| 00:11 | <Ms2ger> | Is @import loading sync? |
| 00:11 | <SimonSapin> | https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/453 (re @import) |
| 02:00 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: https://travis-ci.org/whatwg/fetch/builds/181216088 something goes wrong with Java |
| 02:01 | MikeSmith | looks |
| 02:01 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: it’s not calling the Java8 `java` |
| 02:02 | <MikeSmith> | need to do the thign of giving it the full path to the right `java` binary |
| 02:02 | <MikeSmith> | I thought we changed that we for fetch already |
| 02:03 | <MikeSmith> | that PR branch need to be rebased maybe? |
| 02:04 | <annevk> | Ah okay, rebasing it would probably fix it I guess |
| 02:04 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: thanks |
| 07:15 | <ondras> | morning |
| 07:15 | <ondras> | chrome behaves rather strangely in the first case: https://jsfiddle.net/5xzp876y/ |
| 07:16 | <ondras> | is this known/specced? |
| 07:46 | <annevk> | rbyers: ping for https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/334 |
| 07:46 | <botie> | will do |
| 07:46 | <annevk> | miketaylr: that's also the issue you want to look at /\ |
| 07:46 | <annevk> | miketaylr: and we should maybe discuss tomorrow afternoon if we find the time |
| 09:39 | <MikeSmith> | zcorpan: about character references at this point in time I wonder what problems they are actually solving for anybody |
| 09:39 | <MikeSmith> | I wonder why anybody still intentionally chooses to use them |
| 09:41 | <MikeSmith> | so as far as guidance, maybe what we really should be having the spec start out by say is: Don't use character references. They’re a legacy of another era. But if you choose to use them anyway, here are the rules about how they work. |
| 09:42 | <zcorpan> | MikeSmith: maybe for invisibles that don't have named charrefs, or to hide their emails from email scrapers, or because they're still in an environment that's not all-utf-8 |
| 09:42 | <MikeSmith> | yeah those seem all seem like problems that are better fixed with other solutions |
| 09:43 | <MikeSmith> | like, don’t use non-ut8 environments |
| 09:43 | <MikeSmith> | and use a text editor that lets you show invisibles in some way |
| 09:45 | <MikeSmith> | anway in general I think we should be having the spec say more “don’t use this” language about crufty old stuff like this |
| 09:45 | <MikeSmith> | otherwise, unless the spec says something, it is kind of enshrining that stuff |
| 09:45 | <MikeSmith> | as far as how readers perceive it |
| 09:46 | <MikeSmith> | it is like the spec is blessing it, unless it clearly says otherwise |
| 09:46 | <MikeSmith> | anyway, maybe it is just me who sees it that way |
| 09:46 | <MikeSmith> | pet peeve |
| 09:46 | <zcorpan> | MikeSmith: are they causing harm? |
| 09:46 | <MikeSmith> | yes |
| 09:47 | <MikeSmith> | because people use them when they should be fixing their environments, and learning how to do that |
| 09:47 | <MikeSmith> | modernizing |
| 09:48 | <MikeSmith> | and also their docs may get handed off to somebody else to deal with |
| 09:49 | <MikeSmith> | and that new person has a non-broken authoring environment and gets handed some doc riddled with character refs where they should be real unicode and they are rightly gonna feel, wtf |
| 09:51 | <zcorpan> | i don't feel strongly about it, but i wouldn't object to opinionated non-normative text in the spec |
| 10:21 | <zcorpan> | botie: tell caitp being strong improves quality of life throughout life, and it will make a much bigger difference when getting old |
| 10:21 | <botie> | will do |
| 10:21 | <zcorpan> | oh caitp was here already |
| 13:01 | <JakeA> | Crazy idea: "TypeShed" - something that takes typescript and converts it into spec prose |
| 13:04 | <rbyers> | Annevk: Sorry I missed that. Replied. On vacation without a laptop, but dtapuska and tkent are the right people for this area anyway. |
| 13:47 | <saba> | Is there anything wrong, faulty or bad with using a character reference like this in HTML? <p>http://example.com/foo&bar</p>; |
| 13:47 | <saba> | Compared to <p>http://example.com/foo&bar</p>; |
| 13:47 | <saba> | Its not an ambiguous ampersand. So should it be encoded like that? |
| 13:51 | <saba> | I'm just checking my sanity here. |
| 15:15 | <zcorpan> | saba: either is OK. if unsure, use & |
| 15:40 | <felixjet> | so yesterday i asked something but everyone was afk xD let's try again |
| 15:41 | <felixjet> | while wrapping <pre><code> inside <figure> |
| 15:41 | <felixjet> | it is valid to use <figcaption>JavaScript</figcaption> to represent the language of the code? |
| 15:41 | <felixjet> | as a label |
| 15:41 | <felixjet> | because the spec says that figcaption should be a legend |
| 15:42 | <felixjet> | and the dictionary says that a legend explains the content |
| 15:43 | <felixjet> | something like <figcaption>Function that parse text and returns an AST</figcation> is valid. but what about my first example? |
| 15:43 | <felixjet> | class="language-javascript" is used to highlight the code or to give it some semantics |
| 15:44 | <felixjet> | but i'm asking about <figcaption>JavaScript</figcaption> to be used as a label to show the user the language of the code |
| 16:03 | <annevk> | felixjet: prolly depends on context whether that is a suitable caption |
| 16:03 | <felixjet> | there is just 1 possible context |
| 16:04 | <felixjet> | correct or incorrect, but just one |
| 16:06 | <saba> | zcorpan: thanks |
| 18:53 | <miketaylr> | annevk: cool, will find you after lunch today |
| 23:44 | <ajeffrey_> | A question about document.write... |
| 23:44 | <ajeffrey_> | In https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/webappapis.html#dom-document-write, |
| 23:45 | <ajeffrey_> | step 3 is "If the Document object is not an active document, then abort these steps." |
| 23:45 | <ajeffrey_> | should this say "fully active" rather than "active"? |
| 23:46 | <jgraham> | hsivonen: ^ |