IRC log of svg on 2008-09-16
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 10:30:04 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #svg
- 10:30:04 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-svg-irc
- 10:30:06 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 10:30:06 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #svg
- 10:30:08 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG
- 10:30:08 [Zakim]
- ok, trackbot; I see GA_SVGWG()6:30AM scheduled to start now
- 10:30:09 [trackbot]
- Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference
- 10:30:09 [trackbot]
- Date: 16 September 2008
- 10:30:28 [Zakim]
- GA_SVGWG()6:30AM has now started
- 10:30:35 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 10:30:42 [aemmons]
- zakim, [IPcaller] is me
- 10:30:42 [Zakim]
- +aemmons; got it
- 10:31:49 [Zakim]
- +Andrew_Sledd
- 10:31:58 [Zakim]
- +??P2
- 10:32:14 [anthony]
- Zakim, ??P2 is me
- 10:32:14 [Zakim]
- +anthony; got it
- 10:32:51 [ed]
- ed has joined #svg
- 10:34:16 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 10:34:33 [ed]
- Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
- 10:34:33 [Zakim]
- +ed; got it
- 10:37:45 [anthony]
- Zakim, call Doug
- 10:37:45 [Zakim]
- I am sorry, anthony; I do not know a number for Doug
- 10:37:48 [Zakim]
- +Doug_Schepers
- 10:38:05 [ed]
- Zakim, who's here?
- 10:38:05 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see aemmons, Andrew_Sledd, anthony, ed, Doug_Schepers
- 10:38:06 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see ed, Zakim, RRSAgent, NH, aemmons, ed_, ed_home, shepazu, anthony, trackbot
- 10:38:25 [ed]
- scribe: erik
- 10:38:28 [ed]
- scribeNick: ed
- 10:38:32 [ed]
- chair: AE
- 10:38:47 [aemmons]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008JulSep/0304.html
- 10:39:02 [ed]
- Topic: LC comments
- 10:39:51 [ed]
- AE: as of right now, there are no comments
- 10:40:02 [ed]
- ...DS you'll be tracking them as they come in?
- 10:40:11 [ed]
- DS: yes, I'll put them in the LC tracking tool
- 10:40:24 [ed]
- Topic: Test fest update
- 10:40:33 [ed]
- AE: it's up in two weeks time
- 10:40:42 [ed]
- ...not many responders
- 10:40:47 [ed]
- ...three people coming
- 10:40:55 [ed]
- ...want to remind everyone to respond
- 10:42:50 [shepazu]
- http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/Group/wiki/OttawaF2F2008
- 10:42:50 [aemmons]
- http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/19480/svgOttawaTestFest2008/
- 10:43:03 [ed]
- http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Meetings
- 10:43:09 [shepazu]
- http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/19480/svgOttawaTestFest2008/
- 10:43:49 [ed]
- AE: still negotiation to be able to go, but I think bitflash are sending someone
- 10:44:06 [ed]
- ...do we have implementations to test except for the people that are coming?
- 10:44:21 [ed]
- DS: there's abbra, and I think chris contacted some people too
- 10:44:44 [ed]
- AE: so, at least one impl to gather results for there
- 10:44:55 [ed]
- ...and julian from spinetix
- 10:45:23 [ed]
- ...we want to have good coverage, but we need to have enough people to do the testing
- 10:45:39 [ed]
- DS: the more people we have the better
- 10:46:30 [ed]
- AE: bitflash said they could send additional people if we need more impls tested
- 10:46:48 [ed]
- ...will send out an email about the testfest
- 10:47:11 [ed]
- ...need to decide exactly where the meeting will be and so on
- 10:47:53 [ed]
- ACTION: AE to move the ottawa testfest f2f page from the private to the public wiki, and add the location etc
- 10:47:53 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-2192 - Move the ottawa testfest f2f page from the private to the public wiki, and add the location etc [on Andrew Emmons - due 2008-09-23].
- 10:48:30 [ed]
- Topic: values of requiredExtensions to use XHTML/MathML
- 10:48:30 [aemmons]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008JulSep/0291.html
- 10:49:53 [ed]
- AE: so in LC are we allowed to make any changes?
- 10:50:22 [ed]
- DS: got different answers
- 10:50:45 [ed]
- ...the general consensus seem to be that it's ok to make changes in LC
- 10:51:10 [ed]
- ...any change that affects an implementation that makes us reevaluate our test coverage isn't necessarily very good
- 10:52:02 [ed]
- AE: in this particular case, is this for SVG 1.1?
- 10:52:10 [ed]
- DS: i think it's for svg in general
- 10:52:23 [ed]
- AE: CL says adding an example might be a way forward
- 10:52:34 [ed]
- DS: i'm sceptical, it'd be non-normative
- 10:52:49 [ed]
- ...we're making a spec for implementors
- 10:53:14 [ed]
- ...we have an example that has xhtml in it, and it's using some bogus requiredExtension string
- 10:53:28 [ed]
- ...it's a good idea to change the example, but I don't think it's enough
- 10:53:39 [ed]
- AE: should be raise it as an issue?
- 10:53:56 [ed]
- ...and discuss it over the course of our last call, to wait for further feedback
- 10:54:08 [ed]
- DS: we've already got feedback
- 10:54:52 [ed]
- ...question is if this is useful or if it harms anything
- 10:55:07 [ed]
- AE: what does everyone think of it?
- 10:55:56 [ed]
- ED: I'd be happy adding it
- 10:56:06 [shepazu]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008JulSep/0299.html
- 10:57:49 [ed]
- ED: proposed wording looks ok
- 10:58:02 [ed]
- AE: makes sense to make it generic like that
- 10:58:16 [shepazu]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile12/struct.html#ExternalResourcesRequiredAttribute
- 10:58:44 [ed]
- ...my only hesitation is to be careful with making changes to the spec
- 10:59:47 [ed]
- DS: we'd need to make tests for it too
- 11:00:07 [shepazu]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile12/struct.html#RequiredExtensionsAttribute
- 11:00:24 [ed]
- ...how would you test it?
- 11:00:36 [ed]
- ...abbra supports XHTML in foreignObject
- 11:00:51 [ed]
- AE: careful wording in the pass criteria would probably work
- 11:01:52 [ed]
- RESOLUTION: we'll clarify the wording in requiredextensions, adding the proposed wording from DS for XHTML and MathML
- 11:02:05 [ed]
- DS: do we want an errata item for 1.1 too?
- 11:04:07 [ed]
- ACTION: DS to implement the resolution "we'll clarify the wording in requiredextensions, adding the proposed wording from DS for XHTML and MathML" and add a corresponding errata item for SVG 1.1
- 11:04:07 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-2193 - Implement the resolution \"we'll clarify the wording in requiredextensions, adding the proposed wording from DS for XHTML and MathML\" and add a corresponding errata item for SVG 1.1 [on Doug Schepers - due 2008-09-23].
- 11:04:57 [ed]
- RATIONALE: it's a proven interop issue, and the wording is ambigous, and we want interop
- 11:05:22 [aemmons]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008JulSep/0296.html
- 11:05:28 [ed]
- Topic: Fixing the Test Suite
- 11:05:54 [ed]
- AE: CL said he fixed the second part already
- 11:06:14 [ed]
- ...in the online version (so, for the next version)
- 11:06:30 [ed]
- ...should we update the released package?
- 11:06:46 [ed]
- DS: I'd rather wait until we have new content
- 11:06:53 [ed]
- AE/NH/ED: agree
- 11:07:09 [ed]
- AE: the first part, is that something that could be changed in the script
- 11:08:11 [ed]
- AG: file permissions don't get stored with the file do they?
- 11:08:21 [ed]
- DS: follow up with doh?
- 11:08:43 [ed]
- ACTION: AG to follow up with DOH on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008JulSep/0296.html regarding the first point
- 11:08:43 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-2194 - Follow up with DOH on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008JulSep/0296.html regarding the first point [on Anthony Grasso - due 2008-09-23].
- 11:09:16 [aemmons]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008JulSep/0298.html
- 11:09:16 [ed]
- Topic: Review of struct-discard-208-t.svg test
- 11:10:08 [ed]
- AG: tests a specific part of discard
- 11:10:21 [ed]
- ...the original tests didn't quite test it properly
- 11:10:43 [ed]
- AE: we shouldn't approve any new tests until the f2f
- 11:11:10 [ed]
- ...but assigning a reviewer is ok of course
- 11:11:14 [ed]
- ...I'll review it
- 11:12:08 [ed]
- ACTION: AE to review struct-discard-208-t.svg
- 11:12:08 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-2195 - Review struct-discard-208-t.svg [on Andrew Emmons - due 2008-09-23].
- 11:12:18 [ed]
- AG: opera passes
- 11:12:22 [ed]
- NH: ikivo passes
- 11:15:01 [aemmons]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008JulSep/0305.html
- 11:15:15 [ed]
- Topic: SVG clip-path, mask and filter for non-SVG content
- 11:15:49 [ed]
- AG: quick question: are we still going to work on the testsuite after 1.2T goes to rec?
- 11:15:52 [ed]
- DS: yes
- 11:16:15 [ed]
- AE: agree, it'll probably be more tests added
- 11:16:56 [ed]
- DS: to push us over 500 approved tests, would be nice
- 11:17:23 [ed]
- AE: ok, back to the clip-paths
- 11:18:11 [ed]
- ED: haven't had time to look at the proposal in detail yet
- 11:18:30 [ed]
- DS: was trimmed down from what he had before
- 11:18:50 [ed]
- http://people.mozilla.com/~roc/SVG-CSS-Effects-Draft.html
- 11:18:51 [shepazu]
- http://people.mozilla.com/~roc/SVG-CSS-Effects-Draft.html
- 11:21:14 [shepazu]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/cssom-view/#elementview-getboundingclientrect
- 11:21:36 [ed]
- ED: would have to look at the CSS box model to see if that's the most appropriate way of defining exactly what's the size of the svg
- 11:21:49 [ed]
- ...concerned about borders, margin, padding
- 11:23:36 [ed]
- DS: any objections to taking this on?
- 11:23:42 [ed]
- AE: it sounds very powerful
- 11:24:10 [ed]
- RESOLUTION: we'll take on this work, and liaison with the CSS WG to make sure this is ok
- 11:24:20 [ed]
- DS: what spec would it go in?
- 11:24:25 [ed]
- ...filters? compositing?
- 11:24:38 [ed]
- ...clipping and masking?
- 11:25:10 [ed]
- AE: do we want to raise an issue for this then?
- 11:25:20 [ed]
- DS: I'll add to tracker
- 11:26:00 [ed]
- DS: we could originate it in its own spec, like an svg-css spec
- 11:26:09 [ed]
- ...might be more work though
- 11:26:42 [ed]
- AE: still some work to analyze this
- 11:26:52 [ed]
- DS: would prefer to put it in a spec now
- 11:27:29 [shepazu]
- http://dev.w3.org/SVG/modules/
- 11:28:34 [ed]
- AE: this is similar to the enableBackground (where wording is different in two modules)
- 11:29:01 [ed]
- AG: problem is that we'll have to push changes to everywhere
- 11:29:19 [ed]
- AE: we could have the spec scripts pull changes from a central location
- 11:29:29 [ed]
- ...we need to solve how this is handled though
- 11:29:46 [ed]
- AG: yes, that's one way, I don't really mind how we solve this
- 11:30:44 [ed]
- ...the other option is to make a small spec for things that overlap, and include that in the modules
- 11:31:02 [ed]
- AE: problem with that is if you need one little bit only
- 11:31:25 [ed]
- ...and it's own testsuite etc
- 11:32:16 [ed]
- AE: 1) pull in wording for e.g enable-background from some central place for every module
- 11:32:35 [ed]
- ... 2) have a small common module
- 11:32:45 [ed]
- DS: or 3) to have duplicated wording in each module
- 11:32:56 [ed]
- ...problem is maintainability
- 11:33:07 [ed]
- ...the second way is the profile way
- 11:33:51 [ed]
- ...sounds like it would be better if it was specced out in one spec first, and then pulled into core
- 11:34:10 [ed]
- AE: but do we want everything in core?
- 11:34:21 [ed]
- ...for the common things
- 11:34:54 [ed]
- ...because when you look at this it'd be a collection of stuff that has little relation (except in context with the depending specs)
- 11:36:42 [ed]
- DS: so I think it makes sense to add roc's wording to the filters spec, even the clipping case
- 11:37:19 [ed]
- AE: so with enable-background, does it need to say anything about filters or clipping or can it be generic?
- 11:38:09 [ed]
- ED: it's pretty specific in filters, showing the algortihm for the background-image generation
- 11:38:20 [ed]
- ...not sure how it looks like in clipping/compositing
- 11:39:19 [ed]
- AG: the way i've used in compositing is different from the filters spec
- 11:39:30 [ed]
- ...describing attributes etc
- 11:39:58 [ed]
- ...so if you want to pull in things how do we handle the fact that specs are written in different style?
- 11:40:08 [ed]
- AE/DS: we should strive to have the same style
- 11:40:33 [ed]
- AE: we might change the filters spec to be the same style
- 11:40:58 [ed]
- ...how do we merge things between modules? and how do we make sure style is consistent?
- 11:42:27 [ed]
- ACTION: ed to work with AG on integrating ROC's proposal into the filters spec
- 11:42:27 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-2196 - Work with AG on integrating ROC's proposal into the filters spec [on Erik Dahlström - due 2008-09-23].
- 11:43:02 [ed]
- ACTION: AG to work with ED on integrating ROC's proposal into the compositing/clipping&masking spec
- 11:43:02 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-2197 - Work with ED on integrating ROC's proposal into the compositing/clipping&masking spec [on Anthony Grasso - due 2008-09-23].
- 11:44:15 [ed]
- RESOLUTION: we'll fold the clipping&masking into the compositing module
- 11:44:29 [shepazu]
- Rationale: the fewer modules, the easier the integration of features
- 11:44:51 [shepazu]
- q+
- 11:46:36 [ed]
- AE: so how do we merge common elements and attributes in modules, and the stylistic things
- 11:47:11 [ed]
- ACTION: AG to fold in the clipping&masking chapter into the compositing module
- 11:47:11 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-2198 - Fold in the clipping&masking chapter into the compositing module [on Anthony Grasso - due 2008-09-23].
- 11:49:17 [ed]
- DS: do we want to assign editors for the new modules?
- 11:49:40 [ed]
- AE: maybe we should first decide the priorities?
- 11:50:25 [ed]
- ...need to keep focused, and we need to have the style ready first
- 11:50:38 [ed]
- AG: yes, we need to do that first
- 11:50:51 [ed]
- ...so we don't waste time later on
- 11:51:59 [anthony]
- Zakim, who is noisy
- 11:51:59 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'who is noisy', anthony
- 11:52:30 [ed]
- DS: so with vector-effects, I'd just pull in the 1.2Full draft into the module
- 11:52:34 [shepazu]
- http://dev.w3.org/SVG/modules/template/
- 11:52:55 [ed]
- ...we should probably reexamine this
- 11:53:03 [ed]
- ...if this is the right approach
- 11:53:09 [ed]
- ...for vector-effects
- 11:53:22 [ed]
- AG: yeah, there are a lot of problems with it as it stands
- 11:53:28 [ed]
- DS: ok
- 11:53:59 [ed]
- AE: so is there anywhere in the wiki we could have for stylistic rules, like what should go in the primer etc
- 11:54:07 [ed]
- AG: that'd be helpful
- 11:54:14 [ed]
- AE: maybe we could all work on that
- 11:54:30 [ed]
- DS: AE do you want to start it up?
- 11:54:43 [ed]
- AE: I was thinking AG
- 11:55:32 [ed]
- AG: one example is in print, all requirements are highlighted in red boxes
- 11:55:57 [ed]
- ED: i think i have an action to add that to filters too, but haven't had time to do it yet
- 11:56:33 [ed]
- AE: it makes sense to have that on the wiki
- 11:57:01 [ed]
- ACTION: AG to add a wikipage for new modules, describing common styling etc
- 11:57:01 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-2199 - Add a wikipage for new modules, describing common styling etc [on Anthony Grasso - due 2008-09-23].
- 11:57:39 [ed]
- Topic: priorities
- 11:58:46 [ed]
- DS: my wishlist: vector-effects (cool, but will take awhile before implemented), the features that bitflash put in (the z-index) and the 2.5D stuff
- 11:59:47 [ed]
- AE: yes, we want to have the 2.5D soon to see what people have done so far
- 12:00:06 [ed]
- ...and also from a market POV
- 12:01:21 [ed]
- DS: SCXML
- 12:06:41 [Zakim]
- -Andrew_Sledd
- 12:06:42 [Zakim]
- -anthony
- 12:06:42 [Zakim]
- -ed
- 12:06:43 [Zakim]
- -Doug_Schepers
- 12:06:44 [Zakim]
- -aemmons
- 12:06:44 [Zakim]
- GA_SVGWG()6:30AM has ended
- 12:06:45 [Zakim]
- Attendees were aemmons, Andrew_Sledd, anthony, ed, Doug_Schepers
- 12:07:08 [ed]
- Zakim, bye
- 12:07:08 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #svg
- 12:07:17 [ed]
- RRSAgent, make minutes
- 12:07:17 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-svg-minutes.html ed
- 12:15:38 [NH]
- NH has joined #SVG
- 12:51:18 [ChrisL]
- ChrisL has joined #svg