| 01:42 | <Domenic> | https://groups.google.com/d/topic/mozilla.dev.platform/_8OAKUHso0c/discussion is pretty amusing to me... |
| 01:43 | <Domenic> | Do they not see how this is immediately going to turn into news headlines of the form "Mozilla plans to send all your web traffic to Cloudflare", complete with a rundown of previous stumbles Mozilla has made? |
| 03:39 | <Krinkle> | annevk: I like the timeago implementation you use for your blog "Less than a year ago.", quite uncommon but makes a ton of sense. Love it! |
| 06:40 | <annevk> | Krinkle: thanks |
| 06:42 | <annevk> | rbyers: https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/365 |
| 08:37 | <annevk> | jyasskin: so WebAuthn does state "Verify that attStmt is valid CBOR conforming to the syntax defined above and perform CBOR decoding on it to extract the contained fields." |
| 08:38 | <annevk> | jyasskin: if that's not actually sufficient it'd still be good to have an issue I suppose, although I wonder if this format is not developer-controlled whether it matters much; if it's just something the browser produces for the hardware it seems like interop risk is fairly low |
| 08:46 | <annevk> | hayato: are you still planning on reviewing the relatedTarget/touch target list proposal? |
| 08:47 | <hayato> | Yup |
| 08:47 | <hayato> | Let me take a look |
| 08:48 | <hayato> | You mean this, https://github.com/whatwg/dom/pull/585, right? |
| 08:49 | <annevk> | hayato: yeah |
| 08:50 | <annevk> | hayato: https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/414 is probably worth a look too, to figure out if that callback is all we need to make event constructors work well with this |
| 08:51 | <hayato> | I see. |
| 09:18 | <annevk> | kochi: I can also make the changes to the Google tests in a separate PR, maybe that's easier to review |
| 09:18 | <annevk> | kochi: not entirely sure when I'll get to it yet |
| 09:19 | <kochi> | annevk: thanks |
| 09:20 | <kochi> | annevk: so... shall I merge the tests? |
| 09:20 | <kochi> | s/tests/the test PR (#9919)/ |
| 09:21 | <annevk> | kochi: I'd rather wait a bit until everyone has agreed on the spec |
| 09:21 | <annevk> | kochi: and the other test changes are ready, in particular changes to existing tests |
| 09:22 | <annevk> | kochi: otherwise we end up with conflicting tests in the test suite |
| 09:22 | <kochi> | annevk: okay, so #585 has positive reviews from smaug and hayato, do you wait for another from Apple? |
| 09:22 | <annevk> | kochi: ooh, didn't realize hayato finished reviewing already |
| 09:23 | <kochi> | 3 mins ago :) |
| 09:23 | <annevk> | kochi: I guess I only want to wait until I fix those other existing Google tests then |
| 09:23 | <annevk> | (or someone else does) |
| 18:47 | <howdoi> | IntersectionObserver API is not meant for infinite scrolling? Heard that there are some bottle necks |