00:23:43 <webben> webben has joined #html-wg
00:52:07 <taf2> taf2 has joined #html-wg
00:58:00 <dsinger> dsinger has joined #html-wg
01:31:11 <taf2> taf2 has joined #html-wg
01:40:41 <taf2> taf2 has joined #html-wg
01:56:52 <rubys1> rubys1 has joined #html-wg
01:59:57 <rubys1> rubys1 has left #html-wg
02:31:12 <dbaron> dbaron has joined #html-wg
02:41:00 <mjs> mjs has joined #html-wg
04:58:31 <gsnedders_> gsnedders_ has joined #html-wg
05:08:06 <dsinger_> dsinger_ has joined #html-wg
05:54:52 <adele> adele has joined #html-wg
07:26:34 <tH> tH has joined #html-wg
07:47:37 <pimpbot> bugmail: [Bug 7264] make <% start a bogus comment <11http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-bugzilla/2009Aug/0114.html>
07:53:01 <tlr> tlr has joined #html-wg
07:53:28 <tlr> tlr has joined #html-wg
08:07:51 <heycam> heycam has joined #html-wg
08:17:33 <mjs_> mjs_ has joined #html-wg
08:34:18 <ROBOd> ROBOd has joined #html-wg
09:48:10 <pimpbot> bugmail: [Bug 7268] New: contradicts 4.7.1 wrt implied paragraph boundaries (should not in 4.7.1, not good practice in 4.7.4). dont repeat example or simplify <11http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-bugzilla/2009Aug/0115.html>
10:18:20 <pimpbot> bugmail: [Bug 7269] New: user agent requirements: for value=8 max="", step 4 and 11 will cause current value and maximum value to be set to 1, which is destructive (if script wanted to obtain the original value). suggest step 4 change to set maximum to value <11http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-bugzilla/2009Aug/0116.html>
10:27:06 <maddiin> maddiin has joined #html-wg
10:42:26 <tlr> tlr has joined #html-wg
10:45:02 <Sander> Sander has joined #html-wg
10:45:06 <anne2> Julian, so the archives are online, but why do I not get a reply then trying to register for the list?
11:04:34 <pimpbot> planet: The exciting parts of HTML 5 <11http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2009/exciting-parts-of-html-5/>
11:23:23 <Julian> anne2, dunno. I will have to follow up again. You did re-try to subscribe, right?
11:23:49 <anne2> not yet
11:26:07 <anne2> lets see if it works
11:26:35 <anne2> I e-mailed ietf-charsets-request@iana.org with "SUBSCRIBE IETF-CHARSETS" as message body fwiw
11:26:43 <Julian> so did U
11:26:44 <Julian> I
11:26:50 <Julian> maybe the instructions are incorrect
11:27:16 <anne2> not sure if that advice is up to date or not; while the archives are online, it's not toally clear how to interact with the list and URL hacking on the archives yields nothing
11:27:20 <anne2> all a bit ancient
11:27:48 <Julian> that is correct
11:30:34 <anne2> ja :)
11:41:38 <Julian> sent email to IANA
12:14:31 <anne2> anne2 has joined #html-wg
12:14:49 <anne2> thanks Julian
12:33:21 <myakura> myakura has joined #html-wg
12:56:50 <smedero> smedero has joined #html-wg
13:16:46 <J_Voracek> J_Voracek has joined #html-wg
13:17:33 <J_Voracek> J_Voracek has joined #html-wg
13:27:02 <Julian> Julian has joined #html-wg
14:35:01 <aroben> aroben has joined #html-wg
14:44:38 <Julian> Lachy, have you heard lately from Joseph Holsten wrt to the "about" URI spec? In case he can't, would you be willing to pick up the work?
14:44:46 <miketaylr> miketaylr has joined #html-wg
14:47:13 <webben> webben has joined #html-wg
14:48:19 <rubys> rubys has joined #html-wg
14:49:20 <DanC> rubys, I'm somewhat inclined to volunteer to scribe today. it helps me pay attention
14:50:10 <Julian> Julian has joined #html-wg
14:50:18 <rubys> excellent
14:50:39 <rubys> I scribe for the ASF for the same reason
14:50:42 <DanC> also, it lets me arrange the table of contents in the minutes to be full of technical content words (e.g. button-type-radio) rather than boilerplate (review of open actions)
14:51:38 <rubys> would it help if I were to announce moving to the next item in the following way: Issue-35/Action-114 aria-processing
14:52:03 <Lachy> Julian, I haven't heard from him.  I will contact him and see what's going on. If he doesn't respond, I can probably continue with it myself
14:52:04 <DanC> yes; better yet: Topic: Issue-35/Action-114 aria-processing
14:52:41 <rubys> cool.  I have my own expanded agenda in Tomboy, and I can copy/paste as we go along
14:52:52 <DanC> nifty.
14:54:30 <DanC> part of me wishes Lachlan hadn't asked Shelley to elaborate on her canvas objection; aside from being buried in an irrelevant subject heading, she actually came up with a plausible reason for re-opening the issue: addition of <svg>
14:55:45 <Lachy> DanC, I'm sincerely apologise for encouraging the discussion of valid technical issues. It won't happen again.
14:56:00 <rubys> if she objects to it being a part of the document, and everybody agrees to a normative reference to separate document, and *most importantly* somebody actually does the work, then I'm quite OK with that.
14:57:19 <jgraham> I'm not sure that svg is a substantial piece of new information; the overlap with SVG was debated extensively at the time and it was reasonably clear that they had differnet use cases
14:58:12 <rubys> correct me if I'm wrong, the previous decision was more about "in scope vs out of scope" than "in the same document vs multiple documents", right?
14:58:16 <DanC> Lachy, I said "part of me". yes, it's good to focus on technical stuff.
14:58:31 <Julian> Anne, got a subscription confirmation for iana-charsets
14:58:43 <DanC> rubys, both aspects were discussed, and yes, they're orthogonal
14:58:49 <jgraham> rubys: IIRC yes. But I was responding to DanC
14:58:53 <DanC> but they get conflated sometimes
14:59:23 <rubys> DanC: both were discussed, both get conflated, but what do you view was the primary substance of the decision?
14:59:31 <DanC> scope
14:59:32 <Lachy> Julian, anne2, did you end up finding out where the archive for iana-charsets is?
14:59:44 <DanC> same doc vs different doc is just editorial convenience
14:59:48 <Julian> Lachy, the server was down.
14:59:52 <Julian> It's up again.
15:00:14 <rubys> agreed.  I'd rather that Shelley didnconflating the issues.
15:00:28 <rubys> arg...hit enter too soon
15:00:32 <Julian> DanC, it also affects how it can be progressed
15:00:49 <DanC> it might or it might not
15:00:58 <rubys> I'd rather that Shelley didn't conflate the issues, and I'd rather that people didn't respond with a message of "the matter is closed".
15:01:02 <DanC> if there are normative dependencies both ways, it has no impact on progression.
15:01:21 <dbaron> dbaron has joined #html-wg
15:01:33 <Julian> DanC, normaive references both ways are bad
15:02:13 <Julian> DanC, but even then it should be able to progress it separately (but maybe I'm missing something in the W3C standards process)
15:02:29 <DanC> hmm... the matter _is_ closed; i.e. the WG is decided. discussion of the issue (except for requests to reconsider) is out of order, IMO. Some people don't know the history and can be excused for stumbling on it, but eventually we gotta move on.
15:02:37 <Julian> DanC, that being said, I wish canvas was truly optional, and no normative reference was needed
15:03:41 <rubys> DanC: I guess it depends on what the meaning of the word "the" is.
15:04:05 <Philip> (I think it should be possible to have only one-way references from a 2D canvas context spec to the HTML 5 spec, assuming the 2D context was not required for HTML 5 UAs)
15:04:36 <Philip> ((I'm assuming the <canvas> element itself would still be part of HTML 5))
15:04:51 <jgraham> Presumably that wouldn't help canvas progress much faster than HTML5
15:05:43 <Julian> Philip, I'm unhappy with the fact that the <canvas> element needs to be in the HTML5 spec to make things work.
15:05:54 <Julian> Philip, it indicates a broken extensibility model
15:06:18 <Philip> I think Shelley's argument was that it would allow it to progress slower (in the W3C sense of progress), which would be better, because then progress (in the technical sense) wouldn't be frozen by HTML 5 being in LC
15:06:44 <rubys> Philip: s/slower/faster/
15:06:53 <gsnedders> I guess we could get a spec to REC purely describing the 2D context simply because it is basically interoperable already
15:07:02 <DanC> people seem to be making better use of the archives lately. I get stressed when people repeat arguments without noting where it's been said before.
15:07:07 <gsnedders> But that would never go as it would be inaccessible
15:07:10 <Philip> rubys: I did mean slower :-)
15:07:21 <jgraham> "The biggest objection [...] is the fact that web graphics is growing at a pace that far exceeds that for web page markup"
15:07:36 <jgraham> "By the time the HTML 5 specification is ready for CR, the 2D API described within the document will most likely be dated, if not irrelevant"
15:07:48 <rubys> I read what jgraham quoted
15:08:22 <jgraham> I disagree with what she is saying but it seems to be a call to make fater progress not slower
15:08:59 <Philip> "I thought [...] that the possibility of pulling Canvas into a separate effort might be a way of managing the issue about accessibility in Canvas, without holding up last call, and without rushing the accessibility effort."
15:09:31 <Philip> i.e. splitting it out would let it go to LC later (i.e. slower progress (in the W3C sense) than HTML5)
15:09:37 <Philip> without holding up the rest of HTML5
15:10:31 <Philip> (but faster progress (in the technical sense) because it wouldn't be frozen in LC until 2022 when we start working on HTML6)
15:10:31 <jgraham> Philip: Dunno where that is from. If it's from Shelley again I guess she is not being quite consistent
15:10:37 <Philip> jgraham: It is
15:10:45 <Philip> jgraham: I think it's consistent :-)
15:10:49 <Julian> <canvas> as defined today could be done already, but accessible canvas could be done later without affecting HTML5
15:11:08 <jgraham> Philip: Has anyone suggested not working on HTML6 untill 2022?
15:12:46 <jgraham> Julian: Presumably accessible canvas could just as easilly be done in HTML6 if people were to agree to that. *Practically* what happens is when implementations get into the hands of users. Whether the spec with canvas accessibility features in is called HTML5, HTML6, Canvas 1.0, Canvas 2.0 or someothing else is irrelevant
15:12:51 <Philip> jgraham: No, and I presume she doesn't think exactly that, but I presume she presumes that when HTML5 is in LC (and hence shouldn't be adding new features constantly, since it's got to stabilise) it won't be possible to extend <canvas> until much later
15:13:37 <jgraham> Since the spec will /in practice/ stabilise whenever the implementations converge
15:13:53 <jgraham> s/happens/matters/
15:14:11 <Philip> hence worrying about accessibility features missing out if LC happens too soon, and canvas being overtaken by other technologies
15:15:19 <Philip> If I'm presuming right, the concerns could probably be alleviated by being clear that HTML evolution won't stop or slow down just because HTML5 is in LC
15:15:24 <jgraham> Philip: Worrying about canvas being overtaken by other technologies seems silly since it is based on even older, well established, ideas that have not yet been taken over by new technologies
15:15:36 <jgraham> e.g. postscript
15:15:47 <Philip> (though at the moment I don't think it's clear what the process will be for future HTML evolution)
15:16:28 <Dashiva> jgraham: PDF!
15:16:29 <jgraham> Philip: Maybe, but people seem to put a high value on the spec status of things rather than on the practical status
15:17:07 <Philip> jgraham: As I understand it, Shelley's concerns were about the practical status being constrained by the spec status
15:17:38 <jgraham> Philip: We don't just have to make Shelley happy
15:19:26 <jgraham> Remeber how upset people were about 2022? I imagine the same reaction again if people decided that <canvas> would not be accessible until 2028 because the spec would not be a Rec. till then
15:20:03 <rubys> jgraham: don't exaggerate.  People are reacting to an estimate that canvas accessibility won't be ready until mid-December... 2009.
15:20:07 <Philip> Julian: The problem with splitting out <canvas> entirely is that it interacts in slightly complex ways with other features, e.g. you can pass a canvas ImageData to a worked thread using postMessage
15:20:14 <DanC> issue-60?
15:20:14 <trackbot> ISSUE-60 -- Reuse of 1999 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong -- RAISED
15:20:14 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/60
15:20:15 <pimpbot> Title: ISSUE-60 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
15:20:19 <DanC> didn't we close that one? looking...
15:20:33 <rubys> Larry wanted to keep it open, then changed his mind.
15:20:40 <rubys> It's on today's schedule to close.
15:21:05 <rubys> oops, I'm wrong... rechecking.
15:21:33 <Julian> Philip, understood; and that's *exactly* the problem; things that should be orthogonal aren't, and the reason is that they are conveniently being defined in the same doc
15:21:42 <Philip> Julian: and it would presumably be difficult to split everything into acyclically-dependent specs without those interactions becoming a mess
15:21:44 <DanC> ah... right... Larry and Murray wanted more discussion as of 9 July http://www.w3.org/2009/07/09-html-wg-minutes.html#item04
15:21:45 <pimpbot> Title: HTML Weekly Teleconference -- 09 Jul 2009 (at www.w3.org)
15:22:27 <jgraham> rubys: Not sure how I am exagerratin
15:22:30 <jgraham> er
15:23:04 <jgraham> exaggerating. People initially reacted to HTML5 as if it would not be ready until 2022
15:23:29 <Philip> Julian: That is a problem, but on the other hand it seems bad to constrain language functionality just in order to permit a certain organisation of specs into orthogonal documents
15:23:34 <jgraham> Perahps they have learnt that is not the most reasonable date but it's hard to tell
15:24:31 <anne2> Julian, I got nothing from iana
15:25:24 <Philip> s/worked thread/worker thread/ dozens of lines ago
15:27:45 <Julian> Anne, the mailing list server seems to be owned by Ned Freed, and that's where I got eh conf from.
15:28:24 <Julian> Philip, depends on the constraint.
15:28:52 <anne2> didn't work for me
15:28:57 <Julian> Philip, couldn't a canvas spec define that behavior for postMessage?
15:29:32 <rubys> half facetious answer: julian, I don't know, why don't you give it a try?  :-P
15:31:36 <Julian> Sam, you know the answer.
15:32:05 <gsnedders_> gsnedders_ has joined #html-wg
15:32:22 <rubys> ok.  s/don't you/doesn't someone/
15:32:32 <Lachy> Julian, maybe I missed something, but what does postMessage have to do with canvas?
15:32:54 <anne2> Lachy, ImageData
15:33:08 <anne2> so you can work on ImageData in a Worker
15:33:20 <Julian> lachy, see what Philip said earlier: "Julian: The problem with splitting out <canvas> entirely is that it interacts in slightly complex ways with other features, e.g. you can pass a canvas ImageData to a worked thread using postMessage"
15:34:59 <Lachy> so? You can pass any object using postMessage to a worker thread.
15:35:59 <Julian> Lachy, ok, so it *is* orthogonal, and could be specified separately
15:36:18 <Dashiva> Lachy: Only structured clones, isn't it?
15:36:18 <anne2> no, you cannot pass any object
15:37:48 <Lachy> anne2, elaborate?
15:39:54 <Philip> Julian: I expect the canvas spec could (it can just override HTML5's definition of structured cloning), but having the definition split across multiple specs would add some complexity (for implementors working out what to do, for testers working out what it should do, and for spec writers having to be careful not to accidentally introduce contradictions or undefined gaps between all the specs)
15:40:03 <anne2> Lachy, e.g. Workers do not support the DOM
15:41:31 <DanC> issue-28?
15:41:31 <trackbot> ISSUE-28 -- Content type rules in HTML 5 overlaps with the HTTP specification? -- RAISED
15:41:31 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/28
15:41:32 <pimpbot> Title: ISSUE-28 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
15:41:44 <DanC> sam, do you know the status/trajectory of barth's draft?
15:41:56 <DanC> does it live in the http-bis issues list somewhere?
15:42:36 <Julian> sec-from aka origin?
15:42:46 <Julian> or content-sniffing?
15:42:48 <rubys> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-abarth-mime-sniff-01.txt ?
15:43:04 <anne2> DanC, http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-mime-sniff
15:43:09 <pimpbot> Title: draft-abarth-mime-sniff-01 - Content-Type Processing Model (at tools.ietf.org)
15:43:13 <DanC> yes, that document
15:43:15 <Julian> both are discussed on the HTTPbis mailing list, but they aren't deliverables of the WG
15:43:28 <DanC> I'm wondering how to track the dependency from HTML 5 to that document
15:43:35 <Julian> and thus do not use our issues list
15:44:17 <Julian> define "track"
15:44:40 <rubys> what's the diff in purpose between the www.ietf and tools.ietf domains?
15:45:25 <DanC> maciej suggests closing issue-28 because the text has been moved to [MIMESNIFF]. But that doesn't address the technical overlap with HTTP until the HTTP WG gives it an OK
15:45:50 <rubys> what's the next action to be taken?
15:46:34 <anne2> DanC, there's http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HTML5_spin-offs
15:46:35 <Julian> The HTTP WG can and will not "ok" it, because it's not on our charter
15:46:38 <pimpbot> Title: HTML5 spin-offs - WHATWG Wiki (at wiki.whatwg.org)
15:46:44 <Julian> But you probably want to know something else...
15:47:36 <Julian> Does this: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/155 help?
15:47:38 <pimpbot> Title: #155 (Content Sniffing) – httpbis (at trac.tools.ietf.org)
15:48:23 <Julian> Sam, the versions on tools.ietf.org are more readable, have diffs and metadata
15:49:10 <DanC> ticket 155 is marked fixed... I'm looking for the resolution
15:49:46 <rubys1> rubys1 has joined #html-wg
15:49:53 <smedero> smedero has left #html-wg
15:50:02 <smedero> smedero has joined #html-wg
15:50:03 <rubys2> rubys2 has left #html-wg
15:50:08 <plh> plh has joined #html-wg
15:50:36 <DanC> oh... and yes, ticket 155 is exactly what I was looking for, Julian 
15:50:43 <adrianba> adrianba has joined #html-wg
15:51:10 <DanC> I can't tell if ticket 155 is closed/fixed in a way that's compatible with the current HTML 5 spec (which includes draft-abarth by reference)(
15:51:28 <Julian> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/663 and http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/592
15:51:30 <pimpbot> Title: Changeset 663 – httpbis (at trac.tools.ietf.org)
15:51:35 <mjs_> good morning
15:52:19 <Julian> From an HTT point of view all we really changed was to say that there's no default type (when Content-Type is missing)
15:52:27 <DanC> issue-28: note http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/155
15:52:27 <trackbot> ISSUE-28 Content type rules in HTML 5 overlaps with the HTTP specification? notes added
15:52:28 <pimpbot> Title: #155 (Content Sniffing) – httpbis (at trac.tools.ietf.org)
15:52:38 <Julian> We did not change anything about Content-Type defining the type of the payload
15:54:17 <anne2> though it was made clear that applications do not have to follow the mapping if they so desire
15:54:23 <anne2> at least via email
15:55:09 <Julian> The HTTP spec states what the intent of the header is; it doesn't say anything about what a recipient has to do with it.
15:55:23 <rubys> invite rrsagent
15:56:22 <Julian> Trying to say more lead to disagreement in the WG, thus one informative statement was backed out again
15:56:25 <MikeSmith> MikeSmith has joined #html-wg
15:56:39 <mjs_> DanC, Julian: I would suggest that whatever the IETF plans to do with the MIMESNIFF draft, it's no longer the HTML WG's issue
15:57:05 <DanC> well, as I said in email, since HTML 5 cites MIMESNIFF normatively, it's still part of HTML 5
15:57:13 <DanC> (just said in email)
15:57:26 <Julian> Maciej, as far as I can tell, the IETF doesn't have any plans.
15:57:37 <DanC> i.e. HTML 5 isn't done until MIMESNIFF is done
15:58:05 <Julian> Maciej, it's currently an individual submission, and the author will have to find a way to get it published, either through the RFC-Editor or the IESG.
15:58:17 <rubys> that will block last call?
15:58:20 <MikeSmith> trackbot, start meeting
15:58:22 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:58:22 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #html-wg
15:58:23 <richardschwerdtfe> richardschwerdtfe has joined #html-wg
15:58:24 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be HTML
15:58:24 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see HTML_WG()12:00PM already started
15:58:25 <trackbot> Meeting: HTML Weekly Teleconference
15:58:25 <trackbot> Date: 13 August 2009
15:58:34 <rubys> agenda+ open action items
15:58:43 <rubys> agenda+ creation of an HTML Accessibility Task Force
15:58:51 <rubys> agenda+ pending review
15:58:55 <mjs> my understanding is that citing an Internet-Draft is not a Last Call blocker, but would block PR
15:58:58 <rubys> agenda+ raised (and nominated for closure)
15:59:13 <rubys> agenda+ poll
15:59:27 <DanC> shifting some text from one document to another doesn't address the technical issue
15:59:40 <MikeSmith> Zakim, call Mike
15:59:40 <Zakim> ok, MikeSmith; the call is being made
15:59:47 <Zakim> +Mike
15:59:52 <Zakim> +DanC
15:59:59 <Julian> Maciej, citing an I-D normatively would be a showstopper.
16:00:12 <MikeSmith> Zakim, who's on the phone?
16:00:13 <Zakim> On the phone I see Rich, Mike, DanC
16:00:42 <Zakim> +Sam
16:00:47 <msporny_> msporny_ has joined #html-wg
16:00:53 <Zakim> +Shepazu
16:00:56 <DanC> scribe: DanC
16:01:03 <Zakim> +Julian
16:01:05 <DanC> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-wg-announce/2009JulSep/0014.html
16:01:07 <pimpbot> Title: {agenda} HTML WG telcon 2009-08-13 from Sam Ruby on 2009-08-12 (public-html-wg-announce@w3.org from July to September 2009) (at lists.w3.org)
16:01:19 <Zakim> +??P20
16:01:21 <msporny_> zakim, I am ??P20
16:01:21 <Zakim> +msporny_; got it
16:01:25 <Zakim> +Cynthia_Shelly
16:01:41 <MikeSmith> Zakim, Mike is me
16:01:42 <Zakim> +MikeSmith; got it
16:02:00 <Zakim> +[Apple]
16:02:01 <rubys> zakim, agenda?
16:02:01 <Zakim> I see 5 items remaining on the agenda:
16:02:03 <MichaelC> MichaelC has joined #html-wg
16:02:03 <Zakim> 1. open action items [from rubys]
16:02:05 <Zakim> 2. creation of an HTML Accessibility Task Force [from rubys]
16:02:05 <dsinger_> zakim, [apple] has dsinger
16:02:06 <Zakim> 3. pending review [from rubys]
16:02:09 <Zakim> 4. raised (and nominated for closure) [from rubys]
16:02:13 <Zakim> 5. poll [from rubys]
16:02:13 <dsinger_> zakim, I am dsinger
16:02:15 <Zakim> +dsinger; got it
16:02:27 <Zakim> sorry, dsinger_, I do not see a party named 'dsinger'
16:02:45 <Zakim> +Cooper
16:02:55 <dsinger> zakim, who is here?
16:03:03 <Zakim> +Matt_May
16:03:10 <Zakim> On the phone I see Rich, MikeSmith, DanC, Sam, Shepazu, Julian, msporny_, Cynthia_Shelly, [Apple], Cooper, Matt_May
16:03:15 <Zakim> [Apple] has dsinger
16:03:19 <Zakim> On IRC I see MichaelC, msporny_, richardschwerdtfe, Zakim, MikeSmith, adrianba, plh, smedero, rubys, gsnedders_, dbaron, Julian, webben, miketaylr, aroben, J_Voracek, myakura,
16:03:24 <Zakim> ... anne2, Sander, tlr, ROBOd, mjs, heycam, dsinger, Lachy, gavin, krijnh, karl, hober, shepazu, jgraham, gavin_, Philip, jmb, inimino, Dashiva, hsivonen, DanC, RRSAgent,
16:03:27 <Zakim> ... gsnedders, Hixie, xover, Yudai, johndrinkwater, marcin, Shunsuke, pimpbot, ed_work, deltab, trackbot, phenny
16:03:30 <Zakim> + +1.206.922.aaaa
16:03:44 <Zakim> +??P14
16:03:45 <DanC> Zakim, aaaa is Adrian
16:03:45 <Zakim> +Adrian; got it
16:03:52 <johndrinkwater> Zakim, I am ??P14
16:03:52 <Zakim> +johndrinkwater; got it
16:04:05 <rubys> next agedum
16:04:14 <DanC> Zakim, next agendum
16:04:14 <Zakim> agendum 1. "open action items" taken up [from rubys]
16:04:15 <rubys> next agendum
16:04:24 <Zakim> +mjs
16:04:34 <rubys> Topic: Issue-35/Action-114 aria-processing
16:04:57 <Zakim> -MikeSmith
16:05:27 <Zakim> + +1.415.832.aabb
16:05:31 <DanC> Sam: I'd like to get the stuff blocking Ian Hickson's progress unblocked
16:06:18 <billyjackass> billyjackass has joined #html-wg
16:06:28 <DanC> MC: the WAI PF WG is processing last call comments in batch, since they can interact. But since this is blocking progress, perhaps we could tentatively share our response in this case
16:06:40 <DanC> Sam: that would be great
16:06:46 <DanC> MC: I don't have the details to hand...
16:06:48 <billyjackass> Zakim, drop Mike
16:06:48 <Zakim> sorry, billyjackass, I do not see a party named 'Mike'
16:07:00 <billyjackass> Zakim, call Mike
16:07:00 <Zakim> ok, billyjackass; the call is being made
16:07:01 <Zakim> +Mike
16:07:23 <DanC> Rich: there have been several related comments [related to what? scribe could use some help]
16:07:30 <billyjackass> Zakim, drop Mike
16:07:30 <Zakim> Mike is being disconnected
16:07:32 <Zakim> -Mike
16:08:01 <J_Voracek> J_Voracek has joined #html-wg
16:08:31 <J_Voracek> My apologies. I encountered an error with my IRC client.
16:08:31 <billyjackass> Zakim, call Mike
16:08:31 <Zakim> ok, billyjackass; the call is being made
16:08:32 <Zakim> +Mike
16:08:35 <DanC> ... where's the best place to send our tentative response?
16:08:42 <Chris_Wilson> Chris_Wilson has joined #html-wg
16:08:42 <DanC> Sam: on public-html is fine
16:08:48 <Zakim> -Mike
16:09:10 <DanC> MC: I can collaborate with concerned parties and get that out in a few days
16:10:06 <masinter> masinter has joined #html-wg
16:10:09 <DanC> Rich: current [aria] design is that with the exception of @role, host language overrides.
16:10:23 <mjs> q+
16:10:45 <Zakim> +??P4
16:11:05 <billyjackass> Zakim, ??P4 is me
16:11:05 <Zakim> +billyjackass; got it
16:11:13 <rubys> welcome mike!
16:11:25 <DanC> [discussion of details of @role and other details exceeds scribe's bandwidth]
16:11:30 <rubys> ack mjs
16:11:35 <DanC> [scribe hopes this will get replayed in email]
16:11:48 <DanC> mjs: I see 2 separate issues here...
16:11:58 <DanC> ... with aria state conflicting with native state...
16:12:14 <dbaron> dbaron has left #html-wg
16:12:19 <DanC> ... one is w.r.t. implementation; e.g. [darn; good example missed]...
16:12:43 <dsinger> input type=-radio_button role=check_box ?? what does the assistive tech do?
16:12:55 <DanC> ... 2nd issue is w.r.t. conformance... a host language making something [non?]conforming are [orthoganal?] to the implementation issue
16:13:53 <DanC> MC: tentatively, yes that [help? that=?] is a way we'd be willing to go...
16:14:17 <DanC> mjs: tentative answers are totally OK...
16:14:26 <DanC> mjs: specifically on @role...
16:15:03 <DanC> ... I think Ian and some others are inclined to say some values of @role in some cases are non-conforming; e.g. [help again dsinger?]
16:15:38 <kliehm> kliehm has joined #html-wg
16:15:56 <Philip> "< Hixie> e.g. <h1 role=checkbox> shouldn't be valid either, and should act like an <h1> to ATs, not a checkbox"
16:15:58 <Zakim> -Cynthia_Shelly
16:16:09 <DanC> mjs gives some details regarding strong and not so strong situations...
16:16:13 <Philip> (from #whatwg last night)
16:16:23 <DanC> tx, Philip 
16:16:24 <Zakim> + +1.206.528.aacc - is perhaps Chris_Wilson?
16:16:35 <msporny_> DanC: combobox on role="checkbox" should raise a validation error.
16:16:37 <dsinger> I think maciej is asking that some of these conflicts at least should be conformance errors?
16:16:41 <Chris_Wilson> Zakim, Chris_Wilson is me
16:16:41 <Zakim> +Chris_Wilson; got it
16:17:01 <DanC> Rich: that [some @role cases being non-conformting] sounds, tentatively, like something we could work together on, yes.
16:17:01 <msporny_> so <input type="radiobutton" role="combobox" ...> should raise a validation error.
16:17:15 <shepazu> [that all seems reasonable and obvious to me... why would this have been blocking?]
16:18:44 <DanC> mjs: yes, we'll be sure to get adequate review on this... but specifically, there's a prohibition on [more details that sound familiar from public-html email... about a specific ARIA constraint about host langauges overriding]
16:19:37 <msporny_> I was not speaking...
16:19:41 <DanC> Rich: MC, I think we can take this back to the [WAI PF] WG
16:19:50 <mjs> <--- me
16:19:54 <mjs> (maciej)
16:20:03 <Zakim> -johndrinkwater
16:20:18 <mjs> mjs@apple.com
16:20:34 <Zakim> +smedero
16:20:44 <smedero> Zakim, mute me
16:20:44 <Zakim> smedero should now be muted
16:20:50 <DanC> Rich: anybody else in that call/collaboration?
16:21:21 <DanC> mjs: I suggest hsivonen; much of the technical detail I'm relaying come from him
16:21:28 <ChrisWilson> ChrisWilson has joined #html-wg
16:21:48 <msporny_> Yes, Maciej - appreciate your comments, they have been very helpful (even if I don't agree with all of them)
16:21:50 <DanC> Rich: many thanks for the review comments; these are helpful for crafting the next ARIA draft
16:22:30 <DanC> DanC: so who has the ball?
16:22:50 <DanC> MC: so I can send tentative details. and 2nd, work with macie and hsivonen and Ian
16:23:04 <Zakim> +Cynthia_Shelly
16:23:10 <DanC> action-114 due next week
16:23:10 <trackbot> ACTION-114 Report progress on ARIA TF due date now next week
16:23:56 <rubys> Topic: Issue-32/Action-128 table-summary
16:24:09 <rubys> http://dev.w3.org/html5/pf-summary/spec.html
16:24:09 <pimpbot> Title: HTML 5 (at dev.w3.org)
16:24:31 <DanC> (I couldn't find the relevant part of http://dev.w3.org/html5/pf-summary/spec.html , fwiw)
16:24:32 <pimpbot> Title: HTML 5 (at dev.w3.org)
16:24:45 <DanC> action-128?
16:24:45 <trackbot> ACTION-128 -- Cynthia Shelly to work with PF to find an owner for drafting @summary text proposal -- due 2009-08-06 -- OPEN
16:24:45 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/128
16:24:46 <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-128 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
16:25:31 <Chris_Wilson> Chris_Wilson has joined #html-wg
16:26:44 <mjs> presumably something has to be posted to public-html for this item to be done
16:27:03 <DanC> action-128 due next week
16:27:03 <trackbot> ACTION-128 Work with PF to find an owner for drafting @summary text proposal due date now next week
16:27:14 <rubys> Topic: Issue-74/Action-133 canvas-accessibility
16:28:04 <DanC> action-133?
16:28:04 <trackbot> ACTION-133 -- Richard Schwerdtfeger to develop an accessibility API and model for canvas as well as attributes to specify alternative content -- due 2009-12-17 -- OPEN
16:28:04 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/133
16:28:05 <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-133 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
16:28:24 <DanC> Sam: is a december timeframe OK?
16:28:37 <DanC> Rich: I'm working on this... looking at implementation stuff...
16:29:20 <DanC> Cynthia: help from mozilla, opera and/or mac/apple would help
16:30:01 <DanC> dsinger: ok... I've been looking more at accessibility of audio/video, but perhaps we should bump up the priority of canvas accessibility
16:31:01 <DanC> mjs: what would help most in particular?
16:31:21 <DanC> Rich: I'm interested to talk to developers of canvas applications
16:31:31 <DanC> Doug: perhaps the bespin developers?
16:31:58 <DanC> ... things like processing.js that are just images aren't as relevant as something like bespin
16:32:20 <dsinger> There are always 'tour-de-force' demonstrations (like writing an editor in Canvas), but we should probably focus on 'reasonable' uses
16:32:36 <DanC> Cynthia: we'd also like help from somebody that knows the apple accessibility APIs
16:32:39 <Philip> Perhaps canvas graphing libraries are interesting
16:33:25 <Philip> (Canvas gGames presumably aren't interesting, because they're usually inherently visual and can't be non-visually accessible)
16:33:31 <Philip> s/gGames/games/
16:33:31 <DanC> Doug: are there limits to our expectations on canvas accessibility? e.g. a shoot-em-up-game
16:33:52 <rubys> ack next
16:34:23 <rubys> ack next
16:34:36 <DanC> Cynthia: yes, a review of the use cases to consider practical limitations makes sense
16:34:43 <kliehm> (Cannot get into telcon, is full) At PF Task Force we agreed to examine the canvas examples on Laura's wiki page and note down use cases. Bespin probably could have a shadow fallback DOM with paragraphs, list items, code, and buttons. We need to identify common cases first, then look for a solution.
16:35:15 <rubys> next agendum
16:35:49 <DanC> Topic: creation of an HTML Accessibility Task Force
16:35:53 <msporny_> +1 for HTML Accessibility Task Force
16:35:56 <DanC> Sam: volunteers for this task force?
16:36:02 <msporny_> (creation of, not volunteering)
16:36:05 <DanC> Doug: I'm interested
16:36:12 <kliehm> +1 (and help reviewing the wiki use cases appreciated)
16:36:24 <dsinger> q+
16:36:37 <rubys> ack dsinger
16:36:55 <jgraham> I thought avoiding the performance penalty of DOM was a goal of bespin
16:37:05 <DanC> Sam: I gather there's plenty of support; any against?
16:37:39 <masinter> This is a HTML-WG telephone call, so I would assume it would be a HTML-WG task force
16:37:52 <DanC> dsinger: I don't think actual technical discussion of accessibility is drowning out other issues in public-html...
16:38:05 <rubys> @masinter: joint, per http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/html-task-force
16:38:06 <pimpbot> rubys: Huh?
16:38:08 <mjs> q+
16:38:12 <DanC> ... and which IPR realm would it work under? [not sure I scribed that right]
16:38:31 <msporny_> I don't support the process of breaking off into a separate group either.
16:39:11 <DanC> dsinger: there are also governance issues... would the TF be advisory? it couldn't make binding decisions because it's not the actual WG
16:39:27 <masinter> @rubys I understand now, sorry
16:39:27 <pimpbot> masinter: Huh?
16:39:50 <DanC> dsinger: I'm frustrated that process keeps coming up to the exclusion of progress on the technical issues
16:40:01 <rubys> ack next
16:40:04 <DanC> MC: [missed; help?]
16:40:06 <msporny_> q+ to discuss keeping AT TF on HTML WG mailing list.
16:40:15 <kliehm> @jgraham, speed is an issue as canvas is faster than SVG, also convenience: canvas / JavaScript is made for human developers, SVG / XML is output from machines. But keeping objects for re-use in the DOM as a memory could be an argument for developers, enhancing accessibility at the same time.
16:40:16 <pimpbot> kliehm: Huh?
16:41:30 <MikeSmith> Zakim, mute Mike
16:41:30 <Zakim> sorry, MikeSmith, I do not know which phone connection belongs to Mike
16:41:32 <DanC> mjs: I think it's fine for people to get together and hash out proposals before bringing them to the HTML WG is fine, but HTML WG decisions need to get a healthy amount of discussion in public-html...
16:41:40 <rubys> ack next
16:41:41 <Zakim> msporny_, you wanted to discuss keeping AT TF on HTML WG mailing list.
16:42:02 <MichaelC> q+ to say I expect it would be ok to use the HTML list as the task force list
16:42:14 <DanC> ... also, it's not good to spend _too_ much time baking proposals, because that can [raise social issues] too
16:42:42 <rubys> ack next
16:43:01 <DanC> manu: I think it's fine to use the public-html mailing list [I think I missed the gist of his point]
16:43:37 <msporny_> q+ to discuss expertise not being valued (RDFa experience)
16:43:56 <dsinger> q+ to admit he's thinking of something similar...
16:44:04 <DanC> Cynthia: with some hesitation, I feel obliged to bring up culture differences. I've been contacted by people who have posted to public-html and the response seemed like a flame
16:44:09 <rubys> ack next
16:44:10 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say I expect it would be ok to use the HTML list as the task force list
16:44:22 <masinter> q+ tasks forces are a well-known way of getting focus on particular topics. 
16:44:47 <rubys> ack next
16:44:48 <Zakim> msporny_, you wanted to discuss expertise not being valued (RDFa experience)
16:44:51 <masinter> q?
16:45:21 <DanC> MC: xtech was our original proposal so as not to deluge public-html, but perhaps public-html would work... I could discuss that with concerned parties
16:45:36 <DanC> ... there's also a question of which tracker to use
16:45:44 <rubys> ack next
16:45:45 <Zakim> dsinger, you wanted to admit he's thinking of something similar...
16:46:07 <adele> adele has joined #html-wg
16:46:16 <richardschwerdtfe> q+
16:46:20 <dsinger> I have discussed with a few people having an informal get-together to talk over issues, ideas, and experiments for audio/video accessibility.  We will probably try to organize this before the TPAC, so ideas that come up can be brought back to the tech. meetings.
16:46:24 <DanC> Manu: my experience is that when we engaged the HTML WG directly, that's when the bulk of the useful feedback came. So while I'm sympathetic to the flaming concerns, I don't think that [should be the overriding factor?]
16:47:11 <rubys> next agendum
16:47:16 <rubys> ack next
16:47:23 <dsinger> So, I am not opposed to smaller groups getting together to discuss ideas - I am in favor!
16:47:37 <DanC> dsinger: I'm hesitant about formalizing a task force, though I'm fine with small groups getting together to make proposals; I'm engaged in doing that myself with video/audio accessibility
16:47:54 <mjs> I think on canvas accessibility and video accessibility, technical discussion of the issues will be much more productive
16:47:59 <rubys> next agendum
16:48:10 <mjs> and posting on public-html will be a great way to recruit technical help
16:48:12 <rubys> Topic: Action-34 authoring-guide
16:48:50 <MikeSmith> action-34 is not related to any of my actions
16:49:16 <DanC> DanC: I'm inclined to close/withdraw
16:49:21 <rubys> Topic: Action-106 test-suite-coordination
16:49:22 <DanC> close ACTION-34
16:49:22 <trackbot> ACTION-34 Prepare "Web Developer's Guide to HTML5" for publication in some way, as discussed on 2007-11-28 phone conference closed
16:49:43 <MikeSmith> action-106?
16:49:43 <trackbot> ACTION-106 -- Dan Connolly to work out with co-chair and staff how to spark test suite coordination next week -- due 2009-06-30 -- PENDINGREVIEW
16:49:43 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/106
16:49:45 <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-106 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
16:50:29 <DanC> DanC: I
16:50:38 <DanC> DanC: I'm ambivalent about keeping test suite stuff in the tracker
16:51:31 <DanC> ACTION: Doug look at ways to integrate test from browsers into a WG test suite
16:51:31 <trackbot> Created ACTION-134 - Look at ways to integrate test from browsers into a WG test suite [on Doug Schepers - due 2009-08-20].
16:51:36 <DanC> action-134 due 15 Sep
16:51:36 <trackbot> ACTION-134 Look at ways to integrate test from browsers into a WG test suite due date now 15 Sep
16:51:39 <DanC> close action-106
16:51:39 <trackbot> ACTION-106 Work out with co-chair and staff how to spark test suite coordination next week closed
16:51:52 <rubys> Topic: Action-115 TPAC-participants-signup
16:52:13 <DanC> Sam: I'm willing to make an announcement about TPAC registration
16:52:27 <rubys> Topic: Issue-4/Action-129 html-versioning
16:52:58 <DanC> close action-129
16:52:58 <trackbot> ACTION-129 insure that the versioning discussion at least touches on XHTML 2 interactions with the /1999/xhtml namespace closed
16:52:59 <masinter> action-129?
16:52:59 <trackbot> ACTION-129 -- Larry Masinter to insure that the versioning discussion at least touches on XHTML 2 interactions with the /1999/xhtml namespace -- due 2009-08-13 -- CLOSED
16:52:59 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/129
16:53:00 <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-129 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
16:53:32 <rubys> next agendum
16:53:32 <cyns> cyns has joined #html-wg
16:53:37 <Chris_Wilson> Chris_Wilson has joined #html-wg
16:54:21 <DanC> +1 a summary of why to close for each issue, please
16:54:33 <DanC> mjs: I think there's cruft in the issue tracker...
16:54:53 <msporny_> +1 for cruft in the issue tracker, and support Maciej's efforts to close items.
16:55:31 <dsinger> notes that if we make a mistake, it's not exactly hard to create issues etc.
16:56:06 <dsinger> so as long as we close 'without prejudice' i.e. allowing people to re-open without lots of justification, we're fine
16:56:15 <masinter> q+
16:56:47 <masinter> Is there a way of insuring that the people who raised the issue in the first place have had a chance to respond to closing it?
16:57:17 <dsinger> perhaps the name of the raiser could be indicated on each issue, in the email?
16:57:39 <mjs> I can Cc the originators
16:57:44 <dsinger> e.g. issue-314159 (raised by Mordred) should the HTML WG kill orcs?
16:57:53 <DanC> [discussion of mechanics]
16:58:15 <rubys> next agendum
16:58:20 <rubys> ack next
16:58:39 <DanC> Sam: ok, so a separate message for each message to public-html, copied to the originator and a summary on the announce list
16:58:39 <rubys> next agendum
16:58:56 <rubys> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/wd08/
16:59:09 <DanC> Sam: reminder, the poll is ongoing
16:59:47 <Chris_Wilson> Sam and I work that out every week.
16:59:53 <Chris_Wilson> Neither of us are oof.
16:59:55 <Zakim> -mjs
16:59:56 <Zakim> - +1.415.832.aabb
16:59:56 <Zakim> -billyjackass
16:59:58 <Zakim> -smedero
16:59:58 <Zakim> -Matt_May
16:59:59 <Zakim> -DanC
17:00:00 <Zakim> -Sam
17:00:01 <Zakim> -Cooper
17:00:02 <Zakim> -msporny_
17:00:04 <Zakim> -Adrian
17:00:06 <Zakim> -Chris_Wilson
17:00:08 <Zakim> -[Apple]
17:00:10 <Zakim> -Cynthia_Shelly
17:00:12 <Zakim> -Julian
17:00:14 <Zakim> -Shepazu
17:00:18 <Zakim> -Rich
17:00:20 <Zakim> HTML_WG()12:00PM has ended
17:00:22 <Zakim> Attendees were Rich, DanC, Sam, Shepazu, Julian, msporny_, Cynthia_Shelly, MikeSmith, dsinger, Cooper, Matt_May, +1.206.922.aaaa, Adrian, johndrinkwater, mjs, +1.415.832.aabb,
17:00:25 <Zakim> ... Mike, billyjackass, +1.206.528.aacc, Chris_Wilson, smedero
17:00:27 <Chris_Wilson> (sry, I had a likely conflict this morning, which is why Sam picked today up - which turned out to be good, due to tech problems on my end.
17:00:47 <DanC> regrest+ Chris_Wilson
17:00:52 <DanC> regrets+ Chris_Wilson
17:02:00 <smedero> regrets+ Laura_Carlson
17:02:38 <kliehm> present+ kliehm
17:11:14 <shepazu> shepazu has joined #html-wg
17:21:56 <tH> tH has joined #html-wg
17:22:10 <MichaelC> MichaelC has left #html-wg
17:23:24 <J_Voracek> J_Voracek has joined #html-wg
17:50:49 <gavin> gavin has joined #html-wg
17:51:04 <hober> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/wd08/results is publicly visible but http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/wd08/results?view=compact is member-only, weird
17:51:05 <pimpbot> Title: Results of Questionnaire Publish HTML 5 update with or without warnings? - Web-Based Straw-poll and Balloting System (at www.w3.org)
17:54:32 <mjs> mjs has joined #html-wg
17:57:37 <rubys> hober: I guess that's a way to encourage membership.  :-)
18:23:04 <Julian> Julian has joined #html-wg
18:36:30 <pimpbot> planet: 50 Chrome Experiments and counting! <11http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/Egta/~3/JfjUf7Jyv98/50-chrome-experiments-and-counting.html>
18:45:31 <mkozakewich> mkozakewich has joined #html-wg
18:57:21 <rubys> hsivonen: you around?
18:57:26 <mjs> mjs has joined #html-wg
18:58:00 <rubys> mjs: do you think the following captured what happened in the meeting?  http://intertwingly.net/blog/2009/08/12/Mountain-Mohammed-Mohammed-Mountain-Please-Talk#c1250189423
18:58:01 <pimpbot> Title: Sam Ruby: Mountain, Mohammed; Mohammed, Mountain; Please Talk (at intertwingly.net)
18:58:39 <hsivonen> rubys: for a short while, yes
18:58:49 <mjs> rubys: looking...
18:58:56 <hsivonen> (just came back, haven't read scrollback, yet)
18:59:00 <rubys> hsivonen: take a look at the link I just posted
19:00:17 <mjs> rubys: the specific example I used of an element with strong semantics was <input type="radiobutton">, and the fact that there is no way it can act as a combobox, even if you put role="combobox" on it
19:00:23 <mjs> rubys: I think <h1> is a fine example too
19:00:49 <mjs> rubys: otherwise, I think your summary is accurate
19:01:13 <hsivonen> rubys: what you summarize as what Maciej said is pretty similar to my ideas from March 2008: http://hsivonen.iki.fi/aria-html5-bis/
19:01:14 <pimpbot> Title: ARIA in HTML5 Integration: Document Conformance (Draft, Take Two) (at hsivonen.iki.fi)
19:01:14 <rubys> I actually like <h1> as it is clearer.  I did make reference to the type attribute later
19:01:42 <mjs> rubys: thank you for arranging things so people could actually talk - I feel that ~15 minutes of telecon time was more valuable than all the back and forth on this so far
19:02:03 <rubys> hsivonen: I hadn't seen that before.
19:02:19 <hsivonen> I'm happy to see ARIA going in the direction of taking host language semantics into account.
19:02:53 <hsivonen> rubys: note that that blog post of mine talks only about conformance, because I deferred to Aaron Leventhal on UA implementation req point of view.
19:03:04 <rubys> mjs: and thank you for actually attending.  I didn't understand the issue until I heard both "sides" together.
19:03:32 <mjs> I think my feedback was pretty similar to what hsivonen and Hixie have said in the past, but perhaps some combination of the telecon format and my framing helped understanding
19:08:52 <mjs> hsivonen: off the top of your head, can you think of specs that were split out of HTML5 by someone other than Hixie?
19:09:47 <hsivonen> mjs: XHR is now edited by Anne
19:09:49 <smedero> XHR
19:10:06 <mjs> I know about XHR - was wondering if there are other examples
19:10:25 <DanC> RRSAgent, draft minutes
19:10:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/08/13-html-wg-minutes.html DanC
19:10:28 <hsivonen> mjs: Lachy has the selector API, though I'm not sure if it ever was in html5
19:10:32 <mjs> there's MIMESNIFF and WEBADDRESS
19:10:43 <mjs> selectors API managed to avoid ever making it in
19:10:48 <hsivonen> ok
19:12:03 <smedero> http://simon.html5.org/specs/web-dom-core ?
19:12:04 <pimpbot> Title: Web DOM Core (at simon.html5.org)
19:12:52 <mjs> is Simon going to propose that to Web Apps WG at some point?
19:36:23 <webben> webben has joined #html-wg
19:55:17 <anne2> mjs, he did, but wanted someone else to be editor
19:58:32 <mjs> mjs has joined #html-wg
19:58:38 <jgraham> OK I want anolis to read input from stdin, write to stdout or to read from a file and write to a file or some combination of the two (e.g. read from stdin write to a file)
19:58:51 <jgraham> What's the best command line syntax to use?
19:59:19 <jgraham> cat file > anolis - output.html
19:59:27 <jgraham> maybe?
19:59:37 <richardschwerdtfe> richardschwerdtfe has left #html-wg
19:59:46 <jgraham> I don't really like that and optparse might not either
20:00:15 <gsnedders_> jgraham: fail
20:00:21 <Philip> I assume you mean s/>/|/
20:00:41 <jgraham> cat file | anolis -stdin output.html maybe?
20:00:46 <jgraham> Philip: yes
20:01:23 <jgraham> Seems kinda verbose
20:01:42 <jgraham> cat file | anolis -o output.html
20:01:43 <Philip> It'd be easier (and more like typical Unix tools, I think) if you didn't allow a combinaion, i.e. if you only allowed "anolis input output" and "cat input | anolis > output"
20:02:21 <jgraham> I guess that would work
20:02:27 <Philip> Otherwise it's easy to get mixed up and accidentally overwrite the sole copy of your un-backed-up input file
20:04:41 <Philip> (though fortunately someone on the internet a year ago suggested twisting the laptop when turning it on, which solved the problem so now I can copy everything to an external disk)
20:05:49 <aroben> aroben has joined #html-wg
20:11:24 <jgraham> How does one twist a laptop?
20:16:19 <Philip> jgraham: The same as one would twist any other approximation of a quadrilateral
20:16:54 <Philip> (It helps that it's made of plastic rather than metal, and is therefore quite bendy)
20:20:53 <rubys> http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/ietestcenter/html5.htm#
20:20:55 <pimpbot> Title: Windows Internet Explorer Testing Center (at samples.msdn.microsoft.com)
20:21:11 <rubys> has anybody here seen this before?
20:21:20 <smedero> yep
20:21:33 <rubys> thoughts? good, bad, indifferent?
20:21:33 <smedero> I think it is noted on a wiki or an issue somewhere as well.
20:21:58 <smedero> well DanC and I looked at it because if you look at the source
20:21:59 <smedero> http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/ietestcenter/HTML5/DOMStorage/localStorage.htm
20:22:00 <pimpbot> Title: HTML 5 Test Suite: localStorage object (at samples.msdn.microsoft.com)
20:22:13 <smedero> there is stuff like
20:22:14 <smedero>  <meta name="assert" content="5.10.1.2 - localStorage object that can be initialized is not null." />
20:22:52 <smedero> and we wondered if there was a way to automate match a test to a spec section
20:23:21 <Philip> http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Testsuite links to them
20:23:23 <pimpbot> Title: Testsuite - WHATWG Wiki (at wiki.whatwg.org)
20:24:19 <Philip> http://philip.html5.org/tests/canvas/suite/tests/spec.html automates matching tests to spec sentences
20:24:20 <pimpbot> Title: HTML 5 (at philip.html5.org)
20:24:47 <smedero> Oooh
20:25:14 <smedero> at some point in the future I'd like to pick your brain then.
20:25:28 <smedero> non-invasively
20:26:10 <Philip> rubys: At least for their DOM Storage tests, they're far less comprehensive than is needed
20:26:30 <Philip> (They seem reasonable at testing the basic functionality is supported, though)
20:27:49 <Philip> (but there's all sorts of other stuff that ought to be tested, like what happens when you store \u0000 or \ud800 (which caused IE8 betas to make their storage XML files ill-formed))
20:28:33 <Philip> smedero: I believe it was
20:28:34 <rubys> I'm trying to convince the authors of those tests to join IRC...  hopefully it will happen at some point.
20:28:55 <Philip> (though I don't remember what the fix was)
20:29:25 <Philip> (It might have just ignored ill-formed strings instead of storing them in the XML, or something, which is non-conforming but less severely broken)
20:30:22 <aroben> aroben has joined #html-wg
20:30:23 <Philip> I started trying to write some storage tests myself last year, but it was hard and I got bored so I never got very far
20:32:04 <Philip> smedero: My spec-sentence-matching thing basically involves copying sentences into http://philip.html5.org/tests/canvas/suite/spec.yaml with some special markers, then referencing them from tests, and then some code links everything up (and complains if the spec changed so the sentences don't match any more)
20:33:49 <aroben> aroben has joined #html-wg
20:35:24 <Philip> (Fortunately Hixie is lazy and doesn't change the text unnecessarily, so mostly the matches are quite stable)
20:36:13 <smedero> thanks for sharing that
20:40:14 <Philip> Feel free to ask for more brain pickings if you wish
21:23:34 <adele> adele has joined #html-wg
21:51:19 <pimpbot> changes: hixie: Note that pushState() doesn't imply onhashchange. (whatwg r3603) <11http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-diffs/2009Aug/0127.html>
21:54:14 <Dashiva> That edit seemed to contain a lot of other changes too
22:37:55 <heycam> heycam has joined #html-wg
23:37:47 <pimpbot> planet: Is it currently "safe" to use arrows from htmlentities instead of arrow images? <11http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1275123/is-it-currently-safe-to-use-arrows-from-htmlentities-instead-of-arrow-images> 4** Survivor: W3C <11http://realtech.burningbird.net/semantic-web/semantic-web-issues-and-practices/survivor-w3c> 4** Deprecated is Now Obsolete <11http://realtech.burningbird.net/deprecated-is-now-obsolete> 4** One Table in a Thousand 
23:39:12 <Dashiva> pimpbot needs to learn about maximum message length
23:39:13 <pimpbot> Dashiva: Huh?
23:41:35 <rubys> rubys has left #html-wg
23:51:50 <pimpbot> changes: hixie: Yet another example of how context-sensitive markup leads to brittle copy-and-paste behaviour. Context-sensitive markup like prefixes: just say no! (whatwg r3604) <11http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-diffs/2009Aug/0128.html>