SVG Working Group Teleconference -- 16 Feb 2011

<trackbot> Date: 16 February 2011

<scribe> Scribe: anthony

<scribe> ScribeNick: anthony

Face-to-face

CM: Today's telcon will probably the last before the face-to-face
... people may be travelling next week

<heycam> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/F2F/Auckland_2011/Agenda

CM: so we will cancel next weeks
... wanted to check if people had noticed anything missing from the agenda

DS: Did you get confirmation from Dean that he can come?

CM: I got confirmation that he can't come
... he's stuck in the USA
... for another week
... Dean said he was thinking about some APIs for some Animation
... and he may send it through

ED: About the Animations
... if there are questions and topics, I can forward those to people in Opera

CM: I plan to start hashing out some Animation stuff on the Wiki

DS: Brian will be there right?

CM: Yes, he'll stick some stuff up on that page
... he's going to be focusing on fixing SMIL stuff in SVG rather than harmonisation

DS: Not going to be there on Monday until noon

CM: Fujisawa-san is going to be there Monday - Wednesday
... and Alex Danilo will be there Wednesday - Friday
... If you have time to stick stuff up on the Wiki please do so by Monday

CL: I think it's really good that the chairs are doing this work prior to the meeting

ED: I think it will help to get the agenda sorted out before the meeting starts

CM: I think we will discuss that over the next few days
... if there is anything that we've missed, stick it up and let us know

Status update on SVG 1.1 2nd Edition

CM: For my part I haven't been able to find any time
... to fix Batik up for any test failures
... I started looking at one
... there are 19 tests that are marked as less than two passes
... a few telcons ago we assigned actions to people asked them to look at their implementations
... not sure if that is all we needed to do

ED: I haven't had time to look at the actions I took for that
... I do know we have a couple of those failing tests in internal builds

CM: I can't really guarantee that I'll have stuff fixed before the face-to-face

DS: My take on this less than two passes is it isn't supported well
... and we shouldn't include it

CM: Do we remove the feature then?

CL: One option is to say it is not defined
... there is also a class of things that we are saying are defined but we don't test
... in CSS is that is

DS: There are a lot of things that are good in the spec that are not implemented
... and we can resolve some of these things in SVG 2
... so we could change 'must' to 'should'
... but it's a lot of trouble
... I think it would take a lot of work to do
... we can do that in the frame of SVG 2
... even though I don't like the idea of features untested

CM: I feel like we've gone that set of tests to determine if we can get passes on them
... but we haven't decided if we would drop them
... I get the feeling that it's going to be pretty hard to get those done as fix ups
... If we want to get things done by the face-to-face not sure if we will have time
... Should we leave deciding what to do with the test to the face-to-face?

CL: If it's something that we can fix in SVG 2 then we can leave it until then
... then if it is something fundamental to the specification
... then we should push implementations to fix it

CM: That's what worries me the most
... is features not being implemented
... that are important
... it could be one of those case that it is a bit tricky and provides marginal value

DS: I think we should keep in mind that once we complete SVG 1.1 2nd edition
... doesn't mean that we won't make a 3rd edition
... so if we think there is the slightest ambiguity about a test
... we should mark it for SVG 1.1 3rd edition or SVG
... 2

ED: We could mark the parts of tests that are not passing
... I had a couple of actions to do that
... but it doesn't cover all of the tests remaining

DS: Historically going through tests during the face-to-face
... is time consuming
... and we have a pretty full agenda
... we should try to talk about this over email

CL: I think we should have a Wiki page with the tests
... and have reasons for dropping certain tests

CM: I will create a page after the call
... and put my initial opinions up
... and we'll see what comes out of that

<scribe> ACTION: Cameron to Create a Wiki page listing the current tests that have less that 2 passes in SVG 1.1 2nd edition [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/02/16-svg-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2960 - Create a Wiki page listing the current tests that have less that 2 passes in SVG 1.1 2nd edition [on Cameron McCormack - due 2011-02-23].

<tbah> http://tavmjong.free.fr/SVG/BUTTON_TEST/button_test.xhtml

SVG in HTML

TB: I tried to test 'seamless' attribute
... I verified that the SMIL works inside an image
... I guess my conclusion from all this is that it is more tricky
... than I thought
... If you're trying to use more than one button
... it becomes more difficult

ED: Could use window.frameElement

CM: Could use that to write your script in SVG
... One interesting thing you raised was the even propagation
... and I don't think it's defined anywhere specifically
... I'd be interested to see what happens in another document
... with iFrame

TB: It doesn't
... in my page I put a dummy document and tried it
... for IE9 it works for both

CM: That sounds like a general issues that needs to go into DOM events
... so I guess what might be good that comes out of these tests is concrete things that are unresolved
... apart from that one you had the marker one

<ChrisL> tpic: markers and color

Marker and Colour

CL: currentColor on a given taken element takes the color on a given element and uses it
... What you're saying is over here I have a marker defined
... and over here I have a path defined

<ChrisL> tav we lost you

<tbah> i'll be bach in a sec

TB: Suppose that your marker is defined there is nothing that gives you what the colour is

DS: I think Tav one thing to do is make a proposal for specific mechanisms. Why don't you write up some
... spec text
... and we can reviewed that
... I think we all agree that we want the spec to do something useful for markers and colours
... If you find a away and is unlikely to conflict with current implementations then that would be useful

<scribe> ACTION: Tavmjong to Propose text to address issue with marker colours not matching colours of path [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/02/16-svg-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2961 - Propose text to address issue with marker colours not matching colours of path [on Tavmjong Bah - due 2011-02-23].

TB: I liked the idea Patrick suggested in Paris

Review of Progress Events

<ed> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0146.html

CL: There was a spec that SVG was doing that was about MAE
... is this a replacement spec?

ED: I think we defined progress events in Tiny 1.2 spec
... so it's not MAE

<ed> http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGTiny12/svgudom.html#events__ProgressEvent

Adrian: Progress events spec is used in a number of different places
... it ensures that things a consistent no matter where it is used

ED: Sent one minor comment about the spec
... just wondering if there is a set of those events that could be made normative

DS: Does it say they are not normative?

ED: Yes

Adrian: I think it's to do with the naming

DS: This is a spec that defines a model rather than a set of events

Adrian: You shouldn't expect to see tests on this spec
... because this spec is used by others

CL: For SVG 2 would we have to import these and change the names?

Adrian: I think so

CL: Would you be willing to collect the comments for this spec and send them on?

ED: Ok

CM: So everyone agrees that next week telcon is cancelled

trackbot, end telcon

- DRAFT -

SVG Working Group Teleconference

16 Feb 2011

Attendees

Contents

Face-to-face

Status update on SVG 1.1 2nd Edition

SVG in HTML

Marker and Colour

Review of Progress Events

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output