| 00:00 | <ap> | Hixie: perhaps the spec would be easier to follow if the lifetime algorithms were just removed from it |
| 00:00 | <ap> | Hixie: as they will just be so different in practice |
| 00:01 | <Hixie> | well we need to define the detectable aspects of lifetime |
| 00:01 | <Hixie> | that's all the spec is trying to define |
| 00:01 | <Hixie> | obviously the actual implementations will likely be different |
| 00:01 | <ap> | Hixie: what are the detectable aspects? |
| 00:01 | <Hixie> | e.g. when does the worker stop running |
| 00:01 | <ap> | Hixie: usually the goal that there are none :) |
| 00:01 | <dekiss> | Hixie ok thanks for info man |
| 00:02 | <TabAtkins> | annevk: Which thread is this? Have I already responded to it? |
| 00:02 | <dekiss> | Hixie assistive technology devices can interpret javascript and dom? |
| 00:02 | <Hixie> | dekiss: in practice, or in theory? |
| 00:02 | <ap> | Hixie: is there a way to explain the shutdown procedure without the algorithms? Because they seem unlikely to help implementations converge in this case |
| 00:02 | <dekiss> | um |
| 00:03 | <dekiss> | both |
| 00:03 | <ap> | Hixie: people will just have another barrier trying to understand what the algorithm means in spec's synchronous world, and then implement differently anyway |
| 00:03 | <Hixie> | ap: i tried various ways to define it, but what's in the spec is the simplest, least confusing, most declarative manner i was able to come up with |
| 00:04 | <ap> | Hixie: ok |
| 00:04 | <Hixie> | ap: i'm very open to alternative phrasings if you can come up with any though, they're pretty horrific |
| 00:04 | <Hixie> | ap: definitely not a part of the spec i would point to when going up for promotion, shall we say |
| 00:05 | <Hixie> | ap: see the diff i just posted to the bug (https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21416), in case that helps... not sure what else to add |
| 00:06 | <ap> | Hixie: I'll see what I can do if I get a chance to work on channel messaging again. The last time, I had a hard time comparing the spec and the existing WebKit implementation to understand if it was doing something at least related to what's correct |
| 00:07 | <ap> | Hixie: I think that the change you made is helpful |
| 00:08 | <Hixie> | ap: cool, thanks (on both fronts) |
| 00:08 | <ap> | thank you! |
| 00:08 | <Hixie> | ap: totally agreed that this isn't easy to think about. It's probably the second most complicated part of web platform i've worked on |
| 00:08 | <dekiss> | Hixie? |
| 00:08 | <Hixie> | most complicated being xbl2, if we can count that as part of the "web platform" :-| |
| 00:09 | <Hixie> | dekiss: sorry, had to help ap first, he's an implementor, they're my peeps :-P to answe you, yes, ATs can be part of browsers. |
| 00:12 | <dekiss> | ok thanks man |
| 00:12 | <dekiss> | np |
| 00:23 | <Hixie> | ap: fwiw, safari seems to handle this test ok: http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/dom/workers/002.html |
| 00:23 | <Hixie> | ap: what i do there is create two workers, then a message channel, and i pass one side of each message channel to each worker at the same time, then wait a second, then have them send their parts back, then i send a message from one side to the other |
| 00:24 | <Hixie> | (Firefox doesn't seem to support MessageChannel, sadly) |
| 00:27 | <Hixie> | bbl |
| 00:32 | <ap> | Hixie: I think that have an actual mutex for dedicated workers (unsure if we lock it in all the right places, or what we do with shared ones) |
| 00:33 | <ap> | as shared ones were only out of process in chromium port |
| 00:37 | <zewt> | it seems like there's a gap between what the spec wants to happen and how to actually do it in practice--i wonder if a small sample implementation would help narrow that (on top of unix pipes or something) |
| 00:58 | <zewt> | (for that matter, I don't know if it can be sanely implemented with simple pipes, or if it wants some form of shm) |
| 01:02 | <zewt> | heh cute, apparently mousewheel scrolling in chrome closes the context menu |
| 01:02 | <zewt> | handy way when I right-click by accident, want to close the menu, but ... can't find anywhere to click that won't have side-effects |
| 01:03 | <zewt> | (and more natural than hitting esc) |
| 03:16 | <JonathanNeal> | Why does the meta tag not allow virtually any name/content pairing? |
| 03:16 | <JonathanNeal> | Ideally, should Twiter and Facebook be dropping the cards and the open graphs? Realistically, should the spec reflect the true state of <meta>? |
| 03:23 | <JonathanNeal> | I'm just reacting to validator errors versus warnings. |
| 04:02 | <MikeSmith> | JonathanNeal: about arbitrary names not being allowed for meta, it's because the spec says so |
| 04:02 | <MikeSmith> | currently |
| 04:02 | <MikeSmith> | I personally have come around to thinking it's a lost cause |
| 04:03 | <MikeSmith> | that is, it's a lost cause to disallow arbitrary name values |
| 04:03 | <MikeSmith> | but Hixie believes differently, I think |
| 04:03 | <MikeSmith> | I guess I should file a bug |
| 04:04 | <MikeSmith> | btw, you can put anything you want into the value of the content attribute, thoug |
| 04:04 | <MikeSmith> | there are no restrictions on that |
| 04:21 | <jernoble_> | ok |
| 04:21 | <Hixie> | no, i agree that the current state is not viable |
| 04:22 | <Hixie> | the wiki experiment has been a great success |
| 04:22 | <Hixie> | it's shown that a lot of people really are wasting their time, and a lot of other people (far more than i expected) are doing things with meta and link rel and so on that are specific to their deployments |
| 04:23 | <Hixie> | there's a bunch of bugs about how to deal with this |
| 04:26 | <MikeSmith> | well, I just added one more |
| 04:26 | <MikeSmith> | https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22257 |
| 04:27 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: you meant to say that the the wiki experiment has *not* been a great success? |
| 04:27 | <Hixie> | no, it's been a success |
| 04:27 | <MikeSmith> | oh |
| 04:27 | <Hixie> | it has taught us much |
| 04:27 | <Hixie> | at least, it's taught me much :-) |
| 04:27 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 04:27 | <MikeSmith> | I agree about that too |
| 04:28 | <MikeSmith> | anyway I hope hsivonen can weigh in with his opinion on it |
| 04:28 | <MikeSmith> | I'll send a message to the list |
| 04:28 | <Hixie> | i'm not looking at this until sometime next year at the earliest, fwiw |
| 04:28 | <Hixie> | trying to get all the bugs that relate to interop dealt with first |
| 04:29 | <Hixie> | browser interop |
| 04:29 | <MikeSmith> | ok |
| 05:34 | <JonathanNeal> | excellent, twitter cards will soon be valid, thanks to Hixie and MikeSmith and the rest of the gang. |
| 05:40 | <Hixie> | are they invalid now? |
| 05:41 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: https://dev.twitter.com/docs/cards |
| 05:42 | <MikeSmith> | https://dev.twitter.com/docs/cards/markup-reference |
| 05:42 | <JonathanNeal> | Bad value twitter:card for attribute name on element meta: Keyword twitter:card is not registered. |
| 05:42 | <Hixie> | why doesn't someone just register them? they, unlike almost every other meta tag, actually have a spec! |
| 05:43 | <MikeSmith> | hmm I see that some of them are now registered, actually |
| 05:43 | <MikeSmith> | http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions |
| 05:43 | <JonathanNeal> | They are http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions |
| 05:43 | <Hixie> | ah. then they're valid already |
| 05:43 | MikeSmith | goes to add those to the validator source |
| 05:43 | <Hixie> | heh |
| 05:44 | <Hixie> | that's definitely one part of this that doesn't scale well |
| 05:44 | <JonathanNeal> | Ooo, better sneak benschwarz' in there now. |
| 05:45 | <JonathanNeal> | or not, but that's what made me start thinking about this https://github.com/benschwarz/metaquery |
| 05:45 | <JonathanNeal> | You really ought to just make the <meta> element's name attribute open. |
| 05:46 | <Hixie> | the problem is that that would lead to a lot of authors wasting a lot of time |
| 05:46 | <Hixie> | because a lot of authors spend ages including things that are totally pointless |
| 05:46 | <JonathanNeal> | to whom? |
| 05:46 | <Hixie> | pointless to anyone |
| 05:47 | <Hixie> | as in, <meta> tags that are never used by any software at all |
| 05:47 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: they waste time now running stuff throught the validator now and getting errors they don't care about |
| 05:47 | <JonathanNeal> | That's a relative statement. For instance, HTML5 Boilerplate rejected adding twitter cards because "most sites or apps will never use this and too many people will accidentally leave it in there." |
| 05:48 | <MikeSmith> | and then complaining through bug reports and mailing-list messages and e-mail to me |
| 05:48 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: i disagree with the premise that it's a waste of their time to be told that something they're doing is pointless. |
| 05:48 | <Hixie> | but i agree that the current system isn't working |
| 05:49 | <JonathanNeal> | "Keyword X is not registered. " hardly communicates what you are saying. |
| 05:49 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: It's not an absolute waste of time, it's a relative/net waste of time |
| 05:49 | <Hixie> | yeah, the current system isn't working, like i said |
| 05:50 | <MikeSmith> | it's like the validator complaining aobut table@border is a net waste of time, I think |
| 05:50 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: if an author spends 10 minutes per project on a <meta> that gives nobody value, and one day they validate and the validator says "this is a waste of your time, stop doing it", then they can save 10 minutes per future project. |
| 05:50 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: the thing is, they don't change their markup |
| 05:50 | <JonathanNeal> | Then you pick which meta tags are a waste of time, or are they all? |
| 05:50 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: then we're not communicating it well, like JonathanNeal said |
| 05:50 | <JonathanNeal> | Also, is that really an error, or maybe just a warning? |
| 05:51 | <JonathanNeal> | twitter cards might not be so arbitrary from the point of view of, say, twitter. |
| 05:51 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: they keep the meta@name values, and they keep table@border. The main thing they learn is to ignore the validator for those cases |
| 05:51 | <Hixie> | JonathanNeal: well, right now we're in a kind of learning state where we are finding out what the proportion of useful values to not-useful values is |
| 05:51 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: then we're not communicating to them why those are errors well enough. |
| 05:52 | <Hixie> | MikeSmith: especially for <meta>, that's unsurprising, given that it's not well defined in the first place :-) |
| 05:52 | <MikeSmith> | true |
| 05:58 | <JonathanNeal> | IMHO, as long as HTML is the language of the browsers, the <meta> tag will continue down a liberal path, as developers continually extend it to communicate data about the document. |
| 05:59 | <Hixie> | sure, but in reality it's not that simple. |
| 05:59 | <Hixie> | metadata that nobody reads ends up bitrotting |
| 05:59 | <MikeSmith> | JonathanNeal: please try your twitter cards with http://validator.w3.org/nu/ or http://validator.w3.org/ now |
| 05:59 | <Hixie> | metadata that isn't in a specified format starts useless (with everyone using different syntaxes, etc) |
| 05:59 | <JonathanNeal> | And the variations can be quite popular, as they have been for apple, facebook, and now twitter. |
| 05:59 | <JonathanNeal> | I will, thanks. |
| 06:00 | <JonathanNeal> | whoops, was using validator.nu, will try w3's |
| 06:00 | <JonathanNeal> | VALID |
| 06:00 | <MikeSmith> | yeah I'll ping hsivonen about pulling the changes to validator.nu too |
| 06:01 | <MikeSmith> | JonathanNeal: only twitter ones I added are the ones that are actually registered |
| 06:01 | <JonathanNeal> | The error is still "Bad value X for attribute name on element meta: Keyword X is not registered." I tried throwing something random in there. |
| 06:01 | <Hixie> | bbl, sleep |
| 06:01 | <MikeSmith> | not the other 50,000 other ones in their developer docs |
| 06:01 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie: nn |
| 06:02 | <JonathanNeal> | Yea, cause now you are maintaining a <meta name="twitter:X"> spec. |
| 06:06 | <benschwarz> | No sneak required |
| 06:06 | <JonathanNeal> | :) |
| 06:07 | <JonathanNeal> | I think this is a step forward, and hopefully opens folks up to the idea of letting meta name be free. |
| 06:34 | <hsivonen> | http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/201306/msg00002.html trying to make sense of the black text on black background |
| 06:39 | <Ms2ger> | hsivonen, I read "I am as high as a kite" |
| 06:40 | <hsivonen> | "You are using an unregistered meta keyword. Go read Cory Doctorow's metacrap essay." |
| 06:41 | <hsivonen> | so much opportunity for 386 on xml-dev |
| 09:59 | Ms2ger | wonders who writes like TimBL speaks |
| 10:03 | jgraham | wonders the context for Ms2ger's wondering |
| 10:05 | <jgraham> | Kerouac? |
| 10:06 | <jgraham> | Not sure that's really a good fit… |
| 10:09 | <darobin> | TimBL writes like TimBL speaks |
| 10:10 | <darobin> | otherwise, I'm tempted to suggest Robert Shea + Robert Anton Wilson |
| 10:17 | <Ms2ger> | https://twitter.com/glazou/status/341819288182726657 |
| 11:14 | <dekiss> | what is the best way to make something like Facebook posts? |
| 11:17 | <dekiss> | content editable? |
| 11:22 | <dekiss> | I want to make sokmething like Facebook posts, how can I make this what is the best way? Using content editable or using textarea or? |
| 11:23 | <jgraham> | marcosc: No plan because testharness.js has been on github for a long time already |
| 11:24 | <marcosc> | jgraham, ah, should have known :) |
| 11:34 | <zcorpan> | anolis doesn't support referencing a section, or does it? |
| 11:35 | <zcorpan> | dekiss: try asking in #html5 or something instead |
| 11:36 | <dekiss> | ok |
| 11:53 | <jgraham> | tobie: So am I allowed to merge things in ttwf-docs, or is that only for special people? |
| 11:53 | <jgraham> | (also I wonder why the documentation is branded as "ttwf") |
| 11:54 | <jgraham> | (not only because the TTWF people settled on TestTWF which doesn't have such a bad reputation on urban dictionary) |
| 11:55 | <tobie> | Darn. forgot about that. |
| 11:55 | <jgraham> | (not that I really mind, but at least at present TestTWF is a branch of the testing effort rather than the whole thing.) |
| 11:56 | <tobie> | jgraham: plan is to use TestTWF for the overall web platform testing effort |
| 11:57 | <tobie> | and have the event organization be a part of that. |
| 11:57 | <jgraham> | I see |
| 11:57 | <tobie> | but yeah need to fix the urban dic ref. |
| 11:57 | <tobie> | :( |
| 11:58 | <tobie> | jgraham: I think everyone relates to the dinos really well |
| 12:00 | <jgraham> | The dinos are cool |
| 12:00 | <tobie> | and you can go ahead and merge stuff there. |
| 12:00 | <tobie> | I added you to the project with that in mind. :) |
| 12:02 | <darobin> | dinos++ |
| 13:17 | <hallvors> | annevk: shouldn't stuff like "enum XMLHttpRequestResponseType" be marked with [NoInterfaceObject] in the IDL? |
| 13:18 | <annevk> | no |
| 13:18 | <hallvors> | http://xhr.spec.whatwg.org/#interface-xmlhttprequest |
| 13:19 | <hallvors> | Why not? I see no point in having window.XMLHttpRequestOptions and window.XMLHttpRequestResponseType around |
| 13:21 | <annevk> | hallvors: it appears you're either not reading WebIDL, or WebIDL says something silly |
| 13:21 | <hallvors> | Oh, maybe I'm making assumptions here.. |
| 13:23 | <hallvors> | ah, only relevant for "interface" |
| 13:23 | <hallvors> | ofc ;) |
| 13:33 | <annevk> | hallvors: your pull requests are super unclear btw |
| 13:33 | <annevk> | hallvors: you should really rebase or some such first |
| 13:33 | <hallvors> | sorry |
| 13:33 | <hallvors> | I know. I've just forgotten to do so |
| 13:33 | <hallvors> | :-/ |
| 13:34 | <hallvors> | but I've appointed jgraham as my Git guru, so the future is bright |
| 13:40 | <zcorpan> | heycam|away: how should i spec style['font-size']? attribute CSSStyleDeclaration font-size; isn't valid webidl |
| 13:42 | <zcorpan> | DOMString* |
| 13:42 | <darobin> | I don't think that's possible |
| 13:43 | <zcorpan> | not in the syntax, no |
| 13:43 | <zcorpan> | but i can require a dancing unicorn in prose if i like |
| 13:44 | <zewt> | amusing when people try to puff themselves up by saying "open letter" when they mean "blog post" |
| 13:44 | <zcorpan> | "open blog post"? |
| 13:44 | <darobin> | zcorpan: that just makes me sad that you haven't sent me a dancing unicorn |
| 13:44 | <zcorpan> | i keep my blog posts to myself |
| 13:44 | <hallvors> | annevk - PR 9 should be a somewhat improved version of PR8 |
| 13:45 | <zewt> | do you open each post with "dear diary" |
| 13:46 | <zcorpan> | darobin: it hasn't arrived yet? maybe it died trying to swim across the sea :-( |
| 13:46 | <annevk> | zcorpan: why is it not fontSize? |
| 13:46 | <annevk> | zcorpan: sadness prevailed? |
| 13:46 | <zcorpan> | annevk: because /topic |
| 13:47 | <annevk> | I thought CSS had that bit right |
| 13:47 | zcorpan | needs to go |
| 13:48 | <zcorpan> | annevk: apparently trident/webkit/blink support both fontSize and font-size |
| 13:48 | <annevk> | that does sound like sadness has prevailed |
| 13:49 | <annevk> | hallvors: so don't you think we should do that in Fetch |
| 13:49 | <annevk> | hallvors: e.g. <img src=...> should not do the fragment thing either |
| 13:50 | <annevk> | hallvors: I think even old Fetch (which XHR references) requires this |
| 13:53 | <hallvors> | I certainly think we should do it in Fetch ;) |
| 13:53 | <hallvors> | so you can add it there if you want |
| 13:54 | <hallvors> | - just that my main concern still is shipping the XHR spec in a usable state |
| 13:54 | <annevk> | right, you realize shipping XHR also references fetch? |
| 13:55 | <hallvors> | I'm not sure if we'll be "allowed" to - what are those pub rules again? Isn't Fetch too immature? |
| 13:56 | <hallvors> | anyway, it's up to you. By all means add it in Fetch if you would rather do that |
| 13:56 | <annevk> | there's Fetch and HTML fetch |
| 13:56 | <annevk> | the lowercase was intentional |
| 13:56 | <annevk> | XHR has referenced the latter for an eternity |
| 13:57 | <annevk> | you can't remove that |
| 13:57 | <annevk> | you should really know this if you're editing XHR... |
| 14:01 | <hallvors> | Right - it's already covered by HTML5 fetch text. Good. |
| 14:52 | <JonathanNeal> | hello |
| 15:12 | <Ms2ger> | tobie, for http://www.w3.org/wiki/Testing/Infra/Notification_Hell , can I propose critic as an alternative solution? |
| 15:14 | <tobie> | Ms2ger: jgraham brought that up on #testing earlier. |
| 15:17 | <Ms2ger> | And if you guys like dinos, Mozilla has a nice one ;) |
| 15:17 | <Ms2ger> | Ah, zcorpan |
| 15:18 | Ms2ger | continues reading backlog |
| 15:18 | <Ms2ger> | Nvm :) |
| 15:19 | <Ms2ger> | "To JavaScript programmers, it's the only thing that makes sense." |
| 15:19 | Ms2ger | stops reading |
| 15:36 | <reyre> | is the w3c html page down? |
| 15:37 | <JonathanNeal> | which one, reyre? |
| 15:37 | <reyre> | JonathanNeal: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/ |
| 15:39 | <Ms2ger> | whatwg.org/html is up |
| 15:41 | <reyre> | Ms2ger: awesome, i'll use that :) |
| 15:41 | <reyre> | thanks |
| 15:41 | <Ms2ger> | Np |
| 15:41 | <reyre> | Ms2ger: is this less up to date then w3c site? |
| 15:42 | <Ms2ger> | More |
| 15:44 | <reyre> | Ms2ger: agh :( that means the spec has changed again for WEBVTT ... |
| 15:45 | <reyre> | sigh |
| 15:58 | <Philip`> | reyre: I think they're divergent forks, so different people will have different opinions in which is more up to date |
| 16:01 | <Ms2ger> | But he works on Mozilla, so for his purposes, the WHATWG version is most up to date :) |
| 16:10 | <jgraham> | (is that also true for WebVTT? I'm not sure what happened there) |
| 16:12 | <rillian> | jgraham: iirc silvia is maintaining the spec at http://dev.w3.org/html5/webvtt/ |
| 16:13 | <rillian> | I don't know about the whatwg side |
| 16:23 | <annevk> | the format is W3C-only |
| 16:23 | <annevk> | or CG-only |
| 16:23 | <annevk> | <track> and such are part of HTML still |
| 17:27 | <SteveF> | Ms2ger: depends on which folks at Mozilla for which spec to use |
| 17:28 | <Ms2ger> | Track |
| 17:28 | <SteveF> | for acc implementations the W3C html spec is generally more up to date and followed |
| 17:29 | <Ms2ger> | Ah, we're implementing longdesc? |
| 17:30 | <SteveF> | Ms2ger: nut talking about longdesc |
| 17:30 | <SteveF> | Ms2ger: thats not in the HTML spec |
| 17:31 | <SteveF> | Ms2ger: but alas you are |
| 17:31 | <annevk> | I wonder how that was decided |
| 17:32 | <SteveF> | the acc support for longdesc has been implemented in Firefox for donkeys years, only browser that implemented AFAIK |
| 17:32 | <tantek> | Here is the bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=854848 |
| 18:10 | <MikeSmith> | "While we've considered longdesc in the past, the landscape has changed and there are reasons to support it now. For one, the W3C validator now supports it, making it more likely to be supported across browsers." |
| 18:10 | <MikeSmith> | sigh |
| 18:11 | <MikeSmith> | I didn't add support for it to the validator as an endorsement. |
| 18:11 | <MikeSmith> | I added it mostly because of aggressive lobbying. |
| 18:12 | <MikeSmith> | Similar to the kind of aggressive lobbying you can see in the comments in that bug. |
| 18:13 | <MikeSmith> | Where the word "aggressive" is an understatement. |
| 18:13 | <MikeSmith> | There are a lot of other words that kind of thing could be called. |
| 18:14 | <Philip`> | Seems like an effective way to do lobbying - you increase the pressure until just one of your opponents cracks, and then you can use them as leverage against your remaining opponents, until you win |
| 18:14 | <tantek> | MikeSmith, apparently, "successful"? |
| 18:14 | <MikeSmith> | tantek: not sure it's successful for users |
| 18:15 | <MikeSmith> | certainly yeah it's successful for the longdesc partisans |
| 18:15 | <jacobolus> | MikeSmith: you could just add snippets of whatever bits you found most obnoxious to the validator output whenever it finds a longdesc |
| 18:15 | <tantek> | MikeSmith - indeed, or for the web, or for accessibility overall. |
| 18:15 | <MikeSmith> | Philip`: sadly yeah I guess so |
| 18:17 | <MikeSmith> | jacobolus: Yeah I should have the validator emit a warning, "Despite some people wanting you to think otherwise, there is no consensus among accessibility professionals that the longdesc attribute is a win for accessibility." |
| 18:20 | <SteveF> | better to let it be, there are other things to waste ones time on |
| 18:21 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 18:21 | <hober> | we don't always reach consensus, but when we do, it's by exhaustion |
| 18:21 | <MikeSmith> | heh |
| 18:35 | <jacobolus> | way too mild. name names! step it up! |
| 18:35 | <jacobolus> | "X, Y, and Z companies pressured the validator to add 'longdesc', but everyone else on the web thinks it's a dumb idea" |
| 18:35 | <jacobolus> | :p |
| 19:14 | <JonathanNeal> | So, <meta>! |
| 19:18 | <zcorpan> | jacobolus: companies or individuals? |
| 19:19 | <jacobolus> | zcorpan: I dunno. I'm just joking :) |
| 19:27 | <jgraham_> | jacobolus: You should be warned that one of the Commandments of The Lobby is "Thou Shalt Not Joke About Longdesc" |
| 19:28 | <jacobolus> | jgraham_: maybe browsers can just put in a picture of longcat every time someone uses a longdesc? |
| 19:28 | <jacobolus> | (completely serious recommendation) |
| 19:28 | <Ms2ger> | jacobolus, but how will the blind people see it? |
| 19:29 | <jacobolus> | long meows? |
| 20:11 | <Hixie_> | woah, crashed gecko |
| 20:11 | <Hixie_> | it's been a while |
| 20:11 | <Hixie_> | http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/2276 |
| 20:12 | <Hixie_> | Ms2ger: ping https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21736 |
| 20:12 | <Ms2ger> | Hixie_, which Gecko? |
| 20:13 | <Hixie_> | Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:23.0) Gecko/20130508 Firefox/23.0 |
| 20:15 | Ms2ger | frowns |
| 20:17 | <jgraham> | That's pretty out of date? |
| 20:17 | <Ms2ger> | I can find no proof in the code that a named getter would ever have existed on select |
| 20:18 | <Ms2ger> | Hixie_, huh. |
| 20:19 | <Hixie_> | "pretty out of date"! that's barely a month old! and i've been gone for most of that month! :-P |
| 20:19 | <Hixie_> | gotta give the poor browser time to download its updates |
| 20:19 | <Hixie_> | i'm actually surprised it's not older, since i was afk from 0504! :-) |
| 20:19 | <Ms2ger> | The crash with namedItem is probably https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=877910 |
| 20:20 | <Ms2ger> | But I'm quite confused where I got that |
| 20:20 | <Hixie_> | any idea what made you file the bug? :-) |
| 20:21 | <Ms2ger> | I presume something |
| 20:23 | <jgraham> | I thought that "more than 24 hours" was "pretty out of date" for a browser these days :p |
| 20:23 | <jgraham> | Although actually some of mine are rather more out of date than that |
| 20:23 | <jgraham> | Opera 12.16 for example... |
| 20:24 | Ms2ger | looks at the bugs he touched around that time |
| 20:25 | <Ms2ger> | https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=862084 presumably... |
| 20:26 | <Ms2ger> | Hixie_, so I probably just got confused by the namedItem |
| 20:26 | <Hixie_> | k |
| 20:27 | <Ms2ger> | Hixie_, while you're in the area, https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22225 |
| 20:29 | <Hixie_> | i've long left the area, but i'll be back. :-) |
| 20:30 | <Ms2ger> | That fixes the crash you hit ;) |
| 20:30 | <Hixie_> | ...how? o_O |
| 20:30 | <Hixie_> | resource selection algorithm, 9, <source>, 10: Failed: Queue a task, using the DOM manipulation task source, to fire a simple event named error at the candidate element, in the context of the fetching process that was used to try to obtain candidate's corresponding media resource in the resource fetch algorithm. |
| 20:30 | <Ms2ger> | Because JSAPI sucks :) |
| 20:30 | <Hixie_> | anyone have any idea wtf i was talking about when i wrote "in the context of..." above? |
| 20:31 | <Ms2ger> | And in particular, we were creating the returned JS object manually, and needed the JS object for the options collection to exist for that |
| 20:32 | <jgraham> | Hixie_: Not a clue. |
| 20:33 | <Hixie_> | ok i'm removing that text |
| 20:33 | <Hixie_> | doesn't seem to mean anything |
| 20:33 | <Hixie_> | and i've no idea what i was trying to say |
| 20:33 | <Hixie_> | Ms2ger: that sounds... unrelated to the idl? :-) |
| 20:34 | <Ms2ger> | Hixie_, well, our IDL said 'object' |
| 20:34 | <Ms2ger> | And if it says that, you need to use JSObjects |
| 20:34 | <Ms2ger> | It sucks |
| 20:34 | <Hixie_> | k |
| 20:34 | <Hixie_> | i guess |
| 20:34 | <Hixie_> | :-) |
| 20:36 | <Ms2ger> | Hixie_, fun stuff! :) |
| 20:36 | <jgraham> | Can your IDL not express A or B |
| 20:36 | <jgraham> | ? |
| 20:36 | <Ms2ger> | Yes |
| 20:36 | <Ms2ger> | But not for return values |
| 20:36 | <jgraham> | Oh |
| 20:37 | <Ms2ger> | Lifetime management there is somewhat annoying, aiui |
| 20:38 | <Ms2ger> | It'll come eventually, I hope |
| 20:48 | <GPHemsley> | hmm... the crash report comments for that crash are really angry |
| 20:49 | <GPHemsley> | and/or uninformed |
| 20:51 | <Ms2ger> | Better than uniformed, which is what i read first |
| 20:54 | <Hixie_> | so... why do we allow flow content in <dt> and <th> |
| 21:14 | <zcorpan> | interesting that view-source:http://svn.whatwg.org/webapps/source is horribly slow in browsers. except presto is fast |
| 21:15 | <zcorpan> | does <pre class="idl foobar"> make webidl-check skip validation? |
| 21:17 | <zcorpan> | Hixie_: for <dt> i think the use case was something like Q&A. for <th> i guess things like forms? |
| 21:20 | <Hixie_> | "idl extract" is to make the idl checker skip the block, yeah |
| 21:20 | <Hixie_> | those use cases kind of make sense i guess |
| 21:24 | <zcorpan> | thanks |
| 21:27 | <annevk> | Hixie_: allowing flow content there... wasn't that a zcorpan thing? |
| 21:27 | <annevk> | Hixie_: convoluted examples of complex markup in header cells |
| 21:29 | <zcorpan> | annevk: don't think so :-) |
| 21:31 | <zcorpan> | i recall 2006-ish when we pondered about content models i argued for phrasing-only in dt/th. but recently someone came up with the above use cases and the spec was changed to allow flow content. (also in figcaption) |
| 21:33 | <zcorpan> | http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/commit-watchers-whatwg.org/2011/005776.html |
| 21:33 | <zcorpan> | http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/commit-watchers-whatwg.org/2010/004216.html |
| 21:34 | <dglazkov> | good morning, Whatwg! |
| 21:35 | <Hixie_> | https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13174#c6 already mentioned my plans for <dialog> in <th> :-) |
| 21:37 | <Hixie_> | those examples seem to have changed :-( |
| 21:39 | <zcorpan> | maybe we should start attaching snapshots of pages to bugs |
| 21:40 | <Hixie_> | well comment 2 has all you really need |
| 21:46 | GPHemsley | notices dglazkov's mornings getting later and later |
| 21:58 | <Hixie_> | anyone got IE10? IE9 is acting odd on http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/2280 |
| 22:00 | <Hixie_> | sicking: mounir pinged you on https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20580 |
| 22:00 | <Philip`> | Hixie_: I get "error: Invalid argument. on line 4" in IE10 |
| 22:01 | <Hixie_> | well at least the line number makes more sense |
| 22:01 | <Philip`> | following a single "log:" |
| 22:01 | <Hixie_> | IE9 was saying line 128 |
| 22:01 | <Hixie_> | but that still makes no sense |
| 22:01 | <Hixie_> | thanks though! |
| 22:01 | <Hixie_> | anyone understand https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21800 ? |
| 22:05 | <TabAtkins> | I don't even know what s/b is. |
| 22:07 | <Hixie_> | the google says maybe "should be"? |
| 22:08 | <JonathanNeal> | Are <meta> tags liberal? |
| 22:09 | <JonathanNeal> | Howdy Hixie_, Did you and MikeSmith end up emailing folks about the meta name property? |
| 22:10 | <Hixie_> | JonathanNeal: it's on my list of things to deal with in 2014 Q1 |
| 22:10 | <Hixie_> | then again, it was on my list for 2013 Q1 |
| 22:11 | <annevk> | https://twitter.com/antimattur/status/342036107585806336 beautiful |
| 22:11 | <annevk> | oh god, that's an actual quote http://www.altova.com/list/xml-dev/201306/msg1000330505.html |
| 22:11 | <annevk> | lol interwebs |
| 22:15 | <Hixie_> | he does go on to say "it is virtually forgotten" so it's not clear what he meant... |
| 22:16 | <Hixie_> | xforms wasn't a thorn in the side, it was the catalyst :-) |
| 22:17 | <Hixie_> | bbiab. |
| 22:25 | <jarek> | omg, Boeing is using SVG |
| 22:27 | <jarek> | not the best choice for circuit diagraming |
| 23:28 | <zcorpan> | https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21791 stupid browsers :-| |
| 23:41 | <dekiss> | Hixie_, here |
| 23:42 | <dekiss> | ? |
| 23:42 | <dekiss> | if any html editor here please I have one question thanks |
| 23:47 | <rillian> | dekiss: don't ask to ask. |
| 23:48 | <rillian> | it's hard to tell if anyone knows the answer to your question if you don't state it. |