16:53:27 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #css
16:53:27 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/01/30-css-irc
16:53:37 <plinss> rrsagent, make logs public
16:53:43 <plinss> zakim, this will be style
16:53:43 <Zakim> ok, plinss; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 7 minutes
16:56:23 <Zakim> Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started
16:56:29 <Zakim> +??P25
16:56:40 <darktears> Zakim, ??P25 is me
16:56:41 <Zakim> +darktears; got it
16:56:44 <BradK> BradK has joined #CSS
16:56:57 <dbaron> dbaron has joined #css
16:57:59 <nvdbleek> zakim, code?
16:57:59 <Zakim> the conference code is 78953 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), nvdbleek
16:58:48 <Zakim> +nvdbleek
16:58:49 <Zakim> + +1.858.354.aaaa
16:58:58 <plinss> zakim, aaaa is me
16:58:58 <Zakim> +plinss; got it
16:59:16 <Zakim> +hober
16:59:26 <Zakim> +krit
16:59:58 <cabanier> cabanier has joined #css
17:00:01 <rhauck> rhauck has joined #css
17:00:14 <stearns> zakim, krit has me
17:00:15 <Zakim> +stearns; got it
17:00:34 <leif1> leif1 has joined #css
17:00:39 <Zakim> +SylvaIng
17:00:59 <Zakim> +BradK
17:01:03 <rhauck> zakim, krit has me
17:01:03 <Zakim> +rhauck; got it
17:01:07 <Zakim> +leif
17:01:38 <smfr> smfr has joined #css
17:01:45 <Zakim> +smfr
17:02:36 <Zakim> +fantasai
17:02:50 <BradK> Welcome, nick
17:03:08 <Zakim> +cabanier
17:03:36 <teoli> teoli has joined #css
17:04:01 <Zakim> +Bert
17:04:43 <Zakim> +dbaron
17:06:21 <Zakim> +SimonSapin1
17:06:22 <plinss> zakim, who is on the phone
17:06:22 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on the phone', plinss
17:06:32 <plinss> zakim, who is on the phone?
17:06:32 <Zakim> On the phone I see darktears, plinss, nvdbleek, hober, krit, SylvaIng, BradK, leif, smfr, fantasai, cabanier, Bert, dbaron, SimonSapin1
17:06:34 <Zakim> krit has rhauck
17:06:48 <SimonSapin> still on Zakim with the wrong nick…
17:07:01 <Bert> Scribe: Bert
17:07:28 <plinss> http://wiki.csswg.org/planning/tucson-2013?&#agenda
17:07:42 <teoli> teoli has joined #css
17:07:46 <Bert> Topic: Welcome Nick
17:07:58 <Bert> Nick wil not be at the ftf.
17:08:03 <Bert> Topic: Agenda ftf
17:08:23 <Bert> plinss: Please add topics to wiki
17:08:39 <Bert> ... Any questions, issues about ftf?
17:08:51 <smfr> smfr has changed the topic to: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jan/0557.html
17:08:59 <nvdbleek> zakim, mute me
17:09:00 <Zakim> nvdbleek should now be muted
17:09:08 <Bert> Topic: viewport units
17:09:19 <fantasai> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jan/0312.html
17:09:23 <Bert> fantasai: Seems a growing consensus on www-style.
17:10:02 <Bert> ... Generally you try to fit things in view;oort and don't want scroll.
17:10:07 <Zakim> +??P89
17:10:21 <Bert> ... If you *do* want to scroll, you can do 'overflow: scroll' to have scrollbars.
17:11:04 <Bert> ... Alternative is 'overflow: hidden' to be sure to not have scriollbars, but that has side effect of clipping in case things *do* overflow.
17:11:26 <Bert> ??: I agree with that
17:11:37 <Bert> plinss: Objections?
17:11:41 <sylvaing> s/??/Rossen
17:11:42 <fantasai> rossen agrees too
17:11:50 <fantasai> (there was someone else)
17:12:40 <TabAtkins_> TabAtkins_ has joined #css
17:12:49 <Bert> RESOLVED: viewport units in case of 'overflow:auto' are sized as if scrollbar is *not* present (even if they are)
17:13:16 <Bert> dbaron: Worth saying [???]
17:13:20 <Zakim> -hober
17:13:25 <Bert> SimonSapin:
17:13:27 <Zakim> + +1.832.797.aabb
17:13:30 <dbaron> s/[???]/something about overflow:scroll/
17:13:34 <TabAtkins_> zakim, aabb is me
17:13:34 <Zakim> +TabAtkins_; got it
17:13:39 <Bert> plinss: You mean horizontal scrolling?
17:14:05 <Bert> SimonSapin: with 100vh, will get overflow?
17:14:23 <Bert> rossen: with 100.1vh you will have scrollbars.
17:14:45 <SimonSapin> 100vw + lots of content vertically to trigger a vertical scrollbar
17:15:01 <SimonSapin> => horizontal scroll by the width of the scrollbar?
17:15:18 <Bert> plinss: Any objection now, after this explanation?
17:15:54 <fantasai> In case of 'overflow: scroll', scrollbars are accounted for in calculating viewport units
17:16:14 <Bert> plinss: When there is overflow:auto the units will be as if there is no scrollbar, but with 'overflow: scroll' the units *will* deduct the scrollbar.
17:16:15 <SimonSapin> ok, `overflow-y: scroll` would take care of my use case
17:16:15 <fantasai> (so that 100vh/100vw will not cause scrolling, just disabled scrollbars )
17:16:28 <Bert> Topic: Box Module
17:16:32 <sylvaing> could we have width:100% and width:100vw be different? Does that matter?
17:16:42 <Zakim> +[Apple]
17:16:43 <Bert> plinss: Question was if we want to update the WD.
17:16:48 <glenn> +Present glenn (IRC only)
17:16:51 <hober> Zakim, Apple is me
17:16:51 <Zakim> +hober; got it
17:17:07 <SimonSapin> sylvaing: I think it’s possible with `overflow: auto`
17:17:13 <SimonSapin> on the root
17:17:14 <Bert> bert: what was the discussion last week?
17:17:20 <Bert> plinss: No resolution last week.
17:17:30 <SimonSapin> s/sylvaing:/sylvaing,/
17:17:49 <antonp> +Present antonp (IRC only)
17:17:51 <sylvaing> SimonSapin, right. Just stating it looks like it could happen. I'm not sure it's a problem though.
17:17:59 <fantasai> Bert: Would like a new WD soon, because current is very old. Most issues listed in draft.
17:18:11 <fantasai> Bert: On the other hand the order of sections in the draft is in flux. It's chaos atm
17:18:28 <fantasai> Bert: Would like a few weeks for the editors to make sure that it is at least readable, I'm not sure that's the case at the moment
17:19:05 <fantasai> Bert: Started to look if all the issues were there. E.g. noticed some were mentioned 3 times
17:19:35 <fantasai> Bert: With a few days of work, could me much nicer draft than now. Not opposed to publishing now, but would be more readable with some time to clean it up a bit.
17:19:42 <Bert> bert: /me thanks fantasai
17:19:49 <jarek> jarek has joined #css
17:19:58 <fantasai> fantasai: I think we should defer to the editor (Bert) and let him decide when it's ready to republish
17:20:30 <fantasai> Bert: Maybe one week after F2F?
17:21:06 <tantek> tantek has joined #css
17:21:06 <cabanier> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/FXTF/rawfile/tip/compositing/index.html#cssbackgroundsyntax
17:21:17 <Bert> Topic: Compositing bg images
17:21:52 <Bert> cabanier: Q is if this is usful feature to pursue.
17:22:08 <Bert> ... It really belongs in BG & Borders.
17:22:17 <Bert> ... It is kind of hard in the Compositing spec.
17:22:50 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Good idea, the visual effect. I can't say what the imple cost is.
17:23:06 <Bert> ... Putting it in background4 spec may may make spec.
17:23:15 <Bert> cabanier: Yes, then can put it in shorthand.
17:23:27 <Bert> TabAtkins_: let it depend on which spec is faster.
17:23:39 <Bert> cabanier: Pretty simple in term sof implem cost.
17:24:27 <Bert> plinss: Only multiple background images of a single elt?
17:24:31 <Bert> cabanier: Yes.
17:24:36 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Cool.
17:25:10 <Bert> plinss: But if we ever want compos of bg with other elt, syntax shoul dnot preclude that.
17:25:28 <Bert> cabanier: Yes, we can add something. or another property later.
17:25:36 <Bert> dbaron: Curious about use cases.
17:25:47 <Bert> TabAtkins_: The use case sof compos and blen in general.
17:26:02 <Bert> ... I mght want to animate bgs together.
17:26:19 <Bert> cabanier: Some clouds, text that inherits what's behind it...
17:26:33 <Bert> ... designers can tell you much better what they want with it.
17:26:47 <Bert> plinss: Objections?
17:27:14 <Bert> RESOLVED: keep it in the spec for now.
17:27:41 <Bert> Topic: overlay value for overflow
17:27:53 <Zakim> +Tantek
17:27:55 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Don't know eher eit came from, but it is in the spec.
17:27:59 <tantek> zakim, mute tantek
17:27:59 <Zakim> Tantek should now be muted
17:28:10 <Bert> smfr: A feature that is no longer part of our browser.
17:28:23 <Bert> ... Should have been prefixed. And we don't want to standardize it.
17:28:39 <Bert> TabAtkins_: What arte you opposed to?
17:28:45 <Zakim> -TabAtkins_
17:28:49 <Bert> smfr: It is a user control, not an author control.
17:29:01 <Bert> dbaron: Agree with smfr
17:29:01 <tantek> agree with Simon as well
17:29:14 <TabAtkins_> Sorry, got bumped.
17:29:30 <Zakim> +TabAtkins_
17:30:00 <Zakim> -cabanier
17:30:18 <Bert> sylvaing: We have it in IE (?)
17:30:20 <cabanier> *sorry, I need to go*
17:30:47 <sylvaing> we expose auto-hide overlay scrollbars in IE10/Win8 as an overflow-style
17:30:48 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Avoid jumping text
17:31:01 <Bert> dbaron: And what if user has never seen an ovverlay scrollbar before?
17:31:12 <Bert> TabAtkins_: It looks exactly like a normal scrollbar.
17:31:14 <sylvaing> to the extent authors can MQ touch/mouse it may be interesting for them to pick a default as well
17:31:28 <tantek> not sure designing this feature in a telcon make sense?
17:31:48 <Bert> rossen: Only present in case of interaction. User will understand when he sees it.
17:32:15 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Chromw draw a normal scrollbar, it just overlaps. It looks weird anyway.
17:32:32 <Bert> ... But another way would be perfect fine as well.
17:32:49 <Bert> rossen: If the platform decides to do it, then that's what you get.
17:33:05 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Not a difficult problem for design.
17:33:22 <Bert> sylvaing: Do people do these scrollbars, e.g., with jQuery?
17:33:27 <Bert> TabAtkins_: I don't know.
17:33:42 <teoli_> teoli_ has joined #css
17:33:57 <Bert> smfr: We don't allow to style scrollbars, they look like traditonal scrollbars on Mac.
17:34:39 <Bert> smfr: If the user hovers near the edge, the scrollbar will appear. Authors should be able to know if such scrollbars are used, maybe a Media Query.
17:34:57 <Bert> fantasai: 'overflow: scroll' makes sure there is a scrollbar.
17:35:11 <Bert> TabAtkins_: People don;'t liek scrollbars, don 't use ''scroll'
17:35:46 <Bert> fantasai: Overlay scrollbars are great. All platforms should just use them.
17:35:54 <tantek> if scrollbars are ugly, why not just use overflow:hidden?
17:36:10 <smfr> tantek: overflow:hidden prevents user scrolling
17:36:26 <Bert> glenn: Maybe spec scrollbars that somehow don't obscure content.
17:36:40 <tantek> smfr - perhaps that's the answer then - overflow:hidden-scroll
17:36:48 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Every platform that has overlay scrollbars has done something like that.
17:36:49 <tantek> hide the scrollbars, but allow scrolling
17:36:56 <tantek> (native apps seem to do this)
17:36:57 <fantasai> wrt smfr's mq idea, mq should be for how wide the scrollbars are
17:37:09 <Bert> glenn: But overlay scrollbars are hidden. Maybe use a partial transparency instead.
17:37:09 <tantek> (which should be sufficient a use case to justify overflow:hidden-scroll )
17:37:21 <sylvaing> tantek, this is what iOS and Win8 do. no scrollbar until you start moving around
17:37:25 <tantek> (they don't even bother to show overlay scrollbars, they just show no scrolling UI, but allow touch scrolling)
17:37:38 <fantasai> tantek, not sure what you mean. I don't have a scroll wheel, how exactly am I supposed to scroll a window without scrollbars?
17:37:40 <Bert> TabAtkins_: I get your point.
17:37:53 <tantek> sylvaing - I'm talking about native apps (e.g. iOS) which don't even show a scrollbars.
17:38:04 <Bert> smfr: [something about google site]
17:38:11 <tantek> fantasai - touch, page up page down, etc. native apps do this today on mobile.
17:38:37 <Bert> plinss: General pricniple is also to not let authors change the fundamental UI of a platform.
17:38:53 <Bert> Topic: syntax issues
17:38:59 <fantasai> tantek, that's not at all obvious, especially when it's a scroll view inside the page rather than the main viewport
17:39:13 <Bert> SimonSapin: q what is a ASCII character.
17:39:22 <tantek> fantasai - it doesn't work in all cases, just like not all color/bg combinations work in all cases
17:39:42 <tantek> "not at all obvious" in some cases is never an argument against a style feature - that's a strawman.
17:39:46 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Yes, change it to 7F. Should not matter. Nobody uses 7F-9F
17:39:58 <Bert> dbaron: is nbsp inthe range?
17:40:02 <fantasai> tantek, sorry, I don't think you are making any sense
17:40:04 <tantek> … just as color/bg combinations do NOT work in all cases
17:40:08 <Bert> TabAtkins_: No, that is the 1st character out of that range.
17:40:24 <dbaron> dbaron: I'm ok with it; changing Firefox is relatively straightforward.
17:40:25 <oyvind> nbsp is a0
17:40:27 <tantek> fantasai - just because you can come up with a confusing example (strawman) doesn't negate the utility of a feature.
17:40:41 <BradK> Bert, I think you we're attributing my comments to Glenn.
17:41:04 <fantasai> BradK, how far back?
17:41:10 <Bert> bert: is this an errata for 2.1?
17:41:16 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Yes, should be.
17:41:16 <glenn> s/glenn: But/BradK/
17:41:31 <BradK> In the overlay scroll bar stuff
17:41:36 <Bert> RESOLVED: non-ascii starts at 0x80
17:41:39 <glenn> s/glenn: Maybe/BradK: Maybe/
17:42:01 <Rossen> Rossen has joined #css
17:42:02 <Bert> ACTION bert: add errata to 2.1 about non-ascii from 0x80
17:42:02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-529 - Add errata to 2.1 about non-ascii from 0x80 [on Bert Bos - due 2013-02-06].
17:42:29 <glenn> s/BradK overlay/BradK: But overlay/
17:42:41 <glenn> rrsagent, pointer
17:42:41 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2013/01/30-css-irc#T17-42-41
17:42:44 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Some special characters are now allowed instead of undefined. So may have effect on parsers.
17:42:50 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
17:42:51 <Zakim> -??P89
17:43:04 <Rossen> Zakim, Microsoft is me
17:43:04 <Zakim> +Rossen; got it
17:43:28 <Bert> ... But another issue: 2.1 grammar allowed empty selector.
17:43:31 <SimonSapin> TabAtkins: you actually use an "empty selector" in "parse a declaration block"
17:43:41 <SimonSapin> though not that selector is not parsed
17:43:51 <Bert> ... I disallowed that in 3.
17:44:03 <Bert> bert: What does "not allow it mean"?
17:44:19 <Bert> TabAtkins_: It's either a syntax or a semantics error.
17:44:33 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Should not affect any use in browsers.
17:44:55 <drublic> drublic has joined #css
17:45:05 <Bert> bert: then I say do it as it was: allow in the syntax, it just doesn't match anything.
17:45:18 <SimonSapin> 2.1 allows it
17:45:19 <Bert> plinss: Seems reasonable to not disallow it.
17:45:30 <Bert> ... Maybe we want it in the OM and add a selector by script later.
17:45:35 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Potentially.
17:45:49 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Isn't selector readonly?
17:46:06 <Bert> SimonSapin: Empty selector prob. doens't show up in the OM.
17:46:18 <Bert> plinss: Just leave it open for the future.
17:46:43 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Syntax error resynchs at closing '}'
17:46:56 <oyvind> selectorText is read/write
17:47:19 <Bert> ... (Well, tiny thing. Doesn't matter.)
17:47:28 <Bert> plinss: Othe rgrammar issues?
17:47:37 <Bert> TabAtkins_: Nothing that needs WG attention right now.
17:47:45 <Bert> plinss: Other topics?
17:47:48 <SimonSapin> https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/95
17:48:03 <SimonSapin> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Feb/0562.html
17:48:07 <Bert> SimonSapin: I'd like a feature in @page: multiple selectors with a comma.
17:48:28 <Zakim> +Lea
17:48:28 <Bert> TabAtkins_: That seems like it was an oversight... See no reason to disallow.
17:48:32 <Bert> plinss: Objections?
17:48:54 <Bert> RESOLVED: allow commas in @page rules.
17:49:02 <SimonSapin> in page selectors
17:49:15 <Bert> s/rules/selectors/
17:49:21 <Zakim> -TabAtkins_
17:49:22 <Zakim> -krit
17:49:23 <Zakim> -BradK
17:49:24 <Bert> ADJOURNED
17:49:24 <Zakim> -smfr
17:49:24 <Zakim> -SylvaIng
17:49:24 <Zakim> -hober
17:49:26 <Zakim> -Rossen
17:49:26 <Zakim> -Tantek
17:49:27 <Zakim> -dbaron
17:49:27 <Zakim> -leif
17:49:29 <Zakim> -darktears
17:49:29 <Zakim> -SimonSapin1
17:49:30 <Zakim> -Lea
17:49:31 <Zakim> -plinss
17:49:33 <Zakim> -nvdbleek
17:49:34 <Zakim> -fantasai
17:49:38 <Zakim> -Bert
17:49:39 <Zakim> Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has ended
17:49:39 <Zakim> Attendees were darktears, nvdbleek, +1.858.354.aaaa, plinss, hober, stearns, SylvaIng, BradK, rhauck, leif, smfr, fantasai, cabanier, Bert, dbaron, SimonSapin1, +1.832.797.aabb,
17:49:39 <Zakim> ... TabAtkins_, Tantek, Rossen, Lea
17:51:16 <jarek_> jarek_ has joined #css
18:20:28 <teoli> teoli has joined #css
18:31:48 <jarek> jarek has joined #css
18:47:40 <tantek> tantek has joined #css
18:48:25 <SimonSapin> SimonSapin has joined #css
19:02:38 <lmclister> lmclister has joined #css
19:05:41 <nvdbleek> nvdbleek has joined #css
19:13:40 <tantek> tantek has joined #css
19:42:58 <teoli> teoli has joined #css
19:56:11 <teoli_> teoli_ has joined #css
20:02:10 <Zakim> Zakim has left #css
20:02:20 <teoli> teoli has joined #css
20:07:23 <teoli_> teoli_ has joined #css
20:18:17 <teoli> teoli has joined #css
20:45:24 <teoli_> teoli_ has joined #css
21:17:05 <guy> guy has joined #css
21:34:33 <dbaron> dbaron has joined #css
21:45:31 <drublic> drublic has joined #css
22:10:22 <antonp> antonp has joined #css
22:58:06 <dbaron> dbaron has joined #css
23:43:30 <tantek> tantek has joined #css