| 00:00 | <TabAtkins> | Basically, just tokenize things as numbers or non-numeric strings, with a special check for the 1.1.1 case that forces it to tokenize as three numbers and two strings. |
| 00:00 | <TabAtkins> | (etc for longer lists) |
| 00:05 | <Hixie> | well the problem with that is phone numbers are often of the form 1-2-3 |
| 00:06 | <Hixie> | wouldn't want 555-555-5555 to sort before 555-555-5554 |
| 00:08 | <TabAtkins> | Urf, you're right. |
| 00:08 | <TabAtkins> | What's your working definition of a "separator" here? |
| 00:10 | <Hixie> | i have yet to figure that out |
| 00:10 | <Hixie> | the sum total of my work on a solution here is "return b-a" |
| 00:10 | <TabAtkins> | Heh. Well, the resolution of that case depends entirely on how you're determining separators. |
| 00:10 | <Hixie> | my work has been purely focused on the problem side of the equation :-) |
| 00:11 | <Hixie> | i think i might not determine separators. That is, treat "0,1" the same as "0a1". basically anything that i can't get to parse into a number is a separator. |
| 00:11 | <Hixie> | so "e" and "." would be special, and "-" special before a number |
| 00:12 | <Hixie> | but with special rules for what happens if you're parsing a number and come across something weird, like 1e2e3 |
| 00:12 | <Hixie> | or -1-2-3 |
| 00:12 | <Hixie> | or 1.2.3 |
| 00:12 | <Hixie> | i'm thinking -2-4-7 is -2 4 7 though |
| 00:12 | <Hixie> | it'd be weird to treat -2.4,7 as anything but -2.4 followed by something |
| 00:12 | <TabAtkins> | Yeah. Hmm, to be consistent with how we want to treat 1.1 vs 1.1.1, I think you're right - [-2, 4, 7] |
| 00:13 | <TabAtkins> | Yes. |
| 00:14 | <Hixie> | should i trim leading spaces. i'm thinking yes. |
| 00:14 | <TabAtkins> | Yes. |
| 00:15 | <TabAtkins> | Or perhaps just collapsible whitespace? |
| 00:15 | <TabAtkins> | Non-collapsed whitespace is usually significant. |
| 00:15 | <Hixie> | i meant leading U+0020 |
| 00:15 | <Hixie> | and U+000A and U+0009 i'll treat as U+0020 |
| 00:16 | <TabAtkins> | I know, but I'm saying that there's a sematnic distinction between spaces that are collapsed and those that are preserved. |
| 00:16 | <TabAtkins> | Though that's at the CSS level, so probably not usable here. :/ |
| 00:16 | <Hixie> | yeah i'm definitely not looking at the white-space property here |
| 00:17 | <TabAtkins> | Okay, in that case, yeah, just trim all the ascii whitespace or whatever. |
| 00:18 | <JonathanNeal> | if anyone here runs webkit memes, i humbly submit http://i.imgur.com/LVjcEdD.jpg |
| 00:18 | <Hixie> | stdin.value.split('\n').reverse().sort(sorter).join('\n') is sane JS right? |
| 00:19 | <Hixie> | or am i smoking something |
| 00:20 | <TabAtkins> | I forget whether sort() returns something or does it in-place. |
| 00:21 | <TabAtkins> | Oh, it's in-place, but it returns itself for chaining. |
| 00:21 | <Hixie> | oh god, stupid api |
| 00:21 | <Hixie> | don't return something if you're mutating it |
| 00:21 | <Hixie> | gah |
| 00:21 | <Hixie> | makes it look like i'm doing functional stuff but then mutates stuff underneath it! |
| 00:21 | <TabAtkins> | That part's fine - it enables chaining. |
| 00:22 | <TabAtkins> | But it's bad that some parts of the API are functional and others mutate. |
| 00:22 | <TabAtkins> | Oh wait, never mind, reverse() also mutates. |
| 00:22 | <Hixie> | apis should look like they do what they do |
| 00:22 | <Hixie> | and should do what they look like they do |
| 00:22 | <TabAtkins> | Needs more bangs. |
| 00:23 | <TabAtkins> | stdin.value.split('\n').reverse!().sort!(sorter).join('\n') |
| 00:23 | <TabAtkins> | (Scheme idiom for mutating functions.) |
| 00:23 | <Hixie> | heh |
| 00:27 | <Hixie> | what's the js equivalent of the default JavaScript sorter? |
| 00:27 | <Hixie> | comparator, i guess i should say |
| 00:27 | <Hixie> | "If comparefn is not undefined and is not a consistent comparison function for the elements of this array (see below), the behaviour of sort is implementation-defined." |
| 00:27 | <Hixie> | sigh |
| 00:27 | <Hixie> | oh, that's for when your comparator is dumb |
| 00:28 | <Hixie> | not when it's null |
| 00:28 | <Hixie> | nevermind |
| 00:28 | <TabAtkins> | undefined, not null. |
| 00:55 | <Hixie> | i seem to be pretty good about making the problem smaller and smaller without actually making the problem easier. |
| 00:56 | <Hixie> | http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/sorter/index.html |
| 00:56 | <Hixie> | i have now reduced the problem to "just" tokenisation. |
| 01:25 | <zewt> | Hixie: maybe that page has changed since, but it never seems to set currentTokenAsNumber |
| 02:53 | <Hixie> | zewt: it's only 5% done :-) |
| 03:35 | <MikeSmith> | have the html5lib parser tests been merged into the html testsuite? If not doesn't it make sense they should be? |
| 07:16 | <MikeSmith> | the polyglot community is growing |
| 07:16 | <annevk> | http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2013Feb/0060.html really, the parser argument survives all the way into 2013? |
| 07:17 | <annevk> | Man, what a way to wake up. |
| 07:17 | <MikeSmith> | polyglot community now has four members: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/pubclic-html/2013Feb/0121.html |
| 07:17 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: yeah I just now replied to that message |
| 07:19 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: you accidentally a word in the last sentence |
| 07:20 | <MikeSmith> | oh |
| 07:20 | <MikeSmith> | ah thanks |
| 07:21 | MikeSmith | sends the correction |
| 07:21 | <MikeSmith> | I really should just quit reading that thread |
| 07:22 | <annevk> | The argument also doesn't make sense. In the HTML case you just keep going. In the XML case you actively have to check if the grammar is correct. The whole notion of calling it "error correction" is wrong. |
| 07:22 | <MikeSmith> | I wonder if that guy even understands that |
| 07:22 | <MikeSmith> | from his messages, I guess he actually doesn't |
| 07:23 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: Not really sure how to deal with that either. I'm on the TAG, but I've decided long ago that my 386-time is used and I'll do other things instead. |
| 07:23 | <MikeSmith> | heh 386-time |
| 07:24 | <MikeSmith> | yeah I think you're wise to spend it on other problems that have a community of more than 4 people on record as caring about them |
| 07:24 | <MikeSmith> | there are bigger wrongs to right with that 386 time |
| 08:16 | <MikeSmith> | we have today's winner https://twitter.com/hsivonen/status/301940538171596801 |
| 08:17 | <MikeSmith> | I wish you could give votes to tweets the way you can to bugs in bugzilla |
| 08:18 | <MikeSmith> | that on would get all my votes |
| 08:34 | <jgraham> | MikeSmith: Yeah, the html5lib tests are submitted to the testsuite |
| 08:38 | <jgraham> | https://github.com/w3c/html-testsuite/tree/master/old-tests/submission/Opera/html5lib |
| 08:38 | <MikeSmith> | jgraham: ah great, thanks |
| 08:38 | <jgraham> | They just need to be moved to the correct place |
| 08:39 | <jgraham> | (and perhaps regenersated with the newest test data) |
| 08:39 | <jgraham> | *regenerated |
| 08:39 | <MikeSmith> | yeah I guess Robin and Ms2ger have been working on moving the test |
| 08:39 | <MikeSmith> | s |
| 08:44 | <MikeSmith> | jgraham: do we have any existing tests that check whether the correct HTML*Element interface is exposed for an element? |
| 08:44 | <MikeSmith> | if not, would it be worth adding tests for that? |
| 08:53 | <jgraham> | MikeSmith: I can't think of any. You could just write idlharness.js tests for all elements. That would produce a lot of fails :) |
| 08:54 | <jgraham> | In unrelated thoughts, have we attempted to get jQuery and others to make it policy to submit tests when they find themselves working around browser bugs? |
| 08:55 | <jgraham> | http://blog.methvin.com/2013/02/tragedy-of-webkit-commons.html whines about the fact that it's hard to get bugs fixed |
| 08:56 | <jgraham> | But having public failing tests is one way to put pressure on vendors to fix things |
| 08:56 | <jgraham> | So it seems like a win for jQuery and a win for the web |
| 08:57 | <darobin> | jgraham: that's a very good idea |
| 08:57 | <darobin> | I believe there's been talk about it but no action |
| 08:57 | <odinho> | jgraham: We do have Julian Auborg. And now another jQuerist in TAG. |
| 08:57 | <jgraham> | odinho: In the nicest possible way "in the TAG" and "helping the Open Web" are not really the same thing |
| 08:57 | <darobin> | Julian has definitely been interested in testing, he was at TestTWF Paris and has asked several questions about the testing framework |
| 08:58 | <odinho> | Yeah |
| 08:58 | <darobin> | (some of which I still need to answer I'm afraid :() |
| 08:58 | <jgraham> | Yup |
| 08:58 | <odinho> | He's cool. And very interested in testing. |
| 08:58 | <darobin> | yeah he's cool |
| 08:58 | <jgraham> | Sure, I met him in Paris/Lyon too :) |
| 08:59 | <odinho> | He's test facilitator for XHR. And did the test with putting test status in the XHR spec. |
| 08:59 | <jgraham> | But while it's still at the level of "a few individuals are interested" it's not really good enough |
| 08:59 | <darobin> | I think he was a bit annoyed with someone here saying that he didn't understand the web platform well enough to use XHR (because he was using jQuery for some spec stuff) |
| 08:59 | <odinho> | Yeah, -- but I guess it's also to do with process. |
| 08:59 | <darobin> | (or maybe I'm mixing that up with someone else) |
| 08:59 | <jgraham> | We have to leverage their interest to make it something that happens by default |
| 09:00 | <jgraham> | darobin: I think annevk might have said that? |
| 09:00 | <jgraham> | But I could be wrong |
| 09:01 | <darobin> | "Never doubt that a few individuals who are interested can write some tests; indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." |
| 09:01 | <darobin> | -- Margaret Mead, at TestTWF |
| 09:01 | <darobin> | jgraham: might be possible |
| 09:01 | <darobin> | not a very smart comment whoever it came from |
| 09:03 | <jgraham> | darobin: It is hard to disagree that individuals write tests. But it is much more likely that they will write tests when they are in an environment where writing tests is normal and expected |
| 09:03 | <jgraham> | At the moment, for the OWP, there aren't so many environments like that |
| 09:03 | <darobin> | jgraham: I know, I was just having fun introducing anthropology completely gratuitously |
| 09:04 | <jgraham> | (at least for the case of browser-neutral, public tests) |
| 09:04 | <darobin> | in general, without worrying about getting the jQuery project involved directly, it would be a good idea to trawl through the jQ code and spot everything weird it does to work around a bug |
| 09:04 | <darobin> | I want write access to tobie's todo list :) |
| 09:05 | <darobin> | we should track these ideas as bugs |
| 09:05 | <darobin> | whoever wants to set it up gets to pick the bug tracker |
| 09:05 | <jgraham> | "it would be a good idea [...] to trawl through the jQuery code" /me phones the blood testing people to check for illicit substances in darobin's system |
| 09:05 | <darobin> | jgraham: it's something I've done before — it's actually not that long and pretty readable |
| 09:05 | <jgraham> | s/[...] // |
| 09:05 | <annevk> | darobin: just seemed wrong |
| 09:06 | <darobin> | annevk: what did? |
| 09:06 | <annevk> | darobin: using some ajax() abstraction instead of XHR in the XHR spec |
| 09:06 | <darobin> | ah :) |
| 09:06 | <darobin> | well, I expect people to dogfood |
| 09:06 | <annevk> | Though admittedly I'm not very impressed thus far with my three counterparts at the W3C |
| 09:07 | <darobin> | also, there's a reason why ajax() is popular, and it's not because people don't understand XHR! |
| 09:07 | <darobin> | well, that's another issue altogether |
| 09:08 | <darobin> | I'm pretty sure that Julian, who's in charge of ajax(), understands XHR pretty damn well in practice |
| 09:08 | <jgraham> | darobin: Anyway, I think my point is that us going through the jQuery code trying to look for weirdness doesn't scale |
| 09:08 | <darobin> | jgraham: I'm not disagreeing that we should get more people involved |
| 09:09 | <darobin> | but I was thinking of this as a project that could encourage participation |
| 09:09 | <darobin> | sort of like what Brackets does |
| 09:09 | <jgraham> | Brackets? |
| 09:09 | <darobin> | whenever they have a simple bug that's not critical, instead of solving it they add it to an "easy" list |
| 09:09 | <darobin> | so that people who want to get involved can find an easy entry point |
| 09:09 | <darobin> | http://brackets.io/ |
| 09:10 | <jgraham> | [goodfirstbug] |
| 09:10 | <jgraham> | Or something |
| 09:10 | <darobin> | exactly |
| 09:10 | <darobin> | a lot of people know the jQ code, and/or are interested in it, and understand what a given part does |
| 09:10 | <darobin> | spot a bug, submit a test, make jQ smaller and faster over time can be an enticing avenue of action |
| 09:11 | <darobin> | I think it feels more concrete than "write a test against a spec" |
| 09:11 | <darobin> | anyway, just a thought |
| 09:11 | <darobin> | cat log >> tobie.todo |
| 09:13 | <jgraham> | Well whichever path we take to get there I am happy, as long as the destination is a culture where people that depend on the web, and benefit from a high degree of interoperability, are engaged in behaviours that actively improve interoperability, rather than assuming it is someone else's problem |
| 09:13 | <darobin> | you mean as opposed to only testing for WebKit? |
| 09:14 | <jgraham> | Well in the case of jQuery, I mean as opposed to hacking around any bugs they find and then years later moaning that no one fixed the bugs |
| 09:14 | <jgraham> | jQuery are relatively good about testing in lots of engines |
| 09:15 | <jgraham> | Although "relatively good" is quite a low bar here |
| 09:16 | <darobin> | they're actually pretty damn good |
| 09:16 | <jgraham> | Sure |
| 09:16 | <jgraham> | they could be a lot less good and still re relatively good though |
| 09:16 | <jgraham> | *be |
| 09:17 | <darobin> | heh, yeah |
| 09:17 | <darobin> | I've also been wondering if it would make sense to collaborate with http://swarm.jquery.org/ |
| 09:18 | <darobin> | browserstack has run 272 million tests through that interface |
| 09:18 | <darobin> | it's not bad |
| 09:35 | <Ms2ger> | MikeSmith, I've written tests to check the HTML*Element interfaces |
| 09:40 | <jgraham> | Ms2ger++ |
| 09:41 | <Ms2ger> | ./html/semantics/interfaces.html I think |
| 09:44 | <Ms2ger> | "The polyglot feature represents, to me, its value proposition." |
| 09:44 | Ms2ger | snorts |
| 09:49 | <MikeSmith> | Ms2ger: thanks |
| 09:49 | <MikeSmith> | (for the tests not for the snorts) |
| 09:50 | <Ms2ger> | Hmm, do we still have a data element? |
| 09:51 | <MikeSmith> | far as I know |
| 09:52 | Ms2ger | puts reviewing that test on his todo list |
| 10:01 | <Ms2ger> | darobin, hey, feel like reviewing a test of mine? :) |
| 10:02 | <darobin> | Ms2ger: sure :) |
| 10:02 | <Ms2ger> | darobin, https://github.com/w3c/html-testsuite/pull/22 |
| 10:04 | <darobin> | ta, I'll look |
| 10:11 | <annevk> | Got to love how http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2012/vendor-prefixes-mobile-monoculture/ contrasts with http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2013/opera-and-webkit-a-personal-perspective/ |
| 10:14 | <sangwhan> | annevk: :P |
| 10:16 | <othermaciej> | I think Opera using WebKit is bad for the Web because WebKit has the least creative name of the major browser engines |
| 10:16 | <othermaciej> | compared to Gecko, Presto, Trident, it sounds so boring |
| 10:16 | <Ms2ger> | othermaciej, Gecko is hiring ;) |
| 10:16 | <othermaciej> | Ms2ger: if I could have the code name without having to touch the code…. |
| 10:17 | <jgraham> | othermaciej: Sure you can |
| 10:17 | <jgraham> | Go into PR |
| 10:17 | <Ms2ger> | Why do I have a libjs-jquery package installed? |
| 10:17 | <othermaciej> | me working for Mozilla PR would be a brilliant plan for destroying Mozilla |
| 10:18 | <Ms2ger> | I'd suggest joining Opera PR, but it's too late to do anything to them :) |
| 10:19 | <annevk> | othermaciej: if that's the only reason why it's bad it doesn't seem so bad |
| 10:19 | <annevk> | othermaciej: the web is already full of bad names and doing just fine |
| 10:19 | <othermaciej> | they managed to get a lot more press this week than they have for a while |
| 10:20 | <jgraham> | See, you are ideal for PR |
| 10:22 | <othermaciej> | based on this week, I’d recommend changing engines once a month |
| 10:23 | <sangwhan> | Everyone should take turns and swap engines every once in a while. Ensures job security for browser engineers. |
| 10:25 | <darobin> | oooh, now there's an idea |
| 10:25 | <darobin> | it would also keep developers on their toes |
| 10:26 | <Ms2ger> | But then we'd all have to work on WebKit at times... |
| 10:27 | <jgraham> | Ms2ger: Not really |
| 10:27 | <jgraham> | Just mandate that every browser must have a short release cycle and each release must use a different engine in a fixed order |
| 10:27 | <jgraham> | The people working on the engines could keep working on one product at a time |
| 10:27 | <sangwhan> | ...and you carefully schedule your vacations |
| 10:28 | <jgraham> | But the frontsends would all have to be engine-independent |
| 10:28 | <jgraham> | *frontends |
| 10:28 | <jgraham> | Also annevk would get a hippo |
| 10:32 | <annevk> | I'm in! |
| 10:36 | <MikeSmith> | so I had a mail problem and lost most my unread list mail and bugmail from yesterday |
| 10:36 | <MikeSmith> | I'm wondering if I should feel bad about that |
| 10:39 | <annevk> | Sound wonderful :-) |
| 10:40 | <annevk> | Although I guess even if I lost email, I could still figure out what to work on by looking through the long lists of open bugs :/ |
| 10:49 | <annevk> | Ugh, rewriting low-level bits of URL is no fun |
| 10:53 | <MikeSmith> | darobin: for generating the test-case numbers in http://w3c-test.org/html-testsuite/master/tools/coverage/ do you look for test-cases in the top-level dirs? |
| 10:54 | <darobin> | MikeSmith: you mean above depth 3? |
| 10:54 | <MikeSmith> | it seems like not because it'd otherwise be catching the tests in semantics/interfaces.html |
| 10:54 | darobin | looks |
| 10:54 | <MikeSmith> | I mean like that semantics/interfaces.html case |
| 10:55 | <darobin> | "/html/semantics/interfaces.html": 131, |
| 10:55 | <darobin> | so they get detected — if they get lost it's later in the process |
| 10:56 | <darobin> | "semantics": 1129, |
| 10:56 | <jgraham> | darobin: Why does that script think that "navigating across documents" has zero testable words in it? It's a giant, confusing, normative, algorithm |
| 10:56 | <darobin> | MikeSmith: well they seem to be listed? |
| 10:56 | <jgraham> | Which is unimplemeneted in all browsers |
| 10:56 | <MikeSmith> | darobin: hmm I guess there's no separatee row where they're listed? |
| 10:57 | <jgraham> | It's like the most desirable section of the spec to get tests for |
| 10:57 | <MikeSmith> | they're just added to the total but not listed separately? |
| 10:57 | <darobin> | MikeSmith: if a test file is right under semantics/ it goes into semantics |
| 10:57 | <MikeSmith> | ah |
| 10:57 | <MikeSmith> | ok, I see |
| 10:57 | <darobin> | if you want it in a subsection, you need to put it in a subsection dir |
| 10:57 | <MikeSmith> | ok |
| 10:57 | <darobin> | I treat the file names as meaningless |
| 10:57 | <darobin> | because, mostly, they are |
| 10:58 | <MikeSmith> | sure |
| 10:58 | <darobin> | jgraham: lemme look |
| 10:58 | <darobin> | it's very much possible that there are bugs with the spec analysis code — analysing the HTML spec is a FPITA |
| 11:00 | <darobin> | jgraham: yeah I confirm that's a bug |
| 11:01 | darobin | sighs |
| 11:02 | <darobin> | I wish I could use XPath for this, but it just causes PhantomJS to go crazy |
| 11:08 | <annevk> | same for application cache stuff |
| 11:08 | <annevk> | downloading-or-updating-an-application-cache is definitely stuff that requires tests (if we keep it long term that is, otherwise, care) |
| 11:08 | <annevk> | not doing tests for rendering also seems somewhat wrong |
| 11:15 | <Ms2ger> | annevk, want to review my rendering test? :) |
| 11:16 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: I'm on the TAG man, got more important things to do |
| 11:16 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: j/k, pointer? |
| 11:16 | <Ms2ger> | https://github.com/w3c/html-testsuite/pull/22 |
| 11:16 | <annevk> | Hmm, that does look kinda painful to review |
| 11:17 | <Ms2ger> | Heh |
| 11:19 | <annevk> | Okay, so this is mostly about border attribute parsing? |
| 11:19 | <Ms2ger> | Yeah |
| 11:19 | <annevk> | Is there no reflecting attribute for that? |
| 11:19 | <Ms2ger> | https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102112 fwiw |
| 11:23 | <annevk> | Oh, so the spec says that if the algorithm generates an error, it's fine |
| 11:23 | <annevk> | "is also found to have a value other than zero or to generate an error" was confusing me |
| 11:24 | <annevk> | is -0 less than 0? |
| 11:24 | <Ms2ger> | -0 is 0 |
| 11:25 | <annevk> | okay, commented on the pull |
| 11:25 | <annevk> | is that the correct procedure? |
| 11:25 | <Ms2ger> | Sure |
| 11:25 | <Ms2ger> | Now I get to figure out how to merge this :) |
| 11:28 | <annevk> | And I can try to find something else to postpone rewriting fragile URL algorithms |
| 11:29 | <Ms2ger> | :D |
| 11:33 | <annevk> | Hmm if someone sets .href, do we just want to blow the previous query object away or do we want to update it? |
| 11:33 | <annevk> | I guess we want to update it. |
| 12:03 | <annevk> | Hmm, now URL terminology... I guess I can curse Hixie back while he's not around. |
| 12:09 | <smaug____> | annevk: curious, has anyone collected use cases for the new event listener registration thing. And also list of ways to add listeners in various script libraries |
| 12:10 | <annevk> | smaug____: mostly just looked at a bunch of libraries |
| 12:10 | <annevk> | smaug____: plus feedback from developers here and there |
| 12:11 | <smaug____> | but not written all that to a wiki or anything like that? |
| 12:12 | <annevk> | no |
| 12:13 | <annevk> | Nobody ever asks me for my wiki pages :-) |
| 12:16 | <annevk> | smaug____: jQuery has on()/off(); Dart has on.eventName.add()/remove(); X? has obj = on() |
| 12:17 | <annevk> | smaug____: then they have "event delegation" (wrong name yadayada) via selectors and given that default bubbling would be good |
| 12:17 | <annevk> | smaug____: the other use case that came up recently was only receiving trusted events |
| 12:17 | <annevk> | smaug____: which seems reasonable once we have a dictionary for registration options |
| 12:19 | <smaug____> | s/X/Prototype.js/ ? |
| 12:19 | <smaug____> | Dart isn't too relevant |
| 12:20 | <smaug____> | ah, yeah, Gecko has a way to receive only trusted events |
| 12:37 | <annevk> | smaug____: not sure when I'll get to specifying them though |
| 12:38 | <smaug____> | well, before specifying them it is better to know what to specify :) |
| 12:38 | <smaug____> | I mean, the feature set we want |
| 12:38 | <smaug____> | and syntax to use etc |
| 13:21 | marcosc | wishes WebIDL was on GitHub (*hint hint, heycam|away*)… I'm just putting that out there. |
| 13:35 | <zewt> | annevk: event delegation is the word everyone uses, so it's de facto the right name :P |
| 13:36 | <zewt> | what was the use case for receiving trusted events? i've never actually found a purpose of that flag (seems like a relic from the past, back when people visualized the "default action" as part of event dispatch rather than part of the caller) |
| 13:40 | <annevk> | I forgot, I don't store all that |
| 13:42 | <MikeSmith> | Ms2ger: are not the tests in dzenana-trenutak pull requests redundant with the existing semantics/interfaces.html tests? |
| 13:43 | <zewt> | know where it was actually requested? don't see "trusted" in the thread anywhere |
| 13:43 | <zewt> | would be nice to know the actual use case |
| 13:43 | <zewt> | afk |
| 13:48 | <annevk> | Probably the same use case why we have isTrusted in the first place. I think it relates to components. |
| 14:04 | <zewt> | the trusted flag predates components by about a century, right? heh |
| 14:05 | <Ms2ger> | MikeSmith, some of them probably are |
| 14:05 | <annevk> | Not really. XBL is pretty much the same thing |
| 14:05 | <Ms2ger> | idl.spec.whatwg.org? Mmmm |
| 14:05 | <annevk> | Well, century, that could be true I suppose if we're not too specific |
| 14:05 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: want |
| 14:08 | <zewt> | i don't really even know what xbl is, heh, other than it's something that isn't |
| 14:17 | <annevk> | The comments on http://robert.ocallahan.org/2013/02/and-then-there-were-three.html o_O |
| 14:22 | <zewt> | ultimately i suspect the diversity opera gives us doesn't actually benefit us that much, just because their market share is too small |
| 14:25 | <darobin> | it's not the market share that matters |
| 14:25 | <darobin> | it's the possibility |
| 14:26 | <annevk> | And it's getting feedback from a different set of implementation assumptions. |
| 14:26 | <annevk> | And a bunch more |
| 14:26 | <darobin> | what's more 2% market share isn't small |
| 14:26 | <darobin> | give me 2% of the web any day |
| 14:26 | <darobin> | I'll take that |
| 14:26 | <Ms2ger> | darobin, go move that repo instead of taking my market share |
| 14:26 | <darobin> | Ms2ger: tobie said no move it, so I no move it |
| 14:43 | <zewt> | it's small to authors :) 2% market share doesn't correspond to 2% development effort and testing to make our stuff work in it |
| 14:46 | <darobin> | well, turning away 1 person out of every fifty at your shop is hardly the key to success |
| 14:47 | <zewt> | depends on what your shop is, eg. what your resources are |
| 14:47 | <karlcow> | would 17% of mobile worldwide enough? http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_browser-ww-monthly-201112-201212 |
| 14:47 | <karlcow> | or 41% mobile in Bangladesh enough? http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_browser-BD-monthly-201112-201212 |
| 14:48 | <zewt> | that doesn't seem to distinguish opera mobile from opera mini, which from what i understand are very different beasts |
| 14:49 | <jgraham> | I would be interested to see numbers to back up the assertion that supporting WebKit + Gecko + Trident + Presto is significantly more expensive than supporting WebKit + Gecko + Trident |
| 14:50 | <karlcow> | 14.6% Desktop in Russian Federation http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-RU-monthly-201112-201212 |
| 14:50 | <karlcow> | not enough market share? |
| 14:51 | <karlcow> | jgraham: specifically when most of the time, the interop issue was coming for the absence of the codepath more than the incompatibility (blocking through user agent sniffing, forgetting the prefixes in css and JS, not having unprefixed fallbacks) |
| 14:55 | <jgraham> | karlcow: Indeed, that matches my experience too. There are *lots* of sites that would have worked OK with trivial fixes << 2% of the cost of building the site. |
| 14:55 | <jgraham> | Just not blocking Opera would take negative effort, for example |
| 14:55 | <jgraham> | That doesn't apply to all cases of course |
| 15:00 | <Ms2ger> | Wait, track.readyState is an integer? |
| 15:01 | <jgraham> | An unsigned short, in fact |
| 15:02 | <jgraham> | readyState always is, so it's consistent |
| 15:02 | <jgraham> | Even if that's not how we do things these days |
| 15:20 | <Ms2ger> | jgraham, except it isn't; IDB and WebRTC use strings |
| 15:20 | <Ms2ger> | As do some of the B2G APIs |
| 15:41 | <MikeSmith> | jgraham: so looking at the outline algorithm I don't see that there's anything testable in it |
| 15:42 | <MikeSmith> | because it doesn't state that UAs are actually required to expose it, or how |
| 15:44 | <MikeSmith> | wouldn't it make sense to just have a document.outline? |
| 15:44 | <MikeSmith> | so that is actually gets exposed to Web content? |
| 15:44 | <MikeSmith> | and the Web developers could actually do something with it |
| 15:44 | <MikeSmith> | e.g., use it to generate a ToC |
| 15:45 | <Ms2ger> | No, then we'd have to implement it ;) |
| 15:45 | <jgraham> | MikeSmith: Well |
| 15:45 | <jgraham> | I think that browsers are not the intended conformance class |
| 15:45 | <MikeSmith> | maybe they should be |
| 15:46 | <jgraham> | Interesting idea |
| 15:46 | <jgraham> | One problem is that the algorithm is too heavyweight to use in style |
| 15:46 | <MikeSmith> | exposing an outline for Web devs to use seems like a potenally pretty useful thing to do |
| 15:46 | <jgraham> | So the obvious idea of ::heading(n) doesn't really work |
| 15:47 | <jgraham> | I could go with that |
| 15:48 | <MikeSmith> | go with it meaning you don't think it's a bad idea? |
| 15:48 | <jgraham> | Not until hsivonen explains to me that it is ;) |
| 15:48 | <Ms2ger> | "Last, nothing motivates most of us to act than seeing something wrong on the Internet." |
| 15:48 | <Ms2ger> | All too true |
| 15:50 | <jgraham> | MikeSmith: One concern might be that it would be slow to generate |
| 15:50 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 15:51 | <MikeSmith> | so we deal with that by having it only generated on demand |
| 15:51 | <MikeSmith> | I wonder if there's any similar precedent |
| 15:51 | <jgraham> | Right, but the class to document.outline would block the UI thread |
| 15:52 | <MikeSmith> | right so we can't do it that way |
| 15:52 | <jgraham> | MikeSmith: Lots of things are generated lazilly inside UAs |
| 15:52 | <jgraham> | Although, maybe it is no worse than querySelector |
| 15:52 | <jgraham> | Or something |
| 15:52 | <jgraham> | In which case it is fast enough |
| 16:00 | <Ms2ger> | annevk, shouldn't DOM say (Mozilla Foundation) for the three of us now? :) |
| 16:02 | <MikeSmith> | jgraham: so no document.outline but instead created with document.createOutline(Element element) |
| 16:03 | <MikeSmith> | so you could do document.createOutline(document.documentElement) if you wanted an outline for the whole document |
| 16:03 | <MikeSmith> | or you could create an outline for whatever portion of the document you wanted one for |
| 16:43 | <jgraham> | MikeSmith: Is there a use case for a partial outline? |
| 16:43 | <Ms2ger> | TOCs for individual posts on blogs? |
| 16:44 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 16:44 | <MikeSmith> | TOCs per section, in a long single-page doc |
| 16:45 | <Ms2ger> | Hell, the HTML spec |
| 16:45 | <MikeSmith> | hah yeah |
| 16:45 | <MikeSmith> | plus that's a nice general statement |
| 16:46 | <MikeSmith> | curse |
| 16:47 | <MikeSmith> | like Khaaaaaan!! |
| 16:48 | <MikeSmith> | jgraham: could still make it so that document.createOutline() does it for the whole document |
| 16:48 | <MikeSmith> | I guess |
| 16:49 | <MikeSmith> | or add .createOutline() to Element :) |
| 16:49 | <MikeSmith> | but I think that would not be so popular |
| 16:50 | <dglazkov> | good morning, Whatwg! |
| 16:50 | <MikeSmith> | or HTMLELement |
| 16:51 | <MikeSmith> | rather |
| 16:51 | <dglazkov> | I was on vacation yesterday. Did anything interesting happen? |
| 16:51 | <MikeSmith> | though still not likely be popular |
| 16:51 | <jgraham> | MikeSmith: Or Object :p |
| 16:51 | <MikeSmith> | dglazkov: the Quickening |
| 16:51 | <dglazkov> | again?! |
| 16:51 | <MikeSmith> | plus webkitmemes |
| 16:51 | <dglazkov> | I thought we cancelled that |
| 16:52 | <MikeSmith> | dglazkov: nope, you're on the way to top, Highlander |
| 16:52 | <MikeSmith> | it'll just be you and Sean Connery in the end |
| 16:53 | <dglazkov> | I'll yield to Sean. He seems like a cool dude |
| 16:53 | <jgraham> | I have never seen Highlander, but I am imagining dglazkov on top of a Scottish mountain, shirtless, screaming "I am the only one" |
| 16:53 | <jgraham> | It is quite distressing |
| 16:54 | <dglazkov> | when did I lose the shirt? |
| 16:54 | <jgraham> | Quite early on |
| 16:54 | <dglazkov> | hmm. |
| 16:54 | <MikeSmith> | this picture of dglazkov evens looks a lot like Sean Connery: http://media.weirdworm.com/img/misc/6-reasons-highlander-is-awesome/connery.jpg |
| 16:54 | <dglazkov> | that does seem distressing |
| 16:55 | <MikeSmith> | oh man this dglazkov picture even more so http://www.danvelazquez.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/zardoz.jpg |
| 16:56 | <dglazkov> | red underwear. Never could resist that. |
| 16:57 | <MikeSmith> | then there's the new WebKit logo that's been proposed http://www.retronaut.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/zardoz-12.jpg |
| 16:58 | <dglazkov> | stop, stop. You're bringing back memories of that terrible, terrible movie. I give up. |
| 17:00 | <MikeSmith> | dglazkov: "the rudeness with which you made your demand is a sign of dirty conscious" |
| 17:01 | <dglazkov> | <_< |
| 19:19 | <wilhelm> | MikeSmith: You're right. Reading Haavard's tweets is a bad idea. Infuriating stuff. :P |
| 19:19 | <othermaciej> | why is it infuriating? |
| 19:23 | <MikeSmith> | wilhelm: yeah, whatever universe he lives in, it ain't ours |
| 19:25 | <MikeSmith> | othermaciej: he's the Asa Dotzler of Opera |
| 19:25 | <wilhelm> | Pretty much. |
| 19:25 | <othermaciej> | yeah but he’s always been, hasn’t he? |
| 19:26 | <wilhelm> | Yes, but always towards some other browser vendor. Not against former co-workers. (c: |
| 19:28 | <othermaciej> | ah |
| 19:28 | <othermaciej> | well, if he’s going to be reflexively pro-opera, I guess he has to be against anyone who is against opera’s current position |
| 19:29 | <wilhelm> | Yes. I just realized the same thing. |
| 19:29 | <wilhelm> | We've always been at war with Eurasia. |
| 19:29 | <MikeSmith> | othermaciej: yeah true. but it has always baffled me why he's kept on at Opera while massively more productive people are given an invite to work elsewhere |
| 19:29 | <othermaciej> | has Asa ever jumped on ex-Mozilla people? |
| 19:30 | <othermaciej> | I do not know what Haavard’s official day job is or how good he is at it so I can’t comment |
| 19:32 | <othermaciej> | I think Opera’s choice is reasonable under the circumstances though it’s regrettable to have fewer serious browser engines |
| 19:33 | <MikeSmith> | I'll bite my tongue on that at this point (about dude) |
| 19:35 | <wilhelm> | Yes, Opera has been on a collision course with that iceberg for years. And the captain was asleep. My frustration is about the poor decisions that made this inevitable, not the switch itself. |
| 19:35 | <MikeSmith> | othermaciej: outside of the opera thing there are pretty obviously some serious challenges here with this code |
| 19:35 | <tantek> | "Support -webkit- prefixes? Why not all of WebKit?" |
| 19:36 | <MikeSmith> | othermaciej: this is not 2001 or whatever or even 2008 |
| 19:37 | <othermaciej> | WebKit: it |
| 19:37 | <othermaciej> | ’s not just a prefix |
| 19:40 | <tantek> | … it's several prefixes (-webkit-, -khtml-, … ) |
| 19:43 | <Philip`> | Opera should submit a patch to WebKit to add support for -o- prefixes, since there's probably a few sites that rely on that |
| 19:48 | <wilhelm> | Stock markets are funny. "We missed our projected earnings." -10%! "Someone said Facebook may buy us!" +20%! "It's Tuesday!" +5%! ... "18 years of development - and our codebase is worthless." -2%! |
| 19:51 | <marcosc> | LOL |
| 21:08 | <freedrull> | are there any efforts being made to make <audio> aware of icecast/shoutcast metadata updates? |
| 22:23 | <doublec> | freedrull: there's been discussion on the mailing list about changes to metadata but I'm not aware of anything specific happening |
| 22:52 | <volkmar> | how should CORS behave from localhost (ie. not really from another origin) |
| 22:59 | <roc> | I wish Webkit leaders would come out for or against the "screw Web standards, we want a Webkit monoculture" movement |
| 23:00 | <TabAtkins> | A lot of high WebKit people aren't on the Twitters. :/ |
| 23:00 | <TabAtkins> | (I havent' written anything myself, but I've been RTing like mad.) |
| 23:00 | <roc> | Anything in public would do |
| 23:04 | <jamesr> | roc, what sort of statement would you want to see? |
| 23:05 | <jamesr> | "we don't want a monoculture, thus XXXXXX". what's the XXXXXX you want to read? |
| 23:09 | <roc> | I just want to know who in Webkit wants a monoculture, and who doesn't |
| 23:10 | <roc> | partly for my own curiosity, and partly so when people advocate a monoculture I can say, among other things, "and these Webkit people agree with me" |
| 23:10 | <jamesr> | who's advocating a monoculture? |
| 23:11 | <roc> | because whenever *I* say a monoculture is bad, people who disagree say that that's just because I'm not part of the monoculture |
| 23:11 | <roc> | jamesr: John Resig |
| 23:11 | <jamesr> | he's not part of the WebKit leadership (or the community in general AFAIK) |
| 23:11 | <roc> | people commenting on my blog post |
| 23:11 | <roc> | right |
| 23:12 | <nimbu> | why is this such an 'us vs them' discussion? |
| 23:12 | <nimbu> | its not 'with us or against us' |
| 23:12 | <roc> | I didn't say the "screw Web standards, we want a Webkit monoculture" movement is actually coming from the Webkit community |
| 23:12 | <jamesr> | i think that would be fairly obvious |
| 23:12 | <nimbu> | idiotis are uniformly distributed |
| 23:12 | <nimbu> | -i |
| 23:12 | <nimbu> | (clearly i am an idiot) |
| 23:13 | <jamesr> | for the record, i'm also against smallpox, terrorism, and that nasty feeling you get when your sock gets wet inside your shoe |
| 23:13 | <roc> | jamesr: it's not obvious to John Resig at least, and he's no idiot |
| 23:13 | <jamesr> | is he? |
| 23:13 | <jamesr> | is he implying that the WebKit leaders want a monoculture, or that *he* wants a monoculture? |
| 23:14 | <nimbu> | and i dont think he has ever advocated 'screw other browsers' theory |
| 23:14 | <roc> | he does, or at least, he doesn't care if there is one |
| 23:14 | <jamesr> | if the answer is that *he* wants a monoculture, then the inclinations of WebKit leaders is kind of irrelevant |
| 23:14 | <jamesr> | we don't have any control over what he thinks or wants |
| 23:15 | karlcow | doesn't understand this IRC exchange. :) |
| 23:15 | <jamesr> | things that are bad for WebKit or the web community in general may very well be good for jresig |
| 23:15 | <karlcow> | but I agree with nimbu on "idiotis are uniformly distributed" |
| 23:16 | <karlcow> | even on keeping the i in idiotis, it is kind of cute and make it like a disease |
| 23:16 | <nimbu> | :P |
| 23:16 | <karlcow> | ;) |
| 23:17 | <jamesr> | roc, to be clear, i think a monoculture is bad. othermaciej, to pick a "WebKit leader" who has spoken about this topic, has expressed the same sentiment consistently for years |
| 23:18 | <roc> | jamesr: the problem is that anyone who's not a Webkit person arguing against a Webkit monoculture is easily seen as biased |
| 23:18 | <jamesr> | so implying that the folks commenting on your blog are pulling support from an implicit or explicit advocacy for monoculture from WebKit leaders seems highly disingenuous |
| 23:18 | <roc> | I'm not implying that at all |
| 23:19 | <jamesr> | but you feel that WebKit community members have an obligation to argue with people on the internet? |
| 23:19 | <roc> | there's a big discussion going on and I haven't seen Webkit leaders say anything and I'd like to. That's all. |
| 23:19 | <roc> | Have you got something on the record I can link to at least? |
| 23:20 | <jamesr> | i'm pretty sure this channel is logged, maciej was discussing this earlier |
| 23:22 | <roc> | When something blows up like this I think it's helpful to reiterate positions. We don't lose a major browser engine all that often. |
| 23:23 | <roc> | that doesn't translate into an obligation to argue with people on the Internet. |
| 23:23 | <jamesr> | but i'm not sure what sort of statement you are trying to get. a general sentiment that monoculture is bad, or some sort of condemnation of Opera's actions? |
| 23:23 | <roc> | the former. |
| 23:24 | <hober> | roc: see http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20130214#l-990 |
| 23:24 | <roc> | I don't expect anyone to condemn Opera's actions ... I don't. They're doing what they need to do to survive. |
| 23:25 | <jamesr> | certainly. they're in a tough spot |
| 23:25 | <roc> | hober: thanks |
| 23:25 | <roc> | that'll do for now. |
| 23:46 | karlcow | is curious to know what roc is calling a WebKit leader? Reviewers? |
| 23:48 | <roc> | Maciej, Adam Barth, James himself, Hyatt, Ollie ... the old-timers, the great and the good :-) |
| 23:51 | <karlcow> | ah ☺ ok thanks. |
