/irc-logs / freenode / #whatwg / 2009-02-24 / end

Options:

  1. # Session Start: Tue Feb 24 00:00:00 2009
  2. # Session Ident: #whatwg
  3. # [00:00] * Quits: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-69-188.dynamic.amis.net) ("Leaving.")
  4. # [00:00] * Joins: ojan_ (n=ojan@nat/google/x-64589b8425fd1fcd)
  5. # [00:00] * Quits: ojan (n=ojan@nat/google/x-8e7ea02dd539dad6) (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer))
  6. # [00:01] * Joins: nessy (n=nessy@124-171-34-59.dyn.iinet.net.au)
  7. # [00:01] * Quits: mpt_ (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt) ("Leaving")
  8. # [00:02] <Hixie> roc: cool. i was worried about the load algorithm one when i realised that it'd have to change quite a bit to actually work :-/
  9. # [00:02] <Hixie> roc: looks like i had totally broken loading when i made the algorithm actually fetch the media files to check them one by one
  10. # [00:02] <Hixie> instead of relying on the type as we originally did
  11. # [00:02] <Hixie> btw we really need to figure something out about the codec
  12. # [00:03] <Hixie> every time i look at a demo i find it only works in one of firefox or safari
  13. # [00:03] <roc> the codec?
  14. # [00:03] <Hixie> finding a video codec.
  15. # [00:03] <Hixie> for everyone to use.
  16. # [00:06] <roc> yeah
  17. # [00:06] <roc> we're doing our best on that :-)
  18. # [00:06] <roc> I guess Wave is one that everyone supports
  19. # [00:07] <Hixie> audio isn't such a problem
  20. # [00:07] <Philip`> Google should give Mozilla a zillion dollars to buy up all the MPEG patents
  21. # [00:10] <roc> don't start
  22. # [00:10] <roc> Google should ship Ogg in Chrome and crush like a bug anyone who causes trouble
  23. # [00:11] * Quits: webben (n=webben@nat/yahoo/x-b3b7963feac12586) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  24. # [00:12] <scherkus> woah I missed all this delay-the-load stuff
  25. # [00:15] * Quits: roc (n=roc@202.0.36.64) (Remote closed the connection)
  26. # [00:15] * Joins: roc (n=roc@202.0.36.64)
  27. # [00:18] <scherkus> what's an example of using delay-the-load?
  28. # [00:20] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@vpn-118-138-224-5.its.monash.edu.au)
  29. # [00:22] <roc> scherkus: what do you mean?
  30. # [00:22] <roc> like how does a Web page use it?
  31. # [00:23] <roc> <body onload="alert('loaded')"><video src="foo.ogg"></video></body>
  32. # [00:23] <roc> the alert shouldn't fire until the video has reached HAVE_CURRENT_DATA, i.e. is sized correctly and display the first frame
  33. # [00:23] <scherkus> ahhh
  34. # [00:24] <scherkus> thanks
  35. # [00:25] <scherkus> for some reason I usually check w3.org's version of the spec
  36. # [00:25] <scherkus> a bad habit to get into considering how out of date it is atm
  37. # [00:25] <Lachy> scherkus, do you mean the /TR/html5 copy?
  38. # [00:25] <Lachy> that one will always be out of date, until it reaches REC
  39. # [00:25] <scherkus> Lachy: looks like it
  40. # [00:26] <Lachy> the copy on whatwg.org is better cause it has a lot of nice little extra features that make the spec more usable
  41. # [00:26] <Lachy> and it looks better than the W3C CVS copy on dev.w3.org
  42. # [00:27] * Quits: dolske_ (n=dolske@corp-246.mountainview.mozilla.com) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  43. # [00:32] * Joins: svl (n=me@69.Red-88-2-205.staticIP.rima-tde.net)
  44. # [00:36] * Quits: danbri (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri)
  45. # [00:39] * Quits: epeus (n=KevinMar@72.14.228.1) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  46. # [00:39] * Quits: doublec (n=chris@202.0.36.64) ("Leaving")
  47. # [00:40] * Joins: doublec (n=doublec@li30-216.members.linode.com)
  48. # [00:43] * Quits: tantek_ (n=tantek@c-67-161-5-143.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  49. # [00:45] * Joins: slightlyoff (n=slightly@nat/google/x-7c94cad858bff8bb)
  50. # [00:47] * Quits: svl (n=me@69.Red-88-2-205.staticIP.rima-tde.net) ("And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.")
  51. # [00:49] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com)
  52. # [00:50] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com) (Client Quit)
  53. # [00:56] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com)
  54. # [00:58] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com) (Client Quit)
  55. # [00:58] * Quits: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1)
  56. # [01:00] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@c-67-161-5-143.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  57. # [01:05] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com)
  58. # [01:08] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@c-67-161-5-143.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  59. # [01:12] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com)
  60. # [01:24] * Quits: hdh (n=hdh@58.187.17.182) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  61. # [01:25] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@nat/google/x-60a79afb46a4f9d2)
  62. # [01:25] * Joins: heycam` (n=cam@vpn-118-138-224-21.its.monash.edu.au)
  63. # [01:27] * Quits: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@mic92-9-82-236-193-123.fbx.proxad.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  64. # [01:32] * slightlyoff is now known as slightlyoff_afk
  65. # [01:37] * Quits: heycam (n=cam@vpn-118-138-224-5.its.monash.edu.au) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  66. # [01:37] * Joins: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1)
  67. # [01:44] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  68. # [01:45] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246) (Read error: 101 (Network is unreachable))
  69. # [01:45] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  70. # [01:49] <Hixie> oooh, chaals praised the existence of something i asked for
  71. # [01:58] * slightlyoff_afk is now known as slightlyoff
  72. # [01:59] <Hixie> first hit for "moma html opera": "New York Private MoMA and Opera Backstage Tour"
  73. # [01:59] <Hixie> not what i meant...
  74. # [01:59] <gavin_> isn't it mama?
  75. # [01:59] <Hixie> yes
  76. # [01:59] <Hixie> but usually google fixes that kind of thing for me! :-)
  77. # [02:12] * Quits: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1)
  78. # [02:13] * Quits: heycam` (n=cam@vpn-118-138-224-21.its.monash.edu.au) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  79. # [02:14] * Quits: smedero (n=smedero@mdp-nat251.mdp.com)
  80. # [02:19] * Quits: aroben (n=aroben@unaffiliated/aroben) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  81. # [02:33] * Quits: nessy (n=nessy@124-171-34-59.dyn.iinet.net.au) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  82. # [02:41] <deltab> Google seems to be 'correcting' more aggressively now: for instance, try searching for elementmoveto
  83. # [02:44] <deltab> and I think it should correct hashchanged to hashchange, not "has changed" :-)
  84. # [02:47] * Quits: jwalden (n=waldo@corp-246.mountainview.mozilla.com) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  85. # [02:55] * Joins: jwalden (n=waldo@corp-246.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  86. # [02:58] * Joins: sicking (n=chatzill@corp-246.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  87. # [03:07] * Joins: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@mobile-166-214-168-252.mycingular.net)
  88. # [03:10] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-1-240.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  89. # [03:10] <Hixie> holy crap zcorpan, you're amazing
  90. # [03:10] <Hixie> all these status markers!
  91. # [03:11] <Hixie> i wonder if we should ban <caption> when the table is in a <figure>
  92. # [03:22] * Quits: hober (n=ted@unaffiliated/hober) (Remote closed the connection)
  93. # [03:23] * Joins: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1)
  94. # [03:23] * Joins: dimich_ (n=dimich@72.14.227.1)
  95. # [03:23] * Quits: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1) (Client Quit)
  96. # [03:23] * dimich_ is now known as dimich
  97. # [03:25] * Quits: slightlyoff (n=slightly@nat/google/x-7c94cad858bff8bb) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  98. # [03:26] <kinetik> Hixie: Is the video element intended to resume playback after seeking completes if it was playing back prior to the seek?
  99. # [03:26] <kinetik> I think that's what you want, but I'm having trouble convincing myself that the spec says that's what should happen.
  100. # [03:26] <Hixie> yes
  101. # [03:26] <Hixie> the video doesn't stop "potentially playing" while seeking
  102. # [03:27] <Hixie> er
  103. # [03:27] <Hixie> that's a lie
  104. # [03:27] <Hixie> let me rephrase
  105. # [03:27] <Hixie> the video is defined to play back while it is "potentially playing", which becomes true again once there is data to play, if paused is false
  106. # [03:27] <Hixie> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#potentially-playing
  107. # [03:28] <Hixie> (the spec says "When a media element is potentially playing and its Document is an active document, its current playback position must increase monotonically at playbackRate units of media time per unit time of wall clock time.")
  108. # [03:29] <kinetik> Hixie: ah, I see, thanks
  109. # [03:37] <Hixie> hsivonen: it would be interesting for the validator to report tables that, once you've applied the CSS, have no borders.
  110. # [03:40] * Quits: tndH (n=Rob@james-baillie-pc083-014.student-halls.leeds.ac.uk) ("ChatZilla 0.9.84-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.9.0.1/2008072406]")
  111. # [03:42] * Parts: ojan_ (n=ojan@nat/google/x-64589b8425fd1fcd)
  112. # [03:42] * Quits: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.227.1)
  113. # [03:43] * Joins: bgalbraith_ (n=bgalbrai@mobile-166-214-235-026.mycingular.net)
  114. # [03:46] * gsnedders wonders how many of the statuses zcorpan didn't touch
  115. # [04:00] <Hixie> sam wants me to deal with profile="" next, but i've no idea what i am supposed to do
  116. # [04:00] <Hixie> so i shall go eat instead
  117. # [04:02] * Joins: annevk42 (n=annevk@EM114-48-1-240.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  118. # [04:02] * Quits: kingryan (n=kingryan@adsl-99-27-42-97.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  119. # [04:02] * Quits: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@mobile-166-214-168-252.mycingular.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  120. # [04:02] <gsnedders> Hixie: Comfort eating, again? :P
  121. # [04:12] * Quits: dolske (n=dolske@corp-246.mountainview.mozilla.com) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  122. # [04:16] * Joins: billyjackass (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-130-184.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  123. # [04:22] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@vpn-118-138-224-21.its.monash.edu.au)
  124. # [04:22] * gsnedders shakes head at the size of the to and cc lists of the latest email to public-html
  125. # [04:27] * Joins: annevk5 (n=annevk@114.48.130.184)
  126. # [04:31] * Quits: annevk42 (n=annevk@EM114-48-1-240.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  127. # [04:31] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-1-240.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  128. # [04:39] * Quits: dbaron (n=dbaron@corp-246.mountainview.mozilla.com) ("8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.")
  129. # [04:42] * Joins: ray (i=ray@unaffiliated/ray)
  130. # [04:53] <gsnedders> Would I be right to say that <link xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2004/Atom" href="foobar"> is non-conforming because the @href isn't an IRI?
  131. # [04:54] <gsnedders> Actually, the spec is probably referring to IRI-reference by "IRI reference"
  132. # [05:03] * Joins: nessy (n=nessy@124-171-34-59.dyn.iinet.net.au)
  133. # [05:04] * Quits: jwalden (n=waldo@corp-246.mountainview.mozilla.com) ("->home")
  134. # [05:04] * Quits: sicking (n=chatzill@corp-246.mountainview.mozilla.com) (Remote closed the connection)
  135. # [05:07] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  136. # [05:21] * Quits: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1)
  137. # [05:54] * Quits: billyjackass (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-130-184.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp) ("Tomorrow to fresh woods, and pastures new.")
  138. # [05:55] * Joins: annevk42 (n=annevk@dhcp-247-187.mag.keio.ac.jp)
  139. # [05:57] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@dhcp-246-117.mag.keio.ac.jp)
  140. # [06:01] * Joins: shepazu (n=schepers@adsl-221-60-115.rmo.bellsouth.net)
  141. # [06:03] * Joins: dolske (n=dolske@c-76-103-40-203.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  142. # [06:08] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  143. # [06:13] * Joins: nulldomain (n=Soap@ip68-11-193-113.br.br.cox.net)
  144. # [06:14] * Quits: annevk5 (n=annevk@114.48.130.184) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  145. # [06:15] * Quits: roc (n=roc@202.0.36.64)
  146. # [06:16] * Quits: nulldomain (n=Soap@ip68-11-193-113.br.br.cox.net) (Client Quit)
  147. # [06:18] * annevk42 is now known as annevk
  148. # [06:26] * Joins: doublec_ (n=Chris_Do@118-93-186-208.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz)
  149. # [06:27] * Quits: doublec (n=doublec@li30-216.members.linode.com) ("Caught signal 15, Terminated")
  150. # [06:27] * doublec_ is now known as doublec
  151. # [06:27] * Joins: doublec- (n=doublec@li30-216.members.linode.com)
  152. # [06:29] * Quits: doublec (n=Chris_Do@118-93-186-208.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz) (Client Quit)
  153. # [06:30] * doublec- is now known as doublec
  154. # [06:30] * Quits: doublec (n=doublec@li30-216.members.linode.com) (Client Quit)
  155. # [06:31] * Quits: heycam (n=cam@vpn-118-138-224-21.its.monash.edu.au) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  156. # [06:32] <gsnedders> http://stuff.gsnedders.com/atom-export.html
  157. # [06:34] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@vpn-118-138-224-6.its.monash.edu.au)
  158. # [06:43] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  159. # [06:46] * Quits: bgalbraith_ (n=bgalbrai@mobile-166-214-235-026.mycingular.net)
  160. # [06:46] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  161. # [06:49] <annevk> The Live DOM Viewer does not do JavaScript?
  162. # [06:53] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  163. # [06:53] * Quits: heycam (n=cam@vpn-118-138-224-6.its.monash.edu.au) ("bye")
  164. # [07:01] * Joins: jrharshath (i=d2d43dfb@gateway/web/ajax/mibbit.com/x-a764c67d30b28d2e)
  165. # [07:08] <annevk> gsnedders, if we're going with xref rather than title, please just name it data-xref=""
  166. # [07:08] <annevk> unlikely specs will need another xref
  167. # [07:08] <gsnedders> annevk: Blame Hixie. He came up with data-anolis-xref :P
  168. # [07:08] <annevk> ok
  169. # [07:08] * annevk blames Hixie
  170. # [07:08] <annevk> will you change it now?
  171. # [07:08] <gsnedders> Send email, and I'll change it sometime
  172. # [07:09] <gsnedders> (before 1.1)
  173. # [07:11] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  174. # [07:13] * Joins: jwalden (n=waldo@c-76-102-160-171.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  175. # [07:17] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@124-168-12-212.dyn.iinet.net.au)
  176. # [07:23] * Joins: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@c-98-203-247-78.hsd1.wa.comcast.net)
  177. # [07:27] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@adsl-99-140-60-47.dsl.scrm01.sbcglobal.net)
  178. # [07:35] * Quits: jrharshath (i=d2d43dfb@gateway/web/ajax/mibbit.com/x-a764c67d30b28d2e) ("http://www.mibbit.com ajax IRC Client")
  179. # [08:06] * Joins: zalan (n=kvirc@catv-89-133-232-199.catv.broadband.hu)
  180. # [08:18] <annevk> "accessibility theater" I like it
  181. # [08:28] * Joins: ap (n=ap@194.154.88.46)
  182. # [08:36] * Joins: pesla (n=retep@procurios.xs4all.nl)
  183. # [08:41] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com)
  184. # [08:44] * Joins: Maurice (n=ano@a80-101-46-164.adsl.xs4all.nl)
  185. # [08:57] * Joins: sayrer (n=chatzill@user-160ve4s.cable.mindspring.com)
  186. # [08:57] <sayrer> annevk: interoperation with validators? honestly!
  187. # [09:00] <hsivonen> "interoperation with validators"?
  188. # [09:00] <annevk> sayrer, glad I listed some others :)
  189. # [09:00] <sayrer> those were bad too!
  190. # [09:00] <sayrer> :)
  191. # [09:01] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com)
  192. # [09:01] * hsivonen wonders what is being discussed
  193. # [09:01] <annevk> www-archive
  194. # [09:01] <sayrer> hsivonen, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Feb/0108.html
  195. # [09:01] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com)
  196. # [09:01] <sayrer> and anne's reply
  197. # [09:01] <hsivonen> thanks
  198. # [09:01] <gsnedders> Is it bad that all the random poetry I have in my ringbinder for school is in the computing section?
  199. # [09:02] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com) (Client Quit)
  200. # [09:02] <hsivonen> sayrer: requiring authors not to use reserved element or attribute names is relevant to future interop, though
  201. # [09:02] <sayrer> maybe
  202. # [09:03] <sayrer> that is a very small part of the requirements placed on documents, aiui
  203. # [09:03] * Joins: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@APuteaux-155-1-17-103.w83-204.abo.wanadoo.fr)
  204. # [09:04] <annevk> the same goes for possible syntax extensions, etc.
  205. # [09:04] <hsivonen> sayrer: also, if one wants validators to be substitutable, then there's an uniformness (aka. interop in W3C speak) issue between validators
  206. # [09:05] <sayrer> hsivonen, I agree that validators have to "agree" on the content of the spec. are you saying something different?
  207. # [09:05] <hsivonen> sayrer: I'm saying that if validators have to agree on the validation target, then there's an interop-sensitive thing going between validators
  208. # [09:06] <hsivonen> which isn't exactly relevant to interop between browsers
  209. # [09:06] <sayrer> hsivonen, and thus the requirements placed in the document now are ok?
  210. # [09:06] <hsivonen> sayrer: many are ok, in my opinion. there are some that I disagree with.
  211. # [09:07] <sayrer> (I totally don't agree with that, but I want to understand)
  212. # [09:07] <sayrer> hsivonen, I mean the division highlighted by the note I quoted
  213. # [09:08] <sayrer> that rationale would seem to make the requirement in RFC2119 meaningless
  214. # [09:08] <hsivonen> sayrer: I agree that there should be no implied relationship as far as the spec reader does the implication. I think the spec writer needs to keep the relationship sane.
  215. # [09:09] <sayrer> I don't understand what you agree with or what you think, no malice intended
  216. # [09:09] <hsivonen> sayrer: we are still discussing the passage quoted in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Feb/0108.html right?
  217. # [09:10] <sayrer> right
  218. # [09:10] <sayrer> my question is this
  219. # [09:10] * Joins: roc (n=roc@121-72-173-196.dsl.telstraclear.net)
  220. # [09:10] <sayrer> how does the spec call a document non-conforming if it still interoperable?
  221. # [09:10] <sayrer> it's
  222. # [09:11] <sayrer> and it claims to use RFC2119
  223. # [09:11] <sayrer> something has to give
  224. # [09:11] <hsivonen> sayrer: the RFC 2119 criteria for use of MUST includes another thing
  225. # [09:11] <hsivonen> "to limit behavior which has potential for causing harm
  226. # [09:11] <hsivonen> "
  227. # [09:11] <hsivonen> the MUST that apply to authors are supposed to limit "harm"
  228. # [09:12] <hsivonen> sayrer: I'm sure people disagree on what constitutes "harm"
  229. # [09:12] <sayrer> ok, where is the potential for harm?
  230. # [09:12] <sayrer> given a conformant HTML5 user agent
  231. # [09:12] <sayrer> user agents that don't conform to HTML5 are likely to do terrible things
  232. # [09:13] <sayrer> even with documents that match all the requirements that are in there today
  233. # [09:13] <hsivonen> sayrer: the authoring "harm" harms users or authors who maintain what has been authored
  234. # [09:13] <sayrer> hsivonen, I don't see a tenable interpretation here. I could be wrong.
  235. # [09:14] <hsivonen> sayrer: example: making @profile non-conforming protects authors from the harm of the epic waste of time that including no-op syntax is
  236. # [09:14] <hsivonen> sayrer: example: making <font> non-conforming protects users from the harm of media-dependent design
  237. # [09:14] <hsivonen> sayrer: I fully expect you to disagree that there is 'harm'
  238. # [09:14] <sayrer> well, reasonable people can disagree
  239. # [09:14] <hsivonen> sayrer: I disagree with some assumed 'harms' myself
  240. # [09:15] <sayrer> hsivonen, the default wordpress template includes @profile. My blog got that for free. :)
  241. # [09:15] <hsivonen> sayrer: do you find the entire concept of document conformance flawed?
  242. # [09:16] <hsivonen> sayrer: it costs your host in bandwidth bills :-)
  243. # [09:16] <sayrer> so would lots of features in HTML5
  244. # [09:17] <hsivonen> sayrer: if you add something that the profile doesn't cover as far as angels on a head of a pin are concerned, dealing with people emailing you about your incorrect profile would cost you in terms of the annoyance of dealing with the feedback
  245. # [09:18] <hsivonen> sayrer: if you hadn't gotten the wordpress profile for free, would adding the 'right' profile values be a useful activity for you?
  246. # [09:18] <sayrer> beats me
  247. # [09:18] <sayrer> (honestly)
  248. # [09:18] <sayrer> though I do doubt it
  249. # [09:19] <sayrer> hsivonen, I don't find the concept of validators flawed. they help people fix mistakes they didn't know about.
  250. # [09:19] <hsivonen> sayrer: if you wouldn't add a profile yourself but might use a microformat without profile, would you consider massive permathreads about the right profile URIs for use with those formats an epic waste of time for humanity?
  251. # [09:19] * Joins: virtuelv_ (n=virtuelv@APuteaux-155-1-67-144.w90-2.abo.wanadoo.fr)
  252. # [09:20] <sayrer> I might use a microformat without knowing I am using a microformat, because they squat short strings
  253. # [09:20] <sayrer> not that there is anything wrong with that
  254. # [09:21] <sayrer> and, yes, I would consider a massive permathread an epic waste of time
  255. # [09:21] <hsivonen> sayrer: well, there's 'harm' from profile
  256. # [09:22] * Joins: danbri (n=danbri@77.167.54.81)
  257. # [09:22] * Quits: virtuelv_ (n=virtuelv@APuteaux-155-1-67-144.w90-2.abo.wanadoo.fr) (Client Quit)
  258. # [09:22] <sayrer> hsivonen, you mean from spec mailing lists? some people don't want relief from the pain.
  259. # [09:23] <hsivonen> sayrer: well, discussing profile is a huge time sink for the HTML WG. However, if the HTML WG doesn't get rid of profile, over the years profile will sink much more human effort.
  260. # [09:23] <sayrer> maybe. less than em vs. b?
  261. # [09:24] <sayrer> less than "semantic" whatever?
  262. # [09:24] <sayrer> highly questionable
  263. # [09:24] <hsivonen> sayrer: discussing em vs. i is a total waste of time, too.
  264. # [09:24] <sayrer> er
  265. # [09:24] <sayrer> yeah :)
  266. # [09:24] <hsivonen> the right solution would have been to never introduce em, strong, var, and dfn
  267. # [09:25] <hsivonen> but now that both em and i are in use, taking away either would be too disruptive
  268. # [09:25] <sayrer> yeah, and it doesn't matter a whole lot
  269. # [09:25] <hsivonen> however, we might just get away with zapping profile still
  270. # [09:25] <sayrer> would you consider that a great victory?
  271. # [09:25] <hsivonen> no
  272. # [09:26] <sayrer> a small one?
  273. # [09:26] <sayrer> a victory against what?
  274. # [09:26] <sayrer> I honestly have no idea
  275. # [09:26] <sayrer> against wasted bits? I have several vendors you may wish to contact
  276. # [09:26] <annevk> it simplifies the language
  277. # [09:27] <annevk> you consider the Dreamweaver thing a serious implementation?
  278. # [09:27] <sayrer> really? I thought no one used it
  279. # [09:27] <annevk> well, some people do, and apparently a whole bunch of people thought it actually did something, including the guys from WordPress
  280. # [09:27] <sayrer> sure, I consider Mozilla a serious implementation as well. we do useless things.
  281. # [09:27] <sayrer> annevk, they did it because tantek said to.
  282. # [09:28] <annevk> no, I meant what Dreamweaver did for profile=""
  283. # [09:28] <hsivonen> sayrer: a small victory against permathreads
  284. # [09:28] <hsivonen> sayrer: huh? Mozilla does something with profile?
  285. # [09:29] <sayrer> hsivonen, I meant that Mozilla does useless things, but I still consider it a serious implementation
  286. # [09:29] <sayrer> since it mostly does non-useless things
  287. # [09:29] <hsivonen> sayrer: but those useless things aren't relevant to profile?
  288. # [09:30] <sayrer> hsivonen, annevk asked a question about whether I considered Dreamweaver a serious implementation in relation to @profile. I think the two issues are orthogonal.
  289. # [09:30] <annevk> no, I meant if you considered what Dreamweaver did for profile="" to be serious
  290. # [09:31] <hsivonen> sayrer: fwiw, when the microformats community instructs people to use profile, I think they violate the Priority of Constituencies principle by putting the political convenience of specifiers ahead of the convenience of implementors and authors
  291. # [09:31] <sayrer> annevk, sorry. and no, not at all.
  292. # [09:31] <annevk> because it looks like they treat it as an attribute that takes a URL without providing any UI that makes sense for the feature
  293. # [09:31] <hsivonen> it's not their principle, though
  294. # [09:31] <annevk> (besides the fact that profile="" takes a space-separated list of URLs; one might argue Dreamweaver is buggy)
  295. # [09:32] <hsivonen> yay, QA cost of profile
  296. # [09:32] <sayrer> hsivonen, I think arguments that run for the charter or design principles are only useful when something is really off the rails. like some XHTML stuff.
  297. # [09:32] * Joins: virtuelv_ (n=virtuelv@APuteaux-155-1-67-144.w90-2.abo.wanadoo.fr)
  298. # [09:32] <sayrer> I don't see how there is a QA cost if it doesn't do anything
  299. # [09:33] <sayrer> there is a real cost to <o:p>
  300. # [09:33] <hsivonen> sayrer: there's the cost of checking that you can enter the right kind of talismans
  301. # [09:33] <hsivonen> in general, I disagree with the argument that no-op talismans have no cost.
  302. # [09:33] <sayrer> ah
  303. # [09:34] <hsivonen> every piece of spec text has a cost
  304. # [09:34] <sayrer> yes
  305. # [09:34] <sayrer> do you buy the backward compatibility argument?
  306. # [09:34] <hsivonen> even if it is only the cost of people making the informed decision that the text is silly and needs to implmentation action
  307. # [09:34] <hsivonen> sayrer: which argument?
  308. # [09:34] <sayrer> that HTML5 must be backward compatible?
  309. # [09:35] <annevk> backwards compatible with what?
  310. # [09:35] <sayrer> with content that uses @profile, like my blog
  311. # [09:35] <hsivonen> sayrer: I buy it in the sense that a consumer agent implementing HTML5 should not continue to work with existing Web content
  312. # [09:36] <sayrer> should continue to work, you mean?
  313. # [09:36] <annevk> we're already incompatible with your blog
  314. # [09:36] * Quits: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@APuteaux-155-1-17-103.w83-204.abo.wanadoo.fr) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  315. # [09:36] <annevk> e.g. with the DOCTYPE
  316. # [09:36] <hsivonen> sayrer: well, if agents now do nothing with profile, backward compat requires them not to do any thing with it
  317. # [09:37] <sayrer> annevk. user agents would change their parsing of my blog?
  318. # [09:37] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@92.40.4.72.sub.mbb.three.co.uk)
  319. # [09:37] <sayrer> hsivonen, is @profile reserved by Ian's HTML5 document?
  320. # [09:38] <annevk> sayrer, no
  321. # [09:38] <hsivonen> sayrer: yes, it is reserved
  322. # [09:38] <sayrer> hsivonen, is the hope that we can some day unreserve it?
  323. # [09:38] <hsivonen> sayrer: no
  324. # [09:38] <sayrer> then I am a little lost
  325. # [09:38] <hsivonen> sayrer: it is forever tainted
  326. # [09:38] <sayrer> you say forever tainted, I say forever "defined"
  327. # [09:39] * Joins: dave_levin_ (n=dave_lev@72.14.224.1)
  328. # [09:39] <hsivonen> sayrer: how would you define it?
  329. # [09:39] <sayrer> similarly to RSS2 <textinput>
  330. # [09:39] <annevk> a change to the DOCTYPE on your blog would change the layout model
  331. # [09:40] <hsivonen> sayrer: sorry, my knowledge of RSS2 details is so rusty that I don't get the analogy
  332. # [09:40] <sayrer> "The purpose of the <textInput> element is something of a mystery. You can use it to specify a search engine box. Or to allow a reader to provide feedback. Most aggregators ignore it."
  333. # [09:40] <sayrer> http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/rss/rss.html#lttextinputgtSubelementOfLtchannelgt
  334. # [09:41] <annevk> anyway, my point was that todays content is not compatible with HTML5 requirements on content and whether or not profile= is conforming is orthogonal to that unless we change other things first
  335. # [09:41] <sayrer> annevk, I don't get your point at all
  336. # [09:41] <annevk> ok, not sure how else to put it
  337. # [09:41] <sayrer> this entire argument is about whether requirements on content matter
  338. # [09:41] <sayrer> or at least how much they matter
  339. # [09:42] <annevk> well, I asked "backwards compatible with what"
  340. # [09:42] <annevk> you said with your content
  341. # [09:42] <hsivonen> sayrer: so do you think "The purpose of profile is something of a mystery." would meet the level of spec quality we are after with HTML5?
  342. # [09:42] <annevk> I said that your content was incompatible regardless
  343. # [09:42] <sayrer> I see, sloppy
  344. # [09:42] <sayrer> backwards compatible with current parsing of my content
  345. # [09:42] <annevk> I don't see what that has to do with @profile
  346. # [09:43] <sayrer> hsivonen, it is a true statment, so we have that at least
  347. # [09:43] <annevk> and no, there's no parsing differences between limited quirks mode and no quirks mode
  348. # [09:43] <hsivonen> sayrer: it doesn't say what authors or implementors need to do with it, so it's not a very useful true statement
  349. # [09:44] <sayrer> it says it is a mystery
  350. # [09:44] <sayrer> and user agents might ignore it
  351. # [09:44] <hsivonen> sayrer: btw, would you consider getting profile into HTML5 a victory, and if so, against what?
  352. # [09:44] <sayrer> that would be useful to me
  353. # [09:45] <hsivonen> sayrer: how?
  354. # [09:45] <sayrer> hsivonen, a victory against declaring most extant Wordpress blogs invalid
  355. # [09:45] <hsivonen> sayrer: I see
  356. # [09:45] <annevk> sayrer, they are invalid regardless of @profile!
  357. # [09:45] * Joins: doublec (n=doublec@li30-216.members.linode.com)
  358. # [09:45] <hsivonen> sayrer: HTML5 does declare them invalid for other reasons, though
  359. # [09:45] * Quits: doublec (n=doublec@li30-216.members.linode.com) (Client Quit)
  360. # [09:45] <sayrer> ok, let them be invalid for better reasons
  361. # [09:46] <sayrer> better reasons than /> and @profile
  362. # [09:46] <hsivonen> sayrer: would it address your concern if HTML5 allowed profile with the exact value "http://gmpg.org/xfn/11"?
  363. # [09:47] <sayrer> that seems weird, and doesn't increase interoperation vs. letting it be.
  364. # [09:47] * Joins: doublec (n=doublec@li30-216.members.linode.com)
  365. # [09:48] <hsivonen> fwiw, I think http://www.gmpg.org/xmdp/ might have served a political purpose some time, but I don't see it serving a technical purpose today
  366. # [09:48] <sayrer> but if someone showed that was all that was needed
  367. # [09:49] <sayrer> hsivonen, I think it was a political excuse to squat short strings
  368. # [09:49] <sayrer> (again, I don't care about squatting)
  369. # [09:49] * Joins: zcorpan_ (n=zcorpan@c83-252-203-80.bredband.comhem.se)
  370. # [09:49] <hsivonen> aside: regarding the cost of profile, when it was in HTML5, developing validation for it required a datatype that wasn't used anywhere else
  371. # [09:49] <hsivonen> sayrer: right
  372. # [09:50] <hsivonen> however, since *I* already have that code, profile validation is now sunk cost for me
  373. # [09:50] <sayrer> hmm, I'm not sure I would validate an attribute that doesn't do anything
  374. # [09:50] <sayrer> ah, excellent compromise!
  375. # [09:51] <sayrer> couldn't validators alert users to the fact that they don't validate the value of @profile because it doesn't do anything?
  376. # [09:51] <annevk> should be the same data type as <a ping>
  377. # [09:51] <hsivonen> sayrer: I do that with RDF. It's even more code, but it's possible, sure.
  378. # [09:51] <sayrer> <a ping> accepts arbitrary numbers of URIs
  379. # [09:51] <sayrer> hahhaahaha
  380. # [09:51] <sayrer> yeah, that's going to work great!
  381. # [09:52] <hsivonen> annevk: didn't ping accept relative URL?
  382. # [09:52] * Joins: pauld_ (n=pauld@92.40.128.42.sub.mbb.three.co.uk)
  383. # [09:52] <hsivonen> sayrer: oops. the message doesn't say that RDF doesn't do anything.
  384. # [09:52] <sayrer> hsivonen, should I file a bug? ;)
  385. # [09:53] <hsivonen> sayrer: no ;-)
  386. # [09:54] <sayrer> hmm, it occurs to me that using @profile was quite dishonest of the microformats people
  387. # [09:54] <sayrer> they claimed namespaces were overengineering
  388. # [09:54] <sayrer> fair
  389. # [09:54] <sayrer> but then they used one that has no effects
  390. # [09:55] <hsivonen> is it engineering if it has no effects? :-)
  391. # [09:55] <sayrer> might have been better to just say "we're squatting, so what"
  392. # [09:55] <hsivonen> yes
  393. # [09:55] <sayrer> hsivonen, well, one of their central claims concerns unobservable metadata
  394. # [09:56] * Quits: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@c-98-203-247-78.hsd1.wa.comcast.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  395. # [09:56] * dave_levin_ is now known as dave_levin
  396. # [10:04] * Joins: pauld__ (n=pauld@92.40.17.161.sub.mbb.three.co.uk)
  397. # [10:07] * Quits: didymos (i=jho@rapwap.razor.dk) (calvino.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
  398. # [10:07] * Quits: Simetrical (n=Simetric@wikipedia/simetrical) (calvino.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
  399. # [10:07] * Joins: didymos (i=jho@rapwap.razor.dk)
  400. # [10:07] * Joins: Simetrical (n=Simetric@wikipedia/simetrical)
  401. # [10:08] * Quits: zcorpan_ (n=zcorpan@c83-252-203-80.bredband.comhem.se) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  402. # [10:08] * Joins: zcorpan_ (n=zcorpan@c83-252-203-80.bredband.comhem.se)
  403. # [10:08] * Quits: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt) ("Ex-Chat")
  404. # [10:09] * Joins: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt)
  405. # [10:09] <zcorpan_> Hixie: function showLoginForm(network if (network.username && network.password) {
  406. # [10:09] <zcorpan_> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/status.js
  407. # [10:09] <zcorpan_> doesn't look right
  408. # [10:10] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  409. # [10:10] * Quits: pauld__ (n=pauld@92.40.17.161.sub.mbb.three.co.uk)
  410. # [10:11] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@92.40.4.72.sub.mbb.three.co.uk) (Connection timed out)
  411. # [10:11] <Hixie> wip
  412. # [10:15] <sayrer> Hixie, btw there are two kinds of bofs at the ietf
  413. # [10:15] <sayrer> one is formal, on the agenda
  414. # [10:15] <sayrer> the other is not
  415. # [10:15] <sayrer> my understanding is that the html5 thing is the latter
  416. # [10:15] <sayrer> avoiding all the fees etc of the ietf
  417. # [10:16] <zcorpan_> Hixie: while you're working on that, it would be nice if the edit popup said which 'id' it was bound to
  418. # [10:16] <annevk> good
  419. # [10:17] <Hixie> yeah i'm going to the html5 one
  420. # [10:17] <sayrer> the IETF process is pretty much the process of avoiding process
  421. # [10:17] <Hixie> i was talking about the web socket thing at the bof itself
  422. # [10:17] <Hixie> s/bof/official meeting/
  423. # [10:17] <sayrer> oh, the HTTP meeting?
  424. # [10:17] <annevk> Hixie, oh, that's separate?
  425. # [10:17] <Hixie> zcorpan_: k
  426. # [10:17] <Hixie> you've both now exceeded the bounds of my knowledge
  427. # [10:18] <sayrer> they want to discuss web socket behind the paywall, so to speak?
  428. # [10:18] <Hixie> apparently
  429. # [10:18] <Hixie> you were cc'ed on the e-mail mentioning this
  430. # [10:18] <sayrer> some of them
  431. # [10:18] <annevk> how high is this wall in dollars?
  432. # [10:18] <sayrer> whatever the meeting fee is
  433. # [10:19] * hsivonen didn't know the IETF was pay-to-play
  434. # [10:19] <sayrer> $700 US or so last time I went
  435. # [10:19] <Hixie> sayrer: i'm talking about the e-mail that says "Ian, are you attending the IETF officially"
  436. # [10:19] <Hixie> hsivonen: it's double pay-to-play -- some company sponsors the event, and then attendees pay some exhorbitant fee
  437. # [10:19] <Hixie> i don't mind company sponsorship
  438. # [10:20] <Hixie> i do mind restricting participation to those who can pay
  439. # [10:20] <sayrer> there are also ghost fees
  440. # [10:20] <sayrer> like group rates in the hotel hosting
  441. # [10:20] <sayrer> it is insidious
  442. # [10:20] <Hixie> i understand the ietf has rising costs and so forth, and respect that they have to make choices and so forth
  443. # [10:20] <sayrer> it is a little better than the w3c, though
  444. # [10:21] <annevk> 700 US? geez
  445. # [10:21] <Hixie> the w3c varis on a per-wg basis
  446. # [10:21] <Hixie> varies
  447. # [10:21] <Hixie> e.g. the htmlwg meeting is free (excluding personal costs)
  448. # [10:21] <sayrer> I was talking about membership
  449. # [10:22] <sayrer> something the IETF doesn't have
  450. # [10:22] <Lachy> Hixie, the solution to the table summary problem is this:
  451. # [10:22] <Lachy> <p id="summary">Useful summary for everyone...</p><table aria-describedby="summary">...</table>
  452. # [10:23] <annevk> I hope not
  453. # [10:23] * annevk hates writing IDREFs
  454. # [10:23] <sayrer> Hixie, at any rate, I would be willing to discuss Web Sockets. I sincerely think it is a great idea.
  455. # [10:24] <sayrer> I might not be the advocate you are looking for, though
  456. # [10:24] <Lachy> or <figure><legend>summary</legend> <table>...</table></figure>
  457. # [10:24] <sayrer> I will probably defend it no matter what
  458. # [10:24] <sayrer> so maybe it doesn't matter
  459. # [10:24] <Lachy> or just don't use any explicit association, and rely on their proximity and context
  460. # [10:25] <annevk> I like it too, but I'm not gonna get Opera to pay 700 US just to say that; that's insane
  461. # [10:25] * Quits: pauld_ (n=pauld@92.40.128.42.sub.mbb.three.co.uk) (Connection timed out)
  462. # [10:26] <sayrer> I contribute to the HTTP specs too
  463. # [10:26] <sayrer> and the HTTP group doesn't meet at every meeting
  464. # [10:27] <annevk> it seems weird for it to be part of the HTTP WG though since it would be out of charter for them
  465. # [10:27] <sayrer> it's on port 80
  466. # [10:27] <annevk> and the IETF is apparently very peculiar about those
  467. # [10:27] <annevk> sayrer, it's on any port
  468. # [10:28] <annevk> sayrer, defaulting to 81 actually, iirc
  469. # [10:28] <sayrer> oh really
  470. # [10:28] <sayrer> isn't that the same as 80 for some legacy reason?
  471. # [10:28] <sayrer> I forget
  472. # [10:28] <annevk> no, you can do it over 80 if you want
  473. # [10:28] <sayrer> no, I mean 81 is a synonym for 80
  474. # [10:28] <sayrer> just proxy busting
  475. # [10:28] <sayrer> iirc
  476. # [10:29] <annevk> ah, that could be true
  477. # [10:29] <Hixie> sayrer: for most groups membership is free if you can convince someone to invite you -- with the htmlwg, the main group whose creation i was involved in, anyone can join
  478. # [10:29] <Hixie> sayrer: (wg membership at ietf is free too, as i understand it)
  479. # [10:29] <Hixie> sayrer: (and meetings are optional once you've started the group)
  480. # [10:29] <annevk> neh, http://www.opera.com:81/ doesn't work
  481. # [10:29] <Hixie> sayrer: if you're going, feel free to talk about it :-)
  482. # [10:30] <Hixie> 81 isn't registered currently
  483. # [10:30] * Parts: olliej (n=oliver@nat/apple/x-f675d39448e4b12f)
  484. # [10:30] <sayrer> Hixie, maybe no one needs to go. I can already hear the objections.
  485. # [10:30] <Hixie> (though i'll register it if we go ahead with websocket)
  486. # [10:32] <sayrer> gosh, which port did I get recommended for big downloads
  487. # [10:32] <annevk> it seems even harder to convince the IETF of browser related issues than the W3C
  488. # [10:32] <zcorpan_> http://www.isolani.co.uk/blog/standards/TheIe8BlacklistMinefield - as expected ie7 mode in ie8 doesn't match ie7
  489. # [10:32] <sayrer> so busted caching proxies wouldn't break it
  490. # [10:32] <sayrer> I swear it was 81
  491. # [10:32] <annevk> mostly because the IETF is even more convinced we're doing it all wrong :)
  492. # [10:32] <Hixie> sayrer: might well have been
  493. # [10:33] <sayrer> if it was only that one site, no big deal
  494. # [10:33] <zcorpan_> oh wait ie8 has two "ie7" modes?
  495. # [10:33] <sayrer> I thought it was proxy lingua franca. bad assumption.
  496. # [10:34] <sayrer> annevk, it turns out the IETF people are receptive to the reality argument, tho
  497. # [10:35] * Joins: ROBOd (n=robod@89.122.216.38)
  498. # [10:42] * zcorpan_ doesn't follow isofarro's reasoning
  499. # [10:42] <annevk> sayrer, not last time I tried to argue over something with the HTTP WG
  500. # [10:42] <annevk> Content-Location
  501. # [10:43] <sayrer> hmm, doesn't sound reality based?
  502. # [10:43] * Hixie considers using a <canvas> the height of the HTML5 document
  503. # [10:43] <annevk> or URLs
  504. # [10:43] <annevk> sayrer, check bugzilla
  505. # [10:43] <sayrer> which
  506. # [10:43] <sayrer> URLs they are gonna lose
  507. # [10:43] <annevk> the one from Mozilla
  508. # [10:43] <zcorpan_> Hixie: are you trying to make it crash more browsers?
  509. # [10:43] <sayrer> annevk, which bug?
  510. # [10:43] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host81-130-24-71.in-addr.btopenworld.com)
  511. # [10:44] <annevk> several, bz was involved
  512. # [10:44] * annevk doesn't know numbers
  513. # [10:44] <sayrer> zcorpan_: interoperability is good
  514. # [10:44] <sayrer> annevk, bugs on Content-Location?
  515. # [10:44] <sayrer> with real websites?
  516. # [10:44] <sayrer> surprising
  517. # [10:44] <annevk> yeah, real websites broke because of Mozilla supporting it
  518. # [10:44] <Hixie> zcorpan_: :-P
  519. # [10:44] <sayrer> delicious
  520. # [10:45] <annevk> for some time bz even created whitelists/blacklists
  521. # [10:45] <annevk> I believe at some point he concluded the spec didn't make sense either, but this has been a while
  522. # [10:46] <annevk> most of my interactions with the IETF fail for some reason or another
  523. # [10:46] <roc> zcorpan: hmm, an even more impressive train-wreck than I thought
  524. # [10:46] <annevk> could just be me of course, but elsewhere similar interactions work out much better
  525. # [10:47] <Hixie> my interactions with actual ietf people (primarily lisa) have been very productive and friendly
  526. # [10:48] <sayrer> my feeling is that the IETF desperately wants to be relevant
  527. # [10:48] <roc> zcorpan: but I don't think "Compatibility View" is different from "IE7 standards mode"
  528. # [10:48] <sayrer> and they don't have a coordination requirement like the W3C does
  529. # [10:49] <sayrer> but they do have fuzzy consensus processes
  530. # [10:49] <sayrer> that defend against process hacking, but also transparency
  531. # [10:50] <sayrer> also a chickenshit patent policy
  532. # [10:50] <Hixie> personally my experience hasn't been that the problem is with the processes themselves, since as far as i can tell nobody really follows them whatever the standards organisation
  533. # [10:50] <sayrer> I have seen you rail against W3C process violations
  534. # [10:51] <Hixie> oh i'm not saying that violating documented process is a good thing
  535. # [10:51] <Hixie> i'm just saying that i don't think that's the real problem
  536. # [10:51] <sayrer> IETF processes are written such that only loonies go off like that
  537. # [10:51] <Hixie> the main problem that i've found afflict people in all standards organisations is a reliance on expertise rather than logical argument and research
  538. # [10:51] <Hixie> and i've seen that everywhere
  539. # [10:52] <Hixie> ietf, ecma, w3c, iso, you name it
  540. # [10:52] <sayrer> I don't really like "logical argument", but I do like "research"
  541. # [10:52] <Hixie> yeah, research certainly is the more important of the two
  542. # [10:52] <Hixie> a lot of people in the spec world will just go with "well i think it should be foo" and that's the end of their argument
  543. # [10:52] <sayrer> rationalization can usually pass for logical argument
  544. # [10:52] <Hixie> they never say "because..." something
  545. # [10:53] <Hixie> or they say "because i know best", or "because i've had 20 years' experience", or some other argument from authority
  546. # [10:53] <sayrer> I've seen counterexamples
  547. # [10:54] <Hixie> how do you mean?
  548. # [10:54] <Hixie> there are certainly many people doing it the right way
  549. # [10:54] <Philip`> Hixie: I think Opera limits canvases to 32000x32000 pixels, and I'd guess the HTML5 spec is taller than that, and it would be nice if the spec still actually worked in most browsers
  550. # [10:54] <Hixie> with research, etc
  551. # [10:54] <Hixie> Philip`: don't worry, i didn't seriously consider it
  552. # [10:54] <Philip`> and I think Firefox (2, maybe 3?) has a coordinate system that runs out at +/- 32K or something
  553. # [10:55] <Philip`> and of course you'd be incompatible with IE :-(
  554. # [10:55] <sayrer> Hixie, I mean that the value propositions for each party are obvious for people who've been around the block once
  555. # [10:56] <Hixie> value propositions?
  556. # [10:56] <sayrer> Hixie, I am thinking of the classic "firewalls will block it"
  557. # [10:57] <sayrer> turns out they probably will
  558. # [10:57] <sayrer> so people who want to standardize something have a burden of proof that kind of sucks
  559. # [10:58] <sayrer> but they might be prone to argue for evidence that the default is true
  560. # [10:59] <hsivonen> the wish to tweak Referer instead of minting a new header seems more principled than evidence-based, though. at least to a casual observer.
  561. # [10:59] <sayrer> yeah, I agree
  562. # [10:59] <sayrer> the belief that Origin won't be blocked is a different subject
  563. # [11:03] <annevk> whether or not it's blocked, it's near impossible to change right now
  564. # [11:03] <sayrer> Origin?
  565. # [11:03] <annevk> yeah
  566. # [11:04] <sayrer> why?
  567. # [11:04] <annevk> because in a few months it will be shipping in Safari 4, Firefox 3.1, and Internet Explorer 8
  568. # [11:04] <jgraham> FWIW it's still not clear to me that using <caption><details> or <figure><details> doesn't meet the WCAG-recommended use case for <table @summary>. However some control over the styling would be needed for authors to get it right.
  569. # [11:05] <sayrer> annevk, which other header will ship in all of those?
  570. # [11:05] <sayrer> starts with "Ref"
  571. # [11:05] * Philip` guesses that if authors can't trivially work out how to style it 'right' (for whatever their definition of 'right' is, which might include being invisible) then they'll not bother including any summary text anywhere at all
  572. # [11:05] <annevk> servers doing anything with the style of cross-origin requests those implementations allow will use Origin
  573. # [11:06] <jgraham> Philip`: Which would, roughly speaking, be the status quo :)
  574. # [11:06] <sayrer> annevk, I agree. What value does origin deliver to proxies.
  575. # [11:07] <annevk> is that question? (I don't know the answer.)
  576. # [11:08] <sayrer> annevk, yes a question. sorry for the poor punctuation.
  577. # [11:08] <sayrer> annevk, the answer is: nothing.
  578. # [11:08] <sayrer> so it goes in the same circular file
  579. # [11:08] <sayrer> since it does have a risk
  580. # [11:09] <Philip`> Does a lack of complaining users count as value?
  581. # [11:09] <sayrer> no
  582. # [11:09] <sayrer> you have obviously never sat behind an energetic proxy
  583. # [11:09] <annevk> I heard that most proxies are not updated often
  584. # [11:10] <annevk> but ok
  585. # [11:10] <sayrer> not such a good argument
  586. # [11:10] <annevk> it's not an argument
  587. # [11:10] <sayrer> not such a good mitigating factor?
  588. # [11:10] <annevk> I don't really care either way
  589. # [11:10] <sayrer> what matters is how many users sit behind a proxy updated for Origin
  590. # [11:11] <sayrer> or how many of a given site's users sit behind that proxy
  591. # [11:11] <sayrer> tough!
  592. # [11:11] <annevk> yeah
  593. # [11:12] <Philip`> sayrer: Do you mean a proxy updated to allow Origin, or a proxy updated to block Origin?
  594. # [11:13] <sayrer> proxies generally allow unknown headers in my experience, and abarth had some data that showed that too
  595. # [11:13] <sayrer> he misapplied that data to claim that they would continue to allow Origin
  596. # [11:13] <sayrer> but quibble quibble
  597. # [11:14] * Joins: dave_levin_ (n=dave_lev@c-98-203-247-78.hsd1.wa.comcast.net)
  598. # [11:14] <Philip`> "In our experiment, the X-Requested-By header is correctly delivered to servers approximately 99.90–99.99% of the time"
  599. # [11:15] * Philip` supposes it would also be nice to know whether X-* headers are handled any differently to non-prefixed unknown headers
  600. # [11:15] <sayrer> I tried arbitrary headers on 4 different US cell networks once
  601. # [11:15] <sayrer> they worked
  602. # [11:16] <sayrer> but at least two of them were using Squid
  603. # [11:16] <sayrer> and that was years ago nwo
  604. # [11:16] <sayrer> now
  605. # [11:17] <roc> I think Origin has a chance if we can deploy applications that use it faster than people can deploy proxies that strip it
  606. # [11:17] <sayrer> roc, Origin doesn't necessarily need to disclose the origin domain though
  607. # [11:17] <sayrer> unless you want to whitelist domains regardless of hierarchy
  608. # [11:18] <sayrer> it depends whether the goal is to allow cross site requests or prevent CSRF
  609. # [11:19] * Joins: myakura (n=myakura@p3020-ipbf505marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp)
  610. # [11:19] <annevk> my main use case is the former
  611. # [11:20] <sayrer> I've seen both prioritized
  612. # [11:20] <annevk> at some point it was hijacked to also do the latter; I'm ambivalent to that
  613. # [11:20] <sayrer> enough to question whether they need to be the same header
  614. # [11:20] <sayrer> actually
  615. # [11:20] <annevk> see public-webapps archive
  616. # [11:20] <Philip`> roc: That deployment approach would require applications that fail without the header (e.g. use it for allowing cross site requests), because if it merely prevents CSRF then nobody will notice when proxies start stripping it and so proxies would have no reason to stop stripping it
  617. # [11:21] <sayrer> I suppose it's ok to try it for both at first
  618. # [11:21] <Philip`> but the former case doesn't seem to be backward-compatible enough for anyone to rely on it for the next several years
  619. # [11:21] <sayrer> then when Origin fails, a sensible URL-proximity header can be minted
  620. # [11:21] <sayrer> the no stop energy approach
  621. # [11:22] <roc> Philip`: true about CSRF, false about CORS ... applications might have optional features that require CORS
  622. # [11:23] <Philip`> roc: Ah, I suppose it would work better if it was used as a bonus rather than as a core requirement
  623. # [11:24] <sayrer> "it doesn't work from my computer"
  624. # [11:24] <sayrer> "ok, I'll proxy the request"
  625. # [11:24] <sayrer> problem solved
  626. # [11:24] <sayrer> just saying
  627. # [11:25] <sayrer> I could be wrong, unless some website operator is willing to fall on their sword for CORS
  628. # [11:25] <annevk> i guess we'll see, right?
  629. # [11:25] <sayrer> er, I could be wrong if
  630. # [11:25] <sayrer> annevk, exactly. That's why the no stop energy appproach is best.
  631. # [11:26] * Quits: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.224.1) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  632. # [11:26] * dave_levin_ is now known as dave_levin
  633. # [11:28] <annevk> URL proximity does not really allow for the case where you only want to share with specific URLs
  634. # [11:28] <annevk> that are on completely separate domains
  635. # [11:32] <annevk> hmm, how does Referer work in face of redirects?
  636. # [11:32] * Joins: svl (n=me@69.Red-88-2-205.staticIP.rima-tde.net)
  637. # [11:32] * Quits: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@c-98-203-247-78.hsd1.wa.comcast.net)
  638. # [11:36] * Joins: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-75-79.dynamic.amis.net)
  639. # [11:36] <annevk> I don't think it does, but the HTTP spec seems very vague
  640. # [11:37] <hsivonen> hashing origin wouldn't solve the issue of a cross-site widget provider seeing what public sites a user reads but it would address the issue of leaking sensitive intranet host names like wiki.supersentiviteproduct.example.com
  641. # [11:40] <Philip`> But it'd be quite vulnerable to dictionary attacks, because domain names rarely have much entropy
  642. # [11:40] <Hixie> not only that, but typically you're looking for a yes/no answer against a small set of domains
  643. # [11:41] * Joins: tndH (n=Rob@james-baillie-pc083-014.student-halls.leeds.ac.uk)
  644. # [11:42] <hsivonen> I can see how a dictionary attack could tell who has been using a cross-site widget at www.playboy.com, but how would one use a dictionary attack to figure out iphonekiller.corp.google.com?
  645. # [11:43] <Philip`> By having a dictionary that contains terms like "iphone", "killer" and "corp", then trying all the combinations of terms and dots until you find one with the right hash
  646. # [11:43] <hsivonen> ok
  647. # [11:45] <beowulf> FWIW I think "Tables must not be used as layout aids" is too strong, tables layout data afterall
  648. # [11:45] <sayrer> Hixie/annevk, URl proximity does not allow an arbitrary whitelist of domains. it does allow stanford.facebook.com vs. www.facebook.com
  649. # [11:45] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  650. # [11:46] <sayrer> it seems like a reasonable trade-off for CSRF defense, and maybe useless for cross-origin request stuff
  651. # [11:46] <annevk> yeah, though if Origin works it won't be needed
  652. # [11:47] <sayrer> but that's why I say they don't need to be the same header, and also that I don't care if it is tried
  653. # [11:47] <annevk> i.e. if proxies are just scared of the path
  654. # [11:47] <sayrer> plausible, but I think they are scared of preventable breaches
  655. # [11:48] <sayrer> time will tell
  656. # [11:48] * Philip` wonders if Opera has stats on how many people enable its disable-referrer-sending feature
  657. # [11:49] * hsivonen wonders if intranet hosts are actually named iphonekiller or if they use kewl code names
  658. # [11:49] <sayrer> there are lots of interesting variations on the theme
  659. # [11:50] <sayrer> like scanning for hostname patterns that reveal a particular vulnerability might be present
  660. # [11:51] <sayrer> ooh, how about a wordpress vulnerability that made a cross-site request
  661. # [11:51] <sayrer> delicious
  662. # [11:57] <Philip`> http://www.google.com/search?q=referer+%22%2A.corp.google.com
  663. # [11:59] <sayrer> I once found that a googler was mooching my wifi that way :)
  664. # [11:59] <sayrer> close quarters here in nyc
  665. # [12:01] <sayrer> I think the person was a sysadmin too. access to lots of juicy sounding host names
  666. # [12:01] <sayrer> :)
  667. # [12:01] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com)
  668. # [12:03] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com) (Client Quit)
  669. # [12:03] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com)
  670. # [12:13] * Philip` wonders if someone broke Gmail
  671. # [12:14] <annevk> http://twitter.com/mikeyk/statuses/1244442800
  672. # [12:19] * Quits: sayrer (n=chatzill@user-160ve4s.cable.mindspring.com) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  673. # [12:20] * Quits: svl (n=me@69.Red-88-2-205.staticIP.rima-tde.net) ("And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.")
  674. # [12:27] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@dhcp-246-117.mag.keio.ac.jp) ("Tomorrow to fresh woods, and pastures new.")
  675. # [12:30] * Parts: annevk (n=annevk@dhcp-247-187.mag.keio.ac.jp)
  676. # [12:44] * Quits: zalan (n=kvirc@catv-89-133-232-199.catv.broadband.hu) ("KVIrc 3.4.0 Virgo http://www.kvirc.net/")
  677. # [12:55] <Hixie> zcorpan_: ok, added the id
  678. # [12:55] <Hixie> to the little boxes
  679. # [12:59] <Philip`> Argh, now even the multipage version is incredibly slow to load in Opera
  680. # [12:59] <hsivonen> Hixie: HTML5 has changed <!doctype html></body><title>X</title> to parse in a way that's different from Gecko, Safari and Opera
  681. # [12:59] <hsivonen> Hixie: is that intentional?
  682. # [12:59] <Hixie> oh?
  683. # [12:59] <Hixie> oh
  684. # [12:59] <Hixie> hm
  685. # [12:59] <Hixie> i guess </body> shouldn't autoclose before head huh
  686. # [13:00] <hsivonen> seem so
  687. # [13:00] <hsivonen> +s
  688. # [13:00] <Hixie> do you know which diff that was?
  689. # [13:00] <Hixie> actually if you could file a bug that'd be great
  690. # [13:01] <Philip`> Hixie: There still seems to be an off-by-one error in the month of the dates in the status annotations
  691. # [13:01] <Hixie> i don't want to be half-way through this edit when i leave here, which could happen any moment
  692. # [13:01] <hsivonen> Hixie: I'll try to figure that out and file a bug
  693. # [13:01] <Philip`> e.g. all zcorpan's annotations are marked as 2009-01-23
  694. # [13:01] <Hixie> hsivonen: thanks, that's awesome
  695. # [13:01] <Hixie> Philip`: oops
  696. # [13:02] <Hixie> try now?
  697. # [13:02] * Joins: xydyx (n=hdh@58.187.20.139)
  698. # [13:02] <Philip`> Hixie: Looks better now
  699. # [13:03] <Hixie> cool
  700. # [13:03] * Joins: zdobersek1 (n=zan@cpe-92-37-77-108.dynamic.amis.net)
  701. # [13:04] <Philip`> Hixie: I quite dislike how it uses 100% CPU when I view any spec page in Opera
  702. # [13:04] <Hixie> if you can work out why it does it, i'm open to improving the code
  703. # [13:05] <Philip`> Hixie: Hmm, I don't care enough to actually debug it
  704. # [13:05] <Hixie> heh
  705. # [13:06] * Philip` adds http://www.whatwg.org/*/status.js into Opera's blocked content list
  706. # [13:10] * Joins: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@APuteaux-155-1-70-137.w90-2.abo.wanadoo.fr)
  707. # [13:19] * Quits: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-75-79.dynamic.amis.net) (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  708. # [13:21] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-175-10.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  709. # [13:22] * Quits: danbri (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  710. # [13:26] * Quits: virtuelv_ (n=virtuelv@APuteaux-155-1-67-144.w90-2.abo.wanadoo.fr) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  711. # [13:31] * Joins: zalan (n=kvirc@catv-89-133-232-199.catv.broadband.hu)
  712. # [13:35] <hsivonen> http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3C!doctype%20html%3E%3Chtml%3E%3C%2Fhtml%3E%3C!--%20foo%20--%3E is interesting in WebKit
  713. # [13:44] <zcorpan_> hsivonen: why is it interesting?
  714. # [13:45] <hsivonen> zcorpan_: there's no head node
  715. # [13:46] <zcorpan_> hsivonen: there's never a head in webkit unless there's a <head> tag or some element that implies <head>
  716. # [13:47] <hsivonen> ah
  717. # [13:55] * Joins: eric_carlson (n=ericc@adsl-67-112-12-110.dsl.anhm01.pacbell.net)
  718. # [13:56] <Hixie> anyone have a good 16x16 icon that could represent JS libraries / shims / plugins?
  719. # [13:56] <Hixie> oooh
  720. # [13:56] <Hixie> wikipedia plugin icon
  721. # [13:57] <zcorpan_> Hixie: the spec seems to freeze firefox upon scrolling, too
  722. # [13:59] * Philip` wonders if Hixie is getting confused about the differences between specification documents and Acid tests
  723. # [14:01] <zcorpan_> Acid5 is the html5 spec
  724. # [14:01] <Hixie> heh
  725. # [14:01] <jgraham> Does the spec load at all now? I froze two browsers this morning tring to load it. This did not make me happy.
  726. # [14:02] <jgraham> Where by "load at all" I mean "load in a sensible amount of time i.e. < 60 seconds"
  727. # [14:02] <Philip`> I can use the multipage version in Firefox 2 with no problems
  728. # [14:02] <jgraham> The multipage version sucks on account of the multipageness
  729. # [14:02] <Philip`> Not sure about what other possibilities work
  730. # [14:03] <Philip`> jgraham: On the other hand, at least it doesn't suffer from singlepageness
  731. # [14:03] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host81-130-24-71.in-addr.btopenworld.com)
  732. # [14:04] <zcorpan_> jgraham: it works in safari
  733. # [14:05] <jgraham> zcorpan_: If you could only convince Apple to release Safari for Linux that would be a little more helpful :)
  734. # [14:06] * jgraham could use epiphany-webkit but that kind of sucks
  735. # [14:06] <Philip`> jgraham: Use Wine
  736. # [14:06] * zcorpan_ thinks Hixie does a "if (!safari) { while(true); }"
  737. # [14:06] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-175-10.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp) (Excess Flood)
  738. # [14:06] <Hixie> i really can't work out what is causing firefox's slowness during scrolling
  739. # [14:06] <Hixie> unless it's the offsetTop calls
  740. # [14:06] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-175-10.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  741. # [14:06] <Hixie> is offsetTop expensive?
  742. # [14:07] <Philip`> Is it moving stuff and causing a re-layout?
  743. # [14:07] <Hixie> no, only position:fixed stuff is changing
  744. # [14:07] <Hixie> at least in theory
  745. # [14:07] <Philip`> In theory, the code works perfectly with no slowdown at all
  746. # [14:08] <Philip`> so I wouldn't put too much faith in theory
  747. # [14:08] * Joins: annevk (n=annevk@p295349.tokynt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp)
  748. # [14:12] <Hixie> looks like firefox's problem is offsetTop is ass-slow
  749. # [14:14] * jgraham onders how many ways there are to tell the difference between 0 and -0 in ES3
  750. # [14:14] <jgraham> *wonders
  751. # [14:14] <Philip`> Infinite
  752. # [14:15] <jgraham> Philip`: That doesn't seem like a vey helpful answer
  753. # [14:15] <Philip`> function is_minus_zero(n) { return n == 0 && 1/n < 0 && ...an infinite number of expressions that evaluate to true... }
  754. # [14:16] <Philip`> jgraham: Would it be more helpful to lie and give you any other answer?
  755. # [14:16] <jgraham> Philip`: Yes.
  756. # [14:17] <zcorpan_> jgraham: 42
  757. # [14:17] <Philip`> jgraham: There's about seven, then
  758. # [14:17] <jgraham> I could try to make the problem more well defined, if you like
  759. # [14:17] <jgraham> But I would probablu leave some hole
  760. # [14:17] <Philip`> Since I have no idea what the problem is, that might be helpful
  761. # [14:18] <jgraham> What I actually mean is something like "howw many different functions are there such that f(0) != f(-0) in an observable way"
  762. # [14:18] <jgraham> So "division" would be one function
  763. # [14:19] <Philip`> I don't know of any ways that don't involve dividing a number by n and seeing if it's +Infinity or -Infinity
  764. # [14:19] <jgraham> Well atan2 does something different
  765. # [14:19] <jgraham> Though that is kindof division
  766. # [14:21] <Philip`> Ah, I forgot about atan2
  767. # [14:21] <hsivonen> Hixie: do you have an opinion on implementing frameset-ok as an insertion mode?
  768. # [14:25] <Hixie> how does it interact with other modes that currently say "act as if it was in the in-body mode"?
  769. # [14:25] <hsivonen> Hixie: they'd presumably go to the real in-body
  770. # [14:26] <hsivonen> Hixie: to get to any of the table or select stuff, you end up setting the flag to "not ok" first
  771. # [14:26] <Hixie> can any of those cases be triggered when frameset-ok is true, on elements that would make it false?
  772. # [14:27] <Hixie> if you are 100% sure that it is equivalent, then i'm fine with removing state variables
  773. # [14:27] <Hixie> but i wasn't sure when i wrote it
  774. # [14:28] <hsivonen> Hixie: as far as I can tell, any Process the token using the rules for the "in body" insertion mode. happens in cases where you must have set the flag to "not ok"
  775. # [14:29] <Hixie> and all of the cases that currently set the mode to in-body either always happen when frameset-ok or !framset-ok?
  776. # [14:29] <Hixie> i don't understand why gecko is so slow at this
  777. # [14:31] <hsivonen> Hixie: search for "Switch the insertion mode to "in body"." doesn't work for me
  778. # [14:32] <hsivonen> Hixie: but it seems to be that if you are switching towards "in body" and you aren't in one of the head states, frameset-ok must already be "not ok"
  779. # [14:32] * Joins: hdh (n=hdh@58.187.17.9)
  780. # [14:32] <Hixie> i guess i'd have to make <style> and other things that switch to CDATA use the current state
  781. # [14:33] <Hixie> instead of assuming in-body... though that might already be the case
  782. # [14:33] <hsivonen> Hixie: why? they already have to set the original mode. and coming out of CDATA switches to the orginal mode
  783. # [14:34] <Hixie> do any of them explicitly set the original mode to in body instead of to whatever the current mode is?
  784. # [14:34] * Quits: nessy (n=nessy@124-171-34-59.dyn.iinet.net.au) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  785. # [14:34] * hsivonen tries to understand his own character foster parenting code
  786. # [14:34] <Hixie> i guess not, if they did they'd fail in table
  787. # [14:35] <hsivonen> Hixie: none of them set explicitly to "in body"
  788. # [14:35] <Hixie> k
  789. # [14:35] * Joins: aroben (n=aroben@unaffiliated/aroben)
  790. # [14:40] <hsivonen> hmm. I think my text foster parenting may look crazy because it has bogus dead code...
  791. # [14:40] <hsivonen> I wonder why
  792. # [14:45] <Hixie> man i hate c-like languages that don't have the full complement of assignment operators
  793. # [14:45] <hsivonen> Hixie: I think it would be reasonable to do what WebKit does and foster-parent whitespace that comes before non-whitespace in a run of text tokens
  794. # [14:47] <annevk> how would you do that spec-wise?
  795. # [14:47] <Hixie> ok if the people who were complaining of new perf issues could recheck their browsers and see if the perf issues are back to where they were before, that'd be good
  796. # [14:47] <annevk> i guess you'd not special case whitespace
  797. # [14:47] * Quits: xydyx (n=hdh@58.187.20.139) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  798. # [14:48] <hsivonen> annevk: making the text coalescing buffer exist in the spec
  799. # [14:48] <Hixie> hsivonen: that would make the case of <body> text...... [long pause in network traffic] ...more text </body> not render the text received before the pause
  800. # [14:48] <hsivonen> annevk: it's black-box obvious that WebKit has one
  801. # [14:48] <hsivonen> I've got one, too, for the non-SAX cases
  802. # [14:48] <hsivonen> Hixie: correct
  803. # [14:49] <hsivonen> Hixie: but in practice, Web pages don't tend to have huge text nodes
  804. # [14:49] <Hixie> text/plain files do
  805. # [14:49] <hsivonen> instead there's plenty of intervening markup
  806. # [14:50] <Hixie> seems easy enough to me to just cut the buffer in half where necessary to match the current spec
  807. # [14:50] <jgraham> Doesn't it only matter inside tables?
  808. # [14:50] * jgraham isn't paying much attention
  809. # [14:51] <hsivonen> Hixie: text/plain files don't need to use the HTML5 tree builder
  810. # [14:52] * Quits: zcorpan_ (n=zcorpan@c83-252-203-80.bredband.comhem.se)
  811. # [14:52] <hsivonen> jgraham: I never append to text nodes that are in the tree
  812. # [14:53] <Hixie> hsivonen: they're specced to right now
  813. # [14:53] <Hixie> anyway
  814. # [14:53] <Hixie> if you want me to look at this, file a bug
  815. # [14:53] <Hixie> bed time now
  816. # [14:53] <Hixie> nn
  817. # [14:53] * hsivonen looks
  818. # [14:53] <hsivonen> nn
  819. # [14:56] <annevk> nn Hixie!
  820. # [14:56] <hsivonen> sigh. http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#read-text will indeed be a problem
  821. # [14:56] * annevk is tired/jetlagged too
  822. # [14:57] <hsivonen> does interop require text/plain documents to have one huge text node instead of a lot of tiny ones?
  823. # [14:58] <annevk> it would be good if there was interop
  824. # [14:58] <annevk> and one large text node makes more sense...
  825. # [14:58] <hsivonen> I'm tempted to write a one-off custom tree builder for text/plain instead of hacking the HTML one do more tricks
  826. # [14:59] <annevk> but you'll have the same issue for HTML then if people insert large text nodes...
  827. # [14:59] * Joins: olliej (n=oliver@nat/apple/x-f675d39448e4b12f)
  828. # [15:00] <hsivonen> unless a top site does it, I think I can get away with incremental rendering of HTML not happening in the middle of a text node
  829. # [15:00] * Joins: rubys (n=rubys@cpe-075-182-092-038.nc.res.rr.com)
  830. # [15:01] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host81-130-24-71.in-addr.btopenworld.com)
  831. # [15:04] <hsivonen> I guess the easy way out of my current problem is to make every text node flush check for potential foster parenting...
  832. # [15:08] <hsivonen> now I need an effient way to manage table taint so that I don't need to search the stack per non-WS char
  833. # [15:09] <hsivonen> how annoying
  834. # [15:11] <hsivonen> well, the stack doesn't need to be searched very deep anyway...
  835. # [15:14] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  836. # [15:26] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com)
  837. # [15:32] <annevk> rubys, maybe interoperation doesn't matter too much indeed; see also archives of this channel for a discussion regarding "harm"
  838. # [15:34] <rubys> search today?
  839. # [15:34] * Quits: eric_carlson (n=ericc@adsl-67-112-12-110.dsl.anhm01.pacbell.net)
  840. # [15:34] <rubys> I do believe that interop is important, vital even.
  841. # [15:38] <annevk> interop for content in terms of RFC 2119
  842. # [15:38] <annevk> (i.e. conformance requirements)
  843. # [15:38] <annevk> might be yesterday; bit confused with timezones :)
  844. # [15:38] <rubys> almost done reading...
  845. # [15:39] * Quits: myakura (n=myakura@p3020-ipbf505marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp) ("Leaving...")
  846. # [15:40] <Lachy> Hixie, the new floating status box on the left is really annoying
  847. # [15:41] <Lachy> Hixie, having the links to the section from within each status box is very useful, though
  848. # [15:42] <rubys> re: "the harm of the epic waste of time that including no-op syntax", that most emphatically is NOT what RFC 2119 is about.
  849. # [15:42] <rubys> re: "making <font> non-conforming protects users from the harm of media-dependent design", that may rise to the SHOULD NOT level at most.
  850. # [15:43] * Joins: myakura (n=myakura@p3020-ipbf505marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp)
  851. # [15:43] <zcorpan> hsivonen: "Error: The list attribute of the input element must refer to a datalist element or to a select element." - the spec changed here a while ago, only datalist is allowed
  852. # [15:44] <jgraham> rubys: So do you agree with the position that, in the face of a specification with defined error handling, there should be no MUST-level document conformance critera?
  853. # [15:46] * rubys thinking...
  854. # [15:46] <Lachy> jgraham, I don't, since that basically means authors can do whatever they want, which isn't really a useful goal to aim for
  855. # [15:47] <rubys> Lachy: it isn't as binary as that. SHOULDs still can exist, and Validators can still complain, for example.
  856. # [15:49] <Lachy> rubys, so are you saying, you would reduce a MUST-level conformance requirement like this to a SHOULD? "The datetime attribute, if present, must contain a valid date or time string that identifies the date or time being specified."
  857. # [15:49] * rubys repeats: THINKING. :-)
  858. # [15:50] <Lachy> so, that would mean authors SHOULD use a valid date, but they don't have to if they have a good reason??
  859. # [15:50] * Philip` wonders why everyone writing specs claims to use RFC 2119 terminology, even though they're usually not using the terms in the way defined there
  860. # [15:50] <Philip`> (rather than defining their own terms that are more applicable to their particular spec)
  861. # [15:50] <Lachy> Philip`, specs that don't use them as defined there should be fixd
  862. # [15:50] <Lachy> *fixed
  863. # [15:50] <jgraham> Philip`: Examples?
  864. # [15:52] <rubys> Lachy: I'll consult with some of my IETF friends. Datetime is a wonderful example, thanks!
  865. # [15:52] <rubys> The one I plan to start with (Paul Hoffman) is west coast US, so not likely to be up yet.
  866. # [15:53] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@99.140.60.47)
  867. # [15:54] * annevk votes for RFC2119-5
  868. # [15:54] <annevk> weinig, congrats!
  869. # [15:54] <Philip`> As far as I can tell, RFC 2119 was intended to apply to implementors of protocols, hence talking about "vendors" and "interoperability" (which I presume is in the sense of two pieces of software communicating with each other) and "e.g. limiting retransmissions", and was never intended to apply to human authors of documents
  870. # [15:55] <weinig> annevk: ?
  871. # [15:55] <annevk> on shipping and all
  872. # [15:56] <weinig> ah, we shipped!
  873. # [15:56] <annevk> :p
  874. # [15:56] <weinig> I forgot :)
  875. # [15:56] <annevk> did cross-origin requests ship?
  876. # [15:56] <jgraham> (FWIW I tend to think that such a position would be putting theoretical purity ahead of the actual needs of authors. It is much easier to write a useful QA tool based on MUST level conditions than SHOULD and, although it is true that defined error handling may lead to interoperable browser behaviour, authors should not be expected to understand the details of the error handling and therefore should be warned whenver they encounter it)
  877. # [15:56] <weinig> annevk: yes
  878. # [15:56] <annevk> yay
  879. # [15:56] * annevk changes the spec :p
  880. # [15:56] <jgraham> Also: what Philip` said
  881. # [15:56] <weinig> but it is just a beta
  882. # [15:56] <Philip`> Given a definition like "MAY: ... One vendor may choose to include the item because a particular marketplace requires it or because the vendor feels that it enhances the product while another vendor may omit the same item." it makes no sense to say "Authors MAY use some particular element or whatever"
  883. # [15:56] <weinig> so anything goes
  884. # [15:56] <annevk> i see
  885. # [15:56] <zcorpan> hsivonen: i think opera emits several text nodes for text/plain
  886. # [15:56] <Philip`> because authors aren't vendors, and documents aren't products, and they're not offering it to a marketplace
  887. # [15:57] <annevk> well, bits in the spec have changed, but nothing that should preclude it from shipping (unless it's really out of date)
  888. # [15:57] * annevk has been working on mostly editorial issues
  889. # [15:57] <Philip`> so any use of RFC 2119 for documents seems contrary to its intention, which results in the terms being effectively undefined and nobody quite agrees on what they mean
  890. # [15:58] <zcorpan> hsivonen: in fact, i think we emit several text nodes in text/html, too
  891. # [15:58] <rubys> jgraham: it is all too easy to recast positions one disagrees with in terms of the "other side" pursuing "theoretical purity". In general, when I see people do that, I see us as only being a step or two away from Godwin's law.
  892. # [15:59] <rubys> 2119 has provided useful and pragmatic advice for quite some time, sullying it (like many have done with summary, for example) has pragmatic implications too
  893. # [16:01] <jgraham> rubys: I am emphatically not suggesting that RFC 2119 is not a useful document. I am suggesting that using it as the basis for arguing that we should have weaker document conformance constraints ignores the practical value of those constraints
  894. # [16:02] <jgraham> I am very intersted to hear your considered opinion once you have formulated it
  895. # [16:03] <rubys> A document with a BOM that is actually encoded as win-1252, or with a datetime of mañana are both clearly wrong, even if all software in the world handles such documents identially. What we need to find is the most useful way to express that. Others here might differ, but I think that a document that uses profile, summary, or property as originally intended and documented in other (prior or elsewhere) specs are considerably less "wrong"
  896. # [16:08] * Quits: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@pat.se.opera.com) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  897. # [16:08] * Joins: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@pat.se.opera.com)
  898. # [16:17] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  899. # [16:26] * Joins: billmason (n=bmason@ip102.unival.com)
  900. # [16:26] * Parts: billmason (n=bmason@ip102.unival.com)
  901. # [16:32] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  902. # [16:36] <zcorpan> cufón seems to miss the concept of canvas fallback
  903. # [16:37] <zcorpan> <h3><span class="cufon cufon-canvas" style="width: 68px; height: 24px"><canvas width="86" height="25" style="top: -1px; left: -1px"></canvas><span class="cufon-alt">Select </span></span>...
  904. # [16:37] <rubys> this will likely end up being a blog entry. The cases aren't quite so cut and dry.
  905. # [16:37] * Joins: yecril71 (n=giecrilj@piekna-gts.2a.pl)
  906. # [16:38] <annevk> it depends on who has a say over the vocabulary
  907. # [16:39] <rubys> annevk: was that @me?
  908. # [16:39] * Joins: cying (n=cying@adsl-75-18-226-34.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  909. # [16:39] <annevk> yeah
  910. # [16:39] <annevk> sorry
  911. # [16:40] <yecril71> There must be a compelling use case for date/time intervals out there,
  912. # [16:40] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  913. # [16:40] <yecril71> otherwise database engines would not create a separate data type for them
  914. # [16:40] <yecril71> Although, of course, many small database engines ignore the issue
  915. # [16:41] <yecril71> Since HTML5 started supporting DATE and TIME,
  916. # [16:41] <yecril71> it seems logical that it would ultimately support intervals as well,
  917. # [16:41] * Joins: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-43-20.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  918. # [16:41] <yecril71> for database compatibility, if for no other purpose.
  919. # [16:42] <yecril71> That was @Lachy.
  920. # [16:42] <yecril71> There are different forms out there, and their layout is different.
  921. # [16:43] <Lachy> yecril71, HTML5 isn't solving the same problems as databases, so the use cases are not necessarily the same
  922. # [16:43] <yecril71> But database access is a strong application of HTML.
  923. # [16:44] <Lachy> so what problem would be solved by marking up time intervals in the HTML, even if it were output from a database?
  924. # [16:44] <yecril71> There are bureaucratic forms that require the applicant to fill a host of disconnected entries;
  925. # [16:45] <yecril71> The resulting HTML could be easily processed afterwards, without losing information.
  926. # [16:45] <Lachy> yecril71, just because someone might use HTML to publish some particular data type, doesn't necessarily mean there needs to be dedicated markup for it.
  927. # [16:45] <yecril71> Because the data types would be preserved.
  928. # [16:45] <Lachy> processed in what way? For what purpose?
  929. # [16:45] <zcorpan> why is the summary discussion cc-ed to every list i'm subscribed to (and a few others)?
  930. # [16:46] <zcorpan> and directly to me no less
  931. # [16:46] <Lachy> zcorpan, because the accessibility advocates feel the need to CC every list whenever an accessibility-related issue is discussed
  932. # [16:46] <jgraham> How many copies of each mail do you get?
  933. # [16:46] <yecril71> The report could be processed by a HTML grabber to enter information to a local database.
  934. # [16:46] <zcorpan> Lachy: why, to make their emails more accessible?
  935. # [16:46] <Lachy> I don't know.
  936. # [16:47] <Lachy> It's just an observation. I haven't yet formed a theory to explain it.
  937. # [16:47] <zcorpan> jgraham: 4, i think
  938. # [16:47] <yecril71> I am suggesting that time intervals are not "some particular data type";
  939. # [16:47] <yecril71> they are standardised and widely accepted and used.
  940. # [16:47] <jgraham> My hasiily constructed theory is that noone understands the tangle of accessibility related lists and so everyone just CCs them all in case one is relevant
  941. # [16:48] <Philip`> zcorpan: It's probably because Hixie selected all the recent summary mails and hit "reply all" and posted his response to sixteen addresses
  942. # [16:48] <Lachy> yecril71, vague use cases involving some unspecified "HTML grabber" to enter information into some local database with an undefined purpose doesn't make a useful use case or problem statement
  943. # [16:49] * Quits: karlcow (n=karl@modemcable202.32-81-70.mc.videotron.ca) ("O public road, I say back I am not afraid to leave you, yet I love you, you express me better than I can express myself.")
  944. # [16:49] <yecril71> But it is likely that some such use case will eventually apppear.
  945. # [16:49] <Philip`> yecril71: Once it does appear, it can be addressed
  946. # [16:49] <Lachy> so if and when it does appear, then we can look at it
  947. # [16:49] <Lachy> and then we can address it.
  948. # [16:49] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  949. # [16:49] <Lachy> Trying to address a potential use case we haven't seen yet isn't likely to result in an adequate solution.
  950. # [16:50] <yecril71> Lachy! Since you asked about it, I thought you were interested
  951. # [16:50] <yecril71> I am not applying or promoting anything, just discussing things.
  952. # [16:50] <Lachy> I'm interested in hearing any real use cases there may be. I'm not interested in discussing hypothetical use cases that aren't based in reality
  953. # [16:51] <othermaciej> new Safari beta, in case you folks haven't seen it
  954. # [16:51] <Lachy> othermaciej, link?
  955. # [16:51] <Lachy> is that Safari 4?
  956. # [16:52] <Philip`> othermaciej: How awesome is it, on a scale of 1 to 10?
  957. # [16:52] <othermaciej> Philip`: over 9000!
  958. # [16:52] <zcorpan> wow that's pretty awesome
  959. # [16:52] * Joins: eric_carlson (n=ericc@nat/apple/x-44acb97d81ea35fd)
  960. # [16:52] * Joins: karlcow (n=karl@modemcable202.32-81-70.mc.videotron.ca)
  961. # [16:52] <othermaciej> Lachy: http://www.apple.com/safari/whats-new.html
  962. # [16:53] <annevk> I hope the buffer overflow is restricted to awesomeness
  963. # [16:53] <gsnedders> Wait, SFX has been renamed to "Nitro" now?
  964. # [16:54] <Lachy> othermaciej, I have an old Safari 4 developer release installed. Do i need to remove that first?
  965. # [16:54] <yecril71> and there are forms that contain the data for didactical problems,
  966. # [16:54] <othermaciej> Lachy: it should be able to update over it just fine
  967. # [16:54] <yecril71> e.g. in mathematics or in grammar.
  968. # [16:55] <yecril71> I would use LI LABEL for bureaucratic forms, and P for educational problems.
  969. # [16:55] <yecril71> And, of course, there are numerous other possibilities, these are just the two I have come across.
  970. # [16:55] <othermaciej> gsnedders: our marketing people have a strange sense of humor apparantly
  971. # [16:56] <Lachy> thanks for not warning me I'd need to restart after it installed. That's annoying. I thought that wasn't supposed to be needed on OS X :-(
  972. # [16:56] * Lachy restarts his macbook
  973. # [16:56] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com) ("Leaving")
  974. # [16:56] <yecril71> DT, DD INPUT is another possibility; however, I think LI LABEL renders better by default.
  975. # [16:57] * yecril71 is skeptical about Safari
  976. # [16:57] <gsnedders> othermaciej: Nitro is so boring compared with extreme fish
  977. # [16:57] <yecril71> Safari was all broken to me when it came around April.
  978. # [16:58] <othermaciej> gsnedders: are you calling this guy boring: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPqFxtWgsvQ
  979. # [16:58] <yecril71> And none of the problems I have reported have been addressed.
  980. # [16:58] <yecril71> And the ADC Web site does not even work in IE :=(
  981. # [16:58] <yecril71> So I decided to trash the whole thing.
  982. # [16:59] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com)
  983. # [16:59] <othermaciej> what problems did you report?
  984. # [17:00] <yecril71> For example, ?xml-stylesheet href="#".
  985. # [17:00] <karlcow> yecril71: "extremely fishy" would amuse journalists… though if the browser is not stable nitro will find its way in the columns too. There is always a way to make fun of something
  986. # [17:00] <zcorpan> othermaciej: "This video is not available in your country."
  987. # [17:01] <othermaciej> yecril71: is that supposed to make an XML file act as its own XSLT stylesheet? or by '#' do you mean a gragment identifier?
  988. # [17:02] <yecril71> self-referencing stylesheet, yes.
  989. # [17:02] <yecril71> The workaround is you have to use the actual name.
  990. # [17:02] <yecril71> (but it breaks when you rename the resource)
  991. # [17:03] <yecril71> Or ignoring external DTDs.
  992. # [17:03] * Philip` wonders what will come next after the V8 and Nitro engines
  993. # [17:03] <karlcow> I wonder what "Disable Site-specific Hacks" means
  994. # [17:04] <gsnedders> How's that a bug? There's no requirement to read external DTDs…
  995. # [17:04] <karlcow> Philip`: Nuclear
  996. # [17:04] <othermaciej> incidentally, if any of you get it installed, the little first-time intro thing is not a video, it's made with HTML5 and CSS Animation
  997. # [17:04] <karlcow> or maybe Nuked!
  998. # [17:04] <yecril71> It is a bug for me, because it is denying a useful feature.
  999. # [17:04] <othermaciej> (well, there's a video in it, using <video>)
  1000. # [17:04] <annevk> yecril71, I doubt that's a bug per spec
  1001. # [17:04] <Philip`> karlcow: Fallout 3 has taught me that nuclear-powered cars blow up in a mushroom cloud after three gunshots, so that's probably not a great name
  1002. # [17:04] <karlcow> hehe
  1003. # [17:05] <yecril71> That is a bug per usability, not per spec.
  1004. # [17:05] <annevk> there's no such bugs for technical questions
  1005. # [17:05] <gsnedders> yecril71: You then have the overhead of the time taken to fetch the DTD, which is a bug per usability
  1006. # [17:05] * Quits: Maurice (n=ano@a80-101-46-164.adsl.xs4all.nl) ("Disconnected...")
  1007. # [17:05] <yecril71> I prefer correctness over efficiency.
  1008. # [17:06] <gsnedders> Per spec it is correct, though
  1009. # [17:06] <yecril71> But I can tell it to Safari because Safari knows better.
  1010. # [17:06] <yecril71> s/can/cannot/
  1011. # [17:06] <othermaciej> I don't think we have any principled reason to refuse to support that, we just haven't got around to fixing it yet
  1012. # [17:06] <othermaciej> if there are sites using it in the wild we could raise the priority
  1013. # [17:07] <yecril71> And I still cannot get rid if its traces in the registry after I removed it.
  1014. # [17:07] <othermaciej> otherwise, we'll get to it eventually, and patches welcome
  1015. # [17:07] <karlcow> othermaciej: is there an easteregg to replay the first time intro or the files somewhere on the hard drive?
  1016. # [17:07] <othermaciej> http://www.apple.com/safari/welcome/
  1017. # [17:08] * Joins: smedero (n=smedero@pia145-154.pioneernet.net)
  1018. # [17:08] <Lachy> othermaciej, I like what's been done with the Speed Dial feature in Safari, and cover flow in the history search is nice
  1019. # [17:08] <yecril71> patches to Safari are possible only from people who have the source code.
  1020. # [17:09] <othermaciej> yecril71: http://webkit.org/
  1021. # [17:09] <yecril71> Preferences are UI, and UI is closed.
  1022. # [17:09] * Quits: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@c-98-207-88-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  1023. # [17:09] <othermaciej> that's the engine used by Safari, it's all open source, and any code relating to XSLT will be in there
  1024. # [17:09] <othermaciej> don't see what preferences have to do with it?
  1025. # [17:10] <yecril71> "Read external DTDs" is a preference.
  1026. # [17:10] <othermaciej> what does that have to do with ?xml-stylesheet href="#" ?
  1027. # [17:11] <yecril71> We were discussing the second item.
  1028. # [17:11] <othermaciej> oh
  1029. # [17:11] <yecril71> href="#" can be patched in WebKit, yes.
  1030. # [17:11] <othermaciej> well that's a feature we probably wouldn't add, preference or no
  1031. # [17:13] <yecril71> That is, of course, up to you, but then Safari installer should not claim Safari is "the browser".
  1032. # [17:13] <yecril71> Because it is too crippled and limited to be "the browser".
  1033. # [17:14] <karlcow> hmmmm wonders what is /Applications/Safari.app/Contents/Resources/SnippetEditor
  1034. # [17:14] <annevk> your sense of logic is not allowed in this channel yecril71, see topic ;)
  1035. # [17:14] <jgraham> No Linux. Less bling than a rap star. Lame ;)
  1036. # [17:14] <gsnedders> karlcow: Develop -> Show Snippet Editor
  1037. # [17:14] * Joins: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@c-98-203-247-78.hsd1.wa.comcast.net)
  1038. # [17:14] <zcorpan> othermaciej: what's new with the "enhanced keyboard navigation"?
  1039. # [17:15] <Lachy> othermaciej, http://images.apple.com/safari/welcome/media/audio.mp4 (the audio file used on the Safari welcome page) is served as text/plain :-(
  1040. # [17:15] <yecril71> annevk! Was that a plonk?
  1041. # [17:16] <othermaciej> zcorpan: not sure
  1042. # [17:16] <othermaciej> Lachy: I will try to let the right people know
  1043. # [17:16] <othermaciej> Lachy: is the video served with the right MIME type?
  1044. # [17:16] <karlcow> gsnedders: had missed that. thanks. still don't know what is it
  1045. # [17:17] <Lachy> othermaciej, yeah, compass.mov is served as video/quicktime
  1046. # [17:17] * Quits: pergj (n=pergj@home.kvaleberg.no) (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  1047. # [17:18] * yecril71 s system is always loaded
  1048. # [17:18] <yecril71> so I would rather that the player degraded by itself.
  1049. # [17:20] <yecril71> Hixie! If I isolated the problem that slows down IE rendering your spec as it is,
  1050. # [17:20] <yecril71> would you implement some workaround?
  1051. # [17:22] <Lachy> othermaciej, I'm curious why the developers who made the welcome page decided to do it with separate <video> and <audio> elements, instead of just adding the audio track to the video file
  1052. # [17:22] <othermaciej> Lachy: the video is shorter than the audio, and it turns out this way has better performance
  1053. # [17:23] <Lachy> hmm, that's interesting.
  1054. # [17:23] <Lachy> does it improve network performance by being able to download the tracks separately, or is it more performant to play them as 2 separate tracks?
  1055. # [17:24] * Quits: smedero (n=smedero@pia145-154.pioneernet.net)
  1056. # [17:24] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host81-130-24-71.in-addr.btopenworld.com)
  1057. # [17:25] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-175-10.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp) ("Tomorrow to fresh woods, and pastures new.")
  1058. # [17:26] <Lachy> I think I prefer Chrome's tab design over Safari's because it's more practical. When I click on a tab in Safari while I'm still moving the mouse, it thinks I want to move the window. Whereas, Chrome makes a clearer distinction between the title bar and each tab and doesn't suffer from that problem
  1059. # [17:27] <karlcow> "Show Snippet Editor: Opens a window you can use to quickly test small fragments of HTML, without requiring you to open an entire webpage."
  1060. # [17:27] * Parts: annevk (n=annevk@p295349.tokynt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp)
  1061. # [17:29] * Joins: smedero (n=smedero@pia145-154.pioneernet.net)
  1062. # [17:30] * Joins: danbri (n=danbri@s55927ef8.adsl.wanadoo.nl)
  1063. # [17:32] <karlcow> I'm pretty sure there must be com.apple.blabla to tell safari to restart with my previous sessions. Quit with two tabs, reopened with one window and no tabs. But there is a menu for it now
  1064. # [17:33] <Lachy> karlcow, hasn't the "Reopen All Windows From Last Session" menu item been available in Safari for a long time?
  1065. # [17:35] <karlcow> Lachy: not sure. I barely use safari since safari 2. Just launching it usually when new versions arrive and testing for specific purpose.
  1066. # [17:35] * karlcow is checking % defaults read com.apple.safari
  1067. # [17:38] <karlcow> made a test
  1068. # [17:38] <karlcow> mwahaha
  1069. # [17:38] <karlcow> "com.apple.WebKit.searchField:com.twitter.search" = (
  1070. # [17:38] <karlcow> sex
  1071. # [17:38] <karlcow> );
  1072. # [17:41] <karlcow> ah good, when in private browsing mode, it doesn't save it to the com.apple.safari
  1073. # [17:41] <karlcow> it just keeps the old values
  1074. # [17:42] * Quits: pesla (n=retep@procurios.xs4all.nl) ("( www.nnscript.com :: NoNameScript 4.21 :: www.esnation.com )")
  1075. # [17:43] <zcorpan> othermaciej: hmm, popup windows in general don't seem to work for me (winxp); e.g. "about safari", "customize toolbar" and javascript alerts
  1076. # [17:43] <othermaciej> zcorpan: strange
  1077. # [17:44] <zcorpan> i like having the tabs in the title bar
  1078. # [17:47] <othermaciej> zcorpan: did you update from the Safari 4 Developer Preview?
  1079. # [17:47] <zcorpan> othermaciej: yes
  1080. # [17:47] <othermaciej> zcorpan: I'm told what you are seeing is a known bug and should go away if you quit and relaunch Safari
  1081. # [17:47] <karlcow> zcorpan: me too. but there is a little issue, with long titles when many tabs opened. At least when you over the title it displays the full title
  1082. # [17:48] <zcorpan> othermaciej: it was a bit tricky to quit since trying to quit opened a popup that i couldn't see (and none of esc or enter made safari quit) :)
  1083. # [17:49] <karlcow> the top sites is quite nice
  1084. # [17:49] <othermaciej> zcorpan: doh!
  1085. # [17:49] <zcorpan> works now though
  1086. # [17:49] <jgraham> Does the coverflow thing actually work well? I tend to find that coverflow looks nicer in screenshots than it is to use in real life...
  1087. # [17:50] <karlcow> jgraham: for the history?
  1088. # [17:50] <jgraham> karlcow: Yeah
  1089. # [17:50] <jgraham> I imagine *screenshots* for history are a good idea
  1090. # [17:50] <karlcow> I would prefer an expose like thing
  1091. # [17:51] <karlcow> cover flow is hard to use usually (for me), maybe other users might have a different experience
  1092. # [17:55] <karlcow> ooops Top Sites does a get on previous uris which were a POST.
  1093. # [17:55] * Joins: annevk (n=annevk@EM114-48-148-177.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  1094. # [17:57] * Joins: itpastorn (n=itpastor@139.57.227.87.static.th.siw.siwnet.net)
  1095. # [17:57] <karlcow> that seems to be a bug
  1096. # [17:59] * Quits: itpastorn (n=itpastor@139.57.227.87.static.th.siw.siwnet.net) (Client Quit)
  1097. # [18:02] * Joins: srushe (n=srushe@81.130.239.199)
  1098. # [18:02] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@92.40.95.108.sub.mbb.three.co.uk)
  1099. # [18:03] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  1100. # [18:03] * karlcow really likes the Web Inspector. nice job
  1101. # [18:03] * Joins: sayrer (n=chatzill@user-160ve4s.cable.mindspring.com)
  1102. # [18:03] * jgraham apologises to zcorpan
  1103. # [18:04] * Joins: Maurice (i=copyman@5ED548D4.cable.ziggo.nl)
  1104. # [18:06] * annevk wonders why Number(x) is not enough if parseInt(x) is not good enough because there's no way to do input validation
  1105. # [18:07] <karlcow> oohhh safari messing up with mime-type and content sniffing
  1106. # [18:07] * Joins: mpt_ (n=mpt@nat/canonical/x-0480c058b5a7125a)
  1107. # [18:08] <karlcow> http://www.w3.org/ contains w3c_main
  1108. # [18:09] <karlcow> Web Inspector reports Resource interpreted as image but transferred with MIME type text/html. w3c_main
  1109. # [18:09] <jgraham> annevk: No idea. Having two functions to do the same thing seems like a really bad idea though
  1110. # [18:09] <annevk> I agree
  1111. # [18:09] <jgraham> TSBO(APOO)OWTDI
  1112. # [18:09] <karlcow> but w3c_main is sent with the right mime-type http://web-sniffer.net/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FIcons%2Fw3c_main&submit=Submit&http=1.1&gzip=yes&type=GET&uak=0
  1113. # [18:10] <annevk> I'm a bit scared by es-discuss now and then
  1114. # [18:10] <annevk> it seems quite easy for things to go the wrong way
  1115. # [18:10] <annevk> though hopefully that's only because it's hard to follow what's going on
  1116. # [18:11] <annevk> i.e., just like some people are complaining about the WHATWG / HTML WG :)
  1117. # [18:11] <jgraham> annevk: I have been on the list for mere days and I already sense a predilection for theoretical purity over solutions that will actually be deployed
  1118. # [18:11] * Joins: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@32.179.6.216)
  1119. # [18:12] <jgraham> Although I hope that is unfair
  1120. # [18:12] <annevk> well, I've been on the list for over a year and have the same kind of sense
  1121. # [18:12] <annevk> dunno
  1122. # [18:13] <annevk> time to take a break
  1123. # [18:13] * Parts: annevk (n=annevk@EM114-48-148-177.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  1124. # [18:15] * Quits: cying (n=cying@adsl-75-18-226-34.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  1125. # [18:15] * karlcow reported the mime type bug
  1126. # [18:17] * Quits: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt) (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  1127. # [18:18] * Quits: myakura (n=myakura@p3020-ipbf505marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp) ("Leaving...")
  1128. # [18:19] * Quits: srushe (n=srushe@81.130.239.199)
  1129. # [18:23] * Joins: xydyx (n=hdh@58.187.17.9)
  1130. # [18:30] * Quits: zcorpan (n=zcorpan@pat.se.opera.com)
  1131. # [18:32] * Quits: sayrer (n=chatzill@user-160ve4s.cable.mindspring.com) (Remote closed the connection)
  1132. # [18:39] <jgraham> http://intertwingly.net/blog/2009/02/24/Cataloging-Venial-Sins
  1133. # [18:40] * Joins: mlpug (n=mlpug@a88-115-168-225.elisa-laajakaista.fi)
  1134. # [18:40] * Quits: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-43-20.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  1135. # [18:42] * Quits: hdh (n=hdh@58.187.17.9) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  1136. # [18:44] * Quits: danbri (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri)
  1137. # [18:45] * Quits: dolske (n=dolske@firefox/developer/dolske)
  1138. # [18:48] * Quits: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@APuteaux-155-1-70-137.w90-2.abo.wanadoo.fr) (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  1139. # [18:50] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@92.40.95.108.sub.mbb.three.co.uk)
  1140. # [18:51] * Joins: ojan (n=ojan@c-67-164-75-36.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  1141. # [18:53] * Joins: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-43-20.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  1142. # [18:54] * Joins: ojan_ (n=ojan@72.14.224.1)
  1143. # [18:54] <jgraham> karlcow: The example of spelling and grammar rules always suffers because spelling and grammar rules are extremely descriptivist
  1144. # [18:55] <jgraham> Which could be your point but you should say so explicitly
  1145. # [18:56] <karlcow> see html-wg
  1146. # [18:56] <jgraham> (that maybe wasn't clear. I mean that the "rules" are mainly observations of what real people do rather than any kind of spec. And when people do try to make up a spec it usually contains nonsense like "don't split infinitives" which is based on how Latin worked...)
  1147. # [18:59] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com)
  1148. # [19:00] * Quits: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@c-98-203-247-78.hsd1.wa.comcast.net)
  1149. # [19:00] * Quits: jwalden (n=waldo@c-76-102-160-171.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) ("ChatZilla 0.9.82.1-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.8.0.9/2006120508]")
  1150. # [19:02] <karlcow> you mean the current grammar rules are not really what really people speak, but what they should write.
  1151. # [19:03] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com) (Client Quit)
  1152. # [19:04] * Philip` wonders what the relevance of Gödel is to HTML document conformance
  1153. # [19:05] * karlcow wonders what is the relevance of challenging the document conformance, or what does it achieve in the end. mesmerized
  1154. # [19:05] * Joins: kingryan (n=kingryan@adsl-99-27-42-97.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  1155. # [19:06] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@nat/google/x-6a3499ded3fddb04)
  1156. # [19:10] * Joins: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@mic92-9-82-236-193-123.fbx.proxad.net)
  1157. # [19:11] <karlcow> hmmm the issue with the mime type for safari is happening with only of this type: Content-Type: image/png; qs=0.7
  1158. # [19:11] * Quits: ojan (n=ojan@c-67-164-75-36.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  1159. # [19:14] <jgraham> karlcow: I'm saying grammer "rules", as understood by modern linguists, are based on a description of what people actually say / write.
  1160. # [19:14] * Joins: dolske (n=dolske@67.111.52.130.ptr.us.xo.net)
  1161. # [19:16] <karlcow> and I'm talking about language taught at school
  1162. # [19:18] <karlcow> and the way I write is definitely not the way I speak plus a big variety depending on the context, including respect forms, humour, etc. My language is mostly super neutral here.
  1163. # [19:19] * Quits: zdobersek1 (n=zan@cpe-92-37-77-108.dynamic.amis.net) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  1164. # [19:20] * Joins: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-77-108.dynamic.amis.net)
  1165. # [19:27] * Joins: dave_levin (n=dave_lev@72.14.227.1)
  1166. # [19:27] * Quits: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@mic92-9-82-236-193-123.fbx.proxad.net) ("Leaving")
  1167. # [19:34] * Joins: itpastorn (n=itpastor@139.57.227.87.static.th.siw.siwnet.net)
  1168. # [19:36] * Quits: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-77-108.dynamic.amis.net) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  1169. # [19:36] * Joins: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-77-108.dynamic.amis.net)
  1170. # [19:38] * Quits: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@32.179.6.216) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  1171. # [19:58] * Joins: danbri (n=danbri@ip80-101-238-54.hotspotsvankpn.com)
  1172. # [20:00] * Quits: Amorphous (i=jan@unaffiliated/amorphous) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  1173. # [20:02] * Joins: Amorphous (i=jan@unaffiliated/amorphous)
  1174. # [20:05] * Joins: webben (n=webben@nat/yahoo/x-de1b170777f7bd79)
  1175. # [20:05] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@guest-230.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  1176. # [20:07] * Quits: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-43-20.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  1177. # [20:08] <yecril71> I still think METER is enough for marking up scalar quantities.
  1178. # [20:09] * Quits: danbri (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri)
  1179. # [20:17] * Joins: hdh (n=hdh@58.187.16.238)
  1180. # [20:18] * ap is now known as ap|away
  1181. # [20:18] * Joins: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-43-20.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  1182. # [20:19] <rubys> jgraham: re: "I am suggesting that using [RFC 2119] as the basis for arguing that we should have weaker document conformance constraints ignores the practical value of those constraints" +1
  1183. # [20:20] * Quits: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-43-20.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) (Client Quit)
  1184. # [20:21] <tantek> hsivonen, I just saw a few references to the profile attribute and XMDP - I may be able to help answer questions.
  1185. # [20:22] <Dashiva> "Seems like a lot of trouble for just Links/Lynx users." <-- So much for universal access :)
  1186. # [20:22] <yecril71> Tantek! Do you know why OBJECT was proposed to hold dates?
  1187. # [20:22] <yecril71> Seems like utter nonsense to me.
  1188. # [20:23] <tantek> yecril71, because OBJECT is a semantic for embedding arbitrary data
  1189. # [20:23] * Joins: jwalden (n=waldo@corp-246.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  1190. # [20:23] <tantek> many things seem like nonsense until explained
  1191. # [20:23] * gsnedders needs to wake up
  1192. # [20:24] <yecril71> Arbitrary data, like white noise?
  1193. # [20:24] <tantek> it is typically quite unscientific to conclude that something is "utter nonsense", negative proofs are extraordinarily difficult
  1194. # [20:24] <yecril71> I said "seems".
  1195. # [20:25] <yecril71> Object is semantics for external content, not for arbitrary data.
  1196. # [20:25] * Quits: xydyx (n=hdh@58.187.17.9) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  1197. # [20:25] <gsnedders> Fear the axiomatic proof (by contradiction)!
  1198. # [20:26] * Quits: ojan_ (n=ojan@72.14.224.1)
  1199. # [20:27] <yecril71> And dates are not external content, although a calendar widget may be.
  1200. # [20:27] <Philip`> gsnedders: Is proof by contradiction one of your axioms?
  1201. # [20:27] <tantek> fair enough, the seems qualifier improves it yes
  1202. # [20:27] <Philip`> Clearly you should be using constructivist logic instead
  1203. # [20:27] <gsnedders> Philip`: But that's boring.
  1204. # [20:28] * Dashiva has bad memories about deducing a->a from those stupid axioms
  1205. # [20:29] <tantek> expressions of doubt or lack of understanding (questions) are more conducive to scientific discourse than assertions of nonsense. i.e. better to think/say "I don't understand why {assertion}" than "{assertion} seems like (or is) nonsense". the latter statement tends to be counter-productive, and in my experience, falsely implies a negative proof.
  1206. # [20:30] <yecril71> I do not understand why OBJECT would make a good element for making up dates then.
  1207. # [20:31] * yecril71 perceives the second version much less interesting
  1208. # [20:31] <tantek> like many applications of semantic HTML, the framing is a bit different
  1209. # [20:31] <Dashiva> No one said it's good, but rather that it's the default way
  1210. # [20:31] <tantek> rather than asking for each element is this good/bad for marking up x
  1211. # [20:31] <tantek> the question is, what is the best choice in semantic HTML for marking up x
  1212. # [20:32] <yecril71> A choice that is no good cannot be the best
  1213. # [20:32] <yecril71> so it should be automatically out of consideration.
  1214. # [20:32] <tantek> actually it can, because best is a relative assessment, rather than absolute "good"
  1215. # [20:32] <yecril71> I do not understand why it was considered.
  1216. # [20:33] <yecril71> So it was just the first shot?
  1217. # [20:33] <tantek> object is not just semantics for external content, hence why object has fallback, all the way down to the innertext
  1218. # [20:34] <tantek> that's a very important distinction between object and img/iframe/embed/applet etc.
  1219. # [20:34] <tantek> thus the semantic for providing alternate types of data
  1220. # [20:35] <yecril71> But in this case you want the alternate content displayed, not the object data.
  1221. # [20:35] <tantek> precisely
  1222. # [20:35] <yecril71> So it is rather an antiobject.
  1223. # [20:35] <tantek> and that's not difficult to do, with implementation that conform to HTML4
  1224. # [20:35] <tantek> implementationS
  1225. # [20:36] <tantek> and that's why I first tried to use OBJECT as the most semantic choice in semantic HTML to represent datetimes, just over four years ago now. http://tantek.com/log/2005/01.html#d26t0100
  1226. # [20:37] <tantek> unfortunately, bugs in Safari prevented this from being a practical solution.
  1227. # [20:38] <yecril71> OBJECT displays object data by default.
  1228. # [20:38] <yecril71> If fallback data should be normally displayed, it cannot be OBJECT.
  1229. # [20:41] <tantek> ideally, for semantic datetimes, what should be displayed is what the viewer can best understand and manipulate, which may for example be a localized version of the datetime
  1230. # [20:41] <tantek> but given lack of localized-preference-aware datetime display plugins, then yes, a suitable inline fallback should be provided consistent with the statistically likely locale of the reader
  1231. # [20:42] <yecril71> Localized datetime in an article given in a foreign language?
  1232. # [20:42] <tantek> or for example, in a train schedule shown in a foreign language
  1233. # [20:42] <yecril71> If you understand the foreign language, it serves only as a disruption.
  1234. # [20:43] * Joins: ojan (n=ojan@72.14.229.81)
  1235. # [20:43] <tantek> any experience international traveler knows that just being able to read the dates and times of schedules etc makes them FAR more usable, even if you don't know the foreign language
  1236. # [20:43] <tantek> so yes, even if in a foreign language
  1237. # [20:43] <tantek> to put it another way, making *some* of the content viewable / understandable is often preferable to *none*
  1238. # [20:44] <tantek> numbers, measures, dates, times fall into this category
  1239. # [20:44] <yecril71> I can see it depends on the reading environment, because sometimes it can be worse.
  1240. # [20:44] <tantek> in practice it is far more often better
  1241. # [20:44] <tantek> as in the actual example I gave above
  1242. # [20:44] <yecril71> Not in my practice. I do not travel that much.
  1243. # [20:44] <tantek> of international travel and train schedules
  1244. # [20:45] <yecril71> Besides, arent these things produced from a database rather then authored?
  1245. # [20:45] <tantek> your expression of a lack of personal utility does not refute any positive assertions of utility made by others.
  1246. # [20:46] <yecril71> I am not trying to refute your POV.
  1247. # [20:46] <tantek> the point is, the practice increases utility for some or many
  1248. # [20:46] <tantek> thus is an improvement
  1249. # [20:46] <yecril71> And the database engine could produce content according to the viewers settings
  1250. # [20:46] <tantek> it increases usability, heck accessibility for that matter
  1251. # [20:46] <yecril71> without any help from the browser
  1252. # [20:47] <yecril71> i.e. provide localization with no special markup
  1253. # [20:47] <yecril71> necessary
  1254. # [20:48] <tantek> your asserted solution has poorer scaling characteristics (requiring all publishers to code everything aware for all locales) than the alternative of simply providing the data semantically, and having the localize viewing smarts be in the user's browser
  1255. # [20:48] * Joins: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1)
  1256. # [20:48] <yecril71> Not all publishers, just travel agencies, railways and the like.
  1257. # [20:48] * Joins: slightlyoff (n=slightly@nat/google/x-a62a070da6e7db5b)
  1258. # [20:49] <tantek> all publishers of date and time information
  1259. # [20:49] <yecril71> They have to operate in a multilingual environment already.
  1260. # [20:49] <tantek> event sites etc.
  1261. # [20:49] <yecril71> What is the utility of attending an event when you do not know the language of communication?
  1262. # [20:50] <tantek> maintaining 1 or 2 or a small number of variants is not the same as maintaining all variants for all locales, so the "already" argument is false.
  1263. # [20:50] <tantek> you are assuming the language that the event is posted in is required to attend and take value in the event, which is a poor assumption.
  1264. # [20:51] <tantek> taking a train or bus is only one example of the problem of that assumption
  1265. # [20:51] <tantek> concerts are another
  1266. # [20:51] <yecril71> Oh, I thought you meant social events.
  1267. # [20:51] * Quits: itpastorn (n=itpastor@139.57.227.87.static.th.siw.siwnet.net) ("Leaving.")
  1268. # [20:51] <tantek> regardless, a very poor assumption to make, and certainly insufficient to reason from
  1269. # [20:53] <yecril71> It is valid for social events where people talk to each other.
  1270. # [20:53] * Quits: slightlyoff (n=slightly@nat/google/x-a62a070da6e7db5b) (Client Quit)
  1271. # [20:53] <tantek> even then, you can't know what language(s) the attendees may know and thus speak to each other
  1272. # [20:54] <tantek> you might be able to statistically model some likelihood of number of attendees knowing particular languages, given the demographics
  1273. # [20:54] <yecril71> The attendees agree to use a common language
  1274. # [20:54] <yecril71> or the organisation hires live translators.
  1275. # [20:54] <tantek> or people talk however they want to talk to each other
  1276. # [20:54] <yecril71> Otherwise it does not make sense.
  1277. # [20:55] <tantek> see above examples. again, asserting "it does not make sense" itself is not a helpful path for discourse.
  1278. # [20:56] <yecril71> An example of an event where people talk to each other without having to understand each other I have not seen above.
  1279. # [20:57] <yecril71> I can only think about the tower of Babel event when I see this.
  1280. # [20:57] <tantek> people are often able to communicate some understanding to each other without having to speak the same language
  1281. # [20:57] <tantek> reasoning by negative examples like that will lead you to many errant conclusions because of implied assumptions
  1282. # [20:57] * Joins: slightlyoff (n=slightly@nat/google/x-d9d974bd025e9149)
  1283. # [20:58] <yecril71> I disagree about that "often" thing.
  1284. # [20:58] <yecril71> Only in extreme circumstances, most of them unplanned.
  1285. # [20:59] <tantek> lack of examples = you need to accept doubt and not knowing something rather than knowing or asserting that something is not.
  1286. # [20:59] <tantek> and "only" is a strong assertion to make without evidence
  1287. # [21:00] <tantek> get more experience with international travel, and you will get more data for understanding cross-language cross-locale etc. issues, problems and solutions
  1288. # [21:00] <yecril71> I meant, only in extreme circumstances people often
  1289. # [21:00] <tantek> right, "only" is making assumptions of negative examples
  1290. # [21:00] * Quits: dbaron (n=dbaron@guest-230.mountainview.mozilla.com) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  1291. # [21:01] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@corp-246.mountainview.mozilla.com)
  1292. # [21:01] <yecril71> You mean, travelling abroad will make me attend social events based on nonverbal communication?
  1293. # [21:02] <tantek> traveling abroad -> more data for understanding cross-language cross-locale etc. issues, problems and solutions -> more appreciation of partial understanding of content in foreign languages.
  1294. # [21:02] <tantek> whether that content is on the web, or in communication at social events
  1295. # [21:02] <yecril71> However, understanding of dates is included in partial understanding of content.
  1296. # [21:03] <yecril71> It is basic knowledge.
  1297. # [21:03] <tantek> until then, rather than asserting negatives, you should start with "I don't have the experience therefore I don't know", and ask those with experience.
  1298. # [21:03] * Parts: kingryan (n=kingryan@adsl-99-27-42-97.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  1299. # [21:03] <yecril71> I do not have the experience, therefore I do not know
  1300. # [21:03] <yecril71> whether people who travel abroad much
  1301. # [21:04] <yecril71> are often exposed to planned social events
  1302. # [21:04] <yecril71> where the attendees do not understand each other
  1303. # [21:04] <yecril71> and therefore have to resort to nonverbal communication.
  1304. # [21:04] <yecril71> If you have the experience needed to enlighten me in this matter, please do.
  1305. # [21:06] * yecril71 thinks the problems with Safari were a fortunate accident
  1306. # [21:07] <tantek> see W3C i18n presentations by Richard Ishida regarding how dates and times are not basic knowledge and actually quite hard to understand well / accurately across languages and locales.
  1307. # [21:07] * Joins: itpastorn (n=itpastor@139.57.227.87.static.th.siw.siwnet.net)
  1308. # [21:08] * dave_levin is now known as dave_levin|lunch
  1309. # [21:08] <yecril71> Gwneud y we fyd-eang yn wirioneddol?
  1310. # [21:09] <tantek> again your example above is trying to reason by negative, in this case, a strawman you constructed ("planned social events" - "do not understand" - "nonverbal communication"), which is also a logical fallacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
  1311. # [21:09] <tantek> Hixie, do you have a Logic101 primer for the #whatwg channel, or are discussions like this (with flawed reasoning by negative examples, strawman etc) a common thing?
  1312. # [21:09] <yecril71> That was actually a question, not a reasoning.
  1313. # [21:09] * Joins: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-43-20.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  1314. # [21:11] <yecril71> Do you want me to look at the wirioneddol thing?
  1315. # [21:12] <tantek> see above: presenting cases/questions with an absence of utility does not refute cases presented that demonstrate utility.
  1316. # [21:12] * Parts: itpastorn (n=itpastor@139.57.227.87.static.th.siw.siwnet.net)
  1317. # [21:13] <yecril71> Like that with concerts?
  1318. # [21:15] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com)
  1319. # [21:18] <tantek> it appears you may have referring to a resource on the web with the previous question. URLs usually work better to reference things on the web (rather than the titles of documents).
  1320. # [21:20] <tantek> this presentation is a good start: http://www.w3.org/2008/Talks/05-atmedia-ishida/slides.pdf
  1321. # [21:20] * Joins: xcombelle (n=chatzill@AToulouse-158-1-155-201.w90-60.abo.wanadoo.fr)
  1322. # [21:20] * yecril71 is looking at that
  1323. # [21:21] * yecril71 found wirioneddol and thought it may be the refernced document but it was not
  1324. # [21:22] * Parts: rubys (n=rubys@cpe-075-182-092-038.nc.res.rr.com)
  1325. # [21:22] <yecril71> But it has 113 pages, and I want information about dates
  1326. # [21:23] <yecril71> and no TOC
  1327. # [21:23] <tantek> this one is good too: http://www.w3.org/2007/Talks/0706-atmedia/
  1328. # [21:24] <tantek> having expressed lack of experience about language/locale issues, you should read through both of those presentation to gain more understanding
  1329. # [21:25] <yecril71> There is plenty of things I should do but I do not have infinite resources :-(
  1330. # [21:25] * yecril71 needs a shortcut
  1331. # [21:25] <tantek> here is a specific slide on dates: http://www.w3.org/2007/Talks/0706-atmedia/slides/Slide0460.html
  1332. # [21:27] <yecril71> If I know that the page is in English, I also know that 03 is March.
  1333. # [21:27] <tantek> for a better experience, listen to the audio from the previous link as well: http://www.w3.org/blog/International/2007/06/11/new_talk_slides_media_2007
  1334. # [21:27] <yecril71> I do not know from what culture 2.3.01 may be.
  1335. # [21:28] <tantek> you don't actually know that, and here are several examples of ambiguous dates, many from English-speaking countries: http://flickr.com/photos/tags/needsisodate
  1336. # [21:28] <tantek> English UK dates are written different from English US dates
  1337. # [21:28] <tantek> so when is 4/5 ? in April or May?
  1338. # [21:29] <yecril71> English UK is Mar 2, 2001
  1339. # [21:29] <yecril71> or March.
  1340. # [21:29] <tantek> hence ambiguous, hence not basic knowledge
  1341. # [21:30] <yecril71> I can easily tell 03/02/01 (US) from March 2, 2001 (UK)
  1342. # [21:31] <yecril71> No ambiguity here
  1343. # [21:31] <tantek> 03/02/01 is not necessarily US
  1344. # [21:31] <tantek> see the Flickr link
  1345. # [21:31] <tantek> some of those dates are printed in that format in the UK
  1346. # [21:31] <tantek> in speaking with Richard Ishida, he agreed that using a date like "2001-03-02" is actually the most readable to the most people, worldwide.
  1347. # [21:31] <yecril71> IMG_2410 is not from the Web, there is no context
  1348. # [21:32] <tantek> it appears you may have referring to a resource on the web with the previous question. URLs usually work better to reference things on the web (rather than the titles of documents).
  1349. # [21:32] <yecril71> YYYY-MM-DD is ANSI date, used in France.
  1350. # [21:32] <yecril71> http://flickr.com/photos/tantek/3241965515/
  1351. # [21:32] <tantek> YYYY-MM-DD is ISO8601. which ANSI standard is it?
  1352. # [21:33] <yecril71> ANSI SQL
  1353. # [21:33] <karlcow> http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime
  1354. # [21:34] <tantek> "/" separators are used in the UK as well as the US. e.g. http://flickr.com/photos/tantek/1386536315/
  1355. # [21:34] <karlcow> http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/iso-date
  1356. # [21:34] <tantek> or ".": http://flickr.com/photos/tantek/1341747652/
  1357. # [21:35] <karlcow> http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-date-format
  1358. # [21:35] <tantek> karlcow - thanks for the URLs.
  1359. # [21:36] <tantek> from http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/iso-date : "Albeit not perfect, ISO date format is, however, the best choice for a date representation that is universally (and accurately) understandable."
  1360. # [21:36] <yecril71> http://flickr.com/photos/tantek/1341747652/ is not from the Web either
  1361. # [21:37] <yecril71> My country used D.MM.RRRR, then RRRR.MM.DD, I suppose adoption of ISO is in progress
  1362. # [21:38] <tantek> right, that's what people will end up using, because it makes the most sense to the most people (= most accessible)
  1363. # [21:38] <yecril71> <http://flickr.com/photos/tantek/1386536315/> is not from the Web
  1364. # [21:38] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com)
  1365. # [21:38] <tantek> the point of those photos is to demonstrate differences in written date formats in different locales
  1366. # [21:39] <tantek> ISO8601: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601
  1367. # [21:39] * dave_levin|lunch is now known as dave_levin
  1368. # [21:40] <yecril71> Demonstrate that different date formats are used in a single locale
  1369. # [21:40] <yecril71> on pages containing invitations to events
  1370. # [21:40] <yecril71> causing all sorts of misunderstandings.
  1371. # [21:40] <yecril71> Consumer product validity tags are out of scope for this discussion.
  1372. # [21:41] <tantek> they're not, as people travel across locales IRL, as they do when browsing the web
  1373. # [21:42] <yecril71> But you cannot use OBJECTs on validity tags, so using OBJECTs in those cases would not help.
  1374. # [21:42] <tantek> what are "validity tags"?
  1375. # [21:42] <yecril71> Valid through
  1376. # [21:42] * karlcow fears the unproductive discussion :)
  1377. # [21:43] * tantek tends to agree with karlcow, given the frequency of logic flaws.
  1378. # [21:46] * yecril71 does not admit committing a logic flaw
  1379. # [21:46] <tantek> by the way, for folks interested on how to "best" markup dates and times on the web, we (the #microformats community) made good progress in microformats with additions to the value-excerption pattern to workaround the cases where using abbr may present accessibility or presentation problems. for more on this topic (which may be offtopic for #whatwg - I'm not sure), feel free to /join #microformats
  1380. # [21:47] <yecril71> And?
  1381. # [21:47] <tantek> which is also a reasonable place to ask about XMDP (which was the subject I brought up in the first place).
  1382. # [21:49] * Joins: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@mobile-166-214-055-048.mycingular.net)
  1383. # [21:50] <tantek> yecril71, see above where I noted reasoning by negative (examples), strawman examples etc. every time I pointed those out, they were in response to logical flaws in your statements / arguments. acknowledging your logic flaws will help with recognizing them in the future, reduce the frequency, and result in higher quality / more productive discussions.
  1384. # [21:51] * Quits: zalan (n=kvirc@catv-89-133-232-199.catv.broadband.hu) ("KVIrc 3.4.0 Virgo http://www.kvirc.net/")
  1385. # [21:59] * Quits: mlpug (n=mlpug@a88-115-168-225.elisa-laajakaista.fi) (Remote closed the connection)
  1386. # [22:01] * yecril71 was not reasoning by negative examples
  1387. # [22:01] * yecril71 was merely pointing out the cases where the strategy is not really needed
  1388. # [22:02] * yecril71 thinks other cases exist but they are far less common
  1389. # [22:06] * ap|away is now known as ap
  1390. # [22:09] * Quits: ROBOd (n=robod@89.122.216.38) ("http://www.robodesign.ro")
  1391. # [22:14] * Joins: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com)
  1392. # [22:15] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@99.140.60.47)
  1393. # [22:19] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@adsl-99-140-60-47.dsl.scrm01.sbcglobal.net)
  1394. # [22:25] * yecril71 found his objection raised by Sarven Capadisli at <http://microformats.org/wiki/datetime-design-pattern>
  1395. # [22:26] * yecril71 is glad he is not the first one
  1396. # [22:27] * Quits: pauld (n=pauld@host86-134-106-105.range86-134.btcentralplus.com)
  1397. # [22:28] * gsnedders tries to get his head around working with RDF
  1398. # [22:31] <karlcow> gsnedders: what are you trying to do?
  1399. # [22:31] * Quits: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@mobile-166-214-055-048.mycingular.net)
  1400. # [22:31] * Quits: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-77-108.dynamic.amis.net) ("Leaving.")
  1401. # [22:31] <gsnedders> karlcow: Using http://www.w3.org/2002/01/tr-automation/tr.rdf find the latest version of each URI and find the title, authors, and date of that document
  1402. # [22:32] <yecril71> Owls are experts at getting their head around.
  1403. # [22:35] * Quits: webben (n=webben@nat/yahoo/x-de1b170777f7bd79) (Connection timed out)
  1404. # [22:37] * Quits: roc (n=roc@121-72-173-196.dsl.telstraclear.net)
  1405. # [22:37] * Joins: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@32.179.0.86)
  1406. # [22:38] * Quits: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1)
  1407. # [22:53] * Joins: rubys (n=rubys@cpe-075-182-092-038.nc.res.rr.com)
  1408. # [22:53] * Joins: bgalbraith_ (n=bgalbrai@72.158.245.34)
  1409. # [22:56] * Joins: roc (n=roc@202.0.36.64)
  1410. # [23:01] * Parts: rubys (n=rubys@cpe-075-182-092-038.nc.res.rr.com)
  1411. # [23:03] * Joins: svl_ (n=me@69.Red-88-2-205.staticIP.rima-tde.net)
  1412. # [23:03] * Quits: yecril71 (n=giecrilj@piekna-gts.2a.pl)
  1413. # [23:03] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  1414. # [23:08] * Quits: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@32.179.0.86) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  1415. # [23:11] * Joins: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1)
  1416. # [23:11] * Quits: ap (n=ap@194.154.88.46)
  1417. # [23:18] * Joins: erlehmann (n=erlehman@86.59.25.121)
  1418. # [23:20] * Joins: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@mic92-9-82-236-193-123.fbx.proxad.net)
  1419. # [23:20] <karlcow> http://280atlas.com/
  1420. # [23:20] <karlcow> gsnedders: do you need examples of scripts?
  1421. # [23:23] * Quits: Maurice (i=copyman@5ED548D4.cable.ziggo.nl) ("Disconnected...")
  1422. # [23:23] * Quits: heycam (n=cam@124-168-12-212.dyn.iinet.net.au) ("bye")
  1423. # [23:31] * Joins: danbri (n=danbri@193.72.18.170)
  1424. # [23:36] * Joins: nessy (n=nessy@124-171-34-59.dyn.iinet.net.au)
  1425. # [23:37] * Quits: nessy (n=nessy@124-171-34-59.dyn.iinet.net.au) (Client Quit)
  1426. # [23:40] * Joins: virtuelv_ (n=virtuelv@mic92-9-82-236-193-123.fbx.proxad.net)
  1427. # [23:49] * Quits: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@mic92-9-82-236-193-123.fbx.proxad.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  1428. # [23:59] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@vpn-118-138-224-41.its.monash.edu.au)
  1429. # Session Close: Wed Feb 25 00:00:00 2009

The end :)