SVG Working Group Teleconference -- 29 May 2008

<trackbot-ng> Date: 29 May 2008

<scribe> scribe: Erik

<scribe> scribeNick: ed

<ChrisL> I answered a couple of Kalles font questions

<ChrisL> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008May/0053.html

<ChrisL> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008May/0055.html

<aemmons> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008AprJun/0068.html

Errors in approved tests

<aemmons> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008AprJun/0065.html

ED: so these tests are invalid as I see it, how do we proceed?

CL: mark them as non-approved, and take them out for this release
... Kalle also writes that there are additional tests that are invalid
... some of the converted 1.1 tests

AE: we'd have to reprocess the testsuite after this, right AG?

AG: yes, but it's all ready, just run some scripts

AE: AG will you mark tests as non-approved, and re-run the scripts?

AG: sure
... which ones should I unapprove?

CL: fonts-gyph-03 is ok
... text-intro-03 I'll fix that now

AE: ok, so that will be fixed now before we do the publication

AG: ok, will have testsuite ready for publication on tuesday next week

CL: the process of publishing is not that difficult, we just need to decide to do it

AE: so let's do the publication on tuesday next week

<anthony> ACTION: anthony to send an email out asking for tests to un-approve and to regenerate the test suite based on the feedback [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-svg-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-2044 - Send an email out asking for tests to un-approve and to regenerate the test suite based on the feedback [on Anthony Grasso - due 2008-06-05].

RESOLUTION: we will publish the 1.2T testsuite on wednesday June 4, all pending changes need to be in before tuesday

public cvs transition

AE: status update?
... doug was trying to get the repository added, but we didn't assign anyone to move stuff over
... is that something only the staff contact can do?

CL: everyone in the group needs cvs access
... so that we can all read and write to it

AE: once that's in place anyone can do that

CL: yes, but we need to be careful with revision numbers (especially on the testsuite)

AE: and the history will be lost

CL: yes
... the 1.2T spec, 1.2 specs and 1.1 errata should be moved

<ChrisL> need to talk to systems team to ensure all wg members have read write cvs access

AE: who wants to do that?

CL: i can do that

AE: just needs to be coordinated so that we don't check into the old cvs-space
... decide on a time, or send an email about it?

CL: will send email

<scribe> ACTION: CL to move the 1.2T spec, 1.2 modules, 1.1 errata to the new public cvs-space [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-svg-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-2045 - Move the 1.2T spec, 1.2 modules, 1.1 errata to the new public cvs-space [on Chris Lilley - due 2008-06-05].

the open edits action review

<aemmons_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008AprJun/0064.html

AE: I'll start sending out weekly updates on edits, to make sure that actions are kept at a minimal level
... since the spec was changed after tests were made

animate-elem-224

<aemmons_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008AprJun/0063.html

AE: this is in response to our review comments (from the F2F) about making a simpler test
... just wanted to respond, the tests are complex and that makes it take longer to review them

TZ: it tests many things at once, it was difficult to verify it

AE: yes, there are a few tests like it
... is it worth trying to make the tests simpler?

CL: he's synthesizing a quadratic curve
... suggest putting it out
... i'm worried if it requires particular precision

AE: the expected result is way different from what's actually happening

TZ: it's also made more complex because of the multiple animations
... i'm going to let the implementors judge if it's easy enough
... and that it's testable

AE: because it's a complex test we'd have to debug it over the course of several days
... it's a resource issue

TZ: is it just this test, or are the others that players don't pass?

AE: there are others

TZ: i could take a look at those tests in house and see if we can verify them
... I'm going to ask the developers to verify the correctness of the tests

CL: this particular ones can't be simplified
... he's correct that you can't simplify it if you want to have a curve
... he's testing two combined animations on one attribute
... otherwise it would just be animated on a line
... since it's a quadratic curve and svg has quadratic curves he can show the correct trajectory
... think the test is correct

AE: I can email the group with the list of DOH tests that are still left to review

CL: right, but this one is fairly simple still

<scribe> ACTION: TZ to review the 1.2T DOH tests that are still unreviewed (AE will send a list of the tests to public-svg-wg) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-svg-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - TZ

<scribe> ACTION: atanas to review the 1.2T DOH tests that are still unreviewed (AE will send a list of the tests to public-svg-wg) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-svg-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-2046 - Review the 1.2T DOH tests that are still unreviewed (AE will send a list of the tests to public-svg-wg) [on Atanas (Tony) Zlatinski - due 2008-06-05].

<scribe> ACTION: AE to email DOH to say that we're doing additional review on his tests [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-svg-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-2047 - Email DOH to say that we're doing additional review on his tests [on Andrew Emmons - due 2008-06-05].

<aemmons_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008May/0047.html

unanswered questions on www-svg

AE: some of these have been discussed

CL: I've responded to the first two

AE: no spec changes?

CL: not in svg, but in css

<ChrisL> clarifications, not conformance changes

AE: for the third one, cameron have already had some feedback but there's been no official response

CL: I'm halfway through that one

AE: ok, the last one then

CL: he's correct
... the spec says that xml:space applies to text block elements, which is text and textarea only
... the test puts in on tspan
... which should be possible
... but we need to edit the spec
... just going to check the current spec
... it refers to text element content
... need to say that xml:space also applies to children of text element content
... we need to errata 1.1 and change 1.2T

DS: I started to add a definition for text content child elements, since you may have a title for example
... or an anchor tag

<scribe> ACTION: CL to add the child definition of text content element to cover the xml:space issue and add an errata 1.1 item, and fix the 1.2T spec, and reply to kalle [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-svg-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-2048 - Add the child definition of text content element to cover the xml:space issue and add an errata 1.1 item, and fix the 1.2T spec, and reply to kalle [on Chris Lilley - due 2008-06-05].

AE: do we need to track the list better, and make sure it's on the agenda each week?

CL: yes, and reply to each message quickly with links to the public minutes

AE: yes

<ChrisL> its the same text in the repository version

<ChrisL> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/Group/repository/spec/mobile/1.2/1.2NG/publish/intro.html#TermTextContentBlockElement

DS: using tracker would be useful, many things falls through the cracks
... in trying to answer to questions, we should still prioritize spec work, we should set aside about 30 mins each telcon for that

AE: do you suggest putting things in the issue tracker as soon as they come in?

CL: the new tracker can create agendas from the open issues and actions
... based on due dates too

AE: the public can't add issues though?

CL: right
... but they can read it

DS: better than the bugtracker
... having two tracking systems is a bad idea

AE: right, so just paying attention to the www-svg list and adding them to the issue tracker would be a good idea

<aemmons_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008AprJun/0061.html

XHR review

AE,CL: haven't had time to review

DS: have read it, has alot of dependencies on HTML5
... have asked for something saying that the host language defines somethings
... there are definitions of terms that are defined in HTML5
... the content-type, if you have an XML type do this, otherwise refer to HTML5
... need to read through it
... reversing the dependency chain would be an option

AE: so svg couldn't reference this, since it has HTML5 dependencies

DS: it wouldn't be neat, but I don't agree with your statement
... it has provisions for processing XML
... it's not exclusive to HTML5

AE: what's the due date?

ED: June 2

DS: it's unlikely the dependencies will change unless defined elsewhere

AE: if we want to have a formal review we need to get it done soon
... so, the dependencies on HTML5

DS: right, but it's small parts of it still

TZ: is it possible to do our own interface?

DS: we've done that already, but we will try to use XHR in the future
... that's the preference

AE: in order to get a review we need reviews to the list and to compile the list of comments

<ChrisL> i was dropped from the call, redialing

DS: I'll review it, ed and heycam should do it too
... we could ask for an extension
... will do that

CL: right, so we can do that and still try to get review comments in order

<scribe> ACTION: heycam to review the XHR spec and send to public-svg-wg [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-svg-minutes.html#action07]

<trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - heycam

<scribe> ACTION: cameron to review the XHR spec and send to public-svg-wg [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-svg-minutes.html#action08]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-2049 - Review the XHR spec and send to public-svg-wg [on Cameron McCormack - due 2008-06-05].

<scribe> ACTION: DS to review the XHR spec and send comments to public-svg-wg [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-svg-minutes.html#action09]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-2050 - Review the XHR spec and send comments to public-svg-wg [on Doug Schepers - due 2008-06-05].

<scribe> ACTION: ED to review the XHR spec and send comments to public-svg-wg [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-svg-minutes.html#action10]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-2051 - Review the XHR spec and send comments to public-svg-wg [on Erik Dahlström - due 2008-06-05].

<anthony> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Nuremburg_F2F_2008

SVG WG F2F

ED: can we confirm these are the correct dates?

CL: if we have a testfest before then we also need to decide those dates

<scribe> ACTION: to respond to alexander adams about the SVG WG F2F nuremberg dates, and get information for the wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-svg-minutes.html#action11]

<trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - to

<scribe> ACTION: ED to respond to alexander adams about the SVG WG F2F nuremberg dates, and get information for the wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-svg-minutes.html#action12]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-2052 - Respond to alexander adams about the SVG WG F2F nuremberg dates, and get information for the wiki [on Erik Dahlström - due 2008-06-05].

testfest

AE: not sure if I can travel for personal reasons

CL: not a problem, w3c staff can run the tests if the implementation is available

AE: so we need to pick a date and location

CL: if we have it sooner we'll get results quicker, but later if we want better results
... thinking july perhaps, in good time before the svg open?

AE: so a virtual testfest is perhaps an idea, so that we don't all have to be present at some location

CL: if people have travelled somewhere, you get the attention of everyone, and can ask anyone for running paricular tests

AG: we could also do it right before the nuremberg f2f

AE: how many more testfests do we need you think?
... it's resource intensive
... we could take time from the f2f to do it

DS: if we're having a testfest in raleigh, i'd have to get somewhere for us to meet

AE: maybe not decide now, but we should try to nail this down for next week

telcon times

DS: this time doesn't work well for heycam
... don't want to lose him from the team
... especially given the constraints stuff
... is it possible to have telcons at different times?

ED,CL: yes, no problem

CL: moving it later wouldn't make it worse for him, since he can't do this time either

DS: if we moved it back to the original time he could make it
... we moved it because of TZ
... we could have one late and one early call
... if we can't find a suitable time for everyone

AE: so we would fluctuate between heycam and slim

RESOLUTION: for tuesdays, let's do the new time, thursdays let's do the old time

- DRAFT -

SVG Working Group Teleconference

29 May 2008

Attendees

Contents