| 04:48 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: three of the W3C validator.nu instances crashed today at almost the same time with segfaults |
| 04:52 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: looking at the log output, I have no idea why. The last stack trace in the logs is for a SAXStreamer.fatal error from TreeBuilder.startTag(TreeBuilder.java:2859) > TreeBuilder.pushHeadPointerOntoStack(TreeBuilder.java:4574) in the htmlparser code |
| 04:54 | <MikeSmith> | but that's a noraml error that appears to occur pretty often in the logs anyway, without any segfault happening |
| 05:10 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: hmm all of them show that somebody was trying to use the /html5 UI for some reason |
| 05:11 | <MikeSmith> | which is not linked to from the main UI nor anywhere, so dunno how they'd even know it was there. I guess I should just disable that but I don't know how |
| 07:15 | <stevefaulkner> | MikeSmith: email to webkit dev list from James Craig http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2013-January/023371.html :-) |
| 08:02 | <hsivonen> | MikeSmith: seems weird for SAXStreamer to be used in ways that’d crash |
| 08:43 | <MikeSmith> | Stevef: yep, saw that. Will get my test fixed and update the patch |
| 08:45 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: yeah, pretty sure that had nothing to do with it |
| 08:45 | <MikeSmith> | nothing else at all in the logs that would provide a clue about what the cause was, though |
| 09:31 | <Stevef> | TabAtkins: didn't think I was putting words in your mouth, I qualified the statement with "appears to think" |
| 09:33 | <Stevef> | TabAtknins: on mobile/tablets not an issue, but on desktop... |
| 09:34 | <odinho> | Hmm. Whatever happened to the tests-on-GitHub thing? |
| 09:35 | <MikeSmith> | odinho: going as planned, far as I know |
| 09:35 | <MikeSmith> | some reason to think otherwise? |
| 09:35 | <odinho> | MikeSmith: Okay, I thought it was done already? :P |
| 09:36 | <odinho> | MikeSmith: I can't find it on github.com/w3c |
| 09:36 | <MikeSmith> | eh? |
| 09:36 | <MikeSmith> | html-testsuite, right? |
| 09:36 | <odinho> | Hmmmm. But but, I'm interested in webapps and webappsec :) |
| 09:36 | <MikeSmith> | aah |
| 09:36 | <odinho> | Yeah, -- I remember asking about that. |
| 09:36 | <MikeSmith> | well |
| 09:37 | <odinho> | And "blabla decision needed". So guess I have to do some actual admin work there :P |
| 09:37 | <MikeSmith> | odinho: bug Art |
| 09:37 | <odinho> | MikeSmith: Okay :] |
| 09:38 | <MikeSmith> | Art is great on getting decisions made and stuff done |
| 09:39 | <odinho> | MikeSmith: I've seen that :-) So I'll just wait till the end of the day when I guess he'll come on. |
| 09:40 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 09:42 | <MikeSmith> | Stevef: in the bug, Niwa-san is asking that I put my name in the name field in the changelogs for the patch. So I'll do that but put "Authored by Steve Faulkner." at the top of the body of the changelog. |
| 09:42 | <MikeSmith> | if that's OK with you |
| 09:43 | <Stevef> | MikeSmith: yeah no problem, the importnat thing is it gets implemented :-) |
| 09:43 | <Stevef> | and you did all the hard work getting the tests done, thanks! |
| 09:44 | <MikeSmith> | ain't done yet |
| 09:44 | <MikeSmith> | well mostly done |
| 09:44 | <MikeSmith> | but then everything's always mostly done |
| 09:45 | <Stevef> | well the patch itself took a few hours and that is only because I am a noob |
| 09:45 | <Stevef> | a few lines of code |
| 12:50 | <MikeSmith> | Stevef: question just out of curiosity, one of the existing tests I'm looking at has a comment, "When a header and footer are inside an article, they should not be landmarks." |
| 12:50 | <MikeSmith> | and the test has an assertion for checking that |
| 12:50 | <MikeSmith> | why is that the expected behavior? |
| 12:51 | <annevk> | landmarks are document/application global |
| 12:52 | <annevk> | iirc |
| 12:53 | <hsivonen> | hmm. so much wrong with the pro-Polyglot rationale |
| 12:53 | <hsivonen> | probably not worth the 386, though |
| 12:55 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: I see |
| 12:55 | hsivonen | is slightly surprised to see “simple majority wins” as opposed to “chairs decide” polls at the HTML WG |
| 12:56 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: me too actually |
| 12:57 | <MikeSmith> | they seem to be making a distinction between process issues and technical issues |
| 12:57 | <hsivonen> | yeah |
| 12:59 | <Stevef> | MikeSmith: thats how webkit have implemented header/footer as their use in HTML is not the same as in ARIA, having lots of headers and footers in pages makes noise if they are all landmarks |
| 13:00 | <MikeSmith> | Stevef: you mean that behavior is not required by the ARIA spec? |
| 13:01 | <Stevef> | Its not required by HTML5 there is not a one to one mapping between definition and recommended use of header/footer and definition and recommended use of banner/contentinfo |
| 13:01 | <Stevef> | as anne said "landmarks are document/application global" |
| 13:02 | <Stevef> | they are not meant to be overused otherwise their utiltiy is lost |
| 13:02 | <Stevef> | landmark are typically big chunks a macro division of content |
| 13:04 | <MikeSmith> | if that's the case then the behavior that WebKit has adopted should be made a requirement in the spec, I think |
| 13:04 | <MikeSmith> | Firefox handles them differently? |
| 13:05 | <Stevef> | Firefox at the moment does am working on getting them to adopt webkit behaviour, at the moment header isn't exposed as a landmark at all |
| 13:06 | <MikeSmith> | oh |
| 13:06 | <Stevef> | note: they still get a role in webkit, a more generic 'group' role |
| 13:06 | <MikeSmith> | ok |
| 13:07 | <MikeSmith> | so to be clear, for the case where they are children of <main> the should still be landmarks, though, right? |
| 13:07 | <Stevef> | yes |
| 13:07 | <MikeSmith> | if so I can have the test check for that |
| 13:07 | <MikeSmith> | ok |
| 13:07 | <Stevef> | its only article/section |
| 13:08 | <MikeSmith> | hai |
| 13:09 | <Stevef> | will need to think on it a bit re: children of main |
| 13:11 | <Stevef> | typically header and footer are used as would be expected of banner/contentinfo in the wild, but when they are not they tend to be many instances on a page |
| 13:12 | <Stevef> | expected as in a single instance of each |
| 13:12 | <Stevef> | 278 HTML5 pages using Header and Footer elements http://www.html5accessibility.com/HTML5data/header-footer/index-all.html |
| 13:13 | <Stevef> | usually header at top and footer at bottom of page unsurprisingly |
| 13:36 | <MikeSmith> | Stevef: oh strike what I said before. It seems like header and footer should not be landmarks if they're childen of main |
| 13:37 | <MikeSmith> | because people should not be using them as children of main to begin with, right? |
| 13:43 | <hsivonen> | is anyone maintaining a service that diffs W3C HTML and WHATWG HTML and visualizes the differences? |
| 13:44 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: not that I know of |
| 13:45 | <hsivonen> | ok :-( |
| 13:47 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: was it announced who got two year and who got one year on the TAG? |
| 13:47 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: one issue is, I think HTML diffing tools choke on the spec in its current size |
| 13:47 | <annevk> | I just noticed again that difference exists |
| 13:48 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: it was announced to the AC |
| 13:48 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: yeah you got the short straw |
| 13:48 | <MikeSmith> | oh |
| 13:48 | <MikeSmith> | hmm |
| 13:48 | <annevk> | that sounds positive |
| 13:49 | <annevk> | http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2013Jan/0016.html could be seen either as order of elected or on order of last name with my name incorrectly ordered as would be typical in the US |
| 13:49 | <MikeSmith> | I guess I shouldn't have said it here if it's not been announced |
| 13:49 | <annevk> | well http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ has it as public |
| 13:50 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: yeah I've no insight into the order he chose |
| 13:50 | <annevk> | thanks for looking |
| 13:52 | <hsivonen> | annevk: I don’t see that page saying anything about the newly-elected members |
| 13:52 | <annevk> | hsivonen: I meant it'll be public soon enough |
| 13:52 | <hsivonen> | ah |
| 13:54 | <MikeSmith> | Stevef: if header and footer really are not meant to be used a direct children of main then you could make that an explicit requirement in the spec, in the Content Model part ("Flow content, with no header or or footer children.") |
| 13:58 | <annevk> | http://digbysblog.blogspot.ca/2013/01/the-poor-poor-rich-of-wall-street.html trololol |
| 14:12 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: yeah in that graphic the distressed looks on the faces of all the people was the best touch |
| 14:16 | <MikeSmith> | people struggling on a meager $200,000 salary plus only $25,000 a year on top of that in investment income |
| 14:16 | <MikeSmith> | you really have to empathize with their hardship |
| 14:17 | <MikeSmith> | but then the kicker is you find out out their taxes are going to increase by $2900 |
| 14:18 | <MikeSmith> | and then at the injustice of that heinous increase you can only feel outrage |
| 14:19 | <MikeSmith> | masterful |
| 14:20 | <Stevef> | MikeSmith: that will involve chnages to authroing advice for footer/header is spec |
| 14:20 | <MikeSmith> | Stevef: my point is it should not be mere advice |
| 14:21 | <MikeSmith> | it should be a requirement |
| 14:21 | <MikeSmith> | and yeah I realize it would need a change to the spec |
| 14:21 | <Stevef> | MikeSmith: well that means significant changes... |
| 14:21 | <MikeSmith> | I'm not asking about it right now for the purposes of tests for the patch |
| 14:22 | <MikeSmith> | Stevef: yeah, sure |
| 14:22 | <Stevef> | MikeSmith: realise that, need to look at data and use cases then... |
| 14:22 | <Stevef> | see what shakes out |
| 14:23 | <MikeSmith> | ok |
| 15:06 | <Somatt_wrk> | any idea what happens when loading new html5 semantic elements via xhr in IE8 once we've made it discover them ? |
| 15:07 | <Somatt_wrk> | can they be parsed properly ? |
| 15:29 | <MikeSmith> | Stevef: OK I just posted and updated patch to the bug, with separate ax tests for Chrome and Safari |
| 15:30 | <Stevef> | yeah saw that thanks, hopefully will pass |
| 15:30 | <MikeSmith> | fingers crossed that it will actually pass when the mac-ews bot runs it |
| 15:30 | <MikeSmith> | cause I am not able to actually run it locally |
| 15:34 | <MikeSmith> | Stevef: it takes quite a while for the bots to run, but if you check later and all the platform indicators are green for the latest patch, then it's happy times |
| 15:35 | <Stevef> | cool will check |
| 15:35 | <MikeSmith> | I will now take the opportunity to drop off for a while and drink some shochu |
| 15:38 | <Stevef> | have one for me you deserve it |
| 16:47 | <annevk> | So is tag⊙wo subscribed to w3c-ac-forum⊙wo and am I therefore getting Member-only email again even though I cannot access Member-only archives? |
| 16:47 | <annevk> | And also, nobody told me I was added to tag⊙wo |
| 17:06 | <hober> | annevk: you're probably the first person elected to the tag who didn't simultaneously also have Member access |
| 17:07 | <annevk> | Does marcosc have Member access? I guess he might because of WebApps. |
| 18:38 | <dglazkov> | good morning, Whatwg! |
| 18:41 | <astearns> | good morning, dglazkov - is the 'is' attribute still immutable in the latest proposal? |
| 18:41 | <dglazkov> | astearns: yup |
| 18:41 | <astearns> | ok, thanks |
| 20:20 | <Hixie> | dglazkov: by "immutable" you mean "changing it does nothing", right? (not that the attribute itself doesn't change) |
| 20:25 | <dglazkov> | Hixie: right |
| 20:27 | <Hixie> | good good |
| 23:23 | <Hixie> | i stuck the html spec intro into http://splasho.nfshost.com/upgoer5/ |
| 23:23 | <Hixie> | it said: UH OH! YOU HAVE USED NON-PERMITTED WORDS (SPECIFICATION, DEFINES, WEB, PLATFORM, DETAIL, WEB, PLATFORM, SPECIFICATION, STACK, RELATIVE, SPECIFICATIONS, SUMMED). |
| 23:23 | <Hixie> | well bummer |
| 23:23 | <Hixie> | that's like half the words of the intro |
| 23:52 | <astearns> | hixie: This paper shows how a big part of the world-wide tied-up things works, in lots and lots of ways. It goes with other papers that show how to make things work, shown in this picture: |