SVG Working Group Teleconference -- 11 Jan 2010

<trackbot> Date: 11 January 2010

<ChrisL> trackbot, start telcon

<trackbot> Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference

<trackbot> Date: 11 January 2010

<jwatt> welcome, patrick

<patrick> thanks ;) a little slow today

<jwatt> no worries, it takes a little time to get up to speed

<scribe> Scribe: anthony

Up coming F2F

<ed> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Meetings#F2F_Meeting_Information

<ed> http://www.w3.org/2010/01/07-svg-minutes.html#item05

DS: Adding conferences
... started but didn't finish

ED: The minutes from last teclon should tell us the same thing

DS: I'm adding some existing meetings we know about
... I sent out emails about SVG DOM API summit
... there was definite interest
... I spoke to Chris Wilson (MS), Brad N (Google), Jeff Schiller, Alex Rustle (Dojo)
... emailed some people privately
... I said we'd like to have it in the valley probably in April

CL: Need 8 weeks notice for a work shop

DS: Is this applicable for a workshop?

CL: Yes, seems appropriate for one

AG: I cannot make late April, has to be early April

DS: I'm going to shoot for early April then it that suits everyone
... Chris do you know when the CSS Group meeting?

CL: 29th - 31st March
... Hosted by Apple

<ChrisL> http://www.w3.org/Member/Eventscal.html

CL: Fonts WG (tentative) 1st - 2nd April
... also in California

<shepazu> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Meetings#Related_Conferences

DS: Are we on planning on having a F2F before then?
... Then there is SVG Open, where we've had a F2F

<ChrisL> aug 30 sep 2

<ChrisL> in Paris

DS: Where is TPAC?
... there's two
... the AC meeting
... then TPAC

CL: AC meeting is 21st - 23rd March

<ChrisL> http://www.w3.org/Member/Eventscal.html

CL: Unsure about TPAC because it only links to past

DS: I know it is going to be France somewhere in the Fall
... I've updated the page with the things we need to think about
... members here on the group don't have to attend AC meeting
... The mini TPAC might not happen this year

<ChrisL> seems to me we should aim for one in Belgium in may for LGM, and one in Paris in August /Sept for SVG Open

DS: The DOM Summit is more urgent than a mini TPAC
... the DOM Summit will be F2F 1
... we can have a the F2F, 1 day after the Summit or before

CL: Are people happy to come to Nice, I can probably host
... or Brussels if we can find a place to host

DS: My preference is to have it in Brussels
... we can probably talk to the people organising LGM

CL: They have a commercial space
... might cost them money to have it for a few more days

DS: Who is hosting?

CL: Constant

<ChrisL> ACTION Chris lo look into f2f hosting in Brussels

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2710 - Lo look into f2f hosting in Brussels [on Chris Lilley - due 2010-01-18].

DS: I will also look for W3C members who are also in Belgium

<ChrisL> http://www.microsoft.com/belux/nl/about/belgium/route_bel.mspx

PD: I think we have a space out there
... or something near there
... you guys let me know where you want to go
... and I'll look into it

ED: What dates are we talking about exactly?

PD: Send me some details and I'll hunt something down

<shepazu> # Libre Graphic Meeting: 27-30 May 2010, Brussels, Belgium

<shepazu> http://libregraphicsmeeting.org/2010/?a=view

DS: Does anyone have any preference about having the F2F before or after the Libre Graphics Meeting?

CL: Should let LGM know about this
... could have an open day

DS: We could have discussions about gradient type features

ED: Before LGM would be better for me

DS: LGM is very Print centric
... Leonard and another Adobe person will be there

<ChrisL> http://www.libregraphicsmeeting.org/2010/

DS: having someone from Scibus and Adobe working with us on the Print related stuff would be nice

AG: I don't have any preference to either side

ED: How many days do you think we need? Just 3 days

AG: I disagree, I don't think 3 days will be enough
... because we'll only have 1 day for the DOM Summit and we wont have had any other F2F before then

DS: I have a slight preference for having the F2F after
... so we digest what learn at LGM

<ChrisL> I have a slight preference for before :)

ED: we could split the F2F

CL: We'd be looking at Monday 24th to Wednesday 26th, May

AG: Good idea to have a day break before the conference
... then have a 2 day meeting after LGM

ED: Are ok with this?

PD: I'll see if I can confirm this

ED: Doug you will decide the days of DOM Summit

DS: But it will be early April

CL: What about the one along side SVG Open?
... should we contact the organisers
... so people can host us there?

DS: I'm sure we can find people in Paris
... Robin B and I will sit down next week and edit last week

CL: I'd like to join you guys on that

Conflicting Actions

ACTION-2378?

<trackbot> Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel

<ed> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2358

<ed> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2372

ACTION-5372?

<trackbot> Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel

ACTION-2358?

<trackbot> Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel

ACTION-2372?

<trackbot> Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel

ED: Both pending review
... seem to be covering the samething

<ChrisL> ACTION-2358

<ChrisL> Propose wording for the clip path pointer-events erratum and masking/compositing module change

<ChrisL> ACTION-2372

<ChrisL> Propose revised wording for the errata item "Capturing pointer-events with a zero opacity mask" to clarify it with clip-path

CL: We started talking about this but then needed JWatt here

ED: Ok they are not exactly the same
... one is masking one is clipping

CL: It was originally on Doug
... then was transferred to JWatt

JW: I'm struggling to recall the details of this

DS: JWatt you thought that the values of pointer events were confusing with regards
... to visibility
... and clip paths
... and you didn't want to introduce anything on that same model
... we still didn't have these resolved
... but you had intended coming up with something new

JW: My preference was to leave SVG 1.1 as is and propose something to 2.0

DS: I was thinking state, this is not defined in 1.1 and say that it will be defined later
... it's not very useful for authors but will speed up the Errata

<ed> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/interact.html#PointerEventsProperty

ED: Just wondering if we have wording in the 2nd Edition spec already
... This is the most current publish

JW: We talked about this quite a lot at Mountain View F2F 2009
... none of the minutes are linked to the actions

<ed> http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/interact.html#PointerEventsProperty

ED: There does seem to be some new wording
... we have two new paragraphs stating something about clip paths and masks
... I don't see anything about introducing new key words
... or new behaviour key words

JW: That was just an idea

ED: Then it sort of sounds like this has already been done
... and we can raise an issue for the next major version

AG: Is there enough wording for authors?

DS: Implementers I'm concerned about as well
... don't want loose wording which is implemented a certain way
... then we change it in 2.0

JW: I need to look at this
... I can read through it by next week
... I need to come back with a statement about what we should
... do

ED: We should probably talk about the gradient thing at some point

CL: I read through it, but I didn't see any consensus
... we should decide what makes the most sense
... and what has the least impact

DS: I think no matter what we decide people will have to change

CL: We should see what content is out there
... as in a bunch of content relying on something
... or an authoring spitting out something in particular

<scribe> ACTION: Anthony to Test the gradient output of authoring tools and report back [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/11-svg-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2711 - Test the gradient output of authoring tools and report back [on Anthony Grasso - due 2010-01-18].

Charter

<shepazu> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/charter/SVG-WG-charter.html <- draft

CL: Did you make that using the charter generator?

DS: I did
... the charter is more about where we are expanding into
... it includes a bit about the task force
... we got interest from one of the guys from Apple who has interest in Multi Media stuff

<ChrisL> Jack Jansen

DS: Jack Jansen and I talked about a smaller subset of the SMIL spec
... that CSS and SVG are interested in
... there were some concerns about the level that these interactions where occurring
... what do you guys think about taking on a new animation spec that we would reference instead of SMIL?

PD: Is the intent to cross more technologies than SVG?

DS: It is. CSS, HTML, SVG

CL: Is already looking for that sort of model. Sometimes it is because the SMIL model is not the best
... Jack knows SMIL very well and he'd be very good to have on board

DS: Vincent Hardy may also participate
... This would be more focused on making things easier
... I'm planning on putting that in the charter
... just wanted you guys to know about it first
... doesn't mean we have to work on it
... just means we can
... I haven't completed the charter
... still a working progress so if you have any comments on it
... feel free to send them to me
... I'm basically saying SVG has to evolve but maintain some backwards compatibility
... and fixing some things from the past

ED: For the DOM Summit do we have a summary of what we want to change

<shepazu> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVG_2_DOM

DS: I'd really like you guys to start identifying specific problems
... that you have with the DOM
... and call them out in the work shop
... and have people to come to the table with proposals
... either spec-ed out or worded so it can be put into a spec
... and possibly some sort of library
... my proposal is all the suggestions from the DOM API discussions we were having
... I will advice people to make position papers
... structurally should we review papers before the conference?

CL: Would be a good idea

DS: I was thinking of having a morning session
... to present papers
... then the other 2 days hashing stuff out

AG: Do all attendees need to present a paper?

DS: No. I think it would be good though if the SVG WG put together a proposal
... the WG as a whole will present a position paper

<ed> ACTION: ed to review the SVG DOM and make notes on http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVG_2_DOM [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/11-svg-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2712 - Review the SVG DOM and make notes on http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVG_2_DOM [on Erik Dahlström - due 2010-01-18].

DS: People on the WG are welcome to put forward position papers
... but you don't have to

PD: One thing we did when we were working with CSS we committed a thousands of conformance tests. I was wondering how to go about doing that for this working group

CL: It depends on if how are going to added
... We have notes on how to add tests
... and we have a template
... for the tests

<ChrisL> we have a methodology fro tracking test maturity so the suite can have newly added stuff and reviewed stuff all at once

DS: JWatt and I were talking about a testing framework were people from the public can also help review the tests

<ChrisL> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Test_Suite_Overview

JW: Patrick do you have a bunch of tests you want to move to the test suite or is this hypothetical?

<ChrisL> I'd rather have tests submitted as they arise rather than in bulk

JW: we should use the framework that Doug was talking about

DS: Also it is intended for use with all the browser specifications
... not just SVG
... the existing stuff does work. In the short term we could use that
... but in the long term
... we can transition to the framework

- DRAFT -

SVG Working Group Teleconference

11 Jan 2010

Attendees

Contents

Up coming F2F

Conflicting Actions

Charter

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output