IRC log of css on 2008-05-21

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:59:19 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #css
15:59:19 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:59:21 [trackbot-ng]
RRSAgent, make logs member
15:59:21 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #css
15:59:23 [trackbot-ng]
Zakim, this will be Style_CSS FP
15:59:23 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot-ng, I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM already started
15:59:24 [trackbot-ng]
Meeting: Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) Working Group Teleconference
15:59:24 [trackbot-ng]
Date: 21 May 2008
15:59:37 [Bert]
rrsagent, make logs public
15:59:45 [sharovatov]
sharovatov has joined #css
15:59:57 [dsinger]
Dave Singer is on the call and IRC but will have to drop off around 9:30, sorry.
16:00:32 [Arron]
Arron has joined #CSS
16:00:44 [glazou]
"this passcode is not valid" !
16:01:05 [glazou]
Bert, help :-)
16:01:12 [glazou]
16:01:20 [Bert]
Try the operator
16:01:29 [Bert]
"0" I think
16:01:36 [Zakim]
16:01:53 [Ming]
just to confirm: passcode: 78953
16:01:58 [glazou]
16:02:23 [Ming]
strange, quite a number of fols are on the call now.
16:02:26 [glazou]
*0 for operator
16:02:29 [Zakim]
16:02:32 [salonir]
salonir has joined #css
16:02:45 [glazou]
16:02:55 [glazou]
there's no op
16:02:56 [Zakim]
16:03:25 [dsinger]
ok, dave moves to relative tme and expects to drop off in +27 mins
16:03:26 [glazou]
16:03:30 [Zakim]
+ +95089aacc
16:03:38 [glazou]
Zakim, +95089aacc is me
16:03:38 [Zakim]
+glazou; got it
16:04:44 [Zakim]
16:04:46 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.981.aadd
16:05:00 [Ming]
scribenick: Ming
16:05:25 [Zakim]
16:05:59 [Zakim]
16:06:59 [Ming]
zakim, who is here?
16:06:59 [Zakim]
On the phone I see fantasai, Bert, +1.858.655.aaaa, +1.408.398.aabb, [Microsoft], [Microsoft.a], Molly_Holzschlag, +1.408.981.aadd, glazou, David_Baron
16:07:09 [Zakim]
On IRC I see salonir, Arron, sharovatov, Zakim, RRSAgent, dsinger, Ming, glazou, bjoern, hsivonen, Hixie, jdaggett, anne, fantasai, Bert, trackbot-ng
16:07:22 [Bert]
zakim, [Microsoft] is probably Saloni
16:07:23 [Zakim]
+Saloni?; got it
16:07:37 [Bert]
zakim, [Microsoft.a] is probably Arron
16:07:37 [Zakim]
+Arron?; got it
16:07:44 [Ming]
zakim, +1.858.655 is Ming
16:07:44 [Zakim]
+Ming; got it
16:08:08 [Ming]
Topic: Charter
16:08:30 [Ming]
daniel: got comments from David B. mainly about not having module list
16:08:41 [Ming]
daniel: some add'l comments from the mailing list
16:08:51 [Ming]
daniel: Alex (MS) think the charter is ok
16:09:09 [Ming]
daniel: need Chris Lilley in the loop
16:09:20 [Ming]
daniel: any other comments from CSS WG?
16:09:46 [Ming]
molly: a question: the charter need to be approved by CSS WG, and then put in place?
16:09:55 [SteveZ2]
SteveZ2 has joined #css
16:10:02 [Ming]
david B: need to be approved by all W3C
16:10:31 [Ming]
daniel: just a clarification: the charter is not being approved by CSS WG and has not gone to the W3C membership at large
16:10:56 [Ming]
daniel: the charter has been submitted for three weeks, so assume most of WG members are ok
16:11:16 [Ming]
daniel: no response from Apple or Opera, nothing from Charles(?)
16:11:34 [Ming]
daniel: assume the charter is ok with the above mentioned feedbacks
16:11:42 [Ming]
daniel: if any issue, say it now
16:11:44 [Bert]
The only official (required) part of the charter process is the review by the members, but the better we prepare the charter in the WG, the more likely it is to pass the W3C membership...
16:12:05 [Bert]
s/the members/the W3C members/
16:12:12 [dsinger]
I am checking my apple colleagues (team leaders)...
16:12:17 [Ming]
steve Z.: what does the prioritization mean? I am a bit confused.
16:12:50 [Ming]
daniel: members of WG express their interest but no one would tell the reasonable timeframe for implementation
16:13:34 [Ming]
daniel: interests vs commitment to deliver; impossible to confirm further
16:14:48 [Ming]
steve: my concern is that part of the reason we make no progress, is working on too much things and nothing get done.
16:14:58 [Ming]
steve: if so, I would vote against the charter;
16:15:22 [Ming]
daniel: maybe a comprise is to restrict the deliverables to be the high priority list of the documents
16:16:11 [Ming]
david S.: make sure that we would have enough resource and dialogue and support would enable progress
16:16:29 [Ming]
molly: how long is the charter in place?
16:16:32 [Ming]
steve: two years
16:16:53 [Ming]
molly: every things on the priority list would be done in two years? right?
16:17:12 [Ming]
steve: if things change, then do a charter revision.
16:17:32 [Ming]
daniel: if a thing is not on the list, does not mean it is not in the scope
16:17:53 [Ming]
fantasai: we can't have absolute list (or commitment); try our best.
16:19:40 [Ming]
david B.: my understanding is the opposite of what you said (daniel); we could work on it if interested; people won't make patent on these things we are interested to work on;
16:19:59 [dsinger]
I would like to be very clear whether the charter is a priority list (and other things can be worked on) or whether it is an exhaustive list (and, to be worked on, something must be on the charter). I thought I had previously heard the second.
16:20:06 [Ming]
steve: looking at the charter now.
16:20:45 [Ming]
david b: a risk knocking off the charter of low priority list things, is discouraging people coming to the WG.
16:21:09 [Ming]
molly: on the list and things FYI, both.
16:21:55 [Ming]
david s: we commit to high priority items and willing to work on other low priority items.
16:22:35 [Ming]
steve: we can't publish a working draft until getting director's approval
16:22:42 [Ming]
steve: not sure what that means
16:23:06 [Ming]
daniel: we can still make revision if needed; and submit new ideas to WG.
16:23:37 [Ming]
daniel: Opera submitted the Medai Query which was not on the list, as an example.
16:23:48 [Ming]
steve: did you go to AC?
16:23:51 [Ming]
daniel: not sure.
16:23:58 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #css
16:24:19 [Ming]
steve: the problem I see is that we may go another two years without progress or deliverables
16:24:31 [dsinger]
I would be unhappy to see all mention of the medium and low-priority items removed from the charter; we do have items there that we think can be progressed with reasonable support, and we don't want to be told that there isn't time for them because they are not on the charter.
16:24:58 [dsinger]
zakim, +1.408.398.aabb is me
16:24:58 [Zakim]
+dsinger; got it
16:25:13 [dsinger]
zakim, who is on the phone
16:25:13 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who is on the phone', dsinger
16:25:17 [Ming]
david b: it is something we never done before (i.e. adding new things to the charter via revisioning)
16:25:24 [dsinger]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:25:24 [Zakim]
On the phone I see fantasai, Bert, Ming, dsinger, Saloni?, Arron?, Molly_Holzschlag, +1.408.981.aadd, glazou, David_Baron
16:25:56 [Ming]
steve: patent policy only went into the charter in the recently(?)
16:26:31 [Ming]
steve: is it really realistic to add more things to the priority list?
16:27:10 [Ming]
molly: if you remove the things from the charter or the list which is a public document, where people can find them again anywhere?
16:27:46 [Ming]
molly: add'l (new) resource, won't take core resource away from items committed.
16:28:32 [Ming]
daniel: using a feature(?) being implemented in Safari as an example.
16:28:49 [Ming]
steve: don't see new people doing the work; see same people doing the work
16:29:22 [Ming]
fantasai: leave them in to have an opportunity, while focusing WG resource working on the priority list
16:30:01 [Ming]
fantasai: leave them in if they have a chance to release a working draft.
16:30:56 [Ming]
molly: medium or low priority items do not have a deliverable, is that your concern, steve?
16:31:46 [Ming]
daniel: AC voting on the charter with patent policy in mind. that is the key.
16:32:11 [Ming]
molly: don't know necessarily what the deliverables are going to be
16:32:29 [Ming]
fantasai: can't be informtive for the public, need to be normative in the charter.
16:32:52 [Ming]
steve: that is the catch of the patent policy.
16:33:27 [Ming]
daniel: to summarize steve's position:
16:33:33 [dsinger]
there is a pretty clear deliverable for our animations and transitions etc.
16:33:33 [fantasai]
steve, can you put a pointer to the part of the patent policy that requires explicit deliverables?
16:33:40 [Ming]
daniel: 1. need to have deliverables
16:33:53 [Ming]
daniel: 2. don't want to close the list of activities in WG
16:34:05 [Ming]
daniel: compromise:
16:34:25 [Ming]
daniel: having a list of deliverables, and willing to make revision if new deliverables to be added
16:34:28 [dsinger]
can we split the list into items with deliverables defined (sub-divided hi, medium, low) and a list of discussion areas (those without a deliverable yet defined)?
16:34:43 [Ming]
daniel: sounds beauratic (or sounds French)
16:35:16 [Ming]
david S.: for those having deliverables, put them into high, medium, low lists;
16:35:43 [Ming]
david S.: then cateogirze the things are interesting but no identified deliverables, into another group for discussion
16:36:10 [Ming]
david S.: when with working draft or deliverables identified, moving them into priority list then
16:36:39 [Ming]
daniel: AC would perceive CSS WG not effective, still having a too long list and nothing to deliver
16:37:21 [Ming]
fantasai: most of things on the list, having a working draft, though old; question is what to do with them.
16:37:41 [Ming]
daniel: having working draft or willingness, but no time or resource to work on them
16:38:11 [Ming]
daniel: this is about to getting a firm list of items into the charter.
16:39:04 [Ming]
daniel: need to remove things from the list for now; if more things in scope, make a revision
16:39:05 [dsinger]
I would take the high-priority list, and those of the medium-priority list that have both (a) an active proponent and (b) a clear deliverable.
16:39:29 [Ming]
daniel: this is the only way to go (forward)
16:40:00 [Ming]
molly: ok, where can those things interesting reside somewhere public have access to?
16:40:26 [Ming]
daniel: see David S.'s IRC comment
16:41:19 [Ming]
daniel: can't solve the issue now; you need to discuss this with your AC rep.
16:41:32 [Ming]
daniel: think David S.'s comment make sense.
16:42:00 [dsinger]
we really don't want to 'foist' our animations and transitions on the industry as a fait accompli, without discussion at the w3c
16:42:03 [Ming]
daniel: high priority list + medium p. list with active proponent and deliverable
16:42:46 [Ming]
steve: all things on the list have active proponent and deliverable, so nothing drops.
16:43:16 [Ming]
daniel: clear deliverable path (for medium item)
16:44:02 [dsinger]
dave regrets that his 9:30 appointment has arrived
16:44:05 [Ming]
fantasai: commit high priority list and medium list is in scope
16:44:10 [dsinger]
I'l get back asap
16:44:13 [Zakim]
16:44:22 [Ming]
steve: what does the patent policy say?
16:44:39 [Ming]
steve: if issue, Adobe may not continue in WG
16:45:13 [Ming]
daniel: in SD, we discuss to have a restricted list of priority items.
16:45:36 [Ming]
daniel: we also say, items in medium or low priority list won't be in the charter.
16:46:09 [Ming]
daniel: can't have a long list of priority items. otherwise, would be the same as before.
16:46:34 [Ming]
daniel: 2nd issue, is patent policy
16:47:09 [Ming]
fantasai: what items should be droped, from Adobe point of view
16:47:20 [Ming]
steve: should focus on high priority list only
16:47:56 [Ming]
steve: need to ask lawyer (patent policy)
16:48:18 [Ming]
bert: you only commit to those that are published
16:49:03 [Ming]
daniel: if we add items w/o high priority list, once it publishes, patent policy apply
16:49:29 [Ming]
steve: the operating process has changed.
16:49:48 [Ming]
fantasai: the first one on the TR page, would kick the patent policy
16:50:24 [Ming]
steve: for Chair to realistically go through the list and what can be accomplished in this time period
16:51:25 [Ming]
fantasai: even in the last period, there are things gets published.
16:51:41 [dbaron]
I can't seem to get a word in... but I think dropping a bunch of the items on the medium priority list off the charter will just force people to work on them outside of the CSS WG.
16:52:13 [Ming]
molly: we want be able to have others to hear what are other things interesting to work on (i.e. in scope)
16:52:32 [Ming]
steve: agree so don't remove anything published on the website
16:52:45 [Ming]
steve: not against on charter revisioning
16:53:01 [dbaron]
I'm also worried that the current modules list is biased because the implementor feedback wasn't normalized, so implementors who put more specs in the "strong interest" category had more influence on the list.
16:53:36 [Ming]
daniel: Chair to discuss with members, and make a proposal to WG
16:53:51 [Ming]
steve: draft section 2.2 and come back to WG
16:54:12 [Ming]
daniel: yes, draft it asap and need WG to comment on immediately
16:54:57 [Ming]
daniel: background-size, for 5 minutes?
16:55:26 [Ming]
fantasai: prefer people to read the issue:
16:55:46 [Ming]
Topic: any objection for Yahoo rep to join next f-t-f meeting?
16:55:50 [Ming]
no objection
16:55:58 [Ming]
Molly: Alex does not have a problem.
16:56:17 [dbaron]
can you not hear me?
16:56:23 [Zakim]
16:56:25 [Ming]
daniel: meeting adjourn
16:57:20 [Ming]
david b: 1. drop medium list item would force work outside CSS WG
16:57:55 [Ming]
david b: 2. concern about the process
16:58:20 [Ming]
david b: submit a short list for high priority list; though doing so, I lost influence
16:58:26 [Ming]
steve: did the same way
16:58:57 [Ming]
danie: most people, submit high priority list of 5 items or less
16:59:37 [Ming]
daniel: most people submitted, short list of H.P., long list of M.P., short list of no interest
17:00:15 [Ming]
molly: agree with david b's #1 point.
17:00:36 [Ming]
fantasai: will rely on Chair to keep us on the high priority list
17:01:02 [Ming]
fantasai: rather than using charter to do so
17:01:43 [Ming]
daniel: in theory, yes; but, concern about patent
17:02:30 [Ming]
daniel: this is different than how we operate before
17:03:03 [Ming]
fantasai: can we talk to the lawyer as what are concerning the lawyers on patent?
17:03:47 [Ming]
steve: suggest chairs to discuss and drop things from the list
17:04:23 [Ming]
daniel: peter, me will work together with help of Bert.
17:04:31 [Zakim]
- +1.408.981.aadd
17:04:33 [dsinger]
17:04:34 [Zakim]
17:04:34 [Ming]
daniel: will get back to you asap
17:04:36 [Zakim]
17:04:38 [Zakim]
17:04:38 [salonir]
17:04:40 [Zakim]
17:04:44 [Zakim]
17:04:46 [Zakim]
17:04:50 [Zakim]
17:04:54 [Zakim]
17:06:18 [Ming]
rrsagent, make logs public
17:07:22 [Zakim]
17:07:23 [Zakim]
Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has ended
17:07:24 [Zakim]
Attendees were fantasai, Bert, +1.858.655.aaaa, Molly_Holzschlag, glazou, +1.408.981.aadd, David_Baron, Saloni?, Arron?, Ming, dsinger
17:08:03 [Ming]
RRSAgent, make minutes
17:08:03 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ming
17:10:17 [Ming]
18:20:42 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #css
18:34:24 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #css
18:42:11 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #css