| 09:37 | <zcorpan> | i tried bananabench and ammo.js in firefox with asm enabled and then disabled, but didn't notice much of a difference |
| 09:39 | <zcorpan> | oh, that's because i have a mac |
| 10:53 | <Ms2ger> | 'I used to be down on Web IDL, until I realised I could pronounce it "Web Idyll".' |
| 10:53 | <Ms2ger> | Maybe we should tell TC39 that |
| 11:14 | <hsivonen> | https://s3.amazonaws.com/f.cl.ly/items/2L0a0B0R130G3u0k0b1y/Layering.pdf looks appealing but fails to discuss the benefits of CSS layout and painting not having to allow JS to plug into points inside the layout and painting process |
| 11:53 | <annevk> | hsivonen: From talking to wycats__ and slightlyoff it's not necessarily about exposing all the guts. First defining the layering better and second seeing what needs to be exposed and how. The hope is that implementors scream for future-hostile proposals. |
| 11:53 | <annevk> | Which seems pretty reasonable to me. |
| 11:53 | <annevk> | And I think it's something we've been doing to some extent already, although a lot of the focus has been on actually defining things in the first place too... |
| 16:17 | <dglazkov> | good morning, Whatwg! |
| 16:22 | <asmodai> | Well, the HTML5 DRM thing now reached defective by design |
| 16:22 | <asmodai> | http://www.defectivebydesign.org/no-drm-in-html5 |
| 17:05 | <wycats__> | hsivonen: it's not about exposing the guts |
| 17:05 | <wycats__> | in fact, it's explicitly about NOT exposing the guts |
| 17:05 | <wycats__> | it's about defining a layered model that's architecturally sound but which may be implemented and optimized in different ways |
| 17:05 | <wycats__> | which means NOT exposing every single C++ function as a JS hook |
| 17:05 | <wycats__> | (that's what we're doing now :/ ) |
| 17:37 | <Hixie> | asmodai: talk about missing the point |
| 17:55 | <Hixie> | anyone know how the content model is broken here? https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19650 |
| 17:55 | <Hixie> | i don't understand the bug report |
| 18:03 | <Hixie> | cabanier: ping https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19818#c1 last paragraph |
| 18:04 | <Hixie> | Ms2ger: ping https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17844 |
| 18:19 | <JonathanNeal> | Do web browsers download the first half of a video if I tell it to play from the second half on? |
| 18:20 | <JonathanNeal> | Say I tell a 10 minute video to play from the 5 minute mark, after, say, the loadedmetadata event, can it skip ahead without downloading the first 5 minutes? |
| 18:20 | <Hixie> | depends on many things |
| 18:21 | <Hixie> | browser, protocol used for downloading the file, server capabilities, etc |
| 18:21 | <JonathanNeal> | Hixie: are these written down somewhere in a friendly fashion? even just for a few of them, like which browsers support downloading fragments? |
| 18:21 | <Hixie> | no idea |
| 18:32 | <Ms2ger> | Hixie, as I said last time, I know nothing :) |
| 18:33 | <Hixie> | say it in the bug, otherwise i forget :-) |
| 18:33 | <Hixie> | sorry :-) |
| 19:24 | <asmodai> | Hixie: I didn't create it :) |
| 19:24 | <asmodai> | Hixie: But that's what the term DRM brings to the table nowadays, I guess. |
| 20:17 | <cabanier> | hixie: thanks! |
| 20:27 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: I suspect the commenter doesn't understand "then transparent" |
| 20:28 | <MikeSmith> | what you have is clear enough if you understand what "transparent" means in the spec |
| 20:28 | <MikeSmith> | but I can imagine it being not very clear if you don's |
| 20:42 | <MikeSmith> | I wish we could get the FSF as interested in examining the W3C document license in the context of what kind of copyright/license for core Web standards is in the public interest. |
| 23:17 | <danbeam_work> | dglazkov, Hixie, hober, jgraham, matjas, othermaciej, ShaneHud1on, TabAtkins, tantek can haz wiki.whatwg.org account to ever-so-slightly edit RequestAutocomplete spec? |
| 23:17 | <danbeam_work> | (http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/RequestAutocomplete) |
| 23:18 | <othermaciej> | I don't think I have the power to make wiki accounts |
| 23:18 | <danbeam_work> | you might want to remove yourself from here then http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/IRC |
| 23:18 | <danbeam_work> | othermaciej: ^ |
| 23:18 | <danbeam_work> | as it's in the header to ping somebody on that list |
| 23:19 | <danbeam_work> | doh, wrong list |
| 23:19 | <othermaciej> | wouldn't you want someone labeled "administrator" on this list? http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Special:ListUsers%26group%3Dautoconfirmed |
| 23:19 | <danbeam_work> | yes, just found that, my bad |
| 23:20 | danbeam_work | doesn't see the point of multiple valid link colors |
| 23:20 | <danbeam_work> | that link looked invalid |
| 23:20 | <danbeam_work> | hsivonen, also ^ (can haz wiki.whatwg.org account?) |
| 23:21 | <othermaciej> | as a side note, it would probably be helpful to for the proposal to explain use cases |
| 23:21 | <danbeam_work> | othermaciej: agreed |
| 23:21 | <danbeam_work> | othermaciej: I'll borrow from some of the other emails we've sent and add on to that for #requestAutocomplete() (i.e. payments for now) |
| 23:23 | <othermaciej> | I would have thought autocomplete should always be triggered by the UA or the user, not the website |
| 23:23 | <danbeam_work> | (as soon as I get an account, of course) |
| 23:24 | <danbeam_work> | othermaciej: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2012Oct/0274.html "Some examples:" |
| 23:25 | <danbeam_work> | this isn't like autofill or the preview of autofill in chrome now |
| 23:25 | <danbeam_work> | it pops a modal dialog, which I wouldn't trust a UA to know what works for all sites' use cases |
| 23:25 | <othermaciej> | oh hey, I already commented on the email thread on this, assuming it is the same requestAutocomplete() |
| 23:25 | <danbeam_work> | yes |
| 23:26 | <danbeam_work> | it was before I mentioned the use cases, though, IIRC |
| 23:27 | <danbeam_work> | othermaciej: also, re: autofill vs. autocomplete, complete and fill seem to be used interchangeably here and HTML spec calls out autocomplete= for individual fields *and* a whole form, so I doubt they'll be cleanly separated any time soon |
| 23:28 | <othermaciej> | I still think it's a bad idea to let websites initiate autocomplete/autofill as per my earlier message |
| 23:28 | <danbeam_work> | othermaciej: there's a few other points I think we responded to from your email - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2012Nov/0105.html - it was a while ago, can't really remember |
| 23:28 | <othermaciej> | but I guess that can be discussed on the list |
| 23:28 | <danbeam_work> | othermaciej: probably the best place |
| 23:29 | <danbeam_work> | othermaciej: I should also mention that it's based on user gesture, so it's not solely up to a site |
| 23:29 | <danbeam_work> | othermaciej: it's up to both |
| 23:29 | <danbeam_work> | othermaciej: as it is currently (at least a site author has the ability to *not* to autofill with autocomplete=off) |
| 23:32 | <othermaciej> | probably not useful to discuss it here since I'm sure many people have an opinion |