Options:
- # Session Start: Fri Oct 05 00:00:00 2007
- # Session Ident: #html-wg
- # [00:19] * Joins: aroben_ (aroben@17.255.99.225)
- # [00:21] * Joins: aroben__ (aroben@17.203.12.236)
- # [00:22] * Quits: aroben_ (aroben@17.255.99.225) (Ping timeout)
- # [00:47] * Quits: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142) (Quit: hyatt)
- # [00:52] * Joins: Philip_ (philip@80.177.163.133)
- # [00:54] * Quits: Philip (philip@80.177.163.133) (Ping timeout)
- # [00:59] * Philip_ is now known as Philip
- # [01:12] * Joins: sbuluf (yeblrpf@200.49.140.225)
- # [01:21] * Quits: tH (Rob@213.249.237.231) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.78.1-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.8.0.9/2006120508])
- # [01:40] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20) (Ping timeout)
- # [01:45] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20)
- # [01:52] * Joins: olivier (ot@128.30.52.30)
- # [01:57] * Quits: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167) (Quit: And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.)
- # [02:01] * Quits: hober (ted@66.75.248.223) (Quit: ERC Version 5.2 (IRC client for Emacs))
- # [02:09] * Joins: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@67.154.87.254)
- # [02:18] * Quits: Hixie (ianh@129.241.93.37) (Quit: brb)
- # [02:18] * Joins: Hixie (ianh@129.241.93.37)
- # [02:21] * Quits: kingryan (rking3@208.66.64.47) (Quit: kingryan)
- # [02:22] * Quits: mjs_ (mjs@17.203.15.159) (Quit: mjs_)
- # [02:23] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.98.159)
- # [02:34] * Joins: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30)
- # [02:52] <karl> http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/html-wg/20071003#l-234
- # [02:52] <karl> hmm if we could drop the doctype alltogether. That would be gem.
- # [02:54] <karl> just having <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="fr"> would be much more fun
- # [02:54] <Hixie> i think html5 gets as close as we can get to that for text/html
- # [02:54] <Hixie> (<!DOCTYPE HTML><html lang="fr">)
- # [02:54] <karl> Hixie: yep. But I wish that it would be even simpler ;)
- # [02:54] <Hixie> yeah, me too
- # [02:55] <Hixie> early drafts had it just as <!DOCTYPE>, but that didn't work in all browsers :-(
- # [02:55] <Hixie> oh well
- # [02:55] <karl> life is fun :) means not perfect :p
- # [03:02] * Quits: aroben__ (aroben@17.203.12.236) (Ping timeout)
- # [03:02] * Quits: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@67.154.87.254) (Quit: Leaving)
- # [03:09] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.98.159) (Quit: mjs)
- # [03:43] * Joins: aroben__ (aroben@17.203.12.236)
- # [03:47] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20) (Ping timeout)
- # [03:51] * Quits: olivier (ot@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Leaving)
- # [03:52] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20)
- # [04:18] * karl is reading the Ajax Mobile Workshop
- # [04:19] * Joins: olivier (ot@128.30.52.30)
- # [04:20] <karl> RG: Rocco Georgi, PavingWays - Frost Ajax Library
- # [04:20] <karl> RG: Working on Ajax library for constrained browsers
- # [04:20] <karl> RG: Ajax works in many mobile browsers but JavaScript/DOM implementations vary. Existing libraries don't work in many cases
- # [04:20] <karl> RG: Needed a library for work on our own mobile web applications
- # [04:20] <karl> RG: Approach is cross browser Ajax for mobile web apps. Support the weakest browser that is capable of Ajax.
- # [04:20] <karl> RG: Keep it small (<3k at the moment)
- # [04:20] <karl> http://www.w3.org/2007/09/28-mobile-ajax-minutes
- # [04:22] * Quits: dbaron (dbaron@63.245.220.241) (Quit: 8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.)
- # [04:22] * Quits: aroben__ (aroben@17.203.12.236) (Ping timeout)
- # [04:50] * Joins: aroben (aroben@67.160.250.192)
- # [04:56] * Joins: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142)
- # [04:56] * Quits: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142) (Quit: hyatt)
- # [04:57] * Joins: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142)
- # [05:01] * Quits: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142) (Quit: hyatt)
- # [05:01] * Joins: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142)
- # [05:01] * Parts: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142)
- # [05:43] * Joins: mjs (mjs@64.81.48.145)
- # [05:45] <karl> DC: I agree with what Jon said about One Web earlier
- # [05:45] <karl> ... the biggest problem we are dealing with is Mashups
- # [05:45] <karl> ... the browser did not anticipate mashups
- # [05:45] <karl> ... which creates security problems
- # [05:45] <karl> ... we need to get that broken browser security model fixed
- # [05:45] <karl> ... browser makers have not been able to go forward without consensus
- # [05:45] <karl> ... but the Google worker-pool solution is one exciting recent development in this area
- # [05:45] <karl> ... but we have to wait for IE6 to die
- # [05:45] <karl> ... on the other hand, in mobile, because of the shorter longevity of mobile devices, we have quicker turnaround on [getting newer browsers deployed on handsets]
- # [05:45] <karl> ... [DC made statement that mashups are one of the most groundbreaking changes to come in many years]
- # [05:45] <karl> still in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/28-mobile-ajax-minutes
- # [05:58] * Quits: xover (xover@193.157.66.5) (Ping timeout)
- # [05:59] * Quits: laplink (link@193.157.66.199) (Ping timeout)
- # [06:09] * Joins: laplink (link@193.157.66.199)
- # [06:09] * Joins: xover (xover@193.157.66.5)
- # [06:18] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20) (Ping timeout)
- # [06:23] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20)
- # [06:46] * Quits: aroben (aroben@67.160.250.192) (Ping timeout)
- # [06:47] * Joins: aroben (aroben@67.160.250.192)
- # [06:51] * Quits: aroben (aroben@67.160.250.192) (Ping timeout)
- # [07:11] * Quits: Thezilch (fuz007@68.52.119.203) (Ping timeout)
- # [07:12] * Joins: Thezilch (fuz007@68.52.119.203)
- # [07:22] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
- # [07:26] * Quits: Lionheart (robin@66.57.69.65) (Connection reset by peer)
- # [07:26] * Joins: Lionheart (robin@66.57.69.65)
- # [08:15] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Ping timeout)
- # [08:26] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20) (Ping timeout)
- # [08:31] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20)
- # [08:34] * Joins: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142)
- # [09:01] * Joins: aroben (aroben@67.160.250.192)
- # [09:19] * Quits: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142) (Quit: hyatt)
- # [09:31] * Quits: sbuluf (yeblrpf@200.49.140.225) (Ping timeout)
- # [09:34] * Joins: heycam (cam@203.214.114.92)
- # [09:36] * Quits: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Where dwelt Ymir, or wherein did he find sustenance?)
- # [10:22] * Quits: aroben (aroben@67.160.250.192) (Ping timeout)
- # [10:33] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20) (Ping timeout)
- # [10:38] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20)
- # [10:42] <hsivonen> anne: Is the access control stuff something that I should use right now in validator.nu response headers?
- # [10:45] <anne> it's something you could use right now
- # [10:45] <anne> I suppose it might be useful if you want to allow cross-site access to the results
- # [10:47] <hsivonen> anne: is there a tutorial or do I need to understand the spec?
- # [10:49] * Joins: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167)
- # [10:51] <hsivonen> hrm. is dev.w3.org down again?
- # [10:52] <anne> if you want to grant everyone access simply put "Access-Control:allow <*>" in your response headers
- # [10:52] <anne> the spec has some examples
- # [10:53] <hsivonen> anne: ok. thanks
- # [10:53] <anne> see http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/access-control/
- # [10:54] <hsivonen> dev.w3.org isn't responding to me
- # [10:55] <hsivonen> does every GET on dev.w3.org hit CVS?
- # [10:56] <hsivonen> would be good to have the docs cached somewhere
- # [10:56] <anne> no
- # [10:56] <anne> what I pointed to is a checked out version
- # [10:56] <hsivonen> ok
- # [10:56] <hsivonen> still not responding, though
- # [10:56] <anne> there's an older version on w3.org/tr/access-control/
- # [10:57] <hsivonen> ok
- # [11:02] * Joins: zcorpan_ (zcorpan@88.131.66.80)
- # [11:04] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
- # [11:04] * Joins: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30)
- # [11:06] * Quits: karl (karlcow@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Where dwelt Ymir, or wherein did he find sustenance?)
- # [11:15] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [11:24] * Quits: shepazu (schepers@128.30.52.30) (Client exited)
- # [11:38] * Quits: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167) (Quit: And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.)
- # [11:39] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Client exited)
- # [11:59] * Joins: ROBOd (robod@89.122.216.38)
- # [11:59] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
- # [12:01] * Parts: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [12:01] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [12:02] * Quits: hasather (hasather@90.227.221.48) (Quit: leaving)
- # [12:02] * Parts: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [12:05] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [12:06] * Parts: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [12:08] <olivier> hsivonen, anne, I restarted the damn server
- # [12:08] <olivier> it's been a daily pain in our... server farm
- # [12:08] <olivier> sorry about it
- # [12:10] <hsivonen> olivier: thanks
- # [12:11] <hsivonen> anne: did I understand correctly that if I want to allow cross-domain XHR POST I must first respond to a GET to the POST URI with a 2xx response?
- # [12:11] <hsivonen> anne: and specify both
- # [12:11] <hsivonen> Access-Control: allow <*>
- # [12:11] <hsivonen> and
- # [12:11] <hsivonen> Allow: POST
- # [12:13] <hsivonen> anne: would 204 No Content work?
- # [12:15] <hsivonen> anne: should I respond with 204 No Content, Allow: POST *only* if there's the If-Method-Allowed request header?
- # [12:16] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [12:16] <anne> hsivonen, the Method-Check header is just there so you can make informed decisions about what to allow
- # [12:17] <anne> hsivonen, it's not a requirement that you do something with it, just like it's not a requirement that you don't do anything with Referer or Referer-Root
- # [12:17] <anne> (the header has been renamed from If-Method-Allowed, see dev.w3.org version)
- # [12:17] <anne> hsivonen, response code doesn't have any significance now, I'm not sure it should
- # [12:18] <anne> (so either 200 or 204 would be fine, iow)
- # [12:18] <mjs> why is Method-Check a header and not a method?
- # [12:18] <hsivonen> anne: would you recommend always responding with Allow: POST if I allow POST at the URI?
- # [12:18] <hsivonen> and completely disregarding Method-Check
- # [12:19] <hsivonen> I'm not completely clear on what the expected choreography is
- # [12:19] <anne> mjs, I think OPTIONS was not picked because it would be harder to author against
- # [12:19] <mjs> (it's hard to think of any other header where on a GET the result is never meant to be to actually retrieve the entity)
- # [12:19] <anne> custom methods are not very well supported in general
- # [12:19] <mjs> are authors expected to do a method check by hand?
- # [12:20] <anne> as I said, it's an informational header, there are no author requirements involved
- # [12:20] <anne> the response header, however, is mandatory (Allow)
- # [12:21] <mjs> what I'm asking is, would this header (or whatever) be something that authors should manually do in their content, or something that user agents do for them?
- # [12:22] <anne> Method-Check is a request header, Allow is a response header; the user agent verifies that Allow specifies something that they send out in Method-Check
- # [12:22] <hsivonen> anne: so if I responded with 204 plus Allow to Method-Check and with 400 to requests without Method-Check, I'd break clients?
- # [12:22] <anne> I would recommend reading http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/access-control/#access1
- # [12:22] <mjs> that still doesn't answer my question
- # [12:22] <mjs> is the user agent expected to add it or the author?
- # [12:22] <mjs> if the user agent adds it, then "easier to author against" is not a relevant consideration
- # [12:23] <anne> you don't understand
- # [12:23] <mjs> clearly
- # [12:23] <anne> the author needs to deal with the request
- # [12:23] <hsivonen> anne: I take MUST as meaning that without it I go 400
- # [12:23] <mjs> this is why I am asking questions
- # [12:23] <anne> if the request uses a weird HTTP method that makes things harder
- # [12:23] <mjs> how does the author need to deal with the request?
- # [12:23] <anne> if the request is a simple GET request with an informational header that makes things easier
- # [12:23] <mjs> do you mean on the server side?
- # [12:23] <anne> mjs, the author replies with an Allow header that specifies the allowed methods
- # [12:24] <anne> Allow: POST, PUT, DELETE
- # [12:24] <anne> mjs, yes
- # [12:24] <hsivonen> anne: will XHR2 UAs do the Method-Check check silently without the script author having to do it?
- # [12:24] <mjs> ok, I was unclear on who "the author" referred to here
- # [12:24] <mjs> is support for custom methods truly so bad on the server side that it's better to smuggle a method in a request header?
- # [12:24] <anne> hsivonen, yes
- # [12:24] <mjs> hsivonen: from the spec it sounds like yes
- # [12:25] <mjs> so the only relevant authoring considerations are server side
- # [12:25] <anne> mjs, it's not smoggling a method in a request header
- # [12:25] <anne> mjs, it's asking whether a certain method can be used
- # [12:25] <mjs> anne: is a GET with Method-Check on it expected to return the resource?
- # [12:25] <mjs> like a GET normally would when it succeeds?
- # [12:25] <anne> no, it's a security check
- # [12:25] <mjs> so it's not really a GET
- # [12:25] <mjs> it's a TELLMEWHATMETHODSAREALLOWED
- # [12:26] <hsivonen> anne: shouldn't it use a SECURITYCHECK method then?
- # [12:26] <anne> it's really OPTIONS, indeed
- # [12:26] <anne> but see above about author complexity
- # [12:26] * Quits: olivier (ot@128.30.52.30) (Quit: Leaving)
- # [12:26] <hsivonen> anne: so are you expecting server-side devs to be too incompetent to respond to OPTIONS?
- # [12:26] <mjs> is OPTIONS defined enough to be useful?
- # [12:27] <anne> hsivonen, that was the feedback Hixie's original proposal got, iirc
- # [12:27] <hsivonen> anne: mmkay
- # [12:28] <mjs> seems to me like one big problem with OPTIONS is that the server may already be doing something for it, and that something is likely wrong
- # [12:28] * anne still hasn't figured out how to use custom methods in Apache
- # [12:28] * anne needs something like that to work to properly test XMLHttpRequest
- # [12:29] <hsivonen> see. enterprisey non-LAMP stuff is needed after all. :-)
- # [12:29] <mjs> can a cgi script or similar see what method was used in the request?
- # [12:30] <hsivonen> mjs: yes. REQUEST_METHOD
- # [12:30] <mjs> so that's how you do it
- # [12:30] <mjs> seems simple enough
- # [12:30] <anne> the problem is that Apache bounces a xxx method not supported thingie before it even reaches the script
- # [12:30] <mjs> (unless the server blocks unknown methods or something)
- # [12:30] <mjs> I suddenly wonder about all the people who insisted that XHR has to support sending custom methods if they are unusable from the server side
- # [12:31] <anne> those are the people who write custom server software and all that
- # [12:31] <anne> it's quite easy to set up a simple server yourself
- # [12:31] <anne> collegue did it in a few lines of python
- # [12:33] <hsivonen> hmm. http://validator.nu/ already says Allow: GET, HEAD, POST, TRACE, OPTIONS when probed with OPTIONS
- # [12:33] <hsivonen> which looks about right
- # [12:33] <mjs> interesting
- # [12:34] <anne> (not if you don't want to allow POST)
- # [12:34] <hsivonen> anne: I override doPost in the servlet, which means I handle POST
- # [12:35] <anne> sorry, not if you don't want to allow cross-site POST
- # [12:35] <anne> is what I meant
- # [12:35] <hsivonen> anne: well, that might be a reason to do something other than vanilla OPTIONS
- # [12:35] <anne> (although I suppose that's already problematic with <form>)
- # [12:35] <hsivonen> anne: like OPTIONS plus header
- # [12:36] <hsivonen> let's see if mod_jk allows me to handle OPTIONS
- # [12:40] <hsivonen> yeah, I get to override OPTIONS handling with whatever I want
- # [12:40] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20) (Ping timeout)
- # [12:40] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Less talk, more pimp walk.)
- # [12:45] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20)
- # [12:46] <hsivonen> anne: if you are concerned that OPTIONS might inadvertently Allow stuff, you could specify a new response header. that way, clients would know that the server recognized Method-Check
- # [12:47] <hsivonen> anne: for example, Allow: GET, HEAD, POST, TRACE, OPTIONS<CRLF>Access-Control-Allow: POST
- # [12:48] <hsivonen> (aside: it sucks that servlets dispatch on method first. it seems to me HTTP dispatch should be done on URI first and method second)
- # [12:48] * Joins: timbl (timbl@146.115.66.146)
- # [12:51] <anne> hsivonen, you think it's worth changing?
- # [12:51] <anne> hsivonen, if so, you need to raise it on public-appformats and convince Firefox to change their implementation
- # [12:52] <anne> I'm afraid :(
- # [12:53] <hsivonen> anne: hmm. OPTIONS certainly seems Right from an ivory-tower perspective. but perhaps the real Web is a two-verb Web. whether this needs stirring is a hard call
- # [12:55] <hsivonen> anne: do Firefox nightlies already support Method-Check with the new name?
- # [12:57] <anne> Firefox nightlies only implement the response part of the security GET request
- # [12:57] <anne> Firefox 3 will also inform the server by sending out Method-Check
- # [12:58] <anne> (and Referer-Root)
- # [12:59] <hsivonen> anne: do you mean the Method-Check stuff isn't implemented yet, if it isn't in the nightlies but will be in Firefox 3?
- # [13:00] <anne> well, Allow is checked and the security GET request is made, it's just that nightlies don't send out the Method-Check header that indicates the desired method header
- # [13:00] <hsivonen> anne: does the server need to read the value of Method-Check at all? Isn't it enough to just check presence of the header and respond with Allow for whatever it is you allow?
- # [13:00] <anne> so depending on what you mean with "Method-Stuff"...
- # [13:01] <hsivonen> now I'm confused
- # [13:01] <hsivonen> am I supposed to know that a particular GET is a security GET even though it has no special labeling header?
- # [13:02] <hsivonen> how do I tell apart security GETs and usual GETs then?
- # [13:03] <anne> in Firefox 3, not sure
- # [13:03] <anne> euh, Firefox nightlies
- # [13:03] <anne> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397879
- # [13:06] <anne> hsivonen, oh, the bug you're seeing on my weblog (was it you?) in Firefox is https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=327765
- # [13:06] <anne> (with commenting)
- # [13:06] <anne> (at least, I think that's the bug)
- # [13:07] <hsivonen> anne: thanks
- # [13:09] * Joins: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167)
- # [13:32] * Quits: timbl (timbl@146.115.66.146) (Quit: timbl)
- # [13:34] * Quits: heycam (cam@203.214.114.92) (Ping timeout)
- # [13:43] * Joins: drry_ (drry@222.225.211.54)
- # [13:44] * Quits: drry (drry@210.191.161.204) (Ping timeout)
- # [13:46] * Joins: shepazu (schepers@128.30.52.30)
- # [14:09] * Joins: heycam (cam@203.214.114.92)
- # [14:26] <anne> thanks hsivonen!
- # [14:32] <hsivonen> anne: I hope my comment is useful and doesn't turn into HTTP verb bikeshedding.
- # [14:33] <anne> there's a risk, indeed
- # [14:34] <zcorpan_> which comment?
- # [14:34] <anne> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-appformats/2007Oct/0024.html
- # [14:35] <zcorpan_> ah
- # [14:35] <hsivonen> anne: but in any case, I think the spec needs to do some more to walk Web app implementor through the process
- # [14:38] * Quits: jmb (jmb@152.78.71.152) (Ping timeout)
- # [14:39] <anne> hsivonen, for the non-GET case?
- # [14:40] <hsivonen> anne: yes
- # [14:41] <anne> it's not really clear which spec owns the domain of access requests which is why it's prolly a bit vague
- # [14:43] * Joins: timbl (timbl@128.30.7.41)
- # [14:48] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20) (Ping timeout)
- # [14:51] * Quits: timbl (timbl@128.30.7.41) (Client exited)
- # [14:52] * Joins: timbl (timbl@128.30.55.178)
- # [14:53] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20)
- # [15:11] * Quits: heycam (cam@203.214.114.92) (Ping timeout)
- # [15:17] * Joins: hasather (hasather@90.227.221.48)
- # [15:40] * Quits: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167) (Quit: And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.)
- # [15:52] * Joins: tH_ (Rob@213.249.237.231)
- # [15:52] * tH_ is now known as tH
- # [16:06] * Parts: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [16:23] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [16:31] * Joins: drry__ (drry@211.9.156.47)
- # [16:32] * Joins: billmason (billmason@69.30.57.156)
- # [16:32] * Quits: drry_ (drry@222.225.211.54) (Ping timeout)
- # [16:39] * drry__ is now known as drry
- # [16:55] * Parts: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [16:56] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20) (Ping timeout)
- # [17:01] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20)
- # [18:06] * Joins: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167)
- # [18:06] * Joins: aroben (aroben@17.203.12.236)
- # [18:24] <Hixie> anne: the Method-Check request is sent, and then the reply to that is checked for Access-Control PIs and headers, right?
- # [18:24] <Hixie> anne: so an entity body _is_ desired, no?
- # [18:25] <Hixie> the reason not to use OPTIONS is that it's not cacheable
- # [18:27] <Hixie> DanC: yt? (topic: informing you of sponsorships)
- # [18:28] <DanC> hi. mail to public-html would be better
- # [18:28] <DanC> I figured IRC was enough last time cuz it went into minutes of a meeting that got sent to public-html
- # [18:28] <DanC> but if you like you can just tell me here and I'll put it on the meeting page.
- # [18:29] <Hixie> yeah will send mail eventually, just wanted to let you know first
- # [18:30] <Hixie> anyway, google will be sponsoring Joshue O Connor, Ben 'Cerbera' Millard, and James Graham (specifically we're paying for flights and hotel)
- # [18:31] <Hixie> they were selected on the basis of picking people who otherwise couldn't attend, who had done productive work in the group, as judged by myself on the advice of various other contributors
- # [18:31] <DanC> nifty
- # [18:40] <Lionheart> Great
- # [18:41] <anne> Hixie, right, for XML responses that is indeed true
- # [18:43] * Joins: DougJ (djones4@74.76.28.112)
- # [18:43] * DanC adds a "Thanks to Sponsors" section http://www.w3.org/html/wg/nov07#tts
- # [18:44] <DanC> crikey... huge list of observer requests in http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2007/registrants#html
- # [18:45] <anne> they can just join any of the small sub groups, no?
- # [18:45] <anne> depending on how much place we have I suppose
- # [18:45] <DanC> the data is pretty noisy; some people I consider WG participants are registered as observers and vice versa; I wonder if it matters
- # [18:45] * Hixie thinks observers should be made to participate :-)
- # [18:46] <anne> no reading e-mail :p
- # [18:49] <Hixie> indeed
- # [18:51] <DanC> 50 registrants altogether
- # [18:51] * Joins: polin8 (polin8@75.71.72.175)
- # [18:52] * Quits: drry (drry@211.9.156.47) (Ping timeout)
- # [18:52] * Joins: drry (drry@210.235.212.2)
- # [18:55] * Joins: kingryan (rking3@64.81.240.149)
- # [18:59] * Quits: zcorpan_ (zcorpan@88.131.66.80) (Ping timeout)
- # [19:00] * Joins: dbaron (dbaron@71.204.145.103)
- # [19:02] <DanC> if I want to parse http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2007/registrants#html with javascript, do I need greasemonkey? or can I use a bookmarklet somehow?
- # [19:02] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20) (Ping timeout)
- # [19:03] <DanC> most of my scripting habits are based on python... I'm new to javascript
- # [19:04] * Joins: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142)
- # [19:04] <anne> either should work
- # [19:05] <anne> I would imagine greasemonkey (or userjs in Opera) to be easier to write unless people have developed tools for writing bookmarklets easier (likely) as they are single-line
- # [19:07] <Hixie> bookmarklets don't have to be single line
- # [19:07] <Hixie> it's just that newlines are written as the three character sequence "%0A" instead of using U+000A :-P
- # [19:08] <Hixie> (but you can use the data URI kitchen to get around it)
- # [19:08] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20)
- # [19:10] * Quits: DougJ (djones4@74.76.28.112) (Quit: DougJ)
- # [19:14] * Quits: xover (xover@193.157.66.5) (Quit: Leaving)
- # [19:15] * Quits: aroben (aroben@17.203.12.236) (Connection reset by peer)
- # [19:15] * Joins: aroben (aroben@17.203.12.72)
- # [19:15] * Joins: DougJ (djones4@74.76.28.112)
- # [19:17] * Joins: xover (xover@193.157.66.5)
- # [19:31] * Joins: drry_ (drry@210.191.161.128)
- # [19:32] * Quits: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142) (Client exited)
- # [19:32] * Quits: drry (drry@210.235.212.2) (Ping timeout)
- # [19:32] * Joins: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142)
- # [19:44] * Quits: hyatt (hyatt@209.173.92.142) (Quit: hyatt)
- # [20:02] * Quits: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167) (Quit: And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.)
- # [20:03] * Quits: mjs (mjs@64.81.48.145) (Quit: mjs)
- # [20:04] * Quits: xover (xover@193.157.66.5) (Quit: Leaving)
- # [20:06] * Joins: mjs (mjs@64.81.48.145)
- # [20:07] * Joins: xover (xover@193.157.66.5)
- # [20:11] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [20:12] * Joins: paullewis (paullewis@82.242.109.217)
- # [20:22] * Parts: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [20:23] * Quits: DougJ (djones4@74.76.28.112) (Quit: DougJ)
- # [20:23] * Joins: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [20:29] * Joins: DougJ (djones4@74.76.28.112)
- # [20:30] * Parts: Lachy (lachlan_hu@213.236.208.22)
- # [20:32] * Quits: mjs (mjs@64.81.48.145) (Ping timeout)
- # [20:54] * Parts: DougJ (djones4@74.76.28.112)
- # [20:57] * Joins: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167)
- # [20:59] * Quits: dbaron (dbaron@71.204.145.103) (Quit: 8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.)
- # [21:11] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20) (Ping timeout)
- # [21:16] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20)
- # [21:21] * Joins: dbaron (dbaron@63.245.220.241)
- # [22:17] * Quits: gsnedders (gsnedders@86.137.237.196) (Quit: gsnedders)
- # [22:32] * Joins: gsnedders (gsnedders@86.137.237.196)
- # [22:42] * Quits: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167) (Ping timeout)
- # [22:43] * Joins: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167)
- # [22:45] * Quits: gsnedders (gsnedders@86.137.237.196) (Quit: 404: Not Found)
- # [22:46] * Joins: gsnedders (gsnedders@86.137.237.196)
- # [23:19] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20) (Ping timeout)
- # [23:20] * Quits: Hixie (ianh@129.241.93.37) (Ping timeout)
- # [23:21] * Joins: Hixie (ianh@129.241.93.37)
- # [23:22] * Joins: drry__ (drry@222.225.140.32)
- # [23:23] * Quits: drry_ (drry@210.191.161.128) (Ping timeout)
- # [23:24] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.226.75.20)
- # [23:35] * Quits: ROBOd (robod@89.122.216.38) (Quit: http://www.robodesign.ro )
- # [23:46] * Quits: kingryan (rking3@64.81.240.149) (Quit: kingryan)
- # Session Close: Sat Oct 06 00:00:00 2007
The end :)