See also: IRC log
<TabAtkins_> fantasai: The issues I didn't log were raised after the end of the LC period, iirc.
<tantek> only on IRC this morning
<TabAtkins_> yo, tantek
<TabAtkins_> Sigh. If Zakim understands the question, why does me make you rephrase it?
<tantek> TabAtkins_ lazy bot programmer is lazy.
<TabAtkins_> But it's actually *more* work to do that!
<tantek> and failed to obey 2nd law
<fantasai> TabAtkins: That doesn't mean you don't file them.
<fantasai> TabAtkins: You addressed them, didn't you? If you're going to ignore them because they're after the deadline, fine.
<fantasai> TabAtkins: But if not, they need to be filed and processed.
<smfr> a 386
<fantasai> TabAtkins: The only time we've ever rejected a comment due to being after the deadline is CSS2.1, fwiw.
<TabAtkins_> fantasai: My understanding was that the DoC was for LC issues.
<fantasai> TabAtkins: And that was because if we didn't, we'd never finish.
<TabAtkins_> Outside of the LC comment period, they're just regular comments, and are dealt with in the normal way.
<fantasai> TabAtkins: You're addressing them between LC and CR, they get filed.
<TabAtkins_> I can do that, sure. But don't complain about me not filing them when the instructions about what to file were apparently unclear. ^_^
<scribe> scribe: glenn
<glazou> ScribeNick: glenn
?WD of Flexbox: like to talk about MQ
<nimbu> florianr is florianr
alex: can we publish flexbox
sylvaing: gradients on agenda?
<tantek> TabAtkins, between end of LC period and when you publish the CR it's a bit of a gray area as to what's "required". I think it's up to editor judgment, in which case consider if addressing the comment will improve the spec, and in particular avoid a CR-LC-CR cycle.
glazou: only normative reference on agenda
glazou: yes if possible
<dstorey> one of those new people is me. Going to try to work out which
<TabAtkins_> tantek: "Addressing" and "filing in the DoC" are very different things. I do the former. I didn't realize I had to do the latter.
alex: discussed LC on flexbox
florianr: would like a WD
alex: will publish by tuesday
chrisl: WD or what?
<TabAtkins_> RESOLVED: Publich Flexbox as WD.
RESOLVE: publish flexbox as WD
<ChrisL> ACTION: ChrisL to publish flexbox wd [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/29-css-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-453 - Publish flexbox wd [on Chris Lilley - due 2012-03-07].
<tantek> TabAtkins, agreed. If it's a cross-WG comment then I tend to be more liberal toward including in the DoC as it tends to improve inter-WG relations and reduce static/friction in future interactions.
glazou: post msg from david with list of issues
<tantek> TabAtkins, do you have a URL/webpage example of the new flexbox syntax/functionality/algorithm that shows it "working" (even prefixed) in 2+ implementations? (just curious what state of spec vs implementation is.
dbaron: order as in email
... animation of images and gradients
... rules in spec about animation of gradients
... work in css4 images about that, should defer to that and remove from spec
<tantek> thanks smfr for the link
florianr: what is meant by defer?
<ChrisL> I agree with all the ones in the postpone category, having read through them
florianr: impls free to do what the want
<sylvaing> ChrisL, +1
<dbaron> Tab: people will depend on whatever the implementations do, no matter what the spec says
<tantek> dbaron's clustering of issues postpone/easy/medium/hard is a good approach for helping advance these specs quickly.
smfr: webkit has cross fade
... will do transitions using cross fade, agrees should be undefined how accomplished
dbaron: thinks that wk is impl
... should not have normative statement if will soon override
chrisl what is wrong with saying undefined?
worried if you say can't animate, or if you say can animate but not what happens
fantasai: should specify that
whether and how it's animated is undefined
... then mention how it will be defined in future spec
chrisl: if spec says you should not try to animate this, will have no test
dbaron: css1/2 have said ignore
props not defined in spec
... yet css3 is defining new props
glazou: has to drop/rejoin due to sip problem, peter pls chair in mean time
<dbaron> dbaron: I think that's fine
<glazou> (sorry, no change, very difficult to hear you all, sound is cut)
<glazou> Bert: probably
<smfr> i'm fine with florianr's wording
???: such and such is not expected to animate, but different ? will defines how this works
dbaron: are we talking just about
images/gradients or everything not animatable?
... thinks we're talking about everything, concerned about putting in big loop hole
<florianr> This level of css does not expect XXX to animate. Different modules or later levels may define how to animate them.
chrisl: (1) animatable and known, (2) not animatable and known, (3) others not sure
???: is it clear on (2) vs (3)
scribe: rather be specific when possible
dbaron: ok if we have statement
about limited set of props
... should i take an action to write that statement?
... most of the rest aren't properties
glazou: would like a decision
<smfr> i agree
chrisl: agrees with entire list
of things to postpone
... to which sylviang agreed
dbaron: transitions about value
types you can't interpolate
... things would animate that people aren't expecting to animate
Tab: can define special timing model for discrete things
chrisl: in SVG discrete changes interpolate
dbaron: are people not worried
... will put constraints on what we can do
tab: if transitions immediately after non-zero, then should work
<smfr> transition: all 2s 2s;
tab: find with leaving or fixing, simple to fix
smfr: thinks not simple to fix
tab: shouldn't have transition all
florianr: suggests postponing
dbaron: should work within constraints just now, is ok with postponing
<smfr> i'm ok with postponing
RESOLUTION: postponing ??? items
<dbaron pls s/// ??? for me>
<dbaron> s/???/the items listed as postpone in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/1083.html/
tab: can't having impls doing different things...
dbaron: don't want webkit behavior
<dbaron> smfr: WebKit treats 'auto' as '0'
dbaron: how to match lists of
... in transition * properties
... background is the length that matters
<ChrisL> agree with the truncated/repeated proposal
dbaron: use beginning of list ignore the rest
dbaron: proposes ???
<dbaron> RESOLVED: resolve bug 14604 as proposed
dbaron: next, reverse animation
using opposite timing function, people ask for feature
... postpone adding such feature, but add example showing how it can be used now
... a little confusing, but not too hard
glazou: good compromise
<dbaron> RESOLVED: resolve bug 14611 as proposed
dbaron: spec mentions grid and zoom props
dbaron: grid isn't any spec, zoom is; propose removing refs
<dbaron> RESOLVED: resolve bug 14618 and 14626 as proposed
dbaron: vertical align is animatable (according to spec), but what does animating keywords mean?
florianr: should we say "no keywords" or just enumerate the subset of what can animate?
<dbaron> RESOLVED: resolve bug 14988 as proposed
dbaron: last of easy items
<Bert> (Animating from 'top' to 'bottom' makes sense, but doesn't seem needed.)
dbaron: no transition when both transition delay and ??? are zero seconds
<ChrisL> agree on the zero transition
dbaron: nothing says it
tab: doesn't like because it is discontinuous behavior
dbaron: the default is delay/duration not transition property
tab: ok, need to make not a transition
smfr: does the spec say this?
<dbaron> smfr: implication of transition not occurring is that no events fire?
<fantasai> tab: oh, we default to transition-property: all; and transition-duration / ?? to zero
<Bert> ". By default the value is ‘0s’, meaning that the transition is immediate"
<dbaron> smfr: does the spec say that?
<TabAtkins_> Specifically, the current "no transitions" default is implemention with a property of "all" and a delay/duration of "0".
<Bert> " (i.e. there will be no animation)."
fantasai: why do we have default of zero?
bert: specs no animation in that case
tab: events are important part
<speaker pls summarize long statement in irc>
<smfr> i approve
<TabAtkins_> smfr: [explained the original reasoning between the current defaults vs defaulting to a property of 'none' and some default duration]
<dbaron> RESOLVED: resolve bug 15838 as proposed
<Bert> smfr: [there are usability reasons for defaults of 'all' and '0s']
glazou: moving to Z-axis
intersection issue for transforms
... is dirk here?
florianr: opera does not have
impl of 3d transforms
... in favor of saying do intersection in spec
... not in favor of saying should
dbaron: talked to Robert O'Callahan, and he agreed the correct behavior (plane splitting) is obvious but we don't do it correctly now, but we should
tab: would like to do correctly, impl is tricky
<smfr> RESOLVED: transform spec should make intersection behavior a MUST
jdaggett: possible problem with
<fantasai> scribenick: fantasai
<glenn> ... proposal to mirror to csswg, thinks it is bad idea
jdaggett: proposal was to host specs on csswg.org
<glenn> <jdaggett pls speak up>
jdaggett: means all ..., and all
editor's drafts have to point to csswg.org
... I don't see that using Apache is necessary. We can use <meta> to do redirection.
... Not ideal, but better than having csswg.org be a point of failure
<glenn> jdaggett: not necessary to use .htaccess facilities
<tantek> I agree, I'd rather delay the source control transition if it means we can avoid one or more temporary places for specs.
<scribe> Scribenick: glenn
plinss: timing to be finalized
... infrastructure in place
... wishes better docs, but working on them today
... no addl burden on editors
jdaggett: questions using URLs to refer to csswg.org host
<tantek> I have not had time to retry the hg instructions again to see where I get stuck next btw.
plinss: suggests reverse proxy on dev.w3.org
bert: pretty sure its possible
<dbaron> (Why do a reverse proxy on a w3c server if we could just do a checkout on a w3c server?)
plinss: this is just a stop gap, i.e., using csswg.org
<tantek> exactly, what dbaron said
jdaggett: doesn't see need for interim step
<tantek> can we delay transition and avoid stopgaps?
<tantek> what's the rush?
plinss: if we use reverse proxy, nobody will know
<tantek> I agree with the concerns that jdaggett has raised.
plinss: will start with proxy on dev.w3.org to csswg.org
jdaggett: doesn't like having csswg.org as a point of failure
plinss: only for a few weeks/months
jdaggett: doesn't see this step as necessary
<dbaron> If there's a chance we can make this happen in a matter of days, I think we should try to get that to happen.
<dbaron> I think it's preferable to have the editors drafts have w3.org URLs
plinss: what's the big deal?
jdaggett: sounds like extra work
... had breakage previously
<going in loops here... glazou?>
<fantasai> plinss: They'll be served from dev.w3.org URLs
glazou: pls take to email or irc after call
<fantasai> plinss: so why do you care
fantasai: DoC but won't get through them today
<dbaron> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/issues-lc-2012 is the thing to discuss?
fantasai: all should review DoC and discuss issues during next telecon
<dbaron> er, to review?
fantasai: suggests talking now about taking V&U to LC
glazou: reds need review
fantasai: all are pretty tricky
tab: need other people looking at them
glazou: action on all to review DoC and comment
<sylvaing> title of css3-images DoC is 'CSS Backgrounds and Borders Level 3'
glazou: what else to say now about this doc?
tab: just discuss DoC
florianr: like to go back to
... current TS is not latest version
fantasai: already has action item to do this
florianr: will write results for opera
florianr: also some editorial
changes, should republish
... question about when
fantasai: suggests passing
(opera) build first
... go to LC then hopefully PR
<fantasai> fantasai: or are they only editorial?
<fantasai> florianr: Borderline
<fantasai> florianr: Not changing what they say, just what people understand them to say
florianr: a request on ML for example
fantasai: no opinion
florianr: suggest not adding this
specific example because it refers to feature not
... request for example using rem unit
glazou: think is not needed
dbaron: but may help clarify spec
text, units never based on results of declarations
... unambiguous that rem behaves same way
<dbaron> Add to "Relative units in media queries are based on the initial value."
dbaron: add to sentence "relative units ..."
florianr: sounds good, will edit and republish
<is there a resolution? pls someone type into irc>
<glazou> RESOLUTION: Add to "Relative units in media queries are based on the initial value."
dbaron: previous version link in draft points to previous previous version
chrisl: if all editorial,
... don't need another LC
... or is proposal to go to PR?
dbaron: possible in one
... depends on impl reports
florianr: can have IRs tomorrow
dbaron: mozilla passes all the tests in the repo
florianr: should we list previous
editors as current editors or previous?
... currently listed as previous
<jdaggett> previous editors seems fine
glazou: no opinion
tab: list as previous
stevez: long tradition
<dbaron> though sometimes the "previous editors" is editors for a previous level of the spec, which is sort of different...
<Bert> RESOLVED: move editors of MQ who are no longer active to "Former editor"
<dbaron> fantasai: Everybody ok with removing the comma between attribute name and type in the attr() function?
fantasai: is everbody ok with removing comma between ? and ?
glazou: not fair to ask this now at end of call
<Bert> (I don't like it without the comma, but can live with it.)
<dbaron> peterl: We discussed it at f2f, and howcome was only dissenter.
<dbaron> peterl: And howcome just said he's ok with it.
<is there a resolution?>
<fantasai, pls type resolution>
<dbaron> RESOLVED: publish last call of css3-values
<fantasai> RESOLVED: drop comma between attribute name and type in attr()
<TabAtkins_> RESOLVED: publish V&U as LCWD.
trackbot, end meeting
<fantasai> Bert, is CSS Speech CR in the pipeline yet?
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136 of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/???/florianr/ Succeeded: s/??/flexbox/ Succeeded: s/??/WD of Flexbox/ Succeeded: s/???/sylvaing/ Succeeded: s/???/florianr/ Succeeded: s/???/dbaron/ Succeeded: s/???/florianr/ Succeeded: s/dbaron:/florianr:/ Succeeded: s/???/smfr/ Succeeded: s/.../chrisl/ Succeeded: s/need not/you should not try to animate this/ Succeeded: s/should say undefined/should specify that whether and how it's animated is undefined/ Succeeded: s/???/Tab/ Succeeded: s/???/smfr/ Succeeded: s/???/florianr/ WARNING: Bad s/// command: s/???/the items listed as postpone in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/1083.html/ Succeeded: s/???/dbaron/ Succeeded: s/???/florianr/ Succeeded: s/duraion/duration/ Succeeded: s/florianr/smfr/ WARNING: Bad s/// command: s/zero/all\/zero/ Succeeded: s/???/florianr/ Succeeded: s/robert/Robert O'Callahan, and he agreed the correct behavior (plane splitting) is obvious but we don't do it correctly now, but we should/ Succeeded: s/???/jdaggett/ Succeeded: s/[...]/to csswg.org/ Succeeded: s/florianr/fantasai/ Succeeded: s/CR/PR/ Succeeded: s/sylvaing/glazou/ Succeeded: s/previous version in draft is obsolete/previous version link in draft points to previous previous version/ Found Scribe: glenn Found ScribeNick: glenn Found ScribeNick: fantasai Found ScribeNick: glenn ScribeNicks: glenn, fantasai Default Present: nimbu, glazou, plinss, jdaggett, glenn, florianr, smfr, sylvaing, +1.650.253.aaaa, stearns, Oliver_Goldman, TabAtkins_, hober, krit, Bert, antonp, arronei, danielweck, kimberly, SteveZ, ChrisL, +8521616aabb, +1.408.421.aacc, +1.415.766.aadd, dbaron, +47.23.69.aaee, kojiishi, dstorey, Rossen, alexmog_, +1.650.766.aaff, bradk, [Microsoft], +47.23.69.aagg, howcome Present: nimbu glazou plinss jdaggett glenn florianr smfr sylvaing +1.650.253.aaaa stearns Oliver_Goldman TabAtkins_ hober krit Bert antonp arronei danielweck kimberly SteveZ ChrisL +8521616aabb +1.408.421.aacc +1.415.766.aadd dbaron +47.23.69.aaee kojiishi dstorey Rossen alexmog_ +1.650.766.aaff bradk [Microsoft] +47.23.69.aagg howcome WARNING: No meeting title found! You should specify the meeting title like this: <dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting Got date from IRC log name: 29 Feb 2012 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/02/29-css-minutes.html People with action items: chrisl[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]