20:58:14 RRSAgent has joined #svg 20:58:14 logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/06/14-svg-irc 20:58:16 RRSAgent, make logs public 20:58:16 Zakim has joined #svg 20:58:18 Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG 20:58:18 ok, trackbot, I see GA_SVGWG(SVG1)5:00PM already started 20:58:19 Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference 20:58:19 Date: 14 June 2012 20:58:50 +??P11 20:58:58 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2012AprJun/0096.html 20:59:02 zakim, ??P11 is me 20:59:02 +Cyril; got it 20:59:52 -??P6 21:00:06 zakim, ??P6 was birtles 21:00:06 I don't understand '??P6 was birtles', Cyril 21:00:11 +??P6 21:00:18 zakim, ??P6 is birtles 21:00:18 +birtles; got it 21:00:49 Tav has joined #svg 21:02:14 + +61.2.980.5.aaaa 21:02:36 krit has joined #svg 21:02:40 Zakim, 61.2.980 is me 21:02:40 sorry, nikos, I do not recognize a party named '61.2.980' 21:02:49 Zakim, +61.2.980 is me 21:02:49 +nikos; got it 21:03:15 + +1.415.832.aabb 21:03:46 Zakim, aabb is me 21:03:46 +krit; got it 21:04:07 nikos: no party? 21:04:24 + +1.612.789.aacc 21:04:46 zakim, +1.612 is me 21:04:46 +Tav; got it 21:04:52 heh. It's a pretty exclusive party 21:05:27 ed, are you still having trouble joining? 21:07:31 zakim, who is here? 21:07:32 On the phone I see Cyril, birtles, nikos, krit, Tav 21:10:03 +??P1 21:10:27 Zakim, ??P1 is me 21:10:27 +ed; got it 21:11:02 ChrisL has joined #svg 21:11:12 scribeNick: ed 21:11:16 topic: Status of Shepherd integration / Test The Web Forward 21:11:28 http://www.w3.org/mid/4FD260CC.5050404@w3.org 21:11:43 DS: heycam wanted to work on that, not sure if there's any progress on it 21:11:46 +ChrisL 21:12:15 ...the focus for svg is for css transforms, we can do it with the css testsuite at the moment 21:12:23 ... and then transfer the tests later 21:13:10 ED: is there any info on how to contribute on the TTWF site? 21:13:24 DS: there will be a presentation on how to do that 21:14:45 ED: just making sure the materials will be available online as the event takes place, to enable people participating even though they're not physically there 21:15:23 DS: I will publish them right after my presention 21:15:40 s/my/doug's/ 21:16:59 TB: peter linss is looking at integrating some of the changes I made for converting html/css test to svg 21:17:33 ... it's perhaps not generic enough, my code was for the submitted adobe tests 21:19:01 ED: so there was a question about whether a pass on a test (regardless of the format) should be a pass for that feature or not 21:19:32 TB: i think you have to have separate results, e.g for transforms in svg and for transforms in html/css 21:20:02 ... I don't think any of the browsers support the new svg things for transforms 21:20:24 s/new svg things for transforms/new transforms things for svg/ 21:21:05 ED: anything else needed from us in time for the event? 21:21:17 TB: would be good to have a couple of approved tests in our repo 21:21:23 DS: don't think that's necessary 21:21:37 ... we can use the same process as the csswg uses for review/approval 21:22:00 ... can=need 21:22:23 TB: we used to require tests to have a reviewer, are we giving up on that? 21:22:33 DS: no, css requires that too 21:22:59 ... you have a creator, a reviewer, and a third person to approve it 21:23:22 ... we could say reviewer and approver could be the same person if we want 21:23:39 TB: how does the test become approved? 21:23:56 DS: the shepherd tool moves the approved tests to another directory 21:24:27 TB: right now we have nothing in our approved directory 21:24:39 ... shouldn't we have a few in there? 21:24:49 DS: I think so yes 21:25:07 ... only a few people have committed tests so far 21:26:27 ... I'll look at reviewing and approving some of the tests 21:26:50 TB: i'll move some of my tests to the submitted folder 21:27:01 DS: right, only those will be picked up by shepherd 21:27:58 ACTION: Dirk to review (and approve) Tav's submitted svg2-tests 21:27:59 Created ACTION-3308 - Review (and approve) Tav's submitted svg2-tests [on Dirk Schulze - due 2012-06-21]. 21:28:56 ED: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/svg2-tests/raw-file/tip/contributors/tavmjong/submitted/template_001.svg is this the template to use? 21:29:08 TB: yes 21:29:18 http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Test_Suite_Overview#How_to_Create_Tests 21:29:22 DS: all tests must be BSD-licensed, right? 21:29:32 CL: yes 21:29:54 http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2008/03-bsd-license.html 21:30:34 TB: how does it work with linking to spec sections, since the spec is still pretty much in flux? 21:30:34 template should be the same as http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVG2/Testing_Requirements#Revised_structure_after_comment_by_Peter_Linss 21:30:59 DS: you should link to the toplevel section 21:31:34 CL: so the file ED linked to isn't the latest template, should be revised 21:31:46 TB: I thought we agreed to allow link elements 21:32:16 DS: I think we have a resolution for that already 21:32:44 jun has joined #svg 21:33:18 CL: for link peter said it was easier for him to import if it was in the html namespace 21:33:35 ... this is all documented in the wikipage I linked to 21:33:54 ... this is based on discussions with peter last week 21:34:20 DS: so the wikipage represents what we want, ok 21:35:16 ACTION: tav to update the svg2 test template https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/svg2-tests/file/tip/contributors/tavmjong/submitted/template_001.svg to be in sync with the agreed format in http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVG2/Testing_Requirements#Revised_structure_after_comment_by_Peter_Linss 21:35:16 Created ACTION-3309 - Update the svg2 test template https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/svg2-tests/file/tip/contributors/tavmjong/submitted/template_001.svg to be in sync with the agreed format in http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVG2/Testing_Requirements#Revised_structure_after_comment_by_Peter_Linss [on Tavmjong Bah - due 2012-06-21]. 21:36:30 BB: did we come to a conclusion on the format for the reference images? 21:36:36 CL: we did discuss that 21:37:36 ... if possible we agreed that if it's easy to do solid green for pass for example then that's preferred, but there are cases where that can give false positives and cases where it's very difficult, like filters 21:38:19 BB: right... another suggestion is to use one standard text string for tests with text 21:38:44 TB: I have objections to having just green rects 21:39:17 BB: in gecko we use tens of thousands of tests, it's easy to quickly see pass if the pass images are always green 21:40:35 DS: if you see green it's passed, if you see red it's failed, basic principle 21:40:44 http://tavmjong.free.fr/SVG/svg2-tests/contributors/tavmjong/incoming/ 21:40:58 TB: here are the transforms tests i wrote a while ago 21:41:04 ... red indicates failure 21:41:14 ... and you can tell what's being tested 21:41:28 BB: how important is it to know what's being tested? 21:41:38 TB: in inkscape it was useful, to show someone 21:42:11 http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-transforms/#transform-functions 21:42:22 BB: if inkscape had a testsuite with 10k tests, then it's still not easy 21:42:45 DS: every test is specified to test one specific thing, it's testing a part of the spec 21:43:00 http://test.csswg.org/harness/test/CSS3-TRANSFORMS_DEV/single/svg-matrix-008/format/html5/ 21:43:13 DS: for that test it's just the matrix value 21:43:26 ... it has a red rect behind that will show if there's something wrong 21:43:40 TB: but you can't tell what it's testing just by looking at it 21:43:52 DS: the filename tells you, and the test metadata 21:44:27 ... every test should describe what it's testing inside the metadata 21:44:36 ... and the pass criteria 21:45:26 BB: one difference is that you should be able to look at a test and see what it's testing, but that's not so important in an automated system 21:45:46 http://test.csswg.org/harness/test/CSS3-TRANSFORMS_DEV/single/svg-matrix-008/format/html5/ 21:45:49 DS: right, because then the automated engine doesn't care what it's testing, just compares the results 21:46:23 ... it's up to the author to provide the information 21:46:31 ... in the metadata, but it should be there 21:47:01 ... I think it's quite clear what it's testing 21:47:21 TB: what do people think? 21:47:52 CL: valuable to run automated tests, but when you get the list of failed tests it's useful if a human can quickly tell whats wrong 21:48:07 ... and then it's useful to know what those tests are testing exactly 21:48:38 ... this means we should have welldocumented testcases 21:48:49 DS: that's why we do review on them 21:49:20 TB: maybe we should have them separate? it's nice to have to some visual tests (like in SVG 1.1) 21:49:45 DS: we have reftests that can do that, two images have to look the same, otherwise it's a fail 21:50:19 -Tav 21:50:36 ... I agree that visual tests are good, and that if you see red it's failed 21:50:53 +Tav 21:51:11 http://test.csswg.org/harness/test/CSS3-TRANSFORMS_DEV/single/svg-scale-001/format/html5/ 21:51:23 DS: here is a test, two rects... 21:52:14 http://test.csswg.org/harness/test/CSS3-TRANSFORMS_DEV/single/svg-skewx-020/format/html5/ 21:52:25 DS: this next test fails in all browsers 21:53:16 ... anyway, we can also discuss further on the mailinglist 21:53:22 the 'show reference' link is broken btw 21:53:38 ... and it means others can follow the discussion 21:53:55 CL: i'd like to say another thing about the template 21:54:06 ... the template doesn't use a particular font 21:54:24 ... which means every implentation may use a different font 21:54:42 ... suggest we standardize on a particular WOFF font 21:55:03 DS: but we don't need that with reftests, because it ensures the font is the same on both reference and testcase 21:55:20 ... AHEM is often used in css tests 21:55:31 CL: ahem is not always useful though 21:55:55 DS: I think it's wrong to require a particular font 21:56:03 CL: why is consistency bad? 21:56:16 DS: but it doesn't matter, because we have reftest 21:56:57 CL: what is the problem? we've had unreadable text, and people assuming a particular default font 21:57:11 ... if you're testing svg it's not going to reflow text for example 21:57:29 DS: if you add more dependencies then that's an additional thing that can fail 21:57:54 CL: all browsers support this, explain why the pass criteria would make it fail? 21:58:16 DS: but you add unnecessary complexity 21:58:26 CL: so should we also take out the metadata? 21:58:39 DS: that's different 21:59:40 -ChrisL 22:00:25 ED: I think it's quite nice to have consistent fonts used throughout the testsuite 22:00:39 +ChrisL 22:01:02 ... looking back at the SVG testsuite, yes svgfonts/webfonts is additional complexity, but it's also nice to get consistent rendering across platforms 22:01:48 DS: webfonts are a requirement or just something we require in svg? 22:01:53 -Cyril 22:02:16 s/we require/we support/ 22:02:17 TB: inkscape doesn't support webfonts 22:03:09 DS: the problem is that if webfonts isn't a requirement for svg 22:03:21 CL: we have resolved that webfonts is a requirement for svg 22:03:47 s/webfonts is/webfonts, and woff, are/ 22:04:38 ED: so, can we agree on having a consistent font used when possible? 22:04:59 DS: don't want to require webfonts for the tests 22:05:45 TB: dirks tests are simple, don't require labeling, but svg1.1 tests are more visual 22:05:51 ... with labels and so on 22:06:03 nikos: it's a risk if the layout obscures the text 22:06:06 -birtles 22:06:16 ... you don't necessaryly know the output you're going to get 22:06:27 CL: right, you might get unexpected results 22:06:43 TB: but the risk is pretty small, but I prefer the svg11 tests though 22:07:24 ... all it would take is to put in a style section in the template to use a webfont as the default font 22:07:28 yes it would just take one @font-face rule plus a font family and size on the main group 22:07:39 TB: inkscape would ignore it 22:09:25 (discussion on inkscape and testing with references) 22:09:41 so you would no longer need to make speccial inkscape test versions with all text elements removed 22:10:06 DS: i'm not strongly opposed to adding WOFF fonts, I just think that we should reduce the tests as much as possible 22:10:56 CL: that's why I pushed hard for pass criteria, because it doesn't matter if the WOFF is supported or not if the only thing that needs to be done is to render a rect for example 22:11:24 ... unless the pass criteria says you have to look exactly like a given font 22:11:29 jet has joined #svg 22:12:21 DS: for automated tests it's still additional complexity, requirements for passing the test 22:12:57 CL: but if we have flags, then we should just not add the flag "need webfont" if it's not necessary 22:13:22 DS: how do you style the elements? 22:13:32 CL: that's why it should be in the template 22:13:49 DS: but we should only have that if it's needed for passing the test 22:14:00 ... don't think we can agree on having this right now 22:14:53 CL: I don't accept your arguments 22:15:19 TB: don't care so much either way 22:15:19 s/arguments/arguments that unflagged tests would fail/ 22:15:43 nikos: no strong opinion from me, but it should be in the template i think so that it's no risk to be missed 22:16:58 ED: i'd be fine with having two templates, one for tests that use text in the visual output, and one that doesn't (where the webfont isn't needed) 22:17:05 CL: that would be ok with me too 22:17:28 ... would that be fine with you DS? 22:17:42 DS: yes 22:18:30 TB: ok, so two templates, one for automated tests (without the webfont), one for visual tests (that have the webfont) 22:18:53 ... I'll make those templates, what font do we want to use? 22:19:03 CL: freesans would be good 22:19:45 DS: do we also want to have other fonts, serif, bold etc? 22:20:12 CL: probably, but not in the template maybe, but it's good to have a library of fonts that can be used 22:20:16 22:22:30 topic: strokebbox 22:22:43 DS: I'd like to add getting the stroked bbox to the spec, is that fine? 22:22:55 CL: yes, we agreed to do that, should be fine 22:23:37 DS: other kinds of bboxes too, like markers, filters etc? 22:23:48 CL: we tried to limit it to stroke I think 22:24:28 ... anything that affects strokes should say how it affects the strokebbox 22:24:40 DS: should markers be included? 22:24:50 CL: possibly 22:25:40 DS: ok, i'll try to do this next week (don't need an action) 22:25:45 -krit 22:25:48 -ChrisL 22:26:01 -nikos 22:26:02 -Tav 22:26:09 -ed 22:26:11 GA_SVGWG(SVG1)5:00PM has ended 22:26:11 Attendees were Cyril, birtles, +61.2.980.5.aaaa, nikos, +1.415.832.aabb, krit, +1.612.789.aacc, Tav, ed, ChrisL 22:27:55 shepazu has joined #svg 22:28:21 krit has joined #svg 22:28:29 krit has left #svg 22:32:55 rrsagent, make minutes 22:32:55 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/14-svg-minutes.html ChrisL 22:56:39 birtles has joined #svg 23:06:56 jet has joined #svg