/irc-logs / w3c / #html-wg / 2008-04-01 / end

Options:

  1. # Session Start: Tue Apr 01 00:00:00 2008
  2. # Session Ident: #html-wg
  3. # [00:05] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.105.99) (Connection reset by peer)
  4. # [00:05] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.105.99)
  5. # [00:09] * Joins: hober (ted@68.101.220.172)
  6. # [00:25] * Quits: gavin_ (gavin@99.253.193.147) (Ping timeout)
  7. # [00:30] * Joins: gavin_ (gavin@99.253.193.147)
  8. # [01:23] * Quits: billmason (billmason@69.30.57.5) (Quit: .)
  9. # [01:30] * Quits: jgraham (james@81.86.216.20) (Quit: I get eaten by the worms)
  10. # [01:32] * Quits: ChrisWilson (cwilso@131.107.0.105) (Ping timeout)
  11. # [01:38] * Joins: ChrisWilson (cwilso@131.107.0.73)
  12. # [01:44] * Parts: anne (annevk@75.5.98.41)
  13. # [01:48] * Quits: aroben_ (aroben@71.58.57.150) (Quit: Leaving)
  14. # [01:50] * Quits: tH (Rob@87.102.14.81) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.81-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.8.0.9/2006120508])
  15. # [02:05] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  16. # [02:15] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Quit: Less talk, more pimp walk.)
  17. # [02:15] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  18. # [02:15] * Quits: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org) (Client exited)
  19. # [02:18] * Joins: MikeSmith (MikeSmith@mcclure.w3.org)
  20. # [03:05] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.105.99) (Quit: mjs)
  21. # [03:08] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.105.99)
  22. # [03:09] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.105.99) (Quit: mjs)
  23. # [03:15] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.203.14.182)
  24. # [03:22] * Quits: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167) (Quit: And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.)
  25. # [03:23] * Quits: adele (adele@17.203.14.240) (Quit: adele)
  26. # [03:25] * Joins: heycam` (cam@130.194.72.84)
  27. # [03:55] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.203.14.182) (Quit: mjs)
  28. # [03:59] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.105.99)
  29. # [04:27] * Joins: aaronlev (chatzilla@71.243.95.215)
  30. # [04:29] * Joins: anne (annevk@64.73.235.34)
  31. # [04:30] * Joins: mjs_ (mjs@17.203.14.182)
  32. # [04:32] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.105.99) (Ping timeout)
  33. # [04:40] * Quits: aaronlev (chatzilla@71.243.95.215) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.81 [Firefox 3.0b5pre/2008032505])
  34. # [04:44] * Joins: Thezilch (fuz007@76.170.20.154)
  35. # [04:53] * Joins: aaronlev (chatzilla@71.243.95.215)
  36. # [04:59] * Quits: mjs_ (mjs@17.203.14.182) (Quit: mjs_)
  37. # [05:01] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.203.14.182)
  38. # [05:14] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.203.14.182) (Quit: mjs)
  39. # [05:24] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.203.14.182)
  40. # [05:38] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.203.14.182) (Quit: mjs)
  41. # [06:01] * Quits: aaronlev (chatzilla@71.243.95.215) (Ping timeout)
  42. # [06:31] * Quits: heycam` (cam@130.194.72.84) (Quit: bye)
  43. # [06:44] * Joins: mjs (mjs@64.81.48.145)
  44. # [07:12] * Joins: Mark1 (Mark_Baker@209.161.202.187)
  45. # [07:13] * Mark1 is now known as MarkB
  46. # [07:20] * Joins: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@69.140.40.140)
  47. # [07:53] * Quits: heycam (cam@124.168.70.20) (Ping timeout)
  48. # [07:58] * Joins: heycam (cam@210.84.31.53)
  49. # [08:44] * Quits: anne (annevk@64.73.235.34) (Ping timeout)
  50. # [09:09] * Quits: hober (ted@68.101.220.172) (Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs))
  51. # [09:25] * Quits: paullewis (paullewis@82.242.109.217) (Quit: paullewis)
  52. # [09:27] * Quits: Thezilch (fuz007@76.170.20.154) (Connection reset by peer)
  53. # [10:13] * Quits: Zeros (Zeros-Elip@69.140.40.140) (Quit: Leaving)
  54. # [10:19] * Joins: jgraham (james@81.86.216.20)
  55. # [10:26] * Joins: paullewis (paullewis@81.255.115.137)
  56. # [10:35] * Joins: tlr (tlr@128.30.52.30)
  57. # [10:45] * Quits: Navarr (Navarr@76.254.115.188) (Quit: Leaving.)
  58. # [10:46] * Joins: Navarr (Navarr@76.254.115.188)
  59. # [10:48] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@88.91.103.11) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  60. # [10:48] * Joins: ROBOd (robod@89.122.216.38)
  61. # [10:57] * Joins: chaals (chaals@213.236.208.22)
  62. # [11:01] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22)
  63. # [11:01] * Joins: deane (dean@203.211.106.11)
  64. # [11:05] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22) (Quit: Leaving)
  65. # [11:05] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22)
  66. # [11:41] * Joins: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167)
  67. # [12:32] * Quits: heycam (cam@210.84.31.53) (Quit: bye)
  68. # [12:35] * Joins: heycam (cam@210.84.31.53)
  69. # [13:03] * Quits: jgraham (james@81.86.216.20) (Quit: I get eaten by the worms)
  70. # [13:22] * Joins: tH_ (Rob@87.102.14.81)
  71. # [13:22] * tH_ is now known as tH
  72. # [13:32] * Joins: zcorpan (zcorpan@88.131.66.80)
  73. # [13:49] * Quits: tH (Rob@87.102.14.81) (Connection reset by peer)
  74. # [13:50] * Joins: tH_ (Rob@87.102.14.104)
  75. # [13:50] * tH_ is now known as tH
  76. # [13:55] * Quits: heycam (cam@210.84.31.53) (Ping timeout)
  77. # [13:56] * Quits: deane (dean@203.211.106.11) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.81 [Firefox 3.0b4/2008030714])
  78. # [13:57] * Quits: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167) (Quit: And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.)
  79. # [14:07] * Quits: paullewis (paullewis@81.255.115.137) (Quit: paullewis)
  80. # [14:08] * Joins: paullewis (paullewis@81.255.115.137)
  81. # [14:14] * Joins: matt_ (matt@128.30.52.30)
  82. # [14:15] * tlr is now known as procrastix
  83. # [14:18] * matt is now known as mattHome
  84. # [14:18] * matt_ is now known as matt
  85. # [14:23] * Quits: mattHome (matt@128.30.52.30) (Quit: mattHome)
  86. # [14:38] * Joins: aaronlev (chatzilla@71.243.95.215)
  87. # [14:45] * Joins: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167)
  88. # [14:56] * procrastix is now known as tlr
  89. # [15:02] * Joins: myakura (myakura@122.29.8.215)
  90. # [15:06] * Joins: timbl (timbl@128.30.5.160)
  91. # [15:13] * Quits: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167) (Quit: And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.)
  92. # [15:14] * Quits: timbl (timbl@128.30.5.160) (Client exited)
  93. # [15:15] * Joins: timbl (timbl@128.30.55.178)
  94. # [15:16] * Joins: Lionheart (robin@66.57.69.65)
  95. # [15:17] * Quits: Lionheart (robin@66.57.69.65) (Quit: Leaving.)
  96. # [15:21] * Joins: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167)
  97. # [15:47] * Joins: anne (annevk@64.73.235.34)
  98. # [15:58] * Quits: matt (matt@128.30.52.30) (Quit: matt)
  99. # [16:03] * Joins: DanC (connolly@128.30.52.30)
  100. # [16:03] <DanC> Element Traversal
  101. # [16:03] <DanC> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-ElementTraversal-20080303/
  102. # [16:03] <DanC> comments due April 03
  103. # [16:03] <DanC> is this a good thing?
  104. # [16:05] <anne> there's some debate on public-webapi
  105. # [16:05] <anne> i think overall most people agree it's ok, except for the bit where existing Java implementations lock down the spec...
  106. # [16:06] * Joins: matt (matt@128.30.52.30)
  107. # [16:08] <zcorpan> i'm not sure what i think about childElementCount vs childElements
  108. # [16:09] <zcorpan> as an author childElements would certainly be convenient
  109. # [16:11] <zcorpan> also, i'm not sure what childElementCount is good for if not for an index based loop and index based access
  110. # [16:11] <zcorpan> what is it good for?
  111. # [16:11] <anne> i asked and got vague replies
  112. # [16:12] <anne> i suggested to simply drop that
  113. # [16:16] <Lachy> it would be better to have childElements return a NodeList, and then you have childElements.length for the count
  114. # [16:17] <Lachy> since the count itself is useless without a collection of child elements to iterate
  115. # [16:19] <zcorpan> "I'll also note that while Stewart and Boris are active contributors to public-webapi, Björn and Maciej were WG members, and that played a small factor in my decision." -- http://www.w3.org/mid/47ED50D1.6050508@w3.org
  116. # [16:19] <zcorpan> hmm
  117. # [16:22] * Joins: aroben (aroben@71.58.57.150)
  118. # [16:23] <hsivonen> what's the point of using the same APIs in Web JavaScript and J2ME?
  119. # [16:23] <Lachy> in practice, authors generally iterate over arrays with for loops, rather than using linked lists, so omitting childElements seems like a bad decision
  120. # [16:25] <mjs> I would hope my technical feedback would be given the same weight if I were not a WG member
  121. # [16:25] <hsivonen> firstElementChild, lastElementChild, previousElementSibling and nextElementSibling make sense to me. childElementCount doesn't.
  122. # [16:26] <hsivonen> also, I disagree with some previous comments about indexing into the element children
  123. # [16:26] <hsivonen> I think writing indexed loops is the wrong abstraction and writing while (next != null) loops is the right abstraction
  124. # [16:27] * Joins: Julian (chatzilla@217.91.35.233)
  125. # [16:28] * Quits: zcorpan (zcorpan@88.131.66.80) (Connection reset by peer)
  126. # [16:28] * Joins: zcorpan (zcorpan@88.131.66.80)
  127. # [16:29] * Joins: jgraham (james@81.86.216.20)
  128. # [16:29] * Quits: jgraham (james@81.86.216.20) (Quit: I get eaten by the worms)
  129. # [16:33] <jmb> it seems to me to be redundant to expose the count of child elements if you can't then index into them
  130. # [16:34] <Lachy> hsivonen, why? Is it more efficient?
  131. # [16:39] * Quits: Lachy (Lachlan@213.236.208.22) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  132. # [16:48] * Quits: myakura (myakura@122.29.8.215) (Ping timeout)
  133. # [16:48] * tlr is now known as joggix
  134. # [16:52] <mjs> I agree that next != null is better than index loops
  135. # [16:53] <mjs> Mozilla's DOM internally uses arrays for the child lists though so they may tend to look at things the other way
  136. # [16:54] <hsivonen> Gecko's internal representation shouldn't leak to JS programming idioms, though
  137. # [16:54] * Joins: jgraham (james@81.86.216.20)
  138. # [16:56] <mjs> well, WebKit's is a doubly-linked list (using the natural next and previous links) so I'm wary of arguing from that representation
  139. # [17:01] * Quits: jgraham (james@81.86.216.20) (Quit: I get eaten by the worms)
  140. # [17:05] * Joins: jgraham (james@81.86.216.20)
  141. # [17:08] * Joins: Lachy (Lachlan@88.91.103.11)
  142. # [17:21] * Quits: matt (matt@128.30.52.30) (Client exited)
  143. # [17:21] * Joins: matt (matt@128.30.52.30)
  144. # [17:31] * Joins: myakura (myakura@122.29.8.215)
  145. # [17:39] * Joins: Sander_ (svl@86.87.68.167)
  146. # [17:39] * Quits: myakura (myakura@122.29.8.215) (Quit: Leaving...)
  147. # [17:41] * Quits: Sander (svl@86.87.68.167) (Ping timeout)
  148. # [17:41] * Sander_ is now known as Sander
  149. # [17:49] * joggix is now known as tlr
  150. # [17:54] * Parts: timbl (timbl@128.30.55.178)
  151. # [18:13] * Quits: anne (annevk@64.73.235.34) (Ping timeout)
  152. # [18:14] * Joins: anne (annevk@64.73.235.34)
  153. # [18:18] * Quits: zcorpan (zcorpan@88.131.66.80) (Ping timeout)
  154. # [18:53] * Joins: adele (adele@17.203.14.240)
  155. # [19:04] * Quits: paullewis (paullewis@81.255.115.137) (Quit: paullewis)
  156. # [19:09] * Quits: matt (matt@128.30.52.30) (Quit: matt)
  157. # [19:15] * Quits: aroben (aroben@71.58.57.150) (Connection reset by peer)
  158. # [19:17] * Joins: aroben (aroben@71.58.57.150)
  159. # [19:20] * Quits: anne (annevk@64.73.235.34) (Ping timeout)
  160. # [19:33] * Quits: aaronlev (chatzilla@71.243.95.215) (Ping timeout)
  161. # [19:42] * Quits: mjs (mjs@64.81.48.145) (Quit: mjs)
  162. # [20:02] * Joins: aaronlev (chatzilla@71.243.95.215)
  163. # [20:05] * Joins: anne (annevk@66.192.2.81)
  164. # [20:18] * Quits: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.44.37.113) (Quit: Partying in teh intarwebs)
  165. # [20:29] <shepazu> ok, given 2 bits of feedback that were soft on the pro side, and 1 was strongly against, and 1 was weakly against, the fact that 2 bits of the feedback came from people who vote on whether the spec is published were negative, that seemed the deciding factor for me
  166. # [20:30] <shepazu> I treated all the feedback seriously and made a judgment call
  167. # [20:31] <anne> It's still not really clear to me when childElementCount is needed
  168. # [20:33] * Joins: dbaron (dbaron@63.245.220.241)
  169. # [20:36] <shepazu> anne, I'm not sure how I can be more clear
  170. # [20:36] <shepazu> do you not understand the example? can I clarify that?
  171. # [20:37] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.203.14.182)
  172. # [20:38] * Quits: aaronlev (chatzilla@71.243.95.215) (Ping timeout)
  173. # [20:38] <anne> your example seems like a presentational issue
  174. # [20:38] * Joins: gsnedders (gsnedders@217.44.37.113)
  175. # [20:39] * Parts: anne (annevk@66.192.2.81)
  176. # [21:14] * Joins: hober (ted@68.101.220.172)
  177. # [21:36] * Joins: mjs_ (mjs@17.255.108.132)
  178. # [21:38] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.203.14.182) (Ping timeout)
  179. # [22:07] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.108.132)
  180. # [22:07] * Quits: mjs_ (mjs@17.255.108.132) (Connection reset by peer)
  181. # [22:08] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.108.132) (Connection reset by peer)
  182. # [22:08] * Joins: mjs_ (mjs@17.255.108.132)
  183. # [22:10] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.108.132)
  184. # [22:11] * Quits: mjs_ (mjs@17.255.108.132) (Connection reset by peer)
  185. # [22:28] * Quits: tH (Rob@87.102.14.104) (Ping timeout)
  186. # [22:32] * Quits: ROBOd (robod@89.122.216.38) (Quit: http://www.robodesign.ro )
  187. # [22:46] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.108.132) (Connection reset by peer)
  188. # [22:46] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.108.132)
  189. # [22:47] * Quits: Julian (chatzilla@217.91.35.233) (Ping timeout)
  190. # [22:48] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.108.132) (Connection reset by peer)
  191. # [22:48] * Joins: mjs (mjs@17.255.108.132)
  192. # [22:59] <Hixie> shepazu: it seems dubious to me to be basing decisions on the amount of feedback rather than the actual content of the feedback
  193. # [23:00] <shepazu> I took into account both
  194. # [23:00] <shepazu> and you can see from the debate that's still going on that both sides have a point
  195. # [23:01] <shepazu> or rather, several points
  196. # [23:01] <shepazu> some implementors think it was a burden to implement the nodeList, so I decided to remove it
  197. # [23:02] <shepazu> and it's kinda silly for you to take my words out of context like that
  198. # [23:03] <shepazu> anne... presentational issue?
  199. # [23:03] <shepazu> what do you mean?
  200. # [23:09] <Hixie> yes i'm sure you've never taken my words out of context or misquoted me or anything either... *cough* http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cdf/2008Apr/0000.html *cough*
  201. # [23:10] * shepazu is a little surprised he's coming under fire because he listened to an implementor and optimized a spec :)
  202. # [23:11] <shepazu> what did I take out of context? what did I misquote there?
  203. # [23:11] <shepazu> I directly linked to your own email...
  204. # [23:12] <Hixie> most of the first paragraph in that e-mail is a lie, e.g. saying that i have any particular opinion on mathml vs vml vs svg vs latex vs wmf
  205. # [23:12] <shepazu> I asked you about the issue several times on IRC, and you never gave me any other impression than what I referenced there
  206. # [23:13] <shepazu> maybe you should have been more clear about what you consider your priorities, because I don't think I was at all misleading
  207. # [23:14] <mjs> shepazu: when I saw the email Hixie linked, I saw it as an attempt to pointlessly stir up trouble rather than a useful call to arms
  208. # [23:14] <mjs> fwiw
  209. # [23:15] <shepazu> when I ask you a question multiple times, and you give the same answer, I have to assume that's what you mean
  210. # [23:15] <Hixie> shepazu: "my" priorities have been posted several times to several mailing lists: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/New_Vocabularies
  211. # [23:15] <Hixie> what answer led you to believe that i have any opinion one way or the other?
  212. # [23:17] <shepazu> the answer where you continually state that you will never allow SVG in HTML, and that you want to rewrite SVG... that sent a very clear message to me and to the SVG WG
  213. # [23:18] <mjs> shepazu: I think if there is any real (as opposed to trumped up) tension, it is open-ended mechanisms for new vocabularies vs. specific support of particular new vocabularies
  214. # [23:19] <shepazu> you don't think there's a real tension when the editor of the spec is on public record as saying he wants to suborn another spec?
  215. # [23:19] <mjs> what do you mean by "suborn"?
  216. # [23:20] <Hixie> shepazu: i think it's obvious that i've only ever said that i won't allow svg in html in frustration at svg, and that that doesn't represent an actual opinion relevant to the vocabulary issue. The rest is true, though, SVG deserves a serious rewrite, and I wish I had the time to do it. The SVG group has utterly failed in the past 10 years to even begin to address the problems with SVG, they just keep making it bigger and worse.
  217. # [23:20] <shepazu> rewrite and alter
  218. # [23:20] <mjs> what I hope and expect Hixie will do is define a way to get SVG-namespace subDOMs in documents in the text/html serialization
  219. # [23:21] <Hixie> shepazu: however, again, my personal opinions of the spec really don't affect what the HTML5 spec ends up saying, as i base that not on opinions but on facts.
  220. # [23:21] <mjs> I don't expect he will redefine the semantics of SVG elements or DOM APIs, no matter how much they may cry out for it
  221. # [23:21] <shepazu> mjs, I haven't been given cause to have that same faith
  222. # [23:22] <Hixie> all of this is totally moot, though, as it doesn't represent what you claim that i said in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cdf/2008Apr/0000.html
  223. # [23:22] <shepazu> and I think my interpretation is quite understandable
  224. # [23:22] <mjs> shepazu: I don't understand what your interpretation is, then
  225. # [23:22] <mjs> Hixie rightly said not to assume the solution when stating a problem
  226. # [23:22] <mjs> but of course, the existence of widely implemented specs has a huge bearing on where to go in the solution space
  227. # [23:23] <mjs> saying this somehow means that Hixie wants to spec VML or Windows Metafiles is just inflammatory and not a sensible interpretation of what he said
  228. # [23:23] <shepazu> mjs: my interpretation is that Hixie wants to redefine SVG, both the semantics and the syntax, and he has said exactly that many times
  229. # [23:23] <mjs> shepazu: I want him to do so as well, just not in HTML5 :-)
  230. # [23:24] <mjs> or at least, I want *some*one to do so
  231. # [23:24] <shepazu> I don't think that's unreasonable
  232. # [23:24] <shepazu> but doing an end-run around the SVG WG is not going to keep everyone calm and open
  233. # [23:25] <mjs> I do think that if HTML5 defines a serialization form that is very far removed from the XML form of the language, that would be problematic
  234. # [23:25] <shepazu> I don't think my comments have been a tenth as inflammatory as Hixie's
  235. # [23:25] <mjs> but I doubt the requirements lead there
  236. # [23:26] <Hixie> shepazu: if you had been saying that i thought svg was a poorly written spec, that would have been accurate. But that's not what you said I said. You said I said that I considered WMF "equally well suited as SVG", which i have never said, either one way nor the other
  237. # [23:26] <Hixie> amongst other things which i also didn't say
  238. # [23:26] <hsivonen> shepazu: SVG is in need of an SVG5. It would be nice if the SVG WG took care of it.
  239. # [23:27] <shepazu> hsivonen: do you attend the SVG telcons?
  240. # [23:27] <shepazu> do you read our minutes for the very concrete suggestions that I make frequently along those lines?
  241. # [23:27] <hsivonen> shepazu: I don't. (If the SVG WG is already on the case, great.)
  242. # [23:28] * Quits: aroben (aroben@71.58.57.150) (Quit: Leaving)
  243. # [23:28] <shepazu> then I wish that we could catch a bit of a break
  244. # [23:29] <shepazu> one of my active goals the entire time I've been on the SVG WG is to work more harmoniously with the browser vendors and with our critics
  245. # [23:29] <shepazu> and the SVG WG is quite receptive to that
  246. # [23:29] <Hixie> you've been saying we should give the svg wg a break for years now dude
  247. # [23:29] <Hixie> nothing has improved
  248. # [23:29] <shepazu> hasn't it?
  249. # [23:30] <Hixie> you haven't even published anything since 2006, other that minor errata
  250. # [23:30] <Hixie> and the thing you published in 2006 was a CR that blatently violated w3c process
  251. # [23:30] <shepazu> we have made many more tests, issued a lot more errata in response to comments in a timelier manner, opened out discussions to vendors not even on the WG, and tightened up the SVGt Tiny spec a lot
  252. # [23:31] <Hixie> yeah, well, no offence intended, but that's peanuts compared to what needs to happen
  253. # [23:31] <shepazu> we haven't published because we've been trying to improve the language of the spec, read our minutes
  254. # [23:31] <Hixie> work in public.
  255. # [23:31] <shepazu> have you read our charter?
  256. # [23:31] <Hixie> fix your charter.
  257. # [23:31] <shepazu> the new one?
  258. # [23:31] <shepazu> we've already resolved to work i public
  259. # [23:31] <shepazu> in
  260. # [23:32] <shepazu> we are just waiting for the new rechartering
  261. # [23:32] <Hixie> there's a world of difference between resolving to do something, and having it done
  262. # [23:32] <Hixie> and the latter is all that matters
  263. # [23:32] <shepazu> wtf?
  264. # [23:32] <Hixie> sorry, but after several years of saying "give us a break", my patience wears thin
  265. # [23:32] <shepazu> and after years of your insults, mine is thin too
  266. # [23:32] <Hixie> i've been pointing out fundamental problems in SVG since before 1.0 was in CR
  267. # [23:33] <Hixie> and the spec has only grown and become worse
  268. # [23:33] <shepazu> and I've been part of the SVG WG since 2006
  269. # [23:33] <shepazu> so I can't be held accountable for anything that happened before that
  270. # [23:33] <Hixie> i'm not criticising you (other than when you lie about what i said, such as in the aforementioned e-mail), i'm cricitising the svg working group
  271. # [23:33] <Hixie> whether you take that personally or not is your call
  272. # [23:34] <shepazu> have you noticed that the participants of the WG are almost all completely different than the ones that wrote the earlier specs? no, because that wouldn't give you reason to complain
  273. # [23:34] * jgraham_ wonders if the new SVG charter has a public URL
  274. # [23:34] <shepazu> jgraham_: sorry, not yet... in a few days it should be
  275. # [23:34] <shepazu> jgraham_: that's not my choice, I wish it were
  276. # [23:35] <shepazu> but I worked hard to push the WG to be more open, and the charter reflects that
  277. # [23:35] <jgraham_> shepazu: np. My limited experience with w3c is that charters put everyone into ultra-paranoid secretive mode
  278. # [23:35] <Philip> shepazu: You should post it to Wikileaks
  279. # [23:36] <shepazu> Philip: lol, not my style :)
  280. # [23:36] <jgraham_> (that is the charters themselves)
  281. # [23:36] * Quits: jgraham (james@81.86.216.20) (Quit: I get eaten by the worms)
  282. # [23:37] <shepazu> no, jgraham_ .... damn you, worms!!!!
  283. # [23:37] <Philip> shepazu: That way they won't suspect you as the leaker
  284. # [23:37] <shepazu> Philip: it will be out soon enough
  285. # [23:37] <Philip> Bah, that's no fun
  286. # [23:37] <shepazu> we have already started putting into place a public wiki and issue tracker, and resolved to have our minutes public
  287. # [23:38] <shepazu> not that that matters much, most people here could read the minutes if they wanted to anyway
  288. # [23:38] <shepazu> including the people calling for us to be open, which implies we're hiding something
  289. # [23:40] <shepazu> Hixie: if you take my referencing your emails as an insult, that's your call, but I think it accurately represents what you've publicly stated
  290. # [23:40] <shepazu> and if you don't want to be misunderstood, state yourself more clearly
  291. # [23:41] <Hixie> i don't take it as an insult, i take it as a sign that you don't read what i write
  292. # [23:42] <shepazu> then you're reading the signs wrong
  293. # [23:42] <shepazu> I pay close attention to what you write, because it has far-reaching implications
  294. # [23:45] <shepazu> "Resistance to errors (e.g. not brittle in the face of syntax errors)" for example, reads to me that you want to change the syntax of SVG
  295. # [23:45] <Dashiva> Gee, HTML not being draconion, who would've thought...
  296. # [23:46] <shepazu> Dashiva: that's the point.... SVG is not HTML
  297. # [23:46] <gsnedders> Draconian error handling ftw!
  298. # [23:46] <Philip> Dashiva: A draconion sounds like an interested hybrid organism
  299. # [23:46] <shepazu> and this assumes that the processing model of SVG is the purview of the HTML WG
  300. # [23:47] <Dashiva> shepazu: It's not HTML, until you put it in HTML.
  301. # [23:47] <shepazu> "Round-tripping (the ability to take image fragments from a Web page and edit them)" with no checkmark implies that this was not a goal met
  302. # [23:47] <mjs> shepazu: I do think some syntax changes (at least defining error handling) will be needed to express SVG in the text/html serialization
  303. # [23:49] <shepazu> mjs: I admit that's a possibility, but we'd have to decide together (SVG + HTML WGs) what is appropriate
  304. # [23:51] <shepazu> mjs, I honestly wish Apple would join the SVG telcons more (and I don't mean that as a dig)
  305. # [23:51] <shepazu> it's very productive when oliver shows up
  306. # [23:54] <jgraham_> Philip: The world's first firebreathing vegetable?
  307. # [23:56] <mjs> laptop going insane must reboot
  308. # [23:56] * Quits: mjs (mjs@17.255.108.132) (Quit: mjs)
  309. # [23:56] <Philip> (Oops, s/interested/interesting/ ten minutes ago)
  310. # [23:58] <shepazu> Philip: I think regex has a time limit
  311. # Session Close: Wed Apr 02 00:00:00 2008

The end :)