01:39
<GPHemsley>
TabAtkins, zcorpan: As long as you don't use "an universal"...
01:40
<TabAtkins>
See? Dumb rule. Starts with a vowel, but pronounced with an initial "y" sound.
01:58
<zewt>
(the rule is "starts with a vowel sound", eg. open-mouthed, and that's not)
02:23
GPHemsley
notes TabAtkins is using the "dumb rule" of two spaces after punctuation
02:23
GPHemsley
wonders if he's pointed this out before
02:24
GPHemsley
notes the "an" rule is one of phonology, which is naturalistic, not artificial
04:04
<TabAtkins>
GPHemsley: Punctuation rules don't actually matter to anything, and it's a habit in my fingers now.
04:09
<SimonSapin>
TabAtkins: Didn’t we resolve on 'pad' rather than 'fill'? https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/rev/372efb71c9ca http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013May/0377.html
04:10
<TabAtkins>
Darn, did we? I misremembered, then.
04:10
<TabAtkins>
I'll change it.
06:26
<SteveF>
GPHemsley: feel free to put your ideas to the WG
07:46
<zcorpan>
MikeSmith: http://www.w3.org/2009/07/webidl-check is giving me 503
07:48
<zcorpan>
or rather http://www.w3.org/2009/07/webidl-check?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.w3.org%2Fcsswg%2Fcssom%2F&output=text
07:51
<zcorpan>
apparently http://dev.w3.org/csswg/
07:55
<MikeSmith>
zcorpan: will check later
07:56
<MikeSmith>
away from my PC at the moment
08:02
<Ms2ger>
HTMLOptionsCollection has
08:02
<Ms2ger>
getter (HTMLOptionElement or HTMLOptGroupElement)? namedItem(DOMString name);
08:02
<Ms2ger>
Can it actually ever return a HTMLOptGroupElement?
08:06
<jgraham>
Why not?
08:07
<jgraham>
At last per-spec
08:10
<Ms2ger>
select.options is the only HTMLOptionsCollection, right?
08:11
<jgraham>
I don't know of any others off the top of my head
08:11
<Ms2ger>
The options IDL attribute must return an HTMLOptionsCollection rooted at the select node, whose filter matches the elements in the list of options.
08:11
<Ms2ger>
The list of options for a select element consists of all the option element children of the select element, and all the option element children of all the optgroup element children of the select element, in tree order.
08:12
<jgraham>
Right
08:12
<jgraham>
So it can contain optgroup elements
08:13
<Ms2ger>
No it can't
08:13
<Ms2ger>
It can contain children of optgroup elements
08:14
<jgraham>
Oooh, interesting. I can't read
08:39
<zcorpan>
Ms2ger: it can't return HTMLOptGroupElement afaict
08:44
<Ms2ger>
Good
08:44
<Ms2ger>
I filed https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22225
08:48
<jgraham>
Ms2ger: Bug would be better if you had written *can't*
08:48
<jgraham>
:)
08:49
<zcorpan>
heh, if i modify the tc is https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15588 to have <html dir=rtl>, webkit scrolls to the bottom
08:59
<Ms2ger>
jgraham, well, more like, added "only"
10:46
<zcorpan>
Hixie: turns out to spec 'top of the document' i first have to support vertical writing modes throughout :-)
11:14
<dekiss>
shoudl I read the specification from w3c.org website or from whatwg.org
11:15
<jgraham>
whatwg.org
11:15
<dekiss>
haha
11:15
<dekiss>
because I asked here you said that?
11:15
<annevk>
dekiss: feel free to ask us over email :p
11:15
<jgraham>
I will say the same thing if you ask on the W3C servers too :)
11:15
<dekiss>
I don't understand in whatwg website html living standard is updated non stop? continiously?
11:15
<dekiss>
ahah
11:16
<dekiss>
fu
11:16
<dekiss>
joke :D
11:16
<annevk>
it is
11:16
<dekiss>
are you people officials from whatwg? ^^
11:16
<dekiss>
you know ian ?
11:16
<annevk>
dekiss: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ has a lot of the details
11:16
<dekiss>
jgraham why will you do that?
11:16
<annevk>
dekiss: i guess I'm an official in some way
11:16
<jgraham>
It's only updated when Hixie's awake. Unless his cats get at the computer.
11:16
<dekiss>
why I should read on whatwg.org and not on w3c.org?
11:17
<annevk>
dekiss: w3.org mostly forks whatwg.org and therefore the latter is more up to date
11:17
<dekiss>
so
11:17
<dekiss>
I am confused
11:17
<annevk>
dekiss: it's what implementers look at too typically
11:17
<dekiss>
whatwg.org html standard is implemented in the web browsers or 23c standard?
11:17
<dekiss>
thwy differ a little
11:17
<dekiss>
w3c*
11:17
<dekiss>
hm
11:17
<annevk>
mostly WHATWG
11:17
<jgraham>
Because on w3.org you are more likely to get an out of date version or a version with some features split out into other documents for political reasons, or simply a version without up to date bug fixes
11:18
<dekiss>
so you say safari and opera for example (NOT IE) implement html from whatwg?
11:18
<dekiss>
website
11:18
<dekiss>
"split out for political reasons" ?
11:18
<dekiss>
canvas is republican and html is democrat?
11:18
<dekiss>
:D
11:18
<annevk>
dekiss: I strongly recommend reading through the FAQ I just linked
11:18
<dekiss>
why canvas is split out for political reasons
11:19
<dekiss>
ok but
11:19
<dekiss>
so you say safari and opera for example (NOT IE) implement html from whatwg?
11:19
<dekiss>
tell me honestly and i wil lrespect you
11:19
<dekiss>
^^
11:19
<annevk>
when I worked for Opera that was the case, I doubt it has changed
11:20
<annevk>
I think the same is true for Apple, but it may vary on a person-by-person basis
11:20
<dekiss>
ah
11:20
<annevk>
the short answer is that it's complicated and does not matter much
11:20
<dekiss>
so you recommend me t oread we dev edition?
11:20
<dekiss>
wil lI miss a lot ?
11:20
<dekiss>
I am not web browser maker (for now)
11:20
<dekiss>
I just make websites
11:21
<annevk>
dekiss: what do you want to learn about?
11:21
<dekiss>
adn web apps
11:21
<dekiss>
web dev
11:21
<annevk>
dekiss: web dev edition would be a good start, but also e.g. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/ has good introductions to many topics
11:21
<dekiss>
man you know if firefox chrome need workers? :D
11:21
<dekiss>
I can even clean monitors hahah :D
11:21
<dekiss>
but web dev monitors
11:22
<annevk>
dekiss: http://careers.mozilla.org/en-US/
11:22
<dekiss>
annevk I am not sure why I cant find list for all meta name atribbute values
11:22
<dekiss>
on whatwg.org
11:22
<annevk>
dekiss: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions
11:23
<annevk>
dekiss: also http://www.whatwg.org/C#standard-metadata-names (blessed by the HTML standard)
11:23
<dekiss>
ok thanks annevk
11:24
<dekiss>
how you found them
11:24
<dekiss>
i coudlnt :S
11:25
<annevk>
i know, basically
11:25
<annevk>
but the latter you can find by searching for "meta element" within the HTML standard and then clicking on the "name" attribute and then scrolling down
11:25
<annevk>
and I think at some point that links to the former
11:26
<dekiss>
ok
11:26
<dekiss>
thanks
11:30
<dekiss>
so DOM is developed at whatwg too?
11:30
<dekiss>
I thought its w3c thing
11:31
<boogyman>
the DOM is developed by implementers, the specification is co-authored by whatwg and w3c
11:31
<dekiss>
hm
11:31
<dekiss>
now im totaly lost
11:32
<dekiss>
co-authored what it means?
11:32
<annevk>
I write the DOM spec here: http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/
11:32
<JibberJim>
co = lots of arguments
11:32
<dekiss>
shoudl I read about DOM at whatwg or w3c
11:32
<JibberJim>
dekiss: Somewhere else
11:32
<annevk>
It's not currently being actively forked by the W3C.
11:32
<dekiss>
so at whatwg website I should read DOM right?
11:33
<annevk>
yes
11:33
<dekiss>
thanks annevk
11:33
<darobin>
it might not even be forked, just republished under RF :)
11:34
<dekiss>
ever gona be dom 4?
11:34
<annevk>
yes that'd be ideal
11:34
<annevk>
dekiss: dunno, versioning is kind of a concept of the past
11:34
<dekiss>
annevk
11:34
<dekiss>
I have one very big concern about html5
11:35
<dekiss>
first of all, all major website lets say: CNN, FAceook use only divs.. not single html5 element (header footer section)
11:35
<boogyman>
dekiss: wrong
11:35
<dekiss>
second, it is MUCH harder to make same website with html5 semantic elements
11:35
<dekiss>
than divs
11:35
<dekiss>
boogyman true check it
11:35
<boogyman>
wrong again
11:35
<dekiss>
now conclusion
11:35
<dekiss>
why should I sue html5 semantic elements?
11:35
<dekiss>
just for impaired people or?
11:35
<annevk>
dekiss: you should definitely sue them
11:36
<dekiss>
third, does impaired people have A LOT of benefit if I use html5 semantic elements?
11:36
<annevk>
dekiss: using them, is really up to you ;)
11:36
<dekiss>
I plan (and I will) test how much really impaired peopel benefit from html5 semantic elemnts
11:36
<dekiss>
because they are HELL
11:36
<dekiss>
I mean very harder to do same things with them than with divs
11:37
<dekiss>
but if they help imapired people alot I will use them no mater how hard they are
11:37
<dekiss>
annevk but you know exaclty how much impaired peopel benefit from them?
11:37
<boogyman>
dekiss: accessibility devices don't care about the "semantic" elements, they care about having the appropriate context, which are provided with some of the "new" tags, but are still applicable for override using the WAI-ARIA attributes
11:37
<dekiss>
because as I see I should use them only for impaired peoiple
11:38
<dekiss>
boogyman WRONG
11:38
<annevk>
dekiss: he's correct actually
11:38
<dekiss>
well
11:38
<dekiss>
how come
11:38
<annevk>
dekiss: search engines might have some benefit too
11:39
<dekiss>
I read everywhere that html5 semantic elements help impaired people :S
11:39
<dekiss>
now I am totally lost pls exaplin to me
11:39
<annevk>
dekiss: the elements map onto semantics exposed by the assistive technology
11:39
<annevk>
dekiss: boogyman is basically saying that, maybe in a different way than you understand ;)
11:40
<dekiss>
man I understand this, when blind person read my page with speech or touch device he sees nav tag and he knows its menu
11:40
<dekiss>
but I wonder if I put div with id="menu" I think he will know what it is
11:40
<dekiss>
..
11:40
<dekiss>
so they benefit from them or not pls exaplin
11:40
<dekiss>
aw
11:40
<dekiss>
why should I use html5 semnatic elements than
11:41
<dekiss>
its much harder to make website with them and noone uses them I havent seen single page with them
11:41
<dekiss>
look cnn.com and facebook.com websites
11:41
<boogyman>
dekiss: example <ol role="navigation"><li><a href="/">home</a></li></ol> can be written like the following <nav><a href="/">home</a></nav>. the "role=navigation" is now implied due to the behind-the-scenes mapping the element has for the accessibility-enabled device.
11:42
<annevk>
dekiss: large sites are slow adopters, but you'll see they switched doctypes
11:42
<dekiss>
I saw annevk
11:42
<dekiss>
but
11:43
<dekiss>
I am totally lost if not for imapired people then why should I use html5 elements
11:43
<dekiss>
I find them useless ( some of them) other than that
11:43
<dekiss>
and its much harder for meto make website with them (some of them) not all
11:43
<dekiss>
if I make standard website okwith header footer etc but If I go with something different div is my friend
11:44
<annevk>
dekiss: people using assistive technology (not sure I like the term impaired) will benefit is what we're saying
11:44
<boogyman>
dekiss: Authors are encouraged to use the semantically appropriate tag, but are not forced to do so.
11:44
<annevk>
dekiss: SteveF can tell you more, we're breaking up for lunch
11:44
<dekiss>
annevk man once you said they will not once you say they will -_-
11:44
<dekiss>
im totally lost now
11:45
<dekiss>
ok
11:45
<dekiss>
guys yo ugot me lost now pls help me
11:45
<annevk>
dekiss: I never said they won't ;-) As I said, you might not have understood all the terminology yet. I'd suggest reading up on things a bit more and generally absorb all the things ;-)
11:46
<dekiss>
once yo usaid people wit hassisitive technology will benefit from html5 semantic elements and once you said they will not :S
11:46
<dekiss>
hm
11:46
<dekiss>
ok..
11:47
<webben>
dekiss: 'but I wonder if I put div with id="menu" I think he will know what it is' : no, browsers + assitive technology will present that exactly the same as any other div
11:47
<boogyman>
dekiss: annevk said that large sights are slow adopters, meaning that it will take them longer to implement, not that they will not implement.
11:47
<SteveF>
dekiss: depending on the browser use of HTML elements such as header/footer/aside etc are exposed to AT as landmarks which is useful
11:47
<dekiss>
webben assistive tech. will not tell man that div has id with value "menu"?
11:47
<webben>
dekiss: id just creates a unique label for an element in a document, user software doesn't assume those labels have any special meaning
11:48
<dekiss>
nah I will try this assistive tech. and see my self
11:48
<webben>
and it doesn't normally present them to the end user
11:48
<dekiss>
thats only true way to find out how really people benefit
11:48
<dekiss>
any guide what assitive technology people use?
11:48
<dekiss>
to read websites? is that software I guess or maybe hardware too?
11:48
<webben>
dekiss: Bear in mind that AT is complicated to learn.
11:49
<dekiss>
webben it is ok I want to know this so I will learn it
11:49
<webben>
So you may get quite a confused idea of how it works if you don't have a bit of time to invest into learning it
11:49
<webben>
dekiss: What platform are you on?
11:49
<dekiss>
I keep at "web for all": thing :)
11:49
<dekiss>
that s he point of web if you ask me its mission
11:49
<dekiss>
and should be !
11:50
<webben>
That's laudable - what I'm warning you is that you may come to false beliefs about what AT can or cannot do or what is or is not useful because of your lack of knowledge of the software in question
11:50
<SteveF>
dekiss: this http://www.html5accessibility.com/ covers support for various aspects of new html5 features, but it needs updating, there have been some improvements since last spetmebr
11:50
<webben>
dekiss: Are you on Mac/*nix/Windows?
11:51
<dekiss>
webben im on Windows
11:51
<dekiss>
7
11:51
<webben>
dekiss: http://uiaccess.com/accessucd/ http://www.nvaccess.org/
11:51
<dekiss>
webben I am going to lear this AT thing :)
11:52
<dekiss>
tyhanks all for info guys
11:52
<boogyman>
btw, welcome to web development :D
11:52
<dekiss>
hope I wont get banned here too I managed to be ignored/muted/banned on most of freenode channels in a day or two :D
11:52
<dekiss>
heheh -_-
11:52
<dekiss>
thanks again
11:53
<boogyman>
dekiss: if you are not rude, then you are welcome
11:53
<dekiss>
boogyman thanks nice to meet you :F
11:53
<dekiss>
:D
12:08
<ondras>
hi
12:09
<ondras>
I am looking for some rather advanced assistance with CORS
12:09
<ondras>
is this a suitable channel, or are there any better?
12:09
<ondras>
more specifically, I am running into issues with credentialed requests and 302 redirects
12:09
<ondras>
(basically this does not work at all, both ff & chrome)
12:10
<dekiss>
cors are for letting xss
12:10
<dekiss>
you knwo right?
12:10
<dekiss>
:)
12:10
<dekiss>
why its not working
12:10
<ondras>
my guess that 302 sets Origin:null to the second request (as per the spec)
12:11
<ondras>
and this does not work with credentialed requests
12:11
<ondras>
or something like that.
12:11
<ondras>
chrome reports "Cannot make any requests from null. "
12:11
<ondras>
(which does not appear when I redirect a non-credentialed xhr)
12:12
<dekiss>
aw
12:12
<dekiss>
sry man Ihave some job and some problems myself I guess omeone wil lhelkp you
12:12
<dekiss>
try #html #html5 too
12:12
<dekiss>
also try #javascript
12:12
<dekiss>
I think guys from javascript chn will help you try there pls
12:12
<ondras>
I would appreciate some w3c member or so
12:13
<dekiss>
try #html
12:13
<dekiss>
im not from whatwg btw :)
12:13
<dekiss>
some guys here are
12:14
<Ms2ger>
annevk, CORS questions
12:19
<dekiss>
web browser creators must use html specifications standards from w3c or its up to them?
12:27
<jgraham>
web browser creators can do whatever they like, mostly
12:28
<jgraham>
I mean it's not like W3C can send in darobin to break their fingers if they use a WHATWG spec
12:28
<dekiss>
:D
12:28
<dekiss>
ok thanks
12:28
<dekiss>
so the yare recommendations liek they say :)
12:28
<dekiss>
ok
12:28
<jgraham>
Or invent a whole new proprietary platform that runs in their browser
12:28
<dekiss>
but why all use them
12:28
<dekiss>
hm ok
12:28
<dekiss>
so xhtml 2 was shame? :D
12:29
<dekiss>
so w3c adopted html5 to hide that shame? :D
12:29
<dekiss>
hehehe
12:29
<dekiss>
becasue xhtml didnt succeed at all?
12:30
<annevk>
Ms2ger: yes?
12:30
<ondras>
annevk: hi
12:31
<darobin>
well
12:31
<ondras>
14:12 < ondras> more specifically, I am running into issues with credentialed requests and 302 redirects
12:31
<ondras>
14:12 < ondras> (basically this does not work at all, both ff & chrome)
12:31
<darobin>
I do enjoy a pretext to break someone's fingers
12:31
<annevk>
ondras: the redirect itself needs to opt in, are you doing that?
12:31
<dekiss>
darobin you have muscles?
12:31
<darobin>
dekiss: enough to operate some plyers, yes
12:31
<dekiss>
:)
12:32
<ondras>
annevk: what do you mean by "opt in"? it is a normal http/302 with correct access-control-... response headers
12:32
<ondras>
annevk: but it redirects to another, "3rd" domain
12:32
<ondras>
(1st being the JS one, 2nd being the one originally requested)
12:33
<jgraham>
darobin: I guess all that free milk makes the google guys harder to intimidate.
12:33
<annevk>
ondras: so the request is credentialed, does it require a preflight?
12:33
<ondras>
no
12:33
<ondras>
it is a GET with a custom Accept, so a Simple request
12:34
<annevk>
and the 302 resource has both Access-Control-Allow-Origin and Access-Control-Allow-Credentials set?
12:34
<darobin>
jgraham: ah, but they forget I worked in the Netherlands
12:34
<darobin>
over there, they shove milk in your face all day long
12:34
<ondras>
annevk: yes, but the redirected request has Origin: null
12:34
<ondras>
annevk: which is correct per spec
12:34
<dekiss>
so why faken IE is ruinning the web?
12:34
<dekiss>
any idea?
12:34
<ondras>
annevk: but causes "Cannot make any requests from null. " in Chrome
12:34
<ondras>
(and fails silently in FF)
12:34
<dekiss>
pls tell microsoft guys to stop sucking thanks in advance
12:34
<dekiss>
sry I had to do it :)
12:35
<annevk>
ondras: aah, is the final response Access-Control-Allow-Origin: null ?
12:35
<ondras>
annevk: should be?
12:35
<ondras>
will try in a sec
12:35
<annevk>
ondras: it needs to match the Origin header
12:35
<zcorpan>
Hixie: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15588
12:35
<dekiss>
anyway I never understood why Bill Gates want to ruin the IT technology if its not profitable for him
12:35
<annevk>
ondras: but yes, that's an annoying edge case implementations might not do correctly :/
12:35
<ondras>
annevk: yeah, looks like this worked (at least in ff)
12:35
<ondras>
annevk: let me try in chrome as well
12:35
<annevk>
ondras: cool
12:36
<ondras>
annevk: fails in chrome, apparently
12:36
<ondras>
Cannot make any requests from null.
12:36
<annevk>
if you could file a bug on them that'd be great
12:36
<ondras>
(the request itself happens)
12:36
<annevk>
abarth et al should just fix that
12:36
<ondras>
annevk: will try, but it is hard for me to make them a simple testcase
12:37
<ondras>
annevk: also, this issue does not happen if the requested and 302ed resource share origin
12:37
<annevk>
ondras: if you file a bug and explain the redirect thing that should be sufficient
12:37
<annevk>
ondras: feel free to name drop me
12:37
<annevk>
ondras: may or may not help
12:38
<ondras>
annevk: also, does the 302ed resource need to return the Credentials header?
12:38
<annevk>
ondras: per spec, yes
12:38
<annevk>
ondras: http://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#cors-check
12:39
<ondras>
okay, thanks
12:39
<ondras>
will double-check my testcase and report chrome bug
12:40
<ondras>
also, let me test opera
12:40
<ondras>
...fails
12:40
<annevk>
Clone Opera is Chrome
12:40
<annevk>
Rebel Opera would prolly pass
12:41
<ondras>
this one is a very old Opera
12:41
<ondras>
probably from the times of the old republic
12:41
<ondras>
12.x or so
12:47
<ondras>
annevk: If the value of the header whose name is Access-Control-Allow-Origin within response's headers is true, return success.
12:47
<ondras>
annevk: probably a typo - should be "Credentials" ?
12:49
<dekiss>
at devices will read only html code not css and javascript at all?
12:50
<boogyman>
dekiss: don't double post
12:50
<EvilMachine>
Hello! So… how complete is the developers spec? I don’t want to miss out on even a single thing relevant to developers, so I would need it to be complete.
12:51
<annevk>
ondras: thanks
12:51
<annevk>
ondras: you want to be credited as "Ondra Zara"?
12:52
<ondras>
annevk: Ondrej Zara, probably, but no need for this credit
12:52
<annevk>
ondras: if there's a non-ASCII spelling that's fine too
12:52
<ondras>
Ondřej Žára
12:52
<annevk>
ondras: awesome
12:53
<dekiss>
EvilMachine go away
12:53
<dekiss>
he came here too -_-
12:53
<dekiss>
this dude called me idiot trying to help him :| good luck helping him haha
12:54
<Ms2ger>
Be nice.
12:54
<dekiss>
boogyman ok but ansewr me pls
12:54
<dekiss>
ok
12:54
<dekiss>
im he is not :S
12:54
<annevk>
EvilMachine: it's synced every month or so, so it's a bit behind http://whatwg.org/C
12:55
<annevk>
ondras: https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/commit/2038f66dcbe7d108a5fcb2c0c5f55b98319b7d07
12:55
<boogyman>
dekiss: again rude. it's generally poor etiquette to discuss "bad" things across channels. leave it in the channel.
12:55
<dekiss>
ok
12:55
<dekiss>
man he called me idiot for helping him not beign hacked :D
12:55
<Ms2ger>
<p class="pubdate">23 November 2012</p> seems to suggest a bit less than every month
12:55
<Ms2ger>
dekiss, leave it.
12:55
<dekiss>
boogyman any idea about my question dude?
12:56
<boogyman>
i answered it in #css
12:56
<dekiss>
oh sry let me see
12:56
<dekiss>
um
12:56
<ondras>
annevk: nice, thanks a lot and thanks for general assistance. going to file a chrome bug now and wait patiently :)
12:57
<dekiss>
at devices interpret dom changes with scripts?
13:06
<EvilMachine>
annevk: Ah, so since the normal HTML5 spec is already a CR, and hence stable enough to use, the dev spec is too.
13:06
<EvilMachine>
annevk: Thanks. :) That anwered my question.
13:07
<EvilMachine>
By the way: How come the spec reads like the instructions for the Holy Handgrenade? ;)
13:08
<annevk>
EvilMachine: we like Monty Python
13:08
<EvilMachine>
annevk: I cannot possibly disagree with that. ;)
13:09
<matjas>
hmm, since <title> may be omitted in HTML5, is `<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"/>` the shortest possible XHTML5 document?
13:09
<matjas>
(if the document is an iframe srcdoc document or if title information is available from a higher-level protocol)
13:11
<annevk>
matjas: sounds plausible
13:12
Ms2ger
wonders if head/body are required
13:12
<Ms2ger>
Looks like they are
13:14
<EvilMachine>
;)
13:19
<EvilMachine>
Why does it say “October 2012” in the title of http://www.w3.org/TR/html5-author/ ? Is this not that “updated monthly” thing you were talking about?
13:19
<EvilMachine>
annevk:
13:19
<EvilMachine>
annevk: ↑
13:20
<annevk>
EvilMachine: you want http://developers.whatwg.org/
13:20
<EvilMachine>
annevk: Aaah, alright.
13:23
<EvilMachine>
Oh-oh. “Living standard”… sound like “there will be no stability, and nobody can trust on any feature being reliably how he expects it to be”… I’m sure it wasn’t intended that way, because that would mean using huge amounts of time to keep up to date…
13:24
EvilMachine
checks the FAQ first.
13:25
<EvilMachine>
Hmm… it seems I can keep track of the “defined” spec. Not the “is actually implemented” (as in post-candidate-recommendation) spec…
13:26
<EvilMachine>
But that makes everything a mess. :(
13:26
<zewt>
(there are lots of things implemented that aren't in "CR" ...)
13:26
<EvilMachine>
zewt: Exactly my point.
13:27
<zewt>
no, "actually implemented" is not the same as "post CR"
13:27
<EvilMachine>
zewt: Also exactly my point.
13:27
<zewt>
...
13:27
<zewt>
what? heh
13:27
<Ms2ger>
Sounds like someone makes a lot of exact points
13:27
<EvilMachine>
zewt: My point is, that everything is different and I can rely on nothing. ^^
13:27
<EvilMachine>
Actually: s/^^/:(/
13:28
<Ms2ger>
You can rely on everything that has been implemented and is used
13:28
<Ms2ger>
You can't rely on anything else
13:28
<zewt>
anyway, you equated "actually implemented" with "CR", which is inaccurate so I'm just explaining the difference (implemented is a superset of CR)
13:28
<EvilMachine>
Ms2ger: Until it changes. Which is *all the time*.
13:28
<EvilMachine>
zewt: Ah, okay, yes, you are of course right.
13:29
<zewt>
and looking at text based on CR specs is definitely not a good way to get up-to-date info
13:29
<EvilMachine>
zewt: You don’t say. ;)
13:30
<annevk>
EvilMachine: living standards are basically better than what we had before, but no silver bullet
13:30
<jgraham>
No, you really can't rely on anything. Just ask David Hume.
13:30
<annevk>
EvilMachine: stability boxes on the side help
13:30
<EvilMachine>
annevk: I don’t like it when people say thing like „better“ without saying why, though. ^^
13:31
<annevk>
EvilMachine: I was hoping you'd read the FAQ for that
13:31
<EvilMachine>
annevk: Ah… Well, that’s an ongoing process too. XD
13:31
<annevk>
EvilMachine: in short, it better reflects the way software is developed and therefore the cycles between software and standards are shorter
13:32
<EvilMachine>
annevk: Being a developer too, I have to agree. But as a user the whole point of a standard is, that it is reliable (= non-changing).
13:33
<zewt>
as a user (developer of software on the web), I disagree
13:33
<EvilMachine>
annevk: In short: What do I develop my site against? I have no idea what to pick now.
13:33
<zewt>
as a user specs are merely documentation for interfaces
13:33
<EvilMachine>
zewt: spec ≠ standard
13:34
<zewt>
uhh
13:34
<annevk>
EvilMachine: typically people develop their sites against implementations, but you could develop it against the stable pieces of the HTML Living Standard (identified by the boxes)
13:34
<jgraham>
When was the web ever non-changing?
13:34
<annevk>
EvilMachine: you'll be better off than with HTML4
13:34
<EvilMachine>
zewt: What I meant was: Yes, a spec is merely a documentation. Correct. A standard is more though, as it is a stable reliable point too. :)
13:35
<annevk>
EvilMachine: typically that's a lie for software standards
13:35
<zewt>
i disagree with the distinction but I'm not really interested in debating a tangental semantic, heh
13:36
<EvilMachine>
annevk: "typically people develop their sites against implementations" – What? No! That is really really wrong! Nobody should *ever* write a website for a specific browser. Otherwise we end up in a “Best read in IE” world again.
13:37
<Ms2ger>
There's a difference between what happens and what should happen
13:37
<zewt>
if you want to know what actually works in browsers, and which versions of browsers, and how well-deployed that version is, you're always going to need extra resources (things like caniuse) and testing (even "CR" has never meant "implemented in every browser")
13:37
<EvilMachine>
annevk: How is it a lie? You mean when browser developers can’t properly implement a standard if their lives depended on it? ;)
13:37
<Ms2ger>
As you might have noticed, we already are in the "You can only use Chrome" world
13:38
<annevk>
Ms2ger: don't make it more confusing than it needs to be
13:38
<annevk>
EvilMachine: it means that while we implement we find things that need changing
13:38
<jgraham>
I am confident that browser vendors couldn't correctly implement standards if their life depended on it
13:38
<EvilMachine>
Ms2ger: Then you live in another universe than I do. Such a site never ever flies in practice. My clients would never accept a site that only runs in one browser.
13:39
<jgraham>
Not least because in that situation no one would work for a browser vendor
13:39
<annevk>
And yes, what jgraham says is also the sad truth. Implementing is hard.
13:39
<zewt>
you seem to be suggesting either 1: all browser vendors release versions in lockstep, implementing features at exactly the same time, or 2: the web implements a set of features, then stops, and we can never add anything because it would cause differing feature sets; obviously both are nonsense
13:39
<EvilMachine>
annevk: I’m not easily confused. Don’t worry. :)
13:39
<jgraham>
and there would be so much red tape that no new things would happen
13:39
<jgraham>
and the web platform would calcify and become irrelevant
13:39
<jgraham>
and there would be no more browser vendors
13:39
<Ms2ger>
EvilMachine, that must be the case, then
13:39
<EvilMachine>
annevk: Yes, that’s why there is a version number for a standard. The changes get into the next version.
13:40
<annevk>
EvilMachine: as an implementor, I want them integrated next hour
13:42
<zewt>
as a user, i sure don't want to wait a year and a half for a giant cycle of spec update, spec ratification, then wait for a long browser update cycle to catch up (which is exactly what we had, which is a trap we've finally, for the most part, broken out of)
13:43
<annevk>
note also that the browser sometimes cannot implement the spec because it has a bug, so it needs to be fixed
13:43
<annevk>
e.g. HTML4 has plenty of bugs
13:43
<EvilMachine>
zewt: No, that wasn’t what I suggested. Let me clarify: I suggested that as a developer, I get a new version of a standard every year (or more), which I can actually use, since I can trust that until the end of said cycle, browsers will always try the best they can to behave that way. If I can’t trust on that, the spec/standard/api becomes useless.
13:43
<zewt>
also it avoids the mistake of assuming all features on the web are developed together, in a specific, predictable order, which is what versioning assumes
13:44
<zewt>
your conclusion is plainly wrong (since the specs and APIs are extraordinarily useful)
13:44
<EvilMachine>
jgraham: I think you may be hallucinating. ^^
13:45
<EvilMachine>
jgraham: Or will the world end and satan will come with its Trident to smite us all? ;)
13:45
<jgraham>
I might be. Who knows? Not me! I might have imagined this whole thing!
13:46
<zewt>
worktime
13:46
<EvilMachine>
zewt: If it is not predictable what an API does, there is no API. There is only useless chaos.
13:46
<jgraham>
But in either case your ideas don't really fit in with the reality I percieve
13:48
<EvilMachine>
In simple plain words that hit the core of the problem: It seems I cannot know, what Document.someFunction() does, one hour from now. I simply can’t. Which means I can’t use it. Which means the thing is dead. (Yes, please correct me because I hope I’m horribly horribly wrong. :)
13:48
<EvilMachine>
(Or what <sometag someattribute="somevalue"/> does in one hour.)
13:49
<EvilMachine>
How could I possibly program code that way?
13:49
<Ms2ger>
Take <div></div>
13:49
<Ms2ger>
Do you know what it does?
13:51
<EvilMachine>
Ms2ger: Trick question. Tags don’t do stuff. They define/markup/represent stuff. And: Bad example, since it’s a generic block element.
13:51
<EvilMachine>
^^
13:51
<Ms2ger>
"(Or what <sometag someattribute="somevalue"/> does in one hour.)"
13:52
<jgraham>
document.body then
13:52
<jgraham>
What does that do
13:52
<Ms2ger>
Bad example, I've got a patch in my tree to change how it works in Gecko
13:52
<jgraham>
?
13:52
<EvilMachine>
Let’s use the <img> element (or any other one with semantic meaning).
13:52
<jgraham>
Ms2ger: I bet your patch doesn't make it a bad example
13:53
<Ms2ger>
:)
13:53
<jgraham>
I bet it makes it a good example in fact
13:53
<EvilMachine>
jgraham: Are you two in love? :D
13:53
<jgraham>
Unless you change document.body to, say, make the computer emit a high pitched squeek that attracts dogs
13:53
<Ms2ger>
So, tell me, what does <img src=foo.png> do?
13:53
<Ms2ger>
jgraham, bingo!
13:54
<jgraham>
EvilMachine: Let's say, for the sake of argument, that you believe that document.body returns the body element of the document (where I leave "the" to be defined)
13:55
<jgraham>
And a crazy spec author decides that document.body should, when accessed, cause the computer to attract local dogs
13:55
<jgraham>
Because "living spec"
13:56
<EvilMachine>
Ms2ger: That’s exactly my point. With a proper standard, I can look up what it does. (Or at least what I can expect it to do. [Or file a bug otherwise]. With a living standard, I have no freaking idea, as in ten seconds it could load the picture from a completely different server and display it upside down.
13:56
<jgraham>
And a mysterious UA implementor like Ms2ger actually goes ahead and implements that spec
13:56
<webben>
EvilMachine: Well the web isn't built that way … so… there is no "proper standard" like that.
13:57
<jgraham>
And somehow manages to land the change
13:57
<EvilMachine>
jgraham: HTML doesn’t do that. CSS’s aural/voice properties can be used to do that dog thing. ^^
13:57
<jgraham>
What do you expect to happen next?
13:57
<jgraham>
(sure HTML does that. bgsound has played sound for decades)
13:57
<EvilMachine>
webben: That sentence, all by itself, meant absolutely nothing.
13:57
webben
shrugs
13:58
<EvilMachine>
jgraham: Presentational markup is not proper HTML and was a PHB abomination that should never have existed.
13:59
<webben>
EvilMachine: Spec compliance isn't a major goal for browser vendors in and of itself. Compatibility with significant deployed content is.
13:59
<EvilMachine>
So what about my point above: Yes, I do in fact have absolutely no idea what the <img src=foo.png> does, an hour from now. That’s my problem.
13:59
<webben>
EvilMachine: Specs are useful to browser vendors mainly to avoid the reverse engineering involved in compatibility.
14:00
<webben>
EvilMachine: Actually induction gives you a very sound guide to what it will do.
14:00
<jgraham>
EvilMachine: Sigh. Are you trolling?
14:00
<EvilMachine>
webben: That *couldn’t* be more ass-backwards, since “deployed” content *is* based on specs.
14:01
<EvilMachine>
jgraham: No? Are you?
14:01
<webben>
EvilMachine: Very little deployed content is written to spec.
14:01
<gsnedders>
Most deployed content is written to "well, this works in IE and Chrome".
14:02
<EvilMachine>
I know I‘ve apparently hit a wound here. I really am that unsure regarding knowing what things do though. :/
14:02
<webben>
EvilMachine: Anyway, regardless of how "backwards" you think it is, it's clearly the case that you have good reason <img src=foo.png"> will work much the same an hour from now as before.
14:03
<webben>
*good reason to think
14:03
<EvilMachine>
webben: And why is it? Because it *can*. Which is exactly because browser makers allowed the horrible mess through instead of throwing an error on detectable misusage or let the site maker suffer the consequences on non-detectable ones, like with every other compiler/interpreter on the planet.
14:03
<jgraham>
EvilMachine: So since apparently the "follow along at home" approach isn't working:
14:04
<jgraham>
The real forces that act on the web are not standards
14:04
<jgraham>
They are market pressures, and the need to keep functioning with deployed content
14:04
<gsnedders>
EvilMachine: Whether or not that should've been done 20 years ago is irrelevant — the market won't allow it now.
14:04
<EvilMachine>
webben: Actually, the point of the „living standard” is apparently exactly that I don’t have good reason to expect that.
14:04
<webben>
EvilMachine: Again, because the major driver is allowing users to access deployed content.
14:04
<jgraham>
If someone arbitarily started changing the way things work sites would break
14:04
<SteveF>
EvilMachine: note if you use the W3C HTML validation service http://validator.w3.org/ to check your code, then the HTML 5.1 Nightly http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/Overview.html contains the corresponding rule set
14:05
<jgraham>
Vendors spend a lot of time and effort making sure not to change things in ways that would break the web
14:05
<jgraham>
Writing things down in specs is part of that effort
14:05
<jgraham>
So, to a certain extent you have the causality backwards
14:06
<jgraham>
Specs aren't a tool for dictating what happens
14:06
<EvilMachine>
jgraham: “market pressures“… Yeah, I noticed: The dumbest and loudest users are always the ones everything is adapted to. End result: iOS, MS Clippy, and other abominations of induced stupidity. But let’s not go there, the channel is already up in arms about my apparent heresy. ;)
14:07
<jgraham>
EvilMachine: You're not being heretical. But you aren't being very receptive to what you could be learning either
14:08
<gsnedders>
EvilMachine: The problem with making anything stricter is that a user can use browser version x (which isn't strict) or browser version x+1 (which is strict). If a website the user relies on only works in version x, are they going to upgrade to x+1?
14:10
<EvilMachine>
I’ll quiet down a bit now, since I see that we get nowhere. Instead of an answer to that problem, I only get empty phrases based on belief, emotional reactions (as if people would link their pride with this and hence I had attacked them personally), and “Are you trolling?” questions. I give up. But I expected more from you guys. :(
14:10
<zewt>
troll score: 1/10
14:10
<EvilMachine>
Case in point: ↑
14:11
EvilMachine
mutes himself.
14:13
<gsnedders>
EvilMachine: There's a fair bit of real data behind things like the above — it's just mostly held internally to the companies that collected it
14:37
<EvilMachine>
Okay. It’s decided.
14:37
<MikeSmith>
EvilMachine: I'd recommend using http://validator.w3.org/nu/ directly instead of http://validator.w3.org/
14:37
<EvilMachine>
After 15 years developing web applications (for market leaders among others), I will change businesses. Maybe Haskell. Maybe Android, if that isn’t also a “living mess”.
14:37
<EvilMachine>
The WhatWG mindset is certifiably insane. It seems you cannot even comprehend the problem with your approach. Like it’s a mental blind spot/taboo and every question about it gets avoided like it was never said because it *must be repressed, or we all couldn’t accept ourselves anymore and would have to hate ourselves*. In this super-defensive emotion-based way that quickly gets to personal attacks. As if you had built yo
14:37
<EvilMachine>
ur whole model of reality and self-acceptance on it. Also you always seem to assume binary black and white scenarios. If I think your approach is bad, you automatically assume I “side” with “the other” or “the opposing” approach, and strongly so, like small children do. In all this, you behave extremely similar to the stereotypical American.
14:37
<MikeSmith>
EvilMachine: for validation that SteveF mentioned
14:37
<EvilMachine>
If kids failed as math and physics, you guys would *change math and physics* to redefine their errors as “correct”. Motto: HTML(2+2=5). Besides: Chrome/Firefox/etc are textbook examples of the Inner Platform Anti-Pattern: Like Emacs, they are their own OSes now. If only the built-in browsers weren’t so shitty. ;) In this, you are very similar to the iOS/Ubuntu/Firefox/MSClippy/Win8 crowd of obsessive dumbward-spiralin
14:37
<EvilMachine>
g. (Mostly caused by lack of spine / individuality.)
14:37
<EvilMachine>
RIP WWW. It was nice while XHTML lasted.
14:39
<SteveF>
MIkeSmith: though they were the same for HTML5, what differences are there?
14:39
<SteveF>
thought
14:39
<MikeSmith>
SteveF: teh UI and options
14:40
<MikeSmith>
pluse the http://validator.w3.org/ does some preprocessing and postprocessing and introduces bugs when it does
14:41
<MikeSmith>
.win 12
14:41
<SteveF>
MikeSmoth: FYI in all TPG technical reports we point to http://validator.w3.org/nu/
14:41
<MikeSmith>
cool
14:41
<SteveF>
that should have been Mike's moth
14:41
<SteveF>
its my pet name for the validator
14:44
<Ms2ger>
I wonder if EvilMachine will find Haskell static enough for his liking
14:45
<jgraham>
Don't tell him that sometimes they update stuff
14:45
<jgraham>
And not everything is rigourously specced
14:46
<jgraham>
Using a pure waterfall model
14:46
Ms2ger
ponders the physics comparison
14:46
<Ms2ger>
If he'd been Einstein, would he have eliminated the relativistic effects from the universe rather than changing the textbooks?
14:47
<dekiss>
someone called for me?
14:47
<dekiss>
:D
14:47
<dekiss>
I think if Nikola TEsla didn't existed we woudln't had html5 and html at all
14:48
<dekiss>
we woudlnt even had comptuers not anything similar.. aalso lights etc
14:48
<Ms2ger>
No, I don't think anybody called, why?
14:48
<dekiss>
HAHAHA
14:48
<dekiss>
ok im off :D
14:48
<Ms2ger>
See you :)
14:48
<dekiss>
:))
14:50
<MikeSmith>
jgraham: btw, about the TTW Forward event in Tokyo, the tentative plan is to focus on writing tests for the input element and the "Dates and Times" section, because that's what http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tests-cr-exit.html indicates we need tests for. But I wanted to ask if you had other suggestions for what to focus on.
14:51
<MikeSmith>
I think there's probably not enough granularity in that http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tests-cr-exit.html list
14:51
<Ms2ger>
I think we established that that page is a lie
14:52
<MikeSmith>
OK, well then I'd really like to try to identify a couple other sections of the spec that the attendees coudl help write tests for
14:53
<MikeSmith>
anything come to mind?
14:54
Ms2ger
thinks
14:55
<jgraham>
Well the base url section just got fixed so it should be correct. If there's anyone you take a dislike to, get them to test that :)
14:55
<SteveF>
MikeSmith: worth a read http://accessibility.oit.ncsu.edu/blog/2013/05/31/screen-readers-at-a-crossroads/
14:55
<MikeSmith>
too bad Nikola TEsla's not alive to write tests for us, similar to the way he created light and computing
14:56
<MikeSmith>
SteveF: will take a look
14:56
<MikeSmith>
jgraham: OK
14:56
<Ms2ger>
form's named item can always use some more tests
14:57
<Ms2ger>
Interaction with tables / <input> and <img> with the same name / past names map
14:57
<MikeSmith>
Ms2ger: which section of the spec is form's named item?
14:57
<dekiss>
MikeSmith wqhat kind of tests
14:57
<Ms2ger>
The form element
14:57
<MikeSmith>
Ms2ger: OK
14:58
Ms2ger
wonders if anybody implemented cssElementMap
14:58
<jgraham>
It's hard to pick things
14:58
<MikeSmith>
dekiss: testing to see if we can send electric power through the air for free
14:58
<dekiss>
hah
14:58
<Ms2ger>
Document.currentScript? Is that implemented?
14:58
<dekiss>
write element that sends 1kw when you click it!
14:58
<jgraham>
I mean I know there are lots of untested things
14:59
<MikeSmith>
Ms2ger: I don't even knwo what that is
14:59
<Ms2ger>
Rendering could use a bunch
14:59
<dekiss>
document.sendElectricityTo("MikeSmith");
14:59
<jgraham>
Yeah, rendering is a good idea
14:59
<Ms2ger>
MikeSmith, me neither, I was just looking through the spec :)
14:59
<MikeSmith>
ah Rendering yeah
15:00
<jgraham>
Probably all the stuff in Obsolete features :)
15:00
<dekiss>
Ms2ger why you work in whatwg?
15:00
<dekiss>
I mean how you find time you have lot free time?
15:00
<Ms2ger>
Obsolete features is mostly reflection, which is covered by Aryeh's tests
15:00
<dekiss>
goof job yo udoing btw
15:00
<Ms2ger>
And document.all, which I don't want tests for
15:00
<jgraham>
Ms2ger: <applet> and <marquee>
15:00
<Ms2ger>
Mm
15:01
<Ms2ger>
Also not for people you like
15:01
<Ms2ger>
dekiss, I'm studying, so I still have some free time
15:01
<jgraham>
(also frames, but that's the general "document loading and navigation" stuff)
15:02
<Ms2ger>
Yeah, tests for <frame> would be nice
15:02
<Ms2ger>
We had some code coverage that showed that most lines of that code was hit about 4 times
15:03
<Ms2ger>
All the new stuff in canvas, I guess
15:03
<MikeSmith>
hard to motivate people to write tests for frames proabbly
15:03
<Ms2ger>
Fair :)
15:03
<MikeSmith>
canvas tests would be fun though
15:04
<jgraham>
MikeSmith: Threaten them with document.sendElectricityTo(victim)
15:04
<Ms2ger>
Is anything about http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/elements.html#wai-aria testable?
15:04
<MikeSmith>
Ms2ger: I think not
15:04
<jgraham>
I think it is
15:05
<jgraham>
But it's essentially aria tests
15:05
<MikeSmith>
really?
15:05
<MikeSmith>
not testable cross-browser in my experience
15:05
<jgraham>
Well I guess if aria doesn't actually have any requirements for UAs
15:05
<MikeSmith>
ah yeah
15:05
<jgraham>
Makes the sentence "User agents are required to implement ARIA semantics on all HTML elements, as defined in the ARIA specifications." a bit meaningless
15:05
<Ms2ger>
http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=7868&to=7869
15:05
<MikeSmith>
I meant the part about what the UA has to expose to platform accessiblity APIs
15:06
<dekiss>
ok
15:06
<Ms2ger>
audio/video/track could use a lot of tests, of course
15:06
<jgraham>
zcorpan wrote quite some tests for parts of that
15:06
<MikeSmith>
jgraham: I guess the meaning there comes from what the UA exposes to the platform
15:07
<jgraham>
So it won't be easy to dive in and hiy stuff that isn't already done
15:07
<Ms2ger>
Mm
15:07
<Ms2ger>
Is that in the repo?
15:07
<MikeSmith>
track is getting implemented more widely now
15:08
<MikeSmith>
I remember seeing some stuff landing in Mozilla
15:08
<Ms2ger>
Yeah
15:08
<Ms2ger>
From Seneca students, don't think there was a lot of tests to them
15:09
<MikeSmith>
those would be funnish tests to write
15:09
<MikeSmith>
relatively
15:09
<Ms2ger>
HTMLTableElement things, except the sorting stuff, perhaps
15:09
<jgraham>
Ms2ger: I don't know where that is
15:09
<Ms2ger>
Somewhere in Canada
15:09
<jgraham>
I'm relatively sure we released it
15:09
<Ms2ger>
Oh
15:10
<jgraham>
not the students :)
15:10
<Ms2ger>
Yeah
15:10
<Ms2ger>
Maybe in a PR?
15:10
<jgraham>
https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/old-tests/submission/Opera/media
15:11
<Ms2ger>
Oh, not even that
15:11
<Ms2ger>
Sounds like someone at Opera should create PRs
15:11
<jgraham>
Yeah
15:11
<jgraham>
I think it was matching the new structure that was hard
15:12
<Ms2ger>
Drag and drop sounds horrible to automate tests for... *skip*
15:12
<Ms2ger>
WebSockets?
15:12
<jgraham>
I'm sure that there were more media tests than that
15:14
<jgraham>
We also released a bunch of dnd tests https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/old-tests/submission/Opera/dnd
15:14
<jgraham>
But yes, automation is a pain
15:14
<dekiss>
people that work in whatwg get any money from any donation or something?
15:14
<Ms2ger>
A lot of people here work for browser vendors
15:15
<jgraham>
Kind of like donation, but the more regular kind that involves a contract and an employer
15:15
<Ms2ger>
bz suggested box-sizing
15:16
<dekiss>
hm
15:16
<Ms2ger>
And that would be really nice, because we're blocking unprefixing on that
15:16
<dekiss>
guys that make firefox get any money?
15:16
<dekiss>
mozilla organization is non profit right? it takes donations or?
15:17
<Ms2ger>
Mozilla Corporation employs several hundred people nowadays
15:17
<kbrosnan>
we can discuss this on #firefox if you want, it is offtopic for this channel
15:18
<Ms2ger>
Historically most of the income was from a deal with Google to make it the default search engine, dunno if that's still true
15:20
<Ms2ger>
+ named getter on Document
15:21
<dekiss>
Ms2ger but mozilla organization makes firefox and it is non profitable org
15:21
<Ms2ger>
MikeSmith, I guess preferably stuff with a good spec ...
15:21
<dekiss>
I think mozilla sponsors them
15:21
<dekiss>
ok sry for off topic chat
15:22
<dekiss>
Ms2ger yeah I guess :)
15:22
<dekiss>
that for Google dewfault search eng
15:22
<jgraham>
Offtopic for this channel? Only if it requires a sense of logic.
15:23
<dekiss>
I am not sure how MOzilla foundation get money from Google
15:23
<MikeSmith>
Ms2ger: yeah
15:23
<dekiss>
Firefox maka mozilla organization which is non profit?
15:23
<Ms2ger>
dekiss, http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/15/mozilla-releases-annual-report-for-2011-revenue-up-33-to-163m-majority-from-google/
15:24
<dekiss>
ok thanks
15:24
<Ms2ger>
MikeSmith, so, named getters might not be optimal, then...
15:24
<Ms2ger>
MikeSmith, but box-sizing would be nice if anyone is interested in CSS
15:24
<dekiss>
hmm I thought mozilla foundation makes firefox and I though is non profit org
15:24
<MikeSmith>
Ms2ger: ok
16:04
<SteveF>
dekiss: you can still generate revenue and be a non profit organization. Non profit means money made is not for the benefit of shareholders but is ploughed back into organization no?
16:06
GPHemsley
wonders why he bothered to read the scrollback
16:07
<dekiss>
hm
16:07
<dekiss>
but I cant take money
16:07
<dekiss>
liek profit
16:08
<SteveF>
dekiss: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_organization "is an organization that uses surplus revenues to achieve its goals rather than distributing them as profit or dividends."
16:11
<dekiss>
yeah
16:11
<dekiss>
people that work in org cant take money for the job
16:11
<dekiss>
they have to be volunteers
16:11
<dekiss>
that is non profit organization
16:12
<dekiss>
its not something like company with shares
16:12
<Ms2ger>
Hardly
16:12
<dekiss>
or no?
16:12
<dekiss>
im not sure
16:13
<Ms2ger>
No, a non-profit can have paid employees
16:13
<dekiss>
than it can act as a company
16:13
<dekiss>
making profits and sharing profits like wages
16:13
<dekiss>
to employees?
16:13
<dekiss>
I think there is no strict line
16:14
<dekiss>
but I guess tehre is border max wage eomployee can take and so
16:15
<Ms2ger>
No idea about the specific laws
16:17
<dekiss>
yeah i think they differ inndifferent coutries too
16:22
<SteveF>
many non profits have paid employees ther is no problem with that
16:35
<GPHemsley>
Feedback welcome: http://mimesniff.spec.whatwg.org/#parse-a-mime-type
17:45
<TabAtkins>
GPHemsley: Is it even possible for a mimetype to be non-ASCII?
17:46
<TabAtkins>
If not, then aside from invalid overlong forms, ASCII and uft-8 are obviously identical.
17:51
<JonathanNeal>
hello
18:02
<gavinc>
dekiss: Non-profits can't have PROFIT or shares, or equity. Wages are not equity.
18:04
<Hixie>
so... how do I unambiguously refer to a JS Object, the kind of thing you get from {} literals, as opposed to JS Arrays, RegExps, Strings, host objects, and so forth?
18:04
<Hixie>
right now i say "If input is an Object object"; is that ambiguous?
18:05
<Ms2ger>
Why?
18:06
<TabAtkins>
All of those things are valid Objects. I echo Ms2ger in asking why you think you need to be that specific.
18:08
<Hixie>
it's for the structured clone algorithm
18:09
<Hixie>
e.g. i want to clone |{ }| but not |function () { }|
18:09
<TabAtkins>
You still don't want literal things of the Object class, I wouldn't think. Subclassing Object is perfectly valid.
18:09
<TabAtkins>
You should exclude things you dont' want instead.
18:10
<gavinc>
Um, that's going to be hard isn't it? as Object is a kind of function yes?
18:10
<Hixie>
there's a potentially infinite list of things i want to exlude
18:10
<Hixie>
e.g. all the host objects
18:10
<Hixie>
all the magical objects future JS versions introduce
18:11
<Hixie>
gavinc: well it's done, right now, and shipped, as far as i can tell, i'm just trying to clean up the wording :-)
18:14
<TabAtkins>
gavinc: No, you're confusing objects with their constructor functions.
18:14
<gavinc>
TabAtkins: Ah, yes I am.
18:15
<TabAtkins>
Hixie: So do that - exclude all host objects and anything with a predefined JS class besides Object in its prototype chain.
18:16
<Hixie>
what's a predefined JS class? That sounds like what I want
18:16
<gavinc>
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/infrastructure.html#safe-passing-of-structured-data ... that seems reasonably easy to follow today?
18:16
<gavinc>
"If input is another native object type (e.g. Error, Function)"
18:16
<Hixie>
lordy, don't rely on the w3 copy :-)
18:16
<gavinc>
"If input is a host object (e.g. a DOM node)"
18:17
<Hixie>
http://www.whatwg.org/html#safe-passing-of-structured-data
18:17
<Hixie>
the specific text i'm asking about is "If input is an Object object"
18:21
<JonathanNeal>
instance of?
18:22
<TabAtkins>
JonathanNeal: We're telling him he doesn't want to test for that. Also, everything is instanceof Object unless you've set prototype to null.
18:24
Ms2ger
wonders why TC39 hasn't tried to take over structured clone yet
18:28
<gavinc>
Hrm, perhaps that is really just the else of that long if?
18:28
<JonathanNeal>
TabAtkins: I thought he was checking for a particular kind of Object, just regular old Object like {} ?
18:30
<Ms2ger>
That doesn't really make sense from an OOP perspective, does it?
18:30
<TabAtkins>
JonathanNeal: Yes, but that's not a good thing. I can make an object-with-defaults, for example, which is nothing more than a {}, but with an object filled with defaults in its prototype.
18:30
<JonathanNeal>
Okay, cause there are some tricks to getting the "class".
18:31
<JonathanNeal>
Ben Alman wrote one https://github.com/cowboy/javascript-getclass/blob/master/dist/ba-getclass.js
18:31
<JonathanNeal>
I'm sorry if that doesn't help.
18:38
<GPHemsley>
TabAtkins: http://whatwg.gphemsley.org/tests/mimesniff/sniffing.php?ct=text/pl%C3%A1in;charset=ISO-8859-5
18:42
GPHemsley
finds it interesting that many of the people requesting wiki accounts to add meta extensions are library and information science people
19:04
<wycats__>
Ms2ger: do you want us to?
19:04
<wycats__>
I think we would like to :p
19:04
<Ms2ger>
I'm not surprised you'd like to :)
19:05
<wycats__>
Ms2ger: the current system isn't hookable, and we can fix that in ES
19:05
<wycats__>
and it would need to interact with proxies, etc.
19:05
<Ms2ger>
I don't know what I'd want, fwiw
19:05
<wycats__>
Ms2ger: I personally see TC39 as just another W3C working group
19:05
<Ms2ger>
Oh
19:05
<wycats__>
sort of similar relationship-wise to WHATWG
19:05
<Ms2ger>
Then keep it in the WHATWG spec
19:06
<wycats__>
O_O
19:06
<wycats__>
Ms2ger: Did I touch a third rail?
19:06
<Ms2ger>
You may find I have little love for the W3C :)
19:07
<wycats__>
Ms2ger: nor I
19:07
<wycats__>
Ms2ger: I'm a reformer, mmmkay?
19:07
<Ms2ger>
Good luck with that :)
19:07
<wycats>
it's going well
19:08
<wycats>
fwiw: many members of TAG believe in forkable licensing
19:08
<wycats>
it's a matter of time imho
19:09
<wycats>
we can call TC39 a WHATWG "WG" :P
19:09
<wycats>
we're all working on the platform, right?
19:09
<Ms2ger>
Well, if you guys are getting closer...
19:09
<wycats>
say more
19:09
<Ms2ger>
We've got a shared test repo that would be marvelous for y'all :)
19:09
<wycats>
seems good
19:10
<wycats>
I guess I miss the war-wound era
19:10
<wycats>
missed*
19:10
<Ms2ger>
https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests, all JS tests welcome ;)
19:11
<wycats>
Ms2ger: if we put stuff in there, do they get trapped in a non-forkable-IP trap?
19:12
<wycats>
I will raise the idea of putting ES stuff in there
19:12
<Ms2ger>
No, 3-clause BSD
19:12
<wycats>
we have a process implementors are using already
19:12
<wycats>
wouldn't want to screw them
19:12
<wycats>
next meeting
19:12
<wycats>
done
19:12
<Ms2ger>
\o/
19:14
GPHemsley
wonders what a frood is
19:14
<hober>
GPHemsley: they're usually pretty hoopy
19:14
<Ms2ger>
A cool dude
19:15
<Ms2ger>
But clearly hober's is better at h2g2 quotes
19:15
<GPHemsley>
so then what is a "cool frood"?
19:15
<Ms2ger>
A guy who knows where his towel is
19:16
<GPHemsley>
"It is maintained by the HTML Test Suite Task Force, which for all that it has "Task Force" in its name is really a bunch of <guys who know where their towels are>."
19:16
<GPHemsley>
Got it.
19:17
<Ms2ger>
And darobin
19:17
<GPHemsley>
heh
19:18
GPHemsley
wonders how many is in a bunch.
19:20
<Ms2ger>
A half dozen?
19:20
<GPHemsley>
Oh, come on. I set that one up for you.
19:21
<Ms2ger>
Uh, 42?
19:21
<GPHemsley>
\o/
19:22
<Ms2ger>
It's been a while since I read it
19:22
<GPHemsley>
yeah, me too
19:23
jgraham
notes that "many mambers of the TAG like X" doesn't really mean anything about the status of X at the W3C
19:24
<hober>
yeah
19:24
<wycats>
jgraham: accurate
19:24
<wycats>
it's a start
19:24
<hober>
though it's getting better, the tag has historically only been tangentially related to the actual work on the platform
19:24
<wycats>
hober: I do not believe that's accurate anymore
19:24
<wycats>
certainly not this meeting
19:25
<jgraham>
Actual work on the platform is also only tangentially related to the status of X at the W3C
19:25
<wycats>
we had a nice chat with Olivier about Web Audio
19:25
<jgraham>
Or at least s/tangentially/indirectly/
19:25
<wycats>
kicked off http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013May/0812.html
19:26
<wycats>
a bunch of stuff
19:26
<wycats>
JSIDL
19:26
<wycats>
http://w3ctag.github.io/jsidl/jsidl.html
19:26
<wycats>
I guess read the minutes but a large % of time was spent on platform-specific stuff
19:26
<wycats>
Alex, Anne, Marcos and I are actively working on platform stuff
19:27
<wycats>
it's almost like we were able to change the composition of the TAG by changing the composition of the TAG ;)
19:34
<Hixie>
TabAtkins: re the questions i was asking earlier, thanks for the class thing. it led me to (i think) the right parts of the right specs. you can see the resulting patches in https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21658
19:34
<Hixie>
Ms2ger: ping https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21590
19:34
Ms2ger
jumps
19:34
<Hixie>
:_D
19:35
<Ms2ger>
Actually, webidl defines a Function
19:35
Ms2ger
closes that bug
19:35
<Hixie>
swee-eeet
19:35
<Hixie>
mission. accomplished.
19:36
<Hixie>
any bikeshed painters interested in a naming frenzy? go crazy on https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21572
19:36
<TabAtkins>
Hixie: In http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=7875&to=7876, you meant "Object" there at the very end.
19:37
<Hixie>
woops
19:37
<Hixie>
yes, thanks. good catch.
19:37
<TabAtkins>
I can stand behind "child-free elements". The fact that text is a Node and thus a child is not usually relevant.
19:38
<jgraham>
child-free sounds like it means "void"
19:39
<jgraham>
in the jargon sense
19:40
<TabAtkins>
But it's not void, so maybe that's okay?
19:40
<Hixie>
i'm a bit reluctant to use terms that are vaguely right but not technically right
19:40
<Hixie>
in a spec, people tend to over-read everything already
19:41
<Hixie>
we'd end up with questions about what it means to have a non-child Text node child, etc
19:47
<hober>
"text-only elements"?
19:58
<tantek>
hober, is that like "text-only email"?
20:09
<Hixie>
hober: that's confusing with CDATA
20:32
<GPHemsley>
plaintext element?
20:32
<GPHemsley>
(what's the difference between CDATA and RCDATA?)
20:32
<Hixie>
also confusing with CDATA
20:32
<Hixie>
RCDATA elements can have text and character references
20:33
<Hixie>
CDATA can only hae text
20:33
<Hixie>
CDATA elements are thus called "Raw text" elements
20:34
<Hixie>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21572 (already addresses why "normal text", "cooked text", "text", and "no-child" are probably less good than just RCDATA)
20:34
<GPHemsley>
escaped text?
20:34
<GPHemsley>
escaped raw text?
20:34
<Hixie>
escaped implies that entities _are_ used
20:34
<GPHemsley>
(maybe "raw text" should be renamed external "raw text" or something?)
20:34
<GPHemsley>
err, "external raw text"
20:35
<Hixie>
(and "potentially escaped text elements" is too long!)
20:35
<Hixie>
"external" how?
20:35
<GPHemsley>
well, according to the definition, they're only used when allowing another language in HTML
20:35
<GPHemsley>
maybe "foreign raw element"?
20:35
<GPHemsley>
maybe "foreign raw text element"?
20:36
<GPHemsley>
(i.e. <script> and <style>)
20:36
<Hixie>
how are they any more foreign than onclick="" and style="" attributes?
20:36
<GPHemsley>
they're foreign in the sense that they switch langauges
20:36
<GPHemsley>
languages
20:37
<GPHemsley>
I'm just brainstorming here
20:37
<GPHemsley>
but presumably @onclick and @style would be similar
20:37
<Hixie>
they allow character references
20:38
<GPHemsley>
right
20:38
<GPHemsley>
so the difference is that the attributes are encoded using HTML
20:38
<GPHemsley>
whereas the elements aren't
20:39
<GPHemsley>
are @onclick and @style considered RCDATA?
20:40
<GPHemsley>
maybe "raw text elements" vs. "escapabale raw text elements"?
20:40
<Hixie>
attributes are RCDATA in the old SGML world, iirc
20:40
<Hixie>
they're nothing special in html
20:41
<GPHemsley>
define "nothing special"
20:41
<GPHemsley>
there lacks a distinction?
20:41
<Hixie>
right
20:41
<GPHemsley>
is there a reason? or was there a lack of a reason?
20:42
<Hixie>
reason for what?
20:42
<a-ja>
hmm
20:42
<a-ja>
RIP Camino
20:42
<GPHemsley>
what I mean is, could attributes be re-called whatever the new name for RCDATA is without changing anything?
20:43
<Hixie>
there's no need for a name for attributes
20:43
<Hixie>
since we treat them all the same now
20:44
<GPHemsley>
wait... were different attributes treated differently at one point?
20:44
<Hixie>
yes sgml, yes
20:44
<GPHemsley>
so why not have a single term describe all attributes plus <title> and <textarea>?
20:45
<Hixie>
well we have no use for a term for attributes
20:45
<Hixie>
but the problem would be having a term for <style> that implies something special that style="" is implied not to have
20:45
<GPHemsley>
we just found a use: to indicate to people that they share restrictions
20:45
<Hixie>
attributes and <title> aren't treated the same
20:46
<GPHemsley>
what do you mean by "treated"?
20:46
<Hixie>
parsed
20:46
<Hixie>
share similar restrictions
20:47
<GPHemsley>
how the content is written and how the content is interpreted are two different things, are they not?
20:47
<Hixie>
it doesn't seem useful to related them to each other
20:47
<Hixie>
they are both different
20:47
<GPHemsley>
what can <title> and <textarea> do that attributes can't, or vice versa?
20:48
<dekiss>
hm
20:48
<dekiss>
real Hixie? :)
20:48
<Hixie>
GPHemsley: it's kinda subtle, see the spec :-)
20:48
<GPHemsley>
Hixie: :P
20:48
<dekiss>
if yes just to say Hi and thanks for doing good job :)
20:48
<Hixie>
dekiss: there's a fake one? :-) Hi! Thanks.
20:48
<dekiss>
haha
20:48
<dekiss>
nice I didn't expect to see you here honestly nice !
20:49
<Hixie>
this is where i hide
20:49
<dekiss>
:)
20:50
<GPHemsley>
alright, well anyway
20:50
<GPHemsley>
Hixie: was there something wrong with "escapable raw text"?
20:50
<GPHemsley>
+elements
20:50
<dekiss>
man have you met Steve Jobs ?
20:51
<dekiss>
sry for asking this but Inever spoke to person who knew him
20:51
<TabAtkins>
Talk to anyone from Apple!
20:51
<dekiss>
:)
20:51
<dekiss>
#apple?
20:51
<Hixie>
GPHemsley: that could work
20:51
<Hixie>
GPHemsley: let me add it to the bug
20:51
<GPHemsley>
k
20:51
<Hixie>
dekiss: nope, never met him.
20:51
<dekiss>
ok
20:52
<dekiss>
man your name is on html standard :) omg yo uare ceo of whatwg^^
20:52
<Hixie>
Conned Editing Officer?
20:52
<GPHemsley>
^_^
20:52
<Hixie>
the guy tricked into writing the spec? :-)
20:52
<dekiss>
you were president
20:53
<dekiss>
:D
20:53
<dekiss>
no, don't look it that way!
20:53
<Hixie>
we have a bunch of editors now actually, not just me
20:53
<Hixie>
see spec.whatwg.org for a list of specs
20:53
<dekiss>
yeah i saw
20:54
<dekiss>
haha
20:54
<dekiss>
this is funny but I must tel lyou :)
20:54
<dekiss>
ok so I hold some private classes about web design and I teach kids about you :)))))
20:54
<dekiss>
hahah
20:54
<dekiss>
omg
20:55
<Hixie>
all good i hope :-|
20:55
<dekiss>
haha yep :)
20:55
GPHemsley
wonders if there's a whatwgmemes he can go post to
20:55
<Hixie>
GPHemsley: we use w3cmemes
20:55
<GPHemsley>
nah, not the same :P
20:56
<dekiss>
Hixie you met Timothy Berners-Lee?
20:56
<dekiss>
have yo useen him in live
20:57
<Hixie>
yes, most people here have probably met tim at some time or other
20:58
<dekiss>
nice
20:58
<GPHemsley>
;_;
20:59
<dekiss>
sry I cant believe its really you man :D
20:59
<dekiss>
pls reply me from your mail and I will belive pls pls :D
21:00
<GPHemsley>
dekiss: Enough already
21:00
<pdr>
Hixie, sign my chest!
21:01
<TabAtkins>
dekiss: Hixie, he's just this guy, you know? A bunch of us either work for the browser companies or are webdevs who do something with browser dev as well.
21:09
<TabAtkins>
Hixie: ...for what?
21:09
<Hixie>
canvas example
21:09
<Hixie>
but actually i found some online
21:09
<Hixie>
under CC license
21:10
<dekiss>
Hixie is there future for webgl?
21:10
<Hixie>
not my area of expertise, but i doubt webgl is going away any time soon
21:12
<dekiss>
man
21:12
<TabAtkins>
Oh man, the molecules really *do* form little hexagons: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/05/atomic-level-images/
21:12
<dekiss>
if you need some employees pls tell me thanks in advance :)
21:12
<Hixie>
employees?
21:12
<Hixie>
for what?
21:12
<dekiss>
welllllll
21:12
<dekiss>
anything web related or pc related or science related etc.
21:12
<dekiss>
I can even clean web dev monitors in google
21:12
<Hixie>
oh
21:12
<dekiss>
HAHAHA :D
21:13
<dekiss>
^^
21:13
<Hixie>
i have no hiring authority for anything
21:13
<Hixie>
so...
21:13
<dekiss>
ok
21:13
<dekiss>
nvm
21:13
<dekiss>
what you work in google man?
21:13
<dekiss>
if its no secret?
21:13
<Hixie>
the html spec
21:13
<dekiss>
Chrome?
21:14
<Hixie>
no, http://whatwg.org/html is what i write as my fulltime job
21:14
<dekiss>
hm ok
21:15
<TabAtkins>
dekiss: None of us have any hiring authority. Our companies' job application pages are easy to find.
21:15
<Hixie>
http://caroll-ann.deviantart.com/art/Bugs-Bunny-Sprites-Sheets-346185418 "This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License"
21:15
<dekiss>
Hixie when you put transition on some element and give position fixed and scroll the page the elements leave lines on the webpage its bug
21:15
<dekiss>
but I think its more css related :)
21:16
<dekiss>
sec im gona report it
21:16
<dekiss>
TabAtkins I know man but if you recommend me
21:16
<dekiss>
^^
21:16
<dekiss>
kidding, no way you can recommend someone you just met on net :D
21:16
<TabAtkins>
I'm not going to recommend a stranger.
21:17
<dekiss>
haha exactly just joke sec.. brb :)
21:20
<dekiss>
Hixie honestly w3c adopted html 5 because they wanted or to escape the shame of not sucessfull xhtml 2?
21:21
<dekiss>
and there was risk that browsers vendors will implement html5 and not xhtml2 and everyone would use html5? :)
21:46
<tantek>
well hello 2007 era political discussion
22:29
<dkiss>
pls link me list of all meta values for http-euqiv attribute thanks
22:30
<tantek>
dkiss, try asking siri
22:31
<dkiss>
?
22:32
<dkiss>
wat
22:33
<dkiss>
I cant find it anywhere
22:52
<gavinc>
tantek: *snicker*
22:52
<dkiss>
what should I use to tell browsers to update their cache? I saw last-modified is not valid meta name value :S
22:55
tantek
is waiting for an irc bot named siri
22:57
<dkiss>
also I have one more question, in keywords attribute can I put english and macedonian words together separated with , ?
23:04
<Hixie>
dkiss: you have to do it at the HTTP level, <meta> won't do anything
23:05
<Hixie>
dkiss: also, keywords meta is a waste of time
23:05
<Hixie>
search engines ignore it
23:06
<dkiss>
ok
23:06
<dkiss>
:|
23:06
<dkiss>
Hixie if you need help pls tell me writing html spec I want to volunteer :)
23:07
<Hixie>
we have many specs that need editors
23:07
<dekiss>
I am finishing some projects for my firm and after that I will be free to help you guys will apply soon
23:07
<Hixie>
apply?
23:08
<Hixie>
all this work is done by volunteers or people whose company is paying them to work on it
23:08
<Hixie>
almost all of us started as volunteers
23:08
<dekiss>
yeah I wil lapply for volunteering
23:08
<Hixie>
no need to apply, you're accepted. just do the work ;-)
23:09
<dekiss>
:) thanks
23:59
GPHemsley
shoots Hixie a look