701 Members
https://whatwg.org/chat — logs: https://matrixlogs.bakkot.com/WHATWG/ — Please leave your sense of logic at the door27 Servers

Load older messages

16 Mar 2023
In reply to @jakea:matrix.org
annevk: Fwiw, Mozilla have a positive position now https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/677. But I'm also happy not to rush the changes to the HTML spec. It isn't getting in the way, just want to make sure we integrate properly
With two-implementer support, it's definitely time :)
@sideshowbarker:matrix.orgsideshowbarkerProgress on HTML Modules seems to be stalled. Is that due to lack of sufficient implementor interest? Or is it due to it being blocked by particular problems? Or because nobody has yet fully specified it?04:50:50
@beau87:matrix.orgbeau87 I’ve yet to get an assignment 04:56:36
@sideshowbarker:matrix.orgsideshowbarkeras far as HTML Modules being specified in detail, I see that https://github.com/WICG/webcomponents/blob/gh-pages/proposals/html-module-spec-changes.md seems to have quite detailed spec changes …but I also see that it’s now been 3 years since it was last updated05:21:33
@annevk:matrix.organnevk sideshowbarker: there's no detailed proposal I think and the last one got a bunch of feedback (probably not all properly recorded) that was never dealt with 07:30:48
In reply to @annevk:matrix.org
sideshowbarker: there's no detailed proposal I think and the last one got a bunch of feedback (probably not all properly recorded) that was never dealt with
I see. I wonder why this has never ended up bubbling up high enough in the collective priority stack for it to actually start getting anywhere.
About other features like DSD, much has been made (rightfully) of developers speaking up to say they need the feature.
It seems like client-side HTML includes is something that we’ve had many developers asking for relatively forever now.
(A developer contacted me today to ask about it, which is why I ended up asking here.)
@annevk:matrix.organnevk sideshowbarker: probably because it's a quite complex idea that involves a lot of tradeoffs 09:10:57
@annevk:matrix.organnevk sideshowbarker: and there being more pressing problems, such as Web Components accessibility 09:11:44
@domenicdenicola:matrix.orgDomenicClient-side includes are also very different from HTML includes11:52:09
@domenicdenicola:matrix.orgDomenicClient-side includes are just a way to have worse performance for more developer convenience, basically11:52:22
@domenicdenicola:matrix.orgDomenic * Client-side includes are also very different from HTML imports11:52:41
@ms2ger:igalia.comMs2ger annevk: I was just about to file https://github.com/w3c/hr-time/issues/152 😅 12:21:25
@jakea:matrix.orgJake Archibald <dialog> and popover seem to queue tasks to fire open/close events, even though these things always happen on the main thread. Anyone know the reasons? 13:49:51
@annevk:matrix.organnevk Jake Archibald: popover doesn't do that for beforetoggle 16:03:20
@jakea:matrix.orgJake Archibald annevk: but it does for toggle, meaning that event could come after the next render 16:12:15
@jakea:matrix.orgJake Archibaldhttps://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/popover.html#the-popover-attribute:queue-a-popover-toggle-event-task16:12:41
@annevk:matrix.organnevk Jake Archibald: yeah sorry, I forgot exactly why dialog did that; I suppose conceivably it could be moved to "update the rendering", but "update the rendering" is doing a lot which is a problem of its own 16:17:48
@annevk:matrix.organnevk Jake Archibald: one thing we've historically tried to avoid is node tree mutations triggering events, but in the select case of attribute mutations it might be okay 16:18:31
@jakea:matrix.orgJake Archibaldyeah, if it was debouncing stuff, I'd expect microtasks or render steps16:19:01
@annevk:matrix.organnevk Jake Archibald: it seems reasonable to try to change this to be closer to sync; not sure if fully sync would be compatible or desirable 16:21:33
@annevk:matrix.organnevk Jake Archibald: for popover the main reason for the timing was consistency with dialog 16:22:01
@jakea:matrix.orgJake Archibald annevk: yeah, I wondered if there was some case where a popover opens, but immediately closes or something, and in that case they didn't want an event 17:27:52
@jakea:matrix.orgJake ArchibaldI made some notes while reading the spec https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/9036. Some of those might just be misunderstandings though.17:28:21
@annevk:matrix.organnevk Jake Archibald: for a case like that we don't want two events, though that also follows dialog 17:50:18
@annevk:matrix.organnevk Jake Archibald: you prolly want to tag mfreed and ntim there (and Joey, doesn't seem to be here anymore) 17:51:11
@annevk:matrix.organnevk Jake Archibald: oh, and add the popover label 17:51:37
@domfarolino:matrix.orgDominic FarolinoSomeone asked a question today that I didn't immediately know the answer to: why must we enforce CORS check on redirects, if the subsequent request would require a CORS check anyways. I understand that we want the redirecting server to opt-out of redirecting requests initiated by cross-origins (via a standard way that fails closed like CORS), but what is the exact threat? What can the initiating request learn if we didn't enforce CORS there?19:46:10
@domfarolino:matrix.orgDominic FarolinoRedacted or Malformed Event19:58:42
@domfarolino:matrix.orgDominic Farolino * Someone asked a question today that I didn't immediately know the answer to: why must we enforce CORS check on redirects that required a preflight? Is the explicit preflight opt-in not enough to act as a proper opt-in for the redirect?20:24:20
@smorimoto:matrix.orgSora Morimoto changed their profile picture.23:03:54

There are no newer messages yet.

Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6