/irc-logs / w3c / #html-wg / 2007-09-26 / end

Options:

  1. # Session Start: Wed Sep 26 00:00:00 2007
  2. # Session Ident: #html-wg
  3. # [00:01] * Quits: timbl_ (timbl@128.30.7.41) (Ping timeout)
  4. # [00:21] <anne> hmm same-origin... bah
  5. # [00:21] <Hixie> agreed
  6. # [00:21] <Hixie> html5 has some stuff on it but it needs more
  7. # [00:25] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.203.14.225)
  8. # [00:26] <anne> i don't like the dependency on HTML5 from XMLHttpRequest but I guess it's unavoidable
  9. # [00:26] <anne> doesn't really matter I suppose
  10. # [00:26] <Hixie> xbl2 has it too
  11. # [00:26] <anne> prolly goes for most relevant specs :p
  12. # [00:26] <Hixie> :-)
  13. # [00:32] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  14. # [00:45] * Quits: hasather (hasather@90.227.221.48) (Quit: Lost terminal)
  15. # [00:47] * Quits: heycam (cam@203.214.33.166) (Ping timeout)
  16. # [00:58] * Quits: tH (Rob@87.102.114.133) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.78.1-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.8.0.9/2006120508])
  17. # [01:07] * Joins: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30)
  18. # [01:12] * Joins: sbuluf (up@200.49.140.162)
  19. # [01:17] * Quits: sbuluf (up@200.49.140.162) (Ping timeout)
  20. # [01:18] * Joins: mjs_ (mjs@17.255.111.173)
  21. # [01:19] * Joins: heycam (cam@130.194.72.84)
  22. # [01:20] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.203.14.225) (Ping timeout)
  23. # [01:20] * Joins: olivier (ot@128.30.52.30)
  24. # [01:21] * Quits: billmason (billmason@69.30.57.156) (Connection reset by peer)
  25. # [01:24] * Joins: sbuluf (ojeqnpe@200.49.140.198)
  26. # [01:26] * Joins: zcorpan_ (zcorpan@83.227.34.9)
  27. # [01:44] * Quits: zcorpan_ (zcorpan@83.227.34.9) (Ping timeout)
  28. # [02:04] * Quits: sbuluf (ojeqnpe@200.49.140.198) (Ping timeout)
  29. # [02:14] * Joins: timbl_ (timbl@146.115.66.146)
  30. # [03:19] * Quits: anne (annevk@81.68.67.12) (Ping timeout)
  31. # [03:20] * Quits: icaaq (icaaaq@85.228.55.82) (Ping timeout)
  32. # [03:21] * Joins: DougJ (djones4@74.76.28.112)
  33. # [03:37] * Quits: timbl_ (timbl@146.115.66.146) (Ping timeout)
  34. # [03:40] * Quits: dbaron (dbaron@63.245.220.241) (Quit: 8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.)
  35. # [03:45] * Quits: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Where dwelt Ymir, or wherein did he find sustenance?)
  36. # [03:52] * Joins: aaronlev (chatzilla@209.6.168.245)
  37. # [03:57] * Quits: kingryan (rking3@208.66.64.47) (Quit: kingryan)
  38. # [04:10] * Quits: jane (j@76.170.65.146) (Connection reset by peer)
  39. # [04:12] * Quits: DougJ (djones4@74.76.28.112) (Quit: DougJ)
  40. # [04:13] * Joins: jane (j@76.170.65.146)
  41. # [04:27] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Less talk, more pimp walk.)
  42. # [04:48] * Quits: jane (j@76.170.65.146) (No route to host)
  43. # [04:55] * Joins: jane (j@76.170.65.146)
  44. # [05:01] * Quits: mjs_ (mjs@17.255.111.173) (Quit: mjs_)
  45. # [05:06] * Joins: Lionheart (robin@66.57.69.65)
  46. # [05:19] * Joins: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30)
  47. # [05:39] * Joins: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30)
  48. # [05:42] * Joins: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142)
  49. # [05:50] * Joins: aaron (chatzilla@209.6.168.245)
  50. # [05:52] * Joins: mjs (mjs@64.81.48.145)
  51. # [05:52] * Quits: aaronlev (chatzilla@209.6.168.245) (Ping timeout)
  52. # [05:52] * aaron is now known as aaronlev
  53. # [05:57] * Quits: aaronlev (chatzilla@209.6.168.245) (Ping timeout)
  54. # [06:06] * Quits: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142) (Client exited)
  55. # [06:06] * Joins: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142)
  56. # [06:08] * Quits: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30) (Ping timeout)
  57. # [06:09] * Joins: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30)
  58. # [06:11] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  59. # [06:29] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Less talk, more pimp walk.)
  60. # [07:19] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  61. # [07:53] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Less talk, more pimp walk.)
  62. # [08:16] * Parts: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142)
  63. # [08:18] * Quits: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30) (Client exited)
  64. # [08:22] * Joins: anne (annevk@81.68.67.12)
  65. # [09:06] * Joins: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30)
  66. # [09:12] * Quits: Lionheart (robin@66.57.69.65) (Ping timeout)
  67. # [10:03] * Quits: heycam (cam@130.194.72.84) (Quit: bye)
  68. # [10:25] * Joins: heycam (cam@203.214.33.166)
  69. # [10:28] * Joins: ROBOd (robod@89.123.60.111)
  70. # [10:48] * Joins: zcorpan_ (zcorpan@88.131.66.80)
  71. # [11:18] * Quits: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30) (Client exited)
  72. # [11:19] * Quits: jmb (jmb@152.78.71.152) (Ping timeout)
  73. # [11:19] * Quits: hsivonen (hsivonen@130.233.41.50) (Ping timeout)
  74. # [11:19] * Joins: jmb (jmb@152.78.71.152)
  75. # [11:19] * Joins: hsivonen (hsivonen@130.233.41.50)
  76. # [11:19] * Quits: Hixie (ianh@129.241.93.37) (Ping timeout)
  77. # [11:19] * Joins: Hixie (ianh@129.241.93.37)
  78. # [11:19] * Quits: bogi (bogi@153.19.120.250) (Ping timeout)
  79. # [11:19] * Joins: bogi (bogi@153.19.120.250)
  80. # [11:43] * Joins: Lachy_ (chatzilla@203.214.146.132)
  81. # [11:45] * Quits: Lachy (chatzilla@203.214.146.132) (Ping timeout)
  82. # [11:45] * Lachy_ is now known as Lachy
  83. # [12:12] * Joins: Steve_ (chatzilla@82.44.69.8)
  84. # [12:20] <Steve_> lurking here too
  85. # [12:20] <karl> :)
  86. # [12:20] * Joins: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30)
  87. # [12:20] <karl> time to drop off. 7:19pm
  88. # [12:21] * Quits: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Where dwelt Ymir, or wherein did he find sustenance?)
  89. # [12:21] <anne> Steve_ is steven f?
  90. # [12:21] <anne> and hi
  91. # [12:22] <Steve_> yes
  92. # [12:25] <anne> mjs, any idea on how to proceed with the form TF?
  93. # [12:26] <mjs> anne: I think we need to just start
  94. # [12:26] <mjs> anne: I can think of a couple of possibilities: (1) suggest people email their thoughts on what should be in the charter (2) kick off with a telecon (3) kick off with an IRC discussion or similar
  95. # [12:26] <anne> at some point in time some of the forms wg and you guys agreed on a set of ideas
  96. # [12:27] <anne> based on that hixie and hyatt then drafted <datatemplate>
  97. # [12:27] <anne> maybe we can use that as input for the charter?
  98. # [12:27] <mjs> I was thinking something like that list of the ideas should be the output of the task force, not the charter
  99. # [12:27] * Quits: Lachy (chatzilla@203.214.146.132) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.78.1 [Firefox 2.0.0.6/2007072518])
  100. # [12:28] <mjs> the main thing we need to decide for the charter is whether our output is a technical specification or a meta-level document that should influence design of HTML and XForms
  101. # [12:28] <mjs> (IMO anyway)
  102. # [12:29] <mjs> I think if the output of the task force is required to be a language specification then it is likely the task force will fail, given the low level of activity so far
  103. # [12:29] * Joins: Lachy (chatzilla@203.214.146.132)
  104. # [12:29] <mjs> so I think that's a nonstarter
  105. # [12:29] <mjs> but it has been suggested before
  106. # [12:30] <anne> it seems that that's what the Forms WG charter suggests, but the HTML WG charter suggests it should be meta-level requirements
  107. # [12:30] <anne> on forms for the web
  108. # [12:31] <mjs> I think that is the issue that the Forms TF charter needs to resolve (and I guess it is also traditional for charters to estimate some sort of timeline)
  109. # [12:32] <anne> yeah, when you expect to be finished and when you finish your first doc etc.
  110. # [12:34] <Lachy> I think you should request that the forms wg appoint a new TF member to replace the one who has failed to participate and just proceed without him
  111. # [12:35] * anne looks at www-archive...
  112. # [12:36] <anne> Lachy, I suppose that's possible, but that doesn't help moving forward
  113. # [12:38] <Lachy> how doesn't it help? It gives you a way to get started instead of waiting
  114. # [12:38] <anne> to me it's more about how to start, then whether or not we have all participants ready
  115. # [12:39] <anne> although it might be good to inform the forms WG of the guy who's absent
  116. # [12:40] <Lachy> I think you could start with everyone stating what they want and don't want the group to achieve in the end, and using that as a basis for the charter.
  117. # [12:46] <Hixie> the htmlwg charter requires the task force to get "architectural consistency" between html5 and xforms _transitional_, iirc
  118. # [12:46] <Hixie> which isn't xforms at all
  119. # [12:46] <Hixie> and can be far easier
  120. # [12:46] <Hixie> since there are basically no requirements on xforms transitional that prevent it from being identical to wf2 as far as i can tell
  121. # [12:47] <anne> it's all a bit icky
  122. # [12:48] <anne> if we make it a literal reading of the HTML charter they might get upset
  123. # [12:48] * anne remembers John Boyer pointing out the vision document and getting all upset at some point in the past
  124. # [12:49] <Hixie> luckily for us, the w3c's vision, that the document nominally based on it, are not binding.
  125. # [12:55] <Lachy> the meaning of architectural consistency isn't really clear in this context.
  126. # [13:01] <mjs> I remember that DanC and John Boyer misquoted the vision document by accidentally citing an unpublished version, but I think that was most likely an honest mistake
  127. # [13:02] <mjs> (still, that mistake did propagate to the message kicking off the TF)
  128. # [13:04] <anne> k, so 1) write a draft charter and 2) ask forms wg about absent participant?
  129. # [13:05] <mjs> proposing a draft is certainly a way to get the ball rolling
  130. # [13:07] <Hixie> i recommend letting the xforms people deal with their own reps
  131. # [13:10] * Joins: myakura (myakura@122.26.229.211)
  132. # [13:11] <anne> the distributed extensibility thread is amusing
  133. # [13:16] <Hixie> it's a tough problem
  134. # [13:17] <Hixie> i do find it amusing that microformats is touted as an example of why it's a good idea when it basically goes against the whole point of microformats
  135. # [13:17] <mjs> in general there seems to be more genuine demand for access to specific well-known vocabularies than to custom vocabularies
  136. # [13:18] <Hixie> what's not really clear to me is why class="" and other html extension mechanisms aren't enough
  137. # [13:18] <mjs> (under the category of well-known vocabularies I include both microformats and XML languages like SVG or MathML)
  138. # [13:18] <Hixie> yeah
  139. # [13:18] <Hixie> anyway
  140. # [13:18] <Hixie> it's on the list of things to look at
  141. # [13:19] <Hixie> though it's not near the top
  142. # [13:19] * Hixie will try to finish the offline stuff tomorrow
  143. # [13:19] <Hixie> assuming i get up in time to actually have a tomorrow
  144. # [13:39] * Quits: Steve_ (chatzilla@82.44.69.8) (Connection reset by peer)
  145. # [13:40] * Joins: Steve_ (chatzilla@82.44.69.8)
  146. # [14:20] * Joins: hasather (hasather@90.227.221.48)
  147. # [14:21] * Quits: hasather (hasather@90.227.221.48) (Quit: Lost terminal)
  148. # [14:22] * Joins: aaron (chatzilla@209.6.168.245)
  149. # [14:22] * aaron is now known as aaronlev
  150. # [14:22] * Quits: aaronlev (chatzilla@209.6.168.245) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.78.1 [Firefox 2.0.0.7/2007091417])
  151. # [14:22] * Joins: aaronlev (chatzilla@209.6.168.245)
  152. # [14:23] * Joins: hasather (hasather@90.227.221.48)
  153. # [14:40] * Joins: Lionheart (robin@66.57.69.65)
  154. # [14:47] * Quits: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30) (Ping timeout)
  155. # [14:50] * Joins: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30)
  156. # [15:20] * Quits: aaronlev (chatzilla@209.6.168.245) (Ping timeout)
  157. # [15:22] * Quits: Lionheart (robin@66.57.69.65) (Connection reset by peer)
  158. # [15:27] * Joins: matt (matt@128.30.52.30)
  159. # [15:39] * Joins: aaronlev (chatzilla@66.31.86.217)
  160. # [15:44] * Joins: tH_ (Rob@87.102.114.133)
  161. # [15:44] * tH_ is now known as tH
  162. # [15:49] <aaronlev> hi zcorpan_
  163. # [15:49] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: should we set up a 3 way chat with you, myself and rich?
  164. # [15:49] <aaronlev> the email back and forth is not that useful
  165. # [15:51] <anne> please publicly log the discussion somehow
  166. # [15:51] * anne would like to follow it
  167. # [15:52] <aaronlev> anne: why don't you join it
  168. # [15:52] <aaronlev> anne: what if we want to discuss something political that we don't want to log :P
  169. # [15:52] <anne> I suppose that works too, depending on when and where
  170. # [15:53] <anne> sounds corperate :p
  171. # [15:54] <aaronlev> nah
  172. # [15:54] <aaronlev> not exactly
  173. # [15:54] <aaronlev> it's just the same old same old
  174. # [15:55] <anne> ah
  175. # [16:00] * Quits: olivier (ot@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Leaving)
  176. # [16:33] * Joins: billmason (billmason@69.30.57.156)
  177. # [16:33] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: hi
  178. # [16:34] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: chatting here wfm
  179. # [16:34] <zcorpan_> although i need to do some other things today, actually
  180. # [16:35] <zcorpan_> i changed the spec to allow multiple roles
  181. # [16:35] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: ok
  182. # [16:35] <aaronlev> so is the remaining unresolved issue that rich has related to requiring the prefix in the role value?
  183. # [16:36] <zcorpan_> i don't understand his concern actually
  184. # [16:36] <aaronlev> that's why i think a chat would be good
  185. # [16:36] <anne> multiple roles, what's the use case?
  186. # [16:37] <aaronlev> anne: i don't know
  187. # [16:37] <zcorpan_> he says that we need to go through the xhtml2 wg, which is fine by me; we can put the proposal on their table
  188. # [16:37] <aaronlev> firefox just uses the first one
  189. # [16:37] <anne> right, I'd assume we're going to follow that
  190. # [16:37] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: yeah, the spec still requires UAs to ignore all but the first
  191. # [16:37] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: fine with me too, but i don't know how long it will take to get an answer, and i'm short on time
  192. # [16:37] <anne> I'm not sure if it makes sense to allow multiple roles if they're not going be used...
  193. # [16:37] <aaronlev> maybe we can split it into the parts we need their approval on and part we don't
  194. # [16:37] <anne> seems very confusing
  195. # [16:37] <aaronlev> anne: i'm confused by it, i voted against it
  196. # [16:39] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: we can implement the spec and propose it at the same time. it's not incompatible with the existing specs or firefox 2 in any way, really
  197. # [16:40] <anne> I think the XHTML2 namespace should not be considered in the namespaced role= algorithm
  198. # [16:40] <aaronlev> not requiring a prefix for role values is different from firefox 2
  199. # [16:40] <aaronlev> for wai roles
  200. # [16:41] <aaronlev> rich says, that would make the wai roles part of the xhtml role module roles
  201. # [16:41] <aaronlev> and that is part of the xhtml2 wg's spec
  202. # [16:41] <zcorpan_> right
  203. # [16:41] <aaronlev> i mean, the own the role module
  204. # [16:41] <anne> maybe he should view it differently
  205. # [16:41] <aaronlev> but the role module is farther along, it's in CR I think
  206. # [16:41] <aaronlev> whereas the wai roles are still being worked on
  207. # [16:41] <anne> role applies to elements in the (X)HTML5 namespace and can be put in the (X)HTML5 namespace
  208. # [16:42] <aaronlev> so i suggested it just say, that the wai roles are included in the list, and use indirection
  209. # [16:42] <anne> seems logical that the XHTML2 can't really do much about that
  210. # [16:42] <aaronlev> anne: the proposal say that the prefix is not needed for wai roles, even when used outside of html/xhtml
  211. # [16:42] <anne> aaronlev, the role module is a simple WD, not even Last Call
  212. # [16:43] <anne> see http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-role/
  213. # [16:43] <aaronlev> ok
  214. # [16:43] <aaronlev> currently that wg owns the spec which says which roles don't require a prefix
  215. # [16:44] <anne> i'm not really sure whether that matter much, zcorpan just put up a spec that says otherwise
  216. # [16:44] <zcorpan_> if the spec is not different from the existing specs, then there is nothing to propose... :)
  217. # [16:44] <zcorpan_> i thought the point was to make the syntax simpler
  218. # [16:45] <zcorpan_> which means that is has to be different
  219. # [16:45] <aaronlev> i'm just trying to help you understand rich's concern so you can address it
  220. # [16:46] <aaronlev> we need to ask a group that loves the extensibility of namespaces to remove the need for them
  221. # [16:46] <aaronlev> but maybe i just don't understand who really can do what
  222. # [16:46] <aaronlev> since there are 2 xhtml groups
  223. # [16:46] <anne> no, we simply need to encorperate the zcorpan proposal into HTML5 or into some separate draft the HTML WG publishes...
  224. # [16:47] <anne> there's 1 XHTML group, there's also one XHTML2 group
  225. # [16:47] <anne> (the XHTML group also happens to do HTML (or vice versa))
  226. # [16:47] <aaronlev> and who decides how the xhtml2 role attribute or the role module's role attribute is used?
  227. # [16:48] <anne> does it matter?
  228. # [16:48] <aaronlev> it might to the people who wrote the original spec
  229. # [16:48] <aaronlev> just politics
  230. # [16:48] <aaronlev> if it's used in xhtml/1999 i say that the html wg decides
  231. # [16:48] <anne> for instance, XHTML2 people want to change the namespace of XHTML2 back to the XHTML namespace creating all kinds of issues
  232. # [16:48] <anne> we're not getting really upset about that, as we simply don't implement it
  233. # [16:49] <aaronlev> ok
  234. # [16:49] <anne> i'd suggest a similar strategy for equivalent proposals, such as the XHTML role module...
  235. # [16:49] <zcorpan_> i guess i can send the spec to www-archive to get a permalink to a dated version of the draft, and then send an email to the html wg and the xhtml2 wg asking for feedback. is that a good idea?
  236. # [16:50] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: yes, better that way i think
  237. # [16:50] <aaronlev> btw i like your proposal
  238. # [16:50] <zcorpan_> :)
  239. # [16:50] <aaronlev> rich has been in w3c for a long time
  240. # [16:50] <aaronlev> he's probably just anticipating some annoying politics and trying to avoid themn
  241. # [16:51] <zcorpan_> i can list the goals/constraints we had when writing the proposal in the email
  242. # [16:52] <aaronlev> ok
  243. # [16:53] <anne> fwiw, I don't like that the conformance critera for authors are totally different from the implementation requirements
  244. # [16:54] <zcorpan_> anne: ok
  245. # [17:00] * Joins: Rich (schwer@72.183.111.208)
  246. # [17:00] <aaronlev> hi Rich
  247. # [17:00] <Rich> hi
  248. # [17:00] <aaronlev> zcorpan_ is Simon Pieters
  249. # [17:00] <Rich> thanks
  250. # [17:01] <zcorpan_> hi Rich
  251. # [17:01] <Rich> Hi Simon
  252. # [17:02] <Rich> what topic are we on?
  253. # [17:02] <Rich> namespaces? ...
  254. # [17:02] <zcorpan_> Rich: i've sent the proposal to www-archive; i'm about the send an email to html wg and xhtml2 wg listing the goals and constraints for the proposal and asking for feedback
  255. # [17:02] <Rich> prefix?
  256. # [17:02] <Rich> cool
  257. # [17:02] <anne> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2007Sep/att-0106/aria-proposal.html
  258. # [17:03] <zcorpan_> Rich: you can read the log if you want (link in /topic)
  259. # [17:03] <anne> (hi Rich, btw!)
  260. # [17:03] <Rich> Hi anne!
  261. # [17:03] <Rich> Nice work by Simon pulling this all together
  262. # [17:03] <zcorpan_> thanks :)
  263. # [17:05] <aaronlev> yeah simon, really thanks
  264. # [17:05] <Rich> reading the latest draft now
  265. # [17:06] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: some of my xhtml exmples on mozilla.org don't use wairole, that breaks with this spec
  266. # [17:06] <aaronlev> "No namespace lookup of the attribute value is performed in this version of this specification."
  267. # [17:07] <aaronlev> I don't understand why you remove that, it's only a couple of lines of code, to ensure that a non "wairole" prefix is in fact pointing to the guiroletaxonomy
  268. # [17:07] <Philip_> ("Note: What "unordered set of space-separated tokens" means is defined in HTML5." - doesn't that need to be a normative reference, rather than a note?)
  269. # [17:07] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: perhaps those examples could be updated?
  270. # [17:08] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: we can add namespace lookup in a future version of the spec when it is needed
  271. # [17:09] <Rich> The PF working group agreed to replace the aaa prefix with aria so it is aria:hidden ( per the document)
  272. # [17:09] <Rich> missed this one before
  273. # [17:09] <zcorpan_> Philip_: i guess, i more pretended that the spec was part of the html5 spec :)
  274. # [17:09] <zcorpan_> Rich: the proposal allows any prefix for those
  275. # [17:10] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: yeah i told him but the latest spec zcorpan_ can read doesn't have that afaict
  276. # [17:10] <aaronlev> s/zcorpan_/rich
  277. # [17:10] <aaronlev> Rich: can't we get him a recent spec to review, the one up there is old
  278. # [17:10] <zcorpan_> i can read the Member-only draft
  279. # [17:10] <zcorpan_> if that's what you're referring to
  280. # [17:11] <zcorpan_> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/adaptable/
  281. # [17:11] <aaronlev> ok good
  282. # [17:12] <Rich> Simon, Did you mean to have aria-hidden in xhtml? I remember that for html 4 and 5 but not xhtml
  283. # [17:12] <aaronlev> Rich: the proposal assums xhtml and html should work basically the same
  284. # [17:12] <aaronlev> otherwise it causes migration issues
  285. # [17:12] <zcorpan_> what aaronlev says
  286. # [17:12] <aaronlev> and is just extra code
  287. # [17:13] <Rich> It is fine with me - just that aria-hidden is not in the xhtml namespace
  288. # [17:13] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: but why not allow the namespace lookup now? like i said it's tiny code
  289. # [17:13] <aaronlev> i mean, namespaces should work like namespaces
  290. # [17:14] <aaronlev> when they are used they should work consistently
  291. # [17:14] <anne> role= should not have qnames!
  292. # [17:14] <anne> and with that remark I'm off as I've to get food :)
  293. # [17:14] <Rich> yes - I understand the position of the html working group for html
  294. # [17:15] <aaronlev> right, what Rich says
  295. # [17:15] <Rich> However let me explain why they are important going forward for xhtml based markup
  296. # [17:15] <Rich> We have a lot of work to do on SVG.
  297. # [17:15] <Rich> We need to deal with diagrams, charts, etc. and these will be there own taxonomies
  298. # [17:16] <Rich> what we want to avoid is having a name duplicated and having different meanings.
  299. # [17:16] <Rich> so,
  300. # [17:16] <Rich> we could have the following namespaces (actually these are taxonomies).
  301. # [17:16] <Rich> flowchart:
  302. # [17:17] <Rich> diagram:
  303. # [17:17] <Rich> geomap:
  304. # [17:17] <Rich> Each taxonomy will has its own roles and set of properties belonging to those roles
  305. # [17:18] <Rich> a decision in flowchart may mean something entirely different in another taxonomy and we don't want a name collision
  306. # [17:18] <Rich> ARIA is pretty well vetted at this point in that the roles we have are targeted at web 2.0 style applications so the risk of name collision can be minimized
  307. # [17:19] <Rich> In terms of accessibility we, as an industry, need to spend time on markup like svg and removing the namespace capability for xhtml would be a serious hindrance going forward
  308. # [17:20] <Rich> Also important: although these are "namespaces" they are really taxonomies. I wish we had taken this approach when we created accessibility APIs in the past
  309. # [17:21] <Rich> We could have clearly deliniated a role and it's designated properties and we probably would have been able to avoid the bad accessibility implementations we have today
  310. # [17:21] * Quits: myakura (myakura@122.26.229.211) (Ping timeout)
  311. # [17:21] * Joins: myakura (myakura@122.26.229.211)
  312. # [17:21] <Rich> using the taxonomy approach was extremely helpful to the PF workin ggroup
  313. # [17:21] <Rich> s/workin/working/
  314. # [17:21] <zcorpan_> Rich: any new values will be meaningless to firefox 3 and opera 9.5; regardless of whether they look up namespaces or not. the namespace lookup can be specced later when it is needed. the current draft doesn't make new values conflict
  315. # [17:21] <Rich> I hope this clears things up. For us a namespace is much more than a namespace
  316. # [17:22] <zcorpan_> i understand the vision, but it is not needed at this point, and the proposal is compatible to make it in that way later on
  317. # [17:22] <Rich> Actually, that is not entirely true. If we were to take the name, say flowchart:decision, we could pass it off to the AT through the accessibility api
  318. # [17:23] <zcorpan_> Rich: indeed, that's what the proposal says
  319. # [17:23] <Rich> I was addressing anne's comments about allowing namespaces
  320. # [17:24] <Rich> flowchart:decision could be passed directly to the AT through the role value in msaa as a string. It would not break your impelmentation
  321. # [17:24] <zcorpan_> indeed
  322. # [17:24] <Rich> ok
  323. # [17:25] <Rich> so, back to the states topic
  324. # [17:25] <Rich> you want to have aria-state, etc. added to the xhtml namespace ... correct?
  325. # [17:26] <anne> nope
  326. # [17:26] <anne> attributes are not in a namespace generally
  327. # [17:26] <Rich> ok
  328. # [17:26] <anne> aria-* would be in no namespace on elements in the XHTML namespace
  329. # [17:27] <anne> (which covers both HTML and XHTML documents; XML documents are covered by aaa:* with aaa bound to some namespace)
  330. # [17:27] <Rich> ok aaa should be aria: not aaa:
  331. # [17:28] <anne> hmm, if you're using namespaces prefixes shouldn't matter
  332. # [17:28] <aaronlev> Rich: for consistency with where our WD is going right?
  333. # [17:28] <aaronlev> anne: just for consistency with the other docs, less confusing i guess
  334. # [17:28] <anne> if prefixes matter you're not using namespaces correctly
  335. # [17:28] <zcorpan_> Rich: it is inappropriate to fix a namespace prefix when the lookup is done by the XML processor
  336. # [17:28] <Rich> yes, namespaces prefixes do not matter but PF decided on this standard prefix
  337. # [17:28] <aaronlev> Rich: but it's non normative right?
  338. # [17:29] <aaronlev> just for the docs we say "aria:"
  339. # [17:29] <Rich> correct
  340. # [17:29] <aaronlev> but you can use anything
  341. # [17:29] <Rich> correct
  342. # [17:29] <aaronlev> so you just think it's clearer
  343. # [17:29] <Rich> yes
  344. # [17:29] <aaronlev> a nit, as they say
  345. # [17:29] <Rich> it is a branding thing if you will. yep a nit
  346. # [17:29] <Rich> a nit of a nit
  347. # [17:31] <anne> hmm, seems better to use "foo" as to not confuse people that "aria" is somehow relevant here
  348. # [17:31] <anne> or "example"
  349. # [17:32] <anne> (bit more than a nit ;) )
  350. # [17:34] <Rich> well aria indicates that the states are part of the aria states and properties specification
  351. # [17:34] <Rich> but yes it is important that the prefix is not normative
  352. # [17:34] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: i still disagree about not processing the prefix, because processing it now means ff3 is compatible with future content if that future content makes use of extensibility and multiple role namespaces
  353. # [17:35] <aaronlev> it's about compatibility with future content when we have that, and it doesn't cost much
  354. # [17:36] <anne> it's still not clear to me why qnames are the right solution to this, why not solve this problem when it actually comes up?
  355. # [17:36] <anne> it's unclear how the prefix is resolved, this doesn't work in HTML, it doesn't allow you to write scripts or CSS that are agnostic of how the qname in the attribute is written (and depend use the namespace instead)
  356. # [17:37] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: when you find an unknown role, do you pass along the qname or the namespace,role pair?
  357. # [17:37] <anne> there's a lot to say against qnames in content and at this point there's not much in favor
  358. # [17:37] <Rich> what is an alternative for specifying a taxonomy for say flowcharts
  359. # [17:37] <Rich> ?
  360. # [17:38] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: we pass on the actual namespace role pair
  361. # [17:38] <anne> just specifying it?
  362. # [17:38] <zcorpan_> Rich: we could have fixed strings "flowchart:foo" without namespaces, for instance
  363. # [17:38] <anne> similarly to how we propose to extend HTML now
  364. # [17:38] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: ok
  365. # [17:39] <anne> there's so far not much evidence that suggests namespacing for web formats is really necessary
  366. # [17:39] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: what if say, yahoo or facebook want to develop their own taxonomy, then they have to go through w3c?
  367. # [17:39] <anne> especially given that virtually all content is in html
  368. # [17:40] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: custom prefixes could with allowed by having them start with an underscore or something
  369. # [17:40] <Rich> Yes, they won't want to clear these through the w3c
  370. # [17:40] <zcorpan_> cf custom properties in css
  371. # [17:40] <anne> do we want all kinds of people to invent their own formats and expose them on the web?
  372. # [17:40] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: now we're getting like perl, not good
  373. # [17:40] <anne> and expect them to work in clients for some reason?
  374. # [17:40] <aaronlev> how about `@ ?
  375. # [17:40] <Rich> we want to at least allow for other taxonomies
  376. # [17:40] <anne> seems like very good reasons to avoid this...
  377. # [17:40] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: any character will do for me
  378. # [17:40] <anne> if everyone invents their own format and sends it over the wire the web won't become more accessible
  379. # [17:41] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: but it's so cheap to process the prefix, so i don't understand the resistance
  380. # [17:41] <anne> you'll just get less interop than you have now
  381. # [17:41] <anne> aaronlev, see arguments above
  382. # [17:41] <anne> aaronlev, about qnames
  383. # [17:41] <aaronlev> so everyone should go through w3c when they want to do something news/
  384. # [17:41] <aaronlev> new?
  385. # [17:42] <zcorpan_> what do you do if you want a custom attribute in html? or a custom property in css?
  386. # [17:42] <anne> not necessarily, but I wonder how often the scenario you describe happens
  387. # [17:43] <aaronlev> anne: i don't know, but how expensive is it to process that?
  388. # [17:43] <anne> afaict, only AT vendors can realistically introduce new values that are meaningfull for people
  389. # [17:43] <anne> aaronlev, adding qnames is expensive, see above for how it complicates CSS and script authoring
  390. # [17:43] <aaronlev> anne: no, the taxonomy describes the inheritance and localization for new properties
  391. # [17:43] <anne> which taxonomy?
  392. # [17:43] <aaronlev> anne: you already have support for qnames in opera
  393. # [17:43] <zcorpan_> oh?
  394. # [17:43] <anne> qnames in content
  395. # [17:43] <anne> I'm not talking about <foo:bar>
  396. # [17:44] <aaronlev> ok, all i do is grab the thing before the colon
  397. # [17:44] <aaronlev> and use an interface to find out if that prefix matches the guiroletaxonomy
  398. # [17:44] <aaronlev> i'm sure you have a n interface to match a namespace uri with a prefix
  399. # [17:44] <anne> I've two documents containing <x role="foo:bar"> and <x role="baz:bar">
  400. # [17:44] <anne> foo and baz are bound to the same namespace
  401. # [17:44] <anne> they are thus equivalent documents
  402. # [17:45] <anne> how do I style them?
  403. # [17:45] <Rich> people are creating all sorts of taxonomies with html today - model-based authoring tools, etc. They are all widgets created with divs, spans, styling, and script. There is no way to convey what they are
  404. # [17:45] <anne> how do I script against them?
  405. # [17:45] <Rich> we need a vehicle
  406. # [17:45] <Rich> for the author to convey what they are
  407. # [17:45] <anne> they don't even work in HTML
  408. # [17:45] <anne> so for the coming 10 years people won't be able to extend ARIA at all
  409. # [17:46] <anne> because namespaces just don't work
  410. # [17:46] <anne> and they will need to resort to other hacks
  411. # [17:46] <anne> like requiring the prefix to be a certain string
  412. # [17:46] <Rich> exactly if we lock the role into a single name that is true
  413. # [17:46] <anne> no
  414. # [17:46] <anne> huh
  415. # [17:46] <anne> I'm not sure I understand that remark
  416. # [17:47] <anne> (also, no implementation supports multiple roles, that's just a weird artifact of the role spec afaict)
  417. # [17:47] <Rich> asl long as the prefix resolves to a url we will be ok. but the group does not want thes in html
  418. # [17:47] <anne> HTML doesn't have prefixes, namespaces, etc.
  419. # [17:47] <zcorpan_> Rich: why is an url+role better than prefix+role?
  420. # [17:47] <Rich> anne: that is not true. middleware uses multiple roles to process information
  421. # [17:47] <anne> HTML is what's being used by authors
  422. # [17:48] <Rich> anne: we understand this
  423. # [17:48] <anne> if we want authors to use it we thus need to cater for HTML
  424. # [17:48] <anne> Rich, how is role="checkbox navigation" supposed to work?
  425. # [17:49] <Rich> anne: Ok so on the server, navigation may be used to restructure the document placing the navigation section first, last, etc. checkbox could be replaced by another role which would fit on the client. I personally would not mix navigation and checkbox in the same instance but you gave that as an example
  426. # [17:50] <Rich> role is being used for more than accessibility
  427. # [17:50] <anne> no, what do I implement in Opera if I encounter stuff like that?
  428. # [17:50] <anne> it's not really about authoring or servers here, I think
  429. # [17:50] * Quits: billmason (billmason@69.30.57.156) (Quit: .)
  430. # [17:50] <anne> authors will eventually code against software, and it's likely they'll do silly things such as the example I gave above
  431. # [17:51] <Rich> understand: the landmark you can use for keyboard navigation and the widget you map to the accessibility api
  432. # [17:51] <anne> (my evidence being that 95% of the web is syntactically incorrect and prolly 99.9% is non-conforming)
  433. # [17:51] <anne> Rich, ok role="checkbox grid"
  434. # [17:52] <Rich> if you have 2 widgets take the first. We are directing authors to use one role as only one role is handled by ATs today
  435. # [17:52] <anne> role="password checkbox"
  436. # [17:52] <anne> hmm
  437. # [17:52] <Rich> we will have this in our best practices
  438. # [17:52] <anne> see, this already makes it more complicated
  439. # [17:52] <anne> because now you have to check whether it's a widget or not
  440. # [17:52] <anne> which also defeats extensibility, because you don't know whether a new value represents a widget or not...
  441. # [17:52] <Rich> btw: I agree with not supporting multiple roles - I was shot down in the xhtml working group as there are good arguments on both sides
  442. # [17:53] <anne> and therefore you don't know which one to pass on to AT clients
  443. # [17:53] <Rich> I am arguing against myself :-)
  444. # [17:53] <Rich> so, it is in for consistency and to support non-accessibility related issues
  445. # [17:54] <anne> hmm, but I just pointed out that it doesn't work?
  446. # [17:54] * Joins: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167)
  447. # [17:54] <anne> I'm not sure it makes sense to specify something that has obvious flaws
  448. # [17:54] <anne> It's fine that some WG thinks it would be theoretically pure that it can have multiple values, but if implementation experience suggests otherwise, it might be wise to revisit that
  449. # [17:54] <Rich> if you limited role to accessibility -which will never fly in the xhtml 2 working group - then that would be true
  450. # [17:55] <anne> as far as I'm concerned role= is for accessibility and nothing else...
  451. # [17:55] <Rich> well the xhtml2 working role is using roles for non-accessibility solutions - take RDF/A, etc.
  452. # [17:55] <Rich> that would be incorrect
  453. # [17:55] <anne> all real world uses are for accessibility
  454. # [17:55] <Rich> It would be nice if that were true
  455. # [17:56] <Rich> I think you need to talk to the RDF/A people
  456. # [17:56] <Rich> but thank you for endorsing our work :-)
  457. # [17:56] * anne isn't sure he's endorsing it
  458. # [17:57] * anne talked to the RDF/A people, but believes more in simpler stuff
  459. # [17:58] <Rich> Unfortunately I need to go to another call folks
  460. # [17:58] <Rich> this is a good discussion - and thank you Simon for the great work
  461. # [17:58] * Quits: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Trillian (http://www.ceruleanstudios.com)
  462. # [17:59] <zcorpan_> Rich: ok, cya later
  463. # [18:00] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: presumeably role+uri is better because no central authority is required for uniqueness
  464. # [18:01] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: using just prefixes is like file extensions
  465. # [18:01] <anne> not really
  466. # [18:01] <anne> file extensions don't have prefixes
  467. # [18:01] <anne> it's not ms-doc
  468. # [18:01] <aaronlev> iow, they are both a small string
  469. # [18:01] <anne> it's simply doc
  470. # [18:01] <aaronlev> the prefix is not guaranteed to be unique
  471. # [18:01] <anne> there's quite a difference
  472. # [18:01] <aaronlev> whereas the url is
  473. # [18:02] <anne> not really
  474. # [18:02] * Quits: Rich (schwer@72.183.111.208) (Quit: Rich)
  475. # [18:02] <anne> XHTML2 for instance proposes an <input> element that's radically different from HTML5 <input> yet is in the same namespace
  476. # [18:02] <anne> (per the latest rumors)
  477. # [18:03] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: uniqueness could be ensured in the same way as it is in css
  478. # [18:03] <aaronlev> anne: btw i don't like xhtml2
  479. # [18:03] <anne> CSS for instance has been using prefixes for years and never had issues with clashes
  480. # [18:03] <anne> one of the reasons they never had clashes is that extensions mostly come from vendors, which is exactly the same here
  481. # [18:03] <aaronlev> anne: so you mean like -moz-user-focus
  482. # [18:04] <zcorpan_> right
  483. # [18:04] <anne> yeah, role=-moz-tristatecheckbox
  484. # [18:04] <anne> or without the - at the start
  485. # [18:04] <aaronlev> we've killed tristatecheckbox btw
  486. # [18:04] <zcorpan_> even when there are namespaces, most likely everyone will use the same prefix to declare it (see rss 1.0, everyone uses <rdf:RDF>)
  487. # [18:04] <aaronlev> but anyway
  488. # [18:04] <aaronlev> -moz-slider
  489. # [18:04] <anne> having a weird prefix like moz-, o-, at- seems good enough
  490. # [18:04] <aaronlev> whatever
  491. # [18:05] <anne> (that's why I used -moz-tristatecheckbox :) )
  492. # [18:05] <aaronlev> ok. how should the vendor define what that inherits from, what properties it has, and what the localization strings are
  493. # [18:05] <aaronlev> ok
  494. # [18:05] <anne> i'm not really familiar with "inherits from"
  495. # [18:06] <anne> properties seems like simply passing the aria-* attributes to the AT client?
  496. # [18:06] * Quits: Steve_ (chatzilla@82.44.69.8) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.78.1 [Firefox 2.0.0.7/2007091417])
  497. # [18:06] <aaronlev> right, but what's the localization for the priperty, in case it changes
  498. # [18:06] <anne> maybe the UA should have an API for all that stuff so AT clients can implement that themselves
  499. # [18:06] <aaronlev> take for example aol-buddylist
  500. # [18:06] <anne> seems easier
  501. # [18:07] <aaronlev> role="aol-buddylist"
  502. # [18:07] <aaronlev> and role="aol-buddy"
  503. # [18:07] <aaronlev> they inherit from listbox and oiption
  504. # [18:07] <aaronlev> or tree or something
  505. # [18:07] <aaronlev> aol-buddy has some new properties, like away, which is a boolean
  506. # [18:07] <aaronlev> and idle, which is a time string
  507. # [18:07] <anne> I think the AT should have that knowledge
  508. # [18:07] <anne> it will support the control after all...
  509. # [18:07] <aaronlev> anne: you can't do that, small at vendors cannot keep up
  510. # [18:08] <anne> if there's no support for a widget there's no point in using it
  511. # [18:08] <aaronlev> when a user goes away and the property changes, we'll fire an event
  512. # [18:08] <aaronlev> the boolean changes
  513. # [18:08] <anne> (how is that handled by the other proposal btw?!)
  514. # [18:09] <aaronlev> anne: it's not fleshed out completely, but basically the xmlns:aolwidgets would point to a URI
  515. # [18:09] <aaronlev> role="aol:buddy"
  516. # [18:09] <anne> oh help
  517. # [18:09] <aaronlev> becomes something like "http://www.aol.com/widgets#buddy"
  518. # [18:09] <aaronlev> which says buddy is really a list item
  519. # [18:09] <aaronlev> so you're not wrong if you treat it as a list item
  520. # [18:10] <aaronlev> anne: i'm actually in favor of xbl btw
  521. # [18:10] <anne> seems like there's not much advantage in using buddy then...
  522. # [18:10] <aaronlev> so don't hate me for explaing this
  523. # [18:10] <anne> no
  524. # [18:10] <anne> i won't
  525. # [18:10] <aaronlev> anne: if either 1) an AT want to put in special code to deal with buddy in a future version they can
  526. # [18:10] <anne> it just seems a really painfull solution
  527. # [18:10] <anne> for no real problem
  528. # [18:10] <aaronlev> and 2) they can read the localizations definied for the role and properties and changes
  529. # [18:10] <zcorpan_> the url is just an opaque string; there's no reason the same processing model can't be applied to the prefix directly
  530. # [18:10] <anne> you'd expect all those browsers to hit that namespace URI all the time?
  531. # [18:11] <aaronlev> anne: i'd cache the info
  532. # [18:11] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: how do i map the prefix to a URL?
  533. # [18:11] <aaronlev> to fetch the definition?
  534. # [18:11] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: you don't, you just use the prefix
  535. # [18:12] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: oh? what do you do with the definition?
  536. # [18:12] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: following the URI for namespaces is not how namespaces in xml work
  537. # [18:12] * anne thinks this particular solution is _way_ too overengineered
  538. # [18:12] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: you fetch the inheritance, the properties and the localization for the role and properties, as well as any special rules for calculating the name
  539. # [18:12] <anne> why all these theoretical issues about extensibility and inheritence etc.?
  540. # [18:13] <aaronlev> inheritancenot theoretical, for example xbl uses it
  541. # [18:13] <anne> well yes, but XBL is not a stopgap solution
  542. # [18:13] <aaronlev> i agree it's too complicated, and that xbl would be great
  543. # [18:13] <aaronlev> but xbl isn't going to happen, i don't believe
  544. # [18:13] <aaronlev> there's no market pressure to make it happen
  545. # [18:14] <aaronlev> it needs to be everywhere to succeed
  546. # [18:14] <aaronlev> in all browsers
  547. # [18:14] <anne> dunno, fetching URIs and invoking an RDF parser...
  548. # [18:14] <aaronlev> i didn't say i liked that, the pf is open to other ideas, so i'm asking for yours
  549. # [18:14] <anne> i'm saying you don't need it
  550. # [18:14] <aaronlev> the problem is that content is always genrations ahead of where AT tools exist, and being to define how to treat new kinds of objects is a very good idea
  551. # [18:15] <anne> i'm saying their won't be many successful extensions unless AT vendors push hard for it
  552. # [18:15] <anne> extensions would come from AT vendors, not the other way around
  553. # [18:15] <aaronlev> i don't know
  554. # [18:15] <anne> increasing pageload on pages seems not something that's really acceptable
  555. # [18:15] <aaronlev> honestly i think xbl is the only technically good solution
  556. # [18:15] <aaronlev> but that it won't happen
  557. # [18:15] <aaronlev> so i feel we're stuck on this one
  558. # [18:16] <zcorpan_> we could be implementing xbl instead of doing this ;)
  559. # [18:16] * zcorpan_ hides
  560. # [18:16] * anne expects it will be implemented in due course
  561. # [18:16] <anne> just not by me
  562. # [18:16] <aaronlev> in opera, yeah
  563. # [18:17] <aaronlev> look, i told everyone this was overengineered and too complicated
  564. # [18:18] <aaronlev> but i do like the idea of being able to describe inheritance and semantics of a widget
  565. # [18:18] <aaronlev> e.g. when this property changes, do this
  566. # [18:18] <aaronlev> because at vendors are tiny and can't keep up with the web
  567. # [18:18] <aaronlev> and the problem will only get worse
  568. # [18:19] <aaronlev> i don't think you can say that a predefined set of roles and states has served a11y very well up until now
  569. # [18:19] <anne> why would new roles be used that don't work in ATs but do work after additional pageloads?
  570. # [18:19] <anne> that seems silly
  571. # [18:19] <aaronlev> why would additional page loads be required?
  572. # [18:19] <anne> to fetch info about the roles that are not supported
  573. # [18:20] <aaronlev> if a11y is active the accessible page load finished event would wait until the info is feteched
  574. # [18:20] <anne> it seems better for me as an author to simply use the one that is supported
  575. # [18:20] <aaronlev> sometimes the shoehorning works, sometimes it is too much of a stetech
  576. # [18:20] <aaronlev> rich and i have been doing a11y for about 20 years each
  577. # [18:21] <aaronlev> it's always been a problem
  578. # [18:21] <aaronlev> to limit developers to shoehorning in these situations
  579. # [18:21] <anne> yes, interop too
  580. # [18:21] <aaronlev> looking ahead something better should be invented
  581. # [18:21] <anne> for the 5 years I've been involved (if it's not a year more or so)
  582. # [18:21] <aaronlev> and defining a taxonomy is logical
  583. # [18:21] <anne> long term this is not going to work
  584. # [18:21] <anne> i think
  585. # [18:22] <aaronlev> why, inheritance and taxonomies are used all over the place in computing
  586. # [18:22] <anne> just like longdesc, alt, headers, etc. don't work
  587. # [18:22] <aaronlev> it's not magic
  588. # [18:22] <anne> afterthought accessibility has mostly failed, betting on it doesn't seem smart
  589. # [18:22] <aaronlev> anne: i didn't disagree that it was too complicated
  590. # [18:22] <aaronlev> i disagreed that some solution is not needed
  591. # [18:23] <aaronlev> and that shoehorning was the best way
  592. # [18:23] <aaronlev> i think other ideas should be considered
  593. # [18:23] <aaronlev> and we should try to advance things
  594. # [18:23] <anne> i think the simple idea should be tried out first
  595. # [18:23] <aaronlev> we are
  596. # [18:23] <anne> and then we can revisit the whole thing in a year or so after we've examined some actual content that works in Opera / Firefox
  597. # [18:23] <aaronlev> we are starting simple
  598. # [18:24] <aaronlev> all i suggested was that a few lines of code are worth it for checking a non "wairole:" prefix to see if it's for one of the standard WAI roles
  599. # [18:25] <aaronlev> so that we can have forward compat with future content
  600. # [18:25] <aaronlev> if we go that way
  601. # [18:25] <anne> all I pointed out was a lot of problems with qnames in content
  602. # [18:25] <anne> which were not addressed
  603. # [18:26] <aaronlev> anne: so you think they will go away completely?
  604. # [18:26] <anne> I'm not sure what you mean
  605. # [18:26] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: future content can use the "wairole:" prefix, and unknown values will be ignored either way. so we won't really be more future proff by looking up namespaces
  606. # [18:27] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: it just seemed weird to me to half support an xml feature in xhtml
  607. # [18:27] <aaronlev> it's there and cheap to impl
  608. # [18:27] <aaronlev> anyway we've talked about it too much
  609. # [18:27] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: it's not an xml feature, actually
  610. # [18:27] <anne> qnames in content are a made up feature
  611. # [18:28] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: would you consider putting a not in there saying it's not checked, and may be in the future if needed
  612. # [18:28] <anne> and not really defined either in terms of dynamic changes to content etc.
  613. # [18:28] * Quits: myakura (myakura@122.26.229.211) (Quit: Leaving...)
  614. # [18:28] <zcorpan_> anne: isn't there such a note already?
  615. # [18:28] <anne> but that's besides the points I raised earlier, as these are addressable
  616. # [18:28] <anne> zcorpan_, does it deal with inserting xmlns attributes and such?
  617. # [18:29] <zcorpan_> anne: i don't understand the q
  618. # [18:29] <anne> <role="x:x"> with some xmlns:x declared
  619. # [18:29] <anne> I can remove that xmlns:x
  620. # [18:29] <anne> I can put a new xmlns:x closer to the role attribute with another value
  621. # [18:29] <anne> I can change the value of xmlns:x
  622. # [18:29] <anne> etc.
  623. # [18:30] <zcorpan_> authors are required to declare prefixes
  624. # [18:30] <anne> that doesn't solve any implementation issue mentioned above :)
  625. # [18:30] <zcorpan_> indeed
  626. # [18:30] <anne> (anyway, the real problems are with writing agnostic CSS and DOM script)
  627. # [18:31] <anne> (for eqvuivalent documents that happen to use different prefixes)
  628. # [18:31] <zcorpan_> right. the practical solution to that (for authors) is to treat prefixes as fixed and ignore the namespaces
  629. # [18:31] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: i see the note, i think that's new,thanks
  630. # [18:32] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: ok
  631. # [18:32] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: where did you post it?
  632. # [18:32] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: to www-archive
  633. # [18:32] <zcorpan_> i will send an email to public-html and public-xhtml2
  634. # [18:33] <anne> zcorpan_, the actual solution is not to introduce something as horrid as qnames into HTML
  635. # [18:33] <anne> "qnames in content"
  636. # [18:33] <zcorpan_> anne: agree
  637. # [18:33] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: xtech?
  638. # [18:33] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: ?
  639. # [18:33] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: wai-xtech, it's the mailing list where people discuss aria
  640. # [18:34] <anne> hmm, what about http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2007JulSep/0000.html btw?
  641. # [18:34] <anne> seems that the PFWG ignores comments
  642. # [18:34] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: i can cc wai-xtech if you want
  643. # [18:35] <aaronlev> thanks
  644. # [18:35] <aaronlev> yes
  645. # [18:36] * Quits: Shunsuke (Shunsuke@123.176.107.50) (Ping timeout)
  646. # [18:37] * Joins: schepers (schepers@128.30.52.30)
  647. # [18:39] <zcorpan_> wai-xtech is the PFWG, right?
  648. # [18:39] <aaronlev> right, i can get you info for it, 1 sec
  649. # [18:39] <aaronlev> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/
  650. # [18:40] <aaronlev> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/participation.html
  651. # [18:40] <zcorpan_> thanks
  652. # [18:42] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: still missing an abstract
  653. # [18:43] <zcorpan_> http://tinyurl.com/23ur7s
  654. # [18:43] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: yeah
  655. # [18:43] <aaronlev> how about "Details of proper usage of ARIA markup for authors and ARIA markup processing for user agents"
  656. # [18:45] <aaronlev> "There should be as few different ways as possible to use role/ARIA."
  657. # [18:45] <aaronlev> Maybe, The number of different possible ways to use ARIA should be minimized, and include only variations that are necessary
  658. # [18:45] <aaronlev> emphasizing that we are simplifying not restricting unnecessarily
  659. # [18:46] <zcorpan_> yep, sounds better
  660. # [18:46] <zcorpan_> added an abstract
  661. # [18:47] <aaronlev> I would remove " The proposal should not be unnecesarily incompatible with the existing specs." unless you want to defend against people who read every single letter like it's the law
  662. # [18:47] <aaronlev> because there are some practical things we did that people might argue needlessly about
  663. # [18:47] <zcorpan_> ok, removed
  664. # [18:48] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: the proposal you point to there doesn't have the abstract but the old URL does
  665. # [18:48] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: right, the point of sending it to www-archive was to get a dated version of the draft :)
  666. # [18:49] <zcorpan_> i can also point to the simon.html5.org version in the email
  667. # [18:49] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: yeah so if you update it based on comments new people comment on that
  668. # [18:49] <aaronlev> can you remind me why we don't allow xhtml2:role in svg?
  669. # [18:50] <aaronlev> but we allow xhtml:role?
  670. # [18:50] <aaronlev> i guess that's fine
  671. # [18:50] <zcorpan_> because "The number of different possible ways to use ARIA should be minimized, and include only variations that are necessary" :)
  672. # [18:50] <aaronlev> yeah
  673. # [18:50] <aaronlev> should we note that specifically?
  674. # [18:51] <aaronlev> well, i'm ok with how it is
  675. # [18:51] <zcorpan_> xhtml2:role is just something that was implemented and is not defined anywhere
  676. # [18:51] <aaronlev> we'll see what people say anyway
  677. # [18:51] <aaronlev> alright, ship it :)
  678. # [18:51] <zcorpan_> ok
  679. # [18:52] <aaronlev> oops, one thing
  680. # [18:52] <aaronlev> you say for html that people can't say <role="wairole:checkbox">
  681. # [18:52] <aaronlev> i still allow that "wairole:" as a predefined prefix
  682. # [18:52] <aaronlev> i thought you wanted html and xhtml to work the same way as much as possible
  683. # [18:53] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: that's just authoring conformance reqs
  684. # [18:53] <zcorpan_> aaronlev: doesn't affect UAs
  685. # [18:53] <aaronlev> ah
  686. # [18:53] <aaronlev> true
  687. # [18:53] <aaronlev> i think a couple of headings showing where the authoring conformance section is
  688. # [18:54] <aaronlev> vs. the user agent processing section
  689. # [18:54] <aaronlev> would make it clearer
  690. # [18:54] <zcorpan_> ok
  691. # [18:57] <zcorpan_> email sent
  692. # [18:59] <zcorpan_> added headings
  693. # [19:05] * Quits: mjs (mjs@64.81.48.145) (Quit: mjs)
  694. # [19:06] <aaronlev> zcorpan_: maybe the title of the doc should be "Proposal: proper usage and processing of ARIA markup"
  695. # [19:06] <aaronlev> because ARIA Proposal is too generic
  696. # [19:07] <aaronlev> anyway, that's a nit, great work
  697. # [19:11] <zcorpan_> that sounds more like an abstract than a title... :)
  698. # [19:11] <zcorpan_> it should be convenient to refer to the thing using the title, imho
  699. # [19:13] * Joins: Lionheart (robin@66.57.69.65)
  700. # [19:14] <anne> yeah
  701. # [19:14] <anne> at some point it will hopefully define all relevant aspects, too
  702. # [19:14] <anne> not just the string details it handles now
  703. # [19:14] <zcorpan_> right
  704. # [19:20] * Parts: Lionheart (robin@66.57.69.65)
  705. # [19:20] * Joins: Roger (roger@213.64.74.230)
  706. # [19:24] * Joins: Shunsuke (Shunsuke@123.176.107.50)
  707. # [19:45] * Quits: Lachy (chatzilla@203.214.146.132) (Ping timeout)
  708. # [19:46] * Joins: Lachy (chatzilla@124.171.0.33)
  709. # [19:59] * Joins: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142)
  710. # [20:02] * Quits: matt (matt@128.30.52.30) (Quit: matt)
  711. # [20:04] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.111.173)
  712. # [20:17] * Joins: matt (matt@128.30.52.30)
  713. # [20:24] * Joins: kingryan (rking3@208.66.64.47)
  714. # [20:35] * Quits: aaronlev (chatzilla@66.31.86.217) (Ping timeout)
  715. # [20:44] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  716. # [20:48] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Less talk, more pimp walk.)
  717. # [21:09] * Quits: zcorpan_ (zcorpan@88.131.66.80) (Ping timeout)
  718. # [21:33] * Quits: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142) (Quit: hyatt)
  719. # [21:35] * Quits: Roger (roger@213.64.74.230) (Quit: Roger)
  720. # [21:40] * Joins: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142)
  721. # [21:40] * Quits: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142) (Client exited)
  722. # [21:41] * Joins: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142)
  723. # [21:47] * Quits: matt (matt@128.30.52.30) (Quit: matt)
  724. # [22:19] <anne> Hixie, this offline stuff integrates with the HTML parser, what about XML?
  725. # [22:20] <anne> (I suppose this is something you considered yourself as well, I'm just curious.)
  726. # [22:22] <anne> maybe it matters less in XML...
  727. # [22:25] <Hixie> it doesn't integrate well with xml
  728. # [22:25] <Hixie> in particular PIs screw up
  729. # [22:25] <Hixie> but see the navigation section for my current attempt
  730. # [22:28] <anne> in "Page load processing model for XML files" it mentions "Step 10" which points to Step 11...
  731. # [22:28] <anne> oh, "step 10" (lowercase s)
  732. # [22:35] * Quits: ROBOd (robod@89.123.60.111) (Quit: http://www.robodesign.ro )
  733. # [22:59] <DanC> mjs, are you done with your editing pass over the design principles? hmm... no mjs... anne, do you know if he's done?
  734. # [22:59] <mjs> DanC: no - it got slightly delayed by work distractions but I'll have time to make more progress this evening
  735. # [23:00] <mjs> DanC: at some point I'd suggest to ship it instead of waiting more
  736. # [23:01] <DanC> oh... you're here after all. (I'll learn to use this IRC client one day...)
  737. # [23:01] <DanC> I'm ready to (propose to) ship when you are.
  738. # [23:10] * Quits: gavin (gavin@63.245.208.169) (Ping timeout)
  739. # [23:13] * Joins: gavin (gavin@63.245.208.169)
  740. # [23:26] * Quits: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142) (Quit: hyatt)
  741. # [23:31] <anne> whoa, http://html4all.org/pipermail/list_html4all.org/2007-September/000428.html ...
  742. # [23:34] <Dashiva> I second that ellipsis
  743. # [23:35] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.111.173) (Quit: mjs)
  744. # [23:39] <kingryan> since the HTML WG is so openly hostile, he's decided to become more hostile and more open about his hostility?
  745. # [23:40] <anne> i've no idea
  746. # [23:41] <anne> i wonder what Opera did wrong
  747. # [23:42] <anne> or the other browser vendors for that matter
  748. # [23:42] <hsivonen> hmm. just about every jibe about html4all on IRC has been based on the irony of "IRC cabal" and actually having a secret mailing list
  749. # [23:43] <anne> yeah, nothing is really based on any technical issues afaict
  750. # [23:44] <anne> they can call us the "IRC cabal" but laughing about their private mailing list is not allowed... oh well, don't think it's my problem
  751. # [23:44] <Philip_> There have been occasions where I thought it'd be good to comment on technical issues they've mentioned on their list, but it's hard to do that when you can't post to it
  752. # [23:45] <hsivonen> Philip_: I subscribed successfully and am allowed to post
  753. # [23:45] <Philip_> hsivonen: Oh, I hadn't realised they'd changed it now
  754. # [23:46] * Philip_ is now known as Philip
  755. # [23:48] <Dashiva> anne: I think the formal complaint over a few jokes in #whatwg set the bar pretty high already
  756. # [23:51] <Hixie> i wonder which "closed small group" he's referring to
  757. # [23:51] <anne> follow-up from DanC: http://html4all.org/pipermail/list_html4all.org/2007-September/000429.html
  758. # [23:52] <anne> Hixie, I'd suspect the people chatting in #whatwg mostly
  759. # [23:52] <Hixie> clearly not the whatwg (800+ people and open), nor the #whatwg (the pinacle of openness, with self-hosted archives)
  760. # [23:52] <Hixie> unless he has a new definition of "closed" that i am not aware of
  761. # [23:52] <Philip> It can be socially closed even if it's technically open
  762. # [23:53] <anne> (which was forwarded, not sure where DanC e-mailed it initially...)
  763. # [23:53] <Dashiva> Philip: Can't be any more closed than a private mailing list
  764. # [23:54] <kingryan> anne: it seems that followup is bound to be misinterpretted
  765. # [23:55] <kingryan> it seems that DanC just wants *more* editors, not to replace the existing ones
  766. # [23:55] <Hixie> Philip: i haven't seen any sign that we are socially closed either, i mean, we actively invited Steven F to the IRC channel yesterday and spoke with him, I didn't see anyone being hostile there.
  767. # [23:57] <Hixie> anyway, as far as i can tell this is just john playing us
  768. # [23:57] <beowulf> when did html4all appear?
  769. # [23:57] <Hixie> he did publically say that he would engage in a mission of divide and conquer
  770. # [23:57] <Hixie> beowulf: early august
  771. # [23:59] <hsivonen> though it didn't become known until late August. I found out only when I returned from Romania at the start of September
  772. # Session Close: Thu Sep 27 00:00:00 2007

The end :)