Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Upcoming WHATNOT meeting on 3/14/2024 #10200

Closed
past opened this issue Mar 13, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

Upcoming WHATNOT meeting on 3/14/2024 #10200

past opened this issue Mar 13, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
agenda+ To be discussed at a triage meeting

Comments

@past
Copy link

past commented Mar 13, 2024

What is the issue with the HTML Standard?

Last week we held our biweekly triage call (#10156) and I will post the meeting notes there in a bit. The next one is scheduled for March 14, 9am PST. Note that this is 1 week later in an America+Europe friendly time, per #10163 and last week's meeting consensus.

People interested in attending the next call please respond here or reach out privately to me or the spec editors. We will be tagging issues for the next call again using the agenda+ label in all WHATWG repos and we would like to invite anyone that can contribute to said issues to join us.

@past past added the agenda+ To be discussed at a triage meeting label Mar 13, 2024
@dbaron
Copy link
Member

dbaron commented Mar 13, 2024

As noted in #10156 (comment) I believe there is a plan to discuss w3c/csswg-drafts#9951 at this meeting.

@dbaron
Copy link
Member

dbaron commented Mar 13, 2024

Also a note for those not in North America: 9am California time (PDT) is an hour earlier than it was a week before, since most of the US and Canada have switched to summer time.

@past
Copy link
Author

past commented Mar 15, 2024

Thank you all for attending the meeting today! Here are the notes from this meeting (the next one is at #10205):

Agenda

Attendees: Luke Warlow, Tab Atkins-Bittner, David Baron, Emilio Cobos Álvarez, Brecht De Ruyte, Elika Etemad, Mason Freed, Chris Harrelson, Sanket Joshi, Tim Nguyen, Ryosuke Niwa, Simon Pieters, Noam Rosenthal, Alan Stearns, Miriam Suzanne, Anne van Kesteren, Chris Wilson, Dan Veditz, Keith Cirkel, Vladimir Levin

  1. Review past action items
    1. Marcos or Anne will follow up with heycam on WebKit's opinion on Add a layer and filter interface in the 2D canvas.
      1. Ongoing
    2. Addison will update the add support for internationalized email addresses PR with the provided feedback.
      1. No update.
    3. Take up joint meeting with CSS for next week's meeting [Panos]
      1. Done.
    4. Ask Anne what to do about joint issues with the I18N WG (tagged issues) carryover, how to get i18n WG involvement, use case planning needed here.
      1. Using specific labels, so they should see them. Anne expects Addison to reach out when he is interested in having a joint meeting.
  2. Carryovers from last time
    1. [Dominic] Atomic move operation for element reparenting & reordering
      1. Carryover.
    2. [Emilio] Render-blocking: the definition of "created by its node document's parser" is a little bit vague
      1. Emilio's proposal (which seems to match browsers?) is to: define behavior of having a flag that is on if you come from a parser and turns off as soon as you get unbound from the tree. Sanket: seems to make sense. Tracking whether it came from the main resource or was from document.dot might not be done right now. Anne: current defn is vague, but document.dot goes through the parser. Once the body has been parsed, it's not render-blocking. Emilio thinks document.write should work the same as regular network stuff. Change needed in the spec: spec doesn't differentiate between doc.write and non-doc.write. Emilio to follow up with PR.
    3. [ChrisH/Domenic] Design pattern for naming new pseudoelements - joint issue with CSSWG.
      1. Discussion comparing two approaches. Consistency and predictability lead to pseudo, but part would support exposing thumbtrack, etc.
      2. Suggestions to do both (expose same thing both ways), or part-like pseudoelement, ua-part::, etc.
      3. Part-like: ::pseudo-foo is equivalent to ::part(foo) (more details needed)
      4. RESOLUTION: We will use pseudo-elements for exposing styling of pieces of built-in controls. We would like these pseudo-elements to be as close to ::part() as possible (for example, in terms of what selectors work and how inheritance works) and intend to further explore the details of how to do this. (9 votes in favor, none opposed)
  3. New topics
    1. [zcorpan] Allowing UA to do <source> selection for media element · Issue #10077 · whatwg/html · GitHub
      1. Safari 17.4 seems to have implemented something, asking what. Simon looked at the changelogs but couldn't find it. AI: Simon to ping Anne to look it up.
    2. Anne looking for input on Allow <input type="color"> to give an alpha channel and/or colors beyond sRGB? #3400.

Action Items

  1. @emilio will follow up with a PR for Render-blocking: the definition of "created by its node document's parser" is a little bit vague.
  2. @zcorpan will ping @annevk to look up what Safari has implemented for Allowing UA to do <source> selection for media element · Issue #10077 · whatwg/html · GitHub

@past past closed this as completed Mar 15, 2024
dbaron added a commit to dbaron/csswg-drafts that referenced this issue May 28, 2024
This adds the ::details-content pseudo-element as resolved in:

1. w3c#9879 (comment)

2. whatwg/html#10200 (comment) /
   w3c#9951 (comment)

3. w3c#9879 (comment)

and uses the definition added in w3c#10083.
dbaron added a commit to dbaron/csswg-drafts that referenced this issue May 30, 2024
This adds the ::details-content pseudo-element as resolved in:

1. w3c#9879 (comment)

2. whatwg/html#10200 (comment) /
   w3c#9951 (comment)

3. w3c#9879 (comment)

and uses the definition added in w3c#10083.
dbaron added a commit to w3c/csswg-drafts that referenced this issue May 30, 2024
This adds the ::details-content pseudo-element as resolved in:

1. #9879 (comment)

2. whatwg/html#10200 (comment) /
   #9951 (comment)

3. #9879 (comment)

and uses the definition added in #10083.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
agenda+ To be discussed at a triage meeting
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants