Engineer on @googlechrome. Involved in CSS and W3C standards. Previously @mozilla, @w3ctag. Mastodon: @dbaron@w3c.social
Rockville, Maryland, USA
Joined March 2008
- Tweets 7,521
- Following 1,244
- Followers 4,296
- Likes 18,519
Counterargument: the way we describe growth numbers is silly.
We should describe the rate of change in (GDP/person), not the rate of change in GDP. That's maps much better to how much better off people are.
2
2
You (@fantasai) were definitely dropping "r"s when you were drawing the static-position diagrams on the whiteboard earlier. Not the first time I've heard you do this...
1
2
gcmap.com/mapui?P=SFO-YVR-SI… is a series of shorter hops that might work?
1
1
Yes, that was openly discussed in github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/… where this was added to the spec, including in the initial comment.
2
I think the 1vw in @Litherum's answer should be changed to something in a different length unit (maybe px or em) to get variation as a function of viewport width. (Exactly what length is the interesting part... might need a more complicated expression too!)
2
2
The resolution to do this was from 2014 (or maybe earlier; we resolved to do it multiple times before the spec was edited), but the spec changes were actually made recently in github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/… .
2
Spec changes for this were recently made in github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/… .
I don't actually see a bug on file for implementing this in Firefox, but if we don't have one already there should probably be one.
3
I can't think of a workaround, though that doesn't mean there isn't one.
It requires that we implement the spec resolution in bugzil.la/1423746
The issue here is really that Firefox is one spec resolution behind, and a bunch of other browsers are two behind.
1
We non-Europeans would need to add an hour for the queue at the border, though.
At least, my layovers at Heathrow are usually because I'm going been the USA and somewhere in Europe that's not the British Isles, which don't otherwise require crossing the normal UK border control.
1
Reminder: the last time the US Supreme Court had a majority of justices appointed by Democratic presidents was just before the resignation of Abe Fortas on May 14, 1969, over 49 years ago.
4
That said, I think RCV is better than first-past-the-post (plurality) or having a separate runoff election of the top two. However, I'd prefer approval voting over RCV.
2
Because the next-to-last round is Breed (34649) - Kim (26805) - Leno (23629), the final round with that set of votes (election day only) is Breed-Kim, and Breed wins the RCV algorithm. But I think that's just by luck and not because she did better in the next-to-last round.
1
Another interesting tidbit looking at only Election Day votes: The three most likely final rounds would have been:
- Breed (40949) defeats Kim (40024)
- Kim (36121) defeats Leno (35400)
- Leno (42882) defeats Breed (39454)
1
I remember hearing zool/XUL and zippy/XPI in the Netscape days, but never heard zibble/XBL until recently except maybe as a joke pronunciation.
1