| 03:26 | <alix88> | Are there any WebVTT people in here? |
| 03:30 | <alix88> | This room is sure lively. |
| 03:30 | <alix88> | I'm looking for anybody who might be familiar with cue settings in the WebVTT spec |
| 03:38 | <alix88_> | .. |
| 03:44 | <alix88> | ERMEGERD |
| 03:46 | <celtboy> | WERB STERNDERDS |
| 03:46 | <celtboy> | Was someone wanting to discuss VTT? |
| 03:46 | <alix88> | That was me. Know much about it? |
| 03:50 | <alix88> | Guess this isn't the place to discuss w3 specs :) Goodnight, room full of silent people. |
| 08:14 | <zcorpan> | wow alix88 can't have heard of this thing called time zones |
| 08:14 | <zcorpan> | but maybe i should have popped in here when my daughter waked me up... |
| 08:16 | <zcorpan> | alix88: if you're reading logs, then, next time, just ask you question, and maybe somebody can answer it later |
| 08:21 | <krijnh> | Tee hee |
| 09:42 | <smaug____> | hsivonen: welcome back |
| 09:44 | <annevk> | so the new Maps.app is terrible, but the new Phone.app lets me call again |
| 09:44 | <annevk> | working Phone.app prolly beats Maps.app |
| 09:45 | <annevk> | krijn: teehee indeed |
| 09:51 | <jgraham> | annevk: My 200SEK Nokia thing lets me make calls, so it seems to me that if you are paying 6000+SEK then that's 5800SEK's for broken mapping |
| 09:52 | <jgraham> | s/SEK's/SEK/ |
| 09:52 | <annevk> | jgraham: if it only were that simple :) |
| 09:53 | <zcorpan> | 5800 for broken Maps.app |
| 09:53 | <zcorpan> | sounds like a fair deal :-) |
| 10:22 | <hsivonen> | smaug____: thanks |
| 11:30 | <annevk> | Does http://url.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-url-parse look comprehensible enough? |
| 11:31 | <annevk> | It's quite a bit of work to write it all out, so I rather not complete it only to hear it has to be redone |
| 11:40 | <annevk> | Ah, no feedbac? |
| 11:46 | <odinho> | annevk: Well, it takes time to read and understand, -- but that's just because that's how it is. I understand what's happening if that was the question. |
| 11:47 | <annevk> | sounds good enough to me :) |
| 11:47 | <annevk> | and yeah, URLs are annoying :) |
| 11:49 | <Ms2ger> | Maybe a list of the possible states would be useful? |
| 11:59 | <annevk> | yeah maybe, lets first write the whole thing down |
| 12:00 | <annevk> | then fix a few small things and then maybe start raising some questions as to how people want various interop issues resolved |
| 12:10 | <zcorpan> | annevk: do you generate the spec from the javascript impl? |
| 12:10 | <annevk> | nah |
| 12:11 | <annevk> | it's only a couple of hours to write it out, figuring out the conversion code would be more and it would not be good or readable anyway |
| 12:12 | <annevk> | but it's written based on the JavaScript impl |
| 12:13 | <zcorpan> | annevk: would be good if it said at the top what the algorithm can return (or what it does) |
| 12:14 | <zcorpan> | annevk: e.g. i expected it to return an error instead of just aborting in step 3 in scheme start |
| 12:15 | <annevk> | you can only get in step 3 if you set .protocol |
| 12:15 | <annevk> | override stuff is like innerHTML madness in the HTML parser |
| 12:16 | <annevk> | but yeah, some notes should be added in due course |
| 12:16 | <annevk> | forks encouraged :) |
| 12:19 | <zcorpan> | yay https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=744907 |
| 12:22 | <zcorpan> | annevk: should it be possible to pass in a URL object as baseUrl? |
| 12:23 | <annevk> | I'd rather not do that |
| 12:24 | <zcorpan> | why not? |
| 12:24 | <zcorpan> | what happens if the base url is invalid? |
| 12:24 | <annevk> | we can make it work, but URL objects can be manipulated in weird ways and the parser would then have to account for that |
| 12:24 | Ms2ger | wonders why this Zynga guy sends email in euc-kr |
| 12:24 | <annevk> | good question |
| 12:24 | <annevk> | zcorpan: should maybe throw for that case |
| 12:25 | <annevk> | zcorpan: also if the base URL hierarchical flag is not set, both are kinda useless |
| 12:25 | <annevk> | zcorpan: I'll add an XXX |
| 12:25 | <zcorpan> | if i have a URL and want to resolve something against it, it seems silly to have to serialize it for it to work |
| 12:26 | <marcosc_> | Anyone here interested in the responsive images stuff? |
| 12:26 | <Ms2ger> | No |
| 12:26 | <marcosc_> | :) |
| 12:26 | <annevk> | zcorpan: e.g. consider if you have a URL and then set its protocol to data |
| 12:27 | <annevk> | zcorpan: it's still a "hierarchical" URL because browsers do weird stuff |
| 12:27 | <annevk> | not sure what result you want out of that |
| 12:27 | <annevk> | I mean if you come with a proposal that solves all the weird shit, mkay |
| 12:32 | <zcorpan> | annevk: can you give a list of weird states i need to cover? |
| 12:33 | <annevk> | prolly once I have looked at it in more detail |
| 12:33 | <annevk> | what we could do btw |
| 12:33 | <annevk> | is that if you pass a URL object in |
| 12:33 | <annevk> | we just parse its URL.href again |
| 12:33 | <annevk> | and if that fails, you fucked up |
| 12:33 | <zcorpan> | annevk: tentatively i'd just check for the weird states and throw INVALID_STATE_ERR |
| 12:34 | <zcorpan> | or have a flag "weird state" that gets set when the url is mutated in weird ways, or whatever |
| 12:36 | <zcorpan> | i guess parsing URL.href could be black-box equivalent |
| 12:36 | <annevk> | it better be :) |
| 13:11 | <annevk> | Anyone know if it's normal for GitHub to lag behind? |
| 13:11 | <annevk> | Something I committed has not shown up on the site thus far... |
| 13:12 | <Ms2ger> | Hmm, https://github.com/whatwg suddenly looks rather different |
| 13:13 | <annevk> | today's redesign I guess |
| 13:13 | <annevk> | but I'm more worried about the syncing |
| 13:14 | <jgraham> | Doesn't sound that normal |
| 13:14 | <jgraham> | Did you check if it is actually in the repo? |
| 13:18 | <annevk> | it seems to be in now |
| 13:19 | <annevk> | but that was at least a delay of several minutes |
| 13:40 | <annevk> | and again |
| 13:40 | <annevk> | committed 3:40 |
| 13:40 | <annevk> | lets see when it shows up |
| 13:56 | <annevk> | still not |
| 14:03 | <annevk> | now it is |
| 14:03 | <annevk> | so that's about 20 minutes |
| 14:03 | <annevk> | zcorpan: added the URL argument thingie: http://url.spec.whatwg.org/#api |
| 14:03 | <odinho> | maybe they're going freemium on the time. |
| 14:03 | <annevk> | zcorpan: haven't actually fixed the bugs it might cause |
| 14:04 | <annevk> | I wanted to expose invalid URLs |
| 14:04 | <annevk> | should I make that URLUtils.isInvalid? |
| 14:04 | <odinho> | Hmm. Just did a small private OTW. Opera is the only one having spaces in its Accept header... |
| 14:10 | <annevk> | they haven't fixed that yet? |
| 14:10 | <annevk> | ideally Accept is just nuked |
| 14:10 | <annevk> | but that's a compat issue |
| 14:13 | <odinho> | annevk: I might just do a troll patch for it. Saw the bug now. Really need those spaces out. I just had to fix a compat issue with a website because we have spaces. |
| 14:14 | <annevk> | ideally you also write that down somewhere |
| 14:15 | <annevk> | odinho: add it to http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HTTP_Issues please |
| 14:15 | <annevk> | should maybe rename that page to HTTP to make it easier to find |
| 14:16 | <odinho> | annevk: I haz no user. |
| 14:16 | <annevk> | email? |
| 14:16 | <odinho> | annevk: the obvious one I guess :] |
| 14:21 | <zcorpan> | ilovespicegirls⊙hc ? |
| 14:21 | <Ms2ger> | I thought that was you, zcorpan? |
| 14:21 | <zcorpan> | wait, maybe that was lachy |
| 14:21 | <annevk> | odinho: moved it to HTTP |
| 14:22 | <annevk> | wait, I've not been chatting with a girl all this time? |
| 14:22 | <Ms2ger> | That's what I thought when I heard "Anne" |
| 14:23 | <annevk> | Belgians |
| 14:23 | <zcorpan> | Ms2ger though is clearly a girl |
| 14:23 | <annevk> | or an unproductive robot |
| 14:23 | <Ms2ger> | You saw through the "Ms."? |
| 14:23 | <zcorpan> | yep |
| 14:23 | <jgraham> | Oooh, like Ms Pacman? |
| 14:24 | <jgraham> | Ms2ger is actually an 80s video game gone sentinent? |
| 14:24 | <Ms2ger> | Beep |
| 14:24 | Ms2ger | eats the ghost of longdesc |
| 14:24 | <jgraham> | *sentient |
| 14:27 | <jgraham> | Actually longdesc is quite like the pacman ghosts |
| 14:27 | <Ms2ger> | It always comes back? |
| 14:27 | <jgraham> | Yeah :( |
| 14:27 | <Ms2ger> | http://w3cmemes.tumblr.com/post/31865121758/the-joker-shares-his-approach-on-css2-1-issues also applies to HTML5, I guess |
| 14:27 | <Ms2ger> | "W3C Invites Implementations of The WebSocket API" |
| 14:28 | <Ms2ger> | Oh, why thank you, I'll start implementing right away |
| 14:28 | <jgraham> | The W3C would be rubbish as party planners |
| 14:28 | <zcorpan> | yeah we've been waiting for the w3c invitation! |
| 14:28 | <jgraham> | We'd be half way through trashing their house before they sent out the invites |
| 14:29 | <Ms2ger> | Of only that was all they were rubbish at |
| 14:29 | <Ms2ger> | If, even |
| 14:58 | <annevk> | TC39 has some complicated way to define percent escaping: http://es5.github.com/#Encode |
| 14:59 | <annevk> | I was hoping for a couple of lines :) |
| 15:44 | <annevk> | mine are a bit shorter |
| 15:44 | <annevk> | http://url.spec.whatwg.org/#percent-escaped |
| 16:05 | marcosc | notes that the hour glass emoji don't worky in Chrome |
| 16:39 | SamB_MacG5 | wonders why he's supposed to leave his sense of logic at the door |
| 16:39 | SamB_MacG5 | wonders "What door?" |
| 16:40 | <SamB_MacG5> | So, I was wondering why XBL 2.0 was scrapped. Is this a good place to find out, or do you know a better place? |
| 16:40 | <annevk> | nobody implemented it |
| 16:41 | <SamB_MacG5> | I wish W3C docs would/could mention stuff like that ... |
| 16:42 | <annevk> | you mean like http://www.w3.org/TR/xbl/#status-of-this-document |
| 16:44 | <SamB_MacG5> | Pretty sure I read that, but it wasn't clear that the lack of plans to implement was the reason for abandonment, rather than the other way around |
| 16:44 | <annevk> | anyway |
| 16:44 | <annevk> | search for "web components" |
| 16:44 | <annevk> | or bug dglazkov |
| 16:45 | <annevk> | that's the new hot thing |
| 16:45 | <annevk> | though like XBL vendor interest is scarce |
| 16:45 | <annevk> | with /\ |
| 16:45 | <SamB_MacG5> | /\ ? |
| 16:46 | <Ms2ger> | An arrow |
| 16:46 | <SamB_MacG5> | ah |
| 16:46 | SamB_MacG5 | is used to ^ for that, possibly with dashes on one side or the other |
| 16:46 | <Ms2ger> | ~^~ |
| 16:47 | <annevk> | mustache? |
| 16:48 | <SamB_MacG5> | anyway, who can I bug about clarifying http://www.w3.org/TR/xbl/#status-of-this-document ? |
| 16:53 | <marcosc> | SamB_MacG5: there should be a mailing list mentioned in the status of this document |
| 16:53 | <SamB_MacG5> | true |
| 16:54 | <SamB_MacG5> | there are actually *two* of them |
| 16:55 | <SamB_MacG5> | I guess public-webapps⊙wo is probably more appropriate for such administrative feedback? |
| 16:55 | <marcosc> | Yeah, hit those guys up... but I would recommend some text to be added... otherwise, I doubt anyone will do anything about it |
| 16:56 | <SamB_MacG5> | you mean, I should suggest a specific piece of text to insert? |
| 16:57 | <SamB_MacG5> | and possibly replacements for parts I think are unclear? |
| 18:26 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: so should we move DOM Parsing into DOM? |
| 18:26 | <Ms2ger> | Mm, I dunno |
| 18:26 | <Ms2ger> | It's icky markup ;) |
| 18:27 | <annevk> | you mean the source code or you mean you don't want markup features to spoil the DOM? |
| 18:27 | <Ms2ger> | The latter |
| 18:28 | <annevk> | okay |
| 18:32 | <annevk> | only a few days left and apart from IPv6 I will be 80% done |
| 18:32 | <annevk> | then of course comes the next 80% |
| 18:33 | <Ms2ger> | Heh |
| 18:35 | <annevk> | it's not too bad for a couple of weeks of research, although I guess it was closer to one or two months, don't quite remember when I started |
| 18:35 | <annevk> | I wonder what Hixie estimated back in the days for writing the URL part |
| 18:36 | <annevk> | I wonder if he included writing the Encoding Standard so http://url.spec.whatwg.org/#query-percent-escaped would be defined :) |
| 18:42 | <matjas> | Ms2ger: you magnificent bastard, you https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11204#c46 |
| 18:50 | <annevk> | hey matjas |
| 18:50 | <annevk> | matjas: did you get my feedback the other day? |
| 18:51 | <matjas> | annevk: i didn’t get anything |
| 18:52 | <matjas> | annevk: was it here in #whatwg? |
| 18:53 | <annevk> | matjas: http://logbot.glob.com.au/?c=freenode%23whatwg&s=18%20Sep%202012&e=18%20Sep%202012#c722062 |
| 18:53 | <annevk> | matjas: though in the end I guess all that was valid was the typo, as what should really be done is not entirely clear yet |
| 18:54 | <matjas> | thanks |
| 18:56 | <annevk> | matjas: are you using that Punycode in the wild btw? |
| 18:56 | <annevk> | matjas: I was wondering whether we should expose such a thing as native API |
| 18:57 | <matjas> | annevk: Punycode.js ships with Node.js, and some other open-source projects depend on it, so yes I think it’s being used |
| 18:58 | <annevk> | ah yeah, outside of browsers |
| 18:58 | <matjas> | annevk: (Node.js uses it internally for its URL stuff) |
| 18:58 | <annevk> | yeah, noticed that when looking at their URL impl |
| 18:58 | <matjas> | IMHO it would be a useful API to have built-in |
| 18:58 | <matjas> | in browsers |
| 18:59 | <matjas> | especially since stuff like <input type=email> disallows IDNA |
| 18:59 | <annevk> | maybe we could have static methods on URL |
| 18:59 | <annevk> | URL.toPunycode() / URL.fromPunycode() or some such |
| 19:02 | matjas | donates Punycode.js unit tests to browser vendors |
| 19:08 | <matjas> | annevk: just noticed your last three blog posts too, yay! |
| 19:16 | <matjas> | “There are other characters that are used as "full stops" that one could consider mapping as label separators, but their use as such has not been investigated thoroughly.” Thanks, RFC 5895 |
| 19:34 | <humph_> | I had a question about the best way to write conformance tests for WebVTT, specifically how and where to capture metadata about the different good/bad .vtt files |
| 19:35 | <humph_> | should we put them in the .vtt file's comment block, in a separate file per test, in a wiki, in one file keyed by test file, etc. |
| 19:35 | <humph_> | what's the right approach? |
| 19:35 | <jgraham> | zcorpan: ^ |
| 19:36 | <jgraham> | If it were me and I was writing a parser, I might develop a simple text format to embed the VTT and a desciption in |
| 19:36 | <zcorpan> | humph_: webvtt doesn't currently support comments, so your options are in the cue text or in a separate file |
| 19:36 | <jgraham> | Like we did for the HTML parser tests |
| 19:36 | <jgraham> | Then have a script to spit out the actual browser-readable tests |
| 19:36 | <humph_> | jgraham: so a file that you'd split the .vtt out of at test time? |
| 19:37 | <jgraham> | Yeah |
| 19:37 | <zcorpan> | humph_: for some of my parser tests i've put json in cue data with expected settings/timings; and a separate json file with expected number of cues or "error" |
| 19:37 | <humph_> | I was afraid of putting it in the cue text and making the tests unnecessarily large |
| 19:38 | <zcorpan> | for my other parser tests i used html5lib style like jgraham suggested |
| 19:38 | <zcorpan> | (i.e. for testing cue text parsing) |
| 19:38 | <zcorpan> | i haven't released these tests but i intend to |
| 19:38 | <humph_> | cool. I'm implementing webvtt in firefox with my class this term, just wanted to figure out the best way to start |
| 19:39 | <humph_> | they are beginning with these tests |
| 19:39 | <zcorpan> | ok |
| 19:39 | <jgraham> | Nice project :) |
| 19:39 | <jgraham> | And testing++ |
| 19:39 | <humph_> | http://vocamus.net/dave/?p=1525 |
| 19:39 | <humph_> | yeah, should be fun |
| 19:40 | <jgraham> | I hope you will release the results to W3C for inclusion in the official testsuite |
| 19:40 | <humph_> | yeah, sylvia suggested the same |
| 19:40 | <humph_> | I think that's a good plan |
| 19:40 | <jgraham> | sylvia++ |
| 19:40 | <humph_> | indeed |
| 19:40 | <humph_> | alright, thanks for the ideas |
| 19:41 | <jgraham> | If you need any help with test harness wrangling or getting the tests submitted feel free to ask me |
| 19:41 | <humph_> | k |
| 19:41 | <humph_> | I started by doing a node module to wrap the js parser |
| 19:41 | <jgraham> | Or there is #testing on the W3C server |
| 19:41 | <humph_> | https://github.com/humphd/node-webvtt |
| 19:41 | <humph_> | so they could at least validate in a test harness |
| 19:42 | <zcorpan> | i used testharness.js for testing the parser and the dom api, and reftests for rendering |
| 19:48 | <annevk> | matjas: nice find |
| 19:48 | <annevk> | matjas: so yeah, what we end up with here kinda depends on what browsers are going to implement :( |
| 19:48 | <annevk> | matjas: Opera has some kind of mixture, Gecko is aiming to adopt http://jprs.co.jp/idn/index-e.html |
| 19:48 | <annevk> | matjas: WebKit has no plans |
| 19:49 | <annevk> | dunno about Internet Explorer |
| 19:49 | <Hixie> | annevk: any chance i can get "nodes are inserted" to be defined so as to give me one hook per node that is inserted, in tree order? |
| 19:49 | <Hixie> | annevk: (if not no worries, i can do it on my end) |
| 19:50 | <jgraham> | Hixie: Doing the "which order should scripts run when several are inserted" bug? |
| 19:50 | <Hixie> | good guess |
| 19:50 | <Hixie> | ues |
| 19:50 | <Hixie> | yes, even |
| 19:50 | <jgraham> | :) |
| 19:51 | <annevk> | Hixie: yeah we could rephrase it like that |
| 19:52 | <annevk> | Hixie: file a bug, can fix it tomorrow prolly |
| 19:52 | <annevk> | I think HTML is the only one that makes use of this right now (SVG should prolly too) so whatever you want works |
| 19:53 | <Hixie> | annevk: k, thanks |
| 19:55 | <Hixie> | annevk: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18941 |
| 19:55 | <smaug____> | annevk: where should I file DOM4 bugs nowadays |
| 19:56 | <smaug____> | is w3c bugzilla still ok? |
| 19:56 | <annevk> | smaug____: yeah works for me |
| 19:56 | <annevk> | I should maybe get a component inside the WHATWG product but so far nobody in the WebApps WG has complained |
| 20:00 | <zcorpan> | [tm]: ^ |
| 21:35 | <Hixie> | who's in charge of cssom these days, do they have a bugzilla account? |
| 21:38 | <jgraham> | Supposedly Glenn Adams |
| 21:40 | <Hixie> | k |
| 21:41 | <jgraham> | http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/log/911a391cb16c/cssom/cssom-source suggests that it might even be slightly true |
| 21:50 | <Hixie> | anne know if apple is on board with Opus as an audio codec? |
| 21:52 | <Hixie> | hober: ^ |
| 22:00 | jgraham | has no idea how to get <input type=file multiple> to expose paths |
| 22:00 | <jgraham> | What am I missing? |
| 22:01 | <Hixie> | it doesn't expose paths |
| 22:01 | <jgraham> | *names* are rather easy |
| 22:01 | <Hixie> | (i suppose a UA could include the path in the name, if so inclined) |
| 22:01 | <Hixie> | oh you mean how _could_ we do it? |
| 22:01 | <Hixie> | it'd be easy |
| 22:01 | <Hixie> | just make the filenames foo/bar/baz.quux |
| 22:01 | <jgraham> | No, no |
| 22:01 | <Hixie> | or C:\foo\bar\baz.quux |
| 22:02 | <jgraham> | "File names may contain partial paths, e.g. in the case that a user has selected an entire directory hierarchy. Path components should be separated from each other using U+005C REVERSE SOLIDUS character (\)." |
| 22:02 | <Hixie> | ah, there you go, the spec even says it already |
| 22:02 | <Hixie> | cool |
| 22:02 | <jgraham> | I don't want it to expose paths |
| 22:02 | <jgraham> | :) |
| 22:02 | <jgraham> | Darin claimed that it already does |
| 22:02 | <Hixie> | whether it does or not is entirely an implementation issue |
| 22:03 | <jgraham> | AFAICT this isn't actually the case |
| 22:03 | <Hixie> | what isn't |
| 22:03 | <jgraham> | That paths are exposed by this API |
| 22:04 | <Hixie> | they can be |
| 22:04 | <Hixie> | in theory |
| 22:04 | <Hixie> | whether implementations do so or not is up to them |
| 22:06 | <jgraham> | How would they expose it if they did? |
| 22:06 | <Hixie> | you just quoted the answer to your question |
| 22:06 | <Hixie> | i don't understand |
| 22:06 | <Hixie> | is it not clear? |
| 22:08 | <jgraham> | Not at all :) |
| 22:09 | <Hixie> | what's not clear |
| 22:09 | <Hixie> | i really don't understand the problem |
| 22:09 | <jgraham> | I don't see how the statement "file names may..." is related to the properties of the input element |
| 22:09 | <Hixie> | oh |
| 22:10 | <Hixie> | the file names it refers to are those that form part of hte /selected files/ list |
| 22:10 | <Hixie> | input.files returns a FileList of the /selected files/ list |
| 22:10 | <Hixie> | FileList is a list of File objects, which each have a name |
| 22:10 | <jgraham> | Right, but that explictly doesn't include a path |
| 22:10 | <Hixie> | they explicitly do, here |
| 22:11 | <Hixie> | well |
| 22:11 | <Hixie> | they don't include a path |
| 22:11 | <Hixie> | they just include a filename with backslashes |
| 22:11 | <jgraham> | What? The File API says they don't |
| 22:11 | <Hixie> | but you can interpret that as a path |
| 22:11 | <Hixie> | the HTML spec says they do |
| 22:11 | <jgraham> | "The name of the file; on getting, this must return the name of the file as a string. There are numerous file name variations on different systems; this is merely the name of the file, without path information" |
| 22:11 | <Hixie> | right |
| 22:11 | <Hixie> | hence why the HTML spec changes the name to include the path information |
| 22:12 | <jgraham> | Woah |
| 22:12 | <jgraham> | That is totally unclear |
| 22:12 | <jgraham> | Why is there a "may" level wilful violation of another spec that no UA actually violates? |
| 22:12 | <jgraham> | (afaict) |
| 22:12 | <Hixie> | so that people can expose paths |
| 22:13 | <jgraham> | But since no UA actually does that, it seems highly unclear and quite probably undesirable |
| 22:13 | <Hixie> | *shrug* |
| 22:13 | <Hixie> | i don't see why it's unclear |
| 22:14 | <Hixie> | nor undesireable |
| 22:14 | <jgraham> | It's unclear because usually when you are willfully violating other specs a) it says so explicitly and b) there is a compat. reqiurement |
| 22:15 | <Hixie> | it's not a wilful violation |
| 22:16 | <Hixie> | a wilful workaround maybe :-) |
| 22:16 | <jgraham> | Erm? If spec A says "you must not do X" and you say "you may do X" that sounds like a wilfull violation |
| 22:17 | <Hixie> | spec A doesn't say "you must not do X". It says "you must return A, and not return B" and HTML says "put B inside A" |
| 22:17 | <Hixie> | actually even that's not quite accurate |
| 22:18 | <jgraham> | Since "B inside A and return A" is a special case of "return B", that is just the same |
| 22:18 | <Hixie> | i read it differently but whatever |
| 22:19 | <Hixie> | i'm happy to change one or the other to avoid the appearance of disagreement |
| 22:19 | <jgraham> | OK. Well I should have been asleep some time ago. Seems like a good juncture to fix that. |
| 23:13 | <Hixie> | can anyone explain the purpose of this change? https://github.com/w3c/html/commit/37b3183567666a226d304c54d6ac5123ba564dcc |
| 23:14 | <Hixie> | hober? |