| 00:01 | <TabAtkins> | Is there a way to make the test runner run a *single* test, specified in the URL? |
| 00:01 | <TabAtkins> | (The online one at http://w3c-test.org/tools/runner/index.html) |
| 00:02 | <TabAtkins> | Oh, if they're testharness I can just link straight to them, looks like. |
| 00:23 | <gsnedders> | yes (there's basically no reason to ever use than runner) |
| 00:24 | <gsnedders> | I mean I guess it's better than nothing for running multiple testharness.js tests |
| 00:29 | <TabAtkins> | The docs currently point to that runner, and don't mention that you can just navigate directly to the test. |
| 00:36 | <TimothyGu> | gsnedders: I'm seeing "POST http://w3c-test.org/tools/runner/update_manifest.py 500 (Internal Server Error)" is this normal? |
| 00:37 | <gsnedders> | TimothyGu: yeah, the runner has never really worked well on w3c-test.org :/ |
| 00:43 | <TimothyGu> | :( |
| 00:47 | <gsnedders> | honestly we should just have better tooling to run the tests; better UI for ./wpt run locally, some better way to run them in browser (and run more than just testharness.js tests), and make that less useful generally by having up-to-date results at https://wpt.fyi/ |
| 00:49 | <TimothyGu> | gsnedders: is there a way to mute websocket connection notifications, like those shown in https://travis-ci.org/tmpvar/jsdom/jobs/329347954#L5163? |
| 00:49 | <TimothyGu> | or, for more fun, https://travis-ci.org/tmpvar/jsdom/jobs/329347954#L5207-L5285 |
| 00:50 | <TimothyGu> | I assume you're the WPT guy but correct me if I'm wrong |
| 00:50 | <gsnedders> | TimothyGu: I… guess they come from the websocket server, so I don't know. |
| 00:50 | <gsnedders> | yeah, they come from pywebsocket |
| 00:51 | <TimothyGu> | so no way to disable it? |
| 00:51 | <gsnedders> | Pretty sure it's coming directly from the third party code, so nothing we directly maintain. Might be configurable with logging levels and the like? I don't know. I've never touched the WebSockets stuff. |
| 00:52 | <TimothyGu> | ok.. |
| 00:52 | <gsnedders> | Sorry, I can't give a useful answer. |
| 00:52 | <TimothyGu> | it's okay, just stopping by |
| 06:53 | <KiChjang> | annevk, spec question about valid floating point numbers |
| 06:54 | <KiChjang> | are whitespaces in front of the numbers allowed? |
| 06:54 | <KiChjang> | i.e. is " 123.345" considered a valid floating point number? |
| 06:55 | <KiChjang> | link to spec: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/common-microsyntaxes.html#valid-floating-point-number |
| 07:22 | <annevk> | KiChjang: what would suggest it’s valid? |
| 07:23 | <KiChjang> | the parsing part of it suggest that it may be valid, since on step 6 it is allowed to skip whitespaces |
| 07:23 | <annevk> | KiChjang: we parse many invalid inputs |
| 07:24 | <KiChjang> | ah ok, that's the part i'm missing |
| 07:24 | <KiChjang> | my intuition was successful parsing == valid string |
| 07:46 | <hayato_> | smaug____:FYI, I'm going to fix the WPT test, https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/blob/master/shadow-dom/event-composed-path-with-related-target.html, as well as fixing Blink's implementation at https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/869693. |
| 09:37 | <annevk> | I wonder what GitHub uses to mark some of my comments as verified and some not |
| 09:38 | <annevk> | I do push from different machines, but I think I use identical setups... |
| 09:38 | <annevk> | And I'm not entirely sure it's related to that |
| 09:39 | <annevk> | Also, Travis being offline is kinda weird |
| 10:35 | <TimothyGu> | annevk: it's GPG signing |
| 10:35 | <TimothyGu> | if you merge on GitHub then it uses GitHub's PGP key and GH automatically recognizes it as verified |
| 10:36 | <TimothyGu> | If you push from your own machine then depends on the setup |
| 10:37 | <TimothyGu> | see https://github.com/jsdom/webidl2js/commit/bfb6ee120e9d816f1515a68d45e3b2d35577570c (GitHub's key) and https://github.com/jsdom/webidl2js/commit/b26285a2fee18f2989874c56f55d94e52c977781 (my own key on my machine) |
| 10:37 | <TimothyGu> | if you don't have signing enabled on your local machine, then only merge commits created on GitHub will be verified, I assume |
| 10:37 | <annevk> | TimothyGu: I merge everything through GitHub though; either rebase and merge or squash and merge |
| 10:38 | <annevk> | TimothyGu: and the difference is also not in the distinction between those, judging from recent whatwg/html changes |
| 10:38 | <TimothyGu> | hmm, maybe fast forward vs. not fast forward? no clue |
| 10:40 | <annevk> | And locally I use GitHub Desktop, logged in to GitHub directly |
| 10:40 | <annevk> | It's probably some minor config difference somewhere, but I don't care enough to find out |
| 11:10 | <gsnedders> | annevk, TimothyGu: pretty sure the commit has to be created on GitHub, not merely rebased on GitHub (hence squash/rebase & merge won't do it) |
| 13:36 | <JakeA> | Fact check for a talk: Microtasks were originally invented for mutation observers right? |
| 13:36 | <annevk> | JakeA: yeah |
| 13:37 | <JakeA> | Ta! |
| 15:43 | <MikeSmith> | <main> in <td> http://www.realto.ru/journal/articles/kogda-mozhet-ponadobitsya-konsultaciya-yurista-po-zhilishnomu-pravu/ |
| 15:43 | <MikeSmith> | because it’s using tables for layout |
| 15:47 | <MikeSmith> | <main> in <section> https://mentecomunal.net/author/luis/ and http://artlist.io/ |
| 15:54 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: foolip: stats on <main> are now included in https://validator.w3.org/nu/stats.html |
| 15:54 | <MikeSmith> | but note that it caches very aggressively |
| 15:54 | <MikeSmith> | so if you want to see fresh data, do something like https://validator.w3.org/nu/stats.html?a |
| 15:55 | <MikeSmith> | then the next time do https://validator.w3.org/nu/stats.html?b |
| 15:55 | <MikeSmith> | or whatever |
| 15:55 | <MikeSmith> | etc |
| 15:56 | <MikeSmith> | I am also logging URLs on the backend for the interesting cases |
| 15:56 | <MikeSmith> | <main> in <td>, <main> in <section>, etc |
| 15:56 | <MikeSmith> | so we will have real current cases to inspect and consider |
| 15:59 | <MikeSmith> | another main in section case http://pticainfo.ru/article/?ELEMENT_ID=1780 |
| 16:00 | <MikeSmith> | multiple visible <main> https://www.ukv.de/content/ |
| 16:01 | <MikeSmith> | anyway, with that I’m off soon for the night |
| 16:02 | <MikeSmith> | hopefully my mostly untested code for those counters doesn’t cause some unexpected eff up in the checker while I’m sleeping |
| 16:04 | <annevk> | Thanks MikeSmith! ❤️ |
| 16:24 | <foolip> | MikeSmith: thanks! |
| 16:25 | <foolip> | I also have stats about what the ancestors usually are now, but my draft comment is at work so it'll have to wait until tomorrow |
| 16:25 | <foolip> | But basically, form and section are the most common ones that we're contemplating making invalid |
| 16:26 | <foolip> | annevk: ^ |
| 16:41 | <annevk> | foolip: do those pages make sense though or would a message from the checker do some good? |
| 16:44 | <foolip> | annevk: I looked at a few and quickly found one that seemed fine, where <main> was just inside a <section>, and inverting it seems like pointless work |
| 17:12 | <annevk> | foolip: I don't think that's the only consideration though |
| 17:13 | <annevk> | foolip: section is a sectioning element too and if it's used as such that seems rather wrong, at least if we ever want to make sections work properly |
| 17:14 | <annevk> | foolip: if it's a high number, maybe, but otherwise I'm not really convinced |
| 21:05 | <wanderview> | are there any ways to generate a network request on a worker thread besides fetch(), xhr, improtScripts(), and es import()? |
| 21:05 | <wanderview> | offline canvas or something? |
| 21:05 | <wanderview> | ^offline^offscreen |
| 21:15 | <annevk> | wanderview: new Worker in theory |
| 21:15 | <wanderview> | annevk: oh yea... ok |
| 21:15 | <annevk> | wanderview: WebSockets/EventSource I guess |
| 21:16 | <annevk> | wanderview: pretty sure canvas has no networking btw |
| 21:17 | <wanderview> | ok |
| 21:17 | <wanderview> | annevk: thanks |
| 21:40 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: seems like we need to look at some sample of the documents we have that use <main> in <section> and <form> and make a determination about which cases are misuses and which seem legit |
| 21:41 | <MikeSmith> | foolip: ⬆ |
| 21:42 | <MikeSmith> | and if it turns out that the percentage of misuses are way higher than the percentage of legit uses, then that argues for making it non-conforming |
| 21:42 | <MikeSmith> | and for the checker to emit an error for those |
| 21:44 | <MikeSmith> | and regardless, unless the legit uses seem to greatly outweigh the misuses, then those still would seem to merit at least a “should not” in the spec |
| 21:44 | <MikeSmith> | and for the checker to at least emit a warning |
| 21:48 | <MikeSmith> | the stats at this point show so far about 800 cases of each that we could take a look at |
| 21:48 | <MikeSmith> | to narrow things, I could also add some more-granular stats |
| 21:49 | <MikeSmith> | like, I could get stats on how many of the <section> cases that contain <main> are <section> without a heading |
| 21:50 | <MikeSmith> | which is arguably a misuse of <section>, in that it indicates the author is just using where they should be using <div> |
| 21:52 | <MikeSmith> | and also because <section> without a heading can be bad for AT users, if the AT exposes each of those <section> even though they have no identifying heading (and so makes exposing them for navigation pretty worthless) |
| 21:52 | <MikeSmith> | which is why the checker emits a warning for <section> without a heading |
| 23:51 | <fantasai> | Afaict, the DOM methods that use selectors are: querySelector, querySelectorAll, closest, matches, webKitMatches |
| 23:51 | <fantasai> | Are there any others? |