/irc-logs / freenode / #whatwg / 2007-05-11 / end

Options:

  1. # Session Start: Fri May 11 00:00:00 2007
  2. # Session Ident: #whatwg
  3. # [00:18] <hsivonen> does IE with MathPlayer Accept: application/xhtml+xml?
  4. # [00:22] <zcorpan> hsivonen: yes
  5. # [00:22] <zcorpan> hsivonen: it's treated as text/html
  6. # [00:24] <zcorpan> (i'm not sure whether the string "application/xhtml+xml" is actually in the Accept header, though)
  7. # [00:25] <hsivonen> zcorpan: I'm interested in the actual Accept header
  8. # [00:28] <zcorpan> seems like the plugin only modifies the UA string
  9. # [00:28] <zcorpan> http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/~distler/blog/archives/000309.html
  10. # [00:29] * Quits: yod (n=ot@banff-72-29-239-177.mycanopy.net) ("Leaving")
  11. # [00:34] <hsivonen> zcorpan: ok.
  12. # [00:34] <zcorpan> ah! ie is one step closer to css2.1 conformance with the developer toolbar! :) (it can disable css)
  13. # [00:35] <hsivonen> zcorpan: I'm serving XHTML+SVG if the UA Accepts a/x+x, except if the UA is a known old release of Opera or Gecko
  14. # [00:35] <hsivonen> zcorpan: t/h otherwise
  15. # [00:35] <hsivonen> I hope that's good enough
  16. # [00:40] * moeffju is now known as moeffju[ZzZz]
  17. # [00:42] <zcorpan> hsivonen: yeah, should be. wonder how it performs on mobiles that lie about what they support, though
  18. # [00:46] <zcorpan> ie's dev toolbar is actually pretty good
  19. # [00:56] <hsivonen> zcorpan: http://hsivonen.iki.fi/thesis/html5-conformance-checker mobile test results welcome.
  20. # [00:57] <hsivonen> zcorpan: it'll probably choke mobile browsers that aren't based on a real browser engine anyway
  21. # [00:58] <hsivonen> hmm. looks like I have a bug in my Opera sniffing
  22. # [00:58] <zcorpan> the document is probably too big for most mobiles anyway, i'd think
  23. # [01:03] <hsivonen> fixed the bug in opera sniffing
  24. # [01:05] * Quits: bzed (n=bzed@dslb-084-059-097-116.pools.arcor-ip.net) ("Leaving")
  25. # [01:19] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@banff-72-29-239-177.mycanopy.net) ("Get thee behind me, satan.")
  26. # [01:23] * Quits: billmason (n=billmaso@ip156.unival.com) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  27. # [01:31] <Philip`> Is it just me that finds it annoying how the multi-page spec's next/previous page links try to jump down to skip the header on the subsequent page (and get it wrong half the time because the page is small enough to fit on the screen without scrolling, so it jumps up and down as you navigate around)?
  28. # [01:41] <SpookyET_> Firefox needs fcgi/scgi for extensions. It needs persistent extensions.
  29. # [01:47] * Parts: hasather (n=hasather@81-235-209-174-no62.tbcn.telia.com)
  30. # [01:56] * Quits: KevinMarks (i=KevinMar@nat/google/x-1cb9419a122ac8b4) ("The computer fell asleep")
  31. # [01:59] * Quits: SpookyET_ (i=user@75.138.70.34) (Client Quit)
  32. # [02:22] * Quits: marcosc (n=chatzill@131.181.148.226) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  33. # [02:27] * Quits: jruderman (n=jruderma@corp-242.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  34. # [02:29] * Parts: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@84-216-42-208.sprayadsl.telenor.se)
  35. # [02:32] * Quits: h3h (n=w3rd@66-162-32-234.static.twtelecom.net) ("|")
  36. # [02:39] * Joins: othermaciej (i=mjs@nat/apple/x-b1b265433fc7af62)
  37. # [02:41] * Joins: csarven- (n=nevrasc@modemcable081.152-201-24.mc.videotron.ca)
  38. # [02:43] * Quits: csarven (n=nevrasc@modemcable081.152-201-24.mc.videotron.ca) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  39. # [02:58] * Quits: dolphinling (n=chatzill@rbpool2-91.shoreham.net) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  40. # [02:59] * Quits: csarven- (n=nevrasc@modemcable081.152-201-24.mc.videotron.ca)
  41. # [03:00] * Joins: csarven (n=nevrasc@modemcable081.152-201-24.mc.videotron.ca)
  42. # [03:03] * Quits: othermaciej (i=mjs@nat/apple/x-b1b265433fc7af62)
  43. # [03:17] * Joins: dolphinling (n=chatzill@rbpool4-60.shoreham.net)
  44. # [03:25] * Quits: dbaron (n=dbaron@corp-242.mountainview.mozilla.com) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  45. # [03:29] * Joins: marcosc (n=chatzill@131.181.148.226)
  46. # [03:49] * Joins: SpookyET_ (i=user@75.138.70.34)
  47. # [03:54] * Quits: SpookyET_ (i=user@75.138.70.34) (Client Quit)
  48. # [03:54] * Joins: jcgregorio (n=chatzill@adsl-072-148-043-048.sip.rmo.bellsouth.net)
  49. # [04:00] * Joins: marcosc_ (n=chatzill@131.181.148.226)
  50. # [04:13] * Quits: marcosc (n=chatzill@131.181.148.226) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  51. # [04:28] * Quits: marcosc_ (n=chatzill@131.181.148.226) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  52. # [04:29] * Joins: weinig_ (n=weinig@cpe-66-108-205-3.nyc.res.rr.com)
  53. # [04:37] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@corp.technorati.com)
  54. # [04:40] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@cpe-66-108-205-3.nyc.res.rr.com) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  55. # [04:51] * Joins: marcosc_ (n=chatzill@131.181.148.226)
  56. # [04:51] * marcosc_ is now known as marcosc
  57. # [05:08] * Joins: othermaciej (n=mjs@dsl081-048-145.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net)
  58. # [05:11] * othermaciej is now known as om_meet
  59. # [05:17] * Joins: jruderman (n=jruderma@corp-242.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  60. # [05:25] * om_meet is now known as om_out
  61. # [05:50] * Quits: jdandrea (n=jdandrea@ool-44c0a1fe.dyn.optonline.net)
  62. # [06:37] * Joins: gavin__ (n=gavin@people.mozilla.com)
  63. # [06:39] * Quits: gavin_ (n=gavin@firefox/developer/gavin) (Read error: 131 (Connection reset by peer))
  64. # [06:53] * Quits: jcgregorio (n=chatzill@adsl-072-148-043-048.sip.rmo.bellsouth.net) ("ChatZilla 0.9.78.1 [Firefox 2.0.0.3/0000000000]")
  65. # [07:43] * Quits: csarven (n=nevrasc@modemcable081.152-201-24.mc.videotron.ca)
  66. # [07:44] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@c-71-198-189-81.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  67. # [09:00] * Joins: aroben (n=adamrobe@c-71-198-188-194.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  68. # [09:31] <krijnh> Hixie: why do you use <!DOCTYPE HTML5> for your tests?
  69. # [09:33] <Philip`> Because everybody loves versioning
  70. # [09:33] <krijnh> Ow, never mind
  71. # [09:33] <krijnh> 'Those are just old tests. Shouldn't make any difference.'
  72. # [09:33] <krijnh> :)
  73. # [09:34] <annevk> does make a difference though
  74. # [09:34] <Philip`> Not having a version number would just be unnatural and unthinkable
  75. # [09:34] <annevk> but the difference is likely not to be relevant for the tests in question
  76. # [09:34] <krijnh> Only gives quirks mode in Gecko
  77. # [09:34] <krijnh> Nope
  78. # [09:34] <krijnh> But I was just wondering
  79. # [09:38] * Quits: aroben (n=adamrobe@c-71-198-188-194.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  80. # [09:45] * krijnh cleans house with the Cleaning House thread
  81. # [09:45] * Quits: dbaron (n=dbaron@c-71-198-189-81.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) ("8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.")
  82. # [09:47] <Philip`> You can play ping pong with it too
  83. # [09:47] <krijnh> :)
  84. # [09:49] <Philip`> I expect some of these thread titles will be hard to find again in the future, but I expect that wouldn't matter since people won't actually want to find them
  85. # [09:49] <krijnh> Which reminds me
  86. # [09:49] <krijnh> Somebody wanted a search box on /irc-logs/
  87. # [09:50] <marcosc> krijnh, that could lead to trouble! :D
  88. # [09:50] <krijnh> marcosc: why?
  89. # [09:50] <krijnh> You can already search with site: now
  90. # [09:51] <marcosc> More people would look themselves up to see what we on IRC have been saying about them... oh, I didn't know you could search the site already
  91. # [09:51] <marcosc> :)
  92. # [09:51] * marcosc only joking
  93. # [09:51] <krijnh> :)
  94. # [09:51] <krijnh> Only annevk is making fun of people anyway ;)
  95. # [09:51] <marcosc> LOL
  96. # [09:59] <krijnh> http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/#search
  97. # [10:01] * marcosc searches for himself to see what defamatory things Annevk has been saying about him.
  98. # [10:12] * Quits: jruderman (n=jruderma@corp-242.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  99. # [10:18] <annevk> about you?
  100. # [10:18] <annevk> nothing in public
  101. # [10:22] <krijnh> :)
  102. # [10:23] <krijnh> Yay, ads
  103. # [10:23] * Joins: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@84-216-41-94.sprayadsl.telenor.se)
  104. # [10:23] <annevk> ads?
  105. # [10:23] <annevk> are you now making profit on my poetry here?
  106. # [10:23] <krijnh> Nope
  107. # [10:23] <krijnh> Only on the index page
  108. # [10:23] <krijnh> Which doesn't make sense at all
  109. # [10:23] <krijnh> Cause there's no content there
  110. # [10:24] * annevk doesn't see them
  111. # [10:25] <krijnh> Me neither
  112. # [10:25] <krijnh> Blocked content hooray
  113. # [10:25] * zcorpan sees them now
  114. # [10:26] * krijnh never noticed Google ads a colon to <dt> elements..
  115. # [10:26] <krijnh> adds even
  116. # [10:27] * Joins: jruderman (n=jruderma@c-67-169-183-228.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  117. # [10:27] * Joins: peepo (n=Jay@host81-132-186-246.range81-132.btcentralplus.com)
  118. # [10:27] <Philip`> I believe putting Google ads on pages without content is against their TOS, and they'll ban the account if they notice
  119. # [10:27] <krijnh> There is content
  120. # [10:28] <krijnh> But you mean I should put it on the subpages? :)
  121. # [10:28] <Philip`> Not on that page - it's just a list of dates and refer(r)ers :-)
  122. # [10:28] <krijnh> I'll fix some content there for you then :)
  123. # [10:29] <Philip`> (There were problems with using Google ads on some forums I've been involved with - most of the pages there don't count as content-based, so you have to remove the ads from them)
  124. # [10:30] <krijnh> There
  125. # [10:32] <Philip`> Any chance of doing Punycode conversion in the referrers list? :-)
  126. # [10:32] * Joins: ROBOd (n=robod@86.34.246.154)
  127. # [10:32] <krijnh> Punycode?
  128. # [10:32] * krijnh reads up
  129. # [10:32] <Philip`> Like with http://xn--74h.damowmow.com/
  130. # [10:33] <Philip`> Hmm, Opera converts that into a happy face but Firefox is sad and doesn't
  131. # [10:33] <zcorpan> ☺
  132. # [10:33] * annevk mostly uses http://damowmow.com/portal/
  133. # [10:33] <krijnh> So why do we see xn--74h ?
  134. # [10:36] <zcorpan> krijnh: it's the punycode for ☺ (decode this as utf-8)
  135. # [10:36] <Philip`> xn--74h is just Punycode's spelling of that Unicode character, so it doesn't break people that expect a limited character set in domain names
  136. # [10:37] <Philip`> What'd be really neat is to register a domain name that spells some sensible Unicode word, where its Punycode encoding also spells a sensible ASCII word...
  137. # [10:38] <annevk> except for the xn-- bit?
  138. # [10:38] <zcorpan> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt
  139. # [10:38] <annevk> i don't think that's the spec for idna zcorpan
  140. # [10:38] <annevk> or was it idn
  141. # [10:39] <annevk> www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3490
  142. # [10:39] <annevk> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3490
  143. # [10:39] <Philip`> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3492
  144. # [10:52] * Joins: BenWard (i=BenWard@nat/yahoo/x-86e3c50e7b5d3888)
  145. # [10:59] * Joins: mikeday (n=mikeday@60.224.50.129)
  146. # [10:59] <peepo> annevk what's with w3 validator?
  147. # [11:03] <annevk> I'm the wrong person to ask, really
  148. # [11:04] <mikeday> Is anyone working on a HTML5 parsing library at the present time?
  149. # [11:05] <jgraham_> code.google.com/p/html5lib/
  150. # [11:05] <jgraham_> That's python. Also gsnedders is working on PHP I think
  151. # [11:05] <mikeday> How about C? :)
  152. # [11:05] <jgraham_> mikeday: Not taken. Go for it ;)
  153. # [11:06] <annevk> mikeday, please :)
  154. # [11:06] <mikeday> Presumably, the Mozilla parser is already a C++ implementation, or partial implementation?
  155. # [11:06] <mikeday> Hi Anne :)
  156. # [11:06] <annevk> it doesn't do HTML5 though
  157. # [11:06] <annevk> starting from WebKit might be your best bet
  158. # [11:07] <annevk> if you don't want to do it from scratch
  159. # [11:07] * jgraham_ wants an implementation in Gecko
  160. # [11:07] <mikeday> WebKit also C++, right? Simpler code than Mozilla?
  161. # [11:07] * annevk doesn't know how well you can extract that piece of code out of the rest though
  162. # [11:07] <mikeday> It's amazing that there is still no browser-compatible parser outside of the browsers themselves.
  163. # [11:08] <annevk> mikeday, it certainly looks simpler to me, it also implements something far close to what HTML5 wants out of <b> <i> </b>
  164. # [11:08] <mikeday> ah, well that's good.
  165. # [11:08] <annevk> html5lib is pretty close, but it's not really fast
  166. # [11:08] <mikeday> What about starting with html5lib, and writing a C parser based on that?
  167. # [11:09] <annevk> that's my plan, but I've had that plan for almost half a year now...
  168. # [11:09] <Philip`> Is it easier to start with html5lib than to start with the spec?
  169. # [11:09] <hsivonen> my plan is to get Java covered Real Soon New
  170. # [11:09] <hsivonen> Now
  171. # [11:10] <annevk> html5lib can show you some implementation ideas
  172. # [11:10] <hsivonen> mikeday: the Gecko HTML parser is not an HTML5 parser
  173. # [11:10] <mikeday> Is the spec complete enough to fully implement a parser for the web as it stands?
  174. # [11:10] <annevk> but apart from that the spec should be fine
  175. # [11:10] <Philip`> Someone should just write it a language-agnostic format that can be transformed into source code for whatever language you're using
  176. # [11:10] <hsivonen> mikeday: you probably don't want to get near the Gecko HTML parser anyway
  177. # [11:10] <annevk> mikeday, we hope so :)
  178. # [11:10] <mikeday> Philip, right.
  179. # [11:10] <annevk> mikeday, but it probably needs some further tweaking in due course
  180. # [11:10] * Philip` has absolutely no idea how you'd do that
  181. # [11:11] <mikeday> One more question, as I'm still not entirely clear on this
  182. # [11:11] <annevk> Philip`, is that the "formal language" idea?
  183. # [11:11] <mikeday> will a parser written to the HTML5 spec break on existing websites?
  184. # [11:11] <annevk> it should not
  185. # [11:11] <mikeday> ie. will it result in a substantially different DOM than currently generated by browsers?
  186. # [11:11] <annevk> it should not
  187. # [11:11] <Philip`> annevk: Possibly - not really formal in a mathematical sense, but at least machine-processable rather than English
  188. # [11:11] <mikeday> Oh, well, that's good; only need one parser instead of two, then :)
  189. # [11:11] <annevk> you need two
  190. # [11:11] <hsivonen> Philip`: you could make compilers for a language that target other HLLs. but the result would suck in terms of getting buffering and language-specific APIs right
  191. # [11:11] <annevk> XML and HTML
  192. # [11:11] <mikeday> hah
  193. # [11:12] <mikeday> XML and HTML, that's fine.
  194. # [11:12] <annevk> good :)
  195. # [11:12] <mikeday> Just don't want HTML and HTML5 separately :)
  196. # [11:12] <annevk> join the HTML WG and say so :)
  197. # [11:12] <annevk> although i think the charter says so too so it should be fine
  198. # [11:12] <hsivonen> Philip`: for example, I intend to make a serious effort to get the buffering performance with Java and SAX right
  199. # [11:12] <mikeday> hmm, I don't think the HTML WG is suffering from a lack of people, right now :)
  200. # [11:12] <annevk> :p
  201. # [11:13] <mikeday> hey annevk, were you in Australia recently?
  202. # [11:13] <annevk> yeah
  203. # [11:13] <annevk> in Brisbane
  204. # [11:13] * Quits: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@84-216-41-94.sprayadsl.telenor.se) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  205. # [11:13] <mikeday> ah, didn't come down to Melbourne then. Next time hmm? :)
  206. # [11:13] <annevk> yeah, maybe
  207. # [11:13] <annevk> i'd like to come back although the trip is quite long
  208. # [11:13] <mikeday> Indeed it is
  209. # [11:14] <annevk> will you be at XTech?
  210. # [11:14] <mikeday> 'fraid not this time, too busy trying to get Prince 6.0 out :)
  211. # [11:14] <annevk> ah, have fun with that then :)
  212. # [11:15] <mikeday> thanks! :)
  213. # [11:16] <mikeday> gee, there is a lot of prose in the syntax portion of the HTML5 spec
  214. # [11:16] <mikeday> can I say +1 to formal language
  215. # [11:17] <hsivonen> mikeday: which one? C? Java? Sawzall? Python? :-)
  216. # [11:18] <mikeday> hmm, and parsing is interspersed with script execution; so much for layering. Not exactly HTML5's fault, though :)
  217. # [11:18] <mikeday> hsivonen: BNF? :)
  218. # [11:19] <Philip`> Can BNF do error handling?
  219. # [11:19] <hsivonen> Philip`: I was about to ask that
  220. # [11:19] <mikeday> on the other hand, there is a state machine
  221. # [11:20] <hsivonen> btw, has anyone found non-stack-like state transitions in the tokenizer, yet?
  222. # [11:20] * hsivonen intends to keep the state implicitly on the runtime stack and use a ReprocessInDataStateException for abtrupt returns
  223. # [11:21] <annevk> entities are non state like
  224. # [11:21] <annevk> they are more like a function
  225. # [11:22] <mikeday> hsivonen: can you use an array-based DFA or similar rather than function calls?
  226. # [11:22] <annevk> and doctypes are slightly different too as they require you to consume several characters and such
  227. # [11:25] <Philip`> I think I remembering reading that the ANTLR 3 parser generator generates JVM bytecode so it can use goto for state transitions instead of function calls (though I've probably got all the details wrong now)
  228. # [11:26] <mikeday> Why not nextState = stateTable[currState][currChar]; ?
  229. # [11:27] <Philip`> That seems a bit inefficient when you've got 2^16 characters :-)
  230. # [11:27] <mikeday> I don't recall HTML assigning special meaning to any but the first 128 of them :)
  231. # [11:28] <annevk> heh, it would suggest you study the spec a bit closer
  232. # [11:29] <mikeday> damn.
  233. # [11:29] <Philip`> The HTML5 parser has a lot more discrete states than it explicitly mentions, if you count things like the PCDATA/CDATA/RCDATA/PLAINTEXT variable as giving four times as many potential states
  234. # [11:30] * mikeday reads the spec
  235. # [11:31] <Philip`> Make sure you read it in all three directions :-)
  236. # [11:31] <annevk> lol
  237. # [11:31] <Philip`> (Not that I've ever bothered doing that)
  238. # [11:33] <mikeday> line 32942 has an unescaped < character
  239. # [11:33] <mikeday> as does line 32947
  240. # [11:34] <mikeday> running it through Prince produces a 550 page PDF file
  241. # [11:34] <mikeday> but the page margins are too big, so that's not really a fair page count
  242. # [11:34] <mikeday> either way, might take me a while to get through it
  243. # [11:34] <mikeday> the question is, can I read it faster than people update it?
  244. # [11:34] <annevk> you don't need to read the whole HTML5 spec
  245. # [11:35] <Philip`> http://hsivonen.iki.fi/printing-wa10/ might be useful
  246. # [11:36] <annevk> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/section-parsing.html
  247. # [11:36] <annevk> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/section-tokenisation.html
  248. # [11:36] <annevk> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/section-tree-construction.html
  249. # [11:36] <annevk> is all you need
  250. # [11:36] <mikeday> at least the prose should be marginally more understandable than the Mozilla codebase, right? :)
  251. # [11:37] <annevk> i was able to implement (together with jgraham_ and others) the thing in Python based on prose
  252. # [11:38] <mikeday> sounds like a challenge :)
  253. # [11:38] <hsivonen> mikeday: I hadn't thought of an array-based DFA
  254. # [11:39] <annevk> unrelated: something with opinions on execCommand()? execCommand('indent') for instance produces <blockquote> in IE
  255. # [11:39] <annevk> we copied that
  256. # [11:39] <hsivonen> mikeday: the spec is more understandable than Mozilla, yes. and Mozilla doesn't even implement the spec, yet.
  257. # [11:39] <annevk> mozilla puts a margin-left:40px on the element
  258. # [11:39] <annevk> same for things like the 'italic' and 'bold' commands
  259. # [11:39] <mikeday> hsivonen: Mozilla being out of sync with the spec could be seen as a defect in the spec...
  260. # [11:39] <annevk> differences all over
  261. # [11:39] <hsivonen> annevk: I prefer IE behavior there
  262. # [11:40] <annevk> hsivonen, also 'italic' -> <em>, 'bold' -> <strong>?
  263. # [11:40] * moeffju[ZzZz] is now known as moeffju
  264. # [11:40] <hsivonen> annevk: no, <i> and <b>
  265. # [11:40] <hsivonen> annevk: Safari is probably worse
  266. # [11:40] <annevk> mikeday, Mozilla has some really weird quirks
  267. # [11:40] <annevk> hsivonen, Safari actually does <i> and <b>
  268. # [11:40] <mikeday> annevk, are they consistent with IE's weird quirks, or unique to Mozilla?
  269. # [11:41] <hsivonen> mikeday: Gecko's HTML parsing is really, really weird in rather pointless ways. the spec most closely resembles WebKit
  270. # [11:41] <annevk> mikeday, unique to Mozilla
  271. # [11:41] <mikeday> ah, okay then.
  272. # [11:41] <annevk> the spec is closer to webkit / ie I think
  273. # [11:42] <annevk> minus the crasher from webkit :)
  274. # [11:42] <mikeday> annevk, roughly how long did it take to get html5lib working?
  275. # [11:43] <annevk> we didn't work on it fulltime
  276. # [11:43] <annevk> but in a week we had something working iirc
  277. # [11:44] <annevk> hsivonen, care to elaborate on why you prefer <blockquote>?
  278. # [11:44] * annevk doesn't care
  279. # [11:44] <annevk> we got at least one complain though
  280. # [11:44] <annevk> on http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/execCommand.html
  281. # [11:44] <hsivonen> annevk: it is more tractable to CMSs that do not want to dive into CSS
  282. # [11:44] <hsivonen> annevk: I'd prefer <indent>, but it has to be called <blockquote> for compat
  283. # [11:45] * Joins: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@84-216-41-94.sprayadsl.telenor.se)
  284. # [11:45] <hsivonen> annevk: if you are writing a CMS and want to use a browser-based editor, Gecko and WebKit emitting style='' aren't helping at all
  285. # [11:46] <annevk> fair point
  286. # [11:46] * mikeday is now known as mikeday|away
  287. # [11:46] <hsivonen> annevk: are those who complain CMS vendors or armchair semanticists?
  288. # [11:47] <hsivonen> oh. it was PPK!
  289. # [11:47] * hsivonen didn't read right at first
  290. # [11:48] <hsivonen> Gecko, WebKit and Presto would do well if they didn't introduce gratuitous deviations from Trident for execCommand
  291. # [11:48] * Joins: met_ (n=Hassman@b14-4.vscht.cz)
  292. # [11:49] <annevk> but <strong> versus <b> is ok?
  293. # [11:49] <annevk> i suppose
  294. # [11:49] <hsivonen> annevk: it is pointless but easily normalized to either one in the CMS
  295. # [11:50] <annevk> some CMS vendors wanted <em> and <strong> because it was more semantic
  296. # [11:51] <hsivonen> those vendors have to semanticize the stuff they receive from Trident anyway
  297. # [11:52] <annevk> Trident gives you <em> and <strong>
  298. # [11:52] <hsivonen> ooh.
  299. # [11:53] <hsivonen> well, <em> and <strong> it is, then
  300. # [11:53] <hsivonen> more nails to the coffin
  301. # [11:54] <hsivonen> (of the de jure semantics of <em> and <strong>)
  302. # [11:54] <annevk> oh yeha
  303. # [11:54] <annevk> people don't understand half how "bad" the situation is
  304. # [11:59] * Quits: peepo (n=Jay@host81-132-186-246.range81-132.btcentralplus.com) ("later")
  305. # [12:01] * Joins: jdandrea (n=jdandrea@ool-44c0a1fe.dyn.optonline.net)
  306. # [12:02] * Joins: Hemebond (n=Hemebond@203.109.175.198)
  307. # [12:02] <zcorpan> seems like toolman doesn't care if the spec is useful to anyone, he just doesn't want the de jure semantics of elements to change
  308. # [12:07] <annevk> use HTML4?
  309. # [12:07] <annevk> languages evolve, deal with it
  310. # [12:07] <annevk> is what i'd say
  311. # [12:21] <Dashiva> Who is this toolman?
  312. # [12:21] <Hemebond> Is it the improvetheweb.com guy?
  313. # [12:23] <zcorpan> http://www.autisticcuckoo.net/
  314. # [12:24] * Quits: weinig_ (n=weinig@cpe-66-108-205-3.nyc.res.rr.com)
  315. # [12:27] * mikeday|away is now known as mikeday
  316. # [12:27] <Hemebond> Oh yeah. That's the one I was thinking of.
  317. # [12:28] <Hemebond> I'm with him on most points I think. From what I can remember of the post.
  318. # [12:30] <zcorpan> Hemebond: can you elaborate on what the benefit is to retain the old de jure semantics even when it doesn't match the real world?
  319. # [12:32] <mikeday> do browsers have to care about semantics? or only editors?
  320. # [12:32] <annevk> browsers have to care about <a> for instance
  321. # [12:32] <annevk> and browsers support some type of editing: contenteditable and designMode
  322. # [12:32] <zcorpan> mikeday: markup consumers
  323. # [12:32] <zcorpan> not just browsers
  324. # [12:33] <mikeday> annevk, right, but eg. <em> vs. <i>
  325. # [12:33] <mikeday> or <i> vs <span> for that matter
  326. # [12:33] <mikeday> zcorpan, eg. google?
  327. # [12:33] * Quits: gsnedders (n=gsnedder@host86-139-123-225.range86-139.btcentralplus.com) (Remote closed the connection)
  328. # [12:33] <zcorpan> mikeday: yes
  329. # [12:33] <zcorpan> mikeday: browsers probably want to mark <i> and <em> different from the surrounding text in some way
  330. # [12:34] <zcorpan> e.g. italics or inverted colors or in speech in a different tone
  331. # [12:34] <zcorpan> while treat <span> the same as surrounding text
  332. # [12:35] <mikeday> right.
  333. # [12:35] <mikeday> em, i { font-style: italic }
  334. # [12:35] <zcorpan> yeah
  335. # [12:35] <zcorpan> for visual browsers
  336. # [12:35] <mikeday> but that treats both elements *identically*
  337. # [12:35] <zcorpan> mikeday: yes
  338. # [12:35] <mikeday> I guess what I'm getting at, is that a lot of time is spent discussing semantics of elements for the spec
  339. # [12:36] <zcorpan> indeed
  340. # [12:36] <mikeday> when in practice, the semantics end up getting decided after the fact, by informal agreement amongst users and implementors
  341. # [12:36] <zcorpan> indeed
  342. # [12:36] <zcorpan> what the spec says doesn't change the real world
  343. # [12:36] <zcorpan> it can either reflect the real world or be irrelevant
  344. # [12:36] <mikeday> descriptive vs. prescriptive, ie. HTML is like an extension of natural language
  345. # [12:37] <mikeday> or informal markup conventions, eg. smileys :) :(
  346. # [12:37] <mikeday> a "spec" for smileys would not be useful; a "guide" to smileys would be more appropriate
  347. # [12:38] <mikeday> or are :) and ^_^ actually just different syntactic forms for the same underlying DOM...
  348. # [12:38] <zcorpan> @_@
  349. # [12:39] <mikeday> if the amount of effort spent on <i> and <em> semantics had been spent defining *table* semantics
  350. # [12:39] <mikeday> well, that would be good.
  351. # [12:41] <zcorpan> tables is another thing
  352. # [12:41] <zcorpan> screen readers have to figure out when a table is used for layout and when it is used for data
  353. # [12:41] <mikeday> to be honest, I really mean table rendering rather than semantics
  354. # [12:41] <zcorpan> ah
  355. # [12:41] <zcorpan> ok
  356. # [12:41] <mikeday> but given that tables are used 90% of the time to achieve a visual effect, that seems reasonable
  357. # [12:43] <zcorpan> not sure if it's worth figuring out what screen readers do and then define an algorithm for the purpose of determinating whether a <table> is used for layout or data
  358. # [12:43] <zcorpan> probably an area where screen readers can compete on being useful
  359. # [12:48] <annevk> Does anyone happen to know if HTML5 now accurately describes how <body onload=> versus window.onload etc. defines?
  360. # [12:54] <annevk> s/defines/works/
  361. # [12:54] <annevk> doesn't look like it
  362. # [13:25] <hsivonen> I wonder if I'm too offensive with a bullet point that says "anyURI is a joke"
  363. # [13:26] <annevk> it would make you funny
  364. # [13:26] <annevk> not offensive
  365. # [13:26] <hsivonen> annevk: as in people laughing at me or as in people laughing at anyURI?
  366. # [13:27] <hsivonen> anyURI is just so mind-boggingly badly specced
  367. # [13:27] <annevk> at anyURI and to you
  368. # [13:27] <annevk> (as opposed to "at you")
  369. # [13:27] <hsivonen> ok
  370. # [13:29] <mikeday> is anyURI an XSD schema thing?
  371. # [13:29] <hsivonen> mikeday: yes
  372. # [13:30] <hsivonen> mikeday: the definition has always been foggy and it has changed with every spec revision. eventually they conceded that any finite string is a valid anyURI
  373. # [13:30] <hsivonen> really useful indeed
  374. # [13:30] * mikeday grins
  375. # [13:30] <mikeday> at least URIs of infinite length are ruled out :)
  376. # [13:31] <mikeday> I find file:// URLs the most annoying, personally
  377. # [13:32] * annevk finds most URLs annoying
  378. # [13:32] * annevk tries not to deal with them
  379. # [13:32] <annevk> Actually, I rather like data: URIs except that it should be made more clear what # does
  380. # [13:33] <mikeday> annevk works on the web, annevk tries not to deal with URLs
  381. # [13:33] <mikeday> amazing annevk's head has not yet exploded :)
  382. # [13:34] <mikeday> (I quite agree though, URLs suck)
  383. # [13:34] <Hemebond> URLs suck?
  384. # [13:35] <mikeday> suck == poorly specified
  385. # [13:35] <Hemebond> oh
  386. # [13:35] <mikeday> not UNICODE-aware
  387. # [13:36] <annevk> they are sort of UNICODE aware
  388. # [13:36] <mikeday> and stupid syntax
  389. # [13:36] <annevk> but the specs don't match the implementations
  390. # [13:36] <annevk> it's a big mess
  391. # [13:36] <annevk> and the people who once made it all happen don't clean it up
  392. # [13:37] <annevk> (see also HTTP, CSS, DOM, XML and several other specs)
  393. # [13:37] <annevk> well, CSS is still being cleaned up
  394. # [13:37] <annevk> to be fair
  395. # [13:37] <mikeday> I still find it amazing sometimes, that the fundamental tech. of our time is so poorly worked out
  396. # [13:38] <mikeday> XML is fairly clean these days, if you ignore its dependencies on URLs
  397. # [13:40] <mikeday> (XML not including XSD schema).
  398. # [13:40] <annevk> and not including DTDs?
  399. # [13:41] <mikeday> well, DTDs are *clean*, they're just *lame*
  400. # [13:42] <mikeday> but the spec defines what to do with them
  401. # [13:42] <mikeday> arguably parameter entities could be specified in a more thorough manner
  402. # [13:43] <annevk> yeah, fair enough
  403. # [13:43] <mikeday> obviously an XML 2.0 could make some improvements, but at least the XML 1.0 spec agrees with reality.
  404. # [13:44] <annevk> not with character encoding and non well-formedness on mobile content and such
  405. # [13:45] <annevk> and feeds
  406. # [13:45] <hsivonen> mikeday: the reality of how IDness is established doesn't always agree with specs
  407. # [13:45] <mikeday> feeds are not XML
  408. # [13:45] <mikeday> that's more a problem with RSS specs than XML spec
  409. # [13:46] <mikeday> hsivonen, right, which kind of situations though?
  410. # [13:46] <hsivonen> mikeday: DTDless XHTML for example
  411. # [13:47] <mikeday> DTDless XML of any kind has no ID attributes, except for xml:id
  412. # [13:47] <hsivonen> mikeday: you want to have a filter somewhere that makes id an ID
  413. # [13:47] <hsivonen> mikeday: that's exactly the kind of unrealism I am talking about
  414. # [13:48] <hsivonen> mikeday: fortunately, Prince works with reality here :-)
  415. # [13:48] <mikeday> hmm. Does it? :)
  416. # [13:48] * mikeday checks Prince
  417. # [13:48] <hsivonen> mikeday: yes. document-internal links to ids work without a DTD
  418. # [13:48] * Joins: gsnedders (n=gsnedder@host86-139-123-225.range86-139.btcentralplus.com)
  419. # [13:48] <mikeday> ah.
  420. # [13:48] <mikeday> that's because we don't use XML IDness to determine links :)
  421. # [13:49] <annevk> Jonas Sicking proposed to make every id= attribute act as ID
  422. # [13:49] * annevk likes that
  423. # [13:49] * mikeday likes that too
  424. # [13:49] <mikeday> don't think it will fly, though.
  425. # [13:49] <annevk> and his argument is that we'd just be changing getElementById() and #id
  426. # [13:50] <annevk> not XML
  427. # [13:50] <mikeday> right
  428. # [13:50] <annevk> which could work in theory
  429. # [13:50] <annevk> if all browser vendors just implement it at some point a standard will catch up...
  430. # [13:50] <hsivonen> annevk: I think it should be defined an XHTML id processor between the XML processor and the app. (with a permission to implement differently if indistinguishable)
  431. # [13:51] <annevk> this is not just about XHTML
  432. # [13:51] <hsivonen> annevk: that's how I implement it concretetly, btw
  433. # [13:51] <hsivonen> annevk: well, an 'id processor' then
  434. # [13:52] <annevk> fair enough
  435. # [13:52] <annevk> and sure
  436. # [13:52] <annevk> as long as everything works as you'd expect I don't really care how it's defined
  437. # [13:52] <mikeday> must go
  438. # [13:52] * mikeday waves
  439. # [13:52] <hsivonen> bye
  440. # [13:52] <annevk> bye
  441. # [13:53] * Quits: mikeday (n=mikeday@60.224.50.129) ("-")
  442. # [13:56] * hsivonen adds a slide about IDness
  443. # [14:00] <annevk> oh good
  444. # [14:00] <annevk> Acid3 doesn't test the very evil of implied <head> parsing
  445. # [14:00] * hsivonen now has a slide titled "Future of IDness"
  446. # [14:02] <annevk> do you follow the Moz xml:id bug?
  447. # [14:02] <hsivonen> not actively
  448. # [14:02] <hsivonen> every four months or so :-)
  449. # [14:02] <annevk> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=275196
  450. # [14:02] <annevk> same here
  451. # [14:02] <annevk> it doesn't change more often anyway
  452. # [14:03] * gavin__ is now known as gavin|
  453. # [14:03] * gavin| is now known as gavin
  454. # [14:07] <hsivonen> metooed what I just said here on the bug as well
  455. # [14:19] * Joins: csarven (n=nevrasc@modemcable081.152-201-24.mc.videotron.ca)
  456. # [14:29] * Quits: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@84-216-41-94.sprayadsl.telenor.se) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  457. # [14:31] * Parts: Hemebond (n=Hemebond@203.109.175.198)
  458. # [14:40] <Dashiva> annevk: What is the very evil?
  459. # [15:03] <annevk> </head><style></style><p>
  460. # [15:03] <annevk> where <style> ends up in <head>
  461. # [15:05] * Joins: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@esk-ba-1-nomad.net.mdh.se)
  462. # [15:21] <gsnedders> annevk: well, I'm not really working on a PHP parser… too many exams :(
  463. # [15:21] <annevk> Huh?
  464. # [15:22] <annevk> This is the second time you say something to me I don't get :)
  465. # [15:22] <annevk> First OS X, now a PHP parser...
  466. # [15:22] <gsnedders> annevk: a PHP HTML5 parser… I have no time to work on it, so I'm not working on it :P
  467. # [15:22] <annevk> Sure, but did I ask about it? :)
  468. # [15:22] <gsnedders> you said I was working on one earlier :P
  469. # [15:23] <Philip`> http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20070511#l-150 ?
  470. # [15:23] * gsnedders can't read.
  471. # [15:23] <annevk> indeed
  472. # [15:23] <annevk> :)
  473. # [15:24] * Joins: briansuda (n=briansud@82.221.34.106)
  474. # [15:27] * Joins: zcorpan_ (n=zcorpan@84-216-40-21.sprayadsl.telenor.se)
  475. # [15:28] <gsnedders> zcorpan: you've missed translating one quote
  476. # [15:28] <zcorpan_> oops
  477. # [15:28] <gsnedders> zcorpan: "Webbläsare kan inte göra så mycket skoj med <p>. Oavsett vad specen säger att en <p> representerar." is meaningless to me :)
  478. # [15:29] * Joins: BenneWarde (i=BenWard@nat/yahoo/x-b1737d489b33ee96)
  479. # [15:30] * Joins: zcorpan__ (n=zcorpan@84-216-40-21.sprayadsl.telenor.se)
  480. # [15:35] * Quits: briansuda (n=briansud@82.221.34.106)
  481. # [15:41] * Quits: BenWard (i=BenWard@nat/yahoo/x-86e3c50e7b5d3888) (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  482. # [15:42] * Joins: briansuda (n=briansud@82.221.34.106)
  483. # [15:44] * Quits: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@esk-ba-1-nomad.net.mdh.se) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  484. # [15:49] * Quits: zcorpan_ (n=zcorpan@84-216-40-21.sprayadsl.telenor.se) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  485. # [15:59] * zcorpan__ is now known as zcorpan
  486. # [16:06] <annevk> zcorpan, anything else that should be dropped? :)
  487. # [16:08] <zcorpan> annevk: don't think so
  488. # [16:08] * zcorpan still needs to write those test cases he promised to do
  489. # [16:09] <annevk> yeah
  490. # [16:10] <zcorpan> perhaps text/xsl from the list of what is an XML MIME type, at least if ie doesn't treat it as such anyway
  491. # [16:11] <annevk> i suppose
  492. # [16:23] * Joins: jcgregorio (n=chatzill@adsl-072-148-043-048.sip.rmo.bellsouth.net)
  493. # [16:36] * Joins: billmason (n=billmaso@ip156.unival.com)
  494. # [16:52] * Quits: briansuda (n=briansud@82.221.34.106)
  495. # [16:55] * hsivonen realizes that SVG has unfortunate xml:id/id IDness interaction
  496. # [16:55] <annevk> SVG 1.2 has
  497. # [16:55] <annevk> but that's a non backwards compatible change
  498. # [16:56] <annevk> which seems badly informed
  499. # [16:57] <hsivonen> yeah.
  500. # [16:57] <hsivonen> any chance of getting it repealed?
  501. # [16:57] <annevk> dunno
  502. # [16:58] <annevk> i keep hoping
  503. # [16:58] * hsivonen wonders whether he should write an "XML ID 5" spec
  504. # [16:58] <annevk> :)
  505. # [16:59] <hsivonen> annevk: have objections been filed against SVG 1.2 on this topic?
  506. # [16:59] <annevk> copy xml:id and s/xml:id/id/ plus some other minor fixes :)
  507. # [16:59] <annevk> I believe people did do that, yes
  508. # [16:59] <annevk> but maybe not clear enough
  509. # [16:59] <annevk> SVG also requires XML Events, Traits and other things
  510. # [17:01] * om_out is now known as othermaciej
  511. # [17:02] <hsivonen> last night, I read slides from a WWW2007 slideshow that mentioned xml:id and XML Events as spinoffs of XHTML 2.0
  512. # [17:02] <othermaciej> SVG 1.2 is full of silly things
  513. # [17:02] <hsivonen> othermaciej: which why I've been saying that SVG 1.1 is part of my long-term goals for the conformance checker
  514. # [17:04] <othermaciej> SVG 1.1 has some silly things too, like SVG fonts
  515. # [17:04] <annevk> I would love a revision of SVG in Hixie or equivalent style
  516. # [17:06] * Joins: BenWard (i=BenWard@nat/yahoo/x-646036de9f35cb7a)
  517. # [17:06] <othermaciej> SVG is huge
  518. # [17:07] <othermaciej> just the language I mean
  519. # [17:07] <annevk> Yeah
  520. # [17:07] <annevk> I'm trying to find a week to spend on learning more of SVG
  521. # [17:07] <annevk> I'm able to create rectangles, circles, gradients and all that, but there's so much more...
  522. # [17:08] <hsivonen> my SVG knowledge is not quite up to date. I studied the spec pre-1.0, because I wrote a magazine article about it back then
  523. # [17:08] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  524. # [17:09] <hsivonen> however, I've learned a thing or two about practical SVG when drawing the figures for my thesis
  525. # [17:10] <hsivonen> annevk: for example, Opera 9.20 does not seem to treat viewBox as the intrinsic aspect ratio of <svg>, which sucks
  526. # [17:10] <hsivonen> and Prince seems to calculate height percentages differently from Gecko, WebKit and Presto
  527. # [17:10] <annevk> SVG always has an intrinsic height and width I think so I'm not sure what that would do
  528. # [17:11] <annevk> (Although that depends on who you ask. Some will say that percentage widths are in fact not intrinsic widths.)
  529. # [17:12] <hsivonen> annevk: for practical purposes, it should be easy and possible to say that I want the <svg> element to have a width set by me and the UA to compute the height of the box so that the aspect ratio of viewBox is preserved
  530. # [17:12] <hsivonen> this doesn't just work
  531. # [17:12] <hsivonen> which suck big time
  532. # [17:12] <hsivonen> sucks
  533. # [17:12] <nickshanks> it works for me
  534. # [17:12] <annevk> yeah, height= defaults to 100%...
  535. # [17:12] <nickshanks> set viewBox and width, but leave height off
  536. # [17:12] <annevk> (and width= too, for that matter)
  537. # [17:12] <hsivonen> nickshanks: works for you across Gecko, Presto, WebKit and Prince? good for you
  538. # [17:13] <nickshanks> well, I only tried with WebKit and the wikipedia svg2png rasteriser
  539. # [17:13] <annevk> although I suppose a height of a 100% might make the intrinsic height ignored in case of an auto or percentage height parent in which case you would use the aspect ratio...
  540. # [17:13] <hsivonen> also, I learned that the SVG export of OmniGraffle Pro sucks big time
  541. # [17:13] <annevk> but that's a guess
  542. # [17:14] <nickshanks> i have OmniG. Pro, can test if you want
  543. # [17:14] <hsivonen> Illustrator CS2 with text converted to path gives the best visual fidelity for PDF conversions
  544. # [17:14] <hsivonen> and Inkscape is the best for creating SVG where text is text (not paths)
  545. # [17:14] * Quits: BenneWarde (i=BenWard@nat/yahoo/x-b1737d489b33ee96) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  546. # [17:14] <nickshanks> nah, BBEdit is the best for that
  547. # [17:14] <hsivonen> all in all, not ready for J. Random illustrator :-(
  548. # [17:15] <hsivonen> nickshanks: I used a combo of Inkscape, TextWrangler and oXygen
  549. # [17:15] <hsivonen> again, not ready for "normal" people
  550. # [17:15] <nickshanks> i just use a text editor (sometimes BBEdit, sometimes TextMate)
  551. # [17:16] <nickshanks> but then i don't draw tigers
  552. # [17:16] <hsivonen> annevk: in Presto, WebKit and Gecko height='100%' is computed from the containing block height
  553. # [17:16] <hsivonen> annevk: in Prince from the containing block width
  554. # [17:17] <hsivonen> oh, and I learned that Presto and Prince don't support arrowheads
  555. # [17:17] <hsivonen> this needs to work much smoother to compete with Flash, PDF and Silverlight
  556. # [17:17] <nickshanks> does PDF have arrowheads?
  557. # [17:18] <hsivonen> nickshanks: I don't remember, but any decent PDF-outputting illustration program does
  558. # [17:18] <nickshanks> i've always just used triangles on the end of the line
  559. # [17:19] <hsivonen> nickshanks: manually placed?
  560. # [17:19] <nickshanks> yes
  561. # [17:19] <hsivonen> not fun
  562. # [17:19] <annevk> hsivonen, sure
  563. # [17:19] <annevk> hsivonen, I blame the spec
  564. # [17:20] <nickshanks> text in Presto is huge too
  565. # [17:20] <hsivonen> annevk: I want both CSS and SVG fixed so that reasonable use cases are easy
  566. # [17:20] <annevk> I would love to improve SVG, but I'm swamped with other stuff
  567. # [17:20] <nickshanks> or is it really small? i forget, one of them
  568. # [17:20] <annevk> Unless someone can take over editing of several specs from me
  569. # [17:20] <nickshanks> annevk: what are you working on?
  570. # [17:22] <annevk> xhr, xhr2, cssom, widgets and access-control
  571. # [17:22] <annevk> (that's part of my job though, there's more...)
  572. # [17:23] <nickshanks> hmm, http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/csswg/cssom/Overview.html?rev=1.35#cssfontfacerule
  573. # [17:24] <nickshanks> IE, Prince and now WebKit have @font-face supported
  574. # [17:24] <annevk> I know
  575. # [17:24] <nickshanks> i wouldn't call it obsolete :)
  576. # [17:24] <annevk> Been a while since I looked at that
  577. # [17:24] <annevk> At that point the idea was to have font-family:url()
  578. # [17:29] <annevk> Might make sense to revamp that API anyhow
  579. # [17:31] * Quits: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt) ("Leaving")
  580. # [17:32] * Joins: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt)
  581. # [17:32] * Quits: othermaciej (n=mjs@dsl081-048-145.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net)
  582. # [17:32] <hsivonen> nickshanks: it appears that PDF doesn't have native arrowheads
  583. # [17:33] <nickshanks> okay, good. means i don't have to feel aggrieved at not having used them before :o)
  584. # [17:34] <hsivonen> nickshanks: do you write PDF in BBEdit, too?
  585. # [17:35] <nickshanks> no, not that skilled. i use adobe Illustrator (it's mostly creating resolution independent buttons for my software on Leopard)
  586. # [17:36] <nickshanks> though I ought to learn how. I am quite skilled at cleaning up SVG (reduce code size, optimising drawing etc) and i should learn the same for PDF
  587. # [17:37] <nickshanks> e.g. a filled circle and two stroked lines (pause button) is 20 KB
  588. # [17:40] <nickshanks> the SVGs I optimise at wikipedia tend to come out at between 8% and 50% of their original size
  589. # [17:41] <hsivonen> nickshanks: does wikipedia show SVG to new browsers?
  590. # [17:42] <nickshanks> no, it always returns the cached rasterisation
  591. # [17:57] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  592. # [18:12] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@66.103.219.119)
  593. # [18:20] <MikeSmith> zcorpan - you in Sweden?
  594. # [18:34] * Quits: BenWard (i=BenWard@nat/yahoo/x-646036de9f35cb7a)
  595. # [18:42] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@66.103.219.119) ("Get thee behind me, satan.")
  596. # [18:50] <zcorpan> MikeSmith: yes
  597. # [18:53] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@corp.technorati.com)
  598. # [18:56] * Joins: KevinMarks (i=KevinMar@nat/google/x-4ed7982c5879cae3)
  599. # [19:03] * Joins: yod (n=ot@banff-72-29-239-177.mycanopy.net)
  600. # [19:10] * Quits: met_ (n=Hassman@b14-4.vscht.cz) ("Chemists never die, they just stop reacting.")
  601. # [19:12] * Joins: othermaciej (i=mjs@nat/apple/x-c438fb3298c4fb7a)
  602. # [19:48] <bewest> would it be possible to get a bot in here similar to the ones in some other channels, where something like `input will tell the bot to provide the link to that element in the spec?
  603. # [19:52] <bewest> lol... if you get hit by a car, does it make you feel better that it's the driver's fault?
  604. # [19:54] <zcorpan> graceful error handling is like a car that doesn't hit anyone, even when the driver does things wrong
  605. # [19:54] <bewest> hmm... according to Don Norman, users first blame themselves when technology goes wrong; even when the issue clearly doesn't involve them
  606. # [19:55] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@corp-242.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  607. # [19:55] <bewest> the first effect would probably be a reduced or even negative growth of people using the web
  608. # [20:07] * Joins: met_ (n=Hassman@r5bx220.net.upc.cz)
  609. # [20:07] <Hixie> did dan really just close down the html5 working group or is it my imagination
  610. # [20:08] <Hixie> i hope he doesn't expect progress on the spec to stop too...
  611. # [20:08] <bewest> did something other than "we suggest taking the weekend off" happen?
  612. # [20:08] <othermaciej> he ordered it to go on involuntary vacation until we have a tracking system and a review agenda
  613. # [20:08] <othermaciej> which I think is silly
  614. # [20:08] <Hixie> it's fine by me, i have to say
  615. # [20:08] <othermaciej> (on vacation from email/commenting)
  616. # [20:08] <gsnedders> Hixie: I guess it allows you to catch up :P
  617. # [20:08] <Hixie> comments still welcome on whatwg@whatwg.org! and on the whatwg forums!
  618. # [20:09] <Hixie> gsnedders: i'm caught up on public-html mail
  619. # [20:09] <gsnedders> Hixie: I mean all the back-suggestions, the 1000-odd emails
  620. # [20:09] <Hixie> oh, indeed
  621. # [20:11] <Lachy> anything that reduces the volume of email from public-html is fine by me. That'll give us more time to do the real work on whatwg :-)
  622. # [20:12] <Hixie> yeah
  623. # [20:12] <Hixie> i just don't get why danc would want whatwg to be the place to do work
  624. # [20:12] * Quits: yod (n=ot@banff-72-29-239-177.mycanopy.net) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  625. # [20:13] <bewest> Hixie: maybe because stuff actually gets done
  626. # [20:14] <bewest> public-html is full or arguments from people who apparently don't share the perspective outlined in the opera position paper back in 2004
  627. # [20:14] <bewest> especially, the ideas of migration path and supporting existing content
  628. # [20:15] <bewest> s/full or/full of/
  629. # [20:15] <Hixie> i don't know about "full of"
  630. # [20:15] <bewest> pregnant with
  631. # [20:16] <Hixie> there's maybe a dozen vocal opponents that i can see, most of which just seem generally confused (as opposed to having actual arguments against the proposed design critecial)
  632. # [20:16] <Hixie> criteria
  633. # [20:16] <bewest> yes, it's a property of the messages, not the membership
  634. # [20:16] <Hixie> indeed
  635. # [20:17] <Hixie> woot, iTunes claims to have fixed my Tao of Rodney!
  636. # [20:17] * Hixie gets out his mac to download it
  637. # [20:18] <Lachy> what's Tao of Rodney?
  638. # [20:18] <Hixie> latest stargate atlantis episode
  639. # [20:18] <Lachy> which ep number?
  640. # [20:18] <Hixie> they accidentally uploaded the latest stargate sg-1 episode instead the first time
  641. # [20:19] <Lachy> ah, s3 e15. Seen that
  642. # [20:19] <Hixie> 14, i think
  643. # [20:19] <Lachy> yeah, typo
  644. # [20:19] <Hixie> s3 e14, episode id 315
  645. # [20:19] <Hixie> (amusingly)
  646. # [20:19] <Lachy> yeah, I just noticed
  647. # [20:20] <Hixie> i hate that i could have seen all of sg1 and atlantis already if i didn't respect copyright laws
  648. # [20:20] <Hixie> i'm trying to throw money at this people and they won't take it fast enough!
  649. # [20:21] <Lachy> I respect them enough to not violate them when they give me a fair deal
  650. # [20:22] <Lachy> but I can't buy Stargate from iTunes cause I'm in Australia
  651. # [20:23] <hsivonen> let's hope that by the last day of XTech everyone know about HTML5, so that I can get rid of intro slides...
  652. # [20:23] <bewest> jgraham_: last time I loaded your parser view thing, it didn't seem to work. the lower pane was always empty
  653. # [20:40] * hsivonen learns about http://www.exforms.org/
  654. # [20:47] <nickshanks> did i not hear they were making a new stargate film
  655. # [20:47] <Hixie> they've been saying that since season 5
  656. # [20:47] <nickshanks> but i mean that it's in production now that CG-1 has finished
  657. # [20:47] <nickshanks> *SG
  658. # [20:48] <Hixie> *shrug*
  659. # [20:49] <Lachy> yes, there's 2 direct-to-DVD films in production now
  660. # [20:49] <Hixie> direct to iTunes too, i hope
  661. # [20:50] <Lachy> yeah
  662. # [20:50] <nickshanks> does that mean i need to buy a cinema?
  663. # [20:50] <Lachy> I just meant, not going to the cinema
  664. # [20:50] <nickshanks> yeah, but so i can watch them in one? :)
  665. # [20:50] * Joins: hasather (n=hasather@81-235-209-174-no62.tbcn.telia.com)
  666. # [20:50] <Lachy> nickshanks, you will be required to buy an expensive home cinema :-)
  667. # [20:50] * hsivonen believes the correct spelling is stargåte
  668. # [20:51] <Lachy> hsivonen, no, the A is replaced with the symbol for earth in the logo
  669. # [20:51] <nickshanks> well in the original film Daniel wrote the translation as "star gate" IIRC
  670. # [20:51] <nickshanks> on the chalkboard
  671. # [20:52] <Lachy> I don't think there was a space
  672. # [20:52] <Lachy> I could check if you like, I have the DVD here
  673. # [20:52] <nickshanks> i have the, erm, DivX handy too
  674. # [20:52] <Hixie> it's "STARGATE"
  675. # [20:53] <Hixie> no fancy anything, though some As are turned into /\ characters with a ring on top
  676. # [20:53] <Hixie> e.g. the second A in ATLANTIS
  677. # [20:53] <Hixie> or the second A in STARGATE-SG1
  678. # [20:53] <nickshanks> obviously the first A isn't good enough
  679. # [20:54] <hsivonen> Hixie: my friends and I tend to pronounce it as if "gåte" was a Swedish word
  680. # [20:55] <Hixie> heh
  681. # [20:56] * Lachy is looking forward to the first webisode of Sanctuary on Monday
  682. # [20:56] <Hixie> hsivonen: stahr-goh-te? :-)
  683. # [20:56] <hsivonen> Hixie: yes
  684. # [20:57] <Hixie> hehe
  685. # [20:57] <Lachy> what the? Does that sound like star-goat?
  686. # [20:57] <Hixie> "stahr-goh-teh", rather
  687. # [20:57] <Lachy> ok
  688. # [20:58] <Hixie> probably emphasised "stahrGoh-teh"
  689. # [20:58] <nickshanks> enter the star goat
  690. # [20:58] <Hixie> anyway
  691. # [20:58] <Hixie> i'm gonna go grab a burrito
  692. # [20:58] <Hixie> and watch my stargoat!
  693. # [20:58] <Lachy> :-)
  694. # [20:58] <Lachy> I'm off to bed, g'night all
  695. # [21:00] <hsivonen> Lachy: nn
  696. # [21:05] <nickshanks> @media print { paper-source: cotton; denomination: "£20"; watermark: queens-head; }
  697. # [21:12] * Joins: maikmerten (n=maikmert@L84a3.l.pppool.de)
  698. # [21:13] <maikmerten> hello, I'm just dropping news that Wikipedia now supports <video> as implemented by the experimental Opera build
  699. # [21:13] <maikmerten> see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Video for a list of available video files
  700. # [21:13] * Joins: yod (n=ot@banff-72-29-239-177.mycanopy.net)
  701. # [21:13] <maikmerten> or see it directly in action e.g. at http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/commonsJOrbisPlayer.php?path=Controlled+Impact+Demonstration+2.ogg
  702. # [21:14] <hasather> maikmerten: cool, thanks
  703. # [21:14] <maikmerten> hasather, well, I only wrote the detection code, I'm not connected to Wikipedia, so I'll just route your thanks into the correct direction
  704. # [21:14] * jgraham_ is now known as jgraham
  705. # [21:15] <maikmerten> that online player checks for <video>, VLC plugin, any plugin registering application/ogg or uses Java (if available) as fallback
  706. # [21:15] <maikmerten> so it's pretty versatile
  707. # [21:16] <maikmerten> and enables video playback on e.g. Ubuntu out of the box (Ubuntu comes with the Totem browser plugin by default, and that of course supports Ogg)
  708. # [21:21] <hsivonen> maikmerten: cool!
  709. # [21:22] <maikmerten> yeah, I'm glad Wikipedia is so quick adopting new stuff
  710. # [21:22] <maikmerten> and I'm sure this gives a nice testbed for browser implementations
  711. # [21:22] <maikmerten> (at least for the basic features... play... stop... buffering...)
  712. # [21:23] <jgraham> bewest: WFM with google.com (it's kinda slow though). Does it break everywhere for you? If it's just a few sites then there might be a bad interaction between the site and the script that builds the DOM
  713. # [21:23] <jgraham> specifically I think document.write running on page load will break everything
  714. # [21:24] <othermaciej> wikipedia adopting it is a little worrisome, especially since Opera's experimental implementation likely doesn't match the spec any more
  715. # [21:25] <maikmerten> othermaciej, it's only using play() and stop()... I don't think that'll ever break
  716. # [21:25] <maikmerten> and of course it'll be fitted to the final spec
  717. # [21:25] * maikmerten looks at the current draft to see if something vital has changed
  718. # [21:33] <maikmerten> hmm... actually I'm too blind to see stop() anywhere
  719. # [21:33] <maikmerten> there's play() and pause(), but I'm missing stop()
  720. # [21:34] <zcorpan> maikmerten: perhaps it was dropped? :)
  721. # [21:34] <maikmerten> perhaps
  722. # [21:34] <maikmerten> but then I don't see a valid replacement for it
  723. # [21:35] <othermaciej> most video player UIs don't actually have a stop operation
  724. # [21:35] <maikmerten> (currently I don't see how you'd properly restart media file playback)
  725. # [21:35] <othermaciej> but if you want one, you can pause() and reset the current time to start
  726. # [21:36] <maikmerten> okay, that sounds like a plan
  727. # [21:36] <maikmerten> an idea if the experimental Opera build supports that...
  728. # [21:36] <maikmerten> well, nah, doesn't matter
  729. # [21:36] <maikmerten> software shouldn't be written against that
  730. # [21:36] <maikmerten> otherwise people will rightfully scream "what part of 'experimenta' didn't you get?" ;-)
  731. # [21:37] <maikmerten> s/experimenta/experimental
  732. # [21:43] <maikmerten> okay, I'd say "document.getElementById(\"video_element\").pause(); document.getElementById(\"video_element\").start = 0;" should mimic a stop button
  733. # [21:44] <maikmerten> in the public (outdated, so it seems) Opera build setting start to zero doesn't seem to work
  734. # [21:49] <zcorpan> there is a public build of opera that supports <video>?
  735. # [21:50] <maikmerten> labs.opera.com
  736. # [21:50] <maikmerten> but seems the API isn't following the current <video> draft
  737. # [21:50] <maikmerten> (no surprise, that build isn't really fresh anymore)
  738. # [21:51] <maikmerten> (plus: it's experimental)
  739. # [21:52] <zcorpan> oh, i thought it was internal builds only
  740. # [21:52] * zcorpan is installing
  741. # [21:52] <zcorpan> separate or upgrade?
  742. # [21:52] <maikmerten> I'd strongly advise installing it separately
  743. # [21:52] <zcorpan> yeah
  744. # [21:55] <zcorpan> ooh, nice!
  745. # [21:55] * zcorpan plays in a data: uri
  746. # [21:58] <hsivonen> too many slides :-(
  747. # [21:58] <hsivonen> have to take out the IDness stuff :-(
  748. # [21:59] <zcorpan> perhaps class="" should always signal classness
  749. # [22:01] <maikmerten> okay, the wikimedia player now has a pause button instead of stop (that'll get reintroduced once the draft is stable and there are new builds with the new API implemented)
  750. # [22:01] * Quits: hasather (n=hasather@81-235-209-174-no62.tbcn.telia.com) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  751. # [22:01] <maikmerten> I guess play() and pause() will stick, so that should be safe
  752. # [22:02] * Joins: hasather (n=hasather@81-235-209-174-no62.tbcn.telia.com)
  753. # [22:10] <maikmerten> oh, and in case the JavaScript you can see in that Wikipedia player is blinding you: Don't blame them, blame me. I haven't written JavaScript for years and never was good in it to begin with ;)
  754. # [22:11] <maikmerten> (just the usual disclaimer, guess some real web programming experts may be in this channel)
  755. # [22:13] * Quits: maikmerten (n=maikmert@L84a3.l.pppool.de) ("going to bed...")
  756. # [22:28] <Hixie> nice summary http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/05/10/six-months-later-the-new-html-working-group/
  757. # [22:28] <hsivonen> hmm. so now the title of the spec is "HTML 5" not "HTML5"
  758. # [22:29] <Hixie> what's the difference?
  759. # [22:29] <hsivonen> Hixie: the space
  760. # [22:29] <Hixie> if people want some trivia that distinguishes us from other people, we can say that "HTML 5" is the name of the spec and "HTML5" is the name of the language...
  761. # [22:30] <hsivonen> :-)
  762. # [22:30] <hsivonen> I guess omitting the space is the WHATWG shibboleth
  763. # [22:31] <Hixie> it's like CSS21 vs CSS 2.1
  764. # [22:31] <Hixie> i'm kinda happy with the abstract of the w3c version of the html5 spec
  765. # [22:32] <Hixie> it ushers in the new wave of spec design and brushes off the last few years of non-work all in one neat paragraph
  766. # [22:38] <othermaciej> I'm surprised to see someone call the HTML5 proposal a "Surprise Proposal"
  767. # [22:39] <Dashiva> Is the w3 version linked anywhere yet?
  768. # [22:39] <Hixie> dev.w3.org/cvsweb/html5/spec/
  769. # [22:39] <Hixie> iirc
  770. # [22:40] <Philip`> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/html5/spec/Overview.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8 specifically, but cvsweb will hate you for downloading it
  771. # [22:40] <Hixie> yeah that's kinda funny
  772. # [22:40] <Hixie> you download it and it locks you out :-)
  773. # [22:41] <Dashiva> Not like I -wanted- to use that mean web server anyway. I bet it has cooties :p
  774. # [22:49] * Quits: ROBOd (n=robod@86.34.246.154) ("http://www.robodesign.ro")
  775. # [23:03] <Hixie> 29 canvas e-mails remaining
  776. # [23:03] <Hixie> other than those asking for a text output api
  777. # [23:08] <hsivonen> Hixie: will you reconsider dashed stroking?
  778. # [23:10] <Hixie> yeah, there's a bunch of mail outstanding on it from a few days ago
  779. # [23:11] <Hixie> from a quick skim i didn't see anything that seemed convincingly in favour of it though
  780. # [23:11] <Hixie> especially given the demo
  781. # [23:12] <hsivonen> Hixie: not even that it seems to be a standard part of the PostScript/PDF imaging model?
  782. # [23:12] <Hixie> how is that relevant?
  783. # [23:12] <hsivonen> Hixie: presumably, offering it is cheap if back end libraries implement it anyway
  784. # [23:12] <Hixie> plenty of things are cheap, but not offered
  785. # [23:14] <hsivonen> I thought canvas was supposed to put a JS API on the PDF imaging back end with all the usual stuff
  786. # [23:15] * hsivonen uses dashed strokes in static diagrams relatively often
  787. # [23:15] <Hixie> nope, it just provides a js direct mode bitmap api
  788. # [23:15] <Hixie> it's not an api to any particular undelying api
  789. # [23:15] * Quits: yod (n=ot@banff-72-29-239-177.mycanopy.net) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  790. # [23:15] <Hixie> understand that i'm not particularly against dashed strokes, i'm just trying to keep the api to a minimum, and so something has to be cut -- and dashed strokes simply aren't very frequently requested
  791. # [23:16] <Hixie> if we did add dashed strokes, though, i bet the next request would be control the dash pattern
  792. # [23:16] <hsivonen> of course I was expecting control of the dash pattern
  793. # [23:16] <Hixie> see, it's a slippery slope :-)
  794. # [23:16] <hsivonen> i.e. exposing the PDF 1.4 drawing back end in JS
  795. # [23:16] <Dashiva> Guys, you need to be more semantic in your use of dash, so my highlighter knows if it refers to me :)
  796. # [23:17] <Hixie> hah
  797. # [23:18] <hsivonen> Hixie: it appears I've misunderstood what canvas is supposed to be. :-/
  798. # [23:18] <Hixie> i don't understand why you thought it had anything to do with a particular underlying api
  799. # [23:19] <hsivonen> Hixie: not API but imaging model
  800. # [23:19] <hsivonen> Hixie: PostScript begat PDF, PDF begat Quartz 2D, Quartz 2D begat canvas
  801. # [23:19] <Hixie> it's certainly not that simple at either of those steps, though i agree there was strong influence down that line
  802. # [23:20] <hsivonen> Hixie: I expect canvas to expose the PDF 1.4 imaging model in a way that maps reasonably to C libraries designed to implement the imaging model
  803. # [23:20] <hsivonen> Hixie: I understand that you don't want more than one way to do things when canvas already does something.
  804. # [23:21] <hsivonen> Hixie: but dash arrays are a hard-to-emulate part of the imaging model
  805. # [23:21] <Hixie> so's text
  806. # [23:21] <Hixie> and we don't have that
  807. # [23:21] <hsivonen> Hixie: not text layout
  808. # [23:21] <Hixie> we don't have any text at all
  809. # [23:21] <hsivonen> Hixie: only drawing a glyph at the current point
  810. # [23:22] <Philip`> About the dash demo, apparently it fails unpleasantly on certain curves and sharp corners. That might just be a fixable bug in the demo, but it's a bit messy and still can't do proper dashed curves
  811. # [23:22] <Hixie> Philip`: indeed
  812. # [23:22] <hsivonen> Hixie: exposing text is harder than exposing dashing
  813. # [23:22] <Hixie> i'm just saying that we're not trying to be the be-all and end-all of all drawing APIs
  814. # [23:22] <Philip`> (s/it's a bit messy/any approach based on simulating dashes within JS/)
  815. # [23:22] <Hixie> some features don't make the cut
  816. # [23:22] <hsivonen> Hixie: it's not like dashing is something that back ends would have to add. they have it already
  817. # [23:22] * Joins: yod (n=ot@banff-72-29-239-177.mycanopy.net)
  818. # [23:23] <Hixie> hsivonen: i'm not making any arguments regarding the complexity of implementation
  819. # [23:25] <jgraham> FWIW I would expect dashed lines to be present too for e.g. plotting applications
  820. # [23:30] <Philip`> http://canvaspaint.org/ - that's doing dashed lines (for the selection tool)
  821. # [23:31] <zcorpan> Philip`: cool!
  822. # [23:33] <Philip`> It looks like it's using the image http://canvaspaint.org/icons/dashed2.gif as a repeated pattern in order to draw the dashed outline
  823. # [23:34] <Philip`> which won't work at all for non-rectangular selections (which aren't supported in that program - don't know if that's because the dashes were too hard or the whole selection thing was too hard)
  824. # [23:35] <othermaciej> I think dashed strokes aren't a very extreme feature
  825. # [23:35] <othermaciej> but maybe better saved for the next version
  826. # [23:35] <Hixie> this whole editing the spec thing would be going much better if cgi.w3.org wasn't dead
  827. # [23:36] <Philip`> Was v2 mostly adding setTransform? (I can't remember what else seemed new...)
  828. # [23:37] <Philip`> and has anybody released a browser with the v2 features yet?
  829. # [23:37] <Hixie> getImageData/putImageData, setTransform, and isPointInPath
  830. # [23:37] <Philip`> Ah, okay
  831. # [23:38] <Hixie> and maybe transform()
  832. # [23:38] <Hixie> i don't recall
  833. # [23:38] <Philip`> I wouldn't have thought it's too late now to add things to v2, since it doesn't need to be frozen for compatibility if nobody's released it yet
  834. # [23:39] * Quits: met_ (n=Hassman@r5bx220.net.upc.cz) ("Chemists never die, they just stop reacting.")
  835. # [23:39] <Hixie> you don't freeze a spec when an implementation is released, you freeze a year before release
  836. # [23:40] <Hixie> also, every feature added is expensive, though some are even more expensive than others
  837. # [23:40] <Philip`> Oh, that makes sense
  838. # [23:40] <Hixie> so you have to go slowly
  839. # [23:41] <othermaciej> I'm still not sure getImageData is sensible
  840. # [23:42] <Philip`> The specific definition, or the whole concept?
  841. # [23:42] <Philip`> I like the concept because it means I can write canvas tests without having to manually check the output of hundreds of them :-)
  842. # [23:43] <Hixie> othermaciej: oh?
  843. # [23:43] <othermaciej> given the possibility of device-specific scaling, it's hard to make interoperable code that actually reads the data
  844. # [23:43] <Philip`> (Actually, I guess I could work around that by assuming toDataURL is deterministic and then extracting a pixel into a new canvas and toDataURLing and comparing to a known image... That'd be very evil, though)
  845. # [23:43] <othermaciej> using it with putImageData is fine, but reading the pixels is dubious
  846. # [23:44] <Hixie> othermaciej: the expected use case is you read the data with getID, apply a filter to all the data, then put it back with putID
  847. # [23:44] <Hixie> othermaciej: you're not really expected to get single pixel values (though i'm sure people will)
  848. # [23:44] <othermaciej> the data attribute is readonly - how would you apply a filter?
  849. # [23:44] <Hixie> the reference to the array is readonly. the actual pixels aren't.
  850. # [23:45] <othermaciej> oh
  851. # [23:45] <othermaciej> is that how IDL works?
  852. # [23:45] <Hixie> it's how my IDL works
  853. # [23:45] <Hixie> :-)
  854. # [23:45] <Hixie> the IDL in the html5 spec is a mess
  855. # [23:45] <Hixie> there's a big thing about that at the top
  856. # [23:46] <othermaciej> anyway, since the width and height might be different even if you got image data the same box, it seems likely to have potential for interop problems
  857. # [23:46] <othermaciej> in fact, any filter you did that isn't scale-independent would have to figure out the scale factor
  858. # [23:47] <othermaciej> (like gaussian blur with a radius of 3 canvas pixels, if there's a 2x device scale factor, would have to be done as a 6 pixel blur)
  859. # [23:47] <othermaciej> I'm not really sure how to solve this though
  860. # [23:48] <Philip`> Are people going to want to implement it with a non-integer number of device pixels per canvas pixel?
  861. # [23:48] <Hixie> yeah what's in the spec seems like the best of a bad set of options
  862. # [23:48] <othermaciej> Philip`: probably, yes
  863. # [23:48] <othermaciej> Mac OS X supports non-integral UI scale factors
  864. # [23:49] <othermaciej> perhaps making the canvas pixel to device pixel scale factor directly visible in the API would make this a bit more clear
  865. # [23:49] <othermaciej> I dunno
  866. # [23:51] <Philip`> Would it be bad to make the canvas use a number of device pixels that's an integer multiple of the canvas pixels, then scale the final bitmap up by a non-integer amount before drawing to the screen? That'd probably avoid the nasty cases of getImageData not mapping to a simple well-defined group of device pixels
  867. # [23:51] * Joins: kingryan (n=kingryan@142.131.37.98)
  868. # [23:52] <othermaciej> yes, that's possible
  869. # [23:52] <Philip`> (Then ImageData could just tell you the number of device pixels per canvas pixel, and you could work everything out by easy multiplication, without worrying about rounding and things)
  870. # [23:53] <othermaciej> though if your scale factor is 4:3, you need a 3x buffer, which is a little sad
  871. # [23:56] <Philip`> I was thinking you could store a 1x buffer then scale the bitmap by 4/3 when copying to the screen, or a 2x buffer and scale by 2/3 (which I guess would be less blurry output). Might not look good in practice, though
  872. # [23:57] <Hixie> it doesn't actually matter in practice
  873. # [23:57] <Hixie> because getID and putID only deal with device pixels
  874. # [23:57] <Hixie> not canvas pixels
  875. # [23:57] <Hixie> (other than for selecting the region, but that's a float)
  876. # [23:57] * Joins: timblair (n=timblair@host-87-74-129-183.bulldogdsl.com)
  877. # [23:59] <Philip`> The problem is in the mapping between device pixels and canvas pixels - I think it'd be much easier to understand if you could call getImageData(x, y, 1, 1) and be certain you'll get n*m pixels (for some known positive integers n and m), rather than getting some arbitrary number that depends on x and y and could be zero
  878. # [23:59] <Hixie> why would you call gID with 1,1?
  879. # Session Close: Sat May 12 00:00:00 2007

The end :)