- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 19:00:29 +0000
- To: public-svg-issues@w3.org
The Working Group just discussed `Review remaining items "at risk"`. <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <krit> topic: Review remaining items "at risk"<br> <liam> https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3AAgenda%2B<br> <krit> krit: do we have a list of raining items?<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: We don't have a nice list but attribute and rendering changes would be on this list<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: We could go through the attribute value list or SVG changelogs.<br> <krit> liam: we started in November and went through some of it<br> <AmeliaBR> s/raining/remaining/<br> <krit> liam: if we don't have a full list within 2 weeks we should republish a cR with current at-risk items in the spec<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: are we republishing as new CR or go back to WD?<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: WD doesn't need to address all issues.<br> <krit> liam: I personally think we should show progress with republished CR<br> <krit> krit: We might need to at least review open issues after last publication.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: Some changes need to get polished<br> <krit> liam: I think it would be ideal to do as much of the editing. It is up to us to set the bar. We must stay within the guidelines of the process of course. There are minor issues we need to track.<br> <krit> chris: We can say that we are discussing issues still<br> <krit> krit+<br> <krit> krit: I'd support a new CR mostly for other specs to reference a spec that is in CR already.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: The other side of republishing is the SVG2.1 branch. We need to do the edits that we agreed on. Need to make a list of changes since 2.0.<br> <krit> liam: We can publish this as FPWD<br> <krit> liam: bar is low so we don't need a complete list of changes.<br> <krit> liam: we could publish with a note that the list of changes will follow and a short list with summary of things that got in<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: makes sense. We set them up on GitHub so we could provide a diff between the 2 branches.<br> <krit> liam: I try to find the barries of publishing and getting rid of them<br> <krit> liam: We might not get to publishing CR of 2.0 but should get close to it.<br> <krit> resolution: We republish SVG 2.0 as an updated CR ASAP<br> <liam> https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3AAgenda%2B<br> <krit> krit: anything else to discuss? Bogdan seems to work on the list of at-risk?<br> <liam> https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/468<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: disposal of comment list<br> <liam> github issue 468<br> <chris> github:<br> <krit> liam: lets go through the issues<br> <liam> github issue https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/468<br> <liam> github issue: https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/468<br> <krit> liam: is there anything we need to do about the cursors on SVG links?<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: links should have a pointer cursor according to CSS<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: we need to have the normative text for it.<br> <krit> chris: CSS agreed to a generic language to require pointer cursor and that goes to CSS-UI<br> <AmeliaBR> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=841146<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: Safari and Firefox do support the pointer cursor<br> <krit> liam: chris: So not at risk anymore<br> <krit> liam: we could do this in 2.1 but it is a small risk so put it on 2.0<br> <krit> dstorey: support it in 2.0. Just an update on UA stylesheet. Really easy<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: We need to add this change to the spec.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: sufficient testing in place.<br> <krit> resolution: Add UA stylesheet change into normative text on SVG 2.0 to show cursor pointer on links<br> <liam> github issue: https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/423<br> <AmeliaBR> Test case PR (already merged): https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/11396<br> <liam> github issue: https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/423<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/423#issuecomment-396350277 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 11 June 2018 19:00:34 UTC