16:44:55 RRSAgent has joined #css 16:44:55 logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/12/17-css-irc 16:45:04 Zakim has joined #css 16:45:15 zakim, this will be style 16:45:15 ok, plinss; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 15 minutes 16:48:15 Rossen___ has joined #css 16:49:20 dbaron has joined #css 16:51:59 bcampbell has joined #css 16:52:40 dael has joined #css 16:56:43 Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started 16:56:49 +dael 16:57:07 ScribeNick: dael 16:57:22 +plinss 16:57:33 adenilson has joined #css 16:57:48 + +1.479.764.aaaa 16:57:55 Zakim, I am aaaa 16:57:55 +Florian; got it 16:58:14 tantek has joined #css 16:58:39 gregwhitworth has joined #css 16:59:07 + +1.415.832.aabb 16:59:08 +??P29 16:59:16 Zakim, ??P29 is me. 16:59:17 +adenilson; got it 16:59:17 + +1.907.315.aacc 16:59:19 Zakim, aabb is me 16:59:19 +sgalineau; got it 16:59:33 + +1.805.453.aadd 16:59:38 +SteveZ 16:59:44 Zakim, 1.907.315.aacc is me 16:59:44 sorry, gregwhitworth, I do not recognize a party named '1.907.315.aacc' 17:00:00 Zakim, +1.907.315.aacc is me 17:00:02 +dauwhe 17:00:02 +gregwhitworth; got it 17:00:02 murakami has joined #css 17:00:32 good morning #css - I will be IRC only til ~9:15 PST 17:00:59 +??P36 17:01:03 MaRakow has joined #CSS 17:01:06 Zakim, ??P36 is me 17:01:06 +SimonSapin; got it 17:01:10 +??P38 17:01:30 +[Microsoft] 17:01:31 smfr has joined #css 17:01:33 KeshavP has joined #CSS 17:01:34 +Stearns 17:01:43 -??P38 17:02:12 BradK has joined #CSS 17:02:18 emeyer has joined #css 17:02:26 + +1.206.992.aaee 17:02:41 +smfr 17:02:42 +BradK 17:02:54 zakim, aaee is me 17:02:54 +MaRakow; got it 17:03:42 +??P38 17:03:50 +[Microsoft.a] 17:03:54 +[IPcaller] 17:03:57 zakim, ??P38 is me 17:03:57 +murakami; got it 17:04:05 zakim, Microsoft.a is me 17:04:05 +Rossen___; got it 17:04:10 aadd is me 17:04:15 +[IPcaller.a] 17:04:24 zakim, aadd is bcampbell 17:04:24 +bcampbell; got it 17:04:25 Zakim, IPcaller.a is me 17:04:26 +fantasai; got it 17:04:29 bkardell_ has joined #css 17:04:32 Zakim, code 17:04:32 I don't understand 'code', antonp 17:04:33 Good morning everyone! 17:04:43 good morning 17:04:55 Mornin' 17:05:13 plinss: Let's get started. 17:05:22 plinss: I got the additional items from fantasai and sgalineau 17:05:34 +??P46 17:05:40 Rossen___: I have another about the inagural meeting about the whatever-its-called taskforce 17:05:40 +dbaron 17:05:54 Zakim, ??P46 is me 17:05:54 +antonp; got it 17:06:13 Rossen___: Just quick update, I have a number of replies. The two days before the CSS F2F works for everyone. We will hold the meeting a Sydney on Feb 7 and 8 which is a Sat and Sun. 17:06:31 +TabAtkins 17:06:53 Rossen___: shans_ will follow-up with exact location, but it will prob be the same place. In the meantime we've resolved on a name, so we'll create a ML and wiki soon. It'll be similar to CSS meetings. 17:07:00 Florian - re: CSS3-UI pending edits - planning to do a block this week as other tasks have quieted down. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Dec/0201.html 17:07:12 plinss: I'll ask about the domain. You can start on the extf name and we'll carry over. 17:07:21 plinss: Do we know where CSS is meeting in Sydney yet? 17:07:23 ?+ 17:07:29 TabAtkins: It's in the Sydney office. 17:07:32 andreyr has joined #css 17:07:35 Rossen___: I thought it was on the wiki. 17:07:37 +? 17:07:42 plinss: I looked, but maybe I missed it. 17:07:50 TabAtkins: It's all on one line that says place. 17:07:53 https://wiki.csswg.org/planning/sydney-2015 , under "Place" 17:07:55 Florian - please don't worry about writing patches for the simple edits, it's easier for me to just do edits directly than deal with all the machinations of applying patches. 17:07:56 Rossen___: Has anyone been to the office? 17:08:14 TabAtkins: Yeah. I can rec any of the hotels in China Town. Central business is maybe 15 min walk, but has nice hotels. 17:08:20 Rossen___: Central is to the east? 17:08:27 TabAtkins: Yes. Chinatown is to the south. 17:08:34 Rossen___: Either is close enough to walk? 17:08:38 TabAtkins: Yeah. 17:08:46 plinss: If you can get actual names that would help. 17:08:51 Topic: Box Alignment 17:08:57 fantasai: Can you paste the link? 17:08:59 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Dec/0267.html 17:09:36 fantasai: The issue is in the previous draft we didn't let stretch combine with overflow. The issue is that this doesn't make sense because stretch doesn't respond to the keywords. 17:09:38 I tried to jump in there but couldnt ... trying to find out if we will be opening up WebRTC or a conf line for that inaugural meeting 17:10:16 I'm assuming "'true'/'self'" should be "'true'/'safe'" in the message? 17:10:17 fantasai: stretch is more sim to content-distribution keywords. On content-alignment they can't combine with overflow position keywords. You can have a fallback alignment which can combine, but if you just just specify stretch there is no meaning. 17:10:50 fantasai: TabAtkins checked in with some changes to change how things are organized and folded stretch in and it now means you can combine true and safe with stretch in align-self. 17:11:01 +Alex 17:11:05 fantasai: Do we revert that aspect, or do we want to allow this, bt only for align-self 17:11:59 TabAtkins: And what safe/true do, for a couple of the alignment prop if you do align-self it does, but if it's bigger it oes outside and that might make it go outside scrollable. we made these so that you can say don't do whatever alignment you were going to do, just allow the start alignment. 17:12:46 TabAtkins: Stretch got it in there, it's always going to be safe anyoen, but there are a few other values like start that can't be un-safe. It doesn't do anything to have safe, but it allows it because calling out those things would make the grammar more complex. 17:13:03 TabAtkins: This happened to make safe and true apply and it doesn't do anything. That's what fantasai is objecting to. 17:13:17 fantasai: I don't think the grammar is more complex, it par content property more. 17:13:20 /me would rather have complicated grammar than meaningless values. 17:13:27 fantasai: TabAtkins and I don't agree, so you all need an opinion. 17:13:41 plinss: That you can't scroll in opp direction is a bug and we should fix that. 17:13:50 TabAtkins: Yes, but for now that's not the question. 17:14:25 dbaron: I think there's decent arguments on both sides. I can see authors having a way of gen values for these prop where you'd rather not deal with not producing safe or true. It also seems odd to have values that don't do anything 17:14:55 fantasai: Another issue is in the future we might want fallback for stretch keyword in which case the grammar doesn't work the way it's supposed it. It doesn't work in the way it does with content-alignment 17:15:09 TabAtkins: We'd be in the same boat as align-content properties. 17:15:30 I have a slight preference for not allowing a meaningless combination of keywords 17:15:55 TabAtkins: fantasai one thing I realized is the baseline that don't alow safe/true will need it. The last-basseline defaults to end so you need to know if it's safe or true. We need to apply those to baseline so that would leave stretch as the only one without. 17:16:09 fantasai: But in the baseline we have 4 that don't including stretch. We need consitant 17:16:29 TabAtkins: Or we can loosen on the other side. It won't do anything because it will default to reasonable things. 17:16:42 fantasai: We need to have someone else speak up so we're going to be quiet for 30 sec 17:17:30 + +1.201.892.aaff 17:17:30 I'm with dbaron 17:17:33 I would like more time 17:17:36 plinss: We have 4 people with opinions and we're evenly split. 17:17:37 (Sorry, still trying to understand the issue. :-( ) 17:17:59 gregwhitworth: I'd echo dbaron. There's good arguements on both sides, it's difficult to pull the trigger on one. 17:18:44 Rossen___: Should we wait until next week. I'm in the same group as dbaron. I haven't had a chance to review and absorb so I can have an opinion. It's important enough that we shouldn't just resolve for progress. I suggest doing this over mail. We can have a deadline for mail. 17:18:52 dael: s/gregwhitworth/bkardell_ 17:19:29 fantasai: We want to pub tomorrow b/c that's the last publish for end of year. I propose we revert the syntax to the old text, publish the spec tomorrow, and keep this on the telecon agenda. 17:19:41 fantasai: I'd like the published and I'm okay to publish and add later. 17:19:49 Rossen___: That sounds good if TabAtkins doesn't object. 17:19:50 this sounds p reasonable 17:19:55 TabAtkins: I'll go with it. 17:20:01 +1 17:20:05 plinss: I rec thaty ou revert and add an issue? 17:20:20 TabAtkins: We'll need to since we have to apply the baseline. We'll pop something in there. 17:20:27 plinss: Everyone okay with pub the WD? 17:20:49 RESOLVED: Publish a new WD that doesn't have the changes, but instead has an issue 17:21:02 Topic: WD of Inline Layout 17:21:17 fantasai: There was an issue about floats, I don't know if we need to deal with that. Are we deferring? 17:21:28 dauwhe: I think so. ChrisL has already started the process. 17:21:36 fantasai: Okay. We'd like to pub a WD. 17:21:58 ??: Now that I've reviewed, I think it has some issues, but it's a WD and it's going in the right dir so go ahead. 17:22:01 plinss: Obj? 17:22:09 RESOLVED: Publish Inline Layout WD 17:22:09 s/??/florian/ 17:22:20 Topic: Counter Styles to CR 17:22:41 s/I think it has some issues/I've sent some comments about it, some of which have been addressed already/ 17:22:53 TabAtkins: I haven't written the new DoC. There was one comment during LC period. It was a comment asking us to add the additional counter styles impl by at least two browsers. Made sense so I did so. 17:23:20 TabAtkins: They were present in the old draft, we had removed them, I added them back and that was it. I've had no other comments to I believe it's stable. 17:23:31 Florian: I'd echo fantasai comment, but yeah. 17:23:33 plinss: obj? 17:23:40 RESOLVED: Take Counter Styles to CR 17:23:47 plinss: Do we have tests for the new ones? 17:24:03 TabAtkins: I'm not sure if the existing tests do, but it's trivial to adjust so that can be done. 17:24:11 plinss: That would be good. Standard CR period? 17:24:14 TabAtkins: Yeah. 17:24:38 Topic: findRule/deleteRule 17:25:12 sylvaing: Last time we talked we agreed to spec what browsers do as much as possible with the warning about a new API. For these two methods, the key job is to define the key arguement, which is a keyrame selector 17:25:25 sylvaing: That can be sinlge value, % value or from/to keyword 17:25:58 sylvaing: That works fine across browsers. One thing we need to agree on is if multi rules match your selector, which do you return. Webkit, Blink and IE return the first, Gecko does the last. 17:26:22 TabAtkins: Other way around, I think. The bug Timothy Lo (sp?) said we switched to last. 17:26:26 sylvaing: Let me check. 17:26:31 Rossen___: Can you paste the test? 17:26:34 http://jsbin.com/jelili/5/edit?html,css,js,console 17:26:34 sylvaing: Yeah. 17:26:52 https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=438387 17:27:03 TabAtkins: Here's the bug that said we switched. 17:27:15 sgalineau: The build I had returns first. So that means we have 2 doing each. 17:27:22 TabAtkins: We had 2 before, we're now 3 to one. 17:27:27 sgalineau: I don't think so. 17:27:41 TabAtkins: That mplies we previously were 3 to 1 17:27:47 sgalineau: I have 3 to 1 on doing it first. 17:28:14 sgalineau: Point is...is there a good reason to pick one or the other? We need to pick. I think the last made most sense. 17:28:26 +??P15 17:28:28 sgalineau: Now that we cascade the benefit isn't asobvious to using last. 17:28:39 TabAtkins: I'm in favor of sticking to last since we switched. 17:29:05 dbaron: The code comment says, well, no it doesn't say why. It just says last instead of first and ref www-style posts. 17:29:15 -adenilson 17:29:19 sgalineau: It used to be the last one had the effect so it was reasonable at some point. 17:29:29 dbaron: I think the internt was the last one was the winning one. 17:29:30 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Apr/0037.html 17:29:44 +??P24 17:29:45 sgalineau: If we do the last, does anyone from Apple or Microsoft object to changing? 17:29:54 Zakim, ??P24 is me. 17:29:54 +adenilson; got it 17:29:56 TabAtkins: In your earlier e-mail you said IE was returning the last. 17:30:02 -adenilson 17:30:06 sgalineau: That was wrong. I tried remote IE and it did first. 17:30:28 sgalineau: The fact they can swing, I think we can change without distroying anything. I'm happy with doing last. 17:30:32 Zakim, ??P15 is me 17:30:32 +tantek; got it 17:30:36 Zakim, mute me 17:30:36 tantek should now be muted 17:30:44 Rossen___: I wouldn't say I'm excited, but if we have to switch we still have a chance. What about webkit? 17:30:51 ??: We're fine switching 17:31:02 s/??/smfr/ 17:31:07 RESOLVED: findRul and deleteRule will apply to the last keyframe with a specified valeu 17:31:09 (that resolution is no change to spec) 17:31:25 sorry, accidentally pressed 6, like, a million times. 17:31:33 +??P24 17:31:40 sgalineau: When you spec value, what browsers agree on is the number and order must match the selector you agree on. 17:31:47 Zakim, ??P24 is me. 17:31:47 +adenilson; got it 17:32:18 +1, that's lame 17:32:21 sgalineau: So are we okay with requiring the same order and the interop today is that some browsrs aren't happy if you have spaces in there. You have to put your value without spaces. I think we should get ride of that. 17:32:25 Gecko converts the selector to an array of floats and then tests deep equality on the arrays 17:32:55 sgalineau: You need to know the values and query in the same order. So if the stylesheet says 50%,75% you need to go in that order. Is that are problem, or is it okay? That'st he interop today. 17:33:43 sgalineau: The main issue is the whitespace. everyone agrees that the order mustmatch. The whitespace is the only wierdness. I haven't tried escaping and whatnot. 17:33:54 dbaron: Is there interop on from and to matchin 0% and 100%? 17:33:57 sgalineau: Yes. 17:34:04 dbaron: And 100% matchin 100.0%? 17:34:08 sgalineau: Good question. 17:34:27 dbaron: Gecko converts to an array of floats and does testing on the arrays. That's how we handle both conversions. 17:34:49 smfr: I'd prefer we ignore whitespace which would be a change for webkit, but I think it's fine. 17:34:55 sgalineau: So the user does the trimming? 17:35:11 smfr: Basically whitespace is ignored or normalized. I think that would match expectations? 17:35:20 plinss: And normallizing float numbers? 17:35:26 sgalineau: It works in Chrome, I can check. 17:35:39 smfr: Webkit does it via string, so I suspect we would fail. I'd be okay changing that. 17:35:59 sgalineau: Webkit and Blink are happy with 100.0. I haven't tried FF. It's reasonable. 17:36:30 And 100% = 99.999999999999%? 17:36:33 sgalineau: So we're saying for multi-value...for sinlge value it's matching of number values. For multi value we expect the number and order of values to match, but whitespace will be trimmed by browser. 17:36:48 sgalineau: As long as number and order is good, you'll get the last rule that matches. 17:36:53 sounds good to me 17:37:11 RESOLVED: For multi value we expect the number and order of values to match, but whitespace will be trimmed by browser. As long as number and order is good, you'll get the last rule that matches. 17:37:18 zakim, unmute me 17:37:18 tantek should no longer be muted 17:37:20 Topic: CSS3 UI pending edits 17:37:48 Florian: tantek said on IRC that he'd resolve them. Also we made a comment as to if I should write patches. I work better if I work on an issue until it's over. 17:37:59 tantek: That's what the issues list is for. I keep notes on the wiki. 17:38:15 Florian: So I'm not sure if you want me to do less...? 17:38:28 tantek: I won't use patches for simple things because it's faster to make edits directly 17:38:49 plinss: Lets not get into the weeds of editing techniques. It sounds like you have how to do the eidts done worked out. 17:38:56 tantek: I can get a big block done in the next week. 17:39:07 Florian: Since there's a patch for everything it shouldn't take long. 17:39:18 tantek: Well, the patches do take long. 17:39:24 plinss: You can sort that out offline 17:39:32 Florian: I jsut want to make sure we keep making progress. 17:39:50 Florian: We've been making a lot of progress on the telecons. I don't want to bring this up again since it's holding me up. 17:40:00 tantek: I think we went over it, so I don't know what else to discuss. 17:40:08 plinss: I think Florian wants a commitment to keep up on edits. 17:40:45 Florian: I think that 5 of 23ish things are done. I'm hoping it's not tied up too much in the future. To be honest, I don't know why you don't like me doing them. In the past you said you'd do them and it wouldn't hold me up. 17:40:54 tantek: I typically edit in bursts. I'll get to a block this week. 17:41:18 plinss: I think when we discussed offline at TPAC, we just wanted to set a reasonable timeframe of something like 2 weeks. I think that's the expectation. 17:41:22 tantek: lright. 17:41:28 Topic: Flexbox and Tabbing 17:41:40 zakim, mute me 17:41:40 tantek should now be muted 17:42:01 bcampbell: Thanks to everyone that's been helping me. The problem we've been having is when visual order changes the tab order is following and there's a bu in mozilla realing with residual order. 17:42:47 bcampbell: In a discussion, especially for screen reader, it surprisde me screen readers would like to follow the visual order instead of from the DOM. So the tab order, I was prop that it followed the visual order. 17:43:12 bcampbell: The suggested wording is basically saying that rather than saying the order doesn't effect the default, we say that it does effect the order 17:43:23 ChrisL has joined #css 17:44:13 +ChrisL 17:44:17 zakim, mute me 17:44:17 ChrisL should now be muted 17:44:20 fantasai: The reason the spec is how it is currently it because in cases you want the order different and it's better different, this makes it possible. If you always follow visual, you can't have a different order unless you futz with your layout. So if you have mobile and desktop layout and you have desktop side by side, but the logical order matches mobile, you want tab to follow mobile 17:45:16 fantasai: You don't want to just left ot right because that visually looked better. You don't want to follow in that case. There's another case where someone is using visual to make changes that should have been at the source level. If you tie them together you can't split. I can see that maybe it's better becaue all the pages are terrible, but are we giving something up? 17:45:31 fantasai: Should we never follow the source order or is it peole write bad pages? 17:45:41 bcampbell: That's a good question and a long one. 17:46:03 rrsagent, here 17:46:03 See http://www.w3.org/2014/12/17-css-irc#T17-46-03 17:46:20 rrsagent, make logs public 17:46:25 fantasai^: Are you saying that we should always follow the visual order on principle and it's bad to do otherwise, or are you saying that we should follow the visual order because there are too many bad pages and we should accommodate those at the expense of good pages? 17:46:29 bcampbell: I think the suggestion is that, and I'd like to see an ex of what you talked about, we're talking about the majority of the cases that are keyboard only. I think the may be the weakness regarding how are the majority using flexbox andjust not knowing. 17:47:12 +q 17:47:28 bcampbell: Having information that using flexbox for mobile and we're causing an issue, I'd like to bring that evidence back to th group. THe way I'm seeing it right now, they're asking for the same exp generally for web pages. This allows nav-index to fall away, but to change after that point we have to use tab index and you're forcing someone to use tab-index through the page. 17:48:23 fantasai: So an ex would be something like the WG homepage where there's a title, an intro paragraph, and then quick links to things you'd want to hit fast and then we have short articles. We present linearly. When you increase wage width, we put the quicklines side-by0side on the left becausae that looked better. 17:48:59 fantasai: in this case you're saying tab order would do links and then intro para even though the logical order is the opposite. We use order because you want this on the left even though the sourcce order is different. 17:49:22 emeyer has joined #css 17:49:46 fantasai: I don't htink you'll see this in colum flexbox often, but left ot right for a viual person, there isn't quite as strong of a this comes first. Sometimes these are equally interesting. Or here's the stuff on the side that comes first, but I'll color it differently to make it less interesting. 17:49:50 Rossen___: I have a few things. 17:49:56 s/interesting/emphasized/ 17:50:42 Rossen___: What fantasai is explaining based on our experience with windows store that use grid and flex to control application layout. What we've seen and the feedback we've recieved, controlling tabbing or mag and new related apps, the visual order isn't nec what's desired. 17:51:08 zakim, unmute me 17:51:08 tantek should no longer be muted 17:51:10 bcampbell: Here's the layout I was talking about: http://csswg.inkedblade.net/staging/redesign/divya/ 17:51:17 Rossen___: So if you have sections nad usb sections, you want to nav between the sections. So you have business, sport, etc before you tab inside a section. If you only have visual order you have to go through all the business before you get to sport. 17:51:36 Rossen___: I would strongly suggest that you take that feedback/this kind of feedback back. 17:52:06 having to tab throughh all ityems of a list is even more annoying 17:52:07 bcampbell: Isn't that a huge problem for a keyboard user? If you're jumping from section header to section header and not going into the sections to interact. The keyboard only user... 17:52:17 zakim, unmute me 17:52:19 ChrisL should no longer be muted 17:52:23 q+ 17:52:27 ack Rossen___ 17:52:34 q+ 17:52:53 Rossen___: You can always...this is somewhat in the hands of the app. If the only thing you use for nav is the tab key, which is hardly ever the case, this makes sense. But there's also the direction keys where this hub selection makes sense. 17:53:50 bcampbell: I've seen a lot like this and this is a major challange right now. You have powerful shortcuts and you have an advantage over a keyboard user. So you're saying each section has a header, you have to do some code to get the person into a section. It's another facet of keyboard use. I understand what you're saying and I'd like to research more 17:53:54 q- 17:54:18 bcampbell: I'd really want to understand the impact of the responciveness of flexbox and when we're trapping peole into a particular flow if we flip this as suggested. 17:54:26 bcampbell: (That page responds to media queries. Try resizing it very large/very small.) 17:54:31 bcampbell: I'd like to keep the convo going and maybe bring it up in the next meeting. 17:55:16 Rossen___: I can point you to come windows apps that use complex layout that use flex and grid and frag content with regions where you'll have even more challanges. There hass been a lot of qork done on our end and I believe the prop that you have will be quite limiting. 17:55:21 bcampbell, The example here in Flexbox shows the use of reordering a column flexbox in an illogical way (pulling an image up above its header): http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox/#overview 17:55:36 bcampbell: OK. I understand what you're saying. I want to get my head around what you're saying and understand it really well. 17:55:54 bcampbell: I see it in a different way. It'll take a long time to explain, but maybe I can lay it out in a better way. 17:55:55 maybe it is worth collecting a bunch of use cases and say how all are impacted by any choice 17:56:01 plinss: We'll come back to it in the new year. 17:56:58 q- ChrisL 17:57:13 +1 to what tantek is saying 17:57:14 tantek: One of the challenges I find in the discussion is there aren't screenshots or URLs pointing to the examples. I've seen many layouts that need something more complex than sequential tabbing. I've seen it where you have to tab through 100 links to get to the next section. If there's a passion to fix this, rather than shoehorn an auto behavior, I'd like to see documented cases. 17:57:19 q+ 17:57:50 tantek: A link to a real website where we can see, or at least a screenshot that anyone can see. Anyone researching, please document incrementally. That allows the best analysis and particiaption from the group 17:57:51 ack tantek 17:58:03 ack Rossen___ 17:58:22 tab navigation in maps is really poor 17:58:52 yes, its active exploration not "go through everything" 17:58:59 Rossen___: And to add to that, while the examples you brought was a tab nav throug a visual map of something, that is for me a pretty connonical example where tab reordering would be the perfect tool to give an idea, like go through in order of pop size. The point is you have the same set of data, but you want to change the order based on the semantic you want to use. Visual only is limiting there. 17:59:02 I wonder if there are any good examples of sequential navigation for these examples. 17:59:18 bcampbell: I agree in that situation, that makes sense. I'm trying to speak to keyboard only users. 17:59:24 Rossen___: We understand. 17:59:47 perhaps on a /sequential-navigation page on the wiki? 17:59:50 bcampbell: Let me try and get my research and I'll keep a running place for the information and have a good way to have a conversation. I see links people have been giving me 17:59:53 please keep the running documentation on the wiki 17:59:56 not some offline file 18:00:01 will do 18:00:08 thank you bcampbell! appreciated! 18:00:12 -[IPcaller] 18:00:14 -sgalineau 18:00:15 thank you 18:00:15 -smfr 18:00:16 -adenilson 18:00:17 -[Microsoft] 18:00:18 -gregwhitworth 18:00:18 - +1.201.892.aaff 18:00:19 -BradK 18:00:19 -fantasai 18:00:19 -dbaron 18:00:19 -antonp 18:00:20 -dauwhe 18:00:20 -Bert 18:00:21 -tantek 18:00:21 -TabAtkins 18:00:21 -Rossen___ 18:00:21 -Stearns 18:00:22 -Florian 18:00:22 -bcampbell 18:00:23 plinss: That's the end of the hour. No meeting for the next two weeks. Happy Christmas, New Years etc. Travel safe. I'll miss the first meeting of the new year. 18:00:24 -murakami 18:00:24 -SimonSapin 18:00:26 -plinss 18:00:27 plinss: Thanks everyone. 18:00:27 -SteveZ 18:00:32 -dael 18:00:40 -MaRakow 18:00:41 -ChrisL 18:00:41 Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has ended 18:00:42 Attendees were dael, plinss, +1.479.764.aaaa, Florian, +1.415.832.aabb, adenilson, sgalineau, +1.805.453.aadd, SteveZ, dauwhe, gregwhitworth, SimonSapin, [Microsoft], Stearns, 18:00:42 ... +1.206.992.aaee, smfr, BradK, MaRakow, [IPcaller], murakami, Rossen___, bcampbell, fantasai, dbaron, antonp, TabAtkins, Bert, +1.201.892.aaff, tantek, ChrisL 18:01:37 BradK has left #css 18:16:51 jcraig has joined #css 18:32:12 liam has joined #css 18:42:14 adenilson has joined #css 18:46:51 Looking for link to best place in the wiki to create a page about flexbox testing/examples/etc? 18:49:33 bcampbell: https://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css3-flexbox 18:50:51 Thank you. Do I need to request edit capabilities? I am logged in and do not see any. 18:52:40 bcampbell: you should be good to go now 18:53:34 plinss: thank you, I see edit buttons now. do you recommend tacking onto/into this page or creating a new one? 18:54:11 Tack onto the existing. 18:54:18 ok 18:54:34 start with that one, if you start to need a lot of space, make a new page and link to it form the main flexbox page 18:54:50 ok thanks 18:55:45 Protip: never create a new page directly. Always do it by adding a link to the new page from an existing page, then follow it and create it from there. That guarantees you won't forget to link it in somewhere. ^_^ 18:56:05 Excellent 19:02:38 jcraig_ has joined #css 19:30:52 jcraig has joined #css 19:39:26 Florian has joined #css 19:41:28 estellevw has joined #css 19:58:54 Zakim has left #css 20:01:37 good protip TabAtkins 20:02:34 bcampbell: for navigation issues in general - perhaps a page like "sequential-navigation" (implying the kind of navigation you get from tab index) 20:08:21 dbaron has joined #css 20:13:47 zcorpan has joined #css 21:05:22 gregwhitworth has joined #css 21:15:17 For TabAtkins, dbaron, and any other browser people: should I bother filing bugs about computing average gradient colors, or do you already have reports on file? My initial searches didn’t turn up anything, but thought I’d check before creating duplicates. 21:15:33 I dont' think we have bugs on Chrome. Go for it. 21:16:49 TabAtkins: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/list or? 21:19:18 liam has joined #css 21:21:07 emeyer - go for it for Moz too 21:21:22 tantek: Okay, thanks. 21:21:31 emeyer: Or new.crbug.com 21:21:48 TabAtkins: thanks. 21:22:09 I am finding many, many… interesting behaviors in various browsers around this. And not more than a few outright crashes. 21:27:44 bcampbell has joined #css 21:27:57 tantek: thanks, sounds good. 21:32:49 Florian has joined #css 21:53:03 emeyer: Awesome :) 22:01:24 dbaron has joined #css 22:08:28 estellevw has joined #css 23:08:35 Florian has joined #css 23:23:11 dbaron has joined #css 23:24:45 dauwhe has joined #css 23:32:59 thinkxl_ has joined #css 23:37:21 dauwhe has joined #css 23:38:17 shans_ has joined #css 23:38:19 Florian_ has joined #css