16:48:36 RRSAgent has joined #CSS 16:48:36 logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/01/05-CSS-irc 16:48:41 Zakim, this will be Style 16:48:41 ok, glazou; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 12 minutes 16:48:46 RRSAgent, make logs public 16:56:16 Zakim, code? 16:56:16 the conference code is 78953 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), glazou 16:57:00 Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started 16:57:07 +plinss 16:57:14 +??P15 16:57:26 european bridge totally down for me 16:57:39 kojiishi has joined #css 16:58:07 oyvind has joined #css 16:59:06 ahhhh 16:59:09 +David_Baron 17:00:38 +[Microsoft] 17:00:47 +[Microsoft.a] 17:00:58 johnjan has joined #css 17:01:06 +glazou 17:01:13 +[Microsoft.aa] 17:01:14 zakim, microsoft is johnjan 17:01:18 zakim, microsoft has me 17:01:19 sylvaing has joined #css 17:01:21 +johnjan; got it 17:01:23 sorry, arronei, I do not recognize a party named 'microsoft' 17:01:31 zakim, microsoft.aa has me 17:01:31 +arronei; got it 17:01:33 dsinger has joined #css 17:01:49 +[Apple] 17:02:07 +fantasai 17:02:21 +SteveZ 17:02:22 +[IPcaller] 17:02:27 ./me depth-first numbering. or golomb codes :-) 17:02:46 zakim, ipcaller is me 17:02:46 +kojiishi; got it 17:03:37 cathy has joined #css 17:03:39 szilles has joined #css 17:04:35 +cathy 17:05:21 bradk has joined #css 17:06:06 +bradk 17:06:39 ScribeNick: fantasai 17:06:56 plinss: Anything to add to the agenda? 17:07:04 johnjan has joined #css 17:07:15 Topic: Comments on WOFF 17:07:18 zakim, microsoft is johnjan 17:07:18 sorry, johnjan, I do not recognize a party named 'microsoft' 17:07:31 SteveZilles says something quietly 17:07:36 smfr has joined #css 17:07:54 zakim, [microsoft] has johnjan 17:07:57 sorry, dsinger, I do not recognize a party named '[microsoft]' 17:08:04 +smfr 17:08:08 Something about feedback that didn't make it to the public list 17:08:23 zakim, microsoft.aa has johnjan 17:08:23 +johnjan; got it 17:08:32 sylvaing: Bert sent feedback about WOFF to the WG list, but it never made it to www-style 17:09:16 i sent comments on WOFF http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jan/0020.html 17:09:53 plinss notes we are already late on comments for WOFF 17:10:07 -bradk 17:10:12 SteveZ: Most of my comments were editorial. The other seemed to be a conflict in their spec, possibly nontrivial to fix. 17:10:40 SteveZ: They have a note about not following the XML ID syntax when putting an ID in the font, since elsewhere they say it must be well-formed XML in the metadata 17:10:41 seems like it's either an XML ID or it needs a different name 17:10:59 -cathy 17:11:27 +cathy 17:11:45 plinss: How do we want to proceed on this? 17:12:06 SteveZ: Do wehave a URL for Bert's comments? 17:12:28 sylvaing: Should ask Bert if he could either make his comments public, or if we can forward it. 17:12:39 sylvaing: He's on both working groups 17:12:59 plinss: Are these official comments from the WG? Do we need discussion on these? 17:13:06 plinss: We have a history of unofficial comments... 17:13:23 dbaron: A bunch of these comments seem like comments on WOFF, not on how it relates to the work of the CSSWG. 17:13:32 + +47.21.65.aaaa 17:13:35 dbaron: It seems like official comments from the group ought to be things in the latter category. 17:13:40 + +1.650.766.aabb 17:13:41 sylvaing: That's true. 17:13:46 howcome has joined #css 17:14:02 zakim, aabb is me 17:14:02 +bradk; got it 17:14:05 SteveZ: The only thing I'd say is that some of the comments are from experience developing specs that they might not have. 17:14:36 SteveZ: Unfortunately ChrisL isn't here, to explain why some of those were done 17:15:35 Zakim, list conferences 17:15:35 I see WAI_PF()12:00PM, VB_VBWG(SCXML)12:00PM, Style_CSS FP()12:00PM, RWC_web-per(WPWG)12:00PM active 17:15:39 also scheduled at this time are Team_(wf)17:00Z, XML_EXI()12:30PM, T&S_EGOV(UseWebTech)12:00PM, INC_SWXG()11:00AM 17:16:49 Sylvaing: Well, the ID thing was because there are a number of existing WOFF fonts out there that were using malformed XML 17:16:57 fantasai: .. 17:17:31 SteveZ: Maybe they should change the note to say that although the ID must be well-formed XML, but that some currently-existing existing fonts might not adhere to this syntax. 17:18:25 SteveZ: I would prefer to have my comments sent as formal comments by the WG, but I'm happy to send over unofficially. 17:18:40 Sylvaing: This is good feedback. It has to be clear what to do 17:18:55 plinss not hearing any objections 17:19:05 plinss: We also have Bert's comments. Do we want to send those as formal comments? 17:19:23 plinss: There was still some discussion on some of Bert's comments. 17:20:23 fantasai: There are good comments, but I don't see a reason to send them as WG comments. 17:20:56 fantasai: They're not CSS comments, just good comments. 17:21:25 fantasai: LC requires addressing all comments, not just WG comments, so I don't see a reason to send them on behalf of the WG. 17:21:57 howcome: ... 17:22:11 dsinger: Do we need to send a message from the WG that we have no comments? 17:22:41 howcome: We can do better than that. Say there were no CSS-specific comments, but there were other comments that will be submitted individually. 17:23:04 sylvaing expresses concern that jdaggett hasn't sent any direct feedback. 17:23:24 plinss: I don't think we can delay a week. I will send him an email asking if he has any feedback, and if not, send the WG message. 17:23:32 plinss: Anything else on this topic? 17:23:43 Topic: CSS2.1 17:24:02 plinss: We still have a bunch of blocking tests and a bunch of invalid tests. 17:24:33 arronei: With the 32-bit issue we talked about last time, I think I've addressed them all. 17:25:00 arronei: I will send email about it. Would be great if people could review them. 17:25:16 arronei: All I need is a review from anybody to look at them. 17:25:25 dbaron: I can have a look when he sends out the URL. 17:25:32 arronei: Ok, will do that in the next half-hour 17:26:42 arronei: I've flagged the tests as 32bit and as may so you know they're optional 17:27:58 plinss: My biggest concern at this point are the tests that have blocking failures 17:28:10 plinss: We need to either modify the test or modify the spec 17:28:13 http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/blocking 17:29:03 plinss: Do we want to discuss these one by one on a telecon? If not how do we move forward? 17:29:55 fantasai: active-selector-002 was updated for RC5 17:30:13 fantasai: I thought background-intrinsic was fixed. If it's still not passing, it's likely a test bug... 17:30:29 -glazou 17:32:28 arronei: I think discussing them on the conference call is difficult, especially some of the margin and page breaking ones 17:32:37 arronei: It's unfortunate we don't have an F2F soon 17:32:39 I think neither webkit nor opera follow the spec on background-intrinsic 17:32:51 and the others don't support svg backgrounds 17:33:11 arronei: .... 17:33:41 smfr: How about each test author creates a wiki page for that specific test 17:34:02 smfr: Right now we have no way to collaboratively dump information on why we think that test is failing 17:34:43 arronei: I'm handling mine. In most cases the case just need to be updated. 17:34:48 http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/issues or http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/invalid (which seems to duplicate the former)? 17:35:07 smfr: You might know, but the vendors don't 17:35:43 fantasai: It doesn't make sense to me to do that for the invalid tests, but for the blocking tests, that might be a good idea. 17:36:26 plinss: Arron, were you talking about the blocking tests or the invalid tests? 17:36:38 arronei: both.. I have some updates for the blocking tests 17:36:53 dbaron: The previous wiki page that listed blocking tests had notes on some of those 17:37:25 http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/results 17:37:55 plinss: I don't want to lose the notes, but I didn't want to move them over since they're on a much older release 17:38:00 http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1 17:38:23 some discussion of all the different pages that are being created to track problems 17:38:33 http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/issues 17:38:44 I think the pages are just that one and the ones peter listed 17:39:02 http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/results 17:39:07 http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/invalid 17:39:12 http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/blocking 17:39:34 fantasai: Unless Peter created more pages, that should be all of them. 17:40:58 arronei volunteers to consolidate everything into the invalid/blocking pages 17:41:35 arronei: I'll create subpages for the blocking issue 17:42:08 fantasai suggests grouping tests that have the same issue into the same wiki page 17:42:52 plinss: We need to have other people take responsibility for analyzing the test failures, not just arron. 17:43:12 arronei: I'll do enough to get us started 17:43:53 z-index-abspos-009 is a hixie test 17:44:02 A bunch of them (e.g., abspos-*, float-wrap-*), we've already discussed in telecons and discussed next steps for implementors. 17:44:52 plinss: I want to get a commitment from the owners to review these tests and describe their status by next week 17:45:00 dbaron: The ones that are mine we already had a telecon discussion about 17:45:07 plinss: Did we get to a resolution? 17:45:26 dbaron: I think in both cases we came to a resolution of who was going to fix their implementations 17:45:31 dbaron: But I couldn't find minutes 17:45:40 dbaron: For the abspos one it was a small bug in Gecko and one in Opera 17:45:58 dbaron: For the float-wrap ones we had passes from MS, and I said I would flip our behavior after FF4 and see what happens. 17:46:02 I think it was Opera, but not sure 17:46:09 (this is all from memory) 17:47:35 dbaron: Actually float-wrap-top might be different from the ones I think... I'd need to go back and look 17:47:43 plinss: active-selector-002 has been updated 17:47:53 plinss: active-page-breaks? 17:47:55 fantasai: rewritten 17:48:34 dbaron: bidi-004 is tricky. There are a bunch of implementations that are close, but not very close. 17:48:40 dbaron: The remaining bug for us is very hairy 17:49:05 plinss: Can you write up the comments? 17:49:10 dbaron: Prefer if fantasai did 17:49:23 fantasai: I can do the ones I understand, and the ones I'm not sure of would like you to review and add comments. 17:49:27 fantasai: Can't do floats-wrap though 17:49:30 dbaron: I'll do those 17:50:05 fantasai: Here's the assignments: 17:50:09 fantasai: Arron does MS tests 17:50:16 fantasai: dbaron does floats-wrap and abspos 17:50:25 fantasai: Arron does margin-collapse 17:50:44 fantasai: I do anything under my folder, HP's folder, Mozilla's folder (other than the above), and Hixie's folder 17:50:54 fantasai: and approved/ 17:51:05 fantasai: I think that should cover all of the tests 17:51:19 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2010Nov/0124.html may be relevant data for the margin-* tests 17:51:40 fantasai: I think the first step is for Arron to create a template for subpages and put a few up so that dbaron and I can copy 17:51:48 arronei: Sure, I'll do that today 17:51:59 plinss: We also have a bunch of tests that we're lacking data for 17:52:05 plinss: Got a bunch of results from Apple this morning 17:52:19 plinss: Still need data from the other browsers 17:52:26 plinss: Big gap here is Prince, which may save us in some cases 17:52:51 fantasai: Another implementation we can test is Antenna House. That may be especially useful for the page-breaking tests 17:53:46 fantasai: Although we'd want to test against the updated tests, since a bunch have been fixed. 17:54:12 fantasai: I'll see if I can set up a nightly build on the server 17:54:24 fantasai: Now that we have a server with somewhat up-to-date software... 17:54:31 plinss: I can help with that if you need any help 17:54:48 plinss: Ok, let's get a nightly build set up and then we'll ping Antenna House 17:55:09 plinss: any other topics? 17:55:33 Topic: module template 17:55:45 fantasai: I updated the module template and put it on dev.w3.org 17:55:49 http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-module/ 17:56:15 fantasai: You'll notice there's a lot more boilerplate text. This is partly because there was a lot of normative text in the Snapshot 17:56:23 fantasai: Which if we don't have a normative Snapshot, needs to be moved someplace else. 17:57:02 fantasai: This means that all of our existing modules need to be updated with the relative normative bits. 17:57:40 fantasai: That would be, Selectors, Namespaces, Background and Borders, UI, MultiCol, Color, Media Queries, etc. 17:57:59 -bradk 17:58:52 fantasai: So I would suggest everyone review the template, since this has to go in all our specs... 17:59:28 SteveZ: We haven't resolved the Snapshot issue. 17:59:53 SteveZ: My concern is that by copying this stuff all over the place, it will get inconsistent. 18:00:06 SteveZ: But I think we agreed to postpone the Snapshot 18:00:21 http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-module/#partial 18:00:31 http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-module/#experimental 18:00:38 http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-module/#placement 18:00:45 These are the bits that were taken from the Snapshot 18:00:58 -David_Baron 18:01:18 plinss: So meanwhile, the editors should review these. 18:01:38 plinss: That's it for today. 18:01:38 - +47.21.65.aaaa 18:01:40 -johnjan 18:01:41 Meeting closed. 18:01:41 -smfr 18:01:41 -[Microsoft.a] 18:01:42 -[Microsoft.aa] 18:01:42 -SteveZ 18:01:44 -kojiishi 18:01:45 -plinss 18:01:46 -cathy 18:01:53 -[Apple] 18:02:00 cathy has left #css 18:02:07 -??P15 18:02:34 -fantasai 18:02:35 Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has ended 18:02:36 Attendees were plinss, David_Baron, glazou, johnjan, arronei, dsinger, fantasai, SteveZ, kojiishi, cathy, bradk, smfr, +47.21.65.aaaa, +1.650.766.aabb 18:02:39 smfr has left #css 18:24:41 shan has left #css 19:03:57 dbaron has joined #css 19:21:55 Zakim has left #CSS 19:37:41 Simple template for the blocking testcases http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/blocking/margin-collapse 19:38:29 please review the template and apply it to your testcase failures on the blocking page 20:35:03 mollydotcom has joined #CSS 21:36:38 nimbupani has joined #css 23:39:05 mollydotcom has left #CSS