00:09:01 Lachy has joined #html-wg
00:40:29 DanC_lap has joined #html-wg
01:02:04 gavin has joined #html-wg
01:36:10 anne has joined #html-wg
01:43:18 anne2 has joined #html-wg
02:07:31 timbl has joined #html-wg
02:26:27 timbl has joined #html-wg
02:30:50 marcos has joined #html-wg
02:41:47 marcos has joined #html-wg
02:55:32 myakura has joined #html-wg
02:59:24 mjs has joined #html-wg
03:00:18 mjs has joined #html-wg
03:09:43 jgraham_ has joined #html-wg
03:09:45 gavin has joined #html-wg
03:16:20 tantek has joined #html-wg
03:17:25 tantek_ has joined #html-wg
03:23:52 So I think Timed Text is a no-op
03:24:27 Six namespaces, duplicating tons of functionality in HTML and CSS, etc.
03:24:55 s/no-op/no-go/
03:47:29 hober has joined #html-wg
04:12:08 marcos has joined #html-wg
04:16:25 Zeros has joined #html-wg
04:23:24 marcospod has joined #html-wg
04:41:15 jgraham_ has joined #html-wg
05:10:37 Zeros_ has joined #html-wg
05:14:25 marcos has joined #html-wg
05:17:04 gavin has joined #html-wg
05:23:25 marcos has joined #html-wg
07:24:23 gavin has joined #html-wg
07:40:43 Zeros has joined #html-wg
07:46:18 Lachy has joined #html-wg
08:41:44 Sander has joined #html-wg
09:32:11 gavin has joined #html-wg
09:48:57 ROBOd has joined #html-wg
09:52:49 Julian has joined #html-wg
10:15:11 kazuhito has joined #html-wg
10:23:48 Lachy_ has joined #html-wg
10:39:33 Sander has joined #html-wg
11:15:11 Sander has joined #html-wg
11:37:57 Ooh, Opera supports -apple-dashboard-region in CSS
11:39:04 timbl has joined #html-wg
11:39:41 gavin has joined #html-wg
11:55:58 karl has joined #html-wg
11:56:20 yeah, but I think it's a bit strange it was added with the -apple- prefix instead of -o-
11:56:53 AFIAK, apple widgets aren't compatible with opera widgets anyway
12:01:23 Does WebKit still support -apple-dashboard-region? The source code only mentions -webkit-dashboard-region, but maybe they do a s/-apple-/-webkit-/ on the input or something
12:03:29 Hmm, Opera doesn't even support some of the dashboard-region syntax from the Apple documentation
12:03:38 The support is very, very minimal
12:05:02 O9.2 reserialises style="-apple-dashboard-region: dashboard-region(control circle 15px 15px 75px 15px);" into STYLE='apple-dashboard-region: circle'
12:05:18 but O9.5 handles that correctly
12:05:39 ... because it doesn't actually reserialise the style attribute at all
12:07:09 ... so actually O9.5 reserialises into style="-apple-dashboard-region: circle 15px 15px 75px 15px"
12:07:33 so O9.2 does look about as minimal as possible, but O9.5 is somewhat better :-)
12:08:22 Well, let me know if you can make it do something useful
12:08:51 I can't see it doing anything in normal web pages, and I don't care about widgets so I have no idea if it does anything there :-p
12:10:00 Julian has joined #html-wg
12:11:29 Sander has joined #html-wg
12:20:10 Lachy_ has joined #html-wg
12:29:29 Sander has joined #html-wg
12:39:58 MikeSmith has joined #html-wg
12:39:58 billyjack has joined #html-wg
12:55:57 jgraham_ has joined #html-wg
13:25:35 timbl has joined #html-wg
13:27:42 kazuhito has joined #html-wg
13:32:34 olivier has joined #html-wg
13:40:07 timbl has joined #html-wg
13:46:05 Kuruma - you around?
13:47:03 tH_ has joined #html-wg
13:47:17 gavin has joined #html-wg
14:01:58 oedipus has joined #html-wg
14:02:52 olivier has joined #html-wg
14:16:26 DanC_lap has joined #html-wg
14:17:17 shepazu has joined #html-wg
14:18:40 dbaron has joined #html-wg
14:20:32 jun has joined #html-wg
14:27:18 Lachy_ has joined #html-wg
14:39:49 Lachy_ has joined #html-wg
14:52:02 Sander has joined #html-wg
15:04:05 Lachy_ has joined #html-wg
15:17:03 hey, will there be an audio stream today?
15:17:28 Lachy_ - nope
15:17:30 hmm... task forces in other languages... great idea for HTML WG
15:18:14 ok, I guess I'll just have to follow on IRC then
15:18:54 hmm... MikeSmith , I don't mind if somebody audiocasts the HTML WG meeting
15:19:20 DanC_lap - so let's get somebody to do that
15:19:26 I'd have to check with Chris W.
15:19:32 any volunteers?
15:19:45 yes, do try to find somebody, MikeSmith
15:20:09 What mechanism were we using to stream the talk yesterday?
15:20:16 something kinda elaborate
15:20:24 Ralph knows about it
15:20:30 and Ted
15:20:43 I will check with Ralph and/or Ted then
15:20:45 maybe not that elaborate; I think it's on/near media.w3.org
15:21:31 k
15:21:37 quick temporary fix? http://www.nch.com.au/streaming/index.html
15:21:57 Probably we don't need to have anything set up for the HTMLWG session tomorrow, right?
15:22:08 just checking: is the f2f starting at 13:30?
15:22:31 hsivonen - aye
15:23:04 can someone please ping me if/when an audio stream is set up and when the meeting starts?
15:23:17 anybody hip to ices2?
15:23:25 that's what they were using yesterday
15:23:31 re NCH BroadWave you can use it for free provided "This software has two modes. A free version which has full features but requires you to have a link to our site on every page with a link to the stream."
15:23:33 we need a machine with ices2 installed
15:23:39 and we need a decent microphone
15:23:50 microphones are in short supply
15:24:06 MikeSmith: thanks
15:24:08 BroadWave runs on linux, mac, and windows and is compatible with IE, FF, Safari
15:24:22 oedipus - OK
15:24:35 I guess the main thing we really need is a mic
15:24:48 hasather has joined #html-wg
15:25:23 How many mics do we rip on the daily? me say many money me say many many man
15:25:25 y
15:28:26 aye, 13:30 Boston time. http://www.w3.org/html/wg/nov07
15:29:02 DanC_lap has changed the topic to: HTML WG meeting starts 13:30 in Charles View (more logs: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ )
15:29:13 DanC_lap has changed the topic to: HTML WG meeting starts 13:30 in Charles View http://www.w3.org/html/wg/nov07 (more logs: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ )
15:31:29 Julian_Reschke has joined #html-wg
15:37:27 billmason has joined #html-wg
15:38:58 oedipus, in your response to the survey about publihsing the HTML5 draft, I don't understand your comment about there being competing specs. They aren't competing. The WHATWG spec and the W3C spec are identical (except for the metadata at the top)
15:40:06 ROOM CHANGE...
15:43:14 DanC_lap has changed the topic to: HTML WG meeting starts 13:30 in Empress Ballroom on the 14th floor http://www.w3.org/html/wg/nov07 (more logs: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/ )
15:43:58 lachy - if that is so, then why not commit to a single draft and single track for HTML5? all feedback is welcome, but the only working draft should be the one housed in W3C space; WHAT WG can continue to develop its own version of HTML5, but the normative draft should be the one based upon the original WHAT WG submission to the W3C
15:45:08 oedipus, the point is we don't want two separate drafts. I don't see the problem in mirroring the same draft in 2 places
15:45:08 oedipus: not everyone can contribute to the W3C draft sadly
15:45:53 indeed. the W3C's rules about member organisations and prevent some people from joining the HTMLWG if they are employees of W3C members
15:46:20 ... and their employers don't nominate them
15:46:24 oedipus - what you describe is what the current draft available on the W3C site already is, it seems to me at least
15:46:38 it is a single draft
15:46:45 just mirrored, as Lachy_ points out
15:46:52 gsnedders: can you explain why not everyone can contribute?
15:47:01 karl: Lachy_ just did so
15:47:02 oedipus, it seems to me that what you're asking us to do, by letting the WHATWG develop it's own version, is exactly what you're saying we shouldn't do
15:47:35 Lachy: W3C doesn't prevent them to join the group.
15:47:53 karl: how can they, then?
15:47:54 why then mark the WHAT WG draft as a "Call For Comments — 27 October 2007". and shouldn't the rest of the introductory text at least mention that this is a mirror of the draft in W3C space, and encourage feedback to both fora?
15:48:03 by going through their employers.
15:48:20 also, some people choose not to join the HTMLWG due to the volume of traffic and nonsense that goes on there sometimes, whereas they can easily subscribe and contribue to WHATWG since it's much easier to follow
15:48:24 karl: but if the W3C didn't have that requirement, we wouldn't be in this situation at the first time
15:48:33 *in the first place
15:48:40 gsnedders: patent policy is a feature not a bug
15:49:17 lachy: i'm not going to deny anyone's right to develop or comment upon a specification, but there needs to be a central repository for feedback and issue tracking
15:49:19 karl: there are people who can't join the WG because their employer won't let them join the WG. it's not a theoretical issue.
15:49:23 oedipus, because it was a snapshot of the spec as it was on that date, and because publishing a spec there doesn't have to go through the same politics that it goes through in the HTMLWG
15:49:36 gsnedders: I would love to know who
15:49:50 lachy, then why submit the spec to the W3C in the first place?
15:50:13 because we needed the patent policy for other groups of people and organisations to participate
15:50:23 oedipus - a central place for issue tracking is doable
15:50:35 right, the W3C issue tracker DanC set up
15:50:37 a central place for feedback doesn't seem doable to me
15:51:06 any editor can possibly get feedback from a lot of different places
15:51:06 oedipus, feedback comes from many places around the web, beyond even the HTMLWG and WHATWG lists.
15:51:09 karl: I know that Sam Ruby couldn't join for quite a while because of it, and I've heard of others
15:51:20 s/politics/community life/
15:51:25 ... feedback from multiple mailing lists, etc.
15:51:28 MikeSmith: but if the feedback funneled to the WHAT WG isn't funneled to the HTML WG, we have separate conversations occuring over ostensively the same document
15:51:33 gsnedders: yes but he finally joined
15:51:41 nominated by his ac rep
15:51:48 oedipus - we have that anyway, with any spec
15:51:49 karl: I've heard of others, though I can't remember off the top of my head
15:52:10 even within the W3C, discussions may take place on multiple mailing lists
15:52:15 gsnedders: I heard about black helicopters too flying low above cities
15:52:56 yes, mikeS, but we don't have 2 specs that are self-identified as different drafts -- if what wg wants to host a snapshot, it should be of the W3C draft, and the W3C draft should be pointed to from the WHAT WG draft
15:52:56 It seems to me it is the responsibility of HTMLWG members to join those other lists and follow conversations taking place there too
15:52:59 I said politics and meant it, I didn't mean community life.
15:53:05 MikeSmith: ++
15:53:08 ... if they want to be able to keep up with everything
15:53:54 I think it's so ridiculous that we have to hold a vote just to get a FPWD out the door
15:53:57 Lachy: you will learn it will take times, it took me time too. But I will not try to convince you, it would be useless. :) It's part of life cycle
15:53:59 oedipus: and should the W3C HTML WG draft point to the WHATWG draft, or does this only apply one way?
15:54:06 MikeS: i'm not against outside feedback, i am concerned about 2 competing drafts, one branded with the W3C style and logo and one branded with the WHAT WG style and logo
15:55:08 gavin has joined #html-wg
15:55:12 oedipus, the logo at the top doesn't make any difference. Both specs are identical in every important aspect
15:55:16 oedipus: take it like translations of W3C specs. it is possible to translate W3C specs in other languages.
15:55:39 the HTML 5 spec is under w3c document license.
15:55:43 gsnedders: it applys only one way -- the WHAT WG draft was submitted to the HTML WG and a number of companies asked that it be considered the basis for the HTML WG's work -- if that is the case, then why have 2 different drafts?
15:55:52 and that all matters
15:56:00 the rest is not very interesting
15:56:01 oedipus - we don't have 2 specs, we have one spec ... and I don't think the copies at the the WHATWG and W3C sites are "self identified as different drafts"
15:56:12 oedipus, why does it matter that the spec is mirrored?
15:56:19 karl: it is possible to translate, but is there a need to translate from english to english?
15:56:36 it doesn't matter that the spec is mirrored, as long as it is the same spec, full stop.
15:56:45 then it is
15:56:52 oedipus - and I don't understand how you see them as competing drafts
15:56:53 it is the same spec
15:56:58 different branding doesn't matter at all
15:57:46 there is nothing the W3C team can or would want to do to prevent any editors or anybody else from mirroring a copy of a draft if the editors chooses to do so
15:57:46 oedipus: whatwg feedback is a good source of input for HTML 5 work.
15:58:14 oedipus - It is the same spec.
15:58:35 oedipus: do you want to disregard several years worth of comments?
15:58:53 i'm not denying that whatwg feedback is a good source of input, but it is but one source, and the draft should be developed in one place -- if it is truly a mirror of the draft in W3C space, it should explicitly state that, and should actually mirror, rather than reflect
15:59:48 gsnedders: no, i'm not disregarding "several years of feedback" i'm concerned that it will take many many more years of feedback under current conditions to arrive at a truly stable state
16:00:26 oedipus - The source is developed in one place, and published in two places.
16:00:38 Philip - no, it would not be difficult
16:01:07 i'm still wondering what lachy meant by "both specs are identical in every important aspect"
16:01:26 DanC_lap has joined #html-wg
16:01:43 (Hmm, I was going to try fixing the multipage generator to be less bad, but I think I forgot about that months ago...)
16:01:54 if they are mirrors of each other, they should be identical in EVERY aspect
16:02:20 oedipus, the header of the spec is not really that important. The important aspects include everything from the Abstract down.
16:02:58 if that's the case, then why insist on having 2 versions of ostensively the same spec? it simply doesn't make any sense...
16:03:06 the header of the spec is quite important; it's about endorsement, branding, etc. the HTML 5 spec currently has two publishers. could be worse.
16:03:18 oedipus - who would you suggest should enforce this identical-in-every-aspect constraint?
16:03:20 Lachy_: They have different abstracts
16:03:27 s/Abstract/TOC/
16:03:33 (and different "status of this document"s)
16:03:33 ... and how would you imagine they'd be able to do it?
16:03:37 2 publishers, 2 fora, 2 streams
16:03:51 it makes sense to me that there's still momentum in the WHATWG, oedipus
16:03:53 Like I said, anybody is free to mirror anything from the W3C site if they choose to.
16:04:07 no, they're not, MikeSmith
16:04:13 DanC_lap - why not?
16:04:28 we have a mirroring policy
16:04:58 MikeSmith, see http://www.w3.org/1999/10/21-mirroring-policy
16:04:58 the W3C editor's draft is lacking a copyright statement
16:05:15 it's not a mirror; it's separately published
16:05:42 DanC: you hit on my concern -- it is separately published -- how and who ensures that they are in sync?
16:06:07 hixie does
16:06:10 by the way, DanC, regrets for not physically attending the f2f - medical problems made it feasible only to participate remotely
16:06:10 oedipus, they are both generated from the same source by the same editor
16:06:17 DanC_lap - so I will qualify my statement by saying that anybody is free to mirror anything as long as they comply with the mirroring policy
16:06:28 yes, sorry to hear that, oedipus ; your regrets were relayed to me by mutual friends
16:07:00 yes, and the mirroring policy is basically: if you want to mirror anything, you need to mirror everything; we'll help you.
16:07:08 i'm not anti-whatwg, i just want to ensure that there is one draft that is the basis for mirroring
16:07:12 ah
16:07:18 it's also important that the WHATWG publish it because it has a much more liberal copyright than the W3C does
16:07:20 DanC_lap - dinnet know that
16:07:37 Would the W3C licences permit publishing of modified versions of the spec, like for http://philip.html5.org/tests/canvas/suite/tests/spec.html ?
16:07:46 don't think so
16:07:52 there are people like myself and anne who have our own specs with parts of text based upon HTML 5 text
16:08:16 Philip, http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-documents-20021231
16:08:17 how does the WHAT WG and W3C copyright differences affect the spec? i raised this as a concern before (also in regards differing copyright statements in WF2)
16:08:30 I'm not an expert in what our licenses might allow. We do have a copyright faq http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/IPR-FAQ-20000620
16:08:40 DanC: thanks for the pointers
16:09:00 welcome
16:09:18 i just think we need to step back, and align all of the ducks in an orderly row...
16:09:42 the ducks seem to be having a pretty good time wandering around
16:09:54 if we put out food, they'll come by
16:10:15 the W3C's document licence does indeed allow copies of the spec to be hosted anywhere, but doesn't allow modifications
16:10:29 they just require the inclusion of the copyright notice
16:10:31 the momentum of the 2 groups should spur one another, not be mutually exclusive (albeit by individuals' individual choices)
16:11:33 oedipus, the barrier between the two groups is mostly artificial as far as work on the spec is concerned.
16:11:43 that's why i didn't object to the issuing of the draft, but expressed concerns i would like to allay before giving a thumbs up --
16:12:23 lachy: so whatever we can do to break down those artificial barriers, the better the growth and maturity of the HTML5 draft
16:12:34 olivier has joined #html-wg
16:12:57 trackbot-ng, status
16:13:59 oedipus, hurl me an url for "Marghanita da Cruz's comments"? (cf http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/wdhdp/results )
16:14:59 DanC: re the ducks, we should be attempting to get them eating out of the same trough -- or at least to swim in one anothers ponds more often
16:15:10 oh, only to some extent
16:15:17 yes, ponds more often
16:15:40 DanC: the comments by marghanita da cruz are in her reply to the same question
16:15:47 too bad you couldn't make it to the pond here in Boston. :-/
16:16:21 ah...
16:16:46 thanks, DanC -- i think my water is getting a bit "stale" here and am chomping at the bit (to mix animal metaphors) to actually get to meet and sit down and discuss thing with others
16:16:48 dglazkov has joined #html-wg
16:17:10 ACTION DanC: consider "inconsistency in the document is the use of examples" from da Cruz in http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/wdhdp/results
16:17:20