| 00:09 | <Domenic> | annevk: let me know if you want help with https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/3276 but it seems more up your alley to me... if I'm just being lazy let me know though :) |
| 03:53 | <Domenic> | Does anyone know a Python HTML beautifier that will not put inline tags on their own lines? |
| 10:08 | <Ms2ger> | If I have a <link id="style3" rel="alternate stylesheet">, does that necessarily imply that link.sheet is null? |
| 10:09 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: because no href? |
| 10:16 | <Ms2ger> | No, with implied href going somewhere sensible, sorry |
| 10:26 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: I don't think it does, at least Firefox would historically load those and populate a CSSStyleSheet |
| 10:26 | <annevk> | (I say historically as I've no idea what happened in the last five years or so) |
| 10:58 | <tobie> | So does GitHub actually honor [fixup] when selecting the rebase option of web merge? |
| 11:01 | <annevk> | tobie: GitHub would not squash for two separate commits, pretty sure |
| 11:06 | <tobie> | Ugh |
| 11:21 | <annevk> | tobie: you do know about "squash and merge", right? |
| 11:22 | <annevk> | tobie: requires a bit of fiddling with the commit message title/body, but it's great otherwise |
| 11:22 | <tobie> | annevk: oh, yeah, absolutely. But I'd like to keep some the commits not marked-up with fixup as separate in TimothyGu 's PR |
| 11:23 | <tobie> | annevk: https://github.com/heycam/webidl/pull/483 |
| 11:23 | <annevk> | tobie: note that you have access to TimothyGu's branch so you can just fix it yourself there |
| 11:24 | <tobie> | annevk: yeah, I'm aware. |
| 11:24 | <tobie> | annevk: it's just I know fixup! has some magic capabilities |
| 11:24 | <tobie> | I'm just not super which |
| 11:25 | <tobie> | nor where |
| 11:26 | <annevk> | I'm not aware of any really, maybe there's some tooling around git rebase that takes them into account and turns them into -f or so |
| 11:27 | <tobie> | think it has to do with auto-squash |
| 11:53 | <Ms2ger> | tobie, yeah, rebase --autosquash pays attention to fixup!, not sure if anything else does |
| 11:54 | <tobie> | ty |
| 13:22 | <annevk> | kochi: at what point shall we draft an agenda? |
| 13:41 | <annevk> | TimothyGu: if things are no longer dangerous for you, you might want to have another look at https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/579 (data: URLs); if you're still interested |
| 13:41 | <annevk> | SimonSapin: you too might want to have a look |
| 13:50 | <SimonSapin> | annevk: is "isomorphic decode" the same as decode with ISO-8859-1 (the IANA one)? |
| 13:51 | <annevk> | SimonSapin: IANA handles the full byte range? If so, yes |
| 13:51 | <SimonSapin> | ok |
| 14:04 | <annevk> | SimonSapin: did WTF-8 end up in Rust proper? |
| 14:04 | <annevk> | SimonSapin: your repository on it is somewhat unclear |
| 14:04 | <annevk> | SimonSapin: (just curious btw) |
| 14:05 | <SimonSapin> | annevk: yes, OsStr and Path contain WTF-8 on Windows (and abritrary bytes on Unix) |
| 14:19 | <SimonSapin> | annevk: are cross-references indexed daily, with "parse a MIME type" new today? |
| 14:31 | <annevk> | SimonSapin: yes and yes |
| 14:31 | <SimonSapin> | cool |
| 14:31 | <SimonSapin> | anyway the data: PR looks good |
| 14:32 | <annevk> | I think it was previously not exported, that was the problem I suspect |
| 14:32 | <SimonSapin> | thanks for pushing on all this |
| 14:32 | <annevk> | Because we did have a somewhat broken "parse a MIME type" dfn |
| 14:33 | <annevk> | SimonSapin: thanks; see you soon 😊 |
| 14:37 | <Ms2ger_> | Oh, it's next week, is it |
| 14:38 | <annevk> | Ms2ger_: it is; I suspect we'll miss you? |
| 14:40 | <annevk> | Whoa, html5lib is 11 |
| 15:06 | <kochi> | annevk: let me sum up agenda so far tomorrow. |
| 15:07 | <kochi> | annevk: I guess MS/Apple are okay around the schedule, but let me check. |
| 15:08 | <kochi> | annevk: thanks for arranging the venue. |
| 15:22 | <annevk> | kochi: yeah, was wondering why they didn't reply thus far |
| 15:23 | <annevk> | kochi: I guess we'll do 3 days? 1 day old stuff. 1 day new stuff. 1 day unconference? |
| 15:25 | <wanderview> | annevk: kochi: I might be able to come to the web components f2f for a day or two... if I would not be in the way... I want to get more knowledgeable about it, but I don't want to take up someone else's seat at the table |
| 15:32 | <annevk> | wanderview: sgtm |
| 15:32 | <annevk> | I suspect the meeting room in Toronto is big enough |
| 15:37 | <wanderview> | annevk: it will depend a bit one how my wife is doing... but since its only a few hours drive for me I might be able to attend |
| 15:44 | <jugglinmike> | annevk: I want to specify some behavior for all ECMAScript realms with the same origin as a given ECMAScript realm. I know that wording is very loose, but do you get my meaning? |
| 15:51 | <jugglinmike> | I suppose I can forget about the ECMAScript realm for now |
| 15:51 | <annevk> | jugglinmike: roughly |
| 15:52 | <jugglinmike> | What I'd like to do is say, "For every browsing context that is same origin as browsing context X" |
| 15:52 | <jugglinmike> | (This is for the Permissions specification--I can give more background if you'd like) |
| 15:53 | <jugglinmike> | As a starting point, I think it's valid to reference "all top-level browsing contexts" |
| 15:53 | <jugglinmike> | Since "the user agent itself has a strong reference to its top-level browsing contexts." https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#garbage-collection-and-browsing-contexts |
| 15:54 | <Mek> | browsing contexts don't really have origins though |
| 15:55 | <annevk> | jugglinmike: you can start with browsing contexts |
| 15:55 | <annevk> | jugglinmike: but you need to get to active documents or some such before talking about origins |
| 15:55 | <annevk> | jugglinmike: note that at this point you're excluding certain realms, such as those found in workers and worklets |
| 15:56 | <jugglinmike> | Oooh. Thank you for pointing that out |
| 15:56 | <jugglinmike> | I think you are being very kind to me, trying to solve the question as I phrased it |
| 15:56 | <jugglinmike> | but I may be going down the wrong path |
| 15:57 | <jugglinmike> | because the specification already works with the realms I'm interested in, but it doesn't go through this trouble |
| 15:57 | <jugglinmike> | So the first thing I should ask is: is the current text acceptable? If so, I'll just re-use that. Otherwise, I'll keep at this work at formalization |
| 15:58 | <jugglinmike> | Here's what I'm referring to |
| 15:58 | <jugglinmike> | > If the user grants permission, return "granted"; otherwise return "denied". The user’s interaction may provide new information about the user’s intent for this realm and other realms with the same origin. |
| 15:58 | <jugglinmike> | https://w3c.github.io/permissions/#requesting-more-permission |
| 15:59 | <annevk> | jugglinmike: that's roughly fine |
| 15:59 | <annevk> | jugglinmike: there's no such thing as "this realm" |
| 15:59 | <annevk> | jugglinmike: and to use "same-origin" you actually need to pass it two origins, not realms |
| 16:01 | <annevk> | jugglinmike: origins live on settings objects |
| 16:01 | <jugglinmike> | Got it. I'll avoid those parts in my patch |
| 16:03 | <annevk> | jugglinmike: so from a realm you'd do realm's [[HostDefined]]'s origin for the origin per https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#realms-settings-objects-global-objects |
| 16:10 | <Domenic> | realm's relevant setting object's origin is more conventional |
| 16:10 | <Domenic> | but you probably just want unit of related similar-origin browsing contexts |
| 16:12 | <Domenic> | Reading the actual text: I don't think users have any intentions about realms at all |
| 16:22 | <jugglinmike> | Domenic: that sounds right to me, though I think the specification is just trying to avoid making that assumption |
| 16:22 | <jugglinmike> | So a browser could present a checkbox that said "Apply this to all realms" if for some reason they thought anyone would know what that meant |
| 16:22 | <jugglinmike> | (when prompting for permission) |
| 16:31 | <jugglinmike> | Okay, one more thing |
| 16:32 | <jugglinmike> | A environment settings object "specifies algorithms for" a realm execution context |
| 16:32 | <jugglinmike> | https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/webappapis.html#environment-settings-object |
| 16:32 | <jugglinmike> | This sounds subtly distinct from saying "has a field for a realm execution context" |
| 16:34 | <jugglinmike> | So is it right to say, "the realm of an environment settings object"? |
| 16:37 | <jugglinmike> | Answer: yes |
| 16:37 | <jugglinmike> | "There is always a 1-to-1-to-1 mapping between JavaScript realms, global objects, and environment settings objects:" |
| 16:37 | <jugglinmike> | https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/webappapis.html#realms-settings-objects-global-objects |
| 16:43 | <jugglinmike> | jyasskin: Hey there! Do you have a moment to talk about WebDriver integration with the Permissions spec? |
| 17:58 | <annevk> | jugglinmike: ooh you're working on WebDriver <3 |
| 17:58 | <annevk> | jugglinmike: it'd be so nice to be able to write cross-browser automated tests for stuff like the Notifications API or the Storage Standard |
| 17:58 | <jugglinmike> | hehe |
| 17:59 | <jugglinmike> | Totally! |
| 17:59 | <jugglinmike> | The "extension commands" mechanism hasn't been vetted, so I've been proving it out with the Permissions API |
| 18:00 | <jugglinmike> | which is itself pretty nuanced |
| 19:25 | <jugglinmike> | jyasskin: I'm working on a new patch for Permissions that supports WebDriver but will stand alone. Do you have a minute to let me know if it sounds like a good idea? |
| 19:25 | <jugglinmike> | (Asking again since I've been dealing with a spotty network connection today.) |
| 19:35 | <jyasskin> | jugglinmike: Sorry, today's my day off to help raise my kid. I'll be back tomorrow if that works. |
| 19:35 | <jugglinmike> | Certainly! Thanks for letting me know, jyasskin |
| 19:35 | <jyasskin> | Also sorry for not watching that issue. |
| 19:36 | <jugglinmike> | No worries at all; it's been months since you gave me some suggestions, after all |
| 19:36 | <jugglinmike> | Are you on the US west coast? |
| 19:36 | <jyasskin> | Yep |
| 19:36 | <jugglinmike> | got it |
| 19:37 | <jugglinmike> | I'll come knocking tomorrow morning then |
| 19:37 | <jugglinmike> | Enjoy your day off :_ |
| 19:37 | <jugglinmike> | :) |
| 20:30 | <smaug____> | Hmm, IntersectionObserver ... |
| 20:30 | <smaug____> | https://w3c.github.io/IntersectionObserver/#dom-intersectionobserver-intersectionobserver "Set this.root to options.root." |
| 20:30 | smaug____ | wonders what that really means |
| 20:31 | <smaug____> | and https://w3c.github.io/IntersectionObserver/#dom-intersectionobserver-root is also weird |
| 20:43 | <smaug____> | Domenic: "Set this.root to options.root." isn't any magical new spec way to say that some internal slot root would be set to options.root, right? |
| 20:43 | <annevk> | Nope |
| 20:44 | <annevk> | We do want to have “this”, but no dots afaik |
| 20:45 | smaug____ | filed a bug |
| 21:04 | <smaug____> | and more IntersectionObserver bugs |
| 21:04 | <smaug____> | I wonder if it is actively maintained |
| 21:04 | <smaug____> | there are lots of open bugs |
| 21:11 | <annevk> | smaug____: it’s observed |
| 21:11 | <annevk> | nn |