# [02:52] <Hixie> hsivonen: i don't have a good page to point to that i can think of. what's the argument, exactly?
# [02:52] <Hixie> hsivonen: haven't looked at the svg/mathml thing. i don't think putting svg in html would make sense, though, and presentational mathml is nearly as bad.
# [02:55] <Hixie> hsivonen: and the insertion point can be weirder than that iirc
# [11:44] <annevk> Hixie, did you leave out almost standards mode with some hope that we might change some CSS stuff to pull almost and standards mode back together?
# [12:30] <annevk> backwards compatibility with HTML4 and XHTML1 in a way that we do not. It has no clean slate policy, but instead tries to maintain elements and attributes from prior W3C recommendations."
# [13:26] <hsivonen> Hixie: the rationale behind the semantic change complaint seemed to be that you are pulling the rug from under those who are authoring assuming previous de jure semantics
# [13:27] <hsivonen> Hixie: The idea that SVG should be kept out of text/html because it is presentational is totally unconvincing. I don't see how things get any better--even theoretically--when you move a chunk of markup into an external network resource
# [13:27] <hsivonen> Hixie: do you think my thesis, the Distler blog and Sam Ruby's blog would benefit from putting SVG into a separate HTTP resource?
# [13:50] <ctford> does anyone know if the new <video> tag supports width and height attributes to force the browser to display it as a particular size?
# [13:50] <ctford> i know there are videoWidth and videoHeight attributes, but they seem to refer to the native height of the video, not the size it's displayed at.
# [13:50] <annevk> you size it with CSS and then the video scales to fit to the width and height
# [13:56] <annevk> for now there are no such attributes though
# [13:57] <ctford> annevk: so you can't use a style attribute?
# [13:57] <ctford> i know it's better practice to put it in a separate css stylesheet
# [13:59] <kfish> ctford, putting it into a style element would be ok (not require generating a separate css resource for each video)
# [14:00] <ctford> kfish: for our purposes it's probably best to put all the sizing in css, because that's where you'd be messing with the page layout and it's the page layout that determines what size you want the videos to be.
# [14:01] * Joins: Jero (n=Jero@d207230.upc-d.chello.nl)
# [14:02] <kfish> yes, but if it's just width and height than that css can live inside <style> ... </style> in the page
# [14:03] <ctford> kfish: sure, it could live in the page, but the rest of the sizing info is in separate stylesheets right?
# [14:05] <kfish> ctford, for cmmlwiki, the rest of the styling is static across the site, not dependent on the video content
# [14:07] <ctford> kfish: yeah, so don't we have to force the video to be a certain height so that it fits in with the static sizing of the rest of the page?
# [15:01] <annevk> one of the problems I have is that I don't have all the dependencies for html5lib anymore on my new machine so running the tests doesn't work...
# [15:21] * Philip` guesses that <video ...><style scoped>video { width: 300px; height: 150px }</style></video> wouldn't work because the contents of <video> get ignored, but isn't sure what says that is true
# [15:22] <zcorpan> Philip`: contents of video is still processed
# [17:02] <zcorpan> Jero: if <style scoped> in head is non-conforming, the handling of it can be considered error handling. why make it more complex than it needs to be? it's not like there is content that depends on a particular handling
# [20:12] <Jero> With "<p><b></p>" a </b> is generated. Should this B element remain in the list of active formatting elements?
# [20:14] <Hixie> annevk: i left out almost standards mode because as far as html5 is concerned, there's no such thing
# [20:15] <Hixie> hsivonen: re changing semantics -- we're not actually changing them, though. <i> and <small> are just broadened to cover non-visual cases, really.
# [20:16] <Hixie> hsivonen: having SVG in an external resource emphasises the point that the resource is not part of the content, and makes it at least slightly more likely that an alternative aural presentation is given (e.g.).
# [20:16] <Hixie> hsivonen: and if it's purely presentational, and thus would not have a visual equivalent, then it should be in hte stylesheet where it can be switched out
# [20:19] <Hixie> Jero: unless the spec says to take it out, it stays in
# [21:39] <jgraham> Hmm, it seems like a river-of-news style feedreader would work better for comment feeds since you wouldn't have old posts cluttering up the UI most of the time (though they'd still get checked I suppose)
# [22:19] <hsivonen> Hixie: Re: changing semantics: I think the issue has been raised often enough that we need a FAQ entry
# [22:21] <hsivonen> Hixie: I still entirely unconvinced about the practicality of your and annevk's stance regarding SVG in text/html. From my point of view, it is a feature parity bug between HTML5 and XHTML5 regardless of whether it's presentational
# [22:23] <hsivonen> jruderman: yes. defining appropriate namespace assignment in the tree builder and a void element mode flag in the tokenizer
# [22:24] * Quits: met_ (n=Hassman@r5bx220.net.upc.cz) ("Chemists never die, they just stop reacting.")
# [22:25] <hsivonen> jruderman: I think publications like the Distler blog should be able to use text/html with math and vector graphics ending up in the right namespaces in the DOM
# [22:26] <jruderman> what would the syntax look like?
# [22:26] <hsivonen> <svg> ... </svg> and <math> .... </math>
# [22:27] <hsivonen> jruderman: implicit namespace assignment based on <svg> and <math> subtree root
# [22:30] <Philip`> Could it be done so that future extensions (like adding <x3d>...</x3d> or whatever) can degrade gracefully, rather than being treated like a collection of <span>s and text that will get misinterpreted by old UAs (and confuse search engines, etc)?
# [22:31] <hsivonen> Philip`: I don't know how to handle arbitrary vocabulary combinations without prefixing
# [22:31] <hsivonen> Philip`: but I want to optimize for SVG and MathML
# [22:31] <hsivonen> Philip`: I'd be OK with a hairier arrangement for arbitrary vocabularies if we really want to do those
# [22:31] <hsivonen> Philip`: (I know that there are WG participants who want to)
# [22:32] <Philip`> Hmm, maybe something like <svg xmlns>...</xml> so it's easy to remember/write but means browsers can easily determine that it's some XML extension and they should ignore it unless they understand what "svg" means?