IRC log of html on 2015-10-28

Timestamps are in UTC.

07:09:07 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #html
07:09:07 [RRSAgent]
logging to
07:09:16 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #html
07:09:37 [LJWatson]
Meeting: Future of HTML (TPAC)
07:09:45 [myakura]
myakura has joined #html
07:09:53 [adrianba]
adrianba has joined #html
07:11:02 [jet]
jet has joined #html
07:11:11 [chaals]
chaals has joined #html
07:11:32 [chaals]
chaals has changed the topic to: "Future of HTML at W3C"
07:12:23 [LJWatson]
CMN: This is one of many discussions about the future of HTML at W3C.
07:12:35 [YusukeN]
YusukeN has joined #html
07:12:36 [Kepeng]
Kepeng has joined #html
07:13:02 [annevk]
annevk has joined #html
07:13:06 [yuwei]
yuwei has joined #html
07:13:07 [xiaoqian]
xiaoqian has joined #html
07:13:32 [LJWatson]
... The Web Platform (WP) WG has been created.
07:13:38 [rus]
rus has joined #html
07:14:30 [LJWatson]
... HTML continues to exist, but the HTML spec is in scope for WP now.
07:14:33 [ymasao]
ymasao has joined #html
07:14:48 [jeff]
jeff has joined #html
07:15:02 [LJWatson]
... The question is - What do we do with HTML?
07:15:37 [LJWatson]
... The last couple of years were focused on shipping 5.0.
07:15:57 [LJWatson]
... Then we fell out of the habit of working on HTML.
07:15:59 [shepazu]
07:16:14 [LJWatson]
... There is a draft 5.1 spec.
07:16:19 [nsakai]
nsakai has joined #html
07:16:37 [LJWatson]
... It's produced through a painful process. Editing the spec is hard work, and we'd like to change that.
07:16:39 [Yuma]
Yuma has joined #html
07:17:19 [LJWatson]
... Other questions - What's broken in HTML? What's missing from HTML?
07:17:28 [LJWatson]
... What bugs need to be fixed?
07:17:35 [wydong_CM]
wydong_CM has joined #html
07:17:52 [LJWatson]
... The answer is that quite a bit is broken, like some of the forms stuff introduced to 5.0.
07:18:14 [YusukeN_]
YusukeN_ has joined #html
07:18:15 [LJWatson]
... There are bugs with features like accesskey.
07:18:42 [LJWatson]
... There may be new things we want to add, like the draft proposal for panels.
07:19:10 [plh]
plh has joined #html
07:19:32 [kokabe]
kokabe has joined #html
07:19:34 [LJWatson]
... We want to hear from you what you think we should be doing?
07:19:48 [adrianba]
07:19:51 [adrianba]
ack next
07:20:13 [paulc]
paulc has joined #html
07:20:19 [paulc]
present+ paulc
07:20:19 [LJWatson]
DS: We need documentation so people can understand how new features get added to HTML.
07:20:31 [LJWatson]
... What can be accomplised, what the constraints are etc.
07:20:41 [adrianba]
07:20:58 [d_ozawa0528]
d_ozawa0528 has joined #html
07:21:00 [LJWatson]
CMN: You need to show that there is interest in your proposed idea.
07:21:14 [Hax]
Hax has joined #html
07:21:22 [jay]
jay has joined #html
07:21:24 [LJWatson]
... The Web Incubator (WICG) has been created to do this.
07:21:33 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
07:21:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
07:22:00 [LJWatson]
... There are constraints. You have to have stuff that's in scope, but it's a broad scope.
07:22:43 [sam_]
sam_ has joined #html
07:23:16 [hta]
hta has joined #html
07:23:38 [paulJeong]
paulJeong has joined #html
07:23:47 [LJWatson]
AB: The charter for WP explicitly calls out that new proposals should go through some incubation, either in WICG or somewhere else.
07:24:42 [LJWatson]
... As a rep for Microsoft, one thing we want to see in HTML is a place for us to identify and discuss issues that we see affecting real websites - causing browser interoperability problems.
07:25:34 [LJWatson]
... We want a venue to discuss these issues.
07:25:52 [karl]
karl has joined #html
07:25:56 [karl]
07:26:02 [chaals]
ack adr
07:26:04 [LJWatson]
ack ad
07:26:10 [ivan_]
ivan_ has joined #html
07:26:44 [LJWatson]
KD: We're doing the same thing as Mozilla.
07:26:54 [plh]
ack kar
07:27:02 [LJWatson]
... We're noticing differences in implementations, sometimes bcause properties are not well described in the spec.
07:27:45 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #html
07:27:49 [LJWatson]
... From our stats, if we don't use vendor prefixes (for CSS transitions for example) things break.
07:27:49 [chaals]
07:28:07 [LJWatson]
... We've created a compatibility project on Github.
07:28:25 [LJWatson]
... So we can bring these issues to the WG.
07:29:08 [LJWatson]
CMN: We need to do bug fixing, and ship that.
07:29:08 [chaals]
ack me
07:29:31 [LJWatson]
DS: It's clear implementors are interested in talking about existing features especially those that cause problems.
07:29:45 [karl]
07:29:46 [LJWatson]
... Other people in the room are interested in proposing new work, like panels.
07:30:02 [LJWatson]
... What can we do to get new work?
07:30:07 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
07:30:07 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
07:30:27 [LJWatson]
CMN: Something like Web Components make it possible to prototype and test proposed implementations.
07:31:19 [LJWatson]
... If we identify common features being created in Web Components, it signals patterns that could be made native to HTML.
07:33:01 [LJWatson]
MW: To answer Doug, you take a new idea hopefully with prollyfill prototypes, convince people it's valuable. Go through the intent to migrate form to document the business case for the proposal.
07:33:19 [LJWatson]
... At that point the proposal enters the queue to enter the WG.
07:33:28 [LJWatson]
DS: But what is the thing that will convince people to do that?
07:33:40 [LJWatson]
MW: The deciders of whether it'll go into the HTML spec is the W WG.
07:33:56 [LJWatson]
07:34:18 [LJWatson]
07:34:40 [LJWatson]
CMN: If you come up with a good idea but there is no implementor interest, you'll have a hard time making the case for it.
07:34:53 [YusukeN_JP]
YusukeN_JP has joined #html
07:35:02 [LJWatson]
... There are other paths. If there is a widely used code pattern that may be enough to make the case to implementors.
07:35:12 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
07:35:12 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
07:35:23 [zqzhang]
zqzhang has joined #html
07:35:24 [LJWatson]
... One of the constraints is that the proposal has to be relevant.
07:35:38 [LJWatson]
... Adding a new feature is notably harder than fixing a bug where something is broken.
07:36:37 [LJWatson]
Paul: When I was developing mobile game content in HTML5 there were problems. Even same device and same OS, but different display, there were bugs.
07:36:52 [LJWatson]
... There are device comparability issues at the moment.
07:37:12 [LJWatson]
... Device manufacturers should also take an interest in the HTML spec.
07:37:41 [LJWatson]
... As the mobile industry is growing, analytics tell us that a lot of mobile development is platform native.
07:37:48 [LJWatson]
... Can HTML5 overcome that?
07:38:11 [Hax]
What do u think about ppk's view?
07:38:20 [LJWatson]
CMN: Will HTML5 gain market share over native languages on mobile?
07:38:43 [LJWatson]
... Who knows? The market share will shift, but it doesn't seem that HTML is going to disappear.
07:38:53 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
07:38:53 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
07:39:24 [LJWatson]
... It isn't our job to owrry about what the mobile platforms do. We can look at those platforms to see what's working well, and ask why.
07:39:54 [LJWatson]
... In HTML we stay away from saying how things should look/be displayed.
07:40:15 [LJWatson]
... So the question about some device display issuesis - where are those issues happening?
07:41:19 [LJWatson]
MW: Do you plan to document a workflow for this?
07:41:33 [LJWatson]
... If a developer is wrestling with an issue, how do they engage with the WG?
07:42:00 [LJWatson]
CMN: We do plan to document it.
07:42:17 [LJWatson]
... There is some, but it's still in development.
07:42:40 [LJWatson]
... The HTML WG historically had a heavy decision making rocess.
07:43:19 [LJWatson]
... It was easier in WebApps because they were smaller documents and specs. HTML cannot be called small.
07:43:25 [LJWatson]
... We're also learning as we go.
07:43:47 [LJWatson]
... We would like to release a version of HTML within the current charter (10 months).
07:44:08 [LJWatson]
... Not with major changes, but with bug fixes for identified issues.
07:44:21 [LJWatson]
... Having a better spec is useful.
07:44:28 [yuwei]
rrsagent, draft minutes
07:44:28 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate yuwei
07:44:30 [LJWatson]
... Possible timetable would be the middle of next year.
07:45:01 [LJWatson]
... Whether it's HTML5 with fixes, or HTML6.0 with new features is a question, and along the way we'll learn more about working with HTML.
07:45:21 [LJWatson]
... Last year at TPAC we discussed modularising the HTML spec.
07:45:51 [LJWatson]
... Thinking was that it was a god idea. But it didn't get done. The publication machinery didn't work with the concept.
07:46:13 [LJWatson]
... Do we want to continue to look at modularisation? Add modules only for new features? We don't know.
07:46:19 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
07:46:19 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
07:47:09 [LJWatson]
PC: An important question is whether you'll include extensions in the spec, or treat them as separate things.
07:47:16 [LJWatson]
CMN: That's a question for the group.
07:47:36 [LJWatson]
PC: Extensions releases the pressure of needing all the box-cars on the same train.
07:48:49 [LJWatson]
CMN: It's useful to have a concept of what HTML is currently. Instead of the living standard model.
07:49:46 [LJWatson]
... If we release a spec every 10 years that would be a failure. If we release a spec every 10 days it gets harder for developers to have a version of the spec they can work with. Somehwere in between is the sweet spot.
07:50:04 [LJWatson]
AK: Why?
07:50:14 [LJWatson]
CMN: Translation is time consuming and difficult.
07:50:46 [LJWatson]
s/AK: Why?/AVK: Why?/
07:52:02 [LJWatson]
... W3C works with the idea specs need to be stable. There are editor's drafts for the updates as they happen.
07:52:51 [LJWatson]
DS: Any thoughts on the future of HTML, rather than the process?
07:53:40 [paulc]
Open HTML5 bugs (231):
07:53:47 [LJWatson]
TL: It would be nice to start fixing the bugs.
07:54:06 [LJWatson]
... Is there anything to stop someone from proposing a fix? If not, where do I send the proposed fix?
07:54:29 [LJWatson]
CMN: We have machinery to generate the HTML spec.
07:54:39 [paulc]
HTML 5.1 setup:
07:54:41 [paulc]
07:54:57 [LJWatson]
... You can make a fix using the current publication process. It's my belief the current process is too heavy to be convenient.
07:55:09 [LJWatson]
PLH: How do you propose fixing bugs?
07:55:41 [paulc]
Open HTML.Next bugs (30):
07:55:46 [LJWatson]
CMN: We can change the current process, or we could look at the current process and we may find it isn't as difficult as we think.
07:55:50 [LJWatson]
DS: Can you own a bug?
07:56:14 [LJWatson]
CMN: Yes, and you can submit a fix - by writing a patch or even by writing an email with the information in (for small bugs).
07:56:20 [LJWatson]
TL: Then PLH ill fix it?
07:56:48 [LJWatson]
PC: we need to fix the process. There are 250+ bugs, plus others in different components and stil more in the WHATWG repo.
07:56:58 [LJWatson]
... We don't know how important those bugs are.
07:57:32 [LJWatson]
... We need to figure out which bugs are causing interoperability problems, and which are valid in other ways, rahter than start an enforced bug fixing march.
07:57:43 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
07:57:43 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
07:58:26 [LJWatson]
CMN: There won't be a forced march because we don't have anyone to force!
07:58:46 [LJWatson]
MW: For the last three years there was a full time person who was the HTML editor.
07:58:55 [LJWatson]
... Right now there is a handful of volunteers.
07:59:04 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
07:59:04 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
07:59:18 [LJWatson]
CMN: We need to make the diting process easy for those editors.
07:59:43 [LJWatson]
07:59:45 [paulc]
Karl, thanks.
08:00:08 [karl]
it's not complete but it could be a start.
08:00:34 [LJWatson]
TL: Do we need to be concerned about having the document diverge from the WHATWG copu?
08:01:04 [LJWatson]
TO: I've been splitting bugs in WHATWG and that propagates to W3C.
08:01:20 [LJWatson]
CMN: The issue with the mechanism is that it makes editing the W3C spec difficult.
08:01:33 [LJWatson]
... Also raises the question of whether we want to copy WHATWG at all?
08:01:53 [LJWatson]
... One option is that we stop doing that.
08:02:14 [LJWatson]
... The specs already diverge.
08:03:02 [LJWatson]
... Do we take the hit that the specs drift slightly more apart?
08:03:12 [LJWatson]
TL: That would break Ted's approach?
08:03:15 [LJWatson]
CMN: It would.
08:03:24 [paulc]
I encourage people to read Robin's plan that the HTML WG Chairs presented to the W3C AB in January.
08:03:28 [jeff]
08:03:28 [LJWatson]
TO: Right now the mechanism works.
08:03:52 [LJWatson]
ack pau
08:04:32 [LJWatson]
PC: What works for HTML5 which has a large interested community, is making sure you identify the imortant questions that need to be answered - then get people's opinions.
08:04:50 [LJWatson]
... The link ^^ is to Robin's HTML plan. It considers many of these questions.
08:04:57 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
08:04:57 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
08:05:12 [LJWatson]
... Should we be date driven?
08:05:29 [LJWatson]
... It is a tar ball of complexity!
08:05:50 [LJWatson]
JJ: Responding to Travis' question.
08:06:13 [LJWatson]
... What would implementor's like us to do? we have people from Google, Mozilla, Apple and Microsoft here.
08:06:40 [LJWatson]
... Editor's drafts that track/update daily/weekly/monthly? A 5.1 release?
08:06:56 [LJWatson]
ack jeff
08:07:10 [karl]
08:07:19 [LJWatson]
TL: At MS we tend to go to the WHATWG spec because it's current, and that's what you want when fixing interoperability bugs.
08:07:45 [LJWatson]
... Don't have an opinion on the publishing process. But it can be grief.
08:08:28 [LJWatson]
TL: The WHATWG version feels like an editor's draft.
08:08:57 [LJWatson]
JF: Why not bring those into the W3C version?
08:09:28 [LJWatson]
TL: anything that makes the task of putting the spec through IPR more difficult is not good.
08:09:33 [LJWatson]
ack kar
08:10:22 [LJWatson]
KD: The WHATWG repo (link ^^) is a good place to track issues.
08:10:48 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #html
08:10:57 [LJWatson]
CMN: Yandex is a browser vendor and content producer. We don't really care about spec divergence all that much.
08:11:07 [LJWatson]
... We wnt the spec to reflect reality though.
08:11:16 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
08:11:16 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
08:11:51 [LJWatson]
... For some of what we do the WHATWG spec is terrible - it's difficult for someone who uses HTML but doesn't write specs to understand.
08:12:13 [karl]
s/link ^^/ /
08:12:37 [LJWatson]
... We think IPR is important.
08:12:43 [LJWatson]
... We like the idea of smaller pieces.
08:13:05 [karl]
s/to track issues/to track issues only for broken stuff. Contributions are more than welcome. And it's small./
08:13:08 [LJWatson]
zakim queue?
08:13:21 [LJWatson]
CMN: How do people look up HTML info?
08:13:40 [LJWatson]
JJ: Want to hear from others in the room.
08:14:02 [LJWatson]
JG: At Mozilla we tell developers to look at the WHATWG spec, because otherwise they'll update something that's out of date.
08:14:36 [LJWatson]
JV: It's welcome to hear MS looks at the WHATWG spec.
08:14:47 [sam_]
sam_ has joined #html
08:14:51 [LJWatson]
... We also think the IPR W3C offers is valuable, but it needs to move faster.
08:15:11 [LJWatson]
CMN: We hear from WHATWG that they want us to stop copying from them.
08:15:36 [LJWatson]
... Do people here feel we should copy because there is value in IPR?
08:15:57 [LJWatson]
... Are you encouraging us to copy it, or asking us to provide IPR without using the text we want protected, or something else?
08:16:12 [LJWatson]
JV: There is spec work outside W3C that allows normative references.
08:16:24 [LJWatson]
CMN: If you reference the IPR doesn't cover.
08:16:52 [LJWatson]
MW: One way forward would be for WHATWG to operate in a way that created stable snapshots that could be put through IPR.
08:17:06 [LJWatson]
... Consensus is also something to consider.
08:17:21 [LJWatson]
... Do we have to revisit this philosophical divide?
08:18:07 [LJWatson]
CMN: One option would be for WHATWG to come and work inside W3C. Tht seems unlikely.
08:18:19 [LJWatson]
TL: It would be good if we could reach agreement with WHATWG.
08:18:35 [LJWatson]
... I would like to contribute. I don't, but want to.
08:18:42 [LJWatson]
PLH: What stops you?
08:18:57 [LJWatson]
TL: I don't want to give away IP protection for work not covered by W3C IPR.
08:19:03 [karl]
rrsagent, where am i?
08:19:03 [RRSAgent]
08:19:17 [LJWatson]
CMN: I would like to contribute, butmy experience is not easy to contribute to - evne in comparison to HTML at W3C.
08:19:23 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
08:19:23 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
08:19:33 [LJWatson]
TL: You can get work done.
08:19:51 [LJWatson]
MW: Was that a reference to the previous editor of WHATWG, or the current editorial team?
08:20:13 [jgraham]
jgraham has joined #html
08:20:28 [LJWatson]
... The process of working on the spec is easier in WHATWG.
08:21:07 [LJWatson]
JG: With the new process we've tried to get new contributors involved.
08:21:34 [LJWatson]
... When they've found problems the WHATWG documentation is updated.
08:21:59 [LJWatson]
PC: Hate to remind people of history... the reason Robin's orting system is so broken is because of the differences between the two spec versions.
08:22:24 [LJWatson]
... You can't just pul the WHATWG spec into W3C because it would break years of HTML WG consensus.
08:22:34 [LJWatson]
... It may be feasible, but if so it should be done intentionally.
08:22:35 [jeff]
08:22:51 [LJWatson]
... The tooling also makes editing the 5.1 spec essentially impossible.
08:23:31 [LJWatson]
... Ted have you ever checked a fix submitted in WHATWG to see that it makes it through to 5.1?
08:23:47 [LJWatson]
TO: Most recently I've done things on canvas, so not sure.
08:24:04 [LJWatson]
PC: so that's separate from the HTML spec.
08:24:25 [LJWatson]
JJ: Seems we agree on a lot of things.
08:24:56 [LJWatson]
... We want a very responsive publication process. We want patent protection. We want to solve portaility problems.
08:25:26 [LJWatson]
... I'm hearing tha... We don't have a plan to get done what we all want to get done.
08:25:42 [LJWatson]
... Suggest the chairs and team try to bring together the right set of people to build that plan. What are we waiting for?
08:26:03 [LJWatson]
CMN: We wanted to listen to what people think.
08:26:12 [LJWatson]
... Yes, we need to develop a plan.
08:27:08 [LJWatson]
NS: There are differences but most developers don't know and don't care.
08:27:24 [LJWatson]
... browser developers in China also don't know.
08:27:48 [LJWatson]
... It's a problem inthe process that should be resolved.
08:28:20 [LJWatson]
... What developers need is a snapshot.
08:28:41 [jeff]
08:28:43 [jeff]
ack je
08:29:45 [LJWatson]
CMN: Let's adjourn this and keep talking.
08:29:56 [LJWatson]
MW: When will be in the same room. Worth continuing the conversaion now?
08:30:16 [LJWatson]
JJ: What about the AC meetings in March?
08:30:21 [LJWatson]
PC: Not everyone will be there.
08:30:53 [LJWatson]
CMN: Retuning to the question of snapshots... what we should be publishing is what reliably works in HTML.
08:31:01 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
08:31:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
08:31:29 [LJWatson]
PC: The WG that produces the spec wasn't willing to take web cace out.
08:31:45 [LJWatson]
... So taking a knife and removing things sounds easy, but getting consensus is actually hard.
08:31:54 [LJWatson]
JJ: So why not move it to a module?
08:32:09 [rus]
rus has joined #html
08:32:19 [LJWatson]
PC: That makes modules a second class citizen - we'l make modules out of the bad things.
08:32:27 [LJWatson]
JJ: I meant that if you're making modules anyway.
08:32:33 [LJWatson]
PC: I think it's a serious mistake.
08:32:56 [LJWatson]
CMN: Yes, it's difficult to get consensus. Sometimes it includes throwing things away.
08:33:12 [LJWatson]
... Right now the WG has a mechanism for sitting down and looking at interoperability.
08:33:44 [LJWatson]
... We can say a feature works on 10 mobile devices, 6 desktop browsers... that's a data driven view on HTML and provides information that's useful to devlopers.
08:33:58 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
08:33:58 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
08:34:10 [LJWatson]
PC: Can someone name me five features we got wrong?
08:34:47 [LJWatson]
CMN: I'm not saying things didn't meet exit criteria. Just that the criteria are different things to different people.
08:34:59 [LJWatson]
TL: This is sort of the approach that the Web IDL spec is taking.
08:35:16 [LJWatson]
... We want to publish levels that describe behaviours and features that are widely implemented.
08:35:32 [LJWatson]
MW: To Adrian's earlier point about what MS wants to see happen in WP WG.
08:35:48 [LJWatson]
... Find out where bugs are actually happening? In the spec? In the browser?
08:36:18 [LJWatson]
... Trying to be data driven about what works/doesn't work is something I like.
08:36:29 [LJWatson]
... Having a common HTML subset.
08:36:42 [LJWatson]
... The real HTML that works reliably on some TBD criteria.
08:36:59 [LJWatson]
... It resets the conversation between WHATWG and W3C.
08:37:09 [LJWatson]
PC: There are asperational things in WHATWG.
08:37:15 [LJWatson]
... So does W3C.
08:37:31 [Hax_]
Hax_ has joined #html
08:37:31 [LJWatson]
... Perhaps we go back to that minimal set that works.
08:37:41 [LJWatson]
PC: No-one has given me an example.
08:38:24 [LJWatson]
CMN: Not saying that the process is wrong. Saying that it worked. Things can be implemented interoperably.
08:38:50 [LJWatson]
... For example summary/details didn't go into 5.0 because although it was demonstrated that it could be implemented interoperably, it wasn't certain there would be enough.
08:39:01 [LJWatson]
PC: Two implementations isn't enough? It should be higher?
08:39:23 [LJWatson]
CMN: The criteria could be all common browsers.
08:39:47 [LJWatson]
PC: W3C and the community has a tremendous amount invested in brand HTML5.
08:40:08 [LJWatson]
... suggest you don't publish 5.1 that's smaller, but publish a profile of 5.0 that has broader and wider interoperability.
08:40:23 [LJWatson]
TL: Yes, we publish it with a different name - HTML common subset or something.
08:40:43 [yingying]
yingying has joined #html
08:41:03 [LJWatson]
MW: We've talked today about getting real world developers into these conversations.
08:41:13 [LJWatson]
CMN: We're over time. Meeting adjourned.
08:41:25 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
08:41:25 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
08:41:39 [myakura]
ljwatson, thanks for scribing!
08:41:42 [LJWatson]
chair: Chaals
08:41:47 [LJWatson]
scribenick: LJWatson
08:41:54 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
08:41:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LJWatson
09:15:24 [rus]
rus has joined #html
09:17:43 [rus_]
rus_ has joined #html
09:44:06 [rus]
rus has joined #html
10:09:13 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #html
10:34:00 [rus]
rus has joined #html
11:10:02 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #html
11:27:08 [rus]
rus has joined #html
11:42:43 [rus]
rus has joined #html
11:43:19 [karl]
karl has joined #html
11:58:27 [rus]
rus has joined #html
12:34:40 [rus]
rus has joined #html
12:41:04 [kurosawa]
kurosawa has joined #html
13:00:02 [rus]
rus has joined #html
13:35:05 [kurosawa_]
kurosawa_ has joined #html
13:41:59 [rus]
rus has joined #html
15:31:20 [rus]
rus has joined #html
16:30:37 [rus]
rus has joined #html
16:52:56 [rus]
rus has joined #html
18:35:13 [rus]
rus has joined #html
19:13:38 [rus]
rus has joined #html
19:45:57 [rus]
rus has joined #html
20:29:58 [rus]
rus has joined #html
22:00:36 [rus]
rus has joined #html
23:01:03 [hta]
hta has joined #html
23:10:58 [adrianba]
adrianba has left #html
23:18:56 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #html
23:21:36 [LJWatson]
LJWatson has joined #html
23:27:26 [rus]
rus has joined #html
23:30:30 [chaals]
chaals has joined #html
23:31:51 [rus_]
rus_ has joined #html
23:33:31 [kimwooglae]
kimwooglae has joined #html
23:35:30 [karl]
karl has joined #html
23:36:17 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #html
23:46:09 [joe]
joe has joined #html
23:48:18 [joe]
joe has left #html
23:54:42 [hwlee]
hwlee has joined #html
23:54:48 [hwlee]
hwlee has left #html