IRC log of svg on 2008-06-10
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 12:31:24 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #svg
- 12:31:24 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-svg-irc
- 12:31:26 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 12:31:26 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #svg
- 12:31:28 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG
- 12:31:28 [Zakim]
- ok, trackbot; I see GA_SVGWG()8:30AM scheduled to start now
- 12:31:29 [trackbot]
- Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference
- 12:31:29 [trackbot]
- Date: 10 June 2008
- 12:31:56 [Zakim]
- GA_SVGWG()8:30AM has now started
- 12:32:03 [Zakim]
- +??P4
- 12:32:12 [aemmons]
- zakim, ??p4 is me
- 12:32:12 [Zakim]
- +aemmons; got it
- 12:32:16 [Zakim]
- +??P5
- 12:32:17 [Zakim]
- +??P6
- 12:32:25 [ed]
- Zakim, ??P5 is me
- 12:32:25 [Zakim]
- +ed; got it
- 12:32:35 [anthony]
- Zakim, ??P6 is me
- 12:32:35 [Zakim]
- +anthony; got it
- 12:35:02 [shepazu]
- Zakim, call shepazu
- 12:35:02 [Zakim]
- ok, shepazu; the call is being made
- 12:35:03 [Zakim]
- +Shepazu
- 12:36:14 [Zakim]
- +zlatinski
- 12:37:31 [zlatinski]
- zlatinski has joined #svg
- 12:37:40 [anthony]
- Scribe: anthony
- 12:37:48 [anthony]
- Chair: Andrew Emmons
- 12:37:57 [aemmons]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008AprJun/0121.html
- 12:38:08 [anthony]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008AprJun/0121.html
- 12:38:41 [anthony]
- Topic: publication of SVGT 1.2 testsuite
- 12:38:50 [anthony]
- AE: Erik sent an email to the public list
- 12:38:55 [anthony]
- ... with sort of a review
- 12:39:16 [anthony]
- ... do we feel comfortable releasing the test as is?
- 12:39:30 [anthony]
- DS: Don't see what the problem is
- 12:39:37 [anthony]
- ... we can always add to the test suite
- 12:39:53 [anthony]
- ED: Miss matching reference images are a small problem
- 12:40:04 [anthony]
- ... The incorrect reference images are a bigger problem
- 12:40:30 [anthony]
- AE: Regarding the existing of tests that haven't been approved
- 12:40:35 [anthony]
- ... and have the draft water mark
- 12:40:44 [anthony]
- ... I think Chris was after feedback
- 12:41:09 [anthony]
- ... I don't mind either way
- 12:41:19 [anthony]
- ED: Some tests looked more complete than others
- 12:41:31 [anthony]
- ... in my opinion I think we should fix the ones with serious errors
- 12:41:39 [anthony]
- ... such as mismatching reference images
- 12:41:56 [anthony]
- AE: So what does everyone else think?
- 12:42:41 [anthony]
- ... there are people that may be waiting for the test suite
- 12:42:52 [anthony]
- ... e.g. OMA
- 12:43:13 [ed]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008AprJun/0103.html
- 12:43:24 [anthony]
- ED: I guess another option is to publish my mail along with the test suite
- 12:43:31 [anthony]
- AE: A list of known issues
- 12:43:39 [anthony]
- ... that might be a good compromise
- 12:44:08 [anthony]
- AG: I'm fine with that
- 12:44:16 [anthony]
- AE: So if we go ahead with this
- 12:44:22 [anthony]
- ... when can we publish it?
- 12:44:42 [anthony]
- ... my impression is that this is something Doug or Chris have to do
- 12:44:54 [anthony]
- DS: I can probably publish it this week
- 12:46:34 [anthony]
- RESOLUTION: We will proceed to with publication of the test suite package currently in CVS and we will package known issues along with it
- 12:47:45 [anthony]
- ACTION: Erik to Update list of known issues and add draft water marking back to tests that are still in their infancy
- 12:47:45 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-2057 - Update list of known issues and add draft water marking back to tests that are still in their infancy [on Erik Dahlström - due 2008-06-17].
- 12:48:12 [anthony]
- ED: Should I put the list of known issues on the wiki
- 12:48:14 [anthony]
- AE: Sure
- 12:48:51 [anthony]
- Topic: status update for moving specs to public CVS
- 12:48:57 [anthony]
- DS: Is that me?
- 12:49:16 [anthony]
- AE: I seem to remember Chris saying he could do that task
- 12:49:47 [anthony]
- DS: He's been a bit sick lately and hasn't been able to get to it
- 12:49:57 [anthony]
- ... I'd like to get to doing it this week if I can
- 12:50:14 [anthony]
- ... have a lot to do at the moment
- 12:50:48 [anthony]
- ... It shouldn't be too hard to transition it to it's new home
- 12:51:00 [anthony]
- ... just need a block of time to do it
- 12:51:08 [anthony]
- AE: We have to coordinate on the list when we are going to do it
- 12:51:30 [anthony]
- ... so changes don't get lost
- 12:51:32 [ed]
- http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2039
- 12:52:56 [anthony]
- ACTION: Doug to look into problem with new tracker having incorrect links to minutes and notes in issues
- 12:52:56 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-2058 - Look into problem with new tracker having incorrect links to minutes and notes in issues [on Doug Schepers - due 2008-06-17].
- 12:53:51 [anthony]
- Topic: XHR review
- 12:54:05 [anthony]
- DS: Both Erik and Cameron have sent in reviews
- 12:54:15 [anthony]
- ... I had already sent some comments earlier on my own
- 12:54:40 [anthony]
- ... I haven't had the time to do any more review
- 12:54:53 [anthony]
- ... I think Erik and Cameron have caught all of the big issues
- 12:55:09 [anthony]
- ... We should probably compile the two sets of comments together
- 12:55:13 [anthony]
- ... to send off
- 12:55:17 [anthony]
- AE: Sounds good
- 12:55:29 [anthony]
- ... the comments have already been put on the list for some time
- 12:55:41 [anthony]
- ... so if any one had any issues with it they could start a discussion
- 12:55:53 [anthony]
- ... does everyone else agree with Doug's proposal?
- 12:55:58 [anthony]
- ED: Sounds good to me
- 12:56:50 [anthony]
- ACTION: Erik to collate together Cameron's and your own comments for XHR and send them to the WebApps list
- 12:56:50 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-2059 - Collate together Cameron's and your own comments for XHR and send them to the WebApps list [on Erik Dahlström - due 2008-06-17].
- 12:57:29 [anthony]
- Topic: HTML + SVG discussion
- 12:58:05 [anthony]
- AE: So has everyone had a chance to read Tony's proposals?
- 12:58:09 [anthony]
- AG: I did
- 12:58:12 [anthony]
- ED: Yup
- 12:58:14 [anthony]
- AE: I did too
- 12:58:16 [anthony]
- DS: Yes
- 12:58:40 [anthony]
- AE: There a number of ways is to go through the document
- 12:59:03 [anthony]
- ... if you read it did you have comments for the list or are your saving them for the telcon?
- 12:59:12 [anthony]
- DS: Not sure on the best way to proceed
- 12:59:35 [anthony]
- AE: We could use Erik's email as a focus point for discussion
- 12:59:51 [anthony]
- ED: Is Power Point format file the way we want to present it?
- 13:00:06 [anthony]
- DS: Wrong format for the audience
- 13:00:19 [anthony]
- ... need to present it into spec format
- 13:00:40 [anthony]
- TZ: I was thinking of changing to HTML format after presenting it in Power Point
- 13:01:19 [anthony]
- ... what I could do is convert it to PDF
- 13:01:25 [anthony]
- DS: We need to rework it into HTML
- 13:01:30 [anthony]
- ... needs to be a single document
- 13:01:38 [anthony]
- ... instead of a bunch of pages
- 13:01:41 [anthony]
- ... I can help do that
- 13:02:30 [anthony]
- AE: So that make sense having it in HTML
- 13:02:45 [anthony]
- ... so we know it will be in a different format
- 13:02:56 [anthony]
- ... do we continue reviewing this?
- 13:03:02 [anthony]
- ... or do we transcribe this to HTML?
- 13:03:11 [anthony]
- DS: There is also Erik's spec text
- 13:03:26 [anthony]
- ... I guess we will be making a couple of different proposals
- 13:03:37 [anthony]
- AE: What is Erik's spec text?
- 13:03:43 [anthony]
- ED: I will send this out
- 13:03:56 [anthony]
- s/this/the spec text/
- 13:04:38 [anthony]
- AE: So let's just start with Erik's comments
- 13:05:08 [anthony]
- ... for the first comment
- 13:05:21 [anthony]
- ... - Slide "Interleaved Parsing of HTML - SVG"
- 13:05:51 [anthony]
- ... I guess it's just talking about the assertion of not being able to put HTML in SVG
- 13:06:00 [anthony]
- ... I agree with you there Erik
- 13:06:13 [anthony]
- ... So may it is just a matter for taking out the sentence
- 13:06:36 [anthony]
- TZ: Not only is there complication from the parser side
- 13:06:43 [anthony]
- ... I would also think about rendering side of things
- 13:06:53 [anthony]
- ... I'm a little bit concerned about embedding HTML
- 13:07:04 [anthony]
- ... lets say we have HTML table inside a group
- 13:07:10 [anthony]
- ... and you start rotating the group
- 13:07:29 [anthony]
- ... what would you do with the table inside the group?
- 13:07:40 [anthony]
- ... this is the concern I have
- 13:07:53 [anthony]
- ... would it be a more complicated rendering model
- 13:08:04 [anthony]
- ... does this make sense to embed HTML in SVG
- 13:08:14 [anthony]
- DS: Firstly there is a CSS transformations proposal by apple
- 13:08:27 [anthony]
- ... so I think they are very much interested way in bring in transformations
- 13:08:37 [anthony]
- ... in a compatible way with SVG
- 13:09:02 [anthony]
- ... I don't think that from the rendering perspective that it is a problem
- 13:09:18 [anthony]
- ... I don't think that particular rendering is the problem
- 13:09:27 [anthony]
- ... there may be other problems
- 13:09:43 [anthony]
- ED: I suppose you could spec it like HTML would respect those elements
- 13:09:56 [anthony]
- ... I don't think it's a problem from the SVG point of view anyway
- 13:10:22 [anthony]
- DS: I think the rendering problems are orthogonal to the parsing problems
- 13:10:48 [anthony]
- ... I actually have pretty good faith to work with us and the CDF working group
- 13:10:57 [anthony]
- ... to define the kind of rendering that we think is compelling
- 13:11:03 [anthony]
- ... that we think users are going to want to do
- 13:11:22 [anthony]
- AE: So what I'm hearing is this sentence was to restrict the model
- 13:12:09 [anthony]
- ... we should probably put something to the effect that the HTML needs to be well formed when in the SVG
- 13:12:26 [anthony]
- TZ: One thing I didn't quite get did you want me to incorporate those comments into the document?
- 13:12:46 [anthony]
- ... or Doug did you want to incorporate it into HTML
- 13:12:53 [anthony]
- DS: However we want to do it is fine with me
- 13:13:16 [anthony]
- AE: We probably need to get the HTML one done sooner than later
- 13:13:43 [anthony]
- DS: If we can have somebody who wouldn't mind converting it to spec style HTML
- 13:13:47 [anthony]
- ... that would be good
- 13:13:52 [anthony]
- ED: I guess I could do that
- 13:13:56 [anthony]
- ... bit pressed on time
- 13:14:10 [anthony]
- DS: I have a feeling we are not acting in a timely manner
- 13:16:31 [anthony]
- ACTION: Anthony to convert the Power Point slides for SVG in HTML to a HTML spec-ish kind of document
- 13:16:31 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-2060 - Convert the Power Point slides for SVG in HTML to a HTML spec-ish kind of document [on Anthony Grasso - due 2008-06-17].
- 13:17:01 [anthony]
- AE: To answer Tony's question any changes we make will go directly into the HTML document
- 13:17:40 [anthony]
- ... so is this our secondary proposal?
- 13:17:59 [anthony]
- ED: So it's basically what we've started to discuss in the power point
- 13:18:06 [anthony]
- AE: Should we start from this then?
- 13:18:19 [anthony]
- ED: I think the Power Point document is a pretty good high level view of it
- 13:18:37 [anthony]
- ... from the HTML side of things they are looking for something like that
- 13:18:52 [anthony]
- ... based on the last draft that had SVG stuff in it
- 13:19:56 [anthony]
- AG: Where to I put this HTML proposal?
- 13:20:06 [anthony]
- DS: Could you just upload them into CVS?
- 13:20:16 [anthony]
- ED: In the public one you mean?
- 13:20:29 [anthony]
- DS: Yes
- 13:21:24 [anthony]
- AE: I guess one of my concerns is that these things stay in sync with HTML
- 13:22:04 [anthony]
- ... mean track the changes in our HTML proposal
- 13:22:34 [anthony]
- ED: Would be good to link to the latest draft of their spec
- 13:22:42 [anthony]
- ... and maybe use bits from it
- 13:23:19 [ed]
- s/latest draft of their spec/last draft that had the svg stuff in it/
- 13:23:40 [anthony]
- AE: As far as the first point goes we will specify rules for embedding HTML in SVG
- 13:23:45 [anthony]
- ... mainly that it has to be well formed
- 13:23:58 [anthony]
- AE: For the next point it seems faily straight forward
- 13:24:07 [anthony]
- ... that's just something on your end Anthony
- 13:24:14 [anthony]
- ... to change these things to lower case
- 13:24:29 [anthony]
- AG: Ok
- 13:24:41 [anthony]
- AE: So the next one is the cascading parser structure
- 13:25:09 [anthony]
- TZ: This was intended to be a high level diagram
- 13:25:36 [anthony]
- ... the reason why HTML parser is on the top because it is the primary one
- 13:25:45 [anthony]
- ... but maybe we need to restructure the diagram
- 13:25:49 [anthony]
- ... but I agree with you
- 13:26:01 [anthony]
- ... do we have any ideas how this should be structured?
- 13:26:08 [anthony]
- ED: Could group all the parsers together
- 13:26:18 [anthony]
- ... maybe make on block a primary initial parser
- 13:26:22 [anthony]
- ... it might make it more clear
- 13:26:36 [anthony]
- TZ: Do we want this tokeniser to be the primary parser?
- 13:26:49 [anthony]
- ED: I guess it's not wrong to put it inbetween
- 13:26:57 [anthony]
- ...but it may not be required for all parsers
- 13:28:39 [ed]
- For document format XYZ: file input -> tokenizer -> parser (html, css, svg, xml, javascript)
- 13:29:17 [ed]
- and inside the parser box show the connections between different parsers
- 13:29:32 [anthony]
- AE: So we are ok with putting the tokenizer step in between?
- 13:29:42 [anthony]
- TZ: I had a page explaining it
- 13:29:53 [anthony]
- ... but Erik you had a problem with putting it in
- 13:30:32 [anthony]
- ED: I had no problem with putting it in
- 13:30:46 [anthony]
- ... but I just wanted to point out that the current tokenizer is too limited for XML
- 13:31:10 [anthony]
- AE: Tony are you ok to take another shot at the diagram
- 13:31:42 [anthony]
- ACTION: zlatinski to Modify the cascading parser diagram
- 13:31:43 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-2061 - Modify the cascading parser diagram [on Atanas (Tony) Zlatinski - due 2008-06-17].
- 13:32:01 [ed]
- s/current tokenizer is too limited for XML/the way the tokenizer is specced in HTML5 makes it too limited for proper use for XML/
- 13:32:14 [anthony]
- AE: The next comment there from Erik is the content provider
- 13:33:02 [anthony]
- TZ: I agree the comment from Erik that "content provider" is not quite clear\
- 13:33:21 [anthony]
- ... language handler or content handler sound good to me
- 13:33:47 [anthony]
- AE: Are there other terms used in the HTML 5 document that is familiar to them
- 13:34:33 [anthony]
- TZ: It's a particular plug to handle a particular language
- 13:34:48 [anthony]
- DS: I'd say content handler
- 13:34:55 [anthony]
- ... or sub-parser
- 13:35:01 [anthony]
- TZ: Content handler sounds good too
- 13:35:07 [anthony]
- AE: Sounds reasonable me too
- 13:35:55 [anthony]
- ... Anthony can you change content provider to content handler
- 13:35:59 [anthony]
- AG: Ok
- 13:36:16 [anthony]
- AE: The next one we've kind of discussed already
- 13:36:27 [anthony]
- TZ: Do you have any idea how to address this problem
- 13:37:04 [anthony]
- ED: You don't need a special tokenizer to handle each language
- 13:37:37 [anthony]
- ... if you read the HTML 5 spec
- 13:37:51 [anthony]
- ... the tokenzier throws away information about the casing
- 13:38:17 [anthony]
- ... You could put an additional sentence saying as long as the tokenizer has to keep enough information to do both HTML and XML parsing on the output
- 13:38:52 [anthony]
- AE: Makes sense to me
- 13:39:08 [anthony]
- ... can keep sentence about special consideration
- 13:39:15 [anthony]
- ... Tony does that sound fine?
- 13:39:17 [anthony]
- TZ: Yes
- 13:39:35 [anthony]
- AE: Next one is slide for element identification
- 13:39:43 [anthony]
- TZ: Maybe this part wasn't quite clear
- 13:40:15 [anthony]
- ... this is from the perspective of how you switch to a particular language
- 13:40:31 [anthony]
- ... we have to kind of reshuffle things around to make it more clear
- 13:41:01 [anthony]
- ED: It still isn't clear enough to me what happens when it switches
- 13:41:12 [anthony]
- ... does it switch at the element you started parsing on
- 13:41:25 [anthony]
- ... or does it continue until it reaches something it can't handle
- 13:41:32 [anthony]
- ... that's my question
- 13:42:00 [anthony]
- AE: Tony is that something we should discuss more
- 13:42:14 [anthony]
- TZ: This is probably one of the major issues
- 13:42:25 [anthony]
- ... I could probably restructure this bit to make it more clear
- 13:42:53 [anthony]
- ED: Which element you're currently in my define what the element is
- 13:42:57 [anthony]
- ... in a HTML a tag
- 13:43:02 [anthony]
- ... or an SVG a tag
- 13:43:54 [anthony]
- s/HTML a tag/HTML <a> tag/
- 13:44:04 [anthony]
- s/SVG a tag/SVG <a> tag/
- 13:45:38 [anthony]
- TZ: From this perspective going back from the SVG to HTML
- 13:45:43 [anthony]
- ED: That's what we need to define
- 13:45:46 [anthony]
- ... when to stop
- 13:45:53 [anthony]
- ... when to switch back
- 13:46:11 [anthony]
- ... in my opinion is we find an SVG element we switch to XML parsing
- 13:46:28 [anthony]
- ... and when we find the closing svg element we switch to HTML parsing
- 13:47:53 [anthony]
- AE: Erik when you say XML well formed HTML in SVG
- 13:48:10 [anthony]
- ... is that XHTML or HTML that is well formed to XML
- 13:48:18 [anthony]
- ED: As long as it's well formed
- 13:48:32 [anthony]
- AE: What about casing, upper and lower mixture
- 13:48:44 [anthony]
- ED: As long as the start and end tags match
- 13:49:18 [anthony]
- TZ: I haven't done any examples or discussed it in any detail
- 13:49:29 [anthony]
- ... I can look into this section into more detail
- 13:49:36 [anthony]
- ... I could put a bit more work into that and make it more clear
- 13:49:54 [anthony]
- AE: So this is the element identification section
- 13:50:04 [anthony]
- ... that's what you're talking about reworking those sections?
- 13:50:51 [anthony]
- ACTION: zlantinski to Revisit the element identification slides based on our comments
- 13:50:51 [trackbot]
- Sorry, couldn't find user - zlantinski
- 13:51:33 [anthony]
- ED: I'm just noting if you want tag soup HTML and SVG interleaved in away
- 13:52:00 [anthony]
- ... it would work in their proposal but would not be conformant XML
- 13:52:13 [ed]
- s/in away/in any way you like/
- 13:52:27 [anthony]
- AE: I noticed some parts are yellow, Anthony that's where you made changes?
- 13:52:30 [anthony]
- AG: Yes
- 13:52:40 [ed]
- s/conformant XML/conformant XML on the source level/
- 13:52:51 [anthony]
- AE: Continue with the Jave script content slide
- 13:53:42 [anthony]
- TZ: You don't see any cases where you'd like to have separate ECMA script
- 13:54:03 [anthony]
- ... like have a separate ECMA script context
- 13:54:03 [ed]
- <object data="some.svg"> will give you a separate script context
- 13:54:54 [anthony]
- TZ: The document implied that the content handler would have a separate ECMA script handler
- 13:55:01 [anthony]
- ... you are saying that they should have the same context
- 13:55:05 [anthony]
- ... in the same DOM
- 13:55:19 [anthony]
- ... as soon as you get to a new content handler you make a new context
- 13:56:00 [anthony]
- ... so practically you're saying the control is from the child content not from the parent content
- 13:56:11 [anthony]
- ED: Just from looking at how it works today, you get the same DOM
- 13:56:30 [anthony]
- ... I would expect it to be the same from HTML as it is in XHTML
- 13:56:45 [anthony]
- s/from HTML/for HTML/
- 13:56:53 [anthony]
- ED: I think you should build the same DOM
- 13:57:09 [anthony]
- TZ: I should change the section to make it clear that they have to be the same one
- 13:57:22 [anthony]
- ... and that the parent passes this down to the child
- 13:57:31 [anthony]
- ... this being the context
- 13:57:50 [anthony]
- AE: Next one is CSS parsing
- 13:58:25 [ChrisL]
- ChrisL has joined #svg
- 13:59:05 [anthony]
- TZ: If we always enforce using the same document then we should use the same CSS rules
- 13:59:12 [anthony]
- AE: Yes so it's the same as above
- 13:59:49 [anthony]
- ... do we need to discuss that section more or can we move on?
- 14:00:19 [anthony]
- TZ: With regards to SVG widgets section
- 14:01:18 [anthony]
- ... just clarifying your comment Erik
- 14:02:07 [anthony]
- AE: So you could have some CSS styling in the SVG but it will apply to any node in the document not just the SVG
- 14:02:24 [anthony]
- ... because it's a single context
- 14:03:20 [anthony]
- ED: I think the idea of having SVG widgets that provide alternative recognition for SVG
- 14:03:33 [anthony]
- ... sounds a bit like XSLT or XSBL
- 14:03:46 [ed]
- s/XSBL/XBL/
- 14:04:01 [anthony]
- TZ: HTML doesn't have name spaces, so you put all the comment information inside the widget
- 14:04:17 [anthony]
- ED: Could do that today with an XSL style sheet
- 14:04:30 [anthony]
- TZ: So you're saying there is no point to talk about widgets at all?
- 14:04:37 [anthony]
- ED: That's my opinion
- 14:04:46 [anthony]
- TZ: Do you mind sending me an example
- 14:04:54 [anthony]
- ... of the concept
- 14:04:56 [anthony]
- ED: Sure
- 14:05:37 [Zakim]
- -aemmons
- 14:05:44 [Zakim]
- -zlatinski
- 14:05:52 [Zakim]
- -anthony
- 14:05:58 [Zakim]
- -ed
- 14:06:00 [Zakim]
- GA_SVGWG()8:30AM has ended
- 14:06:04 [Zakim]
- Attendees were aemmons, ed, anthony, Shepazu, zlatinski
- 14:06:15 [anthony]
- Zakim, bye
- 14:06:15 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #svg
- 14:06:21 [anthony]
- RRSAgent, make minutes
- 14:06:21 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-svg-minutes.html anthony
- 14:18:32 [MikeSmith]
- MikeSmith has joined #svg