| 00:06 | <Garbee> | There is this bug in the webplatform.org bugzilla project that looks like it belongs in the WHATWG project somewhere. Location is: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18702 |
| 00:16 | <Hixie> | weird |
| 00:16 | <Hixie> | oh, i see, somebody just vandalised the bug |
| 00:17 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: looks like you want to ban kaissar11⊙gc and undo anything they did, based on what they did in https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18702 |
| 00:17 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: will do |
| 06:40 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: btw the above is the only bug I could find which that guy touched |
| 06:40 | <MikeSmith> | but anyway I have banned the address now |
| 07:00 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: k |
| 07:00 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: thanks |
| 07:14 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: I wonder if it might make sense to change the name of the "Offline Web applications" section |
| 07:14 | <MikeSmith> | to "Cached Web applications" or "Locally installed Web applications" or something |
| 07:15 | <MikeSmith> | I think part of the confusion people have with it is because of that title |
| 07:15 | <Hixie> | why? |
| 07:15 | <MikeSmith> | I think the body of the spec makes it clear |
| 07:15 | <MikeSmith> | why is because they think the app gets served from the cache only when the user is offline |
| 07:16 | <Hixie> | what people want is "Cached Web applications", but it's not what that section provides, what it provides is applications that act as if they are always offline |
| 07:16 | <MikeSmith> | not that it's the Web app itself that is actually offline |
| 07:16 | <Hixie> | maybe i should rename it to "always-offline web applications"? but that's not quite true either |
| 07:16 | <MikeSmith> | well then someting that conveys 2applications that act as if they are always offline |
| 07:16 | <MikeSmith> | oops |
| 07:17 | <MikeSmith> | something that conveys "applications that act as if they are always offline" would be better |
| 07:17 | <MikeSmith> | I think the title as-is is ambiguous |
| 07:18 | <MikeSmith> | "Offline-by-default Web applications" |
| 07:18 | <MikeSmith> | though that's not really accurate either |
| 07:18 | <Hixie> | yeah, i dunno |
| 07:19 | <Hixie> | if you think of a title that's accurate and better than what we have now, file a bug. so far, i think what we have now is the least inaccurate, though i entirely agree that it's misleading. |
| 07:19 | <Hixie> | i think the real problem isn't the title, though |
| 07:19 | <MikeSmith> | ok well I'll make a bug for it. Maybe somebody else will see it a suggest soemthing celve. |
| 07:19 | <Hixie> | i think the real problem is just that the spec doesn't solve people's problems |
| 07:19 | <MikeSmith> | yep |
| 07:19 | <Hixie> | they see the title, think that it's what they want |
| 07:19 | <Hixie> | and then get confused |
| 07:19 | <Hixie> | so when we fix that, this title will become less of an issue |
| 07:20 | <MikeSmith> | ok |
| 07:20 | <MikeSmith> | yeah I guess just changing the title would be papering over the mismatch |
| 07:25 | <MikeSmith> | "The implementors of Appendix C failed to implement it correctly"... I wonder who he has in mind as the "implementors" of Appendix C |
| 08:18 | <hsivonen> | MikeSmith: who is talking about implementors of Appendix C? |
| 08:19 | <hsivonen> | does one implement Appendix C by publishing documents that adhere to it? |
| 08:19 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2013Feb/0113.html |
| 08:19 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: no clue |
| 08:19 | <MikeSmith> | but that would be my only guess too |
| 08:20 | <MikeSmith> | which isn't implementing it of course |
| 08:20 | <MikeSmith> | it's just conforming to it |
| 08:24 | <tantek> | I think "implementing" in that context referred to browsers. |
| 08:28 | <othermaciej> | the context seems to refer to browsers |
| 08:28 | <othermaciej> | but the things he says implementors "should" do are what they in fact did… |
| 08:29 | <othermaciej> | or is he complaining about Mozilla's early implementation which did something else when the intent was less clear? |
| 09:32 | <darobin> | it's Friday, let's have fun with the TAG! |
| 09:32 | <darobin> | http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2013Feb/0114.html |
| 09:33 | <jgraham> | Or "Play TAG" as the kids say |
| 09:42 | <MikeSmith> | hah |
| 09:42 | <MikeSmith> | Playground TAGtics |
| 09:43 | <MikeSmith> | darobin is becoming a TAG-baiter |
| 09:45 | <darobin> | hehehe |
| 09:48 | <annevk> | the new TAG is certainly supportive of that |
| 09:48 | <annevk> | certainly is what we've been doing |
| 09:51 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: I think that's called "self abuse" |
| 09:51 | <darobin> | aka onannevk |
| 09:52 | <MikeSmith> | and I'm pretty sure the previous TAGs pioneered architectural "self abuse" |
| 09:54 | <MikeSmith> | http://goo.gl/kKwqi |
| 09:55 | <jgraham> | MikeSmith: You suggesting getting the TAG to the dictionary as an example of "self-abuse"? |
| 09:57 | <MikeSmith> | *snort* |
| 09:57 | <MikeSmith> | not me, no |
| 09:57 | <MikeSmith> | gotta like that way somebody thinks who would suggest that |
| 10:00 | <MikeSmith> | the current TAG so far has not delivered enough humor in return for the votes I bought |
| 10:00 | <MikeSmith> | I paid for humor. I paid for "The Standards Suck Team Joins the TAG" |
| 10:01 | <jgraham> | Oh man |
| 10:01 | <jgraham> | Why are we not making a movie of this |
| 10:01 | <jgraham> | "Standards Suck does TAG" |
| 10:02 | <MikeSmith> | someday the chronicle of this journey will be written |
| 10:02 | <jgraham> | Hmm |
| 10:02 | <jgraham> | "chronicle" |
| 10:02 | <jgraham> | sounds like Peter Jackson will turn it into a 9 hour snooze-fest |
| 10:03 | <MikeSmith> | nah this will probably be written on a roll of toilet paper like Kerouac did |
| 10:03 | <MikeSmith> | and I will play the part of William S Burroughs |
| 10:05 | <MikeSmith> | like he was in Drugstore Cowboy |
| 10:06 | <jgraham> | I like it better already |
| 10:33 | <Stevef_> | MikeSmtih: play the part? you live it |
| 10:34 | <jgraham> | Stevef_: It's method acting |
| 10:34 | <Stevef_> | :-) |
| 10:34 | <jgraham> | The real MikeSmith is a stay-at-home sober type |
| 10:34 | <Stevef_> | jgarham: LOL right |
| 10:35 | <Stevef_> | me/ my spelling |
| 10:35 | Stevef_ | my spelling |
| 10:35 | Stevef_ | and ability to use IRC commands is woeful |
| 10:38 | <jgraham> | Me complaining about other people's spelling would be like Pollock berating Klein for being too slapdash |
| 10:46 | <annevk> | You guys make me feel bad for pointing out typos in specs |
| 10:47 | <jgraham> | Typos in specs != typos on IRC |
| 10:49 | <hsivonen> | In the last two weeks or so, I reviewed a patch that only added punctuation to comments in code. |
| 10:50 | <Stevef_> | "Typos in specs != typos on IRC" agreed |
| 10:52 | <smaug____> | annevk: so any reason why to not add the default values to EventInit ? |
| 10:52 | <smaug____> | just for readability |
| 10:56 | <annevk> | your argument was different |
| 10:58 | <annevk> | smaug____: what's the point for readability? |
| 10:58 | <annevk> | hmm |
| 10:58 | <annevk> | sorry, is that the only point now? |
| 10:58 | <annevk> | I intentionally did not do that because people think they define the defaults and think they don't have to define the defaults therefore |
| 10:58 | <hsivonen> | I always become unhappy when I see how localized builds of Firefox make the charset menu even worse than it is by default in en-US |
| 10:59 | <Stevef_> | annevk: which part of london you living in? |
| 10:59 | <annevk> | We should really not leave that in the control of l10n. |
| 10:59 | <annevk> | Stevef_: W1 |
| 10:59 | <hsivonen> | annevk: I intend to file bugs to that effect after lunch. |
| 11:00 | <Stevef_> | annevk: city boy |
| 11:00 | <annevk> | hsivonen: I'd vote for them if I felt that'd have an effect, but please cc me to back you up in case there's pushback :-) |
| 11:00 | <hsivonen> | annevk: ok |
| 11:00 | <annevk> | Stevef_: quite :-) |
| 11:01 | <Stevef_> | annevk: I'll wait for an invite to Mozilla HQ ;-) |
| 11:03 | <annevk> | Stevef_: you can drop by pretty much anytime :-) there's a sort of open space to work from too, it's semi-restricted but since you know me it should be okay |
| 11:03 | <Stevef_> | annevk: cool, will ping you sometime when i can bring myself to venure out of the burbs |
| 11:03 | <annevk> | heh |
| 11:04 | <Stevef_> | i find that the only time i leave kingston is to go overseas, very rarely go to london proper |
| 11:05 | <Stevef_> | glad I don't need to, commuting is crap |
| 11:09 | <annevk> | I'm not a big fan of the tube either, glad to walk |
| 11:11 | <Stevef_> | it's OK if its off peak for a joy ride, but having to use it sucks |
| 11:14 | <gsnedders> | annevk: W1? Rich boy. :P |
| 11:18 | <SimonSapin> | annevk: are you within walking distance of the Mozilla office? |
| 11:18 | <smaug____> | annevk: "don't have to define the defaults therefore" ? |
| 11:18 | <smaug____> | what you mean with that |
| 11:20 | <gsnedders> | SimonSapin: If he lives in W1, then yeah, he will be. |
| 11:20 | <SimonSapin> | nice |
| 11:21 | <gsnedders> | On a related note, why the hell do I know about London postcodes? |
| 11:22 | <annevk> | smaug____: new people designing events might think they don't need to define the default values via prose |
| 11:22 | <annevk> | SimonSapin: yup |
| 11:23 | <smaug____> | annevk: well, new events shouldn't use createEvent anyway |
| 11:23 | <annevk> | smaug____: is that implemented? |
| 11:24 | <smaug____> | "that"? |
| 11:24 | <annevk> | smaug____: do browsers not support new events via createEvent? |
| 11:24 | <smaug____> | at least in Gecko we don't put new events to the list of stuff you can create using createEvent |
| 11:25 | <gsnedders> | On an unrelated note: Anybody got any ideas for a 200 hour final year project for uni next year that they think might interest me? |
| 11:25 | <smaug____> | though, there are plenty of un-spec |
| 11:25 | <smaug____> | 'ed events in createEvent.. |
| 11:26 | <annevk> | hmm |
| 11:26 | <Ms2ger> | gsnedders, a HTML parser in Haskell |
| 11:26 | <smaug____> | hmm, or not so many after all |
| 11:26 | <gsnedders> | Ms2ger: To what end? |
| 11:26 | <annevk> | http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-document-createevent has a very short list |
| 11:26 | <annevk> | might be too short |
| 11:26 | <Ms2ger> | gsnedders, a degree, I presume ;) |
| 11:27 | <smaug____> | all the old stuff is there in gecko |
| 11:27 | <gsnedders> | Ms2ger: But what makes it interesting from an academic POV, I meant? |
| 11:27 | <Ms2ger> | If you want something useful... One in C? |
| 11:27 | <smaug____> | I mean stuff before event constructors |
| 11:27 | <annevk> | smaug____: pointer? |
| 11:27 | <Ms2ger> | Oh |
| 11:27 | <Ms2ger> | Haskell ;) |
| 11:27 | <gsnedders> | XD |
| 11:28 | <smaug____> | annevk: http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/content/events/src/nsEventDispatcher.cpp?rev=3b05660cbdd2&mark=821-910#819 |
| 11:29 | <jgraham> | I thought we decided Coq was the right implementation language for an academic parser |
| 11:29 | Ms2ger | has never heard of Coq |
| 11:29 | <Ms2ger> | I think I'd like to keep it that way :) |
| 11:30 | <gsnedders> | Theorem prover that can export Haskell/ML impls of the functions. |
| 11:30 | <annevk> | gsnedders: IDNA? |
| 11:30 | <gsnedders> | annevk: Certainly academic enough. :P |
| 11:30 | <jgraham> | Also, if annevk was really a city boy he would live in EC1 |
| 11:31 | <gsnedders> | Pedant. |
| 11:31 | <annevk> | jgraham: so close |
| 11:31 | <gsnedders> | Wait, EC1 isn't the city quite, is it? |
| 11:32 | <jgraham> | Wikipedia says it is |
| 11:32 | <jgraham> | I think |
| 11:32 | <gsnedders> | Yeah, it is. |
| 11:33 | <gsnedders> | Okay. I thought it was too far west looking it up, but obviously not. |
| 11:34 | <annevk> | smaug____: so I think I'm moderately convinced it's a good idea to go down this route |
| 11:34 | <annevk> | smaug____: any chance we're going to trim that list in the future? |
| 11:35 | <smaug____> | not very likely |
| 11:35 | <smaug____> | there are some gecko specific events there which ofc should be removed |
| 11:38 | <Stevef_> | gsnedders: didn't mean city in the bowler hat sense... |
| 11:38 | <Ms2ger> | And mutation events :) |
| 11:40 | <gsnedders> | Things I love: waiting for parcels to appear. |
| 11:41 | <annevk> | WebKit has a long list too http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/Source/WebCore/dom/EventNames.in |
| 11:42 | <annevk> | And their infrastructure seems geared towards making it ever longer |
| 11:42 | <jgraham> | gsnedders: If you calculate the probabilities, it is *highly* unlikely that parcels will just appear |
| 11:42 | <jgraham> | Even if you already have the parcel the other side of some energy barrier like, say, a wall |
| 11:43 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: When they were dispatched yesterday on next day delivery going to my flat? |
| 11:43 | <jgraham> | Quantum tunneling just isn't going to happen |
| 11:47 | <hsivonen> | annevk: https://mxr.mozilla.org/l10n-central/source/zh-CN/toolkit/chrome/global/intl.properties#54 does that look like a Web-compatible default or like political activism? |
| 11:47 | <hsivonen> | shouldn't that be gbk? |
| 11:48 | <hsivonen> | I'm unhappy that the HTML spec just parrots what happened to be in Mozilla's repos one day without checking if IE agrees |
| 11:48 | <annevk> | It has been argued we might be able to merge them, but until that is done I'd expect gbk to be more prevalent |
| 11:49 | <annevk> | Merge gbk and gb18030 that is |
| 11:49 | <hsivonen> | ok |
| 12:14 | <annevk> | smaug____: so we expect document.createEvent("customevent") to not be removable? |
| 12:16 | <annevk> | well yeah, if we have initCustomEvent we should have that too |
| 12:16 | <smaug____> | customevent has been there quite awhile |
| 12:17 | <smaug____> | and supporting createEvent for it doesn't make the platform that much worse |
| 12:19 | <smaug____> | but, I don't have any data about customevent usage |
| 12:31 | <annevk> | added it |
| 12:37 | <annevk> | https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2013-February/023943.html o_O |
| 12:37 | <annevk> | That seems kinda weird |
| 13:00 | <hsivonen> | annevk: did you find the actual regulation? the spec links to a summary of the regulation |
| 13:01 | <hsivonen> | annevk: anyway, live TV in the U.S. traditionally uses captioning where text scrolls up when more text appears instead of the previous caption disappearing |
| 13:02 | <hsivonen> | annevk: and the regulation requires programming that has been shown on TV to retain the captions on the Web |
| 13:02 | <annevk> | hsivonen: I did not investigate. I merely find it odd it would not be in the proper draft. |
| 13:02 | <hsivonen> | annevk: unclear if the exact scrolling behavior needs to be retained per regulation |
| 13:02 | <hsivonen> | annevk: oh right |
| 13:02 | <annevk> | And that this coordination happens on webkit-dev rather than whatwg |
| 13:03 | <hsivonen> | yeah, that sucks |
| 13:03 | <annevk> | Or maybe the coordination also happened on the WebVTT list? I'm not on that... |
| 13:04 | <annevk> | http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-texttracks/2013Feb/ doesn't look like it |
| 13:05 | <annevk> | http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-texttracks/2012Dec/0000.html is where the discussion starts hsivonen if you're interested |
| 13:20 | <hsivonen> | annevk: thanks |
| 13:39 | <karlcow> | "due to several FCC regulations"… but no links to these regulations |
| 13:40 | <karlcow> | maybe maciej knows |
| 13:41 | <Stevef_> | Karlcow: this may be helpful http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-texttracks/2012Dec/0066.html |
| 13:43 | <karlcow> | ah thanks Stevef_ that helps understanding |
| 13:43 | <karlcow> | was missing context |
| 14:08 | <hsivonen> | sigh. so many bugs to file about this encoding stuff |
| 14:09 | <hsivonen> | maybe I should suggest that changes to these prefs that affect the behavior of the HTML parser should need review from the HTML parser module owner (i.e. me) |
| 14:10 | <Ms2ger> | What's next, getting build system changes reviewed by build system peers? :) |
| 14:10 | <annevk> | hsivonen: yes you should |
| 14:14 | <jgraham> | Is this the point where I start the "if you used critic, it would automagically pick the right reviewers based on the file path" pitch? |
| 14:19 | <karlcow> | :) |
| 14:23 | <jgraham> | I wonder if there is money to be made marketing critic so it becomes popular, selling hosted critic installs, and eventually being bought by github. Or whether they would eventually just take advantage of the licesning and integrate it with github directly |
| 14:36 | <hsivonen> | annevk: OK. suggested |
| 14:38 | <marcosc_> | GPHemsley: any chance of a status update on MIME sniffing spec? |
| 14:38 | <marcosc_> | anything I can do to help? |
| 14:59 | hsivonen | finds https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=536506 |
| 15:32 | <sedovsek> | An odd question. Is it or would it be possible to perform some sort of automated UI test with the emphasis on visual appearance of our websites/apps? |
| 15:34 | <karlcow> | sedovsek: such as taking a screenshot to see if it's conform to a reference image? |
| 15:35 | <karlcow> | you can use selenium Web driver to take screenshots http://la-grange.net/2012/05/04/webdriver-kiwi-talk/?full#screencode |
| 15:35 | <karlcow> | then make a diff of the image |
| 15:35 | <karlcow> | http://la-grange.net/2012/05/04/webdriver-kiwi-talk/?full#compare |
| 15:36 | <karlcow> | The idea is not from me but from a Mozilla bug report |
| 15:36 | <karlcow> | quite cool. |
| 15:37 | <sedovsek> | @karlcow: Thanks for pointing that out. |
| 15:37 | <sedovsek> | I think https://mogotest.com/ does something similar. |
| 15:38 | <sedovsek> | It's perhaps even cooler, because it does not take reference image, but it takes a website in predefined browser as a reference. |
| 15:38 | <sedovsek> | And afterwards compares rendered result from other browsers to this one. |
| 15:38 | <karlcow> | yup just a matter of what you define as a reference. :) |
| 15:39 | <sedovsek> | It's less work that way. |
| 15:41 | <hsivonen> | annevk: gotta love the rationale for adding stuff like autodetection support for GB18030: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92806 |
| 15:42 | <hsivonen> | it seems that most of the time, CJK detections were not added out of need but just for completeness |
| 15:42 | <hsivonen> | I wish I could go back in time and r- |
| 15:43 | <annevk> | :) |
| 15:45 | <annevk> | hsivonen: the name invites those kind of patches |
| 15:46 | <hsivonen> | annevk: yes. |
| 15:46 | <hsivonen> | annevk: the name invites to enable it, too |
| 15:46 | <hsivonen> | who wouldn't want universal detection, right? |
| 15:46 | <annevk> | uhuh |
| 15:46 | <gsnedders> | I know a guy who wouldn't. He's called Henri. |
| 15:47 | <annevk> | oh gsnedders |
| 15:47 | <annevk> | gsnedders: are you ever in London? |
| 15:47 | <gsnedders> | I know a girl, too. Called Anne. ;P |
| 15:47 | <gsnedders> | annevk: Occasionally. I was last month. :P |
| 15:48 | <annevk> | gsnedders: ah, but I wasn't; next time gimme a ping |
| 15:48 | <gsnedders> | annevk: I always intend to go to London more than I ever do. |
| 15:49 | <MikeSmith> | drunk or troll? https://twitter.com/anttikoivisto/status/304962127653912576 "The biggest problem with C++ is the lack of features." |
| 15:49 | <zewt> | heh |
| 15:58 | <hsivonen> | I wonder if the CJK combo detector has users |
| 16:21 | <MikeSmith> | so I guess the Chrome CDM-related stuff is at https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome/trunk/src/webkit/media/crypto/ppapi/ |
| 16:33 | <dglazkov> | good morning, Whatwg! |
| 16:35 | <tantek> | good morning dglazkov! |
| 16:48 | <annevk> | so all these web app stores? |
| 16:49 | <annevk> | are they global or local? |
| 16:52 | <marcosc> | annevk: I also got screwed when I moved from Australia to Norway to Portugal. |
| 16:52 | <marcosc> | It's pretty stupid |
| 16:52 | <marcosc> | I lost a whole bunch of software |
| 16:52 | <marcosc> | that was associated with the norwegian credit card I had |
| 16:52 | <annevk> | Does Android do this? |
| 16:53 | <marcosc> | I have not had any issue with Android |
| 16:53 | <annevk> | They don't care about copyright law or did they manage to solve it? |
| 16:53 | <gsnedders> | annevk: The Play Store is global, as are accounts, and you can always just grab the .apk |
| 16:53 | <gsnedders> | annevk: What they sell you depends on the locale of your address, I believe. |
| 16:55 | <annevk> | arv_: is there a WebKit bug that matches https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=844134 ? |
| 16:55 | <annevk> | arv_: would be nice to link 'm |
| 16:55 | <annevk> | gsnedders: that sounds reasonable |
| 16:55 | <arv_> | annevk: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110510 |
| 16:55 | <annevk> | thanks! |
| 16:56 | <annevk> | also, nice :) |
| 16:57 | <annevk> | that'll help remove some source comments from the spec |
| 17:10 | <GPHemsley> | Not sure if this is the right audience, but FYI: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gellens-negotiating-human-language ("Negotiating Human Language Using SDP") |
| 17:15 | <TabAtkins> | GPHemsley: Yeah, runaway element. :/ This is why you shouldn't use unidirectional chars as pairs. |
| 17:16 | <TabAtkins> | GPHemsley: Follow the "negative-capable" link. It defines which systems use a negative sign. |
| 17:18 | <TabAtkins> | GPHemsley: I'm somewhat inconsistent in whether I refer to the @counter-style rule or the "counter style" so defined, so shrug. I should do a fixup in general. |
| 17:28 | <GPHemsley> | TabAtkins: Not sure what you mean re negative-capabale. I'm referring to this paragraph: " Not all ‘system’ values use a negative sign. In particular, a counter style is negative-capable is one where its ‘system’ value is ‘symbolic’, ‘alphabetic’, ‘numeric’, ‘additive’, or ‘override’ if the overridden counter style is itself negative-capable. If a counter style is not negative-capable, it ignores the nega |
| 17:28 | <GPHemsley> | tive sign when generating a counter representation. " |
| 17:35 | <GPHemsley> | marcosc: I haven't really been working on mimesniff, because there hasn't seemed to have been much interest, and I don't have any other motivation. I don't have any particular vested interest in it. |
| 17:50 | <MikeSmith> | CAQGBgoFD1YaHA4ZH1AIBwIOBR8ADhJWU1pcXlADBBgfBQoGDlYDCgUeDgcORgkIXVtcWVtQ |
| 17:51 | <TabAtkins> | GPHemsley: I don't understand what you mean, then. |
| 17:52 | <TabAtkins> | GPHemsley: Oh! You want a non-normative example of what kind of systems aren't negative-capable? |
| 17:52 | <GPHemsley> | TabAtkins: Yup! :) |
| 17:52 | <TabAtkins> | Ah, sure, I can do that. Email www-style to remind me? I'm in the middle of Syntax edits right now, so I'll forget by next Monday. |
| 17:55 | <annevk> | mounir: https://github.com/slightlyoff/DOMFuture/ |
| 17:57 | <marcosc> | GPHemsley: It's kinda central to some of the SysApps WG work (but not sure if that means much). |
| 17:58 | <marcosc> | I guess it's mostly a documentation task... or did you find some interop issues? |
| 17:58 | <GPHemsley> | marcosc: I didn't really get that far. |
| 17:59 | <marcosc> | I noticed a few times you were doing a bit of testing here an there |
| 17:59 | <marcosc> | GPHemsley: if I was to help with it, what would you advise me to do? |
| 17:59 | <marcosc> | (theoretically speaking( |
| 17:59 | <marcosc> | ) |
| 17:59 | <GPHemsley> | Yeah, but it was all preliminary, and I didn't record the results (except insofar as I mentioned them in here). |
| 18:00 | <GPHemsley> | marcosc: I honestly don't know. It'd probably be more helpful to me if I knew what exactly your usecases were. |
| 18:01 | <GPHemsley> | Right now the spec is more what browsers should do, rather than what they actually do. |
| 18:01 | <marcosc> | In FxOS, they've defined an app:// URI that reads files from a zip achieve. The browser then user heuristics to try to work out what the mime type is for those files. |
| 18:02 | <marcosc> | (well, the URI does not read, but you know what I mean) |
| 18:02 | <marcosc> | So, I assume the heuristics are basically based on file extensions and magic numbers |
| 18:02 | <GPHemsley> | So, heuristics for detecting the type after they've been unzipped? |
| 18:02 | <marcosc> | exactly |
| 18:02 | <marcosc> | soo, given a file with no extension foo... |
| 18:03 | <GPHemsley> | Are there types that aren't on the list that should be? |
| 18:03 | <marcosc> | Probably not, I think the list covers the main types |
| 18:04 | <marcosc> | s/list/spec |
| 18:04 | <GPHemsley> | Alright, so, where is the spec lacking, then? |
| 18:05 | <marcosc> | GPHemsley: that's my initial question to you about status update? :) |
| 18:05 | <GPHemsley> | Oh. Heh. |
| 18:05 | <GPHemsley> | Yeah, I don't really know. |
| 18:05 | <marcosc> | and if you needed any help with finishing it :) |
| 18:05 | <GPHemsley> | The contents of the lists were mostly written by abarth, from a security standpoint. |
| 18:06 | <marcosc> | I know that either Mark Pilgrim or Mark Baker had written a reference implementation of it |
| 18:06 | <GPHemsley> | Oh? |
| 18:06 | <marcosc> | Yeah, this was a few years back |
| 18:06 | <GPHemsley> | Ah |
| 18:06 | <marcosc> | If it was Mark Pilgrim ... then we might be out of luck |
| 18:06 | <GPHemsley> | Yeah... I never heard about it, so I wouldn't know |
| 18:08 | <marcosc> | GPHemsley: no probs. |
| 18:08 | marcosc | reading https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=808593 |
| 18:10 | <marcosc> | GPHemsley: thanks for the info. This was useful :) |
| 18:11 | <GPHemsley> | I'm surprised, but glad. :) |
| 18:27 | <Hixie> | annevk: it's because i think it's a dumb feature and haven't specced it |
| 18:28 | <Hixie> | annevk: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20348 |
| 18:31 | <annevk> | Hixie: what a mess |
| 18:31 | <Hixie> | not that much of a mess, at least they wrote a spec |
| 18:40 | <Hixie> | hmmm |
| 18:40 | <Hixie> | maybe TextTrackCue should be WebVTTCue |
| 18:42 | <annevk> | hsivonen: you still online? |
| 18:43 | <annevk> | hsivonen: can we support an encoding name that is not one of its labels? |
| 18:43 | <annevk> | hsivonen: going to assume yes for now |
| 18:43 | <annevk> | Hixie: so UAs are implementing multiple formats? :/ |
| 18:44 | <Hixie> | are firefox and IE doing anything at all? |
| 18:45 | <annevk> | no idea what we are doing |
| 18:45 | <zewt> | basically it seems like they've given up arguing that roll-up captions are actually good, and are just falling back on "our lawyers say you have to do this and we expect you to take our word for it" (and I've since stopped paying attention) |
| 18:46 | <Hixie> | zewt: yeah but when i pointed out that the best way to handle the FCC requirements was just to implement CEA-708 natively, nessy's response was basically just "no, we want X" with no rationale at all |
| 18:46 | <annevk> | so I'm an idiot |
| 18:46 | <annevk> | I had these tools to process various bits for the Encoding Standard |
| 18:47 | <annevk> | and they are not in the repository, and with multiple computer switches, they're likely gone |
| 18:49 | <Hixie> | no backups? |
| 18:49 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie, annevk: AFAIK, Mozilla is working on WebVTT support |
| 18:50 | <annevk> | Hixie: I just found something from October 2012 from when I tried out Google Drive |
| 18:50 | <GPHemsley> | See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=629350 and dependencies |
| 18:50 | <annevk> | so teehee Google Drive |
| 18:50 | <annevk> | maybe I should enable that again |
| 18:50 | <annevk> | or just put more stuff on GH |
| 18:51 | <rillian> | GPHemsley: yep. It's actually a studen group implementing it right now |
| 18:51 | <GPHemsley> | rillian: Well, I knew that, but I didn't think it was relevant. ;) |
| 18:53 | <rillian> | Hixie: I still don't understand the rollup argument. Is it that we should provide native roll up so authors can use it to comply with these regulations, or do people believe the user agent itself is subject to the regulations? |
| 18:54 | <Hixie> | rillian: i think the argument is that the browsers are subject to the regulations in certain cases if they're made by US companies that also publish US made-for-TV content? i dunno. |
| 18:54 | <rillian> | aha |
| 18:54 | <rillian> | charming |
| 18:55 | <Hixie> | this is the kind of stuff we can expect to be entirely covered by if the ITU were to take over btw |
| 18:55 | GPHemsley | wonders if mimesniff stuff is still needed if it was only requested by Opera. |
| 18:56 | <Hixie> | GPHemsley: mimesniff is required by everyone as far as i can tell |
| 18:56 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie: Yeah, but there were a few things where only Opera spoke up and said "we want this" |
| 18:56 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie: But also, I was mostly joking |
| 18:56 | <Hixie> | ah, like what? |
| 18:56 | <Hixie> | heh ok |
| 18:57 | <GPHemsley> | certain context-specific sniffing algorithms |
| 18:57 | Hixie | gets bored of going through the e-mail from when he was afk and goes back to the sorting algorithm |
| 18:57 | <GPHemsley> | hah |
| 18:57 | <GPHemsley> | how much of your life have you devoted to that? |
| 18:57 | <Hixie> | e-mail, or the sorting algorithm? :-) |
| 18:57 | <Hixie> | too much, in both cases, i'm sure :-) |
| 18:57 | <GPHemsley> | oh, I know better to ask about e-mail ;) |
| 18:58 | <GPHemsley> | +than |
| 18:58 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie: What is your primary concern in https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20867 ? That the algorithm references the value it's defining? |
| 18:59 | <Hixie> | you're invoking the algorithm recursively |
| 18:59 | <Hixie> | due to the way you defined the variable you're using |
| 18:59 | <GPHemsley> | hmm |
| 19:00 | <Hixie> | e.g. in step 7, "If the sniffed media type is not undefined, abort these steps" |
| 19:00 | <GPHemsley> | right |
| 19:00 | <Hixie> | just use a local scratch variable |
| 19:00 | <Hixie> | and when you exit, return that variable |
| 19:00 | <GPHemsley> | I see what you're saying, but I'm not sure everyone would read it that way |
| 19:00 | <Hixie> | rather than using "is" |
| 19:00 | <GPHemsley> | but OK |
| 19:00 | <Hixie> | well, if you have a spec, and not everyone is reading it the same way, you have a bug, regardless :-) |
| 19:01 | <GPHemsley> | oh, I've got a bug alright ;) |
| 19:01 | GPHemsley | gets out his bug squasher |
| 19:01 | <Hixie> | i have had to change many sentences over the years because silly people didn't understand what i meant :-P |
| 19:02 | <Hixie> | a lot of the stiltedness of the spec prose comes from avoiding colloquially understood yet strictly ambiguous phrasing |
| 19:02 | <Hixie> | ("or" is a big offender in this) |
| 19:03 | <GPHemsley> | ah, yeah |
| 19:03 | <GPHemsley> | had a bunch of that |
| 19:03 | <GPHemsley> | if x and y or x and z |
| 19:03 | <GPHemsley> | etc. |
| 19:04 | <Hixie> | also people start getting _really_ irked when my sentences span more than a few lines |
| 19:06 | <GPHemsley> | now I have to remember how to edit this spec |
| 19:06 | <GPHemsley> | (it's been ~3 months) |
| 19:09 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie: I keep meaning to ask you: What is the reason/motivation for allowing modern browsers to accept '--' in comments while having the validator reject them? |
| 19:11 | <Philip`> | GPHemsley: I think they're invalid because of a desire to minimise the differences between valid HTML and XML |
| 19:11 | <Philip`> | (and you can't have -- in a comment in XML) |
| 19:11 | <Hixie> | they're invalid because they can't be reserialised in xml mode |
| 19:11 | <GPHemsley> | I'm actually more concerned with the former part of the question ;) |
| 19:12 | <Hixie> | they're parsed for sanity/compat iirc |
| 19:12 | <Hixie> | we can't end the comment at the first "--0" |
| 19:12 | <Hixie> | er "--" |
| 19:12 | <Hixie> | and doing the full sgml thing like acid2 originally required was not popular with vendors |
| 19:12 | <GPHemsley> | I ask because, when I use Firefox 3.6, a lot of pages that would work in modern Firefox go completely blank, because they have -- in their comments |
| 19:12 | <Hixie> | to put it mildly |
| 19:12 | Hixie | is still in therapy from that |
| 19:13 | <Hixie> | yeah, firefox did that for acid2 |
| 19:13 | <Hixie> | before i was... convinced to change it |
| 19:13 | <GPHemsley> | argh |
| 19:13 | <Hixie> | hey, in my defense, that's what sgml requires! |
| 19:13 | <GPHemsley> | so who should I be mad at, then/ |
| 19:13 | <Hixie> | goldfarb |
| 19:13 | <Hixie> | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Goldfarb |
| 19:14 | <Hixie> | but he's already paid the cost |
| 19:14 | <Hixie> | his two colleagues' names survive in "HTML", whereas he was dropped |
| 19:14 | <Hixie> | poor guy |
| 19:14 | <GPHemsley> | But I thought -- wasn't allowed in SGML comments? |
| 19:14 | <Hixie> | SGML comments are started by -- and ended by -- |
| 19:14 | <Hixie> | but can only occur inside whatever a <!...> thing is called |
| 19:15 | <Hixie> | declaration or something |
| 19:15 | <GPHemsley> | heh |
| 19:15 | <GPHemsley> | but somebody convinced you to allow them |
| 19:15 | <GPHemsley> | I want to be mad at that person |
| 19:15 | <Hixie> | allow what? |
| 19:15 | <Hixie> | i'm confused |
| 19:15 | <GPHemsley> | <!-- this is a -- comment --> |
| 19:15 | <Hixie> | in sgml, <!-- this is a comment -- but this is not --> this is a comment --> this is not |
| 19:15 | <GPHemsley> | that would be fine in a modern browser, but would blank the rest of the page in Firefox 3.6 |
| 19:16 | <GPHemsley> | so I want to know who to blame for it being allowed in a modern browser |
| 19:16 | <jamesr> | Firefox 3.6 is not a modern browser |
| 19:16 | <jamesr> | it's ancient |
| 19:16 | <GPHemsley> | thank you |
| 19:16 | <Hixie> | what is "it" |
| 19:16 | <Hixie> | that is "allowd" |
| 19:16 | <Hixie> | you mean why is "<!-- this is a comment -- but this is not --> this is a comment --> this is not" not the standard? |
| 19:16 | <GPHemsley> | "<!-- this is a -- comment -->" |
| 19:17 | <GPHemsley> | would not cause a problem for modern browsers |
| 19:17 | <Philip`> | Are you arguing that it *should* cause a problem? |
| 19:17 | <GPHemsley> | yes |
| 19:17 | <GPHemsley> | ^_^ |
| 19:17 | <Hixie> | ah |
| 19:17 | <Hixie> | then the person you should "blame" is "all the sane people in web standards" |
| 19:17 | <Hixie> | which is to say, not me |
| 19:17 | <GPHemsley> | ah, that's a long thing to yell while shaking my fist... |
| 19:17 | <Hixie> | but we're wrong to want what you want |
| 19:18 | <Hixie> | well, i was wrong. i'm not any more, as i have since seen the light |
| 19:18 | <wilhelm> | Things that cause problems are problematic, m'kay. |
| 19:18 | <Hixie> | though firefox 3.6 remains as the legacy of my mistake, apparently |
| 19:18 | <GPHemsley> | so, I can blame you after all? |
| 19:19 | <Philip`> | Supporting -- in comments makes it much easier to embed hidden ASCII art in web pages |
| 19:19 | <GPHemsley> | Philip`: Yeah, but it makes it much harder for me to browse the Web with Firefox 3.6 ;) |
| 19:19 | <GPHemsley> | I mean, come on, weigh the value |
| 19:19 | <Hixie> | GPHemsley: changing modern parsers wouldn't affect legacy content |
| 19:20 | <Hixie> | GPHemsley: so it wouldn't make that much difference |
| 19:20 | <Hixie> | GPHemsley: other than making it harder for anyone to browse the web |
| 19:20 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie: Ah, but it would. Because people would suddenly wonder why all their pages are blank. |
| 19:20 | <GPHemsley> | And then they'd fix them. |
| 19:20 | <GPHemsley> | As it stands, they have no idea what they're doing to me. |
| 19:20 | <Philip`> | GPHemsley: Firefox is open source, so you can fork the Firefox 3.6 code and glue hsivonen's parser onto it (surely that can't be too hard) and then it'll all work nicely |
| 19:21 | <GPHemsley> | Philip`: That sounds hard. |
| 19:21 | <Hixie> | GPHemsley: most pages are not maintained |
| 19:21 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie: It's the modern and maintained pages that I'm trying to read ;) |
| 19:21 | <Hixie> | then use a modern and maintained browser |
| 19:21 | <GPHemsley> | I can't, because I'm not using a modern and maintained OS |
| 19:22 | <Hixie> | then use a modern and maintained OS |
| 19:22 | <Philip`> | Hmm, actually I think the new parser was probably included in FF3.6 (but disabled by default) |
| 19:22 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie: That costs money and/or time and/or effort. |
| 19:23 | <GPHemsley> | Philip`: Hmm, i think you're right. But it was preffed off because it was buggy. |
| 19:23 | <Hixie> | GPHemsley: so does using 3.6 apparently |
| 19:23 | <GPHemsley> | Philip`: But I don't know what the bugs were or how important they were. |
| 19:23 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie: Meh. |
| 19:23 | <GPHemsley> | Philip`: But you raise a valid point. Might be worth a shot. |
| 19:24 | <Philip`> | GPHemsley: Just keep about:config open and toggle html5.enable whenever you find a page that doesn't look right |
| 19:24 | <Philip`> | since probably one of the parsers will work okay |
| 19:24 | <GPHemsley> | hmm... |
| 19:24 | <GPHemsley> | anyway... back to mimesniff |
| 19:25 | <Hixie> | i hope you're not doing anything you care about on that machine, since you're basically begging to get owned :-) |
| 19:25 | <Philip`> | Anyway, surely your old unmaintained OS will be supported by a reasonably recent version of Opera, so you could use that instead |
| 19:26 | marcosc | starts port scanning GPHemsley.... |
| 19:26 | <marcosc> | ... what do we have here... :) |
| 19:29 | GPHemsley | notes he is not currently on that computer. ;) |
| 19:41 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie: Fixed? |
| 19:41 | <Hixie> | reassign the bug to me if you want me to review it -- i gotta go |
| 19:43 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie: I just resolved it, so you should have bugmail |
| 19:44 | <WeirdAl> | !seen mano |
| 19:44 | <WeirdAl> | oh, wrong channel |
| 20:14 | <GPHemsley> | so... video/avi or video/x-msvideo ? |
| 20:15 | <GPHemsley> | it looks like WebKit aliases the former to the latter |
| 20:15 | <GPHemsley> | Gecko doesn't seem to support AVI |
| 20:17 | <GPHemsley> | ...but only on Blackberry? o_0 |
| 20:18 | <GPHemsley> | (WebKit) |
| 20:21 | <GPHemsley> | other options include video/msvideo and video/vnd.avi (from RFC 2361) |
| 20:21 | <GPHemsley> | naturally, I'm inclined to prefer video/avi, for simplicitiy |
| 20:21 | <GPHemsley> | but video/x-msvideo may be more common |
| 20:21 | <GPHemsley> | (not that it necessarily matters for mimesniff, as I believe the intent is for internal use only) |
| 20:21 | <jwalden> | random mostly-unimportant question motivated by https://twitter.com/dolske/status/304829324656275456 is iframe/frame/subdocument-support-in-general recursion prevention specified at all in HTML? I didn't see anything in http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/history.html#navigate skimming, but it might have been elsewhere |
| 20:23 | <jwalden> | the Gecko rule is that recursion's cut off if the URL being navigated to, minus the hash-component, is the same as the URL of any parent window, fwiw |
| 20:25 | <jamesr> | jwalden, to prevent an iframe from iframing itself somehow? |
| 20:26 | <jwalden> | jamesr: yeah; for example http://johnathpointing.com/#johnathpointing.com/#bringinthecats.com/ fails because http://johnathpointing.com/ tries to haven an iframe with src="http://johnathpointing.com/#bringinthecats.com";, but since that's the URL of the outer window, Gecko just keeps you at (presumably) about:blank |
| 20:26 | <jwalden> | s/haven/have/ |
| 20:27 | <jamesr> | do you know why? |
| 20:27 | <jamesr> | and if other browsers have this? (in chrome i see what i think i expect which is bringinthecats.com on the inside |
| 20:27 | <jwalden> | jamesr: when you load a URL in Gecko, if any parent frame has the same URL ignoring the hash, it doesn't load; I have no idea what other browsers do at all |
| 20:27 | <jamesr> | yeah, but why? |
| 20:28 | <jwalden> | jamesr: so as not to get infinite regress, I'm guessing for easier debuggability than iterating to the max-nested-depth (whatever that is) |
| 20:28 | <jamesr> | chrome seems to stop at http://johnathpointing.com/#johnathpointing.com/#johnathpointing.com/#bringinthecats.com/ |
| 20:29 | <jwalden> | we have #define MAX_SAME_URL_CONTENT_FRAMES 1 right now, so the same URL twice cuts off; sounds like for you it's 2 or 3 |
| 20:30 | <jamesr> | sounds like something that should be tested + specced if browsers are behaving differently |
| 20:30 | <jwalden> | yeah |
| 20:31 | <jwalden> | the max-nested depth seems like something that should be impl-defined, perhaps with a minimum value, but same-URL recursion cutoff seems a bit different |
| 20:31 | <jwalden> | https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=136580 seems to have been the original bug |
| 20:31 | <jwalden> | I imagine back in 2002 there wasn't much thought about specs for this :-) |
| 20:39 | <jgraham> | jwalden: Pretty sure I filed a bug about that at some point |
| 20:39 | <jwalden> | interesting |
| 20:39 | <jgraham> | I don't remember what happened to it though |
| 20:40 | <jgraham> | (spec bug that is) |
| 20:41 | <jwalden> | not obviously finding anything at https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&order=relevance%20desc&bug_status=__all__&product=HTML%20WG&content=nest&list_id=5594 |
| 20:42 | <jgraham> | Me neither |
| 20:42 | <jgraham> | But I remember filing the bug! |
| 20:42 | <jgraham> | (searching email isn't going to happen at the moment) |
| 20:43 | <jwalden> | no worries, this is curiosity-slash-thinking it should be specified at some point, no importance to it timewise |
| 20:45 | <jwalden> | for posterity, http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/content/base/src/nsFrameLoader.cpp#1711 is Gecko's algorithm for checking for recursive loads, gist of which is you can't load a URL in a sub(sub-)*frame, and max frame nesting depth is 10 |
| 22:40 | <GPHemsley> | FTW, added signatures for AVI, AIFF, MIDI, and basic audio (AU). |
| 23:04 | <jarek> | Hi |
| 23:04 | <jarek> | is this an identifier or a location: "url(#gradient1") |
| 23:04 | <Hixie> | depends on your definitions of "identifier" and "location" |
| 23:05 | <rillian> | is there a standard file format for CEA 708 we could just support? |
| 23:05 | <Hixie> | and on whether you're talking about the whole thing or just the bit between the ()s |
| 23:05 | <jarek> | Hixie: by identifier I mean URI, by location I mean URL |
| 23:05 | <Hixie> | rillian: that was my suggestion, yeah |
| 23:05 | <Hixie> | jarek: what's the difference? |
| 23:05 | <Hixie> | jarek: isn't URI just an old term for URL? |
| 23:06 | <Hixie> | jarek: (http://url.spec.whatwg.org/ being the new spec) |
| 23:06 | <jarek> | Hixie: ahh, interesting |
| 23:06 | <rillian> | Hixie: I was worried it was only defined in terms of broadcast video standards |
| 23:06 | <jarek> | Hixie: so e.g. SVG spec will be updated to use this new definition instead of IRI? |
| 23:07 | <Hixie> | rillian: it's bytes, as i understand it. i don't see why it wouldn't be possible to store the bytes in a file. |
| 23:07 | <Hixie> | jarek: dunno, you'd have to ask the svg guys |
| 23:07 | <jarek> | nope... it's still uses IRI... https://svgwg.org/svg2-draft/intro.html#TermIRIReference |
| 23:07 | <rillian> | Hixie: it doesn't rely on the frame boundaries for timing? |
| 23:07 | <Hixie> | rillian: if so, that would be problematic, certainly. |
| 23:07 | <rillian> | too bad it costs money to find out |
| 23:08 | <rillian> | region isn't over the line for me in terms of complexity, especially if we have to implement roll-up display anyway |
| 23:08 | <rillian> | but then I think the positioning attributes are more complexity that webvtt should have |
| 23:08 | <rillian> | *than |
| 23:41 | <Samuel_Roldan> | are there any articles on how to style web components? more precisely, (and if possible) styling the element itself not using classes or inline styles. |