15:52:50 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #css
15:52:50 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/03/18-css-irc
15:52:58 <glazou> Zakim, this will be Style
15:52:58 <Zakim> ok, glazou; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 8 minutes
15:55:11 <dsinger> dsinger has joined #css
15:55:45 <Zakim> Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started
15:55:47 <dsinger> dsinger has left #css
15:55:52 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
15:56:47 <Zakim> +dsinger
15:57:01 <dsinger> dsinger has joined #css
15:57:17 <dsinger> Zakim, mute me
15:57:17 <Zakim> dsinger should now be muted
15:57:27 <ChrisL> ChrisL has joined #css
15:57:42 <dsinger> Zakim, who is here?
15:57:42 <Zakim> On the phone I see [Microsoft], dsinger (muted)
15:57:43 <Zakim> On IRC I see ChrisL, dsinger, RRSAgent, Zakim, glazou, sylvaing, Lachy, anne, myakura, jdaggett, fantasai, krijnh, arronei, Bert, Hixie, shepazu, plinss_, plinss, trackbot
15:57:43 <Zakim> + +1.858.354.aaaa
15:57:48 <ChrisL> rrsagent, here
15:57:48 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2009/03/18-css-irc#T15-57-48
15:58:01 <ChrisL> rrsagent, make logs public
15:58:09 <anne> Zakim, passcode?
15:58:09 <Zakim> the conference code is 78953 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), anne
15:58:11 <plinss> zakim, +1.858.354 is me
15:58:12 <Zakim> +plinss; got it
15:58:26 <Zakim> +Daniel_Glazman
15:58:45 <dsinger> Morning all!
15:58:46 <sylvaing> Zakim, [Microsoft] has sylvaing
15:58:46 <Zakim> +sylvaing; got it
15:58:51 <sylvaing> hi dave !
15:58:56 <Zakim> +??P21
15:59:05 <anne> Zakim, ??P21 is me
15:59:05 <Zakim> +ChrisL
15:59:05 <Zakim> +anne; got it
15:59:34 <melinda> melinda has joined #CSS
16:00:44 <anne> I will have to leave in about 20 minutes.
16:01:05 <emilyw> emilyw has joined #css
16:01:18 <ChrisL> zakim, who is noisy?
16:01:20 <anne> WIP on my action items is on public-css-testsuite
16:01:28 <Zakim> ChrisL, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: [Microsoft] (45%), Daniel_Glazman (15%), anne (4%)
16:01:31 <Zakim> +Bert
16:01:31 <anne> I believe Bert is getting MQ to CR at this point.
16:02:05 <glazou> yes
16:02:12 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:02:32 <fantasai> Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
16:02:32 <Zakim> +fantasai; got it
16:02:39 <dsinger> Lots of wind and mike noise
16:03:01 <dsinger> Cool
16:03:29 <fantasai> I may or may not be able to make next week's telecon
16:03:34 <ChrisL> zakim, mute Microsoft
16:03:34 <Zakim> [Microsoft] should now be muted
16:03:38 <fantasai> if I do, I likely won't have net access at the same time
16:03:38 <anne> Zakim, who is noisy?
16:03:40 <fantasai> but we'll see
16:03:43 <ChrisL> zakim, unmute Microsoft
16:03:43 <Zakim> [Microsoft] should no longer be muted
16:03:51 <Zakim> anne, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: fantasai (71%), Daniel_Glazman (13%)
16:04:04 <ChrisL> zakim, unmute Daniel_Glazman
16:04:04 <Zakim> Daniel_Glazman was not muted, ChrisL
16:04:14 <ChrisL> zakim, mute Daniel_Glazman
16:04:14 <Zakim> Daniel_Glazman should now be muted
16:04:20 <ChrisL> zakim, unmute Daniel_Glazman
16:04:20 <Zakim> Daniel_Glazman should no longer be muted
16:04:57 <glazou> no i was not typing any more
16:05:40 <Zakim> +Melinda_Grant
16:06:00 <dsinger> Mpeg2 transport over skype?
16:07:28 <fantasai> zakim, mute me
16:07:28 <Zakim> fantasai should now be muted
16:08:05 <Bert> Scribe: Bert
16:08:07 <glazou> shepazu: yes we know
16:08:10 <Bert> ScribeNick: Bert
16:08:24 <Zakim> -ChrisL
16:08:45 <anne> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2009Mar/0042.html
16:08:45 <Bert> Topic: today's agenda
16:09:03 <Zakim> +??P22
16:09:11 <Bert> Anne: I suggest talking about test suite [see pointer above]
16:10:05 <fantasai> Topic: Publishing Transforms in coordination with SVG
16:10:07 <Bert> Topic: 3D transforms
16:10:33 <Zakim> +Shepazu
16:10:38 <Bert> Chris: SVG understood that CSS would publish it last week, but then they stopped the process when they noticed CSS wasn't publishing.
16:10:45 <dsinger> Dave is puzzled at the lack of reaction to dean's comments to svg
16:11:05 <dsinger> And also puzzled with chrisl
16:11:29 <dsinger> Lack of pib
16:11:38 <dsinger> Pub
16:11:52 <shepazu> dsinger, what do you mean?
16:12:04 <anne> We did not publish because the CSS WG did not formally go on record for publishing.
16:12:18 <Bert> Chris: We agreed to publish jointly with SVG, but CSS wasn't ready and nothing was published.
16:12:26 <Bert> DaveS: Why were we not ready?
16:12:44 <ChrisL> Beryt, whats up with these four documents?
16:13:27 <fantasai> zakim, unmute me
16:13:27 <Zakim> fantasai should no longer be muted
16:13:29 <Bert> Bert: I couldn't find any resolution in the minutes, so couldn't publish a 1st WD.
16:13:37 <Zakim> +SteveZ
16:13:50 <Bert> Doug: I couldn't find resoltuion either, maybe it was just not correctly minuted?
16:13:56 <ChrisL> ok so since we all recall agreeing this a couple of weeks ago lets have a minuted resolution today
16:14:00 <szilles> szilles has joined #css
16:14:06 <Bert> Fantasai: There was indeed no resolution, only discussion.
16:14:26 <Bert> DaveS: We got stuck on talking on one para in 2D.
16:14:36 <ChrisL> hearing no objections here
16:14:48 <Bert> Steve: We approved 2D provided that para was added.
16:15:15 <Bert> Doug: SVG really wants to see all 4 published. CAn we get resolution on that?
16:15:34 <Bert> Doug: 2D, 3D, animation and transition.
16:15:51 <fantasai> Steve: Think we had approval on all but 3d
16:16:05 <fantasai> DavidSinger: We agreed to publish 3d, but make it clear it's on a longer timescale
16:16:15 <ChrisL> so we can publish all four
16:16:56 <Bert> RESOLUTION: publish all four: anim, 3D, 2D and transtions.
16:17:17 <glazou> anne, I think we hear your music
16:18:07 <Bert> Doug: SVG said to Dean already we are very interested in cooperating on all four.
16:18:10 <anne> glazou, ok, it's off now :)
16:18:34 <Bert> Chris: Last weeks SVG's meeting we talked about Dean's comments.
16:18:52 <Bert> Doug: Yes, the SVG editor has an action to work on them.
16:19:10 <ChrisL> the editor in svg has an action to fold in all deans commentsbefore publication
16:19:16 <Bert> Doug: Might be good to have joint telcon SVG-CSS. Maybe even a taskforce.
16:19:18 <glazou> Zakim, who is here ?
16:19:18 <Zakim> On the phone I see [Microsoft], dsinger, plinss, Daniel_Glazman, anne, Bert, fantasai, Melinda_Grant, ??P22, Shepazu, SteveZ
16:19:20 <Zakim> [Microsoft] has sylvaing
16:19:21 <Zakim> On IRC I see szilles, emilyw, melinda, ChrisL, RRSAgent, Zakim, glazou, sylvaing, Lachy, anne, myakura, jdaggett, fantasai, krijnh, arronei, Bert, Hixie, shepazu, plinss_, plinss,
16:19:23 <Zakim> ... trackbot
16:19:32 <Bert> DaveS: But not middle of the night for Dean...
16:19:55 <Zakim> -Shepazu
16:20:02 <Bert> Topic: test review process
16:20:10 <plinss> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2009Mar/0042.html
16:20:51 <Bert> Anne: At ftf we decided that if you review a test, you would indicate that.
16:21:04 <dsinger> dsinger has joined #css
16:21:07 <Bert> Anne: Also decided you could change and somebody else would review that.
16:21:17 <Bert> Anne: But not clear from the test itself who reviewed it.
16:21:18 <Zakim> +[Apple]
16:21:23 <Zakim> -dsinger
16:21:34 <dsinger> zakim, [apple] has dsinger
16:21:34 <Zakim> +dsinger; got it
16:21:37 <Bert> Anne: So proposal is a small change to tets format.
16:22:16 <Bert> Melinda: So anybody who makes a change should add a link?
16:22:31 <Bert> Anne: yes, add a "reviewer" link.
16:22:54 <Bert> Fantasai: "Author" is who wrote the test, maybe has copyright.
16:23:19 <Bert> Melinda: So are we adding "author" "contributor" or "reviewer" links?
16:23:30 <fantasai> Add "author" if you make a significant contribution to the test
16:23:40 <fantasai> i.e. not fixing a typo or tweaking the title
16:23:45 <fantasai> actually changing the test
16:23:46 <Bert> Fantasai: [writing in IRC]
16:24:27 <sylvaing> so if I submit a test, then fantasai edits it then anne approves it we'll have...
16:24:32 <fantasai> The problem I had with the reviewer link idea, is that it's not clear when the complete test is reviewed
16:24:34 <sylvaing> a link rel=author for fantasai's edit
16:24:36 <fantasai> for example
16:24:41 <fantasai> a test is submitted with some problems
16:24:42 <fantasai> I review it
16:24:44 <fantasai> it's mostly good
16:24:44 <sylvaing> then a link rel=reviewer for anne ?
16:24:47 <fantasai> but this one part needs a fix
16:24:53 <fantasai> I can fix it and then ask the author to review my chang
16:24:59 <fantasai> in that case
16:25:03 <fantasai> we're both actually reviewers
16:25:12 <anne> sylvaing, yes
16:25:16 <sylvaing> ok
16:25:27 <anne> sylvaing, but you can review it yourself as well
16:25:33 <fantasai> that doesn't help fantasai programmatically figure out whether the test is *approved* yet or not
16:25:35 <anne> (dates should be clear from SVN)
16:25:38 <Bert> Melinda: So probably the review needs a date field as well.
16:25:41 <fantasai> Anyone can review
16:25:56 <anne> fantasai, "reviewer" means approved
16:26:00 <fantasai> peers will approve the tests and move it over, and that might mean rubber-stamping a review by someone competent
16:26:02 <Bert> Chris: We have a list of who reviews which chapter in principle.
16:26:02 <anne> fantasai, is what we decided
16:26:12 <sylvaing> right, not sure I as microsoft should review our own tests. am open to reviewing other tests
16:26:14 <fantasai> e.g. if jdaggett is reviewing the fonts test,s I'll assume he's rgith
16:26:23 <fantasai> if someone I've never heard of reviews them, I will probably take another look first
16:26:27 <Bert> Melinda: No record of who "approves" a test?
16:26:30 <fantasai> before copying the tests into CVS
16:26:38 <fantasai> no, just cvs record for that bit
16:27:08 <fantasai> So
16:27:14 <Bert> Melinda: So whoever approves must do a CVS check-in?
16:27:16 <fantasai> there's two levels of "review" one is mainly about reviewing the test
16:27:23 <fantasai> the other is mainly checking that the test has been appropriately reviewed
16:27:31 <fantasai> the first level is where we send comments to public-css-testsuite
16:27:35 <fantasai> and mark reviewr in the test case itself
16:27:43 <fantasai> the second level is mainly about copying it into the main repo
16:28:37 <glazou> dsinger: everyone
16:28:38 <glazou> :)
16:28:44 <fantasai> peter's breaking up, too
16:29:16 <Zakim> -anne
16:29:37 <fantasai> it should mean that you looked at the test and approve of it
16:29:42 <Bert> Peter: Confused about the "reviewer" link: is that marking review or approval? Or both?
16:29:51 <fantasai> at least
16:29:53 <fantasai> that was the goal
16:30:06 <Bert> Peter: And the "contributor" link?
16:30:08 <fantasai> the main purpose of the reviewer link isn't to say who revieed the test for posterity
16:30:17 <fantasai> it's so that someone knows the test has been approved
16:30:24 <fantasai> "contributor" doesn't exist
16:30:28 <fantasai> we are using "author'
16:30:54 <Bert> Sylvain: OK, so there is no "contributor." Fine.
16:31:04 <fantasai> The *point*
16:31:07 <fantasai> of this link
16:31:12 <fantasai> was to mark "this test has been reviewed"
16:31:22 <Bert> Peter/Melinda: Is this for all existing tests as well?
16:31:27 <fantasai> without creating a new system for recording which test have been reviewed
16:31:34 <Bert> Steve: Do the tests already have "author" links?
16:31:43 <Bert> melinda: Yes, I think they do.
16:31:44 <fantasai> yes, they have "author" links
16:32:11 <Bert> Fantasai: Yes, all tests have "author." I put them in.
16:32:36 <Bert> Fantasai: Goal is not to know who reviewed, but to approve.
16:33:04 <Bert> Fantasai: There were other ideas, such as a wiki page. I don't really care about the mechnaism, but we need some way to track.
16:33:26 <Bert> Fantasai: Depending on who is the reviewer I may or may not do another review myself.
16:33:49 <Bert> Melinda: So "reviewer" means approval.
16:34:04 <Bert> Steve: Except when reviewer makes changes inthe process.
16:34:22 <Bert> Melinda: But then you would use an "author" link reahter than reviewer, wouldn't you?
16:34:27 <Bert> Steve: OK, I see.
16:35:06 <Bert> Fantasai: The fixes by a reviewer need to be reviewed, by the original author, e.g.
16:35:21 <Bert> Fantasai: We could put a date in comments or something.
16:35:40 <Bert> Steve: Idea is to know that last reviewer is not not the same as the last author.
16:36:09 <Bert> Steve: Author has signed off that *he* believes it is correct. Just need somebody else after that.
16:36:36 <Bert> Steve: Can we put a date field in the link?
16:36:47 <Bert> Fantasai: A comment on the same line migfht work.
16:36:58 <Bert> Steve: Or just an unknown attribute?
16:37:12 <Bert> Fantasai: It needs to validate.
16:37:38 <Bert> Fantasai/Steve: OK, so a date in a comment, then.
16:37:58 <fantasai> <link rel="author reviewer" title="Elika Etemad"/> <!-- 2009-03-17 -->
16:38:28 <ChrisL> it will do
16:38:29 <fantasai> meaning "everything looks ok except the stuff I changed, and the stuff I changed needs to be reviewed"
16:38:45 <Bert> Fantasai: rel="author reviewer" (plus a date) means I reviewed everything except for the parts I changed.
16:39:03 <Bert> Steve: and thus rel="reviewer" means you did not change anything.
16:39:55 <Bert> Fantasai: I'm working on a Perl script to add anything you need to add.
16:40:03 <fantasai> That was a side-comment to Melinda
16:40:17 <Bert> Steve: Can you point to example?
16:40:36 <fantasai> http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/format
16:41:43 <fantasai> Topic: Matrix Layout
16:41:49 <plinss> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0135.html
16:41:49 <Bert> Topic: matrix layout
16:41:59 <Bert> Fantasai: I agree with the comments Bert sent.
16:42:21 <fantasai> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0183.html
16:43:09 <Bert> Peter: It looks like an itneresting idea. Would it fit? and so where?
16:43:26 <Bert> Steve: We have to talk about Grid and Template at the same time.
16:43:38 <Bert> Steve: Maybe not urgent and better for a meeting.
16:43:56 <Bert> Daniel: Is MS still working on Grid? HAven't heard from Alex in a while.
16:44:21 <Bert> Sylvain: Yes, still interesting, but CSS 2.1 takes all resources right now.
16:44:30 <Bert> Sylvain: Alex should be at ftf in June.
16:44:46 <Bert> Steve: I haven't reviewed the new proposal yet.
16:45:14 <fantasai> Melinda: I think we should put these three proposals side by side and compare their pros and cons
16:45:20 <Bert> Melinda: Putting the three together at a ftf seems a good idea, indeed. Towards some combination of them.
16:45:50 <Bert> Steve: And GCPM seems to have some stuff as well.
16:46:05 <Bert> Bert: Yes moveto/pullfrom and similar ideas.
16:46:38 <fantasai> It seems to me this matrix proposal is just like template layout, except with the added ability to overlap elements
16:46:40 <Bert> Melnda: There is a need for improved layout techniques, but we need to be clear about our objectives.
16:47:04 <Bert> Steve: Peter, is that what you meant when you asked about how it fit?
16:47:33 <Bert> Peter: Yes, ftf seems reasonable. But also wants to know who is interested at the moment.
16:48:03 <Bert> Fantasai: We should look at the proposal and foxus on use cases, but not focus on syntax too much now.
16:48:35 <Bert> Fantasai: Maybe the matrix things can be done by extending layout eleshwre.
16:48:48 <Bert> Sylvain: I heard there was interest in this stuff.
16:49:19 <Bert> Steve: It has alwasy been clear that people want this. Less clear if there are implementers for it.
16:49:32 <sylvaing> i.e. web designers came up during and after the CSS3 panel at SXSW to express interest in Jonathan Snook's proposal
16:49:46 <Bert> Steve: I mean: as a priority.
16:50:28 <Bert> Peter: So to summarize: I hear interest in evaluating the proposal. Don't hear anythign about it being implemented soon.
16:51:07 <Bert> Peter: I suggest we pencil it in as a topic for the ftf.
16:51:39 <Bert> Steve: SOmebody should repsond to Jonathan to say we probably won't talk about it until June.
16:51:58 <Bert> Peter: Who will represent the matrix proposal?
16:52:06 <Bert> Steve: We can invite Jonathan...
16:52:17 <Bert> Steve: Othe rquestion: are there patents involved?
16:52:51 <Bert> Bert: Anybody know Jonathan Snook?
16:53:03 <Bert> All: No, never met him.
16:53:23 <sylvaing> http://snook.ca/
16:54:03 <plinss> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0133.html
16:54:09 <Bert> Topic: Counter-increment
16:54:32 <plinss> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0194.html
16:54:32 <Bert> Fantasai: David Baron posted proposals.
16:54:37 <melinda> *jonathan is a member of the CSS 11 ;-)
16:54:44 <fantasai> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0194.html
16:55:07 <fantasai> I'm in favor of option 1
16:55:30 <Bert> Steve: I like option 1
16:55:50 <Bert> Fantasai: Same question for other keywords, such as 'inherit'
16:56:35 <fantasai> so any objections? :)
16:57:24 <Bert> Bert: Leaning to option 1 as well.
16:57:33 <Bert> Melinda: So what does this mean for 'inherit'?
16:57:42 <Bert> Steve: Can't use it is a coutner name.
16:57:52 <Bert> s/coutner/counter/
16:58:09 <Bert> Chris: Can you escape it? With a backslash?
16:58:14 <Bert> Fantasai: No.
16:58:52 <Bert> Sylvain: What's the use case for 'counter-increment: none'?
16:59:50 <Bert> Fantasai: I can't think of a reaosn for a counter named "none", but I can certainly see a case to explicitly set 'counter-increment' to 'none' to stop the coutner from incrementing.
17:00:09 <Bert> Sylvain: I don't get the 'counter-inc: none 1' rule.
17:00:14 <Bert> Peter: That is just invalid.
17:00:57 <Bert> Peter: I think that's implied by the prose, but not explicit.
17:01:13 <Bert> Melinda: We need some words to describe 'none' then.
17:01:17 <Bert> Peter: Yes, agree.
17:01:53 <Bert> Peter: Bert, can you write text?
17:01:56 <Zakim> -[Apple]
17:01:56 <Bert> Bert: OK.
17:02:08 <Bert> Fantasai: I'll note it in the issues list.
17:02:32 <Bert> Peter: Shoudl be enough if Bert sends it to www-style. We'll see what comments, if any, it gets.
17:02:52 <Bert> s/Shoudl/Should/
17:02:52 <Zakim> -??P22
17:02:54 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
17:02:54 <Zakim> -Melinda_Grant
17:02:55 <Zakim> -Daniel_Glazman
17:02:57 <Zakim> -plinss
17:03:00 <fantasai> RESOLVED: accept proposal 1, Bert to come up with wording, submit for review to www-style; no objections mean accepted
17:03:09 <Zakim> -fantasai
17:03:20 <szilles> Steve has probable regrets for next week due to AB meeting
17:03:28 <Zakim> -Bert
17:03:44 <Zakim> -SteveZ
17:03:45 <Zakim> Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has ended
17:03:46 <Zakim> Attendees were dsinger, +1.858.354.aaaa, plinss, Daniel_Glazman, sylvaing, ChrisL, anne, Bert, fantasai, Melinda_Grant, Shepazu, SteveZ
17:11:59 <arronei> arronei has joined #CSS
17:15:28 <Bert> rrsagent, make minutes
17:15:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/03/18-css-minutes.html Bert
17:15:51 <Bert> rrsagent, make logs public
17:16:21 <Bert> Meeting: CSS telcon
17:16:48 <Bert> Chair: Peter
17:29:07 <Bert> Regrets: Dean, Tona, Molly
17:30:02 <Bert> s/Topic: today's agenda/Topic: Today's agenda/
17:30:45 <Bert> s/Topic: test review process/Topic: Test review process/
17:31:07 <Bert> s/RESOLUTION:/RESOLVED:/
17:31:25 <Bert> s/Topic: 3D transforms//
17:31:32 <Bert> rrsagent, make minutes
17:31:32 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/03/18-css-minutes.html Bert
17:32:39 <shepazu> shepazu has joined #css
17:32:42 <Bert> s/Beryt/Bert/
17:33:11 <Bert> s/CAn/Can/
17:34:53 <Bert> s/anim, 3D, 2D and transtions/Animations, 3D Transforms, 2D Transforms, and Transitions/
17:35:25 <Bert> s/Last weeks/At last week's/
17:36:09 <Bert> s/RESOLVED:/RESOLUTION:/g
17:36:52 <Bert> rrsagent, make minutes
17:36:52 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/03/18-css-minutes.html Bert
17:38:01 <Bert> s/But not middle/But not in the middle/
17:38:26 <Bert> s/tets format/test format/
17:39:44 <Bert> s/Peter\/Melinda/Peter & Melinda/
17:39:48 <Bert> rrsagent, make minutes
17:39:48 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/03/18-css-minutes.html Bert
17:40:03 <Bert> s/melinda/Melinda/g
17:40:35 <Bert> s/mechnaism/mechanism/
17:40:48 <Bert> s/ inthe/ in the/
17:41:04 <Bert> s/reahter/rather/
17:41:32 <Bert> s/migfht/might/
17:41:47 <Bert> rrsagent, make minutes
17:41:47 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/03/18-css-minutes.html Bert
17:42:50 <Bert> s|Peter/Melinda|Peter & Melinda|
17:43:22 <Bert> s|Fantasai/Steve|Fantasai & Steve|
17:44:15 <Bert> s/and so where/and if so where/
17:44:36 <Bert> s/better for a meeting/better for a ftf meeting/
17:44:57 <Bert> s/HAven't/Haven't/
17:45:26 <Bert> s/Sylvain: Yes, still interesting/Sylvain: Yes, still interested/
17:46:20 <Bert> s/foxus/focus/
17:46:34 <Bert> s/eleshwre/elsewhere/
17:47:09 <Bert> s/anythign/anything/
17:47:44 <Bert> s/SOmebody should repsond/Somebody should respond/
17:47:53 <ChrisL> ChrisL has joined #css
17:48:05 <Bert> s/Othe rquestion/Other question/
17:48:52 <Bert> s/reaosn/reason/
17:49:01 <Bert> s/coutner/counter/
17:49:26 <Bert> s/counter-inc: none 1/counter-increment: none 1/
17:49:53 <Bert> rrsagent, make minutes
17:49:53 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/03/18-css-minutes.html Bert
17:51:21 <Bert> s|s/Peter\/Melinda/Peter & Melinda/||
17:51:57 <Bert> RESOLUTION: accept proposal 1, Bert to come up with wording, submit for review to www-style; no objections means accepted.
17:52:03 <Bert> rrsagent, make minutes
17:52:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/03/18-css-minutes.html Bert
17:52:52 <Bert> s/Shoudl/Should/
17:53:58 <Bert> s/alwasy/always/
17:54:35 <Bert> s/coutner/counter/
17:54:44 <Bert> s/anythign/anything/
17:54:50 <Bert> rrsagent, make minutes
17:54:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/03/18-css-minutes.html Bert
18:33:31 <Zakim> Zakim has left #css
18:38:29 <shepazu> where should I send a coordination email about Transforms? which list?
18:50:18 <fantasai> w3c-css-wg
18:50:27 <fantasai> shepazu: we don't do anministrivia on www-style
18:50:49 <shepazu> ok, thanks, fantasai-chan
18:51:02 <fantasai> s/anministrivia/administrivia/
18:51:06 <Bert> Doug, I first need PLH's approval, but we can do the coord here on IRC as well, for speed.
18:51:39 <shepazu> Bert: I mean long-term, maybe a Transforms Task Force
18:51:56 <Bert> I see.
18:51:57 <shepazu> Dean raised the idea tht it might be better if there were one spec
18:52:05 <shepazu> for SVG and CSS
18:52:39 <fantasai> ok, just make sure technical discussion gets to www-style
18:54:10 <shepazu> right
18:58:40 <dsinger> we can split the lists and have task-force is it overwhelms css or svg.  at the moment, more discussion on CSS specs would be welcome...
19:03:12 <shepazu> dsinger: since cross-posting is such a pain, I'm really starting to think a TF is the best way forward at this point
19:03:36 <shepazu> and that might be good to establish *before* the publications, so we can indicate in the specs that discussion should take place on the Transforms TF mailing list
19:03:55 <shepazu> forming a TF is a trivial matter... I could have one running today
19:04:15 <dsinger> ah, yes, hm
19:04:17 <shepazu> assuming that we get approval by both WGs
19:05:18 <shepazu> a TF doesn't require any more overhead than making a page (like a charter) that describes it, and making a mailing list
19:05:32 <shepazu> it doesn't have to go to the AC for approval or anything
19:06:09 <dsinger> right, but we lose the 'accidental oversight' of the people on SVG and CSS lists who don't join, that's all
19:06:28 <shepazu> there is that
19:07:05 <shepazu> but making a public statement on both those lists inviting people to join should help
19:07:21 <dsinger> I'm easy;  I hadn't thought of the cross-posting problem.  
19:07:33 <shepazu> and for those people chiefly interested in the transforms, it makes it much more manageable to track
19:07:45 <shepazu> I think it increases oversight
19:08:20 <dsinger> yes, a different header.  should the discussion of transitions and animations happen there also?
19:08:47 <shepazu> dsinger: I thought about that
19:09:17 <dsinger> ...and...
19:09:25 <shepazu> don't have an opinion on whether it's better to have a topic-specific TF, or one that covers all these CSS-SVG overlaps
19:09:54 <dsinger> it's just that we are also trying to maintain obvious family-resemblance between these
19:10:29 <shepazu> yeah, makes sense
19:10:30 <dsinger> 'primarily to discuss transforms, but also when appropriate transitions and animations, or indeed other areas of css-svg mutual interest'?
19:10:39 <shepazu> wfm
19:10:49 <shepazu> Bert, what do you think about this?
19:10:58 <Bert> About what?
19:11:07 <shepazu> the price of tea in china
19:11:18 <shepazu> also, forming an joint CSS-SVG TF
19:11:44 <shepazu> to coordinate on Transforms, Animations, et al
19:11:51 <shepazu> or a couple of TFs
19:12:17 <shepazu> I think probably a single one, with a dedicated mailing list, is best, now that I ponder on it
19:13:12 <shepazu> dsinger, like CSS-SVG TF, keep it simple
19:13:24 <dsinger> we could call it the stylin' vector group (svg), or the combin' stylin' and scalin' :-) (CSS)
19:13:24 <plh> plh has joined #css
19:13:33 <shepazu> lol dsinger 
19:13:37 <dsinger> bonjour, ca va?
19:13:54 <shepazu> I just summoned plh into the room to discuss it more
19:14:08 <plh> bonjour David
19:14:09 <Bert> :-)
19:14:48 <Bert> Actually, when Doug talks to me, he does so in green. And when you joined, you did so in blue...
19:14:49 <plh> doug, yes, speaking of summoning, who would you like me to doom for the next 50 years?
19:14:51 <shepazu> plh: dsinger and propose to make a CSS-SVG Coordination TF, to discuss Transforms, Animations, Transitions, and other areas
19:15:12 <shepazu> oh, plh, the list is so long...
19:15:29 <shepazu> coward.
19:15:52 <plh> as I said, if the CSS and SVG folks are ok with a TF, I'm fine with it as well
19:15:55 <shepazu> I don't do anything special to my IRC client... it all looks black-and-white to me
19:16:43 <shepazu> plh: it might be good to establish the TF *before* the publications, so we can indicate in the specs that discussion should take place on the TF mailing list
19:16:49 <shepazu> what do y'all think?
19:17:16 <Bert> Given that some people will want to work on transformations and we can't forbid them, a TF is probably the best way to avoid losing time for CSS 2.1 and other high-prio specs on the main CSS telcons.
19:17:29 <dsinger> yes, once we ask for comments, we're stuck with where we ask them to go.
19:18:02 <dsinger> it is trivially easy to make CSS and SVG the expansion of another email address, but very hard to reverse a decision to ask for cross-posting
19:18:30 <shepazu> and like I said, it prevents overwhelming the more general SVG and CSS mailing lists, and allows people to track in a more issue-centered manner
19:18:38 <plh> I could propose public-css-svg-2dtransforms-3dtransforms-animation-transition-task-force@w3.org for a mailing list name
19:18:52 <shepazu> plh: sold!
19:19:25 <shepazu> dsinger: I don't think you want to talk to me about patents right now ... :)
19:19:28 <dsinger> s please on transition and animation, otherwise it's too short
19:19:38 <plh> lol
19:19:57 <dsinger> but the first word: public or member-only?
19:20:11 <plh> I'd prefer public
19:20:24 <plh> unless we have a really really good reason not to
19:20:36 <shepazu> public-css-svg-tf@w3.org
19:20:50 <Bert> I don't care about the name, except: why "public-"? Participants must be member of either SVG or CSS, mustn't they?
19:21:07 <Bert> (Talking about patents...)
19:21:09 <shepazu> Bert: naming convention
19:21:19 <dsinger> I tend to think that they should be, yes.  they must be under the patent policy to be on the list :-)
19:21:34 <shepazu> what about public comment?
19:22:05 <plh> bert, yes participants must be from css or svg, but the css wg is supposed to work in public. creating a task force doesn't change that fact
19:22:15 <shepazu> as is the SVG WG
19:22:19 <dsinger> public comments come from when a real WG publishes something for public comment
19:22:35 <dsinger> ok, got it
19:23:12 <plh> note public- doesn't mean you have to open the list to everyone. we have public mailing list where posting is restricted to group participants
19:23:36 <shepazu> (for instance public-svg-wg)
19:23:39 <plh> it depends on much emails you're willing to get in your inbox sometimes
19:23:45 <plh> s//how/
19:23:51 <plh> s/much/many/
19:24:03 <dsinger> ok, there's public readability (good, both groups are), public comment (good), and public contribution (bad, IPR issues)
19:24:08 <shepazu> honestly, I think having a public list, open to public comments, is best
19:24:18 <shepazu> dsinger: right
19:24:25 <dsinger> if the documents are publicly visible, yes
19:24:45 <Bert> I wouldn't want to be on a task force whose archives are public. Better ask the potential members if they want to be.
19:25:01 <shepazu> Bert: huh?
19:25:27 <plh> Bert, let me be clearer then: I would strongly object if the mailing list archive was Member only. it's against the CSS charter
19:25:33 <dsinger> if the archives and membership is private, but the public can send, all it takes is comeone to respond to public submissions with a 'thank you for your comments'
19:25:40 <dsinger> s/is/are/
19:26:00 <Bert> Making the discussions public means the *real* discussions aren't archived.
19:26:35 <plh> are you telling me that the real discussion for the css working group aren't archived?
19:27:02 <shepazu> ok, kids, let's get back on topic
19:27:03 <dsinger> join a call sometime :-)
19:27:36 <dsinger> this is close enough to a policy question that I feel plh et al. can work it out
19:27:48 <shepazu> dsinger: I understand your concerns about IPR from non-WG members, but how do you propose to avoid that and still take public feedback?
19:27:53 <plh> we all know that lots of things don't get archived. but technical discussion should be backed by public archived.
19:28:01 <plh> s/ved/ves/
19:28:09 <dsinger> I can't, that's why I said what I did...
19:28:14 <shepazu> heh
19:28:54 <dsinger> this tf also has calls, an irc channel, separate agenda/minutes, or what?
19:28:57 <dsinger> wiki
19:29:16 <plh> you can even create a twitter account for it :)
19:29:26 <dsinger> that's when me (and my calendar) start getting twitchy
19:29:26 <shepazu> would you object to a public forum for all discussions (WG and public), considering that we have our w3c posting-policy in place?
19:29:48 <shepazu> dsinger: yes, calls as appropriate
19:30:03 <shepazu> not necessarily regular
19:30:25 <shepazu> I'd assume we'd have to adjust to Oz time
19:30:33 <shepazu> since that's where the editors are
19:30:35 <dsinger> ok, we're dealing with a hypothetical.  it can start public and be fixed if problems arise (e.g. people can be asked to join if they start contributing, or the list can be closed down to private if it gets out of control)
19:30:44 <shepazu> Bert: ok, so, a TF is okay with CSS?
19:30:53 <dsinger> I don't think there is a very high risk
19:31:03 <dsinger> and what we lack right now is enough feedback
19:31:14 <shepazu> dsinger: you hit the nail on the head
19:31:26 <Bert> I expect CSS WG is OK with a TF, yes.
19:31:27 <shepazu> we ned to find out what exactly people want
19:31:50 <shepazu> ok, I'll ask the SVG WG tomorrow, and put all the pieces together
19:31:58 <shepazu> thanks, folks
19:32:03 <dsinger> thx all
19:32:13 <shepazu> dsinger: get dino to join the SVG WG :D
19:32:25 <dsinger> he's agreed, I just have to do it
19:32:38 <dsinger> he's an early riser :-(
19:42:25 <shepazu> cool, dsinger 
20:24:33 <plh> plh has left #css
20:55:00 <melinda> melinda has joined #CSS
20:55:06 <fantasai> shepazu: public-css-svg-tf or whatever it was seems fine to me, please make it public read-write
20:55:27 <shepazu> fantasai: that was certainly my intent
20:55:40 <shepazu> I guess we need the whole CSS WG to chime in
20:56:00 <shepazu> I still wonder if there might be a nicer name
20:56:02 <fantasai> probably, although at this point I doubt you'd get much objection from us wrt making it public
20:56:28 <shepazu> hmm... how about public-svg-css-tf... yes, that has a much nicer ring...
20:56:41 <fantasai> hehe
20:56:48 <shepazu> flows trippingly off the tongue...
20:57:06 <fantasai> public-transforms-tf
20:57:12 <fantasai> transitions are a form of transformation :)
20:57:15 <shepazu> lol
20:57:18 <fantasai> so are animations
20:57:34 <shepazu> public-dynamic-tf
20:57:43 <fantasai> but transforms arent' dynamic
20:57:46 <shepazu> public-awesome-tf
20:58:04 <fantasai> public-4d-tf
20:58:12 <shepazu> lol
20:58:57 <shepazu> public-presentation-tf?
20:59:11 <shepazu> nah
20:59:15 <fantasai> no, that would swallow both our groups
21:04:06 <anne> I'd think it would be pretty hard to find a member interested in transforms/transitions who wants it to happen in Member-only space
21:04:31 <anne> so far discussions have taken place on public lists...
21:19:06 <shepazu> anne: I don't think that's really much of a point for debate... dsinger had some reservations about it, but I think I've convinced him that it's for the best
21:19:28 <shepazu> the open question is whether the CSS WG wants to form a joint TF at all
21:19:44 <shepazu> I'm pretty sure the SVG WG is cool with it
21:50:40 <anne> arronei, RFC2119 words don't apply to tests
22:12:11 <fantasai> huh?
22:12:20 <fantasai> anne: pointer?
22:12:46 <anne> public-css-testsuite
22:13:00 <anne> I'm not sure I want to review Microsoft tests anymore
22:13:14 <fantasai> heh
22:13:46 <fantasai> They didn't train under Hixie, that's the problem. :)
22:17:53 <fantasai> a lot of them are open to interpretation
22:17:57 <fantasai> anyway
22:18:18 <fantasai> anne: I just finished reading Arron's post. What he says makes sense to me.
22:19:33 <fantasai> anne: It's not totally consistent with what we've been doing, but we've been pretty inconsistent about these things anyway.
22:20:47 <fantasai> anne: also Melinda's point about precision is valid
22:21:42 <fantasai> anne: especially since we plan to hook up the CSS tests to a harness for non-QA-trained people to run
22:23:14 <fantasai> anne: The guidelines do require not needing to understand CSS in order to pass/fail the test.
22:23:23 <fantasai> anne: http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/guidelines.html#self-explanatory
22:23:28 <anne> right
22:31:54 <Hixie> i think his point about rfc2119 is just looking for trouble where there is none personally
22:32:00 <Hixie> but i haven't followed the rest of the thread
22:33:14 <fantasai> I don't think we need to fix anything necessarily, but if he went through the trouble of figuring out what standard text to use and had a reason to avoid RFC2119
22:33:21 <fantasai> I don't think we have a good reason to ask him to go back and use it
22:33:34 <Hixie> what text does he use?
22:34:03 <anne>         <p>Test passes if the "Filler Text" below is green.</p>
22:34:03 <anne>         <div>Filler Text</div>
22:34:11 <anne> (there are variants on this theme)
22:34:42 <Hixie> I prefer correct english grammar and no indirection, e.g. "This test passes if this text is green." but other than that it seems fine
22:34:57 <Hixie> Filler text should be silver and unimportant
22:35:03 <fantasai> yeah, I wouldn't use "filler text"
22:35:18 <fantasai> maybe "Green Text" or something
22:35:44 <fantasai> but I think the "test passes if" wording is fine in place of "should"
22:36:22 <fantasai> anne: you don't have to fix all the tests yourself, you can post problems that are common to the mailing list and ask Arron to fix them
22:37:15 <anne> I know, but the problem is that we seem to have disagreement over simple things
22:37:20 <anne> and this is not the first time
22:37:33 <anne> and I'm not too optimistic about further exchanges
22:39:54 <anne> In related news I'm still interested in hearing back on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2009Feb/0011.html
22:43:03 <anne> I'd go to bed :)
22:43:29 <fantasai> oh, that
22:43:40 <fantasai> well, looks like you just need to wait for Arron to pay attention and respond
22:45:32 <anne> yup
22:45:43 <fantasai> poke him on IRC in #css-test if you want
22:45:49 <fantasai> or here
22:45:53 <fantasai> not sure what his client settings are though
22:45:56 <fantasai> anyway
22:46:03 <fantasai> bedtime
22:46:57 <fantasai> I'll be offline for a few days possibly a week (but hopefully not more than 24 hours, depends on the dialup situation)
22:47:17 <fantasai> ping me on IRC if there's something I really should pay atention to, I might not be able to wade through all my email quickly enough
22:47:30 <fantasai> but I'll check the IRC client, too
22:47:57 <anne> there's no hurry with anything I think
22:48:02 <fantasai> k
22:48:03 <fantasai> have fun
22:48:04 <fantasai> :P
22:48:15 <anne> cheers, you too, whatever you're up to
22:48:31 <fantasai> holidays with cousins :)
23:32:13 <MikeSmith> MikeSmith has joined #css