IRC log of css on 2011-04-20

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:32:58 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #css
15:32:58 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:33:03 [glazou]
Zakim, this will be Style
15:33:03 [Zakim]
ok, glazou; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 27 minutes
15:33:09 [glazou]
RRSAgent, make logs public
15:52:52 [stearns]
stearns has joined #css
15:55:22 [TabAtkins_]
TabAtkins_ has joined #css
15:55:51 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #css
15:57:17 [mihara]
mihara has joined #css
15:57:32 [Zakim]
Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started
15:57:39 [Zakim]
15:58:04 [Zakim]
15:58:38 [Zakim]
15:58:46 [glazou]
Zakim, ??P42 is me
15:58:46 [Zakim]
+glazou; got it
15:59:28 [Zakim]
15:59:40 [Zakim]
15:59:42 [hober]
Zakim, [Apple] has me
15:59:42 [Zakim]
+hober; got it
15:59:48 [Zakim]
15:59:56 [Zakim]
15:59:58 [Zakim]
16:00:04 [danielweck]
danielweck has joined #css
16:00:39 [Zakim]
16:00:40 [arronei_]
zakim, microsoft has me
16:00:40 [Zakim]
+arronei_; got it
16:00:42 [Zakim]
16:00:44 [Zakim]
+ +1.415.832.aaaa
16:00:54 [danielweck]
Zakim, ??P58 is me
16:00:54 [Zakim]
+danielweck; got it
16:01:02 [Zakim]
+ +1.650.618.aabb
16:01:12 [dbaron]
Zakim, aabb is David_Baron
16:01:12 [Zakim]
+David_Baron; got it
16:01:31 [plinss]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:01:38 [Zakim]
On the phone I see plinss, TabAtkins_, glazou, [Apple], stearns, sylvaing, [Microsoft], danielweck, +1.415.832.aaaa, David_Baron
16:01:40 [Zakim]
[Apple] has hober
16:01:42 [Zakim]
[Microsoft] has arronei_
16:02:52 [arno]
arno has joined #css
16:03:10 [smfr]
smfr has joined #css
16:03:24 [Zakim]
+ +1.415.832.aacc
16:03:37 [Zakim]
16:03:39 [dbaron]
(and, yeah, the "tell Zakim about my number" page doesn't seem to work like it used to, though maybe it's just that there's a delay...)
16:03:44 [arno]
zakim, aacc is arno
16:03:54 [Zakim]
+arno; got it
16:04:01 [Zakim]
16:04:02 [kojiishi]
zakim, ??p5 is me
16:04:02 [vhardy]
vhardy has joined #css
16:04:19 [Zakim]
+kojiishi; got it
16:04:48 [TabAtkins_]
ScribeNick: TabAtkins_
16:05:04 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: Any extra agenda items?
16:05:22 [TabAtkins_]
Topic: TPAC questionaire
16:05:28 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: Deadline is the 30th of April.
16:05:31 [stearns]
zakim, aaaa is vhardy
16:05:32 [Zakim]
+vhardy; got it
16:05:39 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: Bert sent an email, but no other answer.
16:05:49 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: What days do we want? It's from Oct31 to Nov4.
16:06:03 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: What's most convenient for people?
16:06:27 [glazou]
16:07:01 [Zakim]
16:07:21 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: No preference, but I suspect we'll want a joint meeting with SVG to talk about FXTF stuff.
16:07:25 [Zakim]
16:07:29 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: I'll ping shepazu to check when we can meet.
16:07:33 [Zakim]
16:08:08 [TabAtkins_]
plinss: And, if possible, no overlap with HTML.
16:08:27 [TabAtkins_]
szilles: And no meeting with the AB, on Thu/Fri.
16:08:37 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: So that leaves us with Mon/Tue, as usual.
16:08:43 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: I'll try for that.
16:08:50 [TabAtkins_]
Topic: Documents
16:08:51 [plinss]
and no overlap with TAG
16:09:04 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: We almost have CSS Namespaces ready to move. I think we have everything.
16:09:15 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: The normalization issue is still open.
16:09:24 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: I didn't get an answer from Leif.
16:09:28 [vhardy]
vhardy has joined #css
16:09:42 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: The i18n WG needs to weigh in on this.
16:09:46 [fantasai]
16:10:17 [TabAtkins_]
ACTION glazou to ping Leif and i18n about CSS Namespaces issue 3
16:10:17 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-317 - Ping Leif and i18n about CSS Namespaces issue 3 [on Daniel Glazman - due 2011-04-27].
16:10:28 [TabAtkins_]
Topic: Bugzilla for draft issues
16:10:42 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: Saw several opinions.
16:10:51 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: We need tools to track issues and interesting emails.
16:11:03 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: We're missing a few tools for the good management of the group.
16:11:35 [TabAtkins_]
vhardy: Tracker has proved useful in the groups I've been in to solve these kinds of issues.
16:11:46 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: I don't think Tracker has enough features. I think Bugzilla would be more useful.
16:12:01 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: Searching and commenting on issues is easier.
16:12:16 [TabAtkins_]
arronei_: I also prefer Bugzilla - I think it's more detailed/flexible.
16:12:30 [Cathy]
Cathy has joined #css
16:12:36 [TabAtkins_]
arronei_: If we do go with Bugzilla, I'd like specs and testcases to be two separate things somehow - a field or something.
16:12:58 [TabAtkins_]
dbaron: Some of it comes down to whether you want the discussion to happen on the ML or the bug databaes.
16:13:10 [TabAtkins_]
dbaron: Tracker has a bunch of features designed for picking up things on the ML.
16:13:30 [TabAtkins_]
dbaron: But to use those features well, you have to pay a little more attention to that than we do.
16:13:46 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: I think that is a risk that we should guard against (discussions in bugs).
16:14:01 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: The hardest thing, imo, is to identify the interesting messages in the ML and turn them into an issue.
16:14:09 [fantasai]
16:14:24 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: That requires a permanent observation of the ML and the thread - if you don't read everything you don't know if the thread is closed or interesting or what.
16:15:27 [TabAtkins_]
hober: The HTMLWG has buzilla mail the list for every bug, so if it's interesting to you, you can cc yourself on the bug and follow the conversatoin.
16:15:43 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: Bugzilla only works if the whole group reads bugzilla.
16:15:54 [TabAtkins_]
arronei_: Shouldn't it be the editor's responsibility to track issues as bugs?
16:15:58 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: We can decide that.
16:17:04 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: What happens in our WG is that an issue may not seem interesting at first, but people then chime in afterwards when it turns out there is some interesting implementation point.
16:17:32 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: So tracking things in bugs and having to manually cc yourself on things leads to problems.
16:17:52 [TabAtkins_]
sylvaing: Agreed - unless the entire convo moves to the bug, you can fork the conversation.
16:18:41 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: Bugzilla can be just for editorial issues, not for conversation.
16:19:23 [TabAtkins_]
TabAtkins_: I think the wiki tracking of issues for 2.1 worked well in process, it was just not the right tool for that. using a bug tracker in the same way would be good.
16:19:45 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: And we can restrict the bugzilla to just WG members, to limit the possibility of technical discussion happening there.
16:20:04 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: And we can have bugzilla mail the list to let it know that the issue was closed, etc.
16:20:10 [TabAtkins_]
dbaron: That's the Tracker workflow...
16:20:25 [TabAtkins_]
vhardy: [describes Tracker's ability to track conversations and such]
16:20:45 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: The problem with Tracker is that it's not searchable and it has *really* bad UI. These are fixable, but they're really bad problems right now.
16:20:54 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: And it doesn't have enough statuses to track things.
16:21:25 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: Which is fine if you just have a single or two editors and a small number of issues - B&B worked decently with Tracker.
16:21:40 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: But it wouldn't have worked for 2.1, where issues get bounced around in responsibility.
16:22:18 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: And you need to, say, track first-LC issues separately from second-LC comments or pre-LC comments. You can't do that with Tracker currently.
16:23:12 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: It's *really* awkward to make an action-item attached to an issue in Tracker.
16:23:31 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: In the wiki we just annotate the issue, and search for your name to find your issues.
16:24:01 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: And bugzilla lets you change multiple bugs at one time.
16:24:06 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: Does Tracker send notification emails?
16:24:14 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: No.
16:24:35 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: Having to go look at it, rather than getting an email about it, is inconvenient.
16:25:04 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: So what should we do? Try out bugzilla?
16:25:28 [TabAtkins_]
sylvaing: What does "try out" mean? If we decide it's bad, do we have to migrate?
16:25:35 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: Yes, that's true for anything.
16:25:45 [TabAtkins_]
sylvaing: I think we should pilot it then, rather than using it for everything.
16:26:02 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: I think we should start with 2.1, because it's the spec most in need of tracking.
16:26:20 [sylvaing]
to clarify, it doesn't sound like we have a strong consensus either way so let's try bugzilla where we think it makes sense and revisit
16:26:48 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: Objections to start testing bugzilla for CSS 2.1?
16:27:00 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: Do we use the existing w3c installation, or a new one?
16:27:07 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: w3c's makes sense, I think.
16:27:30 [TabAtkins_]
kojiishi: Is the instance public or member-only?
16:27:39 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: There's both, and we would use the public one.
16:28:03 [TabAtkins_]
RESOLVED: Try tracking issues with bugzilla for 2.1.
16:28:23 [glazou]
+1 !!!!!
16:29:13 [fantasai]
Tab: I really dislike the way the HTMLWG splits discussions. I think all discussions should stay on www-style
16:29:20 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: Do we want bugzilla to ping the ML, and do we want conversation o happen on bug or ML?
16:29:42 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: I don't think bugzilla should ping the ML - it would attract too much noise.
16:30:10 [TabAtkins_]
RESOLVED: Don't send bug creation pings to the ML.
16:30:12 [Zakim]
16:30:28 [Zakim]
16:30:39 [danielweck]
Zakim, ??P0 has me
16:30:39 [Zakim]
+danielweck; got it
16:31:30 [TabAtkins_]
Topic: Charter
16:31:43 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: But we don't have Bert or Chris on the call, so we should move this.
16:31:49 [TabAtkins_]
Topic: Review request for SVG Compositing
16:32:02 [fantasai]
ScribeNick: fantasai
16:32:11 [fantasai]
Tab: I sent some comments there, overall think spec looks good ... painting
16:32:14 [fantasai]
dbaron: url?
16:32:21 [szilles]
szilles has joined #css
16:32:43 [fantasai]
Tab: The review comments I sent to www-svg, linked to them last week in www-style... let me go find them
16:32:48 [TabAtkins_]
16:33:08 [fantasai]
dbaron: url for spec?
16:33:21 [TabAtkins_]
16:33:37 [dbaron]
16:33:39 [TabAtkins_]
16:34:00 [fantasai]
Tab: left some comments on terminology, especially naming of property/values
16:34:10 [fantasai]
Tab: Anthony is receptive to changing those, so I'm happy
16:34:14 [fantasai]
Tab: Otherwise I'm cool with the spec
16:34:27 [fantasai]
glazou: Has anyone else reviewed the proposal?
16:34:49 [fantasai]
smfr: Don't think there's much overlap with CSS
16:35:01 [fantasai]
Tab: Given feedback from Anthony so far, I'm cool
16:35:17 [fantasai]
ACTION: glazou ping svg with no comments from CSSWG
16:35:17 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-318 - Ping svg with no comments from CSSWG [on Daniel Glazman - due 2011-04-27].
16:35:18 [TabAtkins_]
Topic: text-transform
16:35:21 [glazou]
16:35:43 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: What I got from the thread is that it doesn't seem particularly important to add it right now.
16:36:03 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: Also there were some concerns about whether its needed at all, and whether it's possible to programmaticly switch been accents/non-accents.
16:36:24 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: So I don't think it should be considered for Text 3, but if there's more information we might do it for Text 4.
16:36:31 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: So should that be the WG answer?
16:37:01 [TabAtkins_]
RESOLVED: Don't consider text-transform of accents for Text 3, but possibly for Text 4 if there's more information showing it's needed/possible.
16:37:07 [TabAtkins_]
Topic: Module Naming
16:37:19 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: We have some inconsistency in naming right now.
16:37:39 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: Right now it hsould should be "CSS ..." or "CSS ... Level X".
16:37:41 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: Yes.
16:37:48 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: What about "Module"? Bert wanted that.
16:38:05 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: Seems fine. Bert wanted it to be clear thta the spec was part of a larger technology rather than something independent.
16:38:23 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: I think it's unnecessary in some instances, and we remove it from listings.
16:38:40 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: That's fine. Let's just make sure that all new documents contain "CSS", "Level", and "Module" if needed.
16:38:40 [fantasai]
s/unnecessary to mention/
16:38:49 [fantasai]
s/unnecessary/unnecessary to mention/
16:38:59 [fantasai]
16:39:04 [TabAtkins_]
plinss: The other part is there is some dissension over whether new modules should be level 1 or level 3 or what.
16:39:41 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: We have a resolution on that. It's that extending functionality is level 3+, but new functionality is level-less at first (but possibly "level 2" when it is extended).
16:39:52 [TabAtkins_]
sylvaing: The day we publish something as "level 1" or "level 2", we'll confuse people.
16:40:17 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: I agree with what Sylvain said.
16:40:30 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: Does that mean that the next iteration of Namespaces will be "Namespaces Level 2"?
16:40:43 [TabAtkins_]
s/Level 2/Level 4/
16:40:51 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: No, it'll be level 2.
16:41:16 [TabAtkins_]
dbaron: I think it'll be a problem anyway when we start doing Selectors 4 when others are just starting at level 3.
16:41:40 [TabAtkins_]
plinss: Yes, and as we go into the future and get things at level 5, 6, etc., it will be more of an issue. This is just an education issue.
16:42:23 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: The snapshot document was supposed to be the replacement for the monolithic "version" spec, while modules leveled independently.
16:43:09 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: I think the best thing we can do right now is publish the snapshot, kill the roadmap which is really out of date, and have /TR/CSS point to the right things.
16:43:53 [TabAtkins_]
[lost discussion]
16:44:12 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: I think I want to try and change the discussion around it first, and then revisit if people are still all super-confused.
16:45:10 [TabAtkins_]
sylvaing: Yeah, I think if we try to evangelize it now nobody will care. After a "level 2" happens, then we can actually try and see if it needs changing.
16:45:20 [Zakim]
16:45:45 [Zakim]
16:46:00 [kojiishi]
zakim, ??p5 is me
16:46:00 [Zakim]
+kojiishi; got it
16:46:40 [szilles]
16:46:42 [TabAtkins_]
plinss: There will be confusion. If we publish snapshots, we can stop talking about "CSS3" and just say "CSS 2011" or "CSS 2012", etc, where the module level is less ocnfusing.
16:47:33 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: So for the snapshots, just publish them as Notes?
16:47:55 [TabAtkins_]
TabAtkins_: Since the modules are our deliverables, I don't think it makes sense to track snapshots as real things. "Note" is fine.
16:48:22 [TabAtkins_]
szilles: Regarding PR, 2.1 is going to come out, and we want people to notice we'r epublishing snapshots.
16:48:54 [TabAtkins_]
szilles: Would be useful to have a PR announcement, maybe combining the snapshot+2.1, saying "2.1's here, and now we live through snapshots".
16:49:08 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: Sounds good. We could to the Rec announcement with that.
16:49:48 [TabAtkins_]
sylvaing: It seems confusing to me, then, to talk about snapshots as Notes at the same time as we talking about Rec stuff.
16:49:58 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: Snapshots are just ToC.
16:50:35 [TabAtkins_]
sylvaing: If Steve is okay with Notes, I'm okay.
16:50:51 [TabAtkins_]
szilles: I prefer something else, but I'm okay with Notes. It's more important to me to get something out.
16:51:03 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: So we should make the snapshot asap, because the Recs will happen first.
16:51:10 [sylvaing]
(I was ok with notes, but wanted to make sure we all were from previous discussions)
16:51:27 [TabAtkins_]
ACTION glazou to let Ian Jacobs know we want to put a special announcement for the PR/Rec.
16:51:27 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-319 - Let Ian Jacobs know we want to put a special announcement for the PR/Rec. [on Daniel Glazman - due 2011-04-27].
16:52:34 [TabAtkins_]
Topic: Variables/Mixins
16:52:41 [glazou]
16:52:54 [TabAtkins_]
TabAtkins_: It would be better for me, probably, if we instead start next week with this discussion so we have plenty of time.
16:53:04 [TabAtkins_]
Topic: Transiations.
16:53:15 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: I think I responded and said it should be "any" instead of "all" in the spec.
16:53:19 [TabAtkins_]
sylvaing: I agree with that.
16:53:50 [dbaron]
dbaron: I agree as well, though dropping the duplication could also help.
16:53:57 [glazou]
16:54:06 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: Next is about z-index.
16:54:24 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: The Transforms spec says that transformed elements act like "relatively positioned element".
16:54:44 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: Webkit has this just create a pseudo-stacking context (like 'opacity' does), but FF and maybe IE let z-index work.
16:55:16 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: I argued that we don't let left/top/etc apply, so z-index shouldn't either. So my proposal is that we change the spec to have transforms create a pseudo-stacking context like 'opacity' instead.
16:55:35 [TabAtkins_]
dbaron: I don't particularly care, but I think it might be good to ask authors.
16:55:50 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: If authors want to apply z-index, they can just actually make it relpos.
16:56:24 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: I think having to use relpos for z-index is confusing anyway.
16:56:40 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: Stacking contexts are confusing anyway.
16:56:48 [TabAtkins_]
sylvaing: What about opacity? z-index doesn't apply?
16:56:54 [TabAtkins_]
smfr: No.
16:57:02 [TabAtkins_]
sylvaing: So you're just wanting to make it consistent with opacity. Sounds good.
16:57:21 [TabAtkins_]
RESOLVED: transforms create a pseudo-stacking context, not a full one. z-index doesn't apply.
16:57:38 [fantasai]
16:58:16 [TabAtkins_]
Topic: list-style-type for disclosure triangle
16:58:19 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: I agree!
16:58:44 [TabAtkins_]
hober: I like the use of ::marker, but I think it's kinda confusing to use list-style-type to do this, because it's not a list.
16:59:06 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: Don't be too stuck on the name - the use of the term "list item" doesn't mean it's actually a list item.
16:59:19 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: It just means "I'm a block with a marker thing".
17:00:23 [Zakim]
17:00:31 [fantasai]
Note: the spec should make the disclosure triange magic wrt writing direciton
17:00:37 [TabAtkins_]
glazou: Because Apple introduced these triangles in OS10 a while ago, I think we'll end up with rotating triangles. So you can't do that with separate list types.
17:00:59 [Zakim]
17:01:01 [TabAtkins_]
TabAtkins_: Just do a transform on ::marker, easy.
17:01:01 [Zakim]
17:01:03 [Zakim]
17:01:05 [Zakim]
17:01:07 [Zakim]
17:01:09 [Zakim]
17:01:11 [Zakim]
17:01:13 [Zakim]
17:01:27 [Zakim]
17:01:28 [Zakim]
17:02:20 [arno1]
arno1 has joined #css
17:02:29 [Zakim]
17:02:30 [Zakim]
17:02:40 [Zakim]
17:02:41 [Zakim]
Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has ended
17:02:42 [Zakim]
Attendees were plinss, TabAtkins_, glazou, stearns, hober, sylvaing, arronei_, +1.415.832.aaaa, danielweck, +1.650.618.aabb, David_Baron, +1.415.832.aacc, arno, smfr, kojiishi,
17:02:44 [Zakim]
... vhardy, SteveZ, fantasai
18:03:33 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #css
18:22:43 [arno]
arno has joined #css
18:34:29 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #css
18:47:34 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #css
20:03:09 [arno1]
arno1 has joined #css
20:34:23 [arno]
arno has joined #css
20:54:41 [nimbupani]
nimbupani has left #css
21:15:11 [arno]
arno has joined #css
21:34:03 [arronei]
arronei has joined #CSS
22:08:44 [arno]
arno has joined #css
22:31:18 [homata]
homata has joined #CSS
22:53:52 [TabAtkins]
TabAtkins has joined #css
23:45:17 [arno]
arno has joined #css