IRC log of svg on 2012-02-02

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:01:11 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #svg
19:01:11 [RRSAgent]
logging to
19:01:13 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
19:01:13 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #svg
19:01:15 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG
19:01:15 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see GA_SVGWG(SVG1)3:00PM scheduled to start in 59 minutes
19:01:16 [trackbot]
Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference
19:01:16 [trackbot]
Date: 02 February 2012
19:05:12 [thorton]
thorton has joined #svg
19:58:09 [karl]
karl has joined #svg
20:00:53 [Zakim]
GA_SVGWG(SVG1)3:00PM has now started
20:01:00 [Zakim]
20:01:35 [ed]
20:02:11 [Zakim]
20:02:12 [Zakim]
20:03:23 [Zakim]
20:03:29 [ed]
Zakim, [IP is me
20:03:29 [Zakim]
+ed; got it
20:03:51 [Zakim]
+ +
20:04:30 [ed]
Zakim, who's here?
20:04:30 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Doug_Schepers, ed, +
20:04:48 [ed]
Regrets: heycam
20:05:23 [Tav]
20:05:23 [Zakim]
I don't understand '', Tav
20:05:45 [Tav]
zakim, +33 is me
20:05:45 [Zakim]
+Tav; got it
20:05:54 [Zakim]
20:06:25 [ed]
Regrets+ Rik, Dirk, Vincent
20:06:31 [Zakim]
+ +29805aabb
20:07:36 [cyril|away]
cyril|away has joined #svg
20:08:00 [cyril]
RRSAgent, pointer
20:08:00 [RRSAgent]
20:08:25 [cyril]
zakim, who is here?
20:08:25 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Doug_Schepers, ed, Tav, ChrisL, +29805aabb
20:08:40 [cyril]
zakim, +29805 is me
20:08:40 [Zakim]
+cyril; got it
20:10:01 [ed]
chair: ed
20:10:19 [cyril]
scribe: Cyril
20:10:24 [cyril]
Scribenick: cyril
20:10:35 [cyril]
topic: currentColor change in CSS
20:10:38 [ed]
20:10:53 [cyril]
CL: I sent an email looking for tests that would be affected
20:11:02 [cyril]
... we have quite a bit of tests affected
20:11:08 [cyril]
... but how much content would be affected
20:11:14 [cyril]
... that's less clear
20:11:24 [cyril]
ed: where you checking the 1.1 test suite
20:11:27 [cyril]
cl: yes
20:11:38 [ed]
20:11:38 [cyril]
ed: we may have some more in the Tiny 1.2 test suite
20:11:45 [ChrisL]
s/tests affected/tests affected as we used 'inherit' all over the place for testing/
20:12:20 [cyril]
cl: the reason why they want to change the behavior
20:12:32 [cyril]
... the color of underlying is not affected by child elements
20:12:46 [cyril]
... so they want to use currentColor to define how it work
20:13:01 [cyril]
20:13:34 [cyril]
... my main concern is that ew say that it's the current animated value, as long as it's stays like that I' ok
20:13:45 [krit]
krit has joined #svg
20:13:51 [cyril]
... but if we change that, that would be a major change
20:14:09 [cyril]
cc: how many implementations implement that correctly
20:14:16 [ChrisL]
20:14:44 [ChrisL]
$ grep -l currentColor *.svg
20:14:44 [ChrisL]
20:14:44 [ChrisL]
20:14:44 [ChrisL]
20:14:44 [ChrisL]
20:14:45 [ChrisL]
20:14:47 [ChrisL]
20:14:49 [ChrisL]
20:14:52 [ChrisL]
20:14:53 [ChrisL]
20:14:55 [ChrisL]
20:14:57 [ChrisL]
20:14:59 [ChrisL]
20:15:01 [ChrisL]
20:16:29 [cyril]
CL: that is a list of tests using currentColor, but not a list of tests that would be affected
20:17:05 [cyril]
CC: I remember a test in the Tiny test suite explicitly testing the currentColor inheritance
20:18:21 [krit]
There is one in SVG 1.1SE as well
20:18:23 [cyril]
CC: has the CSS WG considered other options? Is it the only option they have ?
20:18:41 [krit]
(Just partly attending to view comments)
20:19:02 [cyril]
Tav: we discussed that currentColor would have two values?
20:19:13 [cyril]
CL: no currentColor is a value not a property
20:19:31 [cyril]
CC: we discussed currentFill, currentStroke, ...
20:19:39 [ChrisL]
20:19:56 [cyril]
20:19:58 [cyril]
20:20:00 [cyril]
20:20:02 [cyril]
20:20:04 [cyril]
20:20:06 [cyril]
20:20:27 [cyril]
CL: I wasn't proposing to change currentColor
20:20:37 [cyril]
Tav: CSS could use useColor?
20:20:46 [cyril]
CL: I suppose they could
20:21:30 [cyril]
... actually,' I'm not so sure for their use case
20:21:46 [cyril]
CC: they could add a new keyword for their use case
20:21:50 [cyril]
CL: that's true
20:22:30 [ChrisL]
tab's email describes their use case
20:23:19 [cyril]
20:23:29 [cyril]
CC: the property they seem to need this for is text-emphasis-color
20:24:37 [cyril]
... we should ask the CSS WG to see if they can't use the useColor keyword for that case
20:25:28 [cyril]
CL: it would help if Tab was on the call
20:26:07 [ChrisL]
I suspect he is either travelling or on vacation prior to the CSS meeting next week
20:26:35 [cyril]
ACTION: Chris to ask Tab about the use of useColor keyword for the text-emphasis-color use case
20:26:35 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-3232 - Ask Tab about the use of useColor keyword for the text-emphasis-color use case [on Chris Lilley - due 2012-02-09].
20:26:39 [ChrisL]
I willbe there, i can ask him
20:27:25 [cyril]
topic: SVG Requirements
20:27:38 [cyril]
20:29:07 [cyril]
20:29:20 [cyril]
topic: line-increment
20:29:30 [cyril]
CL: does it apply to textAreq
20:29:33 [ChrisL]
This property applies to the 'textArea' element, and to child elements of the 'textArea' element.
20:29:42 [cyril]
20:29:53 [cyril]
... and to tspan as children of text area
20:30:36 [cyril]
RESOLUTION: SVG 2 will not add line-increment as it is linked to textArea
20:30:54 [ChrisL]
text-align Applies to: textArea elements
20:30:57 [cyril]
topic: text-align
20:30:59 [cyril]
20:31:11 [cyril]
ed: same resolution as line-increment
20:31:28 [cyril]
Tav: we are going to have whatever CSS has for text alignment
20:31:33 [cyril]
CL: yes that's the plan
20:31:46 [cyril]
RESOLUTION: SVG 2 will not add text-align as it is linked to textArea
20:32:15 [cyril]
topic: vector-effect
20:32:17 [cyril]
20:32:25 [cyril]
CL: I suggest that we keep it
20:32:43 [ChrisL]
a new shorthand keyword: stroke-below-fill
20:32:47 [cyril]
... I like Erik's suggestion
20:33:10 [cyril]
20:33:23 [cyril]
20:33:48 [cyril]
RESOLUTION: SVG 2 will have the vector-effect property
20:34:34 [cyril]
CC: I think there is no other CSS-related modifications
20:34:42 [cyril]
CL: we might want to make a check
20:35:25 [cyril]
... I think it's better to do when we have a spec more stable
20:35:38 [cyril]
ed: we already backported a lot of the new text
20:35:45 [cyril]
... there might be some things still in 1.2
20:36:23 [cyril]
ISSUE: Make sure that all relevant improved from 1.2 Tiny is backported to SVG 2
20:36:23 [trackbot]
Created ISSUE-2434 - Make sure that all relevant improved from 1.2 Tiny is backported to SVG 2 ; please complete additional details at .
20:36:43 [ed]
s/lot of the new text/lot of the new text from 1.2T to 1.1SE
20:37:39 [cyril]
topic: constrained transformations
20:37:41 [cyril]
20:37:47 [cyril]
ed: is that transform=ref
20:37:53 [cyril]
CL: yes but not just that
20:38:10 [cyril]
... there is a lot of things on transform stack
20:39:07 [cyril]
... we might want to keep that as explanatory for people who don't have much graphics background
20:40:15 [cyril]
ACTION: Chris to review the Transform chapter of SVG Tiny 1.2 to see what needs to be ported to SVG 2 or the FX Transform spec
20:40:15 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-3233 - Review the Transform chapter of SVG Tiny 1.2 to see what needs to be ported to SVG 2 or the FX Transform spec [on Chris Lilley - due 2012-02-09].
20:41:04 [cyril]
ed: transform ref is down to raise issues on the merged transform spec
20:41:21 [cyril]
... I don't know how much we want to have on transform in the SVG spec
20:41:32 [cyril]
... or if we want to point to that merged spec only
20:42:15 [cyril]
CC: if some transform behavior is only applicable to graphics and less meaningful for HHTML
20:42:36 [cyril]
20:43:14 [cyril]
Tav: I think transforms in general are pretty basic and should be in SVG 2
20:44:52 [cyril]
CL: transform ref is about keeping some aspects in the current transformation system and some aspects in an earlier one
20:45:03 [cyril]
... that is hte use case and that is what it does
20:45:22 [cyril]
... another use case is when you have labels and you don't want them to rotate
20:45:53 [cyril]
... you can't do it correctly with script
20:46:05 [cyril]
... the interaction and the script are fighting each other
20:46:20 [cyril]
Tav: it's an important something to have
20:47:16 [cyril]
... in a map you have a swamp, with a pattern indicated trees,... with a symbol being repeated, and you change the scale and you want to have the symbol remain the same size
20:47:59 [cyril]
... suppose you have a hatching
20:48:17 [cyril]
... you want that hatching to not scale
20:49:54 [Zakim]
20:49:55 [cyril]
RESOLUTION: SVG 2 will have constrained transformations based on SVG 1.2 Tiny
20:50:12 [cyril]
topic: better bounding box definitions
20:50:36 [Zakim]
20:50:42 [cyril]
20:51:20 [cyril]
Tav: how is tiny better than 1.1 ha
20:51:25 [cyril]
20:51:39 [cyril]
ed: it explains tight bounding box and so on, it's much more precise
20:52:09 [cyril]
Tav: bounding box does not include stroke related properties
20:52:22 [cyril]
ed: yes we already agreed to improve that too
20:52:28 [Zakim]
20:52:45 [cyril]
Tav: Inkscape has the notion of geometry bounding box that includes the stroke
20:53:10 [Zakim]
20:53:37 [cyril]
RESOLUTION: SVG 2 will improve the bounding box text based on SVG Tiny 1.2
20:54:07 [cyril]
topic: SVG Tiny 1.2 Paths
20:54:18 [cyril]
CC: any change compared to 1.1 ?
20:54:21 [cyril]
CL: maybe the BNF
20:54:33 [cyril]
ed: maybe
20:54:43 [cyril]
CC: BNF = grammar for path syntax
20:56:37 [cyril]
ACTION: Erik to check if any changes in the path syntax BNF in 1.2 Tiny need to be ported in 1.1
20:56:37 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-3234 - Check if any changes in the path syntax BNF in 1.2 Tiny need to be ported in 1.1 [on Erik Dahlström - due 2012-02-09].
20:56:57 [cyril]
topic: Basic Shapes
20:57:01 [cyril]
CC: any change
20:57:06 [cyril]
CL: I don't think so
20:57:21 [cyril]
ed: I remember we discussed where stroke begins and ends
20:57:31 [cyril]
... I don't know if it was backported
20:57:58 [ChrisL]
Within the current user coordinate system, stroking operations on a circle begin at the point (cx+r,cy) and then proceed through the points (cx,cy+r), (cx-r,cy), (cx,cy-r) and finally back to (cx+r,cy). For stroking operations, there is only one line segment which has its beginning joined to its end.
20:58:18 [cyril]
ACTION: Chris to check if any change in the basic shapes chapter need to be ported to SVG 2
20:58:19 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-3235 - Check if any change in the basic shapes chapter need to be ported to SVG 2 [on Chris Lilley - due 2012-02-09].
20:58:40 [cyril]
topic: new text features
20:58:56 [cyril]
CL: The SVG Tiny 1.2 text is better and I'm keen on having it in 2
20:59:51 [cyril]
RESOLUTION: SVG 2 will include the improved text from SVG Tiny 1.2
21:00:06 [cyril]
on characters and glyphs, text layout, text selection, text search
21:00:23 [cyril]
ACTION: Chris to add the SVG Tiny 1.2 text on characters and glyphs, text layout, text selection, text search to SVG 2
21:00:23 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-3236 - Add the SVG Tiny 1.2 text on characters and glyphs, text layout, text selection, text search to SVG 2 [on Chris Lilley - due 2012-02-09].
21:00:41 [cyril]
topic: editable attribute
21:00:43 [cyril]
21:00:48 [cyril]
CL: we should have the feature
21:00:52 [cyril]
... but not this attribute
21:00:59 [cyril]
... HTML has a different way to do it
21:01:04 [cyril]
... contentEditable
21:01:11 [cyril]
ed: I agree
21:01:54 [cyril]
RESOLUTION: SVG 2 will have the HTML content editable feature
21:02:13 [cyril]
21:02:22 [cyril]
Topic: scrolling and editable text
21:02:35 [cyril]
CL: In 1.2 Tiny it was only applicable to wrapping text
21:02:49 [cyril]
... but content editable could potentially go anywhere
21:02:54 [cyril]
... on a path for instance
21:03:09 [cyril]
.. even if the meaning is not clear
21:03:19 [cyril]
... In 1.2 tiny we had textArea
21:03:34 [cyril]
... and if you would edit it and put too much text
21:03:40 [cyril]
... you might not be able to see it
21:03:50 [cyril]
... so the scrolling was needed
21:04:05 [cyril]
... but now it becomes moot
21:04:09 [ChrisL]
about prior decision on text flow, see
21:04:36 [cyril]
DS: we should define how the combination of properties such as scroll, content editable ... should work on a text area
21:04:41 [cyril]
CL: I agree
21:05:30 [cyril]
ISSUE: for content editable text, we should consider the effects with overflow scroll
21:05:30 [trackbot]
Created ISSUE-2435 - For content editable text, we should consider the effects with overflow scroll ; please complete additional details at .
21:05:51 [cyril]
DS: back on content editable
21:06:07 [cyril]
... we should consider whether content editable is applicable to other elements than text
21:06:09 [cyril]
... on a path
21:06:22 [cyril]
... does it show the points and you can move them around
21:06:28 [cyril]
... maybe the decision is no
21:06:33 [cyril]
... but we should consider it
21:08:01 [cyril]
CC: yes we should define it since we agreed to define all undefined behavior
21:08:28 [cyril]
DS: it could be a good way to have SVG editing in browser
21:08:38 [cyril]
CL: it's a bit naive
21:09:05 [cyril]
ISSUE: Define behavior for content editable on non-text elements
21:09:05 [trackbot]
Created ISSUE-2436 - Define behavior for content editable on non-text elements ; please complete additional details at .
21:09:12 [cyril]
topic: textArea
21:09:21 [cyril]
21:10:08 [ChrisL]
about prior decision on text flow, see
21:10:43 [cyril]
topic: tbreak
21:11:05 [cyril]
CL: I'm trying to work out whether tbreak would work only in textArea
21:11:07 [cyril]
CC: yes
21:11:09 [cyril]
ed: yes
21:11:47 [cyril]
CL: it could be a short hand for x=inherit and dy=font-size+line-spacing
21:12:30 [cyril]
CC: we might then add alignement on different baselines and so on.
21:12:37 [cyril]
DS: we could define it
21:13:06 [cyril]
... I'm not saying it's super useful, but might be useful and wouldn't be to hard
21:13:29 [cyril]
s/to hard/too hard/
21:14:22 [cyril]
... once we have text wrapping people will start using that and not tspans
21:14:35 [ChrisL]
i am no longer arguig for tbreak
21:14:44 [cyril]
... so tbreak is just an optimization at this point
21:15:05 [cyril]
... we should not have it now and reconsider if people complain about it
21:15:45 [cyril]
RESOLUTION: SVG 2 will not have the tbreak element unless compelling use cases are provided
21:16:08 [cyril]
topic: video, transformBehavior and overlay
21:16:18 [cyril]
CL: that's 3 spearate questions
21:16:27 [cyril]
... the audio/video issue is already resolved
21:16:29 [ChrisL]
first resolution here
21:16:40 [cyril]
21:16:49 [cyril]
CL: the transformBehavior is interesting
21:16:54 [cyril]
... not restricted to video
21:17:21 [cyril]
CC: I agree but we should propose it to the merge spec
21:17:46 [cyril]
... but if it is not accepted in the merge spec, do we want it in SVG only
21:17:50 [cyril]
CL: maybe
21:18:40 [cyril]
RESOLUTION: SVG 2 will have the transformBehavior feature in its spec or as part of the merged transform spec
21:18:49 [cyril]
CC: the overlay attribute?
21:18:55 [cyril]
CL: again I think it is useful
21:19:10 [cyril]
... in particular combined with full screen
21:19:20 [cyril]
... it is a convenient way to pop things up
21:19:31 [cyril]
DS: does it make sense if there is a full screen api?
21:19:46 [cyril]
CL: does it take the thing out of the rendering order ?
21:19:58 [cyril]
DS: in some sense, yes it does
21:20:19 [cyril]
... if I have a video occluded but a rectangle and full-screen the video, you would only see the video
21:20:47 [cyril]
ed: it is related to the z-index that we resolved to have
21:22:08 [cyril]
CC: I suspect that this overlay attribute should be discussed with the CSS WG
21:23:13 [cyril]
ed: do we think there we have other features that cover the same thing
21:24:25 [cyril]
DS: the main use case for overlay were create modal dialogs and do full screen videos
21:24:41 [cyril]
CL: modal dialog was not the first use case
21:24:54 [thorton]
thorton has joined #svg
21:25:16 [cyril]
ed: overlay is an attribute on the video element, not a property
21:25:25 [cyril]
CL: it was added because of video-centric people
21:25:32 [cyril]
DS: I suggest that we drop it
21:25:38 [cyril]
... it simplifies things
21:26:33 [cyril]
RESOLUTION: SVG 2 will not add the SVG Tiny 1.2 overlay attribute because the Fullscreen API combined with the z-index property will cover the same use cases
21:26:47 [cyril]
topic: the animation element
21:26:48 [cyril]
21:27:17 [cyril]
CL: the reason that we added the element is because we noted too late that SMIL defines image for static images
21:27:39 [cyril]
... and animation is for animated vector graphics, that's why it's called animation
21:27:55 [cyril]
... but every one is confused because image cannot point to animated SVG
21:28:11 [cyril]
... we certainly want to have one thing point to non-scripted content
21:28:32 [cyril]
... and another one to point to full-fledged content
21:28:56 [cyril]
... it might be an attribute on image and does not need to be an 'animation' element
21:29:07 [ChrisL]
i think the element name 'animation' has proved to be confusing for authors
21:29:43 [cyril]
ed: It would be a good idea to look at the features around this
21:29:55 [cyril]
... I don't think the element in itself is that useful
21:30:11 [cyril]
CC: the fact that it's a timed element is important
21:30:29 [cyril]
CL: yes
21:30:31 [cyril]
ed: yes
21:30:49 [cyril]
CC: we could have an element with the HTMLMediaElement API on it but for vector graphics
21:32:06 [ChrisL]
my regrets next week, css f2f meeting
21:32:23 [cyril]
RESOLUTION: SVG 2 will add the features of the SVG Tiny 1.2 animation element but not the element itself
21:32:32 [cyril]
RRSAgent, make minutes
21:32:32 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate cyril
21:34:52 [ChrisL]
you could send the pointer to the wg
21:35:12 [Zakim]
21:35:13 [Zakim]
21:35:13 [Zakim]
21:35:15 [Zakim]
21:35:15 [Zakim]
21:35:17 [Zakim]
GA_SVGWG(SVG1)3:00PM has ended
21:35:17 [Zakim]
Attendees were Doug_Schepers, [IPcaller], ed, +, Tav, ChrisL, +29805aabb, cyril
21:53:40 [thorton_]
thorton_ has joined #svg
21:55:10 [thorton_]
thorton_ has joined #svg
22:01:09 [thorton]
thorton has joined #svg
22:02:28 [thorton]
thorton has joined #svg
22:22:33 [ChrisL]
rrsagent, make minutes
22:22:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ChrisL
22:52:34 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #svg
22:59:41 [birtles]
birtles has joined #svg
23:15:14 [thorton]
thorton has joined #svg