IRC log of CSS on 2009-08-19
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:49:29 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #CSS
- 15:49:29 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/08/19-CSS-irc
- 15:49:40 [plinss]
- zakim, this will be style
- 15:49:40 [Zakim]
- ok, plinss; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
- 15:57:25 [oyvinds]
- oyvinds has joined #css
- 15:57:49 [Zakim]
- Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started
- 15:57:56 [Zakim]
- +plinss
- 15:58:01 [Zakim]
- +[Microsoft]
- 15:58:10 [sylvaing]
- Zakim, Microsoft has sylvaing
- 15:58:10 [Zakim]
- +sylvaing; got it
- 15:59:07 [bradk]
- bradk has joined #css
- 16:00:44 [Zakim]
- +bradk
- 16:01:22 [Zakim]
- +CesarAcebal
- 16:02:02 [Zakim]
- +??P9
- 16:02:36 [ChrisL]
- ChrisL has joined #css
- 16:02:39 [Zakim]
- +Bert
- 16:03:36 [Zakim]
- +ChrisL
- 16:04:46 [ChrisL]
- zakim, who is here?
- 16:04:46 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see plinss, [Microsoft], bradk, CesarAcebal, ??P9, Bert, ChrisL
- 16:04:49 [Zakim]
- [Microsoft] has sylvaing
- 16:04:49 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see ChrisL, bradk, oyvinds, RRSAgent, Zakim, sylvaing, shepazu, dbaron, Lachy, anne2, karl, CesarAcebal, Hixie, krijnh, plinss, fantasai, Bert, trackbot
- 16:06:10 [Zakim]
- +[Mozilla]
- 16:06:41 [dbaron]
- Zakim, [Mozilla] has dbaron
- 16:06:44 [Zakim]
- +dbaron; got it
- 16:07:12 [Zakim]
- +??P18
- 16:07:31 [dbaron]
- Zakim, ??P18 is howcome
- 16:07:31 [Zakim]
- +howcome; got it
- 16:09:31 [hyatt]
- hyatt has joined #css
- 16:09:42 [fantasai]
- ScribeNick: fantasai
- 16:10:01 [Zakim]
- +hyatt
- 16:10:22 [fantasai]
- Bert: I'd like to add Cesar as co-editor of Template module
- 16:10:49 [fantasai]
- RESOLVED: Cesar accepted as co-editor of Template module
- 16:11:08 [fantasai]
- Topic: CSS2.1 Issues
- 16:11:13 [sylvaing]
- Zakim, [Microsoft] has arronei
- 16:11:13 [Zakim]
- +arronei; got it
- 16:11:24 [plinss]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Jul/0025.html
- 16:11:55 [fantasai]
- Issue 128
- 16:12:09 [fantasai]
- Bert: I've looked at this when working on the Box module, and did write that section more carefully there
- 16:12:10 [Bert]
- http://www.w3.org/Style/Group/css3-src/css3-box/Overview.html#run-in-boxes
- 16:12:23 [fantasai]
- Bert: We're talking about block level with exceptions, e.g. block-level but not floating
- 16:13:13 [fantasai]
- Bert: For issue 2, I think 'follows' is defined, but is not defined in the way we need... in Chapter 3 elements and following elements are defined
- 16:13:26 [fantasai]
- Bert: But here we need "immediately following". So that's a bug in the definition
- 16:13:29 [ChrisL]
- +1 to 'immediately following'
- 16:14:24 [fantasai]
- ACTION: Bert Come up with exact wording for CSS2.1 Issue 128
- 16:14:25 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-172 - Come up with exact wording for CSS2.1 Issue 128 [on Bert Bos - due 2009-08-26].
- 16:14:45 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: The last part is, I think, talking about tree order rather than rendering order (in any case this needs clarification)
- 16:15:09 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: "first child" would be more precise than "starts with"
- 16:15:57 [fantasai]
- Peter: You said you have clarifications that address the first issue, but he's pointing out different behavior in different browsers.
- 16:16:43 [fantasai]
- fantasai thinks Bert should come up with a proposal and then we can talk about it
- 16:17:31 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: I would prefer Boris's suggestion
- 16:17:44 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: That means IE has to change
- 16:18:49 [fantasai]
- Issue 115 (?)
- 16:18:49 [plinss]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0282.html
- 16:19:16 [fantasai]
- dbaron: I think fantasai's text has a serious bug in it in that it says every element has clear even if it's not next to floats
- 16:19:40 [fantasai]
- dbaron: I sent a message to the list a week ago, but it wasn't clear so I sent another one just now
- 16:20:19 [dbaron]
- s/says every element has clear/says every element with 'clear' inhibits margin collapsing/
- 16:20:20 [fantasai]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Aug/0386.html
- 16:24:11 [fantasai]
- dbaron: I don't think there's an issue here
- 16:24:25 [fantasai]
- s/I don't think/I'm not sure/
- 16:24:42 [fantasai]
- fantasai: There is, there are cases where you need clearance to be zero and still be clearance.
- 16:24:56 [fantasai]
- fantasai: Anton pointed out that the spec in some places assumes zero clearance is no clearance
- 16:25:08 [fantasai]
- ACTION: dbaron figure out what he wants to do about this
- 16:25:08 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-173 - Figure out what he wants to do about this [on David Baron - due 2009-08-26].
- 16:26:33 [fantasai]
- Topic: Border-image/box-shadow
- 16:26:50 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: Last time we discussed I present a proposal
- 16:27:09 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: It was rejected, and there was discussion of a border-shadow proposal
- 16:27:40 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Jul/0176.html
- 16:27:50 [fantasai]
- s/ChrisL: //
- 16:32:13 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: But I don't understand what happened sicne then
- 16:32:24 [fantasai]
- fantasai points Chris to the minutes
- 16:35:16 [Zakim]
- -howcome
- 16:37:17 [ChrisL]
- s/rejected/rejected on two grounds, desire for a real box shaddow and the assertion that shadows could be precomputed/
- 16:37:31 [fantasai]
- People repeat their objections to various issues within this issue, and fantasai tells everybody to go read her email and post a reply if they object to her argument there
- 16:38:03 [fantasai]
- People discuss issues
- 16:38:10 [fantasai]
- fantasai fails to minute them.
- 16:38:47 [fantasai]
- Brad: If we're going to have an alpha-based shadow in the future, that should be a separate thing from box-shadow which doesn't follow the shape of the dashes
- 16:39:18 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: I understand that point, but I think people are going to be surprised when box-shadow doesn't follow the shape of the border image
- 16:39:31 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: You could specify it that way, but it's not very satisfactory
- 16:39:52 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: I would prefer if we came up with a resolution that used border-image
- 16:40:07 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: People use it in a way that visually alters the shape of the box
- 16:40:28 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: And if you curve the corners, it follows the curve
- 16:41:25 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: People will expect it to work for border-image, too
- 16:41:41 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: I think either we should follow the border-image, or suppress the shadow
- 16:41:49 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: Making a box shape doesn't make sense
- 16:41:54 [fantasai]
- Brad: Why don't we shadow everything?
- 16:42:00 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: We have that, it's a separate feature
- 16:42:29 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: ... SVG shadows
- 16:42:46 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: That's how I implemented these
- 16:43:07 [fantasai]
- Brad: Once we have SVG shadows, then anything we do for border-image just becomes redundant
- 16:43:31 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: For box-shadow, my concern is what the author expects.
- 16:44:00 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: I think there's really only two options: either shadow the border-image or suppress it
- 16:44:11 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: I don't see what the problem is with doing shadows on border-image
- 16:44:26 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: Is it just that we can't come to agreement on how it works?
- 16:44:52 [fantasai]
- fantasai: not that's not the problem
- 16:45:08 [fantasai]
- Brad: We could add switches to controll what the shadow gets applied to
- 16:45:12 [fantasai]
- fantasai: we can add switches later
- 16:45:34 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: If you really want a separate border-shadow then we can add that and copy the box-shadow syntax
- 16:47:24 [fantasai]
- ...
- 16:47:43 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: If we have a box-shadow, then it tries to do this filled shadow effect where it's drawn outside the box
- 16:47:53 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: A border-shadow effect would shadow whatever's drawn for the border
- 16:48:07 [fantasai]
- Peter: Does border-shadow really change the shape of the box?
- 16:48:12 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: People expect it to
- 16:48:25 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: It looks like they change the shape of the box, but it's kinda fake
- 16:51:32 [fantasai]
- Bert: I don't want to have a non-continuous border change the shape of the box. I still want the box to be rectangular.
- 16:52:11 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: Most of our use of border-image is to round things
- 16:52:38 [fantasai]
- Brad: I think using border-image for interesting dotted patterns will be as interesting as using it for changing the shape of the box
- 16:52:53 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: It's going to be used for a lot of things. Any case where the built-in borders aren't good enough
- 16:53:36 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: So you're saying people want this ... ?
- 16:54:13 [ChrisL]
- s/this/this immediately/
- 16:54:29 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: Feature requests we've gotten: 1. do border-shadow, which is just a property like box-shadow and text-shadow that would exactly shadow the border drawing
- 16:54:41 [Zakim]
- -bradk
- 16:54:42 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: 2. A full-blown shadow property, that would shadow everything drawn inside the element
- 16:54:46 [Zakim]
- +bradk
- 16:54:53 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: 3. Wanting to shadow pieces of SVG.
- 16:55:03 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: You can do that already with the filter property
- 16:55:21 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: The latest draft is adding some syntactic sugar for common effects
- 16:55:32 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: I believe that's already implemented in WebKit, actually
- 16:58:09 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: If we go ahead and do a border-shadow property, then I'd like the box-shadow property to be only affected by the box, not by the border-image
- 16:58:20 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: You'll only get a rectangular shadow
- 16:58:34 [fantasai]
- ChrisL: It's not what people want. It's just clear and simple.
- 16:58:46 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: The argument for suppressing the box-shadow instead of just drawing a rectangle
- 16:59:14 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: Is that if the image don't load you show the border with a shadow
- 16:59:20 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: I'm fine with just rendering the rectangular shadow
- 16:59:24 [Zakim]
- -bradk
- 16:59:25 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: I think that's what we currently do
- 17:00:37 [fantasai]
- Hyatt: I think it's an important point that border-image doesn't change the shape of the box
- 17:00:40 [sylvaing]
- sylvaing has joined #css
- 17:03:00 [bradk]
- is the call over?
- 17:03:08 [Bert]
- No, not quite
- 17:03:32 [Bert]
- (But you're right that it's the top of the hour...)
- 17:04:45 [bradk]
- "the conference is restricted at this time", so I can't rejoin the call, and I'm missing whatever else is being discussed.
- 17:05:02 [fantasai]
- Peter: we're over our time, still no conclusion
- 17:05:15 [fantasai]
- Peter: let's pick this up again next week
- 17:05:16 [Zakim]
- -ChrisL
- 17:05:18 [Zakim]
- -hyatt
- 17:05:18 [Zakim]
- -[Microsoft]
- 17:05:19 [Zakim]
- -[Mozilla]
- 17:05:20 [Bert]
- We're just repeating, to be as clearas possible. No conclusions...
- 17:05:20 [Zakim]
- -plinss
- 17:05:22 [Zakim]
- -CesarAcebal
- 17:05:23 [Zakim]
- -??P9
- 17:05:26 [Zakim]
- -Bert
- 17:05:27 [Zakim]
- Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has ended
- 17:05:29 [Zakim]
- Attendees were plinss, sylvaing, bradk, CesarAcebal, Bert, ChrisL, dbaron, howcome, hyatt, arronei
- 17:05:31 [bradk]
- OK, thanks
- 17:05:34 [fantasai]
- yes, just repeating ourselves over and over and over and over and over
- 17:06:00 [hyatt]
- in the case of border-image i guess i'm just fine with everything, which isn't helpful for coming to a conclusion :)
- 17:06:05 [fantasai]
- heh
- 17:06:20 [hyatt]
- i could suppress, draw a normal shadow, or draw a fancy shadow
- 17:06:23 [hyatt]
- don't really care
- 17:07:00 [fantasai]
- Perhaps we should assign some homework. Everybody go read my message, brad's response, and the minutes, and write one paragraph about what you think
- 17:07:12 [fantasai]
- Most people weren't talking
- 17:07:14 [bradk]
- If we think we can quickly create alpha-based drop shadows, and either restrict them to borders or not, then why don't we just do that, and have THAT suppress box-shadow?
- 17:07:25 [fantasai]
- ?
- 17:08:12 [bradk]
- As a separate property, I mean.
- 17:08:25 [fantasai]
- bradk: you mean, if 'border-shadow' is in effect, 'box-shadow' gets suppressed?
- 17:08:41 [bradk]
- Yes.
- 17:08:59 [fantasai]
- bradk: why is that useful?
- 17:10:10 [bradk]
- It seems like that would be coming in the future anyway. Then, if some want to suppress box-shadow when there is border-image, they can just create a border-shadow with a .0001& opacity.
- 17:11:02 [fantasai]
- bradk: that would suppress even when there wasn't a border-image
- 17:11:47 [bradk]
- or maybe instead of border-shadow, it is "drop-shadow: <box-shadow-properties>, border-only;"
- 17:12:01 [bradk]
- Hmm. Oh, yeah.
- 17:12:13 [fantasai]
- bradk: or maybe we can just add keywords to box-shadow later
- 17:12:28 [sylvaing]
- seconds that, fwiw
- 17:12:32 [fantasai]
- bradk: or that, yeah
- 17:12:38 [sylvaing]
- i.e. adding kw to box-shadow
- 17:12:50 [hyatt]
- i don't know how roc feels, but for me doing something great for border-image and box-shadow was just in the category of "well this might be cool"
- 17:13:00 [hyatt]
- i don't really feel strongly about it
- 17:13:03 [fantasai]
- hyatt: probably the same
- 17:13:18 [bradk]
- drop-shadow suppresses border-shadow, which suppresses box-shadow?
- 17:13:32 [fantasai]
- no, that would be so confusing
- 17:13:34 [fantasai]
- heh
- 17:13:34 [hyatt]
- at the top of webkit's paintBoxShadow method long ago i put:
- 17:13:35 [hyatt]
- "FIXME: Deal with border-image. Would be great to use border-image as a mask."
- 17:13:42 [hyatt]
- and that's the extent of it :)
- 17:14:05 [fantasai]
- bradk: sorry, I misinterpreted what you typed
- 17:14:17 [fantasai]
- bradk: if we're adding keywords then I think we should just do that to box-shadow itself
- 17:14:25 [fantasai]
- bradk: and we can do that later, we don't have to do it now
- 17:15:04 [fantasai]
- hyatt: I think it's a good idea. I'd only want to suppress the shadows if it turns out to be difficult implementation-wise
- 17:15:15 [fantasai]
- hyatt: and since you and roc don't think so, that's not a concern right now
- 17:15:24 [bradk]
- "box-shadow: <box-shadow-properties>, supress-if-there-is-a-border-image;"?
- 17:15:52 [fantasai]
- bradk: how about
- 17:16:03 [fantasai]
- border-image: ... shadowed image ...;
- 17:16:06 [fantasai]
- box-shadow: none;
- 17:16:10 [hyatt]
- fantasai: opaque padding box unioned with border-image shape and drawn as a mask
- 17:16:15 [fantasai]
- @media (images-disabled) {
- 17:16:17 [hyatt]
- will look good in some circumstances but really lousy in many others
- 17:16:19 [fantasai]
- box-shadow: something;
- 17:16:19 [fantasai]
- }
- 17:16:43 [hyatt]
- like the diamond pattern in bert's original draft for example
- 17:16:48 [fantasai]
- hyatt: and shadows drawin in the image will look good in some circumstances but really lousy in many others
- 17:17:04 [hyatt]
- you'd have these little holes in between the right interior edges of the diamonds and the padding box
- 17:17:05 [hyatt]
- in the shadow
- 17:17:17 [hyatt]
- fantasai: true
- 17:17:18 [fantasai]
- hyatt: the diamond pattern in Bert's original example draft would work if you filled in the area between the diamonds and the padding edge
- 17:17:28 [fantasai]
- hyatt: it would /not/ work if you had to draw the shadows inside the image
- 17:17:40 [fantasai]
- hyatt: they'd get sliced up wrong
- 17:17:47 [hyatt]
- fantasai: right... so would need an algorithm that could specify that the space between the diamonds and padding edge gets filled
- 17:17:50 [fantasai]
- hyatt: feel free to try it :) bradk too
- 17:17:54 [bradk]
- I'd be OK with @media(no-images), I think.
- 17:17:55 [fantasai]
- hyatt: that's edge detection
- 17:17:56 [hyatt]
- i'm not quite sure how to specify that
- 17:18:06 [fantasai]
- hyatt: that's not something we really want to get into imo
- 17:18:22 [hyatt]
- yeah having to grovel around to build an actual shape
- 17:18:25 [hyatt]
- would yield the best results
- 17:18:26 [hyatt]
- but is also hard
- 17:18:50 [fantasai]
- bradk: I think that'll cover a lot more ground than trying to work fallback into border-image+box-shadow
- 17:19:31 [bradk]
- Would it work if images were supported but not yet loaded?
- 17:19:52 [fantasai]
- bradk: hmmm, that's a tough one. probably not
- 17:20:11 [fantasai]
- bradk: for that you need media queries on a per-element basis
- 17:20:16 [fantasai]
- bradk: which we don't have, obviously
- 17:21:14 [bradk]
- OK, got to go. Bye!
- 17:21:23 [fantasai]
- bye!
- 17:24:22 [dbaron]
- dbaron has joined #css
- 17:41:17 [fantasai]
- sylvaing: that or a discussion for when glazou gets back
- 17:41:50 [sylvaing]
- fantasai: not sure I follow the glazou dependency :)
- 17:42:14 [fantasai]
- he's sometimes able to sort out messy discussions like this :)
- 17:42:35 [fantasai]
- I would like to go for last call before the TPAC
- 17:42:36 [sylvaing]
- granted. he does drive with a firmer hand.
- 17:42:55 [fantasai]
- TPAC is a long ways away, and I want this spec done by the end of the year
- 17:42:55 [Bert]
- Fun: let's bring crayons and water colors to the ftf and draw borders! :-)
- 17:42:59 [fantasai]
- Yay!
- 17:43:04 [sylvaing]
- that'd be totally approved
- 17:43:13 [fantasai]
- if we finish borders discussion, we can draw gradients instead :P
- 17:43:37 [sylvaing]
- that was another one I was going to suggest for TPAC
- 17:44:00 [fantasai]
- he's effectively editing the spec, we should make him co-editor for css3-images :)
- 17:44:08 [sylvaing]
- we should !
- 17:44:16 [fantasai]
- Bert: how goes the administrivia?
- 17:44:22 [sylvaing]
- tab got his email
- 17:44:32 [fantasai]
- cool
- 17:44:40 [sylvaing]
- he was all happy about this this morning on #whatwg. minutes before the conf call in fact
- 17:44:40 [Bert]
- He filled the form, it's now under review by Mauro.
- 17:45:27 [sylvaing]
- excellent
- 17:45:28 [Bert]
- He is already IE for HTML, so I don't see what Mauro can find against him. Nothing changed in Tab's situation since then.
- 17:45:52 [sylvaing]
- didn't know he was IE for HTML
- 17:46:00 [Bert]
- Which means that probably early next week he can officially join.
- 17:46:12 [sylvaing]
- but given the quality of his participation there, that certainly makes sense
- 17:47:08 [fantasai]
- sylvaing: HTML's IE status is different, it is self-invited
- 17:47:25 [fantasai]
- sylvaing: you don't qualify, though, because you work for MSFT :P
- 17:47:46 [sylvaing]
- I won't always...
- 17:48:01 [sylvaing]
- or am i tainted for life ?
- 17:48:25 [Bert]
- I prefer that join as rep of a big company, though. I need the fees to be able to travel again :-)
- 17:48:32 [fantasai]
- lol
- 17:48:51 [sylvaing]
- you need to get the fantasai travel guide !
- 17:49:16 [fantasai]
- "W3C Travel on a Student Budget"
- 17:49:17 [fantasai]
- :P
- 17:51:20 [fantasai]
- sylvaing: you can be an IE if you're not working for a W3C-eligible company
- 17:51:48 [sylvaing]
- when i grow up then
- 17:52:03 [hyatt]
- fantasai: roc is on vacation, so i haven't made any progress on gradients
- 17:52:17 [hyatt]
- fantasai: the discussion on them has been crazy
- 17:52:26 [fantasai]
- hyatt: yeah
- 17:52:26 [hyatt]
- i can't keep up with it
- 17:52:41 [fantasai]
- hyatt: Tab's doing most of the work for you
- 17:53:01 [fantasai]
- hyatt: he's effectively editing a spec on it as he goes through the discussions
- 17:53:28 [fantasai]
- hyatt: so you and roc can basically just review the spec once it stabilizes
- 17:53:32 [fantasai]
- hyatt: mostly it's syntax discussions
- 17:53:47 [sylvaing]
- yeah tab is doing good work there
- 17:54:36 [sylvaing]
- between Brad's border image stuff and Tab's gradient work, we've been lucky lately.
- 17:54:49 [fantasai]
- yeah :) good stuff
- 17:57:25 [fantasai]
- I need to be more patient.
- 17:57:26 [Bert]
- Not so sure about that. I would prefer we spent the energy on vertical text, hyphenation, centering (esp. horizontal, but vertical is also important), tabs/leaders, footnotes, intrinsic heights and a few other things that really ought to have been working long ago...
- 17:58:21 [fantasai]
- Bert: Those are much harder topics.
- 17:59:09 [sylvaing]
- well, bert, as someone who works on a browser that doesn't do rounded corners, border images, shadows, gradients and the like, i can tell you i can't argue with the priorities :)
- 17:59:12 [Bert]
- No doubt, but any other typsettting system can do them, while the Web still can't :-(
- 17:59:27 [sylvaing]
- and yes, definitely harder too.
- 17:59:46 [fantasai]
- Bert: if we had as many people who understood intrinsic sizes as gradients...
- 18:00:13 [fantasai]
- Bert: I think it's mainly just you and dbaron (and probably someone from the IE team, though I don't know who)
- 18:00:29 [sylvaing]
- and that someone sure isn't me...
- 18:01:03 [sylvaing]
- but there is someone here who is very good with that
- 18:01:09 [fantasai]
- Bert: howcome has a proposal for leaders, should be extensible to tabs, no?
- 18:01:19 [fantasai]
- Bert: and his footnotes proposal is quite good imho
- 18:02:36 [Bert]
- I think we abandoned general tabs in favour of HÃ¥kon's simplified proposal. That's OK, it can do most things and the rest will have to be faked with floats again. The problem is that even the simplified stuff isn't progressing :-(
- 18:03:11 [fantasai]
- Bert: It's not progressing in browsers
- 18:03:23 [fantasai]
- Bert: which is why it doesn't get talked about much here
- 18:03:35 [fantasai]
- Bert: the companies that are working on it are YesLogic and AntennaHouse
- 18:03:39 [fantasai]
- Bert: neither of which sends reps
- 18:04:41 [annevk]
- annevk has joined #css
- 18:06:04 [fantasai]
- RRSAgent: make logs public
- 18:06:26 [sylvaing]
- mmmm...css3 values and units says angles are for aural stylesheets ?
- 18:06:36 [fantasai]
- that's an error
- 18:06:39 [annevk]
- ooh, my apologies, I was out for food with my dad
- 18:06:41 [fantasai]
- it was reported awhile ago
- 18:06:47 [fantasai]
- annevk: you didn't miss much
- 18:06:55 [fantasai]
- annevk: just a rehash of the border-image box-shadow arguments
- 18:07:07 [annevk]
- I see, hope you guys had fun with that :)
- 18:07:13 [annevk]
- (and girl ;) )
- 18:07:14 [sylvaing]
- annevk: fantasai was fierce :)
- 18:07:26 [fantasai]
- it's not good
- 18:07:30 [fantasai]
- should be more patient
- 18:07:32 [fantasai]
- grr
- 18:07:51 [fantasai]
- annevk: I consider "you guys" to be gender-neutral
- 18:07:55 [sylvaing]
- well, i appreciated it because it clarified a bunch of things for me. but i can totally see how others would see it as a waste of time
- 18:08:03 [fantasai]
- annevk: so you're good :)
- 18:08:17 [Bert]
- Angles are to specify the elevation of the sound source above the horizon
- 18:08:27 [fantasai]
- yes, but they're used for more than that in css3
- 18:08:31 [annevk]
- :)
- 18:08:38 [Bert]
- So yes, they caome from aural style sheets origianlly.
- 18:19:29 [dbaron]
- dbaron has joined #css
- 18:22:13 [sylvaing]
- Bert: thanks !
- 18:22:44 [Bert]
- Sylvain, for what?
- 18:38:18 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #CSS
- 19:04:04 [sylvaing]
- sylvaing has joined #css
- 19:31:13 [MikeSmith]
- MikeSmith has joined #css
- 20:27:49 [sylvaing]
- sylvaing has joined #css
- 20:55:44 [billyjackass]
- billyjackass has joined #css
- 21:20:06 [krijnh]
- krijnh has joined #css
- 21:29:16 [krijnh]
- krijnh has joined #css
- 21:42:39 [krijnh]
- krijnh has joined #css
- 21:49:16 [krijnh]
- krijnh has joined #css
- 22:04:07 [arronei]
- arronei has joined #CSS
- 23:12:15 [sylvaing]
- sylvaing has joined #css
- 23:57:15 [hyatt]
- hyatt has joined #css