| 02:54 | <ghena1986> | http://bit.ly/183GBEv |
| 03:55 | <cabanier> | Hixie_: I don't think adding auto-resizing helps |
| 04:28 | <Hixie_> | cabanier: you don't think it helps with what? |
| 04:29 | <cabanier> | Hixie_: helping authors deal with HiDPI canvas |
| 04:30 | <Hixie_> | the idea is to help them not have to even think about it |
| 04:31 | <cabanier> | Hixie_: that would be nice but since many use temporary canvases, just changing the one in the DOM won't do |
| 04:31 | <Hixie_> | hmmm... interesting point |
| 04:31 | <Hixie_> | (that's maybe what you should have led with, rather than just "i don't think it helps" :-P ) |
| 04:32 | <Hixie_> | we'd need a kind of "slave" mechanism |
| 04:32 | <cabanier> | Hixie_: what is that? |
| 04:32 | <Hixie_> | a way to say "this canvas is a slave of that one, wipe it and resize it accordingly when the other one gets resized" |
| 04:33 | <cabanier> | Hixie_: *thinking* |
| 04:36 | <cabanier> | Hixie_: I can see how that would help for certain scenarios, but there will be cases where you'd have to do it manually |
| 04:36 | <Hixie_> | sure, i said that in one of the e-mails |
| 04:36 | <Hixie_> | there's always going to be people who want crazy stuff |
| 04:36 | <Hixie_> | nobody's talking of removing anything that they can already do |
| 04:37 | <cabanier> | I |
| 04:38 | <cabanier> | I'd really want there to be a way for pinch-zoom to influence the dpi |
| 04:39 | <Hixie_> | why? |
| 04:39 | <Hixie_> | (not saying it's a bad idea, just curious as to your use case) |
| 04:39 | <cabanier> | well, as you zoom in, the canvas pixels just get blockier |
| 04:40 | <cabanier> | you'd have to write JS to deal with zooming |
| 04:40 | <Hixie_> | browsers don't let you pinch-zoom to more than 1 in-page CSS pixel per display CSS pixel, do they? |
| 04:41 | <Hixie_> | the idea is that JS can't see pinch zooming at all |
| 04:41 | <cabanier> | yeah |
| 04:41 | <Hixie_> | i'm confused |
| 04:41 | <cabanier> | you have to write JS to avoid blockiness in canvas if you pinch-zoom |
| 04:42 | <cabanier> | pinch-zoom does not affect the devicepixelratio |
| 04:44 | <cabanier> | your proposal deals with changes in devicePixelRatio and change in CSS pixels |
| 04:45 | <cabanier> | but not with pinch zoom |
| 04:46 | <cabanier> | - maybe we're miscommunicating wrt 'page zoom' - |
| 04:48 | <Hixie_> | "you have to write JS to avoid blockiness in canvas if you pinch-zoom" is false, as far as i can tell. |
| 04:48 | <cabanier> | ? |
| 04:49 | <cabanier> | it's like zooming into an image. |
| 04:49 | <Hixie_> | <Hixie> browsers don't let you pinch-zoom to more than 1 in-page CSS pixel per display CSS pixel, do they? |
| 04:49 | <cabanier> | unsure |
| 04:49 | <Hixie_> | well if my statement is true, your statement is false |
| 04:49 | <Hixie_> | so if you're unsure about my statement, how can you be sure about yours :-) |
| 04:49 | <cabanier> | but you can have a lot of display pixels per CSS pixel |
| 04:50 | <cabanier> | so a 10x10 px canvas can fill the whole screen |
| 04:50 | <Hixie_> | not via pinch-zoom, though, right? |
| 04:51 | <Hixie_> | (assuming you're not articifically making it bigger than it should be) |
| 04:51 | <Hixie_> | maybe this conversation would be easier if we had a concrete example |
| 04:51 | <cabanier> | yes. pinch-zoom makes it bigger |
| 04:51 | <Hixie_> | can you put a test up i can test? |
| 04:51 | <Hixie_> | showing what you mean? |
| 04:52 | <cabanier> | sure. you will need a device that can pinch zoom |
| 04:52 | <Hixie_> | i am surrounded by them |
| 04:54 | <Domenic_> | i am pretty sure i can pinch zoom very far on most web pages, such that only a few words fit on the screen |
| 04:55 | <cabanier> | try https://developer.mozilla.org/samples/canvas-tutorial/2_4_canvas_arc.html and zoom in on the canvas in the top left |
| 04:55 | <cabanier> | Domenic_: yes, and as you zoom in, everything is rerendered so it stays sharp |
| 04:55 | <cabanier> | except images and canvas |
| 04:56 | <Domenic_> | right |
| 04:56 | <Domenic_> | i imagine if my font-size is 12px, by the time i zoom in very far, it's way more than 12px in size. |
| 04:57 | <cabanier> | Hixie_: in your mail: "when the display density changes size (e.g. due to page zoom)" |
| 04:57 | <cabanier> | Hixie_: did you mean pinch zoom, or pixelratio? |
| 04:57 | <Hixie_> | cabanier: i mean page zoom. command+/command- or ctrl+mousewheel or whatever. |
| 04:58 | <cabanier> | Hixie_: ah, OK so we're on the same page |
| 04:59 | <Hixie_> | ah, interesting, yeah, you can pinch-zoom to more than 100% |
| 04:59 | <Hixie_> | crazy |
| 04:59 | <Hixie_> | ok |
| 04:59 | <Hixie_> | well in that case we should just handle that the same way as page zoom. |
| 04:59 | <Hixie_> | and it should affect the device pixel ratio. |
| 05:00 | <Hixie_> | same as page zoom. |
| 05:00 | <cabanier> | no, it shouldn't :-( |
| 05:00 | <cabanier> | changing dpr would change the layout of the page |
| 05:00 | <cabanier> | which is not allowed to happen for pinch zoom |
| 05:01 | <Hixie_> | what? |
| 05:01 | <Hixie_> | changing the device pixel ratio doesn't affect the layout of the page. |
| 05:01 | <Hixie_> | (unless it also affects the width at the same time, as page zoom does) |
| 05:02 | <Hixie_> | (but then that's the width being changed that is affecting the layout) |
| 05:04 | <cabanier> | Hixie_: doing command +/- will cause reflow of text |
| 05:04 | <cabanier> | Hixie_: inline boxes will move |
| 05:04 | <Hixie_> | sure, because the page width is changing (in CSS pixels) |
| 05:04 | <Hixie_> | pinch zoom doesn't affect the page width. |
| 05:05 | <cabanier> | Hixie_: percentages stay the same, but boxes in CSS pixels will change size |
| 05:05 | <cabanier> | correct, pinch zoom does not affect anything today |
| 05:05 | <Hixie_> | well it affects the real device pixel ratio, it just doesn't get reported as doing so |
| 05:06 | <cabanier> | yes, that's true :-) |
| 05:06 | <cabanier> | it would be nice if one could find out about the real dpr |
| 05:07 | <cabanier> | http://stackoverflow.com/questions/995914/catch-browsers-zoom-event-in-javascript |
| 05:07 | <cabanier> | scratch that link, it's page zoom |
| 05:10 | <cabanier> | * going to bed * |
| 06:35 | <hsivonen> | has MS removed IE7 from Windows Update? |
| 06:36 | <hsivonen> | Windows Update doesn't offer it for me (on XP) when I have IE8 blocked using the command-line IE8 blocker |
| 08:42 | <MikeSmith> | Ms2ger: about [[I didn't want a keyword for "Indicates that a test case for this bug is included somewhere in the bug report.", I wanted one for "has a test in the test suite"]], yeah, understood |
| 08:43 | <MikeSmith> | so I can change the description |
| 08:43 | <Ms2ger> | That would be nice |
| 08:43 | <MikeSmith> | I'm happy to change the keyword too if you want |
| 08:44 | <Ms2ger> | Maybe that would be good... Either way |
| 08:51 | <MikeSmith> | Ms2ger: OK https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/describekeywords.cgi now updated with testcase-wanted="Indicates that this bug needs a test case in the test suite." and testcase="Indicates that this bug has a test case in the test suite." |
| 08:51 | <Ms2ger> | Thanks! |
| 08:52 | <MikeSmith> | I can change "testcase" to testcase-has or testcase-done or .. something |
| 08:53 | <MikeSmith> | Ms2ger: or has-testcase and needs-testcase (instead of testcase-wanted) |
| 08:54 | <Ms2ger> | Those would work |
| 08:55 | <MikeSmith> | zcorpan: if you're around I wanted to ask if you could be the reviewer for web-platform-tests/conformance-checkers tests |
| 08:56 | <MikeSmith> | Ms2ger: OK, changeed to has-testcase and needs-testcase https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/describekeywords.cgi |
| 08:58 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: if it's OK with you, this week I can change the validator build script to pull from the github repos instead of bitbucket |
| 09:00 | <Ms2ger> | MikeSmith, much appreciated |
| 09:23 | <zcorpan> | MikeSmith: sure |
| 09:23 | <MikeSmith> | zcorpan: OK, thanks |
| 09:24 | <zcorpan> | my critic filter is "/" so i should get emails for everything. not that i keep up, but... |
| 09:24 | <MikeSmith> | OK |
| 09:24 | <MikeSmith> | now I have a question for anybody about media-query syntax |
| 09:24 | <MikeSmith> | is "@media screen and (min-width: 400px) and(max-width: 600px) {} |
| 09:25 | <MikeSmith> | valid? |
| 09:25 | <MikeSmith> | is @media screen and (min-width: 400px)and (max-width: 600px) {} ? |
| 09:25 | <MikeSmith> | I mean the lack of whitespace around "and" |
| 09:28 | <MikeSmith> | I'm looking at http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-mediaqueries/#syntax and from that it seems like the whitespace around "and" is optional |
| 09:28 | <MikeSmith> | see also https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23188 |
| 09:29 | <zcorpan> | look at the editor's draft |
| 09:29 | <zcorpan> | i can't load it right now because the wifi is "horribly bad" here |
| 09:30 | <zcorpan> | iirc you can omit the space before but not after, because and( parses into a function |
| 09:30 | <MikeSmith> | zcorpan: ok |
| 09:30 | <zcorpan> | but i can't look it up. i remember discussing it on the list |
| 09:31 | <MikeSmith> | yeah, I find a Example 20 in the spec says, "The following is an malformed media query because having no space between ‘and’ and the expression is not allowed. (That is reserved for the functional notation syntax.)" |
| 09:31 | <zcorpan> | ok now the spec loaded |
| 09:31 | <MikeSmith> | but isn't that different from what the BNF says? |
| 09:31 | MikeSmith | looks at the ED |
| 09:32 | <MikeSmith> | "expression [ AND S* expression ]*" |
| 09:32 | <zcorpan> | ok so http://dev.w3.org/csswg/mediaqueries4/ says S+ AND S+ in the syntax |
| 09:35 | <zcorpan> | although the whitespace before *could* be omitted and still parsed correctly, it's required in the syntax. you could also omit the space after if you put in a comment in its place |
| 09:36 | <zcorpan> | since literal "and(" doesn't parse into an IDENT token it can't match the syntax even if it says the space is optional |
| 09:36 | <zcorpan> | i.e. and/**/( would parse correctly, but is not allowed in the current syntax, afaict |
| 09:47 | <MikeSmith> | zcorpan: ok, thanks |
| 09:48 | <darobin> | zcorpan: can I steal your power source? |
| 09:54 | <Ms2ger> | One does not steal in such a palace |
| 09:58 | <jgraham> | You at the CSSWG meeting or something? |
| 09:58 | <zcorpan> | responsive images meeting |
| 09:59 | <jgraham> | Oh |
| 09:59 | <jgraham> | That makes more sense |
| 10:00 | <zcorpan> | csswg meeting is tomorrow |
| 10:02 | <jgraham> | That was one reason it made more sense |
| 10:02 | <jgraham> | But I know CSS like to have pre-meetings |
| 10:02 | <jgraham> | and after-meetings |
| 10:22 | <SimonSapin> | MikeSmith: http://www.w3.org/Style/2012/REC-mediaqueries-20120619-errata.html |
| 10:23 | <SimonSapin> | the problem is that and( tokenizes as a function |
| 10:23 | <SimonSapin> | so whitspace (or a comment, but nobody does that outside test cases) was effectively required there |
| 10:24 | <SimonSapin> | so we changed the grammar to not suggest that it is optional |
| 10:24 | <SimonSapin> | )and was changed as well, but just for symmetry |
| 10:28 | Ms2ger | wonders if there are tests |
| 10:28 | <SimonSapin> | good point |
| 10:30 | <annevk> | http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#MapClass I wonder to what extent this has been coordinated outside of Tab / heycam |
| 10:30 | <Ms2ger> | I'd write some, but I don't want to deal with the csswg's bureaucracy |
| 10:34 | <SimonSapin> | Ms2ger, if you write them I can deal with the bureaucracy |
| 10:34 | <Ms2ger> | Bah |
| 10:34 | <Ms2ger> | You weren't supposed to say that :) |
| 10:34 | <SimonSapin> | :) |
| 10:35 | <SimonSapin> | I think this is the source file for the test suite http://hg.csswg.org/test/file/tip/approved/css3-mediaqueries/src/test_media_queries.html but I don’t know how #metadata_cache is supposed to work |
| 10:35 | <Ms2ger> | I know |
| 10:35 | <Ms2ger> | I wish I didn't |
| 10:35 | <SimonSapin> | uh |
| 10:36 | <Ms2ger> | It's commented out JSON that duplicates the arguments to test() |
| 10:42 | <smaug____> | annevk: in other words, you wonder if bz has reviewed that :) |
| 10:42 | <Ms2ger> | https://pastebin.mozilla.org/3015980? |
| 10:43 | <annevk> | smaug____: more public-script-coord I think |
| 10:45 | <annevk> | smaug____: e.g. whether it passes the "is this a good idea" test |
| 10:47 | <annevk> | smaug____: in https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23189 are you saying you did not implement the specification? :/ |
| 10:48 | <smaug____> | annevk: I did implement the spec |
| 10:48 | <smaug____> | but we could change the spec |
| 10:49 | <annevk> | smaug____: I see, the way you phrased that makes it sound like you think it behaves differently from how the specification says it is |
| 10:49 | <smaug____> | oh, indeed |
| 10:50 | <smaug____> | I shouldn't have commented so late |
| 10:50 | <annevk> | midnight is late these days? :p |
| 10:51 | <smaug____> | it was midnight utc |
| 10:51 | <annevk> | Fair enough :-) I guess I can figure out some phrasing for how this would alternatively work... |
| 10:51 | <MikeSmith> | SimonSapin: thanks for the info |
| 10:52 | <annevk> | I wonder if we should change the exception to be a JavaScript TypeError... |
| 10:54 | <MikeSmith> | Ms2ger: there are some media-queries-in-HTML tests in web-platform-tests/conformance-checkers/html/media-queries |
| 10:55 | <MikeSmith> | but I guess it would be better to use the tests from http://hg.csswg.org/test/file/tip/approved/css3-mediaqueries/src/test_media_queries.html for testing the validator too |
| 10:57 | <MikeSmith> | ...though I find no tests there for checking case of lack of whitespace before or after "and" |
| 10:58 | <MikeSmith> | plus I guess those are parser tests for checking UA conformance and not document-conformance tests |
| 10:58 | <SimonSapin> | MikeSmith: yes, this a recent change and we still need to add tests for it |
| 10:58 | <MikeSmith> | ok |
| 11:01 | <annevk> | Did w3.org/Bugs really go down while I submitted a massive comment? So glad I copy and pasted that... |
| 11:01 | <annevk> | "504 Gateway Time-out" |
| 11:03 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: should probably let sysreq⊙wo know |
| 11:03 | <MikeSmith> | they just upgraded it to v4.4 on Thursday |
| 11:03 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: I think the thing is just down, can you get to it? |
| 11:03 | <MikeSmith> | I could just a few minutes ago |
| 11:04 | MikeSmith | tries again |
| 11:04 | <annevk> | Oh, it's back... |
| 11:04 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 11:04 | <annevk> | It's kinda slow... |
| 11:04 | <annevk> | smaug____: care to review https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23189#c3 ? |
| 11:07 | <annevk> | Oh, you suggested something slightly different... You wanted no defaults for *OldValue... |
| 11:08 | <smaug____> | annevk: I think just passing attributeOldValue is enough to set attributes true |
| 11:08 | <annevk> | smaug____: same for characterData? |
| 11:08 | <smaug____> | right |
| 11:08 | <annevk> | smaug____: okay, so remove the defaults for those from the IDL too and just do a present check |
| 11:09 | <annevk> | smaug____: would it then make sense to have subtree presence imply childList? |
| 11:09 | <annevk> | darobin: ^^ |
| 11:09 | <smaug____> | no |
| 11:10 | <smaug____> | subtree might as well imply attributes |
| 11:10 | <smaug____> | or characterData |
| 11:10 | <annevk> | aight |
| 11:11 | <smaug____> | hmm, "If attributeFilter is a non-empty array and attributes is false, throw a TypeError." |
| 11:11 | <smaug____> | does it need to be non-empty |
| 11:11 | smaug____ | can't recall the current spec |
| 11:11 | <smaug____> | ah, the current spec requires non-empty, ok |
| 11:15 | <annevk> | I think to allow people to pass [] as default and not worry about it |
| 11:15 | <annevk> | however, if they pass [] as default and don't set attributes to false, attributes will become true with this new model |
| 11:16 | <annevk> | smaug____: so I think we should check for non-empty array before setting attributes to true, otherwise it's not quite compatible |
| 11:17 | <smaug____> | right |
| 11:18 | <smaug____> | empty array is still odd case |
| 11:19 | <smaug____> | it shouldn't create any Mutationrecords for attr changes |
| 11:20 | <smaug____> | hmm, thinking |
| 11:20 | <smaug____> | I guess gecko has a bug |
| 11:20 | <smaug____> | it checks the existence of the array |
| 11:20 | <smaug____> | which is better option, IMO |
| 11:20 | <smaug____> | than the length of the array |
| 11:21 | <annevk> | then you cannot have a default value for all init members that doesn't cause throwing |
| 11:22 | <annevk> | I don't see how that's better |
| 11:25 | <annevk> | smaug____: ^ |
| 11:25 | <smaug____> | why should attributefilter have default value? |
| 11:26 | <annevk> | smaug____: it seems libraries often end up creating generic code that has default values for everything |
| 11:26 | <annevk> | smaug____: I guess you could still do undefined in that case... |
| 11:26 | <annevk> | Alright, undefined works for me |
| 11:32 | <annevk> | smaug____: in http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#queue-a-mutation-record should it be a present check too then in step 3? |
| 11:32 | <smaug____> | looking |
| 11:33 | <smaug____> | yeah |
| 11:33 | <smaug____> | I think empty should just means empty |
| 11:33 | <smaug____> | you filter out all the attribute changes |
| 11:35 | <annevk> | alright, lunch... |
| 11:41 | <Ancil> | Hi |
| 11:42 | <Ms2ger> | http://what-if.xkcd.com/imgs/a/62/balloon_wolfram.png |
| 11:43 | <Ancil> | Should CORS be applied on a image with crossorigin="anonymous" only when image is used in Canvas |
| 11:44 | <Ancil> | should it be applied for when the image is used in without any canvas |
| 11:45 | <Ancil> | Firefox applies CORS for both the cases |
| 11:46 | <Ancil> | whereas Chrome does it only when image is used in a Canvas |
| 11:47 | <Ancil> | which is the correct behavior? |
| 11:48 | <Ancil> | http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/embedded-content-1.html#attr-img-crossorigin |
| 11:49 | <Ancil> | is the spec reference |
| 11:54 | <odinho> | Ancil: It should do a CORS then. |
| 11:54 | <odinho> | Ancil: Thing is, you can do <img src=bla crossorigin> and then later use that image in canvas. It'd be stupid to actually do a new fetch in order to check CORS status. |
| 11:55 | <odinho> | http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/fetching-resources.html#potentially-cors-enabled-fetch |
| 11:55 | <odinho> | Read -> If mode is "Anonymous" or "Use Credentials" |
| 11:58 | <Ancil> | odinho: Okay, so whenever the crossorigin attribute is mentioned CORS rules should be applied irrespective of where its used |
| 11:59 | <odinho> | Ancil: You don't know where it'll be used. |
| 12:00 | <Ancil> | odinho: right |
| 12:02 | <Ancil> | odinho: Thanks |
| 12:05 | <annevk> | Ancil: Firefox is correct |
| 12:05 | <annevk> | Ancil: I think this might be a known bug in Chrome, but maybe report it just in case |
| 12:07 | <Ancil> | annevk: Thanks, will log a bug in Chrome |
| 13:02 | <hsivonen> | MikeSmith: wow. the bitbucket diff viewer is comically bad |
| 13:03 | <hsivonen> | MikeSmith: empty lines match and nothing else, so let's consider arbitrary empty lines as unchanged while the bits between the empty lines changes |
| 13:03 | <hsivonen> | *change |
| 13:04 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: yeah, that's among the things that bitbucket doesn't seem to be trying too hard at |
| 13:07 | <hsivonen> | MikeSmith: also, changing from spaces to tabs doesn't make diffs particularly fun |
| 13:07 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 13:07 | <MikeSmith> | eclipse |
| 13:08 | <hsivonen> | isn't this configurable in Eclipse? I use Eclipse. |
| 13:10 | <hsivonen> | I wonder if I should give up trying to review individual change sets on bit bucket and if I should review a massive diff that ignores whitespace |
| 13:10 | <hsivonen> | MikeSmith: are the changes from char[] to String headed somewhere? Those were char[] for a reason... |
| 13:12 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: I can'T see that those are headed anywhere, no. They seem like an arbitrary change he decided on his own. |
| 13:13 | <hsivonen> | MikeSmith: apparently this code isn't supposed to stay working after each changeset? |
| 13:17 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: after looking at that code more since the time when I pinged you about reviewing it, I am now really wondering myself if it's worth putting any more time into reviewing it |
| 13:17 | <MikeSmith> | I'm not sure it's solving any problem that we need solved |
| 13:19 | <MikeSmith> | which is part of the reason why in the mean time I wrote the code in validator/SimpleDocumentValidator.java |
| 13:19 | <MikeSmith> | that is, to expose an interface that does something similar to what this code seems to be trying to do |
| 13:20 | <Ancil> | odinho: annevk: Chrome checks for the image during rendering it. If a image is fetched with crossOrigin attribute. And if the CORS check fails, then it renders the image when used without canvas and doesn't render it when used within canvas in the same html |
| 13:20 | <MikeSmith> | but to do it without refactoring huge swathes of existing code that we otherwise have no need to touch |
| 13:20 | <hsivonen> | MikeSmith: Is a problem with change sets or problem with big pockets that the bit bucket viewer shows moves as removals and additions in stone moves? |
| 13:21 | <Ancil> | annevk: so the Chrome behaviour also is acceptable. Isn't it? |
| 13:22 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: I think that's a problem with the way the code was reformatted, and bitbucket not dealing with that well |
| 13:22 | <Ancil> | annevk: odinho: doesn't fetch the image twice |
| 13:22 | <slartsa> | Yes this regards css not html, but does someone have knowledge about the current state of object-fit? |
| 13:23 | <hsivonen> | MikeSmith: whoa. whoa. does thing make the validator's output non-streaming? |
| 13:24 | <hsivonen> | https://bitbucket.org/bsdgabor/validator-refactoring/commits/49fca1a93cb43f3c25daa0fb7b352913525249b5 |
| 13:24 | <hsivonen> | or is that code only used in the non-servlet case? |
| 13:25 | MikeSmith | looks |
| 13:27 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: that code is not only used for the non-servlet case, I think |
| 13:27 | <odinho> | slartsa: lastorset implemeted it in Presto. |
| 13:28 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: but another thing I need to mention to you is that the current code does not actually run with the servlet properly |
| 13:28 | <MikeSmith> | so that's clearly a show stopper regardless |
| 13:29 | <MikeSmith> | he has been working on trying to troubleshoot the problem but last I heard from him he had not fixed it |
| 13:49 | <hsivonen> | MikeSmith: the changes toward newer history suggest that the servlet side hasn't been tested after each change during the refactoring. That scares me. |
| 13:53 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: yeah, as crazy as it might seem to say it, I don't think testing the servlet behavior is something he made a priority at all |
| 13:54 | <MikeSmith> | and when I agreed to help with this initially, I wasn't agreeing to do that testing for him |
| 13:56 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: really what it comes down to is, I was not the one who outlined the goals for him. That came from a member of the systems team who wants to have an API exposed that's not bound to the servlet. |
| 13:56 | <MikeSmith> | I agreed to help with questions about the existing code if had any |
| 13:57 | <MikeSmith> | but I never got any questions from him |
| 13:57 | <MikeSmith> | I just got essentially the same code you're looking at now too |
| 13:58 | <MikeSmith> | and meanwhile my colleague has done zero review of the code himself to even say whether it meets his needs or not |
| 14:00 | <MikeSmith> | so at this point I have lost whatever small amount of enthusiasm I may have ever had to for ever trying to help get it landed |
| 14:01 | <MikeSmith> | so I think it's probably not worth your time to try to figure out if it's workable or not, or how it could be make workable |
| 14:02 | <MikeSmith> | I'd been meaning to ping you to say I think you could hold off on the review |
| 14:02 | <hsivonen> | MikeSmith: ouch. |
| 14:03 | <hsivonen> | MikeSmith: well, I sent you email. I'll hold off attempts to diff the end state with the tip of the trunk, then. |
| 14:03 | <MikeSmith> | hsivonen: OK |
| 14:04 | <MikeSmith> | I'll look at what you sent already by mail and try to pass it on |
| 14:04 | <hsivonen> | MikeSmith: isn't GSoC supposed to ensure that there's a mentor? were you the assigned mentor or the person from the systeam |
| 14:07 | <MikeSmith> | I think we both were. But in hindsight I think it was a mistake for me to agree to be a mentor for a code project that was not scoped out to solve any problem that I needed solved. |
| 14:08 | <MikeSmith> | my intent was to be available to answer questions about the code and give some guidance about the best way to approach it for whatever the goal was |
| 14:08 | <MikeSmith> | but I never got any questions and never had much opportunity to give guidance |
| 14:09 | <hsivonen> | :-( |
| 14:09 | <hsivonen> | there is some good bits in there. But I can't just pull it all to the trunk without some confidence that it doesn't break the servlet side. |
| 14:22 | <annevk> | Ancil: yeah, that's a bug in how Chrome implements CORS |
| 14:23 | <annevk> | Ancil: if CORS fails it's to be treated as a network error |
| 14:23 | <annevk> | Ancil: rendering it is forbidden |
| 15:09 | <dglazkov> | good morning, Whatwg! |
| 15:30 | <say2joe> | hixie, I agree. my 2 pence. |
| 15:40 | <Hixie_> | agree with what? :-) |
| 15:55 | <zewt> | with whatever you disagree with |
| 16:01 | <annevk> | Domenic_: for some reason I'm not getting your later reply but I did get the one from Jonas... |
| 16:09 | <say2joe> | Hixie_: sorry… playing catchup to yesterday (i get a backlog in my IRC client). I was referring to your comments on getElementById |
| 16:13 | <Domenic_> | annevk: weird. well he quoted it in full so nothing lost i guess. |
| 16:14 | <annevk> | Domenic_: yeah, maybe some mail server delay, it's archived on w3.org too so I could read it there |
| 16:14 | <annevk> | Oh, just got it :) |
| 17:08 | <qtax^w> | i've read what i could find on "hgroup" but i found no "final" answer on the fate of this element. should it be avoided? is it still in whatwg html spec? |
| 17:09 | <qtax^w> | (i guess the answer to the last question is yes) |
| 17:09 | <Ms2ger> | Indeed |
| 17:09 | <Ms2ger> | So the answer to the first is "no" |
| 17:10 | <qtax^w> | hmm. i like it and would like to use it, but not sure since so much fuss about it |
| 17:10 | <jgraham> | I'm not really sure what the worst that can happen is |
| 17:10 | <Ms2ger> | Don't worry about the fuss, that's just the HTMLWG trying to assert authority they don't have |
| 17:11 | <jgraham> | Some future a11y tool fails to extract the perfect heading semantics from your page |
| 17:11 | <jgraham> | An outline generation tool gets stuff a bit wrong |
| 17:11 | <qtax^w> | well i'd like the possible (future?) implementations of outlining algorithms to work properly |
| 17:12 | <jgraham> | They don't seem like significant failure modes, though of course they would be nicer to get right |
| 17:13 | <qtax^w> | btw, are lower "rank" h\d tags valid before higher ranked ones in a hgroup? |
| 17:14 | <qtax^w> | eg <hgroup><h2>foo</h2><h1>bar</h1></hgroup> |
| 17:21 | <Hixie_> | qtax^w: <hgroup> is stable, implemented, and isn't going anywhere. |
| 17:22 | <qtax^w> | great |
| 17:39 | <SteveF> | <font> is stable implemented and is going anywhere |
| 17:42 | <Ms2ger> | It is? |
| 17:43 | <Hixie_> | don't feed the troll, Ms2ger |
| 17:44 | <Ms2ger> | I'm surprised it is going anywhere, apparently |
| 17:45 | <SteveF> | Ms2ger: thanks <font> is stable implemented and isn't going anywhere |
| 19:46 | <smaug____> | hmm, no anne |
| 21:47 | <Hixie_> | http://www.smashcompany.com/technology/ian-hickson-is-always-wrong-about-everything :-( |
| 21:52 | <jgraham> | Hixie_: That seems unlikely. Otherwise you would die the first time you tried to cross the street |
| 22:05 | <annevk> | smaug____: was getting food and such, gonna watch a series and sleep soon though |
| 22:07 | <smaug____> | annevk: it was just about http://logbot.glob.com.au/?c=content#c128978 |
| 22:08 | <say2joe> | Damn, Hixie_ i didn't know people could be so wrong (sarcastic) lol |
| 22:10 | <say2joe> | you should reply… "how about them apples" (in reference to Mr. Krubner's work as an apple picker in an orchard as well as his "extensive" experience with Apple products / programming). |
| 22:11 | <annevk> | smaug____: ah yeah, you mentioned that before |
| 22:11 | <annevk> | I should get better at filing bugs I guess |
| 22:12 | <smaug____> | well, that is why some automatic tool might be good. In the case the spec change is significant, implementation bugs would be filed when committing the spec change |
| 22:13 | <smaug____> | hopefully wouldn't cause more work for spec authors |
| 22:15 | <annevk> | we could have a commit hook in GitHub I suppose |
| 22:15 | <annevk> | I guess Bugzilla has an API? |
| 22:16 | <annevk> | I could look into this I suppose, might be interesting for other browser projects too |
| 22:16 | <smaug____> | bugzilla has some API yes |
| 22:19 | <annevk> | I need an intern to do stuff like this :p |
| 22:28 | <jamesr_`> | if i'm reading things correctly the <dialog>'s UI always shows up in the top layer of the document the element is in, right? |
| 22:28 | <jamesr_`> | meaning if you have a <dialog> inside an <iframe> the dialog is constrained within the iframe? |
| 22:28 | <jamesr_`> | is there any way to break out? |
| 22:30 | <jamesr_`> | Hixie_: ^^ ? |
| 22:32 | <zewt> | wow, now even amazon has product listing items that are fake javascript links that i can't middle-click |
| 22:32 | <zewt> | ww3 |
| 23:04 | <Hixie_> | jamesr_`: there's no way to break out of an iframe currently, right |
| 23:06 | <jamesr_`> | Hixie_: that means you can't use <dialog> as a clickjacking mitigation |
| 23:06 | <jamesr_`> | has there been much discussion about this? |
| 23:06 | <Hixie_> | jamesr_`: there's lots of things you can't use it for, sure |
| 23:06 | <Hixie_> | i don't think you'd ever be able to use it as a click-jacking mitigation -- i mean, there's no way we can allow a cross-origin iframe to break out of itself over a different-origin iframe |
| 23:06 | <Hixie_> | that's a huge spoofing risk |
| 23:07 | <Hixie_> | would just enable reverse clickjacking |
| 23:07 | <jamesr_`> | i get the spoofing concern although i'm not sure what reverse clickjacking is |
| 23:12 | <Hixie_> | the inner iframe click-jacking the outer frame |
| 23:12 | <Hixie_> | i.e. spoofing |
