19:30:36 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #svg
19:30:36 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/01/22-svg-irc
19:30:38 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
19:30:40 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG
19:30:40 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see GA_SVGWG()2:30PM scheduled to start now
19:30:41 <trackbot> Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference
19:30:41 <trackbot> Date: 22 January 2009
19:30:45 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
19:30:46 <Zakim> GA_SVGWG()2:30PM has now started
19:30:47 <Zakim> +Shepazu
19:30:49 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG
19:30:49 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see GA_SVGWG()2:30PM already started
19:30:51 <trackbot> Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference
19:30:53 <trackbot> Date: 22 January 2009
19:31:10 <ed> Zakim, call me too...:P
19:31:10 <Zakim> I don't understand 'call me too...:P', ed
19:31:34 <Zakim> +??P3
19:31:46 <ed> Zakim, ??P3
19:31:46 <Zakim> I don't understand '??P3', ed
19:31:50 <ed> Zakim, ??P3 is me
19:31:50 <Zakim> +ed; got it
19:33:10 <Zakim> +??P0
19:33:12 <heycam> Zakim, ??P0 is me
19:33:12 <Zakim> +heycam; got it
19:34:20 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
19:34:32 <anthony> Zakim, [IP is me
19:34:32 <Zakim> +anthony; got it
19:40:23 <ChrisL> ChrisL has joined #svg
19:40:49 <anthony> Scribe: anthony
19:40:52 <anthony> Chair: Erik
19:40:54 <ed> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009JanMar/0056.html
19:41:09 <anthony> Topic: Focused Telcons
19:41:16 <ChrisL> 1
19:41:25 <anthony> ED: I think that it would be good to split up the telcons so that we can both work
19:41:28 <Zakim> +??P2
19:41:38 <anthony> ... on finishing the SVG Errata and work on new things at the same time
19:41:38 <ChrisL> zakim, ??P2 is me
19:41:38 <Zakim> +ChrisL; got it
19:41:42 <anthony> ... this was also suggested by Doug
19:41:52 <anthony> ... and I think Heycam is also in agreement with the idea
19:42:04 <anthony> ... I suggest we start today in dealing with only the new stuff
19:42:27 <anthony> ... and we'll keep Monday with dealing with maintenance work
19:42:42 <anthony> ... I'm happy to switch chairing of the days as well if you want Heycam
19:42:52 <anthony> CMC: How will we schedule the discussion of the new things?
19:43:04 <anthony> ED: On the agenda I've added the road map on the Wiki
19:43:12 <anthony> ... but I wanted to get some idea where we are with all the work items
19:43:29 <anthony> ... so we are suppose to be publishing documents every 3 months
19:43:37 <anthony> ... we published SVG Tiny 1.2 on Dec 22nd
19:43:42 <anthony> ... we have until March I guess
19:43:53 <anthony> DS: We should be really strict about publishing
19:44:00 <anthony> CL: I agree
19:44:04 <anthony> ... it's more strict than that
19:44:17 <anthony> ... because it's suppose to be for every document
19:44:29 <anthony> ... it depends on the number of deliverables
19:44:38 <anthony> ... the original intention is if you are work on a document
19:44:46 <anthony> ... you should the public what you're working on every 3 months
19:44:55 <heycam> "To this end, each Working Group SHOULD publish in the W3C technical reports index a new draft of each active technical report at least once every three months. An active technical report is a Working Draft, Candidate Recommendation, Proposed Recommendation, or Proposed Edited Recommendation. Each Working Group MUST publish a new draft of at least one of its active technical reports on the W3C technical reports index [PUB11] at least once every three months."
19:44:55 <anthony> ... also publishing test suites counts as publication
19:45:12 <anthony> ... there's a team internal tracking system that detects these things
19:45:24 <anthony> ... but publishing test suites is a manual process
19:45:37 <anthony> DS: I think being a public working group it's more clear what we are doing
19:45:56 <anthony> ED: So does it make sense to discuss the modules we have before going into the layout requirements
19:46:03 <ChrisL> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Roadmap
19:46:43 <anthony> CL: Looking at the road map there is one thing missing from it
19:47:01 <anthony> ... there is no indication to say if we plan on publishing on that date
19:47:07 <anthony> ... or if we missed it
19:47:22 <Zakim> +??P4
19:47:22 <anthony> ... there should be some styling to show if we achieved it
19:47:25 <Zakim> -??P4
19:47:32 <anthony> ... I was actually attempted to edit it
19:47:36 <anthony> ... so Filters for example
19:47:43 <anthony> ... we have several publications of that
19:47:50 <anthony> ... and we should have some links to that
19:47:56 <jwatt> jwatt has joined #svg
19:48:22 <ChrisL> zakim, who is here?
19:48:22 <Zakim> On the phone I see Shepazu, ed, heycam, anthony, ChrisL
19:48:24 <Zakim> On IRC I see jwatt, ChrisL, RRSAgent, Zakim, ed, heycam, shepazu, anthony, ed_work, trackbot
19:48:28 <anthony> ED: Maybe we should go through all the specs
19:48:37 <anthony> ... Compositing is the first module
19:48:54 <jwatt> 7841 is being ignored
19:49:27 <Zakim> +??P4
19:49:47 <shepazu> we can hear you
19:49:52 <jwatt> grr
19:50:43 <anthony> AG: The Compositing module is pretty much ready to go
19:50:47 <heycam> Zakim, code?
19:50:47 <Zakim> the conference code is 7841 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), heycam
19:50:55 <anthony> ... just need to combine the 'enable-background' def
19:51:00 <Zakim> -??P4
19:51:07 <anthony> CL: Does it require much effort to get it published
19:51:18 <anthony> s/CL/ED/
19:51:31 <anthony> DS: So which working draft is this?
19:51:34 <anthony> AG: First
19:51:44 <anthony> CL: Requires approval from domain leader
19:52:21 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
19:52:40 <ChrisL> zakim, who just joined?
19:52:40 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, ChrisL.
19:52:50 <anthony> AG: I'd like to merge the enable-background definition before publishing
19:53:04 <anthony> DS: So how soon can we publish?
19:53:13 <anthony> AG: Very soon, next Friday at worst
19:54:05 <ChrisL> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Roadmap
19:54:12 <anthony> ACTION: Anthony to Merge 'enable-background' definition to align with Filters module
19:54:12 <trackbot> Created ACTION-2412 - Merge 'enable-background' definition to align with Filters module [on Anthony Grasso - due 2009-01-29].
19:54:56 <anthony> ED: I will call for publication of the module as soon as this action is complete
19:55:10 <anthony> JW: What version?
19:55:19 <ChrisL> Resolved: publish Compositing module as FPWD once ACTION-2412 is complete
19:55:20 <anthony> DS: First Public Working Draf
19:55:40 <anthony> ED: So next on the list is the Filters module
19:55:47 <anthony> ... I think we have published this once or twice
19:55:48 <shepazu> Resolution: publish Compositing module as FPWD once ACTION-2412 is complete
19:56:00 <anthony> ... I have a huge backlog of actions to do
19:56:13 <ChrisL> Filters last published 1 May 2007
19:56:34 <anthony> ... I would have time to do some things while traveling, so the best possible scenario will be I might have something to publish after the Face-to-face
19:56:46 <anthony> ... I have some things I want to discuss with that
19:57:05 <anthony> CL: Would it be possible to get a new group draft
19:57:14 <anthony> ... for the group to read, or is that pushing it?
19:57:25 <anthony> ED: Yeah I might not have so much time for that
19:57:43 <anthony> ... I'm going to say looking after the face-to-face for publishing
19:57:45 <ChrisL> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perlin_noise
19:57:49 <anthony> ED: The next thing is Gradients
19:58:03 <anthony> DS: I think that should encompass things like Diffusion Curves
19:58:20 <anthony> ... we were thinking of things like Gradient Mesh
19:58:50 <anthony> CL: So we have basic gradients already
19:59:07 <anthony> ... I made a proposal that wasn't so good
19:59:25 <anthony> ... then I made a suggestion which uses an algorithm similar to filters
19:59:38 <anthony> ... but it never got implemented
20:00:17 <anthony> DS: Can you please send an email to summarise that
20:00:27 <ChrisL> ACTION: Chris summarise the current state of the trimesh gradient investigations
20:00:27 <trackbot> Created ACTION-2413 - Summarise the current state of the trimesh gradient investigations [on Chris Lilley - due 2009-01-29].
20:00:43 <anthony> ED: We have a Paint Servers module, do we need a Gradients module as well
20:01:14 <anthony> DS: I think this would go under the Paint Servers obviously
20:01:39 <anthony> ... Paint Servers is just an internal name
20:01:59 <anthony> DS: We could call it Paint Servers, Gradients and blah blah blah
20:02:16 <anthony> ... implementers are the ones that typically read the specs
20:02:25 <anthony> ... although I could be wrong, designers also
20:02:52 <anthony> ... is there some term of art that means Paint Servers? Maybe a bit more catchier
20:03:12 <anthony> CL: SVG 1.1 had patterns, so we need somewhere for those to go
20:03:41 <anthony> ... I guess Gradients was separate chapter in 1.1
20:03:48 <anthony> DS: I think it's all the same thing
20:03:56 <anthony> ... they are applied to fills and strokes
20:04:08 <anthony> ... ok so there are linear and radial gradients
20:04:16 <anthony> ... are we going to duplicate stuff in Tiny 1.2?
20:04:23 <anthony> ... it might nice to have it all in one place
20:04:30 <anthony> CL: I think the module is adding on
20:04:35 <anthony> ... rather than duplicating
20:04:41 <anthony> ED: I agree with that
20:04:50 <anthony> ... I think that Tiny 1.2 doesn't have all the things from 1.1
20:05:22 <anthony> DS: So we are going to have to put Radial and Linear in there because we are going to extend them
20:05:30 <anthony> ... Diffusion Curves or Shaped Gradients
20:05:39 <anthony> ... we may do the Tri-Mesh
20:05:40 <Zakim> -ChrisL
20:05:43 <anthony> ... Patterns
20:05:48 <anthony> ... Solid Colours
20:06:12 <Zakim> +ChrisL
20:06:36 <anthony> AG: What about listing all the colours
20:06:47 <anthony> DS: Can you reference a raster image as fill?
20:06:49 <anthony> ED: No
20:07:02 <anthony> DS: You can as a pattern
20:07:11 <anthony> DS: I was thinking directly
20:07:29 <anthony> ED: You can say it's like pattern with some parameters
20:07:31 <ChrisL> Needs to have resolution independence, like filters have
20:07:41 <anthony> ... I think that would be quite a natural extension
20:07:51 <anthony> CL: It needs to work at multiple resolutions
20:09:22 <anthony> DS: RGBA?
20:09:35 <anthony> CL: The colours and RGBA are in the CSS Colour module are already there
20:10:08 <anthony> ... it works very simple
20:10:20 <anthony> ... it has a linear like space which is quite important
20:10:28 <anthony> ED: There is HSLA
20:10:40 <anthony> CMC: Should they go in the Compositing module?
20:10:57 <anthony> ED: They'd have to go in Paint Servers because it defines the syntax
20:11:20 <anthony> CL: You can put it in the different modules, but you'd probably have different conformance levels
20:11:39 <anthony> DS: I don't think we define how we treat opacity in PNGs
20:11:45 <anthony> CL: You're right we don't
20:11:55 <anthony> DS: These are things we should explicitly state
20:12:15 <anthony> ED: Who is responsible for Gradients/Paint Servers?
20:12:22 <anthony> CL: Me
20:12:58 <anthony> ... the question is where the PNG transparency tests go?
20:12:58 <ChrisL> ACTION Chris to test PNG transparency and opacity in the SVG 1.1 test suite
20:12:58 <trackbot> Created ACTION-2414 - Test PNG transparency and opacity in the SVG 1.1 test suite [on Chris Lilley - due 2009-01-29].
20:13:11 <anthony> DS: Stick them in 1.1 for now
20:13:20 <anthony> ED: Do we have a date or any estimation
20:13:33 <anthony> CL: It will probably be over Vector Effects
20:13:38 <anthony> s/over/after/
20:13:51 <anthony> CL: Realistically one will be on hold
20:13:59 <anthony> ... while I get the other one out
20:14:34 <anthony> DS: I'm going to remove Gradients from the deliverables roadmap and say it is part of Paint Servers
20:14:42 <anthony> CL: I'd say April for Paint Servers
20:15:06 <anthony> ED: So the next one is Layout Requirements and Use Cases
20:15:21 <anthony> CM: So earlier in the week I started putting somethings in a requirements document
20:15:36 <anthony> ... Maybe I can get the requirements document done by the Face-to-face
20:15:56 <anthony> ... my plan was to have something mostly complete for the face-to-face
20:16:06 <anthony> ... publication of first draft in March
20:16:25 <anthony> ED: The next one then is the Layout Module
20:16:43 <anthony> ... so that's related to the requirements
20:17:05 <anthony> CMC: How about July for the first draft, depending on number of revisions for the requirements
20:17:39 <anthony> ED: Masking and Clipping is the next one
20:17:50 <anthony> ... might want to remove it or combine it in the table
20:17:59 <anthony> ... do we plan any new masking and clipping features?
20:18:12 <anthony> CL: I can't think of any
20:18:22 <anthony> DS: The only thing I can think of is the event clipping
20:18:31 <ChrisL> oh, yes, that should go in
20:18:42 <anthony> ED: There are a few things I can think of
20:18:55 <anthony> ... I don't think there is anything stopping us from combining those two
20:19:03 <anthony> ... next one is Media Access Events
20:19:14 <anthony> ... have we heard of anything from Ikivo?
20:19:24 <anthony> DS: I think I had an action to email them
20:19:31 <anthony> ED: It's relatively close to being done
20:19:38 <anthony> ... it seems like it anyway
20:20:17 <anthony> ... Unless we have someone responding from Ikivo we don't have any idea of how long it will be
20:20:24 <anthony> ... Print
20:20:35 <anthony> CL: We resolved recently to send that one to CR right
20:21:03 <anthony> ED: Next one would be Transformations
20:21:12 <anthony> ... I guess that's the 3D, 2.5D stuff
20:21:44 <ChrisL> zakim, who is meeting in a bar?
20:21:44 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, ChrisL.
20:22:25 <anthony> AG: Just finished the Use Case and Requirements
20:22:37 <anthony> ... I'd planned on getting feedback at the face-to-face
20:24:42 <anthony> ... I suspect that it will have a similar time line to the Layout Module
20:27:06 <anthony> ... Next one is Vector Effects
20:27:13 <anthony> ... I'm taking the stuff out of the 1.2 Module
20:27:29 <anthony> ... and splitting out a primer and a language spec
20:27:47 <anthony> ... there is a bunch of explanation that's need
20:27:53 <anthony> s/need/needed/
20:28:01 <anthony> ... I've been adding a bunch of diagrams
20:28:18 <anthony> ... I've been doing some illustrations which are SVG
20:29:33 <anthony> ... I'd like to have an illustration that shows putting the fill on top of the stroke. I have a PNG and an SVG of that and I have an example of
20:29:41 <anthony> ... the code snippet for that
20:29:56 <anthony> ... I'd like to also have the beginnings of a test suite as well
20:30:35 <anthony> DS: I'd like to start using inline SVG with PNG fallback
20:30:47 <anthony> CL: There are some specs that already do that
20:32:21 <anthony> DS: Like if you were doing an example in SVG, you'd do a mock up of the result rather the put in the specific syntax
20:32:52 <anthony> ... it's sort of a visual use case and requirements really
20:33:22 <anthony> CL: So I'd hope to have a First Public Working Draft for the group to look at in the next few weeks
20:34:04 <anthony> ED: Next spec is Web Fonts
20:34:26 <anthony> CL: So web fonts was going to be a joint effort, but then CSS got really keen on it
20:34:43 <anthony> ... so we agreed to drop doing things on our part as long as we can review it closely
20:34:59 <anthony> ... John Dagget has made a new publications of the spec
20:35:08 <anthony> ... and I'd like to do a close review of it
20:35:47 <anthony> ... in general it's good
20:36:47 <anthony> ... And I've also joined the CSS Working Group
20:37:00 <anthony> DS: There is one thing that Webfonts will not cover is SVG Fonts
20:37:08 <anthony> CL: the other thing is the XML syntax for web fonts
20:37:18 <anthony> ... which is something that XSL is interested in
20:37:32 <anthony> DS: We might rename our Webfonts module to SVG Fonts
20:37:37 <anthony> ... and change the scope
20:37:49 <anthony> ED: Is the latest draft using anything from SVG?
20:37:52 <anthony> CL: Not really
20:38:03 <anthony> DS: I thought there was one thing he did add but I could be wrong
20:38:13 <ChrisL> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-fonts/
20:38:22 <anthony> CL: that's the link
20:39:27 <anthony> ED: SVG 1.1 Full 2nd Edition
20:39:43 <anthony> CL: I saw that there was going to be a discussion at the face-to-face
20:39:57 <anthony> ... and when we do publish it would be a proposed edited Rec
20:40:11 <anthony> ... I would say April
20:40:20 <anthony> ED: We also have to deal with comments on the edits we make?
20:40:26 <anthony> CL: No it's just an AC review
20:41:38 <anthony> AG: Might want to triage the edits
20:41:43 <anthony> ... there are about 50
20:42:23 <anthony> ED: So April for publication
20:42:44 <anthony> DS: We are not going to publish until after the face-to-face so that will be March
20:42:45 <ChrisL> PERin March, so Rec six weeks after
20:44:23 <shepazu> http://www.w3.org/2007/11/SVG_rechartering/SVG-WG-charter.html#deliverables
20:44:24 <anthony> ED: So the next is SVG Tiny 1.2
20:44:50 <anthony> ... I guess there isn't much going on, just collecting errata
20:45:02 <anthony> ... the next is SVG 1.2 Full Modular
20:45:08 <anthony> CL: Are we going with that?
20:45:21 <anthony> ... I guess the red boxes indicate that
20:45:25 <anthony> ... I'd leave it for now
20:46:17 <anthony> DS: We have conflicting constraints, some of the WHAT WG and Mozilla don't want to use Tiny 1.2 as a base
20:46:22 <anthony> ... but JIS do
20:46:55 <anthony> ... I think we'll be able to resolve this once we know the state of all the modules
20:47:09 <anthony> ... so we've reached the end we have SVG 2.0 Core
20:47:13 <anthony> ED: Same thing I guess
20:48:16 <anthony> DS: Have we done a checked that all the features in 1.1 that are not in 1.2 Tiny are in the modules
20:48:27 <anthony> CL: No we haven't and I know there are some features missed
20:48:38 <ChrisL> example of something which is missing:  http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-SVG12-20041027/media.html#multires
20:48:40 <anthony> DS: This is why I think having Core simplifies some things
20:49:07 <anthony> ... because it would save us making artificial modules that collects the bits together
20:49:21 <anthony> CL: I just gave a link to one
20:49:47 <anthony> ... multi resolution images
20:49:53 <ChrisL> Alternate content based on display resolutions 
20:50:15 <anthony> DS: We don't specify foreignObject very well
20:50:59 <shepazu> http://www.schepers.cc/svg/blendups/embedding.html
20:51:01 <ed> ...and we should mention html
20:52:00 <anthony> ... object, iframe and embed should behave the same way
20:52:24 <anthony> ED: I think iframe is a bit special in this case
20:52:30 <anthony> ... because it can give you scroll bars
20:52:41 <anthony> DS: But you can actually do that with object and embed as well
20:52:51 <anthony> ED: Right, but there are different defaults at play
20:53:57 <anthony> DS: There is another aspect in that whole question. When you are embedding it, how does the sizing work?
20:54:05 <anthony> ... we don't really address that anywhere
20:54:10 <anthony> JW: It's better address in Tiny
20:54:15 <anthony> ... the bases are covered
20:54:24 <anthony> ... there are a few weird edge cases
20:54:28 <anthony> ... that I don't expect anyone to hit
20:54:45 <anthony> DS: I have a table and a chart of how it should behave
20:55:00 <anthony> ... and I think Opera has the most sensible behaviour
20:56:48 <anthony> ED: So this kind of thing would be nice to have in the SVG spec
20:56:53 <anthony> DS: you mean the table?
20:56:59 <anthony> ED: Something similar to this
20:57:04 <anthony> ... tests would be great
20:57:18 <anthony> ... we only test SVG, not how you can use it from other languages
20:57:30 <anthony> DS: So you're right it is something more of the CDF domain
20:57:46 <anthony> ... there are certain things about foreignObject that we need to clarify
20:58:35 <anthony> Topic: Testing Framework
20:58:47 <anthony> JW: I'm not sure exactly what state it is in this point
20:58:58 <anthony> ... I haven't looked in to how the testing is done at the moment
20:59:14 <anthony> ... basically what I was thinking was, that I'd like to see a testing frame work
20:59:30 <anthony> ... or a format for tests that we can automate the tests
20:59:35 <anthony> ... for the sake of interoperability
20:59:50 <anthony> ... recycle things into a common frame work
21:00:05 <anthony> ... it's a bit of a shame for interoperability if we test different things
21:00:19 <anthony> ... I'd like to explain at the face-to-face our frame work
21:00:30 <anthony> ... and see if we can combine things
21:00:52 <anthony> DS: I didn't want Anthony to go to far down the road if we are going to do more changes to the framework
21:01:01 <anthony> ... you'd talked about making automated tests
21:01:21 <anthony> ... automated generation might be good for some things like DOM tests
21:01:36 <anthony> ... but you were talking about something like regression tests
21:01:58 <anthony> JW: Currently it's a bit tricky to do it because it uses custom builds only
21:02:19 <anthony> ... I've already got that framework hacked up to work for I.E. and we have another one set up for rendering
21:02:34 <anthony> CL: Are you capturing the image then comparing it?
21:02:41 <anthony> ... how are you comparing rendering?
21:03:06 <anthony> JW: It becomes a bit of a mess when you have different fonts on a different PCs
21:03:10 <anthony> ... for exmample
21:03:20 <anthony> s/exmample/example/
21:03:55 <anthony> JW: We test things like the arc command which has the mark up to draw a circle
21:04:03 <anthony> ... then we compare that to a circle
21:04:56 <anthony> DS: In some of Dr Olaf's tests it goes through some permutations
21:04:59 <anthony> ... if red shows up
21:05:03 <anthony> ... then it fails
21:05:20 <anthony> ... so you could say for example if red comes up in my buffer then something is wrong
21:05:46 <anthony> JW: You could do things like load your test but then tell the frame work to not get a snap shot
21:06:06 <anthony> ... for animation it shouldn't be too hard to extend it
21:06:16 <anthony> ... you can get various snap shots at points in time
21:06:40 <anthony> ... not sure if people think it's worth pursuing
21:06:54 <anthony> DS: One thing I like is we spent so much time, whole face-to-faces infact
21:07:05 <anthony> ... if we can get this done in an hour
21:07:11 <anthony> ... it would be so much better
21:07:32 <anthony> ... this would be a very different testing methodology than we do at the moment
21:07:57 <anthony> JW: There are a lot of technical problems, political problems, and social problems
21:08:19 <anthony> ... one of the biggest problems though is interoperability
21:08:53 <anthony> ... which is one of the disadvantages of open standards
21:10:53 <Zakim> -ChrisL
21:10:55 <Zakim> -heycam
21:15:09 <Zakim> -ed
21:20:02 <Zakim> -anthony
21:21:06 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
21:21:22 <Zakim> -Shepazu
21:21:24 <Zakim> GA_SVGWG()2:30PM has ended
21:21:25 <Zakim> Attendees were Shepazu, ed, heycam, [IPcaller], anthony, ChrisL
21:26:08 <anthony> Zakim, bye
21:26:08 <Zakim> Zakim has left #svg
21:26:14 <anthony> RRSAgent, make minutes
21:26:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/01/22-svg-minutes.html anthony
21:46:31 <shepazu> jwatt: I'm going to take a nap... why don't we do this tomorrow?
22:00:21 <jwatt> shepazu: sure. I got sidetracked anyway
22:10:03 <heycam> heycam has joined #svg
22:11:54 <heycam> "There is no official roadmap for IE9, but native SVG support is likely." -- http://blog.wired.com/business/2009/01/more-details-ab.html
22:12:07 <heycam> anybody read the actual web chat logs?
22:13:04 <heycam> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone/chats/default.mspx
22:13:34 <heycam> ah, no transcript
23:35:26 <anthony> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone/chats/transcripts/default.mspx
23:35:54 <anthony> oh wait no transcripts on IE9