/irc-logs / freenode / #whatwg / 2007-12-12 / end

Options:

  1. # Session Start: Wed Dec 12 00:00:00 2007
  2. # Session Ident: #whatwg
  3. # [00:01] <Hixie> it's hard to know how to react to people who say that apple and nokia are lying
  4. # [00:01] <Hixie> especially since google has the same concern and i know that google isn't lying...
  5. # [00:01] <hubick> Hixie: I think you should make more noise about free alternatives like h.261
  6. # [00:02] <Hixie> h.261 sucks
  7. # [00:02] <jgraham_> Hixie: Well of course you ould say Google aren't lying ;)
  8. # [00:02] <jgraham_> s/ould/would/
  9. # [00:02] <Hixie> jgraham_: well, right, that's why i haven't mentioned that
  10. # [00:02] <Hixie> jgraham_: people would just say that i was part of the conspiracy
  11. # [00:03] <Hixie> the problem is that even if you don't believe the submarine patent risk, you still have the problem that apple won't implement ogg
  12. # [00:03] <Hixie> so whether we are being played or not doesn't really matter, if what we want is interop
  13. # [00:03] <Hixie> sihg
  14. # [00:03] <Hixie> i'll reply when i get to work
  15. # [00:03] <Hixie> afk for now
  16. # [00:04] <jgraham_> Indeed. But I think it's not hard to understand the conspiracy theories. It's so common for companies, especially large companies, to lie
  17. # [00:05] <Dashiva> Even if they didn't lie, they would still be doing the same actions, though
  18. # [00:05] <jgraham_> so I think you'll just have to ignore the conspiracy theories and hope that people can find a technical solution
  19. # [00:05] <hubick> I have taken a survey of the room here at work, and Linux has more market share than Apple, and they will ship ogg, so you are set :)
  20. # [00:07] <jgraham_> Dashiva: I'm not sying they _are_ lying. I'm saying that they're suffering from "boy who cried wolf" syndrome (does that analogy translate?)
  21. # [00:07] <hubick> I'm not supposed to believe Apple is doing this just to protect their interest in pushing the whole world to using only Quick Time?
  22. # [00:09] <othermaciej> do you mean QuickTime the media container format, or QuickTime the media framework software?
  23. # [00:09] <othermaciej> the former is clearly false, Apple primarily advocates the MPEG-4 container and family of codecs
  24. # [00:09] <hubick> I mean the Whatever That Stuff To Do With Watching Video I Need To Get From Apple
  25. # [00:10] <jgraham_> hubick: Ultimately the question of why they are doing it can only be answered by seeing if they act in good faith to find a solution.
  26. # [00:10] <othermaciej> I don't think QuickTime downloads for Windows are a huge revenue driver for Apple, but I'm not privy to financial info on that
  27. # [00:10] <hubick> ask them to grant all patents on their format and donate it to the web then
  28. # [00:10] <Dashiva> jgraham: I know. I'm just saying, regardless of whether they lie or not, we have to consider their actions rather than their words
  29. # [00:11] * Joins: DIrtyF (n=DirtyF@gar31-2-82-224-211-195.fbx.proxad.net)
  30. # [00:11] * Parts: DIrtyF (n=DirtyF@gar31-2-82-224-211-195.fbx.proxad.net)
  31. # [00:11] <hubick> What about "Dirac" ?
  32. # [00:11] <jgraham_> hubick: AIUI Apple + Nokia don't actually hold all the necessary patents, just license them
  33. # [00:11] * Joins: DIrtyF (n=DirtyF@gar31-2-82-224-211-195.fbx.proxad.net)
  34. # [00:12] <jgraham_> hubick: I guess Dirac is a solution if it is agreed to be free of IPR issues
  35. # [00:12] * Quits: DIrtyF (n=DirtyF@gar31-2-82-224-211-195.fbx.proxad.net) (Client Quit)
  36. # [00:12] * Joins: DIrtyF (n=DirtyF@gar31-2-82-224-211-195.fbx.proxad.net)
  37. # [00:12] * Quits: DIrtyF (n=DirtyF@gar31-2-82-224-211-195.fbx.proxad.net) (Remote closed the connection)
  38. # [00:13] <hubick> I'm guessing the same "possibility of submarine patents" argument will be made against Dirac.
  39. # [00:13] <jgraham_> Dashiva: I agree entirely. At this juncture the actions we need to consider are their efforts to find a acceptable codec
  40. # [00:13] <othermaciej> Apple's actions so far have involved negotiating with codec licensing groups, asking the w3c to do patent searches (it's risky for large corporations to do a patent search), and providing a long list of possible codecs for the w3c to consider (w/ a brief summary of the tradeoffs)
  41. # [00:14] <hubick> is this list public?
  42. # [00:14] <othermaciej> sure, it's included in a summary of codec issues that Dave Singer sent to public-html a few months ago
  43. # [00:15] <anne-mac> public-html: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/
  44. # [00:16] <hubick> Is public-html why the www-html I am subscribed to seems so dead?
  45. # [00:17] * Joins: grimeboy (n=grimboy@85-211-246-139.dsl.pipex.com)
  46. # [00:17] <mpt> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0153.html
  47. # [00:17] <othermaciej> I don't think Dirac is materially different from Theora, from an IP risk point of view
  48. # [00:18] <othermaciej> the thing that makes a big difference for MPEG is broad-based open process with disclosure requirements
  49. # [00:18] <othermaciej> that mitigates a lot (but not all) of the risk
  50. # [00:18] <othermaciej> something that *would* help a lot is a codec developed through an RF-license open standards process
  51. # [00:19] <othermaciej> (that could include taking Dirac or Theora through such a process)
  52. # [00:19] * Joins: ianloic (i=yakk@glub.dreamhostps.com)
  53. # [00:19] <anne-mac> hubick, this could be true, yes
  54. # [00:20] <anne-mac> joining the HTML WG (and public-html): http://blog.whatwg.org/w3c-restarts-html-effort
  55. # [00:21] * Quits: kingryan (n=kingryan@74.95.195.25)
  56. # [00:26] <hubick> I dunno if I should subscribe... all these issues just make me frustrated. I don't know how you people involved with creating these standards keep up morale for so long while creating standards that may never see the light of implementation day.
  57. # [00:27] * Joins: parcelbrat (n=parcelbr@96.239.197.10)
  58. # [00:27] <anne-mac> the company I work for implements stuff, so that helps :)
  59. # [00:27] <parcelbrat> can someone point me to the logs for any discussion on the removal of the ogg codec's from the spec?
  60. # [00:27] <hubick> parcelbrat: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0153.html (courtesy of mpt to me a moment ago)
  61. # [00:28] * jgraham_ finds the web standards stuff has more of a "people care abut this" vibe than Astrophysics
  62. # [00:28] <parcelbrat> hubick: thanks
  63. # [00:28] <parcelbrat> has it been a common topic?
  64. # [00:29] <hubick> parcelbrat: I been bugging them in here for almost an hour now :)
  65. # [00:29] <anne-mac> it has been discussed when <video> got introduced and during the technical planery a month ago
  66. # [00:29] <anne-mac> and now
  67. # [00:30] <anne-mac> same arguments each time iirc
  68. # [00:31] <parcelbrat> anne-mac: am i reading correctly that whatwg is still wanting support for the ogg formats? and it will be discussed more, or have they been tossed?
  69. # [00:32] <Philip`> jgraham_: There's as many HTML documents as there are stars in our galaxy (to within a couple of orders of magnitude), and the web is growing exponentially faster than the galaxy, so it's obviously the more interesting area :-)
  70. # [00:32] <hubick> parcelbrat: sounds like they are looking for alternatives, and a likely candidate may be h.261
  71. # [00:32] <anne-mac> parcelbrat, it will most certainly be discussed more
  72. # [00:33] <anne-mac> and W3C is looking into a patent search as I understand things
  73. # [00:33] <anne-mac> for Ogg stuff
  74. # [00:33] <jgraham_> parcelbrat: The WHATWG wants support for some freely-implementable formats
  75. # [00:36] <parcelbrat> so slashdot is over-reacting?
  76. # [00:36] <parcelbrat> http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/12/11/1339251.shtml
  77. # [00:36] * jgraham_ wonders how Philip` arrived at ~100 billion HTML documents
  78. # [00:36] <gavin> slashdot? overreacting? impossible!!
  79. # [00:36] <jgraham_> parcelbrat: If they're not then it would be the first time for this particular thing
  80. # [00:36] <parcelbrat> true
  81. # [00:37] <hubick> the bottom line is that that it *was* there and now it's not though.
  82. # [00:37] <parcelbrat> i knew there was a reason i avoid slashdot usually, ars is usually less dramatic
  83. # [00:37] <parcelbrat> hubick: was and not, but isn't banned, right?
  84. # [00:38] * parcelbrat rhetorical
  85. # [00:38] <hubick> parcelbrat: I find Ars editors have just as biased takes on topics, if less obvious
  86. # [00:38] <parcelbrat> biased yes, just less dramatic
  87. # [00:38] <Philip`> jgraham_: Searching for e.g. "a" on Yahoo gives reportedly 20 billion matches, and Yahoo probably misses lots of pages so round it up to 10^11
  88. # [00:38] <anne-mac> /. is written by contributors
  89. # [00:39] <anne-mac> this post happens to be written by a guy promoting his own post and providing all the incorrect links
  90. # [00:39] <anne-mac> who also posts to the WHATWG list a lot
  91. # [00:39] <parcelbrat> is he dramatic on the list too?
  92. # [00:39] <hubick> parcelbrat: http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-December/013152.html
  93. # [00:43] <parcelbrat> <sarcasm>wow very weasely</sarcasm>
  94. # [00:43] <jgraham_> Philip`: I guess 10^(11±2) search-engine cached HTML documents might not be such a bad estimate, although that's not quite "total number of HTML documents"
  95. # [00:43] <parcelbrat> hubick: that definitely clears stuff up for me, thanks
  96. # [00:43] <jgraham_> s/cached/indexed/ I guess
  97. # [00:44] <Philip`> (Hooray, my cached downloader actually works)
  98. # [00:44] <hubick> Philip`: what are you building?
  99. # [00:45] <Philip`> hubick: Something to download and analyse lots of web pages (for a small value of "lots", like tens of thousands)
  100. # [00:46] <anne-mac> Philip`, didn't you already have sniffing for lots of pages?
  101. # [00:46] <hubick> Philip`: If you need graphs and haven't tried it yet, I highly recommend jFreeChart
  102. # [00:47] * anne-mac though Philip` had hsivonen's stuff up and running
  103. # [00:47] <Philip`> anne-mac: Yes, but I've rewritten stuff so it caches the pages and doesn't have to download hundreds of megabytes of HTML every time I run it
  104. # [00:47] <hubick> hsivonen: which reminds me... I hope you received the patch I sent you for the htmlparser Maven metadata
  105. # [00:48] <Philip`> anne-mac: http://canvex.lazyilluminati.com/misc/media.xml is from 256 pages - is that about what you want?
  106. # [00:49] * anne-mac liked 10s of 1000s
  107. # [00:49] <Philip`> I'm going to move it onto a better computer to run on more pages :-)
  108. # [00:49] <Philip`> assuming it's going to be doing the right thing
  109. # [00:49] <anne-mac> Philip`, I guess that page only shows something on Firefox or something?
  110. # [00:50] * anne-mac gets a blank in Opera
  111. # [00:50] <Philip`> anne-mac: View source :-p
  112. # [00:50] <anne-mac> and Safari
  113. # [00:50] <anne-mac> hmm
  114. # [00:50] <Philip`> It's "XML" - I expect you've heard of that before
  115. # [00:50] <anne-mac> what's this thing you call view source? :p
  116. # [00:51] <mpt> View Source is for hackers
  117. # [00:51] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@adsl-074-229-248-021.sip.bhm.bellsouth.net)
  118. # [00:51] <parcelbrat> what is this XML you speak of?
  119. # [00:51] * Philip` is just generating a big XML dump of lots of headers and attributes and stuff, then using xml_grep to extract the @media values
  120. # [00:52] <anne-mac> so far people seem to comply to the arbitrary media= standards
  121. # [00:52] <anne-mac> i'm amazed
  122. # [00:53] <Philip`> parcelbrat: It's kind of like HTML, except the brackets are anglier
  123. # [00:53] * parcelbrat classic
  124. # [00:54] * Philip` has absolutely no idea how many concurrent downloading/processing threads to run
  125. # [00:55] * jgraham_ is sure the brackets are actually angrier; just look how upset they get when they don't get a partner...
  126. # [00:55] * Quits: hasather (n=hasather@90-231-107-133-no62.tbcn.telia.com) ("leaving")
  127. # [00:55] <hubick> At Linux world 2000 the Konqueror guys were telling me how awesome their browser was, so I loaded my home page which uses @media CSS tags in it, at which point it promptly disappeared *poof* from the screen, leaving them quite embarassed and quiet :)
  128. # [00:56] <mpt> <xml> ≪xml2≫
  129. # [00:56] <parcelbrat> oooh, xml2 is even anglier than xml!
  130. # [00:57] <hubick> mpt: so, xml will eventually evolve into Lisp then?
  131. # [00:57] <mpt> ⋘xml3⋙
  132. # [00:57] <parcelbrat> (xmlisp)
  133. # [00:57] <hubick> isn't this JSON stuff basically that? :)
  134. # [00:58] <parcelbrat> pretty darn close
  135. # [00:58] <Philip`> http://canvex.lazyilluminati.com/misc/sexp.html
  136. # [00:58] * hubick *lolz*
  137. # [00:58] * parcelbrat um.....
  138. # [00:59] <hubick> what was the old sgml transform language?
  139. # [00:59] <anne-mac> dsssl?
  140. # [00:59] <hubick> yeah
  141. # [00:59] <hubick> wasn't it like that?
  142. # [01:00] <anne-mac> no idea
  143. # [01:00] <hubick> heh, I just started clicking links on http://www.jclark.com/dsssl/ and got like, four 404's in a row :(
  144. # [01:03] <anne-mac> Philip`, nice
  145. # [01:11] * Philip` wonders how long it'll take to run "sort -R" on 4.5M lines
  146. # [01:12] <parcelbrat> nice
  147. # [01:12] <anne-mac> we could have text/html+lisp
  148. # [01:13] <parcelbrat> yeah, but then you'd have to start catering to everyone
  149. # [01:13] <parcelbrat> text/html+ruby
  150. # [01:13] <parcelbrat> text/html+python
  151. # [01:13] <parcelbrat> text/html+vbs...
  152. # [01:13] * parcelbrat keyboard breaks
  153. # [01:13] <anne-mac> neh, only those we like
  154. # [01:14] <parcelbrat> shouldn't those be application/html+<<lang>>
  155. # [01:14] <Philip`> We could support them all at first, then remove them all from the spec, and see which ones get complained about the most, and then just put those ones back in
  156. # [01:14] <anne-mac> application/* is overrated I think
  157. # [01:15] <parcelbrat> philip`: works for media, and got me here
  158. # [01:15] <parcelbrat> anne-mac: newbie question: why?
  159. # [01:15] * Dashiva is now known as Dashiva2
  160. # [01:15] * Dashiva2 is now known as Dashiva
  161. # [01:16] <anne-mac> parcelbrat, take text/xml versus application/xml, the only reason to prefer the latter is theoretical concerns over character encoding
  162. # [01:16] <Philip`> Hmm, 6 minutes of CPU time to randomise the list
  163. # [01:16] <anne-mac> but all implementations treat them as being equivalent
  164. # [01:17] <parcelbrat> how would handle text/xml with character encoding? let http handle it?
  165. # [01:17] <anne-mac> most text/* formats have their own specific rules for determining the character encoding actually, all against the various RFCs from the stone age
  166. # [01:18] <anne-mac> text/xml defaults to US-ASCII unless it has a charset parameter that says otherwise
  167. # [01:18] <anne-mac> application/xml defaults to whatever the XML file says unless it has a charset parameter specified
  168. # [01:18] <anne-mac> in practice, text/xml is like application/xml
  169. # [01:20] <parcelbrat> makes sense
  170. # [01:20] <parcelbrat> and we know how well application/html+xml works ;)
  171. # [01:20] <anne-mac> xhtml+xml* ;)
  172. # [01:20] * parcelbrat smacl
  173. # [01:21] <parcelbrat> s/smacl/smack
  174. # [01:22] <hubick> which makes me wonder if Firefox is ever gonna support */*+xml: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=155730
  175. # [01:25] <Philip`> Seems I can download/process 4K pages per minute
  176. # [01:26] <parcelbrat> hubick: yeah, lately, we've had a problem with Ruby on Rails error messages because <%= isn't a valid xml tag... the page isn't supposed to be coming across as xml... oh well
  177. # [01:26] <Philip`> I get loads of cookie spec violation warnings :-/
  178. # [01:30] <Philip`> Argh, and I've got ill-formed XML output too
  179. # [01:31] <parcelbrat> later ya'll
  180. # [01:31] * Quits: parcelbrat (n=parcelbr@96.239.197.10)
  181. # [01:31] <Philip`> <header uri="http://www.ganymede.cz/" name="Server" value="Apache/2.2.6 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.2.6 &#2; DAV/2 PHP/5.2.5"/>
  182. # [01:31] * Philip` wishes XML was easy
  183. # [01:33] <Philip`> Hmm, there's five sites with &#2; in their Server
  184. # [01:33] * Quits: tndH (i=Rob@adsl-77-86-6-102.karoo.KCOM.COM) ("ChatZilla 0.9.79-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.8.0.9/2006120508]")
  185. # [01:34] * Quits: aroben (i=aroben@unaffiliated/aroben) ("Leaving")
  186. # [01:34] <Philip`> <header uri="http://www.doxamus.ro/" name="Server" value="Apache/2.2.6 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.2.6 �N&#31;&#9;YNED�����N&#31;&#9;SAHP�����N&#31;&#9;TATS�����N&#31;&#9; mod_bwlimited/1.4 mod_auth_passthrough/2.1 FrontPage/5.0.2.2635 PHP/5.2.4"/>
  187. # [01:34] <Philip`> That's really not going to work
  188. # [01:39] * Quits: jgraham_ (n=james@81-86-217-3.dsl.pipex.com) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  189. # [01:39] * Quits: Dashiva (i=Dashiva@wikia/Dashiva)
  190. # [01:40] * Quits: mpt (n=mpt@ip-81-1-117-61.cust.homechoice.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  191. # [01:41] * Quits: hubick (n=hubick@cs14.pc.athabascau.ca)
  192. # [01:43] * Joins: Dashiva (i=Dashiva@wikia/Dashiva)
  193. # [01:43] <Philip`> anne-mac: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~pjt47/misc/media.xml
  194. # [01:44] <Philip`> anne-mac: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~pjt47/misc/media.txt too
  195. # [01:44] <Philip`> from 16 kilopages, minus about 500 with errors
  196. # [01:45] <Philip`> (This is only about 400MB of HTML, so I could do more fairly easily)
  197. # [01:45] <Philip`> (but probably not enough more to find really interesting things)
  198. # [01:50] <Philip`> s/about 500/940/
  199. # [01:50] <Philip`> (Also, binary kilo)
  200. # [01:51] * Joins: jgraham_ (n=james@81-86-217-3.dsl.pipex.com)
  201. # [01:54] * Quits: jgraham_ (n=james@81-86-217-3.dsl.pipex.com) (Client Quit)
  202. # [01:58] * Quits: anne-mac (n=annevk@88.80-202-68.nextgentel.com) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  203. # [02:00] <Hixie> "Re: [whatwg] HTML 5, OGG, competition, civil rights, and persons with disabilities"
  204. # [02:00] * Hixie fears looking at that e-mail
  205. # [02:00] <bradee-oh> lol
  206. # [02:01] <Dashiva> Hixie: Now you know how we feel about your mashup replies :P
  207. # [02:01] <Hixie> :-D
  208. # [02:04] <Philip`> hsivonen: I can process 16K pages in 20 seconds (wallclock time) - I think your parser is fast enough for me for now :-)
  209. # [02:05] <_Ivo> I can sadly say that that is a sad title.
  210. # [02:07] <Philip`> 441% CPU usage? I think 'top' is lying to me...
  211. # [02:26] <Hixie> http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/2007/12/video-element-and-ogg-theora.html is a good summary
  212. # [02:34] * Joins: doublec_ (n=doublec@209.79.152.179)
  213. # [02:34] * Quits: doublec (n=doublec@209.79.152.179) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  214. # [02:35] <doublec_> hotel network connections, sigh
  215. # [02:39] <roc> hey
  216. # [02:39] <roc> yeah, that was good Chris
  217. # [02:39] <doublec_> thanks :)
  218. # [02:39] <doublec_> I had to type it in using w3m over a ssh connection using bloggers interface.
  219. # [02:40] <doublec_> since the hotel network seems to kill any browser traffic over a certain size
  220. # [02:41] <roc> This is Avante?
  221. # [02:41] <roc> I don't remember that being a problem
  222. # [02:41] <doublec_> Yes, it's avante. And it is strange. I can receive fine. I can't even send via gmail.
  223. # [02:41] <doublec_> yet that's over ssl so I don' t understand it
  224. # [02:42] * Quits: phsiao (i=shawn@nat/ibm/x-24dd963ac22371ac) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  225. # [02:44] <roc> complain to the management, that's pretty important right now
  226. # [02:45] <doublec_> will do
  227. # [02:46] <othermaciej> mmmm, ogg flamage
  228. # [02:46] <othermaciej> toasty
  229. # [02:47] <othermaciej> Hixie: it argued that not recommending support for the Ogg Theora video codec will be harmful to the blind
  230. # [02:47] <Hixie> i've been trying to keep the flames to a minimum by asking for politeness off-list, i hope it helps
  231. # [02:47] <Hixie> wait, what?
  232. # [02:47] <Hixie> wow
  233. # [02:47] <Hixie> can't wait to read that
  234. # [02:49] <Philip`> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~pjt47/misc/attributes.html - some numbers about values of an arbitrarily-chosen set of elements/attributes
  235. # [02:50] <Hixie> off hand those numbers match what i remember seeing
  236. # [02:50] <Hixie> except for a rev=PARENT
  237. # [02:50] <Hixie> i just saw rev=made and rev=stylesheet
  238. # [02:50] * Quits: billmason (n=billmaso@ip156.unival.com) (".")
  239. # [02:51] <Philip`> They all come from http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~simon/quantum/
  240. # [02:51] <Philip`> (since I counted number of occurrences in total, not number of pages)
  241. # [02:52] <Philip`> Maybe number of pages would be more useful...
  242. # [02:52] <Hixie> ah yeah i found that number of occurances just never works
  243. # [02:52] <Hixie> there are too many gigantic pages that totally screw the count
  244. # [02:54] * Joins: hdh (n=hdh@58.187.109.98)
  245. # [02:57] <Philip`> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~pjt47/misc/attributes.html - now with number of pages too
  246. # [02:58] <Philip`> Not sure why I'm bothering to keep the number of occurrences too, but I guess it doesn't hurt
  247. # [02:58] <Philip`> Looks like cyan and magenta are the least favourite of the binary colours :-(
  248. # [02:59] <othermaciej> doublec_'s blog post is indeed a good summary
  249. # [02:59] * Hixie pokes Philip` to look at his /msgs (and maybe to have him respond on w3.net, since he's not registered on freenode)
  250. # [03:04] <othermaciej> I posted on the codec thread
  251. # [03:05] <othermaciej> may knuth have mercy on my soul
  252. # [03:05] <Philip`> "The" codec thread? I thought there was about two dozen of them
  253. # [03:05] <othermaciej> one of them
  254. # [03:13] * doublec_ is now known as doublec
  255. # [03:17] * Joins: Thezilch (n=fuz007@ip68-111-154-116.sd.sd.cox.net)
  256. # [03:21] <Philip`> othermaciej: About "I've heard game vendors cited, not sure which ones": See http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/Games_that_use_Vorbis
  257. # [03:22] <othermaciej> thanks, that doesn't list the vendors in an easy-to-find way
  258. # [03:22] <Philip`> http://www.unrealtechnology.com/features.php?ref=audio mentions Vorbis support quite prominently
  259. # [03:22] <othermaciej> main thing I wondered about was whether any Microsoft-published games use Ogg Vorbis
  260. # [03:23] <othermaciej> I think the audio issue is somewhat less important since (a) Vorbis has good quality and a somewhat more solid IP footing and (b) MP3 patents will expire in a few years, at which point MP3 is a suitable audio baseline
  261. # [03:23] <Philip`> I don't see any on the list that I recognise as Microsoft
  262. # [03:25] <Philip`> Oh
  263. # [03:25] <Philip`> Halo
  264. # [03:26] <Philip`> which was while they were owned by Microsoft
  265. # [03:27] <Philip`> s/they/Bungie/
  266. # [03:27] <Hixie> halo is certainly high profile
  267. # [03:28] <Dashiva> Fable too
  268. # [03:29] <_Ivo> and Gears of War
  269. # [03:30] <Philip`> _Ivo: Uh, I don't think that used Vorbis
  270. # [03:30] <_Ivo> as far as I know, it did
  271. # [03:30] <_Ivo> may be worth confirming
  272. # [03:31] <Philip`> Oh, looks like you're right
  273. # [03:32] <Philip`> e.g. http://utforums.epicgames.com/showthread.php?t=583980&page=10 says it has a vorbis.dll
  274. # [03:34] <Hixie> btw just so everyone is up to date, i'm thinking we should just drop the whole cross-references nonsense and replace it with some recommendations about using <a href="">
  275. # [03:34] <Philip`> Actually, maybe that's just left over from it being an Unreal Engine game - I have no idea if they really use the Ogg support
  276. # [03:34] <othermaciej> Hixie: the autolinking cross-references?
  277. # [03:34] <Hixie> yeah
  278. # [03:35] <Hixie> too much complexity for not much gain
  279. # [03:35] <othermaciej> Hixie: they did seem cute, but admittedly not that compelling over <a>
  280. # [03:36] <Hixie> good lord we got a lot of feedback on <cite>
  281. # [03:40] <Hixie> hm, i'm thinking, <cite> maybe should just be for a title of a work. any work, and even if it's not technically really cited.
  282. # [03:40] <Hixie> it seems that the typographic convention angle is more useful than the "this is a citation" angle
  283. # [03:40] <Hixie> and the line of what a citation is is a bit vague anyway
  284. # [03:43] <roc> Hixie: FWIW Apple and Nokia support software patents in general.
  285. # [03:44] <othermaciej> http://www.macobserver.com/article/2007/08/31.1.shtml
  286. # [03:45] <othermaciej> (that's not a counter-argument to supporting them in general, I don't know if Apple has an official position on that)
  287. # [03:51] <roc> http://www.macobserver.com/article/2007/08/02.12.shtml
  288. # [03:51] <roc> "However, Apple's chief patent counsel, Chip Lutton, contradicted Ms. Lee, and doesn't think the patent system is broken. In fact, "it's the best system in the world," he said. "
  289. # [03:56] <othermaciej> that certainly seems like support for the patent system in general
  290. # [03:57] <roc> it seems to indicate Apple is pretty happy with software patents in general
  291. # [03:57] <roc> because many other systems in the world don't have them
  292. # [03:58] <othermaciej> well, again, I'm not privy to Apple's official view on the matter, but I know that Apple has actively supported patent reform, and that this is likely to improve the situation at least somewhat
  293. # [03:59] <othermaciej> that probably makes a bigger difference than sound bites
  294. # [04:00] <othermaciej> I personally think software patents are broken and should either not exist or have much shorter terms than current terms, but that that is certainly not an official position
  295. # [04:01] <roc> I agree
  296. # [04:02] <roc> the "reforms" pushed by Apple and others are probably good things in themselves, but they're essentially self-interested attempts to tamp down the troll problem
  297. # [04:04] * roc hopes that the US Supreme Court will just rule software patents invalid and all this will just blow away in the breeze
  298. # [04:05] <othermaciej> unfortunately that seems unlikely
  299. # [04:05] <roc> I would have thought so, but they've been most ornery about patents lately
  300. # [04:08] <othermaciej> honestly I'm not sure I get Apple's stance given which side of patent lawsuits we're usually on
  301. # [04:09] <roc> I know the feeling. I used to work for IBM
  302. # [04:10] * Joins: csarven- (n=nevrasc@modemcable130.251-202-24.mc.videotron.ca)
  303. # [04:14] <MikeSmith> Hixie - I won't shed any tears when the dfn cross-referencing thing gets dropped, but I think, gee wouldn't it be nice if we had a general xref mechanism?
  304. # [04:14] * Quits: Thezilch (n=fuz007@ip68-111-154-116.sd.sd.cox.net) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  305. # [04:15] <MikeSmith> such that empty <xref href="#foo"> gets replaced with content of element at foo
  306. # [04:16] * Quits: csarven (n=nevrasc@modemcable130.251-202-24.mc.videotron.ca) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  307. # [04:30] * Joins: phsiao (n=shawn@c-24-61-15-24.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)
  308. # [04:31] * Quits: phsiao (n=shawn@c-24-61-15-24.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) (Client Quit)
  309. # [04:42] * Joins: G0k (n=hmason@cpe-24-58-3-19.twcny.res.rr.com)
  310. # [04:42] <G0k> uh
  311. # [04:42] * Parts: G0k (n=hmason@cpe-24-58-3-19.twcny.res.rr.com)
  312. # [04:42] * Joins: G0k (n=hmason@cpe-24-58-3-19.twcny.res.rr.com)
  313. # [04:42] <G0k> who the hell is this rudd-o clown?
  314. # [04:46] <othermaciej> G0k: he's clearly passionate about his beliefs
  315. # [04:46] <G0k> at this point i'm convinced he's an agent for MPEG LA
  316. # [04:46] <G0k> because he's doing more to discredit the Ogg crowd than anyone else I've seen
  317. # [04:51] <aphid> it's bulldada, by contrast he makes the rest of us look civilized and reasonable.
  318. # [04:51] <aphid> :D
  319. # [04:52] <G0k> uhg
  320. # [04:58] * Quits: G0k (n=hmason@cpe-24-58-3-19.twcny.res.rr.com)
  321. # [05:17] * Joins: kfish (n=conrad@61.194.21.25)
  322. # [05:20] <MikeSmith> kfish - hei
  323. # [05:33] <kfish> yo MikeSmith
  324. # [05:33] <kfish> cold in tokyo?
  325. # [05:37] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@adsl-074-229-248-021.sip.bhm.bellsouth.net)
  326. # [05:43] * Quits: csarven- (n=nevrasc@modemcable130.251-202-24.mc.videotron.ca) ("http://www.csarven.ca")
  327. # [05:50] * Joins: Compaq_Propietar (n=chatzill@201.153.4.9)
  328. # [05:51] * Quits: Compaq_Propietar (n=chatzill@201.153.4.9) (Client Quit)
  329. # [05:52] <MikeSmith> kfish - yeah, too cold for me already
  330. # [05:52] <MikeSmith> both in Tokyo and out at Keio/SFC
  331. # [05:53] <MikeSmith> warmed up last night by eating shabu-shabu and drinking fugu hire-zake
  332. # [05:54] <kfish> nice :-)
  333. # [06:02] * Joins: parcelbrat (n=parcelbr@c-67-185-108-198.hsd1.wa.comcast.net)
  334. # [06:08] * Quits: jruderman (n=jruderma@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  335. # [06:14] <_Ivo> This won't be nice of me asking, but is it possible to block Manuel Amador (Rudd-O) from the lists at least temporarily til he cools off?
  336. # [06:15] * Quits: roc (n=roc@202.0.36.64)
  337. # [06:15] <bradee-oh> I see he promises an upcoming barrage of emails because of his handiwork at Digg.
  338. # [06:15] <bradee-oh> oh joy.
  339. # [06:16] <bradee-oh> sure has made it difficult to have actual discussions about actual standards issues today *sigh*
  340. # [06:20] <parcelbrat> I'm one of the people who came to get clarification (earlier) due to his /. post. I'd actually like to stay involved for the real reason.
  341. # [06:20] <parcelbrat> That aside, I'm wondering if there has been a barage here from that too
  342. # [06:22] * Joins: jruderman (n=jruderma@c-67-180-15-227.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  343. # [06:29] <bradee-oh> The quantity today has been *much* higher than usual, and much less productive. yay!
  344. # [06:30] * inimino wonders how many productive man-hours were lost
  345. # [06:32] <Teratogen> BRING BACK OGG!
  346. # [06:36] <jruderman> Teratogen: http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=385689&cid=21655557
  347. # [06:36] <jruderman> (sorry, i guess that was Oog)
  348. # [06:38] <parcelbrat> does Teratogen == rudd-o?
  349. # [06:42] <Teratogen> BRING BACK OGG NOW!
  350. # [06:44] <_Ivo> what the hell is a Oog?
  351. # [06:48] <jruderman> Oog, the open-source caveman, a legendary Slashdot troll
  352. # [06:52] <aphid> ogg is also the name of the stalinesque leader from some Nat'l Petroleum Institute produced cartoon that's on archive.org
  353. # [06:53] <aphid> http://www.archive.org/details/Destinat1956
  354. # [07:00] <parcelbrat> lol
  355. # [07:04] * Parts: hdh (n=hdh@58.187.109.98)
  356. # [07:04] * Quits: jruderman (n=jruderma@c-67-180-15-227.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  357. # [07:07] * Joins: jruderman (n=jruderma@c-67-180-15-227.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  358. # [07:08] * Quits: gavin (n=gavin@firefox/developer/gavin) ("leaving")
  359. # [07:08] * Joins: gavin__ (n=gavin@people.mozilla.com)
  360. # [07:09] * Parts: gavin__ (n=gavin@people.mozilla.com)
  361. # [07:09] <Hixie> if anyone is on site5, feel free to point out on this thread that we didn't trade ogg for something proprietary: http://forums.site5.com/showthread.php?t=19941
  362. # [07:16] <parcelbrat> i noticed someone on site5 on #ror, but he already left
  363. # [07:17] * Joins: gavin__ (n=gavin@people.mozilla.com)
  364. # [07:22] * Joins: maikmerten (n=merten@ls5laptop14.cs.uni-dortmund.de)
  365. # [07:46] * Quits: parcelbrat (n=parcelbr@c-67-185-108-198.hsd1.wa.comcast.net)
  366. # [07:46] * Quits: _Ivo (n=ivo@89.180.105.255) (Remote closed the connection)
  367. # [07:51] <Hixie> I've added documentation to the annotation system
  368. # [08:03] * Joins: jgraham_ (n=james@81-86-217-3.dsl.pipex.com)
  369. # [08:05] * Quits: jgraham_ (n=james@81-86-217-3.dsl.pipex.com) (Client Quit)
  370. # [08:33] * Joins: tndH_ (i=Rob@adsl-77-86-6-102.karoo.KCOM.COM)
  371. # [08:33] * tndH_ is now known as tndH
  372. # [08:34] * Joins: roc (n=roc@121-72-24-31.dsl.telstraclear.net)
  373. # [08:45] <hsivonen> lots and lots of ogg email :-(
  374. # [08:48] * Joins: roc_ (n=roc@121-72-24-31.dsl.telstraclear.net)
  375. # [08:51] <doublec> yes, Ogg is the favourite topic of the day
  376. # [08:52] <Hixie> more mail?
  377. # [08:53] <doublec> only a couple :)
  378. # [08:54] * Joins: anne-mac (n=annevk@88.80-202-68.nextgentel.com)
  379. # [08:55] <Hixie> we've hit 855 members
  380. # [08:55] <Hixie> that's 50 more than this morning
  381. # [08:55] * Quits: roc (n=roc@121-72-24-31.dsl.telstraclear.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  382. # [08:57] <othermaciej> Hixie: you need to make more controversial changes so we pass 1000
  383. # [08:59] <Hixie> seriously
  384. # [08:59] <doublec> and find a way to get money from each new member
  385. # [08:59] <doublec> since you aren't getting bribed to remove ogg :)
  386. # [09:00] <doublec> I think your reddit replies should get some sort of award
  387. # [09:01] <othermaciej> for "most reddit replies on a single thread"?
  388. # [09:01] <roc_> when Hixie does start taking bribes we're all going to look stupid
  389. # [09:24] * Quits: hober (n=ted@unaffiliated/hober) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  390. # [09:34] * Joins: madness (n=mng@client-82-2-93-126.manc.adsl.virgin.net)
  391. # [09:35] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@cm-84.215.41.149.getinternet.no) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  392. # [09:36] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@ti200710a340-2895.bb.online.no)
  393. # [09:38] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@ti200710a340-2895.bb.online.no) (Client Quit)
  394. # [09:46] * Joins: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@pat-tdc.opera.com)
  395. # [09:53] * othermaciej is now known as om_sleep
  396. # [09:54] * Quits: maikmerten (n=merten@ls5laptop14.cs.uni-dortmund.de) ("Verlassend")
  397. # [09:56] <Hixie> hsivonen: i don't really see anything in http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2006-December/008849.html that i can respond to (other than the <q> issue), except maybe the suggestion in the parenthetical in point 1
  398. # [09:56] <Hixie> but i don't understand what that's suggesting
  399. # [09:56] <Hixie> can you advise?
  400. # [09:57] <anne-mac> that e-mail is not from hsivonen...
  401. # [09:57] <hsivonen> Hixie: looking at it now
  402. # [09:57] <Hixie> oh you're right, it's not
  403. # [09:57] <Hixie> oops
  404. # [09:58] <Hixie> well i don't know what to do with it then
  405. # [09:59] <anne-mac> i think it's more of a rant than a comment
  406. # [10:04] <hsivonen> Hixie: The main point I'd make is that non-heuristic machine consumption (i.e. naïvely trusting marked-up semantics and only using marked-up semantics) for dialogs, names of vessels, quotations, etc. does not have a plausible market-demand story. However, the elevator pitch for hCard and hCalendar is at least plausible: UI for adding event info or contact info to iCal, Address Book or similar app
  407. # [10:05] <Hixie> agreed
  408. # [10:05] <Hixie> doesn't really affect the spec though
  409. # [10:05] <Hixie> so...
  410. # [10:05] <hsivonen> the volume of the ogg thing has caused me to get out of sync with IRC and list email. :-(
  411. # [10:06] <Hixie> it wasn't that bad
  412. # [10:06] <anne-mac> oh, Hixie replies to a annevk@opera.com e-mail!
  413. # [10:06] <Hixie> :-)
  414. # [10:07] <anne-mac> reached the two year old e-mail mark? :)
  415. # [10:09] <Hixie> nah, just dealing with mail from buckets that have newer mail
  416. # [10:09] <Hixie> thought that particular mail was actually from the time my spam filter hated you
  417. # [10:09] <Hixie> though, even
  418. # [10:09] <anne-mac> could be
  419. # [10:10] <Hixie> no it definitely was
  420. # [10:10] <Hixie> i had to go fish it out of my gmail pile to reply to it
  421. # [10:10] <anne-mac> ok :)
  422. # [10:11] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@17.203.15.140)
  423. # [10:11] <virtuelv> Hixie: you're implying you never delete even spam?
  424. # [10:11] <Hixie> no, i saved a bunch of mail from anne back when my filter hated him
  425. # [10:11] <Hixie> but e-mails saved from gmail's spam folder don't get forwarded to my main imap server
  426. # [10:12] <Hixie> they just sit in my gmail inbox
  427. # [10:12] * Hixie gets to an e-mail from Tina Holmboe
  428. # [10:12] * Hixie decides to deal with that one later
  429. # [10:13] <Hixie> btw, what's the status with the role="" stuff? and what's the status with the forms stuff?
  430. # [10:13] <anne-mac> forms: nobody replied to my request for input
  431. # [10:14] <anne-mac> role: zcorpan knows it better than me at this point, being on the group and all
  432. # [10:14] <anne-mac> I think they like to call it role=, want to use namespaces in some places? and the rest is aria-xxx
  433. # [10:15] <Hixie> so i have a request here for an <attn> element, whose primary use case would be to do what waiaria does with update regions
  434. # [10:16] <Hixie> will i eventually be mentioning waiaria somewhere in html5?
  435. # [10:16] <anne-mac> i think so, yes
  436. # [10:16] <zcorpan> i think the idea is to define both role= and aria-xxx=, and the old namespaced attributes, even with the knowledge that browsers don't want to support the namespaced attributes
  437. # [10:16] <zcorpan> i really don't know why
  438. # [10:17] * Joins: jgraham_ (n=james@81-86-217-3.dsl.pipex.com)
  439. # [10:17] * Joins: ROBOd (n=robod@89.122.216.38)
  440. # [10:17] <anne-mac> Hixie, I guess HTML5 would defer to the aria draft for role= and attributes prefixed with aria-, would make it clear there are no DOM interfaces, and that's it
  441. # [10:18] * anne-mac should probably go to work at some point
  442. # [10:18] <Hixie> no DOM interfaces? huh, that sucks. since it's primarily intended to be for scripts...
  443. # [10:18] <Hixie> zcorpan: can we fight for more sanity?
  444. # [10:19] <Hixie> zcorpan: i'm willing to help if needed. in particular, can we decouple from xhtml2's role stuff?
  445. # [10:19] <zcorpan> Hixie: not sure
  446. # [10:20] <zcorpan> but i think so
  447. # [10:22] <zcorpan> Hixie: the idea is that the attributes should be correct even in legacy browsers with no knowledge of aria, so that screen readers can pick it up from the dom
  448. # [10:22] <zcorpan> although i guess they could read js properties as well
  449. # [10:23] <Hixie> ah interesting
  450. # [10:26] <zcorpan> perhaps we can introduce a dom interface for aria 2, when we know what aria 2 will require
  451. # [10:34] * zcorpan considers marking all ogg emails as read
  452. # [10:34] * krijnh did
  453. # [10:35] <krijnh> Apart from the big Hixie replies
  454. # [10:39] <hsivonen> Philip`: re: 20 seconds: nice
  455. # [10:41] <zcorpan> hsivonen: btw, does your schema support role="fancy-checkbox checkbox"?
  456. # [10:42] * zcorpan can see a disadvantage of allowing arbitrary roles; conformance checkers won't catch typos
  457. # [10:43] <zcorpan> role="chekcbox"
  458. # [10:43] * jgraham_ seems to be getting new ogg emails at roughly his time average rate of reading WHATWG emails so the unread number is almost constant
  459. # [10:43] <hsivonen> Hixie: I think <cite> should be defined to capture the Chicago Manual of Style title-of-work concept while at the same time saying that an author is not an evil person for using <i> instead and saying that you don't need to change legacy content that uses <cite> for names of people
  460. # [10:44] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@c-71-198-176-23.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  461. # [10:44] * Quits: anne-mac (n=annevk@88.80-202-68.nextgentel.com) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  462. # [10:46] <hsivonen> hubick: I'm near email bankruptcy but I have received your patch. Sorry about the delay.
  463. # [10:53] <hsivonen> zcorpan: no, the proof-of-concept schema approach does not take address extensibility
  464. # [10:53] <zcorpan> hsivonen: ok
  465. # [10:53] <hsivonen> zcorpan: extensibility is not on the agenda for 1.0
  466. # [10:54] <hsivonen> zcorpan: moreover, extensibility and white-list-like validation are conflicting things
  467. # [10:54] * Joins: Camaban (n=adrianle@host217-41-27-233.in-addr.btopenworld.com)
  468. # [10:54] <zcorpan> perhaps i should update the authoring conformance reqs accordingly
  469. # [11:00] * Parts: Camaban (n=adrianle@host217-41-27-233.in-addr.btopenworld.com)
  470. # [11:00] * Joins: Camaban (n=adrianle@host217-41-27-233.in-addr.btopenworld.com)
  471. # [11:02] * Joins: peepo (n=Jay@host86-129-168-72.range86-129.btcentralplus.com)
  472. # [11:04] <Philip`> Does the Ogg discussion indicate that HTML5 is actually relevant and people care about it, or would they complain as much about any other specification that did the same thing?
  473. # [11:04] <Hixie> hsivonen: well you never need to change legacy content
  474. # [11:04] <Hixie> hsivonen: it just might not be compliant to html5 :-)
  475. # [11:04] <Hixie> (i don't see any point explicit grandfathering in legacy content in that way)
  476. # [11:05] <hsivonen> Hixie: it appears that *some* authors don't think that way
  477. # [11:05] <hsivonen> Hixie: I'm inclined to think they are misguided, but still
  478. # [11:05] <Hixie> well if they want to be compliant, so much teh better
  479. # [11:05] <Hixie> could you send a mail elaborating on your idea for <cite>?
  480. # [11:05] <Hixie> i really want to address this inline vs block issue
  481. # [11:06] <Hixie> i don't really know hwo to do so
  482. # [11:06] <Hixie> maybe i really should do this matrix idea i mentioned
  483. # [11:06] <hsivonen> http://diveintomark.org/archives/2003/01/13/semantic_obsolescence
  484. # [11:06] * om_sleep is now known as othermaciej
  485. # [11:07] <hsivonen> Hixie: OK. I'll send email on both issue
  486. # [11:07] <hsivonen> s
  487. # [11:07] * Quits: jgraham_ (n=james@81-86-217-3.dsl.pipex.com) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  488. # [11:07] <Hixie> well the inline thing i'm actually thinking of resolving right now
  489. # [11:07] <Hixie> so feel free to discuss that here
  490. # [11:07] <othermaciej> Hixie: I think the matrix would be a useful excercise to clarify what's important to capture in the content model reqirements
  491. # [11:07] <othermaciej> (there might be a bunch of "don't care" boxes)
  492. # [11:07] <othermaciej> Philip`: way to see a silver lining :-)
  493. # [11:08] <zcorpan> Hixie: did you see my thoughts about inline yesterday?
  494. # [11:09] <zcorpan> http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20071211#l-361
  495. # [11:09] <Hixie> hsivonen: (and regarding mark's post, note that i work indirectly with him and he is up to date with the spec :-) )
  496. # [11:09] <Hixie> zcorpan: looking
  497. # [11:09] <hsivonen> Hixie: the following are random thoughts with no conclusion that I'd be comfortable with yet:
  498. # [11:10] <hsivonen> * so far it seems that authors don't like bimorphic
  499. # [11:10] <Hixie> zcorpan: i think there are pretty solid reasons for wanting to allow <p><ol/></p>, but i agree that it's conceptually a pain, especially given the html serialisation issue
  500. # [11:10] <zcorpan> indeed
  501. # [11:10] <hsivonen> * RELAX NG can validate bimorphic but the user experience sucks by default without schema-specific UI-level papering over
  502. # [11:10] <Hixie> hsivonen: (by which you mean they like mixing inline and block content?)
  503. # [11:11] <hsivonen> Hixie: yes
  504. # [11:11] <hsivonen> Hixie: cf. Sean Fraser, Sam Ruby and Dan Connolly
  505. # [11:11] <Hixie> yeah i agree that people want that
  506. # [11:11] <Hixie> i think we should allow that
  507. # [11:11] <Hixie> let's do this matrix thing
  508. # [11:11] * Hixie finds a tool that can do easy editing of grids
  509. # [11:11] <hsivonen> * having general content models like "block" or "inline" makes schemas easier to write
  510. # [11:12] <hsivonen> * also makes conformance easier to teach
  511. # [11:12] <zcorpan> Hixie: (what's the matrix thing?)
  512. # [11:12] <othermaciej> google spreadsheets?
  513. # [11:12] <othermaciej> makes a grid, easy to share on the web
  514. # [11:12] <hsivonen> * having content model differences in XHTML5 is inconvenient
  515. # [11:12] <hsivonen> - Makes schema ugly
  516. # [11:12] <Hixie> othermaciej: way ahead of you :-)
  517. # [11:12] <othermaciej> zcorpan: which block/inline elements should be allowed in what others, assuming the rules were being designed from scratch
  518. # [11:13] <hsivonen> - Requires me to maintain a separate "HTML5-compatible subset of XHTML5" schema/mode
  519. # [11:13] <hsivonen> - Does not make sense with the "people should just use text/html" party line
  520. # [11:14] <hsivonen> - Does not make sense with the "apps should use XHTML internally but serialize to HTML5 for IE" party line
  521. # [11:14] <Hixie> yeah i agree that we should strive for no differences
  522. # [11:14] <othermaciej> Hixie: would you consider also multi-level nesting? (I guess that's most likely to affect <p>)
  523. # [11:14] <Hixie> which basically means the html serialisation wins
  524. # [11:14] <Hixie> or rather, can veto
  525. # [11:14] <Hixie> othermaciej: can you give an example where three-or-more-way nesting would have a different answer than two-way?
  526. # [11:15] <hsivonen> * I'm not convinced that achieving semantic purity with intra-paragraph lists is worth all the trouble
  527. # [11:15] <Hixie> othermaciej: i was just gonna do it on the basis of indirect nesting
  528. # [11:15] <Hixie> do we have a list of elements anywhere yet? i could use docs' magic list making feature but that seems unlikely to work perfectly here :-)
  529. # [11:16] <othermaciej> Hixie: I don't think there is such a case, but expressing the rules in terms of indirect nesting may be hard to understand
  530. # [11:16] <othermaciej> there are lists of elements, yes
  531. # [11:16] <othermaciej> I think zcorpan has one
  532. # [11:16] <othermaciej> http://simon.html5.org/html5-elements
  533. # [11:16] <Hixie> cool thanks
  534. # [11:16] <Hixie> othermaciej: well we'll worry about exactly how to express the rules later
  535. # [11:16] <Hixie> i just want an idea of what the ideal would be first
  536. # [11:17] <hsivonen> * OpenOffice.org Writer/Web makes an interesting case study of an editor with very strict block/inline boundaries
  537. # [11:17] <othermaciej> Hixie: if paragraphs could contain tables, then it might make sense to let a table in a paragraph contain a paragraph in a cell
  538. # [11:18] <othermaciej> I guess that is one plausible exception I can think of
  539. # [11:18] <hsivonen> * I don't know how to reconcile hand-authoring flexibility and importability in an app like OO.o Writer/Web except defining that editing apps MAY introduce a lot of layout-wrecking <p>s
  540. # [11:18] <zcorpan> some elements only allow inlines. others allow both block and inline. inline elements never allow blocks. something in that direction seems to be what authors believe the rules are, i think
  541. # [11:19] <Hixie> othermaciej: i'm not really convinced it would, but interesting
  542. # [11:19] <hsivonen> * Having different content models for <i> and <em> sucks big time
  543. # [11:20] <hsivonen> * In general, this whole strict inline thing probably sucks
  544. # [11:20] <Hixie> if you have google accounts post your e-mail addresses here (or msg me) so i can add you to this thing
  545. # [11:20] <othermaciej> maciej@gmail.com
  546. # [11:20] <zcorpan> zcorpan@gmail.com
  547. # [11:20] <hsivonen> hsivonen@
  548. # [11:21] <krijnh> krijnhoetmer@xs4all.nl
  549. # [11:21] <krijnh> Is this about the mixing of inline/block content as well?
  550. # [11:22] <hsivonen> * I agree that the <div> content model in HTML 4 sucks semantically
  551. # [11:23] <Hixie> http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pkNVM1HEQs-wsHB7s1M5Lbw
  552. # [11:23] <hsivonen> * But it seems the horse is out and the barn has burned
  553. # [11:23] <Hixie> feel free to fill in the cells you think look obvious
  554. # [11:23] <Hixie> if someone fills in something you disagree with, put a question mark after it
  555. # [11:24] <hsivonen> * We should probably allow Philip`'s Firefox <span> workaround
  556. # [11:25] <zcorpan> hmm, i'm a bit uncomfortable about that one. i breaks the rule "inlines never allows blocks"
  557. # [11:25] * Philip` isn't sure that's worthwhile since it doesn't work in IE and is therefore a bit useless for most authors
  558. # [11:25] <hsivonen> * I don't like the direction of these points, since the direction is that <p> should allow inline and almost every other block container should allow %Flow
  559. # [11:26] <zcorpan> Philip`: indeed
  560. # [11:27] <hsivonen> zcorpan: isn't block-in-span an IEism that others have to implement for compat with content out there?
  561. # [11:27] <Philip`> <section><div class=section> lets you style .section in all browsers, and HTML5 UAs will get the sectioning correct
  562. # [11:28] <zcorpan> hsivonen: also h1-h6 and address
  563. # [11:28] <Hixie> feel free to fill in this spreadsheet too, btw, i don't plan on doing all 10000 cells myself :-P
  564. # [11:28] <krijnh> Ow, you're not? ;)
  565. # [11:28] <zcorpan> hsivonen: yes, but authors think it's disallowed
  566. # [11:28] <Philip`> Is there a Google Spreadsheet API to fill these things in automatically? :-)
  567. # [11:29] <hsivonen> as a schema writer and a closet markup purist, I like bimorhic and stuff
  568. # [11:29] <hsivonen> but as a validator front end developer and realist I don't
  569. # [11:29] <hsivonen> I'm torn
  570. # [11:30] <Hixie> Philip`: it's not the api that's the hard part :-)
  571. # [11:30] <Hixie> i think it's clear that forcing a separation of inline and block isn't working in practice
  572. # [11:30] * jgraham wishes he could stay for this discussion
  573. # [11:30] <Hixie> i think we can just say that paragraphs are implied
  574. # [11:31] * Philip` wishes he could stay because it looks freezing outside
  575. # [11:31] <Hixie> done 50 of about 10000 so far
  576. # [11:31] <jgraham> Philip`: That too :)
  577. # [11:31] <zcorpan> (perhaps we should change address to allow %flow as well)
  578. # [11:31] <hsivonen> Hixie: yeah, but is there a credible story that'd allow the likes of OpenOffice.org Writer/Web to make all those implicit paragraphs explicit when it reserializes from its non-DOM internal datastructure?
  579. # [11:31] <Hixie> hsivonen: i don't think semantically we should disallow it
  580. # [11:32] <Hixie> hsivonen: of course as you say, it causes havoc with styling
  581. # [11:32] <Hixie> not sure what to do about that
  582. # [11:32] <jgraham> Hixie: Can you ad my jgraham.html@gmail account
  583. # [11:32] <Hixie> done
  584. # [11:32] <jgraham> thx
  585. # [11:32] <Hixie> anyone can feel free to add other people btw
  586. # [11:33] <Hixie> in case y'all want to continue this when i go to bed :-)
  587. # [11:33] <colione_> olle.lundberg@gmail
  588. # [11:34] <Hixie> added
  589. # [11:34] <colione_> thnx
  590. # [11:36] <Hixie> woot, finished <abbr>
  591. # [11:37] <Hixie> hmm, should <caption> ... <address> </address> </caption> be legal
  592. # [11:39] <zcorpan> Hixie: no, caption should only allow inline (like h1-h6)
  593. # [11:39] <Hixie> makes sense
  594. # [11:40] <Hixie> hmm, should we allow a <dialog> to contain a <section> or <address> or <footer>...
  595. # [11:40] <Hixie> indirectly even
  596. # [11:41] <krijnh> What do you mean by indirectly contain?
  597. # [11:41] <Hixie> <dialog> <dt> krijnh <dd> <section> <p> What do you mean by indirectly contain? ...
  598. # [11:41] <Hixie> in fact, should we allow <ol>/<ul>/<dl> to contain any sectioning elements
  599. # [11:41] <Hixie> i'm thinking not really
  600. # [11:42] <Hixie> how about tables? should they be allowed to contain sectioning elements?
  601. # [11:42] <hsivonen> Indirectly does not sound good for my purposes...
  602. # [11:42] <Hixie> i'm sure we'll find a better way of phrasing this in due course
  603. # [11:42] <krijnh> Hixie: probably for table based layouts
  604. # [11:42] <hsivonen> Hixie: a <td> should have the some content model as <body> to allow real-world authoring patterns
  605. # [11:43] <Hixie> krijnh: well those aren't legal anyway
  606. # [11:43] <hsivonen> s/some/same/
  607. # [11:43] <Hixie> hsivonen: really? i'd have thought discouraging table-based layouts would be a plus here.
  608. # [11:43] <Hixie> they're already invalid
  609. # [11:43] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@ti200710a340-2895.bb.online.no)
  610. # [11:43] <hsivonen> or more to the point, <td> should allow at least everything <body> allows
  611. # [11:43] <Hixie> we just can't catch them
  612. # [11:44] <Hixie> maybe <address> should only be allowed as a direct child of a sectioning element?
  613. # [11:44] <Hixie> hmm
  614. # [11:44] <hsivonen> Hixie: making table-based layout invalid is pointless until the CSS WG delivers a viable alternative *and* the top four browsers implement it
  615. # [11:44] <Hixie> hsivonen: table based layout has never been valid
  616. # [11:45] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@ti200710a340-2895.bb.online.no) (Client Quit)
  617. # [11:45] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@ti200710a340-2895.bb.online.no)
  618. # [11:45] <hsivonen> Hixie: then perhaps we should make them valid
  619. # [11:46] <hsivonen> Hixie: at least with appropriate role='' pixie dust
  620. # [11:46] <annevk> annevankesteren@gmail.com
  621. # [11:46] <Hixie> hsivonen: ew
  622. # [11:46] <Hixie> to the first part
  623. # [11:46] <Hixie> not so much the second
  624. # [11:46] <Hixie> annevk: done
  625. # [11:48] <hsivonen> Hixie: is the table intentionally missing <table> and table-internal stuff?
  626. # [11:48] <Hixie> yeah
  627. # [11:48] <Hixie> <td> and <th> cover those
  628. # [11:48] <Hixie> and <caption>
  629. # [11:48] <Hixie> they're the only "exit points" for tables
  630. # [11:48] <Hixie> i think i might drop <ol> <ul> <dl> <dialog> too for the same reason
  631. # [11:49] <annevk> Hixie, wasn't <p><strong>blah</strong></p> for <lede> or <lead>?
  632. # [11:49] <Hixie> annevk: it's not really marking importance, is it?
  633. # [11:49] <Hixie> actually <figure> should probably be taken out too
  634. # [11:50] <Hixie> it has a whole other set of issues
  635. # [11:50] <krijnh> Can an article contain an article?
  636. # [11:50] * krijnh is very efficient - 2 no's already
  637. # [11:51] <annevk> yeah, for comments on an article
  638. # [11:51] * hsivonen hopes the table will eventually generalize into a handful of content models to teach and to type into a schema
  639. # [11:51] <Hixie> krijnh: yes, blog comments are articles in articles
  640. # [11:51] <Hixie> hsivonen: i hope so too
  641. # [11:52] <annevk> Hixie, yeah, fair enough, just thought that was the idea earlier on
  642. # [11:53] <othermaciej> Hixie: does it make sense to have <td> on the horizontal axis?
  643. # [11:53] <othermaciej> lots of things can indirectly contain it but not directly
  644. # [11:53] <othermaciej> (similarly for other table structure)
  645. # [11:53] <Hixie> othermaciej: you mean the vertical axis? the question is "can elements in the left hand column contain elements on the top row"
  646. # [11:53] <Hixie> you mean on the top row?
  647. # [11:53] <othermaciej> yes
  648. # [11:54] <Hixie> i agree that we should remove all the inner table elements from the top row
  649. # [11:54] <Hixie> feel free to do so
  650. # [11:54] <othermaciej> ok
  651. # [11:55] * Joins: colione (n=colione@17.247.241.83.in-addr.dgcsystems.net)
  652. # [11:56] <othermaciej> I will remove <html> <head> and <body> from the top row for similar reasons
  653. # [11:56] <annevk> bah, the CSS WG discussions should really be public
  654. # [11:56] <Hixie> i'm nuking option and optgroup from the first column since they're special
  655. # [11:57] * Quits: colione_ (n=colione@17.247.241.83.in-addr.dgcsystems.net) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  656. # [11:57] <Hixie> select too, same reason
  657. # [11:57] <krijnh> Hixie: can't <details> contain additional contact information?
  658. # [11:57] <othermaciej> whoah, what's <nest>?
  659. # [11:57] <Hixie> krijnh: like <details> <legend> Contact information for this page </legend> <address> ... </address> </details> ?
  660. # [11:57] <krijnh> Yeah
  661. # [11:57] <Hixie> othermaciej: part of the data template feature. nuke it, it's seriously special.
  662. # [11:57] <Hixie> othermaciej: same wiht <datatemplate> and <rule>
  663. # [11:58] <Hixie> othermaciej: i'm probably gonna nuke that whole section anyway, in favour of some apis to make it easier to make your own templating language and graft it onto html
  664. # [11:58] <Hixie> othermaciej: there are too many different ways of doing templates, each with their own pros and cons, to really annoint any one model
  665. # [11:59] <Hixie> krijnh: sounds plausible...
  666. # [11:59] <othermaciej> removed
  667. # [11:59] <krijnh> So then an article can be put in a details as well
  668. # [11:59] <othermaciej> looking for other things too special to be worth gridding
  669. # [11:59] <krijnh> <details><legend>More articles on this subject</legend><article>foo</article><article>bar</article></details>
  670. # [12:00] <Hixie> seems reasonable
  671. # [12:00] <krijnh> Or would that be wrong use?
  672. # [12:00] <Hixie> it seems unexpected use, but i don't see that it would be wrong... dunno
  673. # [12:01] <othermaciej> base, link, meta, noscript, optgroup, option, param, source, style, script, title
  674. # [12:01] <othermaciej> from the first row
  675. # [12:01] <othermaciej> any objections?
  676. # [12:01] <krijnh> noscript ?
  677. # [12:02] <othermaciej> isn't noscript allowed anywhere and therefore not worth mentioning?
  678. # [12:02] <othermaciej> it does not seem affected by block/inline considerations
  679. # [12:02] <othermaciej> but I'll not remove it for now
  680. # [12:03] <Hixie> leave noscript for now, it's a weird case
  681. # [12:04] <Hixie> but the others can go for sure
  682. # [12:04] <Hixie> actually <style> might be worth leaving
  683. # [12:05] * Quits: doublec (n=doublec@209.79.152.179)
  684. # [12:05] <annevk> <area> can be nuked from the top row probably
  685. # [12:06] <Hixie> why?
  686. # [12:06] <Hixie> <area>'s a tough one
  687. # [12:06] <Hixie> when it's allowed is unclear to me
  688. # [12:06] <annevk> only as descendent of <map>
  689. # [12:06] <annevk> or maybe only as child of <map>
  690. # [12:07] <Hixie> we're allowing things like <map><area/><area/></map> as well as things like <map><p>...<a/><area/>...</map>
  691. # [12:07] <Hixie> so far
  692. # [12:07] <othermaciej> I nuked <style> already, I can put it back if you really want it
  693. # [12:08] <othermaciej> (where <style scoped> is allowed is kind of interesting, but not really related to the core block/inline type issue)
  694. # [12:08] <annevk> Hixie, I'm not sure what the use of the latter is
  695. # [12:09] <Hixie> othermaciej: nuking is fine
  696. # [12:09] <Hixie> annevk: makes it easier to make sure you've got all your links and areas done together
  697. # [12:09] <annevk> isn't <area> a link?!
  698. # [12:09] <annevk> hmm
  699. # [12:10] <annevk> then again, I thought <map> was display:none, it isn't
  700. # [12:10] <Hixie> annevk: <area> is a link with a shape
  701. # [12:10] <krijnh> Hmm, could video contain section elements?
  702. # [12:10] <annevk> Hixie, per HTML4 so is <a>
  703. # [12:11] <Hixie> yeah but we dropped that long ago
  704. # [12:11] <annevk> and I'm not sure how that's relevant
  705. # [12:11] <Hixie> krijnh: i'd say yes, if the fallback is very detailed :-)
  706. # [12:11] <Hixie> annevk: ?
  707. # [12:11] <krijnh> Hixie: yeah, or has contact information?
  708. # [12:11] <Hixie> krijnh: right
  709. # [12:12] <Hixie> i could see one doing <video> <address> For a transcript, contact ...</address> </video>
  710. # [12:12] <Hixie> i guess
  711. # [12:12] <krijnh> Cause you put a ? at video->address :)
  712. # [12:15] <Hixie> fixed :-)
  713. # [12:15] <annevk> Hixie, I'm not sure how <area> being a shaped link is relevant
  714. # [12:15] <Hixie> annevk: when you're doing an image map, you want to provide both the shape link <area> and the fallback link <a>
  715. # [12:15] <Hixie> for each link
  716. # [12:15] <Hixie> easiest to do if you have them all together
  717. # [12:16] <Hixie> rather than as two blocks
  718. # [12:16] <annevk> isn't the algorithm for fallback to use <area>?
  719. # [12:16] <annevk> or is this in the case <map> is not supported?
  720. # [12:17] <Hixie> if <a>s aren't provided the UA uses <area>, but that kinda sucks compared to providing a custom fallback
  721. # [12:17] <annevk> that's not at all how the image map algorithm for fallback works
  722. # [12:17] * Joins: hdh (n=hdh@58.187.109.128)
  723. # [12:18] <Teratogen> bring ogg back!
  724. # [12:26] <hsivonen> coming up with suggested definition of <cite> is hard
  725. # [12:26] <hsivonen> I'm bad at writing weasel words
  726. # [12:26] <Dashiva> hehe
  727. # [12:29] <Hixie> annevk: really?
  728. # [12:30] <Hixie> that was my intention...
  729. # [12:30] <Hixie> Teratogen: :-)
  730. # [12:32] <Hixie> hm, should <map> allow <section> in it then? or <article>?
  731. # [12:32] <Hixie> or <aside> or <address>? hmm
  732. # [12:33] * Quits: roc_ (n=roc@121-72-24-31.dsl.telstraclear.net)
  733. # [12:34] <annevk> just <area> imo
  734. # [12:35] <hsivonen> is the diveintomark.org favicon one of the allegedly indecent IceWeasel icon suggestions?
  735. # [12:37] <Hixie> krijnh: ogg :-P
  736. # [12:37] <krijnh> :p
  737. # [12:38] <krijnh> Bring it back! ;)
  738. # [12:40] <hsivonen> Hixie: so I didn't send email about block/inline, because I dumped my points here instead
  739. # [12:41] <Hixie> k
  740. # [12:41] <Hixie> i think i mostly agreed with your points anyway
  741. # [12:41] <Hixie> it's turning out that there are some edge cases that i hadn't really thought of
  742. # [12:41] <Hixie> like should <nav> be able to contain <article>
  743. # [12:42] <annevk> no
  744. # [12:43] * hdh imagines people use narration to guide users around the site
  745. # [12:44] <krijnh> <body><nav><section><article>An interesting article with lots and lots of interesting links</article></section></nav></body>
  746. # [12:44] * Quits: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@pat-tdc.opera.com) ("Leaving")
  747. # [12:45] <krijnh> Hixie: is that conditional formatting?
  748. # [12:45] <krijnh> Yes, cool
  749. # [12:46] <Hixie> yeah
  750. # [12:47] <Hixie> ok i'm gonna go sleep, i can't concentrate anymore
  751. # [12:47] <Hixie> feel free to continue editing :-)
  752. # [12:47] <Hixie> thanks for the help btw
  753. # [12:47] <Hixie> really helpful
  754. # [12:47] <Hixie> i'll try to continue this tomorrow
  755. # [12:48] <hsivonen> it is "interesting" how <article> and friends that would be "easy" to implement are less supported by browsers than "hard" stuff like <canvas> and <video>
  756. # [12:49] <annevk> it's not entirely clear what it would mean for rendering to support <section> and other sectioning elements
  757. # [12:50] <krijnh> It's also a dull feature to sell :)
  758. # [12:50] <Camaban> hsivonen: video and canvas are 'cool' and 'new', while article doesn't 'do' anything? :)
  759. # [12:51] <annevk> <article> together with <h1>-<h6> can in theory effect rendering, but it's unclear how
  760. # [12:51] <hsivonen> krijnh: yeah. it makes me wonder if using <article> instead of <div class='article'> will ever be compelling for authors
  761. # [12:52] <annevk> I think if CSS gave you something like :heading(2) to style all level two headers that might work
  762. # [12:54] <krijnh> hsivonen: do you think authors would use the new elements already, if IE/Fx didn't close unknown block level elements immediately?
  763. # [12:54] <krijnh> That's probably easy to fix behavior, but I don't think it would change anything
  764. # [12:55] <othermaciej> :heading(n) might be handy for implementing the default rendering of <h[1-6]> as well
  765. # [12:56] <othermaciej> hsivonen: we could easily support default rendering as a block for all the new semantic block elements
  766. # [12:56] <othermaciej> hsivonen: supporting headings styled in accordance with the outline algorithm would be hard and the spec doesn't say how to do that yet
  767. # [12:57] <othermaciej> (or whether)
  768. # [12:57] <othermaciej> I will tell you that we're interested in supporting any new elements and attributes that seem like low hanging fruit in WebKit in the fairly near future
  769. # [13:00] <othermaciej> (that would basically be irrelevant="", sectioning elements, dialog, m if someone decides it should have some special default style
  770. # [13:00] <othermaciej> )
  771. # [13:00] <othermaciej> figure would also be low-hanging fruit if not for the <legend> issue
  772. # [13:02] <hsivonen> krijnh: with the IE/Firefox situation, using the new elements is not worthwhile ATM from the author POV
  773. # [13:03] <hsivonen> othermaciej: Opera Mobile has a nice "scroll to content feature" it would be cool to have that in WebKit, too, and both taking <article> into account
  774. # [13:04] <hsivonen> actually, that's the only UA-side semantic treatment of <article> that I can come up with at the moment
  775. # [13:04] <hsivonen> skipping to content whether on mobile or in an aural browsing setup
  776. # [13:06] <othermaciej> yeah, supporting the new block-level elements would not have much value besides patriotism just yet
  777. # [13:20] <annevk> maybe [#heading=n]
  778. # [13:20] <annevk> at some point there was this idea of separating intrinsic attributes of pseudo-classes, but maybe that point is moot
  779. # [13:24] <othermaciej> "intrinsic attributes"?
  780. # [13:25] <annevk> td[#col=2] was another one
  781. # [13:26] <hsivonen> anyway, it seems that the whole <section> thing hinges upon a selector with reasonable perf and implementation characteristics
  782. # [13:27] <krijnh> Something for CSS5?
  783. # [13:29] * Joins: hasather (n=hasather@90-231-107-133-no62.tbcn.telia.com)
  784. # [13:29] <othermaciej> I'm not sure why that's better than pseudo-classes
  785. # [13:30] <annevk> me neither, I guess the idea might have been dropped already
  786. # [13:31] <krijnh> Why was it an idea in the first place then?
  787. # [13:32] <hsivonen> Is it reasonable to expect the CSS WG to have cycles to look into an outline-dependent selector any time soon?
  788. # [13:33] <hsivonen> they seem to have a lot on their plate even without new HTML5 needs
  789. # [13:35] <othermaciej> this is the WG that's bringing us ascii art layout
  790. # [13:35] <othermaciej> there doesn't have to be a reason
  791. # [13:40] <annevk> it should be pretty easy to draft a specific selector proposal for heading:
  792. # [13:40] <hsivonen> hmm. the TAG is going the way of SGML: the more common concepts have the longer names: resource vs. resource representation
  793. # [13:40] <annevk> especially as CSS only needs to define the syntax and say that it's up to languages to define when it actually matches
  794. # [13:41] <hsivonen> annevk: you still need a kind of rare person who groks CSS formatter internals well enough to assess the computational feasibility with dynamics DOM changes
  795. # [13:42] <krijnh> no
  796. # [13:42] <krijnh> no
  797. # [13:42] <krijnh> Oops :)
  798. # [13:43] <annevk> I can ask the guy who implemented selectors in Opera
  799. # [13:43] <othermaciej> yeah, I'm not sure the current html5 outline algorithm is computationally feasible for incremental rendering and dynamic DOM updates
  800. # [13:43] <annevk> I suppose other implementors have ways to find out themselves
  801. # [13:45] <othermaciej> it's written in terms of generating a hypothetical tree and walking it
  802. # [13:45] <othermaciej> but for selector matching you need something that's evaluated from the element point of view
  803. # [13:47] <othermaciej> so it's hard to tell if it can be efficient without doing a conversion to that type of algorithm first (and making sure it is actually equivalent)
  804. # [13:48] <othermaciej> it's not clear to me if changes outside an <hn> element can change its heading level
  805. # [13:49] <othermaciej> actually it's not that clear to me how the section tree affects heading levels
  806. # [13:56] <annevk> <section><section><h1> would be level 3 I think
  807. # [14:03] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@ti200710a340-2895.bb.online.no) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  808. # [14:11] <hasather> The Ogg debate is like a hydra. You read one thread, and two others pop up during the time
  809. # [14:19] <Dashiva> And over half the mails are by the same two people
  810. # [14:21] <Dashiva> I'm strongly tempted to send a mail saying "So-called non-commercial entities have the option to pay for licences, they just choose not to."
  811. # [14:24] <Philip`> Open source entities don't have that option, since they couldn't distribute their code in a way that other people could modify and use
  812. # [14:26] <Dashiva> But that's just an arbitrary restriction they place on themselves. We're here to get interoperability, not to run errands for other organizations
  813. # [14:26] <Philip`> (unless they get a licence which allows everybody royalty-free usage of the patents for any purpose)
  814. # [14:26] <Philip`> (which is what Theora got, so it's not totally impossible)
  815. # [14:36] <hsivonen> I wonder what MPEG-LA estimates as the expected value of the overall H.264 licensing income over the lifetime of the patents discounted to present value
  816. # [14:41] * Philip` wonders if it's worth trying some basic comparisons of non-state-of-the-art video codecs
  817. # [14:44] <othermaciej> if you know how to do such a thing then sure
  818. # [14:44] <Philip`> I don't know how to do it especially well, hence the "basic" :-)
  819. # [14:45] <othermaciej> might be interesting to try this shootout with H.261, MPEG-2, H.263, etc: http://osnews.com/story.php/19019/Theora-vs-h.264/
  820. # [14:48] * Quits: peepo (n=Jay@host86-129-168-72.range86-129.btcentralplus.com) ("later")
  821. # [14:49] <hsivonen> something that hasn't been explored: it is important to have RF decoding and *an* RF encoder, but it doesn't follow that there could not exist non-RF state-of-the-art encoders or hardware decoders
  822. # [14:49] <hsivonen> back when *compressed* GIF encoding was encumbered, there were RF decoders
  823. # [14:50] <Philip`> http://www.doom9.org/index.html?/codecs-quali-105-1.htm has Theora, but it's a few years old now and I don't know how much has changed
  824. # [14:50] <hsivonen> and RF encoders that sucked badly (i.e. produced a stream that decoded as lzw but was not compressed)
  825. # [14:51] <Philip`> (Also, DVDs are very different quality to what you'd publish on the web)
  826. # [14:52] <othermaciej> MPEG-LA could probably limit decoder revenue to hardware implementations, or mobile devices, or both, and not lose significant revenue
  827. # [14:53] <othermaciej> s/revenue/royalties/
  828. # [14:53] <hsivonen> mobile devices is still a field-of-use restriction that would not go well with Open Source
  829. # [14:54] <othermaciej> realistically nearly all handsets on which you could run interesting software have paid the license fee
  830. # [15:01] * Joins: maikmerten (n=merten@ls5laptop14.cs.uni-dortmund.de)
  831. # [15:02] <alp> othermaciej: mobile distributors of webkit/gtk+ and webkit/qt at least would probably be happy with a royalty-free codec from what i gather but asking for licensing fees is pushing it. maybe the situation is different for other free browsers though
  832. # [15:02] <othermaciej> I don't think you need to pay royalties for the browser component if the phone already has a hardware or software decoder
  833. # [15:03] <othermaciej> which many do
  834. # [15:03] <othermaciej> could be wrong though, it's hard to understand the MPEG-LA's documents
  835. # [15:04] * Quits: Oeighty (n=polx@ip-118-90-51-37.xdsl.xnet.co.nz) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  836. # [15:08] <alp> for various reasons it may be necessary to ship the codec with the browser (say if the hardware only allows video overlay and you need to support more complex rendering features, or if the hardware just doesn't support the codec at all in the first place)
  837. # [15:08] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@ti200710a340-2895.bb.online.no)
  838. # [15:09] <Philip`> It's fun how FFmpeg is happy to be told to output an Ogg file, but actually it silently doesn't support it and outputs something totally different
  839. # [15:10] <othermaciej> fair enough, I don't really know how this works
  840. # [15:10] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@ti200710a340-2895.bb.online.no) (Client Quit)
  841. # [15:12] * Joins: Lachy_ (n=Lachlan@ti200710a340-2895.bb.online.no)
  842. # [15:14] <Philip`> Hmm, H.261 doesn't support 320x240 :-(
  843. # [15:14] <othermaciej> is that too small or too big for it?
  844. # [15:14] <othermaciej> (I guess that is a problem in itself)
  845. # [15:16] <Philip`> "Valid sizes are 176x144, 352x288"
  846. # [15:16] <Philip`> Great flexibility!
  847. # [15:17] <Philip`> Also, it looks horrible quality
  848. # [15:18] <Lachy_> wow, that's terrible
  849. # [15:18] <Lachy_> what about motion jpeg or any of the other older alternatives?
  850. # [15:19] <Lachy_> motion jpeg just sounds like it would have huge file sizes
  851. # [15:21] <annevk> motion jpeg is not a serious option
  852. # [15:21] <Philip`> MJPEG doesn't look that awful compared to other codecs
  853. # [15:21] <maikmerten> H.261 didn't even expire
  854. # [15:22] <maikmerten> it's a 1990 standard
  855. # [15:23] <Philip`> (With my current utterly rubbish test setup, only looking at 5 seconds of video, it's quite better quality than H.261 but twice the filesize and I guess I need to fiddle with the encoder settings to get a fair comparison)
  856. # [15:23] <maikmerten> MJPEG doesn't stand a chance against even H.261
  857. # [15:23] <maikmerten> no motion compensation, no inter-frame coding...
  858. # [15:23] <Philip`> It can do more than two different frame sizes, though :-)
  859. # [15:23] <maikmerten> I'll give it that ;)
  860. # [15:24] <maikmerten> plus there is no MJPEG standard IIRC
  861. # [15:24] <maikmerten> there are a lot of codecs claiming "MJPEG"
  862. # [15:24] <Philip`> and it can do variable bitrates, which I assume H.261 can't since it was designed for streaming over ISDN
  863. # [15:25] <maikmerten> H.261 should be able to do VBR
  864. # [15:25] <maikmerten> thanks to the very nature of video compression codecs are VBR
  865. # [15:26] <maikmerten> and it's actually a lot of work to get them to do CBR
  866. # [15:26] <maikmerten> (bitrate reservoirs etc. etc.)
  867. # [15:26] * MikeSmith finally gets to reading Hixie responses to messages he sent about <term> and <xref> stuff
  868. # [15:27] * MikeSmith goes to re-read spec for <i>
  869. # [15:27] <maikmerten> (well, okay, granted, it's very possible to develop codecs with a fixed bitrate and CBR)
  870. # [15:27] <Philip`> maikmerten: If you want to do e.g. videoconferencing over an ISDN channel, that'd have to be CBR since you can't do buffering, and I thought that was roughly what H.261 was designed for
  871. # [15:28] <maikmerten> (but it's difficult to do e.g. with DCT based codecs)
  872. # [15:28] <maikmerten> why wouldn't you be allowed to send less data than the line allows you to send?
  873. # [15:28] <Philip`> (but you know more about this than I do so I'm probably wrong :-) )
  874. # [15:28] <maikmerten> in worst case just pad with zeros ;)
  875. # [15:28] <Philip`> You could send less but that'd be a waste of resources
  876. # [15:29] <Philip`> since you're not going to be able to reuse the spare bandwidth for anything else
  877. # [15:29] <maikmerten> (which, actually, is one way to get CBR if you manage to ceil the bitrate: Just fill up "unused" bits with crap)
  878. # [15:29] <Philip`> so you might as well send higher quality images instead of lowering the bitrate
  879. # [15:29] <maikmerten> well, albeit it's good to use up all the bandwidth you may not be able to actually deliver
  880. # [15:30] <maikmerten> think compressing a perfect black frame
  881. # [15:30] <maikmerten> DCT will give you a nice zero run
  882. # [15:30] <maikmerten> near-perfect compression
  883. # [15:30] <maikmerten> (only protocol overhead)
  884. # [15:30] <Philip`> You could send 64Kb/s of a really really precise shade of black
  885. # [15:30] <maikmerten> so it's actually *hard* to guarantee you're using up all bandwidth ;)
  886. # [15:30] <Philip`> Fair enough :-)
  887. # [15:30] * Philip` has to go for some minutes
  888. # [15:31] <maikmerten> well, you mostly can't be any more precise than (0,0,0) with black ;)
  889. # [15:31] <Philip`> You can do (0.00000000, 0.00000000, 0.00000000) :-)
  890. # [15:31] <maikmerten> basically all video codecs are integer based
  891. # [15:31] * Philip` is gone
  892. # [15:32] <maikmerten> plus 0.0000000 would just be another case of "fill up with crap" ;)
  893. # [15:42] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@adsl-065-081-081-030.sip.bhm.bellsouth.net)
  894. # [15:46] <Philip`> maikmerten: Those extra significant figures are important in physics - something that I measure as 0.0kg is probably much heavier than something I measure as 0.000000kg :-)
  895. # [15:47] <maikmerten> well, only if you try to give an idea with what sort of precision you were working along with the value
  896. # [15:47] <maikmerten> (which is often done)
  897. # [15:48] <maikmerten> (but for christ's (or any other religious figure's) sake - zero shall be zero ;-) )
  898. # [15:48] * Joins: doublec (n=doublec@209.79.152.130)
  899. # [15:48] <maikmerten> actually my physics teacher always got semi-angry if we didn't compact numerical values ;)
  900. # [15:49] <maikmerten> (0.0340000 wouuld be 0.034)
  901. # [15:50] <Philip`> Eww - I've always been taught that significant figures are significant, and you can't just add them or drop them off whenever you fancy
  902. # [15:51] <maikmerten> well, you *have* to specify what precision is used
  903. # [15:51] <Philip`> and the worst thing you can possibly do is write 3½ instead of 3.5, because "½" implies some kind of mathematical precision that physics never has
  904. # [15:51] * Philip` prefers Computer Science where everything is integers ;-)
  905. # [15:51] <maikmerten> aye
  906. # [15:58] * Joins: csarven (n=nevrasc@81-5-133-33.static.nfwebsolutions.com)
  907. # [16:00] * Philip` wonders what typical internet video bitrate is
  908. # [16:01] <maikmerten> youtube used to serve 256 kbit/s h.263 with 64 kbit/s MP3
  909. # [16:01] <maikmerten> (the latter 22.05 kHz, mono - MP3 just is pretty far behind)
  910. # [16:02] <Philip`> Based on an extensive sample of two Youtube FLVs in my /tmp, they're 320kbit/s, so that sounds right
  911. # [16:03] <maikmerten> yup, two is basically a perfect statistical base ;)
  912. # [16:03] <maikmerten> but they're batch encoded with same settings anyway
  913. # [16:05] <hsivonen> what press release is David Gerard referring to on whatwg@?
  914. # [16:06] <annevk> the one where Chris Double is quoted
  915. # [16:06] <annevk> about Opera and Mozilla pushing <video>
  916. # [16:06] * hsivonen notes that dgerard talk about wikipedia and "we" in a way that assumes that everyone knows his wikipedia affiliation
  917. # [16:06] <hsivonen> annevk: ah the PC World article?
  918. # [16:07] <annevk> PC World just copied it
  919. # [16:07] <annevk> just like Washington Post and several others
  920. # [16:07] <hsivonen> hmm. something has gotten past my HTML5 radar
  921. # [16:07] <Philip`> Urgh, H.263 says "Valid sizes are 128x96, 176x144, 352x288, 704x576, and 1408x1152. Try H.263+."
  922. # [16:07] * Philip` tries H.263+, which works
  923. # [16:09] <hsivonen> annevk: whose press release it was?
  924. # [16:09] <annevk> not sure what the original was
  925. # [16:09] <maikmerten> H.263+ is 1998
  926. # [16:09] <maikmerten> it's not close to expiring
  927. # [16:10] <maikmerten> H.263 itself is 1995/1996
  928. # [16:10] * Quits: doublec (n=doublec@209.79.152.130)
  929. # [16:11] <maikmerten> it's more or less a direct predecessor to MPEG4 Part 2, IIRC
  930. # [16:11] <Philip`> What happened to H.262? :-)
  931. # [16:12] <hsivonen> annevk: I don't see a <video> press release from any of WHATWG, W3C, Mozilla or Opera
  932. # [16:12] <maikmerten> when MPEG ran out of puppies they began consuming future standards
  933. # [16:12] <maikmerten> look MPEG-3 ;)
  934. # [16:12] <annevk> hsivonen, there was no press release
  935. # [16:12] <hsivonen> annevk: ok
  936. # [16:12] <annevk> someone made an article that was reused all over the place (even localized)
  937. # [16:12] <hsivonen> ok
  938. # [16:13] * Joins: grimboy_uk (n=grimboy@85.211.236.12)
  939. # [16:13] <maikmerten> press releases are boring anyway.... "CEO of ..... says.... '...glad to be here and drive innovation..... customer satisfaction.... revenue... world domination'" - not sure I ever read a really interesting press release
  940. # [16:14] <hdh> the opera's dork release?
  941. # [16:14] <hdh> bork, maybe, the spelling escaped me
  942. # [16:17] * Quits: grimeboy (n=grimboy@85-211-246-139.dsl.pipex.com) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  943. # [16:19] <hsivonen> the silly thing about press releases is that all the substance has to be cast into quotations so that jounalists can print them as quotations and avoid stating anything controversial in text that isn't quoted
  944. # [16:19] <hsivonen> so to write a press release, one has to first come up with the points, then massage them into soundbytes and then figure out who agrees to be attributed with which soundbyte
  945. # [16:20] <Camaban> so journos can misinterpret them, mis-quote them, and be selective about what they quote to create a story ;)
  946. # [16:20] <Philip`> (Hmph, I tell these things to do 256Kb/s but they end up doing 430Kb/s instead :-( )
  947. # [16:21] <Philip`> (Maybe they're just not designed to scale so low?)
  948. # [16:24] <maikmerten> many codecs have limits on how low bitrate can be
  949. # [16:24] <hsivonen> comparing codecs properly is very hard, because the fixed parameter is what code you ship to the client and the tricks the encoder does plays such a big role
  950. # [16:24] <maikmerten> tried with lower resolution?
  951. # [16:24] <maikmerten> aye
  952. # [16:24] <hsivonen> so it is quite possible that you end up testing encoders instead of decoding specs
  953. # [16:25] <hsivonen> Philip`: are you testing ffmpeg encoders against each other?
  954. # [16:25] <Philip`> Testing just decoding specs isn't very useful in practice
  955. # [16:25] <maikmerten> well, at least for extremely old codecs "what we have now is as good as it'll ever get"
  956. # [16:25] <Philip`> since people will have to encode things, using what's available
  957. # [16:25] <hsivonen> Philip`: it isn't but testing a bad encoder or a good encoder with bad params isn't, either
  958. # [16:26] <hsivonen> I'd love to have a cheat sheet of QuickTime/H.264, x264, XiphQT and ffmpeg2theora tried and true magic params
  959. # [16:27] <Philip`> hsivonen: Yep, I'm just looking at FFmpeg for now, which is far from ideal and I won't claim this is an especially good comparison :-)
  960. # [16:27] <hsivonen> since the stuff other people encode tends to look better than what I get with naïve dabbling
  961. # [16:28] <maikmerten> most frontends e.g. don't expose all coding options
  962. # [16:28] <maikmerten> like in case of Theora I usually end up altering keyframe interval, the noise threshold or even the complete set of quantization tables
  963. # [16:28] <hsivonen> maikmerten: or worse, they do expose a zillion options that let you shoot yourself in the foot by overstepping your AVC profile bounds
  964. # [16:29] <maikmerten> well, that is a genuine opportunity for formats with profiles ;)
  965. # [16:29] * hsivonen thinks AVC profiles and levels are an awfully bad idea from the interop POV
  966. # [16:29] <maikmerten> well, the argument was that at least it could be made sure restricted deviced could at least reliably support *something*
  967. # [16:30] <maikmerten> but I feel this has gone out of hand a bit
  968. # [16:31] <maikmerten> it's sometimes not quite easy to e.g. come up with a file that happens to play fine on both Playstation Portable and the iPod and some mobile phone etc. etc.
  969. # [16:32] <hsivonen> Google Video has the iPod/PSP magic figured out but afaik they aren't sharing it
  970. # [16:32] <maikmerten> especially for extremely sophisticated codecs it can make sense to have profiles that drop coding schemes that (wild example) increase CPU usage by 50% but only give 5% coding gain
  971. # [16:33] * Philip` can't get below 1300Kb/s with MJPEG
  972. # [16:33] * Joins: billmason (n=billmaso@ip156.unival.com)
  973. # [16:34] * Joins: jdandrea (n=jdandrea@ool-18e42ae7.dyn.optonline.net)
  974. # [16:34] * Quits: maikmerten (n=merten@ls5laptop14.cs.uni-dortmund.de) ("Verlassend")
  975. # [16:35] <MikeSmith> hsivonen, annevk - I believe the source for the "Mozilla, Opera Want to Make Video on the Web Easier" article was Jeremy Kirk of IDG
  976. # [16:35] <MikeSmith> pcworld article has the correct byline at least
  977. # [16:36] <MikeSmith> it was not a press release from Opera or Mozilla or whoever
  978. # [16:36] <annevk> yeah, I recall reading those names
  979. # [16:39] <hsivonen> MikeSmith: ok
  980. # [16:43] * Parts: hdh (n=hdh@58.187.109.128)
  981. # [17:01] <Philip`> hsivonen: Would there be any chance of your HTML Parser including a brief summary of the changes between releases?
  982. # [17:04] <hsivonen> Philip`: perhaps next time.
  983. # [17:04] <hsivonen> Philip`: this time the main difference was Mavenization
  984. # [17:04] * Joins: phsiao (i=shawn@nat/ibm/x-92d84a74862c8112)
  985. # [17:05] * Joins: grimeboy (n=grimboy@85.211.236.228)
  986. # [17:06] <Philip`> hsivonen: Okay - it's just useful to know if e.g. the main difference is something like Mavenization that I don't care about, or if it's important bug fixes and I should bother updating
  987. # [17:06] <Philip`> but since "updating" involves copying one file over another, it's not a significant issue at all :-)
  988. # [17:09] <hsivonen> Philip`: I can't remember if there was something else as well
  989. # [17:09] * hsivonen looks at logs
  990. # [17:11] <hsivonen> Philip`: there was also a bug fix in case you run SAX Tree without a Locator
  991. # [17:13] <Philip`> hsivonen: Okay, thanks
  992. # [17:14] <hsivonen> Philip`: also, I eleminated a bogus import that referenced a Sun-internal class and caused badness
  993. # [17:14] <hsivonen> Philip`: that's about it
  994. # [17:15] <annevk> hsivonen, see www-style for media queries
  995. # [17:15] * annevk tries to fix stuff
  996. # [17:16] * Philip` wonders what "pseudo-legal" really means
  997. # [17:18] <hsivonen> Philip`: my guess is that it means doing stuff that is not legal for a commercial entity to do in the United States but that is legal in e.g. Sweden or Hungary
  998. # [17:20] * Quits: grimboy_uk (n=grimboy@85.211.236.12) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  999. # [17:21] <hsivonen> annevk: aargh. I didn't realize there were comments, too
  1000. # [17:23] <annevk> escapes, comments, error handling of syntax errors
  1001. # [17:32] * Joins: maikmerten (n=maikmert@L932c.l.pppool.de)
  1002. # [17:55] * Joins: doublec (n=doublec@li5-223.members.linode.com)
  1003. # [18:24] * Joins: gsnedders (n=gsnedder@host86-135-224-200.range86-135.btcentralplus.com)
  1004. # [18:24] * Joins: aroben (i=aroben@unaffiliated/aroben)
  1005. # [18:25] * gsnedders probably shouldn't actually even look at the emails
  1006. # [18:26] <gsnedders> woah.
  1007. # [18:26] <gsnedders> 102 in whatwg alone
  1008. # [18:27] <annevk> November 2007: 110 e-mails
  1009. # [18:27] <annevk> Decenber 2007: 208 e-mails so far
  1010. # [18:30] * Quits: Camaban (n=adrianle@host217-41-27-233.in-addr.btopenworld.com) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  1011. # [18:30] * Joins: Camaban (n=adrianle@host217-41-27-233.in-addr.btopenworld.com)
  1012. # [18:38] * gsnedders starts writing a reply
  1013. # [18:38] * gsnedders apologies and closes it
  1014. # [18:39] <Philip`> gsnedders: If it's like your last two messages, it'll be sucked into my spam folder, so I won't even notice :-)
  1015. # [18:39] <gsnedders> I just think there's no point.
  1016. # [18:39] * Quits: jruderman (n=jruderma@c-67-180-15-227.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  1017. # [18:39] <gsnedders> There are formats with no valid patents that cover them (guaranteed, as they are too old) — the same can't be said for Theora
  1018. # [18:40] <gsnedders> My preference is currently H.261/Vorbis (in some container, dunno what)
  1019. # [18:44] * Quits: jdandrea (n=jdandrea@ool-18e42ae7.dyn.optonline.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  1020. # [18:44] <annevk> it's better to wait a week like I said, because then reports from the video workshop will be in to better inform us what's going on
  1021. # [18:45] <doublec> anyone here at the workshop right now (apart from me?)
  1022. # [18:45] * Joins: jgraham_ (n=james@81-86-217-3.dsl.pipex.com)
  1023. # [18:46] <gsnedders> annevk: see what I wrote to you last night?
  1024. # [18:46] * Joins: Lachy__ (n=Lachlan@cm-84.215.41.149.getinternet.no)
  1025. # [18:50] <Philip`> gsnedders: H.261 is limited to 176x144 and 352x288, which seems a bit rubbish
  1026. # [18:50] <annevk> gsnedders, I think so, looked like a start
  1027. # [18:50] * gsnedders doesn't remember it being limited to specific resolutions
  1028. # [18:50] <gsnedders> oh well.
  1029. # [18:50] <gsnedders> MJPEG anyone? :P
  1030. # [18:51] <Philip`> gsnedders: FFmpeg doesn't support other sizes
  1031. # [18:51] <gsnedders> Philip`: wikipedia agrees with you
  1032. # [18:51] <Philip`> H.263 seemingly supports the five sizes on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Intermediate_Format
  1033. # [18:51] * Joins: kingryan (n=kingryan@dsl092-002-056.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net)
  1034. # [18:51] <maikmerten> MJPEG is even worse than GIF ;)
  1035. # [18:51] <Philip`> (which all have a stupid naming convention)
  1036. # [18:51] <maikmerten> GIF can at least say "keep this part unchanged from the last frame" ;)
  1037. # [18:52] <maikmerten> MJPEG just codes everything, every frame
  1038. # [18:52] <Philip`> maikmerten: But keyframes in GIF are gigantic :-)
  1039. # [18:52] <maikmerten> H.263 is a mid-nineties standard
  1040. # [18:52] <maikmerten> won't expire any time soon
  1041. # [18:52] <maikmerten> Philip`, sure, GIF is horrid
  1042. # [18:52] <maikmerten> I wasn't completely serious about GIF
  1043. # [18:52] <doublec> maikmerten, so you suggest animated gif's as the baseline ;)
  1044. # [18:53] <maikmerten> but GIF at least is able to exploit temporal redundancy ;)
  1045. # [18:53] <gsnedders> I wasn't completely serious about MJPEG :P
  1046. # [18:53] <maikmerten> doublec, well, would also save some implementation effort, right? ;)
  1047. # [18:53] <doublec> absolutely :)
  1048. # [18:53] <maikmerten> ah, good
  1049. # [18:54] <maikmerten> having like 500 outdated and underperforming-till-it's-no-fun codec as baseline for sure isn't desirable ;)
  1050. # [18:54] <Philip`> Couldn't you extend JPEG to proper 3D (2D+time, making use of redundancy in all directions) by just using a 3D DCT or something? :-)
  1051. # [18:54] <maikmerten> Philip`, doing anything clever would again make you target to submarine patents
  1052. # [18:54] * Quits: Lachy_ (n=Lachlan@ti200710a340-2895.bb.online.no) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  1053. # [18:55] <maikmerten> because you'd effectively develop a new codec
  1054. # [18:55] * Joins: jruderman (n=jruderma@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  1055. # [18:57] <maikmerten> the only old old old codec I know that is really expired would be H.120 - 2 MBit/s video conferencing
  1056. # [18:57] <maikmerten> oh joy
  1057. # [18:57] <maikmerten> (it's from 1982)
  1058. # [18:57] <maikmerten> (and no, I don't know a nowadays implementation)
  1059. # [18:57] <gsnedders> H.261 at least is commonly shipped
  1060. # [18:58] <maikmerten> 1990
  1061. # [18:58] <maikmerten> currently not old enough
  1062. # [18:58] <gsnedders> H.261 is 1982
  1063. # [18:58] <gsnedders> revised 1988
  1064. # [18:58] <maikmerten> not to my knowledge
  1065. # [18:58] * gsnedders looks up
  1066. # [18:58] <Philip`> I wonder about Bink
  1067. # [18:59] <gsnedders> H.260 is that
  1068. # [18:59] <maikmerten> H.261 is a 1990 ITU-T video coding standard originally designed for transmission over ISDN lines on which data rates are multiples of 64 kbit/s. It
  1069. # [18:59] <gsnedders> H.261 is 1990
  1070. # [18:59] <maikmerten> While H.261 was preceded in 1982 by H.120 [1][2] (which also underwent a revision in 1988 of some historic importance) as a digital video coding standard, H.261 was the first truly practical digital video coding standard (in terms of product support in significant quantities).
  1071. # [18:59] <maikmerten> Wikipedia
  1072. # [18:59] <maikmerten> ^^ yeah, I know this is not the ultimate source
  1073. # [18:59] <maikmerten> but H.261 in 1990 just makes sense from the history-point-of-view
  1074. # [19:00] <maikmerten> it led to a direct line of successors to H.264
  1075. # [19:00] * gsnedders can't remember it
  1076. # [19:00] <gsnedders> but there again, I wasn't yet alive in 1990 :P
  1077. # [19:01] * Quits: jruderman (n=jruderma@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  1078. # [19:04] * Joins: jruderman (n=jruderma@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  1079. # [19:05] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  1080. # [19:05] * Parts: Camaban (n=adrianle@host217-41-27-233.in-addr.btopenworld.com)
  1081. # [19:06] <Teratogen> bring back ogg!
  1082. # [19:07] <gsnedders> Teratogen: _CAN YOU PLEAE MAKE A CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENT!?_
  1083. # [19:07] <Teratogen> yes
  1084. # [19:07] <Teratogen> BRING BACK OGG!
  1085. # [19:07] <gsnedders> why?
  1086. # [19:07] <Teratogen> because it's free!
  1087. # [19:08] <gsnedders> So? What advantages does it have over, say, H.260 or Dirac?
  1088. # [19:08] <Teratogen> freedom!
  1089. # [19:08] <maikmerten> H.260 is oooooold beyond usefulness
  1090. # [19:08] <gsnedders> All three are free (in terms of cost to license patents).
  1091. # [19:08] <Teratogen> ogg totally rocks
  1092. # [19:08] <maikmerten> Dirac is not finished yet and big players would still be scared about submarines
  1093. # [19:09] <Philip`> If we just built web browsers on land instead of in the sea, submarines wouldn't be a problem at all
  1094. # [19:09] * gsnedders hugs Philip`
  1095. # [19:09] <maikmerten> I second that
  1096. # [19:10] <gsnedders> Ogg is no help if it does not achieve interoperability between all browsers.
  1097. # [19:10] <maikmerten> their choice.
  1098. # [19:11] <maikmerten> there *is* no less-than-20-years old codec they'd accept
  1099. # [19:11] <gsnedders> I don't particularly care whose choice it is. I want a video format I can use in every browser.
  1100. # [19:11] <Philip`> gsnedders: You can use FLV
  1101. # [19:12] <gsnedders> silly Philip`. that works in Flash, not any browser.
  1102. # [19:12] <gsnedders> :P
  1103. # [19:14] <Philip`> Flash works in any browser, and it works now, and in a few years it'll still work in more installed browsers than <video> even if IE8/FF3/Opera9.5/Safari4 add support
  1104. # [19:14] <gsnedders> I know, that's true.
  1105. # [19:14] <Philip`> and it'll support VP6, which is better than H.263
  1106. # [19:14] <gsnedders> Philip`: it doesn't run on browsers on IA-64!
  1107. # [19:16] <doublec> or any new hardware or devices that comes along
  1108. # [19:16] <doublec> they'd have to rely on the flash vendor to port their software to it
  1109. # [19:16] <Philip`> It doesn't run on Lynx either, and there's probably Lynx users than IA-64 users :-p
  1110. # [19:16] <Philip`> s/probably/probably more/
  1111. # [19:16] <gsnedders> Philip`: I dunno. probably more IA-64 users, but most won't run browsers on the it :P
  1112. # [19:17] * annevk wonders when the Ogg discussion stops
  1113. # [19:18] <gsnedders> annevk: Christmas, because everyone is away :)
  1114. # [19:18] <Philip`> I wonder how much it cost to get Flash on Opera Wii
  1115. # [19:19] * gsnedders is glad we don't require 100% consensus on everything for REC
  1116. # [19:20] <gsnedders> http://xkcd.com/356/ — you know the worst part? I actually am now stuck thinking about that.
  1117. # [19:21] <Philip`> gsnedders: Just do a numerical simulation :-p
  1118. # [19:21] <gsnedders> I've moved on.
  1119. # [19:21] <gsnedders> Better things to waste my time with.
  1120. # [19:21] <gsnedders> (where <video> is worse)
  1121. # [19:22] * Quits: doublec (n=doublec@li5-223.members.linode.com) (Remote closed the connection)
  1122. # [19:23] * Joins: doublec (n=doublec@li5-223.members.linode.com)
  1123. # [19:23] * Parts: doublec (n=doublec@li5-223.members.linode.com) ("Leaving")
  1124. # [19:24] * Joins: doublec (n=doublec@li5-223.members.linode.com)
  1125. # [19:26] * Quits: doublec (n=doublec@li5-223.members.linode.com) (Client Quit)
  1126. # [19:38] <gsnedders> hmm… vital maths test tomorrow. do I revise (i.e., learn stuff I missed when I was ill which will lead me to fail :P) or work on HTTP parsing, or write on my blog?
  1127. # [19:44] * Joins: roc (n=roc@121-72-24-31.dsl.telstraclear.net)
  1128. # [19:54] * Joins: doublec (n=doublec@li5-223.members.linode.com)
  1129. # [20:05] * Quits: jruderman (n=jruderma@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  1130. # [20:08] * Joins: jruderman (n=jruderma@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  1131. # [20:18] <Philip`> gsnedders: By the way, would you be interested in information about HTTP response headers in the wild? There's some data I've got already, and some other stuff would be easy to collect, but I have no idea if it'd be useful for anything at all
  1132. # [20:22] <maikmerten> gargh, somehow my messages to whatwg go to the moderation queue first because I subscribed as <blabla>@gmail.com but apparently Google is "correcting" the sender address to <blabla>@googlemail.com
  1133. # [20:22] * Quits: roc (n=roc@121-72-24-31.dsl.telstraclear.net)
  1134. # [20:22] <maikmerten> is there a way to get the list accept that gmail.com "==" googlemail.com ?
  1135. # [20:23] <maikmerten> (I really have to thank that brilliant german guy registering "GMail" as trademark and suing Google so all german users are "googlemail")
  1136. # [20:24] <gsnedders> Philip`: yeah, sure. could you possibly drop it in an email to me?
  1137. # [20:24] <Philip`> maikmerten: In Settings / Accounts / 'Send mail as', is that where it claims it's @gmail.com when actually it's not?
  1138. # [20:25] <maikmerten> Philip`, I'll check
  1139. # [20:25] * Quits: doublec (n=doublec@li5-223.members.linode.com) ("Leaving")
  1140. # [20:25] <maikmerten> Philip`, wasn't aware there was a way to specify these things
  1141. # [20:25] <maikmerten> anyway, thanks for the tip
  1142. # [20:25] <Philip`> (The WHATWG moderation queue never gets moderated, so anything sent there will be lost)
  1143. # [20:25] <gsnedders> wow. the email on whatwg won't stop.
  1144. # [20:26] <maikmerten> Philip`, same policy as here at xiph.org ;)
  1145. # [20:26] <zcorpan> oook. i've now cought up with whatwg email (mostly by marking large chunks as read)
  1146. # [20:26] <zcorpan> not much that was interesting, actually
  1147. # [20:27] <maikmerten> "You cannot send e-mail from maikmerten@gmail.com"
  1148. # [20:27] <maikmerten> I'll just unsubscribe and resubscribe with googlemail.com
  1149. # [20:27] <Philip`> That sounds irritating
  1150. # [20:29] * Joins: grimboy_uk (n=grimboy@85-211-244-14.dsl.pipex.com)
  1151. # [20:30] <Philip`> I (in the UK) get a "Google Mail" logo rather than "Gmail", but it seems to be happy with my account staying as @gmail.com
  1152. # [20:30] <Philip`> so I'm not quite sure how all this stuff works
  1153. # [20:30] * Quits: kingryan (n=kingryan@dsl092-002-056.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net)
  1154. # [20:31] <deltab> which MLM is it?
  1155. # [20:31] <gsnedders> My older email is @gmail.com
  1156. # [20:31] <gsnedders> my newer is @googlemail.com
  1157. # [20:32] <maikmerten> Philip`, may indeed be the "GMail" is a registered trademark in germany thingie
  1158. # [20:32] <gsnedders> maikmerten: there was a dispute in the UK too
  1159. # [20:32] <maikmerten> oh, wasn't aware of that
  1160. # [20:32] <deltab> I think mailman supports alternate sending addresses
  1161. # [20:33] <maikmerten> too bad I registered "AMail", "BMail" etc. but stopped at "FMail" ;)
  1162. # [20:33] <Philip`> gsnedders: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~pjt47/misc/headers.xml.bz2 is the headers from ~15K pages, as parsed by HttpClient
  1163. # [20:34] <Philip`> (which is the only data I've got at the moment)
  1164. # [20:35] <gsnedders> Philip`: it's served as application/xml!
  1165. # [20:35] <Philip`> Uh, I think I don't care that it's served as ap...
  1166. # [20:35] <Philip`> Yeah, that
  1167. # [20:35] <Philip`> Not my web server :-p
  1168. # [20:36] <deltab> maikmerten: instead of un/resubscribing you shoudl be able to use this: http://list.org/mailman-member/node22.html
  1169. # [20:36] * gsnedders remembers that SEE doesn't like large files
  1170. # [20:36] <maikmerten> deltab, too late, I'm afraid.... :(
  1171. # [20:36] <maikmerten> (and yeah, shame on me for not finding that myself)
  1172. # [20:37] <gsnedders> Philip`: how's that done? just saving what it gives as headers?
  1173. # [20:39] <Philip`> gsnedders: Yes, specifically via http://jakarta.apache.org/httpcomponents/httpclient-3.x/apidocs/org/apache/commons/httpclient/HttpMethod.html#getResponseHeaders()
  1174. # [20:39] <Philip`> (i.e. using whatever kind of parsing code is provided by that)
  1175. # [20:40] <Philip`> excluding anything that doesn't respond with 200
  1176. # [20:41] <Philip`> and replacing control characters (except 9/A/D) with spaces
  1177. # [20:42] <Philip`> (The output isn't necessarily grouped by uri, since it's processed multithreadedly)
  1178. # [20:46] * Joins: madness_ (n=mng@client-86-27-168-55.popl.adsl.virgin.net)
  1179. # [20:46] <gsnedders> Philip`: you got any issues with me publishing anything based on it?
  1180. # [20:46] * gsnedders assumes not seeming he's just linked to the data in a publicly logged IRC channel
  1181. # [20:46] <Philip`> gsnedders: No - it's all from public web sites anyway, and I didn't ask them for permission ;-)
  1182. # [20:51] * gsnedders goes back to fumbling around with Python
  1183. # [20:51] * Quits: grimeboy (n=grimboy@85.211.236.228) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  1184. # [20:52] * Philip` can't see an obvious way to get unparsed headers from HttpClient
  1185. # [20:52] * Quits: madness (n=mng@client-82-2-93-126.manc.adsl.virgin.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  1186. # [21:02] * Joins: doublec (n=doublec@li5-223.members.linode.com)
  1187. # [21:04] * Joins: roc (n=roc@202.0.36.64)
  1188. # [21:04] * Quits: dbaron (n=dbaron@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com) ("8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.")
  1189. # [21:06] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  1190. # [21:14] * Quits: maikmerten (n=maikmert@L932c.l.pppool.de) ("Leaving")
  1191. # [21:15] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@c-71-198-176-23.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  1192. # [21:18] <gsnedders> Philip`: xml.parsers.expat.ExpatError: not well-formed (invalid token): line 14534, column 56 :(
  1193. # [21:19] <gsnedders> Philip`: ISO-8859-1 file, with encoding undefined it seems
  1194. # [21:19] <Philip`> gsnedders: Argh
  1195. # [21:20] <Philip`> It was correct in my initial XML file, but it looks like xml_grep messes it up
  1196. # [21:21] <Philip`> which is odd since it claims to be doing UTF-8
  1197. # [21:21] <hsivonen> any recommendable JavaScript plug-in for Eclipse?
  1198. # [21:22] <roc> The Aptana stuff is supposed to be good
  1199. # [21:22] <Philip`> and if I set "--encoding utf-8" then it removes all linebreaks
  1200. # [21:23] * gsnedders is failing at Python
  1201. # [21:25] <gsnedders> I'm getting a KeyError with self.headers[name] = [{"name": name, "uri": uri, "value": value}]
  1202. # [21:27] <Philip`> gsnedders: Updated http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~pjt47/misc/headers.xml.bz2 so it should hopefully be utf-8 now
  1203. # [21:27] <Philip`> Also I think I removed the <file> element
  1204. # [21:28] * gsnedders is just using getElementsByTagName() anyway
  1205. # [21:28] <Philip`> gsnedders: I thought it only gave KeyError when trying to read a non-present key
  1206. # [21:29] <gsnedders> Philip`: so did I.
  1207. # [21:29] <gsnedders> "Raised when a mapping (dictionary) key is not found in the set of existing keys." — TFM
  1208. # [21:29] <Philip`> About gEBTN: Ah, okay - I've been avoiding the DOM since my XML files are 200MB :-)
  1209. # [21:30] * gsnedders doesn't particularly care how long the scripts take to run
  1210. # [21:30] <gsnedders> I'd be doing it in C if I did :P
  1211. # [21:30] * Philip` does care, because he's lazy and doesn't like waiting
  1212. # [21:32] <inimino> gsnedders: self.headers['name'] perhaps?
  1213. # [21:32] <gsnedders> inimino: no, name is a variable
  1214. # [21:33] <inimino> oh, ok
  1215. # [21:33] <gsnedders> (and set)
  1216. # [21:33] <gsnedders> odd.
  1217. # [21:33] <gsnedders> now with the new headers.xml it works
  1218. # [21:33] <Philip`> That sounds impossible
  1219. # [21:34] <gsnedders> totally real, though.
  1220. # [21:34] <gsnedders> I love software :P
  1221. # [21:35] <Philip`> I love only software that doesn't involve character encodings
  1222. # [21:35] <gsnedders> Philip`: like what? :P
  1223. # [21:35] <Philip`> Like anything that just uses integers :-)
  1224. # [21:35] <inimino> Philip`: but not as character codes?
  1225. # [21:36] <gsnedders> Philip`: but output? :P
  1226. # [21:36] <gsnedders> Philip`: how do you encode those integers for display?
  1227. # [21:36] <Philip`> inimino: Using integers for character codes is okay, as long as you never have to interpret those integers as characters :-)
  1228. # [21:37] <Philip`> gsnedders: If you're only outputting and never inputting, then you don't have to care about encoding errors, because you just shove stuff through printf() and if the user gets garbage then it's their problem for not using ASCII
  1229. # [21:37] <gsnedders> :D
  1230. # [21:37] <inimino> heh
  1231. # [21:40] * Philip` 's current work's only user interface is via Telnet outputting to a serial console in a virtual machine connected to the host through UDP and then passed through Perl and Python scripts
  1232. # [21:40] <Philip`> so there's pretty much no chance of me getting character encodings straight, so I'm just sticking with ASCII there to save myself the pain
  1233. # [21:41] <Philip`> (Actually, it's a Telnet server and a netcat client, so all the magic Telnet commands get printed out to the screen)
  1234. # [21:43] * inimino guesses there is a story behind doing it that way
  1235. # [21:45] <hsivonen> roc: thanks. installing now
  1236. # [21:45] <Philip`> inimino: I'm testing some networking stuff, so it has to be done in VMs, and then that's the best way I've found to collect the output from them
  1237. # [21:51] * Quits: csarven (n=nevrasc@81-5-133-33.static.nfwebsolutions.com) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  1238. # [22:07] <hsivonen> annevk: where does HTML5 allow target='' on <form>?
  1239. # [22:10] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@adsl-065-081-081-030.sip.bhm.bellsouth.net)
  1240. # [22:20] <gsnedders> Philip`: ValueError: too many values to unpack — your file is too big for what I want :P
  1241. # [22:21] <Philip`> gsnedders: Uh, that sounds like an odd reason to get ValueError
  1242. # [22:21] <gsnedders> Philip`: well, there are over ~15k items in the dictionary I'm trying to iterate over
  1243. # [22:22] <Philip`> I don't see why that would be a problem
  1244. # [22:23] <gsnedders> Philip`: and your saying of ~15k is wrong. ~115k would've been closer :) (116945 FYI)
  1245. # [22:24] <Philip`> It's ~15K unique documents, mostly with >1 header each
  1246. # [22:24] <gsnedders> ah. ~15k documents.
  1247. # [22:24] <gsnedders> that is what you said, actually.
  1248. # [22:27] <gsnedders> This is starting to get really annoying.
  1249. # [22:27] <gsnedders> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2006-June/387414.html
  1250. # [22:27] <gsnedders> hmm
  1251. # [22:28] <gsnedders> the value of the dictionary is a list
  1252. # [22:28] * Quits: ROBOd (n=robod@89.122.216.38) ("http://www.robodesign.ro")
  1253. # [22:28] <Philip`> What do you mean by "the value of"?
  1254. # [22:29] <gsnedders> the value of every key is a list.
  1255. # [22:30] <Philip`> The bit where you said [{"name": ...}] is a list because of the []
  1256. # [22:30] <Philip`> or do you mean something else?
  1257. # [22:31] <gsnedders> {"foo": "bar"} where "foo" is the key and "bar" the value
  1258. # [22:32] * Philip` doesn't understand the problem
  1259. # [22:33] * gsnedders now understanding the problem writes a tiny exemplar
  1260. # [22:34] <gsnedders> Philip`: http://pastebin.ca/813896 — make that work.
  1261. # [22:35] <hsivonen> Lachy__: http://html5.lachy.id.au/ could be better if the form was seeded with an HTML5 skeleton document
  1262. # [22:35] <Philip`> gsnedders: foo.items()
  1263. # [22:37] <Philip`> because "for k in foo" iterates over keys, whereas "for (k, v) in foo.items()" iterates over (key, value) pairs
  1264. # [22:37] <gsnedders> and for k, v in foo?
  1265. # [22:37] <Philip`> (http://docs.python.org/lib/typesmapping.html shows most of the useful functions)
  1266. # [22:38] <hsivonen> Lachy__: the validate html5 button works only once for me on http://html5.lachy.id.au/ in Firefox 2
  1267. # [22:38] <hsivonen> Lachy__: I have to reload to make the button work again
  1268. # [22:38] <Philip`> gsnedders: That will iterates over keys, and try to unpack each key into a (k,v) tuple, which will raise ValueError because your keys are strings and can't be unpacked
  1269. # [22:38] <gsnedders> ah
  1270. # [22:39] <Philip`> (It's like "for x in foo: k, v = x")
  1271. # [22:39] <Philip`> (in terms of iterating over keys rather than keys+values)
  1272. # [22:39] <gsnedders> ah
  1273. # [22:39] * gsnedders doesn't pretend to be anything but a python n00b
  1274. # [22:41] <Philip`> It mostly makes sense when you can see which rules apply - it's not like Perl where magical context-sensitive things happen and you'll never understand unless you read that particular detail in the documentation and newsgroups :-)
  1275. # [22:44] <Philip`> Hmm, I want to watch some video on the web tomorrow, but it's streaming Windows Media and I'm not sure how to handle that
  1276. # [22:44] <Lachy__> hsivonen, the validate button works for me all the time, without reloading
  1277. # [22:46] <Lachy__> hsivonen, send me an email about adding a template document to it, and I'll see what I can do when I get back from Linkoping on Sunday
  1278. # [22:47] <hsivonen> Lachy__: ok
  1279. # [22:47] * Lachy__ is now known as Lachy
  1280. # [22:48] * gsnedders has kinda given up hope at actually passing the maths test tomorrow, having missed a couple of weeks, and barely knowing one section
  1281. # [22:49] <Lachy> gsnedders, maths isn't too hard
  1282. # [22:49] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@17.203.15.140)
  1283. # [22:49] <Lachy> which particular maths topics are you covering this year?
  1284. # [22:51] <gsnedders> Lachy: http://www.sqa.org.uk/files/nq/C10012.pdf (which I think gives enough detail :P)
  1285. # [22:51] <Philip`> Aha, mplayer works
  1286. # [22:52] * Philip` wonders if anyone happens to know how to record and watch a stream simultaneously
  1287. # [22:52] <gsnedders> can anyone explain the reasoning behind there being both plus/minus and minus/plus signs?
  1288. # [22:53] <gsnedders> Lachy: it's the stuff on page 17 of the PDF that I've missed
  1289. # [22:53] <Philip`> gsnedders: They're useful for e.g. "+/- x = - (-/+ x)"
  1290. # [22:54] <Philip`> i.e. representing two versions of the equation, where one has a mixture of + and -, and the other has the +s and -s flipped
  1291. # [22:54] * gsnedders doesn't see how that helps
  1292. # [22:54] <Lachy> gsnedders, on which page can I find one of these minus-plus signs?
  1293. # [22:54] <Lachy> I've never seen one before
  1294. # [22:55] <Philip`> You can't say "+/- x = - (+/- x)" because that would be interpreted as "+x = -(+x) and -x = -(-x)" which is untrue
  1295. # [22:55] <gsnedders> Lachy: the same page (p17 of the PDF, labelled within itself as p16)
  1296. # [22:55] <gsnedders> Philip`: ah. so then you have to take both from the same side!
  1297. # [22:55] <Philip`> In that cos example, it means "cos(A+B) = blah - blah; and cos(A-B) = blah + blah"
  1298. # [22:56] <gsnedders> yeah, that makes sense now
  1299. # [22:56] <Philip`> gsnedders: Yep
  1300. # [22:56] <gsnedders> (I've just about done the basics of the top two formula)
  1301. # [22:56] <gsnedders> and obviously the third is just rearranged
  1302. # [22:56] <Philip`> (though sometimes +/- and -/+ are used in a context-sensitive way and don't actually work like that :-) )
  1303. # [22:56] <gsnedders> (or rather, a rearranged copy of the above)
  1304. # [22:57] <Philip`> The third/fourth are just taking A=B
  1305. # [22:57] <gsnedders> Philip`: 15332 pages of HTTP headers, BTW
  1306. # [22:58] <gsnedders> Philip`: I understand the first equality on the forth, but not the second/third equalities
  1307. # [22:59] <gsnedders> Philip`: are all the headers from accessing the page once, or not?
  1308. # [23:00] <Philip`> cos^2 x + sin^2 x = 1
  1309. # [23:00] <Philip`> ...is the relevant fact that should be known
  1310. # [23:00] <gsnedders> that more or less makes sense from a graph, yeah.
  1311. # [23:00] <Philip`> so that gives the cos^2 A - sin^2 A = 2cos^2 A - 1 and suchlike
  1312. # [23:00] * Quits: Teratogen (i=leontopo@unaffiliated/teratogen) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  1313. # [23:02] <Lachy> there was a time about 10 years ago where I would have been able to do those trig equations. Now I just stare at them blankly
  1314. # [23:02] <jgraham> IRC clearly needs better support for maths notation
  1315. # [23:02] <gsnedders> Philip`: LaTeX!
  1316. # [23:02] <roc> IRC should be XML
  1317. # [23:02] <roc> then we could post our HTML examples directly
  1318. # [23:02] <roc> and use MathML
  1319. # [23:03] <gsnedders> peh. start with the basics. get a universally accepted character encoding on IRC :)
  1320. # [23:03] <Philip`> gsnedders: Each page was GETed once, but the <header uri> in the output is the result of redirections, so it's possible that some pages redirected to the same location
  1321. # [23:03] <gsnedders> kk
  1322. # [23:03] <roc> and play XSS pranks on each otehr
  1323. # [23:03] <Hixie> lordy what a lot of main
  1324. # [23:03] <Lachy> UTF-8 seems to be fairly widely accepted for IRC these days
  1325. # [23:03] <gsnedders> Philip`: there's a page that claims to have 94 headers
  1326. # [23:03] <Philip`> gsnedders: Maybe it'd be more helpful if I gave the original unique requested URI instead of the redirected result?
  1327. # [23:03] <Hixie> half of this video mail has neither the word "video" nor the word "ogg" in it
  1328. # [23:03] <Hixie> sheesh
  1329. # [23:03] <roc> fear the wrath of Ogg!
  1330. # [23:04] <gsnedders> Philip`: give the original URI for each request (i.e., a redirect has a different URI)
  1331. # [23:04] <jgraham> Hixie: That's to make it hard to automatically redirect to /dev/null ;)
  1332. # [23:04] <Lachy> I can't believe the whole ogg discussion is still going on, on far too many different lists
  1333. # [23:05] <Hixie> what i'm amused by is that for every person sending 10 flames to one of the lists, i get a person e-mailing me privately telling me that they have my support and that they believe we're doing the right thing
  1334. # [23:05] <gsnedders> I'm not totally sure whether it was the right thing to do.
  1335. # [23:05] <gsnedders> Though I'm sure plenty of the people on the mailing list think I agree with you :)
  1336. # [23:06] * Quits: billmason (n=billmaso@ip156.unival.com) (".")
  1337. # [23:06] * hsivonen finally replies to an ogg email
  1338. # [23:06] <gsnedders> Philip`: least headers is 3
  1339. # [23:06] * Joins: heycam` (n=cam@clm-laptop.infotech.monash.edu.au)
  1340. # [23:07] <hsivonen> evidently, rudd-o hadn't read the spec before he started his slashdot campaign
  1341. # [23:07] <gsnedders> Philip`: median is 7, mean is 8
  1342. # [23:07] <Hixie> hah, the first comment on http://digg.com/tech_news/Nokia_and_Apple_seem_to_have_succeeded_in_suppressing_ogg is a complete non-sequitur
  1343. # [23:07] <Hixie> hsivonen: shocking, that
  1344. # [23:07] <gsnedders> hsivonen: why bother? it's only another damned technical document!
  1345. # [23:07] <gsnedders> (on a totally unrelated note, I updated the to-do list on the tolerant http parsing spec)
  1346. # [23:08] <Lachy> oh wow, I never expected accessibility to come up in the discussion: [whatwg] HTML 5, OGG, competition, civil rights, and persons with disabilities
  1347. # [23:09] <hsivonen> Lachy: I must have skipped that message.
  1348. # [23:09] <gsnedders> (that's <http://stuff.gsnedders.com/draft-sneddon-http-parsing-00.html> or .txt)
  1349. # [23:09] <Philip`> gsnedders: If I give the original URI, it's still going to return the final after-redirection request's headers, so if several URIs redirect to the same place then it'll repeat the redirection target's headers
  1350. # [23:09] <Philip`> which isn't necessarily bad, but it's something to be aware of
  1351. # [23:09] <gsnedders> Philip`: ergh.
  1352. # [23:10] * Quits: heycam` (n=cam@clm-laptop.infotech.monash.edu.au) (Client Quit)
  1353. # [23:13] * Philip` wonders how to select elements of type A or type B using the subset of XPath supported by xml_grep
  1354. # [23:14] <Hixie> i think i have found an easy way to achieve my goals of replying to hundreds of e-mails by month's end
  1355. # [23:14] <Philip`> Oh, looks like I can't do that
  1356. # [23:18] <Philip`> gsnedders: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~pjt47/misc/headers2.xml.bz2 has the original request URI, and some <redirect>s to point out what got redirected
  1357. # [23:18] * gsnedders just commited into hg the entire XML file
  1358. # [23:19] <Philip`> The new XML file is indented differently, just to make fun diffs
  1359. # [23:20] <gsnedders> what is the <redirect> element? just noting movement?
  1360. # [23:20] <Philip`> Yes - it's added whenever the request URI and response URI differ
  1361. # [23:20] <gsnedders> pay any attention to how many redirects it has?
  1362. # [23:20] <Philip`> (i.e. when HttpClient did whatever magical redirection-handling it does)
  1363. # [23:20] <Philip`> It has less than 100 redirects, but that's all I know
  1364. # [23:21] <Philip`> (because otherwise it throws an exception and aborts)
  1365. # [23:21] <hsivonen> Philip`: did you write your own spider based on HttpClient and the Validator.nu parser?
  1366. # [23:21] <gsnedders> Philip`: different root element, too
  1367. # [23:22] <Philip`> gsnedders: Yes, but you said you were using getElementsByWhatever so I assumed that wouldn't matter, and I used grep/echo/cat instead of xml_grep to extract the bits from my original XML file
  1368. # [23:22] <gsnedders> Philip`: yeah, just an observation :)
  1369. # [23:22] <Philip`> which is totally not the right way to do it :-)
  1370. # [23:22] <gsnedders> http://hg.gsnedders.com/cgi-bin/hgwebdir.cgi/http-parsing/file/96df15d57efb/Philip%20Taylor%27s%20Header%20Data/README.txt — that all right?
  1371. # [23:23] <hsivonen> Philip`: is the code that you are using to drive HttpClient in SVN somewhere?
  1372. # [23:23] <Philip`> hsivonen: I don't think it's a spider since it doesn't follow links at all, but I did write my own thing to download/analyse a list of HTML files using HttpClient and the Validator.nu parser
  1373. # [23:23] <hsivonen> Philip`: ok
  1374. # [23:23] <Philip`> hsivonen: It isn't at the moment
  1375. # [23:24] <hsivonen> Philip`: surely at that point you could make links from the parse tree feed back into the download list
  1376. # [23:24] <hsivonen> although it probably isn't that simple
  1377. # [23:25] <Philip`> hsivonen: I'm not sure exactly what you mean
  1378. # [23:25] <Philip`> gsnedders: The last paragraph doesn't really make any sense :-)
  1379. # [23:25] <hsivonen> If you analyse docs, presumably the contain links and those could be put on the list to download/analyse
  1380. # [23:26] <hsivonen> but then there's robots.txt
  1381. # [23:26] <gsnedders> Philip`: that's true, but I only did it quickly
  1382. # [23:26] <Philip`> hsivonen: Ah, yes
  1383. # [23:26] <hsivonen> and crawling in a reasonable breadth-first order etc, etc
  1384. # [23:26] <Philip`> hsivonen: I'd prefer to use someone else's code rather than do all that work
  1385. # [23:27] <Philip`> (I'm not even looking at robots.txt now, since that would double the number of requests I make)
  1386. # [23:27] <gsnedders> Philip`: "It may not be grouped by URI fully, as it is not processed by a single thread"?
  1387. # [23:27] <Philip`> gsnedders: Is that sentence needed at all?
  1388. # [23:28] <gsnedders> Philip`: not really, but I may as well put it there in case anyone ever cares.
  1389. # [23:28] <Philip`> gsnedders: It just means it might have <header uri=a/><header uri=b/><header uri=a/>, which isn't an extremely interesting observation
  1390. # [23:28] <hsivonen> Philip`: the Internet Archive spider has the kitchen sink in it but seems to be picky about its execution environment according to docs
  1391. # [23:29] <hsivonen> Philip`: also, the code base isn't particularly approachable due to the kitchen sink nature
  1392. # [23:29] <gsnedders> Philip`: it means you can't do anything that assumes it's in order, which you might sometimes want to do
  1393. # [23:31] <Philip`> hsivonen: Hmm, it does sound not entirely trivial
  1394. # [23:31] <Philip`> I'm not sure how worthwhile it would be to do actual spidering, rather than sticking with the dmoz.org list
  1395. # [23:32] <hsivonen> Philip`: isn't dmoz biased towards front pages?
  1396. # [23:32] <Philip`> (particularly since I can't do especially extensive spidering - I'd prefer not to be making a hundred thousand requests, because it's kind of expensive in bandwidth)
  1397. # [23:33] <Philip`> hsivonen: Yes, and to CNN
  1398. # [23:33] <hsivonen> also, how alive is dmoz these days? does it represent current authoring?
  1399. # [23:33] * Philip` has no idea
  1400. # [23:34] <Philip`> I can imagine getting much worse results from a spider that gets sucked into a single giant site, so I'm not sure how to make things definitely better
  1401. # [23:34] * Quits: gsnedders (n=gsnedder@host86-135-224-200.range86-135.btcentralplus.com) ("404: Not Found")
  1402. # [23:35] <Philip`> (I'm not even sure what "better" means)
  1403. # [23:37] <hsivonen> Philip`: knowledge about web site structures would probably be needed to make reasonable guesses
  1404. # [23:38] <hsivonen> Philip`: without data I might guess that a sensible strategy would be taking a list of site roots, analyzing the front page, picking two site-internal links at random, analyzing those pages too and following one site-internal link from each of those
  1405. # [23:38] <hsivonen> that would give front page plus 4 non-front pages for each site
  1406. # [23:38] * Quits: othermaciej (n=mjs@dsl081-048-145.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net)
  1407. # [23:51] <Philip`> hsivonen: It would be good to have a way of evaluating the strategies, to see which ones actually work sensibly in practice, but I've got no idea how to do that either :-/
  1408. # [23:54] * Joins: weinig_ (n=weinig@17.255.108.233)
  1409. # [23:54] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@17.203.15.140) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  1410. # [23:55] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@17.203.15.140)
  1411. # [23:59] * Quits: gavin_ (n=gavin@firefox/developer/gavin)
  1412. # [23:59] <tndH> ooh, acronym/initialism debate again
  1413. # [23:59] <tndH> feels nice to read that after all the ogg stuff
  1414. # Session Close: Thu Dec 13 00:00:01 2007

The end :)