00:05
<rniwa>
smaug____: interesting
00:05
<rniwa>
smaug____: yeah
00:05
<rniwa>
smaug____: currently, there's a bit of timing issue with respect to mutation obserers
00:06
<rniwa>
smaug____: interesting
00:06
<rniwa>
smaug____: yeah
00:06
<rniwa>
smaug____: currently, there's a bit of timing issue with respect to mutation obserers
00:06
<rniwa>
smaug____: some editor developers have explictily told me that they want to see what changed in a given DOM transation
00:06
<rniwa>
smaug____: and we told them that they can use mutation observers
00:06
<rniwa>
smaug____: some editor developers have explictily told me that they want to see what changed in a given DOM transation
00:06
<rniwa>
smaug____: and we told them that they can use mutation observers
00:06
<rniwa>
smaug____: however, mutation observer only notifies at the end of a micro task
00:06
<rniwa>
smaug____: whereas multiple transactions can be added at once within a single micro task
00:07
<rniwa>
smaug____: however, mutation observer only notifies at the end of a micro task
00:07
<rniwa>
smaug____: whereas multiple transactions can be added at once within a single micro task
00:07
<rniwa>
I think AryehGregor and ehsan didn't want to add a duplicate API
00:07
<smaug____>
right
00:07
<rniwa>
I think AryehGregor and ehsan didn't want to add a duplicate API
00:07
<smaug____>
right
00:07
<rniwa>
also, the only case where catching the list of DOM mutations is important is when UA does something per user actions
00:07
<rniwa>
not then they themselves modify DOM
00:07
<rniwa>
because then they'll know what had happened
00:08
<rniwa>
also, the only case where catching the list of DOM mutations is important is when UA does something per user actions
00:08
<rniwa>
not then they themselves modify DOM
00:08
<rniwa>
because then they'll know what had happened
00:08
<rniwa>
but then the API is kind of inconsistent in that way :(
00:08
<rniwa>
haven't figured out a way to \ this yet
00:08
<rniwa>
but then the API is kind of inconsistent in that way :(
00:08
<rniwa>
haven't figured out a way to \ this yet
00:08
<rniwa>
smaug____: i'm all ears if you have some suggestion to resolve this issue
00:09
<rniwa>
smaug____: i'm all ears if you have some suggestion to resolve this issue
00:09
<smaug____>
need to think about, after reading the API
00:09
smaug____
adds undomanager to the list of things to read and review
00:10
<smaug____>
need to think about, after reading the API
00:10
smaug____
adds undomanager to the list of things to read and review
00:10
<rniwa>
smaug____: :)
00:10
<rniwa>
smaug____: i'm a bit bised here but undo manager api is one of exciting new APIs for those people who make productivity apps on the web
00:11
<rniwa>
smaug____: :)
00:11
<rniwa>
smaug____: i'm a bit bised here but undo manager api is one of exciting new APIs for those people who make productivity apps on the web
00:11
<smaug____>
what is "productivity apps" ?
00:11
<smaug____>
what is "productivity apps" ?
00:11
<rniwa>
smaug____: productivity apps as in word processors, spreadsheet app, presentation app, etc...
00:11
<rniwa>
smaug____: things that microsoft office do
00:12
<rniwa>
smaug____: productivity apps as in word processors, spreadsheet app, presentation app, etc...
00:12
<rniwa>
smaug____: things that microsoft office do
00:12
<rniwa>
smaug____: or any other business-related apps that create things
00:12
<rniwa>
smaug____: or any other business-related apps that create things
00:12
<smaug____>
ah, those things I don't use :)
00:12
<rniwa>
smaug____: as supposed to games, etc...
00:12
<smaug____>
not that I play games either :)
00:13
<smaug____>
ah, those things I don't use :)
00:13
<rniwa>
smaug____: as supposed to games, etc...
00:13
<rniwa>
i don't play games on my computer ever
00:13
<smaug____>
not that I play games either :)
00:13
<rniwa>
i don't play games on my computer ever
00:13
<rniwa>
so i'm less appreciative of lots of media/device related apis that have been introdued...
00:13
<rniwa>
introduced*
00:13
<rniwa>
so i'm less appreciative of lots of media/device related apis that have been introdued...
00:13
<rniwa>
introduced*
00:16
<smaug____>
I could still like to see good audio APIs, for music
00:16
<smaug____>
I could still like to see good audio APIs, for music
00:17
<rniwa>
smaug____: yeah, that's true
00:17
<rniwa>
smaug____: yeah, that's true
00:26
<zewt>
audio apis for music are trivial, compared to ones for games
00:26
<zewt>
audio apis for music are trivial, compared to ones for games
00:35
<smaug____>
zewt: really? requirements are higher, especially if you need to handle input and output
00:35
<smaug____>
zewt: really? requirements are higher, especially if you need to handle input and output
00:44
<zewt>
there's not a whole lot to "play song from URL"; there's a huge amount involved in games
00:44
<zewt>
there's not a whole lot to "play song from URL"; there's a huge amount involved in games
00:46
<smaug____>
zewt: I mean producing music
00:47
<smaug____>
zewt: I mean producing music
00:47
<smaug____>
games are easier, since for example with effects you don't have to be so exact. reverb can be just some reverb
00:48
<smaug____>
games are easier, since for example with effects you don't have to be so exact. reverb can be just some reverb
00:48
<smaug____>
with music you need to know the results exactly
00:48
<smaug____>
with music you need to know the results exactly
00:51
<zewt>
games are hard; you need low latency, and it wants lots of features (3d directionality, occlusions, time shifting, other filters, all of it changing in realtime)
00:51
<zewt>
games are hard; you need low latency, and it wants lots of features (3d directionality, occlusions, time shifting, other filters, all of it changing in realtime)
00:51
<smaug____>
you need very low latency with music
00:51
<smaug____>
and you want all features in music production
00:51
<zewt>
low latency playing back music is fairly straightforward; harder to do with complex effects
00:52
<smaug____>
you need very low latency with music
00:52
<smaug____>
and you want all features in music production
00:52
<zewt>
low latency playing back music is fairly straightforward; harder to do with complex effects
00:52
<smaug____>
I talking about a DAW implemented in HTML+JS :)
00:53
<smaug____>
I talking about a DAW implemented in HTML+JS :)
01:01
<Hixie>
i added some examples for arcTo() in http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#building-paths
01:02
<Hixie>
i added some examples for arcTo() in http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#building-paths
01:03
<Hixie>
and made arcTo() support ellipses, though i haven't added examples for that yet
01:03
<Hixie>
i'll make arc() support ellipses tomorrow
01:03
<Hixie>
(spent way too much time today drawing those danged diagrams)
01:04
<Hixie>
and made arcTo() support ellipses, though i haven't added examples for that yet
01:04
<Hixie>
i'll make arc() support ellipses tomorrow
01:04
<Hixie>
(spent way too much time today drawing those danged diagrams)
01:51
<MikeSmith>
scott_gonzalez: I have something ready for you guys to try out
01:51
<MikeSmith>
scott_gonzalez: I have something ready for you guys to try out
01:51
<scott_gonzalez>
MikeSmith: Awesome. Where can I download it?
01:52
<scott_gonzalez>
MikeSmith: Awesome. Where can I download it?
01:52
<MikeSmith>
scott_gonzalez: I've not written up the how-to on it yet, so lemme tell you here
01:53
<MikeSmith>
scott_gonzalez: I've not written up the how-to on it yet, so lemme tell you here
01:53
<MikeSmith>
first thing you need this:
01:53
<MikeSmith>
http://validator.github.com/jars/
01:53
<MikeSmith>
http://validator.github.com/jars/jing-html.jar
01:53
<MikeSmith>
first thing you need this:
01:53
<MikeSmith>
http://validator.github.com/jars/
01:53
<MikeSmith>
http://validator.github.com/jars/jing-html.jar
01:54
<scott_gonzalez>
got it
01:54
<scott_gonzalez>
got it
01:55
<MikeSmith>
then this:
01:55
<MikeSmith>
http://about.validator.nu/htmlparser/htmlparser-1.3.1.zip
01:55
<MikeSmith>
then this:
01:55
<MikeSmith>
http://about.validator.nu/htmlparser/htmlparser-1.3.1.zip
01:56
<MikeSmith>
you just need the jar file from that
01:56
<MikeSmith>
not the sources
01:56
<MikeSmith>
you just need the jar file from that
01:56
<MikeSmith>
not the sources
01:56
<MikeSmith>
htmlparser-1.3.1.jar
01:56
<scott_gonzalez>
ok
01:57
<MikeSmith>
htmlparser-1.3.1.jar
01:57
<scott_gonzalez>
ok
01:57
<MikeSmith>
then the last thing is this:
01:57
<MikeSmith>
http://kent.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/saxon/saxonb9-1-0-2j.zip
01:57
<MikeSmith>
last jar needed
01:58
<MikeSmith>
then the last thing is this:
01:58
<MikeSmith>
http://kent.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/saxon/saxonb9-1-0-2j.zip
01:58
<MikeSmith>
last jar needed
01:59
<scott_gonzalez>
The "saxonb9-1-0-2j.zip" file could not be found or is not available. Please select another file.
01:59
<scott_gonzalez>
The "saxonb9-1-0-2j.zip" file could not be found or is not available. Please select another file.
01:59
<MikeSmith>
oh
01:59
<scott_gonzalez>
http://sourceforge.net/projects/saxon/files/Saxon-B/9.1.0.8/saxonb9-1-0-8j.zip/download ?
02:00
<MikeSmith>
oh
02:00
<scott_gonzalez>
http://sourceforge.net/projects/saxon/files/Saxon-B/9.1.0.8/saxonb9-1-0-8j.zip/download ?
02:00
<MikeSmith>
yeah
02:00
<MikeSmith>
whatever the latest one is will be fine
02:00
<MikeSmith>
whatever the latest one is will be fine
02:02
<scott_gonzalez>
Do I need all of the saxon jars or just specific ones?
02:02
<scott_gonzalez>
Do I need all of the saxon jars or just specific ones?
02:03
<MikeSmith>
just the one
02:04
<MikeSmith>
just the one
02:04
<MikeSmith>
saxon9he.jar I think
02:04
<MikeSmith>
saxon9he.jar I think
02:05
<MikeSmith>
oh
02:05
<MikeSmith>
just saxon9.jar I guess
02:05
<scott_gonzalez>
ok
02:05
<MikeSmith>
yeah
02:05
<MikeSmith>
oh
02:05
<MikeSmith>
just saxon9.jar I guess
02:05
<scott_gonzalez>
ok
02:05
<MikeSmith>
yeah
02:05
<MikeSmith>
are all your docs HTML? I mean served as text/html?
02:06
<MikeSmith>
are all your docs HTML? I mean served as text/html?
02:06
<scott_gonzalez>
yeah
02:06
<scott_gonzalez>
yeah
02:06
<MikeSmith>
OK, so you need this:
02:06
<MikeSmith>
http://validator.github.com/schemas/html5.rnc
02:06
<MikeSmith>
OK, so you need this:
02:06
<MikeSmith>
http://validator.github.com/schemas/html5.rnc
02:06
<MikeSmith>
and this:
02:06
<MikeSmith>
http://validator.github.com/schemas/assertions.sch
02:07
<MikeSmith>
and this:
02:07
<MikeSmith>
http://validator.github.com/schemas/assertions.sch
02:08
<scott_gonzalez>
ok
02:09
<scott_gonzalez>
ok
02:17
<scott_gonzalez>
MikeSmith: I assume there's more (like how to run the validation)?
02:17
<MikeSmith>
yeah, sorry, got distracted
02:18
<scott_gonzalez>
MikeSmith: I assume there's more (like how to run the validation)?
02:18
<MikeSmith>
https://raw.github.com/validator/schemas/gh-pages/tools/validate-html.sh
02:18
<MikeSmith>
yeah, sorry, got distracted
02:18
<MikeSmith>
https://raw.github.com/validator/schemas/gh-pages/tools/validate-html.sh
02:24
<scott_gonzalez>
MikeSmith: https://gist.github.com/2026207
02:24
MikeSmith
looks
02:24
<scott_gonzalez>
MikeSmith: https://gist.github.com/2026207
02:24
MikeSmith
looks
02:25
<MikeSmith>
scott_gonzalez: seems like it's not finding the htmlparser in your java classpath
02:25
<MikeSmith>
maybe because of the filename
02:26
<MikeSmith>
scott_gonzalez: seems like it's not finding the htmlparser in your java classpath
02:26
<MikeSmith>
maybe because of the filename
02:26
<scott_gonzalez>
Oh, right, the saxon file is differnet.
02:26
<MikeSmith>
need to use htmlparser-1.3.1.jar instead
02:26
<scott_gonzalez>
Oh, right, the saxon file is differnet.
02:26
<MikeSmith>
need to use htmlparser-1.3.1.jar instead
02:27
<scott_gonzalez>
Yeah, that and saxon9.jar instead of saxon9he.jar
02:27
<scott_gonzalez>
It ran without errors that time.
02:27
<scott_gonzalez>
Let me try an invalid doc.
02:28
<scott_gonzalez>
Yeah, that and saxon9.jar instead of saxon9he.jar
02:28
<scott_gonzalez>
It ran without errors that time.
02:28
<scott_gonzalez>
Let me try an invalid doc.
02:29
<scott_gonzalez>
Seems to be working :-)
02:29
<scott_gonzalez>
Thanks.
02:29
<MikeSmith>
OK
02:30
<scott_gonzalez>
Seems to be working :-)
02:30
<scott_gonzalez>
Thanks.
02:30
<MikeSmith>
OK
02:30
<MikeSmith>
there are almost certainly some bugs in that schema that will cause it to report some attribute values as invalid when in fact they are valid
02:30
<MikeSmith>
there are almost certainly some bugs in that schema that will cause it to report some attribute values as invalid when in fact they are valid
02:30
<MikeSmith>
I don't know which ones
02:30
<MikeSmith>
but if you find any cases of that, let me know
02:31
<MikeSmith>
I don't know which ones
02:31
<MikeSmith>
but if you find any cases of that, let me know
02:31
<MikeSmith>
also, one big limitation of this is that it does not understand about data-* attributes
02:31
<scott_gonzalez>
I'll try to get this into our build system this week and I'll let you know how it goes.
02:31
<MikeSmith>
great
02:31
<scott_gonzalez>
Will it complain about them being invalid?
02:31
<MikeSmith>
also, one big limitation of this is that it does not understand about data-* attributes
02:31
<scott_gonzalez>
I'll try to get this into our build system this week and I'll let you know how it goes.
02:31
<MikeSmith>
great
02:31
<scott_gonzalez>
Will it complain about them being invalid?
02:31
<MikeSmith>
yes
02:31
<scott_gonzalez>
:-/
02:31
<scott_gonzalez>
We can just filter that out on our end for now.
02:32
<MikeSmith>
yes
02:32
<scott_gonzalez>
:-/
02:32
<scott_gonzalez>
We can just filter that out on our end for now.
02:32
<MikeSmith>
yeah, you'll need to do that
02:32
<MikeSmith>
yeah, you'll need to do that
02:32
<MikeSmith>
there is no way I can tell this jing tool about data-* attributes -- not without hacking it further
02:33
<MikeSmith>
there is no way I can tell this jing tool about data-* attributes -- not without hacking it further
02:33
<MikeSmith>
validator.nu uses a special pre-processing filter to deal with data-*
02:33
<MikeSmith>
validator.nu uses a special pre-processing filter to deal with data-*
02:33
<MikeSmith>
scott_gonzalez: anyway, one more thing: If you want it to run faster, you can cut out the second java call
02:34
<MikeSmith>
scott_gonzalez: anyway, one more thing: If you want it to run faster, you can cut out the second java call
02:34
<MikeSmith>
the one that uses the assertions.sch file
02:34
<MikeSmith>
of course you may miss some errors if you do that
02:34
<MikeSmith>
the one that uses the assertions.sch file
02:34
<scott_gonzalez>
What's that one doing?
02:34
<MikeSmith>
of course you may miss some errors if you do that
02:34
<scott_gonzalez>
What's that one doing?
02:34
<MikeSmith>
it's checking stuff that can't be checked with just the html5.rnc schema
02:34
<MikeSmith>
e.g., stuff that depends on checking the whole tree
02:35
<MikeSmith>
it's checking stuff that can't be checked with just the html5.rnc schema
02:35
<MikeSmith>
e.g., stuff that depends on checking the whole tree
02:35
<MikeSmith>
but it is relatively slow
02:35
<MikeSmith>
but it is relatively slow
02:35
<MikeSmith>
because I think it basically constructs a DOM and uses XSLT on the backend
02:36
<MikeSmith>
because I think it basically constructs a DOM and uses XSLT on the backend
02:36
<scott_gonzalez>
Ok, in that case we may just have three build targets for this. One for each of these and one that runs both of those targets.
02:37
<scott_gonzalez>
Ok, in that case we may just have three build targets for this. One for each of these and one that runs both of those targets.
02:37
<MikeSmith>
sounds good
02:37
<MikeSmith>
sounds good
02:37
<MikeSmith>
once you get it set up, I'd be curious to know about the times
02:38
<MikeSmith>
once you get it set up, I'd be curious to know about the times
02:38
<MikeSmith>
I think without that assertions check it will probably check most documents in 1 second or less
02:38
<MikeSmith>
probably 2 seconds at the very most
02:38
<MikeSmith>
I think without that assertions check it will probably check most documents in 1 second or less
02:38
<MikeSmith>
probably 2 seconds at the very most
02:38
<scott_gonzalez>
I'll let you know what we're seeing once it's all set up.
02:38
<MikeSmith>
thanks
02:39
<scott_gonzalez>
I'll let you know what we're seeing once it's all set up.
02:39
<MikeSmith>
thanks
02:39
<scott_gonzalez>
Thanks for getting this together.
02:40
<scott_gonzalez>
Thanks for getting this together.
02:40
<scott_gonzalez>
Now that I've got that working, I'm heading to bed.
02:40
<scott_gonzalez>
Have a good night.
02:40
<MikeSmith>
cheers
02:41
<scott_gonzalez>
Now that I've got that working, I'm heading to bed.
02:41
<scott_gonzalez>
Have a good night.
02:41
<MikeSmith>
cheers
03:07
<kennyluck>
I can't believe that CSS2.1 has been having an example that doesn't work in browsers for 5+ years. → http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visuren.html#comp-float ('clear' doesn't apply to <span>)
03:07
<kennyluck>
I can't believe that CSS2.1 has been having an example that doesn't work in browsers for 5+ years. → http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visuren.html#comp-float ('clear' doesn't apply to <span>)
03:07
<kennyluck>
more than 5+ years I would guess… anyway
03:08
<kennyluck>
more than 5+ years I would guess… anyway
03:19
<heycam>
Hixie, Ms2ger was right you can't distinguish (five doubles and a boolean) from (six doubles) -- all primitive types and DOMString are considered "undistinguishable" when it comes to overloading
03:19
<heycam>
Hixie, Ms2ger was right you can't distinguish (five doubles and a boolean) from (six doubles) -- all primitive types and DOMString are considered "undistinguishable" when it comes to overloading
03:19
Hixie
sad
03:19
<heycam>
Hixie, however you could always have a single operation and use "any" for the final arg type, if you must
03:19
<heycam>
Hixie, though I would agree with AryehGregor it sounds like it's verging on a confusing overload
03:20
Hixie
sad
03:20
<heycam>
Hixie, however you could always have a single operation and use "any" for the final arg type, if you must
03:20
<heycam>
Hixie, though I would agree with AryehGregor it sounds like it's verging on a confusing overload
03:20
<Hixie>
the specific example is arc() here: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#building-paths
03:20
<Hixie>
look at the domintro description to see what i'm going for
03:20
heycam
looks
03:20
<Hixie>
(and bask in my pretty drawings just before it, which i spent all afternoon working on)
03:21
<Hixie>
the specific example is arc() here: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#building-paths
03:21
<Hixie>
look at the domintro description to see what i'm going for
03:21
heycam
looks
03:21
<Hixie>
(and bask in my pretty drawings just before it, which i spent all afternoon working on)
03:22
<heycam>
Hixie, so this is arcTo()?
03:22
<Hixie>
no, arc()
03:22
<Hixie>
arcTo() is fine
03:22
<Hixie>
no ambiguity
03:22
<heycam>
oh below, I see
03:23
<heycam>
Hixie, so this is arcTo()?
03:23
<Hixie>
no, arc()
03:23
<Hixie>
arcTo() is fine
03:23
<Hixie>
no ambiguity
03:23
<heycam>
oh below, I see
03:23
<heycam>
optional arguments in the middle of the argument list?
03:23
<heycam>
please no
03:23
<heycam>
optional arguments in the middle of the argument list?
03:23
<heycam>
:)(
03:23
<heycam>
please no
03:23
<heycam>
:)(
03:23
<Hixie>
well it'd be silly to have the radii split apart with a boolean in the middle
03:23
<heycam>
put angles before radii?
03:24
<Hixie>
well it'd be silly to have the radii split apart with a boolean in the middle
03:24
<heycam>
put angles before radii?
03:24
<Hixie>
i can't change the existing signature
03:24
<Hixie>
the method today exists, just with one radius
03:24
<Hixie>
i can't change the existing signature
03:24
<Hixie>
the method today exists, just with one radius
03:24
<heycam>
oh
03:25
<heycam>
oh
03:25
<heycam>
I like the pictures though! ;)
03:25
<Hixie>
:-D
03:25
<heycam>
I like the pictures though! ;)
03:25
<Hixie>
:-D
03:25
<heycam>
hmm I don't have any good suggestion at the moment, except to say that I'm really not found of optional arguments in the middle of the arg list
03:26
<heycam>
hmm I don't have any good suggestion at the moment, except to say that I'm really not found of optional arguments in the middle of the arg list
03:26
<Hixie>
well i'm no fan either but i don't really see a better solution here
03:27
<Hixie>
well i'm no fan either but i don't really see a better solution here
03:27
<heycam>
separately named functions?
03:27
<heycam>
separately named functions?
03:27
<heycam>
passing [radiusX, radiusY] as the third argument?
03:27
<heycam>
(second suggestion slightly in jest)
03:28
<heycam>
passing [radiusX, radiusY] as the third argument?
03:28
<heycam>
(second suggestion slightly in jest)
03:28
<Hixie>
arc() and arcEllipse() would be kinda weird in this api, given the rest of it
03:29
<Hixie>
arc() and arcEllipse() would be kinda weird in this api, given the rest of it
03:29
<Hixie>
the array idea wouldn't be so bad if we were already doing it for all the coordinates, but doing it just for two radii, yeah
03:29
<Hixie>
the array idea wouldn't be so bad if we were already doing it for all the coordinates, but doing it just for two radii, yeah
03:29
<Hixie>
seems a bit silly
03:29
<Hixie>
seems a bit silly
03:46
<sicking>
Hixie: hey, do you have an eta for looking at the .readyState bugs that I filed? I have a feeling that if we're going to get MS to change their WebSocket implementation we need to act fast
03:46
<sicking>
Hixie: hey, do you have an eta for looking at the .readyState bugs that I filed? I have a feeling that if we're going to get MS to change their WebSocket implementation we need to act fast
03:46
sicking
isn't sure if IE10 previews has had EventSource support
03:47
sicking
isn't sure if IE10 previews has had EventSource support
03:48
<Hixie>
let me look now
03:48
<Hixie>
is this 16223 and 16224?
03:49
<Hixie>
let me look now
03:49
<Hixie>
is this 16223 and 16224?
03:49
<Hixie>
if you hadn't brought them to my attention, eta would have been several months :-)
03:49
<Hixie>
if you hadn't brought them to my attention, eta would have been several months :-)
03:49
<Hixie>
but eta can be a few minutes now
03:49
<Hixie>
sicking: what's wrong with "if (ws.readyState == 0) { ... }" ?
03:50
<Hixie>
but eta can be a few minutes now
03:50
<Hixie>
sicking: what's wrong with "if (ws.readyState == 0) { ... }" ?
03:50
<sicking>
Hixie: it's unreadable to humans
03:50
<Hixie>
it's readable fine
03:50
<sicking>
really?
03:50
<Hixie>
i can't say i've ever had a problem with xmlhttprequest.readyState == 4
03:51
<sicking>
Hixie: it's unreadable to humans
03:51
<Hixie>
it's readable fine
03:51
<sicking>
really?
03:51
<Hixie>
i can't say i've ever had a problem with xmlhttprequest.readyState == 4
03:51
<sicking>
you're the first person i hear say that
03:51
<sicking>
you're the first person i hear say that
03:51
<sicking>
well..
03:51
<sicking>
ok
03:51
<sicking>
so constants are in general bad because they are hard to remember
03:51
<Hixie>
there's only like 3 states for eventsource and 4 states for websocket
03:51
<Hixie>
it's not like this is going to be a huge deal
03:52
<sicking>
well..
03:52
<sicking>
ok
03:52
<sicking>
so constants are in general bad because they are hard to remember
03:52
<Hixie>
i agree in principle with using strings, and have moved to that style for new things
03:52
<Hixie>
there's only like 3 states for eventsource and 4 states for websocket
03:52
<Hixie>
it's not like this is going to be a huge deal
03:52
<Hixie>
i agree in principle with using strings, and have moved to that style for new things
03:52
<sicking>
which makes it even worse, since you'll likely have to listen for state 3 for ES and state 4 for WS
03:52
<Hixie>
but i'm not sure it's worth breaking shipping implementations here
03:52
<Hixie>
you don't in practice have to listen to any of the states
03:52
<Hixie>
but i'm not sure it's worth breaking shipping implementations here
03:52
<Hixie>
you just use the events
03:52
<Hixie>
you don't in practice have to listen to any of the states
03:52
<Hixie>
you just use the events
03:52
<sicking>
Hixie: i think we at mozilla would be happy to change both ES and WS, but I can't speak for other implementations of course
03:52
<Hixie>
honestly we could probably remove readyState and it wouldn't remove any use cases
03:53
<sicking>
Hixie: i think we at mozilla would be happy to change both ES and WS, but I can't speak for other implementations of course
03:53
<Hixie>
honestly we could probably remove readyState and it wouldn't remove any use cases
03:53
<sicking>
Hixie: sure, you'd just make developer ergonomics worse
03:53
<sicking>
but all apps would still be implementable
03:53
<sicking>
Hixie: sure, you'd just make developer ergonomics worse
03:53
<sicking>
but all apps would still be implementable
03:53
<Hixie>
how would you even use readyState in an app, other than for debugging?
03:53
<sicking>
if you want to push for removing readystate instead i'm ok with that. As long as we go for string values if we decide not to
03:54
<Hixie>
how would you even use readyState in an app, other than for debugging?
03:54
<Hixie>
i don't want to push for changing anything
03:54
<sicking>
if you want to push for removing readystate instead i'm ok with that. As long as we go for string values if we decide not to
03:54
<Hixie>
churn is bad
03:54
<Hixie>
i don't want to push for changing anything
03:54
<Hixie>
churn is bad
03:54
<Hixie>
we should just leave it as is and learn for the future
03:54
<Hixie>
we should just leave it as is and learn for the future
03:54
<sicking>
Hixie: ok, please state so in the bug so I can disagree with you there :)
03:54
<Hixie>
k :-)
03:55
<sicking>
Hixie: ok, please state so in the bug so I can disagree with you there :)
03:55
<Hixie>
k :-)
03:55
<sicking>
won't get to in until tomorrow, but i'll comment then
03:56
<sicking>
won't get to in until tomorrow, but i'll comment then
03:57
<Hixie>
sicking: fwiw in case there's anything else you want me to look at in the near future, my plan is to work on canvas for a while, and then work on this Web Intents stuff
03:58
<Hixie>
sicking: fwiw in case there's anything else you want me to look at in the near future, my plan is to work on canvas for a while, and then work on this Web Intents stuff
03:58
<Hixie>
sicking: and after that, go back to dealing with feedback in a first-come-first-served manner (at which i'm about 6 months behind)
03:58
<Hixie>
sicking: and after that, go back to dealing with feedback in a first-come-first-served manner (at which i'm about 6 months behind)
03:58
<Hixie>
sicking: for canvas i'm working down this list http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Canvas#Proposals
03:58
<sicking>
Hixie: cool, thanks
03:59
<Hixie>
sicking: for canvas i'm working down this list http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Canvas#Proposals
03:59
<Hixie>
sicking: but as usual i'm happy to prioritise stuff if there's anything urgent
03:59
<sicking>
Hixie: cool, thanks
03:59
<Hixie>
sicking: but as usual i'm happy to prioritise stuff if there's anything urgent
03:59
<sicking>
sounds good
04:00
<sicking>
sounds good
04:02
<zewt>
"consistency with XHR" seems more often an argument for bad things than good things, heh
04:03
<zewt>
"consistency with XHR" seems more often an argument for bad things than good things, heh
04:16
<rstuppi>
Does anyone know of an IRC channel for HTML5 Boilerplate questions?
04:17
<rstuppi>
Does anyone know of an IRC channel for HTML5 Boilerplate questions?
04:28
<kennyluck>
rstuppi, #html5 maybe?
04:29
<kennyluck>
rstuppi, #html5 maybe?
05:24
<MikeSmith>
should <meta name="description" itemprop="description" content="Some Description"> be valid?
05:24
<MikeSmith>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16342
05:25
<MikeSmith>
should <meta name="description" itemprop="description" content="Some Description"> be valid?
05:25
<MikeSmith>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16342
05:33
<MikeSmith>
nm
05:33
<MikeSmith>
found "If a meta element has an itemprop attribute, the name, http-equiv, and charset attributes must be omitted, and the content attribute must be present."
05:33
<MikeSmith>
nm
05:33
<MikeSmith>
found "If a meta element has an itemprop attribute, the name, http-equiv, and charset attributes must be omitted, and the content attribute must be present."
05:34
<MikeSmith>
such a great idea it was to split out microdata from the spec
05:34
<MikeSmith>
makes things much easier and clearer for users
05:34
<MikeSmith>
such a great idea it was to split out microdata from the spec
05:34
<MikeSmith>
makes things much easier and clearer for users
05:47
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: use the whatwg spec :-)
05:48
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: use the whatwg spec :-)
05:49
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: I like things "modularized"
05:49
<MikeSmith>
with extensibility
05:50
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: I like things "modularized"
05:50
<MikeSmith>
with extensibility
05:50
<MikeSmith>
plus a lot of ABNF
05:51
<MikeSmith>
plus a lot of ABNF
05:51
<MikeSmith>
then I know I'm reading a real spec
05:51
<MikeSmith>
then I know I'm reading a real spec
05:52
<Hixie>
mmm
05:52
<Hixie>
modularisation
05:53
<Hixie>
mmm
05:53
<Hixie>
modularisation
06:01
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: could you kindly update the spec to fix errors #5 and #6 here: http://validator.nu/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whatwg.org%2Fspecs%2Fweb-apps%2Fcurrent-work%2F
06:02
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: could you kindly update the spec to fix errors #5 and #6 here: http://validator.nu/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whatwg.org%2Fspecs%2Fweb-apps%2Fcurrent-work%2F
06:02
<MikeSmith>
stray </dt> end tags
06:02
<MikeSmith>
stray </dt> end tags
06:03
<MikeSmith>
about the other errors for itemprop, I dunno why it's reporting those but I will fix that in the validator
06:04
<MikeSmith>
about the other errors for itemprop, I dunno why it's reporting those but I will fix that in the validator
06:04
<MikeSmith>
hmm, weird
06:04
<MikeSmith>
http://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whatwg.org%2Fspecs%2Fweb-apps%2Fcurrent-work%2F does not report those as errors
06:05
<MikeSmith>
hmm, weird
06:05
<MikeSmith>
http://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whatwg.org%2Fspecs%2Fweb-apps%2Fcurrent-work%2F does not report those as errors
06:05
<MikeSmith>
must be I made a fix earlier that hsivonen hasn't pushed to validator.nu yet
06:05
<MikeSmith>
must be I made a fix earlier that hsivonen hasn't pushed to validator.nu yet
06:06
<Hixie>
when i run my script i only get:
06:06
<Hixie>
Possible conformance errors:
06:06
<Hixie>
when i run my script i only get:
06:06
<Hixie>
14480.3-14480.77: info warning: The "cite" attribute on the "blockquote" element is not supported by browsers yet.
06:06
<Hixie>
14501.3-14501.76: info warning: The "cite" attribute on the "blockquote" element is not supported by browsers yet.
06:06
<Hixie>
Possible conformance errors:
06:06
<Hixie>
14480.3-14480.77: info warning: The "cite" attribute on the "blockquote" element is not supported by browsers yet.
06:06
<Hixie>
67062.36-67063.88: info warning: The "cite" attribute on the "q" element is not supported by browsers yet.
06:06
<Hixie>
120626.49-120626.126: error: Attribute "itemprop" not allowed on element "a" at this point.
06:06
<Hixie>
120627.7-120627.113: error: Attribute "itemprop" not allowed on element "a" at this point.
06:06
<Hixie>
14501.3-14501.76: info warning: The "cite" attribute on the "blockquote" element is not supported by browsers yet.
06:06
<Hixie>
120628.5-120628.77: error: Attribute "itemprop" not allowed on element "a" at this point.
06:06
<Hixie>
67062.36-67063.88: info warning: The "cite" attribute on the "q" element is not supported by browsers yet.
06:06
<Hixie>
120626.49-120626.126: error: Attribute "itemprop" not allowed on element "a" at this point.
06:06
<Hixie>
120627.7-120627.113: error: Attribute "itemprop" not allowed on element "a" at this point.
06:06
<Hixie>
120628.5-120628.77: error: Attribute "itemprop" not allowed on element "a" at this point.
06:06
<MikeSmith>
hmm
06:06
<MikeSmith>
odd
06:06
<Hixie>
oh hm
06:07
<MikeSmith>
hmm
06:07
<MikeSmith>
odd
06:07
<Hixie>
oh hm
06:07
<Hixie>
the error does exist in the .../index file
06:07
<Hixie>
wonder why it's not in my source-validator version
06:07
<MikeSmith>
oh
06:07
<Hixie>
the error does exist in the .../index file
06:07
<Hixie>
wonder why it's not in my source-validator version
06:07
<MikeSmith>
oh
06:08
<Hixie>
oh i know why
06:08
<Hixie>
it's a bug in anolis or something
06:08
<Hixie>
i have a bunch of omitted </dt>s in the source
06:08
<Hixie>
oh i know why
06:08
<Hixie>
it's a bug in anolis or something
06:08
<Hixie>
i have a bunch of omitted </dt>s in the source
06:08
<Hixie>
and something in the pipeline is "helpfully" putting them back
06:08
<MikeSmith>
aha
06:08
<Hixie>
probably libxml2 misparsing again
06:08
<MikeSmith>
yep
06:08
<Hixie>
is html5lib fast yet?
06:08
<MikeSmith>
heh
06:08
<MikeSmith>
no, it's not, unfortunately
06:09
<Hixie>
and something in the pipeline is "helpfully" putting them back
06:09
<MikeSmith>
aha
06:09
<Hixie>
probably libxml2 misparsing again
06:09
<MikeSmith>
yep
06:09
<Hixie>
is html5lib fast yet?
06:09
<MikeSmith>
heh
06:09
<MikeSmith>
no, it's not, unfortunately
06:14
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: maybe it would be if you ran it under PyPy
06:15
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: maybe it would be if you ran it under PyPy
07:24
<ruby_on_tails>
hello
07:24
<zcorpan>
hello
07:25
<zcorpan>
hello
07:25
<ruby_on_tails>
i made a new tutorial, anyone wants to check it out ?
07:25
<ruby_on_tails>
i made a new tutorial, anyone wants to check it out ?
07:26
<ruby_on_tails>
Philip`: the issues i was facing yesterday is solved now :D
07:26
<ruby_on_tails>
Philip`: the issues i was facing yesterday is solved now :D
07:31
<zcorpan>
drop a link
07:32
<zcorpan>
drop a link
07:34
<annevk>
http://example.org/
07:35
<annevk>
http://example.org/
07:36
<zcorpan>
annoying that that redirects to another domain
07:36
<zcorpan>
annoying that that redirects to another domain
07:40
<annevk>
well since IANA handles it... it's not surprising
07:41
<annevk>
well since IANA handles it... it's not surprising
07:54
<hsivonen>
what can I do to learn to express myself in a way that chuck@jumis won't mischaracterize?
07:54
<hsivonen>
what can I do to learn to express myself in a way that chuck@jumis won't mischaracterize?
07:55
<annevk>
sing a song to the moon
07:56
<annevk>
sing a song to the moon
07:57
<annevk>
oh, even Mozilla is doing H264 now
07:57
<annevk>
also on desktop?
07:57
<annevk>
oh, even Mozilla is doing H264 now
07:57
<annevk>
also on desktop?
07:59
<hsivonen>
annevk: well, there's a discussion on whether Mozilla will be doing H.264
07:59
<hsivonen>
annevk: Mozilla isn't doing it now
07:59
<hsivonen>
annevk: well, there's a discussion on whether Mozilla will be doing H.264
07:59
<hsivonen>
annevk: Mozilla isn't doing it now
07:59
<annevk>
oh ok, sorry
08:00
<annevk>
oh ok, sorry
08:00
<hsivonen>
annevk: opinions vary. The spectrum is: nowhere, on mobile only, where systems codecs are available, everywhere
08:00
<hsivonen>
annevk: opinions vary. The spectrum is: nowhere, on mobile only, where systems codecs are available, everywhere
08:01
<hsivonen>
personally, I think the middle ground is worse than either end of the spectrum
08:01
<hsivonen>
personally, I think the middle ground is worse than either end of the spectrum
08:13
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: has there been specific requests to support it on mobile?
08:13
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: has there been specific requests to support it on mobile?
08:13
<MikeSmith>
I mean, people wanting to use particular sites
08:14
<MikeSmith>
I mean, people wanting to use particular sites
08:16
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: I don't know
08:17
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: I don't know
08:17
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: there have been *lots* of specific requests for Flash support, though
08:17
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: which for many sites amounts to roughly the same thing
08:17
<hsivonen>
e.g. Vimeo does H.264 <video> or Flash
08:18
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: there have been *lots* of specific requests for Flash support, though
08:18
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: which for many sites amounts to roughly the same thing
08:18
<hsivonen>
e.g. Vimeo does H.264 <video> or Flash
08:18
<MikeSmith>
OK
08:18
<MikeSmith>
OK
08:18
<MikeSmith>
yeah, I knew about the Flash demand
08:18
<MikeSmith>
that is an odd situation giving that Adobe is end-of-lifing mobile Flash
08:19
<MikeSmith>
yeah, I knew about the Flash demand
08:19
<MikeSmith>
that is an odd situation giving that Adobe is end-of-lifing mobile Flash
08:19
<hsivonen>
In the light of Adobe's recent announcements, I think it's safe to expect Adobe not to supply Flash Player for B2G
08:19
<MikeSmith>
yep
08:19
<hsivonen>
In the light of Adobe's recent announcements, I think it's safe to expect Adobe not to supply Flash Player for B2G
08:19
<MikeSmith>
yep
08:19
<hsivonen>
shumway won't be able to play H.264 wrapped in .swf without an H.264 decoder somewhere
08:20
<hsivonen>
shumway won't be able to play H.264 wrapped in .swf without an H.264 decoder somewhere
08:20
<MikeSmith>
I wonder what happened to all the plans for getting native WebM support on device hardware
08:21
<MikeSmith>
I wonder what happened to all the plans for getting native WebM support on device hardware
08:21
<MikeSmith>
there were lots of announcements about partnership with chipset vendors to support WebM
08:21
<MikeSmith>
there were lots of announcements about partnership with chipset vendors to support WebM
08:21
<MikeSmith>
but I don't recall seeing much news about any of it actually having shipped yet
08:21
<annevk>
hsivonen: I think we have non-desktop only at the moment
08:21
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: I haven't seen news of anyone shipping device drivers that actually work
08:22
<MikeSmith>
but I don't recall seeing much news about any of it actually having shipped yet
08:22
<annevk>
hsivonen: I think we have non-desktop only at the moment
08:22
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: I haven't seen news of anyone shipping device drivers that actually work
08:22
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: it does look like hardware has shipped
08:22
<MikeSmith>
oh, ok
08:22
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: it does look like hardware has shipped
08:22
<MikeSmith>
oh, ok
08:22
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: WebM on Android seems to be full of FAIL on Google's part AFAICT
08:22
<MikeSmith>
that's disappointing
08:22
<hsivonen>
annevk: yeah, I think that's worse than supporting H.264 everywhere or supporting it nowhere
08:23
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: WebM on Android seems to be full of FAIL on Google's part AFAICT
08:23
<MikeSmith>
that's disappointing
08:23
<hsivonen>
annevk: yeah, I think that's worse than supporting H.264 everywhere or supporting it nowhere
08:23
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: promising to drop H.264 and then not dropping it in over a year is disappointing, too
08:23
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: not getting the encoder competitive with x264 is disappointing
08:23
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: etc.
08:24
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: promising to drop H.264 and then not dropping it in over a year is disappointing, too
08:24
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: not getting the encoder competitive with x264 is disappointing
08:24
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: etc.
08:24
<zcorpan>
adobe promised webm support in flash, but that never happened either, did it?
08:24
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: that didn't happen, either
08:25
<zcorpan>
adobe promised webm support in flash, but that never happened either, did it?
08:25
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: that didn't happen, either
08:26
<zcorpan>
at least opera and mozilla kept their promise and shipped webm in a timely fashion :-)
08:26
<zcorpan>
at least opera and mozilla kept their promise and shipped webm in a timely fashion :-)
08:26
<hsivonen>
The way Google is handling WebM reminds me of how AOL handled Gecko
08:26
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: for some value of timely in the case of Mozilla
08:26
<hsivonen>
The way Google is handling WebM reminds me of how AOL handled Gecko
08:26
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: for some value of timely in the case of Mozilla
08:26
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: (not the video team's fault that Firefox 4 was so late)
08:26
<zcorpan>
yeah
08:27
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: (not the video team's fault that Firefox 4 was so late)
08:27
<zcorpan>
yeah
08:27
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: also, Mozilla could have done a better job at getting 3.6 out of circulation more quickly
08:27
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: also, Mozilla could have done a better job at getting 3.6 out of circulation more quickly
08:27
<zcorpan>
i.e. made extensions work in 4+ ?
08:28
<zcorpan>
i.e. made extensions work in 4+ ?
08:28
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: I was thinking of pushing updates more aggressively
08:28
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: there were *months* without prompted updates away from 3.6
08:28
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: there were *months* without prompted updates away from 3.6
08:28
<zcorpan>
i saw several people who intentionally didn't upgrade because their extensions weren't compatible
08:28
<hsivonen>
(let alone non-prompted updates)
08:28
<zcorpan>
(but i guess that's not the reason for the biggest chunk of 3.6 users since most users don't use extensions at all)
08:29
<zcorpan>
i saw several people who intentionally didn't upgrade because their extensions weren't compatible
08:29
<hsivonen>
(let alone non-prompted updates)
08:29
<zcorpan>
(but i guess that's not the reason for the biggest chunk of 3.6 users since most users don't use extensions at all)
08:29
<hsivonen>
"make extensions compatible" seems reasonable on surface, but it's technically not reasonable given how extensions work
08:29
<zcorpan>
and this was around the time of firefox *6*
08:30
<hsivonen>
"make extensions compatible" seems reasonable on surface, but it's technically not reasonable given how extensions work
08:30
<zcorpan>
and this was around the time of firefox *6*
08:30
<hsivonen>
the thing is that prior to JetPack, there wasn't an extension API in Firefox
08:30
<hsivonen>
the thing is that prior to JetPack, there wasn't an extension API in Firefox
08:30
<hsivonen>
there were extensions poking deep into implementation details
08:31
<hsivonen>
there were extensions poking deep into implementation details
08:31
<hsivonen>
the Firefox extension model is awesomely powerful if you only ever ship one version of Firefox
08:32
<hsivonen>
the Firefox extension model is awesomely powerful if you only ever ship one version of Firefox
08:32
<MikeSmith>
heh
08:32
<MikeSmith>
heh
08:41
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: btw, I think you need to redeploy validator.nu
08:41
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: btw, I think you need to redeploy validator.nu
08:41
<MikeSmith>
oh wait
08:41
<MikeSmith>
maybe you did already
08:42
<MikeSmith>
oh wait
08:42
<MikeSmith>
maybe you did already
08:42
<MikeSmith>
ah maybe not
08:42
<MikeSmith>
http://validator.nu/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whatwg.org%2Fspecs%2Fweb-apps%2Fcurrent-work%2F
08:42
<MikeSmith>
ah maybe not
08:42
<MikeSmith>
http://validator.nu/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whatwg.org%2Fspecs%2Fweb-apps%2Fcurrent-work%2F
08:46
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: ok. rebuilding it now
08:46
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: ok. rebuilding it now
08:47
<MikeSmith>
ok
08:47
<MikeSmith>
ok
10:06
<annevk>
pretty cool that all the DOM3 Events issues are being looked at again
10:06
<annevk>
hadn't expected that
10:06
<annevk>
pretty cool that all the DOM3 Events issues are being looked at again
10:06
<annevk>
hadn't expected that
10:33
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: validator.nu build fails for me
10:33
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: validator.nu build fails for me
10:33
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: looks like embed.rnc forgets to remove itemref from the set of attributes it adds to <embed>
10:34
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: looks like embed.rnc forgets to remove itemref from the set of attributes it adds to <embed>
12:11
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: validator.nu is down
12:12
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: validator.nu is down
12:12
<MikeSmith>
and prior to going down it was responding much more slowly than usual
12:12
<MikeSmith>
and prior to going down it was responding much more slowly than usual
12:16
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: yeah, I had to kill it to relieve the server under too much use
12:17
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: yeah, I had to kill it to relieve the server under too much use
12:18
<MikeSmith>
ok
12:18
<hsivonen>
the server is currently in a pretty bad shape
12:18
<MikeSmith>
ok
12:18
<hsivonen>
the server is currently in a pretty bad shape
12:18
<MikeSmith>
oh
12:18
<hsivonen>
an ls command has now taken almost a minute to run
12:18
<MikeSmith>
wow
12:19
<MikeSmith>
oh
12:19
<hsivonen>
an ls command has now taken almost a minute to run
12:19
<MikeSmith>
wow
12:21
<hsivonen>
LOL FAIL. someone in the logs is using an anymizer that announces it's an anonymizer in the UA string
12:21
<hsivonen>
LOL FAIL. someone in the logs is using an anymizer that announces it's an anonymizer in the UA string
12:22
<hsivonen>
I wonder if someone has made a Firefox extension that does site validation by POSTing to V.nu excessively
12:23
<hsivonen>
I wonder if someone has made a Firefox extension that does site validation by POSTing to V.nu excessively
12:23
<hsivonen>
most of the activity is POST with JSON output with Firefox Nightly UA strings
12:24
<hsivonen>
most of the activity is POST with JSON output with Firefox Nightly UA strings
12:30
<hsivonen>
ok. whoever is producing a Firefox extension that uploads stuff to V.nu needs to make the extension stop when it gets a non-200 response
12:30
<hsivonen>
ok. whoever is producing a Firefox extension that uploads stuff to V.nu needs to make the extension stop when it gets a non-200 response
12:31
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: does V.nu start up for your locally given the current state of repos?
12:32
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: does V.nu start up for your locally given the current state of repos?
12:33
<hsivonen>
one of these days I need to build some thingy that limits concurrent validation requests from one IP address
12:33
<hsivonen>
one of these days I need to build some thingy that limits concurrent validation requests from one IP address
12:34
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: ok. validator.nu is back up
12:35
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: ok. validator.nu is back up
12:35
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: with old code, because the current repo state crashes at startup for me
12:35
<hsivonen>
I banned some IP numbers manually. this doesn't scale
12:35
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: with old code, because the current repo state crashes at startup for me
12:35
<hsivonen>
I banned some IP numbers manually. this doesn't scale
12:39
<zcorpan>
hsivonen: ask @paulrouget to ask who the extension maker is on twitter
12:39
<zcorpan>
hsivonen: ask @paulrouget to ask who the extension maker is on twitter
12:44
<zcorpan>
or maybe someone took https://github.com/rogerjohansson/html5validator and didn't bother installing v.nu locally but instead just changed extensions.html5validator.validatorURL
12:45
<zcorpan>
or maybe someone took https://github.com/rogerjohansson/html5validator and didn't bother installing v.nu locally but instead just changed extensions.html5validator.validatorURL
12:47
<zcorpan>
hsivonen: http://superuser.com/questions/107228/is-there-a-html5-validator-plugin-for-firefox/259550#259550
12:48
<zcorpan>
hsivonen: http://superuser.com/questions/107228/is-there-a-html5-validator-plugin-for-firefox/259550#259550
12:48
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I will check out and build from a clean install
12:56
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen:
12:57
<MikeSmith>
Error:
12:57
<MikeSmith>
Error:
12:57
<MikeSmith>
Duplicate attribute “itemref”.
12:57
<MikeSmith>
File: file:/opt/archive/checker/syntax/relaxng/embed.rnc
12:57
<MikeSmith>
Line: 518 Col: 17
12:57
<MikeSmith>
sorry, will fix that
12:57
<MikeSmith>
sorry, will fix that
13:00
<hsivonen>
I wonder how much this is an HTML5 validation perf issues and how much this is an HTML 4 validation (Schematron) perf issue
13:00
<hsivonen>
I wonder how much this is an HTML5 validation perf issues and how much this is an HTML 4 validation (Schematron) perf issue
13:01
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: oh if you have people hitting it for HTML4 validation I would bet that could chew up a lot of resources
13:02
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: oh if you have people hitting it for HTML4 validation I would bet that could chew up a lot of resources
13:02
<MikeSmith>
jing schematron is a hog even running it locally
13:03
<MikeSmith>
jing schematron is a hog even running it locally
13:05
<zcorpan>
hsivonen: i've filed an issue on the extension and edited the answer (though the edit needs to be reviewed until it shows up)
13:06
<zcorpan>
hsivonen: i've filed an issue on the extension and edited the answer (though the edit needs to be reviewed until it shows up)
13:07
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: thanks. roger johansson's extension may be what I'm seeing
13:07
<hsivonen>
maybe I should just move validator.nu and irssi to different servers, so slowness wouldn't bother me
13:08
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: thanks. roger johansson's extension may be what I'm seeing
13:08
<hsivonen>
maybe I should just move validator.nu and irssi to different servers, so slowness wouldn't bother me
13:08
<hsivonen>
html5.validator.nu is already separate
13:08
<hsivonen>
html5.validator.nu is already separate
13:09
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: that particular Stackoverflow answer doesn't explain this, because it points to html5.validator.nu instead of validator.nu
13:10
<hsivonen>
zcorpan: that particular Stackoverflow answer doesn't explain this, because it points to html5.validator.nu instead of validator.nu
13:11
<hsivonen>
whoa. does that extension post all pages you visit in whitelisted domains to the validator?
13:11
<hsivonen>
whoa. does that extension post all pages you visit in whitelisted domains to the validator?
13:11
<zcorpan>
it can be configured to do that, i think
13:11
<zcorpan>
hsivonen: it says validator.nu afaict
13:12
<zcorpan>
it can be configured to do that, i think
13:12
<zcorpan>
hsivonen: it says validator.nu afaict
13:12
<zcorpan>
hsivonen: btw it seems my answer has been reviewed and accepted now (at least it shows up for me in a private tab with turbo enabled)
13:13
<zcorpan>
hsivonen: btw it seems my answer has been reviewed and accepted now (at least it shows up for me in a private tab with turbo enabled)
13:15
<hsivonen>
of course it's my fault for not having defenses for this
13:15
hsivonen
is trying to figure out what the right defense would be
13:15
<hsivonen>
of course it's my fault for not having defenses for this
13:15
hsivonen
is trying to figure out what the right defense would be
13:16
<hsivonen>
stuff that I can think of:
13:16
<hsivonen>
1) Move validator.nu to a new dedicated VM
13:17
<hsivonen>
stuff that I can think of:
13:17
<hsivonen>
1) Move validator.nu to a new dedicated VM
13:17
<hsivonen>
2) Stop offering HTML 4 validation in validator.nu; let the W3C deal with that
13:17
<hsivonen>
2) Stop offering HTML 4 validation in validator.nu; let the W3C deal with that
13:17
<hsivonen>
3) some kind of scoreboard for N most recent IP numbers and denying some requests depending on the scoreboard
13:18
<hsivonen>
3) some kind of scoreboard for N most recent IP numbers and denying some requests depending on the scoreboard
13:18
<zcorpan>
(2) seems uncool i think
13:18
<zcorpan>
(2) seems uncool i think
13:18
<hsivonen>
the problem is I'm not sure what exactly the scoreboard should track in order to not to limit reasonable use
13:19
<hsivonen>
the problem is I'm not sure what exactly the scoreboard should track in order to not to limit reasonable use
13:19
<hsivonen>
4) Rewrite HTML 4 validation Schematron in Java
13:19
<StoneCypher>
lol yeah
13:19
<StoneCypher>
let's do it in *java*
13:19
<hsivonen>
4) Rewrite HTML 4 validation Schematron in Java
13:19
StoneCypher
facepalm
13:19
<StoneCypher>
lol yeah
13:19
<StoneCypher>
let's do it in *java*
13:19
StoneCypher
facepalm
13:19
<zcorpan>
StoneCypher: you know v.nu is written in java, right?
13:19
<StoneCypher>
why would i know that
13:20
<zcorpan>
StoneCypher: you know v.nu is written in java, right?
13:20
<StoneCypher>
all i know is java isn't a particularly good choice for that kind of tool
13:20
<StoneCypher>
why would i know that
13:20
<StoneCypher>
all i know is java isn't a particularly good choice for that kind of tool
13:20
<zcorpan>
dunno, it says so in http://about.validator.nu/
13:20
<StoneCypher>
and?
13:20
<zcorpan>
dunno, it says so in http://about.validator.nu/
13:20
<StoneCypher>
and?
13:20
<StoneCypher>
"you know this random characteristic of this site you've never bothered to open, right? well it says so right in the corner"
13:20
<zcorpan>
...
13:21
<StoneCypher>
"you know this random characteristic of this site you've never bothered to open, right? well it says so right in the corner"
13:21
<zcorpan>
...
13:21
<StoneCypher>
yes, that's an ellipsis.
13:21
<StoneCypher>
it generally indicates text that has been removed for brevity's sake, not a pause.
13:21
<StoneCypher>
yes, that's an ellipsis.
13:21
<StoneCypher>
it generally indicates text that has been removed for brevity's sake, not a pause.
13:21
<StoneCypher>
technically it's a greek tricolon, but insert standard rabble here about getting it something someone will recognize instead of being correct
13:22
<StoneCypher>
technically it's a greek tricolon, but insert standard rabble here about getting it something someone will recognize instead of being correct
13:24
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I vote for 4
13:24
<Philip`>
5) Get MikeSmith to rewrite HTML 4 validation Schematron in Java
13:24
<MikeSmith>
heh
13:25
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I vote for 4
13:25
<Philip`>
5) Get MikeSmith to rewrite HTML 4 validation Schematron in Java
13:25
<MikeSmith>
heh
13:25
<hsivonen>
this same IP keeps hitting validator.nu over and over again oblivious to the 403
13:25
<hsivonen>
this same IP keeps hitting validator.nu over and over again oblivious to the 403
13:26
<StoneCypher>
so block it
13:26
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I can write up the HTML4 assertions checker if you can make time to review it
13:26
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: deal
13:26
<StoneCypher>
so block it
13:26
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I can write up the HTML4 assertions checker if you can make time to review it
13:26
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: deal
13:26
<zcorpan>
(6) hunt down the user(s) of the extension and beat them up with a cricket bat
13:26
<MikeSmith>
I reckon I can get it done by next week or next next
13:27
<zcorpan>
(6) hunt down the user(s) of the extension and beat them up with a cricket bat
13:27
<MikeSmith>
I reckon I can get it done by next week or next next
13:27
<hsivonen>
6) Make even validator.nu default to HTML5 instead of defaulting to 4 or 5 depending on doctype
13:27
<hsivonen>
6) Make even validator.nu default to HTML5 instead of defaulting to 4 or 5 depending on doctype
13:27
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I think it makes sense to re-implement it to not just real schematron, regardless of this current load issue
13:28
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I think it makes sense to re-implement it to not just real schematron, regardless of this current load issue
13:28
<MikeSmith>
*to not use real schematron
13:28
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: ok
13:28
<MikeSmith>
*to not use real schematron
13:28
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: ok
13:29
<zcorpan>
though of course, letting html4 validation take resources away from making html5 validation better is also uncool
13:29
<zcorpan>
though of course, letting html4 validation take resources away from making html5 validation better is also uncool
13:29
<hsivonen>
StoneCypher: http://about.validator.nu/#faq
13:30
<hsivonen>
StoneCypher: http://about.validator.nu/#faq
13:30
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: fwiw, I think the W3C systems team could give you some concrete suggestions on how to automatically deal with the bad-behaving IPs
13:30
<StoneCypher>
hsivonen: what about it
13:30
<MikeSmith>
the have a lot of experience at it :)
13:30
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: fwiw, I think the W3C systems team could give you some concrete suggestions on how to automatically deal with the bad-behaving IPs
13:30
<StoneCypher>
hsivonen: what about it
13:30
<MikeSmith>
the have a lot of experience at it :)
13:31
<hsivonen>
StoneCypher: the answer to "Java? Eww. Why didn’t you write it in Python or Ruby?"
13:31
<hsivonen>
StoneCypher: the answer to "Java? Eww. Why didn’t you write it in Python or Ruby?"
13:32
<StoneCypher>
i didn't say that
13:32
<StoneCypher>
those two languages would be even worse choices.
13:32
<hsivonen>
StoneCypher: and your choice would be?
13:32
<StoneCypher>
i didn't say that
13:32
<StoneCypher>
those two languages would be even worse choices.
13:32
<hsivonen>
StoneCypher: and your choice would be?
13:32
StoneCypher
sighs
13:32
<StoneCypher>
do we really need to get into a clueless java zealot argument
13:33
StoneCypher
sighs
13:33
<StoneCypher>
do we really need to get into a clueless java zealot argument
13:33
<StoneCypher>
that was 15 minutes ago
13:33
<StoneCypher>
c, c++, ocaml, haskell, factor, fortress, basically anything with real direct access to strings and no boxing overhead
13:33
<StoneCypher>
that was 15 minutes ago
13:33
<StoneCypher>
c, c++, ocaml, haskell, factor, fortress, basically anything with real direct access to strings and no boxing overhead
13:33
<StoneCypher>
no, not haskell, it's got immutable strings
13:33
<StoneCypher>
but yeah, next bring up the alioth shootout
13:33
<StoneCypher>
then insist there's nothing wrong with java, that hotspot is magic and takes out all the overhead
13:34
<StoneCypher>
no, not haskell, it's got immutable strings
13:34
<StoneCypher>
but yeah, next bring up the alioth shootout
13:34
<StoneCypher>
then insist there's nothing wrong with java, that hotspot is magic and takes out all the overhead
13:34
StoneCypher
starts writing out the flowchart to save time
13:34
Philip`
wonders why StoneCypher anticipates that any discussion will turn into an argument, and preemptively starts the argument himself
13:34
StoneCypher
starts writing out the flowchart to save time
13:34
Philip`
wonders why StoneCypher anticipates that any discussion will turn into an argument, and preemptively starts the argument himself
13:34
<StoneCypher>
Philip`: i don't assume that.
13:34
<StoneCypher>
Philip`: i do assume that discussions that start with someone inventing false quotes for someone else will, however, becuse they already have.
13:34
<StoneCypher>
because*
13:35
<StoneCypher>
Philip`: i don't assume that.
13:35
<StoneCypher>
Philip`: i do assume that discussions that start with someone inventing false quotes for someone else will, however, becuse they already have.
13:35
<StoneCypher>
because*
13:37
<annevk>
it's not a false quote
13:37
<annevk>
it's a quote from the FAQ
13:37
<annevk>
it's not a false quote
13:37
<annevk>
it's a quote from the FAQ
13:38
<StoneCypher>
uh.
13:38
<StoneCypher>
try again, anne.
13:39
<StoneCypher>
uh.
13:39
<StoneCypher>
try again, anne.
13:39
StoneCypher
sighs and just doesn't bother
13:39
StoneCypher
sighs and just doesn't bother
13:42
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: fix for the breakage pushed
13:42
<MikeSmith>
just backed out my previous change
13:42
<MikeSmith>
sorry again
13:43
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: fix for the breakage pushed
13:43
<MikeSmith>
just backed out my previous change
13:43
<MikeSmith>
sorry again
13:46
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: verified. thanks. I'll redeploy
13:47
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: verified. thanks. I'll redeploy
13:47
<MikeSmith>
I will attempt to be more careful in the future
13:47
<MikeSmith>
I will attempt to be more careful in the future
13:49
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: btw, after trying out a few different ways of doing command-line validation (using that VerifierCommandLine class, using Jing directly), it's even more clear to me now that the HTTP interface is just way better than the alternatives
13:49
<MikeSmith>
certainly much faster
13:50
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: btw, after trying out a few different ways of doing command-line validation (using that VerifierCommandLine class, using Jing directly), it's even more clear to me now that the HTTP interface is just way better than the alternatives
13:50
<MikeSmith>
certainly much faster
13:56
<zcorpan>
nice, "cssom !" with ddg gives me the editor's draft of cssom
13:56
<zcorpan>
nice, "cssom !" with ddg gives me the editor's draft of cssom
13:57
<hsivonen>
Ask.com: How do I get rid of the toolbar? DuckDuckGo: How do I make it the default?
13:58
<hsivonen>
Ask.com: How do I get rid of the toolbar? DuckDuckGo: How do I make it the default?
13:58
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I wonder how many people who set out download and build the validator code never get past the downloading-dependencies + downloading-local-entities stage
13:59
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I wonder how many people who set out download and build the validator code never get past the downloading-dependencies + downloading-local-entities stage
13:59
<MikeSmith>
if we could make that step less time-consuming and painful, that would be good
13:59
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: probably many
13:59
<hsivonen>
yeah
14:00
<MikeSmith>
if we could make that step less time-consuming and painful, that would be good
14:00
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: probably many
14:00
<hsivonen>
yeah
14:00
<hsivonen>
dunno how to do that without a weekly test to see if the download locations still work
14:00
<MikeSmith>
yeah
14:00
hsivonen
mumbles about cool URIs not changing
14:00
<hsivonen>
dunno how to do that without a weekly test to see if the download locations still work
14:00
<MikeSmith>
yeah
14:00
hsivonen
mumbles about cool URIs not changing
14:00
<MikeSmith>
oh, that reminds me, I still did not actually land the patch that downloads the w3c stuff from the zip file I made
14:00
<StoneCypher>
hateoas is still the best acronym alive
14:01
<MikeSmith>
oh, that reminds me, I still did not actually land the patch that downloads the w3c stuff from the zip file I made
14:01
<StoneCypher>
hateoas is still the best acronym alive
14:01
<hsivonen>
Do I have to host all the libs somewhere and go through all the license compliance issues *again* from a slightly different perspective?
14:01
<hsivonen>
Do I have to host all the libs somewhere and go through all the license compliance issues *again* from a slightly different perspective?
14:02
<MikeSmith>
even hosting all the libs, user still has to download them all
14:02
<MikeSmith>
don't know how to get around that
14:02
<MikeSmith>
even hosting all the libs, user still has to download them all
14:02
<MikeSmith>
don't know how to get around that
14:02
<zcorpan>
hmm. maybe i should file bugs instead of sending emails to www-style
14:03
<zcorpan>
hmm. maybe i should file bugs instead of sending emails to www-style
14:03
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: https://twitter.com/#!/tbroyer/status/175603090978897921
14:04
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: https://twitter.com/#!/tbroyer/status/175603090978897921
14:04
<MikeSmith>
heh
14:04
<MikeSmith>
ain't that the truth
14:04
<MikeSmith>
heh
14:04
<MikeSmith>
ain't that the truth
14:09
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I just sent you that zip patch for review
14:09
<MikeSmith>
if you have time to take a quick look at it I'd appreciate it
14:10
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I just sent you that zip patch for review
14:10
<MikeSmith>
if you have time to take a quick look at it I'd appreciate it
14:10
<MikeSmith>
I think it's sane but always possible there's something I didn't consider
14:10
<MikeSmith>
anyway, it's only 10 lines or so
14:10
<MikeSmith>
I think it's sane but always possible there's something I didn't consider
14:10
<MikeSmith>
anyway, it's only 10 lines or so
14:11
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: looking
14:12
<hsivonen>
MikeSmith: looking
14:25
<annevk>
http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-webmessaging-20120313/#messageeventinit should maybe use sequence<MessagePort>? ?
14:26
<annevk>
http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-webmessaging-20120313/#messageeventinit should maybe use sequence<MessagePort>? ?
14:35
<zcorpan>
ok so for the collapsing table quirk, which browser behavior should i spec? i'm a bit tempted to follow ie compat quirks since i guess that's what everyone else is trying to emulate
14:36
<zcorpan>
ok so for the collapsing table quirk, which browser behavior should i spec? i'm a bit tempted to follow ie compat quirks since i guess that's what everyone else is trying to emulate
14:37
<smaug____>
zcorpan: I suggest asking dbaron and bz
14:37
<zcorpan>
but maybe mozilla's behavior is better since it can look at just the child boxes
14:37
<smaug____>
zcorpan: I suggest asking dbaron and bz
14:37
<zcorpan>
but maybe mozilla's behavior is better since it can look at just the child boxes
14:37
<zcorpan>
smaug____: they'll just say i should spec mozilla's behavior :-P
14:38
<zcorpan>
smaug____: they'll just say i should spec mozilla's behavior :-P
14:38
<smaug____>
so they'll give you the right answer :)
14:38
<smaug____>
so they'll give you the right answer :)
14:39
<zcorpan>
ie doesn't collapse the table when there's a caption, but the other browsers do that
14:39
<smaug____>
zcorpan: but really, dbaron and bz have years of experience on that stuff.
14:39
<annevk>
the Mozilla "do whatever is best for the web mantra" seems to be about over these days :p
14:39
<zcorpan>
ie doesn't collapse the table when there's a caption, but the other browsers do that
14:39
<smaug____>
zcorpan: but really, dbaron and bz have years of experience on that stuff.
14:39
<annevk>
the Mozilla "do whatever is best for the web mantra" seems to be about over these days :p
14:39
<zcorpan>
smaug____: oh sure
14:39
<annevk>
or maybe it's just highly aligned with whatever is best for Gecko
14:39
<smaug____>
annevk: bah
14:40
<zcorpan>
smaug____: oh sure
14:40
<annevk>
or maybe it's just highly aligned with whatever is best for Gecko
14:40
<smaug____>
annevk: bah
14:41
<zcorpan>
i think i'll go with making the quirk have affect for the minimal set needed, which i think is a combination of ie and mozilla: if there's a table-caption, table-row-group, table-header-group or table-footer-group box child of a table, don't apply the quirk
14:42
<zcorpan>
i think i'll go with making the quirk have affect for the minimal set needed, which i think is a combination of ie and mozilla: if there's a table-caption, table-row-group, table-header-group or table-footer-group box child of a table, don't apply the quirk
14:42
<zcorpan>
(moz also applies the quirk for inline-table and when there's a table-caption)
14:43
<zcorpan>
(moz also applies the quirk for inline-table and when there's a table-caption)
14:45
<zcorpan>
hmm, ie also doesn't apply the quirk when there's a table-column (but does apply it if there's just a table-column-group)
14:46
<zcorpan>
hmm, ie also doesn't apply the quirk when there's a table-column (but does apply it if there's just a table-column-group)
14:46
<annevk>
oh yes, W3C starts publishing drafts documenting a single method: http://www.w3.org/TR/hr-time/
14:46
<annevk>
oh yes, W3C starts publishing drafts documenting a single method: http://www.w3.org/TR/hr-time/
14:47
<zcorpan>
let's split html5 into lots of drafts where each idl member gets its own spec
14:47
<MikeSmith>
modularization
14:48
<zcorpan>
let's split html5 into lots of drafts where each idl member gets its own spec
14:48
<MikeSmith>
modularization
14:48
<MikeSmith>
it's clearly catching on
14:48
<MikeSmith>
it's clearly catching on
14:48
<MikeSmith>
XHTML 1.1 Modularization for HTML5
14:48
<annevk>
and constants: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-navigation-timing-20120313/#performancenavigation ?
14:49
<MikeSmith>
XHTML 1.1 Modularization for HTML5
14:49
<annevk>
and constants: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-navigation-timing-20120313/#performancenavigation ?
15:10
<zcorpan>
ok http://simon.html5.org/specs/quirks-mode#the-collapsing-table-quirk specced
15:10
<zcorpan>
ok http://simon.html5.org/specs/quirks-mode#the-collapsing-table-quirk specced
15:11
<zcorpan>
that leaves the table cell nowrap quirk
15:11
<zcorpan>
that leaves the table cell nowrap quirk
15:42
<MikeSmith>
zcorpan, annevk - fyi the CSS validator now has CSS3 support
15:42
<MikeSmith>
zcorpan, annevk - fyi the CSS validator now has CSS3 support
15:42
<MikeSmith>
so please actually check the pubrules CSS reports
15:42
<MikeSmith>
and if it is reporting false positives, file bugs
15:43
<MikeSmith>
so please actually check the pubrules CSS reports
15:43
<MikeSmith>
and if it is reporting false positives, file bugs
15:46
<MikeSmith>
is there no :marker pseudo-element?
15:46
<MikeSmith>
is there no :marker pseudo-element?
15:46
<MikeSmith>
wait I know there isn't
15:46
<MikeSmith>
just what can I use instead of :marker
15:47
<MikeSmith>
wait I know there isn't
15:47
<MikeSmith>
just what can I use instead of :marker
15:47
<MikeSmith>
ah wait
15:48
<MikeSmith>
ah wait
15:48
<MikeSmith>
it's just not in either of the selectors specs
15:48
<MikeSmith>
but instead only in the lists and counters module
15:48
<MikeSmith>
but instead only in the lists and counters module
15:48
<MikeSmith>
modularization ftw
15:49
<MikeSmith>
modularization ftw
15:55
<zcorpan>
[nowrap] turned out to be two quirks
15:56
<zcorpan>
[nowrap] turned out to be two quirks
16:01
<dglazkov>
good morning, Whatwg!
16:02
<dglazkov>
good morning, Whatwg!
16:02
<zcorpan>
two quirks specced today (and one dropped)
16:03
<zcorpan>
two quirks specced today (and one dropped)
16:06
<MikeSmith>
zcorpan, annevk - https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/enter_bug.cgi?product=CSSValidator
16:06
<MikeSmith>
zcorpan, annevk - https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/enter_bug.cgi?product=CSSValidator
16:06
<zcorpan>
MikeSmith: ok
16:07
<zcorpan>
MikeSmith: ok
16:07
<MikeSmith>
Yves did a lot of work to get it updated, so would be great if we can help get it improved
16:07
<MikeSmith>
Yves did a lot of work to get it updated, so would be great if we can help get it improved
16:07
<MikeSmith>
really doesn't help much that the rules are spread out across 30+ different specs
16:07
<MikeSmith>
I mean as far as trying to implement a validator for it
16:08
<MikeSmith>
really doesn't help much that the rules are spread out across 30+ different specs
16:08
<MikeSmith>
I mean as far as trying to implement a validator for it
16:56
<bga>
IE correctly parse unknown css properties and put it in CSSRuleStyleDeclaration
16:56
<bga>
IE correctly parse unknown css properties and put it in CSSRuleStyleDeclaration
17:13
<bga>
background: url("linear-gradient: red white");
17:13
<bga>
background: url("linear-gradient: red white");
17:13
<bga>
custom handler that return svg w/ gradient
17:14
<bga>
custom handler that return svg w/ gradient
17:22
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: so with the zip-file thing added, even over my really slow connection, it takes only 10 mins to completely download and build and run the validator code
17:22
<MikeSmith>
hsivonen: so with the zip-file thing added, even over my really slow connection, it takes only 10 mins to completely download and build and run the validator code
17:22
<MikeSmith>
which isn't very harsh
17:23
<MikeSmith>
which isn't very harsh
17:34
<AryehGregor>
Gmail's important-conversation-marking works really well.
17:35
<AryehGregor>
Now it's correctly marking transforms-related discussions as important because of the people involved.
17:35
<AryehGregor>
Now it's correctly marking transforms-related discussions as important because of the people involved.
17:39
<MikeSmith>
AryehGregor: point is also about what it recognizes as not important I guess
17:39
<Hixie>
i think my arcTo() relying on transforms to get rotations makes no sense
17:39
<Hixie>
so i'm adding a 'rotation' argument to arcTo()
17:39
<Hixie>
also, i think instead of overloading arc() i'm just going to make a method ellipse()
17:39
<Hixie>
that is basically the same but not for circular arcs
17:40
<MikeSmith>
AryehGregor: point is also about what it recognizes as not important I guess
17:40
<Hixie>
i think my arcTo() relying on transforms to get rotations makes no sense
17:40
<Hixie>
so i'm adding a 'rotation' argument to arcTo()
17:40
<Hixie>
also, i think instead of overloading arc() i'm just going to make a method ellipse()
17:40
<Hixie>
that is basically the same but not for circular arcs
17:40
AryehGregor
is all in favor of a separate method instead of overloading
17:41
AryehGregor
is all in favor of a separate method instead of overloading
17:41
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: what AryehGregor said
17:41
<MikeSmith>
in general
17:42
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: what AryehGregor said
17:42
<MikeSmith>
in general
17:42
<AryehGregor>
Overloading is only a good idea when you have two different calls that mean basically the same thing, like with different argument types or optional arguments or things conceptually similar to that.
17:42
<AryehGregor>
The canvas API seems very over-overloaded already.
17:42
<AryehGregor>
Overloading is only a good idea when you have two different calls that mean basically the same thing, like with different argument types or optional arguments or things conceptually similar to that.
17:42
<AryehGregor>
The canvas API seems very over-overloaded already.
17:43
<TabAtkins_>
+1 to ellipse().
17:43
<TabAtkins_>
+1 to ellipse().
17:43
<MikeSmith>
the canvas API seems like not a model to be followed
17:43
<AryehGregor>
I haven't tried using it, but I saw operations along the lines of "if you provide six floats it behaves one way, but if you provide eight floats then the fifth and sixth arguments mean something different and the seventh and eighth mean the same as the old fifth and sixth".
17:43
<AryehGregor>
Which I guess is just optional arguments in the middle.
17:43
<AryehGregor>
But it seems quite horrible.
17:43
<TabAtkins_>
Yeah, the drawImage function.
17:44
<MikeSmith>
the canvas API seems like not a model to be followed
17:44
<AryehGregor>
I haven't tried using it, but I saw operations along the lines of "if you provide six floats it behaves one way, but if you provide eight floats then the fifth and sixth arguments mean something different and the seventh and eighth mean the same as the old fifth and sixth".
17:44
<AryehGregor>
Which I guess is just optional arguments in the middle.
17:44
<AryehGregor>
But it seems quite horrible.
17:44
<TabAtkins_>
Yeah, the drawImage function.
17:44
<TabAtkins_>
Which, as usual, should have just taken some objects instead.
17:44
<TabAtkins_>
Which, as usual, should have just taken some objects instead.
17:44
<AryehGregor>
:(
17:45
<AryehGregor>
:(
17:45
<TabAtkins_>
drawImage(img,{x,y,w,h}, {w,y,w,h})
17:45
<TabAtkins_>
drawImage(img,{x,y,w,h}, {w,y,w,h})
17:46
<AryehGregor>
Do you mean arrays there?
17:46
<AryehGregor>
Do you mean arrays there?
17:46
<TabAtkins_>
No, but arrays might work too, since it's always the w,h that are omittable.
17:47
<TabAtkins_>
No, but arrays might work too, since it's always the w,h that are omittable.
17:47
<AryehGregor>
Oh, you mean an object like {x: 7, y: 5} or something.
17:47
<TabAtkins_>
yeah
17:47
<AryehGregor>
I think an array is shorter and clearer here.
17:47
<TabAtkins_>
probably, yeah.
17:48
<AryehGregor>
Oh, you mean an object like {x: 7, y: 5} or something.
17:48
<TabAtkins_>
yeah
17:48
<AryehGregor>
I think an array is shorter and clearer here.
17:48
<TabAtkins_>
probably, yeah.
17:48
<TabAtkins_>
ctx.drawImage(src, [0,0], [0,0,50,100])
17:48
<TabAtkins_>
Makes sense to me.
17:48
<TabAtkins_>
ctx.drawImage(src, [0,0], [0,0,50,100])
17:48
<TabAtkins_>
Makes sense to me.
17:49
<AryehGregor>
The trick is whether the third and fourth parameters are width/height, or the x/y coords of a second corner.
17:49
<AryehGregor>
You just have to rely on platform consistency for that.
17:50
<AryehGregor>
The trick is whether the third and fourth parameters are width/height, or the x/y coords of a second corner.
17:50
<AryehGregor>
You just have to rely on platform consistency for that.
17:50
<MikeSmith>
hey TabAtkins_
17:50
<TabAtkins_>
Oh, true. That's a potential advantage of objects. Naming is always useful.
17:50
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: Yo!
17:50
<MikeSmith>
hey TabAtkins_
17:50
<TabAtkins_>
Oh, true. That's a potential advantage of objects. Naming is always useful.
17:50
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: Yo!
17:50
<MikeSmith>
where you been man?
17:50
<TabAtkins_>
AryehGregor: Luckily the xywh pattern is pretty well established.
17:50
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: At sxsw
17:50
<MikeSmith>
ah
17:50
<MikeSmith>
yeah
17:50
<MikeSmith>
Gingerman?
17:50
<MikeSmith>
B-side?
17:51
<MikeSmith>
where you been man?
17:51
<TabAtkins_>
AryehGregor: Luckily the xywh pattern is pretty well established.
17:51
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: At sxsw
17:51
<MikeSmith>
ah
17:51
<MikeSmith>
yeah
17:51
<MikeSmith>
Gingerman?
17:51
<MikeSmith>
B-side?
17:51
<TabAtkins_>
Spent every night at ginger man, yeah.
17:52
<TabAtkins_>
Met *tons* of people that I'd only known through Twitter. Lots of fun all around.
17:52
<TabAtkins_>
And our panel went even better than last year.
17:52
<MikeSmith>
great
17:53
<TabAtkins_>
Met *tons* of people that I'd only known through Twitter. Lots of fun all around.
17:53
<TabAtkins_>
And our panel went even better than last year.
17:53
<MikeSmith>
great
17:53
<MikeSmith>
someday I will get back to Austin
17:53
<MikeSmith>
someday I will get back to Austin
17:54
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: btw I'm still wondering about your claim that emscripten had overcome the "order of magnitude" gap
17:54
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: Heard it on Twitter, with a link to a github issue that I skimmed.
17:54
<MikeSmith>
hmm
17:55
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: btw I'm still wondering about your claim that emscripten had overcome the "order of magnitude" gap
17:55
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: Heard it on Twitter, with a link to a github issue that I skimmed.
17:55
<MikeSmith>
hmm
17:55
<TabAtkins_>
It would be from about two weeks ago, and I think it was a RT, so it would be hard for me to find.
17:55
<TabAtkins_>
It would be from about two weeks ago, and I think it was a RT, so it would be hard for me to find.
17:55
<gsnedders>
TabAtkins_: It depends on the code, though.
17:55
<TabAtkins_>
gsnedders: Yeah, definitely.
17:55
<MikeSmith>
afaict from Joel Webber postings that gap is still there
17:55
<MikeSmith>
gsnedders: of course
17:55
<MikeSmith>
also like recent JSC refactoring
17:56
<gsnedders>
TabAtkins_: It depends on the code, though.
17:56
<TabAtkins_>
gsnedders: Yeah, definitely.
17:56
<MikeSmith>
afaict from Joel Webber postings that gap is still there
17:56
<MikeSmith>
gsnedders: of course
17:56
<MikeSmith>
also like recent JSC refactoring
17:56
<MikeSmith>
rewriting
17:56
<MikeSmith>
rewriting
17:56
<MikeSmith>
from dude
17:56
<gsnedders>
https://github.com/kripken/emscripten/issues/22#issuecomment-4201138 is the origin
17:56
<MikeSmith>
forgot his name
17:56
<MikeSmith>
from dude
17:56
<MikeSmith>
guy from Purdue
17:56
<gsnedders>
https://github.com/kripken/emscripten/issues/22#issuecomment-4201138 is the origin
17:56
<MikeSmith>
forgot his name
17:56
<MikeSmith>
guy from Purdue
17:56
<TabAtkins_>
gsnedders: That's it! Thanks.
17:57
<TabAtkins_>
gsnedders: That's it! Thanks.
17:58
<MikeSmith>
holy fuck
17:58
<MikeSmith>
" I can now definitively state that emscripten+ff has broken the order-of-magnitude barrier w.r.t. C++."
17:58
<MikeSmith>
from the man himself
17:59
<MikeSmith>
holy fuck
17:59
<MikeSmith>
" I can now definitively state that emscripten+ff has broken the order-of-magnitude barrier w.r.t. C++."
17:59
<MikeSmith>
from the man himself
17:59
<MikeSmith>
that's pretty impressive
17:59
<jgraham>
(using objects in places where you might have a tight loop seems like it could impose some performance cost)
18:00
<jgraham>
(using objects in places where you might have a tight loop seems like it could impose some performance cost)
18:03
<Philip`>
MikeSmith: Where "from the man himself" means "from an inherently biased person"?
18:03
<Philip`>
MikeSmith: Where "from the man himself" means "from an inherently biased person"?
18:03
<MikeSmith>
heh
18:04
<MikeSmith>
heh
18:04
<MikeSmith>
he is the foremost EXPERT in his field man
18:04
<MikeSmith>
he is the foremost EXPERT in his field man
18:04
<TabAtkins_>
Don't get all wikipedian on us, jgraham .
18:04
<MikeSmith>
as am I in the field of smokable varieties of THC
18:05
<TabAtkins_>
Don't get all wikipedian on us, jgraham .
18:05
<MikeSmith>
as am I in the field of smokable varieties of THC
18:05
<TabAtkins_>
Who invented data urls? I want to buy that person a beer.
18:06
<TabAtkins_>
Who invented data urls? I want to buy that person a beer.
18:07
<TabAtkins_>
Ooh, and now I get to set up hg on my work box.
18:07
<TabAtkins_>
Yay?
18:07
<TabAtkins_>
Ooh, and now I get to set up hg on my work box.
18:07
<TabAtkins_>
Yay?
18:08
<WeirdAl>
TabAtkins_: hope you like Xerox
18:08
<WeirdAl>
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2397
18:08
<WeirdAl>
TabAtkins_: hope you like Xerox
18:08
<WeirdAl>
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2397
18:08
<TabAtkins_>
Dammit, Larry Masinter!
18:08
<MikeSmith>
LOL
18:08
<TabAtkins_>
Okay, I'll still buy him a beer. And then run away.
18:08
<MikeSmith>
dude
18:09
<TabAtkins_>
Dammit, Larry Masinter!
18:09
<MikeSmith>
LOL
18:09
<TabAtkins_>
Okay, I'll still buy him a beer. And then run away.
18:09
<WeirdAl>
I have no idea who the guy is, actually - a name in our industry I've never heard.
18:09
<MikeSmith>
dude
18:09
<WeirdAl>
I have no idea who the guy is, actually - a name in our industry I've never heard.
18:09
<MikeSmith>
you owe Larry some serious ove
18:09
<MikeSmith>
WeirdAl: Larry is god
18:09
<MikeSmith>
like Loki
18:09
<MikeSmith>
or the demiurge
18:10
<MikeSmith>
WeirdAl: Larry is god
18:10
<MikeSmith>
he is deep into the matrix
18:10
<MikeSmith>
like Loki
18:10
<MikeSmith>
or the demiurge
18:10
<MikeSmith>
he is deep into the matrix
18:10
<TabAtkins_>
I know he's done good things. He's still crazy now.
18:10
<TabAtkins_>
I know he's done good things. He's still crazy now.
18:14
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: I'm crazier
18:14
<MikeSmith>
I guarantee
18:15
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: I'm crazier
18:15
<MikeSmith>
I guarantee
18:16
<TabAtkins_>
In a good way, though.
18:17
<TabAtkins_>
In a good way, though.
18:34
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: help me out man
18:35
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: help me out man
18:35
<MikeSmith>
the chairs are telling me they want stuff actually done before we can publish updated WDs
18:35
<MikeSmith>
the chairs are telling me they want stuff actually done before we can publish updated WDs
18:35
<MikeSmith>
specifically,
18:35
<MikeSmith>
http://intertwingly.net/tmp/wgstatus.html#editor
18:36
<MikeSmith>
specifically,
18:36
<MikeSmith>
http://intertwingly.net/tmp/wgstatus.html#editor
18:36
<MikeSmith>
the "Editor Queue" stufff
18:36
<MikeSmith>
the "Editor Queue" stufff
18:36
<MikeSmith>
so if you can actually make those changes in the W3 version you will be my hero for this week
18:36
<MikeSmith>
beyond TabAtkins_
18:37
<MikeSmith>
so if you can actually make those changes in the W3 version you will be my hero for this week
18:37
<MikeSmith>
beyond TabAtkins_
18:41
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: my timetable for the next few weeks is canvas, web intents, the start time thread on the whatwg list, sicking's readyState bugs, and then <dialog> and sandbox/CSP
18:41
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: my timetable for the next few weeks is canvas, web intents, the start time thread on the whatwg list, sicking's readyState bugs, and then <dialog> and sandbox/CSP
18:45
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: all I need for now is those WG decisions applied to the W3C versinos
18:45
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: all I need for now is those WG decisions applied to the W3C versinos
18:45
<MikeSmith>
so that we can publish on Thursay
18:45
<MikeSmith>
if you don't have time to apply them, I will, I gues
18:46
<MikeSmith>
so that we can publish on Thursay
18:46
<MikeSmith>
if you don't have time to apply them, I will, I gues
18:46
<MikeSmith>
but I would appreciate it if you tried
18:46
<MikeSmith>
but I would appreciate it if you tried
18:46
<MikeSmith>
so that i can reduce a bit the mountain of BS PITA that I have to deal with
18:47
<MikeSmith>
so that i can reduce a bit the mountain of BS PITA that I have to deal with
18:47
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: i'm adding your script to the pipeline as we speak, but the other two don't have simple diffs that need applying, they're both week-long efforts to try to work out exactly what should happen
18:47
<MikeSmith>
OK
18:47
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: e.g. the sandbox one needs basically a refactoring of the entire sandbox feature for CSP
18:47
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: i'm adding your script to the pipeline as we speak, but the other two don't have simple diffs that need applying, they're both week-long efforts to try to work out exactly what should happen
18:47
<MikeSmith>
OK
18:47
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: e.g. the sandbox one needs basically a refactoring of the entire sandbox feature for CSP
18:47
<MikeSmith>
I see
18:47
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: and the dialog one needs coordination with the fullscreen spec to work out how it'll work
18:47
<MikeSmith>
who submitted that CP?
18:47
<MikeSmith>
OK
18:48
<MikeSmith>
I see
18:48
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: and the dialog one needs coordination with the fullscreen spec to work out how it'll work
18:48
<MikeSmith>
who submitted that CP?
18:48
<MikeSmith>
OK
18:48
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: in both cases one could naively apply the exact diff the CP says to do, but that would just be a waste of everyone's time
18:48
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: in both cases one could naively apply the exact diff the CP says to do, but that would just be a waste of everyone's time
18:48
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: if anyone suggests you do that, i highly recommend explaining to them that they clearly care less about the web than about the appearance of progres and should maybe reconsider their life choices
18:49
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: if anyone suggests you do that, i highly recommend explaining to them that they clearly care less about the web than about the appearance of progres and should maybe reconsider their life choices
18:49
<MikeSmith>
yeah
18:50
<MikeSmith>
yeah
18:50
<Hixie>
(if the chairs actually wanted <dialog> in the spec quicker, they would have just let it happen without the escalation process, in which case hober and i would have put it in the spec sometime last year, when we had nothing more pressing to work on)
18:51
<Hixie>
(if the chairs actually wanted <dialog> in the spec quicker, they would have just let it happen without the escalation process, in which case hober and i would have put it in the spec sometime last year, when we had nothing more pressing to work on)
18:56
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: indee
18:56
<MikeSmith>
d
18:57
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: indee
18:57
<MikeSmith>
d
18:57
<MikeSmith>
the whole premature escalation thing I never did understand either
18:57
<MikeSmith>
the whole premature escalation thing I never did understand either
18:57
<MikeSmith>
anyway, we find ourselves at this poing
18:57
<MikeSmith>
as we have found ourselves before
18:58
<MikeSmith>
anyway, we find ourselves at this poing
18:58
<MikeSmith>
as we have found ourselves before
18:58
<Hixie>
i don't really see what is stopping them from just publishing
18:58
<Hixie>
i don't really see what is stopping them from just publishing
18:58
<Hixie>
i mean, there's nothing particularly special about these new features than the other new features i'm working on
18:58
<MikeSmith>
those 3 decisions, afaict
18:58
<Hixie>
i mean, why have they decided that they need those decisions applied but not, say, the canvas changes applied?
18:59
<Hixie>
i mean, there's nothing particularly special about these new features than the other new features i'm working on
18:59
<MikeSmith>
those 3 decisions, afaict
18:59
<Hixie>
i mean, why have they decided that they need those decisions applied but not, say, the canvas changes applied?
18:59
<Hixie>
i'd have thought the canvasregion hit testing changes were way more important/controversial in the wg
18:59
<Hixie>
i'd have thought the canvasregion hit testing changes were way more important/controversial in the wg
19:01
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: see the topic, ese
19:01
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: see the topic, ese
19:01
<Hixie>
it's one thing for the language to be irrational
19:01
<Hixie>
another for the people the w3c is putting forward as leaders to be irrational
19:02
<Hixie>
it's one thing for the language to be irrational
19:02
<Hixie>
another for the people the w3c is putting forward as leaders to be irrational
19:02
<MikeSmith>
leaders fail us
19:02
<MikeSmith>
everywhere
19:03
<MikeSmith>
leaders fail us
19:03
<MikeSmith>
everywhere
19:03
<MikeSmith>
we need to work around the "leaders"
19:03
<MikeSmith>
we need to work around the "leaders"
19:04
<Hixie>
i don't intend to work around anyone
19:04
<Hixie>
i don't intend to work around anyone
19:04
<MikeSmith>
yeah well I do I gues
19:05
<MikeSmith>
yeah well I do I gues
19:05
<MikeSmith>
I guess that's a difference between you and me
19:05
<MikeSmith>
I guess that's a difference between you and me
19:05
<annevk>
hober: I wasn't necessarily disagreeing, though it does seem somewhat weird to have event handler attributes
19:05
<annevk>
in the dictionary
19:06
<annevk>
hober: I wasn't necessarily disagreeing, though it does seem somewhat weird to have event handler attributes
19:06
<annevk>
in the dictionary
19:06
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: arguing with asshats on principle is fun for about 30 seconds
19:06
<MikeSmith>
te
19:07
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: arguing with asshats on principle is fun for about 30 seconds
19:07
<MikeSmith>
te
19:07
<MikeSmith>
then it gets boring an pointless
19:07
<MikeSmith>
then it gets boring an pointless
19:08
<Hixie>
you don't have to argue if someone asks you to do something dumb
19:08
<MikeSmith>
right
19:08
<Hixie>
that's what spam filters are for
19:08
<Hixie>
you don't have to argue if someone asks you to do something dumb
19:08
<MikeSmith>
right
19:08
<Hixie>
that's what spam filters are for
19:09
<MikeSmith>
in the mean time we actually want to get some WD published if we can
19:09
<MikeSmith>
in the mean time we actually want to get some WD published if we can
19:10
<Hixie>
so just publish what we have
19:10
<Hixie>
i really don't see the problem here
19:10
<Hixie>
so just publish what we have
19:10
<annevk>
MikeSmith: so html5-diff has validation errors?
19:10
<Hixie>
i really don't see the problem here
19:10
<annevk>
MikeSmith: so html5-diff has validation errors?
19:10
<MikeSmith>
annevk: dunno, maybe CSS non-erros
19:10
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: the whatwg manages to "publish a rec" every time i make a diff, why can't the w3c "publish a wd"?
19:11
<MikeSmith>
annevk: dunno, maybe CSS non-erros
19:11
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: the whatwg manages to "publish a rec" every time i make a diff, why can't the w3c "publish a wd"?
19:11
<MikeSmith>
fuck
19:11
<MikeSmith>
please
19:11
<MikeSmith>
fuck
19:11
<MikeSmith>
please
19:11
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: I can idiot that you ask me that?
19:11
<MikeSmith>
christ
19:11
<zewt>
parse error, redo from start
19:12
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: I can idiot that you ask me that?
19:12
<MikeSmith>
christ
19:12
<zewt>
parse error, redo from start
19:12
<MikeSmith>
* Am I can idiot that you ask me that
19:12
<MikeSmith>
* Am I can idiot that you ask me that
19:12
<annevk>
"You should add a 'type' attribute with a value of 'text/css' to the 'style' element"
19:12
<zewt>
not better :)
19:12
<annevk>
that sounds wrong
19:13
<annevk>
"You should add a 'type' attribute with a value of 'text/css' to the 'style' element"
19:13
<zewt>
not better :)
19:13
<annevk>
that sounds wrong
19:13
<MikeSmith>
zewt: god
19:13
<zewt>
uh?
19:13
<MikeSmith>
zewt: god
19:13
<zewt>
uh?
19:13
<MikeSmith>
* Am I an idiot that you ask me that
19:13
<MikeSmith>
fucking typewriters
19:13
<Hixie>
well i'm not really asking you, i'm asking whoever is telling you that you can't somehow
19:14
<MikeSmith>
* Am I an idiot that you ask me that
19:14
<MikeSmith>
fucking typewriters
19:14
<Hixie>
well i'm not really asking you, i'm asking whoever is telling you that you can't somehow
19:14
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: me
19:14
<MikeSmith>
I am asking you
19:14
<zewt>
if you're using a typewriter it may be time for an upgrade
19:14
<MikeSmith>
Hixie: me
19:14
<MikeSmith>
I am asking you
19:14
<zewt>
if you're using a typewriter it may be time for an upgrade
19:14
<MikeSmith>
so that we can publish on Thursday
19:15
<MikeSmith>
so that we can publish on Thursday
19:15
<MikeSmith>
if you can't make those changes by Thursday, then I guess we are up shit creek
19:15
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: oh you just want me to rerun the pipeline with the flags set for publication? i can do that, sure. i thought you were saying we were somehow gated on some random CPs.
19:15
<MikeSmith>
if you can't make those changes by Thursday, then I guess we are up shit creek
19:15
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: oh you just want me to rerun the pipeline with the flags set for publication? i can do that, sure. i thought you were saying we were somehow gated on some random CPs.
19:15
<MikeSmith>
yeah, re-run it
19:15
<MikeSmith>
I changed the boilerplate already
19:16
<MikeSmith>
yeah, re-run it
19:16
<MikeSmith>
I changed the boilerplate already
19:16
<Hixie>
k
19:16
<MikeSmith>
I leave it up to the chairs to deal with the aftermath
19:16
<Hixie>
k
19:16
<MikeSmith>
I leave it up to the chairs to deal with the aftermath
19:16
<Hixie>
what date should i use?
19:16
<MikeSmith>
which amounts to, they leave it up to me]
19:16
<MikeSmith>
15
19:16
<Hixie>
and which drafts
19:16
<MikeSmith>
html, md, canvas
19:17
<Hixie>
what date should i use?
19:17
<MikeSmith>
which amounts to, they leave it up to me]
19:17
<MikeSmith>
15
19:17
<Hixie>
and which drafts
19:17
<MikeSmith>
html, md, canvas
19:17
<MikeSmith>
I'm about ready to stab myself in the heart with a broken bottle here
19:17
<MikeSmith>
I'm about ready to stab myself in the heart with a broken bottle here
19:17
<gsnedders>
MikeSmith: emo.
19:17
<Hixie>
oh wait, i don't need to update the date, that's in the boilerplate now
19:17
<Hixie>
sweet
19:18
<gsnedders>
MikeSmith: emo.
19:18
<Hixie>
oh wait, i don't need to update the date, that's in the boilerplate now
19:18
<Hixie>
sweet
19:18
<MikeSmith>
gsnedders: dude I was em before there was a word for it
19:18
<MikeSmith>
gsnedders: dude I was em before there was a word for it
19:18
<MikeSmith>
and I will punk jackass that claims to have re-invented emo in my wake
19:19
<MikeSmith>
and I will punk jackass that claims to have re-invented emo in my wake
19:20
<TabAtkins_>
Yay, I can finally publish in HTML5!
19:21
<TabAtkins_>
Yay, I can finally publish in HTML5!
19:21
<annevk>
hmm
19:21
<annevk>
I wonder what dbaron just posted on twitter
19:22
<annevk>
hmm
19:22
<annevk>
I wonder what dbaron just posted on twitter
19:22
<TabAtkins_>
Hm.
19:22
<TabAtkins_>
Hm.
19:22
<TabAtkins_>
Don't want to try and decode it, given the possibility of wasted effort if twitter mangled it.
19:22
<annevk>
it's something about having 140 code units I reckon
19:23
<TabAtkins_>
Don't want to try and decode it, given the possibility of wasted effort if twitter mangled it.
19:23
<annevk>
it's something about having 140 code units I reckon
19:23
<gsnedders>
MikeSmith: Your kisses kill me a little inside.
19:23
<gsnedders>
MikeSmith: Your kisses kill me a little inside.
19:23
<TabAtkins_>
Likely. I'll bet it's using one of the alternate roman alphabets in the multibyte sections.
19:23
<MikeSmith>
gsnedders: wonderful phrase
19:24
<TabAtkins_>
Likely. I'll bet it's using one of the alternate roman alphabets in the multibyte sections.
19:24
<MikeSmith>
gsnedders: wonderful phrase
19:25
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: please work with closely with Elika to create another 30 CSSSS specs
19:25
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: Already on it.
19:25
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: please work with closely with Elika to create another 30 CSSSS specs
19:25
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: Already on it.
19:25
<MikeSmith>
heh
19:25
<annevk>
MikeSmith: filed https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16347
19:26
<MikeSmith>
heh
19:26
<annevk>
MikeSmith: filed https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16347
19:27
<MikeSmith>
annevk: ありがとうございます
19:27
<MikeSmith>
annevk: ありがとうございます
19:27
<annevk>
問題ない
19:27
<TabAtkins_>
What the hell is that "XSL or XQuery WG" checkbox doing floating over there?
19:27
<MikeSmith>
heh
19:28
<annevk>
問題ない
19:28
<TabAtkins_>
What the hell is that "XSL or XQuery WG" checkbox doing floating over there?
19:28
<aklein>
Hixie: hi there. random question about the "form" attribute: if a form-associated element is not in the document tree, should it still be associated with a form if it has a "form" attribute matching the ID of a <form> that _is_ in the document?
19:28
<MikeSmith>
heh
19:28
<aklein>
Hixie: hi there. random question about the "form" attribute: if a form-associated element is not in the document tree, should it still be associated with a form if it has a "form" attribute matching the ID of a <form> that _is_ in the document?
19:28
<aklein>
(poking around at WebKit's incomplete implementation)
19:28
<aklein>
(poking around at WebKit's incomplete implementation)
19:28
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: that is to remind you about how important X-*shite is
19:28
<aklein>
from my reading it seems the form attribute basically overrides the tree-based form-association rules
19:29
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: that is to remind you about how important X-*shite is
19:29
<aklein>
from my reading it seems the form attribute basically overrides the tree-based form-association rules
19:29
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: Should I just check it on every bug? I've already started doing so.
19:29
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: Should I just check it on every bug? I've already started doing so.
19:29
<MikeSmith>
heh
19:29
<annevk>
the stuff from dbaron is in the Shavian Alphabet apparently?
19:29
<annevk>
http://www.unicode.org/standard/translations/shavian.html
19:30
<MikeSmith>
heh
19:30
<annevk>
the stuff from dbaron is in the Shavian Alphabet apparently?
19:30
<annevk>
http://www.unicode.org/standard/translations/shavian.html
19:30
<Hixie>
aklein: looking...
19:30
<Hixie>
aklein: looking...
19:30
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: maybe I can change the config. I dunno. configuring bugzillla dpresses me
19:30
<AryehGregor>
. . . wow, backface-visibility interop is much worse than I thought.
19:31
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: maybe I can change the config. I dunno. configuring bugzillla dpresses me
19:31
<AryehGregor>
. . . wow, backface-visibility interop is much worse than I thought.
19:31
<AryehGregor>
I need lots more tests for this.
19:31
<AryehGregor>
I need lots more tests for this.
19:31
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: I'm just wondering why those WGs have the ability to mark bugs as WG-private anyway. It's bizarre.
19:32
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: I'm just wondering why those WGs have the ability to mark bugs as WG-private anyway. It's bizarre.
19:32
<Hixie>
aklein: yeah, looks like the spec says that it should be associated even if the control isn't in the same subtree as the form element
19:32
<Hixie>
aklein: the form element has to be in the document, though
19:32
<Hixie>
aklein: yeah, looks like the spec says that it should be associated even if the control isn't in the same subtree as the form element
19:32
<Hixie>
aklein: the form element has to be in the document, though
19:33
<annevk>
so you can submit controls not part of the DOM
19:33
<Hixie>
ok canvas now supports ellipses
19:33
<annevk>
that's kind of weird
19:33
<annevk>
so you can submit controls not part of the DOM
19:33
<Hixie>
ok canvas now supports ellipses
19:33
<annevk>
that's kind of weird
19:33
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: i am checking in the wds with WD livery
19:33
<Hixie>
s/wds/docs/
19:33
<MikeSmith>
ok
19:34
<Hixie>
MikeSmith: i am checking in the wds with WD livery
19:34
<Hixie>
s/wds/docs/
19:34
<MikeSmith>
ok
19:34
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: eh? which groups?
19:34
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: eh? which groups?
19:35
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: if you mean the "XSL or XQuery WG" bugzilla thing I have zero insight
19:36
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: if you mean the "XSL or XQuery WG" bugzilla thing I have zero insight
19:36
<aklein>
Hixie: thanks, that's what I got from my reading. WebKit sometimes lets such associations take place, Firefox doesn't seem to.
19:36
<rniwa>
what's a good irc channel for regions discussion?
19:36
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: Yeah, that. It's a new thing, so it's weird.
19:36
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: Here, or w3.org/#css
19:36
<rniwa>
what's a good irc channel for regions discussion?
19:36
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: Yeah, that. It's a new thing, so it's weird.
19:36
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: Here, or w3.org/#css
19:36
<aklein>
(it's not clear the WebKit impl meant to let this take place)
19:36
<MikeSmith>
OK
19:36
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: okay. i guess i'll start here since i'm already here
19:36
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: I'm pretty sure that checkbox wasn't in place a week ago.
19:36
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_, annevk: so we've had some more discussions about regions node list
19:37
<aklein>
(it's not clear the WebKit impl meant to let this take place)
19:37
<MikeSmith>
OK
19:37
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: okay. i guess i'll start here since i'm already here
19:37
<TabAtkins_>
MikeSmith: I'm pretty sure that checkbox wasn't in place a week ago.
19:37
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_, annevk: so we've had some more discussions about regions node list
19:37
<rniwa>
and we're rolling out webkit's implementation for now since it's not implemented correctly
19:37
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: hai
19:37
<rniwa>
and we're rolling out webkit's implementation for now since it's not implemented correctly
19:37
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins_: hai
19:37
<rniwa>
but dhyatt pointed out a point that in the future, regions node list can have css generated nodes as well
19:37
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: You mean that api that lets you get the boxes that a region spans?
19:37
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: yeah
19:37
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: or rather "nodes"
19:37
<TabAtkins_>
Yeah, Hyatt's right.
19:38
<rniwa>
but dhyatt pointed out a point that in the future, regions node list can have css generated nodes as well
19:38
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: You mean that api that lets you get the boxes that a region spans?
19:38
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: yeah
19:38
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: or rather "nodes"
19:38
<TabAtkins_>
Yeah, Hyatt's right.
19:38
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: so we need some mechanism to represent css generated nodes
19:38
<annevk>
in general, adding new CSSOM stuff without having fixed the underlying model is scary imo
19:38
<TabAtkins_>
Heh, pinging alex russell.
19:38
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: so we need some mechanism to represent css generated nodes
19:38
<annevk>
in general, adding new CSSOM stuff without having fixed the underlying model is scary imo
19:38
<TabAtkins_>
Heh, pinging alex russell.
19:38
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: it can be of type Node since it's not a real node
19:38
<rniwa>
annevk: I agree.
19:38
<TabAtkins_>
annevk: Probably agree.
19:39
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: it can be of type Node since it's not a real node
19:39
<rniwa>
annevk: I agree.
19:39
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_, annevk: what would this pseudo-node look like?
19:39
<TabAtkins_>
annevk: Probably agree.
19:39
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_, annevk: what would this pseudo-node look like?
19:39
<annevk>
we have not figured out how CSSOM should look, yet CSSMatrix is being added somewhat brokenly, now regions, there's stuff for variables...
19:39
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: Dunno!
19:39
<annevk>
we have not figured out how CSSOM should look, yet CSSMatrix is being added somewhat brokenly, now regions, there's stuff for variables...
19:39
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: Dunno!
19:39
<rniwa>
annevk: :(
19:39
<TabAtkins_>
annevk: At least for vars, it's just some stuff on the CSSStyleDeclaration.
19:39
<annevk>
rniwa: wouldn't CSS just generate boxes?
19:39
<rniwa>
annevk: yeah
19:39
<rniwa>
annevk: but how do you prefer to span:before { flow-from: "my-flow"; }
19:40
<rniwa>
annevk: :(
19:40
<TabAtkins_>
annevk: At least for vars, it's just some stuff on the CSSStyleDeclaration.
19:40
<annevk>
rniwa: wouldn't CSS just generate boxes?
19:40
<rniwa>
annevk: yeah
19:40
<rniwa>
annevk: but how do you prefer to span:before { flow-from: "my-flow"; }
19:40
<rniwa>
annevk: it's not a real node
19:40
<rniwa>
annevk: it's a pseudo-node but it's part of the flow nonetheless
19:40
<rniwa>
annevk: it's a pseudo-node but it's part of the flow nonetheless
19:40
<rniwa>
annevk: so if you're getting the list of nodes that belong to the same flow
19:40
<rniwa>
then it's got to be there
19:40
<annevk>
maybe introduce CSSNode?
19:40
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: You'll have to reify CSS pseudo-elements to do this correctly.
19:41
<rniwa>
annevk: so if you're getting the list of nodes that belong to the same flow
19:41
<rniwa>
then it's got to be there
19:41
<annevk>
maybe introduce CSSNode?
19:41
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: You'll have to reify CSS pseudo-elements to do this correctly.
19:41
<annevk>
making it inherit from Node though seems wrong
19:41
<annevk>
making it inherit from Node though seems wrong
19:41
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: right.
19:41
<TabAtkins_>
(Which I'm totally cool with.)
19:41
<annevk>
so maybe it should just be CSSBox and you mix it in the list
19:41
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: right.
19:41
<rniwa>
annevk: definitely not > inherit from Node
19:41
<TabAtkins_>
(Which I'm totally cool with.)
19:41
<TabAtkins_>
(If we can do it in a performant way.)
19:41
<annevk>
so maybe it should just be CSSBox and you mix it in the list
19:41
<rniwa>
annevk: definitely not > inherit from Node
19:41
<TabAtkins_>
(If we can do it in a performant way.)
19:41
<rniwa>
annevk: yeah...
19:41
<annevk>
you can have (CSSBox or Node)[]
19:41
<rniwa>
annevk: "Box" is kind of confusing though
19:41
<rniwa>
annevk: because it's an inline / block objects
19:41
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: I think you were in the room months ago when we were discussing reifying pseudoelements in some way related to the shadow dom.
19:41
<rniwa>
annevk: not really line boxes
19:42
<rniwa>
annevk: yeah...
19:42
<annevk>
you can have (CSSBox or Node)[]
19:42
<rniwa>
annevk: "Box" is kind of confusing though
19:42
<rniwa>
annevk: because it's an inline / block objects
19:42
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: was I?
19:42
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: I think you were in the room months ago when we were discussing reifying pseudoelements in some way related to the shadow dom.
19:42
<rniwa>
annevk: not really line boxes
19:42
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: oh yeah
19:42
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: was I?
19:42
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: oh yeah
19:42
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: decorator stuff
19:42
<annevk>
from a spec perspective they're all boxes
19:42
<annevk>
from a spec perspective they're all boxes
19:42
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: but I think decorator approach is an overkill for this
19:42
<annevk>
block-level, inline-level, line-level boxes
19:42
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: because that'll make them real nodes
19:42
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: but I think decorator approach is an overkill for this
19:42
<annevk>
block-level, inline-level, line-level boxes
19:42
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: because that'll make them real nodes
19:42
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa, annevk: "box" isn't the right term, anyway. That's a level too far down. You want the notion that CSS has of "elements" after it's doctored the tree.
19:42
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: yeah
19:42
<TabAtkins_>
But before converting the element-tree to the box-tree.
19:42
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: for that, I like CSSElement or CSSNode
19:42
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: or PseudoNode
19:43
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa, annevk: "box" isn't the right term, anyway. That's a level too far down. You want the notion that CSS has of "elements" after it's doctored the tree.
19:43
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: yeah
19:43
<TabAtkins_>
But before converting the element-tree to the box-tree.
19:43
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: for that, I like CSSElement or CSSNode
19:43
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: or PseudoNode
19:43
<rniwa>
i like the third one least since nobody can spell pseudo correctly :P
19:43
<annevk>
PseudoElement then
19:43
<rniwa>
i like the third one least since nobody can spell pseudo correctly :P
19:43
<annevk>
PseudoElement then
19:43
<rniwa>
annevk: LOL
19:43
<TabAtkins_>
I'd want to spend some time hashing this out publicly, but something like that sounds interesting.
19:43
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: yeah
19:43
<TabAtkins_>
::element, obviously.
19:43
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: was there cssom mailing list?
19:43
<TabAtkins_>
window['::element'](foo)
19:43
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: www-style
19:43
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: oh man... :(
19:44
<rniwa>
annevk: LOL
19:44
<TabAtkins_>
I'd want to spend some time hashing this out publicly, but something like that sounds interesting.
19:44
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: yeah
19:44
<TabAtkins_>
::element, obviously.
19:44
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: was there cssom mailing list?
19:44
<TabAtkins_>
window['::element'](foo)
19:44
<annevk>
rniwa: uhuh
19:44
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: www-style
19:44
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: oh man... :(
19:44
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: i don't wanna subscribe to www-style
19:44
<annevk>
rniwa: uhuh
19:44
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_: i don't wanna subscribe to www-style
19:44
<Hixie>
aklein: file bugs :-) we can also change the spec if the browser vendors think this is bad, it wasn't exactly intentional, it just fell out of how i specced it
19:44
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: Sorry.
19:44
<Hixie>
aklein: file bugs :-) we can also change the spec if the browser vendors think this is bad, it wasn't exactly intentional, it just fell out of how i specced it
19:44
<TabAtkins_>
rniwa: Sorry.
19:45
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_, annevk: CSSElement would do.
19:45
<rniwa>
TabAtkins_, annevk: CSSElement would do.
19:45
<TabAtkins_>
Yeah, that works for me.
19:45
<TabAtkins_>
Yeah, that works for me.
19:46
<Hixie>
anyone know what the url is for the absolute latest svg spec content? (draft/ed content is fine)
19:46
<TabAtkins_>
Hixie: Generally, you want SVG Tiny 1.2 for definitions or stuff.
19:46
<annevk>
TabAtkins_: I didn't know CSS had something between "tree" and "box tree"
19:47
<TabAtkins_>
Hixie: Generally, you want SVG Tiny 1.2 for definitions or stuff.
19:47
<annevk>
TabAtkins_: I didn't know CSS had something between "tree" and "box tree"
19:47
<annevk>
TabAtkins_: where is that defined?
19:47
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: but 1.1 for dom stuff?
19:47
<annevk>
TabAtkins_: where is that defined?
19:47
<TabAtkins_>
annevk: It's not well-defined, because no one's written Box 3.
19:47
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: svg 1.1 has a more elaborate d="" syntax than 1.2 T
19:47
<TabAtkins_>
Hixie: Yes.
19:47
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: but 1.1 for dom stuff?
19:47
<TabAtkins_>
annevk: It's not well-defined, because no one's written Box 3.
19:47
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: svg 1.1 has a more elaborate d="" syntax than 1.2 T
19:47
<TabAtkins_>
Hixie: Yes.
19:47
<annevk>
hmm
19:47
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: any idea which is the "right" one?
19:47
<TabAtkins_>
Hixie: Ask shepazu or heycam.
19:48
<annevk>
hmm
19:48
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: any idea which is the "right" one?
19:48
<TabAtkins_>
Hixie: Ask shepazu or heycam.
19:48
<Hixie>
(what i was really hoping for was an svg 2 ED or something)
19:48
<TabAtkins_>
annevk: You've got what the host-language reports, which is used for Selectors. CSS decorates it with pseudos to form the element-tree.
19:48
<Hixie>
(what i was really hoping for was an svg 2 ED or something)
19:48
<TabAtkins_>
annevk: You've got what the host-language reports, which is used for Selectors. CSS decorates it with pseudos to form the element-tree.
19:48
<TabAtkins_>
Hixie: There's an SVG2 in the hg repo, but it's not usable yet for good stuff, I think.
19:49
<TabAtkins_>
Hixie: There's an SVG2 in the hg repo, but it's not usable yet for good stuff, I think.
19:49
<annevk>
isn't pseudo + anonymous box stuff all happening at the same time?
19:49
<TabAtkins_>
Nope.
19:49
<annevk>
isn't pseudo + anonymous box stuff all happening at the same time?
19:49
<TabAtkins_>
Nope.
19:49
<TabAtkins_>
For example, pseudos can affects the table-fixup stuff.
19:50
<TabAtkins_>
For example, pseudos can affects the table-fixup stuff.
19:50
<TabAtkins_>
There's no reasonable way to define it simultaneously, I think. But everything works great if you define it happening before box-tree construction.
19:50
<annevk>
I guess they are input to the box generation
19:50
<TabAtkins_>
Yeah, exactly.
19:50
<TabAtkins_>
There's no reasonable way to define it simultaneously, I think. But everything works great if you define it happening before box-tree construction.
19:50
<annevk>
I guess they are input to the box generation
19:50
<TabAtkins_>
Yeah, exactly.
19:50
<annevk>
but so is display:block
19:50
<TabAtkins_>
Yes, display:block controls how an element generates a box.
19:50
<annevk>
and I'm not sure there's much of a difference there
19:51
<annevk>
but so is display:block
19:51
<TabAtkins_>
Yes, display:block controls how an element generates a box.
19:51
<annevk>
and I'm not sure there's much of a difference there
19:51
<TabAtkins_>
While a pseudo needs to be an element so it can *have* display:block on it.
19:51
<annevk>
I mean sure tr might have ::before
19:51
<TabAtkins_>
And then generate a box appropriately.
19:51
<annevk>
if it also has display:inline; thinks are going to be different too
19:51
<TabAtkins_>
While a pseudo needs to be an element so it can *have* display:block on it.
19:51
<annevk>
I mean sure tr might have ::before
19:51
<TabAtkins_>
And then generate a box appropriately.
19:51
<annevk>
if it also has display:inline; thinks are going to be different too
19:51
<TabAtkins_>
annevk: I can just assure you that assuming that pseudos are part of the element-tree makes literally everything related to box generation easier.
19:52
<TabAtkins_>
annevk: I can just assure you that assuming that pseudos are part of the element-tree makes literally everything related to box generation easier.
19:52
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: k...
19:52
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: k...
19:53
<TabAtkins_>
annevk: Otherwise you have to insert tons of special-cases everywhere and use horrible guarded language everywhere and will still, inevitably, fuck up corner-cases.
19:53
<TabAtkins_>
annevk: Otherwise you have to insert tons of special-cases everywhere and use horrible guarded language everywhere and will still, inevitably, fuck up corner-cases.
19:53
<annevk>
that sounds like how the CSS specs work
19:53
<TabAtkins_>
Boo
19:54
<annevk>
that sounds like how the CSS specs work
19:54
<TabAtkins_>
Boo
19:54
<annevk>
look no further than chapter 10 of CSS 2.1
19:54
<annevk>
look no further than chapter 10 of CSS 2.1
19:58
<annevk>
so the dbaron thing again...
19:58
<annevk>
it's more than a 140 16-bit code units
19:59
<annevk>
so the dbaron thing again...
19:59
<annevk>
it's more than a 140 16-bit code units
19:59
<annevk>
it's 193, which means Twitter counts Unicode characters?
20:00
<annevk>
it's 193, which means Twitter counts Unicode characters?
20:00
<gsnedders>
annevk: Correct.
20:00
<gsnedders>
annevk: They changed about a year ago.
20:01
<gsnedders>
annevk: Correct.
20:01
<gsnedders>
annevk: They changed about a year ago.
20:01
<gsnedders>
annevk: IIRC, it's graphemes they count provided the code points are defined.
20:01
<zewt>
now if only they'd change to, say, not limit messages to so small a length that it inhibits communication
20:01
<gsnedders>
annevk: IIRC, it's graphemes they count provided the code points are defined.
20:01
<zewt>
now if only they'd change to, say, not limit messages to so small a length that it inhibits communication
20:02
<zewt>
it's entirely silly that you can fit like twice the content on twitter in japanese than english, heh
20:02
<zewt>
it's entirely silly that you can fit like twice the content on twitter in japanese than english, heh
20:05
<annevk>
gsnedders: they count code points after normalizing the text to NFC according to https://dev.twitter.com/docs/counting-characters
20:05
<annevk>
gsnedders: they count code points after normalizing the text to NFC according to https://dev.twitter.com/docs/counting-characters
20:56
<matjas>
http://whatwg.org/html/infrastructure.html#conformance-checkers → any examples of “criteria that cannot be expressed by a DTD, but can still be checked by a machine”, and/or “criteria that can only be checked by a human”?
20:57
<matjas>
http://whatwg.org/html/infrastructure.html#conformance-checkers → any examples of “criteria that cannot be expressed by a DTD, but can still be checked by a machine”, and/or “criteria that can only be checked by a human”?
20:58
<TabAtkins_>
There are several examples of the former in the validator.
20:58
<TabAtkins_>
There are several examples of the former in the validator.
20:58
<TabAtkins_>
The latter is things like @alt conformance.
20:59
<TabAtkins_>
The latter is things like @alt conformance.
20:59
<matjas>
TabAtkins_: are those listed somewhere?
20:59
<TabAtkins_>
I doubt it. Nobody really cares. ^_^
20:59
<matjas>
TabAtkins_: are those listed somewhere?
20:59
<TabAtkins_>
I doubt it. Nobody really cares. ^_^
20:59
<matjas>
“There are several examples of the former in the validator.” → could you please name one then? I can’t think of any :)
21:00
<matjas>
“There are several examples of the former in the validator.” → could you please name one then? I can’t think of any :)
21:00
<TabAtkins_>
I dunno. Ask the validator folks like hsivonen or MikeSmith
21:00
<TabAtkins_>
I dunno. Ask the validator folks like hsivonen or MikeSmith
21:00
<matjas>
consider yourselves pinged, fellas.
21:01
<matjas>
consider yourselves pinged, fellas.
21:09
<TabAtkins_>
Lolwut. A few months of Process (that was largely built for the a11y people) is harming longdesc?
21:09
<TabAtkins_>
What about the 10+ years of authors ignoring or misusing it?
21:09
<TabAtkins_>
Lolwut. A few months of Process (that was largely built for the a11y people) is harming longdesc?
21:09
<TabAtkins_>
What about the 10+ years of authors ignoring or misusing it?
21:14
<Philip`>
matjas: Table constraints are one major machine-checkable area, if I remember correctly
21:15
<Philip`>
matjas: Table constraints are one major machine-checkable area, if I remember correctly
21:15
<Philip`>
matjas: e.g. verifying that there are no overlapping cells (in the presence of colspan and rowspan)
21:16
<Philip`>
matjas: e.g. verifying that there are no overlapping cells (in the presence of colspan and rowspan)
21:21
<AryehGregor>
What does CSS specify for how an image is supposed to be transformed when it has an explicit height/width?
21:22
<AryehGregor>
What does CSS specify for how an image is supposed to be transformed when it has an explicit height/width?
21:22
<AryehGregor>
It seems like a PNG is stretched or squished without regard to aspect ratio, if both are specified, but an SVG always preserves its aspect ratio and gets letterboxed.
21:22
<AryehGregor>
In an <img>.
21:22
<AryehGregor>
That seems very confusing.
21:22
<TabAtkins_>
It doesn't, very specifically. How an image draws itself into the rectangle that CSS tells it to is up tot he iamge format.
21:22
<AryehGregor>
That doesn't seem desirable.
21:23
<AryehGregor>
It seems like a PNG is stretched or squished without regard to aspect ratio, if both are specified, but an SVG always preserves its aspect ratio and gets letterboxed.
21:23
<TabAtkins_>
Rasters are stretched, SVG (in the absence of bugs) depends on the values fo the viewport stuff on the root.
21:23
<AryehGregor>
In an <img>.
21:23
<AryehGregor>
That seems very confusing.
21:23
<TabAtkins_>
It doesn't, very specifically. How an image draws itself into the rectangle that CSS tells it to is up tot he iamge format.
21:23
<AryehGregor>
That doesn't seem desirable.
21:23
<TabAtkins_>
Rasters are stretched, SVG (in the absence of bugs) depends on the values fo the viewport stuff on the root.
21:23
<AryehGregor>
Hmm.
21:23
<AryehGregor>
Interesting.
21:23
<AryehGregor>
Hmm.
21:23
<TabAtkins_>
It's quite desirable, given things like SVG that want to specify their scaling behavior.
21:23
<AryehGregor>
Interesting.
21:23
<TabAtkins_>
It's quite desirable, given things like SVG that want to specify their scaling behavior.
21:24
<AryehGregor>
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/coords.html#PreserveAspectRatioAttribute
21:24
<AryehGregor>
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/coords.html#PreserveAspectRatioAttribute
21:24
<TabAtkins_>
Yup.
21:25
<TabAtkins_>
Yup.
21:25
AryehGregor
doesn't see what the default is
21:25
AryehGregor
doesn't see what the default is
21:26
<TabAtkins_>
Check the definition for <svg>.
21:26
<TabAtkins_>
It's "xMidYMid meet".
21:26
<TabAtkins_>
Check the definition for <svg>.
21:26
<TabAtkins_>
It's "xMidYMid meet".
21:26
<TabAtkins_>
Also: omigod worst attribute value names ever.
21:26
<TabAtkins_>
EVER
21:26
<TabAtkins_>
Differing capitalization for x and y asldfkja;sdlkf
21:27
<TabAtkins_>
Also: omigod worst attribute value names ever.
21:27
<TabAtkins_>
EVER
21:27
<TabAtkins_>
Differing capitalization for x and y asldfkja;sdlkf
21:27
<TabAtkins_>
This is one of those things that should *really* change in SVG2 to match the CSS convention (which was established *after* SVG did its stuff, so its understandable why it doesn't currently match).
21:28
<TabAtkins_>
This is one of those things that should *really* change in SVG2 to match the CSS convention (which was established *after* SVG did its stuff, so its understandable why it doesn't currently match).
21:28
<AryehGregor>
Browsers seem to not implement this right. Sigh.
21:28
<TabAtkins_>
Unsurprising.
21:28
<AryehGregor>
Browsers seem to not implement this right. Sigh.
21:28
<TabAtkins_>
Unsurprising.
21:28
<TabAtkins_>
I know that Chrome does pretty badly.
21:29
<TabAtkins_>
I know that Chrome does pretty badly.
21:45
<Hixie>
should path.addPathData(svgPathData) continue the current subpath if any, or always start a new one?
21:46
<Hixie>
should path.addPathData(svgPathData) continue the current subpath if any, or always start a new one?
21:47
<TabAtkins_>
Hm.
21:47
<TabAtkins_>
Hm.
21:48
<TabAtkins_>
It would be useful to be able to interrupt the subpath construction and continue it, so you can insert a conditional without repeating the prelude or having to store it in a var for later concat.
21:48
<TabAtkins_>
It would be useful to be able to interrupt the subpath construction and continue it, so you can insert a conditional without repeating the prelude or having to store it in a var for later concat.
21:48
<TabAtkins_>
But SVG always starts with a fresh subpath (because it doesn't have the concept of extending one).
21:49
<TabAtkins_>
But SVG always starts with a fresh subpath (because it doesn't have the concept of extending one).
21:49
<TabAtkins_>
I think it should always start a new one.
21:49
<TabAtkins_>
I think it should always start a new one.
21:49
<Hixie>
hm, good point about stringing things together with if statements
21:50
<Hixie>
hm, good point about stringing things together with if statements
21:50
<TabAtkins_>
You can always just repeat the last point yourself, though.
21:50
<TabAtkins_>
You can always just repeat the last point yourself, though.
21:51
<Hixie>
but that would create a new subpath
21:52
<Hixie>
but that would create a new subpath
21:52
<Hixie>
so it would be quite different
21:52
<TabAtkins_>
Another possibility is extending the path syntax with a command (vaguely similar to z) that forces continuation from the previous subpath.
21:52
<TabAtkins_>
Oh yeah, stroking has different behavior.
21:52
<Hixie>
fill, too
21:52
<Hixie>
so it would be quite different
21:52
<TabAtkins_>
Hm.
21:52
<TabAtkins_>
Another possibility is extending the path syntax with a command (vaguely similar to z) that forces continuation from the previous subpath.
21:52
<TabAtkins_>
Oh yeah, stroking has different behavior.
21:52
<Hixie>
fill, too
21:52
<TabAtkins_>
Hm.
21:52
<Hixie>
and clip
21:52
<Hixie>
the three things you can do :-)
21:52
<TabAtkins_>
Heh.
21:52
<TabAtkins_>
Okay, then perhaps it should continue things.
21:52
<Hixie>
i think you're convincing me to continue rather than start afresh, yeah
21:52
<Hixie>
ok
21:53
<Hixie>
and clip
21:53
<Hixie>
the three things you can do :-)
21:53
<TabAtkins_>
Heh.
21:53
<TabAtkins_>
Okay, then perhaps it should continue things.
21:53
<Hixie>
i think you're convincing me to continue rather than start afresh, yeah
21:53
<Hixie>
ok
21:53
<TabAtkins_>
Forcing a new subpath is also trivial - just prepend an "M" with the same point that your first real command starts with.
21:53
<Hixie>
yeah
21:53
<TabAtkins_>
Forcing a new subpath is also trivial - just prepend an "M" with the same point that your first real command starts with.
21:53
<Hixie>
yeah
21:53
<TabAtkins_>
Also, you can do that *after* the conditional, which allows differing behavior from different branches.
21:54
<TabAtkins_>
Also, you can do that *after* the conditional, which allows differing behavior from different branches.
21:55
<Hixie>
um
21:55
<Hixie>
am i missing something
21:55
<Hixie>
or does SVG not say what the initial current point is
21:56
<Hixie>
um
21:56
<Hixie>
am i missing something
21:56
<Hixie>
or does SVG not say what the initial current point is
21:56
<TabAtkins_>
If you didn't start with an M, all the commands need a starting point.
21:56
<TabAtkins_>
If you didn't start with an M, all the commands need a starting point.
21:56
<Hixie>
oh i see, if you don't start with an M then the path is invalid
21:56
<Hixie>
well then
21:56
<Hixie>
that makes my earlier point a bit moot
21:56
<Hixie>
nevermind
21:56
<TabAtkins_>
Oh, indeed. Why did I remember that wrong?
21:57
<Hixie>
oh i see, if you don't start with an M then the path is invalid
21:57
<Hixie>
well then
21:57
<Hixie>
that makes my earlier point a bit moot
21:57
<Hixie>
nevermind
21:57
<TabAtkins_>
Oh, indeed. Why did I remember that wrong?
21:57
<Hixie>
dunno, i did too
21:57
<Hixie>
maybe i was confusing it with the canvas path api
21:57
<Hixie>
dunno, i did too
21:57
<Hixie>
maybe i was confusing it with the canvas path api
22:02
<TabAtkins_>
matjas: Since the CSSWG switched to the Hg repo, my service isn't necessary anymore. You can redirect your @csscommits parser to the RSS feed at
22:02
<TabAtkins_>
22:02
<TabAtkins_>
22:02
<TabAtkins_>
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/rss-log
22:02
<TabAtkins_>
matjas: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/rss-log
22:03
<TabAtkins_>
matjas: Since the CSSWG switched to the Hg repo, my service isn't necessary anymore. You can redirect your @csscommits parser to the RSS feed at
22:03
<TabAtkins_>
goddam middleclick.
22:03
<TabAtkins_>
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/rss-log
22:03
<TabAtkins_>
matjas: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/rss-log
22:03
<TabAtkins_>
goddam middleclick.
22:04
<heycam>
Hixie, you want the 1.1 path syntax -- 1.2T doesn't have arc commands
22:04
<heycam>
Hixie, you want the 1.1 path syntax -- 1.2T doesn't have arc commands
22:15
<Hixie>
heycam: is there anything for which i want 2.1T?
22:15
<Hixie>
heycam: is there anything for which i want 2.1T?
22:15
<heycam>
Hixie, there are a few definitions that are clearer/better, but off the top of my head I can't remember what things specifically
22:16
<heycam>
Hixie, there are a few definitions that are clearer/better, but off the top of my head I can't remember what things specifically
22:16
<heycam>
Hixie, for anything about the language or DOM itself I think you should definitely reference 1.1
22:16
<TabAtkins_>
I was told by shepazu to reference 1.2T for language stuff.
22:17
<heycam>
Hixie, for anything about the language or DOM itself I think you should definitely reference 1.1
22:17
<TabAtkins_>
I was told by shepazu to reference 1.2T for language stuff.
22:17
<heycam>
by language here I mean like markup, content
22:17
<TabAtkins_>
(Image Values is doing so now, for the definition of "decorated bounding box".)
22:17
<heycam>
by language here I mean like markup, content
22:17
<TabAtkins_>
(Image Values is doing so now, for the definition of "decorated bounding box".)
22:17
<heycam>
right for definitions and wordy stuff some 1.2T text is better
22:17
<TabAtkins_>
kk
22:18
<heycam>
right for definitions and wordy stuff some 1.2T text is better
22:18
<TabAtkins_>
kk
22:18
<heycam>
also shepazu wrote the improved bounding box text so of course he'd say that ;)
22:18
<TabAtkins_>
heh, kk
22:18
<heycam>
also shepazu wrote the improved bounding box text so of course he'd say that ;)
22:18
<TabAtkins_>
heh, kk
22:22
<Hixie>
heycam: k
22:22
<Hixie>
heycam: k
22:22
<Hixie>
heycam: any idea how long it'll be before there's an ED worth referencing that brings things back to reality?
22:23
<Hixie>
heycam: any idea how long it'll be before there's an ED worth referencing that brings things back to reality?
22:23
<Hixie>
or rather, that unifies svg-related stuff into one document?
22:23
<heycam>
Hixie, um, we had hoped to have something ready by next month
22:24
<heycam>
Hixie, um, we had hoped to have something ready by next month
22:24
<heycam>
Hixie, which would be at a minimum the current 1.1 spec with stub sections on features we've agreed to include in 2.0
22:24
<heycam>
Hixie, which would be at a minimum the current 1.1 spec with stub sections on features we've agreed to include in 2.0
22:34
<Hixie>
heycam: k
22:34
<Hixie>
heycam: btw either you are doug asked about paths and what i would need from the spec
22:35
<Hixie>
heycam: 1.1 and 1.2T are vague enough that i can just refer to them
22:35
<Hixie>
heycam: and handwave the interface between specs
22:35
<heycam>
Hixie, ok, though probably the first time I've heard you say something is vague enough ;)
22:35
<Hixie>
heycam: well i mean that it's completley underdefined and doesn't actually require that any paths draw at all in svg
22:35
<Hixie>
heycam: but that means i can just pretend that's good enough and if it's good enough to be interpreted for svg it's good enough to be interpreted for canvas :-)
22:36
<Hixie>
heycam: k
22:36
<Hixie>
heycam: btw either you are doug asked about paths and what i would need from the spec
22:36
<Hixie>
heycam: 1.1 and 1.2T are vague enough that i can just refer to them
22:36
<Hixie>
heycam: and handwave the interface between specs
22:36
<heycam>
Hixie, ok, though probably the first time I've heard you say something is vague enough ;)
22:36
<Hixie>
heycam: well i mean that it's completley underdefined and doesn't actually require that any paths draw at all in svg
22:36
<Hixie>
heycam: but that means i can just pretend that's good enough and if it's good enough to be interpreted for svg it's good enough to be interpreted for canvas :-)
22:36
<heycam>
Hixie, ok :) it should get improved as we work in SVG2 anyway, so when doing that I'll try to keep in mind how HTML is referencing it to not break things
22:36
<heycam>
s/work in/work on/
22:36
<Hixie>
heycam: going forward though it would be nice if it was (a) actually defined in terms of testable requirements, and (b) had an interface where given a string, it would return a path (a list of subpaths each consisting of coordinates and lines between them, each subpath optionally marked as closed)
22:36
<Hixie>
heycam: k
22:37
<heycam>
Hixie, ok :) it should get improved as we work in SVG2 anyway, so when doing that I'll try to keep in mind how HTML is referencing it to not break things
22:37
<heycam>
s/work in/work on/
22:37
<Hixie>
heycam: going forward though it would be nice if it was (a) actually defined in terms of testable requirements, and (b) had an interface where given a string, it would return a path (a list of subpaths each consisting of coordinates and lines between them, each subpath optionally marked as closed)
22:37
<Hixie>
heycam: k
22:37
<heycam>
an interface as in a spec interface definition? or an IDL interface?
22:37
<Hixie>
heycam: feel free to ask me to change things to help you out if you want me to refernece it a different way
22:37
<heycam>
an interface as in a spec interface definition? or an IDL interface?
22:37
<TabAtkins_>
heycam: Also note that CSS would like to use SVG paths *without* drawing.
22:37
<Hixie>
heycam: spec interface
22:37
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: i use them without drawing too. so does svg actually.
22:37
<Hixie>
heycam: feel free to ask me to change things to help you out if you want me to refernece it a different way
22:37
<TabAtkins_>
heycam: Also note that CSS would like to use SVG paths *without* drawing.
22:37
<Hixie>
heycam: spec interface
22:37
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: i use them without drawing too. so does svg actually.
22:37
<Hixie>
heycam: as in, a <dfn> of an algorithm i can just reference
22:38
<Hixie>
heycam: as in, a <dfn> of an algorithm i can just reference
22:38
<heycam>
yup ok
22:38
<heycam>
yup ok
22:44
<Hixie>
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#dom-path-addpathdata is what i have now
22:45
<Hixie>
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#dom-path-addpathdata is what i have now
22:45
<Hixie>
heycam: also, would be nice to have some way to do fragments of paths, as TabAtkins_ and i were discussing earlier
22:46
<Hixie>
heycam: also, would be nice to have some way to do fragments of paths, as TabAtkins_ and i were discussing earlier
22:46
<heycam>
Hixie, as part of the <dfn> that does path parsing? so you can parse say just "L100,100"?
22:46
<heycam>
Hixie, as part of the <dfn> that does path parsing? so you can parse say just "L100,100"?
22:46
<TabAtkins_>
heycam: Yeah, given an existing subpath as context.
22:46
<Hixie>
heycam: yeah
22:46
<heycam>
ok sure
22:47
<TabAtkins_>
heycam: Yeah, given an existing subpath as context.
22:47
<Hixie>
heycam: yeah
22:47
<heycam>
ok sure
22:47
<TabAtkins_>
(Or I suppose, without such a context, assuming an "M0 0" beforehand.)
22:47
<Hixie>
ideally given not a subpath as context, but a point
22:47
<Hixie>
and then i can just graft the first subpath i get back to the existing subpath
22:47
<Hixie>
or something
22:47
<Hixie>
i dunno
22:47
<heycam>
ok so presumably this matters just for the relative commands
22:47
<Hixie>
might not really be needed
22:48
<Hixie>
ideally given not a subpath as context, but a point
22:48
<Hixie>
and then i can just graft the first subpath i get back to the existing subpath
22:48
<Hixie>
well the idea is that you could do:
22:48
<Hixie>
or something
22:48
<Hixie>
i dunno
22:48
<heycam>
ok so presumably this matters just for the relative commands
22:48
<Hixie>
might not really be needed
22:48
<Hixie>
well the idea is that you could do:
22:48
<Hixie>
path.addPathData('M 100 100');
22:48
<heycam>
if the output of this algorithm is a list of absolute abstract path segments
22:48
<Hixie>
if (foo) path.addPathData('L 300 100');
22:48
<Hixie>
path.addPathData('M 100 100');
22:48
<heycam>
if the output of this algorithm is a list of absolute abstract path segments
22:48
<Hixie>
if (foo) path.addPathData('L 300 100');
22:48
<Hixie>
path.addPathData('v 100');
22:48
<Hixie>
and it would either return a capital gamma or a vertical line depending on foo's value
22:48
<Hixie>
s/return/cause the path to contain/
22:49
<Hixie>
path.addPathData('v 100');
22:49
<Hixie>
and it would either return a capital gamma or a vertical line depending on foo's value
22:49
<Hixie>
s/return/cause the path to contain/
22:49
<heycam>
sure, sounds reasonable
22:49
<heycam>
and a path interface that might actually be usable!
22:50
<heycam>
and a path interface that might actually be usable!
22:51
<TabAtkins_>
Yus.
22:51
<TabAtkins_>
SVG path syntax >>> canvas path API.
22:51
<TabAtkins_>
s/canvas path/current canvas path/
22:52
<TabAtkins_>
Yus.
22:52
<TabAtkins_>
SVG path syntax >>> canvas path API.
22:52
<TabAtkins_>
s/canvas path/current canvas path/
23:35
<Hixie>
hm
23:35
<Hixie>
dashed lines are a pain to define
23:35
<Hixie>
hm
23:35
<Hixie>
dashed lines are a pain to define
23:36
<TabAtkins_>
And SVG doesn't help you out. :/
23:37
<TabAtkins_>
And SVG doesn't help you out. :/
23:37
<TabAtkins_>
What's the issue you're having?
23:38
<TabAtkins_>
What's the issue you're having?
23:40
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: so i'm defining it by saying you cut out bits of the path that aren't in the dash
23:41
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: so i'm defining it by saying you cut out bits of the path that aren't in the dash
23:41
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: but there's nothing to cut in the line between the last point and the first point of a closed path
23:41
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: so i have to add it
23:41
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: but there's nothing to cut in the line between the last point and the first point of a closed path
23:41
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: so i have to add it
23:41
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: but what if the whole subpath is in an "on" segment? then i don't want to add it, because i have to leave it to get the right join
23:41
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: etc
23:41
<Hixie>
also, 0-width segments
23:42
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: but what if the whole subpath is in an "on" segment? then i don't want to add it, because i have to leave it to get the right join
23:42
<Hixie>
TabAtkins_: etc
23:42
<Hixie>
also, 0-width segments
23:42
<TabAtkins_>
I don't understand what you mean by "nothing to cut" in closed paths.
23:42
<TabAtkins_>
I don't understand what you mean by "nothing to cut" in closed paths.
23:49
<TabAtkins_>
(Specifically, a closed path still draws dashes (and thus has stuff to cut out) on the line you mention.)
23:50
<TabAtkins_>
(Specifically, a closed path still draws dashes (and thus has stuff to cut out) on the line you mention.)
23:52
<Hixie>
i mean there's no line between the last point and the first point in the path
23:52
<Hixie>
it's implied
23:52
<Hixie>
i mean there's no line between the last point and the first point in the path
23:52
<Hixie>
so there's nothing for me to remove
23:52
<Hixie>
it's implied
23:52
<Hixie>
i actually have to _add_ the line before i can remove it
23:52
<Hixie>
so there's nothing for me to remove
23:52
<Hixie>
i actually have to _add_ the line before i can remove it
23:52
<TabAtkins_>
The .close() command doesnt' add it?
23:52
<Hixie>
it just sets a flag
23:52
<Hixie>
you can't add the line because otherwise the join is wrong
23:53
<TabAtkins_>
The .close() command doesnt' add it?
23:53
<Hixie>
it just sets a flag
23:53
<Hixie>
you can't add the line because otherwise the join is wrong
23:56
<TabAtkins_>
Oh wow, arcTo is *confusing*.
23:57
<TabAtkins_>
Oh wow, arcTo is *confusing*.
23:57
<Hixie>
that's why i added the diagrams yesterday
23:57
<Hixie>
that's why i added the diagrams yesterday
23:57
<Hixie>
with the diagrams it's not so bad
23:57
<Hixie>
(and actually is really useful for rounded corners)
23:57
<TabAtkins_>
...would you mind if I wrote a visualizer for this that let you drag around the points/radius/etc?
23:58
<Hixie>
with the diagrams it's not so bad
23:58
<Hixie>
(and actually is really useful for rounded corners)
23:58
<TabAtkins_>
...would you mind if I wrote a visualizer for this that let you drag around the points/radius/etc?
23:58
<Hixie>
i would love it. You'll find the code for the current diagrams in the spec in a comment, which will likely be a good starting point
23:58
<Hixie>
i would love it. You'll find the code for the current diagrams in the spec in a comment, which will likely be a good starting point
23:59
<TabAtkins_>
I guess to do a roundrect you just issue four arcTo commands in succession?
23:59
<Hixie>
(search the source for "update the label positions")
23:59
<TabAtkins_>
I guess to do a roundrect you just issue four arcTo commands in succession?
23:59
<Hixie>
you'd have some lineTos and moveTos, but yeah
23:59
<Hixie>
oh actually yeah
23:59
<Hixie>
i guess you don't even need lineTos
23:59
<TabAtkins_>
You either need to figure out where the first edge starts after the curve, or start in the middle of an edge and finish with a lineTo back to that point.
23:59
<Hixie>
(search the source for "update the label positions")
23:59
<Hixie>
you'd have some lineTos and moveTos, but yeah
23:59
<Hixie>
oh actually yeah
23:59
<Hixie>
i guess you don't even need lineTos
23:59
<TabAtkins_>
You either need to figure out where the first edge starts after the curve, or start in the middle of an edge and finish with a lineTo back to that point.
23:59
<Hixie>
yeah you start in the middle and end with a closePath
23:59
<TabAtkins_>
Yeah.