IRC log of svg on 2010-05-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:30:10 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #svg
14:30:10 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-svg-irc
14:30:12 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
14:30:12 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #svg
14:30:14 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG
14:30:14 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see GA_SVGWG()10:30AM scheduled to start now
14:30:15 [trackbot]
Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference
14:30:15 [trackbot]
Date: 06 May 2010
14:30:34 [Zakim]
GA_SVGWG()10:30AM has now started
14:30:35 [Zakim]
+Shepazu
14:30:44 [Zakim]
+??P21
14:30:52 [ed]
Zakim, ?? is me
14:30:52 [Zakim]
+ed; got it
14:32:31 [ed]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010AprJun/0054.html
14:35:57 [Zakim]
+??P26
14:36:12 [anthony]
Zakim, ??P26 is me
14:36:12 [Zakim]
+anthony; got it
14:39:03 [ChrisL]
ChrisL has joined #svg
14:39:13 [Zakim]
+ChrisL
14:40:04 [shepazu]
agenda+ href
14:41:35 [ed]
agenda+ css style comments
14:43:10 [anthony]
Topic: Updates on F11 2nd Edition
14:43:13 [ChrisL]
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/products/1
14:43:27 [anthony]
ED: Went over entire spec
14:43:34 [anthony]
... to look for default values
14:43:35 [ed]
http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/struct.html#SVGElement
14:43:40 [anthony]
... that were not mentioned in the DTD
14:43:46 [anthony]
... if you look at the SVG element for example
14:43:53 [anthony]
... and scroll down to the bottom of the element defs
14:44:17 [anthony]
... I've added a few things Zoom, Pan, PreserveAspectRatio
14:44:36 [anthony]
... Should the default value be defined, is it the same on all elements?
14:44:52 [anthony]
... Not sure if it's true
14:45:19 [anthony]
... I could remove what I've added and add default values else where
14:45:38 [anthony]
... should I remove the things that have links
14:45:43 [anthony]
... or list them explicitly
14:45:53 [anthony]
CL: Might be better to list them explicitly
14:45:59 [anthony]
... but I don't mind either way
14:46:01 [anthony]
DS: Same
14:46:16 [anthony]
ED: A good part of it is that I found no places that were missing things
14:46:20 [anthony]
... except for the filters chapter
14:46:23 [ChrisL]
The above discussion relates to ACTION-2676
14:46:34 [anthony]
... the only place is PreserveAspectRatio
14:46:44 [anthony]
CL: Just add the definition once
14:46:53 [anthony]
ED: Ok, I'll go back and do some minor changes
14:47:03 [anthony]
... I'll reopen the ACTION and make the changes
14:47:24 [anthony]
... Then I did a bunch of updates on the testsuite
14:47:32 [anthony]
... some of that was based on the QA staff from Opera
14:47:44 [anthony]
... they would like to see a test harness that doesn't have all the stuff
14:47:48 [anthony]
... that a person would look at
14:47:54 [anthony]
... like a test description etc
14:48:00 [anthony]
... they just want a basic test suite
14:48:08 [anthony]
... with test, ref image, and link
14:48:24 [anthony]
CL: How do the automated test suite move from one link to the next?
14:48:27 [anthony]
... list of links?
14:48:47 [anthony]
... if you have a HTML page that links the SVG and PNG image then that's all you need
14:48:51 [anthony]
... what does the HTML do for you?
14:49:02 [anthony]
ED: Have the reference image and SVG side-by-side for checking
14:49:08 [anthony]
... I haven't checked that in anyway
14:49:22 [anthony]
... and the QA staff seem to think the amount of text on the test is too much
14:49:31 [anthony]
... in some cases the description is too long
14:49:53 [anthony]
CL: We've talked before about having the information there
14:50:01 [anthony]
... it's valuable if you want to know more about the test
14:50:16 [anthony]
ED: One suggestion was to collapse the description field
14:50:22 [anthony]
CL: That would be an easy thing
14:50:29 [anthony]
... what to do to pass the test
14:50:33 [anthony]
... and what to do to run the test
14:50:39 [anthony]
... we starting to get some standard text
14:50:58 [anthony]
... I think it's good to start putting that everywhere when it's valid
14:51:09 [anthony]
DS: I think we're getting two different cases here for the text
14:51:14 [anthony]
... one running the test
14:51:32 [anthony]
... and two using the tests as examples
14:51:46 [anthony]
... having an explanation is useful for the later case
14:51:53 [anthony]
... but not so useful for the initial
14:52:00 [anthony]
ED: Just wondering if I should make another harness
14:52:11 [anthony]
... that collapses the extra wording
14:52:17 [anthony]
CL: The harness is not normative
14:52:27 [anthony]
... and so we can make as many versions as we like
14:52:35 [anthony]
ED: Ok, I'll have another chat with them
14:52:50 [anthony]
... I moved the description last on the page
14:53:01 [anthony]
... because it was pushing the images out
14:53:18 [anthony]
... status update on actions
14:54:49 [anthony]
CL: Sent an email about spec history checking because we made some edits we agreed to then undid them and change them to something else
14:55:18 [anthony]
... JWatt had proposed some wording at an F2F that we all agreed on
14:55:22 [anthony]
... and put that back in
14:55:52 [anthony]
... all the stuff EBNF we thought was wrong is not
14:55:58 [anthony]
... so I closed that ACTION
14:56:10 [ChrisL]
ACTION-2765
14:56:17 [ChrisL]
ACTION-2730
14:56:28 [anthony]
CL: Above are the actions I closed
14:56:38 [anthony]
... and then there's the long running action about the IRI stuff
14:56:43 [anthony]
... I did them
14:56:50 [anthony]
s/them/that/
14:56:52 [ChrisL]
ACTION-2697?
14:56:52 [trackbot]
ACTION-2697 -- Chris Lilley to make funcURI consistent, and update tests -- due 2009-11-30 -- CLOSED
14:56:52 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2697
14:57:22 [anthony]
... I also checked for all the properties in the appendix that has the funcURI and checked to see if we have tests for them
14:57:24 [anthony]
... and we do
14:57:29 [ChrisL]
ACTION-2753?
14:57:29 [trackbot]
ACTION-2753 -- Chris Lilley to investigate BNF fix for path and pologyon commonality and see if it is easier to fix 2nd edition spec or move to 2.0 spec -- due 2010-04-15 -- OPEN
14:57:29 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2753
14:57:39 [anthony]
... the above is what I'm currently working on
14:57:46 [anthony]
... the BNF is going to a big change
14:58:00 [anthony]
... while I was doing the action there was something in the spec that we don't test
14:58:34 [anthony]
... polyline and polygon they are the same as the path with an absolute move to
14:58:37 [ChrisL]
http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/shapes-polyline-02-t.svg
14:58:41 [anthony]
... and I wrote a test there
14:58:48 [anthony]
... I'm about to make a test for polygon
14:59:43 [anthony]
... just need someone to review the tests
15:00:30 [ChrisL]
action: anthony to review shapes-polyline-02-t.svg and /shapes-polylgon-02-t.svg
15:00:30 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-2779 - Review shapes-polyline-02-t.svg and /shapes-polylgon-02-t.svg [on Anthony Grasso - due 2010-05-13].
15:00:48 [anthony]
CL: Another thing I noticed
15:00:53 [anthony]
... what I was working the types chapter
15:01:10 [anthony]
... the ones that have the type IRI or type funcIRI don't have it
15:01:17 [anthony]
... is it represented as a DOM string?
15:01:32 [anthony]
ED: Do you have the wording?
15:01:40 [ChrisL]
http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/types.html#BasicDataTypes
15:01:50 [ChrisL]
In the SVG DOM, <angle> values are represented using SVGAngle or SVGAnimatedAngle objects.
15:01:55 [anthony]
CL: So for example it says the above
15:02:14 [anthony]
... it says that for most of the types except for things that are a sequence of 0 or more characters
15:02:23 [anthony]
ED: I think there is an interface
15:02:24 [ed]
http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/types.html#InterfaceSVGURIReference
15:02:33 [anthony]
ED: I don't think it is used for all of them
15:02:38 [anthony]
... only used for properties
15:02:45 [anthony]
... so it wont use that interface
15:02:56 [anthony]
CL: So IRI uses that, but funcIRI doesn't
15:03:00 [anthony]
ED: Right
15:03:09 [anthony]
CL: Ok, I'll add it for funcIRI
15:03:14 [ed]
s/only used for properties/only used for non-properties/
15:05:09 [ed]
s/Ok, I'll add it for funcIRI/Ok, I'll add it for IRI/
15:08:27 [anthony]
Topic: Mercurial is available
15:08:43 [anthony]
ED: Did you guys see the announcement?
15:08:50 [anthony]
... we can put it as a topic for the F2F
15:08:56 [ChrisL]
http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/TortoiseHg
15:09:03 [anthony]
... was thinking that we might be able to move to it
15:09:28 [anthony]
CL: There is a TortoiseHg which gives you a GUI to interface to it
15:09:39 [anthony]
ED: I will add that to the agenda page for the F2F
15:09:51 [shepazu]
http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/TortoiseHg
15:09:57 [anthony]
Topic: TPAC Schedule
15:10:17 [ChrisL]
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/19480/SVGLyon/
15:10:30 [anthony]
ED: I haven't had a time to look at the schedule
15:10:40 [anthony]
CL: CSS and Webfonts are on Mon/Tue
15:10:45 [anthony]
... and SVG is on Thur/Fri
15:10:58 [anthony]
... XSL-FO might be a clash
15:11:19 [anthony]
... I don't see any hard overlaps
15:11:26 [anthony]
DS: Is HTML only meeting 2 days?
15:11:42 [anthony]
... so we can't meet with the HTML group at all?
15:11:51 [anthony]
CL: We'd have to do a joint session
15:12:14 [ed]
Zakim, take up agendum 1
15:12:14 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "href" taken up [from shepazu]
15:12:21 [Zakim]
-ChrisL
15:12:39 [ChrisL]
batteries in my headset are dead. will rejoin in a moment
15:13:15 [shepazu]
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Href
15:13:31 [anthony]
DS: I made the page on the wiki
15:13:41 [anthony]
... I tried to summaries all the issues in the resolution
15:13:47 [anthony]
... and put the resolution up the top
15:14:03 [anthony]
... I front loaded what we actually plan on doing
15:14:15 [anthony]
... then underneath is all the discussions
15:14:20 [anthony]
... and decisions we made
15:14:27 [anthony]
... before we release it to the public
15:14:32 [anthony]
... if you guys can look over it
15:14:35 [anthony]
... that would be good
15:15:13 [anthony]
ED: I think in the resolution it shouldn't say something will be parsed
15:15:19 [anthony]
... both attributes will be parsed
15:15:29 [anthony]
... so that's something you don't have put there
15:15:51 [anthony]
... but it's useful to say which namespace the href and xlink:href attributes end up in
15:16:03 [anthony]
DS: What about in the 3rd one?
15:16:13 [anthony]
ED: That I'm not so sure about
15:16:19 [anthony]
... that's not consistent
15:16:40 [anthony]
DS: So say "The resulting DOM attribute will have the attribute name with a NULL namespace?"
15:16:54 [anthony]
... added the wording in
15:16:59 [anthony]
... look at it again
15:17:19 [anthony]
ED: I'm not really sure I understand the 3rd one
15:17:42 [ed]
"the resulting DOM attribute will have the href value of the href attribute and the namespace value null."
15:18:14 [anthony]
ED: I think you need to be a bit more specific then
15:18:22 [anthony]
... because it sounds like both will have one attribute in the DOM
15:19:23 [anthony]
... so we agree that both attributes will be on the element and you did a getAttribute, which one would you get?
15:19:36 [anthony]
DS: you'd get the one you specify
15:19:53 [anthony]
... get href gets href. get xlink:href gets xlink:href
15:20:09 [anthony]
ED: I think it's good to say explicitly what it does
15:20:41 [anthony]
DS: I'll add a section for getters and setters there
15:20:51 [Zakim]
+ChrisL
15:21:33 [anthony]
CL: This is for SVG 2.0 right?
15:21:37 [anthony]
DS: Yes
15:21:47 [anthony]
... that is something I should say right upfront
15:21:59 [ChrisL]
"If this is going to be done, the time to do it is now, while SVG is not yet ubiquitous. " could be interpreted as, well, now as in SVG1.1SE
15:23:08 [anthony]
DS: Chris I've now indicated that in two different places that this is SVG 2.0
15:23:17 [anthony]
CL: This looks like a good summary
15:23:26 [anthony]
... It covers the issues I'd expect to see there
15:24:30 [anthony]
DS: There was one particular issue
15:25:01 [anthony]
... if you guys reload the page
15:25:10 [ed]
http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/types.html#InterfaceSVGURIReference
15:26:40 [anthony]
... that interface doesn't have a namespace it's just a string
15:26:50 [anthony]
DS: That's a mistake
15:27:02 [anthony]
ED: Maybe I'm miss reading things
15:27:44 [anthony]
... the interface doesn't really care where it comes from
15:27:52 [anthony]
DS: There wont be a namespace value
15:28:10 [anthony]
...I should look at the equivalent HTML interface
15:28:23 [anthony]
ED: I guess that makes sense
15:28:29 [anthony]
... there's the location interface
15:28:33 [anthony]
... and window
15:28:40 [anthony]
DS: Window is part of HTML
15:30:24 [anthony]
... there's three different ways in which this is exposed
15:30:26 [ed]
http://dahlström.net/svg/dom/changing_href_on_use.svg
15:30:39 [anthony]
... one as the attribute value itself
15:30:53 [anthony]
... the second is the href interface or the URI interface
15:31:25 [anthony]
ED: The read only part is only for that particular interface
15:31:42 [anthony]
... it points to the save animated string
15:32:13 [anthony]
DS: We should at least note in SVG 2.0
15:32:18 [anthony]
... how that works
15:32:28 [anthony]
... we should just say
15:32:30 [ed]
s/to the save animated string/to an "SVGAnimatedString href"/
15:32:48 [anthony]
... for any attribute is read only, because it writable because it inherits from a different interface
15:32:54 [anthony]
... it is writable
15:33:24 [ed]
ED: you can write to the href.baseVal, but you can't assign something to SVGURIReference.href
15:38:50 [ed]
Zakim, take up agendum 2
15:38:50 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "css style comments" taken up [from ed]
15:39:00 [ChrisL]
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-style-attr/issues-lc-2009
15:39:14 [ChrisL]
our comments http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Feb/0041.html
15:39:23 [shepazu]
scribeNick: shepazu
15:39:27 [ChrisL]
their responses http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Feb/0191.html
15:40:43 [shepazu]
ChrisL: they have accepted 1 comment, rejected 1, ruled 2 out of scope
15:41:12 [shepazu]
shepazu: please CC the SVG WG list, so we're aware of it
15:41:22 [shepazu]
ChrisL: will do next time
15:41:32 [ChrisL]
Peter Linss agreed with outr comment #3
15:41:33 [ChrisL]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Feb/0192.html
15:42:10 [shepazu]
ChrisL: comment 3 was not listed in their DoC, though they agreed to it
15:42:55 [shepazu]
ChrisL: comment 2, they clarified the spec, we should accept that one
15:43:01 [ed]
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-style-attr/
15:45:44 [shepazu]
ChrisL: it doesn't seem clear to me whether curly braces are allowed within a declaration block
15:45:55 [shepazu]
... but they said it is clear from the grammar
15:46:08 [ed]
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/syndata.html#rule-sets
15:48:56 [ChrisL]
their grammar had declaration but not declaration block
15:48:57 [ChrisL]
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/grammar.html
15:49:23 [shepazu]
DS: for example <circle style="{fill:red;}"/> ?
15:49:25 [shepazu]
ChrisL: their grammar doesn't include the term "declaration block"
15:51:01 [shepazu]
ChrisL: they do have "declaration list"
15:51:14 [shepazu]
ed: its probably clear anyway
15:53:10 [ed]
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-style-attr/#syntax
15:55:20 [ed]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/csswg/css-style-attr/Overview.html
15:55:41 [shepazu]
ChrisL: I think it can be read either way, but on rereading it, I guess it is clear enough
15:59:23 [shepazu]
ChrisL: the next issue is that CSS 2.1 could be read that only CSS2.1 properties are valid, therefore CSS3 and SVG properties should be ignored
15:59:59 [shepazu]
... they seem to be saying in their reply that that's not the intent, but I'm not sure what the resolution is
16:00:51 [shepazu]
ed: we could ask them to include the wording change more explicitly
16:01:22 [shepazu]
ChrisL: this could be solved by changing "CSS 2.1 properties" to "CSS properties"
16:02:58 [shepazu]
ed: I think we should push for this change
16:03:26 [shepazu]
ChrisL: in other words, we shouldn't accept it until we see the change in CSS 2.1
16:03:51 [shepazu]
... their change would be fine if they actually commit it
16:06:07 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #svg
16:07:03 [shepazu]
ChrisL: I asked if unitless values and scientific notation were allowed
16:07:12 [shepazu]
... they responded no
16:07:44 [shepazu]
... that are using FLEX grammar, but with their own definition of NUMBER
16:09:23 [shepazu]
... SVG is consistent currently with this, because it allows scinot for attribute values but not in CSS declarations
16:09:26 [shepazu]
... Mozilla seems to support this, but Bert rejected any change to the grammar, which he insists must be frozen
16:10:08 [shepazu]
shepazu: if an implementation (at least one, maybe more?) supports it, CSS shoudl be changed to reflect reality
16:12:04 [shepazu]
ed: it seems it would be better to be consistent
16:14:31 [shepazu]
Action: ChrisL to ask CSS WG to include clarification for "CSS 2.1 properties" as noted in response
16:14:31 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-2780 - Ask CSS WG to include clarification for "CSS 2.1 properties" as noted in response [on Chris Lilley - due 2010-05-13].
16:14:56 [shepazu]
Action: ChrisL to ask CSS WG to revisit scientific notation issue for grammar
16:14:56 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-2781 - Ask CSS WG to revisit scientific notation issue for grammar [on Chris Lilley - due 2010-05-13].
16:18:00 [shepazu]
trackbot, end telcon
16:18:00 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
16:18:00 [Zakim]
sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
16:18:01 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:18:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-svg-minutes.html trackbot
16:18:02 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
16:18:02 [RRSAgent]
I see 3 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-svg-actions.rdf :
16:18:02 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: anthony to review shapes-polyline-02-t.svg and /shapes-polylgon-02-t.svg [1]
16:18:02 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-svg-irc#T15-00-30
16:18:02 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: ChrisL to ask CSS WG to include clarification for "CSS 2.1 properties" as noted in response [2]
16:18:02 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-svg-irc#T16-14-31
16:18:02 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: ChrisL to ask CSS WG to revisit scientific notation issue for grammar [3]
16:18:02 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-svg-irc#T16-14-56
16:18:12 [shepazu]
Zakim, who is here?
16:18:12 [Zakim]
sorry, shepazu, I don't know what conference this is
16:18:13 [Zakim]
On IRC I see ChrisL, RRSAgent, ed, ed_work, anthony, f1lt3r, shepazu, karl, jwatt, trackbot
16:34:59 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #svg
16:34:59 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-svg-irc
16:35:03 [ChrisL]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:35:03 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-svg-minutes.html ChrisL
16:36:19 [ChrisL]
Present: Erik, Anthony, Doug, Chris
16:36:24 [ChrisL]
Chair: Erik
16:36:32 [ChrisL]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:36:32 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/05/06-svg-minutes.html ChrisL
18:36:14 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #svg