06:30:09 RRSAgent has joined #svg 06:30:09 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/06/03-svg-irc 06:30:11 RRSAgent, make logs public 06:30:11 Zakim has joined #svg 06:30:13 Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG 06:30:13 ok, trackbot; I see GA_SVGWG()2:30AM scheduled to start now 06:30:14 Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference 06:30:14 Date: 03 June 2009 06:30:14 GA_SVGWG()2:30AM has now started 06:30:21 +??P0 06:30:25 +Shepazu 06:30:54 +??P1 06:31:01 Zakim, ??P1 is me 06:31:01 +ed; got it 06:33:08 +[IPcaller] 06:33:10 Zakim, [ is me 06:33:10 +heycam; got it 06:33:40 Zakim, ??P0 is me 06:33:40 +jwatt; got it 06:34:27 +??P3 06:34:32 Zakim, ??P3 is me 06:34:32 +anthony; got it 06:35:07 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009AprJun/0189.html 06:35:35 agenda+ SVG Integration 06:35:58 scribe: jwatt 06:36:03 chair: ed 06:36:11 scribeNick: jwatt 06:37:07 Topic: ODF Liaison 06:37:10 ODF response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009AprJun/0183.html 06:38:04 DS: not heard back from them for a few months, so wanted to check that they weren't going off on some other direction, but that doesn't seem to be the case 06:38:16 ED: do we want someone to go to their meetings 06:38:37 DS: would be good for one of us to go to their meetings too 06:38:51 DS: see what each other's cultures are like 06:39:42 DS: SVG isn't going to be talked about a lot at theirs, so it would probably only be on occassion 06:40:27 [discussion about who could attend] 06:40:42 DS: I guess I would be the best person 06:40:52 JW: and I might on occassion 06:41:15 ChrisL has joined #svg 06:42:17 -heycam 06:42:56 +??P2 06:42:58 Zakim, ??P2 is me 06:42:58 +heycam; got it 06:43:04 ACTION: Doug to send email to ODF saying a couple of us would be interested in attending their telcons where they talk about SVG 06:43:05 Created ACTION-2591 - Send email to ODF saying a couple of us would be interested in attending their telcons where they talk about SVG [on Doug Schepers - due 2009-06-10]. 06:43:53 Zakim, who's noisy? 06:44:05 shepazu, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: jwatt (71%), ed (18%), anthony (43%), Shepazu (9%) 06:44:55 ED: would be good to have them here for a telcon to get started too 06:45:13 Topic: F2F 06:45:55 DS: attending me, jwatt, chris, heycam, ed 06:46:07 DS: chris dialing in 06:46:53 s/chris dialing in/anthony dialing in/ 06:51:41 [discussion about travel and accommodation, etc.] 06:51:47 Topic: SVG integration 06:51:53 http://dev.w3.org/SVG/modules/integration/SVGIntegration.html 06:52:45 http://dev.w3.org/SVG/modules/integration/SVGIntegration.html#svg-elements 06:54:34 DS: want to draw your attention to these tables 06:55:27 DS: thought Attributes and Properties could be collated into one table 06:56:43 CM: probably you will have to have multiple rows for attributes and properties with the same name 06:59:36 http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/attindex.html 06:59:45 ED: we tried having a single table for attributes and properties for the Opera documentation, but it turned out to confuse people due to clashes 07:00:01 http://www.opera.com/docs/specs/presto211/#graphics 07:00:12 CM: see the 'cx' attribute at the link I just gave 07:01:52 CM: so the number of rows would depend on how many definitions there are 07:04:12 JW: another problem with a joint table is that sometimes attributes and properties with the same name are only animatable on some elements, even though they are usable on more 07:04:57 DS: all the definitions in the table would be linked back to the relevant parts of the spec 07:05:35 s/that sometimes/I seem to remember some/ 07:06:50 CM: an advantage of the table is that you'd be able to lift for one element the attributes and properties you're allowed to put on that element 07:07:42 DS: all the modules that we're working on now would have to be listed under the 2.0 column 07:08:09 DS: how hard would it be to have an automated way to generate this list? 07:08:45 JW: automated solutions can be prone to errors too 07:09:00 DS: maybe we could have a list of things to hand edit in? 07:09:17 s/able to lift/able to list/ 07:10:07 CM: I think we could do something, but it might be trickier where we have to merge things from multiple specs 07:10:36 DS: I raised this now because an implementer asked for a diff of the specs 07:10:51 DS: seems to me this would be the best way of fulfilling that request 07:11:57 ED: rng files for the specs would help with making this table 07:12:13 s/this table/these tables/ 07:13:11 DS: robin may be willing to help with the rng files, and is probably the person that knows rng best 07:13:26 CM: chris has an action to make an rng for SVG 1.1 07:13:51 CM: how it works currently is the list is just in a separate XML file 07:14:15 CM: but we want to remove that duplication and source of conflicting information 07:14:21 CM: I'll look into that 07:14:35 DS: I'll contact robin 07:15:23 ACTION: Doug to contact Robin about RNG (so CM can work on build scripts) 07:15:23 Created ACTION-2592 - Contact Robin about RNG (so CM can work on build scripts) [on Doug Schepers - due 2009-06-10]. 07:18:10 JW: if we annotate which attributes are animatable, the build script could flag attributes that are only animatable on a subset of elements to which it would be applicable 07:20:33 ED: one thing that would be good to add to the Integration spec would be how SVG fonts are used outside SVG 07:21:36 ACTION: Doug to ask Chris what should go into the Integration spec for SVG for SVG fonts 07:21:36 Created ACTION-2593 - Ask Chris what should go into the Integration spec for SVG for SVG fonts [on Doug Schepers - due 2009-06-10]. 07:21:48 ChrisL has joined #svg 07:21:53 Topic: ISSUE-2275 - Define processing for @type in script elements 07:22:39 ED: we don't really define how 'type' affects script processing 07:23:05 ED: maybe we could even fix that for the errata for SVG 1.1 to bring it into alignment with HTML 07:26:03 CM: if bringing into alignment with HTML, we may not want contentScriptType to affect