15:23:39 RRSAgent has joined #css 15:23:39 logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/06/19-css-irc 15:23:44 Zakim, this will be Style 15:23:44 ok, glazou; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 37 minutes 15:23:48 RRSAgent, make logs public 15:26:46 dbaron has joined #css 15:43:52 antonp has joined #css 15:49:18 shezbaig_wk has joined #css 15:49:44 honestly, the worst in ten years 15:54:12 sgalineau has joined #css 15:54:28 florian has joined #css 15:55:08 Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started 15:55:15 +[IPcaller] 15:55:20 sgalineau has joined #css 15:55:27 Zakim, [IPcaller] has me 15:55:27 +florian; got it 15:55:57 +plinss 15:56:19 + +1.206.675.aaaa 15:56:27 +Plh 15:56:28 Zakim aaaa is me 15:56:39 Zakim, aaaa is me 15:56:39 +sgalineau; got it 15:56:47 +??P11 15:56:53 Zakim, ??P11 is me 15:56:53 +glazou; got it 15:57:20 jerenkrantz_ has joined #css 15:57:54 BradK has joined #CSS 15:58:33 wow, lights going down, almost power outage 15:58:40 if you see me leave the channel, you'll know why 15:58:53 +Stearns 15:59:15 +BradK 15:59:25 Driving in about a minute. Won't look at screen. 15:59:49 + +93192aabb 15:59:55 Zakim, aabb is me 15:59:55 +antonp; got it 16:00:06 Muted too, but listening. 16:00:07 molly has joined #css 16:00:27 dael has joined #css 16:00:31 SimonSapin has joined #css 16:00:34 + +1.212.318.aacc 16:00:44 Zakim: aacc is me 16:00:52 I don't see my 650 number 16:00:52 +??P61 16:01:08 Zakim, aaccis jerenkrantz_ 16:01:08 I don't understand 'aaccis jerenkrantz_', antonp 16:01:12 Zakim, who is here? 16:01:12 On the phone I see [IPcaller], plinss, sgalineau, Plh, glazou, Stearns, BradK, antonp, +1.212.318.aacc, ??P61 16:01:14 [IPcaller] has florian 16:01:14 On IRC I see SimonSapin, dael, molly, BradK, jerenkrantz_, sgalineau, florian, shezbaig_wk, antonp, dbaron, RRSAgent, Zakim, glazou, cabanier, nvdbleek, zcorpan, darktears, plh, 16:01:14 ... Ms2ger, tobie, arronei_, ed, arno, abucur, cbiesinger, logbot, Liam 16:01:16 + +1.610.324.aadd 16:01:17 +Lea 16:01:20 leif has joined #css 16:01:20 Zakim, aacc is jerenkrantz_ 16:01:22 +jerenkrantz_; got it 16:01:25 florian, same here, you can probably hear the thunder in background from my microphone 16:01:26 +??P69 16:01:28 zakim: aadd is me 16:01:39 Zakim, who is noisy? 16:01:42 Zakim, aadd is dael 16:01:43 +dael; got it 16:01:50 glazou, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: [IPcaller] (53%), plinss (9%) 16:01:57 Zakim, mute [IPcaller] 16:01:57 [IPcaller] should now be muted 16:02:00 Zakim: ??P69 is probably me 16:02:07 Zakim, ??P69 is me 16:02:07 +SimonSapin; got it 16:02:09 Zakim, unmute [IPcaller] 16:02:09 [IPcaller] should no longer be muted 16:02:21 + +47.23.69.aaee 16:02:27 [IPcaller] is several people, including me, but I was muted on my side 16:02:28 Zakim, aaee is me 16:02:28 +leif; got it 16:02:39 done :) 16:02:52 +Molly_Holzschlag 16:02:55 +jerenkrantz_.a 16:03:10 zakim, +jerenkrantz_.a is me 16:03:10 +dbaron 16:03:11 sorry, shezbaig_wk, I do not recognize a party named '+jerenkrantz_.a' 16:03:25 +Krit 16:03:25 zakim, jerenkrantz_.a is me 16:03:26 +shezbaig_wk; got it 16:03:28 krit has joined #css 16:03:48 +shezbaig_wk.a 16:03:57 oyvind has joined #css 16:04:05 +[Apple] 16:04:08 Zakim, Apple is me 16:04:08 +hober; got it 16:04:30 Zakim, who is noisy? 16:04:38 Rossen has joined #css 16:04:41 glazou, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: [IPcaller] (5%), plinss (5%) 16:04:47 c_palmer has joined #css 16:04:49 hahaha 16:04:54 -shezbaig_wk.a 16:05:00 +SteveZ 16:05:06 plh, well I don't ARRRRRRGLL 16:05:20 what’s the status on background-position-x/y? 16:05:21 JohnJansen has joined #CSS 16:05:21 +[Microsoft] 16:05:30 zakim, microsoft is me 16:05:32 +Rossen; got it 16:05:36 Zakim, Micrsoft has JohnJansen 16:05:36 sorry, JohnJansen, I do not recognize a party named 'Micrsoft' 16:05:44 Zakim, Microsoft has JohnJansen 16:05:45 sorry, JohnJansen, I do not recognize a party named 'Microsoft' 16:05:52 ScribeNick: antonp 16:06:01 +shezbaig_wk.a 16:06:09 Zakim [Microsoft] has JohnJansen 16:06:15 Zakim, [Microsoft] has JohnJansen 16:06:15 sorry, sgalineau, I do not recognize a party named '[Microsoft]' 16:06:24 Zakim, you're drunk 16:06:24 I don't understand 'you're drunk', sgalineau 16:06:45 SteveZ has joined #css 16:07:05 zakim, Rossen has JohnJansen 16:07:05 +JohnJansen; got it 16:07:18 is somebody scribing? 16:07:20 I guess my phone is angry with Zakim. 16:07:28 plh: Chris is sick and Bert is on vacation. So I'm stepping in as publishing rep. 16:07:28 israelh has joined #CSS 16:07:38 .. I hope tomorrow we will be up to date 16:08:02 .. I don't look at the technical issues, just the administrative ones 16:08:13 MaRakow has joined #CSS 16:08:58 SimonSapin: shortnames - we discussed in Tokyo 16:09:18 plh: I think there is an issue in this group about shortnames 16:09:24 .. I found inconsistency 16:09:50 plinss: Issue about latest version links vs current version links? 16:09:52 plh: yes 16:10:09 zakim, who is on the phone? 16:10:09 On the phone I see [IPcaller], plinss, sgalineau, Plh, glazou, Stearns, BradK, antonp, jerenkrantz_, ??P61, dael, Lea, SimonSapin, leif, Molly_Holzschlag, shezbaig_wk, dbaron, 16:10:13 ... Krit, hober, SteveZ, Rossen, shezbaig_wk.a 16:10:13 [IPcaller] has florian 16:10:13 Rossen has JohnJansen 16:10:15 plinss: Also we'll talk about the preprocessor 16:10:25 TOPIC: css-text-3 Issues 16:10:33 Elika sent regrets, and comments to the list 16:10:35 Zakim, ??P61 is me 16:10:35 +c_palmer; got it 16:10:49 tantek has joined #css 16:10:53 zakim, code? 16:10:54 the conference code is 78953 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), nvdbleek 16:11:02 dbaron: I'd rather wait for Elika I think 16:11:07 http://www.w3.org/mid/51C15ECC.2030309@inkedblade.net 16:11:30 plinss: OK 16:11:40 TOPIC: CSS Ruby Editors 16:12:24 Elika and Koji would like to take over as editors. 16:12:27 glazou: fine 16:12:39 RESOLVED: Koji, Elika and Jim as editors 16:12:48 tantek has joined #css 16:12:57 TOPIC: Revive direction focus nav properties 16:13:04 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jun/0332.html 16:13:27 leif: 16:13:55 * JohnJansen is not able to dial in either. 16:14:09 Also can't dial in 16:14:15 plh, being told 16:14:58 The number or code you have dialed is incorrect. Please check the number or code and try again. Message 7. Switch 521. 16:15:07 have been trying for past 10 min 16:15:16 ..: tantek was concerned about whether the properties (?nav-up, nav-down, nav-right, and nav-left ?) were implementable/testable 16:15:31 ..: we have a test suite to demonstrate they "work" 16:15:44 ..: so, we conclude we only want to drop nav-index not those other four 16:16:00 ?: Are you ok with adding them to css4? 16:16:10 Am totally ok adding them to CSS4 16:16:22 leif: we think they're good to add to css3 16:16:26 hence I've put them on the wiki page for CSS4-UI 16:16:38 I think they're fine wherever they go so long as they go somewhere #a11y 16:16:45 s/?:/hober/ 16:16:46 hober: I'd rather not resolve without the editor on the call 16:16:52 http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css4-ui 16:16:55 I'll drop the call if would help. I'm non-critial. 16:17:00 http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css4-ui#nav-properties 16:17:16 florian: (?) we can’t hear you 16:17:24 I'll type it 16:17:38 -dael 16:17:43 I'm opposed to putting them in CSS3-UI until there's more work done on the part of those that want them like submitting the test cases for directional nav-properties. 16:18:08 +[Microsoft] 16:18:22 Zakim, [Microsoft] is me 16:18:22 +MaRakow; got it 16:18:35 If that's done and the download simulator shows it clearly working, I'd strongly consider keeping directional nav-* properties in CSS3-UI but *at risk*. 16:18:37 leif: I'm ok with the idea that if we don't do the work then we don't include them in css3-ui 16:18:49 Tantek: is your concern the type of implementations or lack of them? 16:18:53 ..: but I'd like not to make that decision now before we've tried 16:19:20 plinss: The props are there but at risk 16:19:23 That is, IF we have contributed test cases, AND *ONE* implementation that is easily downloadable/testable, THEN I think it is correct to include them in CSS3-UI but *AT RISK* 16:19:25 It was argued that these are mainly used outside of the open web. But I don't think that's relevant. If it was in conflict with stuff on the open web, that would be a point, but there is not conflict I know of, and there is nothing in our charter that restricts CSS to open web only. Importantly, if walled garden people are increasingly adopting our technology stack, we try to accomodate them, to limit the risk of them forking into something incompatible 16:19:26 ..: so what specifically are you asking for? 16:19:32 +[Microsoft] 16:19:39 leif: The edits haven't happened yet, but they were resolved dropped. 16:19:40 Zakim, Microsoft has JohnJansen 16:19:40 +JohnJansen; got it 16:19:41 plinss: ok 16:20:12 asking for: contribute the test cases per the existing process in CSSWG for contributing test cases 16:20:20 hober: regarding test cases, doesn't tantek's objection disappear if you can get simulator,implementation reports, tests our 16:20:23 leif: yes 16:20:43 agree with Sylvain 16:20:50 http://wiki.csswg.org/test#contributing 16:20:59 sylvain(?): I think your request to undo the previous resolution is reasonable; sounds like it was based on incorrect info 16:21:09 plinss: I agree 16:21:10 The reason I'm skeptical about this is that none of this has happened in the years that directional nav was previously in CR. 16:21:19 s/hober/?/ 16:21:20 s/hober/sylvain (earlier)# 16:21:26 tantek, it has happened; we didn't know until now that it did 16:21:26 It wasn't based on incorrect info, it was based on the info at the time. 16:21:32 Now we have newer information 16:21:39 i didn't say incorrect, i said incomplete 16:21:52 We can re-assess once the test cases have been contributed. 16:21:58 leif: afaict there's limited functionality, not much "space" to test. Think it's interoperable 16:22:07 test cases are required to exit CR 16:22:11 Level 3 at risk sounds good to me 16:22:14 plinss: any objections to leaving it as risk (instead of removing)? 16:22:28 currently they're slated for removal 16:22:34 molly: what does "at risk" actually mean? 16:22:42 I'll hold off on those edits if there's a commitment for contributing test cases within a reasonable time frame 16:22:45 plinss: We can drop them without regressing from CR to LC 16:22:50 tantek, yes the are. based on incomplete info. 16:23:02 "at risk" means "at risk of being dropped or pushed back if there are no implementations" 16:23:09 so any such resolution should include a time commitment for contributing the tests 16:23:28 retrying zakim 16:23:42 +Tantek 16:23:57 plinss: acknowledge tantek's request 16:24:40 There are already 2 implementations, as Leif said: presto and webkit 16:24:50 tantek: If we're able to get even one implementation and see it working then that's good enough for leaving "at risk". 16:25:16 plinss: was the webkit implementation done by opera as well 16:25:23 leif: probably not, but I'll get that confirms 16:25:30 s/confirms/confirmed/ 16:26:05 plinss: I'm not hearing any objections to leaving them in "as risk" 16:26:15 tantek: I'd like a time commitment for submitting tests 16:26:25 plinss: well, that's the rec track right? 16:26:48 tantek: I'd like to pick a timeframe. I'm willing to be patient, but would like to hear a commitment 16:27:06 leif: I think we can do that within a month 16:27:25 tantek: OK let's wait a month. Then if no tests etc we'll drop them 16:27:48 RESOLUTION: leave these features at risk in level 3 16:27:55 ACTION leif to submit tests etc 16:27:55 Created ACTION-565 - Submit tests etc [on Leif Arne Storset - due 2013-06-26]. 16:28:23 My mike doesn't work, so I'll type it. We resolved to make "not", "or", "and", and "only" invalid (rather than unknown) media types. I made the change in MQ level 4 and posted a few tests: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jun/0270.html 16:28:23 This looks like something that should cause an errata for MQ3, but I want the group's confirmation, and I don't know the process 16:28:28 s/RESOLUTION: /RESOLVED: / 16:28:28 TOPIC: Errating MQ3 16:28:43 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jun/0270.html 16:28:56 SimonSapin: Goes back to Tokyo discussion 16:29:30 zakim, who is making noise 16:29:30 I don't understand 'who is making noise', tantek 16:29:36 zakim, mute tantek 16:29:36 Tantek should now be muted 16:29:42 florian: we should errata level 3 if we agree on the changes 16:29:56 glazou: I think we should do the changes 16:30:02 I'd like the group to tell me if the change I put in level 4 is fine, and if yes, someone explain the process 16:30:08 that's the only errata 16:30:14 tantek_ has joined #css 16:30:20 plinss: we probably don't have any errata yet for mq3? 16:30:26 is there? 16:30:26 http://www.w3.org/Style/2012/REC-mediaqueries-20120619-errata.html 16:30:30 dbaron: There's an erratum in the errata doc 16:31:05 thanks for reminding me of the other errata 16:31:13 plh: Just tell me what I need to put there, and I'll put it 16:31:27 ..: the doc isn't normative until it's folded into a new edition 16:31:44 plinss: you mean an ED of the spec? 16:31:49 plh: correct 16:31:54 the spec header says that errata are normative … 16:31:57 s/ED/PER/ 16:32:00 I don't think there is a rush 16:32:12 but I'd like implementers' opinion 16:32:16 plh: so do we fold into level 3? Or wait until level 4 16:32:20 btw florian, your tests don't pass on IE10 either 16:32:34 +1 to dbaron 16:32:38 I'll try and remember 16:32:40 +1 16:32:50 dbaron: I'm inclined to say, stick it in the errata and wait to see if any other errata crop up in the next 6 months 16:33:02 dbaron: And then hopefully we'll remember to come back in 6 months. 16:33:12 -[Microsoft] 16:33:17 plinss: so we'll add it to the errata. Who will take that action? 16:33:23 I've written if for level 4 16:33:32 I think the same phrasing applies to level 3 16:33:36 I'd like feedback 16:33:36 plh: I'm happy to add it - but someone needs to send the text 16:33:48 ACTION florian to send relevant prose to plh 16:33:48 Created ACTION-566 - Send relevant prose to plh [on Florian Rivoal - due 2013-06-26]. 16:33:57 leif, florian, I couldn't find the URL to the Webkit-simulator with nav-* properties 16:34:06 could you provide URL to email or just the simulator directly? 16:34:09 SimonSapin: I'd like to go back to how we do changes 16:34:42 ..: Does a level 4 completely replace level 3? Or do we need to fix level 3? 16:34:43 -BradK 16:34:50 ...: when level 4 becomes a REC 16:34:52 ? 16:35:12 plh: I don't remember what we do to the level 3 spec in that case. Add a note to readers? 16:35:18 we don't have any level 4 rec yet, do we? 16:35:23 +BradK 16:35:35 plinss: we don't have many level 4 yet 16:35:48 TOPIC: Extend !important to !* 16:35:56 SimonSapin: 16:36:05 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jun/0268.html 16:37:07 hober (?): I don't think we should do this until we actually have a module which requires it 16:37:58 There were two parts proposed about it, one about forward compatibility, one about an actual used of the ! for new stuff. I am ok with the first stuff, I think the later is interesting but premature 16:38:05 molly: I'm really concerned about this. There's already misuse and understanding due to the existing syntax choice 16:38:27 dbaron (after hober): I think we want to make the values of variables general now. 16:38:51 hober: until we have a concrete ident-after-! it would be premature to generalize the syntax 16:39:18 SimonSapin: but we need to think about compat 16:39:28 .. 16:39:51 plinss: Didn't we already resolve as invalid, variables with !important? 16:40:21 SimonSapin: 16:40:29 SimonSapin: we want new stuff to be invalid in older UAs 16:41:36 Doesn't this also simplify parsing of the variable value? 16:42:07 dbaron: I want var-foo: red !type(color); to be invalid rather than have the value be "red !type(color)" 16:42:22 s/dbaron:/dbaron,/ 16:42:30 +1 to Molly's and Hober's objections/concerns. 16:42:36 hober: I don't see why we need to generalize this so early, but I'm not going to formally object or whatever 16:43:18 hober: we can just disallow ! in variables other than !important so that we can extend it later, without extending it now 16:43:19 I approve of the proposal 16:43:23 SimonSapin: That's exactly my proposal. 16:43:45 glazou: looking at the example, I agree with the proposal 16:43:46 +1 for Simon's proposal 16:44:11 as long as !important is still valid for a variable, I'm for it 16:44:19 smfr has joined #css 16:44:49 plinss: any objections to the proposal? 16:45:02 yay SimonSapin 16:45:04 RESOLVED: proposal accepted 16:45:23 RESOLVED: top-level ! is invalid in Custom Properties 16:45:40 … allowing for future extensions with similar syntax to !important 16:46:18 ScribeNick: molly 16:46:40 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jun/0245.html 16:46:51 -antonp 16:47:03 Topic: Paint order 16:47:17 Alan: Describes issue 16:47:19 Zakim, mute me 16:47:19 glazou should now be muted 16:47:41 Topic: elementsFromPoint() and pointer-events:paint-order 16:47:48 David: I think I'd have interest if it were clearly defined but I need to understand more 16:48:02 Alan: I'll reply to thread with a more complete definition 16:48:03 +antonp 16:48:29 David: This is good for me, but in the spec would need to be more detailed 16:48:35 Zakim, unmute me 16:48:35 glazou should no longer be muted 16:48:36 David: I'm okay with it 16:48:47 Peter: Thoughts/Objections? 16:48:50 (we're discussing just elementsFromPoint() so far) 16:49:30 Alan: Will add some text for more information, and wait until we have implementations of elementesFromPoint() 16:49:44 Peter: Seems fair enough: opinions? 16:49:54 Alan: For the second part (pointer-events: paint-order), I think it makes sense to wait until we have implementations of elementsFromPoint() 16:50:05 Peter: Resolved 16:50:25 no objection 16:50:41 RESOLVED: add elementsFromPoint() to cssom-view 16:51:04 ACTION: stearns to propose text for elementsFromPoint 16:51:04 Created ACTION-567 - Propose text for elementsFromPoint [on Alan Stearns - due 2013-06-26]. 16:51:12 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jun/0240.html 16:51:32 Topic: Multiple Subject Indicators 16:51:40 Glazou: Describing issue 16:52:09 Glazou: Two possibilities - first if multiple, only last wins OR 16:52:16 didn't catch that 16:52:26 glazou: or all of them match 16:52:50 I'd prefer either (a) or (c) in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jun/0240.html ; I don't like (b). 16:52:51 Fantasai: I think it makes more sense if all of them match 16:53:09 Glazou: it's an implementation change so I want to hear from implementors 16:53:18 David: I might be missing something here 16:53:25 s/Fantasai/leaverou/ ? 16:53:37 Glazou and Dbaron - syntactic sugar discussion 16:53:46 s/Fantasai/leaverou 16:54:04 Peter: Is anyone implementing yet? 16:54:17 tantek_ has joined #css 16:54:31 Lea: It's just syntactic sugar. 16:54:56 Glazou: put in selectors4 16:54:57 dbaron: It might (depending on implementation) require implementations to remap the syntax, which is a bit of a pain, but hard to know. 16:55:13 Peter: Resolved 16:55:52 RESOLVED: multiple subject selectors allowed and all match 16:56:03 RESOLVED place Multiple Subject Indicator matching in Selectors Level 4 16:56:20 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jun/0097.html 16:57:21 Discussing Cross-Origin Style Sheets 16:57:34 dbaron: I think people who are interested should go review the change. 16:57:58 Peter: Anyone else? 16:58:45 Simon: Please look at the issue in agenda item (A) on the mailing list. 16:58:56 A. [css-backgrounds] Painting area and 'background-attachment: local' 16:58:56 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jun/0276.html 16:58:57 -dbaron 16:58:58 -hober 16:58:59 Thanks for taking over the scribing, Molly! My line was terrible; couldn't hear half the group 16:59:07 -sgalineau 16:59:07 -jerenkrantz_ 16:59:07 -glazou 16:59:07 -Lea 16:59:07 -Krit 16:59:07 -shezbaig_wk 16:59:07 -BradK 16:59:07 -Molly_Holzschlag 16:59:07 -Tantek 16:59:08 -MaRakow 16:59:08 -Stearns 16:59:08 -antonp 16:59:08 -leif 16:59:10 -shezbaig_wk.a 16:59:11 -Plh 16:59:11 -plinss 16:59:13 -SteveZ 16:59:15 -SimonSapin 16:59:20 -Rossen 16:59:23 BradK has left #css 16:59:48 dbaron: looked at Syntax yet ? :) 17:00:03 -c_palmer 17:00:22 RRSAgent, please make minutes 17:00:22 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/06/19-css-minutes.html leif 17:04:20 FWIW, I now have UI for font-feature-settings in BlueGriffon 17:05:03 disconnecting the lone participant, [IPcaller], in Style_CSS FP()12:00PM 17:05:06 Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has ended 17:05:06 Attendees were florian, plinss, +1.206.675.aaaa, Plh, sgalineau, glazou, Stearns, BradK, +93192aabb, antonp, +1.212.318.aacc, +1.610.324.aadd, Lea, jerenkrantz_, dael, SimonSapin, 17:05:07 ... +47.23.69.aaee, leif, Molly_Holzschlag, dbaron, Krit, shezbaig_wk, hober, SteveZ, JohnJansen, c_palmer, MaRakow, Tantek 17:05:59 leif has left #css 17:07:58 leif has joined #css 17:08:10 leif has left #css 17:17:04 TabAtkins: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20130619#l-434 17:17:36 Yup, saw that. I'll make the edit shortly. 17:17:45 cool 17:17:58 Except that !important is, of course, allowed. 17:18:15 (And stripped out by the parser.) 17:18:38 yeah, it’s removed and accounted for before we get to dealing with custom proporties 17:28:45 TabAtkins: hi, are the minutes from the f2f published anywhere yet? Is there any draft I could look at? 17:29:23 leaverou: I don't think so. You can check out the logs that krijn has, or the auto-generated minutes (but I forget how to access those). 17:29:45 TabAtkins: thanks! 17:30:50 for the generated stuff start with http://www.w3.org/2013/06/19-css-minutes.html and try changing the date 17:31:24 The F2F was June 5-7 17:31:50 thanks SimonSapin! 17:32:16 leaverou: thoughts on background-attachment:local vs. background-clip? http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jun/0276.html 17:32:27 SimonSapin: lemme take a look 17:33:58 SimonSapin: "Note: This means that 'background-clip: border-box' is indistinguishable from 'padding-box'." Why? 17:34:30 if 'overflow: (not visible)' clips at padding box, like it does for content 17:34:32 I can think of ways to paint it under the border too 17:35:00 SimonSapin: is that how existing implementations behave? 17:35:27 I’ll have to double-check, but I think there is no interop 17:35:49 on eg. background-clip: content-box; background-attachment: local 17:36:51 we *could* have 'overflow' clip backgrounds at the border-box instead, but the inconsistency with content such as text is weird 17:38:48 SimonSapin: what inconsistency? 17:39:40 scrolled text and scrolled background (with attachment: local) being clipped on different rectangels 17:40:12 assuming overflow: scroll/auto/hidden 17:40:26 SimonSapin: huh, so WebKit does what you're saying 17:40:51 which is very weird, because it's different than both the other values 17:40:52 http://dabblet.com/gist/5816242 17:41:40 arno has joined #css 17:41:46 background-attachment: local basically moves the image inside the scrolling thing 17:42:14 you don’t see scrolled text behind the border 17:44:04 leaverou: see http://dabblet.com/gist/5816265 with 'background-clip: content-box' the content-box rectangle also scrolls with the content 17:47:17 SimonSapin: it could still scroll, underneath the border 17:47:27 it could 17:47:35 but that would be inconsistent with how the text is clipped 17:47:37 and you'd just see a part of it 17:47:59 I could see cases where that "inconsistency" is intentional 17:48:44 I could live with that either way 17:48:57 krit has joined #css 17:48:59 I’m more interested in content-box scrolling with the content 17:49:20 rather than doing this http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2013Jun/att-0076/painting-area-notref.html 17:51:05 which is what Presto does 17:53:06 … and IE too 17:53:51 tantek has joined #css 17:56:50 smfr has left #css 17:56:56 SimonSapin: huh, yeah, that's obvious 17:57:15 leaverou: anyway, I would appreciate a comment one way or another on www-style, so far this thread is a bit of a monologue :) 17:57:26 SimonSapin: ok, will do! 17:57:30 thanks 18:01:55 arno has joined #css 18:06:32 SimonSapin: btw, I couldn't find the minutes :( 18:06:36 any URL I tried didn't work 18:07:54 leaverou, http://www.w3.org/2013/06/19-css-minutes.html ? 18:08:11 Ms2ger: that's for today 18:08:19 leaverou: http://www.w3.org/2013/06/05-css-minutes.html 18:08:24 then change 05 to 06 and 07 18:08:30 SimonSapin: oooooh, it needed a leading zero 18:08:32 that explains it 18:08:37 Couldn't tell from what you were saying what you needed :) 18:08:43 alternatively http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20130605 18:09:16 thanks Simon! 18:09:41 the latter logs all the time, not just meetings 18:17:46 SimonSapin1 has joined #css 18:38:25 arno has joined #css 18:44:11 krit has joined #css 18:46:19 cabanier has joined #css 18:51:44 dbaron has joined #css 18:53:01 zcorpan has joined #css 19:00:24 Zakim has left #css 19:28:00 SimonSapin has joined #css 20:01:44 SimonSapin has joined #css 20:20:33 cabanier has joined #css 20:31:27 tobie has joined #css 20:37:41 zcorpan has joined #css 20:40:01 zcorpan_ has joined #css 20:48:31 zcorpan has joined #css 21:19:08 zcorpan has joined #css 22:23:56 cabanier has joined #css 22:33:19 tobie has joined #css 23:32:18 sgalineau has joined #css 23:44:30 zcorpan has joined #css