See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribe: melinda
David: I sent an item for SVGMobile Last Call
Bert: Not a lot of comments;
Bert updates us on the minor changes summarized in his email.
Daniel: In fact we are back to
the previous state where we didn't mention the REC track.
... Steve, are you ok with these changes?
... You were most concerned about which modules were in scope for legal reasons?
Steve: I'll need to check with Adobe legal. But I'm not surprised about these changes.
Daniel: Hakon isn't here, but
left us with a comment asking to move GCPM up from low priority
... I'm a bit reluctant to do that without committment for implementations.
Peter: I don't have a problem moving it into the 'medium' priority list, but we can't move it into the 'high' priority list.
<glazou> dbaron: correct, EDF
Alex: Do we have two implementations of 'variables'?
<glazou> Bert: s/Disruptive Innovations/Electricit� de France although I'd really prefer that mention to be dropped...
fantasai: We have one implementation and another 'high interest'?
Alex: It would probably help to have an implementation count next to modules.
Peter: We collected that info, we can publish it I guess.
Daniel: Anyone have problems with the charter now?
(Some discussion about changing the liaisson section.
Daniel: I suggest we wait for Adobe's reply regarding the charter.
<dbaron> Issues list for css3-color LC is at http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css3-color
David: I just have one
implementation report so far.
... I should probably write one myself for Webkit.
... So I can't really say yet we're ready to move to PR.
... It's possible we may need to look to Opera as well, because Webkit may be missing a couple.
... I've proposed resolutions to some of the issues remaining, so we could discuss them I think.
Steve: Is CMYK in or out?
fantasai: I checked with HP, and there's really no defined standard for CMYK.
Steve: I checked with ICC about
standardizing CMYK, and they indicated there are three (US,
... None are suitable, but there is apparently some interest in coming up with a default that's interoperable.
Daniel: David, I see 19 issues on your page.
David: Issue 2
<anne> (I don't think Opera does 'opacity' entirely correct yet. rgba() and such have been implemented as part of Acid3 work though are not in release builds.)
David: There's a request to
restructure the TOC.
... There's an advantage to keeping the current numbering because people have been using it for years.
... On the other hand the spec could benefit from some reorg.
Daniel: So the proposal is to move gamma correction...
David: That's a minor part; the bulk of the proposal's in the first URL's in the issue.
Anne: I think it's best to keep as is; we can reorg in level 4 as necessary.
fantasai: How about we remove
... Remove Section 2 and put gamma correction (scribe lost it...)
<fantasai> David: there's an issue on removing the gamma correction section since it's mostly wrong
David: There's another proposal
to remove the gamma section, so don't get too into the details
of where it goes yet.
... My tendency is to keep it pretty much as is.
Daniel: Yes, let's keep it as is and move things around for CSS4.
David: Another thing I want to discuss (not really in css3-color, but affects the whole group)
David: People don't really like our use of the word 'interoperable'.
Melinda: I agree.
... but it's broadly misused within the W3.
Daniel: Yes, this goes far beyond
the CSS WG.
... Let's leave the wording as is and I will take it to the mailing list for W3C chairs or the HTCG.
<Bert> ("Interoperable" is the word used in the W3C process document...)
David: Many of the other issues
are trivial in that they are totally editorial or they're
proposing new features that we're obviously not going to add
... There are a few others that I would like to propose solutions for before we discuss.
Daniel: Conference call or upcoming f2f?
David: I think it depends on how quickly I can get to them.
fantasai: Now negative lengths
are not allowed, but it's been discussed on www-style to get
some interesting effects without actually collapsing...
... When do we want to tackle this, as a 2.1 or a 3 issue?
fantasai discusses some issues...
David: This is not something I want to be rushing to implement, so I don't think it's for 2.1.
fantasai: We could say in 2.1 that negative widths are clampled to 0, that way they get parsed.
David: Which would be yet another change to what UA's do now.
Bert: It's better to keep disallowing neg lengths in 2.1, and target this for Level 3.
Melinda: My preference would be not to change 2.1 unless we need to.
<SaloniR> no objection
Daniel, David: We should keep it on the radar for CSS3.
RESOLUTION: Not for 2.1, keep for 3.
fantasai: I remember having an issue to remove the parens for background shorthand.
Anne: The previous draft does use the parentheses. Why did we decide to change this?
fantasai: Because we don't yet use them, and it didn't seem necessary here (we wanted to save them for other disambiguation).
<fantasai> where grouping is important
fantasai: I think Bert and I should take a closer look at this.
David: this is not urgent for me yet because we're not implementing background size yet. You could possibly use a fn.
fantasai: but the value itself
doesn't take a function.
... we do use a slash in the font shorthand.
David: But there it's used after a mandatory part.
fantasai: I understand there's a problem here, but I'm not convinced fn notation is the answer.
<scribe> ACTION: Bert to propose new syntax. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/17-css-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-105 - Propose new syntax. [on Bert Bos - due 2008-09-24].
<glazou> SVG MObile
<shepazu> I'm here if anyone has questions
David: They issued a Last Call with a 4 week review period.
<dbaron> I'd note Chapter 10 has font-* properties (CSS2.0 definitions, via XSL) and a bunch of text properties (mostly different from ours)
David: I encourage everyone to look at this. They are using different definitions for our font and text properties.
<fantasai> anne, see this message wrt background shorthand - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006May/0121.html
Daniel: We need an extensive review of our properties versus theirs...
Doug: Are there major differences in this draft?
David: The flowing text stuff is new.
Doug: I just want to be sure we don't open old wounds for stuff that's been in there for several years.
<fantasai> ACTION fantasai review text properties in svg draft
<trackbot> Created ACTION-106 - Review text properties in svg draft [on Elika Etemad - due 2008-09-24].
Doug: One of the issues with the
1.x series of Tiny is that we're playing catch-up with
implementations, and we really need to get this wrapped
... We're not as constrained wrt the 2.0 family.
ACTION bert review svg draft
<trackbot> Created ACTION-107 - Review svg draft [on Bert Bos - due 2008-09-24].
Melinda: Do we want to coordinate a group review or just send out individual comments?
David: I suggest individual review because of the size.
Daniel: I agree.
... If we see an issue we think is quite large, we can comment on it as a group. But for smaller things, I think individual comments will be more efficient.
fantasai: I see rather large issues...
Daniel: What about a wiki
... we can collect comments there and send the whole page...
fantasai: I'm of the opinion we should send individual comments and deal with problems that arise from that as a group.
<glazou> "Please send comments to email@example.com"
We will send issues to www-svg, and cc www-style, and add a link to the archive on an issues list on the wiki.
Each person submitting an issue needs to update the wiki.
Peter: You can add a note on the wiki about group discussion as necessary.
Daniel: Other agenda items?
Steve: I will miss the next three meetings due to travel.
<fantasai> Steve: Jason, do you have an overview of your website redesign plan?
<fantasai> Jason: No, my manager's been pulling back on how much time I can spend on this stuff
<fantasai> Jason: Direction we outlined in San Diego is on hold until IJ's site-wide redesign goes forward
<fantasai> Jason: We need to figure out how we fit into that
<fantasai> Fantasai: I think the information design is going to stay mostly the same, but the visuals might change a lot from what we discussed in SD
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/./?/ Succeeded: s/issues/issued/ Succeeded: s/I want/I just want/ Succeeded: s/with Tiny/with the 1.x series of Tiny/ Found Scribe: melinda Inferring ScribeNick: melinda Default Present: glazou, plinss, fantasai, David_Baron, Melinda_Grant, MohamedZergaoui, anne, Bert, Jason_Cranford_Teague, +1.858.792.aabb, Ming, +1.408.536.aacc, [Microsoft], SteveZ, +1.425.533.aadd, Saloni, Shepazu Present: glazou plinss fantasai David_Baron Melinda_Grant MohamedZergaoui anne Bert Jason_Cranford_Teague +1.858.792.aabb Ming +1.408.536.aacc [Microsoft] SteveZ +1.425.533.aadd Saloni Shepazu Got date from IRC log name: 17 Sep 2008 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/09/17-css-minutes.html People with action items: bert[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]