| 00:46 | <gsnedders> | does anyone know where Acid3 test 99 comes from? |
| 00:46 | <gsnedders> | "check for the weirdest bug ever" |
| 00:46 | <gsnedders> | I presume some browser at some point genuinely failed it |
| 00:46 | <gsnedders> | or is it literally just there as a sanity test? |
| 01:56 | <ali0> | Hello! Would it be possible for fetch to set a header like X-Requested-With: XMLHttpRequest by default? |
| 01:57 | <ali0> | Libraries like jQuery set it without the user knowing, and server frameworks such as Rails use it to identify that it was an AJAX request |
| 02:16 | <MikeSmith> | alwu: https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/issues/58#issuecomment-110339399 is relevant |
| 02:19 | <MikeSmith> | also, why not just check for the Origin header |
| 02:28 | <MikeSmith> | question for any git experts here: |
| 02:30 | <MikeSmith> | when I do a `git log --decorate` on a clone of git⊙gc:w3c/web-platform-tests.git |
| 02:30 | <MikeSmith> | or https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests.git |
| 02:30 | <MikeSmith> | it shows `(origin/marcoscaceres-patch-1)` for commit 5516a2bcb3a7e67da0ba3d69b973ef008c7c350b |
| 02:31 | <MikeSmith> | = “Remove @alphan102, add @mnoorenberghe” |
| 02:31 | <MikeSmith> | and for commit b0c75cd8857f9f9596a744fac65c3be5e526aede (origin/TimothyGu/jsdom-tmp) |
| 02:32 | <MikeSmith> | but it only shows the branch names like that for those two commits |
| 02:32 | <MikeSmith> | why? |
| 02:32 | <MikeSmith> | what’s special about those commits? |
| 02:33 | <MikeSmith> | I don’t see any metadata in the raw commit log that would cause those to be show differently like that |
| 02:33 | <MikeSmith> | TimothyGu: maybe you know |
| 05:29 | <bathos> | is there a mechanism / is there a proposed mechanism for custom pseudoclasses in web components (or something equivalent?) — in some cases, css vars do the trick, but in others it doesn’t work out that way |
| 05:33 | <MikeSmith> | so to close the loop on the git question I asked here earlier about the branch refs in the WPT git log --decorate: |
| 05:34 | <MikeSmith> | the branch refs were shown for those two commits because the branches were still in the origin |
| 05:35 | <MikeSmith> | that is, it basically is showing that those two cases are for merged PR branches that somebody forgot to delete when they merged the commits from the PRs for those |
| 05:37 | <MikeSmith> | so it’s kind of a handy indicator for visually catching those cases from the command line, so that you can know those merged branches need to deleted and locally pruned |
| 06:31 | <tobie> | MikeSmith: git would definitely benefit from some form of branch cleanup option |
| 06:32 | <MikeSmith> | yeah |
| 06:32 | <MikeSmith> | the ongoing guessing game with git is fun though |
| 07:42 | <nox> | git remote prune |
| 07:43 | <nox> | git log --decorate has been the default for a long time now btw. |
| 10:09 | <kochi> | I found there are two distinct "SyntaxError"s : https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=609415#c20 |
| 10:09 | <kochi> | One is DOMException whose name is "SyntaxError", and the other is `SyntaxError` which is an exception itself. |
| 10:10 | <annevk> | kochi: the latter is very specific and should not be used outside ECMAScript |
| 10:10 | <kochi> | annevk: yeah, I learned it today. |
| 10:15 | <kochi> | Even though the webidl spec describes both, it doesn't say "they are different" explicitly :-( |
| 10:16 | <kochi> | I'm tempted to add a note on "SyntaxError" in the webidl spec. |
| 10:23 | <annevk> | kochi: https://heycam.github.io/webidl/#idl-exceptions mentions they're explicitly omitted |
| 10:24 | <annevk> | kochi: but maybe you mean in the section of DOMException? Might be good |
| 10:25 | <kochi> | annevk: yes, the spec is kinda sound, but "SyntaxError" typeface aren't different, so without reading carefully readers may not make out the difference. |
| 10:26 | <kochi> | annevk: so yeah, in the exceptions section is okay, but adding a note in DOMException section could make sense. |
| 13:06 | <annevk> | Domenic: seen RTCIdentityProviderGlobalScope? |
| 13:07 | <annevk> | Domenic: https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/1627 |
| 13:33 | <annevk> | https://github.com/WebAssembly/spec/issues/577 makes me wonder how much review WebAssembly's type system has had |
| 13:56 | <annevk> | Turns out that strings are byte sequences in WebAssembly |
| 13:56 | <annevk> | And names are strings |
| 14:02 | <nox> | annevk: Not the first string-related misnomer. |
| 14:02 | <nox> | :) |
| 14:04 | <bathos> | answering my own q from last nite: I was able to achieve what I wanted through element attributes & just a bit of extra logic to ensure said attributes can not be in invalid states ... seems to be a viable substitute for pseudoclasses in at least some cases (someElemWithASlot[specialAttr] somethingInSlot {}) |
| 14:09 | <annevk> | bathos: pseudo-elements are semi-planned btw |
| 14:09 | <annevk> | bathos: there's an issue, I can look it up for you |
| 14:10 | <annevk> | bathos: wanted to ping you earlier, but you were not around anymore |
| 14:10 | <annevk> | bathos: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/300 |
| 14:19 | <bathos> | oh, cool! I’ve occasionally wished for both pseudo elems and pseudo classes, though the latter is a lot easier to work around |
| 15:41 | <wanderview> | as a browser vendor person at tpac, should I register for this meetup? I don't want to take a web devs seat if space is limited: https://www.w3.org/2017/11/Meetup/ |
| 15:44 | <annevk> | wanderview: I have attended such a meetup at one point; suspect it's fine |
| 18:38 | <ondras> | webcrypto question: is there an api to compute a public key from a corresponding private key? |
| 18:39 | <TabAtkins> | That would defeat public-key crypto entirely, so no. ^_^ |
| 18:40 | <ondras> | https://stackoverflow.com/questions/696472/given-a-private-key-is-it-possible-to-derive-its-public-key |
| 18:40 | <TabAtkins> | (The public and private keys are identical in purpose; we designate one as "public" and one as "private" arbitrarily. If you could compute one from the other, pk crypto wouldn't work at all.) |
| 18:41 | <TabAtkins> | Ah, interesting, so practical concerns mean that it usually can be computed, because we make some choices that make the public key much more predictable than it should be theoretically. |
| 20:27 | <jyasskin> | TabAtkins/ondras: Generally the data we call the "private" key also includes the public key, whereas the public key doesn't include the private key. |
| 23:02 | <TimothyGu> | MikeSmith: feel free to delete TimothyGu/jsdom-tmp. I forgot what it was for. |
| 23:23 | <MikeSmith> | TimothyGu: thanks yeah I did already |