| 06:23 | <annevk> | jgraham: it seems you fixed it! |
| 06:29 | <jgraham> | annevk: Great! |
| 06:30 | <annevk> | ah you just put a copy of Python there |
| 06:30 | <annevk> | interesting |
| 06:31 | <jgraham> | It's running in its own virtualenv |
| 06:31 | <jgraham> | So it's mostly links to the system python, but with a totally seperate set of libraries |
| 06:36 | <annevk> | k |
| 09:00 | <gazzwi86> | Just wondering where I would submit a proposal for a new html element? |
| 09:01 | <tomasf> | implement it, submit patches and hope nobody notices |
| 09:03 | <webben> | gazzwi86: see the whatwg faq page |
| 09:07 | <Ms2ger> | I would suggest submitting a use case instead |
| 09:07 | <miketaylr> | form a CG |
| 09:07 | <miketaylr> | (jk) |
| 09:08 | <gazzwi86> | I was going to tell you guys what I'm planning on suggesting adding but my computer is crashing at the moment |
| 09:08 | <gazzwi86> | so unresponsive |
| 09:10 | <gazzwi86> | I was thinking it would be good to add a meta tag for age restricted content. I haven't seen one being used before and figured if it became standard the browsers could better protect younger users from the content they are able to access |
| 09:10 | <gazzwi86> | what do you think? |
| 09:11 | <jgraham> | Tried that, didn't work |
| 09:13 | <gazzwi86> | why? |
| 09:13 | <gazzwi86> | I'm sure that if there were EU legislation to go with it, just like the poorly thought out Cookie policy then it could work |
| 09:14 | <gazzwi86> | It would be somewhat enforced |
| 09:18 | <divya> | TabAtkins: SOS |
| 09:18 | <jgraham> | Ah, so you believe in souls? |
| 09:19 | <divya> | strangeee question to ask jgraham but only strange if you are asking me |
| 09:19 | <Ms2ger> | Sounds about jgraham-level strangeish |
| 09:19 | <jgraham> | Oh, although wikipedia suggests that primary school lied to me |
| 09:19 | <jgraham> | and SOS doesn't actually stand for anything |
| 09:20 | <jgraham> | So, as you were on the philosophical points |
| 09:22 | <divya> | OH |
| 09:22 | <divya> | I GET IT NOW |
| 09:23 | <divya> | i was hoping to gain attention of Tab who is sitting a seat away. |
| 09:23 | <divya> | but he is actually revising his talk |
| 09:23 | <divya> | jgraham: i was in oslo but you were not! |
| 09:23 | <jgraham> | I am not usually in oslo! |
| 09:23 | <Ms2ger> | Why not! |
| 09:24 | <divya> | :D |
| 09:24 | <divya> | exactly Ms2ger |
| 09:25 | <jgraham> | Because it would be a long way to commute to Linköping every day? |
| 09:25 | <divya> | :D |
| 09:25 | <Ms2ger> | Oh, you're *there* |
| 09:25 | <divya> | terrible |
| 09:28 | <divya> | jgraham: Ms2ger i had this view that box shadows are never hardware-accel do you know by any chance this to be true? |
| 09:28 | <divya> | i also dont know how to search for this assertion on the internetz |
| 09:28 | <Ms2ger> | No idea |
| 09:29 | <divya> | oh it is accel in IE |
| 09:29 | <jgraham> | I don't know |
| 09:29 | <jgraham> | It sounds implementation specific |
| 09:29 | <divya> | yes it is ;( |
| 10:25 | <gazzwi86> | Are there any proposed suggestions on how to resolve the restriction of adult content to minors? |
| 10:26 | <Ms2ger> | I think the usual suggestion is that adults have a trusted relationship with their children |
| 10:37 | <gazzwi86> | Ms2ger: hmmm… that tends not to satisfy the more netortic of idividuals |
| 10:37 | <gazzwi86> | neurotic* |
| 10:38 | <gazzwi86> | IE uses certificates does it not? Certs. that most people don't bother to apply for |
| 13:09 | <reyre_> | are WebVTT Lang Objects not supposed to be translated to DOM content ? http://dev.w3.org/html5/webvtt/#webvtt-cue-text-dom-construction-rules |
| 13:10 | <Ms2ger> | "HTMLElement element node with localName "span", and a lang attribute set to the WebVTT Language Object's applicable language. "? |
| 13:11 | <Ms2ger> | Looks like a typo in that table to me |
| 13:11 | <reyre_> | Ms2ger: i'm also wondering if the lang object should have it's own translation not just as a property on another object |
| 13:11 | <Ms2ger> | There's two entries for "WebVTT Class Object" |
| 13:11 | <reyre_> | ah good eye Ms2ger |
| 13:11 | <reyre_> | ah good eye Ms2ger |
| 13:11 | Ms2ger | bows |
| 13:12 | <reyre_> | i'll open a bug, thanks :) |
| 13:13 | <Ms2ger> | Thank you :) |
| 13:13 | <Ms2ger> | Thank you :) |
| 13:26 | <darobin> | Hixie: heads up that I just imported <template>, which is a fairly large change |
| 14:10 | <GPHemsley> | I thought ETags were for content grading? |
| 14:11 | <GPHemsley> | s/grading/rating/ |
| 14:18 | <zewt> | etag? that's a cache thing |
| 14:20 | <reyre_> | any reason why the webvtt pseudo element only allows the matching of a particular number of css selectors? |
| 14:25 | <GPHemsley> | zewt: Yeah, I just realized. But I could've sworn there was something with a similar name. PICS? |
| 14:25 | <GPHemsley> | yeah, PICS |
| 14:25 | <GPHemsley> | that's what I meant |
| 14:44 | <GPHemsley> | gazzwi86: PICS already exists http://www.w3.org/PICS/ |
| 14:44 | <GPHemsley> | gazzwi86: Though apparently it's been superseded by POWDER: http://www.w3.org/2007/powder/ |
| 14:44 | <GPHemsley> | (which has been shuttered, too) |
| 14:45 | <GPHemsley> | which I suppose is to say that it's been tried and failed twice now |
| 14:45 | <Ms2ger> | PICS was just a way to block the US Congress, no? |
| 14:46 | <darobin> | nicely put |
| 14:47 | <darobin> | GPHemsley: PICS was actually moderately successful. For a while almost everyone used it. |
| 14:47 | <darobin> | then people realised that no serious product was taking it into account... |
| 14:47 | <darobin> | then people realised that no serious product was taking it into account... |
| 14:47 | <darobin> | but it stuck for quite a while because it was in a lot of templates |
| 14:53 | <annevk> | darobin: you're potentially gonna end up in merge pain |
| 14:53 | <annevk> | darobin: Hixie's gonna do other parser changes first |
| 14:53 | <darobin> | oh, didn't know that |
| 14:53 | <darobin> | annevk: do you know what other changes? |
| 14:53 | <darobin> | I would assume they would be relatively orthogonal |
| 14:54 | <darobin> | has he started? |
| 14:54 | <annevk> | the way the parser talks about tags and such |
| 14:54 | <annevk> | he commented on the <template> bug |
| 14:54 | <darobin> | ah, so terminology? |
| 14:54 | <darobin> | really? |
| 14:54 | darobin | looks |
| 14:54 | <annevk> | prolly just the WHATWG one |
| 14:55 | <darobin> | ah, damn, he commented that right after I started (I had looked at the bug) |
| 14:55 | <darobin> | actually, this might be a good hting |
| 14:55 | <darobin> | *thing |
| 14:56 | <darobin> | annevk: it looks like he hasn't started |
| 14:57 | <darobin> | and applying the change for https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22322 is likely to be easier after incorporating template since it requires the same switches |
| 14:57 | <darobin> | and applying the change for https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22322 is likely to be easier after incorporating template since it requires the same switches |
| 14:57 | <darobin> | I'll point that out in the bug |
| 15:08 | <annevk> | darobin: fwiw, parts of Shadow DOM will likely move to DOM once I get to it |
| 15:09 | <annevk> | might wait a bit more with that though |
| 15:09 | <annevk> | seems it's not quite ready yet |
| 15:10 | <darobin> | annevk: yeah, that would make sense |
| 15:10 | <darobin> | though probably not all the spec? |
| 15:10 | <annevk> | no just parts |
| 15:10 | <darobin> | annevk: btw did you see that there's a bit of Templates for DOM, too? |
| 15:10 | <annevk> | it's already in DOM if you mean the host concept |
| 15:10 | <darobin> | no, it's about cloning |
| 15:11 | <annevk> | oh, but cloning is extensible |
| 15:11 | <darobin> | https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/templates/index.html#node-clone-additions |
| 15:11 | <annevk> | or do you need a different hook because of the children thing? |
| 15:11 | <darobin> | if you prefer that to go into HTML just lmk |
| 15:11 | <darobin> | it's certainly HTML specific |
| 15:11 | <annevk> | oh wow |
| 15:11 | <darobin> | yeah |
| 15:12 | <annevk> | kinda wish someone would have given feedback to that effect before implementing |
| 15:12 | <darobin> | well, it makes sense relative to the feature |
| 15:12 | <darobin> | but I'm not sure it's the best place to monkey patch |
| 15:13 | <annevk> | it's okay to monkey patch, but you should tell the host spec you're doing that and where |
| 15:13 | <annevk> | and how |
| 15:14 | <annevk> | surprises are no good |
| 15:14 | <annevk> | but it makes sense |
| 15:14 | <darobin> | yeah, that's why I was surprised I could see a reaction from you :) |
| 15:14 | <darobin> | yeah, you actually can't make it work at all without specifying this |
| 15:14 | <gazzwi86> | GPHemsley: thanks! I'll look into that! |
| 15:15 | <annevk> | I don't really see why they can't use the "cloning steps" extension hook though |
| 15:15 | <annevk> | I guess it doesn't get passed the flag |
| 15:15 | <annevk> | or the original algorithm |
| 15:15 | <darobin> | in general I don't mind monkey patching, but when it gets to "add this step beneath step 27" I'd rather it not stay that way too long; you know it's just going to go wrong at some point |
| 15:15 | <annevk> | meh |
| 15:15 | <annevk> | oh yeah, it ought to be integrated |
| 15:15 | <annevk> | but it should also be coordinated upfront imo |
| 15:15 | <darobin> | annevk: let me look more closely, maybe I can just go ahead and fix that |
| 15:16 | <annevk> | nah it needs to go in, pretty sure |
| 15:16 | <annevk> | someone file a bug I guess, it's sleepytime here |
| 15:16 | <darobin> | annevk: nah, I'll just fix it now — forget about this, I'll add it to HTML and use the proper extension point instead of this |
| 15:17 | <annevk> | so you can't |
| 15:17 | <annevk> | the extension point is not passed any of the details you need |
| 15:17 | <darobin> | how do you mean? |
| 15:17 | <annevk> | guess it depends on how you read it |
| 15:18 | <annevk> | oh well, nn |
| 15:18 | <darobin> | I can just saw "at the step in the cloning algo that say blah other applicable specs, do this" |
| 15:18 | <darobin> | nn :) |
| 15:18 | <darobin> | *say |
| 15:20 | <jgraham> | In general I mind monkey patching |
| 15:20 | <jgraham> | HTML even does it to itself |
| 15:20 | <jgraham> | and I have seen implementors make mistakes for that reason |
| 15:21 | <jgraham> | (if you consider the seperation of "obsolete but conforming" into a chapter at the end that then patches other APIs to be "monkey patching") |
| 15:21 | <jgraham> | Or just "obsolete" |
| 15:26 | <darobin> | jgraham: I guess it depends on the type of monkey patching |
| 15:26 | <darobin> | monkey patching algorithms that don't have a well-defined extension point is a problem |
| 15:26 | <darobin> | but other things less so |
| 15:27 | <jgraham> | Well, in general monkey-patching introduces non-locality |
| 15:27 | <jgraham> | Which is generally considered bad for readable code, and I think the same applies to specifications |
| 15:28 | <darobin> | up to a point |
| 15:28 | <darobin> | putting everything in the same spec can also hurt readability |
| 15:28 | <darobin> | it's a hard problem, let's have beer |
| 15:30 | <Ms2ger> | As bz said, the HTML spec is spaghetti code |
| 15:39 | <darobin> | at more than one level :) |
| 15:39 | <darobin> | the spaghetti are made of spaghetti |
| 15:39 | <darobin> | it's hyperspaghetti |
| 15:40 | <Ms2ger> | Mm |
| 15:40 | <darobin> | which is very sensible if you think about it |
| 15:40 | <darobin> | hmmmm, spaghetti |
| 15:40 | Ms2ger | would like him some hyperspaghetti |
| 15:40 | <Ms2ger> | Now I'm hungry |
| 15:40 | <darobin> | yeah, shit I'm hungry now |
| 15:40 | <darobin> | heh |
| 15:40 | <Ms2ger> | Damn you! |
| 15:40 | <Ms2ger> | And me! |
| 15:40 | <darobin> | I blame the spec, really |
| 15:41 | <Ms2ger> | wfm |
| 15:53 | <darobin> | there, annevk can sleep soundly, I put the cloning op in HTML |
| 15:54 | <darobin> | there, annevk can sleep soundly, I put the cloning op in HTML |
| 16:05 | GPHemsley | worries about darobin's alcohol intake |
| 16:07 | <Ms2ger> | He's French, he can deal |
| 16:08 | <odinho> | Don't we all. |
| 16:39 | <jgraham> | The problem with extension points is that they are the spec equivalent of COMEFROM |
| 16:57 | <Ms2ger> | Mm, comefrom |
| 17:42 | <GPHemsley> | Is there a tool that validates WebIDL (and perhaps demonstrates its output)? |
| 17:43 | <GPHemsley> | Also, is there a way to define a foo() that ouputs a string when called as foo but is an object when called as foo.bar? |
| 17:44 | <Hixie> | in webidl? |
| 17:44 | <Hixie> | there's legacycaller |
| 17:44 | <Hixie> | as its name may suggest, heycam doesn't want you using it :-) |
| 17:44 | <Ms2ger> | Nah |
| 17:44 | <Ms2ger> | PutForward |
| 17:45 | Ms2ger | doesn't see how Hixie matched that with legacycaller |
| 17:45 | <Hixie> | foo() returns a string? |
| 17:45 | <Hixie> | that's call |
| 17:46 | <Hixie> | if you mean an object that stringifies, then there's stringifier |
| 17:46 | <Hixie> | if you mean an attribute that can be set to a string but that retains its identity as an object when you do so, there's, as Ms2ger says, [PutForwards] |
| 17:48 | <Ms2ger> | I read ... to define an attribute foo that returns a string when gotten as foo, but returns an object when gotten as foo.bar |
| 17:48 | <Ms2ger> | But maybe I misread that |
| 17:53 | <Hixie> | ah then you want serialiser |
| 17:53 | <Hixie> | not putforwards |
| 17:55 | <Ms2ger> | GPHemsley, what *do* you want? |
| 18:00 | <reyre_> | for the text track spec -- there seems to be a conflict with how TextTrackCueList::ActiveCues is defined to work |
| 18:00 | <reyre_> | for the text track spec -- there seems to be a conflict with how TextTrackCueList::ActiveCues is defined to work |
| 18:01 | <reyre_> | here http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/the-video-element.html#texttrack in the definition of the webidl it says that it should be all the cues whose start times and end times fall within the current play back time |
| 18:01 | <reyre_> | however here, http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/the-video-element.html#dom-texttrack-activecues it says that it is all the cues who have the active flag set |
| 18:02 | <Hixie> | reyre_: look at the top of the green box at that first url |
| 18:03 | <Hixie> | reyre_: anything that's green, in the spec, as an implementor, you should just ignore |
| 18:03 | <reyre_> | Hixie: ah okay >.< |
| 18:03 | <Hixie> | reyre_: it's intended for authors and often presents a simplified view of the world |
| 18:04 | <Hixie> | (that's what "non-normative" means) |
| 18:04 | <GPHemsley> | I want something that looks like a string but acts like an object |
| 18:04 | <reyre_> | Hixie: okay thanks |
| 18:05 | <GPHemsley> | Hixie: Is that what stringifier does? |
| 18:05 | <Ms2ger> | Probably |
| 18:05 | <Ms2ger> | Depends on what you mean exactly |
| 18:05 | <Hixie> | stringifier handles the "looks like a string" part, PutForwards handles the "quacks like string" part |
| 18:06 | <Hixie> | stringifier makes the object have a custom toString |
| 18:06 | <GPHemsley> | are they not mutually exclusive? maybe links would help |
| 18:06 | <GPHemsley> | if I do console.log(foo) I want it to output a string |
| 18:06 | <Hixie> | PutForwards makes an attribute forward getting set to a value to an attribute in the attribute's object |
| 18:06 | <GPHemsley> | but I want foo.bar to not be an error |
| 18:06 | <Hixie> | that's stringifier |
| 18:08 | <GPHemsley> | so now, is there an easy way to test that I'm writing WebIDL correctly? A validator of some sort? |
| 18:09 | <Ms2ger> | Hixie, don't you have that in your pipeline? |
| 18:09 | <Hixie> | have what? |
| 18:09 | <Ms2ger> | Something to check your webidl |
| 18:09 | <Hixie> | oh |
| 18:09 | <Hixie> | yeah, i use webidl checker or something |
| 18:09 | <Hixie> | http://www.w3.org/2009/07/webidl-check |
| 18:10 | <GPHemsley> | excellent, thanks |
| 18:11 | <Hixie> | anyone here responsible for filing this bug about onresize and onblur? https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21972 |
| 18:22 | <GPHemsley> | what is the right type for a dictionary that has a variable list of keys? |
| 18:22 | <Ms2ger> | There is no such thing |
| 18:22 | <GPHemsley> | really? |
| 18:22 | <GPHemsley> | how would one do that, then? |
| 18:22 | <Hixie> | "object" |
| 18:23 | <Hixie> | but maybe you should describe what you're doing :-) |
| 18:23 | <Hixie> | your questions sound a lot like the kinds of questions i ask a few horus before i get scolded for designing bad apis :-P |
| 18:23 | <GPHemsley> | heh |
| 18:24 | <GPHemsley> | I'm trying to write up document.contentType/mimeType |
| 18:24 | <GPHemsley> | and I was hoping to have document.contentType.parameters |
| 18:24 | <Hixie> | any browsers interested in implementing that? |
| 18:24 | <GPHemsley> | well, the stringified parts are already there |
| 18:25 | <GPHemsley> | Opera and Gecko have document.contentType |
| 18:25 | <GPHemsley> | whose value corresponds to "MIME type portion" in mimesniff |
| 18:25 | <GPHemsley> | whose value corresponds to "MIME type portion" in mimesniff |
| 18:25 | <Hixie> | there's a vast difference in complexity between returning a string, and returning an object with detailed parsing and stringifying and so on... |
| 18:25 | <GPHemsley> | perhaps, but it's no more complex than the algorithms I've already defined |
| 18:25 | <GPHemsley> | in that, they'd be the same |
| 18:27 | <GPHemsley> | my thought is that a web author would be able to do: if (document.contentType.type === "image") {} |
| 18:27 | <GPHemsley> | etc. |
| 18:28 | <GPHemsley> | or if ("charset" in document.contentType.parameters) {} |
| 18:29 | <GPHemsley> | oh, actually |
| 18:29 | <GPHemsley> | if (document.contentType.parameters["charset"] !== undefined) {} |
| 18:33 | <Hixie> | does anyone actually use document.contentType today? |
| 18:34 | <GPHemsley> | some people do |
| 18:34 | <GPHemsley> | (and it's not like it's going away, because it's used in Gecko extensions and internal code, AFAIK) |
| 18:34 | <GPHemsley> | the problem, of course, is that WebKit/Blink don't have it |
| 18:35 | <GPHemsley> | (it's probably used more for iframes than the main window) |
| 18:45 | <Hixie> | i strongly recommend getting clear indications from browser vendors that they want to implement and extend this |
| 18:46 | <Hixie> | or at least clear indications from Web authors that this is something they really need (which would convince the former) |
| 18:46 | <GPHemsley> | meh |
| 18:46 | <GPHemsley> | you're no fun |
| 18:47 | <Ms2ger> | Nobody's ever accused Hixie of being fun |
| 18:48 | <Ms2ger> | Except when there are board games |
| 18:49 | <GPHemsley> | Ms2ger: Any chance you could speak to whether browser vendors would want to implement this? >_> |
| 18:49 | <Ms2ger> | I can't talk for Mozilla, but I'd expect a "meh" |
| 18:49 | <GPHemsley> | That's all I ever get regarding mimesniff ;_; |
| 18:50 | <Ms2ger> | It's true, it's not fancy |
| 18:51 | <Hixie> | html editing apis-- well, they aren't any more sexy, i'll admit. but there's probably more implementation interest in fixing things there and more opportunity to create nice apis. |
| 18:51 | <Ms2ger> | Hardly |
| 18:51 | <Hixie> | and more likelihood of people having opinions. |
| 18:51 | <Ms2ger> | Our editor is all but dead |
| 18:51 | <Hixie> | Ms2ger: the web needs better text editing apis, i doubt anyone disagrees with that |
| 18:52 | <Ms2ger> | Sure |
| 18:52 | <Ms2ger> | Sure |
| 18:52 | <Ms2ger> | But that doesn't mean I'm going to read or implement the spec :) |
| 18:52 | <Ms2ger> | But that doesn't mean I'm going to read or implement the spec :) |
| 18:53 | <GPHemsley> | nevertheless, I should probably at least document the existing document.contentType |
| 18:53 | <GPHemsley> | (IE's document.mimeType is weird) |
| 18:54 | GPHemsley | has been wondering the last few days why we opted for "MIME type" in favor of "content type" |
| 18:54 | <GPHemsley> | s/in favor/over/ |
| 18:54 | <GPHemsley> | s/ of// |
| 18:55 | <Hixie> | because the content's type often doesn't match the "MIME type" |
| 18:55 | <GPHemsley> | For reference, this is the existing documentation: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/document.contentType |
| 18:56 | <GPHemsley> | and the IDL: http://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/dom/interfaces/core/nsIDOMDocument.idl#l276 |
| 18:56 | <GPHemsley> | for the lazy: "readonly attribute DOMString contentType;" |
| 18:58 | <GPHemsley> | on a side note, I think MXR is still better than DXR |
| 18:59 | <GPHemsley> | though I suppose it depends on your usecase |
| 19:02 | <GPHemsley> | hmm... document.contentType has been around since the CVS days |
| 19:02 | <GPHemsley> | so probably much longer than that |
| 19:03 | <jgraham> | It took me the longest time to work out that "our editor is all but dead" didn't refer to Aryeh |
| 19:04 | <GPHemsley> | 2001: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73847 |
| 19:04 | <GPHemsley> | jgraham: I didn't even get that |
| 19:04 | <GPHemsley> | jgraham: But it makes much more sense now |
| 19:07 | <Ms2ger> | GPHemsley, that idl doesn't count anymore, it's now dom/webidl/Document.webidl |
| 19:10 | <GPHemsley> | ah, hmm |
| 19:11 | <GPHemsley> | oh, so annevk's already specced it |
| 19:11 | <GPHemsley> | well then |
| 19:11 | GPHemsley | goes back to puttering, then |
| 20:14 | <zewt> | GPHemsley: because "mime type" is what people actually call it, not "content type" |
| 20:15 | <zewt> | if you call a mime type a content type, i'll look at you strange in the same way as if you said "MiB" :) |
| 20:18 | GPHemsley | likes MiB |
| 20:51 | <GPHemsley> | If anyone is wondering: light WHATWG green is #CCE79A |
| 20:58 | <rillian> | E79A? that doesn't sound web safe. |
| 21:00 | <jsbell> | The 90's called; they want their 8-bit display adapter back. |
| 21:06 | <rillian> | it's retro now. tell them to go back to their discrete transistors if they want nostalgia. |
| 21:36 | <GPHemsley> | is the HTML spec really asking me how satisfied I am with this website? |
| 21:50 | <Hixie> | yup :-) |
| 22:40 | <GPHemsley> | dependencies of the WHATWG specs: http://whatwg.gphemsley.org/web.png |
| 22:40 | <Hixie> | that's actually less bad than i expected :-) |
| 22:40 | <GPHemsley> | (HTML is only partial) |
| 22:41 | <GPHemsley> | source is here: http://whatwg.gphemsley.org/web.gv |
| 22:41 | <Hixie> | yeah i was gonna say, where are the papal bulls! |
| 22:42 | <GPHemsley> | :) |
| 22:42 | <GPHemsley> | I left HTML until the end, since I knew it had a long list |
| 22:42 | <GPHemsley> | and then I only added the ones that were used in other specs |
| 22:43 | <GPHemsley> | I probably could have auto-generated this from xref, but I chose to do it by hand instead |
| 22:43 | <GPHemsley> | took me ~2 hours |
| 22:43 | <Hixie> | :-) |
| 22:43 | <GPHemsley> | (not that I knew it was going to take that long when I started...) |
| 22:45 | <GPHemsley> | (this would probably be a lot cleaner if I took out the references to RFC 2119...) |
| 22:46 | <Hixie> | heh |
| 22:48 | <GPHemsley> | well, "a lot" is relative, but it does seem to be a bit cleaner |
| 22:48 | <GPHemsley> | though it's got funky arrows |
| 22:49 | GPHemsley | goes to eat |
