SVG Working Group Teleconference -- 09 Oct 2014

<trackbot> Date: 09 October 2014

I proposed another agenda on the agenda page

"Updating the old specs to make clear SVG 2 is the latest (Cyril)"

<scribe> scribe: Cyril

<scribe> scribeNick: Cyril

TTML review

ed: this is a reminder that you should review
... since it covers images, it might be worth to see if SVg images can be used

Cyril: image support comes from SMPTE
... not sure it has SVG support, I doubt
... I will review it but may not have any comment

ed: my comment would be just a question related to the use of SVG, that's it

Cyril: one question worth looking at would be to see if TTML to SVG could be done

<scribe> ACTION: Cyril to review the TTML WD and send comments to the TTWG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-svg-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-3671 - Review the ttml wd and send comments to the ttwg [on Cyril Concolato - due 2014-10-16].

content model of gradient stops

ed: came up in a code review for blink
... SVG 2 drafts says that any paint server is allowed in a stop
... this may or not make sense

<ed> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2014Oct/0003.html

ed: this is a change from SVG 1.1
... it's a little bit confusing to have gradients or patterns in stops

Cyril: is it related to solid color ?

ed: maybe

<ChrisL> I don't see a benefit to gradients in stops

ed: but more related to Brian changes regarding the child keywords for fill and stroke properties

birtles: I can't rememer exactly, doesn't feel so important, happy to drop that

nikos: meshrow also includes paint servers
... that seems wrong as well

Tav: yes

birtles: with meshrow it might make more sense, you could specify and inherit

Tav: meshrow is a container for meshpatches

birtles: can mesh patches have paint servers

nikos: no

birtles: then it does not make sense

<ed> https://svgwg.org/svg2-draft/single-page.html#pservers-GradientStops

ed: meshrow, stop, what else ?
... other elements that should not have paint servers as children ?

Tav: mesh patches or coons patches ?
... do they allow that ?

nikos: mesh patch doesn't

birtles: I probably did a search/replace for fill and allowed child paint servers

<ed> meshGradient?

<ChrisL> silverlight did the same thing, paint servers as children of what they were painting

ChrisL: solidColor shouldn't allow any paint server

<ChrisL> things restricted to solid fills should not allow other types of paint server though

<birtles> (the reasoning was anything that allows 'fill' as a presentation attribute should allow the 'child' keyword, and hence should allow paint servers in its content model... but that might not be such a great idea)

nikos: it seems useful when you have href and you can inherit values from the paint server

Tav: the only case is when you use solid paints, but that's probably not important

nikos: but even that case doesn't work for mesh row

birtles: I haven't even updated the definition of the paint servers to allow the child keyword
... not so useful yet

ed: we should update the spec so that it's describing the truth

<scribe> ACTION: Brian to update the content model for elements using paint servers (stop, mesh row, mesh patch) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-svg-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-3672 - Update the content model for elements using paint servers (stop, mesh row, mesh patch) [on Brian Birtles - due 2014-10-16].

F2F

<ed> https://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/F2F/TPAC_2014/Agenda_proposals

ed: reminder that you should add your agenda items for the F2F
... I moved Tav's item to the FX
... text on a shape: is it FX or SVG?

Tav: FX
... image rendering should be discussed in FX too

Cyril: is the FX meeting the 1st or 2nd day

ed: not decided, I'd prefer the first day

ChrisL: we had a request from another group to meet on the first day

ed: my idea is to have FX on the afternoon of the 1st day
... I need to confirm with CSS
... I don't want to waste people's time, I'd like to have a solid list of topics for FX
... so please add your topics
... we had another request with accessibility to meeting in the morning 11AM on the thursday
... if no objection, I'll say yes

ChrisL: sounds good, 11AM to 1PM
... otherwise it'd be brief

<ed> proposal from Janina: "Thursday, October 30, from 11:15 AM until approx 11:45-Noon."

richardschwerdtfeger: 45 minutes you said ?
... really short

ChrisL: we have accessibility in the Charter
... that seems a good opportunity to start taht

<ChrisL> two new deliverables

ed: I'd suggest we'll meet earlier

ChrisL: 10 to 12 would be good

<ed> ok, will respond

SVG Accessibility TF Work Statement

<ed> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/svg-a11y-tf/work-statement

ChrisL: I sent comments yesterday
... there is only one deliverable listed while we have 2
... contradictory text that has not been removed
... mostly fine
... Janina said it's ok
... we can say we approve it when we receive the update
... but that document is less important than the charter
... the charter needs to have 5% of member's approval

richardschwerdtfeger: did IBM vote yet?

nikos: what about Canon ?

ChrisL: Canon have not, IBM have
... Mozilla have not either

<ChrisL> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/svg2014/

<ChrisL> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/2014/charter

richardschwerdtfeger: what about Oracle?

ChrisL: not yet responded

richardschwerdtfeger: I'll ask them

Update old specs

<ed> Cyril: ppl are complaining which is the latest spec, between whatwg, github and so on

<ed> ... ppl were even wondering on www-svg if svg2 is a continuation of svg1.1 or not

Cyril: we should add text to old specs saying that SVG 2 is the latest version

ChrisL: good idea

ed: heycam had an action related I think

ChrisL: you are asking for a republication of those documents
... we can do those sorts of things

Cyril: yes

<ed> https://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/3506 was the action on heycam

ChrisL: I can do it

<scribe> ACTION: ChrisL to prepare wording for updating the old specs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-svg-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-3673 - Prepare wording for updating the old specs [on Chris Lilley - due 2014-10-16].

ChrisL: not sure it will be ready before the publishing moratorium

<ChrisL> assume this covers svg 1.0, svg 1.1se, svg tiny and svg basic and svgt1.2

<ed> http://www.w3.org/2013/06/13-svg-minutes.html#item02

ed: heycam's action was on SVG color and pagination
... it's not the same action

ChrisL: I can do that too

- DRAFT -

SVG Working Group Teleconference

09 Oct 2014

Attendees

Contents

TTML review

content model of gradient stops

F2F

SVG Accessibility TF Work Statement

Update old specs

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output