/irc-logs / w3c / #html-wg / 2007-04-07 / end

Options:

# Session Start: Sat Apr 07 00:00:00 2007
# Session Ident: #html-wg
# [00:10] * Quits: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221) (Ping timeout)
# [00:15] * Joins: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221)
# [00:48] * dbaron wonders whether kingryan considers vim or emacs to be the pass condition :-)
# [00:51] <mjs> well, "frontpage" is clearly the fail condition
# [01:00] <tylerr> Now MS have Expression Web though, which I've only toyed around with a minimal amount.
# [01:48] * Joins: Lachy (chatzilla@124.168.24.114)
# [01:54] * Quits: tylerr (tylerr@66.195.32.2) (Quit: Leaving)
# [02:00] * Quits: myakura (myakura@60.239.122.32) (Quit: Leaving...)
# [02:01] * Lachy can't believe Chris Wilson is in favour of versioning! :-/
# [02:01] <Dashiva> Well, if you're in the "Let's build a new parsing mode for each new version" camp, you need version marking
# [02:01] <Dashiva> Dunno why anyone would voluntarily put themselves in that camp, though
# [02:02] <Zeros> Or the "HTML that needs for work for years and years to come" camp?
# [02:02] <Zeros> Without any version marker HTML parsers in the far future are going to need to use all kinds of document sniffing to figure out the version. No version information at all is not forward thinking.
# [02:03] <mjs> or you could not break parsing rules
# [02:03] <mjs> Chris Wilson is advocating versioning not to detect standards versions but to activate one of multiple IE-specific quirks modes
# [02:03] <Zeros> The WHATWG already redefined parsing rules and said /> was okay
# [02:04] <mjs> yeah, and /> was already always ok, de facto
# [02:04] <Zeros> You can't assume that they won't do something similar in the future to deal with another issue
# [02:04] <mjs> it's not like people will change HTML4 parsers to reject />
# [02:04] <Dashiva> "Let's assume the next standard will be XHTML2. Then there's no point in trying to be compatible in this one either."
# [02:04] <Zeros> If we use <!DOCTYPE HTML> we're stuck. They'd just end up adding versioning back again for HTML6.
# [02:04] <mjs> or to treat it in the SGML-compliant way
# [02:04] <Zeros> mjs, emacs-w3 does. Think its the only one though
# [02:06] <Dashiva> So, do you have any examples that actually break a significant amount of pages?
# [02:06] <Zeros> Dashiva, Break what?
# [02:07] * Zeros didn't realize he was talking about breaking existing pages
# [02:07] <Zeros> emacs-w3 parses with a proper (or closer to it) SGML parser so XHTML pages send as text/html end up with > all over them.
# [02:07] <Dashiva> If a HTML5 parser can handle existing HTML4 pages, we do not need to distinguish between them
# [02:08] <Zeros> Dashiva, Its not just parsing rules. We've removed and added HTML elements between versions. <canvas>, <object> etc.
# [02:08] <Zeros> In the future how do you know which version you'd need to implement to be able to render an arbitrary HTML page?
# [02:09] <Dashiva> The latest, unless some version decides to dump compatability
# [02:09] * Quits: st (st@62.234.155.214) (Quit: st)
# [02:09] <Zeros> Dashiva, That's short sighted, we can't know what HTML6 will do. Dumping version information now sets up the future for all kinds of problems
# [02:10] * Quits: hasather (hasather@81.235.209.174) (Ping timeout)
# [02:10] <Dashiva> No, it doesn't. Even if HTML6 decides to be XHTML2, -they- can do versioning
# [02:11] <Zeros> Dashiva, And all those pages that have no version now need to get sniffed to figure out what they are
# [02:12] <Dashiva> No, they'll be recognizable as "the set of compatible versions between HTML4 and HTML6"
# [02:13] <Zeros> I don't see what's to be gained by removing versioning information
# [02:13] <Zeros> The version is about the specification which a document is attempting to conform to. That's why doctypes have a dtd in the first place
# [02:14] <mjs> Dashiva: <object> is neither added or removed; most removed elements are (a) rarely used and (b) need to be handled by compliant UAs anyway
# [02:15] <mjs> (the spec will have a section on particular elements that are not conforming in documents but that UAs must handle)
# [02:16] <Dashiva> Zeros: Attempting to conform is typically not the case
# [02:17] <Dashiva> The words doctype and cargo cult go well together
# [02:17] <Zeros> Dashiva, so do the words <head> and <html>
# [02:17] * Quits: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221) (Ping timeout)
# [02:17] <Zeros> Even the <body> element isn't really required
# [02:17] <mjs> doctypes have never actually been used by browsers to decide what spec level to treat the document as
# [02:18] <Zeros> Dashiva, do /you/ use those too?
# [02:18] <mjs> they have been used to activate quirks mode
# [02:18] <mjs> which is a laundry list of bugs that are mostly CSS bugs
# [02:18] <mjs> but no browser will recognize an HTML 3.2 or HTML+ doctype and do anything different than for HTML 4.01 quirks mode
# [02:19] <Dashiva> Zeros: They remind me which scripts are in head and which are in body :)
# [02:20] <mjs> and I think IE wants the HTML5 doctype to be just another quirks mode switch, so that what used to be standards mode becomes a new quirks mode
# [02:20] <Zeros> Dashiva, the the doctype ensures that in far future browsers know exactly what version of HTML it was and what dtd it used
# [02:20] <Zeros> and*
# [02:20] <Dashiva> Zeros: Did you not read what mjs just said?
# [02:21] <Zeros> Dashiva, um yes?
# [02:21] <Dashiva> Far future browsers won't have HTML4 parsers
# [02:21] <Zeros> Dashiva, You're making assumptions you can't back up
# [02:22] <Zeros> We don't know what will happen in the future, but /do/ know that without version information the version of the HTML document is unknown without a big master list of features for every version
# [02:23] <Dashiva> And you still cling to incompatability
# [02:23] * Joins: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221)
# [02:24] <deltab> mjs: /> was not always ok: in Links, tags closed with it weren't treated as tags but displayed literally
# [02:25] <deltab> that's been changed now, but it was annoying for a while
# [02:25] <Dashiva> Incompatability usually is :)
# [02:27] <mjs> deltab: I'm not sure what you mean
# [02:27] <mjs> are you referring to the standard?
# [02:27] <mjs> or to what browsers actually implemented?
# [02:27] <mjs> ah, specifically the Links browser
# [02:27] <mjs> yes, I doubt there is a lot of Links-specific web content out there
# [02:28] <deltab> eh?
# [02:30] <mjs> I misunderstood what you meant
# [02:30] <mjs> didn't get that when you said "Links", you mean the text-mode browser of that name
# [02:30] <deltab> oh, sorry
# [02:30] <deltab> it's a terrible name
# [02:32] <Zeros> Lynx is at least better in printed form
# [02:56] * Quits: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@67.154.87.254) (Quit: Leaving)
# [03:01] * Joins: anne (annevk@81.68.67.12)
# [03:04] <anne> oops
# [03:04] <anne> I see I should not have replied to the <canvas> flamebait
# [03:05] <Dashiva> You weren't here to tell zeros about doctypes either
# [03:06] <anne> doctypes...
# [03:06] <anne> at this point I can't think of a single non-controversial HTML topic
# [03:06] <mjs> I wonder when our co-chair will actually put on his chair hat
# [03:07] * Dashiva suggests... <title>
# [03:07] <anne> <title> has controversy
# [03:07] <Dashiva> What kind?
# [03:07] <anne> http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/help-whatwg.org/2007-February/thread.html
# [03:07] * anne should pay less attention to this nonsense
# [03:08] <Philip> Bah, why isn't <title> optional? I always write "<!DOCTYPE HTML><title></title><p>(content)" and it'd be much easier if I could skip the title and still be valid :-(
# [03:08] <mjs> there needs to be documentation of previously controversial issues
# [03:08] <mjs> including past arguments raised that were rejected
# [03:08] <mjs> so you can just point someone re-raising it to the URL
# [03:09] <Dashiva> Okay, so title is controversial. How about... hmm...
# [03:09] <mjs> how about <p>?
# [03:09] <anne> It's unclear whether <p> gets a different content model in XHTML5
# [03:10] <Dashiva> p may not be controversial in itself, but it is implicitly controversial due to all the tags that may or may not subclass/specialize it
# [03:10] <anne> There's no real consensus about that
# [03:11] <Dashiva> <tr> surely isn't controversial!
# [03:12] <anne> some people suggested <form> should be allowed around <tr>
# [03:12] <anne> not sure if that counts
# [03:12] <anne> Chris is against rewriting HTML4?!
# [03:12] <Dashiva> Ah, that's true
# [03:12] * anne ponders
# [03:12] <Dashiva> I've been wishing for <form> inside table a long time
# [03:13] <Hixie> <form> inside table would legitimise syntax that wasn't round-trippable.
# [03:13] <Dashiva> Like if you have a table where each row acts like a form for one object
# [03:23] <anne> you can now have specialized submit buttons
# [03:23] <anne> those should solve that
# [03:23] <anne> in combination with form="" they should solve it completely
# [03:26] <Dashiva> It's rather hacky using specialized submit buttons and disabling everything except that one row, though
# [03:26] <anne> so use form=""
# [03:27] <Dashiva> Which requires that on every single form element, and a long list of form elements outside the table. Still hacky.
# [03:27] <anne> use GET
# [03:27] <anne> :)
# [03:27] <Dashiva> ?
# [03:27] <Hixie> you can put the forms in the first cell
# [03:28] <Hixie> not sure exactly what you're trying to do though
# [03:28] <Dashiva> E.g. a database interface
# [03:28] <Dashiva> You don't want to change every single row displayed, just one of them
# [03:31] <anne> Hixie, parsing of comments also differs in quirks and standards mode :(
# [03:31] <Hixie> it does?
# [03:31] <anne> it does in Mozilla and Opera
# [03:31] <Hixie> Dashiva: ?
# [03:32] <Hixie> anne: what's different?
# [03:32] <anne> Hixie, <!--> is a comment in quirks mode in Opera
# [03:32] <anne> also in Mozilla
# [03:32] <anne> data:text/html,test<!-->test
# [03:32] <Hixie> is  a comment, or is it a comment with --> text?
# [03:33] <anne> data:text/html,testtest
# [03:33] <anne> shows -->
# [03:33] <Hixie> interesting
# [03:33] <Hixie> well we can support that
# [03:33] <Hixie> that's not too hard
# [03:33] <Hixie> send mail :-)
# [03:34] * anne isn't sure that's all
# [03:34] <mjs> that's quirks mode only?
# [03:35] <anne> at the moment
# [03:35] <anne> does Safari have parsing differences depending on the doctype?
# [03:37] <mjs> I don't know off-hand
# [03:38] <mjs> looks like we do have the <!--> quirk
# [03:38] <mjs> // Fix bug 34302 at kde.bugs.org. Go ahead and treat
# [03:38] <mjs> // <!--> as a valid comment, since both mozilla and IE on windows
# [03:38] <mjs> // can handle this case. Only do this in quirks mode. -dwh
# [03:38] <mjs> if (!src.isEmpty() && *src == '>' && m_doc->inCompatMode()) {
# [03:38] <mjs> another parsing quirk:
# [03:38] <mjs> // Apparently some sites use </br> instead of <br>. Be compatible with IE and Firefox and treat this like <br>.
# [03:38] <mjs> if (t->isCloseTag(brTag) && document->inCompatMode())
# [03:38] <mjs> t->beginTag = true;
# [03:39] <mjs> that's the only two I could find
# [03:39] <anne> you can do the latter in standards mode too
# [03:40] <anne> and I suppose the first as well
# [03:40] <anne> also, thanks!
# [03:42] <anne> (that comment should say bugs.kde.org btw)
# [03:42] <mjs> it's probably long since irrelevant
# [03:43] <anne> http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34302
# [03:43] <anne> still there
# [03:44] <mjs> the patch in that bug is very different from what is in our code, oddly
# [03:45] <anne> IE treats both  as comments
# [03:45] <anne> <!-- > also
# [03:45] <anne> and <!-- ->
# [03:46] * anne has the feeling that IE treats <! as the start and the first > as the end
# [03:46] <anne> but that's wrong
# [03:46] <anne>  has " > " as comment data
# [03:47] <Dashiva> What about
# [03:47] <anne> text is inside the comment
# [03:47] <anne> they're doing reparsing
# [03:48] <anne> I suppose that's not really acceptable for security reasons
# [03:48] <anne> we should be able to handle  though
# [03:48] <Hixie> always always make sure comments tests have an extra "-->" at the end
# [03:48] <Hixie> otherwise you trigger reparse modes
# [03:48] <Hixie> which we don't want to have
# [03:48] <Dashiva> So I suppose it looks for a --> first, and then falls back to the quirks?
# [03:49] <Hixie> not to quirks
# [03:49] <Hixie> but yes
# [03:50] <Dashiva> quirks as in ->, <!-->, etc
# [03:50] <Hixie> ah
# [03:50] <Hixie> don't call those quirks, that's confusing :-P
# [03:51] <Dashiva> freak parsing rules better?
# [03:52] <anne> both Opera and Firefox seem to do reparsing in quirks mode
# [03:52] * anne wonders how Safari stays out of it
# [03:54] <mjs> for unclosed comments?
# [03:54] <mjs> we might be always reparsing
# [03:55] <anne> oh right :(
# [03:56] <mjs> good to hear that could be quirks-only potentially
# [03:56] * Quits: dbaron (dbaron@63.245.220.242) (Quit: 8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.)
# [03:58] <Hixie> microsoft got rid of a bunch of reparsing things in IE7
# [03:58] <Hixie> presumably for security reasons
# [04:01] <anne> Experimental: http://twitter.com/annevk
# [04:02] * anne wonders what Doug is mumbling
# [04:03] <Hixie> ?
# [04:03] <anne> on public-html
# [04:03] <anne> First he wants it to be out of scope and now he's fine with doing <canvas> in HTML
# [04:04] <mjs> he found my powers of persuasion effective
# [04:04] <mjs> (plus hyatt's)
# [04:04] <anne> He also mentions it's not a good fit for a document description language where Maciej already explained that it's for applications
# [04:05] <mjs> I thought at first he was fighting some political turf war
# [04:05] <mjs> now it sounds like he just wants it to be possible for SVG to have <canvas> or a similar API somewhere
# [04:05] <anne> but the SVG WG &hearts; namespaces
# [04:05] <anne> <html:canvas>!
# [04:06] <Hixie> that works today
# [04:06] <Hixie> so sure
# [04:06] <anne> http://therealcrisp.xs4all.nl/blog/2007/04/07/breaking-the-web/
# [04:07] <mjs> well, it would have to be <svg:foreignObject><xhtml:canvas/></svg:foreignObject>, but yes, I pointed out they could do that
# [04:07] <MikeSmith> anne - crisp = Chris Pine?
# [04:07] <anne> nope
# [04:07] <mjs> that's a refreshing blog post
# [04:09] <MikeSmith> in other news... James Clark seems to have resurfaced:
# [04:10] <MikeSmith> http://blog.jclark.com/2007/04/do-we-need-new-kind-of-schema-language.html
# [04:10] <anne> old news
# [04:10] <anne> ;)
# [04:10] <MikeSmith> ah
# [04:10] <Hixie> sweet, i finally tricked twitter into stopping me from following myself
# [04:12] <mjs> python seems to make an adequate schema language
# [04:14] <mjs> hah, that's what he recommends (though not the way I meant)
# [04:21] * Quits: Philip (excors@80.177.163.133) (Quit: Philip)
# [04:21] * anne -> bed
# [04:22] <MikeSmith> deltab - I think they call it eLinks now
# [04:24] <deltab> that's a fork of it
# [04:24] <MikeSmith> well, I wonder whether lynx etc. should even be called browsers any more
# [04:24] <deltab> it has lots of nice features, but not a graphical mode, which Links 2 (what I'm using) has
# [04:24] <MikeSmith> they are more like just, well, HTML pagers
# [04:24] * Quits: anne (annevk@81.68.67.12) (Ping timeout)
# [04:24] <MikeSmith> hmm.. graphical mode
# [04:25] <deltab> http://links.twibright.com/
# [04:25] * Quits: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221) (Ping timeout)
# [04:25] <MikeSmith> I think in general they are as much like browsers as antiword(1) is like MS Word or other word processors
# [04:27] <MikeSmith> lacking support for Javascript or CSS
# [04:30] * Joins: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221)
# [04:31] <MikeSmith> deltab - you use Links as your main browser?
# [04:35] <deltab> yes: it's fast, responsive, not particularly memory hungry, always shows a legible font and can be compiled easily on my machine
# [04:35] <deltab> none of which are true of Firefox
# [04:35] <MikeSmith> linux machine?
# [04:36] <deltab> yes
# [04:36] <MikeSmith> you've tried Konqueror?
# [04:36] <deltab> not for long
# [04:36] <MikeSmith> Opera runs on Linux too
# [04:41] <MikeSmith> Webkit code compiles easily .. you can check out Webkit source from their subversion repository, run a script to build it, run another script to launch Safari against that build
# [04:43] <MikeSmith> deltab - I assume you care about compiling it because you want to customize the source?
# [04:46] <deltab> I have in the past made a few small changes, such as tagging downloaded files with their URLs
# [04:47] <deltab> of course there's less reason to recompile Firefox, because of its JS and XUL
# [04:50] <MikeSmith> deltab - you tried Konqueror and didn't like it
# [04:50] <MikeSmith> or you just never tried it so much?
# [04:51] * MikeSmith is reminded that it would be good to have Lars Knoll on the HTML WG
# [04:51] <MikeSmith> and George Staikos
# [04:51] <MikeSmith> and others
# [04:52] <deltab> MikeSmith: I've used it a bit, didn't liek it much
# [05:04] <mjs> MikeSmith: I asked both of them specifically and Konqueror people in general - none are particularly willing, and having watched the group so far, I can see why
# [05:05] <MikeSmith> mjs - yeah, I can understand, but still would be great to have them
# [05:05] <MikeSmith> wonder if I can do anything to help get them involved
# [05:32] * Quits: hsivonen (hsivonen@130.233.41.50) (Ping timeout)
# [05:32] * Joins: hsivonen (hsivonen@130.233.41.50)
# [05:32] <MikeSmith> hsivonen - hi
# [05:35] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Get thee behind me, satan.)
# [05:47] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
# [06:06] * Disconnected
# [06:06] * Attempting to rejoin channel #html-wg
# [06:06] * Rejoined channel #html-wg
# [06:06] * Topic is 'W3C HTML WG http://www.w3.org/html/wg/ - http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ (logged) - http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ProposedDesignPrinciples'
# [06:06] * Set by anne on Tue Mar 27 12:28:46
# [06:06] * Quits: krijnh (krijnhoetm@213.84.148.98) (Connection reset by peer)
# [06:24] * Joins: sbuluf (oie@200.49.140.165)
# [06:33] * Joins: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@69.140.48.129)
# [06:33] * Quits: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@69.140.48.129) (Quit: Leaving)
# [06:33] * Quits: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221) (Ping timeout)
# [06:33] * Joins: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@69.140.48.129)
# [06:38] * Joins: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221)
# [06:54] * Joins: Shunsuke (kuruma@219.110.80.235)
# [07:49] * Quits: Lachy (chatzilla@124.168.24.114) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.78 [Firefox 2.0.0.3/2007030919])
# [07:52] * Joins: serdar (serdar@203.206.240.219)
# [08:29] * Quits: serdar (serdar@203.206.240.219) (Quit: serdar)
# [08:40] * Quits: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221) (Ping timeout)
# [08:45] * Joins: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221)
# [08:48] * Joins: serdar (serdar@203.206.240.219)
# [09:24] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: morning
# [09:44] <MikeSmith> hsivonen - I'm on my way out but wanted to ask if you had read James Clark's blog posting.
# [09:48] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: I have started reading it.
# [09:52] <hsivonen> OK. now I have read it
# [09:53] <hsivonen> two thoughts: TEDI seems a lot like JSON with another level of indirection to make XML the wire format
# [09:53] <hsivonen> it is assumed that a schema can document the API contract
# [09:54] <Zeros> What entry is this?
# [09:56] <MikeSmith> http://blog.jclark.com/2007/04/do-we-need-new-kind-of-schema-language.html
# [10:02] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Get thee behind me, satan.)
# [10:03] <Zeros> interesting
# [10:07] * Joins: loic (loic@90.29.250.167)
# [10:08] * Quits: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@69.140.48.129) (Quit: Leaving)
# [10:16] * Joins: ROBOd (robod@86.34.246.154)
# [10:27] * Quits: heycam (cam@203.214.79.176) (Quit: bye)
# [10:36] * Joins: anne (annevk@81.68.67.12)
# [10:40] * Parts: anne (annevk@81.68.67.12)
# [10:40] * Joins: anne (annevk@81.68.67.12)
# [10:47] * Quits: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221) (Ping timeout)
# [10:52] * Joins: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221)
# [11:25] * Joins: hasather (hasather@81.235.209.174)
# [12:09] * Joins: Lachlan (Lachlan@124.168.25.222)
# [12:19] <anne> http://www.paulgraham.com/microsoft.html
# [12:21] * Quits: Shunsuke (kuruma@219.110.80.235) (Ping timeout)
# [12:35] * Joins: Philip (excors@80.177.163.133)
# [12:38] <ROBOd> anne: interesting article
# [12:44] * Quits: mw22 (chatzilla@84.41.169.151) (Ping timeout)
# [12:54] * Quits: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221) (Ping timeout)
# [12:59] * Joins: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221)
# [13:58] * Quits: anne (annevk@81.68.67.12) (Ping timeout)
# [14:03] * Quits: loic (loic@90.29.250.167) (Ping timeout)
# [14:12] * Joins: Shunsuke (kuruma@219.110.80.235)
# [14:18] * Joins: loic (loic@90.29.167.210)
# [14:34] * Joins: mw22 (chatzilla@85.144.187.22)
# [14:46] * Joins: mw22_ (chatzilla@85.144.187.22)
# [14:48] * Quits: mw22 (chatzilla@85.144.187.22) (Ping timeout)
# [14:48] * mw22_ is now known as mw22
# [15:01] * Quits: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221) (Ping timeout)
# [15:02] * Joins: st (st@62.234.155.214)
# [15:02] * Quits: st (st@62.234.155.214) (Quit: st)
# [15:06] * Joins: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221)
# [15:44] * Quits: sbuluf (oie@200.49.140.165) (Ping timeout)
# [16:19] * Joins: asbjornu (asbjorn@84.48.116.134)
# [16:25] * Parts: asbjornu (asbjorn@84.48.116.134)
# [16:28] * Quits: serdar (serdar@203.206.240.219) (Quit: serdar)
# [16:41] * Joins: anne (annevk@83.82.206.111)
# [18:08] * Joins: vy (user@88.235.30.169)
# [18:10] <vy> Hi, all! I've a proposal about a new feature I'd like to see in XHTML and for this reason I've sent a message to html-public ml team contacts, Dan Connolly and Karl Dubost. But I'm not sure if this is the right approach and they're the right person I should get in touch with.
# [18:11] <vy> Might anybody help me in the right direction to discuss about a new XHTML feature? (e.g. a specific ml?)
# [18:13] * Joins: sbuluf (lockbp@200.49.140.72)
# [18:25] <anne> are you a member of the WG?
# [18:25] <vy> Umm... No. Just a web enthusiast.
# [18:27] <anne> maybe www-html@w3.org is the best then
# [18:27] <vy> Let me check it from w3.org. Thanks!
# [18:29] <vy> But first it'll be better if I'd wait 2-3 days for the response of Dan Connolly or Karl Dubost. I don't want to be rude to them.
# [18:29] <vy> Maybe 2-3 days is a little bit long. 1 day should be enough to reply to a message. :-)
# [18:29] <anne> They're not the right people to e-mail feature requests to
# [18:30] <vy> Hrm... I see then. Thanks agaim.
# [18:57] * Quits: vy (user@88.235.30.169) (Quit: ERC Version 5.2 stable pre-release (IRC client for Emacs))
# [19:09] * Quits: Shunsuke (kuruma@219.110.80.235) (Quit: See you...)
# [19:26] * Quits: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221) (Ping timeout)
# [19:31] * Joins: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221)
# [20:03] * Quits: ROBOd (robod@86.34.246.154) (Quit: http://www.robodesign.ro )
# [20:58] * Quits: sbuluf (lockbp@200.49.140.72) (Ping timeout)
# [20:59] * anne grows tired of the silly default style sheet debate
# [21:00] <gsnedders> anne: want more codec debate? :P
# [21:00] <anne> oh well, I suppose I should let it go until someone gets around to actually define it
# [21:01] <anne> apart from RF and good enough I don't really have an opinion on codecs
# [21:02] <anne> and I'm prolly not the one making the call for Opera anyway
# [21:03] <anne> Besides the default style nonsense I have a hard time following Microsoft's position on versioning
# [21:07] * Quits: Yudai (Yudai@59.147.29.149) (Quit: SIGTERM received; exit)
# [21:33] * Quits: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221) (Ping timeout)
# [21:38] * Joins: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221)
# [21:40] * Joins: ROBOd (robod@86.34.246.154)
# [21:58] * Quits: ROBOd (robod@86.34.246.154) (Quit: http://www.robodesign.ro )
# [22:39] * Quits: loic (loic@90.29.167.210) (Quit: hoopa rules)
# [22:41] * Joins: Preston (chatzilla@70.181.71.135)
# [22:43] * Joins: Yudai (Yudai@59.147.29.149)
# [22:44] <gavin_> this talk of "really, really, really, I mean it" standards mode is hurting my brain
# [22:44] <anne> no shit
# [22:45] <Philip> Just wait until IE9
# [22:47] * gavin_ disappears again
# [22:54] <Philip> If there have to be new modes, I suggest calling them "IE5 bugs mode", "IE6 bugs mode", "IE7 bugs mode", etc, just so everybody knows whose fault it is
# [22:57] * Joins: sbuluf (du@200.49.140.20)
# [23:08] * Quits: anne (annevk@83.82.206.111) (Ping timeout)
# [23:40] * Quits: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221) (Ping timeout)
# [23:45] * Joins: gavin (gavin@74.103.208.221)
# Session Close: Sun Apr 08 00:00:00 2007

The end :)