/irc-logs / freenode / #whatwg / 2009-04-02 / end

Options:

  1. # Session Start: Thu Apr 02 00:00:00 2009
  2. # Session Ident: #whatwg
  3. # [00:12] <gsnedders> So, I click the button and then it gets stuck "Contacting 'www.opera.com'"
  4. # [00:12] <gsnedders> Service Temporarily Unavailable
  5. # [00:12] <gsnedders> The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later.
  6. # [00:12] <gsnedders> Additionally, a 503 Service Temporarily Unavailable error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
  7. # [00:12] <gsnedders> Oh fun
  8. # [00:13] <Hixie> if we did want to do a review process for the whatwg, i guess we could use a google calendar to suggest areas to review each week
  9. # [00:14] * Quits: heycam (n=cam@124-168-80-126.dyn.iinet.net.au) ("bye")
  10. # [00:15] <gsnedders> Hmmm…
  11. # [00:15] <gsnedders> This rules. I'm going to miss the application deadline because the form doesn't work :P
  12. # [00:17] <Hixie> is there no e-mail alternative?
  13. # [00:17] <gsnedders> Nope
  14. # [00:27] <annevk42> oh that sucks
  15. # [00:31] * gsnedders has it come back to life
  16. # [00:31] * gsnedders reads RFC 5514
  17. # [00:32] * Quits: danbri (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri)
  18. # [00:36] <jcranmer> gsnedders: seesh, you're so slow
  19. # [00:36] <jcranmer> you're only reading it now?
  20. # [00:39] * Joins: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-43-20.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  21. # [00:41] * Joins: danbri (n=danbri@86.92.118.197)
  22. # [00:43] * Joins: doublec (n=doublec@118-93-172-205.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz)
  23. # [00:43] * Quits: danbri (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri) (Client Quit)
  24. # [00:48] <Hixie> annevk42, hsivonen: looks like what you said about aria conflicts with aria
  25. # [00:48] <Hixie> specifically, the wai-aria doc says that a host language must support all roles on all elements
  26. # [00:51] <Hixie> abarth rocks http://www.w3.org/mid/7789133a0904010118g437592e0vb61b67e2dd18feb2@mail.gmail.com
  27. # [00:56] * Quits: aroben|meeting (n=aroben@unaffiliated/aroben) ("Leaving")
  28. # [01:07] <gsnedders> jcranmer: Yeah :(
  29. # [01:23] * Joins: taf2 (n=taf2@c-68-49-245-59.hsd1.dc.comcast.net)
  30. # [01:24] * Quits: taf2 (n=taf2@c-68-49-245-59.hsd1.dc.comcast.net) (Client Quit)
  31. # [01:26] * Joins: taf2 (n=taf2@c-68-49-245-59.hsd1.dc.comcast.net)
  32. # [01:27] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@dhcp-246-223.mag.keio.ac.jp)
  33. # [01:28] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@dhcp-246-223.mag.keio.ac.jp) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  34. # [01:30] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@dhcp-246-223.mag.keio.ac.jp)
  35. # [01:31] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@zot.infotech.monash.edu.au)
  36. # [01:54] <Hixie> ok I'm going to create a Google Calendar, and it'll list sections for review each week
  37. # [01:54] <Hixie> anyone interested in helping set this up?
  38. # [02:00] * Quits: tndH (n=Rob@james-baillie-pc083-014.student-halls.leeds.ac.uk) ("ChatZilla 0.9.84-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.9.0.1/2008072406]")
  39. # [02:02] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@nat/google/x-929669a994d52f96)
  40. # [02:12] <Hixie> hm, this doesn't seem like a good way of doing this
  41. # [02:13] * Hixie ponders
  42. # [02:16] <MikeSmith> Hixie: I might otherwise offer to help but I'm the middle of (re)learning Java so that I can try to write useful patches for v.nu conformance-checking backend without making my lack of coding skills obvious
  43. # [02:30] <Hixie> MikeSmith: heh
  44. # [02:31] * Joins: shepazu (n=schepers@adsl-221-31-6.rmo.bellsouth.net)
  45. # [02:32] <Hixie> maybe the better solution is to just get people to see if the spec satisfies their pet peeve rather than trying to get people to review the spec section by section
  46. # [02:32] <Hixie> since the latter really isn't something most people have the skillset to do sanely
  47. # [02:36] <Philip`> There are still some people who would be willing and able to review many sections, and those people's interests would overlap to some extent, and so it would be good to prioritise them to maximise coverage
  48. # [02:36] <Philip`> s/prioritise/organise/
  49. # [02:38] * Joins: shepazutoo (n=schepers@adsl-144-190-9.rmo.bellsouth.net)
  50. # [02:38] <othermaciej> I can probably do a lot of useful review but I have no idea how to prioritize it in a secion-based way
  51. # [02:39] <MikeSmith> hmm, Glazman resigning from CSS WG
  52. # [02:39] <MikeSmith> http://www.glazman.org/weblog/dotclear/index.php?post/2009/04/01/Moving-on
  53. # [02:40] <MikeSmith> oh
  54. # [02:40] <MikeSmith> April Fools
  55. # [02:40] <MikeSmith> ?
  56. # [02:40] <MikeSmith> maybe I should actually read the posting
  57. # [02:41] <MikeSmith> ah, got me
  58. # [02:43] * Joins: cying (n=cying@adsl-75-41-121-135.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  59. # [02:45] <MikeSmith> Hixie: maybe Sierk Bornemann's comments in "Disregard of RFC 4329 and IANA MIME Media Types" are an April Fools joke
  60. # [02:48] * Quits: shepazu (n=schepers@adsl-221-31-6.rmo.bellsouth.net) (Connection timed out)
  61. # [02:51] * Quits: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-43-20.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  62. # [02:52] <Hixie> MikeSmith: it's an old bug, i doubt it
  63. # [02:52] <Hixie> Philip`: any suggestions on how to do that?
  64. # [02:54] * Quits: jwalden (n=waldo@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com) ("ChatZilla 0.9.82.1-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.8.0.9/2006120508]")
  65. # [02:54] <MikeSmith> Hixie: I think it planned it well in advance. He seems like a really clever guy. I like especially the part where he says, "the browser teams of Mozilla, KDE Konqueror, Safari and Opera... did not have such problems like you in accepting and implementing these ... They simply did it. Without questioning the decision of IANA and IETF."
  66. # [02:54] * Joins: shepazu (n=schepers@adsl-150-130-240.rmo.bellsouth.net)
  67. # [02:55] <MikeSmith> s/think it planned/think he planned/
  68. # [02:55] <Hixie> i wish i could think you were right
  69. # [03:01] * Quits: shepazutoo (n=schepers@adsl-144-190-9.rmo.bellsouth.net) (No route to host)
  70. # [03:06] * Quits: sid0_ (n=sid0@unaffiliated/sid0) (Remote closed the connection)
  71. # [03:06] * Joins: sid0_ (n=sid0@unaffiliated/sid0)
  72. # [03:09] * Quits: heycam (n=cam@zot.infotech.monash.edu.au) ("bye")
  73. # [03:10] * Joins: shepazutoo (n=schepers@adsl-150-130-240.rmo.bellsouth.net)
  74. # [03:11] * Quits: shepazu (n=schepers@adsl-150-130-240.rmo.bellsouth.net) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  75. # [03:15] * Joins: shepazu (n=schepers@adsl-221-79-248.rmo.bellsouth.net)
  76. # [03:16] * Quits: cying (n=cying@adsl-75-41-121-135.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  77. # [03:18] * Joins: cying (n=cying@adsl-75-41-121-135.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  78. # [03:18] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  79. # [03:23] * Quits: cying (n=cying@adsl-75-41-121-135.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  80. # [03:30] <Philip`> Hixie: No
  81. # [03:30] * Quits: shepazutoo (n=schepers@adsl-150-130-240.rmo.bellsouth.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  82. # [03:39] <Philip`> Hixie: "the MIME type used to refer to JavaScript in this specification is text/javascript, since that is the most commonly used type." - most commonly used where? http://canvex.lazyilluminati.com/misc/stats/scripttypes2.html says the HTTP Content-Type 1.5 years ago was almost always "application/x-javascript" instead
  83. # [03:39] <Philip`> Hixie: Also: s/JavsScript/JavaScript/
  84. # [03:41] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  85. # [03:44] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host81-151-61-163.range81-151.btcentralplus.com)
  86. # [03:45] <Hixie> hm, most commonly used isn't what i meant
  87. # [03:45] <Hixie> most recognisable, maybe?
  88. # [03:46] <Hixie> it's most commonly used in <script type="">, i think
  89. # [03:46] <Hixie> but i haven't checked recently
  90. # [03:47] <Philip`> http://canvex.lazyilluminati.com/misc/stats/scripts2.html - it was the most common <script type> by far
  91. # [03:51] <Hixie> ok
  92. # [03:51] <Hixie> then i'll claim that's what i meant :-P
  93. # [03:51] <Hixie> after all, i don't think i talk about the HTTP type anywhere
  94. # [03:58] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@17.246.17.52)
  95. # [03:59] * Quits: dolske (n=dolske@firefox/developer/dolske)
  96. # [04:07] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  97. # [04:09] * Quits: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1)
  98. # [04:10] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@zot.infotech.monash.edu.au)
  99. # [04:29] * Quits: davidb_ (n=davidb@bas4-toronto06-1279309917.dsl.bell.ca)
  100. # [04:30] <Hixie> Philip`: yt?
  101. # [04:30] * Quits: dbaron (n=dbaron@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com) ("8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.")
  102. # [04:36] * Joins: dolske (n=dolske@c-76-103-40-203.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  103. # [04:37] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  104. # [04:37] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) (Client Quit)
  105. # [04:39] <Hixie> if anyone has any comments on http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Reviewing_HTML5 let me know, otherwise i'll post it to the list and the blog tomorrow
  106. # [04:42] * Quits: Niictar24 (n=ritz@S010600183f550ae0.cg.shawcable.net) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  107. # [04:50] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  108. # [05:06] * Quits: taf2 (n=taf2@c-68-49-245-59.hsd1.dc.comcast.net)
  109. # [05:20] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  110. # [05:22] * Quits: slightlyoff_afk (n=slightly@72.14.229.81)
  111. # [05:29] * Hixie sends aria last call comments
  112. # [05:33] * olliej is now known as fakeolliej
  113. # [05:36] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  114. # [05:44] <MikeSmith> Hixie: so is it not your plan for the HTML5 spec itself to define which ARIA attributes are conformant on particular elements?
  115. # [05:45] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  116. # [05:46] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) (Client Quit)
  117. # [05:46] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  118. # [05:51] * Joins: jwalden_ (n=waldo@c-24-6-169-169.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  119. # [05:51] * jwalden_ is now known as jwalden
  120. # [06:00] * Quits: bzed (n=bzed@devel.recluse.de) (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
  121. # [06:00] * Quits: jgraham (n=jgraham@web22.webfaction.com) (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
  122. # [06:00] * Quits: campd (n=dave@li5-166.members.linode.com) (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
  123. # [06:00] * Quits: scherkus (n=scherkus@72.14.227.1) (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
  124. # [06:00] * Quits: Dashiva (i=Dashiva@wikia/Dashiva) (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
  125. # [06:00] * Joins: hdh (n=hdh@58.187.22.40)
  126. # [06:00] * Joins: scherkus (n=scherkus@72.14.227.1)
  127. # [06:00] * Joins: bzed (n=bzed@devel.recluse.de)
  128. # [06:00] * Joins: Dashiva (i=Dashiva@wikia/Dashiva)
  129. # [06:00] * Joins: campd (n=dave@li5-166.members.linode.com)
  130. # [06:00] * Joins: jgraham (n=jgraham@web22.webfaction.com)
  131. # [06:02] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  132. # [06:15] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  133. # [06:28] * Joins: Niictar24 (n=ritz@S010600183f550ae0.cg.shawcable.net)
  134. # [06:36] * Quits: roc (n=roc@202.0.36.64)
  135. # [06:41] <Hixie> MikeSmith: as far as i can tell, the ARIA spec disallows that. I sent them e-mail asking if they could change that.
  136. # [06:42] <MikeSmith> Hixie: I see. I wasn't aware that the ARIA spec explicitly disallowed it.
  137. # [06:43] <MikeSmith> Hixie: I'm wondering how useful it will be in the long run to put ARIA-attribute checking into conformance checkers
  138. # [06:43] <MikeSmith> I mean, isn't the real use-case for ARIA that the attributes get added to the DOM dynamically?
  139. # [06:44] <MikeSmith> instead of in markup
  140. # [06:51] * Joins: onar (n=onar@c-98-234-65-251.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  141. # [06:52] <Hixie> yeah
  142. # [06:53] <Hixie> i'm hoping we will get dynamic conformance checkers on the long run
  143. # [06:53] <Hixie> not holding my breath though
  144. # [07:06] * Quits: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.227.1)
  145. # [07:06] * Joins: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.224.1)
  146. # [07:09] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  147. # [07:17] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  148. # [07:27] * Joins: roc (n=roc@121-72-165-244.dsl.telstraclear.net)
  149. # [07:36] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  150. # [07:41] * Joins: sayrer (n=chatzill@pool-71-105-181-8.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net)
  151. # [07:41] <sayrer> hmm, these what blog posts have become increasingly snide
  152. # [07:42] <sayrer> whatwg blog posts
  153. # [07:42] <sayrer> I would like to publish a whatwg blog post about that
  154. # [07:44] <Hixie> go ahead :-)
  155. # [07:44] <Hixie> the blog is open to anyone
  156. # [07:44] <sayrer> that's what I thought
  157. # [07:44] <sayrer> how do I do it?
  158. # [07:45] <Hixie> if you register for an account and log in, you can write the post
  159. # [07:45] <Hixie> then ask lachy to submit it
  160. # [07:45] <sayrer> alright, let's see
  161. # [07:46] <Hixie> keep things nice and happy though :-)
  162. # [07:46] * Hixie is off to play his game console
  163. # [07:46] <Hixie> bbl
  164. # [07:46] <sayrer> I think markp is failing at nice and happy, fwiw
  165. # [07:51] * Joins: ginger (n=nessy@124-171-14-211.dyn.iinet.net.au)
  166. # [07:59] * Quits: heycam (n=cam@zot.infotech.monash.edu.au) ("bye")
  167. # [08:05] * Joins: harig (n=opera@59.90.71.35)
  168. # [08:09] * Quits: nessy (n=nessy@124-171-14-211.dyn.iinet.net.au) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  169. # [08:14] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  170. # [08:21] * Joins: ap (n=ap@194.154.88.34)
  171. # [08:25] * hsivonen notes that markp's copy and paste from IRC logs lower cases content
  172. # [08:25] * Joins: shepazutoo (n=schepers@adsl-144-163-98.rmo.bellsouth.net)
  173. # [08:28] <hsivonen> Hixie: as benh says, we'll probably be stuck with <nav role=navigation> indefinitely. so that probably needs to be made conforming even for the long term accompanied by IRC, blog and twitter whining how it sucks that the W3C has a separate WG patching HTML only from an accessibility point of view
  174. # [08:29] <hsivonen> Hixie: (and whining how implementors opted to implement role=navigation first instead of exposing <nav> right away)
  175. # [08:32] <hsivonen> annevk42: I think in general, ARIA should just stay away from XSD. (nmtoken or otherwise)
  176. # [08:34] <hsivonen> annevk42: regarding ARIA working around MS but being supported in IE8 nonetheless: do you believe that all top four would have some support for ARIA if ARIA weren't designed in such a way that no vendor can block it?
  177. # [08:34] * Joins: tndH (n=Rob@james-baillie-pc083-014.student-halls.leeds.ac.uk)
  178. # [08:34] * Joins: weinig_ (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  179. # [08:34] * Joins: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@c83-252-196-43.bredband.comhem.se)
  180. # [08:38] * Quits: doublec (n=doublec@118-93-172-205.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz) ("Leaving")
  181. # [08:38] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  182. # [08:41] * Quits: shepazu (n=schepers@adsl-221-79-248.rmo.bellsouth.net) (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  183. # [08:48] * Joins: Maurice (n=ano@a80-101-46-164.adsl.xs4all.nl)
  184. # [08:50] * Quits: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@c83-252-196-43.bredband.comhem.se) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  185. # [08:53] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@124-168-80-126.dyn.iinet.net.au)
  186. # [08:57] * Joins: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@c-71-202-109-116.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  187. # [08:58] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host81-151-61-163.range81-151.btcentralplus.com)
  188. # [08:58] * Joins: pesla (n=retep@procurios.xs4all.nl)
  189. # [09:04] * Joins: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@pat-tdc.opera.com)
  190. # [09:04] * Quits: onar (n=onar@c-98-234-65-251.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  191. # [09:20] <Hixie> sayrer: how so?
  192. # [09:20] <sayrer> Hixie, just snide stuff like
  193. # [09:21] <sayrer> regarding the meta charset thing
  194. # [09:21] <sayrer> "This is mainly to address the desire of a few overly vocal authors to be able to serve the same markup in both text/html and application/xhtml+xml modes."
  195. # [09:21] <sayrer> or
  196. # [09:21] <Hixie> is that snide? isn't it precisely accurate?
  197. # [09:22] <sayrer> do you add things because people are overly vocal?
  198. # [09:22] <sayrer> I thought not
  199. # [09:22] <Hixie> in that particular case, yes, it was added because sam complained loudly
  200. # [09:22] <Hixie> i probably wouldn't have added it if he hadn't asked for it
  201. # [09:23] <Hixie> because i think serving polyglot documents is silly
  202. # [09:23] <sayrer> did he make a bad argument?
  203. # [09:23] <Hixie> but he had some use cases for it
  204. # [09:23] <Hixie> so in it goes
  205. # [09:23] <Hixie> no, what makes you ask that?
  206. # [09:23] <sayrer> so, it seems snide to require people to make their case, and then call them "overly vocal" for doing so
  207. # [09:24] <sayrer> and then there's
  208. # [09:24] <sayrer> "Those who complained that HTML 5 was 'too bloated' will have a little less to complain about now that several parts of it have been published as separate documents. On the other hand, critics who complained about these things as a cover for other agendas will have to continue complaining a little while longer."
  209. # [09:24] <Hixie> again, that just seems accurate
  210. # [09:24] <Hixie> how is that snide?
  211. # [09:25] <Hixie> i think you're reading far more into mark's humorous comments than is intended
  212. # [09:25] <sayrer> who has a hidden agenda?
  213. # [09:25] <Hixie> the only way that last comment could be offensive is if someone had a hidden agenda, which no-one does as far as i know
  214. # [09:25] <sayrer> but the comment seems to claim they exist
  215. # [09:26] <sayrer> not very productive
  216. # [09:26] <sayrer> I wouldn't call it "precisely accurate" at all
  217. # [09:26] <Hixie> given how productive mark is and how useful his posts are, i think it's reasonable to let him inject some of his humour in there
  218. # [09:26] * Quits: harig (n=opera@59.90.71.35) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  219. # [09:26] <Hixie> in what way is it not accurate?
  220. # [09:27] <sayrer> I think it's reasonable to let him write whatever he wants
  221. # [09:28] <sayrer> you just said no one has a hidden agenda, but Mark wrote
  222. # [09:28] <sayrer> "critics who complained about these things as a cover for other agendas"
  223. # [09:29] <sayrer> I would call that "haha only serious"
  224. # [09:29] <Hixie> why, are there people with hidden agendas?!
  225. # [09:29] <sayrer> oh probably
  226. # [09:29] <Hixie> o_O
  227. # [09:29] <Hixie> who?
  228. # [09:30] <sayrer> I dunno, the problem with the comment is that it places some people above reproach
  229. # [09:30] <Hixie> how ever so?
  230. # [09:31] <Hixie> are you seriously suggesting that mark was suggesting that there really are people with hidden agendas??
  231. # [09:31] <sayrer> yes
  232. # [09:31] <Hixie> ok in that case allow me to disillusion you
  233. # [09:32] <Hixie> mark may have a sense of humour that some would call "british"
  234. # [09:32] <sayrer> oh, I understand that kind of humour
  235. # [09:32] <Hixie> but i assure you that he's not actually suggesting there are people acting in bad faith
  236. # [09:32] <sayrer> Agree to disagree
  237. # [09:32] <Hixie> he likes needling people (just see his blog)
  238. # [09:32] <Hixie> apparently he needled you this time :-)
  239. # [09:33] * Quits: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@c-71-202-109-116.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  240. # [09:34] <sayrer> no, I just think he's smug, and I don't mind saying so
  241. # [09:34] <sayrer> it's not happy and nice
  242. # [09:34] <Hixie> mark is one of the most self-effacing guys out there
  243. # [09:35] <sayrer> ok
  244. # [09:41] <MikeSmith> +1 to more jackassery on the whatwg blog
  245. # [09:41] <sayrer> http://twitter.com/diveintomark/status/1344958151
  246. # [09:42] * Joins: sid0 (n=sid0@unaffiliated/sid0)
  247. # [09:42] <MikeSmith> the whatwg blog should ideally reflect the diversity of opinion on #whatwg, and the color/character of #whatwg discussions
  248. # [09:42] <sayrer> what a self-effacing guy
  249. # [09:43] * Joins: danbri (n=danbri@86.92.118.197)
  250. # [09:43] <Hixie> are you sure you know what "smug" and "self-effacing" mean? that twitter had nothing at all to do with mark, how could it possibly be either?
  251. # [09:43] * Quits: sid0_ (n=sid0@unaffiliated/sid0) (Remote closed the connection)
  252. # [09:43] <Hixie> i'm very confused about your attitude here
  253. # [09:43] <sayrer> yes, I know what both of those mean. do you?
  254. # [09:44] <Hixie> yes, and both require one to say something about oneself
  255. # [09:44] <Hixie> that twitter said nothing about mark
  256. # [09:44] <sayrer> that isn't true
  257. # [09:45] <Hixie> smug: Exhibiting or feeling great or offensive satisfaction with *oneself*
  258. # [09:45] <Hixie> self-effacing: Not drawing attention to *oneself*
  259. # [09:45] <sayrer> what do you need to do to pass judgement on others, in public?
  260. # [09:46] <Hixie> who is passing judgment on something?
  261. # [09:46] <sayrer> especially regarding their moral fiber or motivations
  262. # [09:46] <Hixie> sam himself has acknowledged that his history document missed numerous key points of the history of html, how is mark's statement again anything but factual?
  263. # [09:47] <sayrer> would you say it is "unencumbered as it was by facts, context, or perspective of any kind" ?
  264. # [09:47] <Hixie> yes, the whole document was woefully inaccurate and wildly devoid of context
  265. # [09:47] <sayrer> so, no facts, context, or perspective of any kind?
  266. # [09:47] <Hixie> (literally starting with the first sentence)
  267. # [09:48] <Hixie> it certainly had an interesting perspective
  268. # [09:48] <sayrer> no facts?
  269. # [09:48] <Hixie> so possibly the statement was inaccurate in that regard
  270. # [09:48] <Hixie> i'll certainly grant you that mark, like myself, is prone to exaggeration
  271. # [09:48] <sayrer> no context?
  272. # [09:48] <sayrer> of any kind?
  273. # [09:49] <sayrer> which part of the statement was true?
  274. # [09:50] <Hixie> mark's twitter was an exaggerated indication of inaccuracy in sam's document, and sam's document was indeed wildly inaccurate
  275. # [09:51] <Hixie> sure, it was exaggerated for humorous value, just like mark's blog posts have humorous comments which you apparently take seriously
  276. # [09:51] <sayrer> by exaggerated, you mean wrong?
  277. # [09:51] <Hixie> no, i mean exaggerated.
  278. # [09:51] <Hixie> why are you offended at an obvious joke (people with hidden agendas? really? you thought that was serious?), and why do you now try to insult someone who has spent so much of his time helping us bring html to a greater audience?
  279. # [09:52] <sayrer> he gets paid to that, afaik
  280. # [09:52] <Hixie> so...?
  281. # [09:53] <sayrer> anyway, you think "HTML is being developed outside of the W3C by a number of browser implementers, excluding Microsoft. "
  282. # [09:53] <sayrer> is wrong?
  283. # [09:53] <Hixie> yes
  284. # [09:53] <sayrer> why?
  285. # [09:54] <Hixie> HTML is being developed inside the W3C by 350 people and outside the W3C by over 950 people, and Microsoft contributes roughly equal amounts to html both inside and outside the w3c
  286. # [09:54] <Hixie> the statement is wildly misleading from start to finish
  287. # [09:54] <sayrer> you mean exaggerated?
  288. # [09:54] <Hixie> no, i mean misleading
  289. # [09:54] <Hixie> there's no exaggeration there
  290. # [09:55] <Hixie> if anything it's the opposite
  291. # [09:55] <Hixie> misleading through omission
  292. # [09:55] <sayrer> I don't know. you mean the ommission of development inside the W3C?
  293. # [09:56] <sayrer> too many mms. anyway, there is some W3C mailing list traffic
  294. # [09:56] <Hixie> and the omission of people other than browser vendors, who form the bulk of the contributors, and the omission of the way microsoft's involvement is not any substantially more productive in the w3c than out
  295. # [09:56] <Hixie> but i'm really not interested in discussing sam's document, i don't think it is particularly important
  296. # [09:56] <sayrer> OK
  297. # [09:56] <Hixie> (i and others have already mentioned the numerous mistakes with it)
  298. # [09:56] <Hixie> (to him)
  299. # [09:57] <sayrer> it's mostly quotes
  300. # [09:57] <sayrer> I guess there's a bit of commentary alongside
  301. # [09:57] * Joins: zcorpan_ (n=zcorpan@c83-252-196-43.bredband.comhem.se)
  302. # [09:58] <Hixie> if you're interested in a significantly more balanced and accurate history of html, btw, MikeSmith wrote one on the esw wiki
  303. # [09:58] <MikeSmith> heh
  304. # [09:58] <MikeSmith> well, there are some that think that is not more balanced or more accurate at all
  305. # [09:58] <MikeSmith> which is why my name is at the top of it now
  306. # [09:59] <MikeSmith> I was asked to put it there to make it clear that, well, it was written by an actual person
  307. # [09:59] <Hixie> i said "more balanced", not that it was perfect :-P
  308. # [09:59] <MikeSmith> a person with opinions
  309. # [09:59] * Quits: ginger (n=nessy@124-171-14-211.dyn.iinet.net.au) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  310. # [09:59] <sayrer> what is the link?
  311. # [09:59] <MikeSmith> http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/history
  312. # [09:59] <sayrer> I wonder if it spends a lot of time discussing XHTML
  313. # [10:00] <MikeSmith> there are subpages like http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/DraconianErrorHandling
  314. # [10:00] <MikeSmith> sayrer: yeah, both flavors
  315. # [10:00] <MikeSmith> e.g., http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/XHTML2/objections
  316. # [10:01] <sayrer> frankly, this one just looks uncontroversial
  317. # [10:01] <sayrer> so I guess there is less to argue about
  318. # [10:01] * jgraham wasn't aware that controversy was a goal
  319. # [10:01] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  320. # [10:02] <sayrer> it is orthogonal to accuracy
  321. # [10:02] <MikeSmith> sayrer: anyway, you will notice that Mark Pilgrim's name shows up in that history a lot
  322. # [10:02] <sayrer> yours?
  323. # [10:02] <MikeSmith> yeah
  324. # [10:02] <sayrer> where?
  325. # [10:02] <MikeSmith> everywhere
  326. # [10:02] <MikeSmith> he has been like a kind of Greek chorus throughout this whole tragic comedy
  327. # [10:03] <sayrer> in the linked documents?
  328. # [10:03] <MikeSmith> I probably could have dropped a whole more more Pilgrim in there
  329. # [10:03] <sayrer> boy oh boy
  330. # [10:03] <MikeSmith> but I tried to use it judiciously
  331. # [10:03] <sayrer> like... SVG Tiny 1.2 Candidate Recommendation published.
  332. # [10:03] <MikeSmith> Mark's like a fine spice
  333. # [10:03] <sayrer> what is that about?
  334. # [10:03] <MikeSmith> filler
  335. # [10:04] <sayrer> haha
  336. # [10:04] <MikeSmith> to make the peanut gallery happy
  337. # [10:04] <sayrer> oh, XML On The Web Has Failed
  338. # [10:06] <sayrer> it has an entire section titled "Enter RFC 3023"
  339. # [10:06] <MikeSmith> sayrer: feel free to add anything to that history page, if you find gaps
  340. # [10:06] <sayrer> no thanks
  341. # [10:06] <MikeSmith> well, you can even say mean stuff there that you know will really piss people off
  342. # [10:07] <MikeSmith> but just put a smiley after it
  343. # [10:07] <MikeSmith> and then everything will be OK
  344. # [10:07] <sayrer> oh right
  345. # [10:07] <MikeSmith> that's the magic of the smiley
  346. # [10:07] <sayrer> british humour
  347. # [10:07] <MikeSmith> I want to make a smiley that's a little icon of me smiling
  348. # [10:07] <MikeSmith> but flipping the bird at the same time
  349. # [10:07] <MikeSmith> I would use that one a lot if I had it
  350. # [10:08] <sayrer> I'm surprised this hasn't gotten old yet
  351. # [10:08] <sayrer> "you're a cunt :)"
  352. # [10:08] <sayrer> so many forms of that on the internet
  353. # [10:09] <jgraham> MikeSmith: Just make a really popular typeface and thn use some PUA glyphs for extra smilie characters
  354. # [10:10] <MikeSmith> sayrer: you know what playing the dozens is?
  355. # [10:10] <sayrer> yes
  356. # [10:10] <MikeSmith> well, there's only one way to lose that game
  357. # [10:11] <sayrer> I thought there were a couple
  358. # [10:11] <sayrer> but which did you have in mind?
  359. # [10:12] <MikeSmith> the one where you get genuinely mad or hurt by what the other dude says
  360. # [10:14] * Joins: adambeynon (n=adambeyn@94-193-137-51.zone7.bethere.co.uk)
  361. # [10:14] <sayrer> you can also lose by being an actual asshole
  362. # [10:14] <MikeSmith> nope
  363. # [10:14] * Joins: danbri_ (n=danbri@86.92.118.197)
  364. # [10:14] <MikeSmith> not in that game
  365. # [10:14] * Quits: danbri (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  366. # [10:15] <MikeSmith> it's irrelevant
  367. # [10:15] <MikeSmith> I'm not defending it as a great game, by the way
  368. # [10:15] <sayrer> there are lots of seemingly rude things that are allowed, sure
  369. # [10:15] * Joins: zcorpan__ (n=zcorpan@c83-252-196-43.bredband.comhem.se)
  370. # [10:15] <zcorpan__> "The fact that different user agents deal with protocol violations in different ways is a good thing." -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2009AprJun/0030.html
  371. # [10:16] <takkaria> uh-oh
  372. # [10:16] * Quits: zcorpan_ (n=zcorpan@c83-252-196-43.bredband.comhem.se) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  373. # [10:18] <MikeSmith> zcorpan__: that is a gem
  374. # [10:18] <MikeSmith> [[
  375. # [10:18] <MikeSmith> It cannot be standardized in a way that would be safe for safety-
  376. # [10:18] <MikeSmith> critical
  377. # [10:18] <MikeSmith> environments such as health care, where failure to display the errors
  378. # [10:18] <MikeSmith> could very well result in serious injury or death.
  379. # [10:18] <MikeSmith> ]]
  380. # [10:18] <MikeSmith> solid gold, that
  381. # [10:18] <MikeSmith> the "serious injury or death" card
  382. # [10:18] <sayrer> yeah, close to godwin's law
  383. # [10:19] <sayrer> on the other hand, they aren't protocol violations if everyone handles them the same way
  384. # [10:19] <Hixie> aah, mikesmith is ready roy's latest offering
  385. # [10:19] <jgraham> "The correct way to interoperate with broken Web
  386. # [10:19] <jgraham> content is to display a very large error message that explains why
  387. # [10:19] <jgraham> it is broken"
  388. # [10:20] <jgraham> I see Roy is pitching for that UI led job he's always coveted
  389. # [10:20] <MikeSmith> sayrer: they are because the Bible and/or the Founding Fathers said they should be violations
  390. # [10:20] <jgraham> *lead
  391. # [10:21] <takkaria> I do wonder what to do with a problem like Roy
  392. # [10:21] <MikeSmith> jgraham: very well aligned with market realities
  393. # [10:21] <hsivonen> It would be "fun" to generate a version of the HTML5 parser for Gecko that halts on the first parse error
  394. # [10:21] <Hixie> sayrer: i think there are things that are clearly errors even if all UAs interoperate on the behaviour
  395. # [10:21] <Hixie> sayrer: e.g. <span></em> is clearly an error
  396. # [10:21] <jgraham> takkaria: I guess sending him off to work as a children's nanny won't work?
  397. # [10:22] <sayrer> <b><i>hmm</b></i> ?
  398. # [10:22] <Hixie> that's another example
  399. # [10:22] <Hixie> the markup doesn't match the resulting DOM at all
  400. # [10:22] <sayrer> where is the error?
  401. # [10:23] <sayrer> we should have a good reason to call it an error
  402. # [10:23] <sayrer> it's certainly ugly
  403. # [10:23] <takkaria> jgraham: I have a feeling his approach to children when they do soething wrong is display a very large erorr message that explains what they've done wrong, probably not too lenient on the error-correcting side of things...
  404. # [10:23] <annevk42> if you put a character after </b> you cannot tell what DOM you get
  405. # [10:23] <annevk42> unless you know how an HTML parser works
  406. # [10:23] <annevk42> therefore it makes sense to flag the simple case as well
  407. # [10:23] <sayrer> we're assuming a conformant HTML parser
  408. # [10:24] <sayrer> what else would we talk about?
  409. # [10:24] <annevk42> I am too
  410. # [10:24] <MikeSmith> takkaria: we don't want to do anything. he's actually a secret double agent of the whatwg cabal
  411. # [10:24] <annevk42> I'm just saying that getting nodes duplicated is not what you expect to happen
  412. # [10:24] <sayrer> but you can check it in your browser and see if it is what you want
  413. # [10:24] <MikeSmith> he appears in times of trouble to act as a sort of common foil to unite the cabal
  414. # [10:24] <takkaria> how about we call things parse errors where the DOM and the text/html don't intuitively match up?
  415. # [10:26] <annevk42> sayrer, that doesn't really lead to understanding how it works or why it works in unexpected ways
  416. # [10:26] <sayrer> so parse errors have a pedagogical goal?
  417. # [10:26] <jgraham> sayrer: What if it isn't what you want? How do you tell where you made a mistake?
  418. # [10:27] <sayrer> a fair point!
  419. # [10:27] * Joins: svl (n=chatzill@a194-109-2-36.dmn.xs4all.nl)
  420. # [10:27] <sayrer> the difference between a C compiler and a lint tool, right?
  421. # [10:28] <jgraham> Hmm. Not sure that's a good analogy. biab
  422. # [10:28] <takkaria> I don't know what other goal they would have
  423. # [10:29] <takkaria> HTML prior to HTML5 never had parse errors
  424. # [10:29] <roc> it's important to have a common enemy to unite against
  425. # [10:30] <roc> hsivonen: you need to implement that strict parser, ship it to Roy and force him to use it exclusively
  426. # [10:31] <sayrer> "The error handling for parse errors is well-defined"
  427. # [10:31] <sayrer> pretty much says it all
  428. # [10:32] <annevk42> I doubt it says the same to you and me
  429. # [10:32] <sayrer> well, what does it say to you?
  430. # [10:33] <zcorpan__> it's just a statement of fact, might not actually be true
  431. # [10:34] <zcorpan__> just like this one http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=2951&to=2952
  432. # [10:35] <Hixie> zcorpan__: btw, please send comments on typos and things by e-mail, i can't track them when you just mention them on IRC
  433. # [10:35] <annevk42> sayrer, that requirements for authors are different from implementors
  434. # [10:35] <sayrer> when I see <b><i>hmm</b></i>
  435. # [10:36] <sayrer> I definitely agree there is an aspect "this may not mean what you think it means"
  436. # [10:36] * MikeSmith likes roc idea of inviting people to try browsing the Web with a strict-HTML-parser browser for one day or whatever. or even 1 hour. or ten minutes
  437. # [10:36] <annevk42> actually, the simple case does what you think it means
  438. # [10:36] <sayrer> beside the point
  439. # [10:36] <annevk42> problems starts arising when you enter a few more characters between the tags
  440. # [10:36] <sayrer> but also invalid?
  441. # [10:36] <sayrer> or a parse error?
  442. # [10:36] <annevk42> sure
  443. # [10:36] <sayrer> why, it does what I think it means
  444. # [10:37] <Hixie> <b>a<i>b</b>c</i> is different from <x>a<y>b</x>c</y>, too
  445. # [10:37] <annevk42> it's more likely you made a typo
  446. # [10:37] <zcorpan__> Hixie: k
  447. # [10:37] <sayrer> I agree that is possible
  448. # [10:37] <sayrer> but it's not an interoperability problem
  449. # [10:38] <Hixie> sayrer: do you think we should allow <blink>, too?
  450. # [10:38] <sayrer> yes
  451. # [10:38] <Hixie> ok
  452. # [10:38] <takkaria> if you mentally do s/parse error/warning/, does that solve your problems?
  453. # [10:38] <Hixie> i am confident that your opinion is far from the consensus
  454. # [10:38] <sayrer> not really
  455. # [10:38] <sayrer> no big deal
  456. # [10:38] <sayrer> it's not like I'm going to propose blink
  457. # [10:39] * Joins: ROBOd (n=robod@89.122.216.38)
  458. # [10:39] <sayrer> since, well, who cares
  459. # [10:39] <annevk42> if you don't believe in having differences for authors and impl at all I can see why we differ from opinion :)
  460. # [10:39] <sayrer> I think there is value in helping authors understand what they have written
  461. # [10:39] <zcorpan__> sayrer: it's easy to make everything allowed - just don't read the spec and don't use a validator
  462. # [10:40] <sayrer> that is true for authors
  463. # [10:40] <zcorpan__> yes i meant as an author
  464. # [10:40] <zcorpan__> if you're not an author, why do you care about conformance requirements on authors? :)
  465. # [10:40] <sayrer> I am obviously an author
  466. # [10:41] <sayrer> but I don't care about them at all, true
  467. # [10:41] <sayrer> I have noticed that most of the controversy in the spec centers around author requirements
  468. # [10:42] <Hixie> removing teh author requirements won't remove the controversies
  469. # [10:42] <zcorpan__> removing the author requirements doesn't mean that the controversy is removed, too
  470. # [10:42] <Hixie> it would add a lot more :-)
  471. # [10:42] <sayrer> how so?
  472. # [10:42] <Hixie> well for a start i would start bitching :-)
  473. # [10:42] <sayrer> but why?
  474. # [10:42] <sayrer> is more the question
  475. # [10:42] <zcorpan__> people would go "omg html5 allows <font> again! and tag soup! what a mess!"
  476. # [10:43] <Hixie> because i think have conformance rules for authors is an extremely valuable tool for quality assurance and for learning the language
  477. # [10:43] <sayrer> sounds like what the IETF would call a BCP document
  478. # [10:43] <sayrer> and that is something that would be valuable, I agree
  479. # [10:44] <sayrer> I am not sure I would call them "conformance rules"
  480. # [10:44] <sayrer> still thinking of a better way to put it
  481. # [10:44] <annevk42> if you do not want authoring conformance at all it might be easier to start with that next time rather than why <i><b>test</i></i> is non-conforming
  482. # [10:45] <annevk42> would save me some time
  483. # [10:45] <Hixie> call them what you like, so long as not following them is considered an error
  484. # [10:45] <Hixie> and is not allowed
  485. # [10:45] <sayrer> it is obviously allowed
  486. # [10:45] <sayrer> as HTML5 is written currently
  487. # [10:46] <Hixie> given that html5 explicitly disallows the use of incorrect syntax and incorrect semantics, "obvious" is not the word i would use
  488. # [10:46] <Hixie> "not" maybe would be the word
  489. # [10:47] <sayrer> hmm, there don't seem to be a lot of teeth there
  490. # [10:48] <sayrer> like, Apple's HTML5 homepage had incorrect semantics
  491. # [10:48] <Hixie> teeth?
  492. # [10:48] <sayrer> well, if you use English incorrectly, people might think of less of you, or maybe not even understand you
  493. # [10:48] <Hixie> right, and it's incorrect
  494. # [10:49] <Hixie> just like using incorrect html
  495. # [10:49] <Hixie> it's not allowed by english syntax and grammar
  496. # [10:49] <Hixie> it's not allowed by html syntax and grammar
  497. # [10:49] <sayrer> but with HTML5, you can do that and people will read your web page just fine
  498. # [10:49] <Hixie> same concept
  499. # [10:49] <sayrer> and not notice at all
  500. # [10:49] <Hixie> so?
  501. # [10:49] <Hixie> why would we want them to notice
  502. # [10:49] <sayrer> we don't
  503. # [10:50] <zcorpan__> you can make them notice by having a draconian html parser which is allowed in the spec
  504. # [10:50] <sayrer> so why wag a finger over grammar
  505. # [10:50] <zcorpan__> the v.nu html parser is draconian for certain cases in streaming mode
  506. # [10:50] <roc> the only real solution is for Google to dish out search points based on HTML5 conformance
  507. # [10:51] <sayrer> adsense rates are down, might not work ;)
  508. # [10:51] <MikeSmith> sayrer: authors love to be told exactly what to do, even they don't understand the reasons
  509. # [10:51] <sayrer> yep
  510. # [10:51] <annevk42> Hixie, proposed blog post seems fine
  511. # [10:52] <annevk42> Hixie, though I'd indicate they can e-mail public-html-comments as well
  512. # [10:52] <annevk42> Hixie, that's easier to post to than whatwg@whatwg.org
  513. # [10:52] <Hixie> annevk42: good idea
  514. # [10:52] <sayrer> so the main reason for these conformance rules is so that people won't say bad things?
  515. # [10:53] <sayrer> like "ooooh, tag soup! <blink>!"
  516. # [10:54] <annevk42> it's recommending how to author HTML
  517. # [10:54] <annevk42> it doesn't prevent anyone from doing something else
  518. # [10:54] <sayrer> actually, it's requiring
  519. # [10:54] <Hixie> there are dozens of reasons for having authoring requirements, many of which have been discussed tonight
  520. # [10:54] <Hixie> - helping people learn how to write effective markup
  521. # [10:54] <annevk42> sayrer, only if you follow the spec :)
  522. # [10:54] <Hixie> - helping people track down typos and other errors
  523. # [10:54] <MikeSmith> sayrer: authors also love to have conformance rules so that they can beat other authors over the head with them, when those other authors make mistakes
  524. # [10:54] <Hixie> - helping people write markup that reflects what they intend
  525. # [10:54] * Joins: benh (n=benh@nat/yahoo/x-429dd414225cb220)
  526. # [10:54] * Quits: benh (n=benh@nat/yahoo/x-429dd414225cb220) (Client Quit)
  527. # [10:55] <Hixie> - encouraging best practices
  528. # [10:55] <sayrer> that last one seems bogus
  529. # [10:55] <MikeSmith> we need to support that for-beating-others-over-the-head-with use case
  530. # [10:55] <Hixie> - satisfying the needs of authors who feel the need for rules to guide them
  531. # [10:55] <sayrer> or at least redundant
  532. # [10:55] <Hixie> you may agree with some or none of these
  533. # [10:56] <sayrer> I actually find the list quite valuable
  534. # [10:56] <sayrer> are there more?
  535. # [10:56] <zcorpan__> - make people aware of accessiblity issues? at least that seems to be a point pf wants to make about alt
  536. # [10:56] <Hixie> there's lots, yes
  537. # [10:56] <sayrer> do they all start with "help people..."
  538. # [10:56] <Hixie> zcorpan__: yeah, that's similar to the best practices thing
  539. # [10:56] <sayrer> ?
  540. # [10:56] <Hixie> sayrer: no idea
  541. # [10:57] <sayrer> well, I guess your current list is enough for me to work with
  542. # [10:58] <sayrer> but I would like to know whether any of the author conformance requirements actually have an effect on conformant HTML parsers
  543. # [10:58] <sayrer> it doesn't seem that they do
  544. # [10:58] <sayrer> which I think is a fine design, I should add
  545. # [10:59] <Hixie> author conformance requirements have nothing to do with parsers
  546. # [10:59] <annevk42> http://www.w3.org/mid/e9dffd640904011708l3dd36d28xc6e797791777f4df@mail.gmail.com maybe we need WTP, like HTTP, but for Web browsers :p
  547. # [11:00] * Joins: adambeynon_ (n=adambeyn@94-193-137-51.zone7.bethere.co.uk)
  548. # [11:00] <zcorpan__> Web HTTP
  549. # [11:00] * zcorpan__ is now known as zcorpan
  550. # [11:01] <sayrer> Hixie, ok, it's almost like they could be in a different document
  551. # [11:03] <Hixie> i think that would be a maintenance nightmare
  552. # [11:03] <Hixie> but as it stands the html5 spec can be filtered to show only the author stuff
  553. # [11:04] <Hixie> which is a middle ground that seems to address the same needs
  554. # [11:04] <sayrer> can it do the opposite?
  555. # [11:04] <Hixie> only show implementation stuff? no, but it can highlight implementation stuff, which is about as good
  556. # [11:04] <Hixie> (in practice implementations need to know what author rules are because some implementations are conformance checkers)
  557. # [11:05] <Hixie> (and annotation the document in more detail would be far too much work)
  558. # [11:05] <sayrer> is the author stuff marked up with a specific class?
  559. # [11:05] <Hixie> (for me, at least)
  560. # [11:05] <sayrer> I haven't looked since you did your great big edit
  561. # [11:05] <Hixie> the implementation requirements have class="impl"
  562. # [11:06] <sayrer> I can't believe that HTTP WG thread
  563. # [11:06] <annevk42> (but in a way that you cannot extract all class="impl" and have it make sense)
  564. # [11:06] <Hixie> right, imeplementation requirements share definitions with author stuff
  565. # [11:06] <Hixie> anyway
  566. # [11:06] <Hixie> i should sleep
  567. # [11:06] <Hixie> nn
  568. # [11:07] <MikeSmith> cool to see the http mailing list providing some real entertainment value again
  569. # [11:07] * Quits: adambeynon (n=adambeyn@94-193-137-51.zone7.bethere.co.uk) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  570. # [11:07] <MikeSmith> imaginary numbers or no less important than real numbers
  571. # [11:07] <takkaria> annevk42: I wonder how large the non-html/js/jpeg portion of the web is
  572. # [11:08] <annevk42> large enough for the HTTP WG to exist and not care about it
  573. # [11:08] <annevk42> not care about the html/js/jpeg portion, that is
  574. # [11:09] <zcorpan> so they care about the ms word and pdf portion?
  575. # [11:10] <annevk42> harhar
  576. # [11:10] <MikeSmith> why make handling of existing Web content such a huge priority when we have these whole undiscovered galaxies where clients and servers exchange stuff other than things like HTML, Javascript, and JPGs?
  577. # [11:10] <MikeSmith> the logic is perfectly clear
  578. # [11:10] <sayrer> I suggested publishing Barth's document as informational
  579. # [11:10] <sayrer> everyone shook their head at me
  580. # [11:11] <MikeSmith> sayrer: I think they shook their beards
  581. # [11:11] <annevk42> really? I'd think that's what the HTTP WG guys want
  582. # [11:11] <sayrer> they didn't want to publish it without a specific section in the HTTP standard saying "something might happen here"
  583. # [11:11] <MikeSmith> the council of wise men who don't suffer fools lightly
  584. # [11:12] <sayrer> I don't really see why
  585. # [11:12] <annevk42> it might kill people apparently
  586. # [11:12] <sayrer> since the value of the information will be the same, no matter what the HTTP spec says
  587. # [11:12] <MikeSmith> I hope Adam has learned his lesson feels sufficiently chastised
  588. # [11:12] <MikeSmith> all that nonsense about doing real research and collecting data. who cares about that?
  589. # [11:12] <annevk42> I think it should be more than informational personally
  590. # [11:12] <sayrer> why?
  591. # [11:12] <MikeSmith> it will be
  592. # [11:13] <sayrer> what does it matter?
  593. # [11:13] <MikeSmith> sayrer: because it will get implemented
  594. # [11:13] <MikeSmith> or something like it
  595. # [11:13] <sayrer> W3C standards are only recommendations
  596. # [11:13] <annevk42> sayrer, by that metric we might as well not bother at all and just make it publicly available
  597. # [11:13] <annevk42> e.g. by sending a copy to www-archive
  598. # [11:13] <sayrer> JSON is only an informational RFC
  599. # [11:13] <MikeSmith> sayrer: the ones that aren't just recommendations are called "implementations"
  600. # [11:14] <MikeSmith> or "implemented"
  601. # [11:14] <annevk42> sayrer, I don't quite get that either, though I understand JSON has some interop issues
  602. # [11:16] <sayrer> DNS is an informational RFC too
  603. # [11:16] <sayrer> the status doesn't matter
  604. # [11:16] <MikeSmith> sayrer: it's moot point anyway
  605. # [11:16] <annevk42> sayrer, mkay
  606. # [11:16] <sayrer> what do you mean?
  607. # [11:17] <MikeSmith> they clearly aren't going to publish it regardless
  608. # [11:17] <sayrer> you think?
  609. # [11:17] <sayrer> why?
  610. # [11:17] <zcorpan> hmm. here's an idea -- have the same tree builder as in html but use a different namespace and do namespace fixups on attributes when in foreign
  611. # [11:17] <zcorpan> then support /> on "unknown" elements everywhere and do element case fixup everywhere
  612. # [11:18] <MikeSmith> sayrer: because it's too clearly aligned with the real world
  613. # [11:18] <sayrer> I think it is too conservative actually
  614. # [11:18] <sayrer> maybe they would go for it!
  615. # [11:18] <annevk42> zcorpan, idea for what?
  616. # [11:19] <zcorpan> annevk42: handling svg and mathml in html in an html-y way
  617. # [11:19] <zcorpan> allowing proper speculative tokenization
  618. # [11:20] * adambeynon_ is now known as adambeynon
  619. # [11:20] <zcorpan> even past <svg> ... <select><style> ...
  620. # [11:21] <zcorpan> hsivonen: ^
  621. # [11:21] <zcorpan> sicking: ^
  622. # [11:22] <annevk42> I'm not really following, but ok
  623. # [11:22] <zcorpan> instead of having insertion modes, have a flag for foreign content and use the insertion modes you would use for html (except you insert elements with a different namespace)
  624. # [11:24] <Philip`> Hixie: No
  625. # [11:24] <Philip`> but I am now
  626. # [11:24] * Philip` is having fun upgrading his kernel on Gentoo and switching to a new wireless driver architecture and wondering why kdm no longer displays anything on the screen
  627. # [11:25] <annevk42> zcorpan, and then have special handling for some elements?
  628. # [11:26] <annevk42> zcorpan, e.g. <image>
  629. # [11:26] <annevk42> zcorpan, but why can't you speculate past <svg> currently?
  630. # [11:27] <hsivonen> annevk42: currently, you can do speculative tree building past <svg> but you can't do cheap speculative tokenization without tree building
  631. # [11:28] <zcorpan> annevk42: forgot about <image>
  632. # [11:28] <hsivonen> I want to instrument the HTML5 parser in Gecko and get some data about the feasibility of doing speculative tree building only before I express more opinions on this topic
  633. # [11:28] <zcorpan> but yeah, you could check the flag for <image>
  634. # [11:29] <hsivonen> zcorpan: case fixup everywhere might be a good idea regardless of speculative parsing if we end up with a magic mapping for selectors and getElementsByTagName
  635. # [11:30] <annevk42> bz said that making selectors and gEBTN work like HTML5 currently requirescould work
  636. # [11:30] * annevk42 much rather has that
  637. # [11:32] <hsivonen> annevk42: it would bloat all interned node ns/local/prefix interned struct by another pointer and would require changes to code is unexpected places
  638. # [11:32] <hsivonen> annevk42: but clearly, storing pre-lowercased local names for each node would work
  639. # [11:33] <annevk42> you could also do 2 pointer checks at matching time
  640. # [11:33] <hsivonen> annevk42: what's the other pointer check?
  641. # [11:33] <annevk42> isHTMLElement && equallowercasetoken || equaltoken
  642. # [11:34] <annevk42> might need parenthesis there
  643. # [11:34] <hsivonen> if there were pre-lowercased atoms for each node, it would make sense to have those on all nodes anyway to avoid an extra check
  644. # [11:35] <zcorpan> if the parser camelcases everywhere, should createElement similarly camelcase?
  645. # [11:35] <hsivonen> anyway, doing it "right" adds some RAM footprint and requires a review of a lot of code only to support non-conforming cases that currently Gecko, WebKit and IE don't support and only Opera currently supports
  646. # [11:36] <hsivonen> zcorpan: maybe, but you'd still get the wrong namespace
  647. # [11:36] <annevk42> hsivonen, that wouldn't allow for gEBTN("textarea") to not match textArea but gEBTN("textArea") to match textArea
  648. # [11:36] <zcorpan> hsivonen: yep
  649. # [11:36] <hsivonen> annevk42: that can be solved by not supporting textArea
  650. # [11:37] <annevk42> same example for any other camelCase name
  651. # [11:37] <zcorpan> there are no other conflicting camelcase names
  652. # [11:37] <zcorpan> or are there?
  653. # [11:37] <hsivonen> AFAIK, textArea is the only conflict
  654. # [11:37] <annevk42> I don't think so, but you might still not want them to match case-insensitively
  655. # [11:38] <hsivonen> and textArea is a bad idea in the first place since it duplicates CSS formatter functionality
  656. # [11:38] <annevk42> and it also doesn't help with createElementNS() nodes
  657. # [11:38] <annevk42> and I think it would be nice if it did work with createElementNS nodes
  658. # [11:38] <hsivonen> annevk42: it helps with conforming createElementNS() nodes
  659. # [11:38] <annevk42> only if you change createElementNS
  660. # [11:39] <zcorpan> if you want to select elements with a certain case, use getEBTNNS
  661. # [11:39] <hsivonen> annevk42: the only issue is if a WG somewhere creates a camelCaseML for XML and then realizes they need to ship an Ajax library to hack support into text/html
  662. # [11:39] <annevk42> Is (isHTMLElement && equallowercasetoken) || equaltoken really that bad?
  663. # [11:40] <hsivonen> annevk42: it's worse than simply (caseFoldAtom == queryAtom)
  664. # [11:42] <hsivonen> I'd be surprised if Opera implemented what it currently does in a way other than doing what Maciej said on the list
  665. # [11:43] <hsivonen> as far as I can tell, adding a pointer to all Gecko node infos and WebKit qualified names would be the Right Way to implmement real ASCII-case-insensitivity
  666. # [11:44] * Quits: sayrer (n=chatzill@pool-71-105-181-8.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net) (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  667. # [11:48] <annevk42> hsivonen, we match createElementNS("x","X") with gEBTN("x")
  668. # [11:48] <annevk42> (not sure that's what I want either)
  669. # [11:49] <hsivonen> annevk42: that neither proves nor disproves my hypothesis of Opera internals :-)
  670. # [11:49] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  671. # [11:50] <hsivonen> my hypothesis isn't blackbox testable except by observing memory footprint and timing execution
  672. # [11:51] <annevk42> fair enough
  673. # [12:03] <annevk42> sweet
  674. # [12:03] <annevk42> the Forms WG published a whole bunch of Member confidential information
  675. # [12:03] <annevk42> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2009Apr/att-0000/2009-04-01.html
  676. # [12:03] <annevk42> regarding the AC meeting
  677. # [12:08] * Joins: danbri (n=danbri@86.92.118.197)
  678. # [12:10] * Joins: maikmerten (n=maikmert@La35e.l.pppool.de)
  679. # [12:11] <annevk42> not too interesting though
  680. # [12:12] <MikeSmith> annevk42: I should remove that
  681. # [12:12] <MikeSmith> but I don't think I actually have the ability to remove attachments from teh archive
  682. # [12:12] <annevk42> I hope someone makes a copy
  683. # [12:14] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com)
  684. # [12:22] <hsivonen> already gone :-/
  685. # [12:23] * Quits: danbri_ (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  686. # [12:23] <MikeSmith> temporarily gone
  687. # [12:23] <annevk42> I do have a copy
  688. # [12:26] * Philip` wonders what genius thought the new wireless drivers should make the LED blink at about 4Hz every time a packet is sent or received
  689. # [12:27] * Joins: nessy (n=nessy@124-171-14-211.dyn.iinet.net.au)
  690. # [12:31] * Quits: roc (n=roc@121-72-165-244.dsl.telstraclear.net)
  691. # [12:32] <jgraham> Philip`: Presumably one that doesn't suffer from photosensitive epilepsy
  692. # [12:34] <annevk42> Hixie, your ARIA comments went to the wrong list
  693. # [12:34] <annevk42> Hixie, they need to go to public-pfwg-comments@w3.org
  694. # [12:36] * Quits: adambeynon (n=adambeyn@94-193-137-51.zone7.bethere.co.uk) (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer))
  695. # [12:36] * Joins: adambeynon (n=adambeyn@94-193-137-51.zone7.bethere.co.uk)
  696. # [12:43] <hsivonen> Hixie: why is there "XXX quirks" on 'hr' start tag? as far as I can tell, none of Gecko, WebKit, Opera and IE8 have that quirk
  697. # [12:45] * Quits: nessy (n=nessy@124-171-14-211.dyn.iinet.net.au) (Remote closed the connection)
  698. # [12:45] * Quits: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.224.1)
  699. # [12:46] * Quits: adambeynon (n=adambeyn@94-193-137-51.zone7.bethere.co.uk) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  700. # [12:46] * Joins: adambeynon (n=adambeyn@94-193-137-51.zone7.bethere.co.uk)
  701. # [12:47] * Quits: adambeynon (n=adambeyn@94-193-137-51.zone7.bethere.co.uk) (Remote closed the connection)
  702. # [12:47] <hsivonen> hmm. Safari and Opera split the text node on <body>foo</h1>bar
  703. # [12:49] <annevk42> I guess I should stop reviewing non-normative materal in WAI-ARIA
  704. # [12:53] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: I redeployed V.nu
  705. # [12:54] <MikeSmith> hsivonen: cool. hoping I didn't introduce any regresssions
  706. # [12:57] <annevk42> you should probably add tests for code you touch :)
  707. # [12:58] <zcorpan> hsivonen: ie nests the hr in p if there was no text in the p
  708. # [13:00] <hsivonen> zcorpan: ah. I tested with text
  709. # [13:00] <hsivonen> zcorpan: any indication of Web actually needing that?
  710. # [13:00] <zcorpan> seems not since other browsers don't do it
  711. # [13:01] <zcorpan> actually opera nests hr in p if there's another element in between
  712. # [13:01] <zcorpan> but i haven't tested whether styling agrees
  713. # [13:02] <zcorpan> nothing surprising with the styling
  714. # [13:03] <hsivonen> so it seemss the only quirk left in the spec XXX that everyone implements is <p><table>
  715. # [13:03] <zcorpan> gecko nests hr for <p><span><hr>, too
  716. # [13:04] <hsivonen> but it's the <span>, not <hr> that is special, right?
  717. # [13:04] * Joins: adambeynon (n=adambeyn@94-193-137-51.zone7.bethere.co.uk)
  718. # [13:15] <zcorpan> in gecko yes
  719. # [13:16] <zcorpan> in opera span is just as special as em and i, but unknown elements don't cause nesting
  720. # [13:17] <annevk42> doesn't IE nest <hr> inside <p>?
  721. # [13:17] <zcorpan> annevk42: sometimes
  722. # [13:18] <zcorpan> hsivonen: actually the styling doesn't agree with the dom in opera for <p><span><hr>x
  723. # [13:18] <zcorpan> we style it more like as if the p was closed
  724. # [13:20] * hsivonen wonders what the Opera CSS frame constructor is like
  725. # [13:20] <zcorpan> i could tell you but then we'd have to hire you ;)
  726. # [13:25] <zcorpan> hsivonen: ie inserts an empty element for most blockish end tags
  727. # [13:25] <zcorpan> hsivonen: like e.g. </plaintext>
  728. # [13:26] <zcorpan> hsivonen: only </p> is needed for compat :)
  729. # [13:27] * Philip` supposes </plaintext> is pretty rare in practice
  730. # [13:27] <Philip`> seeing as even people legitimately using the obsolete element won't use it
  731. # [13:28] <Philip`> but it wouldn't surprise me to see a non-zero number of occurrences of it anyway :-(
  732. # [13:28] <hsivonen> zcorpan: Interesting. that suggests that the </h1> stuff isn't important
  733. # [13:28] <zcorpan> hsivonen: indeed
  734. # [13:29] <annevk42> OMG: http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/#textequivalentcomputation
  735. # [13:29] <annevk42> make that OMG: http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-20090224/#textequivalentcomputation
  736. # [13:29] <annevk42> 'cause hopefully they fix this mess
  737. # [13:31] <annevk42> a lot of this ARIA stuff is just written down way more fricking complex than necessary
  738. # [13:31] <annevk42> you don't need RDF or OWL
  739. # [13:31] <annevk42> not for conformance checkers anyway, which is what the initial claim in the draft is
  740. # [13:32] <annevk42> it's a bit sad that all this is so over engineered, I imagine they spent a lot of time on these things for zero benefit
  741. # [13:33] <annevk42> I'm now actually making comments, though not on most of the editorial mayhem: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2009AprJun/
  742. # [13:34] <annevk42> OMG2: http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-20090224/rdf_model.png
  743. # [13:40] <Philip`> Oh, my LEDs stopped blinking
  744. # [13:40] <Philip`> and I'm not sure why, since I tried to run some script I found on the internet to disable the blinking but it had no effect for at least an hour
  745. # [13:41] * hsivonen wonders if there's a generic UML<->RDF mapping
  746. # [13:41] <MikeSmith> annevk42: point taken (about tests for v.nu patches)
  747. # [13:54] <MikeSmith> speaking of playing the dozens, I really miss that mookid conneg dude
  748. # [13:58] <hsivonen> Argh. I broke XSLT.
  749. # [13:58] <hsivonen> hmm. maybe not
  750. # [14:02] <hsivonen> does anyone happen to know if Web compat requires http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/content/html/content/test/347174transform.xsl to 'work' without neither the XHTML namespace nor the html output method?
  751. # [14:24] * Quits: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@pat-tdc.opera.com) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  752. # [14:25] * Joins: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@pat-tdc.opera.com)
  753. # [14:25] <hsivonen> Is ARIA Best Practices in LC or just ARIA itself?
  754. # [14:29] <annevk42> just ARIA
  755. # [14:34] * Joins: taf2 (n=taf2@65.210.82.235)
  756. # [14:36] <annevk42> someone argued to me about live-region yesterday
  757. # [14:36] <annevk42> live-regions are apparently dropped
  758. # [14:36] <jgraham> ?!
  759. # [14:36] <jgraham> I thought live regions were supposed to be the most useful part
  760. # [14:36] <annevk42> or is that just a comment?
  761. # [14:37] <annevk42> ah, never mind
  762. # [14:37] <annevk42> it was simplified or something: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2009JanMar/0035.html
  763. # [14:37] * annevk42 read it too quickly initially
  764. # [14:37] <annevk42> I'm getting sick of all these auto-responders
  765. # [14:38] <MikeSmith> "make tests, not war"
  766. # [14:40] <annevk42> is that a DanC quote?
  767. # [14:40] <annevk42> :)
  768. # [14:48] <annevk42> http://www.w3.org/mid/201536C5-96EB-4029-B4A7-D3FB0EAF25FA@activemath.org "I strongly believe that specialized mime-types will be useful in the future!" (MathML 3.0 will have 3 apparently.)
  769. # [14:50] <hsivonen> sigh. does it still have xml:id, too?
  770. # [14:51] <annevk42> I guess some people missed the news about media types, XML, etc.
  771. # [14:56] <hsivonen> has anyone filed a formal objection about xml:id in MathML 3, yet?
  772. # [14:56] <annevk42> i filed a comment
  773. # [14:57] <hsivonen> annevk42: has it been handled yet?
  774. # [14:57] <annevk42> no
  775. # [14:57] <hsivonen> ok
  776. # [14:58] <annevk42> but I filed my comment in April and they have published something since that date
  777. # [15:00] <hsivonen> annevk42: happens all the time with HTML5 :-)
  778. # [15:00] <annevk42> true
  779. # [15:01] <hsivonen> considering all the MUST around @alt, ARIA sure says a lot of SHOULD for authoring reqs
  780. # [15:02] <annevk42> hehe
  781. # [15:04] * Joins: virtuelv_ (n=virtuelv@213.236.208.247)
  782. # [15:05] <MikeSmith> I wish we could all avoid using the words "formal objection"
  783. # [15:05] <MikeSmith> it is a blunt instrument
  784. # [15:05] <jgraham> MikeSmith: I would like to make a formal objection to that wish
  785. # [15:05] <MikeSmith> jgraham: good smartass-ery
  786. # [15:06] <MikeSmith> we need more of that
  787. # [15:06] <MikeSmith> need to pad out whatwg blog with more
  788. # [15:07] <jgraham> MikeSmith: Actually I thought it was pretty lame. I almost didn't bother. Then I realised that consstency is the hobgoblin of little minds, so I ought to be consistent in my lameness.
  789. # [15:07] <MikeSmith> heh
  790. # [15:07] <MikeSmith> even better
  791. # [15:07] <annevk42> hobgoblin is the name of my dreamhost server
  792. # [15:07] <Philip`> The W3C should require all formal objections to actually be formal, and hand-written on paper with an official letterhead and wax seal
  793. # [15:08] <MikeSmith> yeah, and delivered in person
  794. # [15:08] <MikeSmith> and you only get one per lifetime
  795. # [15:08] <jgraham> And signed in blood
  796. # [15:08] <jgraham> Your own.
  797. # [15:08] <jgraham> Lots.
  798. # [15:08] <MikeSmith> and if you ever try to file a 2nd one, we have somebody who comes and visits you and kills you
  799. # [15:08] <jgraham> Hence the one per lifetime restriction
  800. # [15:09] <MikeSmith> draconian error handling
  801. # [15:09] <hsivonen> like suggesting new C++ features?
  802. # [15:11] * Quits: virtuelv_ (n=virtuelv@213.236.208.247) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  803. # [15:14] * Joins: shepazu (n=schepers@adsl-144-163-98.rmo.bellsouth.net)
  804. # [15:14] <hsivonen> what kind of sharp instruments are available?
  805. # [15:15] <MikeSmith> hsivonen: assertions of technical merit
  806. # [15:17] * Quits: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@pat-tdc.opera.com) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  807. # [15:24] <jgraham> MikeSmith: Arguments from technical merit don't seem to be sharp enough to cut through philosophical divides
  808. # [15:26] <MikeSmith> blunt objections don't work any better
  809. # [15:28] * Joins: myakura (n=myakura@p1063-ipbf3305marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp)
  810. # [15:30] * Quits: shepazutoo (n=schepers@adsl-144-163-98.rmo.bellsouth.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  811. # [15:32] <Philip`> Blunt objects work better than blunt objections
  812. # [15:32] <jgraham> MikeSmith: Sure
  813. # [15:33] <jgraham> Philip`: Do sharp objects work better than blunt objects?
  814. # [15:34] <MikeSmith> sharp object slide in between the ribs better
  815. # [15:36] <zcorpan> Hixie: why did you change the forum antispam message from "FIVE"? it's annoying to have to copy-paste every time
  816. # [15:36] <Philip`> MikeSmith: If you're trying to slide a blunt object between people's ribs, you're doing it wrong
  817. # [15:36] <Philip`> I suggest smashing them on the back of the head
  818. # [15:37] <MikeSmith> kneecaps
  819. # [15:39] <Philip`> That's less fatal
  820. # [15:40] <Philip`> (That's just an observation of fact, not a comment on whether I think that's a benefit or a drawback)
  821. # [15:41] * Joins: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@213.236.208.247)
  822. # [15:51] * Quits: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt) (Remote closed the connection)
  823. # [16:02] * Quits: svl (n=chatzill@a194-109-2-36.dmn.xs4all.nl) ("And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.")
  824. # [16:03] * Joins: svl (n=chatzill@a194-109-2-36.dmn.xs4all.nl)
  825. # [16:04] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  826. # [16:05] * Joins: mlpug (n=mlpug@a91-156-60-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi)
  827. # [16:05] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  828. # [16:10] <MikeSmith> blockquote is not allowed in footer, right?
  829. # [16:10] <MikeSmith> neither in header nor footer?
  830. # [16:11] <MikeSmith> hmm, or it is allowed in footer?
  831. # [16:11] <MikeSmith> if so, I wonder why
  832. # [16:12] <Philip`> If online purchasing systems redirecting me to https://www.securesuite.co.uk (who I've never heard of and have no reason to trust) and telling me to enter my online banking password weren't bad enough, I've now found one that opens that site in a snazzy drop-shadowed iframe, which means I can't tell if the page inside the iframe even has a valid certificate and isn't https://a-really-dodgy-domain.info/
  833. # [16:14] <zcorpan> MikeSmith: should be allowed if i'm reading the spec correctly
  834. # [16:14] <zcorpan> MikeSmith: blockquote is sectioning root but sectioning root is not sectioning content
  835. # [16:14] <MikeSmith> hmm
  836. # [16:15] <MikeSmith> so why should it not be allowed in header as well?
  837. # [16:15] <zcorpan> it is allowed in header afaict
  838. # [16:15] <zcorpan> header just bans sectioning content
  839. # [16:17] <zcorpan> MikeSmith: i think blockquote was sectioning content before, which is probably why v.nu disallows it
  840. # [16:17] <MikeSmith> zcorpan:
  841. # [16:17] <MikeSmith> zcorpan: OK
  842. # [16:18] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  843. # [16:18] <zcorpan> hmm.. <header><blockquote><h1></h1></blockquote></header> seems to be allowed in the content model
  844. # [16:19] <MikeSmith> yeah, 'cause I can't see any constraint assertions in the current spec to indicate that blockquote is not allowed in header or footer
  845. # [16:19] <zcorpan> but the outline ignores teh blockquote
  846. # [16:19] <zcorpan> i think
  847. # [16:19] <MikeSmith> maybe that's the issue
  848. # [16:19] <jgraham> zcorpan: Yes
  849. # [16:19] <jgraham> Because the <h1> is part of the quote so it is not the heading of the current page
  850. # [16:20] <zcorpan> where's gsnedders' outline tool?
  851. # [16:20] <MikeSmith> hsivonen: blockquote in header and footer?
  852. # [16:21] * Quits: weinig_ (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  853. # [16:22] <zcorpan> gsnedders: please add a textarea to your outliner
  854. # [16:22] <MikeSmith> v.nu assertions.sch still says, "The sectioning element blockquote..."
  855. # [16:22] <MikeSmith> which it's not a sectioning element
  856. # [16:22] <MikeSmith> or not now at least
  857. # [16:23] <MikeSmith> makes me thinks maybe the rationale for that constraint is outdated/not in sync with current spec
  858. # [16:23] <zcorpan> so clearly the content model for header needs to be smarter about h1 and blockquote
  859. # [16:29] <zcorpan> jgraham: gsnedders outliner doesn't ignore the blockquote when it's a descendant of header
  860. # [16:30] <jgraham> zcorpan: I guess that's a bug
  861. # [16:30] <zcorpan> jgraham: in the spec or in the impl?
  862. # [16:31] <jgraham> In the impl.
  863. # [16:31] <jgraham> At least, if my understanding of the rationale behind the current spec is right
  864. # [16:32] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  865. # [16:33] <jgraham> zcorpan: http://james.html5.org/outliner.html has the same issue so I guess maybe it is a spec bug?
  866. # [16:33] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@c-98-234-51-190.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  867. # [16:41] * Joins: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt)
  868. # [16:51] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  869. # [16:55] * Quits: Maurice (n=ano@a80-101-46-164.adsl.xs4all.nl) ("Disconnected...")
  870. # [16:57] * Quits: maikmerten (n=maikmert@La35e.l.pppool.de) (Remote closed the connection)
  871. # [17:04] * Quits: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt) (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  872. # [17:07] * Joins: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt)
  873. # [17:09] <zcorpan> the pf people seem to think authors are angels and therefore we can expose them to aria-labelledby and aria-describedby etc and disabled users will benefit by both short and long descriptions
  874. # [17:09] <zcorpan> meanwhile authors generally can't use alt correctly (if at all)
  875. # [17:10] <jgraham> The pf people seem to have the alarming notion that authors generally know what they are doing and therefore should be given as much control as possible
  876. # [17:10] <zcorpan> yeah, that's what i meant with "angels" :)
  877. # [17:11] <jgraham> <cynic>Or that authors have no idea what they are doing and so having complex technology results in lots of consulting jobs</cynic> :)
  878. # [17:11] <jgraham> Note that I am not seriously suggesting the second option
  879. # [17:12] <jgraham> Because that would be ascribing to malice what can be adequately explained by naivity
  880. # [17:12] <beowulf> is that malice?
  881. # [17:13] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  882. # [17:13] <jgraham> beowulf: Making accessibility intentionally hard to line one's own pockets would be malice
  883. # [17:13] * Joins: billmason1 (n=bmason@69.30.57.90)
  884. # [17:14] <jgraham> (also: most a11y advocates I have met do not strike me as malicious)
  885. # [17:14] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  886. # [17:15] * Parts: billmason1 (n=bmason@69.30.57.90)
  887. # [17:16] <zcorpan> MikeSmith: i get b.v.nu email even though i'm not explicitly cc-ed
  888. # [17:16] <gsnedders> zcorpan, jgraham: I pretty much exactly implement the spec, so almost certainly spec
  889. # [17:16] <jgraham> gsnedders: Me too, but neither of us have great test coverage so…
  890. # [17:17] <jgraham> (the fact that we have the same bug does suggest a spec bug)
  891. # [17:17] <gsnedders> I just think <http://hg.gsnedders.com/anolis/file/b6d93515d41e/anolislib/processes/outliner.py> is so close to the spec that it's unlikely to be an impl bug :)
  892. # [17:17] <jgraham> gsnedders: iirc the spec is so hard to understand that anything is posssible
  893. # [17:17] <gsnedders> jgraham: When did you last read the spec?
  894. # [17:18] <gsnedders> jgraham: Hixie made quite a few edits just before he wrote URLs
  895. # [17:18] <gsnedders> (Which is when I was writing that impl.)
  896. # [17:18] <zcorpan> i tried to read the spec and i couldn't tell whether it should ignore sectioning roots in header or not
  897. # [17:19] <jgraham> gsnedders: Maybe before that. After the algorithm changed from the treewalker-based one though
  898. # [17:19] <gsnedders> jgraham: A lot of my comments were about spec clarity, as there were things where I wasn't sure what to do because the spec was ambiguous
  899. # [17:20] * Quits: Amorphous (i=jan@unaffiliated/amorphous) (Connection reset by peer)
  900. # [17:20] <Philip`> zcorpan: Maybe they think that a non-zero number of authors are angels and therefore if we expose them to aria-labelledby and aria-describedby etc then a non-zero number of disabled users will benefit, and so the effort will have been worthwhile
  901. # [17:21] <gsnedders> zcorpan: Everything should be ignored in a header, me thinks
  902. # [17:21] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@nat/google/x-1bd69f5cd6cdd833)
  903. # [17:21] * Quits: myakura (n=myakura@p1063-ipbf3305marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp) ("Leaving...")
  904. # [17:21] <zcorpan> Philip`: not if a greater number of authors use aria-labelledby and aria-describedby incorrectly so that users will have a better experience overall if the attributes are ignored
  905. # [17:21] <Philip`> (It's clearly impossible to make everything better for everyone, so the scope is limited to making some things better for some people)
  906. # [17:22] <jgraham> Philip`: That doesn't sound like a good way of making an optimum solution
  907. # [17:22] <jgraham> For example, some disabled people would be better off if no one had spent any time working on aria but had fixed a few existing websites
  908. # [17:22] <zcorpan> gsnedders: what do you use as the heading text in the outline for <header>?
  909. # [17:22] <jgraham> to be more accessible
  910. # [17:23] <gsnedders> zcorpan: See paragraph two of #the-header-element
  911. # [17:23] <gsnedders> "For the purposes of document summaries, outlines, and the like, the text of header elements is defined to be the text of the highest ranked h1–h6 element descendant of the header element, if there are any such elements, and the first such element if there are multiple elements with that rank. If there are no such elements, then the text of the header element is the empty string."
  912. # [17:23] <Philip`> zcorpan: Depends on whether the attributes have a negative effect on user experience when used incorrectly, and it seems easy to imagine that users just won't press the 'access description of this element' key when they know the site isn't going to be using it usefully
  913. # [17:24] <zcorpan> gsnedders: well that's the thing. that paragraph should ignore h1-h6 in descendants that are sectioning roots
  914. # [17:24] <gsnedders> zcorpan: Well, spec bug
  915. # [17:25] * gsnedders is just what Hixie told him to :P
  916. # [17:26] <zcorpan> Philip`: presumably the AT would tell the user that there is a description available, though?
  917. # [17:26] <jgraham> gsnedders: That won't stand up in a court of law when your outliner is used in a life-critical system and someone DIES
  918. # [17:29] <jgraham> Sorry dunno what came over me there, guess I should take a rest
  919. # [17:30] <jgraham> Er, anyway, moving on
  920. # [17:31] <jgraham> Philip`: Your argument still seems like a logical fallacy
  921. # [17:31] <jgraham> Since you are asserting that doing anything that helps a non-zero number of people is good, even if it isn't the optimum solution
  922. # [17:34] * Quits: pesla (n=retep@procurios.xs4all.nl) ("( www.nnscript.com :: NoNameScript 4.21 :: www.esnation.com )")
  923. # [17:36] <Philip`> jgraham: Now you're just engaging in the fallacy of "argument by logical fallacy"
  924. # [17:37] * Joins: Amorphous (i=jan@unaffiliated/amorphous)
  925. # [17:41] * Joins: sayrer (n=chatzill@pool-71-105-181-8.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net)
  926. # [17:47] * Parts: sayrer (n=chatzill@pool-71-105-181-8.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net)
  927. # [17:55] * Joins: davidb (n=davidb@bas4-toronto06-1242458385.dsl.bell.ca)
  928. # [17:55] * Joins: smedero (n=smedero@pia145-154.pioneernet.net)
  929. # [18:01] * Joins: aroben (n=aroben@unaffiliated/aroben)
  930. # [18:09] * Joins: Maurice (n=copyman@5ED548D4.cable.ziggo.nl)
  931. # [18:18] * Quits: svl (n=chatzill@a194-109-2-36.dmn.xs4all.nl) ("And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.")
  932. # [18:22] * Quits: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@c83-252-196-43.bredband.comhem.se)
  933. # [18:46] * Quits: ap (n=ap@194.154.88.34)
  934. # [18:49] * Joins: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.224.1)
  935. # [18:53] * Quits: pergj (n=pergj@home.kvaleberg.no) (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  936. # [19:01] * Quits: taf2 (n=taf2@65.210.82.235)
  937. # [19:03] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host81-151-61-163.range81-151.btcentralplus.com)
  938. # [19:06] * Quits: hdh (n=hdh@58.187.22.40) (Remote closed the connection)
  939. # [19:13] * Quits: dbaron (n=dbaron@c-98-234-51-190.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) ("8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.")
  940. # [19:15] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  941. # [19:16] * Quits: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt) ("Ex-Chat")
  942. # [19:16] * Quits: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@213.236.208.247) (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  943. # [19:27] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  944. # [19:28] * Quits: smedero (n=smedero@pia145-154.pioneernet.net)
  945. # [19:29] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  946. # [19:30] * gsnedders has managed to hang tesseract
  947. # [19:31] * Joins: smedero (n=smedero@pia145-154.pioneernet.net)
  948. # [19:39] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host81-151-61-163.range81-151.btcentralplus.com)
  949. # [19:40] * Joins: svl (n=me@ip565744a7.direct-adsl.nl)
  950. # [19:42] <gsnedders> Wow. Fun. It hangs ocrad too
  951. # [19:42] <gsnedders> This is one awesome image.
  952. # [19:43] * Quits: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.224.1)
  953. # [19:43] <gsnedders> Ah, ocrad comes out of hang, but output is totally wrong
  954. # [19:46] * gsnedders crops image into segments and throws it at tesseract again, and it works straight away
  955. # [19:46] <gsnedders> Oh well
  956. # [19:47] * Quits: jwalden (n=waldo@c-24-6-169-169.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) ("->office")
  957. # [19:57] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host81-151-61-163.range81-151.btcentralplus.com)
  958. # [20:03] * Joins: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.227.1)
  959. # [20:05] * Joins: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1)
  960. # [20:08] * Joins: dave_levin_ (n=dave_lev@72.14.227.1)
  961. # [20:08] * Quits: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.227.1)
  962. # [20:09] * dave_levin_ is now known as dave_levin
  963. # [20:16] * Joins: taf2 (n=taf2@65.210.82.235)
  964. # [20:20] * Joins: jwalden_ (n=waldo@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  965. # [20:20] * jwalden_ is now known as jwalden
  966. # [20:25] * Quits: sid0 (n=sid0@unaffiliated/sid0) (Remote closed the connection)
  967. # [20:25] * Quits: mlpug (n=mlpug@a91-156-60-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi) (Remote closed the connection)
  968. # [20:25] * Joins: sid0 (n=sid0@unaffiliated/sid0)
  969. # [20:27] * Joins: maikmerten (n=maikmert@La35e.l.pppool.de)
  970. # [20:45] <Hixie> hsivonen: re XXX quirks things -- the XXX comments in the spec are what i put in when i don't want to think about something at all
  971. # [20:46] <Hixie> hsivonen: e.g. if i happen to notice a mistake, don't have the inclination to fix it straight away, and want to move on to something more important (at the time)
  972. # [20:46] <Hixie> hsivonen: so "XXX quirks" might just mean i happen to notice something fishy while doing some other testing, and i should look more closely
  973. # [20:46] <Hixie> hsivonen: it doesn't mean "there is definitely a quirk to add here"
  974. # [20:48] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@17.246.17.52)
  975. # [20:57] * Joins: slightlyoff (n=slightly@nat/google/x-daf41f19a2f13ed5)
  976. # [21:01] * Quits: taf2 (n=taf2@65.210.82.235)
  977. # [21:02] * Joins: taf2 (n=taf2@65.210.82.235)
  978. # [21:04] * weinig is now known as weinig|lunch
  979. # [21:10] * slightlyoff is now known as slightlyoff_afk
  980. # [21:13] * Quits: taf2 (n=taf2@65.210.82.235)
  981. # [21:15] * Joins: taf2 (n=taf2@65.210.82.235)
  982. # [21:17] * Joins: mstange (n=markus@pD957901C.dip0.t-ipconnect.de)
  983. # [21:18] * Joins: blooberry (n=brian@c-67-188-123-89.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  984. # [21:21] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  985. # [21:21] * Joins: mpilgrim (n=mark@rrcs-96-10-240-189.midsouth.biz.rr.com)
  986. # [21:22] * slightlyoff_afk is now known as slightlyoff
  987. # [21:23] <mpilgrim> there is a pending (non-spam!) draft on the WHATWG blog
  988. # [21:23] <mpilgrim> by sayrer
  989. # [21:23] * Joins: maikmerten_ (n=maikmert@La7a1.l.pppool.de)
  990. # [21:23] <mpilgrim> any clue if he's done with it and wants it published?
  991. # [21:26] * Quits: maikmerten (n=maikmert@La35e.l.pppool.de) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  992. # [21:26] <mpilgrim> it seems done but still says "draft", not "pending review"
  993. # [21:27] <jgraham> I can deal with that
  994. # [21:27] <gavin_> he is online on moznet
  995. # [21:27] <jgraham> If he wants it published
  996. # [21:28] <mpilgrim> i'm in there anyway, publishing another "this week"
  997. # [21:29] * Philip` thinks it's going by a fairly loose definition of "this"
  998. # [21:30] * mpilgrim slinks away in shame
  999. # [21:30] <mpilgrim> it's been a hectic quarter
  1000. # [21:31] <mpilgrim> i'm catching up now so i can resume regular weekly posts in Q2
  1001. # [21:31] <Philip`> I'm not complaining, just commenting :-)
  1002. # [21:33] <jgraham> Maybe we should rename it "Some past week in HTML5, untill Google finally invents time travel, at which point we'll need several new tenses to describe just what is going on anyway"
  1003. # [21:34] <Philip`> "A week in HTML5"
  1004. # [21:34] <mpilgrim> pretty sure the past tense is taken ;)
  1005. # [21:37] * Joins: pergj (n=pergj@ti0169a380-0535.bb.online.no)
  1006. # [21:38] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  1007. # [21:56] * Hixie grumbles
  1008. # [21:56] <Hixie> openDatabase() should have been a constructor
  1009. # [21:56] <Hixie> i hate watching myself screw up the web
  1010. # [21:56] <gsnedders> Well it's hardly as if _I_ wrote the spec that's now interoperably implemented!
  1011. # [21:57] <Lachy> Hixie, re http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6477 - what made you decide to add support for input.height and .width if browsers don't support it?
  1012. # [21:57] <Hixie> Lachy: i don't remember. they were added long before i added that comment.
  1013. # [21:57] <Hixie> i probably thought browsers did have them
  1014. # [21:58] <Lachy> ok
  1015. # [21:58] <Lachy> I suppose they shouldn't be too hard to implement. Not sure if it's really worth the effort though.
  1016. # [21:59] <gsnedders> Is it bad that more than half the money (in terms of value!) in my wallet is coppers?
  1017. # [21:59] <Lachy> gsnedders, that depends if by "coppers" you mean really low value coins, like 1 and 2 pence peices (or whatever currency you use)
  1018. # [22:00] <gsnedders> Yeah
  1019. # [22:00] <jcranmer> gsnedders: you have copper pound notes in the UK?
  1020. # [22:00] <gsnedders> jcranmer: No
  1021. # [22:00] <gsnedders> Coppers as in coins worth 0.01 GBP and 0.02 GBP
  1022. # [22:02] <Lachy> jcranmer, originally, 1 GBP was actually measured as 1 pound of silver. Imagine carrying several of those around in your wallet :-)
  1023. # [22:02] * Joins: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@95.34.27.22.customer.cdi.no)
  1024. # [22:02] <Hixie> i thought he meant police men
  1025. # [22:02] <gsnedders> heh
  1026. # [22:02] <jcranmer> "
  1027. # [22:13] * Philip` was unaware until recently that Isaac Newton was heavily involved with currency reform
  1028. # [22:14] <Hixie> it's a big plot point in the baroque cycle
  1029. # [22:14] <Philip`> That's how I became aware of it :-)
  1030. # [22:15] <Philip`> (It's probably unwise to take everything in those books as strictly true, but Wikipedia seems to agree that he was involved)
  1031. # [22:15] * Quits: ROBOd (n=robod@89.122.216.38) ("http://www.robodesign.ro")
  1032. # [22:15] * Joins: roc (n=roc@202.0.36.64)
  1033. # [22:15] <Hixie> indeed
  1034. # [22:16] <gsnedders> http://stuff.gsnedders.com/atom-iri/ — start of IRI testing!
  1035. # [22:16] <gsnedders> Not that I got very far, because it took me a while to work out how to produce those files
  1036. # [22:30] * Quits: pergj (n=pergj@ti0169a380-0535.bb.online.no) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  1037. # [22:36] * Joins: doublec (n=doublec@202.0.36.64)
  1038. # [22:36] * Joins: hdh (n=hdh@58.187.22.40)
  1039. # [22:41] * Joins: danbri_ (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri)
  1040. # [22:42] * Joins: takkaria_ (n=takkaria@isparp.co.uk)
  1041. # [22:43] <Philip`> I love how selecting "run as administrator" on a 1.5GB .exe in Vista results in it freezing for ten minutes while silently copying the entire file into c:\windows\temp, and then it runs out of disk space and doesn't clean up after itself and leaves me with 0 bytes of free space
  1042. # [22:47] <Lachy> Philip`, which program has a 1.5GB exe file?
  1043. # [22:47] <Philip`> Lachy: An installer for some game
  1044. # [22:48] * Quits: danbri_ (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri)
  1045. # [22:51] * Quits: maikmerten_ (n=maikmert@La7a1.l.pppool.de) (Remote closed the connection)
  1046. # [22:54] * Quits: danbri (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  1047. # [22:59] * Joins: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  1048. # [22:59] * Quits: takkaria (n=takkaria@isparp.co.uk) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  1049. # [23:15] * Quits: davidb (n=davidb@bas4-toronto06-1242458385.dsl.bell.ca)
  1050. # [23:15] * Quits: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@95.34.27.22.customer.cdi.no) (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out))
  1051. # [23:16] * fakeolliej is now known as olliej
  1052. # [23:32] * Joins: onar (n=onar@17.226.20.255)
  1053. # [23:32] * Quits: hdh (n=hdh@58.187.22.40) ("Leaving.")
  1054. # [23:36] * Quits: svl (n=me@ip565744a7.direct-adsl.nl) ("And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.")
  1055. # [23:40] * Quits: Maurice (n=copyman@5ED548D4.cable.ziggo.nl) ("Disconnected...")
  1056. # [23:47] * Joins: mpilgrim_ (n=mark@rrcs-96-10-240-189.midsouth.biz.rr.com)
  1057. # [23:47] * Joins: nessy (n=nessy@124-171-14-211.dyn.iinet.net.au)
  1058. # [23:47] * Quits: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  1059. # [23:58] * mpilgrim is now known as Guest8575
  1060. # Session Close: Fri Apr 03 00:00:00 2009

The end :)