See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 09 February 2011
uh-oh, Zakim is confused
<jfkthame> "this conference is restricted at this time" ?
zakim thinks our booking is at the later time, 10pm france not 4pm france
http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#D20110209
ok, zakim is not confused. the agenda was confused about which week this is
<jfkthame> aha
<jfkthame> ok, ttyl i guess!
last week was the earlier time, but last week was also cancelled
Vlad, see you in a few hours, then?
<Vlad> Why is this happening?
because this is a late week not an early week
<Vlad> It shoes that our previous call (last week) has also been scheduled at 10 pm France
<Vlad> Did we loose our altenate time schedule?
no
For 2 Feb I see
15: 00-16:00Z
IA_Fonts
and for today I see
21: 00-22:00Z
IA_Fonts
<Vlad> So, if Feb. 02 hae been 10 pm, ths week shoudl be 4 pm CET, right?
<sylvaing> my calendar is definitely on for 7am PST
<jfkthame> for 2 feb i see both times
http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#D20110209
ah. yes, so do I
<jfkthame> also both times for 16 feb and 23 feb
<sylvaing> this is like some kind of quantum scheduling
<sylvaing> meeting is in both states at the same time
<jfkthame> or perhaps neither?
<sylvaing> yes
<jfkthame> it's a heisenmeeting
I will need to talk to the admin staff to see what is happening
<sylvaing> (insert Twilight Zone music)
<sylvaing> (..and witty comment on the need for same-origin meeting time)
<Vlad> So, what do we do for today? Do we reschedule for later or cancel until next week?
I suggest reschedule for later
<sylvaing> but then what is meeting time next week ?
<Vlad> Okay, I will send a notice to WG list
looking at the calendar over a longer period, it looks as if the later call has been scheduled weekly (despite what the booking says) and the earlier call every two weeks
I willtalk to the admin staff and get it sorted out
<sylvaing> all right. so talk again in 6 hours today ?
yup
in my personal calendar today was an early week, and it was set like that months ago
<sylvaing> same here
<Vlad> I just sent a msg to the WG list announcing the change for today, hope you guys can make it.
<Vlad> Check the email
trackbot, start telcon
<trackbot> Meeting: WebFonts Working Group Teleconference
<trackbot> Date: 09 February 2011
oh yes it has, Zakim
<jfkthame> is zakim not paying attention to the phone today?
actions at http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/open
<scribe> ScribeNick: ChrisL
action-29?
<trackbot> ACTION-29 -- John Hudson to review woff faq with chris and vlad -- due 2010-10-06 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/29
Vlad: John sent in some good text, i made some comments
ChrisL: plan to add the text that John sent in, we can always further revise later
close action-29
<trackbot> ACTION-29 Review woff faq with chris and vlad closed
<scribe> ACTION: chris to edit WOFF faq with Johns text incorporating Vlad's corrections [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/02/09-webfonts-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-73 - Edit WOFF faq with Johns text incorporating Vlad's corrections [on Chris Lilley - due 2011-02-16].
action-48?
<trackbot> ACTION-48 -- Tal Leming to create UA test for bad metadata -- due 2010-11-24 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/48
close action-48
<trackbot> ACTION-48 Create UA test for bad metadata closed
close action-49
<trackbot> ACTION-49 Update UA test plan to include new "fringe" tests. closed
close action-50
<trackbot> ACTION-50 Update font format test plan to include new "fringe" tests. closed
Tal: I did those
action-52?
<trackbot> ACTION-52 -- Chris Lilley to respond to erik muller on pronunciation and sorting -- due 2010-12-08 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/52
ChrisL: not done yet
action-57?
<trackbot> ACTION-57 -- Jonathan Kew to respons on issue-14 -- due 2011-01-26 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/57
jfkthame: still working on that one
Vlad: direction attributes inside
element. But issue is text in attributes
... so our conclusion was that font vendor names don't need
directin attributes anyway
jfkthame: direction applies to the attribute, the only thing you can't do ia add markup in attributes. We agreed to add direction to all elements
Vlad: and direction can be based
on Unicode rules, for simple text
... Chris and Richard discussed but there was no conclusion
ChrisL: need to propose a solution to Richard and see what he says
action-58?
<trackbot> ACTION-58 -- Tal Leming to revise test cases to allow multiple credit elements -- due 2011-01-26 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/58
action-59?
<trackbot> ACTION-59 -- Chris Lilley to respond to I18n-ISSUE-2 -- due 2011-01-26 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/59
Chris: that one is easy, will do soon
action-60>
action-61?
<trackbot> ACTION-61 -- Chris Lilley to provide samples and respond to I18n -- due 2011-01-26 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/61
ChrisL: ok so this is the div and
span one
... 62 is waiting for action-61
action-64?
<trackbot> ACTION-64 -- Jonathan Kew to remove normative statements from introduction to new section 'General Requirements' -- due 2011-01-26 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/64
jfkthame: done today
close action-64
<trackbot> ACTION-64 Remove normative statements from introduction to new section 'General Requirements' closed
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/webfonts/WOFF/spec/Overview.html
close action-64
<trackbot> ACTION-64 Remove normative statements from introduction to new section 'General Requirements' closed
close action-66
<trackbot> ACTION-66 Edit spec 'this element may be localised' replaced 'this element may be localised using text child element' closed
close action-67
<trackbot> ACTION-67 Edit section 6, past paragraph: 'at least one text sub element' replaced by 'at least one text child element'. closed
close action-68
<trackbot> ACTION-68 General replacement: 'sub elements' to 'child elements' closed
close action-70
<trackbot> ACTION-70 Replace last sentence of section 7: End of Private Data block must correspond with the end of the last file. closed
close action-71
<trackbot> ACTION-71 Clarify Bert Bos' Point 4 closed
close action-72
<trackbot> ACTION-72 Respond to Bert Bos' Point 5. closed
ChrisL: still need to update
disposition of comments document for these emails
... szilles accepted the comments that were sent
action chrisl to update disposition of comments
<trackbot> Created ACTION-74 - Update disposition of comments [on Chris Lilley - due 2011-02-16].
tal: blanket 'is file valid' is
not very good for debugging. many reasons for invalidity
... looking for a machine readable fault report
... to be linked to
... other than that, these are straightforward
... will work on authoring tool tests next. Not clear on best
structure
... can give sfnt, xml and private then validate the
output
... lots of things the spec says about padding, but rhe
compression variability makes it hard to ensure they do the
right thing
Vlad: we should review the format tests
tal: yes, though after spec updates are done
ChrisL: (explains last call exit and cr entrance policy in process)
Vlad: we don't have an official
comment but we do have two implementors who say they won't
implement
... so is this a last call comment or not
... better to sort it out before entering CR
ChrisL: agreed
Vlad: other opinions?
... Hakon made a proposal in email
cslye: agree with Vlad, need a
more pointed discussion. currently we have implementors saying
they will ignore it if its in the spec
... process is to get consensus first. we should resolve it
Vlad: so we have IE9 and Frefox who implemented it and Chrome may (Tab is not against)
sylvain: lets see when they check
it in
... need to split the mechanics from whether its a requirement
or not
... do we feel some form of SOR is required or not
... several ways to solve it
Vlad: yes we need to solve this and get it behind us
cslye: dave singer said he would get back to us
Vlad: Maciej joined the WG recently, so its good to see further active participation from Apple
sylvaing: opera have not closed the door, they made a counter prooposal and are still talking
Vlad: (checks charter for specific mentionof SOR)
sylvaing: IE9 will ship with current solution, so even if we change later we have that to deal with
"This specification will reference the font formats in existing use (OpenType, WOFF, SVG, and EOT), the font referencing and linking specifications (in both CSS and XML serialisations), access policies such as same-origin and CORS, and define which linking mechanisms, policies and formats are required for compliance."
sylvaing: we also depend on CORS which is not a Rec. Even worse if we depend on a new thing not even FPWD yet
ChrisL: gan go to PR then holding
pattern for Rec.
... or put conformance in a separate spec
sylvaing: not want the format to be held back
Vlad: sooner the better
ChrisL: Zakim booking is correct again, same pattern as previously
Vlad: next telcon will be
dedicated to the CORs/SOR issue
... some regrets in March due to travel
ChrisL: same for me first week of March
<cslye> I can't do Mar 2 either, FWIW.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Found ScribeNick: ChrisL Inferring Scribes: ChrisL Present: Vlad Erik Jonathan Chris Christopher Sergey Tal sylvain Found Date: 09 Feb 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/02/09-webfonts-minutes.html People with action items: chris[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]