16:16:57 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #CSS
16:16:57 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/01/27-CSS-irc
16:40:01 <glazou> Zakim, this will be Style
16:40:01 <Zakim> ok, glazou; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 20 minutes
16:40:06 <glazou> RRSAgent, make logs public
16:52:34 <CesarAcebal> CesarAcebal has joined #css
16:52:42 <plinss> plinss has joined #css
16:56:40 <oyvind> oyvind has joined #css
16:57:06 <fantasai> glazou, headsets are replaceable at least
16:57:15 <fantasai> version control systems on w3c servers, not so much 
16:57:17 <fantasai> :)
16:57:36 <Zakim> Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started
16:57:44 <Zakim> +glazou
16:58:24 <Zakim> +plinss
16:58:35 <Zakim> +??P12
16:58:46 <fantasai> Zakim, ? is fantasai
16:58:46 <Zakim> +fantasai; got it
16:59:19 <Zakim> +TabAtkins
16:59:51 <Zakim> + +1.253.307.aaaa
17:00:12 <glazou> Zakim, aaaa is arronei 
17:00:12 <Zakim> +arronei; got it
17:02:15 <Zakim> + +34.60.940.aabb
17:02:30 <glazou> Zakim, aabb is CesarAcebal 
17:02:31 <Zakim> +CesarAcebal; got it
17:02:41 <bradk> bradk has joined #css
17:04:21 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
17:04:39 <Zakim> +bradk
17:04:47 <howcome> howcome has joined #css
17:04:59 <glazou> Zakim, [IPcaller] has howcome 
17:04:59 <Zakim> +howcome; got it
17:06:42 <Zakim> +SteveZ
17:06:53 <dbaron> dbaron has joined #css
17:07:10 <Zakim> +[Mozilla]
17:07:39 <glazou> Zakim, [Mozilla] has dbaron 
17:07:39 <Zakim> +dbaron; got it
17:07:39 <dbaron> Zakim, [Mozilla] has David_Baron
17:07:40 <Zakim> +David_Baron; got it
17:08:20 <TabAtkins> ScribeNick: TabAtkins 
17:08:39 <TabAtkins> plinss: additional agenda items?
17:08:53 <TabAtkins> plinss: David, you had an action item last week.
17:09:00 <TabAtkins> dbaron: Didn't get to it.
17:09:03 <TabAtkins> plinss: ETA?
17:09:11 <TabAtkins> dbaron: Hopefully next 2 weeks, but I'm pretty busy.
17:09:16 <TabAtkins> plinss: We'll return to that when we can.
17:09:31 <TabAtkins> plinss: First real topic.  Css2.1 test suite.  Where are we on that?
17:09:43 <TabAtkins> fantasai: Checking in Alpha 1 right now.
17:10:11 <TabAtkins> fantasai: Haven't been able to add in HP's tests, because they have wrong metadata.
17:10:22 <TabAtkins> fantasai: Can't index them without the metadata.
17:10:42 <TabAtkins> fantasai: Also haven't yet added all the ref tests, because I haven't figured out how to present them.
17:10:50 <Zakim> +Bert
17:10:59 <TabAtkins> fantasai: Other than those, pretty much everyting is built and should be checked in by the end of the call.
17:11:12 <plinss> s/HP's/Hixie's/
17:11:24 <TabAtkins> arronei: I know for Hixie's tests I was planning to add the metadata, so you should be able to index them by early next week.
17:11:33 <TabAtkins> arronei: Also my feedback for all the reviews, I'll start sending out today.
17:11:47 <TabAtkins> arronei: If anyone's got tests submitted, take a look at issues on the tests.
17:12:07 <TabAtkins> plinss: Sounds like good progress there.
17:12:25 <TabAtkins> plinss: Anything else you guys need?
17:12:55 <TabAtkins> fantasai: Arron, you want comments on reftest format, or talk about it later?
17:13:05 <TabAtkins> arronei: Later.  Need to do some research first, I"ll send out an email.
17:13:28 <arronei> arronei has joined #CSS
17:13:39 <TabAtkins> TOPIC proposal for CSS/SVG task force, cross-group ftf meeting
17:13:47 <TabAtkins> plinss: Perhaps coincident with our ftf meeting?
17:14:14 <TabAtkins> glazou: Long chat with Sheppers, both agreed that the best way to harmonize css and svg, maybe webapps, is to dedicate one day (or half-day) of our upcoming ftf to joint meeting with svg.
17:14:30 <TabAtkins> glazou: We both think it's better than a localized bay area meeting, because some people would be out of the loop.
17:14:33 <shepazu> s/Sheppers/Schepers/
17:14:53 <TabAtkins> glazou: We discussed that svg relies heavily on CSS, but not enough integration.
17:15:06 <TabAtkins> glazou: Both are major technologies, now is the time to start discussing better interaction between the two groups.
17:15:20 <TabAtkins> glazou: Idea is to actively discuss what's going on in both svg and css so other groups know.
17:16:17 <TabAtkins> glazou: Start with ftf with one joint day, and see if we can do better in the future and come back to "mini-TPAC idea" with svg/css/html/webapps all together.
17:16:31 <TabAtkins> glazou: And of course the effect tf is probably the best place to start with.
17:16:41 <TabAtkins> glazou: We could schedule an extra conf call for those interested in it.
17:16:49 <TabAtkins> plinss: confereence call was suggested for thursdays?
17:17:00 <TabAtkins> glazou: That's the first date doug proposed, but it's not firm.  open to discussion.
17:17:10 <TabAtkins> plinss: Opinions?
17:17:23 <TabAtkins> TabAtkins: in favor
17:17:27 <TabAtkins> plinss: Anyone else?
17:17:54 <TabAtkins> glazou: I think it's good.  Frex, pointer-events property came from SVG, and now Moz and Apple implemented it for html.  But it was never standardized in CSS, so harmonization is needed here.
17:18:09 <TabAtkins> plinss: Anyone willing to participate?
17:18:14 <TabAtkins> glazou, TabAtkins: yes
17:18:25 <glazou> shepazu: don't think we need you, thanks for asking
17:18:35 <TabAtkins> plinss: Thursday good for you guys?
17:18:44 <TabAtkins> glazou, TabAtkins: Sure.
17:18:53 <TabAtkins> brad: Might be able to come on Thursday sometimes.
17:19:00 <TabAtkins> plinss: Kick off now, soon, wait for ftf?
17:19:19 <TabAtkins> glazou: Let's discuss with Doug.  We need to confirm the date/time/length.
17:19:32 <TabAtkins> glazou: And other things to do.
17:19:40 <TabAtkins> szilles: We need to have a clear charter of what it's trying to accomplish.
17:19:49 <TabAtkins> glazou: Absolutely.  That's first item in Doug's email.
17:20:01 <TabAtkins> plinss: Hearing support, no objections?
17:20:21 <TabAtkins> RESOLVED Move forward with joint css/svg work
17:20:22 <Zakim> -arronei
17:20:30 <TabAtkins> glazou: I'll notify Doug.
17:20:42 <shepazu> [I suggests starting the telcons before the f2f]
17:20:54 <TabAtkins> TOPIC Shifting august ftf dates
17:21:02 <TabAtkins> plinss: szilles, you want to shift dates?
17:21:11 <TabAtkins> szilles: Yes, a week later.  dsinger also wanted to move them.
17:21:13 <glazou> shepazu, 1h30 may be too much for 8pm UTC for me
17:21:27 <TabAtkins> howcome: Yeah, moving it is fine with me.  dsinger preferred early, szilles preferred late part.
17:21:52 <shepazu> glazou, we would just hold a 30 minute meeting to start, use the rest just for SVG
17:21:58 <TabAtkins> glazou: The end of that week will be extremely busy wrt air travel.  End of summer break for schools in europe.
17:22:09 <TabAtkins> glazou: If we go to end of week, I recommend you book flight asap.
17:22:15 <TabAtkins> szilles: That's fine, do it at the beginning of the week.
17:22:27 <TabAtkins> howcome: I think school in norway has already started by then?
17:23:06 <TabAtkins> plinss: 23rd to 25th is what I'm hearing?
17:23:42 <TabAtkins> RESOLVED Move august ftf to 23-25
17:24:05 <TabAtkins> TOPIC pts vs pixels
17:24:12 <TabAtkins> plinss: Seems like the thread's died down.
17:24:13 <fantasai> RESOLVED: Move August F2F to 23-25
17:24:18 <fantasai> Topic: pts vs pixels
17:24:24 <TabAtkins> plinss: Only issue is Brad's zoom issue.
17:24:25 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
17:24:25 <Lachy> Lachy has joined #css
17:24:37 <arronei> zakim, microsoft is me
17:24:37 <Zakim> +arronei; got it
17:24:42 <TabAtkins> bradk: Seems like the zooming would help if the ratio is wrong for a particular screen.
17:25:07 <TabAtkins> plinss: Question is if we're solving zoom in the right place, and metaquestion - can we table that discussion and resolve zoom in a later part?
17:25:24 <TabAtkins> bradk: I think we should suggest that there's some way for the user to change the ratio if the browser doesn't get it right.
17:25:43 <TabAtkins> bradk: I'm willing to forgo author control.
17:26:00 <TabAtkins> plinss: Some OSes have it, but browsers dont' respect it, and browsers have their own zooming controls
17:26:35 <TabAtkins> plinss: I think it's okay to recommend browsers giving users this control, but it's not something we can mandate.
17:26:50 <TabAtkins> bradk: My iphone already has that control.
17:27:02 <TabAtkins> plinss: iphone zooming is just part of the normal way of dealing with zooming in and out.
17:27:26 <TabAtkins> bradk: I'm not sure if the way the current zooming is ipmlemented, if it's exactly the same as just setting how big a CSS px is, or is there more to it than that?
17:27:48 <TabAtkins> bradk: But that's an impl detail, we can just recommend that there's a way out of it.
17:28:26 <TabAtkins> plinss: So back to pts vs px.  Not hearing any objections against sticking px to 96/inch
17:28:45 <TabAtkins> plinss: And media determines what unit to use as base.
17:28:52 <TabAtkins> szilles: That seems to be a complete reversal of subtended angle.
17:29:07 <TabAtkins> plinss: That still comes into play when you're mapping css px to device pixels based on device.
17:29:28 <TabAtkins> plinss: Some devices you'll know the relation between device pixels and real-world units, and want to align those.  Screen, not so much.
17:30:04 <howcome> howcome has left #css
17:30:08 <TabAtkins> szilles: It seems to be a major reversal, and an inconsistency with SVG.
17:30:20 <TabAtkins> TabAtkins: I think we're just speccing what browsers are doing now.
17:30:51 <TabAtkins> Bert: I thought that the spec already said that?
17:31:54 <TabAtkins> Bert: Basic computer screen, with sufficient dpi, has 96px to the inch.
17:32:14 <TabAtkins> szilles: I thought the subtended angle was supposed to do that.
17:32:27 <TabAtkins> bradk: But there's really no way to, precisely, figure out the angle.
17:32:30 <TabAtkins> szilles: Makes sense.
17:32:45 <TabAtkins> szilles: What I think we're trying to solve is that px dimensions stay commensurate with absolute units.
17:32:55 <TabAtkins> Bert: On a device, but we can't define that across devices.
17:33:10 <TabAtkins> plinss: But we can define the ratio.  We nail 96 px to 1 css inch.
17:35:27 <TabAtkins> Bert: But CSS pixels should be tied to device pixels.
17:35:41 <howcome> howcome has joined #css
17:38:10 <TabAtkins> [rehasing of mailing list discussion about physical units and pixels]
17:38:27 <TabAtkins> Bert: There's no error in the spec.  We can't change the spec because people implement it wrong.
17:39:30 <Zakim> -CesarAcebal
17:39:33 <TabAtkins> plinss: We do that all the time to match reality.
17:40:15 <CesarAcebal_> CesarAcebal_ has joined #css
17:40:47 <Zakim> +CesarAcebal
17:41:25 <TabAtkins> TabAtkins: IE and Safari both use the set ratio.  Gecko doesn't (it conforms to the spec?), and it makes pages wonky sometimes.
17:41:49 <Zakim> +SteveZ.a
17:41:54 <Zakim> -SteveZ
17:42:05 <TabAtkins> howcome: So, change proposal is making px just a ratio of a physical unit, like cm and in have.
17:42:07 <TabAtkins> plinss: Yeah.
17:42:40 <TabAtkins> howcome: I see the benefit of interop, but you lose expressibility.
17:42:54 <TabAtkins> howcome: You can't use px when you need px, and absolute when you need absolute.
17:43:09 <TabAtkins> howcome: But right now, you can't rely on physical lengths.
17:43:35 <TabAtkins> plinss: Right now, the css pixel has no guaranteed relationship to any other unit in CSS.
17:43:38 <TabAtkins> howcome: That's not a problem.
17:44:10 <TabAtkins> plinss: We're getting complaints from impls about the two being disconnected.
17:44:20 <TabAtkins> howcome: I'd like to see a test spec for this.
17:44:27 <TabAtkins> s/test spec/test case/
17:44:56 <TabAtkins> plinss: dbaron, you guys seeing any bug reports?
17:45:22 <TabAtkins> dbaron: Not specifically, but in general browsing, I'm seeing more problems in china.  But I haven't been following individual bugs.
17:45:50 <TabAtkins> Bert: Most common unit ever is "em" and "px", except font size which is specified in pt for some reason.
17:46:07 <TabAtkins> Bert: We need a blog post or something to say "No, you don't have to use points, you can use other units."
17:46:32 <TabAtkins> ?: You have a strong belief in education, and I'm with you here.  We're losing something here.
17:47:10 <dbaron> http://www.bjbus.com/ (Beijing bus site) used to break at DPI larger than 96dpi, but it seems better now
17:47:22 <TabAtkins> TabAtkins:  Is that loss *important*?
17:47:44 <TabAtkins> howcome: People will take things to print, etc, and screw things up there.
17:47:58 <TabAtkins> plinss: No change will be made to print media.  In print media, a px is almost exactly 1/96 inch.
17:48:20 <TabAtkins> szilles: I think we're getting confused by the media issue.  Perhaps the issue of scaling/zooming, like Brad is talking about, is more important.
17:48:42 <TabAtkins> szilles: I can see adding a property that defines mapping of px to physical units, or somehow talks about being a zoomable surface.
17:49:12 <TabAtkins> szilles: I'm being vague, but I somehow think that fixing px to particular number just is the wrong thing to do.  It's not capturing what people are desiring.  So I'm agreeing with Hakon and Bert.
17:50:11 <TabAtkins> TabAtkins: MS fixed the ratio several versions ago, and people were fine with it then.
17:50:22 <TabAtkins> szilles: But the world was 96dpi then.
17:50:40 <TabAtkins> plinss: Yes, and now that it's changing, we need to make sure that things stay the same.
17:50:59 <TabAtkins> szilles: It seems like there's a better way of solving this.
17:51:06 <TabAtkins> plinss: Got a solution?
17:51:33 <TabAtkins> szilles: Wish I did.  It seems that the screen is a window to the canvas, and the canvas may have relevant units, but you may not see all of the canvas.
17:51:42 <TabAtkins> szilles: So measuring things on the screen isn't what you want to do.
17:51:55 <TabAtkins> szilles: But that doesn't happen in print because the document itself is the window - there is no zooming.
17:52:09 <TabAtkins> szilles: That's what I think Brad was trying to get at, building the zoom factor in, as that influences the result too.
17:52:37 <TabAtkins> bradk: I think that when you're dealing with print, the unit is the unit.  If you're designing something 30ft high, you should be able to say you want letters x in high.
17:52:58 <TabAtkins> bradk: But on screen/projection, you'll never know what the physical size is.  You only know what the device driver says, you don't know how far away people are standing from it.
17:53:33 <TabAtkins> bradk: So then you don't have in as a reliable measurement, but you do have device pixels as a reliable measuremenet.  And maybe something that says you'll be better off with 2 device pixels to the CSS px.  but you don't know that is accurate.
17:53:54 <TabAtkins> szilles: So what I was leaning toward is saying something like that, but it's the wrong thing.  It's not the author that wants to say it, it's the usage context that wants to.
17:53:59 <myakura> myakura has joined #css
17:54:17 <TabAtkins> bradk: Zoom was a property in IE, and apparently has some use.  That's why I suggested that it also be an author-based thing.  But that's not exactly essential to this issue.
17:54:42 <TabAtkins> szilles: I guess where i come out is that I'd like at least a week to think more about this.  I find it very scare to change the definition of what pt and in mean.
17:55:25 <TabAtkins> plinss: We're not changing the deifnition.  A pt is 72 to the inch, and in print media where you know the dimensions, an inch is an inch.  We're talking about fixing the ratio of px to inch, so it's not a unit that floats indeterminately based on the device.
17:56:00 <TabAtkins> plinss: What we're trying to stop is the situation where people use px for everything but pt for text, and the page looks great in IE and Safari, but okay-to-bad in Gecko based on the device dpi.
17:56:14 <TabAtkins> Bert: But not everybody believes that ratio.
17:56:31 <TabAtkins> plinss: But it is the common case, and the current behavior of IE and Webkit to have a fixed ratio between px and in.
17:57:05 <TabAtkins> TabAtkins: All this matters only to screens with varying dpis.
17:57:15 <TabAtkins> Bert: The most dangerous device is a screen with 140 dpi.
17:57:24 <TabAtkins> TabAtkins: Yeah, that's the big transition point.
17:58:22 <TabAtkins> howcome: So UAs will have to ask the device driver for the dpi?
17:59:28 <TabAtkins> plinss: Yes, and that's what they have to do today.
17:59:48 <TabAtkins> howcome: And why will they trust that?  What does the new superunit get tied to?
17:59:56 <TabAtkins> TabAtkins: Whatever the browser thinks is appropriate.
18:00:05 <TabAtkins> howcome: And how does it know what's appropriate?
18:00:23 <TabAtkins> TabAtkins: Based on whatever information is available and a best guess.  The guess might be bad, but at least it'll be consistent.
18:00:52 <TabAtkins> plinss: Right now you have a unit that changes according to device pixels, which isn't useful as we go into the future.
18:00:58 <TabAtkins> Bert: But then you'll have fuzzy lines?
18:01:14 <TabAtkins> TabAtkins: Only if the browser maps CSS px to a non-integer number of device pixels, but they won't do that.
18:01:19 <TabAtkins> plinss: Except maybe in a zoom mode.
18:01:26 <TabAtkins> Bert: That's fine, it's a user issue.
18:01:50 <TabAtkins> Bert: I'm hearing different things between what Tab and Steve are saying.  Steve is talking about ratio with device pixels?
18:02:11 <TabAtkins> plinss: I'm talking about just defining the ratio between CSS px and the inch.  And the device pixel to CSS px ratio is up to the browser and user.
18:02:16 <TabAtkins> Bert: That's what the spec says.
18:02:32 <TabAtkins> plinss: The spec does not give us a reliable ratio between the px and a reliable unit.
18:02:45 <TabAtkins> Bert: Yes.
18:03:01 <TabAtkins> plinss: That's the one place we want to change.
18:03:05 <TabAtkins> Bert: And I don't want to change it.
18:03:11 <TabAtkins> howcome: I still want to see a test page first.
18:03:13 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
18:03:17 <Zakim> -CesarAcebal
18:03:18 <Zakim> -[Mozilla]
18:03:20 <Zakim> -arronei
18:03:26 <Zakim> -glazou
18:03:32 <Zakim> -bradk
18:03:48 <Zakim> -Bert
18:04:06 <Zakim> -TabAtkins
18:04:07 <Zakim> -plinss
18:04:14 <Zakim> -fantasai
18:04:25 <Zakim> -SteveZ.a
18:04:26 <Zakim> Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has ended
18:04:27 <Zakim> Attendees were glazou, plinss, fantasai, TabAtkins, +1.253.307.aaaa, arronei, +34.60.940.aabb, CesarAcebal, bradk, howcome, SteveZ, dbaron, David_Baron, Bert
18:14:09 <CesarAcebal> CesarAcebal has left #css
18:31:11 <fantasai> For the minutes: http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20100127/
18:31:25 <fantasai> xhtml1 version is still checking in, xhtml1print will be next
19:24:42 <Lachy> Lachy has joined #css
19:25:43 <Zakim> Zakim has left #CSS
20:09:20 <dbaron> dbaron has joined #css
20:19:03 <plinss> plinss has joined #css
20:24:44 <plinss> plinss has joined #css
21:01:30 <fantasai> fantasai has joined #css
21:26:26 <plinss> plinss has joined #css
21:29:02 <fantasai> Bert: Can you kick of a checkout for /WWW/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20100127/xhtml1/ on the w3.org server?
21:31:13 <fantasai> Bert: It failed to update, and I can't figure out how to fix that
21:31:47 <plinss_> plinss_ has joined #css
21:32:55 <Bert> I'll take a look...
21:34:21 <fantasai> Bert: I'm thinking maybe it was too big of an upload, so maybe check out xhtml1/support first, and then the rest of xhtml1?
21:41:01 <Bert> I guess it's just the size. The servers report that they are lagging behind CVS by some 5 minutes, but maybe it is more in reality...
21:43:15 <Bert> Forcing update works, but I need to find a better way than one file at a time. :-)
21:43:30 <Bert> Let me look for some experts...
21:49:37 <fantasai> sorry, I should have broken it up into thirds
21:50:07 <fantasai> Bert: It's not the lag; I have things I checked in later that are already turning up
23:12:06 <plinss> plinss has joined #css
23:26:11 <shepazu> shepazu has joined #css