18:59:35 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #svg
18:59:35 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/04/01-svg-irc
18:59:37 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
18:59:37 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #svg
18:59:39 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG
18:59:39 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see GA_SVGWG()3:00PM scheduled to start in 1 minute
18:59:40 <trackbot> Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference
18:59:40 <trackbot> Date: 01 April 2010
18:59:44 <Zakim> GA_SVGWG()3:00PM has now started
18:59:51 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
19:00:02 <patrick> patrick has joined #svg
19:00:10 <Zakim> +Shepazu
19:00:53 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
19:01:09 <ed> Zakim, [IP is me
19:01:09 <Zakim> +ed; got it
19:07:41 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
19:08:01 <anthony> Zakim, [IP is me
19:08:01 <Zakim> +anthony; got it
19:10:07 <ed> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010JanMar/0110.html
19:10:22 <anthony> Scribe: Anthony
19:10:30 <anthony> ScribeNick: anthony
19:11:07 <anthony> Chair: Erik
19:11:29 <anthony> Topic: Telcon Times
19:11:42 <anthony> ED: I said that next telcon is canceled
19:11:49 <anthony> ... it'll be a public holiday for some
19:11:58 <ed> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?day=1&month=4&year=2010&hour=20&min=0&sec=0&p1=0
19:12:02 <anthony> ... next one on will be April, Thur 8
19:12:15 <anthony> ED: The time suggested by the script was
19:12:33 <anthony> ... Monday and Thursdays
19:12:53 <anthony> ... 8PM UTC
19:14:12 <anthony> DS: So it's an hour later
19:14:56 <anthony> ... the time is fine for me
19:16:05 <anthony> ... for JW it's 9pm and CL it's 10pm
19:16:28 <anthony> ED: My suggestion is to try this time for this telcon
19:16:34 <anthony> ... and see how it goes
19:17:23 <anthony> PD: Sounds like it's a good idea
19:17:38 <anthony> ED: Do we need to book this now?
19:17:41 <anthony> PD: I say do it now
19:17:51 <anthony> DS: I'll book this now
19:18:00 <anthony> Topic: Publishing Schedule
19:18:15 <anthony> ED: We were kind of late with publishing some documents
19:18:24 <anthony> ... so not meeting the heartbeat requirement
19:18:47 <anthony> ... I remember we resolved to publish some specs
19:19:04 <anthony> ... but I couldn't find any resolutions when I searched through the mailing list
19:19:21 <anthony> PD: I remember there was a whole series of documents
19:19:30 <anthony> ... are we concerned with a certain one?
19:19:44 <anthony> ED: Mainly we were concerned with publishing modules
19:19:52 <anthony> ... Filters, composting
19:21:16 <anthony> PD: Don't really understand the publishing process
19:21:27 <anthony> DS: There's a heartbeat requirement
19:21:47 <anthony> ... where we are suppose to publish every 3 months
19:21:59 <anthony> ... we have Editors Draft
19:22:07 <anthony> ... which is fairly new in W3C
19:22:21 <anthony> ... then there is First Publich Working Draft
19:22:42 <anthony> ... where a company looks at it's IP  and decides to go a head with it or not
19:22:59 <anthony> ... then there is Working Draft
19:23:14 <anthony> ... then it goes to Candidate Recommendation when we think it is almost done
19:23:34 <anthony> ... then there is Proposed Recommendation where people get a chance to comment
19:23:46 <anthony> ... then it moves to Recommendation status
19:23:56 <patrick> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Roadmap
19:24:11 <anthony> PD: Looking a Wiki road map
19:24:27 <anthony> ED: That's a bit off
19:24:49 <anthony> DS: We've been really slowed down by SVG 1.1 2nd Edition
19:25:01 <anthony> ... I think it's were all over worked
19:25:18 <anthony> PD: I don't want to add anymore slowness
19:25:57 <anthony> ED: To push out 2nd edition would require some more work on test suite
19:26:01 <anthony> ... and some spec work
19:26:09 <anthony> ... which isn't too much more work
19:26:33 <anthony> PD: So I saw some drafts on Params, gradients
19:26:44 <anthony> ... and is it a matter of picking bits of those
19:26:54 <anthony> ... then building 2.0 or is it starting from scratch?
19:27:22 <anthony> DS: We have two different markets we are trying to satisfy
19:27:36 <anthony> ... Browsers and then mobile platforms
19:28:52 <anthony> ... The modules allow people to add SVG 2.0 functionality to their browsers
19:29:15 <anthony> ... once we know what modules we will have for 2.0
19:29:42 <anthony> ... we will collect them together with some other bits and we develop 2.0
19:29:56 <anthony> ... that way other user agents can inch their way to 2.0
19:30:23 <anthony> PD: I would like us a WG to take a far step back and look at SVG
19:30:31 <anthony> ... e.g. reduced DOM
19:31:01 <anthony> ... so if were to do something like reduced DOM would that be a new module or a chapter?
19:31:26 <anthony> DS: I could see the DOM as a module, but would probably be part of the core specification
19:31:46 <anthony> PD: Would the original DOM be part of the spec if we go with a new one
19:31:58 <anthony> DS: Personally, I think parts of it would be
19:32:17 <anthony> ... but we have an opportunity to redefine it here
19:32:35 <anthony> ... but it mainly getting the browser vendors to agree on new functionality
19:33:26 <anthony> PD: So then what's the responsibly. Would you list the old DOM bits optional and deprecated?
19:33:32 <anthony> DS: Yes
19:34:35 <anthony> ED: We will try to set up some more joint telcons for FX
19:34:42 <anthony> PD: That sounds great
19:34:48 <anthony> ... looking forward to the F2F
19:36:13 <anthony> ED: From my personal opinion there are definitely parts of SVG 1.1 DOMM
19:36:21 <anthony> ... that are heavily used and useful
19:36:29 <anthony> ... then there are parts that are not well thought out
19:36:41 <anthony> ... if you ask anyone who's implemented SVG
19:36:56 <anthony> ... they will say they that there are parts that they'd like to change
19:37:01 <anthony> PD: What about higher level
19:37:15 <anthony> DS: We have most of the browser vendors participating
19:37:34 <anthony> ... we have people from Adobe if they want to participate
19:38:03 <anthony> ... I saw some Silverlight stuff that looked appropriate for SVG and some of it was not
19:38:25 <anthony> ... if we are going to set the course of future web graphics then we should take a look at some of these things here
19:38:37 <anthony> ... I think there is some useful stuff that we could be adding to SVG
19:39:06 <anthony> ... Parameters is one of those things that is not backwards compatible but most people have loved it
19:39:30 <anthony> ... and if you do that then most of the older SVG content in those older browsers will not work when using this
19:39:39 <anthony> ... I think we have a unique opportunity to change things now
19:40:06 <anthony> PD: So in summary we're not going to do a bottom up approach but more top down
19:40:34 <anthony> ED: So you're thinking more of a functionality and feature thing?
19:40:39 <anthony> PD: Yes
19:41:21 <anthony> DS: One examples is gradients for example
19:41:36 <anthony> ... SVG currently offers radial and linear gradients
19:42:04 <anthony> ... but I'd like as an author to have gradients along a path
19:42:18 <anthony> ... or something like gradient mesh or diffusion curves
19:42:56 <anthony> ... so we could come in from either end when designing SVG
19:44:02 <anthony> ED: This is definitely an interesting discussion to have. Should have this at the F2F
19:44:17 <anthony> ... having backwards compatibility is really important
19:44:25 <anthony> ... but certainly being able to extend it
19:44:35 <anthony> DS: I think we'd have to figure out in the details
19:44:42 <anthony> ... what to preserve and what to move forward with
19:45:05 <anthony> Topic: XLink Href
19:45:44 <shepazu> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/2.0/publish/
19:46:14 <anthony> DS: Patrick you need to get your name on this as well
19:46:55 <ed> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/SVG/profiles/2.0/publish/
19:46:59 <anthony> ... this didn't seem to print out a table of contents
19:47:12 <anthony> ED: Try the second link I pasted
19:47:27 <anthony> DS: I thought metadata wont change much
19:47:28 <ed> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/2.0/publish/metadata.html
19:47:46 <anthony> ... I took sections from 1.2 Tiny that you didn't think would change much
19:47:51 <anthony> ... and started adapting them
19:48:12 <shepazu> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/2.0/publish/intro.html
19:48:35 <anthony> ... so far the most energy has gone into the intro page
19:48:47 <anthony> ... to set the tone what we are going to be doing
19:48:52 <anthony> ... there's just a few pages so far
19:48:56 <anthony> ... a few chapters
19:49:00 <anthony> ... I included linking
19:49:13 <anthony> ... because I want to talk about Link Href
19:49:35 <anthony> ED: That's one of the features that need to be changed because it's slightly different in Tiny
19:49:49 <anthony> ... quite like the page with the linking elements
19:50:03 <shepazu> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/2.0/publish/linking.html
19:50:07 <anthony> DS: What I want to do is allow 'src' on image
19:50:18 <ed> ED: the linking restrictions were not as restricted in tiny 1.2, so needs to be changed to represent 1.1 full
19:50:29 <anthony> ... or have it on use as well
19:50:37 <anthony> ... anything that is sort of inbound
19:50:43 <anthony> ... and for replacement content
19:50:56 <anthony> ... and that leads us to a question
19:51:14 <shepazu> <image xlink:href="foo.png" src="bar.jpg" ... />
19:51:25 <anthony> ... what if you have something like this
19:51:29 <anthony> ... what do you do?
19:51:37 <anthony> PD: Xlink wins
19:51:47 <anthony> DS: What does the DOM look like?
19:51:54 <anthony> PD: It has both
19:52:12 <anthony> AG: I agree with PD on both of those
19:52:14 <shepazu> <a xlink:href="foo.svg" href="bar.svg"> </a>
19:52:19 <anthony> ED: Probably makes the most sence
19:52:28 <anthony> s/sence/sense/
19:53:06 <shepazu> myEl.href = "blah.svg"
19:53:13 <anthony> ED: Doesn't mean to say a new user agent wouldn't have a simpler way of accessing the image
19:53:25 <ed> s/image/link/
19:53:32 <anthony> DS: What happens in the above case?
19:53:40 <anthony> PD: Both are in the DOM?
19:53:43 <anthony> DS: Yes
19:53:57 <anthony> ... my proposal is href changes both
19:54:02 <anthony> PD: Mirrored?
19:54:11 <anthony> DS: Yes mirrored
19:54:35 <anthony> PD: I don't like mirroring but at the same time this is an edge case
19:55:04 <anthony> DS: I think it's where things are backwards compatible
19:55:31 <anthony> ED: I'm not very fond of mirroring
19:56:00 <anthony> ... just trying to think of the case for backwards compatibility
19:56:37 <anthony> PD: It tends to have an unpredictable ripple effect from design and code
19:56:50 <anthony> ... you want to start moving on this right?
19:57:02 <anthony> DS: Yes, I want to have something quantified
19:57:22 <shepazu> (and what would the namespace of the property be?)
19:57:37 <anthony> ... we talked about this on the mailing lists and with other groups in the past
19:58:34 <anthony> PD: Is there anything similar already out there?
19:59:05 <anthony> ED: I think going over all the events and all the event attributes
19:59:09 <anthony> ... is something we need to do
19:59:52 <anthony> DS: One thing we could do is just say not add src
19:59:55 <anthony> ... just add href
20:00:05 <anthony> PD: I think href is a great start
20:00:25 <anthony> DS: There are some people that will get confused
20:01:02 <anthony> ... I actually don't know. I think people would like to get rid of the name space stuff
20:03:11 <anthony> PD: I think what we are saying though is that href is becoming part of the SVG name space
20:03:21 <anthony> DS: I mean right now what's reflected in the DOM
20:03:31 <anthony> ... the href would have the xlink namespace
20:03:56 <anthony> PD: I presumed href would be part of the NULL name space
20:04:23 <anthony> DS: What is the name space of that property?
20:04:43 <anthony> ... if we allowed just bare name href
20:05:06 <anthony> PD: What are we holding up on? Why is this so hard?
20:05:32 <anthony> DS: The question is when you're parsing the document and you encounter xlink:href it is very clear what you need to do
20:05:48 <anthony> ... if you're parsing a document and it has SVG image href without the xlink
20:06:06 <anthony> ... it puts the value in and it puts in a NULL names space
20:06:12 <anthony> ... what does the serialisation say?
20:06:34 <anthony> ... if they both exist in the DOM what happens?
20:06:50 <anthony> ED: I think they can have independent values in the DOM
20:07:05 <anthony> ... and serialise them as you would currently in browsers
20:07:18 <anthony> DS: You can't have two values with the same name
20:07:33 <anthony> ... one has prefix
20:07:45 <anthony> ... what if use dot notation to set it?
20:07:52 <anthony> ... which one does it change/set?
20:08:13 <anthony> ED: It changes which one we decide it to change
20:10:14 <anthony> DS: Honestly I don't care what the answer is
20:10:19 <anthony> ... it's messy either way
20:10:44 <anthony> ... new people to SVG struggle with this one
20:12:26 <anthony> PD: we say xlink:href preceeds it and if .href is used what is changed xlink:href or href?
20:13:01 <anthony> DS: So opening up content in illustrator may break as well as a result
20:13:10 <anthony> ... is it worth getting rid of name spaces
20:13:39 <anthony> AG: What was the advantages of having name spaces in SVG?
20:14:00 <anthony> DS: You can use name spaces and prevent conflicts
20:14:19 <anthony> ... so say I wanted to put in some geolocation information in an SVG map
20:15:15 <anthony> ... I can distinguish between different sets of data using name spaces
20:15:43 <anthony> ... the mapping example is just one case
20:15:52 <anthony> ... it lets you structured data to SVG
20:16:24 <anthony> ... so in general I think some cases it's useful but with xlink:href it's not so much
20:16:46 <anthony> PD: How often are name spaces used on the web outside of SVG
20:17:07 <anthony> ED: XSLT style sheets outputting XHTML
20:17:15 <anthony> PD: Is that done a bit?
20:17:19 <anthony> ED: I've seen it out there
20:17:39 <ed> s/XHTML/XHTML and HTML/
20:17:44 <anthony> DS: If it's supported it may be done some more
20:20:09 <anthony> ED: If we do drop xlink:href we need the tools to follow
20:26:34 <anthony> DS: Don't think we're closer to coming to a conclusion
20:27:00 <anthony> ED: Would be nice to collect all the thoughts and discussions on this
20:27:20 <anthony> ... we need a vote on this
20:27:52 <anthony> AG: Might be good to ask the IG what they think
20:28:13 <anthony> DS: What should I put in the SVG 2.0 spec next?
20:29:29 <anthony> ED: I don't think coordinate systems would change that much
20:29:57 <ed> basic shapes too probably
20:32:45 <anthony> AG: We should consider adding information about processing elements
20:32:54 <anthony> ... and what steps should be done to process an element
20:33:15 <anthony> ... e.g. the spec talks about "at the time of reference" in various areas
20:33:59 <anthony> ... and it is unclear at what point in the processing are things reference
20:34:49 <anthony> ... this is an architectural that we should look at early on in the piece 
20:35:03 <anthony> ED: So one little thing about publishing documents
20:35:16 <anthony> ... you said you'd look through the mailing list for decisions to publish
20:35:27 <anthony> ... I really think we need to get some documents out soon
20:35:52 <anthony> DS: Lets talk about that next Thursday
20:36:35 <anthony> ACTION: Doug to Search through the minutes and look for where the group has made resolutions to publish
20:36:36 <trackbot> Created ACTION-2751 - Search through the minutes and look for where the group has made resolutions to publish [on Doug Schepers - due 2010-04-08].
20:37:05 <patrick> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Test_Suite_1.1F2
20:37:57 <anthony> Topic: Test Suite
20:38:06 <anthony> PD: I've updated the list
20:38:20 <anthony> DS: Can you please send an email out to let people know
20:38:25 <anthony> ... about the list
20:38:31 <anthony> ... and perhaps assign people to tests
20:38:52 <anthony> ... CL would be good with styling and stucture
20:39:06 <anthony> ED: There are a couple more tests
20:39:11 <anthony> ... that need review
20:39:17 <anthony> ... slightly more complex
20:39:47 <Zakim> -ed
20:39:55 <Zakim> -anthony
20:40:23 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
20:40:35 <Zakim> -Shepazu
20:40:36 <Zakim> GA_SVGWG()3:00PM has ended
20:40:38 <Zakim> Attendees were [Microsoft], Shepazu, [IPcaller], ed, anthony
20:40:55 <anthony> Zakim, bye
20:40:55 <Zakim> Zakim has left #svg
20:41:02 <anthony> RRSAgent, make minutes
20:41:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/04/01-svg-minutes.html anthony
20:45:22 <ed> ed has joined #svg
20:49:12 <ed> ed has joined #svg
22:08:21 <eseidelDesk> eseidelDesk has joined #svg