| 04:11 | <Velmont> | Thought I had booked a hotel now, but I left it mid-process I guess. Hmz. Room for 4 persons for one person, -- crazy room types at quality inn and suites mountain view |
| 07:01 | <nesta_> | good morning! |
| 08:54 | <matjas> | zcorpan: re: http://twitter.com/zcorpan/status/195834345972445186 did anyone guess the answer yet? I’m really curious |
| 09:01 | <zcorpan> | dunno, haven't checked twitter yet :) |
| 09:01 | <zcorpan> | seems not |
| 09:02 | <zcorpan> | i'll give you some more time to find out (or curse me). ;) |
| 09:08 | <matjas> | FFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU |
| 09:27 | <Ms3ger> | zcorpan: el.style.filter, WebKit |
| 09:29 | <matjas> | Ms3ger: but that’s a string, so it doesn’t count |
| 09:29 | <matjas> | only objects that aren’t primitives |
| 10:01 | <zcorpan> | Ms3ger: that's what i was thinking of, yeah (though i haven't looked into how it works, indeed it looks like it's a string), and some others we have introduced in opera recently (attachEvent and its friends) |
| 10:01 | <Ms3ger> | Boo, Opera ;) |
| 10:02 | <zcorpan> | attachEvent seems to be a compat balance that's not so easy |
| 10:05 | <zcorpan> | i can't get the 'filter' property to do anything in webkit (though -webkit-filter seems to be supported) |
| 10:05 | <zcorpan> | what am i doing wrong? |
| 11:06 | <zcorpan> | http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/1501 - false in safari and chrome. style.filter quirk dropped? |
| 13:38 | <zcorpan> | annevk: apparently flash can go fullscreen without opt-in from the embedder... http://forums.whatwg.org/bb3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4563 |
| 13:39 | <zcorpan> | i.e. in an iframe |
| 13:55 | <zcorpan> | "JSON is not versioned, and has no mechanism for revision. JSON cannot change." http://inkdroid.org/journal/2012/04/30/lessons-of-json/ |
| 13:56 | <zewt> | nice nonsense conclusion |
| 14:27 | <annevk> | zcorpan: I think it is probably better to disallow that |
| 14:27 | <annevk> | zcorpan: we disallow popups too after all |
| 14:29 | <annevk> | "Some people complained that the X in AJAX stood for XML, and therefore JSON should not be used." this article is hilarious |
| 14:34 | <annevk> | zcorpan: hmm, we only disallow popups from sandboxed iframes I guess |
| 14:34 | <annevk> | zcorpan: I think the idea was to be stricter because it's potentially annoying, but having to embed youtube with all these attributes is annoying too |
| 14:38 | <zcorpan> | there's lots of legacy that embed videos that currently use flash |
| 14:39 | <zcorpan> | which means it's hard for video sites to switch to <video> if they can't use fullscreen for the legacy embedders |
| 14:39 | <zcorpan> | anyway, gotta go |
| 14:58 | <jzaefferer> | MikeSmith: vnu.jar is working great, we've integrated it via http://github.com/jzaefferer/grunt-html - one thing that could be useful: ignoring specific errors. Would that be feasible to add/expose? |
| 14:59 | <annevk> | why would you want to do that? |
| 15:00 | <MikeSmith> | jzaefferer: yeah, I had been expecting you guys might say there were particular errors you didn't care to be emitted dozens of times |
| 15:01 | <MikeSmith> | one answer is, update your HTML documents so that they conform to the spec :) |
| 15:01 | <MikeSmith> | jzaefferer: but to be clear, you mean errors and not just warnings, right? |
| 15:02 | <MikeSmith> | it would help me to know which particular errors are the ones you'd want to ignore |
| 15:02 | <jzaefferer> | MikeSmith: yeah, errors, though so far I can't say I really noticed a difference in the output |
| 15:02 | <MikeSmith> | OK |
| 15:03 | <MikeSmith> | well, there is no good way for us to make the configurable even if we wanted to |
| 15:03 | <jzaefferer> | For now we're just not validating files like this: https://github.com/jquery/jquery-ui/blob/master/demos/tabs/ajax/content1.html |
| 15:03 | <MikeSmith> | ah ywah |
| 15:03 | <MikeSmith> | *yeah |
| 15:03 | <MikeSmith> | scott_gonzalez or you mentioned that earlier |
| 15:03 | <MikeSmith> | t |
| 15:04 | <jzaefferer> | Elsewhere we've got an invalid <object> element, used for certain focus-related tests |
| 15:04 | <MikeSmith> | the fact that it's a document fragment, doesn't have a title element or document |
| 15:04 | <jzaefferer> | Fixing the markup breaks the test |
| 15:04 | <MikeSmith> | interesting |
| 15:04 | <jzaefferer> | That would be a better candidate to skip the error/warning, as the rest of the file is valid |
| 15:04 | <MikeSmith> | that case should be reported as a possible spec bug I guess |
| 15:04 | <jzaefferer> | Maybe, but could also be some mess on our side |
| 15:05 | <scott_gonzalez> | jzaefferer: I need to look into the <object> error. |
| 15:05 | <jzaefferer> | Just wanted to check if there's generally a way to configure reporting per error type |
| 15:05 | <scott_gonzalez> | It's possible the test is just bad. That's why I didn't really want anyone fixing the markup in that file :-P |
| 15:05 | <MikeSmith> | OK |
| 15:06 | <scott_gonzalez> | MikeSmith: Here's the specific line that we're getting an error for: https://github.com/jquery/jquery-ui/blob/master/tests/unit/core/core.html#L64 |
| 15:07 | <MikeSmith> | well, as far as suppressing errors the only thing I can suggest is to run the vnu output through some simple post-processing filter |
| 15:07 | <MikeSmith> | like, grep -v |
| 15:07 | <scott_gonzalez> | The related tests are about whether the element is focusable/tabbable. |
| 15:07 | MikeSmith | takes a look |
| 15:07 | <MikeSmith> | codebase? |
| 15:07 | <scott_gonzalez> | Updating that causes the tests to fail in IE 6. |
| 15:07 | <MikeSmith> | ah |
| 15:07 | <scott_gonzalez> | But I just need to spend some time figuring out whether the updated markup was correct. |
| 15:08 | <scott_gonzalez> | There used to be a lot of invalid markup in that test fixture. |
| 15:08 | <scott_gonzalez> | Because we were testing lots of invalid cases to make sure we got the "correct" results in the tests. |
| 15:08 | <MikeSmith> | object stuff is messy |
| 15:08 | <MikeSmith> | ah |
| 15:08 | <scott_gonzalez> | I ended up just deleting all of the other invalid markup a while ago. |
| 15:09 | <scott_gonzalez> | Realizing that it didn't make sense to have tests around invalid markup since if anyone ever reported a bug about it, we would close the bug as invalid anyway. |
| 15:09 | <MikeSmith> | heh |
| 15:09 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 15:09 | <scott_gonzalez> | Yeah, objects are definitely messy. I don't even remember how I ended up with the markup that we have. It's been a long time. |
| 15:10 | <scott_gonzalez> | I remember spending weeks on that code though, trying to figure out markup and tests that made sense for all browsers. |
| 15:11 | <MikeSmith> | OK, well, for that specific example, I think you could maybe make a case that codebase should be "obsolete bug conforming" |
| 15:11 | <MikeSmith> | in which case, vnu would generate a warning for it instead of an error |
| 15:11 | <MikeSmith> | but I think it would be an uphill battle to make that case |
| 15:28 | <annevk> | https://twitter.com/apple curious |
| 15:29 | <michel_v> | did they ever have a twitter account? |
| 15:30 | <michel_v> | it's not like they would have much to talk about. "Hi everybody! We're working on something great! But everyone's under NDA!" |
| 15:30 | <michel_v> | "Stay tuned!" |
| 15:38 | <JVoracek> | |
| 16:54 | <dglazkov> | good morning, Whatwg! |
| 16:55 | <annevk> | morning dglazkov |
| 16:55 | <Hixie> | is there no way in JS to push an array of items onto an array? |
| 16:55 | <Hixie> | concat returns a new array |
| 16:55 | <annevk> | for once it's morning for me too :) |
| 16:55 | <Hixie> | push() seems to just take one item |
| 16:56 | <annevk> | a.push.apply(a, b) via stackoverflow |
| 16:56 | <annevk> | -- http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1374126/how-to-append-an-array-to-an-existing-javascript-array |
| 16:58 | <Ms2ger> | Morning |
| 17:03 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: no longer in Europe? |
| 17:16 | <dglazkov> | WAT! Ms2ger is coming to F2f!! |
| 17:36 | <gsnedders> | Does this mean we have to work out how to pronounce "Ms2ger"? |
| 17:42 | <Philip`> | "Em ess tooger" ('tooge' as in 'stooge'), surely? |
| 17:48 | <dglazkov> | "Mastuger!" |
| 17:53 | <hober> | "miss toogah" |
| 17:56 | <dglazkov> | oooh, miss. I miss-ed that. |
| 18:06 | <rafaelw_> | hsivonen: ping. |
| 18:13 | <annevk> | hober: on my way |
| 18:13 | <annevk> | hober: well sort of, taxi is on its way first |
| 19:05 | timeless | needs to go to airport to catch flight |
| 19:27 | <Ms2ger> | weinig++ |
| 21:16 | <annevk> | notifications meetup outcome: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-notification/2012Apr/0018.html |
| 21:22 | <roc> | it's sort of annoying that html5rocks.com is really chromerocks.com |
| 21:25 | <annevk> | HTML5 is passé anyway |
| 21:30 | <miketaylr> | roc: http://www.html5r0cks.com/ is the better version |
| 21:35 | <gsnedders> | roc: You mean using browser prefixes is unfair? Oh no! |
| 21:36 | <gsnedders> | Better not try and be compatible, that's undermining the platform! |
| 21:36 | <roc> | have they written about that? I didn't see it |
| 21:37 | <gsnedders> | Written about what? |
| 21:38 | <tantek> | greetings whatwg'rs, who's going to the Web Apps WG f2f and/or the HTML WG f2f this week? (I'll be at both) |
| 21:38 | <othermaciej> | what does <http://www.html5r0cks.com>; do that is Chrome-specific? |
| 21:38 | <othermaciej> | tantek: I'll be at HTML, probably not Web Apps |
| 21:39 | <annevk> | I'll be there, already in MV in fact |
| 21:39 | <tantek> | othermaciej - perhaps html5rocks has some -webkit- specific dependencies? kinda like apple.com/html5 ? |
| 21:39 | <othermaciej> | I don't even know what html5rocks is supposed to do |
| 21:39 | <tantek> | if it's not chromerocks.com then perhaps it's webkitrocks.com |
| 21:41 | <gsnedders> | I believe it uses -webkit-. |
| 21:46 | <annevk> | Hixie: any opinions on passing event handler attributes as members of an object initialization dictionary? |
| 21:49 | <annevk> | Hixie: see "Constructors" in http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebNotifications/publish/Notifications.html |
| 21:50 | <Hixie> | well as defined i don't think it works but in principle i guess it could work |
| 21:51 | <Hixie> | (i don't know what "must be assigned" means in this context) |
| 21:52 | <annevk> | yeah the language in that specification needs some work |
| 21:53 | <annevk> | I was mostly wondering because WebSocket could do something similar |
| 21:53 | <Hixie> | not much point with WebSocket |
| 21:54 | <Hixie> | the only things that need to be given to the constructor are things that the constructor needs to do its stuff |
| 21:54 | <Hixie> | everything else can just be set separately |
| 21:54 | <annevk> | so that is the case here too |
| 21:54 | <annevk> | so you do have an opinion :) |
| 21:57 | <Hixie> | i think it's just a design decision |
| 21:57 | <Hixie> | i mean you could go either way |
| 21:57 | <Hixie> | same as whether methods should return the object they were invoked on or not |
| 21:57 | <Hixie> | i think it's silly, but other people think it's a great api design |
| 21:58 | <annevk> | hmm yeah, I have resisted adding that so far |
| 21:58 | <annevk> | sicking keeps pushing for it |
| 22:07 | <annevk> | https://twitter.com/pornelski/status/197018755778351104 is brilliant |
| 22:09 | <miketaylr> | haha |
| 22:10 | <annevk> | although I think the guy he linked to might actually be serious, which is somewhat sad |
| 22:25 | <tantek> | Yeah, I think @Malarkey is being serious. |
| 22:26 | <tantek> | though I tend to wonder, is the "just implement -webkit- prefix support for EVERYTHING" crowd just a rebranding of the "Why doesn't Mozilla/Microsoft/Opera etc. 'just use WebKit' as their engine?" crowd. |
| 22:27 | <tantek> | WebKitist apologists as it were |
| 22:27 | <tantek> | (or insert web engine du jour/year/decade) |
| 22:27 | <tantek> | I remember when it was "why doesn't MS/Opera etc., 'just use Gecko' " |
| 22:27 | <othermaciej> | if anyone wants to use WebKit as their engine, we're happy to share :-) |
| 22:28 | <tantek> | the monoculture engineists have always been wrong from "what's good for the web" perspective. or they want to go back to the days of 90%+ Trident marketshare for some reason. |
| 22:29 | <tantek> | (maybe they're secretly Java-advocates trolling the web standards folks) |
| 22:30 | <annevk> | or Netscape 4 for that matter, which is why we have all that beautiful <table> parsing now |
| 22:31 | <cbright6062> | The thing that bothers me about this is that all it's doing is allowing the Webkit elitists to win. |
| 22:34 | <tantek> | win what? |
| 22:35 | <Hixie> | i like how that blog post says essentially "i have no problem with any individual member of the group, but i have a problem with the decisions the group made" |
| 22:35 | <Hixie> | as if groups of humans make decisions independent of the members of the group... |
| 22:36 | <othermaciej> | which blog post, Malarkey's? |
| 22:36 | <tantek> | Hixie, vice versa - sounds like he has a problem with the decisions of particular individuals in the group |
| 22:36 | <othermaciej> | it's well known that group decision-making can induce cognitive biases and result in decisions no individual group member would have made |
| 22:36 | <tantek> | = consensus |
| 22:37 | <Hixie> | tantek: he explicitly says that he has no trouble with individuals (See hit footnote 2) |
| 22:37 | <Hixie> | othermaciej: yes, that post |
| 22:37 | <tantek> | "decisions no individual group member would have made" is awfully similar to "least objectionable option" (AKA W3C's way of going for consensus) |
| 22:37 | <cbright6062> | tantek: Winning the right to call themselves the sole "proper" rendering engine. Which is only an opinion, not a fact. |
| 22:37 | <tantek> | Hixie, individuals other than the decision maker who made the decision. |
| 22:37 | <Hixie> | othermaciej: it's true that groups make decisions that no individual may make, but that doesn't get one out of responsibility for the decision |
| 22:38 | <othermaciej> | Is there really such a category of people as "WebKit elitists"? |
| 22:38 | <annevk> | well there was not much confusion at Opera with regards to what we had to do here |
| 22:38 | <Hixie> | othermaciej: (this gets back to one of hte biggest problems i have with standards work at the w3c) |
| 22:38 | <annevk> | it was pretty much universally hated though |
| 22:38 | <othermaciej> | I suspect people writing WebKit-only content are doing it out of lack of testing/support bandwidth, not to hep WebKit's secret agenda of winning |
| 22:38 | <tantek> | annevk - I don't buy it was "necessary" for all the border-radius props |
| 22:38 | <tantek> | that was a gross error IMHO |
| 22:38 | <cbright6062> | othermaciej: Well, I would say so, from some of the people I have talked to out there. |
| 22:39 | <tantek> | as in - prove it - show me the list of sites that are abhorrently broken due to dependency on -webkit- border-radius props. |
| 22:39 | <cbright6062> | I don't consider it a "secret agenda", just an unfortunate fact of uneducated authors which are driven by the web evangilists being overly in love with webkit. |
| 22:39 | <annevk> | abhorrently broken was not our criteria |
| 22:40 | <tantek> | "doesn't quite look as pretty" ?!? |
| 22:40 | <annevk> | as it turns out users and clients care about that |
| 22:40 | tantek | waits for Opera to mimic Webkit into looking the same on http://dowebsitesneedtolookexactlythesameineverybrowser.com/ |
| 22:40 | <zewt> | does breakage only matter if it's a mushroom cloud? heh |
| 22:41 | <cbright6062> | Honestly, I think the Web Browser world in general has become somewhat of a mess. |
| 22:41 | <annevk> | has become? |
| 22:42 | <cbright6062> | Well, has re-become. |
| 22:43 | <cbright6062> | I personally thought the IE/Firefox era of the majority of the 2000s was fairly stable in the long run. |
| 22:43 | <cbright6062> | Now, things are all over the place. |
| 22:43 | <Hixie> | tantek: dude that page looks the exact same to me on every browser i tested (three engines so far) |
| 22:45 | <othermaciej> | is that the joke? |
| 22:47 | <cbright6062> | Honestly, I really hope someday to see Web Browsers finally reach a point where it can be based off of preference only, not having to evangilize that one is "better" than the other due to web rendering abilities. |
| 22:47 | <karlcow> | for things like box-shadow https://github.com/miketaylr/Snort/blob/master/snort.yml#L1263 |
| 22:47 | <tantek> | no when launched that site looked different in every browser |
| 22:47 | <tantek> | a bit surprised that that has changed |
| 22:47 | <tantek> | engines will always have different rendering abilities, so long as the web is evolving |
| 22:47 | <tantek> | i |
| 22:47 | <tantek> | f th |
| 22:47 | <tantek> | e |
| 22:47 | <tantek> | |
| 22:47 | <zewt> | i can't remember the last time any site looked notably different in any browser than any other browser; that hasn't been a factor in which browser I use in years |
| 22:47 | <othermaciej> | cbright6062: I think that will never happen |
| 22:48 | <cbright6062> | I know. It's sad. |
| 22:48 | <tantek> | if they all have the same rendering abilities, and that's stopped changing, then the web is dead |
| 22:48 | <zewt> | othermaciej: no, it happened long ago :) |
| 22:49 | <zewt> | i can't remember the last time I had a page not render reasonably in one browser and having to use another |
| 22:49 | <cbright6062> | I've never really had that issue, either. |
| 22:49 | <cbright6062> | Not since the Netscape days anyway. |
| 22:49 | <zewt> | seems like a non-issue for users, so it should be a useless thing to try to evangelize |
| 22:50 | <karlcow> | zewt: your tolerance to differences might be higher. Mine is quite high too. |
| 22:50 | <othermaciej> | unfortunately on mobile it's pretty common for sites to be broken in browsers with nontrivial share |
| 22:50 | <zewt> | well, mobile is its own mess |
| 22:50 | <karlcow> | I wish transition was not implemented at all ;) I like things which don't make me motion sick ☺ |
| 22:50 | <cbright6062> | I will say what I think part of the problem with mobile is: |
| 22:51 | <cbright6062> | and part of why I think people have a webkit mindset. |
| 22:51 | <cbright6062> | if going by end users is any idea of what the world has become line: |
| 22:51 | <cbright6062> | like* |
| 22:51 | <cbright6062> | "Smart Phones have a little i at the start of it...or they're that droid thing or whatever it's called." |
| 22:52 | <bga_> | http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6585.txt |
| 22:52 | <cbright6062> | Yes, I have seen both end users and developers alike who either believe, or act like, iOS (and maybe Android) are the only Mobile devices in existance. |
| 22:53 | <karlcow> | cbright6062: silicon valley is sooo far from Africa and Asia ;) |
| 22:53 | <cbright6062> | karlcow: ? |
| 22:55 | <karlcow> | if some devs think that iOS/Android are the only mobile phones possible, I would say they do not travel enough. (Or more likely, I guess, they don't care about the business model for users without those) |
| 22:55 | <annevk> | they're pretty common in Asia these days too, dunno about Africa |
| 22:55 | <karlcow> | Though the last few days, I have been impressed by the number of "misconceptions" about CSS. ☺ which I guess is a kind of reality. |
| 22:56 | <karlcow> | annevk: look at the market share of Opera Mini in Africa |
| 22:56 | <zewt> | (why are you sending unicode smiley faces over IRC? heh) |
| 22:56 | <karlcow> | http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_browser-af-monthly-201103-201203 |
| 22:56 | <zewt> | i had to paste into another app just to figure out what that was (looks like © in this window) |
| 22:57 | <karlcow> | heh zewt. Why not, it is part of utf-8 |
| 22:57 | <karlcow> | it reminds me 20 years ago with the controversy about accent such as é on Usenet ☺ |
| 22:57 | <annevk> | part of Unicode |
| 22:59 | <karlcow> | I sent → arrows too, and ♥ hearts :) |
| 23:00 | <annevk> | 💩 |
| 23:03 | <karlcow> | annevk: that is my favorite! |
| 23:10 | <jwalden> | people are aware of <https://plus.google.com/109925364564856140495/posts>;, right? |
| 23:11 | <zewt> | heh, gnu grep is still hopelessly broken when it comes to character ranges and unicode |
| 23:12 | <karlcow> | jwalden: I guess I do not get the joke. |
| 23:12 | <annevk> | jwalden: yeah loving it |
| 23:12 | <zewt> | in en_US.UTF-8, [A-Z] matches "i" and "j", but not "a" (and it shouldn't match any of them) :| |
| 23:12 | <jwalden> | what's not to get? take Unicode characters, rename them in amusing ways :-) |
| 23:13 | <jwalden> | sort of a dig at Unicode for having so many characters for so much esoterica, but not all that seriously |
| 23:13 | <karlcow> | aaaah got it |
| 23:14 | <annevk> | still have to submit MAN WITH BAZOOKA |
| 23:15 | <hober> | ROTATED HEAVY MAN WITH BAZOOKA |
| 23:15 | karlcow | should submit 💩 as PILE OF POO |
| 23:18 | <annevk> | karlcow: but that's not fake |
| 23:18 | <hober> | U+1F4A9 |
| 23:18 | <karlcow> | annevk: I think the irony has been lost :) |
| 23:21 | <karlcow> | ﷺ |
| 23:23 | <jwalden> | karlcow: https://plus.google.com/109925364564856140495/posts/WVCgkLVGUZe |
| 23:24 | <karlcow> | ah italian ice cream |
| 23:24 | <karlcow> | just need a cup and a composition character |
| 23:42 | <kennyluck> | The Web is alive as long as the amount of useful content is increasing. Driving standards (probably) helps but I don't think it's necessary. |