19:59:09 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #fx
19:59:09 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/05/23-fx-irc
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> +[Apple]
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:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), heycam
20:01:13 <Zakim> +??P1
20:01:15 <heycam> Zakim, ??P1 is me
20:01:15 <Zakim> +heycam; got it
20:02:00 <Zakim> +??P2
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> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2011AprJun/0096.html
20:03:29 <Zakim> +cabanier
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> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/FX-Taskforce/2DTransformsToDoList
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> s/.../ED:/
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> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2011AprJun/0089.html
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> -cabanier
20:51:35 <Zakim> - +1.408.536.aaaa
20:51:36 <Zakim> -ed
20:51:37 <Zakim> -[Apple]
20:51:37 <Zakim> -heycam
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 http://www.w3.org/2011/05/23-fx-minutes.html 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