/irc-logs / freenode / #whatwg / 2009-01-21 / end

Options:

  1. # Session Start: Wed Jan 21 00:00:00 2009
  2. # Session Ident: #whatwg
  3. # [00:05] * Joins: xydyx (n=hdh@58.187.20.140)
  4. # [00:07] * Quits: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-65-29.dynamic.amis.net) ("Leaving.")
  5. # [00:11] * Quits: doublec (n=Chris_Do@202.0.36.64) ("ChatZilla 0.9.79-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.8.0.9/2006120508]")
  6. # [00:12] * Quits: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@95.34.27.22.customer.cdi.no) (Remote closed the connection)
  7. # [00:13] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@clm-laptop.infotech.monash.edu.au)
  8. # [00:19] * Joins: doublec (n=Chris_Do@202.0.36.64)
  9. # [00:19] * Quits: hdh (n=hdh@58.187.20.140) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  10. # [00:20] * Quits: hasather (n=hasather@90-231-107-133-no62.tbcn.telia.com) (Remote closed the connection)
  11. # [00:20] * Joins: hasather (n=hasather@90-231-107-133-no62.tbcn.telia.com)
  12. # [00:21] * Joins: doodlewarrior (n=anon-irc@adsl-76-254-56-68.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  13. # [00:22] <doodlewarrior> what's the correct markup to include a phone number?
  14. # [00:22] <doodlewarrior> i imagine it goes into an address element
  15. # [00:22] <doodlewarrior> should i wrap the number itself in a tag?
  16. # [00:24] <webben> doodlewarrior: is the phone number contact information for the author of the page (or at least that distinctive section of the page?)
  17. # [00:24] <webben> http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-address-element
  18. # [00:24] <doodlewarrior> yes
  19. # [00:24] <doodlewarrior> its a feedback viewer
  20. # [00:25] <doodlewarrior> theres a header element containing info about the user who submitted the feedback
  21. # [00:25] <doodlewarrior> followed by his content
  22. # [00:25] <doodlewarrior> i think i found what i need
  23. # [00:25] <doodlewarrior> href='tel:5551212'
  24. # [00:25] <webben> there's no special markup for phone numbers specifically afaik although I would note http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.123 and http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard
  25. # [00:26] <webben> hmm, does anything implement tel: ?
  26. # [00:26] <webben> Skype?
  27. # [00:26] <tantek> in practice phone numbers are nearly always present as part of contact info, and thus should be marked up with hCard as noted.
  28. # [00:27] <doodlewarrior> mobile phones, for one
  29. # [00:28] <webben> point
  30. # [00:28] <webben> (though I think mobile phones probably try to make phone-number-like strings phoneable)
  31. # [00:28] <doodlewarrior> generally yes
  32. # [00:28] <doodlewarrior> but as long as im marking it up i might as well do it properly
  33. # [00:29] <webben> true
  34. # [00:29] <doodlewarrior> http://developer.apple.com/webapps/designingcontent.php
  35. # [00:29] <doodlewarrior> Integrate with Phone, Mail, Maps, and YouTube
  36. # [00:29] <doodlewarrior> symbian and winmo also support it
  37. # [00:30] <webben> interesting
  38. # [00:30] <doodlewarrior> thx
  39. # [00:35] * Quits: hober (n=ted@unaffiliated/hober) ("ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)")
  40. # [00:39] * Quits: Amorphous (i=jan@unaffiliated/amorphous) (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out))
  41. # [00:40] * Joins: hober (n=ted@unaffiliated/hober)
  42. # [00:47] * Hixie puts his gloves back on and begins working on html5 again
  43. # [00:47] <Hixie> right
  44. # [00:48] * Quits: hober (n=ted@unaffiliated/hober) (Remote closed the connection)
  45. # [00:48] * Quits: eric_carlson_ (n=ericc@nat/apple/x-67a2f52b6b20c446)
  46. # [00:48] <Hixie> how does navigating to a javascript: URI that returns a string affect the baseURI of the frame?
  47. # [00:50] * Hixie wishes he'd get as many replies to technical questions like this as he does to questions about the introduction section
  48. # [00:50] <Hixie> maybe we should have a system where you have to contibute technical feedback before you're allowed to have an opinion on simpler stuff
  49. # [00:50] <Hixie> that would reduce the bikeshedding...
  50. # [00:51] * Joins: Amorphous (i=jan@unaffiliated/amorphous)
  51. # [00:52] * Quits: aroben (n=aroben@unaffiliated/aroben) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  52. # [00:55] <doodlewarrior> Hixie: i'm not the most advanced js user, so take this all with salt
  53. # [00:56] <doodlewarrior> but i was under the impression that a javascript:my_function() link would be a prettier way to do onclick='my_function'
  54. # [00:57] <Hixie> i mean something like http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/uri/javascript/003.html
  55. # [00:57] <Hixie> where an iframe has its location set to a javascript: URL that returns a string
  56. # [00:58] <Hixie> opera and firefox seem to agree that the base uri is the base uri of the script that was evaluated
  57. # [00:58] <doodlewarrior> you are officially deeper into JS than i
  58. # [00:58] <Hixie> hehe
  59. # [00:58] <Hixie> no worries
  60. # [00:59] <doodlewarrior> this is a nit
  61. # [00:59] <doodlewarrior> but i was just looking at the address record
  62. # [00:59] <doodlewarrior> in the example <ADDRESS> is capped
  63. # [01:00] <doodlewarrior> isn't the current preferred styling for tags lowercase?
  64. # [01:00] <Hixie> preferred by whom?
  65. # [01:00] <doodlewarrior> fair point
  66. # [01:01] <doodlewarrior> but a general styling consensus
  67. # [01:01] <doodlewarrior> the same way that in python this_var is prefered to thisVar
  68. # [01:01] <Hixie> as far as the spec cares, it makes no difference
  69. # [01:01] <Hixie> lowercase is the case used in xhtml
  70. # [01:01] <doodlewarrior> thanks for clarifying :)
  71. # [01:01] <doodlewarrior> and for kicking ass on the new spec
  72. # [01:01] <Hixie> but other than that it doesn't really matter
  73. # [01:01] <Hixie> (uppercase is the case used by the DOM)
  74. # [01:01] <doodlewarrior> i've been writing a new app in html 5
  75. # [01:01] <Hixie> yeah?
  76. # [01:02] <doodlewarrior> yeah
  77. # [01:02] <doodlewarrior> very much in dev
  78. # [01:02] <doodlewarrior> but imaregular.com
  79. # [01:02] * Parts: billmason (n=bmason@ip8.unival.com)
  80. # [01:03] <doodlewarrior> the data- property is very much my friend
  81. # [01:03] <Hixie> cool
  82. # [01:04] <doodlewarrior> :)
  83. # [01:04] <doodlewarrior> not really relevant, just figured id share
  84. # [01:04] <Hixie> always good to hear about people liking html5 :-)
  85. # [01:05] <Hixie> especially these days, where a lot of hte feedback is from groups who have been spurned by html5 :-)
  86. # [01:05] <doodlewarrior> as a matter of fact. . .
  87. # [01:06] <doodlewarrior> regarding boolean attributes
  88. # [01:06] <doodlewarrior> it would be nice if their was a caveat in the spec that value='true' and value='false' are not valid
  89. # [01:06] <doodlewarrior> since the term boolean is defined to be true/false in so many other web languages
  90. # [01:08] <doodlewarrior> that broke my validation for a little while. it boggled my mind that value='value' was true and a complete omission was false
  91. # [01:09] <doodlewarrior> second (and final so far) feedback:
  92. # [01:09] * Quits: webben (n=webben@nat/yahoo/x-a39eb7eec7cdf737) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  93. # [01:09] <doodlewarrior> it would be really sweet if you could get the value of a radio group by name in javascript
  94. # [01:10] <Hixie> i've added a note for the boolean attributes
  95. # [01:10] <Hixie> i agree about the radio buttons
  96. # [01:10] <doodlewarrior> thanks :)
  97. # [01:11] <Hixie> i suppose we could add a method on the object returned by HTMLFormControlCollection...
  98. # [01:12] <Hixie> hm no that wouldn't always work
  99. # [01:12] <doodlewarrior> i don't know the implementation so much as the UI
  100. # [01:13] <Hixie> i suppose we could add a .groupValue attribute on HTMLInputElement
  101. # [01:13] <doodlewarrior> i would expect that as myForm.myTextField returns the value of the text field, myForm.myRadioButton would return the value of the chosen element
  102. # [01:13] <Hixie> myForm.myRadioButton returns a NodeList of all the controls with the name "myRadioButton"
  103. # [01:14] <doodlewarrior> ahhh
  104. # [01:14] <Hixie> (which might not even be the same as the list of radio buttons in that group)
  105. # [01:14] <doodlewarrior> isn't a group defined by having a similar name?
  106. # [01:15] <Hixie> yeah but "similar" for radio button grouping and for NodeList returning is defined differently
  107. # [01:15] <doodlewarrior> i see
  108. # [01:15] <doodlewarrior> so if you add groupValue, then it would be myForm.myRadio[0].groupValue?
  109. # [01:16] <Hixie> yeah
  110. # [01:16] <Hixie> which looks silly, i admit
  111. # [01:16] <doodlewarrior> it's better than nothing
  112. # [01:16] <Hixie> yeah
  113. # [01:16] <doodlewarrior> i feel for you though
  114. # [01:16] <doodlewarrior> backwards compatibility is a bitch when you're trying to standardize
  115. # [01:17] <Hixie> yeah
  116. # [01:17] <doodlewarrior> it would be really nice to iron out all of the inconsistencies, like bool='false' being invalid or a myForm.text returning something different than myForm.radio
  117. # [01:18] <Hixie> myForm.text returns a NodeList if there are multiple controls with the name text too
  118. # [01:18] <Hixie> but yeah
  119. # [01:18] <doodlewarrior> really, myForm.text ought to always return a NodeList
  120. # [01:18] <doodlewarrior> it would make the DOM slightly shittier
  121. # [01:18] <doodlewarrior> but more predictable
  122. # [01:18] <Hixie> yeah well
  123. # [01:19] <Hixie> that boat sailed decades ago
  124. # [01:19] <doodlewarrior> i know it
  125. # [01:20] <doodlewarrior> there needs to be a backwards-incompatible HTML upgrade
  126. # [01:20] <doodlewarrior> its probably to late to have it be HTML5, but maybe HTML6
  127. # [01:20] <doodlewarrior> fix all the bullshit that people are afraid to change because of backwards incompatibility
  128. # [01:21] <Hixie> we'll never be able to do that
  129. # [01:21] <Dashiva> Philip`: Would it be wrong to suggest XHTML2 here? :)
  130. # [01:21] <Hixie> the content that we need to be compatible with today isn't going to go away tomorrow
  131. # [01:21] <doodlewarrior> exactly
  132. # [01:21] <doodlewarrior> that's what DOCTYPE is for
  133. # [01:22] <Hixie> browsers aren't going to add yet another processing mode
  134. # [01:22] <Hixie> microsoft tried that with ie8
  135. # [01:22] <Hixie> and they're already regretting it as far as i can tell
  136. # [01:22] <Hixie> they haven't even shipped it yet
  137. # [01:22] <Hixie> opera, mozilla, and safari devs have all told me point blank that there's zero chance they'll ever want to do that
  138. # [01:22] <Hixie> we already have four modes
  139. # [01:22] <Hixie> which they consider to be plenty
  140. # [01:22] <Hixie> (quirks, limited quirks, no quirks, and xml)
  141. # [01:23] <doodlewarrior> wow
  142. # [01:23] <Dashiva> Before I can even ask what the fourth was...
  143. # [01:24] * Joins: codedread (n=schiller@c-24-13-214-153.hsd1.il.comcast.net)
  144. # [01:25] <doodlewarrior> so Hixie, do you imagine we'll be tiptoeing around things that are broken in HTML indefinitely?
  145. # [01:25] <Hixie> until something replaces html entirely, yes
  146. # [01:25] <Hixie> e.g. xhtml2
  147. # [01:25] <Hixie> though i doubt xhtml2 is radical enough to be the one to replace html
  148. # [01:26] <Dashiva> Something json-based
  149. # [01:26] <Dashiva> Angle brackets are out
  150. # [01:26] <doodlewarrior> so if the browsers refuse to add a processing mode to iron out the kinks in HTML
  151. # [01:27] <doodlewarrior> why would they even start from 0 on a new language entirely?
  152. # [01:27] <doodlewarrior> *ever
  153. # [01:27] <Hixie> they probably wouldn't
  154. # [01:27] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-49-3.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  155. # [01:27] <Hixie> they'll probably be replaced by some newcomer
  156. # [01:27] <Philip`> Dashiva: Suggest XHTML2 where?
  157. # [01:27] <doodlewarrior> so HTML will be broken until the entire web is replaced?
  158. # [01:27] <doodlewarrior> in your estimation
  159. # [01:27] <Dashiva> Philip`: <doodlewarrior> fix all the bullshit that people are afraid to change because of backwards incompatibility
  160. # [01:28] * Quits: codedread (n=schiller@c-24-13-214-153.hsd1.il.comcast.net) (Remote closed the connection)
  161. # [01:28] <Hixie> doodlewarrior: unless someone can work out a way to upgrade all the old unmaintained content in one go, yes, probably
  162. # [01:28] <Philip`> Dashiva: Oh, I wasn't reading the context :-p
  163. # [01:28] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-49-3.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp) (Client Quit)
  164. # [01:28] <Philip`> Dashiva: Am I an expert in making wrong suggestions, or something? :-)
  165. # [01:28] <Hixie> doodlewarrior: for some meaning of the word "broken" anyway
  166. # [01:28] <doodlewarrior> broken being things that are inconsistent or unintuitive
  167. # [01:28] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-49-3.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  168. # [01:29] <doodlewarrior> adding tags and properties is one thing
  169. # [01:29] <Hixie> doodlewarrior: do you know much about the Win32 API?
  170. # [01:29] <doodlewarrior> but overhauling them is another
  171. # [01:29] <doodlewarrior> no
  172. # [01:29] <Hixie> hmm
  173. # [01:29] <doodlewarrior> i do mostly flash
  174. # [01:29] <doodlewarrior> some django/javascript
  175. # [01:30] <Hixie> i was going to illustrate with the Win32 API, or the Unix API for that matter, that pretty much every successful long-lived platform so far has been inconsistent or unintuitive
  176. # [01:30] <doodlewarrior> flash spoils me. one language - a cleaned up version of javascript, with a built in display list
  177. # [01:30] <Hixie> successful platforms pick up cruft over the years
  178. # [01:30] <Hixie> from all the people working on them
  179. # [01:30] <Hixie> with different ideals, different motivations, different visions
  180. # [01:30] <doodlewarrior> my room does too, but i clean it when that happens ;-)
  181. # [01:30] <doodlewarrior> i certainly understand why it happens
  182. # [01:30] <Dashiva> Philip`: Wasn't it you who said something about XHTML2 being the default response whenever someone made a silly request?
  183. # [01:30] <Hixie> imagine if your room was the size of a city, and there were lots of blind people who knew where all the junk was
  184. # [01:31] <doodlewarrior> i just happen to be a UI designer/entrepreneur
  185. # [01:31] <Hixie> you couldn't clean it any more :-)
  186. # [01:31] <doodlewarrior> so i constantly think of 'how can this be fixed'
  187. # [01:31] * Hixie . o O ( ok everyone except Firefox seems to agree that the base URL is the same as the url of the frame before it was replaced )
  188. # [01:31] <Dashiva> Don't fix it, make an alternative that's so awesome everyone stops using the old way
  189. # [01:31] <Hixie> doodlewarrior: well if you can think of a way, do let us know :-)
  190. # [01:31] <Dashiva> Then you can let the old way fade into obscurity and remove it when you think no one cares anymore
  191. # [01:32] <Hixie> that's what will eventually happen, as i said above
  192. # [01:32] <doodlewarrior> Dashiva: i agree
  193. # [01:32] <doodlewarrior> i figured it could be an iteration on HTML though
  194. # [01:32] <Dashiva> But that's probably on a time scale of decades
  195. # [01:32] <doodlewarrior> a real standards mode
  196. # [01:32] <doodlewarrior> but we've established that won't happen
  197. # [01:32] <Dashiva> No one's preventing you from only using a subset of HTML5
  198. # [01:33] <Dashiva> You could form the HTML5 Samurai or somesuch :)
  199. # [01:33] <doodlewarrior> hahaha
  200. # [01:33] <doodlewarrior> ill leave that to others
  201. # [01:33] <doodlewarrior> i have other parts of the world to change :-p
  202. # [01:33] <doodlewarrior> speaking of which, i need to get back to that
  203. # [01:33] <doodlewarrior> i'll be at the google appengine meeting in palo alto tonight if anyone wants to say hi
  204. # [01:38] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@nat/google/x-61c50824599fefe2)
  205. # [01:40] * Parts: erlehmann (n=erlehman@86.59.25.121)
  206. # [01:41] * Quits: hasather (n=hasather@90-231-107-133-no62.tbcn.telia.com) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  207. # [01:45] * Joins: hallvors (n=hallvord@softbank221089079197.bbtec.net)
  208. # [01:47] <Philip`> Dashiva: I don't remember saying something about that
  209. # [01:47] <Philip`> Dashiva: though I say a lot of things that I immediately forget, so that's not saying much
  210. # [01:50] <Philip`> Would an HTML5 Samurai have to commit seppuku if they noticed themselves thinking that actually maybe XML isn't that bad after all?
  211. # [01:50] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  212. # [01:51] * Joins: nessy (n=nessy@169.222.9.224)
  213. # [01:53] <sicking> Hixie, ping
  214. # [01:54] <Hixie> hey
  215. # [01:58] <Hixie> sicking: pong
  216. # [02:00] <sicking> Hixie, would be great if you could have a looksee at the onerror thread i posted to whatwg. We're still a few weeks out from shipping, and I doubt that any comments you have are major, so there's still time to fix things. Just prefer not to get past that point
  217. # [02:01] <Hixie> sure, will do that next
  218. # [02:01] <sicking> Hixie, other than that i think we're either not implementing an API (such as location or shared workers) or follow the spec
  219. # [02:01] <Hixie> nice
  220. # [02:03] <Hixie> shepazu: was there every a decision made in the svgwg about http://www.w3.org/mid/48B26024.8090403@w3.org ?
  221. # [02:07] <MikeSmith> Philip`: the HTML5 Samurai would need to commit seppuku after their lord was executed and they had extracted revenge from all those responsible
  222. # [02:07] <jcranmer> せぷく (and yes, I'm forgetting the tsuku-thing or whatever it's called)
  223. # [02:07] * sicking needs more fonts on his system
  224. # [02:08] <Philip`> IRC needs embeddable TTF fonts
  225. # [02:08] <sicking> @font-face ftw!
  226. # [02:10] * Quits: danbri (n=danbri@ip565f6edb.direct-adsl.nl)
  227. # [02:12] * Quits: gavin_ (n=gavin@firefox/developer/gavin) (Remote closed the connection)
  228. # [02:12] * Joins: gavin_ (n=gavin@firefox/developer/gavin)
  229. # [02:15] <Hixie> sicking: you still there?
  230. # [02:16] <Hixie> sicking: re your first point, i don't understand. the onerror on the worker global scope is exactly the same as window.onerror, including the three parameters.
  231. # [02:16] <Hixie> sicking: the onerror on the Worker object is the one that involves the event.
  232. # [02:18] <Hixie> i can do your second request easily though
  233. # [02:19] <roc> Philip`: that would be easy to implement in Chatzilla!
  234. # [02:19] * Quits: doublec (n=Chris_Do@202.0.36.64) ("ChatZilla 0.9.79-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.8.0.9/2006120508]")
  235. # [02:19] * Hixie pokes sicking
  236. # [02:21] * Joins: doublec (n=chris@202.0.36.64)
  237. # [02:28] <Lachy> http://lastweekinhtml5.blogspot.com/2009/01/bonnie-prince-cheesie.html
  238. # [02:29] <sicking> Hixie, pong
  239. # [02:31] <Hixie> sicking: see above
  240. # [02:31] * Quits: roc (n=roc@202.0.36.64)
  241. # [02:32] <sicking> Hixie, oh?
  242. # [02:34] <sicking> Hixie, interface WorkerGlobalScope { ... attribute EventListener onerror;
  243. # [02:34] <sicking> Hixie, that's not right then
  244. # [02:34] <Hixie> its the same as on Window
  245. # [02:34] <sicking> Hixie, well, it's wrong there too then :)
  246. # [02:35] <sicking> Hixie, "Must be invoked whenever an error event is targeted at or bubbles through the element" is also wrong, there is no element and no event
  247. # [02:35] <Hixie> hm
  248. # [02:35] <Hixie> wonder how to fix onerror then
  249. # [02:35] <Hixie> since it can also take an EventListener
  250. # [02:35] <sicking> Hixie, JS prose is all i can think of
  251. # [02:35] <Hixie> yeah
  252. # [02:35] <sicking> Hixie, really? on window too?
  253. # [02:35] <Hixie> heycam: yt?
  254. # [02:35] <heycam> yeah..
  255. # [02:36] <sicking> Hixie, that seems very hokey
  256. # [02:36] <Hixie> heycam: so window.onerror is called both for 'error' events and with three arguments sometimes
  257. # [02:36] <Hixie> sicking: yeah... maybe we should just use the events on Worker after all
  258. # [02:36] <Hixie> workers, i mean
  259. # [02:36] <sicking> Hixie, i think we should :)
  260. # [02:36] <Hixie> heycam: any idea how to do that in the idl? just have it be an 'any' thing?
  261. # [02:36] * Parts: doodlewarrior (n=anon-irc@adsl-76-254-56-68.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  262. # [02:37] <Hixie> sicking: k, i'll do that. sorry for wasting your time trying to be compatible with Window.
  263. # [02:37] <sicking> Hixie, otherwise we have to look at how many arguments the function takes, and if it's 3 give it those, and if it's 1 give it an event
  264. # [02:37] <sicking> Hixie, heh, no problem
  265. # [02:37] <Hixie> well we still have the weirdness with window.onerror
  266. # [02:37] <heycam> so onerror is sometimes called with (Event) and sometimes with (some, thing, else) ?
  267. # [02:38] <sicking> Hixie, i don't think window.onerror is anything event like on window. At least not in gecko. Maybe in safari/opera though
  268. # [02:38] <heycam> what about introducing an interface that has an overloaded handleEvent (one that takes Event, like EventListener, and one for the 3-arg version)?
  269. # [02:38] <Hixie> heycam: yeah
  270. # [02:38] <Hixie> heycam: oh, could do that, yeah
  271. # [02:38] <Hixie> heycam: ok
  272. # [02:38] <Hixie> heycam: thanks
  273. # [02:38] <Hixie> maybe make it inherit from EventListener
  274. # [02:38] <Hixie> cool
  275. # [02:39] <Hixie> thanks
  276. # [02:39] <heycam> Hixie, I'll have to make sure that overloading like that works when you assign a plain Function
  277. # [02:39] <Hixie> k
  278. # [02:39] <heycam> but, assume for now it does
  279. # [02:39] <Hixie> thanks
  280. # [02:39] <heycam> and i'll check on it later at some point
  281. # [02:39] <sicking> do we need this stuff at all? Even for window though?
  282. # [02:40] * sicking tries in opera
  283. # [02:41] <heycam> Hixie, pointer to where in the spec this three-argument thing is?
  284. # [02:42] <Hixie> heycam: search for "runtime error"
  285. # [02:42] <Hixie> or "runtime script errors"
  286. # [02:44] <heycam> got it
  287. # [02:47] <Hixie> sicking: http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3C!DOCTYPE%20html%3E%0A%3Cscript%3E%0Awindow.onerror%20%3D%20function%20%28a%2Cb%2Cc%29%20{%0A%20w%28%27onerror%3A%27%20%2B%20a%20%2B%20%27%3B%27%20%2B%20b%20%2B%20%27%3B%27%20%2B%20c%29%3B%0A}%3B%0A%3C%2Fscript%3E%0A%3Cscript%3E-%3C%2Fscript%3E%0A%3Cscript%3E%0A%20var%20x%20%3D%20document.createEvent%28%27Event%27%29%3B%0A%20x.initEvent%28%27error%27%2C%20false%2C%20false%29%3B%0A%20window.dispatchE
  288. # [02:47] * sicking also had an 'onerror = function(a, b, c)'
  289. # [02:47] <sicking> Hixie, i think that got cut off :(
  290. # [02:48] <Hixie> http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/ click "download"
  291. # [02:48] <Hixie> the results are in the log at the bottom
  292. # [02:48] <sicking> Hixie, no, the url you pasted me literally ends with ".dispatchE" on this side
  293. # [02:49] <sicking> possibly chatzilla or irc server cutting it off
  294. # [02:49] <gavin> server, but that doesn't change his followup instructions :)
  295. # [02:49] <Hixie> sicking: if you go to that url and click download, you'll see what i tried to paste
  296. # [02:50] <sicking> Hixie, oh, neat
  297. # [02:51] <Hixie> haven't tested IE yet
  298. # [02:51] <Hixie> Firefox does what I described; Webkit doesn't seem to have an onerror at all, and Opera only seems to have a the event handler.
  299. # [02:51] <Hixie> sicking: workers spec updated with new onerror stuff
  300. # [02:52] * sicking ponders
  301. # [02:53] <Hixie> ok IE does the 3-argument form
  302. # [02:53] <Hixie> but they don't support DOM Events
  303. # [02:53] <Hixie> so i can't test the other one
  304. # [02:54] <sicking> right
  305. # [02:55] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@17.203.15.177)
  306. # [02:55] <Hixie> actually the webkit problem seems to be lack of dispatchEvent() support on Window
  307. # [02:55] <Hixie> dunno what that's about
  308. # [02:56] <sicking> Hixie, however you can't set onerror to an EventListener
  309. # [02:56] <sicking> Hixie, so spec is still not correct
  310. # [02:56] <sicking> err
  311. # [02:56] <sicking> nevermind
  312. # [02:57] <sicking> Hixie, right, you can't set onerror to an EventListener
  313. # [02:58] <Hixie> ?
  314. # [02:58] <sicking> Hixie, how do i do the upload magic?
  315. # [02:58] * Quits: nessy (n=nessy@169.222.9.224) ("Leaving")
  316. # [02:58] <Hixie> click "upload"
  317. # [02:58] <Hixie> it'll replace whatever's in the clipboard
  318. # [02:59] <sicking> done
  319. # [02:59] <Hixie> i don't understand what you are trying to show
  320. # [02:59] <sicking> Hixie, if I try to set onerror to an eventhandler, i would have expected to receive 2 events
  321. # [02:59] <sicking> Hixie, but i receive a string and an event
  322. # [03:00] <sicking> so attribute EventListener onerror; is not correct
  323. # [03:00] <sicking> basically onerror is a JS function
  324. # [03:00] <Hixie> why would you expect that?
  325. # [03:00] <Hixie> a JS function always implements any Callback interface
  326. # [03:01] <Hixie> the number of parameters you put in the signature has no effect
  327. # [03:01] <sicking> right
  328. # [03:01] <sicking> ok, so simplified example
  329. # [03:02] <sicking> given the definition in the idl, i would have expected the onerror function to receive a Event object
  330. # [03:03] <sicking> but it receives a string
  331. # [03:03] <Hixie> the runtime script errors section explicitly says to just call with three arguments
  332. # [03:03] <Hixie> there is no event a this point
  333. # [03:03] <sicking> but then it's not an EventListener
  334. # [03:03] <Hixie> it's a totally unrelated callback
  335. # [03:03] <Hixie> indeed
  336. # [03:03] <Hixie> it's an EventListenerOrErrorHandler
  337. # [03:03] <Hixie> which inherits from EventListener and also has a handleEvent() overloaded with three arguments
  338. # [03:04] <sicking> it's never an EventListener
  339. # [03:04] <sicking> So just call it ErrorHandlerCallback or some such
  340. # [03:04] <Hixie> it has to be an EventListener otherwise it wouldn't work with event dispatch
  341. # [03:04] <sicking> hmm.. actually, that's not true either i guess
  342. # [03:05] <sicking> right
  343. # [03:05] <sicking> actually
  344. # [03:05] * sicking tries something else
  345. # [03:06] <sicking> ok, uploaded new example
  346. # [03:07] <sicking> if that was an EventListenerOrErrorHandler i would have expected the example to work
  347. # [03:07] <sicking> but it's really just a JS function, that we sometimes call with one parameter, and sometimes with 3
  348. # [03:07] <Hixie> the EventListenerOrErrorHandler interface is marked with [Callback=FunctionOnly]
  349. # [03:08] <Hixie> (actually i think i'll just call it ErrorHandler, EventListenerOrErrorHandler is too long)
  350. # [03:08] <sicking> ugh, that's really wierd
  351. # [03:08] * Hixie points at the topic
  352. # [03:08] <sicking> an interface with two functions, but that can't be implemented by an object?
  353. # [03:08] <Hixie> i didn't make this up, i'm just describing what happens
  354. # [03:09] <sicking> well, not really
  355. # [03:09] <sicking> you're describing something that looks mostly the same
  356. # [03:09] <sicking> what it really is is just a plain JS function
  357. # [03:09] <Hixie> how is it distinguishable?
  358. # [03:09] <Hixie> it's not _just_ a plain JS function, since it works with DOM Events
  359. # [03:09] <sicking> it's possibly not, but yours is more convoluted
  360. # [03:10] <Hixie> and that wouldn't be compatible with other languages, either
  361. # [03:10] <sicking> there is an eventhandler that calls into the JS function
  362. # [03:10] <Hixie> that's just as convoluted
  363. # [03:10] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-24-130-144-56.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  364. # [03:11] <Hixie> except it only works in JS
  365. # [03:11] <Hixie> actually what i'm describing is pretty terse in the spec
  366. # [03:11] <Hixie> i'm just putting the finishing touches on it
  367. # [03:12] <sicking> it's way uglier than a simple onerror EventListener though
  368. # [03:12] <sicking> but i agree we'll have to do something like it for the window object
  369. # [03:14] * Joins: dglazkov_ (n=dglazkov@72.14.224.1)
  370. # [03:14] <sicking> btw, is this updated in a draft somewhere? still looks like |attribute EventListener onerror| when i reload the webapps draft
  371. # [03:18] <Hixie> why would that change?
  372. # [03:18] <Hixie> i was only going to change the HTML5 draft
  373. # [03:18] <Hixie> though i just noticed another problem
  374. # [03:18] <sicking> because it's an EventListenerOrErrorHandler or ErrorHandler, no?
  375. # [03:18] <Hixie> not on the workers...?
  376. # [03:19] <Hixie> the whole point of the earlier change was to get rid of the error handler stuff
  377. # [03:19] <Hixie> wasn't that what you wanted?
  378. # [03:19] <Hixie> i'm confused
  379. # [03:19] <sicking> sorry, i said webapps, meant html5
  380. # [03:19] <Hixie> oh
  381. # [03:19] <sicking> i didn't know the whatwg spec was called that too :)
  382. # [03:20] <Hixie> there are two specs. workers and html5. "webapps" and "whatwg" are working groups not specs :-P
  383. # [03:20] <sicking> ah :)
  384. # [03:20] <sicking> i guess this does make sense for the window object, though i'm not really sure if we'd be able to implement it that way
  385. # [03:20] <Hixie> html5 in the whatwg used to be called Web Apps 1.0, but we renabed it before the webapps wg started, iirc
  386. # [03:20] <Hixie> the problem i just noticed is that actually none of the so-called EventListener objects are EventListeners really
  387. # [03:20] <sicking> ok
  388. # [03:21] <Hixie> they're all functions
  389. # [03:21] <Hixie> that then get wrapped and the wrapper is addEventListener'ed implicitly
  390. # [03:21] <Hixie> the wrapper does things like handle return values
  391. # [03:21] <Hixie> which EventListeners don't normally have
  392. # [03:21] <sicking> yep
  393. # [03:22] <Hixie> so i think actually what i need to do (contrary to what heycam and i just discussed) is just change EventListener to something else in every IDL block
  394. # [03:22] <Hixie> in html5
  395. # [03:22] <Hixie> (and maybe workers)
  396. # [03:22] <sicking> hmm.. wait a minute
  397. # [03:22] * Hixie waits
  398. # [03:22] <sicking> this doesn't happen for things other than onerror, no?
  399. # [03:22] <Hixie> what is "this"?
  400. # [03:23] <sicking> the dealing with return values and such
  401. # [03:23] <sicking> oh, wait
  402. # [03:23] <sicking> that's not true either
  403. # [03:23] <Hixie> it happens for everything
  404. # [03:23] <sicking> i guess that happens spottily
  405. # [03:23] <sicking> at least in gecko
  406. # [03:23] <Hixie> it's different for onbeforeunload, onmouseover, and onerror
  407. # [03:23] <Hixie> but the others all support return false; to cancel
  408. # [03:24] <sicking> we don't actually support that in a bunch of places
  409. # [03:25] <sicking> but all the places I can think of only fires non-cancelable events
  410. # [03:25] <Hixie> well some events can't be canceled
  411. # [03:25] <sicking> right
  412. # [03:25] <Hixie> my plan is to unify all event handling across all elements so that all elements and Window have the same set of event handler attributes
  413. # [03:26] <Hixie> thus making it all much simpler to implement
  414. # [03:26] <Hixie> no special cases (other than the three i just mentioned)
  415. # [03:26] <sicking> don't think that'll work on Window where you have magic undefined-by-default things
  416. # [03:27] <Hixie> well that might be a fourth exception
  417. # [03:29] <Hixie> heycam: yeah don't worry about the earlier issue, i'll deal with it differently
  418. # [03:31] <Hixie> going for dinner
  419. # [03:34] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-24-130-144-56.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  420. # [03:41] * dglazkov_ is now known as dglazkov
  421. # [03:43] * Quits: KevinMarks (n=KevinMar@nat/google/x-55e4ca6440e9a31e) ("The computer fell asleep")
  422. # [03:47] * Quits: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.227.1)
  423. # [03:57] * Quits: xcombelle (n=chatzill@AToulouse-158-1-125-171.w90-55.abo.wanadoo.fr) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  424. # [03:58] * Joins: xcombelle (n=chatzill@AToulouse-158-1-125-171.w90-55.abo.wanadoo.fr)
  425. # [04:14] * Quits: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  426. # [04:15] <heycam> Hixie, ok
  427. # [04:17] * Joins: eric_carlson (n=ericc@adsl-67-112-12-110.dsl.anhm01.pacbell.net)
  428. # [04:27] * Joins: dimich (n=dimich@c-98-203-230-54.hsd1.wa.comcast.net)
  429. # [04:32] <hallvors> sicking: Opera doesn't support window.onerror , I guess you figured that out by testing.
  430. # [04:33] <sicking> hallvors, that's about as far as I got yeah :)
  431. # [04:42] * Joins: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.224.1)
  432. # [04:50] * Quits: heycam (n=cam@clm-laptop.infotech.monash.edu.au) ("bye")
  433. # [05:24] * Quits: dolske (n=dolske@firefox/developer/dolske)
  434. # [05:24] * Joins: hober (n=ted@unaffiliated/hober)
  435. # [05:25] * Joins: dolske (n=dolske@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  436. # [05:27] * Quits: dimich (n=dimich@c-98-203-230-54.hsd1.wa.comcast.net)
  437. # [05:33] * Quits: dbaron (n=dbaron@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com) ("8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.")
  438. # [05:44] * Joins: roc (n=roc@222-152-171-232.jetstream.xtra.co.nz)
  439. # [05:48] * Quits: dolske (n=dolske@firefox/developer/dolske)
  440. # [05:50] * Joins: harig (n=opera@219.64.74.75)
  441. # [05:51] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@72.14.224.1)
  442. # [05:58] <MikeSmith> hendry: you around?
  443. # [06:05] * Joins: Papus (n=Papus@186.15.23.131)
  444. # [06:05] <Papus> hello ?
  445. # [06:08] * Quits: doublec (n=chris@202.0.36.64) ("Leaving")
  446. # [06:10] * Joins: dolske (n=dolske@c-76-103-41-195.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  447. # [06:13] <Papus> hi ?
  448. # [06:13] <Papus> dolske
  449. # [06:17] <dolske> yes?
  450. # [06:18] * Joins: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@c83-252-203-80.bredband.comhem.se)
  451. # [06:26] * Quits: xydyx (n=hdh@58.187.20.140) (Remote closed the connection)
  452. # [06:34] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-99-137-128-33.dsl.snfc21.sbcglobal.net)
  453. # [06:35] * Quits: Papus (n=Papus@186.15.23.131) ("Leaving")
  454. # [06:57] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@c-69-181-81-233.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  455. # [07:01] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@c-69-181-81-233.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) (Client Quit)
  456. # [07:14] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@124-168-33-122.dyn.iinet.net.au)
  457. # [07:22] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-49-3.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp) ("Tomorrow to fresh woods, and pastures new.")
  458. # [07:23] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-147-127.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  459. # [07:28] * Joins: starjive (i=beos@213-66-217-32-no30.tbcn.telia.com)
  460. # [07:33] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-99-137-128-33.dsl.snfc21.sbcglobal.net)
  461. # [07:35] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@c-98-234-51-190.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  462. # [07:46] * Quits: jwalden (n=waldo@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com) ("ChatZilla 0.9.82.1-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.8.0.9/2006120508]")
  463. # [07:46] * Joins: maikmerten (n=merten@ls5dhcp195.cs.uni-dortmund.de)
  464. # [07:47] * Parts: hallvors (n=hallvord@softbank221089079197.bbtec.net)
  465. # [07:49] * Joins: dimich (n=dimich@c-98-203-230-54.hsd1.wa.comcast.net)
  466. # [07:53] * Joins: ap (n=ap@195.239.126.10)
  467. # [07:54] * Joins: pesla (n=retep@procurios.xs4all.nl)
  468. # [07:55] * Quits: dimich (n=dimich@c-98-203-230-54.hsd1.wa.comcast.net)
  469. # [07:56] * Joins: KevinMarks (n=KevinMar@c-71-202-163-211.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  470. # [08:35] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@92.40.201.202.sub.mbb.three.co.uk)
  471. # [08:37] * Quits: gavin_ (n=gavin@firefox/developer/gavin) (Remote closed the connection)
  472. # [08:37] * Joins: gavin_ (n=gavin@firefox/developer/gavin)
  473. # [08:40] * Joins: Maurice (n=ano@a80-101-46-164.adsl.xs4all.nl)
  474. # [08:45] * Quits: dbaron (n=dbaron@c-98-234-51-190.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) ("8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.")
  475. # [08:51] * Joins: pauld_ (n=pauld@92.40.200.23.sub.mbb.three.co.uk)
  476. # [08:54] * Quits: pauld_ (n=pauld@92.40.200.23.sub.mbb.three.co.uk) (Client Quit)
  477. # [09:05] <ap> Hixie: ayt? for some questions about offline cache
  478. # [09:06] <Hixie> here
  479. # [09:06] <ap> Hixie: did you get my e-mail about updating obsolete caches yesterday? I was having some network troubles, so I'm not sure if it got through
  480. # [09:07] <Hixie> yeah, i got it. added it to my pile, since iirc there was nothing urgent. i can look it up if you have a question you need a reply on right away
  481. # [09:08] <Hixie> i agree that the text is confusing and will make it better at some point
  482. # [09:08] <ap> Hixie: I'm discussing this with dcamp now, so it could help to have the spec updated
  483. # [09:08] <ap> anyway, question #2
  484. # [09:09] <Hixie> i'll add it to my list for this week, ping me friday if i still haven't done anything
  485. # [09:09] <ap> Hixie: it's not quite clear to me how documents for new master resources are associated with caches
  486. # [09:10] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@92.40.201.202.sub.mbb.three.co.uk) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  487. # [09:10] <ap> Hixie: say, we're opening a new frame with a document that has a manifest URL, and there is already a cache for this URL, but the master resource is not in cache
  488. # [09:10] <ap> Hixie: when will the document be associated to the cache?
  489. # [09:11] <ap> Hixie: it looks like it will not be until reload with the current spec, which is weird
  490. # [09:11] <ap> Hixie: the document will be flagged as a candidate, but candidates are only associated when an initial cache attempt finishes
  491. # [09:12] <Hixie> "Otherwise, invoke the application cache update process for the given manifest URL, with the browsing context being navigated, and with the Document as the new master resource."
  492. # [09:12] * Joins: danbri (n=danbri@ip565f6edb.direct-adsl.nl)
  493. # [09:12] <Hixie> step 2 of the relevant variant of the application cache selection algorithm
  494. # [09:12] <ap> Hixie: yes, that will mark the document as candidate in step 1.3 of update process
  495. # [09:13] <ap> Hixie: but nothing more than that afaict
  496. # [09:13] <Hixie> the sentence that says that, in section 1.3, says what the effect is
  497. # [09:14] <Hixie> and links straight to the relevant step
  498. # [09:14] <Hixie> step 23
  499. # [09:14] <Hixie> "Associate any Document objects that were flagged as candidates for this manifest URL's caches with cache."
  500. # [09:14] <ap> Hixie: precisely, and step 23 starts with "If this is a cache attempt, then"
  501. # [09:14] <Hixie> oh
  502. # [09:15] <Hixie> yeah i'm just being slow today sorry!
  503. # [09:15] <ap> Hixie: besides, step 23 is never reached for upgrade attempts
  504. # [09:15] <Hixie> it isn't1?
  505. # [09:15] <Hixie> s/1//
  506. # [09:16] <Hixie> i should move that sentence to just before step 23 as far as i can tell
  507. # [09:16] <Hixie> so it happens in both cases
  508. # [09:16] <ap> Hixie: step 6 says "If this is an upgrade attempt and the newly downloaded manifest is byte-for-byte identical to the manifest found in cache" ... "Abort the update process"
  509. # [09:16] <ap> Hixie: long before step 23 :)
  510. # [09:16] <Hixie> oh, yeah, i didn't think of that case
  511. # [09:17] <Hixie> oh, hey, step 6 even waits for all these downloads to finish
  512. # [09:17] <Hixie> i just need to make sure step 23's sentence is in that list too
  513. # [09:18] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  514. # [09:18] <Hixie> can you send a mail or file a bug saying to make that sentence in step 23 happen before step 23 for upgrad attempts too, and to say to make it happen in step 6 after waiting also?
  515. # [09:18] <ap> Hixie: I'm also not sure about error and obsolete cases - will the candidate be associated with its cache in that case?
  516. # [09:19] <Hixie> in the obsolete case, a new cache will be created from scratch
  517. # [09:19] <Hixie> obsolete caches are never consulted again
  518. # [09:19] <Hixie> in the error case, the result should be no change to anything
  519. # [09:19] <ap> Hixie: I mean, if the cache is found out to be obsolete when there is a candidate
  520. # [09:20] <Hixie> i guess it matters if the author then xhr's the document?
  521. # [09:20] <ap> Hixie: we're opening a new frame, it master resource is not in cache, and it has a manifest attribute, and the manifest turns out to be 404
  522. # [09:20] <ap> Hixie: as it works in WebKit now, the document will be associated to the obsolete cache, and it will get an "obsolete" event
  523. # [09:21] <Hixie> yeah the only way that can actually matter is if the document like xhr's itself or some such right
  524. # [09:21] <Hixie> i mean, whether the document is actually added to the cache or not
  525. # [09:21] <Hixie> i think if we mark it obsolete we should also disable the network blocking
  526. # [09:21] <Hixie> and unassociate the cache
  527. # [09:21] <ap> Hixie: I don't see how this is related to xhr
  528. # [09:21] <ap> Hixie: hmm
  529. # [09:21] <Hixie> xhr would be the only way to get a copy of the document again
  530. # [09:22] <Hixie> without xhr, or <img> or some such, it doesn't matter if you add the doc to the cache or not
  531. # [09:22] <ap> Hixie: yes, I was thinking about being associated to the cache for the purposes of blocking other loads, not just the master resource
  532. # [09:23] <ap> Hixie: but indeed, it isn't quite clear when master resources are added to the cache either
  533. # [09:24] <Hixie> i think the obsolete case should be fixed by just disassociating from the cache
  534. # [09:24] <Hixie> so it works as if there hadn't been one
  535. # [09:24] <Hixie> if there's a new master doc
  536. # [09:25] <Hixie> (if it came from the cache, that's a different matter)
  537. # [09:27] <Hixie> does that make sense?
  538. # [09:27] <ap> Hixie: currently, WebKit associates the new master resource to an existing cache earlier, before invoking the update process
  539. # [09:27] <Hixie> well so long as you take it out again in case of error, and so long as you don't block network loads until it's done, that's fine
  540. # [09:27] <ap> Hixie: I think that it is reasonable behavior - and what you said is reasonable, too
  541. # [09:28] <ap> Hixie: what's the problem with not taking it out in case of error, and starting blocking immediately?
  542. # [09:29] <ap> Hixie: our behavior just makes new master resources for existing caches behave as if they were already in cache
  543. # [09:29] <Hixie> both of those would be detectably different behavior than strict implementations of the spec
  544. # [09:29] <ap> Hixie: so, opening them for the first time works exactly like re-opening
  545. # [09:29] <Hixie> oh the reason why the spec does it this way is to avoid race conditions
  546. # [09:30] <Hixie> and for consistency between the case of going to a page for the first time whether or not it already has a manifest marked
  547. # [09:30] <Hixie> i guess if there's already a cache the consistency case isn't that important
  548. # [09:31] <ap> Hixie: right - if there is already a cache, it's more consistent to associate it right away, even if te master resource wasn't loaded from it
  549. # [09:31] <Hixie> makes sense
  550. # [09:31] <Hixie> makes the spec simpelr too
  551. # [09:36] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  552. # [09:42] * Joins: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@pat-tdc.opera.com)
  553. # [09:48] * hsivonen wishes C++ compilers figured out inlining on their own...
  554. # [09:51] <Philip`> They usually do
  555. # [09:58] * Joins: svl_ (n=chatzill@a194-109-2-86.dmn.xs4all.nl)
  556. # [10:00] <Hixie> ap: please file a bug or send mail about the above so i don't forget to do it
  557. # [10:01] <ap> Hixie: I sent an e-mail a few minutes ago
  558. # [10:01] <Hixie> ok cool thanks
  559. # [10:11] <Hixie> sicking: ok i checked in my fix for event handler attributes. i think it's in line with reality.
  560. # [10:13] <Hixie> ok my next task is working out how to handle the crazy wackiness around window.onload/document.onload/<body onload=""> and the like (onhashchange, onstorage, etc)
  561. # [10:16] * Joins: aaronlev (n=chatzill@f051077041.adsl.alicedsl.de)
  562. # [10:24] * Quits: aaronlev (n=chatzill@f051077041.adsl.alicedsl.de) ("ChatZilla 0.9.84 [Firefox 3.1b3pre/20090119034558]")
  563. # [10:29] * Joins: ROBOd (n=robod@89.122.216.38)
  564. # [10:34] * Joins: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt)
  565. # [10:36] * Joins: othree_ (n=othree@admin39.ct.ntust.edu.tw)
  566. # [10:37] * Quits: othree (n=othree@admin39.ct.ntust.edu.tw) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  567. # [10:45] <annevk> are we getting a new EventListener thingie for onX attributes?
  568. # [10:46] <annevk> that will affect XMLHttpRequest
  569. # [10:46] <Hixie> to match reality
  570. # [10:46] <annevk> k
  571. # [10:49] <annevk> jezus christ, to pay for a NOK 280 (= EUR 30) transaction they charged me EUR 20
  572. # [10:49] * Quits: othree_ (n=othree@admin39.ct.ntust.edu.tw) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  573. # [10:51] <annevk> Problem: Want to reuse format consumed by browsers. Solution: Change the format to be XML-like.
  574. # [10:51] * Joins: aaronlev (n=chatzill@f051077041.adsl.alicedsl.de)
  575. # [10:51] <annevk> it's not clear to me how some TAG members make that jump
  576. # [10:52] <hsivonen> annevk: huh? where's that from?
  577. # [10:52] <annevk> though admittedly, before HTML5 it is somewhat sensible as HTML was not predictable
  578. # [10:52] <annevk> hsivonen, it's not a literal quote
  579. # [10:52] <jgraham> annevk: You have to love scandinavia, right :)
  580. # [10:52] <annevk> it seems to be gist of http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jan/0069.html
  581. # [10:53] <annevk> jgraham, I suppose, I think my bank charged EUR 5 and the bank charged EUR 15 and I had to pay for both
  582. # [10:54] <Hixie> annevk: before html5, it would have been as right (or wrong) as now, except that an additional solution would have existed: "write html5" :-P
  583. # [10:54] <annevk> jgraham, I suppose they are flat fees which become ridiculous when the amount of money is small
  584. # [10:54] <annevk> Hixie, :)
  585. # [10:55] <Hixie> annevk: a flat fee costs the same regardless of how much you're paying, so if it's ridiculous for one amount, it's ridiculous for another too.
  586. # [10:55] <annevk> the gist of, even
  587. # [10:56] <annevk> Hixie, I just mean that If I were to pay EUR 2000, EUR 20 is fine
  588. # [10:56] <annevk> Hixie, or at least neglicable
  589. # [10:56] <Hixie> it's 20 EUR
  590. # [10:56] <Hixie> it the same as if you're paying EUR 10
  591. # [10:56] <jgraham> annevk: According to economists you are wrong
  592. # [10:56] <Hixie> still 20 EUR
  593. # [10:58] <jgraham> You should apparently always think about the absolute amount of money. It's just that most people are more disappointed if they pay $6 for something that they could have got for $1 rtahn if the numbers are $1E6, $1E6+5
  594. # [10:58] <annevk> jgraham, I just realized that, as I had read that link Hixie posted some time ago, but I suppose I think in relative amounts of money :)
  595. # [10:59] <Philip`> annevk: Converting between HTML and XML in the toolchain doesn't seem like a good solution in that situation, since the conversion is lossy (in both directions) - e.g. you can't write a web crawler that parses HTML then stores it in an XML database to do a load of querying on the data, because the translation will destroy some of the data
  596. # [10:59] <jgraham> annevk: That's a problem called "being human" which economists have difficulty with
  597. # [10:59] <jgraham> Philip`: The conclusion seems to be that storing things in an XML datatbase is not a good idea
  598. # [11:00] <jgraham> (at least things that may not be XML)
  599. # [11:00] <annevk> Philip`, I never said that to convert anything, you can use XML on the infoset level...
  600. # [11:01] <annevk> s/that//
  601. # [11:02] <Philip`> annevk: I would imagine any XML toolchain is very likely to serialise to XML at some point, so you've got to restrict yourself to well-formed documents
  602. # [11:03] <annevk> <!doctype html><title>test</title><p>test can still be used within an XML toolchain
  603. # [11:03] <Hixie> can't we just assume that the html5 documents will be conforming? non-conforming html documents surely aren't something we want to deal with
  604. # [11:03] * Hixie ducks
  605. # [11:03] <gsnedders> Hixie: Can we remove section 8.2 then?
  606. # [11:03] <Philip`> jgraham: Rather, the conclusion is that there is a benefit if the document format is compatible with the tools you use (without needing ugly munging in the middle), so it'd be good if all were HTML or all were XML or all were anything else
  607. # [11:04] <Philip`> annevk: That's why I said "e.g. you can't write a web crawler ...", because there are cases where you have no control over the input HTML but you want to make use of useful tools that already exist (and that today are mostly designed for XML)
  608. # [11:05] <annevk> the web crawler based on an HTML parser would surely be far more successful than one based on an XML parser
  609. # [11:05] <annevk> s/the/a/
  610. # [11:06] <Philip`> annevk: That's why I said "e.g. you can't write a web crawler that parses HTML then stores it in an XML database to do a load of querying on the data"
  611. # [11:07] <jgraham> Philip`: OK, let's be clearer. "Storing web pages from the public internet in an XM database is not a good idea".
  612. # [11:07] <jgraham> *XML
  613. # [11:07] <Hixie> i wonder if there's a correlation between how closely search engines' parsers conform to html5 and how much market share the search engine has
  614. # [11:07] <annevk> and doesn't HTML5 define a way to handle those layer problems?
  615. # [11:07] * Quits: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@c83-252-203-80.bredband.comhem.se)
  616. # [11:07] <hsivonen> Hixie: but which way does the causation go? :-)
  617. # [11:08] <Philip`> annevk: because you've got to use an HTML parser, but then there are other useful tools you'd like to use, and you don't want to have to deal with weird artifacts introduced by the HTML-to-well-formed-XML translation process
  618. # [11:08] <Hixie> hsivonen: that's the next question :-)
  619. # [11:08] <annevk> obviously one based on an XML parser will be superior, because it's much faster
  620. # [11:08] <jgraham> Specifically I don't understand why "the value of the layering is not primarily for the browsing-only
  621. # [11:08] <jgraham> scenario. It's to give you the opportunity of using HTML documents with a
  622. # [11:08] <jgraham> "
  623. # [11:08] <jgraham> lot of additional tools and in additional scenarios
  624. # [11:08] <jgraham> Because it doesn't actually do that.
  625. # [11:09] <jgraham> s/why/why he thinks/
  626. # [11:10] <annevk> Philip`, why is http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/tree-construction.html#coercing-an-html-dom-into-an-infoset not a solution?
  627. # [11:10] <Philip`> jgraham: As I read it, Noah was describing an advantage of XHTML and of its use of layering on XML, which is that such a language would give you that opportunity (in the hypothetical case that people used that language)
  628. # [11:11] <Philip`> jgraham: and it does indeed seem to be an advantage of XHTML, even if it's overshadowed by the fact that nobody uses XHTML
  629. # [11:11] <Hixie> xhtml has many advantages
  630. # [11:11] <jgraham> Philip`: I guess that could be true. But as you say, since no one uses XHTML it's really quite irrelevant
  631. # [11:12] <jgraham> And therefore not worthwhile to discuss in a way that suggests it is a real world consideration
  632. # [11:12] <Philip`> annevk: If I write something that e.g. downloads a load of random pages and then tries to count the most common attributes, using some XML database that provides nice easy-to-use efficient querying features, I don't want to be told that there's lots of attributes named "xlinkU0003Ahref" because that's just an artifact of the translation process
  633. # [11:13] <annevk> so you translate back when you display
  634. # [11:13] <Philip`> annevk: Also it might irreversibly drop 'xmlns' attributes, so it's impossible to translate the results back accurately
  635. # [11:15] <annevk> yeah ok, so you cannot use an XML toolchain for all use cases
  636. # [11:15] <Philip`> The problems aren't insurmountable, they're just a bit of a pain and it'd be nicer if they weren't problems
  637. # [11:15] <annevk> but for the case Noah was talking about, switching to using XHTML as a storage format for Web pages, it doesn't seem worth the effort
  638. # [11:15] <Hixie> jgraham: the tag is not about real world considerations, it's about architecture. (And I don't mean that sarcastically -- the whole point of the TAG is to discuss how things should be designed, not to deal with the realities of how things got screwed up.)
  639. # [11:15] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  640. # [11:16] * Philip` aways
  641. # [11:17] <jgraham> Hixie: "How things should be designed" does not seem to be a particularly useful thing to discusss when there are insurmountable problems that prevent them ever from actually being designed in that way (not to mention the fact that it tends to lead to overengineerining, poor usability considerations, etc.)
  642. # [11:18] <annevk> oh nice, twitter.com uses tables for layout
  643. # [11:19] <Hixie> i wasn't making value judgements about whether or not the work of the tag was useful, i was just explaining that your statement was a non-sequitur for the tag.
  644. # [11:21] <Philip`> annevk: I think I forgot whether I was trying to argue for any particular point, but I guess the point was that it seems better to say "HTML not being XML is indeed a problem because it makes it hard to interoperate with XML tools, but it's an unfixable problem so we'll have to reduce its impact and live with it" rather than saying "that's not a problem at all, just stick an HTML parser on your toolchain"
  645. # [11:22] <Philip`> but anyway I'm away :-)
  646. # [11:27] <annevk> I think in practice those sentences are near identical (i.e. both are true), but you're away now...
  647. # [11:33] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com)
  648. # [11:55] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@217.41.229.235)
  649. # [12:04] * Quits: pergj (n=pergj@home.kvaleberg.no) ("Ex-Chat")
  650. # [12:07] * Joins: pergj (n=pergj@home.kvaleberg.no)
  651. # [12:17] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@217.41.229.235)
  652. # [12:18] * Quits: pergj (n=pergj@home.kvaleberg.no) (Remote closed the connection)
  653. # [12:19] * Joins: myakura (n=myakura@p3020-ipbf505marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp)
  654. # [12:21] * Joins: pergj (n=pergj@home.kvaleberg.no)
  655. # [12:30] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@217.41.229.235)
  656. # [12:34] <annevk> Hixie, shouldn't the specification define what happens when the hyperlink cannot be parsed?
  657. # [12:34] <Hixie> ?
  658. # [12:34] <annevk> e.g. <a href="http://example,org/">test</a>
  659. # [12:35] <annevk> what happens when you "follow a hyperlink" like that
  660. # [12:37] <Hixie> it's defined
  661. # [12:37] <Hixie> navigation algorithm, step 4.
  662. # [12:38] <annevk> ah, thanks
  663. # [12:39] <annevk> is it correct that Firefox not treating <a href="http://a b/">test</a> as a hyperlink is considered a bug?
  664. # [12:39] <Hixie> per the current spec, yes.
  665. # [12:40] <jgraham> Hixie: That doesn't seem quite right because the TAG often have an opinion on how real things are defined and try to apply principles that they derived from abstract considerations to those situations
  666. # [12:41] <Hixie> jgraham: ah well if the discussion was about an application of their principles to a real-world situation, then clearly real-world concerns must also be considered.
  667. # [12:50] <Hixie> right
  668. # [12:50] <Hixie> bet time
  669. # [12:50] <Hixie> nn
  670. # [12:50] <annevk> nn
  671. # [12:51] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@217.41.229.235)
  672. # [12:52] * annevk finds http://flickr.com/photos/rohaan03/2311303100/
  673. # [12:54] <annevk> hmm, is the <body onload> trick that simple?
  674. # [12:55] <hsivonen> annevk: on the face of it, it does look rather questionable
  675. # [12:56] <annevk> especially as some UAs also support document.onload and such
  676. # [13:00] <hsivonen> "Cookies shouldn't used as a means to identify say distinct shopping carts between users (though I'm sure it's done)"
  677. # [13:00] <hsivonen> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jan/0022.html
  678. # [13:00] <hsivonen> good luck with that
  679. # [13:00] <annevk> sessionStorage :)
  680. # [13:01] <annevk> hmm, guess I need to study all that event handler attribute text again to see what to do about XMLHttpRequest...
  681. # [13:02] <annevk> it would actually be good if WebIDL defined a binding for it, e.g. EventHandlerAttribute so most of the wording can be moved elsewhere and shared accross specs
  682. # [13:03] <annevk> heycam, ^^
  683. # [13:13] <jgraham> annevk: It seems like seesionStorage would be just as bad from that point of view
  684. # [13:15] <Philip`> The web doesn't need architecturally impure constructs like shopping carts anyway
  685. # [13:21] <Philip`> "Cookies shouldn't used as a means to identify say distinct shopping carts between users (though I'm sure it's done) - different resources should be blessed with different URI names." doesn't sound so helpful when I want the URI http://www.amazon.co.uk/ to show me my own shopping cart
  686. # [13:23] <annevk> even the W3C uses user credentials to show people different content at the same URL
  687. # [13:23] <annevk> and it seems like a perfectly sane thing to do
  688. # [13:32] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@217.39.1.225)
  689. # [13:35] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@217.39.1.225) (Client Quit)
  690. # [13:41] * Quits: starjive (i=beos@213-66-217-32-no30.tbcn.telia.com) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  691. # [13:43] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-147-127.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  692. # [13:52] * Joins: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@pat.se.opera.com)
  693. # [13:53] <zcorpan> Hixie: "Must be invoked whenever a beforeunload event is targeted at or bubbles through the element or object." - s/element or //
  694. # [13:53] * Quits: eric_carlson (n=ericc@adsl-67-112-12-110.dsl.anhm01.pacbell.net)
  695. # [13:54] * Joins: eric_carlson (n=ericc@adsl-67-112-12-110.dsl.anhm01.pacbell.net)
  696. # [13:54] * Quits: eric_carlson (n=ericc@adsl-67-112-12-110.dsl.anhm01.pacbell.net) (Client Quit)
  697. # [13:56] * Quits: pesla (n=retep@procurios.xs4all.nl) ("( www.nnscript.com :: NoNameScript 4.21 :: www.esnation.com )")
  698. # [14:02] <zcorpan> http://blog.whatwg.org/styling-ie-noscript#comment-35694 - spam?
  699. # [14:05] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-215-113.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  700. # [14:11] * Quits: maikmerten (n=merten@ls5dhcp195.cs.uni-dortmund.de) (Client Quit)
  701. # [14:12] <Lachy> zcorpan, when I moderated that comment, I checked the site, and it didn't fit the profile of a typical spam website and seemed to be web development related, even though the comment isn't really on topic
  702. # [14:14] <zcorpan> so more a case of self-promotion
  703. # [14:14] <Lachy> yeah, that's what I thought
  704. # [14:15] <Lachy> I could mark it as spam if you think that's a better course of action, but I try to reserve that for real spam sites instead of resorting to anything that could be conceived as censorship
  705. # [14:16] <zcorpan> i don't really care either way, it just triggered my spamometer so i thought i'd mention it
  706. # [14:19] <jgraham> That's spam
  707. # [14:20] <jgraham> At best it is designed to get people to visit the mostly useless website to click on Google Ads
  708. # [14:22] <Lachy> fixed
  709. # [14:23] <Dashiva> "DTD based SGML parsers", where are these used?
  710. # [14:25] <Lachy> Dashiva, OpenSP is the major one, but its use is limited mainly to validators or non-HTML uses
  711. # [14:30] <MikeSmith> more than that, SP is the only open-source SGML parse, as far as I know
  712. # [14:31] <Dashiva> So there's little reason why a language that doesn't lend itself to DTD-based validation should support it
  713. # [14:31] <MikeSmith> well, we should be killing DTD-validation
  714. # [14:31] <MikeSmith> at every chance possible
  715. # [14:32] <MikeSmith> James Clark himself said as much
  716. # [14:32] <MikeSmith> some years ago
  717. # [14:33] <MikeSmith> "we need to put a knife in the back of SGML" (or something along those lines)
  718. # [14:33] <MikeSmith> he said
  719. # [14:34] <MikeSmith> some might say that it's fairly absurd that in 2009 the W3C Validator is still doing DTD-based validation
  720. # [14:34] <Dashiva> I agree, but I don't think people who want to support DTDs will
  721. # [14:34] <Dashiva> So a more pragmatic argument might be in order :)
  722. # [14:36] <MikeSmith> some might say that, seeing as this is the year 2009 (not 1989), people who want to support DTDs should probably not be our highest concern
  723. # [14:36] * Joins: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-76-139.dynamic.amis.net)
  724. # [14:37] <MikeSmith> maybe the rule should be that if you mention the term "DTD" un-ironically, you get knee-capped
  725. # [14:40] <Philip`> Lachy: Judging by the university mailing lists I'm on, "spam" just means any message that you aren't personally interested in, so on the blog you should just delete any comments that don't seem to add anything useful to the post
  726. # [14:40] <Lachy> the problem is that DTD based validation has been the only reasonably reliable HTML4 validation method for many years, people have grown accustomed to them
  727. # [14:40] <Dashiva> You'd have to invent a machine that lets you kneecap people over the internet first
  728. # [14:41] <Philip`> Dashiva: Who said it has to be a machine? You could use something like Mechanical Turk to farm the work out
  729. # [14:41] <Lachy> Dashiva, the alternative is to simply send the offending person an email virus or perform a DOS attack on them
  730. # [14:42] <Lachy> or should we setup virtualkneecap.com?
  731. # [14:43] <Dashiva> I suppose a DOS attack is similar to kneecapping, in online terms
  732. # [14:47] * Quits: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@pat-tdc.opera.com) ("Leaving")
  733. # [14:47] <MikeSmith> Lachy: RELAX NG has been around since 2000 or so. .. problem was that nobody involved with HTML did much with it until 2006 or so, when fantasai (and then hsivonen) started work on whattf schema for HTML5 & WF2
  734. # [14:52] * Joins: mstange (n=markus@aixd3.rhrk.uni-kl.de)
  735. # [14:54] * Joins: eric_carlson (n=ericc@nat/apple/x-1bea7a9eec8412df)
  736. # [14:55] * Quits: xcombelle (n=chatzill@AToulouse-158-1-125-171.w90-55.abo.wanadoo.fr) (Remote closed the connection)
  737. # [14:55] <Lachy> MikeSmith, yes, but there's also the stigma attatched to the DTD as being the only official validation method endorsed by the spec, and alternative validators using different techniques and which didn't strictly adhere to the spec were seen as inferior
  738. # [14:57] <Lachy> even if their results were more useful in practice, like claiming unimplemented SGML shorthand features were invalid
  739. # [14:57] * Philip` never even heard of any HTML validators other than validator.w3.org
  740. # [14:58] <MikeSmith> Lachy: if such sentiment exists, better to just ignore it it without comment
  741. # [14:58] <MikeSmith> Philip`: we have this thing called validator.nu
  742. # [14:59] <Lachy> Philip`, http://validator.w3.org/docs/help.html#others
  743. # [14:59] <MikeSmith> v.nu represents a corruption of the ideals
  744. # [14:59] <Lachy> there are other ones too, but I can't remember their names or URLs
  745. # [14:59] * Quits: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-76-139.dynamic.amis.net) (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  746. # [15:00] * Joins: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-72-11.dynamic.amis.net)
  747. # [15:00] <Lachy> MikeSmith, HTML5 in general represents a corruption of many people's ideals
  748. # [15:00] <Dashiva> And of idealism in general :)
  749. # [15:00] <MikeSmith> HTML5 is an abomination
  750. # [15:02] <Lachy> it's ironic that 4 or 5 years ago, I shared the ideals of many who are complaining about HTML5 today. Though I've since been corrupted myself :-)
  751. # [15:02] <MikeSmith> Lachy: that is a sign that you beliefs are changed to easily
  752. # [15:03] <MikeSmith> next year, you'll believe something different
  753. # [15:03] <Lachy> MikeSmith, no, changing my beliefs is never easy. I'm really quite stubborn
  754. # [15:03] <MikeSmith> you?
  755. # [15:03] <MikeSmith> stubborn?
  756. # [15:04] <MikeSmith> I can't believe it
  757. # [15:04] <Lachy> yes. Don't you think so?
  758. # [15:04] <MikeSmith> no, you are the most reasonable person in the world
  759. # [15:04] <MikeSmith> you should get a special aware
  760. # [15:04] <Lachy> award?
  761. # [15:05] <MikeSmith> the Tactful and most Thougtfully Considered Opinions Award
  762. # [15:08] <Lachy> I wanted to win the Smeghead award
  763. # [15:09] <MikeSmith> too bad
  764. # [15:09] <Philip`> MikeSmith: I mean, before I was involved with HTML5 I'd never even heard of any HTML validators other than validator.w3.org
  765. # [15:09] <Lachy> although I didn't think "smeg" referred to a kind of cheese http://lastweekinhtml5.blogspot.com/2009/01/bonnie-prince-cheesie.html
  766. # [15:10] <MikeSmith> Philip`: that's of course because there are none
  767. # [15:10] <MikeSmith> or were none before hsivonen appeared
  768. # [15:11] <MikeSmith> Lachy: Mr Last Week clearly wants to have sex with you
  769. # [15:11] <MikeSmith> with you in particular
  770. # [15:11] <MikeSmith> so you can choose to accept that and make it happen, or you
  771. # [15:11] <Lachy> what?!
  772. # [15:11] <MikeSmith> can politely decline
  773. # [15:12] <MikeSmith> read between the lines, genius
  774. # [15:12] <Dashiva> Or he can lie, merely using it as a tool to figure out the secret identity of you-know-who
  775. # [15:13] <Lachy> I'm sure we'll figure out the identity of Mr Last Week one day. There's no rush though
  776. # [15:13] <MikeSmith> Lachy: your IQ is clearly greater than that of former US President George W. Bush
  777. # [15:13] <MikeSmith> which puts you in a special class
  778. # [15:14] <MikeSmith> run with it
  779. # [15:14] <MikeSmith> take advantage of it
  780. # [15:14] <Dashiva> Lachy: What if he just stops posting and disappears? Then it'll be too late
  781. # [15:14] <Lachy> woo hoo! I join the elite 90% of the world's population with an IQ greater than Bush.
  782. # [15:14] <MikeSmith> Lachy: strike while the iron is H O T hot
  783. # [15:16] <MikeSmith> Lachy: you are clearly the sorta super exemplar of our group
  784. # [15:16] * Quits: harig (n=opera@219.64.74.75) (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer))
  785. # [15:16] <MikeSmith> tall, poised
  786. # [15:16] <MikeSmith> represent us well to the world, please
  787. # [15:17] <MikeSmith> take your responsibilities seriously
  788. # [15:20] * Joins: aroben (n=aroben@unaffiliated/aroben)
  789. # [15:21] <Lachy> what responsibilities does this new role of mine include?
  790. # [15:22] <MikeSmith> Lachy: mostly, you have to provide sexual services to any lonely ladies in need of special attention
  791. # [15:22] <MikeSmith> (as far as I read the contract at least)
  792. # [15:23] <Lachy> oh, so I'm a gigalo then
  793. # [15:31] * Joins: othree (n=othree@admin39.ct.ntust.edu.tw)
  794. # [15:37] * Quits: svl_ (n=chatzill@a194-109-2-86.dmn.xs4all.nl) (Remote closed the connection)
  795. # [15:41] * Quits: eric_carlson (n=ericc@nat/apple/x-1bea7a9eec8412df)
  796. # [15:52] <Philip`> The problem with http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/groups.html#three-month-rule is that there is no defined error-handling for the cases where the "must" requirement is violated
  797. # [15:52] <Philip`> (or if there is any then it's not implemented in practice)
  798. # [15:53] * Joins: rubys (n=rubys@cpe-075-182-092-038.nc.res.rr.com)
  799. # [15:59] * Joins: eric_carlson (n=ericc@nat/apple/x-84f18bc1e3636d98)
  800. # [16:20] * Joins: svl_ (n=chatzill@a194-109-2-86.dmn.xs4all.nl)
  801. # [16:21] <Philip`> Quite a lot of people write <meta http-equiv="refresh" content="4" url="/index.html">
  802. # [16:21] <Philip`> all with content="4" in particular
  803. # [16:24] * Quits: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@pat.se.opera.com)
  804. # [16:25] * Quits: hober (n=ted@unaffiliated/hober) (Remote closed the connection)
  805. # [16:25] <Philip`> zcorpan: Assuming you meant http-equiv=refresh (not name=refresh), it seems already work fine in Opera 9.63, so I'm not sure why you'd need to change your implementation
  806. # [16:26] * Joins: hober (n=ted@unaffiliated/hober)
  807. # [16:40] * Joins: billmason (n=bmason@ip8.unival.com)
  808. # [16:53] * Quits: mstange (n=markus@aixd3.rhrk.uni-kl.de) ("ChatZilla 0.9.84-2009010213 [Firefox 3.2a1pre/20090119020412]")
  809. # [16:54] * Quits: aaronlev (n=chatzill@f051077041.adsl.alicedsl.de) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  810. # [17:02] <karlcow> [08:46] <MikeSmith> Lachy: RELAX NG has been around since 2000 or so. .. problem was that nobody involved with HTML did much with it until 2006 or so, when fantasai (and then hsivonen) started work on whattf schema for HTML5 & WF2
  811. # [17:02] <karlcow> not fully true.
  812. # [17:03] <karlcow> Olivier has been exploring ways of integrating new methods of validation for a loooooooong time with NVDL and Schematron. Unfortunately nobody had the resources to create a full new engine. The issue always nails down to resources (time, and people)
  813. # [17:06] <karlcow> ;) At least if in the past Bush had been part of the W3C Team, There would have been an easy way to apologize.
  814. # [17:06] <karlcow> Damn
  815. # [17:07] * Joins: erlehmann (n=erlehman@86.59.25.121)
  816. # [17:09] * Quits: Maurice (n=ano@a80-101-46-164.adsl.xs4all.nl) ("Disconnected...")
  817. # [17:25] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  818. # [17:26] * Parts: rubys (n=rubys@cpe-075-182-092-038.nc.res.rr.com)
  819. # [17:32] * Quits: svl_ (n=chatzill@a194-109-2-86.dmn.xs4all.nl) ("And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.")
  820. # [17:34] <jgraham> http://codespeak.net/pipermail/lxml-dev/2009-January/004311.html
  821. # [17:34] <jgraham> I guess that competes for "worst idea ever"
  822. # [17:35] <hsivonen> jgraham: he needs OWL sameAs
  823. # [17:39] <jgraham> hsivonen: And an XSLT engine that understands OWL?
  824. # [17:39] * Quits: KevinMarks (n=KevinMar@c-71-202-163-211.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) ("The computer fell asleep")
  825. # [17:47] <Philip`> Amazon EC2's HTTP API is versioned, and if your request uses e.g. ...&Version=2008-12-01&... then the response has xmlns="http://ec2.amazonaws.com/doc/2008-12-01"
  826. # [17:48] <Philip`> I'd guess it encourages consumers to just ignore the namespace entirely, because otherwise it's more effort to update it every time you want to start using a newer API version
  827. # [17:49] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  828. # [17:50] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@nat/google/x-898f7ed62e16ee4b)
  829. # [17:51] * Joins: aaronlev (n=chatzill@f051077041.adsl.alicedsl.de)
  830. # [17:53] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net) (Client Quit)
  831. # [17:54] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  832. # [18:03] * Joins: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@c83-252-203-80.bredband.comhem.se)
  833. # [18:11] * Joins: smedero (n=smedero@mdp-nat251.mdp.com)
  834. # [18:12] <Philip`> I think http://lensco.be/ is the first place I've seen anyone write "<!Doctype html>"
  835. # [18:13] * Quits: hober (n=ted@unaffiliated/hober) ("ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)")
  836. # [18:16] * Philip` follows some links from there
  837. # [18:16] <Philip`> http://cameronmoll.com/archives/2009/01/12_resources_for_html5/ - "HTML 5 differences from HTML 4 [link to html5-diff]. Not surprising: frame and frameset no longer allowed in HTML 5. Surprising: A document from the W3C that’s actually fairly readable."
  838. # [18:17] * Joins: Maurice (i=copyman@5ED548D4.cable.ziggo.nl)
  839. # [18:17] <Philip`> "The Web Developer’s Guide to HTML 5 by W3C. I’ve not read this one yet, but it’s got colored boxes — a rarity from the W3C. That must mean it’s good."
  840. # [18:18] <zcorpan> oh, the page has this:
  841. # [18:18] <zcorpan> <META HTTP-EQUIV="refresh" content="01; url='http://aac.recruitsoft.com/servlets/CareerSection?art_ip_action=FlowDispatcher&amp;flowTypeNo=13&amp;pageSeq=1&amp;art_servlet_language=en&amp;csNo=2'>
  842. # [18:18] <zcorpan> i.e no close "
  843. # [18:19] <Philip`> Ah, that sounds less typical
  844. # [18:19] <zcorpan> the spec bug still applies though
  845. # [18:20] <Philip`> url='...' does seem common enough that the spec needs to handle it
  846. # [18:23] <zcorpan> and we might want to discard what's after the '...'
  847. # [18:28] * Quits: myakura (n=myakura@p3020-ipbf505marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp) ("Leaving...")
  848. # [18:40] <zcorpan> should i blog about why people should not use the new elements (i.e. it constrains what useful stuff browsers can do with them)?
  849. # [18:41] * Joins: ap_ (n=ap@195.239.126.10)
  850. # [18:41] <zcorpan> do we have such examples other than styling of headings?
  851. # [18:42] <Philip`> Seems a bit late now to tell people to stop using HTML5 elements, after they've got all excited about them
  852. # [18:43] <zcorpan> maybe
  853. # [18:43] <beowulf> i don't think it's too late, in the 'burbs people are only just discovering html5
  854. # [18:43] <Philip`> You could just look at the extensive list of use cases that were required before the new elements were allowed into HTML5
  855. # [18:44] <zcorpan> although i'm slightly sceptical to styling of headings anyway
  856. # [18:44] <Philip`> which surely must include more than just having a second way to style headings
  857. # [18:44] <zcorpan> digging the archives is a lot of effort :)
  858. # [18:45] <smedero> It is seems fair to raise concerns that implementors have with encountering the new elements in the wild. An explanation of what the state of support is today and why it may or may not continue to work in the future.
  859. # [18:45] <smedero> a full out call to stop using them doesn't seem good though.
  860. # [18:46] <zcorpan> yeah i didn't have in mind writing a "using html5 elements considered harmful" article
  861. # [18:46] <Philip`> It seems quite a few people have already discussed the issues browsers have with the new elements, and appropriate workarounds when necessary, so there's probably not much point writing another one of those
  862. # [18:47] * Joins: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1)
  863. # [18:47] <zcorpan> Philip`: but that's with current browsers, it hasn't been widely discussed what happens when browsers implement the parsing rules and apply styling etc
  864. # [18:48] <zcorpan> e.g. right now you can do <p>foo <section>bar</section> baz</p> (as a silly example)
  865. # [18:50] * Quits: ap (n=ap@195.239.126.10) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  866. # [18:50] * Quits: shepazu (n=schepers@pool-71-246-220-112.washdc.fios.verizon.net) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  867. # [18:51] <beowulf> zcorpan: in the future would you not be able to do that?
  868. # [18:51] <zcorpan> beowulf: no, the <section> would imply </p>
  869. # [18:51] <beowulf> i did not know this
  870. # [18:51] <zcorpan> if you omit the last </p> the validator wouldn't complain so it might be hard to detect you're relying on it
  871. # [18:52] <beowulf> do you mean a ua would close off the para around foo and start a new one on bar?
  872. # [18:52] * ap_ is now known as ap
  873. # [18:52] <beowulf> or that the validator would complain?
  874. # [18:52] <zcorpan> beowulf: no the <section> start tag would just imply a </p> before it
  875. # [18:53] <zcorpan> so it's equivalent to <p>foo </p><section>bar</section> baz</p>
  876. # [18:53] <zcorpan> which in turn is equivalent to <p>foo </p><section>bar</section> baz<p></p>
  877. # [18:53] <beowulf> cool
  878. # [18:53] <zcorpan> and the validator would complain about the stray </p>
  879. # [18:54] <zcorpan> (so the knee-jerk reaction would be to remove the </p> to silence the validator but it would still break in browsers later)
  880. # [18:54] <Philip`> Maybe the validator should emit a warning when a <section> causes a </p> to be generated
  881. # [18:54] <zcorpan> hsivonen: consider commenting out new elements in the parser until browsers support them to make the validator messages more helpful
  882. # [18:55] <jgraham> Philip`'s idea sounds better
  883. # [18:55] <zcorpan> Philip`: yeah, there's a bug about that in b.v.nu iirc
  884. # [18:55] <zcorpan> (or at least about warning about tag inference in general)
  885. # [18:56] <Philip`> Warning in general would be annoying for people who like tag inference
  886. # [18:56] <zcorpan> i agree
  887. # [18:56] <Philip`> but warning in the cases where it differs from current/legacy browser behaviour would still be useful to those people
  888. # [18:56] <jgraham> Trying to stop people using HTML 5 is a bad idea. If we dangle nice stuff in front of them and say "oh but you can't have it because it will be bad for you in the future" people are likely to just get annoyed with the whole thing
  889. # [18:57] <Philip`> People switched to using XHTML 1.0 despite it offering them no advantages whatsoever and causing subtle problems in the future, so they're bound to do the same with HTML5
  890. # [18:58] <Philip`> See e.g. people using <section> and adding script hacks to make it work in IE, despite it being a waste of time and unnecessary complexity
  891. # [18:58] <Philip`> when <div class=section> works much better in some UAs, and no worse in any current ones
  892. # [18:58] <zcorpan> maybe we should make hsivonen emit messages about things people need to look out for and we can tell people the importance of validation :)
  893. # [18:58] <jgraham> Without the early adopters there will be no mainstream HTML5
  894. # [18:59] <jgraham> And we already have had enough bad publicity about unreasonably long schedules
  895. # [18:59] <zcorpan> maybe it's just time for browsers to implement the new elements
  896. # [19:00] <jgraham> zcorpan: Indeed. But I guess it is much easier to say "we need to implement x that people want to use" than to just say "well x is in the spec so we should do it"
  897. # [19:01] <Philip`> If the browsers all implement it today, I guess it'd still be a year before they're released
  898. # [19:01] <jgraham> Well if they did it *today* I guess it would be sooner :)
  899. # [19:02] <jgraham> (but only if they put it in their soon-to-be-released branches which seems unlkely)
  900. # [19:02] <jgraham> s/unlkley/impossible/
  901. # [19:02] * Joins: mstange (n=markus@aixd3.rhrk.uni-kl.de)
  902. # [19:02] <zcorpan> why would it be impossible?
  903. # [19:03] <Philip`> I mean if they wrote the code today, and then put it into wherever they put patches that aren't in the thing that's going to be released very soon and is too late for new features that could have significant web compatibility issues
  904. # [19:03] <jgraham> zcorpan: Because several major browsers are in feature freeze for imminent releases?
  905. # [19:04] <jgraham> (dunno what the ? was for)
  906. # [19:04] <zcorpan> jgraham: yeah but still not impossible - i think it has happened before that features have gone in after feature freeze
  907. # [19:05] <Philip`> But it seems like a pretty irresponsible thing to do, particularly for a feature that nobody cares about that much
  908. # [19:05] <zcorpan> yes :)
  909. # [19:05] * jgraham should go
  910. # [19:14] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  911. # [19:15] * Joins: maikmerten (n=maikmert@L9f70.l.pppool.de)
  912. # [19:16] * Quits: mstange (n=markus@aixd3.rhrk.uni-kl.de) ("ChatZilla 0.9.84-2009010213 [Firefox 3.2a1pre/20090119020412]")
  913. # [19:24] * Joins: svl (n=me@ip565744a7.direct-adsl.nl)
  914. # [19:25] <zcorpan> Philip`: http://fonts.philip.html5.org/ - very nice! :)
  915. # [19:29] * Parts: erlehmann (n=erlehman@86.59.25.121)
  916. # [19:39] * Joins: hober (n=ted@unaffiliated/hober)
  917. # [19:49] * Joins: erlehmann (n=erlehman@86.59.25.121)
  918. # [19:51] * Quits: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.224.1)
  919. # [19:54] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  920. # [19:58] * Joins: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@95.34.27.22.customer.cdi.no)
  921. # [20:06] * Quits: maikmerten (n=maikmert@L9f70.l.pppool.de) (Remote closed the connection)
  922. # [20:07] * Joins: maikmerten (n=maikmert@L9f70.l.pppool.de)
  923. # [20:10] <Philip`> zcorpan: The main problem is that it's a terribly ugly site :-)
  924. # [20:11] <Philip`> (The other main problem is that the code is very buggy, but I've been fixing some of those issues so hopefully it'll become slightly less rubbish)
  925. # [20:14] * Joins: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.227.1)
  926. # [20:17] * Quits: jruderman (n=jruderma@c-67-180-39-55.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  927. # [20:24] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-215-113.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  928. # [20:24] * Quits: aaronlev (n=chatzill@f051077041.adsl.alicedsl.de) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  929. # [20:33] * Joins: jwalden (n=waldo@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  930. # [20:47] * Quits: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@c83-252-203-80.bredband.comhem.se)
  931. # [20:49] * Joins: aaronlev (n=chatzill@f051077041.adsl.alicedsl.de)
  932. # [20:55] * Quits: gsnedders (n=gsnedder@host86-136-52-180.range86-136.btcentralplus.com) (Client Quit)
  933. # [21:06] * Joins: jruderman (n=jruderma@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  934. # [21:13] * Quits: jwalden (n=waldo@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com) ("->K")
  935. # [21:14] * Quits: aaronlev (n=chatzill@f051077041.adsl.alicedsl.de) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  936. # [21:16] * Joins: gsnedders (n=gsnedder@host86-136-52-180.range86-136.btcentralplus.com)
  937. # [21:16] * Joins: maikmerten_ (n=maikmert@Lb75c.l.pppool.de)
  938. # [21:29] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host217-43-109-26.range217-43.btcentralplus.com)
  939. # [21:33] * Quits: maikmerten (n=maikmert@L9f70.l.pppool.de) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  940. # [21:33] * Joins: xcombelle (n=chatzill@AToulouse-158-1-167-226.w90-60.abo.wanadoo.fr)
  941. # [21:39] * Quits: heycam (n=cam@124-168-33-122.dyn.iinet.net.au) ("bye")
  942. # [21:40] * Joins: jwalden (n=waldo@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  943. # [21:42] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@17.203.15.177)
  944. # [21:44] * Joins: aaronlev (n=chatzill@f051077041.adsl.alicedsl.de)
  945. # [21:59] * Quits: maikmerten_ (n=maikmert@Lb75c.l.pppool.de) (Remote closed the connection)
  946. # [22:01] * Quits: ROBOd (n=robod@89.122.216.38) ("http://www.robodesign.ro")
  947. # [22:14] * Quits: jruderman (n=jruderma@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  948. # [22:15] * Quits: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-72-11.dynamic.amis.net) ("Leaving.")
  949. # [22:21] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host217-43-109-26.range217-43.btcentralplus.com)
  950. # [22:30] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host217-43-109-26.range217-43.btcentralplus.com)
  951. # [22:36] * Quits: jwalden (n=waldo@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com) ("lunchtime")
  952. # [22:36] * Joins: jruderman (n=jruderma@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  953. # [22:37] * Quits: ap (n=ap@195.239.126.10)
  954. # [22:49] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@clm-laptop.infotech.monash.edu.au)
  955. # [23:01] * Quits: dolske (n=dolske@firefox/developer/dolske)
  956. # [23:16] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host217-43-109-26.range217-43.btcentralplus.com)
  957. # [23:17] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host217-43-109-26.range217-43.btcentralplus.com)
  958. # [23:18] * Quits: Maurice (i=copyman@5ED548D4.cable.ziggo.nl) ("Disconnected...")
  959. # [23:26] * Joins: dolske (n=dolske@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  960. # [23:36] * Joins: doublec (n=chris@202.0.36.64)
  961. # [23:36] <heycam> annevk, fwiw batik doesn't implement @color-profile rules (or the corresponding DOM 2 Style interfaces)
  962. # [23:36] <heycam> (or the SVGColorProfileRule interface from SVG, i mean)
  963. # [23:38] * Joins: jwalden (n=waldo@corp-241.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  964. # [23:49] * Quits: svl (n=me@ip565744a7.direct-adsl.nl) ("And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.")
  965. # [23:54] * Parts: billmason (n=bmason@ip8.unival.com)
  966. # [23:55] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host217-43-109-26.range217-43.btcentralplus.com)
  967. # Session Close: Thu Jan 22 00:00:00 2009

The end :)