IRC log of CSS on 2009-08-19

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:49:29 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #CSS
15:49:29 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/08/19-CSS-irc
15:49:40 [plinss]
zakim, this will be style
15:49:40 [Zakim]
ok, plinss; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
15:57:25 [oyvinds]
oyvinds has joined #css
15:57:49 [Zakim]
Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started
15:57:56 [Zakim]
+plinss
15:58:01 [Zakim]
+[Microsoft]
15:58:10 [sylvaing]
Zakim, Microsoft has sylvaing
15:58:10 [Zakim]
+sylvaing; got it
15:59:07 [bradk]
bradk has joined #css
16:00:44 [Zakim]
+bradk
16:01:22 [Zakim]
+CesarAcebal
16:02:02 [Zakim]
+??P9
16:02:36 [ChrisL]
ChrisL has joined #css
16:02:39 [Zakim]
+Bert
16:03:36 [Zakim]
+ChrisL
16:04:46 [ChrisL]
zakim, who is here?
16:04:46 [Zakim]
On the phone I see plinss, [Microsoft], bradk, CesarAcebal, ??P9, Bert, ChrisL
16:04:49 [Zakim]
[Microsoft] has sylvaing
16:04:49 [Zakim]
On IRC I see ChrisL, bradk, oyvinds, RRSAgent, Zakim, sylvaing, shepazu, dbaron, Lachy, anne2, karl, CesarAcebal, Hixie, krijnh, plinss, fantasai, Bert, trackbot
16:06:10 [Zakim]
+[Mozilla]
16:06:41 [dbaron]
Zakim, [Mozilla] has dbaron
16:06:44 [Zakim]
+dbaron; got it
16:07:12 [Zakim]
+??P18
16:07:31 [dbaron]
Zakim, ??P18 is howcome
16:07:31 [Zakim]
+howcome; got it
16:09:31 [hyatt]
hyatt has joined #css
16:09:42 [fantasai]
ScribeNick: fantasai
16:10:01 [Zakim]
+hyatt
16:10:22 [fantasai]
Bert: I'd like to add Cesar as co-editor of Template module
16:10:49 [fantasai]
RESOLVED: Cesar accepted as co-editor of Template module
16:11:08 [fantasai]
Topic: CSS2.1 Issues
16:11:13 [sylvaing]
Zakim, [Microsoft] has arronei
16:11:13 [Zakim]
+arronei; got it
16:11:24 [plinss]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Jul/0025.html
16:11:55 [fantasai]
Issue 128
16:12:09 [fantasai]
Bert: I've looked at this when working on the Box module, and did write that section more carefully there
16:12:10 [Bert]
http://www.w3.org/Style/Group/css3-src/css3-box/Overview.html#run-in-boxes
16:12:23 [fantasai]
Bert: We're talking about block level with exceptions, e.g. block-level but not floating
16:13:13 [fantasai]
Bert: For issue 2, I think 'follows' is defined, but is not defined in the way we need... in Chapter 3 elements and following elements are defined
16:13:26 [fantasai]
Bert: But here we need "immediately following". So that's a bug in the definition
16:13:29 [ChrisL]
+1 to 'immediately following'
16:14:24 [fantasai]
ACTION: Bert Come up with exact wording for CSS2.1 Issue 128
16:14:25 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-172 - Come up with exact wording for CSS2.1 Issue 128 [on Bert Bos - due 2009-08-26].
16:14:45 [fantasai]
ChrisL: The last part is, I think, talking about tree order rather than rendering order (in any case this needs clarification)
16:15:09 [fantasai]
ChrisL: "first child" would be more precise than "starts with"
16:15:57 [fantasai]
Peter: You said you have clarifications that address the first issue, but he's pointing out different behavior in different browsers.
16:16:43 [fantasai]
fantasai thinks Bert should come up with a proposal and then we can talk about it
16:17:31 [fantasai]
Hyatt: I would prefer Boris's suggestion
16:17:44 [fantasai]
ChrisL: That means IE has to change
16:18:49 [fantasai]
Issue 115 (?)
16:18:49 [plinss]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0282.html
16:19:16 [fantasai]
dbaron: I think fantasai's text has a serious bug in it in that it says every element has clear even if it's not next to floats
16:19:40 [fantasai]
dbaron: I sent a message to the list a week ago, but it wasn't clear so I sent another one just now
16:20:19 [dbaron]
s/says every element has clear/says every element with 'clear' inhibits margin collapsing/
16:20:20 [fantasai]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Aug/0386.html
16:24:11 [fantasai]
dbaron: I don't think there's an issue here
16:24:25 [fantasai]
s/I don't think/I'm not sure/
16:24:42 [fantasai]
fantasai: There is, there are cases where you need clearance to be zero and still be clearance.
16:24:56 [fantasai]
fantasai: Anton pointed out that the spec in some places assumes zero clearance is no clearance
16:25:08 [fantasai]
ACTION: dbaron figure out what he wants to do about this
16:25:08 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-173 - Figure out what he wants to do about this [on David Baron - due 2009-08-26].
16:26:33 [fantasai]
Topic: Border-image/box-shadow
16:26:50 [fantasai]
ChrisL: Last time we discussed I present a proposal
16:27:09 [fantasai]
ChrisL: It was rejected, and there was discussion of a border-shadow proposal
16:27:40 [fantasai]
ChrisL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Jul/0176.html
16:27:50 [fantasai]
s/ChrisL: //
16:32:13 [fantasai]
ChrisL: But I don't understand what happened sicne then
16:32:24 [fantasai]
fantasai points Chris to the minutes
16:35:16 [Zakim]
-howcome
16:37:17 [ChrisL]
s/rejected/rejected on two grounds, desire for a real box shaddow and the assertion that shadows could be precomputed/
16:37:31 [fantasai]
People repeat their objections to various issues within this issue, and fantasai tells everybody to go read her email and post a reply if they object to her argument there
16:38:03 [fantasai]
People discuss issues
16:38:10 [fantasai]
fantasai fails to minute them.
16:38:47 [fantasai]
Brad: If we're going to have an alpha-based shadow in the future, that should be a separate thing from box-shadow which doesn't follow the shape of the dashes
16:39:18 [fantasai]
ChrisL: I understand that point, but I think people are going to be surprised when box-shadow doesn't follow the shape of the border image
16:39:31 [fantasai]
ChrisL: You could specify it that way, but it's not very satisfactory
16:39:52 [fantasai]
Hyatt: I would prefer if we came up with a resolution that used border-image
16:40:07 [fantasai]
Hyatt: People use it in a way that visually alters the shape of the box
16:40:28 [fantasai]
ChrisL: And if you curve the corners, it follows the curve
16:41:25 [fantasai]
ChrisL: People will expect it to work for border-image, too
16:41:41 [fantasai]
Hyatt: I think either we should follow the border-image, or suppress the shadow
16:41:49 [fantasai]
Hyatt: Making a box shape doesn't make sense
16:41:54 [fantasai]
Brad: Why don't we shadow everything?
16:42:00 [fantasai]
Hyatt: We have that, it's a separate feature
16:42:29 [fantasai]
Hyatt: ... SVG shadows
16:42:46 [fantasai]
ChrisL: That's how I implemented these
16:43:07 [fantasai]
Brad: Once we have SVG shadows, then anything we do for border-image just becomes redundant
16:43:31 [fantasai]
Hyatt: For box-shadow, my concern is what the author expects.
16:44:00 [fantasai]
Hyatt: I think there's really only two options: either shadow the border-image or suppress it
16:44:11 [fantasai]
Hyatt: I don't see what the problem is with doing shadows on border-image
16:44:26 [fantasai]
Hyatt: Is it just that we can't come to agreement on how it works?
16:44:52 [fantasai]
fantasai: not that's not the problem
16:45:08 [fantasai]
Brad: We could add switches to controll what the shadow gets applied to
16:45:12 [fantasai]
fantasai: we can add switches later
16:45:34 [fantasai]
Hyatt: If you really want a separate border-shadow then we can add that and copy the box-shadow syntax
16:47:24 [fantasai]
...
16:47:43 [fantasai]
Hyatt: If we have a box-shadow, then it tries to do this filled shadow effect where it's drawn outside the box
16:47:53 [fantasai]
Hyatt: A border-shadow effect would shadow whatever's drawn for the border
16:48:07 [fantasai]
Peter: Does border-shadow really change the shape of the box?
16:48:12 [fantasai]
Hyatt: People expect it to
16:48:25 [fantasai]
Hyatt: It looks like they change the shape of the box, but it's kinda fake
16:51:32 [fantasai]
Bert: I don't want to have a non-continuous border change the shape of the box. I still want the box to be rectangular.
16:52:11 [fantasai]
Hyatt: Most of our use of border-image is to round things
16:52:38 [fantasai]
Brad: I think using border-image for interesting dotted patterns will be as interesting as using it for changing the shape of the box
16:52:53 [fantasai]
Hyatt: It's going to be used for a lot of things. Any case where the built-in borders aren't good enough
16:53:36 [fantasai]
ChrisL: So you're saying people want this ... ?
16:54:13 [ChrisL]
s/this/this immediately/
16:54:29 [fantasai]
Hyatt: Feature requests we've gotten: 1. do border-shadow, which is just a property like box-shadow and text-shadow that would exactly shadow the border drawing
16:54:41 [Zakim]
-bradk
16:54:42 [fantasai]
Hyatt: 2. A full-blown shadow property, that would shadow everything drawn inside the element
16:54:46 [Zakim]
+bradk
16:54:53 [fantasai]
Hyatt: 3. Wanting to shadow pieces of SVG.
16:55:03 [fantasai]
ChrisL: You can do that already with the filter property
16:55:21 [fantasai]
ChrisL: The latest draft is adding some syntactic sugar for common effects
16:55:32 [fantasai]
ChrisL: I believe that's already implemented in WebKit, actually
16:58:09 [fantasai]
ChrisL: If we go ahead and do a border-shadow property, then I'd like the box-shadow property to be only affected by the box, not by the border-image
16:58:20 [fantasai]
ChrisL: You'll only get a rectangular shadow
16:58:34 [fantasai]
ChrisL: It's not what people want. It's just clear and simple.
16:58:46 [fantasai]
Hyatt: The argument for suppressing the box-shadow instead of just drawing a rectangle
16:59:14 [fantasai]
Hyatt: Is that if the image don't load you show the border with a shadow
16:59:20 [fantasai]
Hyatt: I'm fine with just rendering the rectangular shadow
16:59:24 [Zakim]
-bradk
16:59:25 [fantasai]
Hyatt: I think that's what we currently do
17:00:37 [fantasai]
Hyatt: I think it's an important point that border-image doesn't change the shape of the box
17:00:40 [sylvaing]
sylvaing has joined #css
17:03:00 [bradk]
is the call over?
17:03:08 [Bert]
No, not quite
17:03:32 [Bert]
(But you're right that it's the top of the hour...)
17:04:45 [bradk]
"the conference is restricted at this time", so I can't rejoin the call, and I'm missing whatever else is being discussed.
17:05:02 [fantasai]
Peter: we're over our time, still no conclusion
17:05:15 [fantasai]
Peter: let's pick this up again next week
17:05:16 [Zakim]
-ChrisL
17:05:18 [Zakim]
-hyatt
17:05:18 [Zakim]
-[Microsoft]
17:05:19 [Zakim]
-[Mozilla]
17:05:20 [Bert]
We're just repeating, to be as clearas possible. No conclusions...
17:05:20 [Zakim]
-plinss
17:05:22 [Zakim]
-CesarAcebal
17:05:23 [Zakim]
-??P9
17:05:26 [Zakim]
-Bert
17:05:27 [Zakim]
Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has ended
17:05:29 [Zakim]
Attendees were plinss, sylvaing, bradk, CesarAcebal, Bert, ChrisL, dbaron, howcome, hyatt, arronei
17:05:31 [bradk]
OK, thanks
17:05:34 [fantasai]
yes, just repeating ourselves over and over and over and over and over
17:06:00 [hyatt]
in the case of border-image i guess i'm just fine with everything, which isn't helpful for coming to a conclusion :)
17:06:05 [fantasai]
heh
17:06:20 [hyatt]
i could suppress, draw a normal shadow, or draw a fancy shadow
17:06:23 [hyatt]
don't really care
17:07:00 [fantasai]
Perhaps we should assign some homework. Everybody go read my message, brad's response, and the minutes, and write one paragraph about what you think
17:07:12 [fantasai]
Most people weren't talking
17:07:14 [bradk]
If we think we can quickly create alpha-based drop shadows, and either restrict them to borders or not, then why don't we just do that, and have THAT suppress box-shadow?
17:07:25 [fantasai]
?
17:08:12 [bradk]
As a separate property, I mean.
17:08:25 [fantasai]
bradk: you mean, if 'border-shadow' is in effect, 'box-shadow' gets suppressed?
17:08:41 [bradk]
Yes.
17:08:59 [fantasai]
bradk: why is that useful?
17:10:10 [bradk]
It seems like that would be coming in the future anyway. Then, if some want to suppress box-shadow when there is border-image, they can just create a border-shadow with a .0001& opacity.
17:11:02 [fantasai]
bradk: that would suppress even when there wasn't a border-image
17:11:47 [bradk]
or maybe instead of border-shadow, it is "drop-shadow: <box-shadow-properties>, border-only;"
17:12:01 [bradk]
Hmm. Oh, yeah.
17:12:13 [fantasai]
bradk: or maybe we can just add keywords to box-shadow later
17:12:28 [sylvaing]
seconds that, fwiw
17:12:32 [fantasai]
bradk: or that, yeah
17:12:38 [sylvaing]
i.e. adding kw to box-shadow
17:12:50 [hyatt]
i don't know how roc feels, but for me doing something great for border-image and box-shadow was just in the category of "well this might be cool"
17:13:00 [hyatt]
i don't really feel strongly about it
17:13:03 [fantasai]
hyatt: probably the same
17:13:18 [bradk]
drop-shadow suppresses border-shadow, which suppresses box-shadow?
17:13:32 [fantasai]
no, that would be so confusing
17:13:34 [fantasai]
heh
17:13:34 [hyatt]
at the top of webkit's paintBoxShadow method long ago i put:
17:13:35 [hyatt]
"FIXME: Deal with border-image. Would be great to use border-image as a mask."
17:13:42 [hyatt]
and that's the extent of it :)
17:14:05 [fantasai]
bradk: sorry, I misinterpreted what you typed
17:14:17 [fantasai]
bradk: if we're adding keywords then I think we should just do that to box-shadow itself
17:14:25 [fantasai]
bradk: and we can do that later, we don't have to do it now
17:15:04 [fantasai]
hyatt: I think it's a good idea. I'd only want to suppress the shadows if it turns out to be difficult implementation-wise
17:15:15 [fantasai]
hyatt: and since you and roc don't think so, that's not a concern right now
17:15:24 [bradk]
"box-shadow: <box-shadow-properties>, supress-if-there-is-a-border-image;"?
17:15:52 [fantasai]
bradk: how about
17:16:03 [fantasai]
border-image: ... shadowed image ...;
17:16:06 [fantasai]
box-shadow: none;
17:16:10 [hyatt]
fantasai: opaque padding box unioned with border-image shape and drawn as a mask
17:16:15 [fantasai]
@media (images-disabled) {
17:16:17 [hyatt]
will look good in some circumstances but really lousy in many others
17:16:19 [fantasai]
box-shadow: something;
17:16:19 [fantasai]
}
17:16:43 [hyatt]
like the diamond pattern in bert's original draft for example
17:16:48 [fantasai]
hyatt: and shadows drawin in the image will look good in some circumstances but really lousy in many others
17:17:04 [hyatt]
you'd have these little holes in between the right interior edges of the diamonds and the padding box
17:17:05 [hyatt]
in the shadow
17:17:17 [hyatt]
fantasai: true
17:17:18 [fantasai]
hyatt: the diamond pattern in Bert's original example draft would work if you filled in the area between the diamonds and the padding edge
17:17:28 [fantasai]
hyatt: it would /not/ work if you had to draw the shadows inside the image
17:17:40 [fantasai]
hyatt: they'd get sliced up wrong
17:17:47 [hyatt]
fantasai: right... so would need an algorithm that could specify that the space between the diamonds and padding edge gets filled
17:17:50 [fantasai]
hyatt: feel free to try it :) bradk too
17:17:54 [bradk]
I'd be OK with @media(no-images), I think.
17:17:55 [fantasai]
hyatt: that's edge detection
17:17:56 [hyatt]
i'm not quite sure how to specify that
17:18:06 [fantasai]
hyatt: that's not something we really want to get into imo
17:18:22 [hyatt]
yeah having to grovel around to build an actual shape
17:18:25 [hyatt]
would yield the best results
17:18:26 [hyatt]
but is also hard
17:18:50 [fantasai]
bradk: I think that'll cover a lot more ground than trying to work fallback into border-image+box-shadow
17:19:31 [bradk]
Would it work if images were supported but not yet loaded?
17:19:52 [fantasai]
bradk: hmmm, that's a tough one. probably not
17:20:11 [fantasai]
bradk: for that you need media queries on a per-element basis
17:20:16 [fantasai]
bradk: which we don't have, obviously
17:21:14 [bradk]
OK, got to go. Bye!
17:21:23 [fantasai]
bye!
17:24:22 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #css
17:41:17 [fantasai]
sylvaing: that or a discussion for when glazou gets back
17:41:50 [sylvaing]
fantasai: not sure I follow the glazou dependency :)
17:42:14 [fantasai]
he's sometimes able to sort out messy discussions like this :)
17:42:35 [fantasai]
I would like to go for last call before the TPAC
17:42:36 [sylvaing]
granted. he does drive with a firmer hand.
17:42:55 [fantasai]
TPAC is a long ways away, and I want this spec done by the end of the year
17:42:55 [Bert]
Fun: let's bring crayons and water colors to the ftf and draw borders! :-)
17:42:59 [fantasai]
Yay!
17:43:04 [sylvaing]
that'd be totally approved
17:43:13 [fantasai]
if we finish borders discussion, we can draw gradients instead :P
17:43:37 [sylvaing]
that was another one I was going to suggest for TPAC
17:44:00 [fantasai]
he's effectively editing the spec, we should make him co-editor for css3-images :)
17:44:08 [sylvaing]
we should !
17:44:16 [fantasai]
Bert: how goes the administrivia?
17:44:22 [sylvaing]
tab got his email
17:44:32 [fantasai]
cool
17:44:40 [sylvaing]
he was all happy about this this morning on #whatwg. minutes before the conf call in fact
17:44:40 [Bert]
He filled the form, it's now under review by Mauro.
17:45:27 [sylvaing]
excellent
17:45:28 [Bert]
He is already IE for HTML, so I don't see what Mauro can find against him. Nothing changed in Tab's situation since then.
17:45:52 [sylvaing]
didn't know he was IE for HTML
17:46:00 [Bert]
Which means that probably early next week he can officially join.
17:46:12 [sylvaing]
but given the quality of his participation there, that certainly makes sense
17:47:08 [fantasai]
sylvaing: HTML's IE status is different, it is self-invited
17:47:25 [fantasai]
sylvaing: you don't qualify, though, because you work for MSFT :P
17:47:46 [sylvaing]
I won't always...
17:48:01 [sylvaing]
or am i tainted for life ?
17:48:25 [Bert]
I prefer that join as rep of a big company, though. I need the fees to be able to travel again :-)
17:48:32 [fantasai]
lol
17:48:51 [sylvaing]
you need to get the fantasai travel guide !
17:49:16 [fantasai]
"W3C Travel on a Student Budget"
17:49:17 [fantasai]
:P
17:51:20 [fantasai]
sylvaing: you can be an IE if you're not working for a W3C-eligible company
17:51:48 [sylvaing]
when i grow up then
17:52:03 [hyatt]
fantasai: roc is on vacation, so i haven't made any progress on gradients
17:52:17 [hyatt]
fantasai: the discussion on them has been crazy
17:52:26 [fantasai]
hyatt: yeah
17:52:26 [hyatt]
i can't keep up with it
17:52:41 [fantasai]
hyatt: Tab's doing most of the work for you
17:53:01 [fantasai]
hyatt: he's effectively editing a spec on it as he goes through the discussions
17:53:28 [fantasai]
hyatt: so you and roc can basically just review the spec once it stabilizes
17:53:32 [fantasai]
hyatt: mostly it's syntax discussions
17:53:47 [sylvaing]
yeah tab is doing good work there
17:54:36 [sylvaing]
between Brad's border image stuff and Tab's gradient work, we've been lucky lately.
17:54:49 [fantasai]
yeah :) good stuff
17:57:25 [fantasai]
I need to be more patient.
17:57:26 [Bert]
Not so sure about that. I would prefer we spent the energy on vertical text, hyphenation, centering (esp. horizontal, but vertical is also important), tabs/leaders, footnotes, intrinsic heights and a few other things that really ought to have been working long ago...
17:58:21 [fantasai]
Bert: Those are much harder topics.
17:59:09 [sylvaing]
well, bert, as someone who works on a browser that doesn't do rounded corners, border images, shadows, gradients and the like, i can tell you i can't argue with the priorities :)
17:59:12 [Bert]
No doubt, but any other typsettting system can do them, while the Web still can't :-(
17:59:27 [sylvaing]
and yes, definitely harder too.
17:59:46 [fantasai]
Bert: if we had as many people who understood intrinsic sizes as gradients...
18:00:13 [fantasai]
Bert: I think it's mainly just you and dbaron (and probably someone from the IE team, though I don't know who)
18:00:29 [sylvaing]
and that someone sure isn't me...
18:01:03 [sylvaing]
but there is someone here who is very good with that
18:01:09 [fantasai]
Bert: howcome has a proposal for leaders, should be extensible to tabs, no?
18:01:19 [fantasai]
Bert: and his footnotes proposal is quite good imho
18:02:36 [Bert]
I think we abandoned general tabs in favour of HÃ¥kon's simplified proposal. That's OK, it can do most things and the rest will have to be faked with floats again. The problem is that even the simplified stuff isn't progressing :-(
18:03:11 [fantasai]
Bert: It's not progressing in browsers
18:03:23 [fantasai]
Bert: which is why it doesn't get talked about much here
18:03:35 [fantasai]
Bert: the companies that are working on it are YesLogic and AntennaHouse
18:03:39 [fantasai]
Bert: neither of which sends reps
18:04:41 [annevk]
annevk has joined #css
18:06:04 [fantasai]
RRSAgent: make logs public
18:06:26 [sylvaing]
mmmm...css3 values and units says angles are for aural stylesheets ?
18:06:36 [fantasai]
that's an error
18:06:39 [annevk]
ooh, my apologies, I was out for food with my dad
18:06:41 [fantasai]
it was reported awhile ago
18:06:47 [fantasai]
annevk: you didn't miss much
18:06:55 [fantasai]
annevk: just a rehash of the border-image box-shadow arguments
18:07:07 [annevk]
I see, hope you guys had fun with that :)
18:07:13 [annevk]
(and girl ;) )
18:07:14 [sylvaing]
annevk: fantasai was fierce :)
18:07:26 [fantasai]
it's not good
18:07:30 [fantasai]
should be more patient
18:07:32 [fantasai]
grr
18:07:51 [fantasai]
annevk: I consider "you guys" to be gender-neutral
18:07:55 [sylvaing]
well, i appreciated it because it clarified a bunch of things for me. but i can totally see how others would see it as a waste of time
18:08:03 [fantasai]
annevk: so you're good :)
18:08:17 [Bert]
Angles are to specify the elevation of the sound source above the horizon
18:08:27 [fantasai]
yes, but they're used for more than that in css3
18:08:31 [annevk]
:)
18:08:38 [Bert]
So yes, they caome from aural style sheets origianlly.
18:19:29 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #css
18:22:13 [sylvaing]
Bert: thanks !
18:22:44 [Bert]
Sylvain, for what?
18:38:18 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #CSS
19:04:04 [sylvaing]
sylvaing has joined #css
19:31:13 [MikeSmith]
MikeSmith has joined #css
20:27:49 [sylvaing]
sylvaing has joined #css
20:55:44 [billyjackass]
billyjackass has joined #css
21:20:06 [krijnh]
krijnh has joined #css
21:29:16 [krijnh]
krijnh has joined #css
21:42:39 [krijnh]
krijnh has joined #css
21:49:16 [krijnh]
krijnh has joined #css
22:04:07 [arronei]
arronei has joined #CSS
23:12:15 [sylvaing]
sylvaing has joined #css
23:57:15 [hyatt]
hyatt has joined #css