19:01:25 RRSAgent has joined #svg 19:01:25 logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/11/11-svg-irc 19:01:27 RRSAgent, make logs public 19:01:27 Zakim has joined #svg 19:01:29 Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG 19:01:29 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot 19:01:30 Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference 19:01:30 Date: 11 November 2010 19:02:25 Zakim, who is on the call? 19:02:25 sorry, heycam, I don't know what conference this is 19:02:26 On IRC I see RRSAgent, fantasai, ed, anthony, heycam, karl, trackbot 19:02:30 Zakim, this is SVG 19:02:30 sorry, heycam, I do not see a conference named 'SVG' in progress or scheduled at this time 19:02:32 Zakim, this is GASVG 19:02:32 sorry, heycam, I do not see a conference named 'GASVG' in progress or scheduled at this time 19:02:35 anthony_ has joined #svg 19:02:47 anthony_ has left #svg 19:03:58 anthony_work has joined #svg 19:04:26 anthony has joined #svg 19:08:25 RRSAgent, stop 20:59:54 jwatt has joined #svg 21:00:45 +[IPcaller] 21:00:49 Zakim, [ is me 21:00:49 sorry, heycam, I do not recognize a party named '[' 21:00:54 Zakim, IPcaller is me 21:00:54 +heycam; got it 21:00:59 Zakim, who is on the call? 21:00:59 On the phone I see [Microsoft], heycam 21:01:23 +??P5 21:01:33 Zakim, ??P5 is me 21:01:33 +ed; got it 21:01:54 anthony has joined #svg 21:03:01 Chair: Cameron 21:03:08 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010OctDec/0127.html 21:05:55 +??P7 21:06:03 Zakim, ??P7 is me 21:06:03 +anthony; got it 21:06:05 I would if I could figure out how to get the number pad to come up in the new version of skype 21:06:58 +??P10 21:07:20 Zakim, ??P10 is me 21:07:20 +jwatt; got it 21:07:57 for anyone else hitting that problem in future, you need to hide your sidebar to get the number pad to show up 21:07:59 crazy 21:08:14 Scribe: anthony 21:08:17 ScribeNick: anthony 21:09:16 Topic: Telcon Time 21:09:32 CM: Ed we did we resolve what was discussed in terms of telcon time? 21:09:43 ED: What we discussed at TPAC meeting was to have the telcon one hour earlier than before 21:09:55 ... as I understood it that was one hour before the actual time 21:10:02 ... and not the shifted time 21:10:16 ... so essentially it means 20:00 UTC 21:10:28 CM: 2 hours ago was my translated time 21:10:34 ... but it's actually 1 hour ago 21:10:53 AG: So 7am for me and 9am for CM 21:10:59 PD: So 9pm for you ED? 21:11:08 ED: It's 10pm here now 21:11:21 PD: Noon for PST 21:11:27 ... that does not apply to the task force correct? 21:11:37 ED: As far as I know the task force has not changed the time 21:11:45 ... I think that is 20:00 UTC 21:11:48 ... I'll double check 21:12:16 ... Yes task force 20:00 UTC 21:12:28 CM: That's the time we want to move to for our teclon time right? 21:13:10 ... this means that the task force time is at the same time? 21:13:28 ED: Actually I think, 20:00 UTC is the time we have now in the telcon system 21:13:36 ... for SVG teclons 21:13:38 ... check that now 21:13:44 http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar.html#s_2216 21:14:22 ED: I'm happy with we have now 21:14:27 ... so we shouldn't change anything 21:14:32 ... as in starting 1 hour ago 21:14:37 AG: That's fine with me 21:14:51 ... PD is that fine with you? 21:14:55 PD: That's great 21:15:05 CM: And you also discussed having single telcon a week? 21:15:15 ED: I think everyone at the meeting was ok with that 21:15:22 ... and we decided to go with Thursdays 21:15:34 RESOLUTION: We will have 1 telcon per week at 20:00 UTC on Thursdays 21:15:51 Topic: Little TPAC Summary 21:16:06 CM: I did skim through the minutes 21:16:20 ... but I just wanted to get some broad ideas on what was decided about plans and directions 21:16:48 ED: What I heard we were aiming for some what stable specs for June 2011 21:17:12 ... those specs will include public fx Transforms 2D/3D, Filters spec (that apply to HTML), join Animation model spec 21:17:17 ... the SVG Integration spec 21:17:26 ... and as a lower priority the Advanced Gradients 21:17:34 CM: At what sort of level by June? 21:17:46 ED: Not sure we decided on, but I heard somewhat stable 21:18:00 ... but it suggests and agressive schedule for getting drafts out 21:18:32 ... I think we can probably have a couple of sepcs ready by then. Not sure if they'll all be at the same level 21:18:46 CM: Might be duable if we all put an effort in 21:18:53 PD: Two additional items 21:19:08 ... We were going to put Erik on the SVG DOM 21:19:38 ... And thinking about simplifying the DOM, having getters and setters and simpler list API 21:19:55 ... only other thing was we identified owners 21:20:02 ... Transforms is and has been driven by Anthony 21:20:09 ... Animation was going to be driven by Dean 21:20:15 ... Filters was going to be driven by Robert 21:20:33 ... Advanced Gradients sounded like a partnership by Tav and Anthony 21:20:38 CM: Robert? 21:20:45 PD: ROC 21:21:24 ED: I think someone from Apple said that they were happy to be an editor of Filters 21:21:32 ... I'm pretty sure I have an action relating to that 21:21:38 ... can't remember off hand who it was 21:21:50 PD: The only other thing we said was that, to do two things around testing 21:22:08 ... as we look to make tests, we move to make tests for the new W3C testing harness 21:22:22 ... and we deliver tests and specs as much as we could at the same time 21:22:48 ... and Doug was going to lead investigation into doing crowed sourcing for test development 21:23:09 CM: Obviously we are not going to convert all our existing tests to that? 21:23:12 PD: No 21:23:19 ED: I think it's probably best to go with the current test suite now 21:23:26 ... but for future test development 21:23:34 ... we should use the new harness 21:23:45 CM: Does it enable more automated testing like ref tests? 21:23:59 ED: Yes, and I think it makes sense to use ref tests where we can 21:24:07 ... not everything can be script automated 21:24:17 ... not sure if scripted tests and ref tests will cover everything 21:24:24 ... but it will cover a big portion 21:25:05 CM: The drivers for these task force specs are they the editors? 21:25:24 PD: My understanding was that they are at least the owners, as in they are responsible to get it from point A to pint B 21:25:31 s/pint/point/ 21:25:46 PD: And both myself and anyone else should contribute to make that happen 21:27:12 -anthony 21:27:33 +??P7 21:27:41 Zakim, ??P7 is me 21:27:41 +anthony; got it 21:28:31 Topic: Plan for 1.1 Test Suite 21:28:47 CM: Was 1.1 2nd Edition discussed at the F2F as well? 21:29:20 ED: What we discussed at TPAC was to try and finish the last call issues 21:29:27 ... and close them before December 15th 21:29:32 ... and around the same time 21:29:39 ... we should have a somewhat stable charter document 21:29:51 ... because it will take a few weeks for the AC review to happen 21:30:02 CM: That's mostly a task for Doug and Chris 21:30:07 ED: I know Doug has started work on it 21:30:11 ... and he showed some work on it 21:30:37 CM: The plan for having thses last call issues by the 15th Dec 21:30:50 ... was that we could publish the spec at the next maturity level as well? 21:31:05 ED: I think the plan is to ask for publication some time in december 21:31:16 ... and have it move to recommendation some time in January 21:31:23 ... if everything goes according to plan 21:31:35 ... because the plan is to not have the 1.1 2nd Edition in the charter document 21:31:39 ... just new things 21:32:05 CM: Test suite do you have a status of that? 21:32:14 ED: I've been doing updates and I've been working on it today 21:32:19 ... generating reference images 21:32:24 ... and fixing minor issues 21:32:30 ... and I sent an email to the list 21:32:33 ... with the issues 21:32:47 ... some tests have some unclear or missing pass criteria 21:32:53 ... some tests have missing revision numbers 21:33:02 ... due to the way they were checked in 21:33:08 ... missing 'ko' flag 21:33:12 ... some tests are using 21:33:18 ... red to indicate pass 21:33:24 ... but not to concered about that 21:33:41 ... So there are lot of animation tests that are missing written pass criteria which is bad 21:33:49 CM: Do we need to give someone an action to look at some of those 21:34:09 AG: Might have to triage those because there are alot of those 21:34:19 ED: Seems that there are about 30 or so 21:34:23 CM: Can you put that on a wiki page 21:34:27 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010OctDec/0130.html 21:34:35 ED: Already emailed the lsit 21:34:46 s/lsit/list/ 21:35:09 AG: If we divide that up between us, could have that done in no time 21:35:13 CM: Time line for tests suite work? 21:35:35 ED: I think that it is ok to have it done by december if we all do the work 21:35:43 ... I've run it from start to finish a few times 21:35:56 ... and everytime I've run through it I've come across issues 21:36:06 ... this list is not complete with all the issues 21:36:19 ... so basically it's making sure it's ok for releasing 21:36:26 CM: Is that something you were going to continue on and do? 21:36:28 ED: I think so 21:36:39 CM: So things that need to be done are 21:36:43 ... addressing pass criteria 21:36:46 .. and fixing red 21:36:53 ... and there are some tests which need to be approved by us 21:36:59 ED: I wasn't too concerned about those 21:37:05 ... we could put more in 21:37:11 ... or we can keep going with the ones we have already 21:37:24 CM: By adding to those? 21:37:30 ED: The ones that I've been reviewing 21:37:44 CM: Ideally we'd be able to approve or not the ones you've reviewed so far 21:37:55 ED: If you have a list of those we could go through those quickly 21:38:01 CM: Don't have the list at the moment 21:38:59 ED: Can we run the test suite status generation script again? 21:40:12 AG: Yes, I can run the test suite status again 21:40:42 ... after the telcon, and email out 21:41:09 ED: Just make sure to run an update before you generate 21:41:23 CM: There are still some tests that heven't been reviewed 21:41:28 ... I don't know at this point 21:41:41 ... if we want to consider not reviewing those 21:41:51 ED: The sooner we close on the final list of tests 21:41:57 ... the easier it will be 21:42:11 ... we still need to run through the implementation status of each test 21:43:00 AG: Might be worth waiting for the status report 21:43:07 CM: There are a bunch that I reviewed 21:43:11 ... of the Microsoft tests 21:43:24 ... and some of them have questions or arguments and I've marked those as reviewed 21:43:37 ... and there are still some that haven't been responded to 21:43:40 PD: Is that right? 21:43:48 CM: I can go back a check back through my email 21:44:05 ... and if there are ones that have outstanding comments I'll email out 21:44:09 PD: I'll also look 21:44:18 ... if we've missed anything that would also be great 21:45:02 Topic: SVG 2 21:45:18 CM: People are still bringing up issues that might apply to SVG 1.1. 21:45:25 ... since we want to get the document out 21:45:36 ... don't want to make too many drastic changes to it 21:45:45 ... I want a place to address these issues 21:45:47 ... that come up 21:45:52 ... What is the current plan for SVG 2 21:46:26 ED: I think we touched or discussed topics 21:46:39 ... but we didn't talk about it alot 21:46:57 ... we are still on the plan on using the modules for parts of the spec 21:47:15 CM: When you were talking before about these core DOM changes 21:47:23 ... it sounded more like stuff that effects SVG 2 21:47:28 ... rather than a separate document 21:47:47 PD: The way I think about it is SVG 2 is going to be modulised like we talked about 21:47:53 ... you're right about the DOM work 21:47:57 ... we need to figure out where that goes 21:48:02 ... and the SVG integration module 21:48:10 ... these two are portion of the SVG 2 21:48:32 ... might want to look at or add to or improve things 21:48:41 ... which is part of the SVG 2 track 21:49:13 CM: In terms of what SVG 2 the document is going to include 21:49:27 ... is say the integration document going to be part of the SVG 2 family of specifications 21:49:36 ... or will that text go into the SVG 2 document itself 21:49:59 ... I remember talking about a while ago about producing modules 21:50:05 ... and bringing them together 21:50:21 ... never been quite sure logistically where the text is going to go 21:50:32 ED: We do have the SVG 2 base document there in place 21:50:37 ... it is possible to add stuff to it 21:50:49 http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/2.0/ 21:50:53 CM: The question is if I'm going to add some text 21:50:57 ... where do I go to add it 21:52:13 PD: I think that for example, I think that Anthony wants me to look at SVG Compositing and maybe that's a module in itself 21:52:21 ... should probably make a first pass at what the modules are 21:52:29 ... so we don't have to revisit it 21:52:40 CM: We should decide what features are going to be part of SVG 2 21:53:08 ... in the broad SVG 2 time frame and then from that and see which are modules 21:53:23 ... that are going to be seperate at the moment 21:53:26 ... and which ones are not 21:53:44 ... and the features that are not modules 21:53:50 ... will have to go into the document itself 21:54:01 ... and we'll have to work out what the structure is like 21:54:17 ... one thing that bugs me about SVG 1.1 it's wordy in some places 21:54:22 ... where it doesn't need to be 21:54:26 ... and not detailed enough 21:54:43 ... and I wonder how much we want to use from the 1.1 21:55:58 AG: I remember Doug was saying use SVG 1.1 but mark it up as text that is unapproved 21:56:01 ... then we review it 21:56:07 ... so that it goes to a reviewed status 21:56:34 CM: If someone has time it would be good to go through and rewrite whole sections 21:57:07 -anthony 21:57:54 scribenick: jwatt 21:57:57 scribe: Jonathan Watt 21:58:26 topic: rx/ry clamping on 21:58:28 http://www.w3.org/mid/20101101023449.GK28301@wok.mcc.id.au 21:58:43 ED: I'm happy with the suggested wording and don't mind changing tests 21:58:49 ...do we want to put it in 1.1 or not 21:58:56 CM: I'm happy to put it in 1.1 21:59:02 ...it's a small clarification 21:59:11 ED: I think it's better to put it in than not 22:01:06 PD: if I don't come back to it, assume that I think it's okay 22:01:16 ...the cost of changing for us is high right now though 22:01:52 http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/shapes-rect-03-t.svg 22:03:46 ED: if we make the proposed change, that test would need to be changed 22:04:11 ...what Firefox is doing right now would then be the correct behavior I believe 22:05:22 PD: I'll comment on the list 22:06:04 Topic: gzip MIME-type 22:06:24 ED: people seemed unhappy with the changed wording 22:06:44 ...do we want to have it as a supported format for SVG, or is it just intended for transfer? 22:07:36 ...I think people generally set the HTTP header 22:08:02 ...you tend to end up with .svgz files on your local machine, and it's actually useful 22:08:07 ...I think most editors support it 22:08:47 CM: I think the preferred way is to have your server set up to send the appropriate headers, rather than having a separate MIME-type 22:09:12 ...I'm not convinced the spec needs to say anything about gzip, when it doesn't say anything about other compression formats 22:09:53 PD: would we potentially change 1.1 for this? 22:10:06 ED: we won't change it if people really dislike the change 22:11:09 PD: we aren't going to support opening .svgz from the local file system in IE9 22:11:25 CM: making it a requirement would be a big change at this point 22:11:36 ED: okay, I'm fine with dropping this for now in that case 22:11:52 ...I'd like to spec it out in 2.0 though 22:13:20 Topic: Actions and issues in Tracker 22:14:46 CM: I see there are many open actions in Tracker 22:15:15 ... and we're probably at the point again when lots of it is now irrelevant, making Tracker less useful 22:15:48 ...I think it would help if it got back to the stage when it's an accurate reflection of what has to be done, and when 22:16:00 ...I think we need to add a component to the telcons for this 22:17:41 PD: does Tracker support cross-group collaboration 22:17:43 CM: no 22:18:05 ...the fx task force are using tracker 22:18:38 ...you can get a view of all the issues assigned to you across all Tracker instances, but that's about the limit of the cross-group integration 22:18:44 ..."My Tracker" 22:19:15 PD: one thing that concerns me is that people in the CSS WG hadn't heard of the work Antony had done 22:19:36 ...and in another case a group left at TPAC because they didn't know there was a meeting 22:21:06 CM: I'd imagine you have reps from groups out in other groups reporting back 22:21:15 ...to their group 22:21:25 ...which is probably the way to solve this 22:22:05 ...minute emails to the lists have a good summary of the actions and resolutions at the top 22:22:22 ...maybe an email with just that and a link to the full minutes should go out to other groups lists 22:22:59 ED: fantasai does send out summaries via twitter 22:23:34 ...I think pulling out the resolutions and putting them at the top would be an improvement 22:23:42 PD: we don't use resolutions enough 22:23:52 ED: we need to make sure we act on them 22:24:03 ...track them in the wiki? 22:24:18 CM: I think tracker has some crude tools for resolution tracking 22:24:49 ...I think we should be clearer about desicions and making sure they get turned into resulutions 22:26:43 JW: I'm concerned we don't remember the details of what we talk about and decide, and the details get lost in minutes 22:28:50 ...we should really have topic pages in the wiki where we summarize the important details from telcons 22:29:35 ...so that we don't have to waste so much time going over the same topics because we forgot the details of when we discussed the topic last time 22:29:54 ...or if not a summary, at least topic pages where we add links to relevant minutes 22:30:18 PD: shame our wiki doesn't work very well 22:30:24 22:32:32 ED: I talked to someone after TPAC who said we might be able to share resources 22:32:44 PD: I'd be willing to look into resources 22:33:09 s/someone/Peter Linss (css wg co-chair)/ 22:35:46 PD: I'd like a solution that pushes out info, like to my email box 22:35:55 ...and provides good query tools 22:37:02 22:37:36 CM: I worry that we may just swap one set of problems for another, and take up a lot of time switching 22:38:24 ...and that changing wouldn't solve the problems 22:39:14 -ed 22:39:16 trackbot: end telcon 22:39:16 Zakim, list attendees 22:39:16 As of this point the attendees have been [Microsoft], heycam, ed, anthony, jwatt 22:39:17 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 22:39:17 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/11/11-svg-minutes.html trackbot 22:39:18 RRSAgent, bye 22:39:18 I see no action items