IRC log of fx on 2011-05-23

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:59:09 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #fx
19:59:09 [RRSAgent]
logging to
19:59:11 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
19:59:11 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #fx
19:59:13 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 3983
19:59:13 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see GA_FXTF()4:00PM scheduled to start in 1 minute
19:59:14 [trackbot]
Meeting: CSS-SVG Task Force Teleconference
19:59:14 [trackbot]
Date: 23 May 2011
20:00:04 [Zakim]
GA_FXTF()4:00PM has now started
20:00:11 [Zakim]
20:00:21 [hober]
Zakim, Apple has me
20:00:21 [Zakim]
+hober; got it
20:01:05 [heycam]
Zakim, code?
20:01:05 [Zakim]
the conference code is 3983 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.203.318.0479), heycam
20:01:13 [Zakim]
20:01:15 [heycam]
Zakim, ??P1 is me
20:01:15 [Zakim]
+heycam; got it
20:02:00 [Zakim]
20:02:09 [ed]
Zakim, ??P2 is me
20:02:09 [Zakim]
+ed; got it
20:02:27 [cabanier]
cabanier has joined #fx
20:02:48 [ed]
20:03:29 [Zakim]
20:05:05 [ed]
Zakim, who's here?
20:05:05 [Zakim]
On the phone I see [Apple], heycam, ed, cabanier
20:05:06 [Zakim]
[Apple] has hober
20:05:08 [Zakim]
On IRC I see cabanier, Zakim, RRSAgent, hober, dbaron, shepazu_errands, CSSWG_LogBot, TabAtkins, plinss, ed, trackbot, heycam
20:05:39 [hober]
Zakim, Apple has smfr
20:05:39 [Zakim]
+smfr; got it
20:05:49 [smfr]
smfr has joined #fx
20:06:04 [heycam]
Scribe: Cameron
20:06:08 [heycam]
ScribeNick: heycam
20:06:11 [heycam]
Chair: Cameron
20:06:46 [heycam]
Topic: FX 2D transforms
20:07:10 [heycam]
ED: let's try to figure out what to do with the remaining actions
20:07:15 [heycam]
... since anthony won't be editing the spec for a while
20:07:23 [heycam]
... do we have other editors to take over these actions?
20:07:34 [heycam]
SF: dean, probably
20:07:36 [ed]
20:07:38 [heycam]
... but I can do some edits too
20:07:56 [heycam]
... is there anything on the todo list to discuss today?
20:08:08 [heycam]
20:08:21 [heycam]
ED: I'm personally interested in the optional arguments for scale()
20:08:38 [heycam]
SF: I'm still kind of fuzzy on the second todo, which is the role of this spec vs the css 2d transforms spec
20:08:49 [heycam]
... just because I'd expect the CSS transforms spec to progress faster
20:09:20 [heycam]
ED: you'd prefer to move this as a pure svg spec?
20:09:28 [heycam]
SF: I agree that a combined spec is useful, just not sure whether we're ready for it yet
20:09:52 [heycam]
... as long as css doesn't do anything that's totally incompatible with svg, then i can see we could have a css 2d transforms spec first, and then later one we have only a single canonical spec
20:10:07 [heycam]
... I'd like to hear from other implementers too, what should happen
20:11:05 [heycam]
CM: what's the difference between the two documents?
20:11:50 [heycam]
... apart from the open issues list?
20:12:31 [heycam]
DJ: my fear would be that there are lots of implementations of 2d transforms, so it's possibly holding up progress by waiting for svg
20:12:39 [heycam]
s/2d/css 2d/
20:13:01 [hober]
Zakim, Apple has dino
20:13:01 [Zakim]
+dino; got it
20:13:58 [heycam]
CM: to me, as long as the issues are resolved to make css and svg transforms harmonised, I don't particularly mind if two separate specs exist for a bit longer
20:14:11 [heycam]
ED: we could still go for a joint spec for version 2
20:14:19 [heycam]
DJ: we could do it in CR phase
20:14:36 [heycam]
... my point is that it doesn't seem worth risking delaying one of them by merging them
20:14:44 [heycam]
... when they can easily reference each other at the moment
20:15:54 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.536.aaaa
20:16:45 [vhardy]
vhardy has joined #fx
20:17:02 [heycam]
CM: I wonder whether it is worth having a separate spec just for the SVG side, maybe it should just be folded into SVG2?
20:17:18 [heycam]
DJ: I think that would reduce the impetus to implement the changes to the SVG side
20:17:37 [heycam]
ED: one of the things that would concern me is the alignments that are made in the FX version that have not been made in the CSS version
20:17:46 [heycam]
... where the css and svg transforms syntax differ slightly
20:18:30 [heycam]
... I'm not sure all of the changes that have already been made in the FX version have been made as comments against the CSS version of the spec
20:18:44 [heycam]
DJ: that's right, but I don't remember right now which changes they were
20:18:46 [heycam]
SF: we can look them up
20:19:26 [heycam]
CM: is that the process, for us to comment on the css version to get the changes done?
20:19:34 [heycam]
SF: no, dean and I will work on making those changes
20:19:41 [heycam]
... and any incompatibilities we find we'll raise them on the list
20:19:53 [heycam]
CM: what's the current state of the css version of the spec?
20:20:00 [heycam]
DJ: I think it's only had 1 or 2 publications
20:20:06 [heycam]
... but the ED has significantly advanced
20:20:16 [heycam]
... I'd say it's almost worth moving to LC
20:21:20 [heycam]
ED: how many of those changes that we've made already will get moved to a later version?
20:21:25 [heycam]
... do you want to mention SVG in the CSS version at all?
20:21:36 [heycam]
DJ: it'd be hard to mention if we don't explain how it works
20:21:43 [heycam]
... we could have a note that calls out to the FX spec
20:22:15 [heycam]
... but I do think it's worth us making -- if we satsify the syntax changes in the FX spec, we should make sure they're merged in now
20:22:24 [heycam]
... extra parameters on rotate? a few small ones.
20:23:28 [heycam]
s/merged in/merged into the CSS spec/
20:23:53 [heycam]
CM: I think those changes should be done before LC
20:24:15 [heycam]
ED: the other thing is the transform property vs attribute thing
20:24:23 [heycam]
... I guess the discussion is still useful, but
20:25:10 [heycam]
CM: I guess it's not as urgent now
20:25:28 [heycam]
... but I will try to get a counter proposal for the transform as property soon
20:26:16 [heycam]
[discussion about moving FX spec forward or not]
20:26:53 [heycam]
ACTION: Erik to look for an editor for the FX version of the transforms spec
20:26:53 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-32 - Look for an editor for the FX version of the transforms spec [on Erik Dahlström - due 2011-05-30].
20:27:52 [heycam]
Topic: Reusing filter functions as images in CSS
20:28:06 [ed]
20:28:37 [heycam]
DJ: I think the proposal that people seemed happy about was from Tab or Robert
20:28:56 [smfr]
filter(image, list of filters)
20:29:06 [smfr]
filter(url(foo.png), blur(10px))
20:29:22 [heycam]
SF: whereever you could use image() in CSS
20:29:45 [heycam]
... maybe it should be filtered-image(), or something like that
20:29:53 [heycam]
... we can work on the name
20:30:17 [TabAtkins]
That was roc's, and yeah, I'm happy with that.
20:30:29 [heycam]
CM: does that give more expressiveness, since you can use filter(filter(...))?
20:30:41 [heycam]
DJ: the current proposal doesn't have different filter inputs
20:31:05 [TabAtkins]
filter(filter(...), ...) is equivalent to just concatenating the two filter lists.
20:31:08 [heycam]
... at the moment there's no way to create a circular dependency, which you can in svg filters
20:31:42 [heycam]
SF: then we can define how filters animate
20:32:29 [heycam]
ED: does that actually need a definition? if you use regular numerical types, would that just work with the current definitions in animations?
20:32:37 [heycam]
DJ: the transitions spec has a definition for how things animate
20:32:56 [heycam]
... but the transforms spec defines there how transform animates, so maybe the filters spec should define how the filter property animates
20:32:57 [TabAtkins]
Though, filter(cross-fade(filter(...), url()), ...) gets more complicated. ^_^
20:33:04 [heycam]
ED: I agree
20:33:31 [cabanier]
Does this work with the image values spec?
20:33:31 [heycam]
DJ: it has to be a list where all the functions are the same
20:33:45 [TabAtkins]
cabanier, yes.
20:34:03 [TabAtkins]
cabanier, anything that works with/produces an <image> works nicely with Image Values.
20:34:04 [cabanier]
filter(image(a.svg, a.png), blur(10px))
20:34:09 [heycam]
ED: one of the things I've started thinking about is DOM access to those CSS syntax things
20:34:23 [heycam]
... there was a bit of a discussion on the mailing list about CSSOM and accessing the shorthand filter notations
20:34:32 [heycam]
... I guess CSSOM is not actively edited at the moment
20:34:47 [TabAtkins]
Given the complexity of nested function syntax, I'd be okay with defining a <base-image> (produced by url() and image()), and making it so the image-manipulation functions only take <base-image>.
20:34:48 [heycam]
EO: when anne's back it should be edited
20:34:58 [heycam]
ED: should it be described there, and not in the filters spec?
20:34:59 [TabAtkins]
And then letting SVG handle the more complex cases.
20:35:16 [heycam]
SF: I think once we have a CSSOM API, the spec needs to defined the interface for these filters
20:35:20 [heycam]
... but we don't have the API yet
20:35:31 [heycam]
... e.g. we also avoid creating new CSSValue things, since CSSOM is in flux
20:35:37 [heycam]
DJ: we have a CSSTransformValueList
20:35:39 [heycam]
... but we don't want to keep it
20:36:10 [heycam]
TabAtkins, that sounds like a good idea
20:36:32 [heycam]
ED: do we have an action for writing up this syntax?
20:36:49 [heycam]
DJ: Tab decided on the list that it should be in the Filters spec, so that can be an action on me
20:37:00 [heycam]
ACTION: Dean to write up the filter() syntax
20:37:00 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-33 - Write up the filter() syntax [on Dean Jackson - due 2011-05-30].
20:38:22 [heycam]
ED: Among the shorthand filter functions, we don't have the drop shadow one
20:38:27 [heycam]
... was that intentional?
20:38:29 [TabAtkins]
If necessary, Dean can ping me. I should already have the right terms set up to hook into.
20:38:39 [TabAtkins]
In other words, I probably dont' need an action.
20:38:54 [heycam]
DJ: with drop shadow, let's say we do want to expose a way to do it directly in a filter
20:38:58 [heycam]
... we have to describe a whole bunch of options
20:39:01 [heycam]
... it has lots of parameters
20:39:10 [heycam]
... if you shadow an svg image, would it shadow only the non-transparent part?
20:39:13 [heycam]
... the box that the image is in?
20:39:46 [heycam]
ED: for boxes, I'd assume box-shadow is enough
20:39:59 [heycam]
... but for other things, you would filter based on the alpha channel
20:40:04 [heycam]
SF: people in CSS have requested drop shadow as well
20:40:12 [heycam]
... because they want to shadow an alpha image, or the fg contents of an element
20:40:17 [heycam]
DJ: seems like people want it
20:40:31 [heycam]
ACTION: Dean to add a drop shadow filter shorthand
20:40:31 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-34 - Add a drop shadow filter shorthand [on Dean Jackson - due 2011-05-30].
20:40:51 [heycam]
DJ: maybe you want a shadow based on what the colour in the images is?
20:40:57 [heycam]
SF: shorthands should be for common cases
20:41:08 [heycam]
... we should just pick what we think is the most common application, and define that as the shorthand
20:41:53 [heycam]
Topic: Upcoming SVG F2F
20:42:03 [heycam]
ED: hopefully we'll be able to have some people from the FXTF attending
20:42:13 [heycam]
... covering FX related topics
20:42:24 [heycam]
... it's looking like we'll be having that meeting in the Seattle area in late July
20:43:00 [heycam]
VH: would it be an SVG F2F first and then FX, or would it be combined/overlapped?
20:43:11 [heycam]
ED: I'd imagine they'd overlpa
20:44:25 [heycam]
CM: I imagined that we'd just block out some time out of the week to work on FX stuff
20:44:30 [heycam]
... and FX/SVG people would all be there
20:44:39 [heycam]
... for the rest of the week we work on SVG only stuff, and FX people can go home
20:45:03 [heycam]
ED: who might be able to attend?
20:45:05 [heycam]
VH: I would
20:45:09 [heycam]
DJ: someone from Apple will
20:45:15 [heycam]
ED: I'll try to get a proper agenda set up
20:51:34 [Zakim]
20:51:35 [Zakim]
- +1.408.536.aaaa
20:51:36 [Zakim]
20:51:37 [Zakim]
20:51:37 [Zakim]
20:51:38 [Zakim]
GA_FXTF()4:00PM has ended
20:51:40 [Zakim]
Attendees were hober, heycam, ed, cabanier, smfr, dino, +1.408.536.aaaa
20:51:43 [heycam]
RRSAgent, make minutes
20:51:43 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate heycam
20:57:36 [heycam]
mm, coffee went cold while scribing :(
21:04:59 [vhardy]
vhardy has left #fx
21:31:15 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #fx
23:19:44 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #fx
23:23:27 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #fx