02:43
<kennyluck>
"Grand Unified HTML Parser"
02:44
<Hixie>
zewt: <title> is required because UIs break down if they don't have a way to refer to the page
02:47
<zewt>
"break down"?
02:47
<Hixie>
become crappy
02:47
<Hixie>
bad user experience
02:47
<zewt>
i've made plenty of test pages with no title and it works just fine
02:47
<Hixie>
our opinions on what is "just fine" are clearly quite different :-)
02:50
<zewt>
given that <title></title> appears to be legal, and that browsers treat that the same (from the user's perspective) as no title element at all, I'm not seeing the problem
02:50
<zewt>
(the URL as a default title works just fine)
03:01
<MikeSmith>
is "called getter WebElement findElement(in Locator locator)" valid WebIDL?
03:08
<Hixie>
yeah we should probably make that non-conforming
03:08
<heycam>
MikeSmith, should be "caller"
03:08
<heycam>
MikeSmith, also getters have to get either unsigned long or DOMString as their first arg
03:09
<MikeSmith>
OK
03:09
<MikeSmith>
thanks
03:09
<MikeSmith>
shouldn't be "legacycaller"?
03:09
<zewt>
(yeah, please create more bogus validator warnings)
03:29
<Hixie>
zewt: it's not bogus, having an empty <title> seems rather pointless and probably an authoring mistake
03:31
<zewt>
or "just use the URL and stop nagging me to add a pointless <title>"; the URL is just fine as a default title (and better than the "foo" I'd put in if I had to enter something to shut up the validator)
03:33
<Hixie>
URLs aren't really supposed to be user-facing, notwithstanding that they're plastered on busses and are a core part of the web's origin security model
05:40
<zcorpan>
matjas: the grunt thing sounds interesting, care to give some hints for how to set it up? (i tried reading the documentation but still didn't really know how to do it)
06:12
<MikeSmith>
heycam: "caller getter ..." thing I mentioned earlier, should be "legacycaller getter ..." instead?
06:12
<heycam>
MikeSmith, ah yep
06:12
<MikeSmith>
ok
06:33
<zcorpan>
MikeSmith: can i has a bugzilla component?
06:33
<MikeSmith>
sure
06:34
<MikeSmith>
for quirks-mode?
06:34
<zcorpan>
yep
06:43
<matjas>
zcorpan: install node, then run `npm install -g grunt`
06:44
<matjas>
zcorpan: then, in your spec dir, create a `grunt.js` file — here’s mine: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=hR6yAev7 (required running `npm install grunt-shell` in that dir first)
06:45
<matjas>
after that you can just cd into the spec dir, and enter `grunt` to watch the index.src.html file for changes and automatically regenerate index.html when needed
06:46
<zcorpan>
matjas: thanks, i'll give it a go later
07:10
<MikeSmith>
zcorpan: added https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/describecomponents.cgi?product=Web%20Platform%20%28other%29
07:12
<zcorpan>
thanks
07:34
<MikeSmith>
hey cool another ambiguously-worded unimplementable CP thanks to "amicable resolution"
07:35
<MikeSmith>
""Conformance checkers *may* use the information given on the WHATWG Wiki MetaExtensions page to establish if a value is allowed or not: values defined in this specification or marked as "proposed" or "ratified" must be accepted, whereas values marked as "discontinued" or not listed in either this specification or on the aforementioned page must be *reported* as invalid."
07:37
<MikeSmith>
so conformance checkers both must use the information on the wiki and also may use it
07:38
<MikeSmith>
oh and btw "Analogic edit has to be done in sections "4.2.5.4 Other pragma directives" and "4.12.4.14 Other link types"."
07:38
<MikeSmith>
real precision there
08:28
<matjas>
Ms2ger: how’s that patch coming along?
08:31
<matjas>
MS is currently looking into the two bug reports re: the HTML String.prototype methods \o/
08:32
<matjas>
Opera and V8 are waiting for other browsers to escape " into &quot; first
08:32
matjas
files JavaScriptCore bug
08:54
<opera>
timeless: Hmmm. Works rather well here ;_)
09:24
<zcorpan>
you can now select text in quirks mode and a link will appear to file a bug
09:26
<zcorpan>
(should be keyboard-accessible if you can select text with the keyboard; the buglink has accesskey 1)
09:27
<odinho>
zcorpan: Gotta love that, I likey :D
09:28
<zcorpan>
the script should be spec-agnostic so can be copied verbatim (but needs to be placed after the "file a bug" link to work)
09:38
<zcorpan>
(also two lines of css need to be copied)
09:49
<annevk>
MikeSmith: I sure hope Hixie stops paying attention to them
09:51
<MikeSmith>
annevk: I bet Hixie didn't even read that one
09:51
<MikeSmith>
I didn't myself until today
09:52
<MikeSmith>
that's failure point number in this scheme
09:52
<MikeSmith>
that it depends on people actually being motivated to invest time in reading totally half-baked change proposals
09:52
<annevk>
it's clear that the bureaucrats have taken over and everyone doing real work moved elsewhere
09:53
<MikeSmith>
which CPs nobody is responsible for vetting first to make sure they are sane before they are hoisted up to the whole WG
09:54
<MikeSmith>
annevk: I would at least like to get a heads-up about any CP that involves requirements for conformance checkers
09:54
<MikeSmith>
and/or Henri should
09:55
<MikeSmith>
from the title of that CP I had no idea what it was supposed to be about
09:56
<MikeSmith>
it sounded to me like another pet "I don't like the way you are handling citation style of the references section" thing
10:00
<annevk>
I wonder why the W3C is only looking for an editor for HTML
10:15
<Stevef>
putting all CP's in the crap basket and not worthy of consideration is not helpful or useful, some CPs are useful and result in changes that make HTML better me thinks...
10:22
<annevk>
I haven't seen any
10:24
<annevk>
CPs are just some layer of bureaucracy to please the insane crowd coming from WAI as far as I can tell; it's not actually helping produce a high quality specification
10:24
<Stevef>
well you and I have differing opinions on whats useful and makes HTML better, luckily neither of us has a stranglehold on what is good for the web
10:25
<annevk>
nobody does
10:25
<annevk>
but that seems besides the point
10:26
<Stevef>
annevK: yeah thanks for that mature characterization, I am one of those insane WAI people
10:26
<zcorpan>
annevk: wdyt about the file-bug script in quirks mode? something you want to adopt in your specs? if so, maybe we can rip it out and maintain it as an external script somewhere?
10:30
<annevk>
Stevef: WAI seems largely non-functional and has way too much bureaucracy; they somehow successfully ported that to the HTML WG
10:31
<annevk>
zcorpan: looks interesting yeah!
10:31
<annevk>
zcorpan: what's the status thing?
10:32
<zcorpan>
status? oh, that's just the boxes "Status: Awaiting implementation feedback. Has tests." that i maintain manually for now
10:33
<annevk>
okay
10:33
<zcorpan>
where should we put the script? should it inject the styles it needs also?
10:34
<annevk>
I think that would be nice
10:35
<annevk>
you could put it inside the quirks-mode repository I suppose
10:35
<annevk>
then I can use <script src=/hg/quirks-mode/raw-file/tip/file-bug.js> or some such
10:36
<annevk>
zcorpan: can we make it use the "file a bug" link to pick the appropriate component?
10:36
<annevk>
zcorpan: so we don't need to pass in any data specially
10:38
<zcorpan>
it uses the component from the "file a bug" link it expects to be there
10:38
<zcorpan>
good enough?
10:38
<Stevef>
annevk: the HTML WG process has nothing to do with WAI, its maciej's and sam rubys baby
10:38
<annevk>
zcorpan: ah yeah it already does
10:39
<annevk>
Stevef: only because WAI insisted on "a clear process" they could then abuse
10:40
<Stevef>
annevk: rather than the no process that whatwg could abuse
10:40
<annevk>
zcorpan: looks pretty great
10:43
<annevk>
zcorpan: could use cloneNode btw
10:44
<annevk>
Stevef: Given the number of differences between W3C HTML and WHATWG HTML I think the WHATWG worked pretty well and way faster too
10:44
<annevk>
s/worked/works/
10:48
<Stevef>
annevk: i do not disagree that the whatwg works well in some respects, but when it comes to disagreement it fails, it is not the perfect model, which is why I work within the html wg framework as stakeholders other than chosen have a voice.
10:49
<Stevef>
s/chosen/the chosen/
10:50
<annevk>
but as long as the HTML WG is ignored that hardly seems like an effective use of time
10:50
<annevk>
and the HTML WG seems even further away from "the perfect model"
10:51
<zcorpan>
annevk: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/quirks-mode/raw-file/tip/file-bug.js
10:51
<annevk>
it's sort of working now because Hixie is still cooperating to some extent
10:51
<annevk>
zcorpan: maybe advice to just put the id on the <script>?
10:53
<Stevef>
its not always ignored, just by a set of people who you deam as important, my main issues have been with author conformance stuff which is not the domain of browser implementers, if hixie chooses not to chnage the whatwg spec in that regard it is a problem but not end of the world
10:53
<Stevef>
s/chnage/change/
10:54
<annevk>
zcorpan: added to fullscreen, cool
10:54
<annevk>
zcorpan: only problem seems to be source code newlines get copied over
10:55
<Ms2ger>
timeless, another etiquette point... No "This email may contain confidential information" signatures ;)
10:56
<Ms2ger>
MikeSmith, no, it should not have either "caller" or "legacycaller"
10:57
<zcorpan>
annevk: changed to dispatch on data-no-style=""
10:58
<zcorpan>
annevk: any suggestion about source newlines?
10:58
<Stevef>
annevk: without the whatwg i would not have had the impetus or freedom within the W3C to edit the various documents I have: alt guidance/using aria in html/html acc implementation, so cheers for that!
10:58
<Ms2ger>
annevk, it's looking for an HTML *WG* editor, not an HTML editor, no?
10:58
<annevk>
zcorpan: no sorry :/
10:59
<annevk>
Ms2ger: sure, editor for the HTML spec
10:59
<jgraham>
Ms2ger: You think they're hiring an assasin?
11:00
<Ms2ger>
jgraham, why would they, they already have MikeSmith :)
11:00
<annevk>
Stevef: without the WHATWG the W3C would still be a closed shop with lots of F2F meetings and teleconferences
11:01
<Stevef>
annevk: thats what I was saying
11:01
<jgraham>
annevk: Like the CSS WG, then?
11:02
<annevk>
jgraham: well technically CSS is chartered as a public group now, but somehow they kept their Member-only list around without crackdown from above
11:03
<annevk>
Stevef: ah sorry
11:03
<jgraham>
And they mainly work by F2F meetings and teleconfs
11:04
<jgraham>
http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/opera-spdy-build/
11:05
<annevk>
jgraham: uhuh :/
11:05
<Ms2ger>
jgraham, if by "work" you mean "bikeshed the names of flexbox properties" :)
11:05
<annevk>
flexbox should have been ready a decade ago
11:05
<annevk>
but you know, resources
11:06
<jgraham>
Ms2ger: I am still in denial about that. I am working on the hypothesis that you must have been joking
11:06
<Ms2ger>
Should I point out they did another rename this week?
11:06
<jgraham>
That's the one I'm in denail about
11:06
<jgraham>
*denial
11:07
<Stevef>
annevk: I can happily edit specs/docs with the minumum of beaurocracy that sometimes challenge ideas in other specs and working groups I don't have to attend telecons unless i want to, i get support and feedback...
11:07
<jgraham>
Because that would be so stupid it would be like writing a big sign saying "Incompetent" and sticking it to your face
11:08
<Stevef>
annevk: and yes that is because the HTML WG is a less confining WG than others thanks to the WHATWG influence
11:12
<Philip`>
jgraham: And then crossing out the "Incompetent" and writing "Foolish" over it
11:13
<Philip`>
and then crossing that out too
11:28
<Ms2ger>
Looks like unprefixed gradients in Gecko are coming soon
11:30
<MikeSmith>
Ms2ger: about caller thanks yeah I think Stephen Stewart already fixed that in the place I had been asking about it, the WebDriver spec
11:31
<jgraham>
*Simon
11:31
<jgraham>
(Unless there are multiple people with very similar names working on WebDriver)
11:33
<MikeSmith>
yeah I meant Simon
11:36
<MikeSmith>
oh cool no week is complete until I get at least one e-mail message from somebody explaining to me what my job is and how to do it
11:36
<Ms2ger>
MikeSmith, assassin? :)
11:38
<MikeSmith>
Superman and Mr. Mxyzptlk
11:39
<jgraham>
Oh, there are four s's in assassin
11:39
<MikeSmith>
I guess I really shouldn't read e-mail on Friday nights
11:41
<annevk>
MikeSmith: haters gonna hate
11:41
<MikeSmith>
yeah
11:42
<MikeSmith>
I do love to get lectured though
11:43
<Ms2ger>
Don't we all?
11:43
<MikeSmith>
especially when I'm doing something that's in contrast a mundane non-Alice-through-the-looking-glass kind of thing, like, say, trying to help get errors in the WebDriver spec corrected
12:54
<matjas>
does Opera allow volunteers to access (parts of) https://bugs.opera.com/?
12:54
<jgraham>
matjas: Yes, some people who have signed NDAs
12:55
<matjas>
jgraham: where do I sign?
12:55
<timeless>
Ms2ger: yeah, so
12:55
<jgraham>
I don't know how you become such a person
12:55
<timeless>
... that is added by my corporation outside my mailer
12:55
<timeless>
... i have *zero* control over it
12:55
<jgraham>
But I think maybe Philip` has access?
12:55
<timeless>
... i used to be upset about that bit, until i discovered how it was configured
12:56
<timeless>
... and learned that it really isn't something people sending it can control
12:57
<jgraham>
matjas: Alternatively, you get bug access with an employment contract ;)
12:58
<timeless>
that's the normal way :)
13:00
<Philip`>
matjas: There's a volunteer thing where you get access to non-public pre-release builds and non-secret parts of the bug tracker
13:01
<Philip`>
(and have to sign an NDA)
13:01
<Philip`>
though nowadays it seems a lot of the pre-release builds are public anyway
13:01
<matjas>
Philip`: do want, if only to check the status of bugs i reported. who do i have to talk to?
13:02
<Philip`>
I have no idea
13:03
<Philip`>
Some Opera person invited me, back when I used to do vaguely useful stuff instead of dossing around
13:03
<matjas>
hah
13:03
<Ms2ger>
timeless, I know, but still, silly corporations :)
13:03
<Philip`>
(mainly since it was useful for Opera if I could test their pre-release builds to report bugs, I guess)
13:04
<timeless>
Ms2ger: well
13:04
<timeless>
to be fair, i don't think we add it to all employees
13:04
<timeless>
i work in the Legal division
13:04
<timeless>
it actually makes sense for them to add that disclaimer to our correspondence
13:05
<timeless>
you really don't want to let the lawyers remove or modify it
13:05
<Ms2ger>
timeless, you're a lawyer now? :)
13:05
<timeless>
no
13:06
<matjas>
I love how anyone can get the CORE-ID of any Opera bug based on its DSK-ID, even though it’s useless information unless you have access to the bug tracker
13:07
<zcorpan>
matjas: i just moved the bug, wrote a tc and assigned it
13:07
<zcorpan>
matjas: thanks for filing
13:07
<zcorpan>
with that i call it a day
13:07
<matjas>
yay \o/
13:07
<matjas>
zcorpan: DSK-369398 → CORE-47441, right?
13:08
<matjas>
:P
13:09
<odinho>
matjas: Since I love following bugsl I'm watching that one :]
13:09
<Ms2ger>
Btw, if bug access is being handed out... I'm in line too :)
13:09
<matjas>
with every Opera employee in #whatwg tracking bugs for me, it’s almost like having real bug tracker access
13:10
<matjas>
Ms2ger: how’s your patch coming along?
13:10
<odinho>
^_^
13:10
<Ms2ger>
matjas, running tests
13:10
<matjas>
Ms2ger: \o/
13:23
<annevk>
matjas: talk to andreas, he can hopefully sort you out
13:23
<Stevef>
hixie: here http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/the-canvas-element.html#hit-regions says "control (default null) An element (that is a descendant of the canvas) to which events are to be routed, and which accessibility tools are to use as a surrogate for describing and interacting with this region" The focusable elements are also interacted and can be activated by a...
13:23
<Stevef>
...keyboard user who navigates to them so doesn't seem correct to say only for 'accessibility tools'
13:24
<matjas>
annevk: thanks
13:31
<Stevef>
hixie: test and video demos of current canvas sub DOM iimplementation and how it works with keyboard here: http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2012/06/html5-canvas-accessibility-in-firefox-13/
13:44
<gsnedders>
matjas: In JIRA if you move a bug from one project to another it gets a new number. The DSK bug number becomes an alias for the CORE bug number. If you move it back to DSK, it gets another new DSK number. :)
13:46
<matjas>
gsnedders: e.g. https://bugs.opera.com/browse/DSK-369398 is kind enough to redirect to https://bugs.opera.com/browse/CORE-47441 before telling me i have no access :)
13:47
<gsnedders>
Hah, that's lovely data leakage.
15:09
<Ms2ger>
Found 99 tests
15:09
<Ms2ger>
99 Pass
15:10
<Ms2ger>
matjas, and it doesn't look like I'm failing other tests...
15:10
<matjas>
Ms2ger: \o/
15:33
<odinho>
Ms2ger: What tests are you using?
15:33
<Ms2ger>
http://mathias.html5.org/tests/javascript/string/
15:33
<odinho>
matjas: I've made a patch for it in Opera :-) But I need to learn all that review stuff etc etc etc. It'll take some time.
15:35
<odinho>
Oh, that's not the ones I was looking for. I was looking for the v\u061r stuff.
15:37
<Ms2ger>
matjas, you should check those tests into hg, btw
15:52
<odinho>
matjas: You should update your v\u0061r test in http://mathias.html5.org/tests/javascript/identifiers/
15:55
<matjas>
odinho: done
18:15
<Yuhong>
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3945953
18:26
<zcorpan>
Yuhong: was there something specific in quirks mode that should be changed/corrected?
18:26
<Yuhong>
No, just an editorial change to the spec.
18:27
<Yuhong>
To explain why there is a need for a quirks mode "standard".
18:27
<zcorpan>
what do you suggest?
18:27
<Yuhong>
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/almost-precedent/
18:28
<zcorpan>
do you suggest i put that in the spec verbatim?
18:28
<Yuhong>
Not the entire thing.
18:28
<Yuhong>
"Mode Switches are a Product of Their Time" is the section I am thinking of.
18:29
<zcorpan>
hmm, gotta go, but please elaborate in a bug report, thanks!
18:30
<Yuhong>
Perhaps with some changes.
18:59
<matjas>
I’ve wondered why hsivonen’s site loads 5 MB of fonts for ages now
23:12
<zewt>
apparently firefox used to have an option to not allow target=_blank, and now it's hidden; why do I have to jump through hoops to get things that should be the default :(
23:12
<zewt>
might not really be doing the old thing, either
23:14
<zewt>
ah, got it--browser.link.open_newwindow 1, browser.link.open_newwindow.override.external 3