| 13:33 | <annevk> | Is it known that wattsi's error information is completely off? |
| 13:33 | <annevk> | I cannot find the line where there is a parse error anymore |
| 13:47 | <annevk> | Sigh, cleaning up mess other folks left behind with half-defined features is really frustrating |
| 13:48 | <annevk> | window.open(..., frameName, 'noopener'); |
| 13:48 | <annevk> | new window in Chrome/Firefox, navigates frame in Safari |
| 13:48 | <annevk> | Note that what Chrome/Firefox do here is the opposite what they do for <a> |
| 14:23 | <Soni> | what can I pass off as a web browser? |
| 14:24 | <Soni> | is "a script that extracts forms from the HTML and lets you fill and submit them" a web browser? |
| 14:26 | <Soni> | well I'm gonna try to pass it off as one |
| 15:08 | <bradleymeck> | is newline delimited JSON used anywhere in web specs...? |
| 15:32 | <annevk> | bradleymeck: don't think so |
| 16:40 | <annevk> | Domenic: if you manage to do a pass on the refactor browsing context that'd be great, but I suppose between tests and event loops I have something else I can do as well (among a myriad of even more things I'm trying to ignore) |
| 16:41 | <annevk> | Domenic: I guess the main thing with the browsing context thing is that it's such a blocker for so much other work |
| 16:42 | <Domenic> | bradleymeck: we've contemplated adding a built-in stream thingy for it, but not very much |
| 16:42 | <Domenic> | annevk: yeah, will try! |
| 16:43 | <bradleymeck> | Domenic: yea, was more a curiosity of Response -> streaming async iterator of some kind for events |
| 16:43 | <bradleymeck> | not really required but mild convenience |
| 16:45 | <annevk> | bradleymeck: is this http://jsonlines.org/ btw? Does it have a MIME type? |
| 16:46 | annevk | finds https://github.com/wardi/jsonlines/issues/9 |
| 16:48 | <bradleymeck> | https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/json-seq is the only official one I see |
| 16:50 | <annevk> | Ah, so https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7464 defines it and references IETF JSON |
| 16:50 | <annevk> | I guess that's mostly equivalent to TC39 JSON these days so maybe it's too early to grab popcorn |
| 16:51 | <bradleymeck> | IETF JSON says all the specs should agree on the syntactic elements |
| 16:56 | <annevk> | That sequence RFC is no good for browsers though, the parser doesn't require whitespace, but the security considerations do |
| 16:56 | <annevk> | Not that it would be hard to define a more robust parser, but that would have to happen if this became a thing in browsers |
| 16:59 | <annevk> | I guess if you view section 2.4 as monkey patching section 2.1 it might be okay, but the whole setup is rather weird in that case |
| 17:00 | <annevk> | IETF documents would be a lot clearer if they adopted algorithms |