00:00
<Hixie>
so for legacy purposes you could do method=dialog action="that"
00:10
<Hixie>
okie dokie
00:10
<Hixie>
<dialog> is now done! i think.
00:10
<Hixie>
(also inert="", though only in the whatwg copy)
00:11
<Hixie>
(not sure if i should limit method=dialog to the whatwg copy also... anyone? i guess it wasn't mentioned in your CP, right hober?)
00:12
<Hixie>
i guess i'll exclude it
00:12
<Hixie>
since maciej said to err on the side of caution with respect to the feature freeze
00:16
<Hixie>
oh, oops, i never got around to referencing FULLSCREEN
00:21
<hober>
yeah, we left the form integration for v2
00:22
<Hixie>
k, i've left that out of the w3c copy
00:22
<Hixie>
(it's like five lines...)
00:22
<Hixie>
(ok maybe five paragraphs)
00:34
<Hixie>
ok.
00:34
<Hixie>
NOW i have finished <dialog>.
00:34
<Hixie>
right?
00:34
<Hixie>
right?
00:35
hober
hopes so! :)
00:41
<Hixie>
checked in.
00:41
<Hixie>
tomorrow i begin on the CSP refactoring
00:42
<Hixie>
actually i guess i'll have to reply to these dialog e-mails first
01:18
<abarth>
Hixie: seamless has some pretty funny bugs
01:18
<abarth>
Hixie: turns out you can't ever load anything into a seamless iframe
01:19
<abarth>
Hixie: i'll send an email to whatwg to explain
01:35
<zewt>
sort of funny to see people recommending canvas features that are pretty much identical to opengl minus a decade or so
01:36
<zewt>
i guess not really, strictly speaking, since blend functions are still fixed
01:36
<Hixie>
abarth: heh, k
01:37
<abarth>
Hixie: it's not actually as bad as I thought, but there is a bug in there
01:46
<Hixie>
abarth: btw, i'm planning on starting the CSP/sandbox refactoring tomorrow
01:46
<abarth>
Hixie: thanks
01:47
<abarth>
I think the main trickiness is that we'll want to be able to sandbox top-level documents
01:47
<Hixie>
yup
01:47
<Hixie>
re: seamless - um, yeah, oops
01:48
<abarth>
I probably sent you an email about the sandbox stuff. let me know if there's anything I can do to help
01:48
<Hixie>
i expect tomorrow i'll just be printing and reading the CSP spec :-)
01:49
<abarth>
the sandbox requirements use "as if", which is always kind of sketchy
01:49
<Hixie>
yeah
07:02
<annevk>
new cherry tomatoes at the AH
07:02
<annevk>
it's a good day
07:07
<nesta_>
annevk :)
07:07
<smaug____>
AH must be Albert Heijn or some such
07:23
<annevk>
smaug____: it is
07:36
<annevk>
I should use argument defaulting in XHR in general I guess
07:36
<annevk>
would simplify open() nicely
07:43
<Ms2ger>
Not much, I think
07:44
annevk
was dramatizing
07:45
<Ms2ger>
I only managed to use it for async
08:01
<wilhelm>
How stable is the chapter on the <time> element now? Was the feud of last year resolved?
08:12
<smaug____>
wilhelm: does any browser engine implement <time> ?
08:12
<smaug____>
looks like Opera
08:13
<smaug____>
ok, that is a better sign
08:13
<wilhelm>
smaug____: Opera implemented it before it was removed and put back again.
08:13
<smaug____>
ahaa
08:14
<smaug____>
in many cases I'd wait for 2+ implementations before calling anything stable
08:17
<wilhelm>
Indeed. I was merely wondering whether significant changes were planned, however. (I've returned my browser vendor hat, wearing the web developer hat today. “Let's use the <time> element!”, said one of the people I work with, pointing to documentation from, well, 2010. :)
11:06
<annevk>
heh 竼 is indeed cool
11:06
<annevk>
竼 MAN WITH BAZOOKA
11:07
<annevk>
(re some time yesterday MikeSmith)
11:09
<hsivonen>
material for Fake Unicode Consortium on G+
11:13
<hsivonen>
is it really the expectation that xmlDoc.load() fails if the caller is a document.open()ed document?
11:21
zcorpan
now follows FUC
11:22
<zcorpan>
hmm, it needs a K-something in the name
13:15
<zcorpan>
http://html5.validator.nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fembed.spotify.com%2F%3Furi%3Dspotify%3Atrack%3A4bz7uB4edifWKJXSDxwHcs
13:16
<zcorpan>
(or check the Image Report)
13:54
<annevk>
http://blog.whatwg.org/weekly-fullscreen-dialog
14:04
<zcorpan>
man the spec for innerHTML in xml needs a rewrite
14:06
<zcorpan>
here's a starting point for the replacement that's probably better than what's currently there: ¯\(°_o)/¯
14:12
zcorpan
finds out about "xml:Father"
14:16
<annevk>
it's not SGML?
14:16
<annevk>
or is that mother?
14:18
<annevk>
I need context https://twitter.com/__farre__/status/190073001029550080
14:18
<annevk>
anyone?
14:21
<zcorpan>
i guess CORE-45384
14:22
<annevk>
heh
14:55
<tohava>
how would you recommend testing via javascript if a browser supports binary websocket frames?
14:55
<tohava>
also, does safari 5.1.5 support binary frames?
15:00
<zcorpan>
var binarySupported = (function(){ var s = new WebSocket('ws://example.invalid/'); s.close(); return 'binaryType' in s })();
15:01
<zcorpan>
per spec this should work but it doesn't in all browsers yet: var binarySupported = 'binaryType' in WebSocket.prototype;
15:02
<tomasf_>
tohava: I think Safari still only supports draft 00 web sockets, but I could be wrong
15:03
<tohava>
tomasf, safari does hixie-76, but for some reason autobahn automated tests insist it supports binary frames in some way, this is why i'm confused
15:03
<tomasf_>
aha
15:04
<zcorpan>
a testsuite should just go "FAIL" for -76
15:39
<Hixie>
wilhelm: i'm not aware of any outstanding feedback, but the htmlwg is still working through their bureaucracy dealing with the issues they raised on it months ago
15:40
<annevk>
http://www.peterkroener.de/die-karte-des-html5-universums/ is kind of cool
15:40
<annevk>
except WHATWG does not publish HTML5, but that's a minor typo
16:32
<MikeSmith>
I see the discussion in the coremob group has reached the point where it's clear that it's all about targeting the "Android 2.2 Froyo and iOS5 default browsers"
16:32
<MikeSmith>
that didn't take long
16:33
<MikeSmith>
wonder how long it will be before we have a "Best viewed in iOS or Android default browser." badge
16:33
<Ms2ger>
Never
16:34
<Ms2ger>
"Best viewed in iOS default browser", sure
16:34
<Ms2ger>
"Best viewed in Android default browser", sure
16:34
<Ms2ger>
But allowing both? Nah
16:34
<MikeSmith>
time to put WebGL into ring 0
16:35
<Ms2ger>
How about window.opera?
16:35
<MikeSmith>
yeah, that too
16:36
<MikeSmith>
I think the criteria for ring 0 should be that at least one browser project has shipped an implementation on a browser for mobile devices
16:37
<MikeSmith>
isn't the point of this effort to drive browser projects to actually implement support for the platform?
16:38
<MikeSmith>
it is really misguided to capitulate to restrictiing the feature set to only those which the majority market share browsers implement
16:38
<MikeSmith>
the intention seems to be to intentionally restrict things such that we have some browsers that pass everything in ring 0
16:39
<MikeSmith>
which is way different from the philosophy of the ACID tests, which were initially at least, Everybody Fails.
16:40
<MikeSmith>
setting up a test so that you intentionally restrict it in a way that ensures that particular browsers are always going to pass, that's .. wrong
16:41
<tantek>
MikeSmith, agreed.
16:41
<MikeSmith>
anyway, can at least look forward to the lulz forthcoming from further rationalizations about why this approach is good idea
16:42
<Ms2ger>
Is DRM in ring 0 already?
16:42
<MikeSmith>
heh
16:42
<MikeSmith>
Ms2ger: it will be when default Android and i0S support it
16:43
<MikeSmith>
I wonder if they understand how this makes the barrier of entry for lower market-share mobile browsers that much higher
16:44
<MikeSmith>
this is exactly like creating a conformance level for desktop that restricts itself to only what's implemented in IE9
16:45
<MikeSmith>
anyway, I guess I should shut up
16:45
<tantek>
no no, I think you're on a roll :)
16:46
<tantek>
MikeSmith - let me know when -webkit- prefixed properties make it into ring 0.
16:46
<Ms2ger>
They haven't yet?
16:47
<tantek>
then you'll know they're not even pretending to care about other browser engines.
16:47
<Ms2ger>
Surely we're all going to implement -webkit- prefixes?
16:47
<gsnedders>
tantek: I saw claims they already have.
16:48
<MikeSmith>
some of the apple-specific meta tags were in there before, iirc
16:48
<MikeSmith>
but I think they were since removed
16:48
<karlcow>
MikeSmith: I have the feeling that the audience is not defined. Marketers/Journalists or Browsers Implementers. The discussion seems to revolve around the first group. When the interesting question is what is needed for *Core* Mobile tech.
16:48
<MikeSmith>
um
16:48
<gsnedders>
If I want an HTML WYSIWYG editor, to edit really minimal content in — basically provided headers, lists, and paragraphs work fine, that's good for me.
16:48
<karlcow>
As usual, the tool displaying a score will become a certificate
16:48
<gsnedders>
*What do I want?
16:49
<tantek>
"Core" is political term
16:49
<MikeSmith>
karlcow: I don't think anybody is trying to target "Marketers/Journalists" here. not as far as I can see. at least I hope to god not
16:49
<MikeSmith>
tantek: as is "Open"
16:50
<MikeSmith>
which is why I pretty much avoid using "Open"
16:50
<Ms2ger>
"Web"?
16:52
<karlcow>
any kind of Proxy browsers, UCWeb, Opera Mini, Kindle Fire, etc. should they be included in the level 0 of requirements of what they should do. Which market needs are we trying to address? Which population with which revenues? etc.
16:53
<karlcow>
Ms2ger: Web is over philosophically and politically loaded ;) </joke>
16:53
<gsnedders>
karlcow: Well, Kindle Fire is fundementally different to UCWeb and Mini.
16:53
<MikeSmith>
totally unrelated, but on the good-news side, it's encouraging to see that abarth isn't totally against the proposal to update the parsing algorithm to support <template>
16:53
<karlcow>
gsnedders: agreed
16:54
<karlcow>
different type of use cases
16:54
<gsnedders>
UCWeb and Mini are *inherently* limited by their design. Kindle Fire shouldn't be black-box observably different from any other WebKit fork.
16:54
<MikeSmith>
and on the more good-news side, it looks like pointer lock is going to land in mozilla trunk soon
16:56
<MikeSmith>
back about ring 0, any test-y thing like this should reward browser projects for shipping feature support, not give them a disincentive for doing so
16:56
<MikeSmith>
e.g., case of WebGL support
17:06
<MikeSmith>
speaking purely hypothetically, this would be an especially misguided approach for platforms where users have no choice about which browser (engines) they are allowed to install on the devices they've purchased
17:07
<MikeSmith>
no I should really shut up
17:14
<tantek>
MikeSmith - difference between "Open" and "Core" is that "Open" tends to have fairly widely accepted principles and definitions, e.g. open source, open licenses etc. whereas "core" is always a one-off arbitrary distinction based on whoever is making the distinction - hence political.
17:15
<MikeSmith>
tantek: true I guess
17:21
<Ms2ger>
zcorpan: yes, it needs a rewrite
17:21
<Ms2ger>
Patches welcome
17:44
<MikeSmith>
I wonder how much more resources Mozilla could put on work for Firefox Mobile is i0S users had the choice to install it
17:44
<MikeSmith>
same thing for Opera Mobile
18:00
<hober>
annevk: hey, so we're in the notifications wg now, yay!
18:00
<MikeSmith>
hober: yeah, thanks
18:00
<MikeSmith>
and welcome :)
18:01
<MikeSmith>
this helps to ensure that plh is not going to tell me to shut down the notifications wg and tell us to move it to a CG
18:02
<MikeSmith>
we are only chartered until June
18:02
<MikeSmith>
and I suggest that we haul ass to publish a LC draft soon
18:02
<Ms2ger>
Shut it down anyway
18:02
<Ms2ger>
Along with the HTMLWG
18:03
<Ms2ger>
That one certainly has more "Community" than "Working"
18:04
<MikeSmith>
I'd be happy to shut down all WGs
18:04
<MikeSmith>
less work for me :)
18:04
<MikeSmith>
great idea to make the Web a free-for-all where
18:04
<MikeSmith>
... where a CG can bind its work to specific products
18:05
<MikeSmith>
so let's definitely do more of that
18:05
<zcorpan>
tohava: what if the user has a server on localhost? (i dunno if browsers allow cross-network websocket like that...)
18:05
<hober>
MikeSmith annevk: first thing on the notifications agenda for me is to try to drive the permissioning issue to some kind of conclusion
18:05
<MikeSmith>
hober: oh please yes
18:05
<hober>
but first, i've got to finish up this canvas hit testing CP. :/
18:06
<MikeSmith>
hober: btw, after the meetings in May I am planning to not head back home til Sunday, so if you have time on Saturday, I hope to paint the town red
18:06
<MikeSmith>
along with annevk
18:07
<hober>
I'm flying to Germany that Saturday for the CSS F2F
18:07
<hober>
but friday night, it's *on*
18:07
<MikeSmith>
了解
18:09
<MikeSmith>
effing CSS always seems to get in the way of unlimited debauchery
18:10
<zcorpan>
unlimited debauchery? wow
18:10
<zcorpan>
MikeSmith knows what the ultimate end point is
18:11
<zcorpan>
fuck standards
18:11
<MikeSmith>
that's one of the very few things I know anything about
18:12
<Ms2ger>
Standards or debauchery?
18:12
<MikeSmith>
I know nothing about standards
18:12
<MikeSmith>
standards just continue to find novel ways to confuse me
18:12
<Ms2ger>
You have no standards, that's something else ;)
18:12
<MikeSmith>
heh
18:13
<MikeSmith>
I am a world-class expert in debauchery
18:13
<MikeSmith>
Coxcombe, profligate, popinjay, rake, Bully Dawson, 道楽者
18:13
<MikeSmith>
I welcome anybody who wants to challenge me on that
18:14
<TabAtkins>
Cool, CSS Images 3 just went to CR.
18:14
<Ms2ger>
MikeSmith, a duel at dawn?
18:14
<MikeSmith>
Ms2ger: bring it on
18:15
<Ms2ger>
No thanks, my money is on you
18:15
<MikeSmith>
heh
18:15
<MikeSmith>
annevk: blog post don't mention location.parentOrigin. karlcow scooped you
18:16
karlcow
who was making the point of being fashionably late… here goes my reputation. Damn
18:17
<MikeSmith>
http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2012-April/035348.html is a great message btw
18:17
<MikeSmith>
[[
18:17
<MikeSmith>
I constantly fear that origin scoping for security mechanisms is too
18:17
<MikeSmith>
coarse-grained in many use cases, because the complexity of what lives
18:18
<MikeSmith>
in any single origin is growing pretty rapidly. Sites put
18:18
<MikeSmith>
attacker-controlled content inside framed gadgets or advertisements,
18:18
<MikeSmith>
and can't be reasonably expected to understand that if such a frame is
18:18
<MikeSmith>
navigated to in a particular way, it may circumvent an origin-scoped
18:18
<MikeSmith>
check.
18:18
<MikeSmith>
]]
18:18
<zcorpan>
nice - http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2012/04/html5-accessibility-chops-data-for-the-masses/
18:19
<MikeSmith>
zcorpan: Steve walks the walk
18:19
<Ms2ger>
Next: longdesc?
18:21
<MikeSmith>
I think Steve's conspicuous lack of public comment on longdesc makes his thoughts on it sorta conspicuous already
18:22
<MikeSmith>
when Steve has a strong position in support of something, he states it
18:22
<TabAtkins>
For example, he has a strong position that I am dumb as concrete.
18:23
<MikeSmith>
Steve ain't dumb
18:23
<MikeSmith>
he gets paid money to do real accessibility work for clients
18:24
<MikeSmith>
anyway, in general when you see other accessibility professionals in the group who do actual client/product work, and they don't come out strongly in support of something, that tells you somethng
18:24
<zcorpan>
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=708406 - anyone know where the data file went?
18:26
<zcorpan>
oh, there was an android version and a safari version
18:27
<MikeSmith>
zcorpan: sounds like you have complete support then
18:31
MikeSmith
looks around for tantek to mention something about "open"
18:31
<Ms2ger>
Core
18:32
<MikeSmith>
instead I'll just say, https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2012-April/020182.html
18:33
<MikeSmith>
"sharded" has become a verb now?
18:33
<TabAtkins>
Yes?
18:33
<TabAtkins>
Has been for some time.
18:33
<karlcow>
hmm list of urls
18:34
<karlcow>
the only issue I have with the surveys we all do is that we have a tendency to use the home page, which is a very specific type of page on a Web site
18:36
<zcorpan>
stevef's data seems to have lost the URLs, which makes it slightly less useful :-|
18:37
<MikeSmith>
TabAtkins: I guess I don't get around enough
18:37
<karlcow>
zcorpan: what do you mean? "lost"
18:39
<zcorpan>
karlcow: the downloaded pages have names like index-123.html and no mapping to the original URL of the page, afaict
18:40
<karlcow>
aaaah
18:40
<karlcow>
in his sample
18:40
<zcorpan>
yeah
18:40
<karlcow>
Maybe it is just a matter of telling him if he has the reference
18:41
<zcorpan>
he usually reads the logs and replies on twitter :-)
18:45
<MikeSmith>
much cheerz to chaals for speaking wisdome
18:45
<MikeSmith>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-coremob/2012Apr/0062.html
18:46
<MikeSmith>
"The picture in Asia is much more mixed." etc.
18:47
<MikeSmith>
though I suspect the response is effectively going to be, fuck asia
18:47
<MikeSmith>
because, who cares out those billions of people?
18:48
<MikeSmith>
since their web interactions don't translate into ad revenue
18:49
<MikeSmith>
this discussion process is really useful, actually
18:50
<MikeSmith>
in that it clarifies that the goal is to target users whose web interactions are the most monetizable
19:09
<abarth>
MikeSmith: I was skeptical of the <template> stuff at first, but I've come around. It's not actually that nutty a change.
19:10
<MikeSmith>
abarth: yeah, understood
19:12
<karlcow>
MikeSmith: definitely useful. Doing devrel it is another drawback we have. People very often creates their Web site for the very local market and/or thinking they will only have local users with the new top smartphone. Mirror effect? "Users are what I see in the mirror in the morning"
19:13
<MikeSmith>
karlcow: that's actually a pretty smart business model for most orgs
19:14
<MikeSmith>
it's not as if users in Indonesia or Ukraine are generating much revenue for various corpo-web properties/services
19:16
<karlcow>
MikeSmith: for paid apps "maybe". For Ads revenues, I'm not that sure.
19:16
<karlcow>
that would be an interesting study to do.
19:17
<MikeSmith>
I think I know that the results of that study would be
19:18
<annevk>
MikeSmith: heh, location.targetOrigin was too obscure
19:18
<annevk>
MikeSmith: also, it's just an idea at this point
19:18
<isherman>
Hixie: Any ETA on when you'll have some time to look in more depth at [ http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Autocomplete_Types ]?
19:18
<annevk>
yeah, leave...
19:18
<annevk>
:p
19:18
<annevk>
hober: yeah I noticed, that's awesome
19:18
<karlcow>
I guess also $socialNetwork have a population of users in developing countries just by the fact of immigration. Son, daughter, or friends studying in another rich country and driving the relations into using the $socialnetwork. This would be interesting to measure
19:19
<annevk>
hober: the permission stuff is a problem, the spec writing seems like a minor problem too, but maybe we can overcome that somehow
19:19
<annevk>
hober: or maybe you can help out ;)
19:56
<hober>
annevk: :)
20:09
<annevk>
I didn't know about ArrayBufferView
20:09
<annevk>
if I had we would not have had responseType = "arraybuffer"
20:09
<annevk>
many times bah
20:10
<annevk>
nn
20:10
<Ms2ger>
nn
20:19
<TabAtkins>
Man, ArrayBuffer is kinda broken all over the place.
20:28
<Ms2ger>
A true Web API
20:29
<TabAtkins>
Good point.
20:35
<jamesr>
created to avoid having to wait for tc39
21:28
<Hixie>
isherman: no current ETA but if it's on my list of things to prioritise. O(weeks), not months.
21:29
<isherman>
Hixie: Ok, thanks
21:29
<Hixie>
(sorry about the delay, i've been dealing with big feature issues that i'd been putting on the back burner for too long)
21:30
<Hixie>
(like the canvas v5 api additions, <dialog>, csp, web intents...)
21:42
<hober>
First pass on a canvas hit testing CP that restores the v5 Path object etc.; any comments / thoughts / suggestions for improvement? http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/User:Eoconnor/ISSUE-201
23:19
<hober>
deafening response :)
23:23
<Velmont>
As always ;-)
23:38
<zewt>
googling specs is becoming useless; 'site:whatwg.org/specs "structured clone"' apparently no longer even returns http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/common-dom-interfaces.html