| 00:04 | <nattokirai> | heycam: ping |
| 00:05 | <heycam> | nattokirai, pong |
| 01:02 | <crocket> | Does mozilla developer network provide proper learning materials for HTML, CSS, and javscript? |
| 01:02 | <crocket> | w3schools is said to suck. |
| 01:03 | <zewt> | w3schools was the first site i blocked on google as soon as google grew that feature |
| 01:03 | <zewt> | can't speak for learning materials but mdn is usually okay as a reference |
| 01:04 | <MikeSmith> | MDN has some how-to docs as well |
| 01:04 | <MikeSmith> | gimme a minute |
| 01:05 | <MikeSmith> | MDN JavaScript Guide: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/JavaScript/Guide |
| 01:05 | <crocket> | MDN seems to contain firefox-specific extensions. |
| 01:05 | <zewt> | (browsing mdn tends to not be so good, feels like a bunch of isolated pages connected by huge indexes, but fine for individual things reached through goog) |
| 01:06 | <MikeSmith> | crocket: yeah it has some things like that but generally they're clearly marked |
| 01:07 | <MikeSmith> | and it now includes a lot of information about things like implementation status in all major browsers |
| 01:07 | <MikeSmith> | not just Firefox |
| 01:08 | <MikeSmith> | the other thing is, for pretty much every bug that gets created for implementing a new standards feature, a "needs docs" flag gets added to the bug |
| 01:08 | <crocket> | Does <body> have border property? |
| 01:09 | <zewt> | quickest way to answer questions like that is to try it :) |
| 01:10 | <zewt> | (randomly makes me think back on something I hit a few months ago, trying to have a width: 100%; height: 100%; border: 1px whatever; body and hitting the "100% + 2px" problem; guess I should revisit that using box-sizing) |
| 01:10 | <MikeSmith> | crocket: what zewt said |
| 01:11 | <zewt> | (technically I said one relevant thing and one rambling, obscure thing; go with the first) |
| 01:11 | <MikeSmith> | open up Firebug or Web Inspector on any page, go in and add a "body { border: 5px solid green}" CSS rule |
| 01:11 | <MikeSmith> | and see what happens |
| 01:12 | <crocket> | meh |
| 01:13 | <MikeSmith> | anyway, the Mozilla docs team goes in and adds docs to MDN for all new standards feature every time any new feature is implemented in Firefox |
| 01:13 | <zewt> | if you're not willing to try things out for yourself, you'll have difficulty in any platform :) |
| 01:13 | <crocket> | zewt, I'll try |
| 01:13 | <MikeSmith> | MDN CSS guide: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/CSS/Getting_Started |
| 01:14 | <MikeSmith> | or https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/CSS is better |
| 01:14 | <MikeSmith> | bunch of tutorial docs linked to there |
| 01:22 | <MikeSmith> | crocket: you can also use http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/#validate_by_input to test whether a particular CSS is valid or not |
| 01:23 | <crocket> | MikeSmith, ok |
| 02:00 | <crocket> | How do I use "inspect element" feature in firefox to modify CSS? |
| 02:00 | <crocket> | I tried, but it doesn't work. |
| 02:07 | <crocket> | What tag do I use to specify properties of a part of a sentence? |
| 02:07 | <crocket> | <span.? |
| 02:08 | <crocket> | <span>? |
| 02:25 | <Oliver_> | Hello everyone! |
| 02:39 | <divya> | care to explain what "properties" mean crocket ? |
| 02:39 | <crocket> | divya, font-size |
| 02:39 | <crocket> | font-weight |
| 02:40 | <crocket> | such things |
| 02:40 | <divya> | ya span would do |
| 02:40 | <crocket> | divya, But span looks dirty. |
| 02:40 | <divya> | o? |
| 02:40 | <crocket> | Do I have a neater way? |
| 02:40 | <divya> | use <u>, <i> or <b>? but they all ahve default properties set |
| 02:48 | <crocket> | divya, how about <div>? |
| 02:48 | <divya> | wat no |
| 02:48 | <crocket> | divya, why not? |
| 02:48 | <divya> | because it is for a division |
| 02:48 | <divya> | a block level alteration |
| 02:48 | <divya> | not for inline content |
| 02:48 | <crocket> | divya, I don't know what it means yet. |
| 02:48 | <divya> | then checkout MDN |
| 02:49 | <crocket> | divya, What do <h1>, <h2>, ... mean? |
| 02:49 | <crocket> | I don't understand the meaning of numbers. |
| 02:49 | <divya> | go to MDN that MikeSmith linked to |
| 02:49 | <divya> | and read up on html page. |
| 08:41 | <annevk> | cpearce: I was indeed |
| 08:43 | <cpearce> | annevk: yeah, I was going to ask whether object-fit:contain on the :fullscreen style is supposed to only apply to <img> elements which are fullscreen? |
| 08:45 | <cpearce> | object-fit is only mentioned here: http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/#object-fit which implies it's image only, I just wanted to check, |
| 08:46 | <cpearce> | since we've had a few bugs filed against gecko recently regarding scrolling fullscreen content, and that's relevant here. |
| 08:55 | <annevk> | also for <video> and such |
| 08:55 | <annevk> | especially video |
| 08:59 | <odinho> | annevk: XHR testsuite: He updated it a bit, but yeah, nothing great. He wrote a few extra tests. And found a few bugs that he wrote in a document. |
| 09:00 | <Ms2ger> | Hey, a few is better than none |
| 09:03 | <annevk> | odinho: spec bugs? |
| 09:03 | <odinho> | annevk: testsuite bugs :P And browser ofc bugs. |
| 09:03 | <annevk> | ah good |
| 09:47 | <Ms2ger> | c = new(window.ActiveXObject || XMLHttpRequest)("Microsoft.XMLHTTP") |
| 10:52 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: so that fails in everything but IE? |
| 10:53 | <Ms2ger> | Nah, extra arguments are ignored |
| 10:53 | <Ms2ger> | Only we have a dictionary argument in that spot |
| 10:53 | <annevk> | right |
| 10:53 | <annevk> | and we wanted to maybe change the whole AnonXMLHttpRequest design to use that dictionary instead |
| 10:54 | <Ms2ger> | Yeah |
| 10:54 | <annevk> | I guess someone will keep me posted |
| 10:54 | <annevk> | is anyone else going to maintain XHR or should we WHATWG that too? |
| 10:55 | <Ms2ger> | I guess |
| 10:56 | <annevk> | that could apply to either option :p |
| 10:57 | <Ms2ger> | No idea who would maintain it at the W3C |
| 10:57 | <Ms2ger> | darobin? |
| 10:58 | <darobin> | no idea either |
| 10:58 | <darobin> | annevk: I presume you haven't heard back on your post? |
| 10:58 | <annevk> | nope |
| 10:58 | <darobin> | let me figure this one out |
| 10:59 | <annevk> | in 2006 or so timbl told rigo to make it happen, instead of being a lawyer and doing as told, rigo objected and nothing happened |
| 10:59 | <annevk> | it prolly then escalated at some point within the Team |
| 11:00 | <annevk> | and the Team being lame instead of making a decision they put it forward to the AC |
| 11:00 | <annevk> | which is where all good ideas go to die |
| 11:00 | <annevk> | 400 people are not going to embrace change |
| 11:01 | <darobin> | that's not exactly what happened, but I can't say I disagree with the sentiment |
| 11:31 | <MikeSmith> | there were actually only 24 AC reps who responded to the survey about the document license |
| 11:31 | <MikeSmith> | out of 350-400 or so AC reps |
| 11:31 | <MikeSmith> | so it's hardly like there was even a resounding mandate on it from the AC |
| 11:33 | <MikeSmith> | all that the survey really indicated is that we had 300+ other AC reps who didn't feel strongly enough about it either way to take the time to respond with their opinions |
| 11:34 | <odinho> | Oh, that doesn't sound very good. |
| 11:36 | <MikeSmith> | hmm |
| 11:37 | <darobin> | more importantly, the question was IMHO phrased completely wrong |
| 11:38 | <MikeSmith> | I guess I shouldn't say anything more |
| 11:38 | <darobin> | it was put forth as a possible exemption granted only to the HTML WG, which is silly because there's no reason any group should have an exemption, and it's a political hot button to boot |
| 11:39 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 11:39 | <darobin> | IMHO, and like Mike I don't want to speak out too much on this just yet, it should be up to individual groups to select which licence to use |
| 11:39 | <darobin> | groups do the work, they have the stakeholders, they should make the call |
| 11:39 | <MikeSmith> | 100% agreed about that personally |
| 11:40 | <MikeSmith> | and within groups, editors do the hands-on editing work |
| 11:40 | <MikeSmith> | anyway I'm realizing now I can't remember how much of the details are still secret |
| 11:41 | <darobin> | the number of respondents probably was :-p |
| 11:41 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 11:41 | <darobin> | the rest I already knew, so it probably wasn't |
| 11:44 | <MikeSmith> | anyway I'm not sure about that number |
| 11:44 | <MikeSmith> | I could be plain wrong and thinking about something else |
| 11:45 | <MikeSmith> | and I can't document it so doesn't matter anyway |
| 11:45 | <MikeSmith> | people shouldn't listen to what I say |
| 11:46 | <Ms2ger> | Yay W3C: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2012JulSep/0264.html |
| 11:47 | <annevk> | I wanted to click on that, but then realized I no longer can :/ |
| 11:50 | <Ms2ger> | You're not missing much |
| 11:54 | <jgraham> | Ms2ger: I think what you meant to say was "Oh well then you missed out on life-changing information" |
| 11:54 | <jgraham> | But with more commas |
| 11:58 | <Ms2ger> | Well, I can't tell him what you get when you dereference that eleph^WIRI, so we'll never know if it would have been life-changing |
| 12:47 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: you around still? |
| 12:47 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 12:47 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: what are you going to cover next week? |
| 12:47 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: and are we going to prepare in one way or another together? |
| 12:48 | <MikeSmith> | in part I'm going to talk about recent HTML WG developments, so we're definitely not going to have overlap there |
| 12:49 | <MikeSmith> | but we should get together to compare notes |
| 12:49 | <MikeSmith> | I'm otherwise planning to talk about new features at a pretty high level |
| 12:49 | <darobin> | maybe it would be more entertaining if you let annevk cover the HTML WG instead |
| 12:49 | <MikeSmith> | and implementation status |
| 12:50 | <MikeSmith> | heh |
| 12:50 | <MikeSmith> | yeah that would definitely be entertaining |
| 12:50 | <MikeSmith> | I'm going to work from the list of specs at http://platform.html5.org/specs/a |
| 12:50 | <MikeSmith> | http://platform.html5.org/specs/ |
| 12:50 | <MikeSmith> | and http://platform.html5.org/ |
| 12:51 | <annevk> | okay |
| 12:51 | <MikeSmith> | and http://www.w3.org/Mobile/mobile-web-app-state/ too probably |
| 12:52 | <MikeSmith> | maybe also talk about http://ringmark.io/ |
| 12:52 | <Ms2ger> | Hah |
| 12:52 | <annevk> | sounds good |
| 12:52 | <annevk> | maybe I'll do my code point / byte talk for something a little bit more low level |
| 12:52 | darobin | isn't sure he'd cover RingMark, it's not really finalised atm IMHO |
| 12:53 | <jgraham> | I wouldn't say anything nice about RingMark at least :) |
| 12:56 | <jgraham> | I guess I should qualify that with in-principle I have no problem with the idea of a graded set of targets for browsers to implement based on developer priorities |
| 12:56 | <jgraham> | But the reality of ringmark is highly non-ideal |
| 13:01 | <tantek> | indeed, last I checked the ringmark folks were including all kinds of "-webkit-" properties as part of their "platform/standard" |
| 13:06 | darobin | is now out of CoreMob, won't comment :) |
| 14:38 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: when are you in the Netherlands? |
| 14:39 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: middle of next week? |
| 14:49 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: arriving on the 13th at around 8pm |
| 14:49 | <annevk> | ah okay, so quite late :) |
| 14:49 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 15:31 | <dglazkov> | good morning, Whatwg! |
| 15:44 | <Hixie> | lol, the only thing that has happened in the last 5 days on the w3c html wg specs is that they've removed the form for sending feedback and removed links to the whatwg |
| 15:44 | <Ms2ger> | They hadn't done that yet? |
| 15:45 | <Hixie> | seems not |
| 15:46 | <annevk> | I have the feeling that's about the same that happened to the CSSOM in the last, well, I stopped counting |
| 15:48 | <annevk> | the way the CSS WG uses version control these days makes it hard to view progress for a single spec |
| 15:48 | <annevk> | or maybe there is a way that I don't know |
| 15:48 | <Ms2ger> | I love how Bert always has four commits per change |
| 15:49 | <annevk> | maybe http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/log/tip/cssom/Overview.html |
| 15:50 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: is http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Jul/0014.html being tracked? it doesn't look like it got a formal reply |
| 15:51 | <annevk> | doesn't look like much happened |
| 15:51 | <annevk> | just some moving things around |
| 16:00 | <Ms2ger> | Adam Sobieski? I think I've seen that name before... |
| 16:02 | <Hixie> | does _anyone_ implement the dnd addElement() properly? |
| 16:03 | <Ms2ger> | I doubt it |
| 16:03 | <Ms2ger> | It's dnd |
| 16:04 | <TabAtkins> | Hixie: I don't remember seeing this! It looks like his use-cases are all addressed by :user-error now (the official name for :moz-ui-invalid). |
| 16:09 | <jwalden> | given the dnd spec is so wrong, it's not a surprise implementations are wrong</troll> |
| 16:09 | <jwalden> | :-) |
| 16:10 | <jgraham> | Hixie: Got a test? |
| 16:21 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: k, thanks |
| 16:21 | <Hixie> | jwalden: it's not wrong :-P |
| 16:21 | <Hixie> | jgraham: live dom viewer download |
| 16:21 | <jwalden> | success troll! |
| 16:22 | <Hixie> | looks like the browsers that support addElement() just treat it like setDragImage(), and they allow any element to be passed to setDragImage() |
| 16:23 | <Hixie> | i wonder if a should just remove addElement(), or leave it as an alias to setDragImage() |
| 16:24 | <Hixie> | webkit doesn't have addElement() |
| 16:25 | <Hixie> | (which is weird because i could have sworn it webkit documentation that i got it from) |
| 16:25 | <Hixie> | firefox treats it as setDragImage() without coordinates |
| 16:25 | <Hixie> | opera doesn't do anything with it but seems to not fire an error message |
| 16:28 | <Hixie> | i'm just gonna drop it |
| 17:24 | <miketaylr> | are we going to get something like srcList (DOMTokenList) for srcset? slicing up strings by hand doesn't sound fun |
| 17:30 | <Hixie> | miketaylr: i've been asking people on whatwg@ for use cases for script manipulation |
| 17:30 | <Hixie> | miketaylr: so far nobody has described anything concrete |
| 17:31 | <Hixie> | miketaylr: when they do, i'll try to design an api that makes sense for it |
| 17:31 | <miketaylr> | fair enough |
| 17:32 | <miketaylr> | Hixie: fwiw, i don't have one either. |
| 17:32 | <Hixie> | yeah, i couldn't come up with one either, even a theoretical oe |
| 17:32 | <Hixie> | constructing it, sure |
| 17:32 | <Hixie> | but reading it? |
| 17:32 | <Hixie> | someone suggested it would be good to have a way to force a specific one to be selected |
| 17:33 | <Hixie> | but again, that seems easier to do by just constructing a srcset with only the value you want |
| 17:33 | <Hixie> | that to use an api |
| 17:33 | <miketaylr> | my use case: if any of the filenames have the string "dog" in them, change them to a cat picture. |
| 17:33 | <miketaylr> | nailed it. |
| 17:33 | <Hixie> | you can do that today without any more of an api that .srcset :-) |
| 17:33 | <miketaylr> | heh |
| 17:33 | <Hixie> | .srcset.replace() or whatever the right regexp is |
| 17:36 | <miketaylr> | guess we can wait for srcsetQuery to pave some cowpaths |
| 17:41 | <Hixie> | annevk, Ms2ger: so for seamless="" we need to fire events (e.g. mouse and key events, focus events) across the iframe boundary so that the outer page doesn't miss events |
| 17:42 | <Hixie> | annevk, Ms2ger: e.g. if the user has focus in a seamless iframe but presses an accesskey="" key or onkeypress="" key set up in the outer frame |
| 17:42 | <Hixie> | annevk, Ms2ger: or if the user has a dialog and drags it across the inner iframe, so that the page doesn't lose track of where the mouse is during the drag |
| 17:43 | <Hixie> | annevk, Ms2ger: this seems like it'd require pretty invasive changes to the event model, is it something you want to do instead of having me try to patch it in the html spec? |
| 17:43 | <Hixie> | annevk, Ms2ger: (i can provide a link to feedback on the topic if you're interested) |
| 17:44 | <annevk> | you can't just dispatch the events again? |
| 17:45 | <Hixie> | no, because you want the capture phase on the outer frame to happen before the inner frame |
| 17:45 | <Hixie> | and stopPropagation has to work across both events |
| 17:45 | <Hixie> | and they have to be different Event objects |
| 17:45 | <Hixie> | and mouse event coordinates need to be adjusted |
| 17:45 | <Ms2ger> | Can you just mess with the propagation chain? |
| 17:45 | <Hixie> | and it has to work at multiple levels |
| 17:46 | <Hixie> | (consider multiple nested iframes) |
| 17:46 | <Ms2ger> | Oh, hmm, adjusting coordinates sounds like fun |
| 17:46 | <annevk> | hmm, sounds like something for HTML to define as DOM does not know about Window |
| 17:46 | <Hixie> | and also this might end up being a very similar system as for web components |
| 17:46 | <annevk> | alternatively, you could merge all of DOM into HTML and maintain both ;) |
| 17:46 | <Hixie> | you guys keep taking stuff out, it's too late to give it back :-P |
| 17:47 | <Hixie> | is there some way you guys could spec all that but just provide a hook for me to say what the objects are that should get the events fired on and stuff? so you don't have to know about Window/iframe/seamless? |
| 17:48 | <Hixie> | that seems like it'd be the best solution |
| 17:48 | <annevk> | 1) DOM does not have mouse events |
| 17:48 | <Hixie> | well, nothing has mouse events currently |
| 17:49 | <Hixie> | not properly specced, anyway |
| 17:49 | <annevk> | yeah :/ |
| 17:49 | <annevk> | definitely not signing up for that at this point though |
| 17:51 | <Ms2ger> | Hey, you'll get mouseevents.spec.whatwg.org if you do! |
| 17:52 | <annevk> | teehee, more domain names |
| 17:52 | <annevk> | Hixie: not exactly sure what you'd want DOM to define |
| 17:52 | <annevk> | Hixie: some kind of pausing in dispatch and a more global stop propagation flag? |
| 17:53 | <annevk> | Hixie: some kind of bug report with the details and the link to the use case is prolly best, can't really give an ETA |
| 17:54 | <Hixie> | basically a way to say "when an event is dispatched in this browsing context, the following tree of trees is to be used as the chain: ..." and then you deal with all the cloning events, checking dispatch cancelation and so on, and have a hook for when the event is retargetted so that event definitions can say what happens to their values and stuff |
| 17:54 | <Hixie> | k |
| 18:07 | <Hixie> | anne: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18780 |
| 18:13 | <smaug____> | Hixie: I thought event re-targeting was discarded |
| 18:13 | <smaug____> | (for seamless) |
| 18:16 | <smaug____> | that is at least who I interpret the email thread about it |
| 18:16 | smaug____ | comments on the bug |
| 18:27 | <dsheets> | wow… ms on public-fx… wow... |
| 18:28 | <jamesr> | they're in the CSS WG and that is a joint deliverable between CSS and SVG |
| 18:30 | <dsheets> | not their membership… their approach |
| 18:31 | <dsheets> | doesn't seem very savvy |
| 18:39 | <Hixie> | smaug____: what part of the thread suggested it was discarded? |
| 18:39 | <Hixie> | smaug____: i don't see anything to suggest that, but maybe i missed something |
| 18:39 | <smaug____> | Hixie: I sent email explaining the problems |
| 18:39 | <Hixie> | url? |
| 18:39 | <smaug____> | and dglazkov said "We should probably recreate an event object at each seamless frame boundary." |
| 18:40 | <Hixie> | right |
| 18:40 | <Hixie> | retargetting always involves new objects |
| 18:40 | <Hixie> | you can't reuse the objects |
| 18:40 | <smaug____> | no |
| 18:40 | <smaug____> | retargeting is retargeting |
| 18:41 | <Hixie> | ok well call it whatever you want :-) |
| 18:41 | <smaug____> | but ok, perhaps we do agree what should be done :) |
| 18:41 | <Hixie> | i'm talking about dispatching events at multiple scopes, with new objects at each level |
| 18:41 | <Hixie> | same as xbl |
| 18:41 | <smaug____> | right |
| 18:41 | <smaug____> | well, not same as xbl1 |
| 18:42 | smaug____ | doesn't remember what shadow DOM does |
| 18:42 | <smaug____> | Shadow DOM: "In the cases where events cross the shadow boundaries, the event's information about the target of the event is adjusted in order to maintain upper boundary encapsulation." |
| 18:43 | <smaug____> | so it is closer to XBL1 |
| 19:46 | <Hixie> | heycam|away: yt? |
| 20:07 | <deane> | Hixie: He's probably not there as it was only 07:49 here. Not sure when he would start work. |
| 21:14 | <jkew> | Mildly dumb question; is there an xml namespace for microdata? Is it considered harmful? |
| 21:18 | <gavinc> | jkew: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-microdata-rdf-20120112/ may help you, or make you more confused |
| 21:18 | <gavinc> | see http://www.w3.org/ns/md# it's not an XML namespace, but it is a well known URI |
| 21:19 | <gavinc> | err, should have been http://www.w3.org/TR/microdata-rdf/ |
| 21:19 | <gavinc> | sorry |
| 23:02 | <heycam> | hi Hixie |
| 23:07 | <Hixie> | heycam: we have a weird situation with HTMLCollection and its descendants, where they introduce operations that have the same name as in HTMLCollection, with different behaviour |
| 23:07 | <Hixie> | heycam: how this works in practice probably needs to be tested |
| 23:07 | <heycam> | hmm yes I remember there was a bug on this |
| 23:07 | <Hixie> | i looked but couldn't find it |
| 23:08 | <heycam> | I remember replying on it just recently… because you asked for some IDL way to say "override" |
| 23:08 | <heycam> | https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17201 |
| 23:08 | <Hixie> | aha, wasn't in webidl :-) |
| 23:09 | <Hixie> | ah, i see your comment |
| 23:09 | <Hixie> | the answer to all those questions is "i've no idea" |
| 23:09 | <Hixie> | :-) |
| 23:09 | <heycam> | ha |
| 23:12 | <heycam> | ignoring what happens in practice, it would be good if calling HTMLCollection's namedItem on an HTMLPropertiesCollection object does something consistent with the definition from HTMLCollection |
| 23:13 | <Hixie> | i would suspect that the answer is entirely constrained by legacy |
| 23:13 | <heycam> | might be, but HTMLPropertiesCollection isn't that new. I guess maybe for the other descendents of HTMLCollection? |
| 23:13 | <heycam> | er, isn't that old |
| 23:14 | <Hixie> | HTMLPropertiesCollection should just be consistent with the others, yeah |
| 23:18 | <heycam> | Hixie, in the green author box for HTMLOptionsCollection it says "element = collection.item(name)". is that right? |
| 23:18 | <Hixie> | yeah, there's a legacycaller in the idl |
| 23:19 | <heycam> | but "item"? |
| 23:19 | <Hixie> | oh, right. yeah, i just filed a bug on DOM Core for that. |
| 23:19 | <Hixie> | turns out all browsers support it. |
| 23:20 | <heycam> | so item takes integers and names |
| 23:20 | <Hixie> | https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18784 |
| 23:37 | <zewt> | drawing a blank here--is there a term for a node relationship on a rooted tree, where the path from node A to B starts by going to the parent |
| 23:37 | <zewt> | i guess "nodes that aren't descendants of the current node" is closer |
| 23:38 | <say2joe> | siblings? |
| 23:38 | <zewt> | that's just other children of your parent |
| 23:39 | <say2joe> | not sure i understand what you mean. |
| 23:39 | <zewt> | parents; grandparents; siblings; aunts, uncles; anything that you'd go up to your parent to reach, rather than down to a child |
| 23:39 | <say2joe> | i can only think of ancestors or siblings as fitting your question as an answer |
| 23:39 | <zewt> | i think simply "not a descendant" is good enough |
| 23:40 | <say2joe> | ancestor |
| 23:40 | <dsheets> | and not self |
| 23:40 | <zewt> | (not a descendant nor yourself) |
| 23:40 | <say2joe> | but ancestors does not cover lateral nodes (aunt, uncles, etc). |
| 23:40 | <zewt> | siblings aren't ancestors :) |
| 23:41 | <say2joe> | i think you're right… not a descendent. |
| 23:41 | <astearns> | parents, grandparents but not great-grandparents? or great-uncles? |
| 23:42 | <heycam> | and n-th cousins m-times removed |
| 23:58 | <zewt> | laughing at my desk at someone calling { image: 'img2.jpg', density: '2x', query: '300w' } "fractal complexity" |
| 23:59 | <say2joe> | hmmm. last i checked… that's just adaptive images in light of RWD |
| 23:59 | <say2joe> | i'd be laughing too. |