraham> | Well s/window/nested browsing context/ |
| 15:03 | <jgraham> | or whatever the right term for "document loaded in an iframe" is |
| 15:03 | <jgraham> | Without changing the DOM of that document |
| 15:06 | <annevk> | you could declare functions in that document and execute them |
| 15:06 | <annevk> | depends a bit on what you mean with context |
| 15:07 | <jgraham> | I mean with the global object being the window object of that iframe |
| 15:07 | <jgraham> | Just running functions in the iframe might work, I guess |
| 15:08 | <annevk> | you can do iframewindow.test = ... and then iframewindow.test(), no? |
| 15:09 | <zcorpan> | window[0].foo() seems to work |
| 15:12 | <zcorpan> | but if foo is declared in the outer document then the scope is the outer document, at least in opera |
| 15:13 | annevk | wonders if ... = iframewindow.function() { ... } |
| 15:13 | annevk | ... works |
| 15:13 | <jgraham> | function is a keyword, not a variable |
| 15:13 | <jgraham> | So that shouldn't work |
| 15:14 | <jgraham> | Also, my initial solution, that I didn't expect to work, of doing eval.call(iframewindow, code) also doesn't work |
| 15:57 | <hsivonen> | jgraham: what happens if you call setTimeout on another window? |
| 15:59 | <jgraham> | hsivonen: Won't that be like a direct function call on the other window? |
| 15:59 | <jgraham> | At least I assume |
| 16:09 | <hsivonen> | jgraham: oh. right. yes |
| 16:14 | <hsivonen> | eww. the style sheet of my site looks bad in Opera 11 on Linux. I wonder what has gone wrong. |
| 16:15 | <hsivonen> | also, what's the deal with the loop attribute on <video> not working in Firefox? |
| 16:16 | <hsivonen> | simply not implemented yet: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=449157 |
| 16:22 | <adactio> | Is anyone here working on WebKit/Safari/Chrome? |
| 16:24 | <Rik`> | adactio: "don't ask to ask" :) |
| 16:24 | <adactio> | Um.. okay. I guess I'll just go ahead and um, "ask" then... |
| 16:25 | <adactio> | Why is it that WebKit gives the datalist special treatment in its html.css file by declaring display: none ...despite the fact that datalist is otherwise an unknown element as far as the browser is concerned? |
| 16:26 | <Rik`> | ah, I don't know why but it's been bugging me a lot |
| 16:27 | <adactio> | I was about to file a bug in the WebKit Bugzilla but I wanted to sanity-check first that there wasn't a good reason for that CSS declaration. |
| 16:27 | <Rik`> | it makes it almost unusable in Firefox and Opera because of that |
| 16:27 | <Rik`> | adactio: my understanding is that datalist implementation in webkit has various patches and some landed |
| 16:28 | <adactio> | So it's because we're in a period of transition that we've got what's kinda the worst of both worlds; no support, but no fallback either. |
| 16:28 | <Rik`> | https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27247 |
| 16:28 | <Rik`> | this is the master bug for this |
| 16:29 | <adactio> | I should add my concerns there? |
| 16:29 | <Evet> | what is your favourite cross-domain user auth method? |
| 16:30 | <Rik`> | adactio: I think you should file a bug with a small testcase and set it as blocking bug 27427 |
| 16:30 | <adactio> | Okay. Will do. |
| 16:32 | <Rik`> | adactio: please cc me (rik⊙wo) |
| 16:32 | <Rik`> | I won't be able to help but I'd like to follow the subject |
| 16:40 | <Rik`> | adactio: apparently the datalist implementation is hidden behind a config flag |
| 16:40 | <Rik`> | all code related to that should be disabled but the CSS style in html.css is not behind a flag |
| 16:40 | <Rik`> | https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/47420 |
| 16:41 | <adactio> | Ah, right! (damn: I just posted my bug) |
| 16:42 | <Rik`> | adactio: bug number ? |
| 16:42 | <adactio> | 52214 |
| 16:52 | <Rik`> | adactio: thanks, I should have filed this bug when playing with this |
| 18:16 | <Hixie> | hsivonen: that's something the rich snippets team keep telling me that i should change in the spec, so maybe it's just them leading by implementation |
| 18:19 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: I see |
| 18:19 | <Hixie> | (assuming you mean the content=""-on-everything thing) |
| 18:19 | <hsivonen> | Hixie: that's what I meant |
| 19:08 | <TabAtkins> | I'm not sure I really understand what @content-on-everything is for, anyway. |
| 19:08 | <TabAtkins> | It seems better to make it obvious that you're embedding invisible data via a <meta>, personally. |
| 19:12 | <Ms2ger> | TabAtkins, but invisible data causes unicorns to be born |
| 19:12 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: agreed |
| 19:14 | <TabAtkins> | Plus, @content-on-everything is, on first sight, ambiguous when it appears on something which already takes its value from an attribute, like <a>. |
| 19:14 | <TabAtkins> | So, yeah, remove away. |
| 19:15 | <TabAtkins> | Should I file a bug? |
| 19:17 | <Hixie> | anyone know what http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11572 is about? |
| 19:17 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: internally, on the docs? sure |
| 19:17 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: cc me? |
| 19:20 | <Ms2ger> | Hixie, I'm assuming the "Watch for updates" widget |
| 19:20 | <Hixie> | yeah but what does he want to have happen? |
| 19:20 | <Hixie> | i don't understand his request |
| 19:21 | <Ms2ger> | Me neither |
| 19:21 | Ms2ger | verifies |
| 19:21 | <Hixie> | heh |
| 19:23 | <Hixie> | how abotu http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11574 ? |
| 19:31 | <TabAtkins> | Hixie: Nope, another nonsense bug. |
| 19:32 | <Hixie> | k |
| 19:32 | <Hixie> | just making sure i'm not missing something :-) |
| 19:45 | <TabAtkins> | Hixie: Bug filed, you're cc'd. |
| 19:45 | <Hixie> | ta |
| 19:49 | <TabAtkins> | Hixie: How long does the publishing pipeline take for whatwg.org? I'm getting a persistent message that I'm on r5747. |
| 19:49 | <Hixie> | full-page or multipage? |
| 19:50 | <TabAtkins> | /C |
| 19:50 | <TabAtkins> | Also, I just discovered an irssi shortcut, dammit. |
| 19:50 | <Hixie> | dunno, it's however long Philip`'s server takes to send a reply |
| 19:50 | <Hixie> | sometimes things get backed up |
| 19:50 | <Hixie> | use the single-page copy :-) |
| 19:51 | <TabAtkins> | If I had it up constantly, I probably would. But for pulling up multiple times over the course of a day, single-page is too slow to load. |
| 19:52 | <Hixie> | ah |
| 19:52 | <Hixie> | yeah |
| 19:52 | <Hixie> | leave it open :-P |
| 19:52 | <TabAtkins> | Bah. |
| 19:55 | <Hixie> | i have a bunch of tabs open... gmail, corp gmail, calendar, the spec... |
| 19:56 | <mpilgrim> | obviously the spec needs an in-page autoupdate mechanism so we can keep it open all the time and have it bring itself up to date automatically |
| 19:57 | <Hixie> | i had that |
| 19:57 | <Hixie> | but having a 5mb doc reload itself every 90 seconds is pretty painful :-) |
| 19:57 | <Hixie> | so now it just has an alert |
| 19:57 | <Hixie> | and lets you reload it manually |
| 19:58 | <mpilgrim> | something more sophisticated than window.refresh() |
| 19:58 | <Hixie> | (and the alert is a bit broken for the multipage copy because it checks the single-page rev, not the multipage one) |
| 19:58 | <Hixie> | ah |
| 19:58 | <Hixie> | that would be neat |
| 19:58 | <Hixie> | well |
| 19:58 | <Hixie> | patches welcome! |
| 19:58 | <mpilgrim> | lol |
| 20:07 | <Ms2ger> | mpilgrim, looks like you've got outstanding feedback on Google's audio/video tests, any plans to address? |
| 20:07 | <mpilgrim> | coming this week |
| 20:07 | <Hixie> | man, suggesting that <device> should support usb and rs232 has sure hit a nerve |
| 20:08 | <Hixie> | that one note in the spec (which is only in the whatwg copy) has received at least 3 separate bugs voicing support for the dea |
| 20:08 | <Hixie> | idea |
| 20:08 | <Ms2ger> | Excellent |
| 20:11 | <webr3> | are the specs aligned enough to make an html and js application, then wrap it up and deploy as an extension which works in even a coupel of browsers (lke widget specs for isntance) ? |
| 20:11 | <Hixie> | which specs? |
| 20:12 | <webr3> | warp digital signatures and the like i guess - just anything that's interop between the browsers |
| 20:13 | <Hixie> | oh, widget specs? |
| 20:14 | <webr3> | just any specs that would allow you to create a web app in html + js (and related specs) then wrap it up and run it as an extension in anybrowser - kudos++ if it can run in main browser context |
| 20:15 | <Hixie> | web apps and extensions seem like unrelated concepts, i don't really understand |
| 20:15 | <Hixie> | an extension is something that can manipulate the browser or the page loaded in the browser, |
| 20:16 | <Hixie> | but a web page is something that a browser runs that can't affect the browser |
| 20:16 | <Hixie> | no? |
| 20:17 | <webr3> | depends hwo you're looking at it, on the other hand, an extension is something somebody can install and then trust to access the web, and given cors etc you can't do this w/ a normal js app, so people are forced to move in to creating extensions.. |
| 20:17 | <AryehGregor> | Most Chrome extensions are mostly just web pages with access to some extra functions, aren't they? |
| 20:17 | <webr3> | just so they can make an app which can access the web.. |
| 20:18 | <webr3> | AryehGregor, exactly - they are - and half the time the extra functions aren't wanted or required - there are many that just need the "can access the web" status |
| 20:19 | <webr3> | basically, every extension which doesn't extend the browser but is rather just an app w/ advanced permissions |
| 20:20 | <AryehGregor> | There's work in this direction, but nothing that multiple browsers actually implement yet, as far as I can see. |
| 20:22 | <webr3> | indeed - I raised on webapps and device-apis a few times but haven't refined down the "use-cases" yet to something v convincing - even though many have asked |
| 20:23 | <TabAtkins> | Yay, Chrome's dropping h.264! |
| 20:24 | <miketaylr> | just saw that |
| 20:26 | <Ms2ger> | (http://blog.chromium.org/2011/01/html-video-codec-support-in-chrome.html) |
| 20:29 | <Hixie> | there's something silly about me resolving bugs i filed with "Rationale: concurred with reporter's comments" |
| 20:29 | othermaciej | wonders if WebM will ever be submitted to a standards process |
| 20:29 | <TabAtkins> | Heh. |
| 20:30 | <AryehGregor> | Very interesting. |
| 20:30 | <Ms2ger> | Hixie, I've been thinking that too |
| 20:30 | <Hixie> | Ms2ger: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11051 - i removed them, but this leaves holes in the numbers, is that right? |
| 20:30 | <AryehGregor> | This means H.264 is no longer a serious contender, even if Firefox loses a lot of market share. |
| 20:30 | <AryehGregor> | Hixie, I always thought it was amusing. |
| 20:31 | <Ms2ger> | I was thinking make DATA_CLONE_ERR 24 |
| 20:31 | <AryehGregor> | othermaciej, what I wonder is whether Google will actually ever license its patents for anything other than using its exact implementation. |
| 20:31 | <Hixie> | does anyone implement DATA_CLONE_ERR yet? |
| 20:31 | <Ms2ger> | Fx |
| 20:31 | <AryehGregor> | Because it hasn't. |
| 20:31 | <othermaciej> | AryehGregor: orly |
| 20:31 | <Hixie> | Ms2ger: let's just leave it as is then |
| 20:31 | <Hixie> | Ms2ger: we can fill the holes later |
| 20:31 | <Ms2ger> | I've already changed it once, I can do it again ;) |
| 20:31 | <AryehGregor> | othermaciej, http://www.webmproject.org/about/faq/#what_if_someone_makes_a_change_to_the_code_and_gives_it_to_me_do_i_have_a_patent_license_from_google_for_that_change |
| 20:32 | <Hixie> | Ms2ger: from what i hear, long-term heycam has a plan to make these numbers academic instead |
| 20:32 | <Ms2ger> | But I was thinking the same thing earlier today, actually |
| 20:32 | <AryehGregor> | That's how I'm reading it. |
| 20:32 | <Hixie> | Ms2ger: s/instead/anyway/ |
| 20:32 | <Hixie> | not sure where "instead" came from |
| 20:32 | <AryehGregor> | http://www.webmproject.org/license/additional/ |
| 20:32 | <othermaciej> | AryehGregor: that addresses the issue of patent licenses on random changes to the code - it doesn't really address independent reimplementation |
| 20:32 | <othermaciej> | which is IMO the interesting question |
| 20:33 | <AryehGregor> | "Google hereby grants to you a . . . patent license to make, have made, use [etc.] . . . the contents of this implementation of VP8 . . ." |
| 20:33 | <Ms2ger> | With a class per exception? That sounded a little bloated to me |
| 20:33 | <othermaciej> | that license does say "this implementation" |
| 20:33 | <othermaciej> | is there any separate patent grant? |
| 20:33 | <AryehGregor> | Not that I'm aware of. |
| 20:33 | <Hixie> | Ms2ger: yeah i dunno how he'll do it |
| 20:34 | <AryehGregor> | Nobody seems to have publicized this point much, that I've seen. |
| 20:34 | <heycam> | I think my mail to public-script-coord had most of the pertinent details |
| 20:34 | <Ms2ger> | Anyway, keep the hole for now |
| 20:34 | <AryehGregor> | Maybe I should submit a Slashdot story, that often works to get people's attention. |
| 20:34 | <heycam> | Ms2ger, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/2010OctDec/0112.html |
| 20:34 | <AryehGregor> | Or maybe I should post to some Mozilla list asking why they're going along with it. |
| 20:35 | <Hixie> | oh dear, i reached http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11067 |
| 20:35 | <AryehGregor> | I've definitely seen someone from Mozilla post to www-font saying that even field-of-use restrictions on patent licenses are unacceptable to them. |
| 20:35 | <Hixie> | is annevk around? |
| 20:35 | <othermaciej> | AryehGregor: I wonder if the independently implemented WebM decoder is technically liable for patent infringement |
| 20:35 | <Ms2ger> | Hixie, shall I add a random comment? :) |
| 20:35 | <othermaciej> | (ffvp8) |
| 20:36 | <Hixie> | Ms2ger: hah |
| 20:36 | <AryehGregor> | I can't see why not. |
| 20:36 | <othermaciej> | that is a surprisingly poor patent situation |
| 20:36 | <AryehGregor> | It's exactly what gave rise to Oracle's current lawsuit against Google, isn't it? They reimplemented Java when the patent grant only covered the original implementation. |
| 20:37 | <othermaciej> | it's potentially a similar situation, yeah |
| 20:37 | <Ms2ger> | I'll just touch all bugs that I didn't file :) |
| 20:37 | <Hixie> | Ms2ger: then i'll just increase the priority on all your bugs... :-P |
| 20:37 | <othermaciej> | I'm concerned more from the practical aspect of "could Apple legally ship an independent reimplementation of WebM as part of QuickTime" |
| 20:38 | <othermaciej> | it sounds like that would not be safe, even if we were confident that the only applicable patents are held by Google |
| 20:38 | <Ms2ger> | Increase or decrease? Because increasing is fine with me ;) |
| 20:38 | <AryehGregor> | Well, you'd think that if Apple wanted to do that, they could talk to Google about it and get a special patent grant, if nothing else. |
| 20:39 | <AryehGregor> | My impression is there are other problems that prevent Apple and Microsoft from signing on. |
| 20:39 | <Hixie> | Ms2ger: either way, it touches the bug's change time :-P |
| 20:40 | <Ms2ger> | I'll need to reverse engineer your sorting algorithm to be sure whether your suggestion would help me |
| 20:41 | <Hixie> | my sorting algorithm is just sort-by-change-time-ascending |
| 20:41 | <Hixie> | click "Bugs" on damowmow.com/portal (under the column arbitrarily titled "Weekly") to see the list i use |
| 20:42 | <Hixie> | in the order i use it |
| 20:44 | <Ms2ger> | Oh, and input.selectionStart is still yours |
| 20:45 | <Hixie> | oops |
| 20:45 | <Hixie> | did you reassign it back? |
| 20:45 | <Ms2ger> | Yeah |
| 20:46 | <Hixie> | thanks |
| 20:55 | <othermaciej> | AryehGregor: I doubt there would be much enthusiasm for negotiating a one-off patent license - that's one thing that going through a standards process would help with |
| 20:57 | <AryehGregor> | It would certainly make sense to make a standard out of it. |
| 20:58 | <AryehGregor> | Just for appearances' sake, if nothing else. |
| 21:00 | <annevk> | Hixie, am now for a few minutes |
| 21:03 | <Hixie> | i fixed your formdata thing |
| 21:03 | <Hixie> | commented in the bug on how to use it |
| 21:04 | <annevk> | yay |
| 21:04 | <annevk> | kudos on Chrome for dropping H264 |
| 21:05 | <annevk> | I cannot help but wonder if it was for legal reasons (those that were raised initially and dismissed) |
| 21:05 | <annevk> | but either way it rocks |
| 21:06 | <annevk> | I suspect it has something to do with P2P as well |
| 21:09 | <Hixie> | othermaciej: btw, any chance the deadlines for the four things that are past the deadline on issue-status.html could be changed? It makes it harder to check what is the next deadline to come up |
| 21:10 | <AryehGregor> | annevk, what could it have to do with P2P? |
| 21:11 | <annevk> | For P2P having one format is important |
| 21:12 | <annevk> | So not supporting H264 makes arguing for WebM easier |
| 21:12 | <Hixie> | othermaciej: also, can the deadline for -119 be pushed to after the chairs make a decision on -118? What I propose for 119 depends on the answer to 118. |
| 21:12 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: looking |
| 21:13 | <AryehGregor> | Ms2ger, where exactly is the Selection stuff implemented, in Firefox? I've found the interface, but not the implementation. |
| 21:13 | <othermaciej> | I only see 3 expired items on issue-status.html at the moment |
| 21:13 | <othermaciej> | oh wait |
| 21:13 | <othermaciej> | misread the month |
| 21:13 | <Ms2ger> | Look for nsTypedSelection |
| 21:13 | <Hixie> | in other news, if any implementors care about how ;charset inside <meta content=""> is parsed, now is the time to write counter proposals for -125 and -126, I do not intend to write any myself. |
| 21:14 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: I can fix up the 4 that are marked expired |
| 21:14 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: not sure what to do about 119; can you explain the relation to 118 to me briefly? |
| 21:14 | <Hixie> | othermaciej: depending on how you resolve 118, there might not be an "up" relation at all, making 119 moot. |
| 21:15 | <othermaciej> | Hixie: would there be any other likely impact other than making the issue moot? |
| 21:16 | <othermaciej> | I wonder if abarth would care about 125 or 126 |
| 21:16 | <othermaciej> | too bad he's not here at the moment |
| 21:16 | <Hixie> | well if you decide in leif's favour, i'd have to try to decode what leif was proposing so as to work out what impact it has on 119 |
| 21:16 | <Hixie> | the only way it would not have an effect is if you decided in favour of the status quo, as far as i can tell |
| 21:17 | <Hixie> | and then my change proposal for 119 would likely just be the same two CPs from 118 but with slightly different rationales... |
| 21:17 | <Hixie> | ...which would be based on what you considered a strong argument for 118 |
| 21:20 | <othermaciej> | I would have to ask other people to indefinitely stretch the deadline, so the options I'd suggest are: (1) just write the proposals now with the understanding that they may be rendered moot; (2) ask for a fixed extension on the mailing list (e.g. an extra month to write counter-proposals) and I'll do my best to get 118 resolved in that time period; (3) ask for it to be tabled until 118 is resolved on the malning list, in which case I can't predict the answe |
| 21:20 | <othermaciej> | certainty |
| 21:21 | <Hixie> | i'm not asking for an indefinite stretch, unless you're saying the date you'll resolve 118 on is itself indefinitely stretched :-) |
| 21:22 | <Hixie> | and a fixed extension doesn't help if you still haven't resolved the other one by then |
| 21:30 | <Hixie> | ok well i sent an e-mail asking for an extension |
| 21:30 | <Hixie> | if we don't get it i guess i'll just let it slide and then when we get the resolution for -118 i'll reraise it saying we have new information :-) |
| 21:31 | <Hixie> | lunch time |
| 22:01 | <annevk> | At some point Mark Pilgrim made a fuss about Mozilla not doing H264 yet continuing to support Flash. I feel like pulling a Gruber but I cannot find it :/ |
| 22:05 | <cying> | did google give any warning here about h.264? |
| 22:06 | <bga_> | h.268 :( -> http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRWare_Iron instead chromium |
| 22:06 | <annevk> | If they did you would have known cying :) |
| 22:06 | <annevk> | We are a public group |
| 22:07 | <cying> | annevk: :) |
| 22:07 | karlcow | has difficulty to see that as a big news, but I may miss something. |
| 22:07 | <cying> | karlcow: how do you see it? |
| 22:08 | <karlcow> | they drop the support in Chrome, but if I understand it means that to play h264. there will be plug-ins? Am I right? |
| 22:09 | <karlcow> | either flash, or plugins on the OS platforms. |
| 22:09 | <cying> | karlcow: well, flash would require special code path to yank the h.264 video out of the HTML5 video tag and put it in a Flash player wrapper. |
| 22:10 | <cying> | karlcow: i see your point about other system codecs / Quicktime on the desktop |
| 22:10 | <cying> | karlcow: but mobile video would have weaker support |
| 22:10 | <karlcow> | indeed |
| 22:11 | <karlcow> | I think we do not know what is the real story behind aka the business figures |
| 22:12 | <karlcow> | on the other hand, it might help some people to move further away of h264 and encourage to adopt other codecs. |
| 22:12 | <karlcow> | We will see. |
| 22:12 | <annevk> | I posted a few theories above |
| 22:12 | <AryehGregor> | Chrome doesn't support pluggable <video> formats AFAIK, I think it's hardcoded into the source. |
| 22:13 | <cying> | it's true, but the WebM story is just really weak at the moment |
| 22:13 | <annevk> | AryehGregor, they use ffmpeg; so if that is pluggable somehow |
| 22:14 | <AryehGregor> | annevk, yeah, but I'm pretty sure the code that calls it is hardcoded to only allow a few formats. I once asked in #chromium-dev or something whether there was official info on what <video>/<audio> formats Chrome supported, and a dev linked me to the source code. |
| 22:15 | <AryehGregor> | I didn't actually read the code or anything, but it looked like it involved short lists of supported formats supplied as literal arrays. |
| 22:15 | <AryehGregor> | Anyway, the status quo was that for web video you needed to encode as H.264 plus (Theora or WebM) anyway to work in the latest browsers. This doesn't change that at all. |
| 22:15 | <AryehGregor> | Except that it pretty much quashes any hope that Firefox will be won over. |
| 22:17 | <AryehGregor> | Also, it's notable because the non-WebM-supporting browsers still support WebM if you get the user to download the codec, at least on desktop. But the non-H.264-supporting browsers just don't support it period. |
| 22:17 | <AryehGregor> | (well, that's actually irrelevant to Google not supporting H.264, I guess, but it's notable in the broader picture) |
| 22:20 | <TabAtkins> | Dammit, twitter HTML-unescapes one level in their messages. |
| 22:30 | <cying> | so much for h.264 HTML5 video demos |
| 22:31 | <KrocCamen> | Microsoft and Apple, sitting in a tree… |
| 22:32 | <AryehGregor> | I don't know why people care so much about IE/Safari's non-support of WebM. They'll still support it if the user installs the right codec, right? |
| 22:32 | <AryehGregor> | Aren't users adequately trained to install anything they're asked to if it says "You need to install this to play the video"? |
| 22:32 | <KrocCamen> | Flash will support WebM, minimising that necessity. Not that installing Flash isn’t torturous to begin with. |
| 22:33 | <AryehGregor> | Ah, right. |
| 22:33 | <webr3> | AryehGregor, there's quite a distrust w/ many users.. they're used to seeing messages like "you have a virus, click here to remove it" (which they do, just to download the virus) |
| 22:33 | <AryehGregor> | Anyway, mobile (read: iPhone) is still a problem. |
| 22:34 | <TabAtkins> | You seem to be contradicting yourself, webr3. They can't be distrustful *and* click on the virus scanner downloads. |
| 22:35 | <annevk> | AryehGregor, expecting end users to install codecs seems very naive |
| 22:37 | <AryehGregor> | Well, some will. |
| 22:37 | <AryehGregor> | It's far from ideal, of course. |
| 22:37 | <AryehGregor> | But they only need to do it once. |
| 22:37 | <MikeSmith> | as I understand it, at this point Safari will not support WebM for the video element even if a user does manually install it |
| 22:38 | <AryehGregor> | I thought it supported anything QuickTime supported. Does QuickTime not support WebM? |
| 22:38 | <MikeSmith> | I guess it does not |
| 22:38 | <MikeSmith> | and will not |
| 22:38 | <KrocCamen> | Not yet, because a plugin has not been made -- but it is being worked on. |
| 22:38 | <MikeSmith> | unless they change their position oin it |
| 22:38 | <AryehGregor> | Ah. |
| 22:38 | <MikeSmith> | ah |
| 22:39 | <KrocCamen> | Safari on the desktop will play WebM if the codec is installed, it’s iOS where it’s H.264 or nothing. |
| 22:39 | <MikeSmith> | KrocCamen: I didn't know a third-party plugin for it is possible |
| 22:39 | <MikeSmith> | ok |
| 22:39 | <KrocCamen> | Have you not heard of Perian? |
| 22:39 | <MikeSmith> | nope |
| 22:39 | <MikeSmith> | but I don't know much about Quicktime |
| 22:40 | <MikeSmith> | nor really about platform video stuff in general |
| 22:40 | <MikeSmith> | I am among the unwashed masses who just expect this stuff to work |
| 22:40 | <karlcow> | I wonder if things like Perian will be done for mac user base |
| 22:40 | <karlcow> | http://www.perian.org/ |
| 22:41 | <roc> | Flash has announced support for VP8, not WebM |
| 22:41 | <karlcow> | http://groups.google.com/group/perian-discuss/browse_thread/thread/e32789fc0b2b7612 |
| 22:42 | <karlcow> | http://trac.perian.org/changeset/1310 |
| 22:43 | <jgraham> | roc: How significant is the difference, in context? |
| 22:43 | <roc> | I don't know |
| 22:44 | <roc> | conceivably they could support VP8+AAC in some non-WebM container, thus making their support token only |
| 22:44 | <roc> | which would make no sense |
| 22:44 | <roc> | except that we did observe Adobe's original announcement said "WebM" and was revised to "VP8" |
| 22:46 | <jgraham> | Maybe VP8 in a flash-specific container? Which would be OK if you could just switch containers without changing the video |
| 22:46 | <roc> | I suppose that's possible but it also doesn't make a lot of sense |
| 22:46 | <AryehGregor> | Presumably they'd have to support Vorbis too for that to be useful, yes? |
| 22:46 | <roc> | yes |
| 22:47 | <roc> | Also I'm surprised that they haven't produced any Flash build with any kind of VP8 support yet |
| 22:47 | <jgraham> | I find nothing in the video world makes a lot of sense, so it is hard to tell the actually nutty ideas from the merely nutty-sounding |
| 22:48 | <MikeSmith> | http://nodejs.org/old_spec/ (early spec for node from 2009) |
| 22:50 | <MikeSmith> | with <html lang="en-US-x-hixie"> and <link href="http://www.whatwg.org/style/specification">; |
| 22:50 | <MikeSmith> | so now we can claim that node is part of HTML5! |
| 22:50 | <TabAtkins> | Yus! |
| 22:51 | <AryehGregor> | roc, why is Mozilla shipping WebM support when the VP8 patent license doesn't cover anything other than Google's exact implementation? |
| 22:54 | <roc> | I thought that was going to change |
| 22:54 | <AryehGregor> | Well, it hasn't yet. http://www.webmproject.org/license/additional/ |
| 22:54 | <AryehGregor> | "this implementation of VP8" |
| 22:54 | <roc> | in any case, what we have now is much better than the alternatives |
| 22:55 | <AryehGregor> | Yeah, that's certainly true. |
| 22:56 | <MikeSmith> | we really need to get it specced properly somewhere and published |
| 22:56 | <roc> | that is being worked on |
| 22:56 | <roc> | AryehGregor: note that the license says "patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, transfer, and otherwise run, modify and propagate the contents of this implementation of VP8" |
| 22:57 | <roc> | note "modify" there ... the license applies to modifications of Google's implementation |
| 22:57 | <AryehGregor> | That doesn't give you a license to distribute the modified version. |
| 22:57 | <AryehGregor> | The FAQ says this explicitly. |
| 22:57 | <AryehGregor> | http://www.webmproject.org/about/faq/#what_if_someone_makes_a_change_to_the_code_and_gives_it_to_me_do_i_have_a_patent_license_from_google_for_that_change |
| 22:58 | <AryehGregor> | It sounds like maybe you have a patent license to any unmodified parts of the code, but not to the changes? |
| 22:58 | <AryehGregor> | Anyway, it certainly doesn't cover reimplementations. |
| 22:59 | <roc> | OK I don't understand that FAQ item in relation to that patent license, then |
| 22:59 | <roc> | however |
| 22:59 | <roc> | this license does cover reimplementations: http://www.webmproject.org/license/bitstream/ |
| 23:00 | <Hixie> | woah, firefox alert() changed |
| 23:00 | <Hixie> | pretty |
| 23:00 | <jamesr_> | is it really tab-modal? |
| 23:00 | <roc> | AryehGregor: does that satisfy you? |
| 23:01 | <AryehGregor> | Hixie, it behaves badly on long lines, though. It should break them, but content just becomes inaccessible instead (except by select all + copy/paste or such, I guess). |
| 23:01 | <jamesr_> | omg it is! |
| 23:01 | <roc> | jamesr_: yes |
| 23:01 | <jamesr_> | roc: what if two tabs have a script link? is it modal for both of 'em? |
| 23:01 | <roc> | I don't know |
| 23:02 | <jamesr_> | btw that gradient renders slow as balls on my linux box so resizing sucks (minefield 4.09b9pre 2011-01-07) |
| 23:02 | <AryehGregor> | roc, hmm. That's quite confusing. But yeah, that seems like it should cover things, unless Google wants to argue about exactly what is "necessarily" infringed. |
| 23:02 | <jamesr_> | large gradients are a pain |
| 23:02 | <roc> | jamesr_: I blame your X drivers |
| 23:02 | <AryehGregor> | I don't know why they have the other license at all. |
| 23:02 | <roc> | we use XRender |
| 23:02 | <jamesr_> | ah, i have compiz off |
| 23:03 | <roc> | AryehGregor: the other license covers people who want to use Google's VP8 implementation |
| 23:03 | <AryehGregor> | Why isn't that covered by the bitstream license, though? |
| 23:03 | <roc> | since it's quite likely that there are patents covering features of Google's VP8 implementation that are not "necessary" to implementing the specification |
| 23:03 | <AryehGregor> | In case they infringe random unrelated patents, I guess. |
| 23:03 | <roc> | right |
| 23:04 | <AryehGregor> | Okay, that makes sense. |
| 23:04 | <AryehGregor> | The FAQ should really be clearer, though. |
| 23:06 | <roc> | you might want to follow up on your chromium blog comment :-) |
| 23:06 | <roc> | if you can still find it |
| 23:06 | <roc> | amongst the noise |
| 23:08 | <AryehGregor> | Actually, I'll just delete it. |
| 23:08 | <AryehGregor> | Easier that way. |
| 23:09 | <AryehGregor> | (since I can't edit it, Blogger stinks that way) |
| 23:10 | <AryehGregor> | The commenters there implying Adobe paid Google to do this amuse me. |
| 23:11 | <AryehGregor> | It seems like a clear indication to me that Google will cut off Flash support too as soon as it's strategically possible (if ever). |
| 23:11 | <gsnedders> | I wonder if they will on Android |
| 23:11 | <gsnedders> | Esp. seeming their main competitor doesn't support it there. |
| 23:11 | <gsnedders> | But there again, I wonder if OEMs would just patch it back in… |
| 23:13 | <AryehGregor> | I imagine they will someday, but not until Flash is really mostly useless. |
| 23:13 | AryehGregor | is on the record as predicting Flash's demise in 2015 at the latest |
| 23:14 | <KrocCamen> | AryehGregor: It’s irrelevance will come much sooner. |
| 23:14 | gsnedders | declines to make such estimates |
| 23:14 | <AryehGregor> | Yeah, I was being conservative. |
| 23:14 | <AryehGregor> | No point in making predictions that have a significant chance of being wrong, right? |
| 23:15 | <gsnedders> | KrocCamen: For a lot of things, it is still going to to relevant as long as people want DRM on videos. And I don't see that going away soon… |
| 23:16 | <AryehGregor> | Flash uses DRM that's not broken? Because you can do broken DRM with <video> too. |
| 23:17 | <gsnedders> | AryehGregor: how? |
| 23:17 | <KrocCamen> | gsnedders: And what if Google implement DRM in Chrome; they have bought a video DRM company... http://www.osnews.com/story/24099/Google_buy_DRM_firm_Widevine_Solution_to_HTML5_Video_Adoption_ |
| 23:17 | <AryehGregor> | For a loose definition of "DRM". |
| 23:17 | <AryehGregor> | I mean, you can make it hard for users to save the video. |
| 23:18 | <AryehGregor> | KrocCamen, not a replacement unless all the browsers agree on a DRM scheme. Plugins are more likely. |
| 23:20 | <gsnedders> | AryehGregor: Flash is a plugin, and has an installed user base. |
| 23:21 | <roc> | does iOS have any DRM support? |
| 23:21 | <AryehGregor> | gsnedders, yes, I agree, if you want more than basic obfuscation than Flash is a likely solution. |
| 23:21 | <AryehGregor> | The iOS platform is DRM'd. |
| 23:21 | <gsnedders> | roc: Not apart from FairPlay. But you also have no way to save files. |
| 23:21 | <AryehGregor> | I mean, you can't actually modify the programs or anything. |
| 23:21 | <AryehGregor> | Without jailbreaking, anyway. |
| 23:22 | <gsnedders> | AryehGregor: And most, e.g., IPTV solutions use DRM due to contractual obligations. |
| 23:23 | <gsnedders> | And that's a growing market, so we need some serious plan to move Flash there. |
| 23:25 | <roc> | Netflix has shown quite a bit of interest in HTML5 video |
| 23:26 | <KrocCamen> | Google TV will need to implement DRM internally, there doesn’t have to be any agreement between browser vendors there. |
| 23:33 | <AryehGregor> | Now gmaxwell has e-mailed me complaining about my Chromium blog post too. |
| 23:33 | <AryehGregor> | Well, at least that confusion has been cleared up. |
| 23:36 | <AryehGregor> | othermaciej, it turns out I was wrong, there's a separate bitstream license that covers all reimplementations and modified versions: http://www.webmproject.org/license/bitstream/ |
| 23:36 | <othermaciej> | AryehGregor: I guess that covers anything that supports the exact bitstream in the spec |
| 23:37 | <AryehGregor> | I guess, yeah. |
| 23:37 | <AryehGregor> | But it's comparable to many other such patent grants, isn't it? I'm pretty sure Adobe's patent grants on PDF have similarly narrow wording. |
| 23:38 | <AryehGregor> | I imagine the MPEG-LA license does too. |
| 23:38 | <AryehGregor> | (although I haven't looked at the latter, is it even public?) |
| 23:38 | <othermaciej> | I'm having trouble finding the bitstream guide |
| 23:38 | <othermaciej> | I have no idea what the terms of the MPEG-LA license are |
| 23:39 | <othermaciej> | ah, here we go http://www.webmproject.org/code/specs/ |
| 23:41 | <AryehGregor> | It looks like the H.264 license agreement is only available in hard copy: http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/AgreementExpress.aspx |
| 23:43 | <AryehGregor> | "Adobe grants . . . the royalty-free right . . . to make, have made, use, sell, import and distribute Compliant Implementations." http://www.adobe.com/pdf/pdfs/ISO32000-1PublicPatentLicense.pdf |
| 23:46 | <othermaciej> | yes, limiting patent grants to compliant implementations is a common set of terns for RF licensing for a standard |
| 23:58 | <bga_> | lol http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/f0fb0/google_removing_h264_support_in_chrome/c1ccnwg |