20:25:52 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #svg
20:25:52 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/07/09-svg-irc
20:25:54 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
20:25:54 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #svg
20:25:56 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG
20:25:56 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
20:25:57 <trackbot> Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference
20:25:57 <trackbot> Date: 09 July 2015
20:26:12 <heycam> Regrets: Erik
20:26:27 <heycam> Present+ Cameron
20:29:44 <AmeliaBR> AmeliaBR has joined #svg
20:36:23 <AmeliaBR> present+ AmeliaBR
20:36:28 <nikos> Present+ nikos
20:38:00 <stakagi> present+ stakagi
20:40:29 <Tav> present+ Tav
20:41:08 <heycam> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2015Jul/0004.html
20:41:10 <heycam> Chair: Cameron
20:41:22 <AmeliaBR> Scribenick: AmeliaBR
20:41:46 <AmeliaBR> TOPIC: Behavior of overflow:auto
20:42:30 <AmeliaBR> Nikos: In SVG 1.1, auto overflow is treated as visible.  In CSS, it creates a clipped but scrollable or swipeable region
20:42:56 <AmeliaBR> ... For SVG 2, I think the plan from previous discussions was to make SVG similar to CSS.
20:42:57 <nikos> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2012May/0096.html
20:43:27 <AmeliaBR> ... However, I haven't been able to find any clear resolutions, just this mailing list post.
20:44:21 <AmeliaBR> ... In which Cameron mentions that this is unlikely to be a breaking change.
20:44:42 <nikos> http://jsfiddle.net/dodgeyhack/9naLshrm/
20:44:46 <AmeliaBR> ... There is some mention of moving it to the Integration spec, but that doesn't address elements within SVG such as symbol.
20:44:59 <AmeliaBR> The JSFiddle is just a simple test of current behavior.
20:45:51 <AmeliaBR> Cam: I'm not sure what Edge will do; I'm pretty sure Firefox still treats it as visible.
20:46:03 <AmeliaBR> Nikos: Everyone does visible for auto as far as I can see.
20:46:42 <nikos> https://svgwg.org/svg2-draft/render.html
20:47:28 <AmeliaBR> Tav: Didn't we change the behavior for markers?
20:47:45 <AmeliaBR> Cam: Yes, but that was just a matter of changing the default UA stylesheet.
20:47:57 <AmeliaBR> Nikos: I've added a table into the relevant section of SVG2 describing current values for each element.
20:50:00 <AmeliaBR> AmeliaBR: To be consistent with CSS auto behavior, we need to deal with pan&zoom or scrolling.  There are already values for both visible and hidden, don't need to repeat either.
20:50:35 <AmeliaBR> Cam: We discussed this at the F2F, but it's really too big a topic for now.
20:52:43 <AmeliaBR> ... It would seem more of a natural transition if browsers currently clipped to the rectangle.
20:53:05 <AmeliaBR> AmeliaBR: For me, auto implies that the content is accessible.  I wouldn't want to treat it as hidden.
20:53:35 <AmeliaBR> Cam: It depends which is the relevant feature: that inner content is accessible, or that the defined region is a strict limit.
20:54:10 <AmeliaBR> ... I'm inclined to keep the current behavior, since it is well supported.
20:55:19 <AmeliaBR> Nikos: I don't really have a strong opinion.  I thought about making auto hidden for nested SVG elements, but visible for the outer stand-alone SVG.
20:56:41 <AmeliaBR> Cam: That's interesting, because there might be differences in current implementations.
20:56:55 <AmeliaBR> AmeliaBR: For stand-alone root SVG, you'll get scrollbars I think.
20:58:00 <AmeliaBR> Cam: What about inline SVG?
20:59:16 <heycam> http://mcc.id.au/temp/ov.html
20:59:37 <AmeliaBR> AmeliaBR: Currently there are cross-browser inconsistencies.  But that's a user stylesheet issue, visible vs hidden, not related to auto.
21:01:36 <AmeliaBR> Cam: This test case shows the effect of overflow: auto on inline SVG.
21:02:35 <AmeliaBR> Results: IE treats auto as visible, everyone else seems to treat it as hidden
21:07:48 <AmeliaBR> ... In contrast, everyone treats auto as visible for content inside the SVG: http://codepen.io/AmeliaBR/pen/ee899b133d902fb82a2f6357f4bb908c
21:08:21 <AmeliaBR> Nikos: Did we not already agree that overflow: scroll should be available, if scrollbars or similar mechanism is possible?
21:09:08 <AmeliaBR> Cam: So auto could be similar, if scrolling is allowed.
21:10:18 <AmeliaBR> ... But I think we can get a resolution on the original issue, should it be treated as visible or hidden?
21:10:37 <AmeliaBR> ... I would recommend visible based on current behavior.
21:11:07 <AmeliaBR> AmeliaBR: Can we add wording that leaves open the possibility of panning or scrolling, but makes it visible if panning/scrolling is not possible?
21:11:50 <AmeliaBR> Cam: That would be consistent with the wording we already have for scroll.
21:12:35 <AmeliaBR> Nikos: It would nicely complement scroll, which is display scrollbars if you can, but otherwise clip content.  Auto would be display scrollbars if you can, but always make content available one way or the other.
21:12:42 <AmeliaBR> Cam: I think that would be alright.
21:15:01 <AmeliaBR> Nikos: Current behavior for scroll is visible in Firefox and clipped in IE/Chrome
21:18:26 <AmeliaBR> RESOLUTION: Overflow:auto should be treated as overflow:visible if scrollbars are not possible for the given element; overflow:scroll should be treated as overflow:hidden if scroll bars are not possible
21:19:12 <AmeliaBR> TOPIC: Paris & Sydney F2F meetings
21:20:13 <AmeliaBR> Cam: For the Paris meeting, coordinated with CSS, that's 99% sure that space is available & other logistics will work.  The CSSWG is supportive of some overlap for FX work.
21:20:49 <AmeliaBR> https://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/F2F/Paris_2015
21:21:24 <AmeliaBR> ^^^ Not much there ^^^^
21:23:30 <nikos> http://www.w3.org/2015/06/12-svg-minutes.html#item14
21:23:42 <heycam> https://wiki.csswg.org/planning/paris-2015
21:24:07 <AmeliaBR> Cam: The currently decided dates are the previous week.  CSS is August 25-27, we were going to meet after.  I'll update the wiki.
21:25:09 <AmeliaBR> s/meet after/meet at the same time/
21:28:17 <AmeliaBR> Cam: I also wanted to mention the Sydney F2F.  I sent an email to the list.  Unfortunately, logistics don't work for having the meeting at the same time as CSS, as we'd wanted.
21:28:37 <AmeliaBR> ... I suggested going back to having it after, but we will need to confirm & decide relatively soon.
21:29:39 <AmeliaBR> ... This would be similar to the Feb2015 schedule.  Any concerns should be sent to the mailing list.
21:29:52 <AmeliaBR> Nikos: Would that be the next week, or immediately after?
21:30:05 <AmeliaBR> Cam: Immediately after, with an overlap day for FX.
21:30:44 <AmeliaBR> zakim, who's here?
21:30:44 <Zakim> sorry, AmeliaBR, I don't know what conference this is
21:30:46 <Zakim> On IRC I see AmeliaBR, Zakim, RRSAgent, stakagi, ed, Tav, shepazu, amtiskaw, birtles, mihnea_____, heycam, plinss, botie, Rossen_away, slightlyoff, trackbot, TabAtkins, iank, pdr,
21:30:46 <Zakim> ... cabanier, krit, shane, nikos
21:30:47 <shepazu> present+ shepazu
21:31:12 <AmeliaBR> trackbot, end telcon
21:31:12 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
21:31:13 <Zakim> sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
21:31:20 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
21:31:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/07/09-svg-minutes.html trackbot
21:31:21 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
21:31:21 <RRSAgent> I see no action items