IRC log of html-wg on 2008-09-04

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:58:07 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #html-wg
15:58:07 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:58:09 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
15:58:09 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #html-wg
15:58:11 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be HTML
15:58:11 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see HTML_WG()12:00PM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
15:58:12 [trackbot]
Meeting: HTML Issue Tracking Teleconference
15:58:12 [trackbot]
Date: 04 September 2008
15:59:14 [Zakim]
HTML_WG()12:00PM has now started
15:59:21 [Zakim]
+ +2
15:59:29 [Joshue]
zakim, +2 is Joshue
15:59:29 [Zakim]
+Joshue; got it
15:59:30 [MikeSmith]
Zakim, call Mike-Mobile
15:59:30 [Zakim]
ok, MikeSmith; the call is being made
15:59:31 [Zakim]
15:59:40 [Zakim]
16:00:05 [MikeSmith]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
16:00:05 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Joshue, Mike, Laura
16:00:58 [MikeSmith]
16:01:33 [Zakim]
+ +1.425.467.aabb
16:01:34 [Zakim]
16:01:48 [MikeSmith]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
16:01:48 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Joshue, Mike, Laura, +1.425.467.aabb, Julian
16:01:51 [smedero]
Zakim, aabb is me
16:01:51 [Zakim]
+smedero; got it
16:02:01 [Zakim]
16:02:21 [hsivonen]
Zakim, P16 is me
16:02:21 [Zakim]
sorry, hsivonen, I do not recognize a party named 'P16'
16:02:48 [MikeSmith]
Zakim, ??P16 is hsivonen
16:02:48 [Zakim]
+hsivonen; got it
16:02:59 [Zakim]
16:03:13 [smedero]
smedero has left #html-wg
16:03:28 [smedero]
smedero has joined #html-wg
16:04:02 [Joshue]
zakim, mute me
16:04:02 [Zakim]
Joshue should now be muted
16:04:23 [anne]
Zakim, passcode?
16:04:23 [Zakim]
the conference code is 4865 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.117.370.6152), anne
16:04:32 [Zakim]
16:04:44 [anne]
Zakim, ??P22 is me
16:04:47 [Zakim]
+anne; got it
16:04:57 [anne]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
16:04:57 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Joshue (muted), Mike, Laura, smedero, Julian, hsivonen, DanC, anne
16:05:23 [MikeSmith]
Zakim, pick a scribe
16:05:23 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Mike
16:05:32 [MikeSmith]
scribe: anne
16:05:39 [MikeSmith]
scribenick: anne
16:06:00 [MikeSmith]
Topic: Convene and review the agenda
16:06:11 [MikeSmith]
16:06:11 [trackbot]
ISSUE-20 -- Improvements to the table-headers algorithm in the HTML 5 spec -- OPEN
16:06:11 [trackbot]
16:06:13 [anne]
MS: ISSUE-20 is on the agenda
16:06:28 [MikeSmith]
16:06:28 [trackbot]
ISSUE-54 -- difficulties generating HTML5 from XSLT -- OPEN
16:06:28 [trackbot]
16:06:37 [anne]
MS: ISSUE-54 is also on the agenda
16:06:44 [MikeSmith]
16:06:45 [trackbot]
ISSUE-55 -- head/@profile missing, but used in other specifications/formats -- RAISED
16:06:45 [trackbot]
16:06:51 [anne]
MS: and ISSUE-55
16:07:38 [anne]
MS: if we get through those we'll take a look at the tracker. Julian mentioned discussing the new void elements. Lets possibly add that
16:07:55 [anne]
MS: Chris Wilson is not here so we skip ISSUE-20 and go straight to ISSUE-54
16:08:01 [MikeSmith]
Topic: Issue 54
16:08:04 [anne]
MS: regarding XSLT
16:08:17 [Julian]
16:08:17 [trackbot]
ISSUE-54 -- difficulties generating HTML5 from XSLT -- OPEN
16:08:17 [trackbot]
16:08:22 [DanC]
Topic: ISSUE-54 html5-from-xslt
16:08:49 [anne]
MS: what change should be made to the restrictions on the DOCTYPE in HTML5 to make it possible for existing XSLT engines to output conforming HTML5
16:10:03 [anne]
MS: XSLT engines can't output <!DOCTYPE html>, but it is a conforming XML DOCTYPE.
16:10:46 [anne]
MS: the proposal, is <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC ""> or <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "some value">
16:11:13 [anne]
MS: that would help with the XML case but is not valid [scribe: not sure if that was what said]
16:11:46 [anne]
MS: I'm not sure the current text in the spec, <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "XSLT-compat"> makes sense, as it's not valid XML and might confuse people
16:11:57 [MikeSmith]
16:12:02 [DanC]
DanC has joined #html-wg
16:12:04 [cshelly]
cshelly has joined #html-wg
16:12:44 [anne]
MS: Any feedback on the current state of things?
16:12:44 [cshelly]
having phone trouble, will lurk here
16:13:07 [anne]
MS: Hixie added the "XSLT-compat" case to the spec, solely intended for XSLT tools
16:13:17 [Zakim]
16:13:24 [anne]
MS: not clear whether that's the best solution and if that helps people long term
16:13:29 [MikeSmith]
Zakim, call Mike-Mobile
16:13:29 [Zakim]
ok, MikeSmith; the call is being made
16:13:31 [Zakim]
16:14:24 [anne]
MS: need to decide whether the change is ideal or whether we should go back to what we had before, just have <!doctype html>
16:14:24 [Julian]
16:14:29 [MikeSmith]
ack Julian
16:14:36 [Zakim]
16:14:46 [anne]
JR: another option is to allow <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC ""> or <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC ''>
16:14:51 [anne]
MS: that is another option certainly
16:15:07 [anne]
MS: the reason Hixie didn't like that was that it looked "reasonable"
16:15:17 [anne]
MS: he thinks it should look "unreasonable"
16:15:48 [anne]
JR: whether it should look "unreasonable" has no consensus
16:16:00 [hsivonen]
null and "" are distinct
16:16:11 [anne]
JR: I look at it as having two ways to indicate there is no doctype
16:17:34 [anne]
MS: Hixie thinks having that gives confusion; changing the meaning of the public ID might not be good
16:17:43 [Zakim]
16:18:02 [anne]
MS: it makes DOCTYPEs less purposeful [scribe: I hope I got that correct]
16:18:21 [Zakim]
16:18:30 [anne]
JR: I don't really care whether we make it a real public ID in the historical way; I would expect there to be pushback
16:18:43 [DanC]
(email seems to be working for this issue... though perhaps I'm not reading clearly enough to see communication breakdowns.)
16:18:44 [anne]
JR: I'm open to make it simpler
16:18:57 [hsivonen]
16:19:05 [anne]
JR: I think XSLT-compat is misleading and will also cause confusing
16:19:17 [MikeSmith]
ack hsivonen
16:19:18 [anne]
MS: none of us is going to say things not said on e-mail
16:19:38 [anne]
HS: this is damned if you do, damned if you don't situation
16:19:56 [anne]
MS: adding a DOCTYPE makes things confusing, not adding one makes XSLT people annoyed
16:20:02 [anne]
16:20:33 [anne]
HS: I'm happy to flip-flop on the empty string and use XSLT-compat to make it clear it's not for most people
16:21:07 [anne]
MS: we'd only want people to use the long form if that's all their tool can
16:21:14 [hsivonen]
(not really "happy")
16:21:18 [anne]
DC: what do you mean with "we"?
16:21:30 [takkaria]
I think there's a really big problem with allowing 'public ""' in the doctype; it interacts badly with quirks mode. if xslt people want to write standards-mode content, they're better off fixing the output mode than outputting quirky content
16:21:46 [anne]
MS: I think most people want the spec to be simple and not provide options unless necessary
16:21:51 [Julian]
16:21:57 [MikeSmith]
ack Julian
16:21:57 [hsivonen]
takkaria, which browser?
16:21:58 [anne]
MS: this might be a case where it is not necessary to add complication
16:22:18 [hsivonen]
16:22:19 [DanC]
takkaria, is the interaction with quirks mode in email? I missed that. That seems more significant than aesthetic arguments.
16:22:22 [MikeSmith]
takkaria: if you have data for that, please mail it to the list
16:22:25 [DanC]
16:22:28 [MikeSmith]
ack hsivonen
16:22:38 [anne]
JR: If the goal is to have one notation for the DOCTYPE and another goal is to allow XSLT to generate HTML5 we could pick the longer
16:22:50 [MikeSmith]
16:22:58 [MikeSmith]
ack DanC
16:23:02 [anne]
HS: I don't think we should make it longer just for XSLT
16:23:14 [takkaria]
(I thought it had already been mentioned on the list; has it not?)
16:23:21 [anne]
(Also, some optional features of XSLT do allow <!doctype html>.)
16:23:48 [DanC]
<takkaria> I think there's a really big problem with allowing 'public ""' in the doctype; it interacts badly with quirks mode. if xslt people want to write standards-mode content, they're better off fixing the output mode than outputting quirky content
16:23:51 [hsivonen]
takkaria, my testing showed it was OK with modes
16:24:58 [anne]
MS: I want to close this topic for now as there's no new information and not close to a resolution
16:25:13 [anne]
16:25:13 [trackbot]
ISSUE-55 -- head/@profile missing, but used in other specifications/formats -- RAISED
16:25:13 [trackbot]
16:25:16 [MikeSmith]
Topic: Issue 55 (the profile attribute)
16:25:18 [anne]
Topic: <head profile>
16:25:44 [DanC]
editor's rationale from 6 May:
16:25:58 [anne]
MS: <head profile> is not part of HTML5 and there hasn't been much new e-mail on this topic
16:26:08 [anne]
MS: some new data on the case of making it conformant
16:26:16 [DanC]
dissenting argument from 9 Jul 2007:
16:26:21 [anne]
(scribe hasn't seen data that suggests it was used in a conforming way)
16:26:59 [anne]
MS: Some popular WordPress themes or plugins are generating <head profile>
16:27:21 [anne]
[Can't be removed by a WordPress upgrade.]
16:27:58 [anne]
MS: It seems there's not much support for re-adding profile to the HTML vocabulary
16:28:03 [MikeSmith]
16:28:15 [Julian]
+1 to DanC
16:28:20 [anne]
DC: I think the cost is small and the benefit is to be seen; I said this before
16:28:41 [anne]
DC: I'm waiting for a survey so I can formally object and we can move on
16:28:58 [anne]
MS: I'll put the question to the group
16:29:42 [Julian]
16:29:52 [MikeSmith]
ack Julian
16:29:57 [anne]
MS: [explains various options for the survey]
16:30:11 [Julian]
16:30:18 [anne]
DC: I think it's up for the chairs to determine whether the editor made all the considerations
16:30:22 [MikeSmith]
ack Julian
16:30:27 [anne]
DC: up to the chairs to say that a discussion is done
16:30:49 [anne]
JR: I'd don't like to judge the editor, but the technical issue itself
16:31:23 [anne]
MS: I think it's useful for people in the group to say whether or not they trust the editor
16:32:19 [anne]
MS: it's not clear-cut who's right and we have to make some kind of decisions
16:32:27 [hsivonen]
16:32:29 [DanC]
(I think the question should just be "shall HTML 5 have no profile attribute on the head element?")
16:32:51 [anne]
MS: in most WGs it's the chairs, but for better or worse a lot of the decisions of things in the spec now have been made
16:33:13 [DanC]
(no reason to continue/condone the "or worse" parts of the process)
16:33:25 [anne]
JR: I don't think it's a good idea to conflate both issues as it might effect the outcome
16:34:00 [anne]
MS: That's the point, we want to know why people say something
16:34:17 [anne]
DC: I don't think that's possible
16:34:28 [anne]
DC: if they don't give rationale, don't consider them
16:34:35 [deane]
deane has joined #html-wg
16:34:41 [anne]
MS: I will talk about this with Chris and Dan as this is a process issue
16:35:18 [hsivonen]
I'm in q
16:35:33 [DanC]
ack hsivonen
16:35:40 [MikeSmith^]
MikeSmith^ has joined #html-wg
16:36:17 [anne]
HS: I'd prefer to defer the question on profile until after we've considered a way to have a category of attributes not to recommend to authors of new documents but not forbid
16:36:37 [Julian]
16:36:41 [MikeSmith^]
16:36:58 [anne]
HS: allowing it in the validator is easy, but there's a complexity cost for authors. Microformats authors might care for it, but then consumers don't, etc.
16:37:53 [anne]
MS: How do long do you think the discussion for the other attributes will take?
16:38:20 [anne]
HS: I've no idea whether there's a satisfactory solution to that problem. (Category of conforming non-endorsed attributes.)
16:38:26 [DanC]
(I suppose it's OK with me to move the profile attribute back to "raised" while the discussion of not-very-nice attributes; the recent data HS collected certainly makes me wonder about various things.)
16:38:42 [Julian]
16:38:45 [DanC]
(I'm also OK to have the issue closed for now and re-open it if new data comes up)
16:38:50 [MikeSmith^]
16:38:59 [adele]
adele has joined #html-wg
16:39:09 [Julian]
(it would be good if the Microformats community would come up with an answer whether or not to @profile)
16:39:17 [anne]
MS: I would like a decision
16:39:56 [MikeSmith^]
16:40:05 [anne]
MS: anything else on profile? move on?
16:40:22 [DanC]
(I recently checked in #microformats and didn't find much support for @profile; cf )
16:40:33 [anne]
MS: we could go to the tracker agenda but I don't see anything urgent
16:40:43 [anne]
MS: we could talk about void elements
16:40:46 [anne]
Topic: new void elements
16:41:06 [Julian]
16:41:08 [anne]
(<script></script> is an empty element, which would be a confusing term to use therefore)
16:41:10 [MikeSmith^]
ack Julian
16:41:18 [anne]
Zakim, who makes noise?
16:41:18 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, anne.
16:41:40 [hsivonen]
Julian, it would be nice if microformats had a specced processing model and conformance reqs
16:42:08 [smedero]
Zakim, mute me
16:42:08 [Zakim]
smedero should now be muted
16:42:20 [anne]
JR: Even if we did the DOCTYPE thing for XSLT, they still wouldn't do the new elements; they also wouldn't do SVG and MathML
16:42:23 [DanC]
16:42:45 [DanC]
q+ to ask for pointers to earlier discussion of void elements
16:43:14 [anne]
JR: Users of HTML have no information on whether an element is a void element.
16:43:32 [Zakim]
16:43:39 [hsivonen]
16:43:51 [anne]
JR: Having a fixed set of void elements from HTML4 was nice, but now all those sets over the Web need to be updated. Would like to have a story that also works for HTML5+n
16:43:52 [MikeSmith^]
ack DanC
16:43:52 [Zakim]
DanC, you wanted to ask for pointers to earlier discussion of void elements
16:44:07 [anne]
DC: I find it hard to believe that since 2004 this hasn't already come up
16:44:13 [Zakim]
16:44:47 [MikeSmith^]
anne: I don't have pointers, but was seen as a minor issue by browsers at least
16:45:10 [MikeSmith^]
16:45:13 [anne]
AvK: and also for authors, in terms of backwards compatibility
16:45:34 [MikeSmith^]
ack hsivonen
16:46:07 [anne]
HS: I had considered this issue before but I didn't see it as a big deal. I would write a serializer with a liberal license that other people then can use.
16:46:19 [anne]
HS: Just make enough HTML libraries and problem solved.
16:46:55 [Julian]
16:47:16 [anne]
HS: I thought everyone would bring their own serializer. I can see a problem here, but I don't think it's as big as JR makes it seem.
16:47:28 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #html-wg
16:47:31 [anne]
HS: These void elements also don't come up all the time. There's been a ten year break or so...
16:47:47 [MikeSmith^]
q+ to mention cost of adding support for new void elements to libraries and other tools
16:48:22 [anne]
HS: I can see how the implied paragraph end tag and void elements is in theory bad, but I'm not sure if it's really a problem in practice
16:48:31 [MikeSmith^]
ack Julian
16:49:24 [anne]
JR: I assume HSs' serializer also has a hardwired set of elements. Whatever seralizer you take it will generate a start and end tag and user agents will have to deal with it.
16:49:43 [anne]
JR: I'm totally sure that eg <eventsource></eventsource> will turn up in the real Web
16:50:10 [anne]
DC: The spec already deals with every input stream, right?
16:50:17 [DanC]
(I think whether it's void or not is a pretty small part of the design of new elements)
16:50:30 [anne]
HS: the spec covers parsing yes, but eg. <command></command> is non-conforming for text/html
16:51:01 [MikeSmith^]
ack MikeSmith^
16:51:01 [Zakim]
MikeSmith^, you wanted to mention cost of adding support for new void elements to libraries and other tools
16:51:33 [anne]
JR: If there's no technical problem it's just believe
16:51:58 [hsivonen]
16:52:04 [Laura]
Steve and Gez have conficting meetings. Sends regrets.
16:52:31 [Laura]
regrets+ SteveF
16:52:38 [Laura]
regrets+ GezLemon
16:53:01 [anne]
AvK: it gives confusion with <br>, where <br></br> does different things, authors will get confused because they think they can put stuff inside, updating a fixed list is small
16:53:24 [anne]
JR: the problem is to deploy those libraries
16:54:09 [MikeSmith^]
ack hsivonen
16:54:17 [anne]
MS: those elements are not supported currently, so it will take some time anyway
16:54:45 [anne]
HS: two void elements XSLT doesn't deal with are already widely deployed, <embed> and to lesser extent <source>
16:55:18 [anne]
HS: the question is whether we should introduce new void elements in HTML5
16:55:37 [anne]
HS: should we have <command>command-type</command> and <eventsource></eventsource> instead?
16:55:58 [deane]
anne: I think allowing <command></command> and <eventsource></eventsource> would be a bad move
16:56:07 [anne]
HS: so the question is whether the HTML5 spec is the last spec to introduce new void elements (<source> and <embed>), or will we have new elements?
16:56:17 [anne]
deane, I'm the scribe
16:56:18 [Julian]
+1 to henri
16:56:37 [MikeSmith^]
16:57:35 [hsivonen]
<p>foo<aside> will hurt authors more likely
16:57:36 [anne]
It would be interesting to see in a few years whether <source> has been a problem.
16:57:51 [anne]
Then we can decide for HTML6 whether it was worth it
16:58:25 [anne]
MS: [scribe missed a lot]
16:58:39 [anne]
... So we will have a meeting next week, same time. Chris Wilson chairing.
16:58:52 [anne]
... If anybody would like to volunteer to scribe for that meeting, speak up
16:58:59 [anne]
DC: I'm probably available
16:59:20 [anne]
MS: CW will be sending a detailed agenda
16:59:28 [anne]
MS: adjourn
16:59:32 [Joshue]
Joshue has left #html-wg
16:59:35 [Zakim]
16:59:36 [Zakim]
16:59:38 [Zakim]
16:59:48 [Zakim]
17:00:00 [anne]
RRSAgent, make minutes
17:00:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate anne
17:00:12 [anne]
RRSAgent, make logs public
17:01:01 [Zakim]
17:01:04 [smedero]
I updated ISSUE-54 (html5-from-xslt) with a pointer to data and limited test concerning <!doctype html public ""> and quirks mode... hopefully someone can push those tests a little further if need be.
17:01:23 [Zakim]
17:01:27 [Zakim]
17:01:30 [Zakim]
17:01:31 [smedero]
(notes at the bottom, after all the email links...)
17:01:42 [MikeSmith^]
smedero: cool -- thanks
17:28:01 [smedero]
smedero has joined #html-wg
17:30:59 [deane]
deane has left #html-wg
17:35:00 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, DanC, in HTML_WG()12:00PM
17:35:02 [Zakim]
HTML_WG()12:00PM has ended
17:35:04 [Zakim]
Attendees were Joshue, Mike, Laura, +1.425.467.aabb, Julian, smedero, hsivonen, DanC, anne, Cynthia_Shelly, Shawn_Medero
17:47:41 [anne]
Zakim, bye
17:47:41 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #html-wg
18:07:18 [Laura]
Laura has joined #html-wg
18:10:48 [mjs]
mjs has joined #html-wg
18:18:26 [Sander]
Sander has joined #html-wg
18:56:36 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #html-wg
19:05:26 [mjs_]
mjs_ has joined #html-wg
19:23:58 [aaronlev]
aaronlev has joined #html-wg
19:29:40 [Laura]
Laura has joined #html-wg
19:29:45 [Laura]
Laura has left #html-wg
19:40:51 [paullewis]
paullewis has joined #html-wg
19:50:50 [aaronlev]
aaronlev has joined #html-wg
19:51:37 [ChrisWilson]
ChrisWilson has joined #html-wg
19:55:02 [aaronlev]
aaronlev has joined #html-wg
20:16:13 [mjs]
mjs has joined #html-wg
20:17:17 [tlr]
tlr has joined #html-wg
20:53:42 [adele_]
adele_ has joined #html-wg
20:58:25 [tlr]
tlr has joined #html-wg
21:32:56 [maddiin]
maddiin has joined #html-wg
22:03:37 [tlr]
tlr has joined #html-wg
22:18:14 [Lachy]
Lachy has joined #html-wg
23:12:13 [paullewis]
paullewis has joined #html-wg
23:14:07 [Citrus]
Citrus has joined #html-wg
23:16:17 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #html-wg
23:16:20 [MikeSmith^]
MikeSmith^ has joined #html-wg
23:17:52 [Citrus]
Citrus has left #html-wg
23:21:42 [mjs]
mjs has joined #html-wg