IRC log of CSS on 2009-05-13
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:47:22 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #CSS
- 15:47:22 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/05/13-CSS-irc
- 15:47:28 [glazou]
- Zakim, this will be Style
- 15:47:28 [Zakim]
- ok, glazou; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 13 minutes
- 15:56:06 [mollydotcom]
- mollydotcom has joined #css
- 15:56:12 [mollydotcom]
- mollydotcom has left #css
- 15:56:51 [Zakim]
- Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started
- 15:56:58 [Zakim]
- + +1.858.216.aaaa
- 15:57:20 [plinss]
- zakim, +1.858.216 is me
- 15:57:20 [Zakim]
- +plinss; got it
- 15:57:54 [Zakim]
- +glazou
- 16:01:46 [CesarAcebal]
- CesarAcebal has joined #css
- 16:03:13 [Zakim]
- +[Microsoft]
- 16:03:28 [Zakim]
- +Bert
- 16:03:33 [sylvaing]
- sylvaing has joined #css
- 16:03:42 [sylvaing]
- Zakim, [Microsoft] has sylvaing
- 16:03:44 [Zakim]
- +sylvaing; got it
- 16:05:03 [Zakim]
- +David_Baron
- 16:05:40 [Zakim]
- +??P21
- 16:06:13 [glazou]
- fantasai: you join the call?
- 16:07:08 [Bert]
- Scribe: Bert
- 16:07:08 [Zakim]
- +SteveZ
- 16:07:14 [Bert]
- ScribeNick: Bert
- 16:07:24 [Bert]
- Topic: 2.1 issues
- 16:07:37 [glazou]
- http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-117
- 16:08:12 [Zakim]
- +??P29
- 16:08:24 [alexmog]
- alexmog has joined #css
- 16:09:00 [plinss]
- zakim, ??P21 is CesarAcebal
- 16:09:00 [Zakim]
- +CesarAcebal; got it
- 16:09:12 [plinss]
- zakim, ??P29 is fantasai
- 16:09:12 [Zakim]
- +fantasai; got it
- 16:10:03 [dbaron]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009May/0067.html
- 16:10:10 [Bert]
- David baron sent some replies.
- 16:10:26 [szilles]
- szilles has joined #css
- 16:10:54 [Bert]
- David: We might want to define issue 4, indeed. We would need test cases.
- 16:11:13 [sylvaing]
- issue 4a
- 16:11:18 [sylvaing]
- ?
- 16:11:54 [Bert]
- David: Specifically 4a.
- 16:12:32 [Bert]
- David: I already pointed out it was udnefiend 10 years ago and the group decided to leave it 5 years ago. But we might change our mind.
- 16:13:00 [Bert]
- Bert: Defined at some point, yes, but needed for 2.1?
- 16:13:15 [Bert]
- David: Maybe not necessary, but we won't get interoperability.
- 16:13:53 [Arron]
- Arron has joined #CSS
- 16:14:09 [Bert]
- Daniel: So we confirm that we leave it undefined?
- 16:15:35 [Bert]
- (Discussion about what 2004 decision meant...)
- 16:16:24 [Zakim]
- +??P0
- 16:16:37 [Bert]
- David explains the "root" in that decision.
- 16:16:37 [glazou]
- Zakim, who is here?
- 16:16:37 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see plinss, glazou, [Microsoft], Bert, David_Baron, CesarAcebal, SteveZ, fantasai, ??P0
- 16:16:39 [Zakim]
- [Microsoft] has sylvaing
- 16:16:40 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see Arron, szilles, alexmog, sylvaing, CesarAcebal, RRSAgent, Zakim, glazou, arronei, dbaron, Lachy, krijn, jdaggett, karl, plinss, Hixie, fantasai, Bert, trackbot
- 16:16:48 [Bert]
- David: We don't have good terminology.
- 16:16:54 [plinss]
- zakim, ??P0 is alexmog
- 16:16:54 [Zakim]
- +alexmog; got it
- 16:17:26 [Bert]
- David: An element inside a top-aligned is not a root and is not considered for the alignment of that root.
- 16:18:11 [fantasai]
- ScribeNick: fantasai
- 16:18:13 [Bert]
- Steve: For XSL I said top was considered first and than the bottom-aligned elements would align to what was the resulting bottom after the rest was aligned.
- 16:18:22 [Bert]
- s/than/then/
- 16:18:29 [fantasai]
- Steve: XSL, you align all the things that are neither top nor bottom-aligned
- 16:18:41 [fantasai]
- Steve: Then you align against top, then bottom
- 16:19:02 [fantasai]
- s/against/things that are top/
- 16:19:53 [fantasai]
- fantasai: Should we just copy XSL's definition?
- 16:20:12 [fantasai]
- David: We could use some test cases to see what browsers do
- 16:20:20 [fantasai]
- fantasai: Didn't Anton post a test case?
- 16:20:42 [fantasai]
- David: Some browsers might use always top, or always bottom, or the first thing, or the last thing.
- 16:20:51 [fantasai]
- ACTION Steve come up with wider set of testcases
- 16:20:51 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-144 - Come up with wider set of testcases [on Steve Zilles - due 2009-05-20].
- 16:21:28 [fantasai]
- Daniel: So we will return to 4a after analyzing testcases
- 16:21:41 [fantasai]
- Daniel: What abotu 4b?
- 16:21:49 [fantasai]
- David: We should come up with proposals for these
- 16:21:59 [fantasai]
- Daniel: That's ok, but who will come up with the proposals?
- 16:22:03 [szilles]
- You align all the things that are neither top or bottom aligned; then next align the top items to the top of the first result and finally align the bottom aligned items to the bottom of the first two results
- 16:22:06 [fantasai]
- Steve: That should be either David or I
- 16:22:36 [fantasai]
- David: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009May/0035.html
- 16:22:54 [fantasai]
- fantasai: I didn't have any proposals for this one, just filed the issue
- 16:24:17 [glazou]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009May/0084.html
- 16:24:19 [fantasai]
- fantasai: I folded Issue 4 and Issue 10 from that message into 117, they are all related and multiple bits might be solved by one proposal
- 16:24:39 [fantasai]
- Daniel: Ok, Steve will take care of this. Next issue
- 16:25:05 [fantasai]
- Topic: Background Shorthand for size
- 16:25:11 [fantasai]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009May/0084.html
- 16:26:10 [fantasai]
- David: I don't like using slash as a delimiter when the item before it is optional
- 16:26:15 [fantasai]
- Daniel: Thoughts on this?
- 16:26:29 [fantasai]
- fantasai: Even the poster decided he didn't like this proposal, so I don't think we should adopt it.
- 16:26:34 [glazou]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009May/0030.html
- 16:26:38 [fantasai]
- Topic: pity thread
- 16:27:08 [fantasai]
- Daniel: Was there anything to extract from this email?
- 16:27:35 [fantasai]
- Bert: The first issue about the grammar, I made an error, it's my fault.
- 16:27:51 [fantasai]
- Bert: The others, he doesn't like the way we write it... and I don't like it either, the handling of errors is not very clear
- 16:27:58 [fantasai]
- Bert: I'm not sure we want to change that
- 16:28:21 [fantasai]
- Bert: The last one, the fonts one, we still have an open issue. We should wait for that before we decide anything new on fonts
- 16:28:29 [fantasai]
- Bert: I think John was going to come up with a proposal for that.
- 16:28:38 [fantasai]
- Daniel: So we have one error that you are going to fix, or have already fixed
- 16:28:49 [fantasai]
- Daniel: Two clarifications requested for the prose?
- 16:29:23 [fantasai]
- Bert: Number 2 in his mail is about ignoring until the end of the block. The way it's written now says "up to and including the end of the block", which is wrong
- 16:29:37 [fantasai]
- (we don't want to ignore the } )
- 16:30:13 [fantasai]
- Bert: For number 3, I don't think we change anything there. I don't like the way it's written either, but I don't want to try to rewrite it. It's maybe not nicely written, but no real need to change.
- 16:30:14 [dbaron]
- "up to (but not including) the end of the block"
- 16:30:44 [fantasai]
- dbaron, that's not sufficient
- 16:30:58 [fantasai]
- dbaron, reread the paragraph, you need to rearrange some text for that to work
- 16:31:04 [dbaron]
- I can't find the paragraph
- 16:31:10 [fantasai]
- it's in Bert's mail
- 16:31:17 [fantasai]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009May/0054.html
- 16:32:05 [fantasai]
- Search for "Maybe change from"
- 16:32:48 [fantasai]
- David: I think I prefer Bert's first proposal
- 16:33:05 [fantasai]
- fantasai: I would be ok with the first proposal if s/up to and including the next block/block/
- 16:37:06 [fantasai]
- fantasai: but I guess that makes it ambiguous
- 16:37:45 [dbaron]
- it might be clearer if we say that it's the next semicolon not in a block
- 16:38:17 [fantasai]
- several prefer Bert's original proposal
- 16:38:27 [fantasai]
- fantasai: I can live with that if we add a comma before the second 'or'
- 16:38:40 [fantasai]
- RESOLVED: Bert's first proposal accepted with comma before second or
- 16:38:53 [dbaron]
- mine are not ready
- 16:39:00 [sylvaing]
- not ready either
- 16:39:10 [glazou]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009May/0065.html
- 16:39:15 [fantasai]
- Nobody's ready with CSS2.1 issues
- 16:39:17 [fantasai]
- Next issue
- 16:39:33 [fantasai]
- Topic: REquest for new pseudos to Selectors spec
- 16:40:22 [fantasai]
- Daniel: I think it's too late in process to add these to css3-selectors
- 16:40:33 [fantasai]
- agreemeent
- 16:40:48 [fantasai]
- RESOLVED: Deferred to future specs
- 16:42:04 [fantasai]
- Daniel: Please make sure to book your hotels and flights
- 16:42:17 [fantasai]
- Daniel: And add topics to agenda http://wiki.csswg.org/planning/sophia-2009
- 16:44:25 [fantasai]
- Meeting closed
- 16:44:29 [Zakim]
- -David_Baron
- 16:44:31 [Zakim]
- -[Microsoft]
- 16:44:32 [Zakim]
- -plinss
- 16:44:33 [Zakim]
- -glazou
- 16:44:34 [Zakim]
- -SteveZ
- 16:44:35 [Zakim]
- -CesarAcebal
- 16:44:47 [Zakim]
- -Bert
- 16:45:01 [Bert]
- rrsagent, make logs public
- 16:45:06 [Bert]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 16:45:06 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/13-CSS-minutes.html Bert
- 16:45:34 [Zakim]
- -fantasai
- 16:46:22 [Bert]
- trackbot, end meeting
- 16:46:22 [trackbot]
- Zakim, list attendees
- 16:46:22 [Zakim]
- As of this point the attendees have been +1.858.216.aaaa, plinss, glazou, Bert, sylvaing, David_Baron, SteveZ, CesarAcebal, fantasai, alexmog
- 16:46:23 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, please draft minutes
- 16:46:23 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/13-CSS-minutes.html trackbot
- 16:46:24 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, bye
- 16:46:24 [RRSAgent]
- I see no action items