| 00:27 | <Hixie_> | zewt: how does "-related" help with that? |
| 00:28 | <zewt> | "randomProposal()-related use cases" meaning "the use cases that randomProposal() addresses" |
| 00:29 | <zewt> | sometimes just feels like i'm talking to a room of lawyers :) |
| 00:29 | <Hixie_> | i don't undrstand the difference between "randomProposal()-related use cases" and randomProposal() use cases" but ok :-) |
| 03:46 | <zewt> | <social> element? sounds like a subject of an onion article |
| 06:15 | <MikeSmith> | zewt: where that come from ? |
| 06:53 | <MikeSmith> | Hixie_: good trolling with your sockpuppet <social> proposal |
| 06:53 | <MikeSmith> | well played |
| 08:09 | <zcorpan> | <!-- could be valid JS if it wasn't for being a line comment. http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/2582 |
| 08:10 | <zcorpan> | Hixie_: </script> also http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/2583 |
| 08:34 | <zcorpan> | can we make the name getter on HTMLCollection throw or return null for out-of-document trees? |
| 08:35 | <zcorpan> | or on elements |
| 08:42 | <Ms2ger> | Mm |
| 08:53 | <zcorpan> | maybe throw and null are both bad options; being undefined/not present probably |
| 09:27 | <Ms2ger> | Lachy, congratulations, btw |
| 09:27 | <Lachy> | thanks :-) |
| 09:28 | <annevk> | "None of this is an excuse for the W3C selling its soul, of course." |
| 09:29 | <Ms2ger> | It had one? |
| 09:35 | <karlcow> | MS2ger: Exactly. |
| 09:36 | <annevk> | zcorpan: I'm not sure why we want to change the named getter algorithm to forbid certain scenarios. Could you elaborate? |
| 09:36 | <karlcow> | no organization has a soul. It frightens mean each time, people try to do anthropomorphism with social entities outside of a poetic license |
| 09:37 | <annevk> | You need a poetic license these days to write nice things? |
| 09:37 | <annevk> | Seems pretty clear what Brendan meant. |
| 09:37 | <karlcow> | annevk: and I disagree. |
| 09:38 | <karlcow> | It's a rhetorical way for polarizing the debate, which doesn't help. |
| 09:39 | <karlcow> | it's like saying Opera, Mozilla, Microsoft have a soul. Same. Exact same. They have interests, a set of described values (sometimes). |
| 09:48 | <foolip> | annevk, where was that quote from? |
| 09:48 | <foolip> | Lachy, congratulations! (what am I congratulating you about?) |
| 09:49 | <annevk> | foolip: mozilla.dev.planning |
| 09:49 | <Lachy> | foolip, https://twitter.com/Lachy/status/390431332766982144 |
| 09:50 | <foolip> | Lachy, congratulations indeed! |
| 09:50 | <Lachy> | I was on holiday in the Maldives last week |
| 09:52 | <jgraham> | Lachy: You should have waited 24 days |
| 09:55 | <jgraham> | karlcow: I don't think people have souls either, but it doesn't mean that I can't understand what is meant when they are mentioned |
| 09:56 | <Lachy> | jgraham, we're having the engagement party on the 9 November. That is day 1024. |
| 09:56 | <karlcow> | jgraham: ;) I think I agree with the first part. I still disagree with the second. What $ORG is doing is part of its constituencies, it evolves with what the constituency is made of. :) |
| 09:57 | <annevk> | Nah, it also depends on leadership. The patent policy happened over the dead body of some members. |
| 09:58 | <annevk> | The whole "W3C is not responsible for anything" spiel is a half-truth. |
| 09:58 | <Ms2ger> | It's not responsible for anything good? ;) |
| 10:01 | <jgraham> | karlcow: Even if you believe that (which I think I don't), W3C is still free to choose its constituents |
| 10:02 | <karlcow> | annevk: agreed about leadership. |
| 10:02 | <karlcow> | I never said W3C was not responsible either. |
| 10:03 | <karlcow> | Mozilla, Microsoft, and Google are responsible for their actions too. |
| 10:03 | <karlcow> | :) |
| 10:04 | <karlcow> | but we may have a different idea of what you put in "W3C" when we say the letters. |
| 10:06 | <jgraham> | Anyone know anything about London JS Conf? |
| 10:07 | <jgraham> | Like, is it something that has happened before? How big is it? |
| 10:31 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/blink-dev/yujPcy889e4/0GN9eNO4koAJ |
| 10:32 | <annevk> | (Rant by Kornel about AWebP. It's nice.) |
| 10:38 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: thanks |
| 10:39 | <MikeSmith> | yeah, classic kornel |
| 10:43 | <karlcow> | oh and agreed with Henri on this one http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2013Oct/0052.html |
| 11:00 | <MikeSmith> | karlcow: I think one thing we can all agree on is that http://twoproblems.com/ is good for the Web |
| 11:01 | <MikeSmith> | and that porneL should be made Minister of Education |
| 11:02 | <annevk> | 'Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll check teh interwebs for teh codez" Now they have two videos of cats.' |
| 11:02 | <annevk> | All the time... |
| 11:40 | <zcorpan> | Lachy: congrats! what happens on day 1,000,000? |
| 11:45 | <zcorpan> | annevk: i thought the objection to Element.getElementsByTagName was that HTMLCollection has a named getter and it has bad perf in such cases. |
| 12:19 | <annevk> | zcorpan: the objection is that HTMLCollection is a terrible API |
| 12:19 | <zcorpan> | ok |
| 14:26 | <SimonSapin> | jgraham: to test selectors, do you think it makes more sense to have reftest with a green square, or something JS-based? |
| 14:27 | <jgraham> | SimonSapin: js-based I would have thought |
| 14:27 | <jgraham> | It should be much faster to run, since you can test lots of things on a single page |
| 14:28 | <jgraham> | (it does mean that it depends on js ofc, but even Servo is getting to the point where that's acceptable :) |
| 14:28 | <darobin> | oh please js-based |
| 14:28 | <darobin> | green squares must die, if at all possible |
| 14:29 | <jgraham> | Poor green squares :( |
| 14:29 | <jgraham> | If you are testing rendering, green squares are good |
| 14:30 | <jgraham> | But if you are just testing selector matching, that doesn't really depend on rendering |
| 14:30 | <darobin> | yeah yeah I know |
| 15:12 | <SimonSapin> | js-based means cssselect is out :/ |
| 15:13 | <SimonSapin> | (and by extension WeasyPrint) |
| 15:13 | <SimonSapin> | or it could be a JS harness that uses text/json/whatever static data |
| 15:13 | <jgraham> | But it does mean everyone else gets a factor of 100 in runtime or something |
| 15:14 | <jgraham> | Sure |
| 15:14 | <jgraham> | querySelector[All] already has tests, if that helps |
| 15:15 | <darobin> | in fact that's even a very good idea, since if needed you could just generate a lot of green squares from it |
| 15:16 | <SimonSapin> | jgraham: https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/selectors-api ? Interesting |
| 15:16 | Ms2ger | needs to poke Servo some more |
| 15:18 | <SimonSapin> | jgraham: are these based on testharness.js? |
| 15:19 | Ms2ger | clicks on one |
| 15:19 | <Ms2ger> | Yes |
| 15:20 | <zcorpan> | jgraham: what does ^M mean in https://critic.hoppipolla.co.uk/showfile?sha1=4536ea21c7f33904626e6e72a06c2a59dc499f51&path=cors/resources/cors-headers.asis&review=368 ? |
| 15:20 | <jgraham> | See also: self.assertEquals("Some Status", resp.msg) self.assertEquals("test-value", resp.info()["test-header"]) |
| 15:20 | <jgraham> | Sigh |
| 15:20 | <jgraham> | See also: http://w3c-test.org/web-platform-tests/master/selectors-api/level1-baseline.html |
| 15:20 | <jgraham> | SimonSapin: ^ |
| 15:20 | <jgraham> | zcorpan: It's a CR, I hope] |
| 15:22 | <zcorpan> | ah, that makes sense. first line should have that also, right? |
| 15:22 | <jgraham> | Yeah, good point |
| 15:23 | zcorpan | adds an issue |
| 15:25 | <jgraham> | Probably also need to ensure that the repo is configured not to touch line endings |
| 15:26 | <Ms2ger> | jgraham, took me a while to figure out you didn't mean CR :) |
| 15:28 | <jgraham> | I did mean CR :p |
| 15:59 | <jgraham> | Oh joy. longdesc tests. I wonder what happens if I reject them all on the basis that they're not in the spec. |
| 15:59 | <jgraham> | Oh, I guess they don't claim to be |
| 16:05 | <zcorpan> | © chaals |
| 16:05 | <gsnedders> | jgraham: Approve them, on grounds that you can then mark them at risk due to implementation lack. |
| 16:25 | <annevk> | Pretty sure I commented on <iframe>'s weird loading model before. An error event for 4xx would never fly... |
| 16:26 | <jgraham> | Hmm, I wonder if the © is actually a problem |
| 16:26 | <annevk> | However, I don't think we have ever defined that "http://test:test/"; and "http://test.invalid/"; should give different results for <iframe>... |
| 17:54 | <dglazkov> | good morning, Whatwg! |
| 20:26 | <Hixie_> | i don't understand the w3c bugzilla |
| 20:26 | <Hixie_> | i do a search, i walk down the bugs in that search one by one, and sometimes, i end up on a bug that isn't in the search |
| 20:26 | <Hixie_> | it's like it gets confused as to which bug list i'm looking at |
| 20:37 | <foxtrotwhiskey> | Are you doing multiple searches while paging through one list? I think it only works right on your most recent search. |
| 20:40 | <Hixie_> | i'm definitely doing multiple searches, but this is happening without intevening searches. |
| 20:40 | <Hixie_> | like, search, search, search, open bug, submit, submit, next, next, submit, woah, what bug is this |
| 21:04 | <Hixie_> | annevk: so what's the story on https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22296 ? (microtasks) |
| 21:33 | <annevk> | Hixie_: wycats wants a model that he has found works well for systems such as ember.js; Rafael questions whether that model is always better and worth the added complexity |
| 21:34 | <annevk> | Hixie_: note that Rafael would like wycats to be correct, as he's trying to address the same kind of use cases |
| 21:38 | <jgraham> | Hixie_: presumably W3C bugzilla is required to show you a random selection of bugs to better reflect the interests of the Member organisations |
| 21:41 | <Hixie_> | annevk: so should i be making changes? |
| 21:42 | <annevk> | Hixie_: so... I recommend pinging rafaelw |
| 21:42 | <Hixie_> | rafaelw: ping |
| 21:43 | <annevk> | Hixie_: it's starting to become somewhat important now promises and Object.observe() are closer to shipping |
| 21:44 | <annevk> | Hixie_: so how they queue relative to mutation observer stuff will become observable and we'll have to figure out a story here |
| 21:45 | <Hixie_> | annevk: agreed, i just don't know what i should be speccing |
| 22:16 | <Hixie_> | gsnedders: ping https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22818 |