19:01:02 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #svg
19:01:02 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/01/13-svg-irc
19:01:04 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
19:01:04 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #svg
19:01:06 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG
19:01:06 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see GA_SVGWG(SVG1)3:00PM scheduled to start in 59 minutes
19:01:07 <trackbot> Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference
19:01:07 <trackbot> Date: 13 January 2011
19:25:18 <ChrisL> First!
19:50:37 <anthony_work> anthony_work has joined #svg
19:58:37 <anthony> anthony has joined #svg
20:00:10 <Zakim> GA_SVGWG(SVG1)3:00PM has now started
20:00:17 <Zakim> +??P0
20:00:20 <heycam> Zakim, ??P0 is me
20:00:20 <Zakim> +heycam; got it
20:01:25 <ChrisL> ChrisL has joined #svg
20:01:33 <Zakim> +Shepazu
20:02:34 <Zakim> +ChrisL
20:04:12 <Zakim> +??P2
20:04:21 <ed> Zakim, ?? is me
20:04:21 <Zakim> +ed; got it
20:06:08 <Zakim> +??P3
20:06:27 <anthony> Zakim, ??P3 is me
20:06:27 <Zakim> +anthony; got it
20:09:42 <heycam> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0012.html
20:09:56 <heycam> Chair: Cameron
20:10:00 <anthony> ScribeNick: Anthony
20:10:04 <anthony> Scribe: Anthony
20:10:19 <anthony> Topic: Telcom time
20:10:37 <anthony> CL: It is not very convenient because it runs into the WOFF call
20:10:43 <anthony> ... it doesn't overlap
20:10:47 <anthony> ... and I could manage it
20:10:59 <anthony> ... no objection though
20:11:10 <anthony> CM: It's fine for me as well
20:11:14 <anthony> ED: It's no problem for me
20:11:32 <anthony> AG: I'm ok with that
20:12:37 <anthony> DS: That would be fine
20:12:55 <anthony> CM: Replied to Pat's email but forgot to CC the list
20:13:29 <anthony> CL: Wait it would overlap with first half hour of WOFF
20:14:08 <anthony> CM: Might be bad for Anthony
20:14:21 <anthony> AG: I can turn up 30mins earlier
20:15:07 <anthony> CM: We'll tentatively set the time to be one day and a half hour earlier than it is currently
20:15:14 <anthony> CL: What about Tav?
20:16:29 <anthony> DS: Should be ok
20:17:01 <anthony> CM: Someone should mail the list
20:17:19 <anthony> DS: And we are still be having the bi-weekly FX call
20:17:46 <anthony> CM: I'll email the list
20:17:56 <anthony> Topic: SVG 1.1 2nd Edition
20:18:18 <anthony> CL: I noticed that there was an action that was not on the wiki
20:18:25 <anthony> ... it was about the media type registration
20:18:34 <anthony> ... I've now closed it
20:19:13 <heycam> (this is the media type registration)
20:20:22 <heycam> ACTION-2816?
20:20:22 <trackbot> ACTION-2816 -- Anthony Grasso to look into ISSUE-2339 and report back -- due 2010-07-13 -- OPEN
20:20:22 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2816
20:21:22 <anthony> AG: Started looking into this
20:21:28 <heycam> ACTION-2811?
20:21:28 <trackbot> ACTION-2811 -- Erik Dahlström to determine new wording for ISSUE-2334 (filter sub-regions) -- due 2010-07-13 -- OPEN
20:21:28 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2811
20:21:34 <ed> ISSUE-2334?
20:21:34 <trackbot> ISSUE-2334 -- Last Call Comment: filter primitive subregion and feGaussianBlur, feTile and infinite filter input images -- raised
20:21:34 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2334
20:21:37 <anthony> ED: I did half of it
20:22:03 <anthony> ... Just before the call I checked in an updated version of the published directory
20:22:13 <anthony> ... the change I made was for the last half of the comment
20:22:25 <anthony> ... which was about defining what a tile was
20:22:33 <shepazu> agenda+ Mapping Task Force
20:22:34 <anthony> ... the first half has an agreement from ROC
20:22:41 <anthony> ... and I need to come up with some wording for that
20:23:02 <heycam> ACTION-2911?
20:23:02 <trackbot> ACTION-2911 -- Tavmjong Bah to finish the response to Dr Olaf regarding ISSUE-2338 and fix the issues highlighted by Dr Olaf -- due 2010-11-25 -- CLOSED
20:23:02 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2911
20:23:11 <heycam> ACTION-2834?
20:23:11 <trackbot> ACTION-2834 -- Doug Schepers to clarify section 16.5 Processing order for user interface events relating to problems in ISSUE-2364 -- due 2010-09-10 -- OPEN
20:23:11 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2834
20:23:21 <anthony> DS: I'm about half done with it
20:23:35 <anthony> ... I was struggling how to word that section
20:24:02 <anthony> ... I'm going to make a set of tests once I'm done with the wording
20:24:25 <anthony> CM: Can you make the tests last, as we may not be adding more tests
20:24:40 <anthony> DS: I don't expect them to be part of the released test suite
20:24:46 <anthony> ... just would like to make some tests
20:25:06 <heycam> ACTION-2917?
20:25:06 <trackbot> ACTION-2917 -- Patrick Dengler to review Issue 2384 and decide if the change to the test and the text is reasonable -- due 2010-12-09 -- OPEN
20:25:06 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2917
20:25:19 <anthony> CM: Not sure what the status of that is
20:25:35 <anthony> ... I think last telcon we had we reminded him to have a look at the text
20:26:00 <anthony> ... I'm not sure if he has replied back if it is expectable or not
20:26:03 <heycam> ACTION-2910?
20:26:03 <trackbot> ACTION-2910 -- Chris Lilley to cleanup changes appendix for SVG Full 1.1 2nd Edition -- due 2010-11-25 -- OPEN
20:26:03 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2910
20:26:20 <anthony> CL: So what I did was I checked in the changes appendix
20:26:27 <anthony> ... with all the content removed
20:26:38 <anthony> ... then I started checking all the individual chapters
20:26:44 <anthony> ... by doing diffs
20:26:55 <anthony> ... I've saved the text file with the diffs
20:27:03 <anthony> ... part way done
20:27:03 <ed> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/changes.html
20:27:04 <heycam> ACTION-2921?
20:27:04 <trackbot> ACTION-2921 -- Chris Lilley to bring the 1.2 changes for bidi and text anchor back to the 1.1 spec -- due 2010-12-16 -- OPEN
20:27:04 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2921
20:27:15 <anthony> CL: Done that
20:27:19 <anthony> ... sent an email about it
20:27:40 <anthony> ... I ported across two sections
20:27:49 <anthony> ... and brought across two examples
20:28:02 <ed> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/text.html
20:28:05 <anthony> ED: Text chapter?
20:28:13 <anthony> CL: Yes
20:28:24 <ed> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/text.html#RelationshipWithBiDirectionality
20:28:35 <anthony> ... both examples render in Opera
20:28:58 <ed> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/images/text/rtl-text.svg (borken link)
20:29:06 <anthony> ED: The published version doesn't seem to find the SVG files
20:29:23 <anthony> DS: How are we managing the publishing
20:29:39 <anthony> CL: Being run every now and again
20:29:56 <anthony> ... I run it every now and again, but depends on the change
20:30:25 <anthony> ED: Need to do a CVS add manually
20:30:51 <anthony> ... the link is broken probably because it wasn't added to publish
20:30:54 <heycam> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/master/images/text/rtl-text.svg
20:30:58 <anthony> ... this needs to be done manually
20:31:22 <heycam> http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/master/images/text/rtl-complex.svg
20:33:01 <ChrisL> http://www.w3.org/2010/09/SVG1.1SE-LastCall/dump.html
20:33:09 <anthony> Topic: Disposition of Comments
20:33:27 <anthony> CL: I updated it just recently
20:34:44 <anthony> CM: Lets go through each unfinished one
20:35:13 <ed> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2010Jul/0009.html
20:35:31 <anthony> ED: Robert says he's ok with thisone
20:35:38 <anthony> s/thisone/this one/
20:36:36 <anthony> CL: The next one seems to be 2339
20:36:49 <anthony> CM: That is Anthony's one we were talking about
20:38:32 <heycam> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2346
20:38:48 <heycam> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2908
20:38:55 <anthony> CM: Action is pending review
20:39:10 <anthony> ... all the comments on the issues say it's done
20:39:32 <anthony> CL: Ok, now sorted
20:41:52 <anthony> CM: So in the comments in tracker has it noted if responses have been sent
20:42:04 <shepazu> agenda+ pointer-events on root, inline and referenced
20:42:05 <anthony> ... I'm just wondering if we have done the action
20:42:12 <anthony> ... but not recorded it in the tool
20:42:58 <anthony> CL: I think some of ones is because of say a typo and there is no point in replying back and saying thanks for fixing the typo
20:44:13 <heycam> Zakim, take it!
20:44:13 <Zakim> I don't understand 'take it!', heycam
20:44:18 <ChrisL> Topic: pointer-events on root, inline and referenced
20:44:34 <anthony> Topic: pointer-events on root, inline and reference
20:44:35 <ChrisL> zakim, move to next agendum
20:44:35 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Mapping Task Force" taken up [from shepazu]
20:44:40 <ChrisL> zakim, move to next agendum
20:44:40 <Zakim> agendum 1 was just opened, ChrisL
20:45:10 <anthony> DS: If someone clicks on SVG and they click on the area outside of the circle
20:45:36 <anthony> ... what happens depending oh where the document lives
20:45:50 <anthony> ... so if it is standalone, or if it is part of html
20:46:10 <anthony> ... or reference the SVG in the html
20:46:24 <ChrisL>  A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds
20:46:38 <anthony> ... the question is does SVG have a background?
20:46:50 <anthony> ... does it pass through the SVG to the underlaying document
20:47:20 <anthony> CM: I can see how there would be a background there if you give it a background colour
20:47:35 <anthony> DS: I was wondering if someone could remind me what the decision was
20:47:51 <anthony> CM: Wondering if the pointer events on HTML come into play
20:48:04 <anthony> ED: It was part of the discussion at the last F2F
20:49:37 <anthony> DS: I guess the only answer we can have for the last call comment is it is undefined
20:49:50 <anthony> ISSUE-2364?
20:49:50 <ed> ISSUE-2364?
20:49:50 <trackbot> ISSUE-2364 -- Last Call Comment: SVG 1.1 may be ambiguous about the root element acting as a proximal event target -- raised
20:49:50 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2364
20:49:50 <trackbot> ISSUE-2364 -- Last Call Comment: SVG 1.1 may be ambiguous about the root element acting as a proximal event target -- raised
20:49:53 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2364
20:51:24 <anthony> CM: If this was discussed at length was there any resolution in the minutes?
20:51:45 <anthony> DS: I looked through the minutes and could not find a clear resolution
20:54:07 <shepazu> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2010Aug/0028.html
20:54:26 <anthony> DS: This is the original email
20:55:04 <anthony> ... I think what we will say for SVG 1.1 that it is undefined
20:55:29 <anthony> ... and say that it is a larger issue that we will address in SVG 2
20:55:58 <anthony> CL: we don't want to add something in SVG 1.1 that will conflict with SVG 2
20:58:17 <anthony> DS: What do people want me to say on this matter?
20:58:31 <anthony> ... I guess we are treating it as a last call comment
20:58:49 <anthony> ED: Say that it will be dealt with in the integration specification
20:58:59 <anthony> ... I don't see how it is a pressing issue
20:59:14 <anthony> CM: If the comment is dealing with the non-integration case, we can just leave it
21:00:07 <anthony> RESOLUTION: We will define the pointer event testing behaviour for root elements in the Integration specification for SVG 2
21:00:28 <anthony> ED: We will probably have to work with people in CSS on this issue as well
21:01:18 <anthony> DS: Pointer events doesn't cover the case where you've tab-ed to it
21:01:27 <anthony> CM: So things which are focusable
21:01:52 <anthony> DS: Does pointer event effect things that gain focus?
21:02:02 <anthony> CM: That would be something separate
21:03:10 <anthony> Topic: Next Face-to-face
21:03:15 <heycam> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/19480/SVGAuckland2011/
21:03:30 <anthony> CM: There is the registration form for everyone to fill out
21:03:39 <anthony> ... you'll see in the form there I've put some extra notes there
21:03:48 <anthony> ... which we haven't had in some previous face-to-faces
21:04:05 <anthony> ... this is deadline for requesting agenda topics
21:04:14 <anthony> ... and to prepare materials
21:05:12 <anthony> ... so preparing material may be putting some information up on a wiki
21:06:32 <anthony> ... I'd like to see particular things to discuss
21:07:54 <anthony> ... For specification that have not been written up have ideas or proposals on the wiki
21:08:05 <anthony> ... would be good
21:08:59 <anthony> ... TC39 - ECMA script group have a process like this
21:11:32 <anthony> ... Two important dates for the face-to-face
21:11:44 <anthony> ... is three weeks before to have a list of the agenda items
21:11:55 <anthony> ... and then two weeks before is to have material up on the wiki
21:13:37 <anthony> ... So, have a think about the topics you'd like to discuss and if you are a person behind a specification then I'd expect you to write up the material for the page
21:14:21 <anthony> Topic: SVG Mapping Taskforce
21:14:23 <shepazu> mapping task force:    http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Mapping    http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/map/map-charter.html
21:15:08 <anthony> DS: This is a topic I spoke to Andreas about
21:15:23 <anthony> ... because we'd seen an interest in mapping build up again in SVG
21:15:35 <ChrisL> Polymaps http://polymaps.org/
21:15:45 <anthony> ... Chris and I approached Andreas about the idea of an SVG Mapping taskforce
21:16:02 <anthony> ... It would be a subgroup of this group
21:16:04 <ChrisL> SVG Map consortium http://blog.svg-map.com/2007/03/about_establish.html
21:16:14 <anthony> ... It would be finding use case and requirements
21:16:19 <anthony> ... and suggesting features for SVG 2
21:16:35 <anthony> ... I put together a sort of a wiki page and a charter
21:16:47 <anthony> ... it would not require advisory committee
21:16:59 <anthony> CL: Since we are rechartering, we should put that in
21:17:10 <anthony> ... so we can easily make a taskforce
21:17:40 <anthony> ... I dropped in a link of supporters
21:17:59 <anthony> DS: There are other potential companies
21:18:08 <anthony> ... that may be interested
21:18:14 <ChrisL> http://www.openstreetmap.org/
21:18:26 <anthony> ... it could be applicable to other technologies
21:18:49 <anthony> ... I think there is a lot of potential interest
21:19:18 <anthony> ... It would probably be good for us to think about broader cases
21:19:40 <anthony> ... the question is do we want to start this taskforce?
21:21:09 <anthony> CM: I think bringing mapping people together for this is a good idea
21:21:29 <anthony> ... I think a few years ago we considered putting mapping modules on Tiny but without the mapping people
21:21:33 <anthony> ... it's a bit difficult
21:21:59 <anthony> ... Having Andreas involved is a good idea
21:23:27 <anthony> RESOLUTION: We will continue to explore the idea of a Mapping Taskforce
21:24:07 <ChrisL> international cartographic association, comission on maps and the internet  http://maps.unomaha.edu/ica/Maps&Internet/Members/list.html
21:27:10 <anthony> Topic: Test suite
21:27:30 <anthony> CM: I added results for Fire Fox nightly build
21:27:46 <anthony> ... So we have Microsoft, Opera, Inkscape and Fire Fox
21:27:52 <anthony> CL: Who is doing Batik?
21:27:58 <anthony> CM: I was going to start looking at those today
21:28:19 <anthony> CL: I have been going through the ones of Abbra
21:28:37 <anthony> ED: Do we have someone doing Chrome or Safari?
21:28:41 <anthony> DS: I could do either
21:29:03 <anthony> CL: Which is the best webkit based implementation?
21:29:24 <anthony> CM: Going to be mostly the same, some differences in Java script engine
21:30:49 <anthony> ... In an email I listed a number of issues with tests
21:30:57 <anthony> ... there are a couple of changes that need to be made
21:31:19 <anthony> ... and there are a few where we are not going to change our implementation to pass the test
21:34:07 <anthony> ... or somethings we disagree with
21:34:35 <anthony> ... there is one test at least which doesn't have any implementations passing it at all
21:35:12 <anthony> ... before I started looking at Batik, I noted we had 80 tests that didn't pass
21:35:24 <anthony> ... just wondering what we do about them
21:35:47 <anthony> CL: Until we have Batik and Safari it's hard to say
21:36:08 <anthony> ... we need the full test results before we figure out what to do
21:38:55 <Zakim> -ChrisL
21:43:53 <shepazu> trackbot, end telcon
21:43:53 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
21:43:53 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been heycam, Shepazu, ChrisL, ed, anthony
21:43:54 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
21:43:54 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/01/13-svg-minutes.html trackbot
21:43:55 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
21:43:55 <RRSAgent> I see no action items