| 06:41 | <annevk> | jgraham: btw, GMail itself cannot handle the incorrectly formatted messages it emits either |
| 06:46 | <annevk> | "The open*Cursor exception should be enforcable using WebIDL by using an enum. The only reason we don't have it that way in the spec is because ReSpec doesn't support that." o_O |
| 06:48 | <sicking> | does any browser support AnonXMLHttpRequest yet? |
| 06:49 | <sicking> | I'm wondering if we should change the constructor syntax to something like |new XMLHttpRequest({ anon: true})| to make it easier to expand for the future |
| 06:50 | <sicking> | annevk: rewriting the spec to not use ReSpec would be a pretty major undertaking. Especially to do without introducing regressions. But hey, if you are offering to put in the time... :-) |
| 07:16 | <sicking> | annevk: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=692677#c39 |
| 07:19 | <Ms2ger> | sicking, file a bug on XHR, please? |
| 07:20 | <jgraham> | annevk: Neither can thunderbird, it seems |
| 07:26 | <sicking> | Ms2ger: done |
| 07:27 | <Ms2ger> | Thanks |
| 07:58 | <odinho> | 09:51 < sicking> does any browser support AnonXMLHttpRequest yet? <<< Opera does, but more importantly, does anyone use it? Not too sure about that :P |
| 08:00 | <zcorpan> | we do? |
| 08:02 | <MikeSmith> | anybody know what "RC buggy" means in Debian discussions? |
| 08:02 | <MikeSmith> | hmm, RC means release critical, I guess |
| 08:03 | <odinho> | zcorpan: Uh, Dragonfly isn't working for me so it seems we support everything actually. |
| 08:03 | <odinho> | Even aoeu |
| 08:04 | <MikeSmith> | anybody have suggestions for alternatives to hypermail? |
| 08:06 | <jgraham> | MikeSmith: Why? |
| 08:06 | <MikeSmith> | because Fette is right about it being dead |
| 08:07 | <odinho> | sicking, zcorpan: Oh, no, we don't :P Actually. I remember writing a test for it, and somehow thought that meant we did more to it :] |
| 08:07 | <jgraham> | Oh well I guess you have to choose one of his four approved mail clients then |
| 08:07 | <MikeSmith> | heh |
| 08:07 | <jgraham> | We could have a shared gmail account |
| 08:07 | <MikeSmith> | heh |
| 08:07 | <jgraham> | No way that could go wrong |
| 08:07 | <MikeSmith> | I use mutt man |
| 08:07 | <MikeSmith> | compile it myself from sources |
| 08:08 | <MikeSmith> | that's the way everybody should do |
| 08:08 | <sicking> | odinho: what about this page: http://fr.opera.com/docs/specs/presto2.10/ |
| 08:09 | <jgraham> | I like to imagine that Philip` reads emails like he reads PDFs: cat and the mbox specification |
| 08:09 | <MikeSmith> | I used to use mh, which isn't far from that |
| 08:10 | <MikeSmith> | I assumed Fette's list of approved mail clients was some kind of Dadaist joke |
| 08:11 | <odinho> | sicking: My tests are green, so yes, we do support it. I don't know why it didn't work in the console. |
| 08:12 | <reggna> | sicking: Yes, it's included in 2.10.232 and should work in Opera Next at least. |
| 08:12 | <odinho> | sicking: I switched to using DragonFly experimental track yesterday, I think I maybe shouldn't do that. |
| 08:12 | <sicking> | ok |
| 08:12 | <odinho> | sicking: IE10 doesn't implement it. Fx does not. |
| 08:12 | <sicking> | yeah, we don't |
| 08:13 | <odinho> | sicking: Neither the Chromium I have does. |
| 08:34 | <annevk> | sicking: everything trumps spec writers man |
| 08:34 | <annevk> | sicking: better fix it up |
| 08:35 | <annevk> | sicking: about AnonXMLHttpRequest -> XMLHttpRequest(object); I like that, but that does make it less detectable for code validating libraries |
| 08:36 | <annevk> | well, it gets more complicated at least |
| 08:36 | <annevk> | but if you could do new XMLHttpRequest({url:..., } etc. that'd be pretty neat |
| 08:39 | <odinho> | What do you think about the sugar cg idea? -- It would probably make an easy version like that, but without the long name. |
| 08:41 | <annevk> | sugar cg? |
| 08:41 | <annevk> | guess I should read the logs |
| 08:43 | <annevk> | not in the logs odinho |
| 08:43 | <odinho> | Hmm. Like django.shortcuts, having a way for 90% to do 90% of what they want using much easier, less flexible shortcuts. -- It's something that a library should do, at least at first, as a proof of niceness (and to keep the bikeshedding down, because it'll basically only be about bikeshedding). |
| 08:44 | <annevk> | the danger with aliasing is that often you also start to want to "fix" things |
| 08:44 | <odinho> | They can even build it into extensions in the different browsers and put it on window, and see how it works :P |
| 08:44 | <annevk> | a problem with aliasing is that you need tests x2 |
| 08:44 | <odinho> | annevk: Yeah, - it was like, it should only do json and process it and only give you the object back. |
| 08:44 | <annevk> | maybe even tests ^2 for combinations |
| 08:52 | <matjas> | re: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20120524#l-737 is the makefile / whatever it is you’re using to publish open source? |
| 09:00 | <annevk> | matjas: not everything is public |
| 09:00 | <annevk> | matjas: the spec goes through http://pimpmyspec.net/ which is open source |
| 09:00 | <annevk> | matjas: http://code.google.com/p/html5/source/browse/trunk/spec-splitter/spec-splitter.py is used to generate the multi-page copy but as you observed it's a problem with the single-page copy as well |
| 09:01 | <matjas> | thanks |
| 09:01 | <annevk> | matjas: I think the problem is with Anolis (which pimpmyspec.net uses), but I'm not a 100% sure and have not looked at it in a while |
| 09:01 | <annevk> | there's an open bug with confused comments about it |
| 09:02 | <matjas> | i suppose the source file that’s fed to pimpmyspec.net to generate the HTML spec isn’t public? |
| 09:03 | <annevk> | there is http://svn.whatwg.org/webapps/ |
| 09:03 | <annevk> | but how source and the .inc files are combined is not public I'm afraid |
| 09:03 | <annevk> | you'll have to ask Hixie |
| 09:04 | <matjas> | aha, https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12539 |
| 09:04 | <annevk> | I wish he'd publish more of that code so everyone can have a go, but apparently it's a somewhat hackish script |
| 09:04 | <annevk> | matjas: your Bugzilla fu is better than mine :) |
| 09:05 | <annevk> | matjas: my comments there are bullshit as the problem is in the single-page version too reportedly |
| 09:06 | <annevk> | hmm although currently that does validate... |
| 09:07 | <matjas> | annevk: comment #2 by [tm] says it’s only a problem in the multi-page spec |
| 09:07 | <matjas> | i only noticed in the multi-page version, but then again i hadn’t looked at the single-page version |
| 09:08 | <annevk> | I think david_carlisle pointed that out at one point |
| 09:08 | <annevk> | meh |
| 09:12 | <matjas> | ok, i’ll just wait for you to fix it then :p |
| 09:12 | <annevk> | looks like people have been waiting since January :) |
| 09:13 | <annevk> | I'll appoint Philip` |
| 09:13 | <annevk> | he's always timely |
| 09:14 | <annevk> | time to fly |
| 09:18 | <matjas> | TIL html.org is owned by the W3C now — that’s new, right? |
| 11:29 | <Ms2ger> | The note on http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-3d-transforms/ could stand out more... |
| 11:32 | <jgraham> | The "please test" junk on the new spec makes me unhappy |
| 11:33 | <Ms2ger> | I don't get that, use a tested browser ;) |
| 11:39 | <Philip`> | I like how the new spec uses SVG images that have what looks like ugly raster scaling artifacts in Firefox |
| 11:39 | <Philip`> | (Particularly the text is ugly) |
| 11:40 | Philip` | just be misinterpreting a lack of hinting or something |
| 11:56 | <annevk> | matjas: yeah, was a donation apparently |
| 11:57 | <annevk> | matjas: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2012May/0013.html |
| 11:58 | <matjas> | cool |
| 12:07 | <matjas> | i wonder what they’ll use it for |
| 12:30 | <odinho> | MikeSmith: If you want to research, and don't need actual suggestions, you could look at Postorius, and Hyperkitty. I think Posterius is tied to the Mailman 3.0 REST API, so guess it won't work. I don't know much about hyperkitty, it kinda seems like an earlier name of postorius, so it will probably be just as unusable :P |
| 13:42 | <zcorpan> | AryehGregor: having the stack in the message in testharness.js is quite verbose and most of the trace is about the harness itself, which isn't overly helpful |
| 13:46 | <zewt> | pretty annoying that we still don't have any legitimate stack trace API in JS |
| 13:46 | <jgraham> | zewt: But it might be used for *evil* |
| 13:47 | <jgraham> | And no one is allowed to use javascript for evil |
| 13:47 | <jgraham> | Crockford forbids it |
| 13:47 | <zewt> | heh |
| 13:47 | <zewt> | well, we can already get stack traces (in most browsers), just badly :) |
| 13:48 | <gsnedders> | ES7 may well define it. |
| 13:53 | <jgraham> | Will ES7 come out before or after flying cars go mainstream? |
| 13:56 | <gsnedders> | Well, ES6 will be this year. |
| 14:02 | <zcorpan> | ES3 1999, ES5 2009, ES5.1 2011, ES6 2012, ES7 ??? |
| 14:02 | <zcorpan> | ES1 and ES2 were 1997 and 1998 |
| 14:03 | <gsnedders> | I dunno. Many of the proposals are beginning to stablize. |
| 14:03 | <zcorpan> | so they burst out three editions every decade |
| 14:04 | <zcorpan> | which means ES7 will be some time around 2020 |
| 14:04 | <Ms2ger> | Or as early as 2017 |
| 14:04 | <Ms2ger> | Still 5 years ahead of HTML5 |
| 14:08 | <jgraham> | There is no HTML5, there is only HTML |
| 14:13 | <volkmar> | Ms2ger: we should have HTML 2020, HTML 2021, HTML 2022 :) |
| 14:21 | <Philip`> | I guess HTML 2020 would be the best and then they'd get progressively more shortsighted |
| 14:25 | <jgraham> | (tumbleweed) |
| 14:39 | <Philip`> | (Optometry jokes are hard :-( ) |
| 14:40 | <annevk> | uploading a large file to DreamHost is no fun |
| 14:40 | <annevk> | starts at MiB/s |
| 14:40 | <annevk> | now KiB/s |
| 14:40 | <annevk> | oh now done |
| 14:40 | <annevk> | yay |
| 14:50 | <odinho> | annevk: So why the uploading of big files to DreamHost òÓ |
| 14:52 | <annevk> | I made a one-minute video for someone and I don't think 70MiB works as an email attachment |
| 14:52 | <annevk> | but maybe it does these days |
| 14:52 | <jgraham> | That's not a big file |
| 14:52 | <annevk> | jgraham: yes it is |
| 14:52 | <odinho> | Heh |
| 14:52 | Philip` | thought everyone used Youtube for videos nowadays |
| 14:52 | <annevk> | most of my files are several KiBs |
| 14:52 | <odinho> | I normally use BitTorrent for it, -- but those files are normally several hundreds of gigabytes. |
| 14:53 | <annevk> | Philip`: doesn't work great for sharing the raw data |
| 14:53 | <Philip`> | Ah |
| 14:53 | <karlcow> | Philip`: vimeo, dailymotion too |
| 14:53 | <jgraham> | youporn |
| 14:54 | <odinho> | jgraham: ... Well, now we know what kind of videos you share. |
| 14:54 | <karlcow> | hmm… if we go into hipsters video hosting sites |
| 14:54 | <jgraham> | I don't think I have ever shared a video of anything |
| 14:54 | <odinho> | s/share/make/ |
| 14:54 | <zcorpan> | "you wanna see a video of my cat? i uploaded it to youporn. here's a link." |
| 14:55 | <jgraham> | I guess I probably can't claim I have never made a video of anything |
| 14:55 | <odinho> | lol, would be cool to try. |
| 14:55 | <odinho> | See how long before it is taken down for not being explicit. |
| 14:55 | <jgraham> | I don't think I have ever made anything that some one surfing youporn would be looking for :) |
| 14:55 | <annevk> | it would be disturbing if it was odinho |
| 14:55 | <odinho> | annevk: If what was? |
| 14:56 | <jgraham> | the porographic video annevk is uploading |
| 14:56 | <jgraham> | That's what's happening, right? |
| 14:56 | <odinho> | :o |
| 14:56 | <annevk> | I was referring to the cat video |
| 14:56 | <odinho> | annevk: So, it'd be disturbing if I was zcorpan's cat. Yes, I can agree with that. Thankfully I'm not :] |
| 14:57 | <Philip`> | Whose cat are you, then? |
| 14:57 | <odinho> | Philip`: I'm my own cat. |
| 14:57 | <odinho> | Just like the tomcat in aristocats. |
| 14:58 | <annevk> | an employed wild cat? |
| 14:58 | odinho | sees his story starts crumbling |
| 14:58 | <jgraham> | Mmm, crumble |
| 14:59 | <annevk> | apple crumble |
| 14:59 | <annevk> | yumyum |
| 14:59 | <odinho> | I bought yumyum yesterday. |
| 14:59 | jgraham | has quite some rhubarb at the moment. Makes very nice crumble |
| 14:59 | <karlcow> | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_a_Cat |
| 15:00 | <jgraham> | (not as much as I would like of course. It is not possivle to have too much rhubarb) |
| 15:00 | <odinho> | jgraham: True dat. |
| 15:03 | <jgraham> | I wonder if I will be brave enough to split the crowns later in the year |
| 15:03 | <jgraham> | Truly the most republican-sounding of all gardening tasks |
| 15:04 | <Ms2ger> | Not in this jubilee year, of course |
| 15:11 | <odinho> | Ms2ger, jgraham: Waddaya think about my last comment? |
| 15:13 | <Ms2ger> | Er, yes, rhubarb makes good crumble for you humans |
| 15:14 | <jgraham> | Indeed. I recommend homemade custard |
| 15:14 | <jgraham> | to go on the side |
| 15:14 | <jgraham> | Or homemade ice cream |
| 15:14 | <odinho> | Ms2ger: On github :P |
| 15:14 | <jgraham> | (I have also made rhubarb crumble icecream) |
| 15:14 | <Ms2ger> | What's github? :) |
| 15:14 | <odinho> | Making a commit now. |
| 15:14 | <jgraham> | (that was nice) |
| 15:15 | <jgraham> | Ms2ger: The clue's in the namew |
| 15:15 | <jgraham> | -w |
| 15:15 | <odinho> | This is no environment to get any work done :P |
| 15:15 | Ms2ger | did not get email |
| 15:19 | <odinho> | Ms2ger: https://github.com/jgraham/testharness.js/pull/1#r900500 << this is new stuff |
| 15:20 | <odinho> | Ms2ger: Think I'll make it into a patch now, -- and dump it on jgraham as long as it's OK. |
| 15:22 | <Ms2ger> | odinho, what was "I actually think adding || required_props.code == 0..." in reply to? :) |
| 15:22 | <odinho> | This one --> Right now, it's possible to just throw code = 0, and no name and it'll pass for e.g. IndexedDB spec's DataError or TransactionInactiveError. |
| 15:24 | <Ms2ger> | Please update the documentation for assert_throws too? |
| 15:25 | <odinho> | Ms2ger: Smart. Hmm. |
| 15:25 | <Ms2ger> | And explain what we're checking if you pass in an object |
| 15:27 | <Ms2ger> | odinho, in the part where you check required_props.code === undefined, could you use `in` there too? |
| 15:28 | <odinho> | Ms2ger: Sure. |
| 15:28 | <Ms2ger> | And in the if (e.name !== e.name.toUpperCase() || required_props.code === 0), add a comment along the lines of "New style exception: also test the name property." |
| 15:37 | <matjas> | probably waaaay too easy for you guys, but here goes: http://twitter.com/mathias/status/207858124802097154 |
| 15:38 | <Wilto> | matjas: A REGEX-BASED HTML PARSER???? |
| 15:38 | <Wilto> | [cue: Zalgo] |
| 15:38 | <matjas> | Y̸͉͚̘̯̥̠̋̌̋̈́̏̃͒͆ͦ̓ͧ͛ͫ̀͐͗̇ͮ͘e̸̴̛͉̳̼̼̯ͥ̑̏͆ͩ̃̆̅ͬ̌̍͗̀̚͘sͦ̒̔̏̾̆̇ͮ͊ͤͣͮ̂҉̶̹̪̘̘̳̞̞͍̞̝̭̪̻̕ͅ,̴̥͎͇̲̠̻̱͇͓̯̭̦̯̟̣̟̤̅ͩͩ͌ͦ͗ͪ̇̒͋͂ͧͩ̚͜ ͪ̾̿ͩ̓ͫ͐ͮ̓҉̶͔͉̯̫̙̞̟̤̗̹̹̕͠ͅW̶̸̶̝̪̞̩̤̰̉̇͗͛͒͌͛̽ͦ͛͑̕i̔̒͆͐ͪ͗ͩ͐̌̑̓̒̋ͥ̈͑̕҉͟͏̢̱͖͈͉͓͙l͑̒ͧͩ̾̒̆̇ͣͦ͠ |
| 15:38 | <matjas> | ̸̨͇̘̩̦̣̼ṯ͎̤̱̺̤̜̜̯̦͖͇͓̋̉̂́ͮͦ̑̃͂͆͟͡ͅö̷̔͐ͬ̓͏̨̖̦̙͖͇͎̹̠͔͘.̧̥͓̹̜̹͖̩̙̭̯̪̣̺̘̅͗̎ͩ̔̄ͬ͑͟ͅ ̧̢͉̱͈̫͚̬ͮ͐ͮ͝A̡͍͇̥͖̣̜͎͙̦̖̻̼̅̈̆ͭͬͧ̔͐ͩ̏̍̍ͫ̀͘͡ ̨̛̪̲͈͇͖̯̫͔̟͈̒ͧ͋ͬͧ̎ͤ͂͑͐̔̚͠r̪͚͔̝̩̐͌̽͗ͨ̏̇̿ͣ͆̉̈̽͊̈́̅̒ͧ͘͢͜͜͠ͅę̬̘̰̘̤̣̱̫̟͖͐̔̋̃ͤ̾̾̓̔́̎̔͡ |
| 15:38 | <matjas> | ̘g̡͖̹̙̣͉̭̥̤̝̯͈̝̣̳̬͂͊̄̽ͤ͑͢͠͡e͔̙͖͍͎̟̣̬̰̟͓̍͂͌͗̃̄̇̑ͭ̉̉ͦͥ͗ͣ̐̈́͢͠x̬͚͙̣̥͖̲̞̣̠̞̍͒ͫ̒ͮ̐̽̇͆̂͂͊̚͜͜-̛̟͓͙̹̱͚̙̟̣̭̙̤̳̖̤̥̜̐ͮ̉͆̏̽̊̌̓̀̀͢͝b̴̸̸̢͚̼̭̞̥̭̬̣̘̮̮̣͇͈̪̹̜̓̇͗̽á̺̥͎̰̲̺͖͉̬̗͓̪̫͉̘̯ͣ͆̄ͪ̈̓̒͐̄̍ͩͨ́͆́͢ͅͅs̨͓͔̲̜̗̥̦̦͚̖̻̫͍͈̍̈ͩ̏͐ͤ̃e͑ |
| 15:38 | <matjas> | ̷̙̗͇̬̭͕̘̞̯̣͕̟̩̑͂̒͐͋ͨ͊͆͆̇̏ͩ͛͋ͯ̕͟͝͞d̡ͤ̃ͧ̋͒̎̌̌ͫ҉͕̩̰̭̻͎̠̗̙̭̼̪̀ ̝̥̰͎̼̙̮̫̮͚͖͖͎̫̐̎̈́ͤ͒ͪ̏ͦ͗͛ͣ͑͋͠͡ͅH̶̢̛̠̪̼͎͖͇̠̲͕͓̥͇͍̬̟̘̟ͨ̂ͪ͌̋̈͌̋͗̑̆͊͒̔̌̀͝T̛̘̝̬̜̜̝͈̣̗͍̤̝̤̤̣̎͋͛̿͛ͧ͒ͤ̃̄̀̒̚͘͠͠͠M̵͈̼͈̜͔̗̟̯͖͎̜̦̈́̒ͧ͗ͩ́̾ͨ̉ͪͨ͛ͦ͟͝Ļ͐̒̃̃͏̣̘̠̝͖̜ |
| 15:38 | <matjas> | ̤̗̫̥̣͙͇̭̘ ̶̶̵̡͙̰̼͈͔̩̹̻̻̫̪̓͊́̿ͪͮ͆͐ͭ̄̔ͪͨ̾͋́̿̎̍͝p̴͑ͮ̏̓̅̌̉ͭ̀͐̄ͧ̽҉̴̶̭̖̮̦̣͈͚͓̦̠̤͍̫̱̩͎͢ă̷̶̪̮̼̹̬̯̫͖͈̻̦̪͈̭͚̩͇̞̔̃̄ͭ͆͗̄̂͋͌́͜r̢̛̫͓͓͕̫͙͈̟͇͚̮͔̜̰̥̄̋̌̔ͨ͑͐̏̔͗ͨ̔̀͘͠ş̸̸͔̥̩̰̦̹̝̳͖̲̻̣̮̭̲͔͈̅̔̈̾͊̔́ͣ̓͋̿̋̓̚͘e̵ͩ̅͊ͮͣ͗̊̽̏̀͗̒͒̓̊ͩͬ̊ |
| 15:38 | <matjas> | ̴̶͍͍̲̱̟̺̘̥̀͡ͅr̢̟̳͉͈̫͇̒ͮ̒͛ͬͣ͐ͩ̈́ͯ͒ͧ͘͡.̛͋ͨ̓͌͡͏̨͓̱̺̠̪̭͈̩ |
| 15:38 | <miketaylr> | matjas: my answer will fail if you come from an enterprise shop, most likely |
| 15:39 | <matjas> | go for it |
| 15:39 | <miketaylr> | just @'d you |
| 15:39 | <matjas> | ah, no i don’t think that’d work |
| 15:39 | <matjas> | if it does i just got owned |
| 15:39 | <matjas> | hahahaa omg i suck |
| 15:40 | <matjas> | i had something completely different in mind |
| 15:40 | <miketaylr> | :D |
| 15:40 | <miketaylr> | hmm what's the other way |
| 15:40 | miketaylr | looks |
| 15:40 | <annevk> | matjas: more like #dompubquiz |
| 15:40 | <matjas> | annevk: yeah, i was considering adding multiple hashtags!!1 |
| 15:41 | <TabAtkins> | Hah, miketaylr, that was my first thought too. I just wasn't certain that document had the node methods. |
| 15:41 | <matjas> | sometimes i miss document.innerHTML |
| 15:41 | <annevk> | matjas: better question: why ever access document.doctype? :) |
| 15:42 | <matjas> | fo’ funsies |
| 15:42 | <annevk> | "because you can and because Acid3 made it so" |
| 15:42 | <odinho> | :] Writing annoying analytics/stats package? |
| 15:43 | <miketaylr> | i was using it w/ jsdom to modify some html files, http://miketaylr.com/post/4e85dc30.png |
| 15:43 | <miketaylr> | but then i removed jsdom because i hate it |
| 15:43 | <Philip`> | Surely the best approach is to tell everyone to use <!DOCTYPE html> and then never worry about doctypes ever again |
| 15:43 | <matjas> | odinho: no, just learned about //node() in XPath today, and noticed it even gets the DOCTYPE node |
| 15:44 | <matjas> | (i’m a complete XPath n00b too, fwiw) |
| 15:44 | <annevk> | data:text/xml,<!DOCTYPE html><svg/> |
| 15:44 | <odinho> | matjas: Ah, I was answering annevk what you could do with it. :] |
| 15:44 | <Ms2ger> | BSOD |
| 15:44 | <Ms2ger> | Well, YSOD / RBOD |
| 15:44 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: not in Opera |
| 15:44 | <Philip`> | Solution: data:text/html,<!DOCTYPE html><svg/> |
| 15:45 | <Ms2ger> | Hence, the Red Box Of not-quite-Death |
| 15:49 | <TabAtkins> | annevk: No need to ever use a doctype for SVG. |
| 15:50 | <matjas> | (^ for XML in general) |
| 15:52 | <miketaylr> | matjas: i think i found the other way, document[document.toString().slice(12,15).toLowerCase()+TypeError.toString().slice(9, 13).toLowerCase()] |
| 15:52 | <TabAtkins> | Booooo |
| 15:52 | <tantek> | what are folks' opinions on lowercase doctype vs uppercase DOCTYPE? e.g. <!doctype html> (faster to type, no shiftkey) vs. <!DOCTYPE html> ? |
| 15:52 | <matjas> | miketaylr: that’s cheating! |
| 15:52 | <TabAtkins> | tantek: <!DoCtYpE hTmL> |
| 15:53 | <matjas> | tantek: I like <!DOCTYPE html> as SGML always uppercases DOCTYPE |
| 15:53 | <miketaylr> | matjas: ok, but it was a good way to kill 2 minutes |
| 15:53 | <tantek> | TabAtkins - that's only because you can't use upside down letters |
| 15:53 | <TabAtkins> | tantek: True. |
| 15:53 | <jgraham> | I think my opinion is that time spent debating it would be better spent making crumble |
| 15:53 | <TabAtkins> | But anyway, I'm lazy so now I always just write <!doctype html> |
| 15:53 | <matjas> | miketaylr: brilliant use of TypeError, though |
| 15:53 | odinho | agrees with jgraham |
| 15:53 | <odinho> | (But I do as TabAtkins) |
| 15:54 | <tantek> | which do you use in practice odinho jgraham? (not a debate, more of a poll) |
| 15:54 | <TabAtkins> | Same reason I usually use single quotes when I have to quote an attribute. |
| 15:54 | <TabAtkins> | No shift. |
| 15:54 | <Philip`> | tantek: How do you write the "<!" without the shift key? |
| 15:54 | <tantek> | good catch Philip :) |
| 15:55 | <odinho> | tantek: Looking over all my tests at w3c-test.org, they're all <!doctype html> if I wrote them myself (not porting other people's :P) |
| 15:55 | <Ms2ger> | Philip`, French keyboard |
| 15:55 | <miketaylr> | i use <!DOCTYPE html> because it looks cooler |
| 15:55 | <Philip`> | tantek: Surely it's better to keep the shift key held down for all of "<!DOCTYPE" because then you've got the entire duration of the " " to release the shift key, whereas with "<!doctype" you've got to release it very quickly else you'll end up with "<!Doctype" |
| 15:56 | <TabAtkins> | Philip`: I'm not sure what kind of keyboard you use, or how you type, but I can't "keep the shift key held down" for all of those letters. |
| 15:56 | <Philip`> | I always do <!DOCTYPE html> largely because KDE's syntax-highlighting text control thing complains about <!doctype ...> in underlined red |
| 15:57 | <Ms2ger> | How many fingers do you use? :) |
| 15:57 | <Philip`> | TabAtkins: I have multiple fingers, so I can use my right little finger for shift while typing with the rest of my hands |
| 15:57 | <TabAtkins> | It feels supremely unnatural to try and hold down a shift on the same side as the letter I'm typing. |
| 15:58 | <TabAtkins> | When I do happen to write it in caps, I just use caps lock. |
| 15:58 | <Philip`> | I only do the O and P with my right hand |
| 15:58 | <TabAtkins> | Wait, the P is done with your pinky though, right? |
| 15:58 | <jgraham> | Presumably not |
| 15:58 | <Philip`> | No, that's done with my middle finger if I'm holding shift |
| 15:59 | <TabAtkins> | Okay, so I'm back to that just being weird. |
| 15:59 | <Philip`> | or with the next outermost finger if I'm not holding shift |
| 15:59 | <TabAtkins> | That's the ring finger. |
| 15:59 | <TabAtkins> | And that's still really weird. It's quite difficult for me to hit P with my ring finger. |
| 15:59 | <TabAtkins> | While it's directly above the ; key, so quite natural to use my pinky. |
| 16:00 | <matjas> | Philip`: better answer: use a custom keyboard layout |
| 16:00 | Philip` | doesn't have any kind of consciously consistent pattern for what fingers he uses - he just hits the keys with whatever happens to be nearest at that instant |
| 16:00 | <Ms2ger> | Use a hotkey for <!DoCtYpE hTmL>? |
| 16:00 | <odinho> | This is getting unweild. |
| 16:00 | <matjas> | DOCTYPEs are too mainstream. |
| 16:01 | <matjas> | stop using them & you get box-sizing: border-box for free!!11 |
| 16:01 | <tantek> | lol |
| 16:12 | <tantek> | annevk - on the topic of fullscreen - are you ok with the suggested edits from glazou? http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012May/1129.html |
| 16:23 | <tantek> | and fantasai's comments are constructive/helpful as well: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012May/1131.html |
| 16:23 | <miketaylr> | matjas: oh thought of another one, document.all.item(0).previousSibling |
| 16:26 | <Ms2ger> | Objection! |
| 16:26 | <Ms2ger> | Also, not necessarily with whitespace |
| 16:29 | <miketaylr> | :'( |
| 16:29 | <dglazkov> | good morning, Whatwg! |
| 16:30 | <Ms2ger> | Reasonable afternoon, dglazkov |
| 16:30 | <dglazkov> | \o/ reasonable is almost good |
| 16:32 | <tantek> | good morning dglazkov |
| 16:51 | <odinho> | https://github.com/Velmont/testharness.js/commit/0cba0a7a006cb9493a9f9d3eea5a64d0e606832a < docs look reasonable, anyone? |
| 16:52 | <Ms2ger> | odinho, it checks .name for the object, no? |
| 16:54 | <odinho> | Ms2ger: Yeah. But I think it should do what I wrote, although I see that is rather stupid to do that. I guess I thought a bit too much about it and wrote it in. |
| 16:55 | <Ms2ger> | I mean, I'd be happy to have the code do what you documented |
| 16:55 | <Ms2ger> | But I want the docs and the code to match |
| 16:55 | <odinho> | I was all like, "it does that? yeah, strange, should maybe fix that. How to do it? Well, could do that. ... <long break>. So, writing this docs stuff. write/write totally wrong stuff, write." |
| 17:43 | <Ms2ger> | odinho, and now the { type: "TypeError" } example :) |
| 17:43 | <odinho> | WÆÆÆ :P |
| 17:43 | <odinho> | So just remove the object example I guess. |
| 17:44 | <Ms2ger> | W���� |
| 17:44 | <odinho> | Because I can't manage to make a sane one. |
| 17:44 | <Ms2ger> | Make it `new TypeError()`, because that's what's actually used :) |
| 17:46 | <odinho> | There, pushed. |
| 17:50 | <Ms2ger> | <Ms2ger> odinho, in the part where you check required_props.code === undefined, could you use `in` there too? |
| 17:50 | <odinho> | Ms2ger: I tried. |
| 17:50 | <odinho> | Ms2ger: Didn't work. :P Because it does set code on required_props |
| 17:50 | <odinho> | Ms2ger: But it sets it to undefined. |
| 17:50 | <Ms2ger> | Yeah |
| 17:52 | <Ms2ger> | I was thinking of var name_code_map = { ... }; if (!(name in name_code_map)) { throw... } required_props.code = name_code_map[code]; |
| 17:57 | <odinho> | Ms2ger: Ah, you want to expand that one. Sure that's needed? It was like that before. ... It might be a bit clearer, yea. |
| 17:57 | <Ms2ger> | I would prefer it :) |
| 17:58 | <odinho> | Ms2ger: Will have a code_name_map and a name_code_map then, where code means different things in the two different ones :P |
| 17:58 | <odinho> | assert_throws taking "code" is a bit strange now already. |
| 17:58 | <Ms2ger> | We already overload "code", no? |
| 17:58 | <Ms2ger> | Right |
| 18:05 | <odinho> | Ms2ger: Refactored. |
| 18:06 | <Ms2ger> | Hmm, you could make it var required_props = { code: name_code_map[name] }; |
| 18:07 | <Ms2ger> | Either way, push it |
| 18:07 | <Ms2ger> | (As one patch) |
| 18:09 | <odinho> | Ms2ger: Yeah, I was mindlessly moving code :P |
| 21:37 | <TabAtkins> | Oof, just spent two hours working through a nerd-snipe. |
| 21:37 | <TabAtkins> | On the good side, Animations now has much cleaner markup. |
| 21:38 | <tantek> | TabAtkins, you know often you have to rework markup to "clean it up" in MediaWiki? Like never. |
| 21:39 | <TabAtkins> | MediaWiki markup is horrible and I hate it. |
| 21:39 | <tantek> | I stand by the assertion that specs as we develop them today have more markup than we need. |
| 21:39 | <tantek> | no argument about MediaWiki markup opinions - I'm neutral on it. |
| 21:39 | <tantek> | how do you feel about MarkDown? |
| 21:39 | <TabAtkins> | Shrug. You're wrong. If your assertion is that you would prefer a stronger preprocessor so you do more compact syntax instead of the occasional tag, okay, but you can't actually reduce the amount of syntax we have significantly. |
| 21:40 | <TabAtkins> | Beyond attaching a Markdown processor to the front of the preprocessor. |
| 21:40 | <TabAtkins> | Markdown is great. |
| 21:40 | <tantek> | Markdown is not bad. Except how it does links seems bass-ackwards. |
| 21:41 | <tantek> | which seem quite critical |
| 21:41 | <TabAtkins> | I think doing links in plain text is a hard problem no matter what you do. |
| 21:41 | <TabAtkins> | But I'm okay with how it's done in Markdown. |
| 21:41 | <TabAtkins> | I'd also be okay with the brackets swapped. |
| 21:42 | <tantek> | what gets me about the markup we use in spec development aren't the occasional things like emphasis, keywords, but rather the common text |
| 21:43 | <tantek> | li |
| 21:43 | <tantek> | ke |
| 21:43 | <tantek> | paragraphs, lists all become a noisier because of the markup |
| 21:43 | <Hixie> | welcome to HTML |
| 21:43 | <TabAtkins> | I can sympathize with that. |
| 21:43 | <tantek> | welcome Hixie |
| 21:44 | <tantek> | TabAtkins - so if wikis accepted Markdown - you'd think they're ok? |
| 21:44 | <tantek> | who "owns" the Markdown spec btw? like if someone wants to suggest syntax additions... |
| 21:45 | <TabAtkins> | Gruber. |
| 21:45 | Hixie | wishes wikis would just use HTML |
| 21:45 | <karlcow> | Gruber owns markdown |
| 21:45 | <karlcow> | and not in a liberal way |
| 21:45 | tantek | has documented Hixie's preference. |
| 21:45 | <TabAtkins> | tantek: I think Markdown is a technically superior syntax, so yeah. |
| 21:45 | <tantek> | karlcow - do you have a URL to the live spec? |
| 21:46 | <karlcow> | ah no! my bad |
| 21:46 | <karlcow> | Markdown is free software, available under a BSD-style open source license. See the License page for more information. |
| 21:46 | <TabAtkins> | http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/ |
| 21:46 | <karlcow> | http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/ |
| 21:46 | <karlcow> | I remember reading a stricter license in the past |
| 21:49 | <karlcow> | and really my bad because the files on Web archives show a BSD license at least since 2004. |
| 21:54 | <tantek> | very nice, so thanks to liberal licensing anyone can fork it and improve it. |
| 21:54 | <tantek> | whether the syntax (spec) or the implementation (code) |
| 21:54 | <TabAtkins> | Yes, and has been done a few times. |
| 21:55 | <tantek> | is there a community evolving it? |
| 21:55 | <TabAtkins> | No clue. But I use an extended Markdown parser written in PHP for my blog. |
| 21:55 | <TabAtkins> | (And have been off-and-on working on my own parser.) |
| 21:55 | <tantek> | is there a spec for the extended Markdown syntax that you use? |
| 21:56 | <TabAtkins> | http://michelf.com/projects/php-markdown/extra/ |
| 21:58 | <TabAtkins> | Oh man, I forgot that it had footnote support. |
| 21:59 | tantek | reads - hey that's pretty slick. |
| 22:00 | <TabAtkins> | I mainly use it just for the code block guards. Indenting my code blocks like regular Markdown wants is annoying. |
| 22:00 | <kamals> | Any girls here |
| 22:00 | <TabAtkins> | Oh man, so many girls, kamals. |
| 22:00 | <TabAtkins> | You wouldn't believe. |
| 22:00 | <TabAtkins> | Girls coming out my fucking ears. |
| 22:01 | <TabAtkins> | None of them like you, though. |
| 22:01 | <kamals> | I dont know how to fing the girls |
| 22:01 | <TabAtkins> | First suggestion: try the real world. Plenty of girls out there. I hear estimations that upwards of 50% of people are girls. |
| 22:01 | <Hixie> | more than 50% |
| 22:02 | <TabAtkins> | Thus my phrasing, Hixie. |
| 22:02 | <Hixie> | i thought "upwards of x" meant "up to x", my bad |
| 22:02 | <TabAtkins> | ...I don't *think* so, but I"m not sure. |
| 22:02 | dglazkov | shakes head |
| 22:02 | <Hixie> | no, no, you're right |
| 22:02 | <Hixie> | i looked it up before saying "my bad" :-P |
| 22:03 | <TabAtkins> | Haha |
| 22:08 | <dglazkov> | poor kamals. His quest was unsuccessful. |
| 22:11 | <TabAtkins> | tantek: Oh man, the <abbr> support in Markdown Extra is great too. So much I never actually paid attention to and then forgot. |
| 22:12 | <tantek> | dglazkov, indeed, why aren't more women involved in WHATWG? |
| 22:12 | <Hixie> | or indeed the IT industry in general |
| 22:12 | <dglazkov> | I would say we are definitely failing the upwards to 50% criteria. |
| 22:13 | <tantek> | well there's been plenty of articles written about IT industry in general - with various theories. simple web search will suffice there. |
| 22:13 | <dglazkov> | I blame Hixie. He started WHATWG. Surely it's his fault. |
| 22:13 | <tantek> | but does WHATWG have *any* active women? |
| 22:13 | Hixie | hopes his effors with FIRST will help in the future, but that's a long-term solution |
| 22:13 | <Hixie> | tantek: dunno. i thought anne was a woman for a while. |
| 22:13 | <tantek> | FIRST(citation?) |
| 22:13 | <Hixie> | turns out not |
| 22:13 | <Hixie> | tantek: http://www.usfirst.org/ |
| 22:13 | <tantek> | Hixie, we could get anne to wear a dress perhaps? |
| 22:15 | Hixie | actually has no idea what gender people in the whatwg have (other than those he's met), and pays no attention to it |
| 22:15 | <tantek> | Hixie: re: FIRST agreed. Similarly that's why I help co-organize ScienceHackDay (when it's in SF) http://sciencehackday.com |
| 22:15 | <Hixie> | cool |
| 22:16 | <tantek> | and yes, inspiring kids (of all genders/backgrounds) is a good long term approach. |
| 22:16 | <Hixie> | (i expect the reason for the imbalance in web standards is the same as for the IT industry as a whole, i don't think there's anything special about web standards) |
| 22:16 | <tantek> | web standards appear to be worse than the IT industry in general |
| 22:17 | <tantek> | just the small sample during the WG f2f at MS-SVC the other week |
| 22:17 | <Hixie> | do we have data on that, or is that just an impression? |
| 22:17 | <tantek> | there were a few women in the HTML WG. none in the WebApps WG. |
| 22:17 | <Hixie> | cos impressions on this kind of thing can be really misleading |
| 22:17 | <gavinc> | Err, I don't think FIRST has any women/girl specific mission does it? |
| 22:17 | <Hixie> | (in both directions) |
| 22:17 | <Hixie> | gavinc: it's about bringing engineering up in general, for all genders, nothing female-specific as far as i know. |
| 22:17 | <tantek> | Hixie, I have yet to find a WG with a % of women even close to what averages in IT are. |
| 22:18 | <gavinc> | There is Girls Connect, but I thought that was a small part of FIRST |
| 22:18 | gsnedders | doesn't even know how many girls are in his CS course at uni, as lecture attendence is so low |
| 22:19 | <tantek> | I do think W3C has tried to be specific about outreach, e.g. in attendance at TPACs. |
| 22:19 | <tantek> | And I vaguely remember the CEO quoting improving statistics year over year |
| 22:19 | <tantek> | but that's TPAC attendance, not WG membership/participation |
| 22:20 | <Hixie> | gavinc: i dunno what the %s are, but (a) the proportion of girls to boys is much higher in FIRST events than in the IT industry as a whole, and (b) since the problem with the IT industry seems to be about girls losing interest before picking a career, anything that reaches children at a young age is huge for this kind of thing |
| 22:20 | <tantek> | still, unless someone wants to stand up and provide a counter-example, from all outside (and even semi-inside) perspectives, it does appear WHATWG has no women. |
| 22:20 | <tantek> | Hixie +1 |
| 22:20 | <Hixie> | gavinc: (there are numerous girl-only teams every year, just like there are boy-only and mixed teams) |
| 22:21 | <Hixie> | tantek: what do you mean by "WHATWG"? |
| 22:21 | <tantek> | Hixie, what do you? |
| 22:21 | <gavinc> | Hixie: Yeah, same was true of Odyssey of the Mind |
| 22:21 | <Hixie> | tantek: if you mean the list as a whole, there's over 1000 people subscribed, and i've no idea what the proportions are |
| 22:21 | <tantek> | sure, but can you provide any (even one) counter example? |
| 22:22 | <tantek> | or in irc |
| 22:22 | <tantek> | or wiki contributors |
| 22:22 | <Hixie> | tantek: if you mean spec editors, which is where i think we really need good people, then there's a lack of people of all sexes, and i'm not sure the numbers are big enough that we can tell what the proportions are relative to the industry as a whole |
| 22:22 | <Hixie> | tantek: statistically |
| 22:22 | <Hixie> | tantek: but certainly i agree that there aren't enough active female editors |
| 22:23 | <gsnedders> | tantek: Are there even that many women working for browser vendors? As that'll have some knock-on effect. |
| 22:23 | <Hixie> | tantek: silvia, e.g. |
| 22:23 | <Hixie> | tantek: if you just want an existence proof :-) |
| 22:23 | <tantek> | gsnedders - yes, plenty of women working at Mozilla for example, and on other working groups, e.g. fantasai on CSS. |
| 22:23 | <Hixie> | (nessy on irc) |
| 22:23 | <TabAtkins> | Yeah, within the browsers themselves, the women fraction is probably around IT average. |
| 22:23 | <gavinc> | I admit part of my introduction to standards and the W3C was Jeni Tennison and I assumed there were plenty more like her... and was very surprised. |
| 22:24 | <tantek> | Hixie - good to know there's at least one exception. |
| 22:24 | <wilhelm> | Hixie: Reaching out to kids is a great approach. However, our industry (and its bridgeheads within education) has fundamental cultural problems we need to solve for them to remain interested. |
| 22:24 | <Hixie> | gavinc: there's plenty of other people like jeni in the web standards world, they're just mostly male. :-P |
| 22:24 | <tantek> | wilhelm - the dropoffs occurs at various levels in school before they even get to industry. |
| 22:24 | <wilhelm> | tantek: Yes. |
| 22:24 | <gavinc> | Hixie: Yes. |
| 22:24 | <gsnedders> | tantek: Mainly saying that because — at least within the Core team — at Opera there are very few. Get out into mobile delivery teams and other such things and there are far more. |
| 22:24 | <tantek> | women in STEM drop-off starts in highschool/college. |
| 22:25 | <Hixie> | wilhelm: there may well be cultural issues too |
| 22:25 | <Hixie> | wilhelm: but i don't think those are female/male-specific |
| 22:25 | <TabAtkins> | Well, a lot fo the IT industry (like most industries, unfortunately) is very sexist. |
| 22:25 | <Hixie> | wilhelm: e.g. i find the w3c culture abominable, and i'm a guy :-P |
| 22:25 | <TabAtkins> | You see this pretty easily at conventions. |
| 22:25 | <tantek> | Hixie, cultures that tend to be against women literacy are problematic. |
| 22:27 | <wilhelm> | Hixie: I disagree. I don't have anything else than anecdotal evidence, but I've observed that in mostly male collectives, males may behave like if they were participating in a college fraternity. |
| 22:27 | <gavinc> | Mmm, how many staff contacts at W3C are women? |
| 22:27 | <Hixie> | wilhelm: if you see anything even approaching such a thing in the whatwg list, please let me know so i can stamp it out |
| 22:28 | <Hixie> | wilhelm: (i am culturally insensitive to that kind of thing) |
| 22:28 | <wilhelm> | Hixie: That's the difficult part. In formal discussions, people generally behave well. It's in the informal settings things go bad. |
| 22:29 | <Hixie> | wilhelm: well the only informal setting for the whatwg is here, really, and i'm not sure i'd say that #whatwg's culture was particularly friendly to anyone, male or female, who isn't already in the "in crowd" :-P |
| 22:30 | <wilhelm> | Indeed. I haven't observed anything particularly bad here either. (c: |
| 22:31 | <TabAtkins> | If you see anyone chanting BROS BROS BROS in a bar, go ahead and confront them there too. |
| 22:33 | <wilhelm> | You don't have to venture very far to see the bad stuff, though. I've seen this happen at Opera, at the University of Oslo and a number of other places. Heck, even the “why are there no women in this industry” discussions at Hacker News are a disgrace. |
| 22:33 | <gsnedders> | TabAtkins: Even if I do it sarcastically? |
| 22:33 | <wilhelm> | gsnedders: Actually, yes. |
| 22:34 | <Hixie> | especially so |
| 22:35 | <tantek> | gsnedders, yeah - it still creates a unfriendly environment, even as humor/sarcasm. |
| 22:35 | <tantek> | also, "being ironic" or humor is a frequent defense of that kind of sexist behavior |
| 22:36 | <wilhelm> | gsnedders: Just take a look at your mail archive! Dig up the “rape joke” thread on nonsense⊙oc That was probably intended to be ironic. It's a perfect example of the frat boy culture that plagues our industry. |
| 22:36 | <Hixie> | o_O |
| 22:36 | <wilhelm> | That's what I thought too. |
| 22:37 | <gsnedders> | I guess this is rather how I end up often being percieved as homophobic, which as plenty of people who've met me can say is laughable. |
| 22:37 | <gsnedders> | wilhelm: There's a reason I'm not subscribed to nonsense. :) |
| 22:37 | <tantek> | for more on this, here's a Google News search: https://www.google.com/search?tbm=nws&q=brogrammer |
| 22:37 | <tantek> | (and that's just recent phenomena) |
| 22:39 | <wilhelm> | It's a real pity. There's an equally large subset of the female populatuion that could be active contributors here. But they've been weeded out in cultural funnels long before they could get here. |
| 22:39 | <gsnedders> | I think certainly that plenty of people who make such jokes do so deliberately (not necessarily consciously) seeing the victimized group as "less good" in whatever way. |
| 22:39 | <TabAtkins> | gsnedders: I was your age only a few years ago, so I know how funny being sarcastically offensive is. But it's still usually offensive. :/ |
| 22:40 | <Hixie> | what's with the styles on http://dev.w3.org/csswg/selectors4/ ? they make the summary table really much harder to read on a wide monitor than is necessary |
| 22:40 | <Hixie> | or http://dev.w3.org/csswg/selectors3/ for that matter |
| 22:40 | <Hixie> | styles on http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/ don't suffer from the same problem |
| 22:40 | <TabAtkins> | Which styles? |
| 22:40 | <gsnedders> | TabAtkins: I think the other issue that a lot of people have with me is I'm often deliberately sarcastic and making jokes about really quite horrific things as a way of coping with them myself. |
| 22:40 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: seems to be forcing a column width or something |
| 22:41 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: but the forced width is narrower than the table's intrinsic width |
| 22:41 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: so it forces lots of wrapping |
| 22:41 | <wilhelm> | gsnedders: I love sarcastic jokes at the expense of victimized groups. I just try to be careful about _where_ I say those jokes out loud. |
| 22:41 | <TabAtkins> | Hixie: Interesting. |
| 22:42 | <Hixie> | (forwarding this complaint from someone who found the TR/ page version easier to read because of this) |
| 22:44 | <Hixie> | in other news, the web interface to mercurial is a disaster |
| 22:44 | <TabAtkins> | Yes. |
| 22:44 | <TabAtkins> | I have no idea how someone actually made that and thought they did a good job. |
| 22:44 | <Hixie> | can anyone work out for me what url i should go to to see the changelog for http://dev.w3.org/csswg/selectors3/ ? |
| 22:45 | <Hixie> | i've been trying for like the last 10 minutes |
| 22:45 | <Hixie> | https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/log?rev=selectors3 didn't seem to be it |
| 22:45 | <Hixie> | aha! |
| 22:45 | <Hixie> | got it |
| 22:45 | <Hixie> | https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/log/27544a0821fd/selectors3/Overview.src.html |
| 22:46 | <TabAtkins> | Yeah, that's it. |
| 22:47 | <tantek> | I agree. Mercurial web UI is a step down from the CVS one. |
| 22:47 | <tantek> | I am curious how people make these thing so much worse from one tool to the next. |
| 22:47 | <gsnedders> | Well, CVS didn't provide any UI |
| 22:47 | <tantek> | Are people really not smart enough to just copy first, invent later? |
| 22:47 | <Hixie> | gsnedders: he means cvsweb, i expect |
| 22:47 | <tantek> | gsnedders, the paths were nicer to tip |
| 22:47 | <TabAtkins> | I have no idea how I might interact with Systeam about this kind of thing. Last time we tried to make a UI improvement to something (adding line anchors for the mail archives), they balked for a long time and never actually did it. |
| 22:47 | <tantek> | Hixie, right |
| 22:48 | <TabAtkins> | tantek: The paths problem is the whole reason plinss put together his redirects. |
| 22:48 | <gsnedders> | tantek: My point is in some sense they are moving forward — just not equaling what third-party tools for CVS achieved. |
| 22:48 | <Hixie> | tantek: well the good thing about mercurial is that it's distributed, so you could do it on another server somewhere |
| 22:48 | <tantek> | TabAtkins, I've been hanging out in irc://irc.w3.org:6665/sysreq and dropping increasing difficulty requests to see what happens. |
| 22:48 | <TabAtkins> | Ah, cool. |
| 22:49 | <tantek> | using the friendliest of polite language of course :) |
| 22:50 | <tantek> | TabAtkins - it's fairly low traffic, feel free to auto-join it. |
| 22:50 | <tantek> | do you have a URL to the request for the email line anchors? |
| 22:50 | <tantek> | usually timeless is in there too and can be quite supportive and a good interpreter of how w3c's systems work |
| 22:51 | <TabAtkins> | tantek: I'd have to go look it up in the sysreq email archives. |
| 22:51 | <tantek> | yeah |
| 23:02 | <Hixie> | huh |
| 23:02 | <Hixie> | well here's an interesting question |
| 23:02 | <Hixie> | what task source should we use for the task in http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#scroll-to-fragid ? |
| 23:03 | <Hixie> | dom manipulation, i guess? |
| 23:07 | <zewt> | http://www.furnituredude.com/ i wonder if this guy hired htmldude to make his website |
| 23:09 | <tantek> | zewt - glasses houses? http://zewt.org/ |
| 23:10 | <tantek> | *glass even |
| 23:12 | <zewt> | <- not a store |
| 23:14 | <tantek> | still, you can do better than "Forbidden ¶ You don't have permission to access / on this server." certainly if you're going to pick on others' sites. |
| 23:15 | <zewt> | why? |
| 23:15 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: cvs is being particularly slow currently, fwiw |
| 23:15 | <tantek> | zewt … unless you like being an armchair critic, all talk, no code. |
| 23:16 | <TabAtkins> | tantek: Are you actually suggesting that zewt needs to provide an example of better visual design for that page before he can criticize it? |
| 23:16 | <zewt> | seriously. heh |
| 23:17 | <zewt> | (so sorry for providing passing amusement to people bored on IRC) |
| 23:19 | <tantek> | TabAtkins - no, just something better than "Forbidden ¶ You don't have permission to access / on this server." |
| 23:19 | <tantek> | and yes, a simple visual design is pretty easy, so yeah, add that too. |
| 23:19 | <TabAtkins> | tantek: His own homepage is irrelevant. (Though horrible.) But that store page is unarguably horrible as well. |
| 23:19 | <tantek> | It's ok, it's useful to distinguish talkers vs. doers. |
| 23:19 | <Hixie> | zewt.org isn't his home page, it says right there that you're not allowed to see it! |
| 23:19 | <tantek> | TabAtkins - someone's own homepage provides a good indication of self-dogfooding. |
| 23:20 | <TabAtkins> | tantek: Still irrelevant. |
| 23:20 | <Hixie> | i don't think making "access denied" messages pretty is a high priority for anyone |
| 23:20 | <zewt> | (a page with nothing on it might indicate to you that it's not a homepage; it's a server used for other purposes that doesn't serve a public webpage) |
| 23:20 | <TabAtkins> | Oh man, I never realized what the old display:compact value was supposed to do. |
| 23:21 | <tantek> | TabAtkins - that depends on whether you value self-dogfooding or not. I think self-dogfooding demonstrates both skill and commitment. |
| 23:21 | <TabAtkins> | I love the crazily underspecified stuff in CSS2. |
| 23:21 | <tantek> | and thus quite relevant. |
| 23:21 | <tantek> | TabAtkins - you wouldn't say that if you'd spent years trying to implement it. |
| 23:21 | <zewt> | ("you don't have a hobby of making pointless webpages for nobody? how dare you laugh at comically bad websites!") |
| 23:22 | <tantek> | it starts out funny and interesting sure, but after a few years, you're done. |
| 23:22 | <TabAtkins> | tantek: Oh, I'm sure. |
| 23:22 | <tantek> | it's ok zewt, Twitter is good for that too. |
| 23:23 | <tantek> | And yeah, I expect anyone who wants to speak seriously about evolving the web (as most people in #whatwg seem to be here to do) to be able to at least make a simple decent home page for themselves. If not, then yeah, it kind of undermines credibility. |
| 23:24 | <zewt> | (also, i think i make enough of a case for my own competence in here to not need to put up a content-free website to prove myself; if you disagree; oh well) |
| 23:24 | <zewt> | (comma one of those semicolons) |
| 23:25 | <Hixie> | i think one's feedback ot the list should speak for itself, you don't have to build credibility first |
| 23:25 | <Hixie> | especially since i completely ignore the source of feedback so the "credibility" part would have no effect... |
| 23:26 | <Hixie> | (case in point, before my vacation i was replying to one e-mail rejecting some guy's proposal as inane and almost sent the e-mail before i noticed i was the one who had sent the e-mail in question) |
| 23:26 | <zewt> | one's feedback to the list is what builds credibility, and that does matter for those of us with different day jobs, who have to pick and choose what we spend time on |
| 23:26 | <Hixie> | that's fair |
| 23:27 | <Hixie> | i agree that if you want to be considered by anyone other than me then it makes sense to worry about your credibility |
| 23:27 | <TabAtkins> | Hixie: Hahahahahaha |
| 23:28 | <zewt> | Hixie: it's a bit weird when I search for something, start reading a mailing list post, then go "???" about halfway through and realize it's something I wrote a decade earlier |
| 23:28 | <tantek> | Hixie - good that that method of inbox processing works for you (per the list). I've found it to be more productive to prioritize feedback from creators over talkers. I might eventually get to the talkers (people that only send messages), but then I also have other things I'd rather do with my time. |
| 23:28 | <zewt> | also, one of those most discouraging things that can happen when researching a problem--and this has happened to me more than once--is to search for it and to have the first hit be me asking about the problem |
| 23:29 | <Hixie> | tantek: to each his own method, indeed |
| 23:29 | <Hixie> | tantek: (i find that if i allow myself to dismiss feedback based on who sent it, i start dismissing feedback just because it's hard to fix, not because it's not valid) |
| 23:29 | <dcheng> | 4 |
| 23:29 | <dcheng> | Oops sorry |
| 23:29 | <zewt> | an awesome number |
| 23:30 | <tantek> | Hixie, I get more hard to fix feedback from creators that tend to be based on real world use-cases (that they ran into while creating). And again helps with prioritization, as unblocking creators helps them find more problems. Whereas who knows if theoretical hard fixes will ever block anyone. |
| 23:31 | <tantek> | Again, just a different approach to productivity and prioritization. |
| 23:31 | <zewt> | (afk) |
| 23:32 | <Hixie> | the kind of hard problem i'm talking about is something like "the entire spec's organisation makes a flawed assumption X which results in the spec being wrong in edge case Y", which i could just ignore, but not while keeping the spec in line with reality |
| 23:32 | <Hixie> | (assuming Y is something browsers can't change, however minor it is) |
| 23:32 | tantek | will keep an eye out for such problems. |
| 23:33 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: cvs seems stalled (it hasn't progressed since my last comment on the matter 18 minutes ago) |
| 23:33 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: i'm going to comment out cvs checkins for now, will try again later |
| 23:48 | <dbaron> | Hixie, if you want a permalink to the changelog, you want https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/log/tip/selectors3/Overview.src.html |
| 23:48 | <Hixie> | ah, cool |
| 23:48 | <TabAtkins> | dbaron: Is that link discoverable through the interface? |
| 23:48 | <Hixie> | is there a link to that? |
| 23:48 | <Hixie> | what tab said |
| 23:48 | <TabAtkins> | I can never seem to find the permalinks. :/ |
| 23:48 | <dbaron> | TabAtkins, afaict, no |
| 23:48 | <TabAtkins> | Awesome. |
