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
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]
10:30:42 [aemmons]
zakim, [IPcaller] is me
10:30:42 [Zakim]
+aemmons; got it
10:31:49 [Zakim]
10:31:58 [Zakim]
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]
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]
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]
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]
10:42:50 [aemmons]
10:43:03 [ed]
10:43:09 [shepazu]
10:43:49 [ed]
AE: still negotiation to be able to go, but I think bitflash are sending someone
10:44:06 [ed] 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]
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]'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]
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]
10:58:44 [ed] 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]
11:00:24 [ed] 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]
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] 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 regarding the first point
11:08:43 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-2194 - Follow up with DOH on regarding the first point [on Anthony Grasso - due 2008-09-23].
11:09:16 [aemmons]
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]
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]
11:18:51 [shepazu]
11:21:14 [shepazu]
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]
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] 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] 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]
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] 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]
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]
12:06:41 [Zakim]
12:06:42 [Zakim]
12:06:42 [Zakim]
12:06:43 [Zakim]
12:06:44 [Zakim]
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 ed
12:15:38 [NH]
NH has joined #SVG
12:51:18 [ChrisL]
ChrisL has joined #svg