<scribe> ScribeNick: fantasai

Charter

Peter: I updated charter with Chris's feedback
... Any comments?

<plinss> http://www.w3.org/Style/Group/2008/draft-charter2.html

<plinss> http://www.w3.org/Style/Group/2008/proposed-charter.html

Melinda: I have a concern
... Bullet number three we say "..."
... We should say for each feature
... It sounds like we musth have two complete implementations of the entire CSS2.1 rather than two implementations of each feature, etc.

Peter needs to check the process document

<melinda> http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/

David: Why was the wording about potentially merging and splitting modules taken out?

Peter: Since adding new modules would be done by amending the charter anyway

David: What would happen with the SVG features module that's being discussed?
... Does that require rechartering?

<melinda> http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#cfr #2

David: Does it require amending the charter?
... Or can we just do it?

Melinda: I didn't see any wording in the charter said that items not in the deliverables list can't be advanced along REC track

Peter: I didn't want to specifically call that out
... We do want to focus on our deliverables and not get sidetracked
... but I also don't want us to get stuck in charter process
... Wrt CSS-SVG thing.. I'm not sure if that fits our definition of working with other groups

Melinda: We might want to ask Chris how he thinks we should handle these kinds of emergent things

dsinger: On the subject on other material, we can always discuss things on the mailing list and work on it
... but getting formal time on it, that requires having it in the charter

Peter: our focus should be driving our deliverables to REC

dbaron: I can see this CSS-SVG thing advancing quickly enough that we might have multiple implementations by the end of this charter period
... Do we want to just let that slip?

Peter: how do we split this with SVG?

dbaron: I think if we're adding features to CSS, it should be in CSS

Peter: Isn't there something about changing interpretations of SVG?

dbaron: there might have been a few details

<melinda> Bert, what could go wrong?

<Bert> :-)

Peter: I'll make a note to ask Chris about cross-group issues, where that should live in our charter, using this as an example

<scribe> ACTION: Peter talk with Chris about cross-group issues [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/16-css-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-78 - Talk with Chris about cross-group issues [on Peter Linss - due 2008-07-23].

Bert: I think 11 RECs is a bit much
... We have a list of priority things...
... You really think we can make 11 RECs in just two years?

dbaron: Why did Paged Media get bumped up?

Elika: We're planning to publish Last Call this year
... Doesn't make sense to amend charter right after it gets approved

Peter: A lot of the things in the list are small and/or far along

Elika: A lot of them depend on CSS2.1

Melinda: I think even if we only worked on CSS2.1, it would be a stretch to finish it in 2 years

fantasai agrees

Bert still thinks variables should not be on our charter

Bert: That's an architectural concern, not a process concern

<dsinger> perhaps each of the 11 should have a calendar, to show what needs done by when

Peter: I hear your argument, but if we have implementors who want to work on it, we need to work on a spec otherwise it'll happen outside the standardization process

dsinger: I wonder if for each of the 11 we have a calendar to show what needs to be done by when
... otherwise we'll procrastinate until the end of the 2 years and realize that we can't finish them all

Melinda: We maybe don't need it in the charter, but it would be a good companion document

Peter: Do we call out dependencies anywhere?

fantasai: Most docs depend on CSS2.1. If it doesn't make it, most things won't make it

<anne> (also for the next three weeks, as I'm on holiday)

Melinda: only Selectors doesn't

fantasai: Should put that in the charter. Any other dependencies can be tweaked out, but anything that depends on CSS2.1 depends on CSS2.1
... If 2.1 doesn't make it to REC, almost nothing else will no matter how ready
... Only Selectors and Media Queries are independent

Peter: I will call out the dependency on 2.1 in the charter

<scribe> ACTION: Peter update charter in response to Melinda's comment on CR crit and 2.1 ep [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/16-css-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-79 - Update charter in response to Melinda's comment on CR crit and 2.1 ep [on Peter Linss - due 2008-07-23].

Color Module

Peter: We have permission to publish LC
... Chris says we don't need to ask for permission here

dbaron: That was the transition request. What about the pub request?
... Did you request a publication date?

Peter: no

dbaron: I'll work on that then

Peter: Where are we with implementation reports?

dbaron: We're in good shape for implementations, but don't have reports

Peter: Can we generate those by the end of the LC period?

dbaron: Once the LC is published, the test suite will reflect a published spec
... then we can request implementation reports

<scribe> ACTION: dbaron prepare implementation report template for CSS3 Color [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/16-css-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-80 - Prepare implementation report template for CSS3 Color [on David Baron - due 2008-07-23].

Marquee

Peter: Ready for LC?

fantasai: no. Still some issues with marquee-direction table
... sent message to www-style this morning

Peter: Let's not get into the technical discussion here
... revisit in a week

Test Suite Harness

Peter: Wanted to let everyone know that there's a demo version online

dbaron: what does it do?

<Bert> http://www.w3.org/2008/07/test-harness-css/

MWI test harness it is based off of : http://www.w3.org/2007/03/mth/harness

fantasai: it's Member-only until Dom has a chance to review the code

Peter: the goal is to make it easy to do implementation reports
... The other thing I want to discuss, we've been tossing idea of building a test management system

<anne> (FWIW, I think both Media Queries and Selectors have a grammar dependency on CSS 2.1)

Peter: Allow people to submit tests, manage reviews and approvals, etc.
... I don't think there's anything out there, we'd have to build one
... HP is interested in contributing resources, wanted to put out a call to see if anyone else is interested
... I'm not asking for answers or commitments, just give a thought
... If there are questions about why or what's the value, let's hear them
... I think having a system like this rapidly in place would be a big win for us, for CSS2.1 test suite in particular
... If there's something open source out there that we can use, can be modified, etc. that will get us there rapidly, let us know?
... We could use any able-bodied hands that can write PHP or whatever

dbaron: I wonder if we're being too picky about review reqs for the test suite
... Maybe we don't need as formal a review process as we have
... We should be trying to just get tests in
... Implementors can catch incorrect tests

Melinda: We are catching incorrect tests during the review process
... If we collected the thousands of tests on the Web, we could have a test suite with a lot of tests. Won't know how correct it is, or how much coverage

dbaron: My worry is that, if I want to contribute tests I don't know if the tests I want to write are in progress or if they're actually missing

Peter: That's one problem we want to solve with this test management system
... It will include tests that have been submitted, tests that are in the system
... One problem is tests ar currently hosted on submitters site, etc.

<anne> (I agree with dbaron that implementors will easily catch incorrect tests.)

Peter: I think it would be very beneficial for us to build software here

(anne, but not incorrect specs, which is something else I've been catching)

<anne> (Implementors are usually the ones catching spec bugs in my experience.)

Test Suite Interest Group

Peter: any thoughts?

Melinda: I think it'd just be more overhead unless we identify the set of people who can really focus on this.

Bert: I'm sure there are people who are good in making test suites.
... We are not that kind of people
... Maybe we aren't attracting that kind of people because we aren't that kind of people

dbaron: I don't think we're not that kind of people
... I think the not finishing the test suite is another problem, but I don't think you'll be able to pull in random people who aren't good CSS people and have them write good CSS tests

Peter: I think the question is, there are people out there who could be involved, would we be more likely to get people involved by forming a separate interest group, or is just informally coordinating through our group enough?

Bert: How would that affect the organizations that we represent? Would it make a difference to any colleagues?

Melinda: Hp has maybe one person

Peter: I think HP has been demonstrating that we're dedicated to the test suites whether or not there's an interest group

Jason: I have a request from someone at AOL who is interested in joining this group. He might be someone to work on tests

Peter: I think the benefit of Interest Group is to allow non-W3C-Members to be formally involved. I think that's the only thing we'd gain by forming an interest group
... Is that worth the extra overhead?

(for W3C, for participants in this group)

Peter: I see advantages and disadvantages

Melinda: Could ask www-style if anyone would be interested in joining to work on tests one day per week

<dsinger> if making progress on items people care about have dates for test suites % completion, I bet we'll see more activity

fantasai: I think having a test day is a great idea
... Mozilla does something like that with bug days

Bert: I don't think test suites are inspiring enough

<dsinger> test suites are inspiring if their absence has negative consequences (like, you get dropped from the charter and you won't get published)

fantasai: we have several volunteers on the public test list who are writing tests because they think it's interesting
... I need help reviewing their tests

<dbaron> fantasai, is there a list somewhere of the tests that have been contributed that need review?

Melinda: I'd like to see a milestone schedule for CSS2.1, although i don't know how though

dbaron, I can't remember atm, I'll ping you after the meeting

melinda: Maybe Elika and I can discuss and toss something out next week

<dbaron> fantasai, not just for me... the list should be publicly available somewhere from Style/CSS/Test/

yes, you're absolutely right

Meeting closed

I think I had a place to put that, but I don't remember if I updated it

melinda: when did you want to discuss tests? Arron's interested, too

RRSAgent: make logs public

RRSAgent: make minutes

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133  of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/just be more overhead/just be more overhead unless we identify the set of people who can really focus on this./
Found ScribeNick: fantasai
Inferring Scribes: fantasai
Default Present: dsinger, plinss, Bert, Ming, jason_cranfordtea, Melinda_Grant, fantasai, George, David_Baron, [Microsoft]
Present: dsinger plinss Bert Ming jason_cranfordtea Melinda_Grant fantasai George David_Baron [Microsoft]
Regrets: anne

WARNING: No meeting title found!
You should specify the meeting title like this:
<dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting


WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Got date from IRC log name: 16 Jul 2008
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/07/16-css-minutes.html
People with action items: dbaron peter

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.