KartikPrabhurepeating "saw your post-type-discovery algorithm draft https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-post-type-discovery-20161028/#algorithm . Any particular reason for the ordering of types as "rsvp > reply > repost > like" ? I understand "reply" getting precedence but don't understand the "rsvp > reply" and the ordering after "reply""
Loqitantek: KartikPrabhu left you a message 3 days, 18 hours ago: saw your post-type-discovery algorithm draft https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-post-type-discovery-20161028/#algorithm . Any particular reason for the ordering of types as "rsvp > reply > repost > like" ? I understand "reply" getting precedence but don't understand the "rsvp > reply" and the ordering after "reply"
gRegorLoveThe nested li was one thing, but I guess what I was thinking more was: there's a lot of redundant information with the full city/region listed under the shorthand
ChrisAldrichPivotal is taking care of the lion's share. They're a relatively large company of programmers, so they've got lots of snacks/drinks in their kitchen area and will be catering lunch for us.
ChrisAldrichThey've got a large open area in the front for the opening/closing/demos (with pingpong tables), and half a dozen or so individual highly connected conference rooms for breaking into groups of 3-15+ for sessions.
sknebelhm, rereading the webmention spec the security section focusses on the sender side in a few subsections (don't send WMs to localhost, don't send WMs to servers in private networks), but the same concerns apply similarly to webmention verification?
aaronpki think the concern is less important with GET requests, since normally GET requests don't mutate state. tho for really poorly designed systems i guess that could still be a problem.
sknebelon localhost, you potentially could talk to e.g. a database using a non-HTTP protocol, there have been weird vulnerabilities where creative HTTP requests then are interpreted as commands. especially relevant if you accept HTTP urls including port numbers