19:59:42 RRSAgent has joined #svg 19:59:42 logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/10/28-svg-irc 19:59:49 Zakim, this is SVGWG 19:59:49 heycam, this was already GA_SVGWG()4:00PM 19:59:50 ok, heycam; that matches GA_SVGWG()4:00PM 20:00:00 Zakim, who is on the call? 20:00:00 On the phone I see +1.425.868.aaaa 20:00:14 +??P3 20:00:23 Zakim, ??P3 is me 20:00:23 +ed; got it 20:00:43 +??P7 20:00:46 Zakim, ??P7 is me 20:00:46 +heycam; got it 20:00:47 Zakim, +1. is pdengler 20:00:47 +pdengler; got it 20:01:04 +ChrisL 20:01:10 Chair: Cameron 20:01:17 http://player.microsoftpdc.com/Session/6b113af7-ba3e-44ae-bf8c-1f394029cc18 20:01:27 +Shepazu 20:01:30 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010OctDec/0074.html 20:01:39 +[IPcaller] 20:02:01 Zakim: IPcaller is me 20:02:15 Zakim: [IPcaller] is me 20:02:47 scribeNick: ed 20:02:55 Topic: SVG 1.1 2nd Edition Test Suite Analysis 20:02:57 chair: heycam 20:03:05 Zakim, [IPcaller] is me 20:03:05 +jwatt; got it 20:03:13 PD: good thread on the mailinglist 20:03:23 CM: maybe i've been out of the loop for a bit 20:03:39 CL: the naming convention is what we've been used to date, just the section in the spec 20:03:43 ...what's wrong with that? 20:04:18 PD: don't disagree with that... the problem is if ppl look at these tests and try to judge if browsers support svg, because of the file naming 20:04:56 ... my solution is: rename the tests... or if that's a problem, ...[scribe missed] 20:05:14 ... many ppl are going to see these tests 20:05:46 CL: if the tests are testing things that aren't in the section in the spec that the filenaming suggests 20:05:47 tbah has joined #svg 20:06:19 ... some tests use animation, but they're not particularly testing animation, but other things 20:06:40 PD: i don't want devs to look at e.g struct-* and IE or FF fails 20:07:13 +tbah 20:07:51 ... testing animating colors and gradient, just letting people understand the test uses e.g colors AND animations AND fonts 20:08:15 q+ 20:08:24 CM: if people are making that jump, if some tests fail the whole spec is not interoperable... 20:08:57 PD: a fourth suggestion is to make the implementation report categorize the tests 20:09:09 DS: is anyone suggesting something else? 20:09:38 CL: we're missing a category for combinations of features 20:09:54 >>> The SVG Working Group could modify the conformance template to re-categorize these tests into their appropriate area. 20:09:55 PD: we're close, i don't want to hold back process 20:10:30 ... the modules browsers get to last should be categorized, like fonts, or filters, or animation... 20:10:43 ... there should be exceptions, to not confuse developers 20:10:44 q+ 20:11:31 CL: some tests uses svgfonts because they're helpful for knowing exact metrics in advance 20:11:41 Zakim, ack shepazu 20:11:41 I see no one on the speaker queue 20:11:48 ... some tests will still pass even if svgfonts are not supported 20:12:01 anthony has joined #svg 20:12:03 ...tried to convert svg -> woff and adding that to one test 20:12:11 ...trying to figure out how to do that 20:12:28 ...we could add woff fallback fonts in css 20:12:59 PD: so for the compositing test svgfonts are not really required 20:13:14 ...concerned that woff isn't yet a standard 20:13:32 ...don't understand the pushback on renaming tests 20:13:46 CL: we decided already that woff fonts will be mandated by SVG2 20:13:56 +??P16 20:13:57 ...so i'm not too concerned about those 20:14:09 Zakim, ??P16 is me 20:14:09 +anthony; got it 20:14:29 DS: we need reliable fonts to give the expected appareance on particular tests 20:14:48 ...how best to achieve that passing criteria / that effect? 20:15:07 CL: we've already done that for one of the tests, using ahem 20:15:13 ... and we have an svg ahem 20:15:18 ...both look the same 20:15:24 ... both provide the same end result 20:16:06 PD: if other vendors agree adding more fallback fonts sounds good 20:16:28 DS: don't think this is a point of contention 20:16:42 PD: would like us to address this concern this for SMIL 20:17:04 CM: some tests use smil for mechanical reasons, just for generating events at particular times 20:17:41 ..[missed] so you basically want the renaming to happen? 20:18:13 CL: renaming the tests is probably easier than recategorizing the tests 20:18:32 DS: there's a bit of work 20:18:37 ...to do this 20:18:53 ... the tests are approved, but going through substituting the names... 20:19:30 ...if MS has resources available to help with that that would be good 20:19:33 PD: sure 20:19:44 ... CL was going to help to add WOFF to some tests 20:20:00 DS: if you are renaming tests, some tests have dependencies 20:20:10 ...maybe some tests need to be rewritten 20:20:30 ...maybe to remove use of some particular feature 20:20:49 PD: i'll take each test that depends on smil, and split out the smil stuff 20:21:33 CL: one test was testing unsuspendRedraw, that could probably be rewritten as a script test 20:21:48 PD: i'll do what you want 20:22:02 CM: renaming the test first, making changes later 20:22:44 DS: have we studied what level of support is required for passing a test? 20:22:59 CL: we tried, but then we started to assume that more and more things were there 20:23:28 DS: agree with patrick that filters animation and fonts are heavyduty 20:24:13 ...so putting them in a higher category seems reasonable 20:24:26 trackbot has joined #svg 20:24:58 ED: i disagree, all the mobile implementations did animations and fonts, filters sure, those are harder (and harder still to do well on old mobile platforms) 20:25:36 CM: we could have levels of test, one simple, one hard, or several levels of passing (?) 20:26:31 PD: tests that use smil and something else we will propose a solution 20:26:42 DS: renaming the tests is my proposal 20:26:55 ...don't want tests removed, rather have substitute tests added 20:27:06 PD: pulling out non-essential smil 20:27:46 DS: creating alternate tests, anything that uses animation should be named something animation 20:27:57 ... this topic is becoming a permathread 20:28:40 DS: my proposal is that if any test uses animation, the test should be named something-animation 20:29:26 ...in some way it's testing animation, regardless if that's the main point of the test 20:30:16 ED: i like being able to quickly find tests based on a section in the spec 20:31:20 ...keeping the naming scheme, but adding a suffix to indicate if it's using FOOBAR maybe could be ok... 20:31:44 ...don't want most tests to start with animate-* 20:32:02 pdengler: Rename all tests that have SMIL with a prefix of animate-elem- 20:32:11 pdengler: For those tests that have merely a mechanical (non SMIL focussed test), in addition to the animate-elem rename, let's create a test without the SMIL elements 20:33:26 ED: I disagree with the "Rename all tests that have SMIL with a prefix of animate-elem-" 20:34:21 DS: i don't follow 20:35:00 ...MS thinks that tests should only test one single thing 20:35:48 AG: we could use the tiny12, and add a numerical series like 40x 20:36:34 pdengler: MS does not think that a test should only test a signle thing as evidence by the tests we have submitted, that's not the poitn 20:37:08 ScribeNick: heycam 20:37:38 DS: is it ok with you if we, for tests that have purely mechanical uses of animation, that we substitute new tests for those tests, keeping the existing tests in the test suite, but essentially marking them as having something to do with animation? 20:37:41 ED: that part is fine with me 20:37:48 ... i agree we should have tests not using SMIL as well 20:37:56 ... there's more than one way of doing something, so why not test all of them 20:38:02 DS: i agree there, so i'm not sure where the problem is 20:38:15 ED: my problem is mostly with the prefix. i wouldn't like the test suite to have animate-elem- 20:38:26 AG: that's why i made my suggestion [of 400-series tests] 20:38:30 DS: how about combo-? 20:38:44 AG: that'd break the test suite generation scripts 20:38:52 DS: can't we fix the tests? 20:39:07 AG: there's no chapter "combo-" 20:39:16 CL: in that case don't give a link to the spec 20:39:36 DS: or we all call them animate-elem- because they do have something to do with animation, and the scripts won't break 20:40:27 ED: there are other tests that are testing other features as well, you have to rely on some things at some points 20:40:42 DS: if you just prefix it with anim-elem something, and it also has the other names in it, will it break the scripts? 20:40:54 ... here's the thing the tests are testing, and it also uses animation 20:41:27 AG: the scripts are fixed to a certain number of dashes in the name, would have to go back to the scripts 20:41:48 ED: maybe renaming the tests is not the best way to go about it. maybe changing the template to identify what's relied on. 20:41:53 DS: that sounds like a lot more work 20:42:07 ED: what would you rename it to then? who decides which feature it should be listed as, how long can filenames be? 20:42:48 DS: so we have one vendor that has a problem with three features, and that's it. i don't see this being a situation where we're going to get out of control... 20:43:31 ED: i think you are understating how much work it would be 20:45:38 ED: it'd be really easy to write a script to pull out what elements a particular test uses, that could be a reasonable indicator 20:46:12 DS: what is your proposed solution? 20:46:42 ... another one is to change these 30 tests completely, get rid of the ones that have smil in them, and then review and approve these 30 tests, which we'll have to do anyway, and dump the old ones or put them as unapproved or something 20:46:57 ... it's a solution i like less, then we don't have these combinatorial tests that we would otherwise be getting for free 20:47:17 ... i think this is the main reason i object originally about having the file name being the identity of the test 20:48:35 CM: patrick you were saying that it's the implementaiton report you're worrying about rahter than the test names, right? 20:48:35 PD: yes 20:51:34 PD: my belief is that the impl report should easily reflect the features that folks can depend on. i realise that the tests are dense. i believe that people depend on text, and masking, gradients.... and firefox and we won't pass these. i don't care. 20:51:52 ... i jsut want the impl report, at a glance, that it's easy to see that they don't pass because it's filters, or animation, that is used 20:55:12 http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/errata/implementation-report.html 21:07:57 http://www.w3.org/mid/4A2DB3AE4504E944AF122BBFBA7FBA1F54D8FB55@TK5EX14MBXC114.r 21:07:57 edmond.corp.microsoft.com 21:08:01 http://www.w3.org/mid/4A2DB3AE4504E944AF122BBFBA7FBA1F54D8FB55@TK5EX14MBXC114.redmond.corp.microsoft.com 21:08:15 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010OctDec/0075.html 21:11:43 http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/paths-dom-02-f.svg 21:12:21 http://www.w3.org/mid/20101028035114.GO10034@wok.mcc.id.au 21:14:59 ED: i will look at that list of animation tests and get back to you, but i think it'll be ok 21:15:08 ... it's just the ones targetting the animation report? 21:15:10 PD: yes 21:15:24 [we talked about the fonts one getting woff font fallback ones] 21:15:42 PD: but if we can't do the woff thing, we might have to look at prefixing these too. but the woff solution would be perfect. 21:16:02 ACTION: Chris look at patd's font tests to add woff fallback 21:16:03 Created ACTION-2887 - Look at patd's font tests to add woff fallback [on Chris Lilley - due 2010-11-04]. 21:16:15 ACTION: Erik to look at the animate tests in patd's email for renaming 21:16:15 Created ACTION-2888 - Look at the animate tests in patd's email for renaming [on Erik Dahlström - due 2010-11-04]. 21:18:09 Topic: auckland f2f 21:18:20 JW: looking through the dates people sent me, seems like the first 3 weeks in march are the best 21:18:32 ... i'd suggest the first week, which starts on monday 28th feb, and ends on friday 4th march 21:18:37 CL: sounds good to me 21:18:49 DS: i'll just check if i have any conflicts 21:19:55 JW: this is probably one of the only opportunity to meet the people who are working on svg for mozilla, if that helps get you here 21:20:54 DS: those dates work for me 21:21:09 JW: pat do those dates matter to you? 21:21:13 PD: no it won't change anything 21:21:27 JW: i'll send an email about it starting on the 28th feb 21:22:06 Topic: TPAC 21:22:18 CL: i have a few constraints. thursday afternoon we've got fx tf thing. 21:22:25 ... other constraint is that svg and webfonts are meeting on the same day 21:22:39 ... so i'll have to split my time between the 2 groups 21:22:40 DS: friday? 21:22:53 CL: i'm probably doing mornings and afternoons. so mornings in web fonts and afternoons in svg. 21:23:17 CM: agenda link? 21:23:28 http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Tpac2010_Agenda 21:23:53 ED: was hoping tav would have something with gradients research 21:24:38 CL: we haven't really got submitted impl reports, so we can't really see how close we are to being done 21:24:49 ... i'd really hoped we could know we're deeply in trouble or know we're almost right 21:25:04 ... i want 1.1 2ed out the door and behind us 21:25:19 CM: that's just relying on people running the tests, right? 21:25:25 CL: yes, but we still haven't got a finalised set of tests 21:25:36 ... as erik said recently we can start, we just update the impl report as things change 21:26:30 PD: i like the idea of getting prepped our css discussion on thursday, i think we could break that out 21:26:38 ... i sent a document to the fx mailing list that i'm not seeing yet 21:29:42 ED: do people need to dial in to tpac? 21:29:53 DS: maybe, timing might not work out for most people 21:30:00 CL: i asked for a phone 21:30:43 PD: i'm going to present on the html.next panel at tpac 21:31:24 http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/ 21:33:30 -ed 21:33:32 -pdengler 21:33:33 -heycam 21:33:34 -anthony 21:33:34 -ChrisL 21:33:36 -jwatt 21:33:36 -tbah 21:33:46 -Shepazu 21:33:47 GA_SVGWG()4:00PM has ended 21:33:49 Attendees were +1.425.868.aaaa, ed, heycam, pdengler, ChrisL, Shepazu, jwatt, tbah, anthony 21:34:36 trackbot, end telcon 21:34:36 Zakim, list attendees 21:34:36 sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is 21:34:37 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 21:34:37 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/28-svg-minutes.html trackbot 21:34:38 RRSAgent, bye 21:35:25 rrsagent, make logs public 21:35:37 rrsagent, make minutes 21:35:37 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/28-svg-minutes.html ChrisL 21:35:49 rrsagent, bye 21:35:49 I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/28-svg-actions.rdf : 21:35:49 ACTION: Chris look at patd's font tests to add woff fallback [1] 21:35:49 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/28-svg-irc#T21-16-02 21:35:49 ACTION: Erik to look at the animate tests in patd's email for renaming [2] 21:35:49 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/28-svg-irc#T21-16-15