/irc-logs / freenode / #whatwg / 2009-07-08 / end

Options:

  1. # Session Start: Wed Jul 08 00:00:00 2009
  2. # Session Ident: #whatwg
  3. # [00:00] <takkaria> mm
  4. # [00:00] * Quits: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-78-179.dynamic.amis.net) ("Leaving.")
  5. # [00:00] <takkaria> I don't know what I'd do in this situation
  6. # [00:00] <takkaria> four levels of conformance seems a little silly
  7. # [00:01] <gavin_> the point is that peope don't like being told that they are non-conformant
  8. # [00:01] <gavin_> yet they might like being told that they're wrong
  9. # [00:01] <gavin_> and since the distinction doesn't really matter in practice, you might as well accomodate them
  10. # [00:02] <Hixie> i think i might be more happy to making the others downplayed errors into this "warning" class than introducing a new class altogether
  11. # [00:02] <takkaria> I'm just worried about falling into the HTML4 Transitional trap
  12. # [00:02] <Hixie> but anyway, i'd like hsivonen's input on the topic
  13. # [00:02] <Hixie> since right now, he's the main one this affects
  14. # [00:02] <takkaria> Hixie: yeah, I was thinking that might be an idea
  15. # [00:03] <takkaria> probably make people happier about profile="" too
  16. # [00:03] <Hixie> yeah i'm really worried about doing another transitional
  17. # [00:03] <takkaria> (though I'm not sure that's necessarily a good thing. :))
  18. # [00:03] <Hixie> well that's the thing
  19. # [00:03] * Quits: weinig_ (n=weinig@17.246.17.208)
  20. # [00:03] <Hixie> profile="" and summary="" are very similar in this respect. They make people think they're doing something useful while really they are only wasting their time, even though in theory it could have been useful
  21. # [00:03] <Hixie> s/it/they/
  22. # [00:04] * Joins: Kuruma (n=Kuruman@p2101-ipbf204hodogaya.kanagawa.ocn.ne.jp)
  23. # [00:12] * Joins: archtech (n=stanv@83.228.56.37)
  24. # [00:13] * Joins: karlcow (n=karl@nerval.la-grange.net)
  25. # [00:17] <othermaciej> Hixie: I think making downplayed errors into warnings (that must be reported but don't break conformance) would be a good change and one that hsivonen could probably go along with
  26. # [00:17] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@17.246.17.208)
  27. # [00:18] <Hixie> othermaciej: i'm worried about making teh HTML4 Transitional mistake.
  28. # [00:18] <Lachy> Hixie, profile is worse than summary in that respect. The usefulness of summary is dependent upon the competence of the author writing it
  29. # [00:18] <gavin_> what were the consequences of "the HTML4 transitional mistake"?
  30. # [00:18] <hober> right, whereas the usefulness of profile is zero, regardless of the competence of the author using it. :)
  31. # [00:18] <Hixie> Lachy: yeah, arguably profile is worse, but then arguably summary is worse because when the author inevitably screws up, he hurts more users.
  32. # [00:18] * gavin_ doesn't really know the history
  33. # [00:19] <Hixie> gavin_: people never transitioned.
  34. # [00:19] <Lachy> whereas the usefulness of profile is dependent upon a majority of authors getting it right, not just the one who chooses to use it
  35. # [00:19] <Hixie> gavin_: basically, people went to the lowest common denominator
  36. # [00:19] <gavin_> how is that relevant to this case? you're afraid people won't transition to the better markup unless it's a conformance error?
  37. # [00:20] <Hixie> gavin_: i guess we might avoid that if hsivonen makes these downplayed errors into warnings that are always present, and doesn't just say "yup you're valid"
  38. # [00:20] <Hixie> gavin_: yeah, more or less
  39. # [00:20] <Lachy> I know. summary isn't particularly conducive to people getting it right
  40. # [00:20] <Hixie> Lachy: arguably summary="" is useless because too many people have gotten it wrong already. :-)
  41. # [00:20] <gavin_> seems like we're mostly debating semantics :)
  42. # [00:21] <Hixie> worse than semantics
  43. # [00:21] <Hixie> psychology :-/
  44. # [00:21] <gavin_> maybe the validator can call them "conformant errors"
  45. # [00:21] <Hixie> hah
  46. # [00:22] <Hixie> othermaciej: so you'd be ok with the proposal i described, if we just made the downplayed errors into frowned-upon-but-ok? i.e. changed from "not serious errors" to "discouraged non-errors"?
  47. # [00:22] <Lachy> Hixie, that depends on the ability of ATs being able to reliably filter out useless values, which we've been told they do, but been given no details about how
  48. # [00:22] <Hixie> Lachy: yeah, that information would definitely help
  49. # [00:22] <Lachy> nor how reliable it is
  50. # [00:22] <Hixie> we really should do usability testing of this
  51. # [00:22] <Hixie> it's hard to do usability testing for AT users, though
  52. # [00:22] <Philip`> Maybe the validator should do like what the Yahoo and Google page speed tools do, giving each message a red/yellow/green severity and showing them in decreasing order of severity, so you can see which issues are the most worth fixing
  53. # [00:23] <Hixie> because you have to go to their setups, you can't just have them come in
  54. # [00:23] <Lachy> if they have laptops, then you could have them come in with them
  55. # [00:23] <othermaciej> Hixie: I think that would be a good improvement beyond even the summary="" issue
  56. # [00:23] <Hixie> from what i've seen of usability studies of AT users here at google, they don't. at least not the ones we found for our studies.
  57. # [00:24] <othermaciej> Hixie: and yes, I would be in favor of that proposal
  58. # [00:25] <Hixie> othermaciej: ok. i'll see what hsivonen thinks, and will see if i can find a way to phrase it that satisfies both the desire to keep these things as second-class citizens, and the desire to allow them to some extent.
  59. # [00:25] <Lachy> how is that different from the downplayed errors we already have in the spec?
  60. # [00:26] <othermaciej> a document containing a downplayed error is nonconforming
  61. # [00:27] <Lachy> so maybe we should have conformance levels, conceptually like the WCAG accessibility levels?
  62. # [00:27] <Philip`> Sounds like it's going to be horrendously confusing to someone who just wants to be told whether their page is okay or not
  63. # [00:27] <Lachy> but then, that's getting closer to the idea of Strict/Transitional conformance
  64. # [00:30] <gavin_> Philip`: "good", "ok, with some problems" and "bad" doesn't seem that confusing
  65. # [00:31] <gavin_> but even with those three buckets there are going to be arguments as to what goes where
  66. # [00:31] * Joins: roc (n=roc@203-97-204-82.dsl.clear.net.nz)
  67. # [00:32] * Quits: svl (n=me@ip565744a7.direct-adsl.nl) ("And back he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky.")
  68. # [00:33] <Lachy> yeah, my idea sucks. Don't listen to me.
  69. # [00:33] <Dashiva> "strict", "transitional", "invalid"
  70. # [00:33] * Joins: webben (n=benh@dip5-fw.corp.ukl.yahoo.com)
  71. # [00:34] <othermaciej> I think "good with no warnings", "good with warnings" and "bad, there are some errors" are sensible states
  72. # [00:34] <othermaciej> that is what programmers get from compilers and such
  73. # [00:37] <Lachy> that seems reasonable. Though it still sucks having to settle for compromises like this just to stop the arguments.
  74. # [00:37] <othermaciej> my personal point of view is that it's the right thing to do, not just a compromise
  75. # [00:38] <othermaciej> because sometimes, there are things that are often but not universally bad, and the right treatment is a mandatory but nonfatal diagnostic
  76. # [00:38] <othermaciej> some people will only care about error-free and take the warnings on a case-by-case basis, some will want their pages warning-free too
  77. # [00:39] <Lachy> I disagree, but fair enough
  78. # [00:39] <Dashiva> That's fair enough, I think the problem are the people who just see "Okay" and ignore the "but"
  79. # [00:39] <Philip`> The validator could let you specify -Werror and Wno-foo
  80. # [00:39] <othermaciej> yes, the validator should be able to toggle warning classes and also optionally treat warnings as fatal
  81. # [00:39] <Philip`> (for all values of foo)
  82. # [00:39] <othermaciej> I personally would want to use it in that mode, I think
  83. # [00:40] <Lachy> othermaciej, are you suggesting this be applied to all attributes that are currently considered downplayed errors, or just to summary?
  84. # [00:42] <othermaciej> Lachy: Hixie proposed converting the whole "downplayed error" class into something warning-like (i.e. does not break conformance)
  85. # [00:43] <othermaciej> I think having "error" and "warning" instead of "error" and "downplayed error" as the two classes of diagnostics makes sense
  86. # [00:43] <Hixie> yeah, i could reluctantly be convinced of that, i think
  87. # [00:43] <othermaciej> I haven't reviewed every current use of downplayed error, so I don't have an opinion on which should become nonfatal and which should be fatal
  88. # [00:44] <othermaciej> it would probably merit case-by-case review, since for some it may make sense to just convert them back to errors
  89. # [00:44] <Hixie> (i was reading a scifi story recently where people could run simulations of their mental processes on a computer, and at one point one of the characters is in a debate
  90. # [00:44] <Hixie> and he just ran 15,000 simulations of how the argument might play out with his simulated mental processes in "vm"s
  91. # [00:44] * Joins: jacobolus (n=jacobolu@adsl-69-228-190-230.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  92. # [00:45] <Hixie> in 95% of cases he was convinced. so he just decided to assume he'd be convinced, and skip the 15 minutes discussion that would otherwise ensue.
  93. # [00:45] <Hixie> i find this a fascinating concept.)
  94. # [00:45] * Quits: webben (n=benh@dip5-fw.corp.ukl.yahoo.com) ("leaving")
  95. # [00:45] * Joins: webben (n=benh@dip5-fw.corp.ukl.yahoo.com)
  96. # [00:46] <othermaciej> I suppose that is meta-rational
  97. # [00:46] <othermaciej> (though sometimes it's important to know why you have been convinced)
  98. # [00:47] * Lachy begins simulating tomorrow's public-html discussions
  99. # [00:47] <Philip`> Isn't that kind of missing the part of the debate that involves exchanging information with the other participant and becoming better informed?
  100. # [00:47] <Hixie> the simulation included a simulation of the other participant
  101. # [00:48] <othermaciej> hmm, did annevk ever put the client rect and caret from point stuff in the CSSOM Editor's Draft?
  102. # [00:48] <othermaciej> or is it somewhere else?
  103. # [00:49] <Philip`> A simulation based on the first person's mental representation of the second person? (in which case the first person still wouldn't be able to learn anything new)
  104. # [00:49] <Hixie> i don't recall the specifics
  105. # [00:51] <Philip`> "authors should be aware that additional media resources might be necessary" - but they are allowed to be unaware if they have valid reasons to be, though presumably they will have to somehow wipe their minds after carefully weighing the full implications and deciding to become unaware of it
  106. # [00:51] <Hixie> is that in html5?
  107. # [00:52] * Philip` notes that he is aware he is making a trivial point and ignoring all the important issues presented in the email
  108. # [00:52] <Philip`> Hixie: No, in sayrer's recent post to public-html
  109. # [00:53] <Hixie> ah ok
  110. # [00:58] * Quits: sbublava_ (n=stephan@77.118.237.248.wireless.dyn.drei.com)
  111. # [00:58] * Philip` supposes a more constructive way to phrase the feedback would be to say that the proposed text uses the word "should" with no intended normative meaning, which is inconsistent with how that word is used throughout the rest of HTML 5
  112. # [00:58] <Philip`> but that's a boring way to say it
  113. # [01:02] * Parts: billmason (n=billmaso@ip192.unival.com)
  114. # [01:07] <Lachy> "New standards shouldn't carry the burden of backwards compatibility, that's the browser's (implementor's) job!" -- http://twitter.com/minusfive/statuses/2522138950
  115. # [01:11] * Joins: othermaciej_ (n=mjs@17.246.18.9)
  116. # [01:12] * Quits: sayrer__ (n=chatzill@user-160va8b.cable.mindspring.com) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  117. # [01:28] * Quits: othermaciej (n=mjs@17.203.15.190) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  118. # [01:39] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  119. # [01:42] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  120. # [01:45] <Hixie> did shelley just formally object to the free market philosophy?
  121. # [01:52] * Joins: equalsJeffH (n=weechat@209.20.72.172)
  122. # [01:57] * Quits: heycam (n=cam@124-168-95-60.dyn.iinet.net.au) ("bye")
  123. # [02:05] * Quits: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@nat/mozilla/x-bc2f40d8fd3879d9)
  124. # [02:08] <gavin_> where?
  125. # [02:11] * Joins: dimich (n=dimich@72.14.227.1)
  126. # [02:15] * Joins: sayrer__ (n=chatzill@user-160va8b.cable.mindspring.com)
  127. # [02:21] * Quits: othermaciej_ (n=mjs@17.246.18.9) (Remote closed the connection)
  128. # [02:21] * Joins: othermaciej (n=mjs@17.203.15.190)
  129. # [02:23] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@clm-laptop.infotech.monash.edu.au)
  130. # [02:26] <Lachy> Hixie, why are you surprised? Shelly objects to everything that doesn't result in getting what she wants
  131. # [02:26] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-137-57.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  132. # [02:31] * aroben|away is now known as aroben
  133. # [02:36] * Quits: dbaron (n=dbaron@nat/mozilla/x-d49e0663523a9091) ("8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.")
  134. # [02:37] * Quits: sid0 (n=sid0@unaffiliated/sid0) (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  135. # [02:53] * Quits: cying (n=cying@70.90.171.153)
  136. # [02:53] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-61-141.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  137. # [02:55] * Quits: jacobolus (n=jacobolu@adsl-69-228-190-230.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net) (Remote closed the connection)
  138. # [02:59] * Joins: jacobolus (n=jacobolu@adsl-69-228-190-230.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  139. # [03:01] * Quits: franksalim (n=frank@adsl-76-243-95-41.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net) ("Leaving")
  140. # [03:01] * Quits: ap (n=ap@nat/apple/x-3712272c243b0317)
  141. # [03:05] * Quits: jennb (n=jennb@72.14.227.1)
  142. # [03:07] * Joins: slightlyoff_ (n=slightly@nat/google/x-7b536238d086e6b9)
  143. # [03:07] * Quits: slightlyoff_ (n=slightly@nat/google/x-7b536238d086e6b9) (Client Quit)
  144. # [03:08] * Quits: slightlyoff (n=slightly@nat/google/x-6e91c49a83a8c8d7) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  145. # [03:21] <Lachy> http://twitter.com/minusfive/status/2524514401
  146. # [03:21] <Lachy> "@Lachy "you misunderstand. <font> is non-conforming, validators will give an error" - please share your sources? #html5"
  147. # [03:27] <Hixie> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#font
  148. # [03:35] <Lachy> thanks. I was looking for where the spec said that authors could only used the defined elements and attributes, but that list is good enough
  149. # [03:38] * Joins: nessy (n=nessy@115.128.27.141)
  150. # [03:40] <Lachy> damn, I really can't keep up with the absurd volume of e-mail on public-html and whatwg. I had 0 mails left in either of those lists earlier today (after ignoring a whole bunch), and it's now up to 46 unread (combined) in just 12 hours
  151. # [03:41] <Lachy> and that's already after having read quite a few of them in the mean time
  152. # [03:44] <Lachy> I'll have to read them all in the morning. Hopefully there won't be another 50 by the time I wake up!
  153. # [03:45] <tantek> Lachy - email doesn't scale. Eventually you'll give up on efail.
  154. # [03:45] <Lachy> tantek, what's the alternative?
  155. # [03:46] <Lachy> the big problem is that the codec and summary threads are largely repetitive.
  156. # [03:47] * Quits: gavin_ (n=gavin@firefox/developer/gavin) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  157. # [03:48] <tantek> Lachy - the alternative is to put content on the wiki, and have email/IRC only for sharing updates/URLs
  158. # [03:48] <tantek> http://tr.im/wikibetter
  159. # [03:48] * Joins: gavin_ (n=gavin@people.mozilla.com)
  160. # [03:49] <tantek> more on EMAIL is EFAIL: http://tantek.com/log/2008/02.html#d19t2359
  161. # [03:49] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  162. # [03:51] <Lachy> tantek, I strongly disagree. Wikis are subject to edit wars and are not optimised for discussion purposes.
  163. # [03:52] <Lachy> they're even worse than forums for discussion purposes
  164. # [03:53] <Lachy> anyway, bed time. Good night.
  165. # [04:00] * Joins: mpilgrim (n=mark@rrcs-96-10-240-189.midsouth.biz.rr.com)
  166. # [04:03] * Joins: Hish_ (n=chatzill@212.60.242.26)
  167. # [04:03] * Quits: equalsJeffH (n=weechat@209.20.72.172) ("WeeChat 0.2.6")
  168. # [04:07] * Quits: jacobolus (n=jacobolu@adsl-69-228-190-230.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net) (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer))
  169. # [04:08] * Joins: hdh (n=hdh@2001:470:18:88:0:0:0:2)
  170. # [04:14] * Joins: jacobolus (n=jacobolu@adsl-69-228-190-230.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  171. # [04:14] * Quits: jacobolus (n=jacobolu@adsl-69-228-190-230.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net) (Remote closed the connection)
  172. # [04:15] * Quits: yshin (n=yshin@72.14.227.1) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  173. # [04:16] <Hixie> Lachy: try joining www-font
  174. # [04:17] <Hixie> 50 a day so far this month
  175. # [04:19] <Hixie> http://blog.halindrome.com/2009/07/w3c-you-ignorant-slut.html?showComment=1247014132596#c5389136712076824446
  176. # [04:19] * Quits: Hish (n=chatzill@212.60.242.26) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  177. # [04:23] <othermaciej> oh jesus, www-font
  178. # [04:28] * Quits: taf2_ (n=taf2@98.218.77.43)
  179. # [04:29] * Quits: nessy (n=nessy@115.128.27.141) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  180. # [04:31] * Hixie ponders the bibtex vocabulary
  181. # [04:31] <othermaciej> omg I got +1d by John Foliot
  182. # [04:33] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-61-141.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp) ("Tomorrow to fresh woods, and pastures new.")
  183. # [04:33] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-61-141.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  184. # [04:34] <Hixie> the main use case for the bibtex stuff was drag-and-drop of content from one page into another (e.g. a wikipedia entry) with the destination having a script that automatically took the biblio data from the first page and added it to the second page's references
  185. # [04:35] <othermaciej> it seems to me that, on the one hand, that use case doesn't sound terribly common, and on the other hand, it could be served via script and agreed convention in absence of native support
  186. # [04:35] <Hixie> yeah
  187. # [04:36] <Hixie> ok i'm gonna strip the bibtex vocabulary out. it wasn't that popular in the first place.
  188. # [04:38] <othermaciej> I do think personal information and calendar events are of greater general interest
  189. # [04:38] <Hixie> yeah
  190. # [04:45] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@17.246.17.208)
  191. # [04:49] * Joins: abii (n=macbook@cm27.delta30.maxonline.com.sg)
  192. # [04:55] * Quits: jwalden (n=waldo@nat/mozilla/x-7a70cd4eddbdc0f5) ("ChatZilla 0.9.85 [Firefox 3.5.1pre/20090704031137]")
  193. # [05:04] * Quits: hdh (n=hdh@2001:470:18:88:0:0:0:2) (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer))
  194. # [05:05] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@c-98-234-51-190.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  195. # [05:05] <heycam> re flexbox and css animation on http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Companion_specifications, i think both have active editors
  196. # [05:07] <dbaron> does anybody know where the message was where the XHTML2 WG announced that XHTML2 would use the 1999 namespace?
  197. # [05:08] <othermaciej> I remember seeing it in the w3c archives but I don't remember where
  198. # [05:09] <dbaron> yeah, that's my current problem
  199. # [05:10] <othermaciej> I think it was posted by Shane McCarron
  200. # [05:13] <dbaron> well, I can cite http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Jun/0313.html since I haven't found anything better
  201. # [05:13] <othermaciej> I think this might be the email I was thinking of: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2007Jun/0014.html
  202. # [05:14] <othermaciej> other than that, I've only seen discussion in minutes I think
  203. # [05:14] <dbaron> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2006JulSep/0137 too
  204. # [05:14] <othermaciej> ah, that might have also been one I was thinking of
  205. # [05:15] * othermaciej pats self on the back for remembering who posted it
  206. # [05:15] <dbaron> See, I remember one that Lachy wrote a good response to that I wanted to link to
  207. # [05:15] <dbaron> but I can't find it
  208. # [05:15] <dbaron> maybe it was on a member-confidential list
  209. # [05:19] <othermaciej> I see this from Lachlan: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2006Oct/0014.html
  210. # [05:20] <dbaron> no, I remembered something else more directly about the namespace
  211. # [05:20] <dbaron> but I have another link that makes the same point, although not quite as well, but well enough
  212. # [05:21] <othermaciej> xhtml2 is dead anyway, are you looking to desecrate the body?
  213. # [05:23] <dbaron> I was just writing a short post-mortem.
  214. # [05:23] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  215. # [05:24] <othermaciej> to me one of the weirdest events in the history of xhtml2 was Sam Ruby's "merger" proposal on his blog which seemed to capture no interest whatsoever in the HTML WG
  216. # [05:24] <othermaciej> even though I believe there was much intense private discussion preceding it
  217. # [05:28] <sayrer__> dbaron, sam ruby wrote on that
  218. # [05:28] <dbaron> sayrer__, on what?
  219. # [05:31] <MikeSmith> dbaron: I seem to remember looking for an archived message with such an announcement, and never being able to find one
  220. # [05:31] <MikeSmith> I think they may have never actually announced it
  221. # [05:31] <dbaron> MikeSmith, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2006JulSep/0137 is one
  222. # [05:31] <MikeSmith> OK
  223. # [05:32] <sayrer__> dbaron, http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/105
  224. # [05:33] <dbaron> I'm looking for a particular message that was probably second half of 2006 or maybe early 2007
  225. # [05:33] <dbaron> or was, rather
  226. # [05:36] <sayrer__> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Oct/0385.html
  227. # [05:36] <sayrer__> getting warmer
  228. # [05:36] <sayrer__> but if you're not looking
  229. # [05:36] <sayrer__> nevermind then
  230. # [05:40] * Joins: weinig_ (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  231. # [05:46] * Quits: aroben (n=aroben@unaffiliated/aroben) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  232. # [05:54] * Joins: jacobolus (n=jacobolu@adsl-69-228-190-230.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  233. # [05:57] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
  234. # [05:57] * weinig_ is now known as weinig
  235. # [06:00] <roc> wow
  236. # [06:00] <roc> Tom Lord's latest to www-font really ups the ante
  237. # [06:02] <roc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-font/2009JulSep/0341.html for those following along at home
  238. # [06:03] * Quits: othermaciej (n=mjs@17.203.15.190)
  239. # [06:06] <dbaron> I think http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2006OctDec/0014.html actually probably was the post I was thinking of
  240. # [06:07] <dbaron> and wasn't as clear as I remembered in explaining what "backwards compatible" meant
  241. # [06:20] * Joins: cying (n=cying@adsl-75-41-114-136.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  242. # [06:30] * Quits: archtech (n=stanv@83.228.56.37)
  243. # [06:46] * Quits: cying (n=cying@adsl-75-41-114-136.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  244. # [06:53] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  245. # [06:55] * Joins: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-42-237.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  246. # [06:55] <othermaciej> my car crash curiosity is aroused
  247. # [06:57] <othermaciej> roc: was he high when he posted that?
  248. # [06:58] <roc> I hope so
  249. # [06:58] <othermaciej> true, it would be much more disturbing if he wasn't
  250. # [06:58] <othermaciej> I wonder how he came to be so very interested in this issue
  251. # [07:02] * Quits: jacobolus (n=jacobolu@adsl-69-228-190-230.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net) (Remote closed the connection)
  252. # [07:17] * Joins: jacobolus (n=jacobolu@c-98-248-43-68.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  253. # [07:24] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  254. # [07:34] <shepazu> Lord's comment is more or less what Chris Wilson argued to me and David Storey at Google I/O (minus the wise holy streetperson)
  255. # [07:35] <shepazu> no, correction... it was me and Arun, not David Storey
  256. # [07:38] <sayrer__> "Lord's comment is more or less what Chris Wilson argued to me "
  257. # [07:38] <sayrer__> lol
  258. # [07:39] <sayrer__> then I got to the end and the joke was over
  259. # [07:39] <shepazu> sayrer: I meant that in the sense of "Lord's Prayer"... I'm a lapsed Catholic, and I still have messianic visions of the lotus and the Beast
  260. # [07:46] * Joins: T-- (n=tim@p5B017A92.dip.t-dialin.net)
  261. # [07:51] * Quits: mpilgrim (n=mark@rrcs-96-10-240-189.midsouth.biz.rr.com) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  262. # [08:03] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  263. # [08:04] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-61-141.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp) ("Tomorrow to fresh woods, and pastures new.")
  264. # [08:06] * Joins: nessy (n=nessy@124-168-240-72.dyn.iinet.net.au)
  265. # [08:10] <othermaciej> shepazu: I doubt that Chris Wilson argued the "also support straight TTF" part
  266. # [08:10] * Joins: Mrmil (n=ut_ollie@host-77-236-204-8.blue4.cz)
  267. # [08:16] * Quits: Sirisian (n=Sirisian@ppp-70-229-37-27.dsl.klmzmi.ameritech.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  268. # [08:21] * Quits: heycam (n=cam@clm-laptop.infotech.monash.edu.au) ("bye")
  269. # [08:25] <shepazu> othermaciej: correct... just the bit that says "The EOT-lite part makes sense because, done correctly, it allows interop with already deployed versions of IE."
  270. # [08:26] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@dyn-130-194-69-201.infotech.monash.edu.au)
  271. # [08:30] * Quits: sayrer__ (n=chatzill@user-160va8b.cable.mindspring.com) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  272. # [08:36] * Joins: pesla (n=retep@procurios.xs4all.nl)
  273. # [08:41] * Joins: Maurice (n=ano@a80-101-46-164.adsl.xs4all.nl)
  274. # [08:46] * Quits: dbaron (n=dbaron@c-98-234-51-190.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) ("8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.")
  275. # [08:48] <hsivonen> Hixie: I saw the discussion between you and maciej on IRC, but I'm unsure which email is expecting my reply. Could you help me with an URI, please?
  276. # [08:49] <Hixie> sure, hold on
  277. # [08:50] <Hixie> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jul/0227.html
  278. # [08:50] <Hixie> but see also related thread messages
  279. # [08:50] <hsivonen> thanks
  280. # [08:50] * Joins: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-73-67.dynamic.amis.net)
  281. # [08:52] <othermaciej> hsivonen: we were discussing whether non-fatal warnings might be a better kind of less-sever diagnostic than down-played errors as they currently stand, and also the possibility of applying that to summary=""
  282. # [08:52] <othermaciej> note: it might be legitimate to make lack of alt="" a nonfatal warning
  283. # [08:52] <othermaciej> since the spec says you should include alt except in exceptional circumstances
  284. # [08:52] <hsivonen> I don't like downplayed errors
  285. # [08:53] <hsivonen> I also don't like prescribed warnings
  286. # [08:53] <hsivonen> but I like downplayed errors less
  287. # [08:53] * Joins: maikmerten (n=merten@ls5dhcp196.cs.uni-dortmund.de)
  288. # [08:55] * Joins: john_fallows (n=j_r_fall@c-71-202-53-211.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  289. # [09:12] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@tea12.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp)
  290. # [09:13] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@tea12.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp) (Client Quit)
  291. # [09:16] * Joins: Khazou (n=Khazou@83.204.60.87)
  292. # [09:16] <hsivonen> my spirits sink reading sicking's description of what IE does with deferred doc.write
  293. # [09:17] <hsivonen> (the innerHTML part)
  294. # [09:18] <Hixie> when i specced defer="" i left a comment in the spec to the effect that i knew it didn't match IE but i was hoping no-one would notice :-/
  295. # [09:19] <othermaciej> I can't think of any possible thing to do with deferred document.write that would be sane
  296. # [09:19] * Joins: gsnedders (n=gsnedder@c83-252-196-10.bredband.comhem.se)
  297. # [09:23] <Philip`> Hixie: The mails to commit-watchers seem to indicate that changes to source are not getting propagated to index
  298. # [09:24] <Hixie> that is correct
  299. # [09:24] <Hixie> the changes in the recent checkins went to the IETF
  300. # [09:25] <gsnedders> Philip`: Pfff. Coward! Just read the spec and check what was updated.
  301. # [09:25] <Hixie> they were WebSocket changes
  302. # [09:25] <Philip`> Oh
  303. # [09:25] <Philip`> Whoops
  304. # [09:30] * Quits: gsnedders (n=gsnedder@c83-252-196-10.bredband.comhem.se)
  305. # [09:36] * Quits: john_fallows (n=j_r_fall@c-71-202-53-211.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) (Remote closed the connection)
  306. # [09:52] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  307. # [09:55] * Joins: mpilgrim (n=mark@96.10.240.189)
  308. # [10:05] * hsivonen wonders if zeldman's comments have different moderation behavior at differt times of day
  309. # [10:05] <hsivonen> that is, if you go to queue when it's night on Zeldman's time zone and straight to public when it's day
  310. # [10:07] <hsivonen> well, maybe my comment appears some time
  311. # [10:13] * Quits: heycam (n=cam@dyn-130-194-69-201.infotech.monash.edu.au) ("bye")
  312. # [10:15] * hsivonen wonders if Google is really going to keep Dalvik apps around or if Android is going Palm Pre now that they are doing the Chrome OS thing
  313. # [10:15] <Hixie> ok
  314. # [10:16] <Hixie> opinions on the new obsolete section? http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#obsolete-features
  315. # [10:16] * Joins: gsnedders (n=gsnedder@pat.se.opera.com)
  316. # [10:16] <othermaciej> hsivonen: Google just recently announced a native C++ SDK for Android I think
  317. # [10:16] <Hixie> see also changes under DOCTYPEs here: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-initial-insertion-mode
  318. # [10:16] <othermaciej> hsivonen: so it sounds more like they are going the other way with it
  319. # [10:16] * Quits: webben (n=benh@dip5-fw.corp.ukl.yahoo.com) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  320. # [10:16] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@tea12.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp)
  321. # [10:17] <gsnedders> othermaciej: So how will they cope with non-ARM Android devices?
  322. # [10:17] <othermaciej> gsnedders: no idea! fat binaries?
  323. # [10:17] <hsivonen> looks like Web apps are the only thing that works across all these devices...
  324. # [10:17] <gsnedders> othermaciej: How will they cope with arch_that_doesn't_exist_yet?
  325. # [10:18] <othermaciej> gsnedders: you should probably ask someone who knows and understands the strategy
  326. # [10:18] <hsivonen> gsnedders: the question is even more interesting for Google Native Client if it catches on
  327. # [10:18] <othermaciej> iPhone's strategy is to lock down the hardware platform and severely limit number of available models so you know what your native apps are targeting
  328. # [10:18] <gsnedders> othermaciej: But I don't know anyone who does, so asking in IRC is the best thing I can do :)
  329. # [10:18] <T--> Hixie, just out of curiosity, what's the rationale of choosing iframes over framesets?
  330. # [10:19] <hsivonen> Hixie: "na name"
  331. # [10:20] <Hixie> T--: they're more flexible, and we can't really get rid of them (they're used everywhere)
  332. # [10:20] <Hixie> hsivonen: fixed
  333. # [10:20] <othermaciej> I would personally lean towards profile="" in the obsolete but conforming bucket, but say HTML processors MUST NOT vary their processing based on it
  334. # [10:21] <othermaciej> wording looks good to me though
  335. # [10:21] <othermaciej> I think this is an improvement over "downplayed errors"
  336. # [10:22] * T-- doesn't understand the ?flexible?.
  337. # [10:22] <hsivonen> Hixie: where's the normative statement that validators must warn about those?
  338. # [10:22] <Hixie> hsivonen: last subsection of that h2-level section
  339. # [10:22] <Hixie> i can move it up if you like
  340. # [10:22] <hsivonen> Hixie: works for me as is
  341. # [10:23] <Hixie> i've moved it up
  342. # [10:23] <hsivonen> ok
  343. # [10:24] * Joins: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@pat-tdc.opera.com)
  344. # [10:36] <jgraham> So "obsolete" is the new "deprecated"
  345. # [10:36] * Hixie growls at bug 7089
  346. # [10:36] <Hixie> jgraham: it always has been, hasn't it?
  347. # [10:37] <jgraham> Well I mean "obsolete"+warning
  348. # [10:37] <Hixie> the big difference between Transitional and the warnings is that you don't ever see "Your document is conforming!" if you have warnings, you see "You document is conforming, but with warnings"
  349. # [10:38] <Hixie> with transitional, once you had the transitional doctype, you never again saw anything clearly telling you that you weren't strict
  350. # [10:38] <Hixie> at least, i reckon that's a difference
  351. # [10:38] <jgraham> Given how popular compiler warnings are I can't imagine it will make a big difference
  352. # [10:38] <Hixie> true
  353. # [10:38] <Hixie> oh well, we'll see
  354. # [10:38] <Hixie> there's not much on the list
  355. # [10:39] <othermaciej> jgraham: are you saying compiler warnings are popular, or unpopular?
  356. # [10:39] <jgraham> othermaciej: I assume they are popular because compiling software tends to give me so many of them ;)
  357. # [10:39] <othermaciej> heh
  358. # [10:40] <othermaciej> WebKit builds with -Werror (or equivalent) and with many optional warnings on
  359. # [10:40] <othermaciej> (although in MSVC we have to turn some off, because they are stupid)
  360. # [10:40] <jgraham> (In seriousness, I know that many projects have a zero-warnings policy but it hardly seems to be normal and in web-developert terms probably translates onto the people who would care about the strict/transitional distinction)
  361. # [10:41] <othermaciej> for example, if you use a high enough warning level and don't silence this one specifically, MSVC will complain if you write if (intVariable) { something(); }
  362. # [10:41] <othermaciej> it wants you to say if (!!intVariable) { something(); }
  363. # [10:42] * Joins: ROBOd (n=robod@89.122.216.38)
  364. # [10:42] <jgraham> what's the difference?
  365. # [10:42] <othermaciej> in generated code and actual effect? nothing
  366. # [10:42] <othermaciej> but for the former, it complains about an implicit conversion to bool
  367. # [10:43] <Hixie> and !!a isn't an implicit conversion?!
  368. # [10:43] <Philip`> (if (intVariable != 0) seems nicer to read)
  369. # [10:43] <othermaciej> and warns you that it may be slow, or something
  370. # [10:43] <othermaciej> I'm not giving this as an example of a good warning!
  371. # [10:44] <Philip`> The Intel C++ Compiler has "info" (I think) messages, as well as errors and warnings, which say things like "order of argument evaluation is undefined" that aren't serious enough to be warnings
  372. # [10:46] * Quits: roc (n=roc@203-97-204-82.dsl.clear.net.nz)
  373. # [10:46] <Hixie> ok bed time
  374. # [10:46] <Hixie> nn
  375. # [10:47] <Philip`> I always get tempted to waste time avoiding any messages the compiler might output, even if they're really pointless and I shouldn't care
  376. # [10:47] * Joins: danbri (n=danbri@130.37.26.94)
  377. # [10:47] <Philip`> since I'm just incapable of ignoring them
  378. # [10:47] <Philip`> and it takes a lot of effort to convince myself to lower the verbosity setting
  379. # [10:47] <othermaciej> for WebKit we basically choose to make compiler or analysis tool messages either fatal or silenced
  380. # [10:50] <hsivonen> othermaciej: that flavor of compiler warning would have helped me avoid one classic if (foo = bar) bug in the HTML5 parser
  381. # [10:50] * Joins: taf2_ (n=taf2@98.218.77.43)
  382. # [10:50] <othermaciej> hsivonen: gcc warns you if you write if (foo = bar)
  383. # [10:50] <othermaciej> hsivonen: it tells you that if you really meant to do that, you should put parentheses around it
  384. # [10:50] <Lachy> Hixie, in #conforming-but-obsolete-features section, you basically give the same list twice, but written in slightly different ways.
  385. # [10:50] <othermaciej> that's much better than the GCC warning
  386. # [10:51] <Lachy> oh, I see. The first is for authors. The latter is the UA conformance requirements
  387. # [10:51] <Lachy> Didn't make sense before I turned on the highlighting stylesheet
  388. # [10:52] * Joins: heycam (n=cam@124-168-95-60.dyn.iinet.net.au)
  389. # [10:53] <hsivonen> othermaciej: what really happened here is that I made the change quickly late in a review cycle for landing, so I only checked it compiled--I didn't take a good look at warning/assert smoke
  390. # [10:53] <hsivonen> so I guess no warning would have saved me
  391. # [10:53] <othermaciej> -Werror would have saved you
  392. # [10:54] <othermaciej> because then it wouldn't have compiled
  393. # [10:55] <Lachy> Hixie, with the "Hide UA text" stylesheet enabled, the link to "obsolete permitted DOCTYPEs" from the "Conforming but obsolete features" section no longer works because that's written in a .impl section
  394. # [10:57] * Joins: webben (n=benh@nat/yahoo/x-ad7a8dcc1ef0a8dc)
  395. # [11:11] <Lachy> re that discussion on www-font, it would suck to even allow EOT-lite, cause then we'll get stuck with DRM-encumbered fonts from major font vendors, even though the DRM is entirely ineffective and only serves as a hinderence to authors
  396. # [11:11] <Lachy> s/allow/require/
  397. # [11:13] <Lachy> just make ttf/otf mandatory. Authors can still provide EOT versions as a fallback font that will work in older versions of IE, at least until support for ttf/otf is widely deployed in more up to date versions of IE
  398. # [11:14] <Lachy> Are Microsoft still objecting to supporting TTF/OTF?
  399. # [11:14] <othermaciej> Web fonts, the other format war
  400. # [11:15] * Joins: Phae (n=phaeness@gatea.mh.bbc.co.uk)
  401. # [11:15] <othermaciej> Chris Wilson gave a really clear flat refusal
  402. # [11:16] <Lachy> It really makes me wonder where Microsoft's interests lie: In providing the best development platform for authors, or for giving in and promoting the absurd needs of the font-foundries?!
  403. # [11:18] <Lachy> I guess it's the same underlying philosiphy that Microsoft uses to push various forms of DRM on other types of media
  404. # [11:19] <Philip`> What is the argument against permitting fonts in a format that can't easily be reused outside the web? (separate from the arguments against not supporting TTF/OTF)
  405. # [11:20] * Philip` is interested since his font subsetting tools makes fonts that can't easily be reused outside the web (or outside the context where they were originally used), and wonders if that's considered a bad thing
  406. # [11:21] * jgraham hasn't been following the discussion but thought the issue was more to do with tying fonts to specific domains making testing a pain
  407. # [11:21] <jgraham> s/testing/deployment/
  408. # [11:21] <Lachy> EOT places restrictions on what domains a font can be used on and expects browsers to enforce those restrictions.
  409. # [11:22] <Lachy> (I could be remembering that wrongly, but I know the font foundries have been pushing for a feature like that in one form or another)
  410. # [11:23] <Philip`> If you could e.g. tweak a TTF/OTF so that it works fine in web browsers but is kind of broken if used in many other applications, e.g. by setting the embedding bits or setting the font name to "", would that be considered harmful to the world?
  411. # [11:26] * Joins: danbri_ (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri)
  412. # [11:28] * Quits: danbri (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  413. # [11:33] <Lachy> yes, because it imposes what could be considered to be a Technological Protection Measure on the font, and could be subject to anti-circumvention clauses of laws like the DMCA.
  414. # [11:33] <Lachy> It would be the font equivalent of the failed broadcast flag proposal
  415. # [11:35] <Lachy> also, that's one of the proposals that was discussed on www-style a long time ago
  416. # [11:36] <Lachy> and I recall someone from the Linux community saying that support for the flag would have to be integrated into the systems font handling, and thus wouldn't protect against other uses on the system anyway
  417. # [11:54] * Quits: maikmerten (n=merten@ls5dhcp196.cs.uni-dortmund.de) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  418. # [11:58] * Quits: Phae (n=phaeness@gatea.mh.bbc.co.uk)
  419. # [11:59] * Joins: maikmerten (n=merten@129.217.26.196)
  420. # [12:00] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  421. # [12:00] * Joins: roc (n=roc@121.74.139.174)
  422. # [12:00] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@chicago.perfect-privacy.com)
  423. # [12:08] * Joins: jacobrask (n=jacobr@vemod.brg.sgsnet.se)
  424. # [12:19] * Joins: Lachy_ (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com)
  425. # [12:19] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@chicago.perfect-privacy.com) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  426. # [12:24] * Quits: starjive (i=beos@213-66-216-93-no30.tbcn.telia.com)
  427. # [12:28] * Joins: Lachy__ (n=Lachlan@chicago.perfect-privacy.com)
  428. # [12:30] * Quits: Lachy_ (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  429. # [12:33] * Joins: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt)
  430. # [12:39] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com)
  431. # [12:39] * Quits: Lachy__ (n=Lachlan@chicago.perfect-privacy.com) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  432. # [12:51] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@tea12.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp) ("Tomorrow to fresh woods, and pastures new.")
  433. # [12:54] * Joins: myakura (n=myakura@124.87.203.127)
  434. # [13:05] * Quits: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  435. # [13:10] * Quits: danbri_ (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri)
  436. # [13:17] * Joins: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt)
  437. # [13:18] * Quits: mpt (n=mpt@canonical/launchpad/mpt) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  438. # [13:22] * Quits: karlcow (n=karl@nerval.la-grange.net) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  439. # [13:23] * Joins: karlcow (n=karl@nerval.la-grange.net)
  440. # [13:25] * Quits: Amorphous (i=jan@unaffiliated/amorphous) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  441. # [13:28] * Joins: Amorphous (i=jan@unaffiliated/amorphous)
  442. # [13:32] * Joins: remysharp (n=remyshar@86.26.237.174)
  443. # [13:35] * Quits: webben (n=benh@nat/yahoo/x-ad7a8dcc1ef0a8dc) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  444. # [13:38] * Quits: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-42-237.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  445. # [13:41] * Quits: remysharp (n=remyshar@86.26.237.174) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  446. # [13:41] * Joins: remysharp (n=remyshar@cpc4-brig15-0-0-cust429.3-3.cable.virginmedia.com)
  447. # [13:42] * Joins: Phae (n=phaeness@host86-142-34-178.range86-142.btcentralplus.com)
  448. # [13:43] * Quits: remysharp (n=remyshar@cpc4-brig15-0-0-cust429.3-3.cable.virginmedia.com) (Client Quit)
  449. # [13:56] * Quits: cyberpear (n=james@fedora/cyberpear) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  450. # [13:57] * Joins: cyberpear (n=james@fedora/cyberpear)
  451. # [14:00] * Quits: cyberpear (n=james@fedora/cyberpear) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  452. # [14:07] * Joins: remysharp (n=remyshar@cpc4-brig15-0-0-cust429.3-3.cable.virginmedia.com)
  453. # [14:12] * Joins: cyberpea2 (n=james@fedora/cyberpear)
  454. # [14:12] * Joins: svl (n=me@86.87.68.167)
  455. # [14:16] * Joins: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-145-170.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp)
  456. # [14:19] * Quits: remysharp (n=remyshar@cpc4-brig15-0-0-cust429.3-3.cable.virginmedia.com) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  457. # [14:20] <takkaria> I don't think the new warning model will be like Transitional, on reflection, because you can't turn the warnings off by putting a toggle in your source file
  458. # [14:21] <gsnedders> takkaria: You feeling better?
  459. # [14:21] * jgraham was about to ask that
  460. # [14:21] <takkaria> well, I'm standing up and lighgt doesn't hurt now. :)
  461. # [14:21] * gsnedders sticks tongue out at jgraham
  462. # [14:22] <takkaria> still a bit of a headace but that's bearable
  463. # [14:24] * Joins: danbri (n=danbri@s5590d015.adsl.wanadoo.nl)
  464. # [14:25] <jgraham> Nice weather we have here
  465. # [14:27] <gsnedders> Yeah, absolutely lovely.
  466. # [14:36] * Joins: tndH (n=Rob@129.11.60.204)
  467. # [14:40] * Joins: webben (n=benh@nat/yahoo/x-243ebfdda728a91e)
  468. # [14:45] * Joins: Hish__ (n=chatzill@mail2.n-e-s.de)
  469. # [14:45] * Hish__ is now known as Hish
  470. # [14:46] * Joins: webaron (n=aron@vm787.vps.tagadab.com)
  471. # [14:49] * Quits: tndH (n=Rob@129.11.60.204) ("ChatZilla 0.9.85-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.9.0.1/2008072406]")
  472. # [14:50] * Joins: pmuellr (n=pmuellr@129.33.49.251)
  473. # [14:50] <hsivonen> Lachy: the WHATWG WordPress isn't up-to-date
  474. # [14:51] * Quits: Hish_ (n=chatzill@212.60.242.26) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  475. # [14:51] <hsivonen> Lachy: Akismet is out of date, too
  476. # [14:54] <Lachy> hsivonen, yeah, I noticed that yesterday
  477. # [14:54] <Lachy> I suppose I could update it now
  478. # [14:56] <hsivonen> hmm. did I just blog with a grammar error in the title?
  479. # [14:56] <Lachy> upgarded now
  480. # [14:56] <hsivonen> should it be "Help test" instead?
  481. # [14:56] <Lachy> yes
  482. # [14:57] <Lachy> or "Help With Testing..."
  483. # [14:57] <Lachy> but Help Test seems better
  484. # [14:57] <hsivonen> Lachy: thanks
  485. # [14:58] <hsivonen> fixed.
  486. # [14:59] <Lachy> plugins upgraded now too
  487. # [14:59] <hsivonen> thanks
  488. # [14:59] <Lachy> I should also check that our wiki installation is up to date as well later
  489. # [15:00] <hsivonen> it's been quite a while since the last "this week"
  490. # [15:00] <Lachy> but that takes a little more effort, since I don't have a script for it
  491. # [15:12] <hsivonen> how should this quote be read? http://twitter.com/markbirbeck/status/2388701600
  492. # [15:13] * Quits: quuxbaz (n=palbo@pat-tdc.opera.com) (":qa!")
  493. # [15:16] * Joins: mstange (n=markus@buntes215.wohnheim.uni-kl.de)
  494. # [15:18] <Lachy> I have no idea what it means for something to "be highest impact"
  495. # [15:19] * Joins: cyberpear (n=james@fedora/cyberpear)
  496. # [15:19] <karlcow> trying to look for more background in http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23swdag2009
  497. # [15:19] <takkaria> RDFa is falling as part of a meteor shower of general web technology, and out of all of the meteorites that will hit the earth, RDFa will be highest impact
  498. # [15:20] <Dashiva> Meaning it will hit a mountain?
  499. # [15:20] <Lachy> hsivonen, I'm curious what the practical difference will be as far as implementing downplayed errors vs. the new conforming but obsolete warnings.
  500. # [15:21] <Dashiva> I could read it as "be [the one with the] highest [degree of] impact"
  501. # [15:21] <Lachy> I thought downplayed errors meant that warnings should be issues, rather than full errors
  502. # [15:21] <Lachy> so it's not clear to me that these spec changes are anything more than superficial
  503. # [15:22] * Joins: aroben (n=aroben@unaffiliated/aroben)
  504. # [15:23] <karlcow> the ajax search call in twitter is killing my firefox
  505. # [15:25] * Quits: cyberpear (n=james@fedora/cyberpear) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  506. # [15:27] <hsivonen> Lachy: warnings don't need new UI code, so they are easier
  507. # [15:28] <Lachy> hsivonen, sure, but how is issuing warnigns for the current spec different from issuing warnings for downplayed errors? Or would something else have been done for that?
  508. # [15:29] <hsivonen> Lachy: downplayed errors would have counted towards making the result turn into invalid
  509. # [15:29] * Joins: cyberpear (n=james@fedora/cyberpear)
  510. # [15:29] <hsivonen> Lachy: and the vision for downplayed errors was that they'd sort and collapse differently
  511. # [15:35] * Quits: cyberpea2 (n=james@fedora/cyberpear) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  512. # [15:42] * Joins: sayrer__ (n=chatzill@user-160va8b.cable.mindspring.com)
  513. # [15:46] <Lachy> hsivonen, that sounds like little more than UI design decisions that aren't really affected by what the spec actually said.
  514. # [15:47] * Joins: archtech (n=stanv@83.228.56.37)
  515. # [15:48] <hsivonen> Lachy: the non-UI effect is that the presence of one or more downplayed errors made the document invalid but the presence of normative warnings doesn't
  516. # [15:49] * Quits: taf2_ (n=taf2@98.218.77.43)
  517. # [15:57] <Lachy> so it's a very fine line between "non-conforming, but ignorable errors" and "conforming, but with warnings"
  518. # [16:00] <Philip`> "non-conforming, but ignorable errors" wouldn't give you a badge
  519. # [16:00] <Philip`> (Maybe the other won't either, which makes them harder to distinguish)
  520. # [16:08] * Joins: taf2_ (n=taf2@98.218.77.43)
  521. # [16:09] <sayrer__> Lachy: sometimes validator authors are nervous about stepping outside of what the spec tells
  522. # [16:09] <sayrer__> tells them is "invalid"
  523. # [16:32] * Quits: Hish (n=chatzill@mail2.n-e-s.de) (Remote closed the connection)
  524. # [16:32] <Lachy> it seems really strange that with so many browsers over the years, the idea of creating a browser OS keeps coming up. It happened with Netscape. It happened with Firefox, and now it's happening with Chrome. I suspect the only reason it didn't really happen with IE is that it was already so closely linked to Windows anyway, it wouldn't make much difference
  525. # [16:32] <Lachy> -- http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2009/07/google-chrome-os-lives-and-is-coming-to-a-netbook-near-you.ars
  526. # [16:35] * Joins: cyberpea2 (n=james@fedora/cyberpear)
  527. # [16:36] <karlcow> [10:04] <sayrer__> Lachy: sometimes validator authors are nervous about stepping outside of what the spec tells
  528. # [16:36] <karlcow> indeed. And what ever option you are choosing you get shot for your choices.
  529. # [16:36] * Quits: cyberpear (n=james@fedora/cyberpear) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  530. # [16:37] <karlcow> been there, seen that (aka w3c markup validator communitie*S*)
  531. # [16:37] <sayrer__> I think the author conformance requirements would be better in a document titled "How to write high quality HTML"
  532. # [16:38] <sayrer__> then the validator could say "Don't you want to write high quality HTML?"
  533. # [16:39] <Dashiva> "Why do you hate freedom?"
  534. # [16:41] <Philip`> "The Android browser has very little in common with Chrome on the desktop (for example, the Android browser uses Apple's SquirrelFish JavaScript engine instead of Chrome's V8)." - apart from having, like, all of WebKit in common?
  535. # [16:41] * Quits: cyberpea2 (n=james@fedora/cyberpear) (Remote closed the connection)
  536. # [16:41] <Lachy> I guess WebKit is just a very minor and insificant part of the browser, compared with the JavaScript engine
  537. # [16:42] <Lachy> </sarcasm>
  538. # [16:42] <MikeSmith> Philip`: where do that quote come from?
  539. # [16:42] <Lachy> sayrer__, how to write high quality HTML should be explained in HTML5 guides and references. Normative conformance criteria belong in the spec
  540. # [16:43] <Philip`> MikeSmith: The Ars article to which Lachy linked
  541. # [16:43] <MikeSmith> ok
  542. # [16:43] <sayrer__> Lachy: sure
  543. # [16:44] <MikeSmith> Lachy: I suspect sayrer__'s point is that they shouldn't be normative conformance criteria
  544. # [16:44] <Lachy> but then that wouldn't be very useful
  545. # [16:45] <sayrer__> useful for producing interoperable markup?
  546. # [16:46] <Lachy> sayrer__, while we could very easily get interoperability between implementations without any authoring conformance criteria, normative conformance criteria are essential to ensure conformance checkers are interoperable and to help authors write markup properly
  547. # [16:47] <sayrer__> you mean lint tools must produce the same result for all input?
  548. # [16:47] <karlcow> interesting that the dicussion around canonical html is coming back :)
  549. # [16:47] <sayrer__> "properly" is not an objective quality
  550. # [16:48] <sayrer__> and I'll note that conformance checker interoperability is not something the WG is chartered to take on
  551. # [16:48] * Quits: myakura (n=myakura@124.87.203.127) ("Leaving...")
  552. # [16:48] <sayrer__> but it seems tangential to me, since conformance checkers are supposed to be the means, not the end
  553. # [16:48] <Lachy> no, I mean conformance checkers and validators. Lints offen flag stuff that isn't necessarily non-conforming, but which you might like to consider fixing anyway
  554. # [16:49] <Lachy> s/offen/often/
  555. # [16:49] <sayrer__> why do you need checker/validator rather than a lint tool?
  556. # [16:50] <Lachy> it depends on your individual needs and the capabilities of the lint tool in use
  557. # [16:51] <Lachy> e.g. you might have a lint which checks that an HTML document fits the criteria necessary for being a syntactically correct polyglot document, but which doesn't check any other conformance criteria.
  558. # [16:51] <sayrer__> I guess I don't understand whats motivating your position. do you feel validators force people to write good markup in some way?
  559. # [16:52] * Quits: nessy (n=nessy@124-168-240-72.dyn.iinet.net.au) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  560. # [16:53] <Lachy> no, validators are very useful QA tools to help ensure the quality of the markup and catch mistakes. Conformance criteria help to ensure that different people are using a comment set of criteria, whcih makes it easier for developers to work together
  561. # [16:53] * Joins: billmason (n=billmaso@ip192.unival.com)
  562. # [16:53] <sayrer__> common set of criteria?
  563. # [16:54] <sayrer__> lint tools are "are very useful QA tools to help ensure the quality of the markup and catch mistakes."
  564. # [16:54] <sayrer__> agree or disagree?
  565. # [16:54] * Quits: webben (n=benh@nat/yahoo/x-243ebfdda728a91e) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  566. # [16:54] <sayrer__> my feeling is that if you want validators to interoperate, you would make rules for validators
  567. # [16:54] <Lachy> partially agree. I've had experience with some lint tools that report useless information that I didn't need. But, they can be depending on your needs
  568. # [16:55] <Lachy> and also experience with lints that fail to report info that I do need
  569. # [16:56] <Lachy> sayrer__, the authoring conformance criteria in the spec do apply to validators. It says that explicitly in the conformance section
  570. # [16:57] <sayrer__> yes, I don't think that makes much sense.
  571. # [16:57] <sayrer__> validators aren't authors
  572. # [16:57] <Lachy> validators check markup on behalf of authors
  573. # [16:58] <Lachy> and if there weren't a common set of conformance criteria defined, then validators would vary significantly in what they report, and they wouldn't be particularly useful
  574. # [16:59] <Lachy> with a common set of criteria, developers can, in theory, use their favourite validation tools (perhaps based on the UI they like most) and be reasonably sure that they'll get equivalent results.
  575. # [17:00] <sayrer__> I am not sure how that became a goal, and it still seems tangential, since conforming HTML5 UAs will produce equivalent results no matter what
  576. # [17:00] <Lachy> I honestly do not understand your POV.
  577. # [17:00] <sayrer__> well, let's say one validator flags <font> and one doesn't
  578. # [17:01] <sayrer__> and the author happens to be using the validator that doesn't
  579. # [17:01] <sayrer__> so a <font> element has slipped through undetected
  580. # [17:01] <sayrer__> what is the interoperability consequence?
  581. # [17:02] <Lachy> that seems like a problem that only applies to your authoring-conformance-free spec
  582. # [17:02] <sayrer__> well, you are saying validators won't be useful without the requirements we have now
  583. # [17:02] <sayrer__> in a world without them, I expect some problems will occur if you are right
  584. # [17:03] <sayrer__> what is the problem that has occured here?
  585. # [17:04] <Lachy> from a browser POV, there isn't an interoperability issue. The issue is that different tools give authors different results. This reduces their ability to rely on tools to give useful results and could cause different people to argue about what's right and what's wrong, based on nothing more than the implementation decision of their favourite QA tools
  586. # [17:05] * Quits: maikmerten (n=merten@129.217.26.196) (Remote closed the connection)
  587. # [17:07] <sayrer__> so all validators must produce identical results?
  588. # [17:07] <sayrer__> and is it so bad if people argue about what's right and wrong?
  589. # [17:08] * Quits: virtuelv (n=virtuelv@pat-tdc.opera.com) ("Ex-Chat")
  590. # [17:08] <Lachy> ideally, yes, as far as issuing errors is concerned. They can issue additional useful warnings based on the user's need
  591. # [17:08] <Lachy> or, actually, the user's desires
  592. # [17:08] * Quits: Maurice (n=ano@a80-101-46-164.adsl.xs4all.nl) ("Disconnected...")
  593. # [17:08] <sayrer__> is that requirement in the spec?
  594. # [17:08] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  595. # [17:09] <Lachy> there's nothing in the spec to say that they can't issue additional warnings
  596. # [17:09] <sayrer__> is there a requirement that they must not issue additional errors?
  597. # [17:09] <sayrer__> otherwise, different tools could give different results
  598. # [17:09] <Lachy> no, tools are only allowed to issue errors defined in the spec
  599. # [17:10] <sayrer__> oh, I missed that. where is it?
  600. # [17:10] * Joins: webben (n=benh@nat/yahoo/x-b60bcbc27fba55d9)
  601. # [17:12] <Lachy> if it issues an error, or even treates something as a fatal error, where the spec doesn't say it can, then it has violated the actual criteria specified which doesn't say to issue an error
  602. # [17:15] <sayrer__> so then it couldn't issue an error for elements developed later
  603. # [17:15] <sayrer__> or elements in other namespaces
  604. # [17:15] <sayrer__> afaik, there are no fatal errors in HTML5
  605. # [17:16] <sayrer__> so far, I don't think there's anything in the spec that will enforce the level of interoperability you claim
  606. # [17:16] <Lachy> a spec that defines new elements would also update the relevant conformance criteria
  607. # [17:16] <Lachy> elements in other namespaces have their own criteria applying to them defined in their respective specs
  608. # [17:19] <Lachy> the parsing requirements allow implementations to treat errors as fatal instead of applying the corrective steps specified.
  609. # [17:20] <Lachy> "The error handling for parse errors is well-defined: user agents must either act as described below when encountering such problems, or must abort processing at the first error that they encounter for which they do not wish to apply the rules described below."
  610. # [17:21] <sayrer__> oh, that's very damaging to interoperability
  611. # [17:21] <sayrer__> but I thought that hedge existed for validators
  612. # [17:21] <sayrer__> it seems to have changed
  613. # [17:22] <Lachy> it depends on the needs of the specific implementation. Browsers, for example, couldn't really get away with aborting on errors in practice. But there are lots of other tools for which graceful error recovery is not essential
  614. # [17:23] <Lachy> A validator is one such use case for that
  615. # [17:23] * Joins: dglazkov (n=dglazkov@nat/google/x-a0dc07b1edb09474)
  616. # [17:23] <Philip`> Some (non-validator) tools really want streamability, and aborting on certain parse errors lets them do that
  617. # [17:23] <sayrer__> Lachy: not sure it is useful to claim they are conformant to the same spec
  618. # [17:23] <sayrer__> Philip`: yeah, a spider for instance
  619. # [17:23] <Philip`> (and they can streamably handle all conforming documents)
  620. # [17:24] <sayrer__> that last part is not true, since they can streamably all non-scripted conforming documents
  621. # [17:24] <sayrer__> streamably handle
  622. # [17:24] <Lachy> from memory, the adoption agency algorithm is one that affects streamability
  623. # [17:25] <Philip`> sayrer__: I'd expect most spiders would want to accept arbitrary input, and so they'd have to non-fatally handle invalid documents
  624. # [17:25] <Lachy> (hsivonen knows more about that, though)
  625. # [17:25] <sayrer__> Philip`: that's good point
  626. # [17:26] <sayrer__> I'll make a note about this
  627. # [17:26] <Philip`> sayrer__: I'm thinking of e.g. a tool that applies some kind of transformation to an HTML document, and doesn't want to buffer the whole document in memory
  628. # [17:26] <Lachy> sayrer__, tools that wish to incorporate an HTML5 parser into existing XML tool chains, and which require streamability, are likely to opt to abort on some errors
  629. # [17:27] <Lachy> e.g. a CMS that allows the author to write HTML, but which uses XML for everything else on the back end
  630. # [17:27] <sayrer__> they will probably opt out of more than just that
  631. # [17:29] * Philip` wrote a web service that converts HTML to XHTML streamingly, but (if he remembers correctly) it also aborted on cannot-serialise-to-XML errors
  632. # [17:33] * Quits: Lachy (n=Lachlan@pat-tdc.opera.com) ("This computer has gone to sleep")
  633. # [17:38] * Parts: Mrmil (n=ut_ollie@host-77-236-204-8.blue4.cz)
  634. # [17:44] * Joins: bgalbraith (n=bgalbrai@nat/mozilla/x-9a7b83dd70143e63)
  635. # [17:45] * Quits: webaron (n=aron@vm787.vps.tagadab.com) ("Leaving")
  636. # [17:45] * Joins: ap (n=ap@nat/apple/x-183b0b0acf5d7004)
  637. # [18:03] * Quits: Khazou (n=Khazou@83.204.60.87)
  638. # [18:07] * Quits: gsnedders (n=gsnedder@pat.se.opera.com) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  639. # [18:18] * Joins: Lachy (n=Lachlan@85.196.122.246)
  640. # [18:18] * Joins: Maurice (i=copyman@5ED548D4.cable.ziggo.nl)
  641. # [18:21] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@c-98-234-51-190.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  642. # [18:38] * Quits: pesla (n=retep@procurios.xs4all.nl) ("( www.nnscript.com :: NoNameScript 4.21 :: www.esnation.com )")
  643. # [18:45] * Quits: taf2_ (n=taf2@98.218.77.43)
  644. # [18:49] * Joins: cyberpear (n=james@fedora/cyberpear)
  645. # [18:54] * Quits: cyberpear (n=james@fedora/cyberpear) (Remote closed the connection)
  646. # [18:56] * Joins: jennb (n=jennb@72.14.227.1)
  647. # [18:59] * Joins: gsnedders (n=gsnedder@c83-252-196-10.bredband.comhem.se)
  648. # [19:00] * Joins: cying (n=cying@70.90.171.153)
  649. # [19:01] * Quits: webben (n=benh@nat/yahoo/x-b60bcbc27fba55d9) (Remote closed the connection)
  650. # [19:02] * Joins: webben (n=benh@nat/yahoo/x-8b98f7d5d6ace1dd)
  651. # [19:03] * Quits: jennb (n=jennb@72.14.227.1)
  652. # [19:06] <Philip`> http://hacks.mozilla.org/2009/07/video-more-than-just-a-tag/ - "<video id="myVideo" src="myFile.ogv"/>" - isn't that syntax going to break badly?
  653. # [19:07] * Joins: ZombieLoffe (n=e@unaffiliated/zombieloffe)
  654. # [19:07] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@c-67-180-35-124.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  655. # [19:08] * Quits: abii (n=macbook@cm27.delta30.maxonline.com.sg)
  656. # [19:09] * Joins: sbublava (n=stephan@77.119.125.235.wireless.dyn.drei.com)
  657. # [19:19] <Lachy> we really should do more to promote better quality fallback, beyond the useless "You're browser doesn't support this"
  658. # [19:20] <Lachy> even a simple <a href="video.ogg">Download and watch</a> would be better
  659. # [19:22] * Quits: archtech (n=stanv@83.228.56.37)
  660. # [19:23] * Joins: maikmerten (n=maikmert@U3670.u.pppool.de)
  661. # [19:25] * Joins: equalsJeffH (n=weechat@209.20.72.172)
  662. # [19:31] <Dashiva> I could imagine a script that generates fallback for video elements based on <source> and @src
  663. # [19:32] * Joins: cyberpea2 (n=james@fedora/cyberpear)
  664. # [19:34] * Joins: ojan (n=ojan@72.14.224.1)
  665. # [19:37] * Quits: Phae (n=phaeness@host86-142-34-178.range86-142.btcentralplus.com)
  666. # [19:41] * Quits: danbri (n=danbri@unaffiliated/danbri) (Excess Flood)
  667. # [19:43] * Joins: danbri (n=danbri@s5590d015.adsl.wanadoo.nl)
  668. # [19:47] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-63-195-114-133.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
  669. # [19:49] * Joins: drostie (n=hopkins@5ED17066.cable.ziggo.nl)
  670. # [19:55] * Joins: jwalden (n=waldo@nat/mozilla/x-1465d912733ebd38)
  671. # [19:56] * Quits: dbaron (n=dbaron@c-98-234-51-190.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  672. # [19:59] <hsivonen> Philip`: is your code for generating inputs that visit various tokenizer states publicly available?
  673. # [20:02] * Quits: dolske (n=dolske@c-76-103-40-203.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  674. # [20:04] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@17.246.17.208)
  675. # [20:06] * Joins: slightlyoff (n=slightly@72.14.229.81)
  676. # [20:06] * Quits: slightlyoff (n=slightly@72.14.229.81) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  677. # [20:06] * Joins: slightlyoff_ (n=slightly@72.14.229.81)
  678. # [20:13] <Philip`> hsivonen: I think the latest version of the code is http://canvex.lazyilluminati.com/svn/tokeniser/ (particularly http://canvex.lazyilluminati.com/svn/tokeniser/test_gen.ml)
  679. # [20:13] <Philip`> though it's very out-of-date, and also very ugly
  680. # [20:13] <Philip`> and quite possibly quite buggy
  681. # [20:20] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@nat/mozilla/x-dc9828b2e2bd2a3e)
  682. # [20:27] * Joins: dolske (n=dolske@nat/mozilla/x-c9675da6af0ca36f)
  683. # [20:37] * Quits: MikeSmith (n=MikeSmit@EM114-48-145-170.pool.e-mobile.ne.jp) (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
  684. # [20:42] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@17.246.17.208)
  685. # [20:46] * Joins: ojan_ (n=ojan@adsl-75-61-137-171.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  686. # [20:49] * Joins: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-42-237.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  687. # [20:49] * Quits: ojan (n=ojan@72.14.224.1) (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
  688. # [20:50] * Quits: dbaron (n=dbaron@nat/mozilla/x-dc9828b2e2bd2a3e) ("8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.")
  689. # [20:56] * Quits: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-42-237.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  690. # [21:01] * Joins: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-42-237.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  691. # [21:04] * Joins: starjive (i=beos@213-66-216-93-no30.tbcn.telia.com)
  692. # [21:06] * Quits: jianli (n=jianli@72.14.227.1)
  693. # [21:06] * Quits: othermaciej (n=mjs@c-69-181-42-237.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) (Client Quit)
  694. # [21:11] * Joins: taf2_ (n=taf2@static-71-127-149-10.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net)
  695. # [21:17] * Quits: mstange (n=markus@buntes215.wohnheim.uni-kl.de) ("ChatZilla 0.9.85 [Firefox 3.6a1pre/20090701032707]")
  696. # [21:19] * Joins: mstange (n=markus@buntes215.wohnheim.uni-kl.de)
  697. # [21:23] <Hixie> Lachy: there are lots of broken links from the author-only section
  698. # [21:33] <Lachy> ok
  699. # [21:34] <Lachy> that really makes it useless in many cases
  700. # [21:40] <Hixie> well like all the DOM stuff's <dfn>s are in the impl section
  701. # [21:40] <Hixie> so all the domintro green boxes point into the impl section
  702. # [21:40] <Hixie> not sure what to do about it
  703. # [21:41] <jgraham> Hixie: The sumamry attribute description looks OK to me but I suggest not referncing <caption> explicitly as a replacement, just the whole techniques section
  704. # [21:41] <jgraham> I think <a @name> could have a similar description
  705. # [21:43] <jgraham> like "This attribute was used in older versions of HTML to allow fragment identifiers o be associated with particular places in the document"
  706. # [21:45] <Hixie> how about saying it was similar to what ID does now
  707. # [21:45] * Quits: maikmerten (n=maikmert@U3670.u.pppool.de) (Remote closed the connection)
  708. # [21:46] <Hixie> checked in
  709. # [21:48] <jgraham> Hixie: perfect, thanks
  710. # [21:48] * Joins: jennb (n=jennb@72.14.227.1)
  711. # [21:51] * Parts: ojan_ (n=ojan@adsl-75-61-137-171.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  712. # [21:54] <Hixie> jgraham: btw, i think there's a difference between a whole spec, and a requirement in a spec
  713. # [21:54] <Hixie> jgraham: and in particular on the theora issue, the requirement in question is just importing another spec entirely, which i think is a particularly special case.
  714. # [21:58] <jgraham> Hixie: I agree that the theora thing is a somewhat different case
  715. # [21:58] <jgraham> But I think e.g. svg-in-HTML is quite a similar case
  716. # [22:00] <jgraham> in the sense that it is more useful to have a spec with support from 3/4 major vendors if one announces that they will not support it
  717. # [22:00] <jgraham> than to not have any spec at all
  718. # [22:17] * Joins: dbaron (n=dbaron@c-98-234-51-190.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
  719. # [22:27] * Joins: othermaciej (n=mjs@17.203.15.190)
  720. # [22:35] * Quits: sbublava (n=stephan@77.119.125.235.wireless.dyn.drei.com)
  721. # [22:37] * Joins: kangax (n=kangax@157.130.31.226)
  722. # [22:37] <Hixie> jgraham: if they're going to implement regardless, then yes
  723. # [22:38] * Joins: poe (n=poe@unaffiliated/xerox)
  724. # [22:42] * Quits: gsnedders (n=gsnedder@c83-252-196-10.bredband.comhem.se)
  725. # [22:45] * Quits: ROBOd (n=robod@89.122.216.38) ("http://www.robodesign.ro")
  726. # [22:48] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-76-202-153-93.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  727. # [22:48] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@17.246.17.208)
  728. # [22:48] * Joins: yshin (n=yshin@72.14.227.1)
  729. # [23:08] * Joins: jianli (n=jianli@72.14.227.1)
  730. # [23:14] * Quits: zdobersek (n=zan@cpe-92-37-73-67.dynamic.amis.net) ("Leaving.")
  731. # [23:20] <jgraham> othermaciej: I think your proposed @summary text may be unnecessarily long and so unlikely to be read (the current text on alt has this problem)
  732. # [23:20] <jgraham> However I'm not sure
  733. # [23:23] <othermaciej> jgraham: it would be at the end of the already long section on how to provide table explanations
  734. # [23:23] <othermaciej> I think it is not overly long compared to the rest of that section
  735. # [23:23] <othermaciej> but
  736. # [23:23] <othermaciej> I am not wedded to my exact wording, it was just an example of how to provide the right information
  737. # [23:27] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@adsl-76-202-153-93.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net)
  738. # [23:29] * Quits: weinig (n=weinig@17.246.17.208)
  739. # [23:30] * Quits: pmuellr (n=pmuellr@129.33.49.251)
  740. # [23:36] * Joins: Sirisian (n=Sirisian@ppp-70-229-32-157.dsl.klmzmi.ameritech.net)
  741. # [23:37] * Joins: weinig (n=weinig@nat/apple/x-668eca44edc86a7f)
  742. # [23:38] * Quits: Maurice (i=copyman@5ED548D4.cable.ziggo.nl) ("Disconnected...")
  743. # [23:39] * Joins: othree_ (n=othree@admin39.ct.ntust.edu.tw)
  744. # [23:39] * Quits: othree (n=othree@admin39.ct.ntust.edu.tw) (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
  745. # [23:44] * Joins: tantek (n=tantek@207.47.0.146.static.nextweb.net)
  746. # [23:50] * Joins: archtech (n=stanv@83.228.56.37)
  747. # [23:54] * Quits: tantek (n=tantek@207.47.0.146.static.nextweb.net)
  748. # [23:54] * Joins: Hish (n=chatzill@mail2.n-e-s.de)
  749. # [23:57] * Joins: weinig_ (n=weinig@17.246.17.208)
  750. # Session Close: Thu Jul 09 00:00:00 2009

The end :)