| 06:07 | <Hixie> | so if <menu type=button> is instead done by having <button type=menu menu=idofmenuelement>, i guess <menu type> should be either "toolbar" or "popup", rather than something and "context" |
| 09:39 | <annevk> | since you might style context menus differently you may want to have a different type for that |
| 10:23 | <baptistem> | o/ |
| 10:24 | <baptistem> | I got a small issue with websocket, there is something that I should miss, |
| 10:25 | <baptistem> | when I lost the connection I try to see if the server is alive, if so I do a reconnection, but server side I see Two differents connections and I don't get how I can close correctly the connection |
| 10:31 | <annevk> | this is probably not the best channel to ask questions about the protocol or the server implementation |
| 10:31 | <annevk> | although I'm not aware of another one... |
| 10:31 | <baptistem> | ahah me nether, html say that html5 belong to here |
| 10:31 | <baptistem> | s/nether/neither (too much minecraft) |
| 10:57 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: you around? |
| 10:57 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: can you tell me how http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#getownproperty works for the Window object? |
| 10:58 | <annevk> | baptistem: #html says to to go here for HTML5 questions? that beautiful :) |
| 10:58 | <annevk> | that's* |
| 10:59 | <baptistem> | #html just say " HTML5 authored by #whatwg " |
| 11:07 | <annevk> | yeah, that's kinda true, but also not, we author "HTML" these days: http://blog.whatwg.org/html-is-the-new-html5 |
| 11:08 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: I think I understand now |
| 11:09 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: not exactly trivial material |
| 11:09 | <baptistem> | oh I see, interesting |
| 11:10 | <baptistem> | but having a living standard won't be an issue for integration in web browser? |
| 11:14 | <annevk> | http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#Will_future_browsers_have_any_idea_what_older_HTML_documents_mean.3F answers that to some extent |
| 11:15 | <annevk> | in any event, the WebSocket protocol was taken outside the WHATWG to the IETF and the people initially developing it stopped participating |
| 11:17 | <baptistem> | oh ok I see for wiki link |
| 11:18 | <baptistem> | when you say "the poeple initially developing" you mean people involved in WHATWG? |
| 11:19 | <Ms2ger> | annevk, good :) |
| 11:19 | <annevk> | baptistem: yeah |
| 11:27 | <Ms2ger> | annevk, window.[[GetOwnProperty]] wouldn't return a named property, no; window.__proto__.__proto__.[[GetOwnProperty]] would |
| 11:28 | <annevk> | two __proto__? |
| 11:28 | <Ms2ger> | Yep |
| 11:29 | <Ms2ger> | window.__proto__ is Window.prototype, window.__proto__.__proto__ is the global scope polluter |
| 11:31 | <annevk> | IDL says "However, when the [NamedPropertiesObject] extended attribute has been used, named properties are not exposed on the object but on the interface prototype object itself." |
| 11:32 | Ms2ger | frowns |
| 11:32 | <annevk> | which suggests window.prototype |
| 11:32 | <Ms2ger> | That's a lie |
| 11:32 | <annevk> | file a bug for me as I don't get it? |
| 11:32 | <Ms2ger> | Yeah |
| 11:35 | <Ms2ger> | http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#interface-prototype-object says |
| 11:35 | <Ms2ger> | The interface prototype object for a given interface A MUST have an internal [[Prototype]] property whose value is as follows: |
| 11:35 | <Ms2ger> | If A is declared with the [NamedPropertiesObject] extended attribute, then the value of the internal [[Prototype]] property of A is the named properties object for A, as defined in section 4.4.4 below. |
| 11:35 | <Ms2ger> | So that's proto.proto |
| 11:49 | <annevk> | how is that proto.proto? |
| 11:50 | <annevk> | Window is declared with that extended attribute |
| 11:50 | <annevk> | so Window.prototype would be the named properties object |
| 11:51 | <Ms2ger> | window's [[Prototype]] is the interface prototype object |
| 11:51 | <Ms2ger> | And the interface prototype object's [[Prototype]] is the named properties object |
| 11:53 | <annevk> | then that sentence is misleading |
| 11:53 | <annevk> | "then the value of the internal [[Prototype]] property of A is the named properties object for A" suggests A's [[Prototype]] not A's interface object's [[Prototype]] |
| 11:54 | <Ms2ger> | Yes, you're right |
| 11:55 | <Ms2ger> | Though I don't know what it would mean for an interface to have a [[Prototype]] |
| 11:56 | Ms2ger | files a bug |
| 11:59 | <annevk> | Typically when you say "determine the value as follows" you should just define the value and not restate some preceding condition |
| 11:59 | <Ms2ger> | Yeah |
| 14:29 | <annevk> | GitHub to Twitter bridge still seems broken :/ |
| 14:45 | <annevk> | I think I need to introduce URL code points and redefine URL units to be either URL code points or percent-encoded bytes. |
| 14:45 | <annevk> | That way the definition of URL code points can be reused in the parser for conformance checking... |
| 18:32 | <Hixie> | annevk: well context menus can't be styled at all |
| 18:32 | <Hixie> | annevk: they're native |
| 18:50 | <Hixie> | if we support <button type=menu> do we also need to support the equivalent in <input>? i'm thinking no. |
| 19:07 | <Hixie> | if we remove toolbars created from Commands, there's really no point keeping the <command> element |
| 19:07 | <Hixie> | hmm |
| 23:45 | <Hixie> | anyone around want to check my menu changes? |