- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 14:29:38 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
Attendees:
David Baron
Bert Bos
Arron Eicholz
Elika Etemad (scribe)
Daniel Glazman
Dean Jackson (arriving late)
Håkon Wium Lie
Peter Linss (chair)
Alex Mogilvesky
Saloni Mira Rai
David Singer
Jason Cranford Teague
Summary
-------
Discussed individual modules in charter and what the deliverables are.
Advocates expressed their expectations:
Expected RECs
CSS Namespaces
Selectors
Color
Media Queries
CSSOM View?
Expected CRs
MultiCol
Paged Media
Backgrounds and Borders
Ruby
GCPM
Fonts
Template Layout
Marquee
Variables
Box Model
Values and Units
Generated Content
Animations and Transitions
Transforms
Expected WDs
Text
Text Layout
Extended Box Model
Flexbox
Grid Positioning
Lists
Tables
WG wants to expect REC for CSS2.1, fantasai thinks it's possible but not likely.
RESOLVED: Accepted proposed wording for CR Exit Criteria (ISSUE-44)
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/actions/44
Full minutes below.
===================================================================================
<RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/05/28-css-irc
<dbaron> I may have to leave at the half hour today.
* glazou too
* anne can't make it
* anne has all kinds of conflicts on Wednesday lately
ScribeNick: fantasai
Charter
-------
Peter: Sent out charter list yesterday.
Peter: Got some feedback on Generated Content, Marquee
Peter: Are there any modules people can't live without?
Jason: List coincides with AOL's direction
dbaron: A little upset that flexbox was dropped
dbaron: We have two prefixed implementations
dbaron: don't know if they are interoperable
Peter: I'm concerned that people don't think we will get anything to REC
fantasai: CSS Namespaces will go to REC. Selectors should be able to get
there
dbaron: Color
howcome: Media Queries
peter: do we have any implementations for that?
dbaron: we have two implementations of that, soon to be three
dbaron: it's in Acid3
Peter: CSS2.1?
fantasai: I wouldn't expect that. Good chance we won't make it to REC.
Jason: Requirements for PR?
fantasai: complete test suite, for each test 2 implementations that pass
fantasai: I think we'll have a better idea of where we are with the test
suite at the end of this year
fantasai: not in time for the charter
peter: anything else?
dsinger: I need to consult with people here at Apple wrt animations and
transitions and transformations
howcome: I think MultiCol is ready
fantasai: It needs work. Some parts are underdefined. I have some comments
on that, can help
fantasai: We should be able to get it to CR soon, though
fantasai: And if we can get together resources for a test suite, to REC
within 2 years
peter: Anything we can't get to CR?
fantasai: Text and Text Layout
fantasai: CR for those would be very ambitious... Paul and I don't have
time to work on them this year
<dsinger> I keep wanting to know, for each module, who the primary
proponent is, and who responded to the survey saying that they
could put resources on it...is that list available?
peter: Paged Media?
fantasai: CR this year
fantasai: HP is working on a test suite, so shouldn't have a problem there
fantasai: Will need implementations. We should have implementations for
all features soon
fantasai: but the older drafts had many things underspecified, and we
fixed those up
fantasai: so defects would be what keeps us from REC there
<dbaron> I have a conflicting meeting now (hopefully only this week,
although maybe next week too). I'll still be on IRC.
<Zakim> -David_Baron
peter: Ruby?
fantasai: I think it needed some edits, not much. Paul won't be able to
work on it this year
fantasai: One of Mozilla's devs was interested in implementing. Not sure
where it's going to go, though.
Peter: Stuck in CR then
Peter: GCPM?
howcome: I think it's useful spec,
...
Peter: Fonts?
Jason: Good progress there. I think we can get to CR pretty quickly.
Jason: Our only concern is the nature of downloadable fonts.
Jason: I don't think we're proposing anything else that is controversial
howcome: You're putting Web Fonts back in the Fonts specification?
Jason: Yes.
howcome: The subset that's implemented or everything?
Jason: everything
Daniel: From discussion with Chris Lilley, most font descriptors were
unimplemented.. panose, etc.
Daniel: So only a subset, not everything, should be in the spec
Daniel: Fonts spec will be edited by Chris Lilley, Jason, and John Daggett
Daniel: Small overhead in getting both WG to agree on publication
Jason: John and I would be willing to split them back out if merging leads
to a roadblock
Jason: I think font properties should be good to go
Jason: Some issues came up in the design community about being able to
suppress synthesized fonts
16:37 * glazou needs to go in 5 minutes from now
Jason: And being able to style different fonts differently
fantasai: You can use multiple fonts in the same elements because of what
glyphs are available. That means you'd style individual glyphs
differently
Peter cuts off technical conversation and redirects to charter
Peter: Expect CR?
Jason: Yes
Peter: REC?
Jason: don't know
<dsinger> this seems very detailed here, but I am not sure I agree with
the question. it falsl into the case "doctor, it hurts when
I do this" and the reply "don't do that, then" seems appealing
<dbaron> ok, my 9:30 was thankfully quite short... calling back in now.
* dbaron wonders what question dsinger was referring to
<dsinger> dbaron: your (?) question where there was a mix of fonts with
different intrinsic styles in a fallback list. but it can wait.
<dbaron> dsinger, I wasn't on the phone then, so it wasn't my question...
Peter: Template Layout?
fantasai: I think CR might be possible, not sure about implementations..
but there remains a lot of work to be done in that spec
Bert: I think we can get to CR
Bert: But I haven't heard anybody talk about implementations
Peter: Tables?
fantasai: MS is not likely to have much time to work on it until after
IE8 releases. They usually spend time on specs right after
the release
dbaron: I'm also interested in Tables.
dbaron: We'd probably want test suite drafts along with working drafts
dbaron: since it's not about features as about refining definitions
dbaron: I think CR is a little ambitious, but we should be able to make
good progress on WDs
* Bert very disappointed that Alex and David can't promise anything more
for tables, after al the work done on defining the old size algorithm :-(
<dbaron> Bert, all that work on the old size algorithm was really only
a small part of it...
Peter: CSS Variables
Daniel: I think we should be able to get this to CR
<dsinger> safari and who else has this in implementation?
Daniel: It does not seem to be that complex
<Zakim> -Daniel_Glazman
Peter: Box Model
Bert: Box Model needs implementations
Bert: of vertical layout
Bert: It's the same as CSS2.1 for horizontal
Bert: So maybe CR
Peter: Extended Box Model
Bert: WD at most
Peter: CSSOM View
fantasai: Need to ask Anne. I would guess REC, but should ask him.
Peter: Values and Units
howcome: Kinda sitting there
dbaron: We agreed to add cycle(), and it's not there.
dbaron: But I really do want to move this forward
dbaron: I would hope that we'd have an implementation within 2 years.
Maybe not all of it. But there are a bunch of features that
I do want to implement.
Peter: So commitment to CR
Peter: Grid Positioning?
fantasai: I suspect WD
Alex: I would hope for CR.
Peter: Lists?
<Arron> Probably WD
<Arron> maybe CR if the tests suite is done early
Peter: Generated Content?
fantasai: CR
Peter: Cascading and Inheritance
howcome: not much changes there. Can probably go to CR
dbaron: Anything new beyond 2.1?
howcome: I don't think so
dbaron: If there's nothing new, why bother?
Peter: If there's nothing beyond 2.1, why do we add this?
<Arron> Specificity had to change for CSS 3 selectors didn't it?
<fantasai> Arron, specificity is defined in Selectors
howcome: It needs to move forward so other specs can point to it.
fantasai: They can point to 2.1
Peter proposes to drop from list
That seems to be ok
Peter: Marquee?
<Zakim> +Dean_Jackson
Bert: We need to finish that one
Bert: We have to do that for the mobile profile
Bert: CR certainly. REC, I'm not sure
Bert: There are implementations in Mobile, not sure how good they are
fantasai: I'd aim for CR. Dependency on 2.1 can hold that back
Peter: FlexBox?
dbaron: I'd like to at least get working drafts out
dbaron: CR would be nice, but I'd say working drafts
Peter: Ok, I will go through list and come up with a new list that
reflects what we think we can deliver
Dean Jackson: I think we can get Animations and Transitions and
Transforms to CR.
CR Exit Criteria
----------------
<plinss> http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/actions/44
dbaron: I think in some cases we might have said that if we want
to count 2 implementations they have to pass the same
test.. if we're going through the "equivalent test" route
where the implementations are passing two different versions
of the same test
dbaron: If we don't require that, then we need to review the
equivalent tests very carefully
<Zakim> -plinss
RESOLVED: adopt proposed wording for CR exit criteria
<dbaron> (assuming peter was in favor)
Meeting closed.
Received on Wednesday, 28 May 2008 21:30:20 UTC