IRC log of css on 2011-08-03

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:55:55 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #css
15:55:55 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:56:19 [plinss]
zakim, this will be style
15:56:19 [Zakim]
ok, plinss; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
15:56:20 [Zakim]
Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started
15:56:27 [Zakim]
15:56:51 [dsinger_]
dsinger_ has joined #css
15:57:54 [kimberlyblessing]
kimberlyblessing has joined #css
15:57:57 [plinss]
there's a call about the html lc issues
15:58:00 [oyvind]
oyvind has joined #css
15:59:36 [Zakim]
15:59:39 [dsinger_]
dsinger_ has joined #css
15:59:45 [dsinger_]
zakim, mute dsinger
15:59:45 [Zakim]
dsinger should now be muted
15:59:59 [Zakim]
16:00:06 [Zakim]
+ +1.206.324.aaaa
16:00:13 [sylvaing]
Zakim, aaaa is sylvaing
16:00:13 [Zakim]
+sylvaing; got it
16:00:30 [Zakim]
16:00:41 [dsinger_]
zakim, who is here?
16:00:41 [Zakim]
On the phone I see plinss, dsinger (muted), kimberlyblessing, sylvaing, ??P25
16:00:44 [Zakim]
On IRC I see dsinger_, oyvind, kimberlyblessing, RRSAgent, Zakim, dbaron, sylvaing, Ms2ger, karl, krijnhuman, TabAtkins, arronei_, anne, gsnedders, Bert, lhnz, hober, CSSWG_LogBot,
16:00:46 [Zakim]
... fantasai, plinss, ed, Hixie, trackbot
16:01:05 [plinss]
zakim, P25 is fantasai
16:01:05 [Zakim]
sorry, plinss, I do not recognize a party named 'P25'
16:01:09 [Zakim]
16:01:18 [plinss]
zakim, ??P25 is fantasai
16:01:18 [Zakim]
+fantasai; got it
16:01:35 [JohnJansen]
JohnJansen has joined #css
16:02:04 [Zakim]
16:02:22 [TabAtkins_]
TabAtkins_ has joined #css
16:03:14 [Zakim]
+ +1.650.618.aabb
16:03:29 [dbaron]
Zakim, aabb is dbaron
16:03:29 [Zakim]
+dbaron; got it
16:05:31 [fantasai]
ScribeNick: fantasai
16:05:40 [plinss]
16:05:46 [fantasai]
plinss: The one topic today is HTML5 LC comments
16:06:32 [fantasai]
fantasai: the ones at the top are just a list of issues, need a proper writeup to be a comment
16:06:40 [fantasai]
plinss: Should we go over them to see if we agree?
16:06:51 [fantasai]
fantasai: Yes, but they still need a writeup
16:07:36 [fantasai]
16:07:48 [fantasai]
plinss: First item, UI selectors and split between CSS3 UI and HTML5
16:08:15 [fantasai]
16:08:47 [TabAtkins_]
Note: there is no split. The only difference is in the direction selectors, which is between Selectors 4 and HTML.
16:09:18 [fantasai]
fantasai: The main problem I see in this section is that there's no normative reference to Selectors /CSS3UI that define the selectors
16:09:32 [dsinger_]
Do we need to separate CSS-related comments from other more general comments?
16:09:37 [fantasai]
TabAtkins, the split is that our specs define the selectors and HTML5 defines when they apply
16:09:48 [sylvaing]
did we log daniel's comment on 10.4.2: "This section is intended to be moved to its own CSS module once an editor is found to run with it."
16:10:12 [Ms2ger]
There is a normative reference to Selectors and CSS3-UI, btw
16:10:14 [fantasai]
I think that fell under the coordination / lack of communication issue.
16:10:30 [sylvaing]
it's more than that; this note says the section is a CSS feature
16:10:59 [sylvaing]
but certainly needs coordination work
16:11:35 [fantasai]
Ms2ger: I don't see it, where?
16:11:39 [anne]
fantasai, (on not having a normative reference)
16:11:49 [Ms2ger]
It's in the references section at least
16:11:58 [Ms2ger]
s/It's/They are/
16:12:02 [fantasai]
16:12:02 [anne]
Ms2ger, yes for the rendering section
16:12:14 [anne]
Ms2ger, not for the pseudo-class section
16:12:14 [fantasai]
fantasai: I think some of Bert's comments should be sent as personal comments, not as WG comments
16:12:31 [Ms2ger]
16:12:38 [fantasai]
dbaron: In general, I think comments shouldn't be sent as group comments unless they really affect the interaction of the specs
16:12:42 [fantasai]
fantasai: A lot of these do
16:12:43 [anne]
sylvaing, I emailed www-style on that
16:12:45 [fantasai]
dbaron: Yes
16:12:48 [anne]
sylvaing, only Tab replied thus far
16:13:04 [fantasai]
plinss: So let's go over the issues and decide what ot do with that
16:13:15 [Zakim]
16:13:19 [fantasai]
fantasai: For UI selectors issue, I think the only problem is the lack of normative reference. Looks like anne filed that
16:13:22 [hober]
Zakim, Apple has hober
16:13:22 [Zakim]
+hober; got it
16:13:52 [fantasai]
fantasai: But that should be considered a WG comment
16:14:08 [fantasai]
fantasai: Anyone else have comments on UI selectors issue?
16:14:12 [fantasai]
16:14:47 [sylvaing]
anne, yes you did. I thought it should be on the wiki as one of the issues we might comment on.
16:15:06 [fantasai]
plinss: So do we want to send that as a WG comment?
16:15:09 [fantasai]
fantasai: How do we do that?
16:15:19 [anne]
sylvaing, it is the third bullet point no?
16:15:31 [fantasai]
ACTION fantasai: Write a paragraph linking to this bug so plinss can send it
16:15:31 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-359 - Write a paragraph linking to this bug so plinss can send it [on Elika Etemad - due 2011-08-10].
16:15:34 [anne]
I don't see any reason to send it as WG comment if the issue is already filed
16:15:53 [fantasai]
anne, it's still an issue raised by the WG
16:15:58 [anne]
"The CSS WG endorses this comment"? seems fairly lame to me
16:16:04 [anne]
it's an issue raised by you and I filed it
16:16:17 [fantasai]
plinss: :ltr, :rtl ?
16:16:23 [anne]
already filed
16:17:02 [fantasai]
plinss: Should have a draft of Selectors 4 for them to reference soon
16:17:25 [sylvaing]
anne, and i don't see any reason to not be complete. If it's just a matter of linking to a filed issue the cost seems pretty low.
16:18:07 [fantasai]
fantasai: So do we put this in the issue list? What do we put?
16:18:09 [anne]
sylvaing, you mean filing an issue on HTML?
16:18:15 [anne]
sylvaing, not sure what that would say
16:18:17 [fantasai]
fantasai: That it needs updating and a reference to Selectors 4?
16:18:19 [fantasai]
plinss: Yes
16:18:45 [fantasai]
plinss: ::cue pseudo-element, :past/:future pseudo-classes
16:19:05 [fantasai]
fantasai: I added :past and :future to Selectors 4 yesterday
16:19:26 [fantasai]
plinss: We do have the general issue of HTML going off and defining pseudo-classes and pseudo-elements without talking to us about it. We need a general statement that they shouldn't do that.
16:19:27 [TabAtkins_]
::cue is potentially interesting to look into. It's actually a generic way to poke selectors into embedded documents.
16:19:54 [TabAtkins_]
Though currently limited to WebVTT, which doesn't have a way of embedding CSS itself.
16:20:07 [fantasai]
fantasai: Don't have a draft for ::cue, not intending to add it
16:20:16 [dsinger]
dsinger has joined #css
16:20:18 [nimbupani]
nimbupani has joined #css
16:20:34 [anne]
it's not selectors in embedded documents...
16:20:45 [fantasai]
plinss: I think we can file it as a general issue that this isn't defined in CSS, there's been no communication to the CSSWG about it, it needs to be defined somewhere in CSS but we need to work together on it at some point in the future.
16:20:46 [Zakim]
16:20:53 [dsinger]
zakim, [apple.a] has dsinger
16:20:53 [Zakim]
+dsinger; got it
16:20:54 [anne]
well it is, but not Selectors selectors
16:20:56 [fantasai]
fantasai: So you want to write that one up?
16:20:58 [fantasai]
plinss: yep
16:21:03 [Zakim]
16:21:13 [anne]
plinss, I communicated it to the CSS WG
16:21:13 [sylvaing]
anne, you were saying we shouldn't need to mention it if the issue has been filed. I'm saying if it has been we should link to it. If it hasn't, we should highlight it as an outstanding issue since it is one. that's all.
16:21:35 [fantasai]
fantasai: disabled attribute, should it be WG comment or Daniel comment?
16:21:41 [fantasai]
plinss: Probably Daniel comment.
16:21:43 [anne]
sylvaing, it points to an email that asks the CSS WG to work on this
16:22:09 [anne]
sylvaing, it has done since that page existed more or less
16:22:18 [fantasai]
plinss: I'll ping him about it
16:22:33 [fantasai]
fantasai: normative references to CSS editors' drafts?
16:22:47 [Ms2ger]
Should be fine
16:22:47 [fantasai]
fantasai: Should be a WG comment
16:23:03 [fantasai]
plinss: Just say they shouldn't be doing it
16:23:06 [anne]
agreed with Ms2ger
16:23:11 [fantasai]
plinss: We discussed a little at the F2F
16:23:24 [fantasai]
plinss: Some said it's just their problem wrt not being able to advance
16:23:24 [anne]
I wouldn't want HTML to reference a WD of CSSOM at this point
16:24:11 [sylvaing]
anne, right. it's an issue so it should be listed. moving on...:)
16:24:53 [fantasai]
fantasai: CSSWG handles editors' drafts differently from HTMLWG [...]
16:25:02 [fantasai]
hober: Should we maybe expedite some updates to WD?
16:25:06 [anne]
no not the CSSWG
16:25:10 [anne]
some people in the CSSWG
16:25:18 [anne]
and some treat them pretty much the same
16:25:25 [fantasai]
plinss: Yeah. We're happy to publish updates as soon as the editor says they have something to update
16:25:41 [anne]
this whole "lets talk as a WG" makes little sense to me
16:25:41 [fantasai]
hober: I think that would be useful to communicate in the comments
16:26:13 [fantasai]
plinss: I'll write that one up
16:26:27 [Martijnc]
Martijnc has joined #css
16:26:37 [fantasai]
plinss: Should I provide a list?
16:27:03 [fantasai]
fantasai: could do
16:27:08 [fantasai]
plinss: case-insensitive attribute values
16:27:21 [fantasai]
fantasai: Is this just values? Bert raised an issue about attribute names..
16:27:52 [fantasai]
plinss: Bert's comment is about elements and attributes
16:28:09 [anne]
bert is wrong
16:28:20 [fantasai]
plinss: Could combine
16:28:33 [fantasai]
fantasai: Well, they're different. Adding a new syntax to do case-insensitive value matching is one thing
16:28:35 [anne]
element names and attribute names in XML are matched case-sensitively and that should never change
16:28:51 [fantasai]
fantasai: Having element selectors match case-sensitively in XML is another matter.
16:28:56 [fantasai]
fantasai: Anne says Bert's wrong
16:29:02 [anne]
there's no use case for that anyway
16:29:08 [anne]
the only use case is for attribute values
16:29:25 [fantasai]
fantasai: I don't know where Bert's getting this idea then
16:29:42 [fantasai]
fantasai: But if it's not correct, then we shouldn't send that as a comment.
16:29:42 [anne]
/* case-insensitive */ in HTML refers to this definition
16:29:46 [anne]
"Similarly, for the purpose of the rules marked "case-insensitive", user agents are expected to use ASCII case-insensitive matching of attribute values rather than case-sensitive matching, even for attributes in XHTML documents."
16:30:54 [fantasai]
fantasai: I don't see a problem with that.
16:31:19 [fantasai]
fantasai: So I don't think we need to send this as a comment.
16:31:27 [fantasai]
plinss: Bert's comment or?
16:31:35 [fantasai]
fantasai: Well, Bert's comment is wrong, so we shouldn't send it
16:31:37 [anne]
I already filed a bug on replacing that construct with the new i-flag
16:31:44 [anne]
I should really go
16:32:25 [fantasai]
fantasai: For the other issue, I don't think how HTML defines it is a problem. And they can use the new Selector 4 syntax once that's stable
16:32:42 [fantasai]
plinss: No comment on this one?
16:32:43 [fantasai]
fantasai: right
16:33:01 [fantasai]
plinss: Next, rendering depends on video { object-fit: contain; }
16:33:06 [fantasai]
fantasai: What does that mean?
16:34:00 [fantasai]
16:34:15 [TabAtkins_]
The rendering rules of video were previous explicitly described. They can instead be described succinctly by that UA style.
16:34:19 [fantasai]
fantasai: It says the following rules apply, and lists video { object-fit: contain; }
16:34:25 [fantasai]
fantasai: I don't see a problem with that
16:35:24 [fantasai]
fantasai: Does anyone else see an issue?
16:36:26 [fantasai]
Nobody sees an issue
16:36:30 [fantasai]
plinss: Who added the issue?
16:36:33 [fantasai]
plinss: Anne
16:36:49 [fantasai]
RESOLVED: No issue
16:37:32 [fantasai]
plinss: xxx-large issue?
16:37:44 [fantasai]
fantasai: Seems like a comment they should make on our spec, not a comment we should make on theirs
16:38:09 [fantasai]
RESOLVED: Not a CSSWG comment to HTML
16:38:14 [anne]
oh, I noted it since we marked it at risk in css3-image
16:38:17 [fantasai]
plinss: Attribute value normalization
16:38:22 [TabAtkins_]
Yeah, it's solely a convenience in the stylesheet, like the "X" selector used in describing the styling of headings.
16:38:48 [anne]
the X selector can be replaced by :matches I think
16:38:53 [fantasai]
fantasai: I think this issue is out of scope for us
16:39:00 [fantasai]
hober: Wouldn't it affect selector matching?
16:39:11 [anne]
it would
16:39:17 [fantasai]
fantasai: And a lot of other things besides, but how they parse their document isn't in our scope imo
16:39:35 [fantasai]
plinss: It's still a valid comment
16:39:45 [fantasai]
fantasai: Yeah, but Bert should send it on his own. It's not a coordination issue between us and them
16:40:02 [fantasai]
RESOLVED: Bert sends this comment on his own
16:40:45 [fantasai]
plinss: Alternate style sheets?
16:40:51 [fantasai]
fantasai: Seems like a fair comment.
16:41:21 [Ms2ger]
It doesn't seem like something that should go in HTML
16:41:35 [fantasai]
fantasai: CSSOM should explain how it interacts with scripting, but ...
16:41:50 [fantasai]
hober: So comment should be they define it themselves?
16:42:09 [fantasai]
fantasai: Theoretically you could have non-CSS style sheets, that's allowed by HTML
16:42:23 [fantasai]
hober: This half-reads as a comment on CSSOM spec, not sure what that has to do with HTML spec
16:44:23 [fantasai]
16:45:35 [fantasai]
fantasai: This seems like a "what's the right dividing line between CSSOM and HTML" issue
16:45:42 [fantasai]
fantasai: And I'm not sure the line is drawn in the right place
16:45:54 [fantasai]
plinss: Who wants to write this up in a better way?
16:46:22 [fantasai]
fantasai: I guess I can write it up? I don't know anything about the OM, so I'm not sure that's a good idea...
16:47:09 [fantasai]
hober: I'm not sure there's an issue, but might be artifact of how big and unweildy the HTML5 spec is
16:47:19 [fantasai]
hober: It does define how style sheet is loaded
16:47:33 [fantasai]
hober: It defers to CSSOM the scripting of enabling and disabling the style sheets
16:47:34 [Ms2ger]
If alternate style sheets aren't defined, that seems like a bug for the CSSWG
16:47:38 [fantasai]
hober: And that should live in the OM
16:47:53 [fantasai]
fantasai: You don't need scripting support to support alternate style sheets
16:48:12 [fantasai]
hober: There's two bits of that, is there some kind of UI exposed to the user -- that's out-of-scope for HTML spec
16:48:23 [fantasai]
hober: And there's the scripting interface, which should live in CSSOM
16:49:33 [fantasai]
fantasai: HTML4 had a section on alternate style sheets. Not very well written, but it described which style sheets were enabled by default, which style sheets were grouped together as a style set, and which style sheets were enabled or disabled when you switched style sets
16:49:48 [fantasai]
hober: There's not a good part of W3C to write that down, so not clear where it should go
16:49:57 [Ms2ger]
It looks like alternative style sheets in HTML are already defined in css3-cascade without a ref to HTML4
16:50:02 [fantasai]
hober: Not specific to HTML that there's a concept of alternate style sheets
16:50:32 [fantasai]
fantasai^: Interaction with disabled attribute just wasn't part of that
16:50:41 [Ms2ger]
There's nothing left to define in HTML besides the OM
16:51:35 [fantasai]
hober: It might be reasonable for us to narrowly scope the comment, say yes the scripting part of this should be in CSSOM, but the other part shouldn't, and HTML should either write down how alternate style sheets work, how the disabled attribute interacts with that ...
16:51:42 [fantasai]
hober: Not clear to me CSSWG specifically shoudl do that
16:51:48 [fantasai]
hober: As you said, could have other style languages
16:51:57 [fantasai]
hober: Might be reasonable for Style Activity to handle that somewhere
16:52:02 [Ms2ger]
hober, The CSSWG already does that
16:52:38 [fantasai]
16:53:09 [fantasai]
hober: I'm agreeing there's a missing piece of prose. Not sure where it should go. Not specific to HTML, it's a part of the web platform. Other languages could have notion of alternate style sheets as well
16:53:25 [fantasai]
fantasai: There's only two places that have this notion: HTML and the xml-stylesheet PI
16:53:36 [fantasai]
16:54:51 [fantasai]
plinss: So what do want to say to HTML5?
16:55:06 [Ms2ger]
fantasai, Also @import according to css3-cascade
16:55:09 [fantasai]
fantasai: To make sure this is defined, either by writing the spec or finding someone else to write the spec
16:55:32 [fantasai]
Ms2ger, any draft that's older than 2007 should be considered abandoned
16:55:56 [Ms2ger]
Replace it, then
16:55:56 [fantasai]
plinss: White space where HTML4 ignored it
16:56:28 [fantasai]
hober: Not really a CSS issue
16:56:33 [fantasai]
RESOLVED: Bert sends that one on his own
16:56:43 [fantasai]
plinss: details element
16:57:38 [Ms2ger]
The body element proposed there has been rejected several times already, fwiw
16:57:44 [fantasai]
fantasai: We can't handle this in CSS yet, but I don't see a problem with the spec
16:57:59 [fantasai]
hober: Tab was looking at handling the disclosure triangle via ::marker
16:58:10 [fantasai]
plinss: Is a case where we might need extra markup
16:58:20 [fantasai]
hober: Nothing's stopping authors from wrapping contents in a DIV
16:58:49 [fantasai]
fantasai: The bit I'm not seeing here is the behavior.
16:59:07 [fantasai]
fantasai: We can show a disclosure triangle, but that doesn't give it the ability to change the open and close states
16:59:35 [Ms2ger]
That's out-of-scope for CSS, I guess
16:59:37 [TabAtkins_]
That part is done via the element's own magic.
16:59:53 [TabAtkins_]
That is, it's a part of <summary>'s activation behavior.
17:00:22 [fantasai]
TabAtkins, is that defined somewhere?
17:00:38 [hober]
"The user agent should allow the user to request that the additional information be shown or hidden. To honor a request for the details to be shown, the user agent must set the open attribute on the element to the value open. To honor a request for the information to be hidden, the user agent must remove the open attribute from the element."
17:01:27 [fantasai]
fantasai: We definitely need to add something about collapsing stuff, though.
17:01:46 [fantasai]
17:02:01 [fantasai]
17:02:47 [fantasai]
fantasai: Do we have selectors for the open and close states?
17:02:55 [TabAtkins_]
Yes, details[open]
17:03:01 [TabAtkins_]
Or details:not([open])
17:03:13 [fantasai]
TabAtkins: that selects on getAttributeSOMETHINGOROTHER
17:03:14 [TabAtkins_]
(The content attribute reflects the state of the element.)
17:03:20 [fantasai]
oh, ok
17:04:24 [fantasai]
plinss: But we still don't have a way of collapsing the contents that doesn't have an element around it
17:04:41 [fantasai]
fantasai: I think we can add something that works similar to 'visibility' or 'speakability' from CSS3 Speech
17:05:11 [fantasai]
TabAtkins, I think it'd be handy to have an example of that in the spec
17:05:23 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: Okay, I can file a bug.
17:05:46 [fantasai]
like, it could just be [open] { background: pink; } makes it pink when it's open
17:05:58 [fantasai]
fantasai: I don't have an issue to file, anyone else?
17:06:06 [fantasai]
RESOLVED: No comment on <details>
17:06:49 [fantasai]
17:06:54 [fantasai]
plinss: <iframe seamless>
17:07:11 [TabAtkins_]
17:07:39 [fantasai]
fantasai: So what does seamless do ...
17:07:45 [fantasai]
fantasai: So this is *not* about replaced elements
17:08:12 [TabAtkins_]
seamless makes the iframe act more-or-less like its contents were just embedded into the outer document.
17:08:20 [fantasai]
fantasai: This is way more sophisticated than adjusting the height of a replaced element
17:08:21 [TabAtkins_]
For sizing, at least. Also, selectors cross through the boundary.
17:09:36 [fantasai]
fantasai: I'm not sure if I have a comment on this... does anybody else?
17:10:00 [fantasai]
fantasai: The only thing I can think is that we need to define handling a document tree that's composed of multiple documents.
17:10:21 [fantasai]
fantasai: Ths is effectively an include
17:10:42 [fantasai]
plinss: There's bits about setting the intrinsic size of the <iframe> that confuse me
17:10:45 [TabAtkins_]
I don't think we need to say anything, really. The tree is still well-formed.
17:10:47 [fantasai]
fantasai: yeah, that doesn't make sense ..
17:11:46 [fantasai]
TabAtkins, defining cascading and inheritance should be our responsibility, ideally ...
17:11:53 [fantasai]
plinss: This whole section of HTML frightens and confuses me
17:12:45 [TabAtkins_]
Actually, my statement's not quite true. Selectors don't match across the document boundary. However, stylesheets from the outer document are applied to the inner document as well. Then, inheritance applies between the <iframe> and the inner <html>.
17:12:50 [fantasai]
hober: Yes. But seamless <iframe> is still treated as a replaced element.
17:12:57 [fantasai]
fantasai: I'm not sure...
17:13:18 [fantasai]
fantasai: What if you make it a circle with exclusions or something?
17:13:28 [fantasai]
hober^: It's still just a rectangle
17:14:19 [fantasai]
plinss: Is it just a replaced element where the style bleeds through and you don't get a border? Or is it something different?
17:14:38 [TabAtkins_]
For sizing, it *should* be saying that the width is computed as if it were a non-replaced element (without any contents). The height is set to the bounding box of the inner document.
17:14:57 [fantasai]
hober: I think it's just a replaced element with the listed exceptions
17:15:03 [fantasai]
fantasai: What happens if you set 'width: min-content' on it?
17:15:25 [TabAtkins_]
Presumably it's still sized as if it has no content, and thus would shrink to zero?
17:15:31 [TabAtkins_]
Good question.
17:15:49 [Zakim]
17:16:02 [fantasai]
fantasai: yeah, I think this has issues
17:16:17 [TabAtkins_]
Okay, so we should file some stuff on the sizing of seamless iframes.
17:17:23 [fantasai]
fantasai: I don't think this is quite thought through.
17:17:25 [oyvind]
"height is set to the bounding box of the inner document" - sounds circular reference-y
17:17:29 [fantasai]
dbaron: It's just including the box tree
17:17:35 [fantasai]
fantasai: Is it that or treating as a replaced element?
17:17:55 [fantasai]
fantasai: It says set the intrinsic height to this and intrinsic width to that. That gives it an intrinsic ration. Do you scale it when you change the width?
17:18:05 [fantasai]
s/it/its height/
17:18:13 [fantasai]
dbaron: ... I guess it's not that clear.
17:18:20 [fantasai]
plinss: Bottom line, what do we say to HTML?
17:18:31 [TabAtkins_]
fantasai: Going strictly by the definition, you'd change the intrinsic width when the page's width changed. ^_^
17:18:42 [TabAtkins_]
Dammit, reference/minuting fail on my part.
17:18:51 [TabAtkins_]
17:19:03 [fantasai]
fantasai: "You're messing withe the CSS box model in ways you do not seem to understand. Maybe you should talk to us and work on a spec jointly." :)
17:19:15 [TabAtkins_]
I think we should file a bug on @seamless to fix the way its sizing is defined.
17:19:31 [dbaron]
I don't think it's as bad as fantasai says, but I do think it needs to be better defined.
17:20:02 [fantasai]
plinss: So can someone please take an action to write up a coherent comment here?
17:20:08 [TabAtkins_]
I can do that.
17:20:25 [fantasai]
ACTION TabAtkins: Write up a comment on seamless
17:20:25 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - TabAtkins
17:20:31 [fantasai]
ACTION Tab: Write up a comment on seamless
17:20:32 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-360 - Write up a comment on seamless [on Tab Atkins Jr. - due 2011-08-10].
17:20:54 [fantasai]
plinss: Scoped style sheets
17:21:07 [fantasai]
plinss: comment says they're not needed?
17:21:14 [fantasai]
dbaron: I think we do need them. And we need to define them.
17:21:19 [fantasai]
plinss: I'll agree with that.
17:21:53 [oyvind]
(my previous comment was in response to what Tab said, I see now that the spec sets initial containing block height to 0)
17:21:53 [TabAtkins_]
Me too.
17:22:09 [fantasai]
fantasai: I have to go, but my comments on the rest are that, If chapter 10 is the rendering section, we should adopt Bert's comment on that.
17:22:19 [fantasai]
fantasai: Anne said the next one is wrong, so no issue
17:22:35 [fantasai]
fantasai: namespaces issue is out-of-scope for us imo, and I don't see it as an issue.
17:22:47 [fantasai]
fantasai: you can discuss scoped without me, I will not be able to minute?
17:22:56 [fantasai]
dbaron: Anything to discuss?
17:23:00 [fantasai]
fantasai: What the comment should say?
17:23:04 [fantasai]
ScribeNick: nobody
17:23:12 [Zakim]
17:23:17 [hober]
ScribeNick: hober
17:23:28 [TabAtkins_]
I think we should pull scoped-ness into CSS directly at some point, but I also think that <style scoped> works just fine as is.
17:24:09 [hober]
dbaron: I'm not convinced we need to make a comment here
17:24:34 [hober]
plinss: drop this comment then?
17:24:43 [hober]
hober: sure
17:24:55 [hober]
plinss: accept comment on chapter 10?
17:25:12 [hober]
sylvaing: agreed re: chapter 10
17:25:18 [Zakim]
17:25:34 [hober]
plinss: Pseudo-namespaces
17:25:44 [hober]
plinss: fantasai said she thought this was out of scope
17:26:14 [TabAtkins_]
HTML defines namespaces properly. All HTML elements are in a namespace, regardless of whether you use the HTML or XHTML serialization.
17:26:17 [hober]
plinss: i think it's fine for an html document to have a namespace
17:26:27 [TabAtkins_]
And it's *definitely* not a CSS issue.
17:26:45 [hober]
dbaron: the way text/html parsing works, dom elements get the xhtml, svg, or mathml namespaces
17:27:08 [hober]
plinss: drop this comment
17:27:32 [Zakim]
17:27:34 [Zakim]
17:27:35 [Zakim]
17:30:12 [TabAtkins_]
We done, or still talking?
17:30:36 [lhnz]
lhnz has joined #css
17:31:19 [TabAtkins_]
I will assume done, and head to work.
17:31:51 [Ms2ger]
Zakim, make logs public
17:31:51 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'make logs public', Ms2ger
17:31:55 [Ms2ger]
Zakim, make minutes public
17:31:55 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'make minutes public', Ms2ger
17:31:57 [Ms2ger]
17:32:01 [dbaron]
RRSAgent, make logs public
17:32:24 [dbaron]
too many bots, you see
17:32:31 [Ms2ger]
17:32:33 [nimbu]
17:32:35 [dbaron]
and then there's trackbot which is capable of managing all the other bots
17:32:36 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, plinss, in Style_CSS FP()12:00PM
17:32:37 [Zakim]
Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has ended
17:32:40 [Zakim]
Attendees were plinss, dsinger, kimberlyblessing, +1.206.324.aaaa, sylvaing, [Microsoft], fantasai, +1.650.618.aabb, dbaron, hober, [Apple]
17:57:57 [arronei]
arronei has joined #css
19:08:28 [sylvaing]
sylvaing has joined #css
19:20:34 [arronei]
arronei has joined #css
19:31:50 [TabAtkins]
fantasai: Can I shift your "split" thread back over to www-style?
19:41:41 [fantasai]
TabAtkins: sure
19:42:36 [arno]
arno has joined #css
19:55:47 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #css
19:58:34 [fantasai]
TabAtkins: posted
20:05:20 [sylvaing]
sylvaing has joined #css
20:09:59 [arronei]
arronei has joined #css
20:13:30 [arronei]
arronei has joined #css
20:34:58 [sylvaing]
sylvaing has joined #css
20:44:08 [arno]
arno has joined #css
20:51:09 [nimbupani]
nimbupani has joined #css
21:05:29 [fantasai]
TabAtkins: Did you get my sms?
21:11:45 [TabAtkins]
21:29:42 [fantasai]
TabAtkins: dump your HTML comment draft into the wiki? plinss can aggregate them and send them together
21:32:07 [TabAtkins]
kk, just a sec
22:00:04 [fantasai]
TabAtkins: Let me know when you unlock the page
22:03:12 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #css
22:07:43 [TabAtkins]
fantasai: Go for it.
22:09:00 [dbaron]
fantasai, fwiw, the minutes from Seattle are a little confused about dates
22:09:19 [dbaron]
fantasai, the ones labeled 7-25 AM contain the resolutions for AM and the very beginning of PM, and the IRC for the whole day
22:09:41 [dbaron]
fantasai, and the ones labeled 7-26 contain the resolutions and the IRC for the remainder of the PM on 7-25 (including duplicate IRC log from previous)
22:09:46 [fantasai]
22:10:20 [fantasai]
I thought there was no IRC log link for the PM minutes
22:10:59 [fantasai]
I cut it off slightly after PM because it was the same topic as the morning, so that was intentional
22:13:32 [dbaron]
also, the resolution to publish an FPWD of css3-conditional is in the full IRC, but not the summary, of
22:13:41 [dbaron]
(that's why I was looking in the first place)
22:14:23 [fantasai]
22:14:26 [fantasai]
any other errors?
22:14:45 [dbaron]
oh, I didn't mean the IRC log link, I meant the "full minutes" part of the minutes, which is partly duplicated between those 2
22:15:18 [dbaron]
now that I've found the resolution I was looking for (and linked the minutes from , I'm done)
22:15:49 [fantasai]
*sigh* copy-paste error :/
22:16:02 [fantasai]
clearly not in top minuting form last night
22:17:18 [dbaron]
Now, my other problem is that I can't get the pubrules checker to work.
22:17:30 [fantasai]
22:17:38 [fantasai]
try just running the validator and asking Bert to take care of the rest then?
22:17:56 [fantasai]
I think I had trouble with it last time, too...
22:19:54 [dbaron]
I'm going to fix the duplicate id IN THE MODULE TEMPLATE while I'm at it. :-)
22:24:25 [dbaron]
I'm also going to improve its use of the preprocessor a little bit
22:35:19 [fantasai]
ok :)
22:38:04 [fantasai]
plinss: I've updated the wiki page and reorganized it a bit. Take a look; you should fill out the sections marked as your ACTIONs.
22:38:07 [fantasai]
22:53:55 [anne]
dbaron, I think you might get into trouble since a REC is listed as previous version
22:54:23 [anne]
dbaron, pubrules complaint about that the other day anyway
22:54:28 [anne]
22:59:16 [dbaron]
seems bogus...
23:00:21 [anne]
yeah, something about superceding a REC, hopefully it'll work out fine
23:01:22 [dbaron]
hmmm, pubrules seems to want "Table of Contents" rather than "Table of contents"
23:05:15 [sylvaing]
sylvaing has joined #css