W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-svg-wg@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: Agenda, Monday 01 June 2009 SVG WG telcon

From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 14:46:55 +1000
To: public-svg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20090601044655.GE2695@arc.mcc.id.au>
Cameron McCormack:
> * Experiment on alternate SVG path syntax for better EXI compression
>   http://www.w3.org/mid/20090529175108.6F3B.2E34A820@canon.co.jp
>   http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2050
> 
> * Native support for Drag & Drop in SVG
>   http://www.w3.org/mid/1D4C6E01-4D41-4E53-BDB6-96F697797213@mac.com
> 
> * ISSUE-2267: Consider removing SVGEvent
>   http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2267
> 
> * Plans for SVG 1.1 test suite, missing test coverage
>   http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2219 properties
>   http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2221 attributes
>   http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2222 elements

If we have time, I’d like also to discuss:

* Multiple <missing-glyph>
  http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4930

With some preliminary testing, it seems that Batik and WebKit use the
first <missing-glyph>, while Opera uses the last.

  http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/ua-tests/missing-glyph-multiple.svg

Choosing the last would be consistent with how duplicated <feFunc[RGBA]>
elements are treated, though.  What other duplicate element handling
functionality do we have in SVG?

Thanks,

Cameron

-- 
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Monday, 1 June 2009 05:01:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 1 June 2009 05:01:34 GMT