| 00:47 | <MikeSmith> | tantek: he just added a restriction that if you have just a year -- like <time>2011</time> -- it has to be 4 digits and it has to be greater than 1 (0001 or after) |
| 00:48 | <tantek> | why only 4 digits? |
| 00:48 | <tantek> | or is it 4+ digits? |
| 00:48 | tantek | is a member of longnow.org :) |
| 00:48 | <MikeSmith> | because it's consistent with the requirements for years elsewhere in the spec |
| 00:48 | <MikeSmith> | ah yeah, I meant 4+ digitis |
| 00:48 | <tantek> | "elsewhere in the spec" ?!? |
| 00:48 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 00:49 | <MikeSmith> | there are other places in date-time values where you can have years... |
| 00:49 | <MikeSmith> | http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=7434&to=7435 |
| 00:49 | <tantek> | can we put "the requirements for years" in *one* place (e.g. with <time> or microsyntax) and then reference it instead of having there be "requirements for years elsewhere in the spec" ? |
| 00:49 | <tantek> | in other words, if you know of specific "requirements for years elsewhere in the spec", please provide URLs to those other places so we can fix them to use a reference rather than duplicating requirements. |
| 00:50 | <tantek> | at least it's 4+ digits |
| 00:50 | <tantek> | that's good |
| 00:50 | <MikeSmith> | feel free to do that if you want to take the time man |
| 00:50 | <tantek> | I don't know of any |
| 00:50 | <tantek> | you asserted the existence thereof |
| 00:50 | <tantek> | hence why I asked you |
| 00:50 | <tantek> | I'm happy to file the bugs accordingly |
| 00:50 | <tantek> | if you mention the URLs when you see them |
| 00:50 | <tantek> | otherwise I'll just pretend there are no requirements for years elsewhere in the spec |
| 00:50 | <MikeSmith> | I suggest reading the spec |
| 00:51 | <MikeSmith> | in general |
| 00:51 | <MikeSmith> | and I'm fine with you pretending that |
| 00:51 | <tantek> | I think I forgot a ;) in there somewhere :) |
| 00:51 | <tantek> | I prefer to read the spec "as needed" |
| 00:52 | <tantek> | and thus unimportant parts get ignored, hopefully unimplemented, and eventually hopefully dropped accordingly. |
| 01:28 | <Hixie> | tantek: (the requirements for years are in two, maybe three places, because they're shorter than the name i would use to refer to a generic definition :-P) |
| 01:30 | <tantek> | oh that's a decent excuse. ok fine. :) |
| 02:14 | <TabAtkins> | Hixie: I assume in your responsive thread, you meant to say "Not without good reason"? |
| 02:20 | <TabAtkins> | zewt: That's not necessarily true. If people are currently reading el.style.display, for example, that'll still return "none" in my suggestion. |
| 02:20 | <TabAtkins> | zewt: But, unrelated to hidden, yes, we should absolutely have some property that does the display:none thing without being tied into display. |
| 02:46 | <zewt> | TabAtkins: i mean it'd break pages that have CSS expecting <div hidden class=x> .x { display: block; } to be displayed |
| 03:05 | <Hixie> | TabAtkins: probably :-) |
| 04:12 | <MikeSmith> | fyi "W3C Bugzilla will be down starting at 20:00 UTC on 2012-10-09 for an upgrade" |
| 08:05 | Ms2ger | looks for annevk |
| 08:05 | annevk | runs |
| 08:07 | <Ms2ger> | document.implementation.createDocument(null, null, null).documentElement |
| 08:07 | <Ms2ger> | annevk, null or non-null? |
| 08:08 | <annevk> | "null" per spec |
| 08:09 | <Ms2ger> | documentElement is a string? :) |
| 08:09 | <annevk> | well you know what I mean |
| 08:09 | <annevk> | if we make null work we should just make the arguments optional altogether |
| 08:09 | <annevk> | but maybe a better approach is making new Document() work |
| 08:10 | <Ms2ger> | Wouldn't necessarily mind that |
| 08:10 | <annevk> | the constructor? |
| 08:10 | <Ms2ger> | Yeah |
| 08:10 | <Ms2ger> | But right now I'm looking at what browsers do here :) |
| 08:10 | <annevk> | okay |
| 08:10 | <annevk> | WebKit has the optional stuff I guess |
| 08:11 | <annevk> | by virtue of their old bindings |
| 08:11 | <Ms2ger> | AFAICT, nobody creates an element for a null qualifiedName |
| 08:12 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: btw I made a new bugzilla component for URL under the whatwg product |
| 08:12 | <annevk> | cool |
| 08:13 | annevk | updates spec |
| 08:14 | <Ms2ger> | Gecko throws if you pass a null qualifiedName and a non-null namespace |
| 08:14 | <Ms2ger> | IE appears to throw if you pass a null or empty qualifiedName and a non-null namespace |
| 08:14 | <Ms2ger> | WebKit and Opera don't throw |
| 08:15 | <Ms2ger> | Neither does the spec, so I'd leave that alone |
| 08:16 | <annevk> | hmm |
| 08:16 | <annevk> | the spec already allows for omitting the element by setting qualifiedName to the empty string |
| 08:16 | <annevk> | so we'd just be adding null to that conditional? |
| 08:17 | <Ms2ger> | Yep |
| 08:17 | <annevk> | and appending ? to DOMString |
| 08:17 | <annevk> | k will do that now |
| 08:17 | <Ms2ger> | Or TreatNullAs=EmptyString |
| 08:18 | <annevk> | ah yeah, I hate that syntax, but okay |
| 08:18 | <annevk> | it's nicer to not change the prose |
| 08:20 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: fixed |
| 08:21 | <Ms2ger> | Thanks :) |
| 08:23 | Ms2ger | fixes his implementation |
| 08:40 | <MikeSmith> | Ms2ger: there's a couple bugs you re-assigned to me that I wasn't sure what I needed to do with, so I moved them to resolved-needsinfo with a comment |
| 08:40 | <Ms2ger> | Oh, are you the default assignee for Unwelcome? |
| 08:41 | <MikeSmith> | aha |
| 08:41 | <MikeSmith> | yeah, that's why |
| 08:41 | <MikeSmith> | OK |
| 08:41 | <MikeSmith> | I'll figure out what to do with those |
| 08:42 | <annevk> | what's Unwelcome? |
| 08:43 | <Ms2ger> | The component where we stick editorless bugs |
| 08:51 | <annevk> | ah okay |
| 08:51 | <annevk> | should maybe link that from specs_todo |
| 08:52 | <annevk> | that's https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=WHATWG&component=Unwelcome&resolution=--- I guess? |
| 08:53 | <annevk> | man |
| 08:53 | <annevk> | https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17659 hahaha |
| 09:32 | <zcorpan> | TabAtkins: spec's source says "Opera supported this quirk (copied from IE), but then dropped it because it broke sites that expected IE's different margin collapsing or Firefox's non-support for the quirk, or some such, and was thus dropped." |
| 09:33 | <zcorpan> | a grep founds some matches, but it seems we're screwed either way, so might as well drop it |
| 09:35 | <zcorpan> | (the grep i ran doesn't differentiate between normal text and css, so some of the matches might not be css at all) |
| 09:35 | <tantek> | annevk - why is that bug marked "Product: WHATWG" ? |
| 09:36 | <Ms2ger> | Because that's where the Unwelcome component lives |
| 09:37 | <Ms2ger> | zcorpan, that's pretty much a constant around here, no? :) |
| 09:37 | <Ms2ger> | (Being screwed either way) |
| 09:37 | <tantek> | whoa, what? "where the Unwelcome component lives" ?!? |
| 09:38 | <zcorpan> | Ms2ger: maybe you are :-P |
| 09:38 | zcorpan | isn't actually here |
| 09:39 | <annevk> | tantek: WHATWG/Unwelcome is for some leftover bugs that didn't fit elsewhere, not sure why that one is classified as such, but it appears to be filed against it as history doesn't show products/components changing |
| 09:39 | <annevk> | tantek: WHATWG as a product exists because the W3C allows us usage of their infrastructure |
| 09:40 | <annevk> | e.g. that's why http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/ exists too |
| 14:26 | <smaug____> | when was ErrorEvent added to the spec |
| 14:40 | <Ms2ger> | When onerror was specced? |
| 14:58 | <smaug____> | Ms2ger: I'd assume onerror was spec'ed way before ErrorEvent |
| 14:59 | <smaug____> | is there some easy way to see the blame for the spec |
| 15:00 | <smaug____> | "Thus, error reports propagate up to the chain of dedicated workers up to the original Document, even if some of the workers along this chain have been terminated and garbage collected." |
| 15:00 | <smaug____> | huh |
| 15:00 | <smaug____> | but I'm not going to care about workers for now |
| 15:01 | <Ms2ger> | http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/blame.r6666 |
| 15:02 | <Ms2ger> | smaug____, http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=2881&to=2882 |
| 15:04 | <smaug____> | ah, is errorevent for workers only |
| 15:05 | <Ms2ger> | Apparently? |
| 15:07 | <smaug____> | but looks like the spec is just wrong here |
| 15:08 | <smaug____> | but not about ErrorEvent but on error handling in general |
| 15:18 | <Hixie> | it's always possible |
| 19:53 | <GPHemsley> | How does one obtain a WHATWG wiki account? |
| 20:02 | <gsnedders> | GPHemsley: Main page says prod annevk (who isn't around) or Hixie |
| 20:09 | <GPHemsley> | gsnedders: Ah, that's simple. Thanks. |