IRC log of svg on 2008-04-29
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 10:30:03 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #svg
- 10:30:03 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-svg-irc
- 10:30:05 [trackbot-ng]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 10:30:05 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #svg
- 10:30:07 [trackbot-ng]
- Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG
- 10:30:07 [Zakim]
- ok, trackbot-ng; I see GA_SVGWG()6:30AM scheduled to start now
- 10:30:08 [trackbot-ng]
- Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference
- 10:30:08 [trackbot-ng]
- Date: 29 April 2008
- 10:30:09 [Zakim]
- GA_SVGWG()6:30AM has now started
- 10:30:16 [Zakim]
- +??P0
- 10:30:20 [heycam]
- heycam has joined #svg
- 10:30:24 [aemmons]
- zakim, ??p0 is me
- 10:30:24 [Zakim]
- +aemmons; got it
- 10:30:54 [Zakim]
- +??P1
- 10:31:03 [ed]
- Zakim, ??P1 is me
- 10:31:03 [Zakim]
- +ed; got it
- 10:31:23 [Zakim]
- +??P2
- 10:31:25 [heycam]
- Zakim, ??P2 is me
- 10:31:25 [Zakim]
- +heycam; got it
- 10:31:49 [Zakim]
- +??P3
- 10:31:58 [anthony]
- zakim, ??P3 is me
- 10:31:58 [Zakim]
- +anthony; got it
- 10:33:03 [Zakim]
- +Andreas_Neumann
- 10:34:02 [anthony]
- Scribe: anthony
- 10:34:09 [anthony]
- Chair: Erik
- 10:34:14 [ed]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008AprJun/0008.html
- 10:34:42 [anthony]
- Topic: Upcoming F2F meetings
- 10:35:06 [anthony]
- ED: The first one is Sophia Antipolis
- 10:35:10 [anthony]
- ... that's already planned
- 10:35:18 [anthony]
- ... the next one is around SVG Open
- 10:35:23 [anthony]
- ... dates have been confirmed
- 10:35:34 [anthony]
- ... but we haven't really figured if out if we have anywhere to stay
- 10:35:57 [ed]
- http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/Group/wiki/NuremburgF2F2008
- 10:36:02 [anthony]
- ... but I was wondering if Chris is going to set it up or if Andrew and I have to contact Alex Adam
- 10:36:26 [anthony]
- AE: The page says it is hosted by Examotion
- 10:36:37 [anthony]
- ... Not sure if Doug contacted Alex about it
- 10:36:53 [anthony]
- ED: We should probably move it to the public wiki
- 10:36:56 [anthony]
- AE: Sure I can do it
- 10:37:14 [anthony]
- ... anyone has any problems?
- 10:37:39 [ed]
- s/are26-29/are Aug 21-24 for the F2F/
- 10:37:50 [anthony]
- CM: That's the week before SVG Open
- 10:38:21 [anthony]
- ACTION: AndrewE to contact Alex Adam about the SVG Face-2-face in August
- 10:38:21 [trackbot-ng]
- Sorry, couldn't find user - AndrewE
- 10:38:30 [anthony]
- ACTION: Emmons to contact Alex Adam about the SVG Face-2-face in August
- 10:38:31 [trackbot-ng]
- Created ACTION-2003 - Contact Alex Adam about the SVG Face-2-face in August [on Andrew Emmons - due 2008-05-06].
- 10:39:02 [anthony]
- ED: So the next meeting after SVG Open is TPac meeting
- 10:39:09 [anthony]
- ... October 20 - 24
- 10:39:26 [anthony]
- AG: Did Doug say where it was going to be held?
- 10:39:27 [ed]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-svg-wg/2008AprJun/0134.html
- 10:40:04 [anthony]
- ED: France somewhere
- 10:41:38 [anthony]
- AE: Doug said something about which groups to meet with at the TP
- 10:41:46 [anthony]
- ED: I did fill out some groups
- 10:42:00 [anthony]
- ... we should meet with HTML, XSL, CSS
- 10:42:04 [anthony]
- ... I filled out a lot of groups
- 10:42:15 [anthony]
- AG: It's not all confirmed though
- 10:42:19 [anthony]
- ED: Yup, it's still open
- 10:42:23 [anthony]
- ... so we can make changes to it
- 10:42:56 [anthony]
- ... I filled out HTML, WebAPI, SMIL, CDF
- 10:43:03 [anthony]
- ... I missed XSL
- 10:43:30 [anthony]
- ... so I guess we should really decide which groups to meet with
- 10:43:43 [anthony]
- ... not sure if we have to meet with WebAPI since many off us in WebAPI
- 10:43:50 [anthony]
- AE: And SMIL
- 10:43:58 [anthony]
- ... do we have any outstanding issues with SMIL
- 10:44:08 [anthony]
- ED: Yeah I guess we could skip it
- 10:44:13 [anthony]
- ... there is only so much time
- 10:44:19 [anthony]
- ... I'm not sure about the ARIA stuff
- 10:44:27 [anthony]
- ... if it will still be an issue
- 10:44:39 [anthony]
- ... or if it will be resolved before the TP
- 10:44:44 [anthony]
- AE: It looks good to me
- 10:45:08 [anthony]
- AG: The only suggestion I have is add in XSL
- 10:45:13 [anthony]
- ED: Yup, I will do that
- 10:45:57 [anthony]
- Topic: XMLHttpRequest
- 10:46:16 [anthony]
- ED: So we have requested the SVG working group to review the spec
- 10:46:18 [anthony]
- ... it's LC
- 10:46:25 [anthony]
- ... with due date June 2nd
- 10:46:53 [anthony]
- AG: Is this something we should have a small discussion in France?
- 10:47:02 [anthony]
- ED: Might be a good idea to read it in advanced
- 10:47:07 [anthony]
- ... then have a short discussion on it
- 10:47:24 [anthony]
- ... it's a pretty small spec, but it does have a fair bit of stuff in it
- 10:47:35 [ed]
- s/So we have/The WebAPI WG/
- 10:47:58 [anthony]
- ... I guess we can do as we've done in the past
- 10:48:10 [anthony]
- ... send all comments to the public mailing list
- 10:48:15 [anthony]
- ... then collate all comments
- 10:48:19 [anthony]
- ... and send them
- 10:48:43 [anthony]
- s/public mailing list/public SVG mailing list/
- 10:48:57 [anthony]
- ED: From a quick read I didn't see anything particularly bad for SVG
- 10:49:09 [anthony]
- CM: I guess the only thing is how compatible it is with getURL and postURL
- 10:49:11 [anthony]
- ED: Yup
- 10:49:33 [anthony]
- Topic: WAI-ARIA
- 10:49:41 [anthony]
- ED: We are trying to set up a telcon
- 10:50:06 [anthony]
- ... some people interested in accessibility
- 10:50:21 [anthony]
- CM: Does Opera implement any of it?
- 10:50:26 [anthony]
- ED: Some of it
- 10:50:35 [anthony]
- ... there are somethings in there which are good for SVG
- 10:50:46 [anthony]
- ... it ties in with the role attribute
- 10:51:03 [anthony]
- ... for example the various roles which make sense for XHTML
- 10:51:10 [anthony]
- ... to represent text
- 10:51:20 [anthony]
- ... there is nothing saying that this is part of map or a diagram
- 10:51:26 [anthony]
- CM: When is the telcon?
- 10:51:32 [anthony]
- ED: Still trying to decide a date
- 10:51:52 [anthony]
- ... just interested in seeing anyone from here would want to attend
- 10:52:16 [anthony]
- CM: A friend of mine who is also ding a PhD has started looking into role and would be interested in it
- 10:52:18 [anthony]
- ... than me
- 10:52:29 [anthony]
- ... dunno if anyone can come along
- 10:52:37 [anthony]
- ED: Not sure, but I can confirm that
- 10:52:59 [anthony]
- AE: We should be able to work something out
- 10:53:11 [anthony]
- ... the original email requested members of the working group
- 10:53:23 [anthony]
- ... but in this case it might be possible to work something out
- 10:53:34 [anthony]
- CM: So at this stage no time has been confirmed
- 10:53:43 [anthony]
- AE: Yeah, so looking for times and key people
- 10:53:53 [anthony]
- ED: So Andrew do you want to look into that?
- 10:54:07 [anthony]
- AE: So maybe if he joined the interest group
- 10:54:27 [anthony]
- ... do you think he would want to join the interest group?
- 10:54:30 [anthony]
- CM: Maybe
- 10:54:41 [anthony]
- ED: We need to respond to the original mail
- 10:54:55 [anthony]
- ... I'd be interested in at least attending one
- 10:55:38 [anthony]
- ACTION: Erik to respond to the WAI-ARIA email regarding the organisation of the multi-group telcon
- 10:55:38 [trackbot-ng]
- Created ACTION-2004 - Respond to the WAI-ARIA email regarding the organisation of the multi-group telcon [on Erik Dahlström - due 2008-05-06].
- 10:55:57 [anthony]
- Topic: SVG in CSS
- 10:56:33 [anthony]
- ED: There is a whole thread going on in the Mozilla group
- 10:56:53 [anthony]
- ... as you know Apple has proposed to add things to CSS
- 10:56:57 [anthony]
- ... similar to SVG
- 10:57:23 [anthony]
- ... there has been suggestions that these things should be done in conjunction with SVG
- 10:57:27 [anthony]
- ... instead of CSS
- 10:57:45 [anthony]
- CM: One of Robs suggestions was that things like fill, stroke be made to work in HTML
- 10:57:51 [anthony]
- ... which I think is a good idea
- 10:58:10 [anthony]
- ED: I tend to agree with that
- 10:58:34 [anthony]
- ... I'm wondering if we should say something as WG on the CSS list
- 10:58:51 [anthony]
- CM: So I guess at this stage making the CSS properties work
- 10:59:05 [anthony]
- ... hasn't been proposed to the CSS WG
- 10:59:35 [anthony]
- ED: I don't know if it is best coming from a company or a working group
- 10:59:46 [anthony]
- ... but I should do something about this
- 11:00:02 [anthony]
- CM: I guess it would be good if you weighed in on the thread
- 11:00:12 [anthony]
- ED: I would love to see the fill and stroke work in HTML
- 11:00:27 [anthony]
- ... seems strange to not use the definitions used already in SVG
- 11:00:57 [anthony]
- ACTION: Erik to send an email to the CSS list regarding SVG in CSS
- 11:00:57 [trackbot-ng]
- Created ACTION-2005 - Send an email to the CSS list regarding SVG in CSS [on Erik Dahlström - due 2008-05-06].
- 11:01:33 [anthony]
- Topic: SVG in HTML requirements TBD
- 11:02:21 [anthony]
- AE: Do you have link to the current requirements?
- 11:02:46 [ed]
- http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVG_in_text-html
- 11:03:06 [anthony]
- ED: These are not decided requirements these are collections of what people thought
- 11:03:42 [anthony]
- ... might be good to have Chris and Doug here on this
- 11:03:49 [ChrisL]
- ChrisL has joined #svg
- 11:04:04 [ChrisL]
- rrsagent, here
- 11:04:04 [RRSAgent]
- See http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-svg-irc#T11-04-04
- 11:04:39 [heycam]
- CM: Maciej argues that if you want to put SVG in HTML, then the main reason is so that you can use HTML-like (non-XML) syntax, since otherwise you could just use XHTML+SVG, which works already.
- 11:04:59 [anthony]
- CM: So I wonder what people think of that argument
- 11:05:09 [anthony]
- ... is it fundamental, does it have merit?
- 11:05:18 [Zakim]
- +ChrisL
- 11:05:26 [anthony]
- AE: I thought the main debate was around Text/HTML
- 11:05:48 [anthony]
- ... so the reason for getting to main stream syntax was because of the lack of support for XHTML
- 11:05:52 [anthony]
- ... by MS
- 11:06:14 [anthony]
- CL: So because MS doesn't do XHTML putting in SVG wont make them do it either
- 11:06:54 [anthony]
- ED: If you have blogging software too that outputs something that is not well formed XHTML and you try to put in SVG inline
- 11:07:02 [anthony]
- ... it could work if we put in something like this
- 11:07:07 [anthony]
- CL: How would it work?
- 11:07:38 [anthony]
- ED: It would work for those people that would SVG inline
- 11:07:51 [anthony]
- CL: If you have inline SVG it will not work
- 11:08:03 [anthony]
- ... but for other browers it will work if you have XHTML
- 11:08:09 [ChrisL]
- MS don't implement xhtml. They don't do SVG either. Whether the SVG is in XML syntax or in some other syntax, it won't suddenly work
- 11:09:28 [ChrisL]
- there are three things : 1) the syntax used 2) the internet media type 3) meta element
- 11:10:52 [anthony]
- CL: meta type overrides media type in IE
- 11:11:17 [ChrisL]
- which is against what the TAG says
- 11:11:29 [anthony]
- ... if you want anything to work in I.E. you already need a lot of adaptation
- 11:11:50 [ChrisL]
- bottom line, if you want something to work in IE, there is a lot of adaptation needed
- 11:12:09 [anthony]
- AE: So with Heycams original question is in the reason you want SVG in HTML syntax
- 11:13:49 [aemmons]
- AE: Is not to have the same syntax as text/html but because xhtml is not used as widely as text/html
- 11:13:58 [anthony]
- AN: I think one problem is that they don't see the web is also tools as well
- 11:14:08 [ChrisL]
- no authorig tols will generate or import an undefined, non-XML syntax for SVG
- 11:14:17 [anthony]
- ... makes it harder for browsers to implement
- 11:14:45 [anthony]
- CL: There is nothing to say this fragment is XML
- 11:15:03 [anthony]
- ... if there was an extension element similar to what Doug proposed
- 11:15:17 [anthony]
- ... then copy and paste from tools could be done
- 11:15:46 [anthony]
- AE: So we want to come up with a list of requirements
- 11:15:52 [aemmons]
- http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVG_in_text-html
- 11:16:38 [anthony]
- CL: So it's like you are or you aren't. It's either XML or it's not
- 11:16:45 [anthony]
- ... basically it's in a different syntax then
- 11:16:52 [anthony]
- ... and it needs to be defined then
- 11:16:59 [anthony]
- CM: What about a subset of XML
- 11:17:12 [anthony]
- CL: So for input a subset is probably fine
- 11:17:18 [anthony]
- ... for export it's probably not good
- 11:17:40 [anthony]
- CL: PIs are already ignored
- 11:18:02 [anthony]
- CM: You can put them anywhere, inside content
- 11:18:33 [anthony]
- CL: As soon as you have unquoted attribute values
- 11:18:45 [anthony]
- ... then all the SVG implementations need to start accepting this as well
- 11:19:01 [anthony]
- ... you also need to say how do you know when you've reached the end of the attribute
- 11:19:17 [anthony]
- ... but if you have spaces and other things, then how do you know
- 11:19:38 [anthony]
- CM: HTML5 has some defined method to define an end of an attribute
- 11:20:00 [anthony]
- CL: It doesn't. HTML5 assumes you know all of HTML5 and you have all these complex rules
- 11:20:06 [anthony]
- ... to figure it out
- 11:20:15 [anthony]
- ... you need to have this case by case
- 11:20:23 [anthony]
- ... you don't have any extensibility at this point
- 11:20:33 [anthony]
- ... you can't skip them silently
- 11:20:38 [anthony]
- CM: I can see that difference
- 11:20:54 [anthony]
- ... but I was under the impression that attributes were not in that case
- 11:21:02 [anthony]
- ED: I read the parser of HTML5
- 11:21:14 [anthony]
- ... and it uses states to determine where you are
- 11:21:21 [anthony]
- ... they use a space and something else
- 11:21:31 [anthony]
- ... to determine the end of an attribute
- 11:21:45 [anthony]
- CL: How would that work in SVG when attributes have spaces
- 11:22:12 [anthony]
- CM: I think it's maybe not as complex as you think
- 11:22:15 [anthony]
- CL: I think it is
- 11:22:28 [anthony]
- ... I've seen earlier problems with HTML
- 11:22:49 [anthony]
- ... at the moment it works as defined
- 11:23:01 [anthony]
- ... and any deviation from that means that you can't copy and paste
- 11:23:11 [anthony]
- ... between implementations
- 11:23:29 [anthony]
- ED: Sounds like we are almost resolving here to not have unquoted attribute values
- 11:23:46 [anthony]
- AE: It's more of a higher level
- 11:24:13 [anthony]
- ... so a requirement is we preserve some or all of the XML syntax
- 11:24:20 [anthony]
- CM: Or a subset
- 11:24:56 [ChrisL]
- yes, i would argue strongly to not allow unquoted attribute values, so that content can be pasted back into authoring tools for future editing, or pasted into new content without change.
- 11:25:23 [ChrisL]
- also, and unquoted syntax meansd authors have to remember which atteras can be safely unquoted and which can not
- 11:25:28 [anthony]
- AE: Seems like the first two points that Doug has covers what you are talking about
- 11:26:11 [anthony]
- ... so this is a discussion page to see what ideas we have that overlap
- 11:26:33 [anthony]
- CL: We could make several proposals
- 11:26:47 [anthony]
- ... one is you use an island to allow XML
- 11:26:56 [anthony]
- ... another is you only use it in XHTML
- 11:27:42 [ChrisL]
- both of those options would keep the svg actually compatible with all existing svg renderers and authoring tools
- 11:28:02 [anthony]
- CM: I think his underlaying reason is not taking the fallback option
- 11:28:37 [anthony]
- ... if the UA hasn't implemented SVG in HTML, then the UA may not understand it then somethings may wrongly appear
- 11:28:51 [anthony]
- CL: We don't have element content that is meaningless
- 11:29:12 [anthony]
- ... in fact if you end up displaying SVG confusing it with HTML
- 11:29:19 [anthony]
- ... then you will see some text
- 11:29:27 [anthony]
- ... with anchors in it
- 11:29:35 [anthony]
- ... and that was by design
- 11:29:54 [ChrisL]
- You will notice that SVG avoided having meaningless numbers as element content. pretty much the only element content iis human readable text. the rest of it is in attributes
- 11:30:18 [anthony]
- AE: So now we are getting to does requirement of a fallback
- 11:30:50 [anthony]
- CL: I do think you should provide fallbacks
- 11:31:00 [anthony]
- ... in HTML there is object, which uses nesting
- 11:31:12 [anthony]
- ED: That still doesn't really work in I.E.
- 11:31:46 [anthony]
- CL: It took a while for vendors to figure out how it works correctly
- 11:32:04 [anthony]
- AE: So Doug's other point was unrestricted growth
- 11:32:17 [anthony]
- ... if you cover requirement 1 and 2, then it seems to be covered by that
- 11:32:36 [anthony]
- ED: I would like Doug's 1st requirement put a bit stronger
- 11:33:04 [anthony]
- ... is about having it render, having the same DOM
- 11:37:32 [aemmons]
- Should allow for SVG Fonts to be included in HTML, and ideally to be usable in HTML text.
- 11:38:39 [aemmons]
- Should allow for the creation of scripted content that works identically for inline SVG and standalone SVG (though there may be certain limitations placed on the script author). This may entail SVG elements be in the SVG namespace in the DOM.
- 11:38:43 [anthony]
- AE: So there'd need to be a way for this to work outside the island
- 11:39:09 [anthony]
- CL: Want it so it could be used with HTML and other things
- 11:39:10 [ChrisL]
- It should; its indirected through a property for exactly that reason
- 11:39:41 [ChrisL]
- so it should work for svfg fonts on html via css, and there are two implementations that do this
- 11:39:45 [anthony]
- ED: I agree with that
- 11:39:52 [ChrisL]
- s/svfg/svg/
- 11:39:58 [anthony]
- ... not sure about the certain limitations
- 11:40:01 [aemmons]
- Should have a clean model for how the various DOM interfaces work together.
- 11:40:09 [anthony]
- ... would be good if there are a few examples there
- 11:40:16 [anthony]
- CM: Not sure what the last one means
- 11:40:34 [anthony]
- CL: I assume what it means is the DOM interfaces should work the way they currently do
- 11:40:50 [anthony]
- ... if that what it means it should be expressed more clearly
- 11:41:00 [anthony]
- ... there are no barriers really
- 11:41:16 [anthony]
- ... when you parse HTML you get an XML DOM
- 11:41:33 [anthony]
- AE: So the island is more from the parser point of view
- 11:41:37 [ChrisL]
- if it means 'the existing dom methods continue to work' then I agree
- 11:41:57 [ChrisL]
- s/parse HTML/parse tag-soup HTML5/
- 11:42:03 [aemmons]
- From Maciej:
- 11:42:04 [aemmons]
- # Existing pages must not break (to a significant extent), even if they are currently using crazy broken syntax.
- 11:42:16 [anthony]
- AE: Moving into Maciej's requirements
- 11:42:38 [anthony]
- CL: This is more a proof of concept
- 11:43:01 [anthony]
- CM: In Ian's large email he did quote some sites that had some broken syntax
- 11:43:39 [anthony]
- ... when I asked Ian about the sites asked in that email he said they were representative of the uses of the crazy SVG things
- 11:43:46 [anthony]
- ... where he doesn't want the rendering to change
- 11:44:06 [anthony]
- ... but I haven't read through the whole email
- 11:44:19 [anthony]
- ... I think it might be worth reading the top bit
- 11:46:07 [ChrisL]
- Of course its trivial to produce a test page that bady misuses something like svg syntax, if all you want is a discussion point or exhibit. if you want an existing page that uses svg *and renders as svg currently* then the amount of broken svg content with a non-xml syntax out there is very small
- 11:47:40 [anthony]
- AN: We have the opportunity to have more stricter conformance from the browers
- 11:47:58 [anthony]
- ... the market share of alternative browsers is rising
- 11:48:05 [anthony]
- ... I.E. is dropping
- 11:48:51 [aneumann]
- AN: and people won't ignore Firefox (with somewhere between 25 and 50%) if it is stricter in conformance
- 11:49:20 [heycam]
- CM: i think the argument about breaking pages is a subjective one. if there is a single page with weirdo svg in it that would break, then perhaps it is ok.
- 11:49:29 [aemmons]
- Any constructs added inline to text/html must specify a tolerant error handling model, for the following reasons:
- 11:49:41 [anthony]
- AE: The last requirement is this one here
- 11:50:17 [anthony]
- ... so that seems to be the main argument
- 11:50:23 [anthony]
- ... to not have an XML island
- 11:50:56 [anthony]
- ED: No one has specified where the draconian handling would be
- 11:51:27 [anthony]
- CL: The XML would have two children, one which is XML and one which is fallback
- 11:51:37 [anthony]
- ... if XML is not understood then use fallback
- 11:51:45 [anthony]
- ... or if XML is not well formed
- 11:51:49 [anthony]
- ... then use the fallback
- 11:51:58 [anthony]
- ... so you hand of the subtree to the XML parser
- 11:52:07 [anthony]
- ... and if it returns an error then you go to the fallback
- 11:52:26 [anthony]
- AN: So if you didn't define a fallback then would have some default rendering?
- 11:52:36 [anthony]
- CL: Perhaps nothing is rendered
- 11:52:46 [anthony]
- ED: In a legacy browser you'd get the text
- 11:52:49 [anthony]
- CL: That's right
- 11:53:06 [anthony]
- ... given that XML tag would have a common name, you could style that
- 11:53:17 [anthony]
- ... and hide it
- 11:53:26 [ChrisL]
- you could easily make a stylesheet to hide the xml part if needed
- 11:53:47 [anthony]
- AN: I think one of the reasons for tag soup is none of the browsers don't display the error messages well enough
- 11:54:00 [anthony]
- ... I.E. has the "!" to show the error
- 11:54:12 [anthony]
- ... it would be a good idea to have something like this for HTML and SVG as well
- 11:54:34 [anthony]
- ... would be a good idea to be able to see the error rather than open up a console
- 11:54:46 [anthony]
- CL: The browsers get used as authoring preview tools
- 11:54:57 [anthony]
- ... they have a preview mode
- 11:55:14 [anthony]
- ... that shows errors and warnings
- 11:55:25 [anthony]
- ... if the error is going to give you problems
- 11:55:38 [anthony]
- ... then they'll fix it
- 11:55:59 [anthony]
- ... it's knowing what the consequences are
- 11:56:22 [anthony]
- AE: It sounds to me like we could keep the last requirement
- 11:56:48 [anthony]
- ... and we have a reasonable way of satisfying it
- 11:57:30 [anthony]
- ED: So I guess we have some solid requirements
- 11:57:38 [anthony]
- ... we should update the wiki from this discussion
- 11:57:46 [anthony]
- ... and try to make a good proposal
- 11:57:58 [anthony]
- AE: Should we do up the requirements?
- 11:58:07 [anthony]
- CL: I think we need to write up the requirements better first
- 11:58:22 [anthony]
- ... I don't think we need to send them out separately
- 11:58:47 [anthony]
- ED: Since we can't edit the wiki (atm) will be have to wait until Doug gets back
- 11:59:10 [anthony]
- AE: my impressing is that there is a second stage to enable editing
- 11:59:19 [anthony]
- ... if you send an email to him
- 11:59:46 [anthony]
- ... and copy me
- 12:00:18 [anthony]
- ACTION: Emmons to update the wiki with the SVG in HTML requirements discussed
- 12:00:18 [trackbot-ng]
- Created ACTION-2006 - Update the wiki with the SVG in HTML requirements discussed [on Andrew Emmons - due 2008-05-06].
- 12:01:20 [ChrisL]
- Topic: SVG Open
- 12:02:06 [Zakim]
- -heycam
- 12:03:01 [ChrisL]
- Andreas says that paper review is about to start
- 12:03:02 [Zakim]
- -ed
- 12:03:06 [Zakim]
- -ChrisL
- 12:03:10 [Zakim]
- -aemmons
- 12:03:13 [Zakim]
- -Andreas_Neumann
- 12:03:18 [aneumann]
- aneumann has left #svg
- 12:04:57 [Zakim]
- -anthony
- 12:04:58 [Zakim]
- GA_SVGWG()6:30AM has ended
- 12:04:59 [Zakim]
- Attendees were aemmons, ed, heycam, anthony, Andreas_Neumann, ChrisL
- 12:05:41 [anthony]
- zakim, bye
- 12:05:41 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #svg
- 12:07:34 [anthony]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 12:07:34 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/29-svg-minutes.html anthony