IRC log of jquery on 2011-11-02

Timestamps are in UTC.

21:37:06 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #jquery
21:37:06 [RRSAgent]
logging to
21:37:31 [darobin]
pi: we're going to talk about the jQuery Standards Group
21:37:32 [jrossi2]
jrossi2 has joined #jquery
21:37:32 [npdoty]
scribenick: darobin
21:37:40 [darobin]
... how we're going to help improve specifications
21:37:52 [darobin]
... things that developers want in the platform that we don't see being actively developed
21:37:57 [lgombos]
lgombos has joined #jquery
21:37:58 [darobin]
... how to get better involvement from authors
21:38:20 [darobin]
yk: I don't like the fact that we use "author", most people are really developers
21:38:29 [darobin]
... it's a pet peeve but I won't fight too much on it
21:38:35 [vhardy]
vhardy has joined #jquery
21:38:43 [darobin]
... bunch of us were complaining about the standards process at the jq meetup
21:38:50 [darobin]
... why don't we formalise that?
21:39:01 [darobin]
... should sollicit from webdevs what they feel should change
21:39:17 [darobin]
... mostly the higher tier, who have a sense of the failures of the platform
21:39:32 [darobin]
... know how we can make sites 10x faster if we fix document fragments
21:39:40 [darobin]
.... people engaged in papering over issues
21:39:49 [darobin]
... process designed for browser vendors
21:39:56 [darobin]
... we wanted to create a forum for that
21:40:05 [darobin]
pi: we want to represent the community
21:40:10 [darobin]
... help them get engaged
21:40:18 [darobin]
... help vendors prioritise properly
21:40:23 [heycam]
heycam has joined #jquery
21:40:23 [darobin]
... match the pain points from devs
21:40:34 [darobin]
... keen to see jq adopt the new standards
21:40:51 [darobin]
yk: eg RAF, we can really help make half the websites adopt it
21:40:57 [darobin]
pi: feature detection
21:41:07 [darobin]
.... current BP in defensive xbrowser dev
21:41:19 [darobin]
... we need robust feature detection
21:41:25 [darobin]
... they can be slow though
21:41:31 [darobin]
... sometimes it can be hard to do, unclear
21:41:42 [darobin]
... e.g. fixed has a different behaviour on mobile
21:41:53 [darobin]
... when it fails people have to resort to UA sniffing
21:42:00 [wycats]
21:42:24 [darobin]
yk shows some of the stuff that jq does
21:42:42 [darobin]
.... some of the tests can be quite complex
21:42:58 [darobin]
... we want the spec making process to take feature detect into account
21:43:06 [darobin]
... would make startup a lot faster
21:43:17 [darobin]
pi: false positives are a problem
21:43:36 [darobin]
... FX half-implemented transforms, and broke feat detect
21:43:43 [darobin]
... Chrome has done similar stuff
21:43:59 [darobin]
... then you have the issue of exceptions on common feat detect vectors
21:44:05 [darobin]
... FD has a good reputation
21:44:28 [darobin]
... but when done poorly it's as bad as UA sniffing
21:44:51 [darobin]
yk: historical note, hasFeature failed
21:45:01 [darobin]
... we should learn something about the past ten years
21:45:07 [krisk]
can someone place a url to the slide deck in IRC?
21:45:42 [hober]
hober has joined #jquery
21:45:43 [vhardy]
robin: what we can do in specs is that have a checklist. There is a limit over what the browsers do.
21:46:03 [vhardy]
yk: the spec. could say that an implementation should not claim it implements something unless...
21:46:19 [vhardy]
robin: what has an effect is if we design an API in a way that people do not get it wrong.
21:46:41 [vhardy]
yk: I think that browsers should not expose a property if they do not implement it.
21:46:52 [darobin]
chris: how many browsers do you think there are?
21:47:03 [darobin]
yk: there are many but only few that people care about
21:47:09 [darobin]
... opera is the bottom line
21:47:17 [darobin]
... there's no one who can address below opera
21:47:28 [darobin]
... a lot of people try to make browsers, few succeed
21:47:49 [darobin]
pi: being able to define what feat detect strategy in the spec would be ideal
21:48:22 [darobin]
... so that it won't false positive
21:48:36 [npdoty]
robin: could we collaborate on a best practices document for specification writers? (on things like feature detection in specs)
21:48:54 [darobin]
heycam: webidl could do that
21:49:02 [darobin]
... don't know if we need to do that in the spec
21:49:13 [darobin]
... not sure if editors are more informed
21:49:24 [darobin]
yk: it should be a spec failure to do it wrong
21:49:40 [darobin]
[scribe lost in fast discussion]
21:49:49 [darobin]
yk: I think that browsers are responsive to bugs
21:49:59 [darobin]
js: I think I'm with you
21:50:07 [ernesto_jimenez]
ernesto_jimenez has joined #jquery
21:50:08 [darobin]
... for functions it's easy, for events it's harder
21:50:09 [npdoty]
... and that browser vendors think that a violation of the spec is a bug
21:50:17 [darobin]
yk: yes, we need something for events
21:50:42 [darobin]
nm: there are certain things where you need total buy-in, but in this case even partial buy-in is already a win
21:51:08 [darobin]
... if it becomes part of the folklore it will become self-sustaining
21:51:39 [darobin]
james: one problem with things like hasFeature is that there's an incentive for vendors to do it wrong
21:51:52 [darobin]
yk: but the disincentive is that you break a lot of sites
21:52:16 [darobin]
js: it is a real problem, we've seen browsers implement new features by just passing feat detect
21:52:23 [darobin]
... since it's new, not breaking the web doesn't apply
21:52:40 [darobin]
yk: the solution to that is using modernizr deep testing
21:52:44 [jrossi2]
q+ shepazu
21:52:48 [darobin]
js: so html5test doesn't do that
21:53:08 [npdoty]
21:53:15 [darobin]
james: feel bad about using a real example
21:53:27 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #jquery
21:53:39 [npdoty]
q+ shepazu
21:53:42 [darobin]
yk: we're all on the same side
21:53:43 [lgombos]
21:54:11 [darobin]
yk: the competitors to the web platform don't have this problem, can we agree to fix this?
21:54:16 [darobin]
js: I think we had
21:54:40 [darobin]
the problem is partial implementation
21:54:59 [darobin]
ds: in d3ev we tried to go to fine grained feat detect but it wasn't very popular
21:55:08 [npdoty]
ack shepazu
21:55:15 [darobin]
js: I think that putting this stuff in the spec will take us already far
21:55:24 [darobin]
... I do really like that idea
21:55:26 [lgombos]
21:55:48 [darobin]
pi: specs don't capture enough of the rationale
21:55:58 [darobin]
... devs are reverse engineering what a feature affords us
21:56:07 [darobin]
... because they don't read the standards lists
21:56:19 [jrossi2]
It's not perfect, but this was somewhat on that idea of sub feature / behavioral detection:
21:56:23 [darobin]
... leaving out the UCs means that devs miss great features
21:56:30 [darobin]
... more complex examples help a lot
21:56:42 [darobin]
... written UCs would help
21:57:30 [darobin]
... (shows F:D&S)
21:57:38 [npdoty]
21:57:50 [darobin]
robin: we should get devs to send us UCs so that we can paste them into the specs
21:58:17 [darobin]
yk: the discussion over the hidden attribute should be summarised in the spec because it makes sense to understand what it's good for
21:58:27 [darobin]
ds: if only so taht people stop asking the same question
21:58:59 [darobin]
pi: we asked on twitter what bugs people wanted fixed
21:59:10 [darobin]
... got 300 devs, some terrible, some really good
21:59:32 [darobin]
yk: (list on screen)
21:59:37 [npdoty]
21:59:47 [darobin]
... a lot of big features like appcache
22:00:04 [darobin]
... get into the spec and implemented before devs have had a chance to figure out that it's broken
22:00:18 [darobin]
... that feedback should happen earlier and better
22:00:48 [darobin]
chris: you seem like that prime candidates for test writing, we're trying to do more and more tests
22:01:22 [darobin]
js: I'm not actually sure that this solution is fixing the problem
22:01:49 [darobin]
yk: if there's no adoption, if people have events to discuss the issues, it should be considered feedback
22:02:22 [darobin]
.... also, there's often a lot of pushback when the feature has already been implemented
22:02:37 [darobin]
yk: it would be great if there were a forum for developers to say when something is broken
22:02:57 [npdoty]
s/forum/W3C forum/
22:03:05 [darobin]
... don't specs need multiple implementations
22:03:19 [darobin]
js: yes, but if the implementation has shipped too long ago, it's hard or impossible to ship
22:03:36 [darobin]
yk: if would be good if devs could play with the feature before it goes to W3C
22:03:53 [darobin]
james: being in a spec isn't fatal
22:04:05 [darobin]
... what's fatal is when people depend on that feature
22:04:17 [darobin]
... we could maybe change appcache because no one is using it
22:04:31 [darobin]
yk: qSA is a great example of something that's broken
22:05:14 [darobin]
js: I agree, we need input from implementers and authors
22:05:17 [tobie]
22:05:27 [darobin]
... maybe we're trying in the wrong way
22:05:56 [noah]
noah has joined #jquery
22:05:58 [noah]
22:06:01 [noah]
22:06:23 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #jquery
22:06:28 [npdoty]
22:06:49 [darobin]
ds: we need to move on, great discussion we should cover more ground
22:06:51 [Suresh]
Suresh has joined #jquery
22:06:52 [npdoty]
ack tobie
22:06:57 [shepazu]
22:07:20 [darobin]
tobie: the problem boils down to the fact that devs want to use stuff before they go mainstream, but once they use it vendors can't change it
22:07:25 [shepazu]
22:07:26 [darobin]
... we need to find a way to fix this
22:07:39 [npdoty]
ack noah
22:07:41 [darobin]
nm: my point is similar, hard to hit sweet spot
22:07:55 [darobin]
... seems like appcache might be okay there
22:08:03 [dowan_]
dowan_ has joined #jquery
22:08:20 [darobin]
... in Geo that wasn't the case, when the spec went out for comments there were already too many sites using the stuff
22:08:34 [darobin]
... I wasn't wrong tecnically, but they couldn't change
22:08:39 [darobin]
yk: same with qSA
22:09:05 [darobin]
ds: the tail is wagging the dog here, content is easier to change
22:09:37 [darobin]
nm: I think it would be good if the community would push us to a better situation
22:09:44 [shepazu]
22:09:50 [darobin]
yk: I think that we should use vendor prefixes properly, make a better contract
22:10:14 [darobin]
js: we need devs involved earlier, how to do it is a harder problem
22:10:32 [Suresh]
Would having JQuery submit test cases help?
22:10:38 [darobin]
ACTION: Robin to coordinate with pi and yk to get a BP document about feature detection
22:11:08 [darobin]
yk: try to get a group together around this
22:11:22 [darobin]
chris: write tests
22:11:35 [darobin]
tobie: this can't just be about devs, but also vendors and many others
22:12:13 [darobin]
yk: I would be submitting test for things that we can't do but should
22:12:32 [darobin]
ACTION: Robin to look into creating a CG for library developers, browsers, editors to communicate
22:12:51 [darobin]
pi: we're coordinating with other libraries to move forward
22:12:59 [darobin]
... we have a mailing list
22:13:06 [darobin]
... we have GH issue tracker
22:13:08 [noah]
My particular point was: yes, having good implementations ahead of frozen specs is very important, but conversely it is very desirable to publish reasonably good drafts of specifications\ for community comment >before< the code is de facto frozen by too widespread adoption of the early implementations.
22:13:40 [darobin]
(showing examples from the issue tracker)
22:13:55 [wycats]
darobin: +1
22:14:25 [darobin]
pi: scaling the group, need to identify champions for specific features
22:14:40 [darobin]
ACTION: Robin to look into using GH for spec development
22:14:57 [darobin]
yk: the ML has evolved into a safer place for devs to make feature proposals
22:15:11 [shepazu]
Please support this group… need 4 others
22:15:13 [noah]
Dumb question: which ML?
22:15:14 [darobin]
... people find it hard to go to public-webapps because they're afraid to look stupid there
22:15:43 [tobie]
tobie has joined #jquery
22:16:12 [darobin]
pi: we want to show the voice of the devs
22:16:22 [darobin]
... reviewing and submitting test cases
22:16:25 [wycats]!forum/jquery-standards
22:16:42 [darobin]
... I don't think devs realise that tests are written in the language of web devs, when specs aren't
22:16:54 [darobin]
yk: getting specs to link to tests
22:17:17 [darobin]
js: implementing a feature is 50% writing tests — if the tests are already there we get there faster
22:17:46 [darobin]
??: how do we get the feedback from non-English speakers
22:18:02 [darobin]
... but some features like bidi needs to be from native devs of those languages
22:18:15 [darobin]
ds: having them write tests would already help a lot
22:18:22 [myakura]
22:18:24 [darobin]
james: very much in favour of tests
22:18:37 [darobin]
... they should be in the w3c framework
22:18:57 [darobin]
(global agreement to move in that direction)
22:19:19 [noah]
Tnx (oooh...#! URI!)
22:19:35 [krisk]
22:19:51 [krisk]
has all the info you need to submit tests to the HTML WG
22:19:55 [darobin]
pi: one of the things that's kind of blocked devs is that lists are overwhelming
22:20:05 [darobin]
js: too many emails, or too high requirements?
22:20:07 [darobin]
all: both
22:20:24 [shepazu]
(we need to make it clear that tests are welcome from everyone, and have a review process)
22:20:32 [shepazu]
22:20:32 [darobin]
yk: it's easy to bring up ideas but then it devolves into implementation discussions, devs lose track/interest
22:20:34 [shepazu]
22:20:45 [darobin]
pi: call for ideas
22:20:53 [darobin]
ds: I have a proposal
22:21:08 [darobin]
... having advocates who can go out there in the community and help drive the ideas they get there
22:21:17 [darobin]
[so more like ambassadors]
22:21:34 [darobin]
... it may seem silly but I see no other way
22:21:55 [darobin]
rn: the vendors already have dev events where they get feedback
22:22:09 [wycats]
something like Chrome DevRel for W3C
22:22:12 [darobin]
... can't we have that for W3C?
22:22:21 [darobin]
ds: W3C Conf!
22:22:37 [darobin]
... first year we're doing it we're still learning
22:22:40 [npdoty], discount code "tpac"
22:22:52 [darobin]
... next year will be more about feedback
22:23:22 [darobin]
... we can also have smaller things
22:23:23 [dowan_]
dowan_ has joined #jquery
22:23:35 [darobin]
chris: there's a lot of devs
22:23:37 [npdoty]
ack shepazu
22:23:38 [darobin]
... millions!
22:23:52 [darobin]
... I'd love to say that I listen to all bugs from devs
22:24:08 [darobin]
... I thikn that participating in the w3c public lists is good because it gets back to it
22:24:18 [darobin]
yk: I thikn that devs of popular libs have super useful information
22:25:06 [darobin]
??: it could be useful to organise money for great demos, would help everyone
22:25:23 [npdoty]
22:25:23 [wycats]
22:25:41 [wycats]
22:25:43 [myakura]
rrsagent, make logs public
22:26:12 [myakura]
Meeting: What jquery and js developers want from web stds.
22:26:12 [krisk] is the URL :)
22:26:28 [npdoty]
Chair: shepazu, yk, pi
22:26:42 [npdoty]
Meeting: jQuery Standards breakout session
22:26:48 [npdoty]
rrsagent, draft minutes
22:26:48 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate npdoty
22:27:07 [dowan]
dowan has joined #jquery
22:28:25 [myakura]
22:28:33 [myakura]
rrsagent, make minutes
22:28:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate myakura
22:31:55 [kensaku]
kensaku has joined #jquery
22:39:40 [ernesto_jimenez]
ernesto_jimenez has joined #jquery
22:40:26 [krisk]
krisk has joined #jquery
22:40:50 [krisk]
krisk has joined #jquery
22:41:50 [evanli]
evanli has joined #jquery
22:44:13 [jrossi2]
jrossi2 has joined #jquery
22:44:59 [npdoty]
npdoty has joined #jquery
22:46:39 [myakura]
myakura has joined #jquery
22:47:00 [si-wei]
si-wei has joined #jquery
22:47:22 [si-wei]
si-wei has left #jquery
22:55:08 [jrossi2]
22:55:25 [jrossi2]
23:31:48 [myakura]
myakura has left #jquery
23:38:46 [noah]
noah has joined #jquery
23:54:23 [kensaku]
kensaku has joined #jquery
23:57:49 [darobin]
darobin has joined #jquery