- From: Jonathan Watt <jwatt@jwatt.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:46:24 +0100
- To: www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html
--
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
SVG Working Group Teleconference
30 Nov 2009
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-irc
Attendees
Present
Shepazu, [IPcaller], ed, +33.9.52.49.aaaa, anthony, jwatt
Regrets
Chair
SV_MEETING_CHAIR
Scribe
Jonathan Watt
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]update on ACTION-2682 (svg errata implementation report)
2. [5]Spec conventions
http://www.w3.org/People/Schepers/spec-conventions.html
3. [6]CVS patch comments
* [7]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 30 November 2009
Zakim: who's here?
<scribe> scribe: Jonathan Watt
<scribe> scribenick: jwatt
<ChrisL> zaki, take up agendum 3
update on ACTION-2682 (svg errata implementation report)
<ed>
[8]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009OctDec/0049
.html
[8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009OctDec/0049.html
<ed>
[9]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009OctDec/att-
0049/implementation-report.html
[9]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009OctDec/att-0049/implementation-report.html
CL: I sent an email with the implementation report
... if you look in the first column, it styles it in grey if there
are no passes at all
... there are four of those, and we're wondering what to do about
that
... or we can back those out
... and publish 2nd edition with a note that those need traction
<ed> btw, latest "nightly" gogi passes the
[10]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/animate-dom-01-f.s
vg test
[10] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/animate-dom-01-f.svg
<shepazu> [11]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/
[11] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/
<ed> ED: types-dom-02-f tests some parts that (animVal mutability)
that we didn't errata, it's just testing previous 1.1 behavior
<ChrisL> types-dom-02-f could be split, some is errate related and
some is not. opera passes the erata-elated part
CL: my action would be to figure out which errata need to be backed
out
DS: backing out would not mean that the errata are lost, only that
they would go to a 3rd Edition errata
<shepazu>
[12]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Errata_in_SVG_1.1_Second_
Edition
[12] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Errata_in_SVG_1.1_Second_Edition
<ChrisL> Stroking subpaths of zero length painting-stroke-10-t.svg
<ed> ACTION: ed to split types-dom-02-f.svg into two tests, one part
testing animVal, one testing the rest (errata parts) [recorded in
[13]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2700 - Split types-dom-02-f.svg into two
tests, one part testing animVal, one testing the rest (errata parts)
[on Erik Dahlström - due 2009-12-07].
<ChrisL> Firefox nightly 20090929 is elderly
<ChrisL> jwatt: firefox trunk passes i think
<ChrisL> ... oh, no it doesn't
<ChrisL> References to characters in SVGTextContentElement should be
UTF-16 code units text-dom-02-f.svg
<ChrisL> text-dom-02-f.svg opera gogi and safari pass the top 3
subtests.
<ed> safari 4.0.3 passes first and third subtests
<ChrisL> firefox nightly passes 1 and 4
<ChrisL> [14]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_B
[14] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_B
JW: it might be a good idea to to use a TTF/OTF/WOFF font instead of
SVG fonts so the test is only testing what it purports to be testing
... because lack of SVG fonts will mean these DOM methods will not
pass
... I mean they could pass, but the test will fail because of lack
of SVG font support
<scribe> ACTION: ChrisL to split the test [recorded in
[15]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2701 - Split the test [on Chris Lilley -
due 2009-12-07].
<ChrisL> fixed in tracker to be meaningful
Spec conventions
[16]http://www.w3.org/People/Schepers/spec-conventions.html
[16] http://www.w3.org/People/Schepers/spec-conventions.html
DS: I was talking to Ian Jacobs about having standard conventions
across specifications so that people could transfer knowledge
between specifications
... I adopted some of the conventions from the SVG for DOM Events
... the above document would change what SVG is doing too in our
next version of the spec
<ChrisL> www-archive@w3.org
DS: I took the convention discussion to www-archive since that seems
to be the w3c's general discussion list
<shepazu>
[17]http://www.w3.org/People/Schepers/spec-conventions.html
[17] http://www.w3.org/People/Schepers/spec-conventions.html
DS: what do you think?
CL: I think it's a good idea in general, and it certainly means
people need to learn less if they have an interest in more than one
specification
... in general I think it's good work
AG: I think it's good
DS: as long as people are using the markup conventions they can
restyle if the default style doesn't work for them for some reason
... we can't simply say that there's one stylesheet that you
reference
... there will be a supplementary stylesheet
... would the SVG WG be willing to adopt this?
... whatever specs I'm editing I plan to use this for
... there are also conventions about putting an id on things you
call out, since if they are that important they should be linkable
to
JW: it sounds good in principle, but I'm minuting so haven't looked
at the doc
... is this still a work in progress, will it change a lot?
DS: I don't think it will change a lot
... at least not the markup
... the styles will probably change
Carl proposed two different types of issue
scribe: so I separated out blocking issues
Hixie suggested a change to use XXX
Bert on the chairs list proposed changes
I incorporated those
Fantasai suggested improvements to the semantic markup
which I added
using <em> rather than <span> for example
I got a bit of pushback about that from Gregory at Opera
but accessibility people were behind it
CL: I think using <em> is overloading it, but I can understand where
the accessibility people are coming from if it makes things easier
for them given the current state of the art with screen readers
... is it the right time to start changing "real" documents right
now, or should we wait a while
JW: that's where I was coming from
DS: well in my experience you need to use it to start getting
feedback, good or bad
... so I think we should start using it to get focus on the issue
CL: I think that's fine
RESOLUTION: The SVG WG will start using the conventions proposed by
Doug
CVS patch comments
ED: for small typo type things I find patch files very useful
DS: I prefer to see things inline, not in the form of a patch
... I think it's just as easy to quote the offending text in an
email
... I'm also afraid that in a time of high feedback, if we set a
trend of accepting patches, then something we might not want could
at some point slip through
CL: I'd also prefer an email just saying what text needs fixed
AG: we also have the issue that our internal format is not the final
document we generate
... so patches would probably be patching the wrong document and
therefore be a problem to integrate
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to reply to Helder explaining why we would
prefer not to receive patch files [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2702 - Reply to Helder explaining why we
would prefer not to receive patch files [on Chris Lilley - due
2009-12-07].
DS: I sent an email to the HTML WG explaining that their current
version of params can only be used with plugins
... mjs sent replied saying he'd discourage use of <object> and
would prefer <iframe>
... I personally don't think that meets the needs of some of the
things people want to use this for
... trying to edit a URL string
... that seems painful to me
... the param element seems the natural way to go to me
... I agree with some of his points including having a good URI
syntax
... but I think param is more user friendly
... and the markup is then much more clear than using encoded URI
strings
ED: I agree it's clearer
... <iframe> doesn't take <param> today
DS: no, but it could
[out of time]
CL: you should keep pushing on params
RSSAgent, generate minutes
thanks
trackbot: end telcon
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Chris to reply to Helder explaining why we would
prefer not to receive patch files [recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: ChrisL to split the test [recorded in
[20]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: ed to split types-dom-02-f.svg into two tests, one
part testing animVal, one testing the rest (errata parts) [recorded
in [21]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [22]scribe.perl version 1.135
([23]CVS log)
$Date: 2009/11/30 21:40:02 $
_________________________________________________________
[22] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[23] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Scribe.perl diagnostic output
[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20
Check for newer version at [24]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/
[24] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)
Succeeded: s/someone/Gregory/
Found Scribe: Jonathan Watt
Found ScribeNick: jwatt
Default Present: Shepazu, [IPcaller], ed, +33.9.52.49.aaaa, anthony, jw
att
Present: Shepazu [IPcaller] ed +33.9.52.49.aaaa anthony jwatt
WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth
Found Date: 30 Nov 2009
Guessing minutes URL: [25]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html
People with action items: chris chrisl ed
[25] http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html
End of [26]scribe.perl diagnostic output]
[26] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
Received on Monday, 30 November 2009 21:46:12 UTC