See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 12 March 2009
<shepazu> sigh
<scribe> Scribe: Cameron
<scribe> ScribeNick: heycam
DS: it is now on the SVG WG to
propose specific wording to go in to the HTML 5 spec
... this would be replacement text for the currently commented
out text
ED: what's the timeframe?
DS: i said 2 weeks
... rubys said there didn't seem to be too much of a hurry,
since conversation is progressing on the mailing lists
ED: i don't know about the list
of element case fixups
... probably would be a good idea to require implementations to
know about SVG 1.1 and 1.2T elements
DS: that seems to be what
hsivonen was suggesting after the telcon
... which is a reasonable compromise
ED: so, not to restrict future
elements, but at least requiring those ones to be
supported
... how should we write this up?
DS: just as a sequence of
"Replace [blah blah] with [foo foo]"
... last time we had multiple proposals that we folded in, and
that seemed to cause confusion
... i think we should keep it simple this time
CM: we should come out with an
email of the form "Replace [blah blah] with [foo foo]" in the
end, but we can draft it on the wiki
... somebody should take the existing text and put in on the
wiki
DS: i can do that
<scribe> ACTION: Doug to take the existing commented out SVG in text/html spec text and put it in the wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/12-svg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2490 - Take the existing commented out SVG in text/html spec text and put it in the wiki [on Doug Schepers - due 2009-03-19].
ED: there were some discussions on the list
<ed__> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009JanMar/0225.html
ED: have dino's comments been dealt with?
AG: dean sent a list of things of
things he'd like to see in our spec, we can put those in as
notes
... i've put in some, but i'll need to check if they've covered
everything that's mentioned
... maybe we should put a chapter at the beginning about the
rendering model
... in that section, we'd describe how the rendering
happens
... elaborate on the note in the introduction, and explain what
happens when you have filters/compositing/clipping interacting
with perspective/3d transforms
... e.g. explain what order they occur in (transform then
filter, or vice versa)
<anthony> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/modules/transforms/SVGTransforms.html
AG: in the intro so far, the last
paragraph has a bit about the rendering model
... that look ok?
CM: looks ok to me
DS: and me. it begins to address the issue.
AG: should i put in this additional Rendering section?
ED: sounds like a good idea
... having a note in there for now would be fine
DS: we should schedule a call with emmons to discuss layeredG
AG: i'm in favour of a property rather than an element
ED: me too
DS: and me. the functionality would be the same though; we should still discuss it with andrew.
AG: i have an action to propose wording
DS: you can start putting in wording about shifting things around in the rendering tree
<anthony> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2482
DS: then andrew can talk with us about implementation experience
AG: should i fold some use cases & requirements in to that document for z-index?
DS: yes, cover the 3d case
... but also say that it could be reused for 2d z-index
... are we planning on making the 3d transforms completely its
own spec... what does is it a diff from?
... are the transforms in 1.2T exactly the same as those in
1.1?
AG: the only thing different is the ability to specify an offset
ED: there is the ref() transform thing yes
DS: so i think we should make transforms be the single place to define it
AG: a chapter in core?
DS: we don't want people wondering if it applies to 1.1 or 1.2T separately
ED: we still need some coordination with the CSS WG
DS: we could split into two
specs, 2d transforms and 3d transforms
... but i don't see why we'd want to do that
ED: i wonder if 2d transforms could be part of core instead of being a separate spec
<scribe> ACTION: Anthony to note Dean's issues about the rendering model, compat with OpenVG, etc. in the Transforms spec [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/12-svg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2491 - Note Dean's issues about the rendering model, compat with OpenVG, etc. in the Transforms spec [on Anthony Grasso - due 2009-03-19].
RESOLUTION: We will publish Tranforms once ACTION-2491 is complete
ED: any edits been made?
... not since february, it seems
... do we need to discuss these comments?
... we should wait for chris i guess
<ed__> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009JanMar/0229.html
ED: there were some comments. have you had a chance to make edits?
AG: not yet
... i think you're right saying that "group image canvas" isn't
defined anywhere
... should i just put in what the term means, or what sort of
wording?
ED: some sort of definition of
what it means
... i suppose it's like the "temporary canvas" (or whatever)
from SVG 1.1
AG: put that in the intro, or the rendering model section?
ED: might be good to collect all the definitions at the beginning somewhere
AG: with the percentage background, that's a separate alpha channel, so i'll add a definition for that as well
ED: wasn't sure if that contained colours or just the alpha
AG: i'll put a definition in for
that as well
... for comment #2, i think the reason we did the equations
that way was they were already that way to begin with
... so i didn't bother updating them to MathML
... for the first draft, is it ok to leave the equations like
that? and put in MathML later?
ED: yes. you might want to
replace the dots with a proper multiplication sign.
... having links to definitions would be handy, since the
equations are spread out over the spec
AG: yep
<scribe> ACTION: Anthony to address Erik's Compositing comments in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009JanMar/0229.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/12-svg-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2492 - Address Erik's Compositing comments in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009JanMar/0229.html [on Anthony Grasso - due 2009-03-19].
<anthony> ISSUE-2095?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2095 -- Algorithm for soft-light blend mode -- RAISED
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2095
<anthony> ACTION-2427?
<trackbot> ACTION-2427 -- Anthony Grasso to use the formulae from ISSUE-2095 to update the Compositing module -- due 2009-02-05 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2427
AG: those can probably be closed,
though i haven't tested them
... the equations from benjamin came from the pdf spec
too
... he said he'd post the correct equations from the iso
spec
DS: if we don't have them in our
spec, then they're not royalty free
... we can't make a normative reference
ED: we could publish the original equations with notes to say that they might not be compatible with ISO/PDF
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/nto/not/ Found Scribe: Cameron Found ScribeNick: heycam Default Present: Shepazu, ed__, anthony, heycam, ChrisL, Chris Present: Shepazu ed__ anthony heycam ChrisL Chris Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009JanMar/0230.html Found Date: 12 Mar 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/03/12-svg-minutes.html People with action items: anthony doug[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]