IRC log of CSS on 2010-01-27

Timestamps are in UTC.

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