20:25:50 RRSAgent has joined #svg 20:25:50 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/08/04-svg-irc 20:25:52 RRSAgent, make logs public 20:25:54 Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG 20:25:54 ok, trackbot 20:25:55 Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference 20:25:55 Date: 04 August 2016 20:26:00 Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2016Aug/0006.html 20:26:03 Char: Nikos 20:26:06 present+ nikos 20:30:10 Tav has joined #svg 20:33:49 present+ stakagi 20:34:20 present+ Tav 20:34:52 present+ shepazu_ 20:35:03 Scribe: Nikos 20:35:05 scribenick: nikos 20:35:36 present+ AmeliaBR 20:36:46 Topic: SVG 2 CR publication update 20:38:15 shepazu: I've mostly done my bit. Need to do some work to merge onto the correct branch. Will try to do it tonight. 20:40:42 nikos: I need to do disposition of comments and request review from i18n and a11y. I'm preparing a list of new features and breaking changes that is a bit more friendly than the changes appendix. I'll hopefully get that done today. 20:41:16 Once we have that we can request transition approval from the W3C 20:42:06 https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/wiki/SVG-2-new-features 20:42:14 https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/wiki/SVG-2-breaking-changes 20:42:46 shane: Nikos and I were talking earlier in the week about making a list of changes between SVG 1.1 and SVG 2 - so people can decide and evaluate what sort of review they are going to try to do 20:45:02 s/shane:/shepazu: 20:46:26 Topic: Self review - security and privacy questionnaire 20:46:38 https://www.w3.org/TR/security-privacy-questionnaire/ 20:48:51 Topic: fill and stroke shorthand 20:48:51 https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/230 20:48:52 Verifying as fantasai and I pull in SVG's fill and stroke stuff - fill-rule doesn't actually apply to text in any way, right? I'm not seeing it with any effect, and it seems silly for it to, as the segment directions are undefined. 20:49:12 Oh, hmm, should fantasai and I call in for this? 20:49:21 Because we are working on this *literally at this moment*. 20:49:26 most of us have only just seen the issue 20:49:37 if you want to jump in you're welcome 20:49:57 TabAtkins: Re fill-rule, yes we explicitly state it doesn't apply here https://svgwg.org/svg2-draft/text.html#TextRenderingOrder 20:50:47 Okay, the 'fill-rule' property still states that it applies to text elements, so I was verifying. 20:51:21 We're in now 20:51:53 fantasai has joined #svg 20:51:56 https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/230 20:51:56 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jun/0678.html 20:52:09 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0609.html 20:52:16 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016Mar/0358.html 20:52:24 TabAtkins: Elika and I are writing this spec right now and our intention is to pull in everything svg needs so it can function as svg fill and stroke spec as well 20:52:35 fantasai: we talked about fill and stroke being short hands 20:52:56 ... for svg attributes there's no issue because of the order in which they are processed. 20:53:11 fantasai: the unsuffixed properties are not a shorthand of these properties 20:53:53 ... it breaks a little bit with how properties work in css. 20:54:10 fantasai: question is what resets? doe stroke-opacity and fill-opacity for example? 20:54:20 AmeliaBR: think we talked about this in the past and it would break way too much contnt 20:54:24 s/contnt/content 20:54:54 ... it's an unfortunate naming situation where people maybe expect things to reset and we have to be very explicit with notes in the spec explaining this what is not part of the fill and stroke shorthand 20:55:15 ... but there's no way we could have a backwards compatible way of making a short hand of any of these 20:55:23 fantasai: last time we had a meeting it was an open question 20:55:39 shepazu: I understand the desire but agree with AmeliaBR 20:55:58 ... I could see another path - we could add a new property that is not 'stroke', but 'stroke-something' 20:56:06 ... not elegant but could serve the same purpose 20:56:16 ... don't mind aliasing stroke color for stroke 20:56:27 fantasai: not going to alias it, stroke is going to be a shorthand for stroke-color at the least 20:56:40 ... if we can't make it work correctly we won't have a shorthand relationship here 20:56:52 shepazu: think whatever the shorthand is it should make the existing behaviour of svg 20:56:57 fantasai: we're doing that 20:57:14 AmeliaBR: the consequences are that the shorthand version of stroke and fill can't reset any existing properties 20:57:20 ... does make sense for stroke geometry properties to have a new shorthand 20:58:03 TabAtkins: if we go with 'stroke-*' that's very close to our naming scheme 20:58:18 s/stroke-*/stroke-dash/ 20:58:42 Tav: stroke-color doesn't seem an appropriate name 20:59:06 fantasai: you can set a color or image as background. stroke-color actually only takes colours 20:59:12 ... stroke-image would also exist 20:59:21 ... we went over this in Sydney 20:59:58 AmeliaBR: all those new properties would only add up to describe the painting of the stroke. They wouldn't change the existing properties. It would just be a way of describing the layers of paint 21:00:15 fantasai: it would just be fill-opacity that would be a bit weird 21:00:24 https://drafts.fxtf.org/paint/ is what we're working on btw 21:00:45 AmeliaBR: my suggestion would be to have a note in the spec saying whether or not it is included in the shorthand 21:01:01 fantasai: we might do it by section 21:01:28 AmeliaBR: the other issue is that there is also a draft spec that svg put together for advanced stroke geometry 21:01:33 fantasai: we merged that in 21:01:41 ... that was one of the action items we took in Sydney 21:02:01 AmeliaBR: we're glad you're working on this 21:02:11 ... as I mentioned on Github is that layering has changed in SVG 2 21:02:24 ... SVG 2 allows multiple paint server layers with fallback as the last parameter 21:02:35 ... but we didn't add css images beacuse we didn't get into all the sizing and positioning issues 21:03:07 https://svgwg.org/svg2-draft/painting.html#SpecifyingPaint 21:03:21 AmeliaBR: this is where it is 21:03:43 fantasai: don't think it would be good to add anything on top of SVG 1 until we've worked through everything 21:03:55 ... can we not do that in svg 2? 21:04:10 fantasai: we're introducing layering in css. Not sure how it will end up 21:04:40 ... I know you're trying to go to CR right now, which means if we run into problems we can't fix them 21:04:55 shepazu: think our goal is to get this capability in asap 21:05:13 ... seems if it's added to css rather than svg 2 it can be added in a timely way and it should meet the goal 21:05:16 ... is that correct? 21:05:34 fantasai: yes, we could take co-editor from svg but we'd like to address this all at once in a nice coherent way 21:05:47 ... not saying there will be issues, but can't say right now 21:06:06 ... I would say take it out of SVG 2 and we'll work on it over the next 6 months 21:06:20 ... we would be happy with cutting back our draft to move quickly 21:06:24 ... but we need to lock down the interaction 21:06:39 shepazu: if the goal is to have the feature and we're not so set on the syntax 21:06:54 ... if svg goes its own way I'd be concerned about conflicts 21:07:09 ... so I'm very reluctant to introduce a feature in svg that may be overriden by css 21:07:22 ... so as long as functionality is available in a timely way 21:07:40 AmeliaBR: There's two different much requested features here - layering is one, but css image types is a bigger one 21:08:07 ... if there is a movement from Tab and Elika to work on the spec and a commitment from implementers to follow through 21:08:55 ... I'm ok with reverting that section to SVG 1.1 syntax for now 21:08:58 ... maybe with a note 21:09:15 shepazu: it's more likely to be implemented quickly if it's a css feautre 21:09:19 ... and this reduces our testing load 21:11:51 FXTF issues https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts/issues/ 21:12:26 RESOLUTION: we will roll back multi layered fill in SVG 2 and it will be defined in an FXTF module 21:12:47 shepazu: To clarify, context-fill and context-stroke will not be removed 21:13:22 AmeliaBR: the idea of using a child instead of a url id is important as well 21:14:15 ACTION: Tav to review CSS fill and stroke to ensure it captures everything from SVG 21:14:15 Created ACTION-3851 - Review css fill and stroke to ensure it captures everything from svg [on Tavmjong Bah - due 2016-08-11]. 21:16:08 ACTION: Nikos to make edits to SVG 2 to remove things going to CSS fill and stroke 21:16:08 Created ACTION-3852 - Make edits to svg 2 to remove things going to css fill and stroke [on Nikos Andronikos - due 2016-08-11]. 21:16:28 shepazu: Tab and Elika, have you reviewed z-index in SVG? 21:16:29 https://www.w3.org/TR/SVG2/render.html#RenderingOrder 21:17:11 AmeliaBR: The big difference is that 2d transform doesn't make a stacking context 21:17:21 TabAtkins: I'll review it 21:19:44 Topic: SVG Animation and SVG Integration specs 21:20:03 AmeliaBR: for SVG Animation I'd like to publish a FPWD of what we have - won't be any extra work on Brian 21:20:16 ... for SVG Integration I'd like to bring the bits we depedn on into SVG 2 21:21:41 nikos: Agree on SVG integration, we and other specs reference the processing modes and they should just be in svg 2 21:21:55 ... that would save us spending lots of time tidying up the svg integration spec 21:22:16 ... svg in OT is looking for something solid to reference too as well so should hopefully make them happy 21:22:32 https://svgwg.org/svg2-draft/conform.html 21:22:44 AmeliaBR: currently the conformance section is an appendix, so we need to make a normative chapter we can put processing modes in 21:23:12 ACTION: Doug to edit SVG 2 to include processing modes from SVG integration spec 21:23:13 Created ACTION-3853 - Edit svg 2 to include processing modes from svg integration spec [on Doug Schepers - due 2016-08-11]. 21:23:33 AmeliaBR: why don't we make conform a proper chapter? 21:25:56 shepazu: Let's do that 21:28:13 RESOLUTION: Publish FPWD of SVG Animation pending Brian Birtles agreement 21:28:17 birtles: ping 21:30:19 ACTION: Nikos to prepare a blurb for front page news 21:30:19 Created ACTION-3854 - Prepare a blurb for front page news [on Nikos Andronikos - due 2016-08-11]. 21:32:23 RRSAgent, make minutes 21:32:23 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/08/04-svg-minutes.html nikos 21:47:38 @shepazu Did you want me to handle the merge of your references commit? 21:48:05 I tested, looks like ~half dozen conflicts, but should be fairly straightforward. 21:48:46 AmeliaBR, well, if you don't mind and think that's the best way forward, it would save me some time 21:49:05 I still need to do the definitions.xml, per your instructions 21:50:08 OK, I'll do that now, then you can pull all the commits into your local copy in one branch. 21:52:25 ok, great 22:19:31 chaals has joined #svg 22:25:16 shepazu: the merge conflicts weren't too bad, then I did a test build & it looks like you deleted some references that were actually being used. Or maybe just changed the id's. Hopefully the second part, but I'm working through them to confirm! 22:26:18 AmeliaBR, hmm, I did remove some references that I couldn't find links to, but I thought that I updated all the old refs to the new IDs where appropriate 22:26:39 if you send me a list, I'll work through them 22:27:17 Yeah, now that I examine it, I think it's just that there are sections of the spec that have been changed, but were using the old ID refs. I should be able to find & replace them. 23:21:17 shepazu: I've pushed the merge to gh-pages branch, I'm just going through the diff before merging it back into master https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/compare/master...gh-pages 23:45:45 nikos: hi 23:45:54 Hey Brian 23:46:43 Are you happy with publishing SVG Animation FPWD? AFAIK there shouldn't be anything controversial in there 23:46:57 it's just the old animation chapter, right? 23:47:11 nikos: sure--pretty sure the styling is broken though 23:47:23 yeah it is 23:47:41 It's half way there, but still has issues 23:47:52 I'll do that before publishing 23:47:53 I think it was fine but then the W3C stylesheets got upgraded and it broke 23:47:58 nikos: thanks! 23:49:11 birtles: We made the resolution to publish earlier today, but pending your approval. So thanks =) 23:49:41 nikos: I think heycam|away might have done most (all?) of the work for that actually 23:50:25 birtles: yeah but you're still the animation guy - you can't escape that easily hehe 23:50:42 birtles: more seriously, you probably have the best big picture view of it all 23:50:46 nikos: oh well, I tried :) 23:50:56 and it looks like my name does show up in the commit history 23:51:01 so I guess I have to take some of the blame 23:51:30 birtles: you are also the only editor listed 23:52:12 shepazu, nikos: the tidied-up reference changes have been merged into master. It builds without errors, but you'll probably want to actually review it Doug, make sure formatting & sort order is correct. There were a couple new references that had been added recently. 23:53:58 AmeliaBR: thanks for doing that! Impressed with git 23:55:27 Yeah, it's pretty good. I had to manually update a lot of recently-edited sections that Doug didn't have in his branch, but there were only about 6-8 actual conflicts that it couldn't figure out. 23:56:08 But now the apprentice is telling me I've missed one, so going to fix that. And I'm going to change that other cross link to HTML it doesn't like, even though it's perfectly valid. 23:57:04 Yeah I'm surprised that one hasn't sorted itself out yet. Usually it's a caching issue