- From: Anthony Grasso <Anthony.Grasso@cisra.canon.com.au>
- Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:45:11 +0000
- To: "www-svg@w3.org" <www-svg@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html
---
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
SVG Working Group Teleconference
18 Nov 2010
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010OctDec/0150.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-irc
Attendees
Present
[IPcaller], ed, anthony, +33.9.53.77.aaaa, tav, ChrisL
Regrets
PD, CM
Chair
Erik
Scribe
Anthony
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]SVG 1.1 Issues and Actions
2. [6]Test Suite
3. [7]Opacity on mask elements
* [8]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 18 November 2010
<tbah> Pass code?
<tbah> Hmm, that didn't work. I'll try again.
<scribe> Scribe: Anthony
<scribe> ScribeNick: anthony
SVG 1.1 Issues and Actions
<ed> ISSUE-2332?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2332 -- Last Call Comment: regarding Text layout --
open
<trackbot> [9]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2332
[9] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2332
ED: Regarding text layout
... raised by Alex in regard to later version of the spec
... Tav you investigated the issue
TB: Yes, did I make some suggestions?
ED: Yes you did. Problem is Alex thought they would raise other
issues
... so he felt that it was best left for SVG 2 then
... My concern is getting SVG F1.1 finished
... so I don't mind moving it to SVG 2
... any objections?
AG: None heard
<ChrisL> issue-2332?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2332 -- Last Call Comment: regarding Text layout --
open
<trackbot> [10]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2332
[10] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2332
RESOLUTION: We will move this issue to SVG 2
ISSUE-2335?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2335 -- Last Call Comment: Clarify feConvolveMatrix
bias property -- raised
<trackbot> [11]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2335
[11] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2335
AG: Just want to try out the formula for option 2 and compare it
with the results in the specification
ED: Will require some test to be written
ISSUE-2346?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2346 -- Last Call Comment: previous discussion
about filterRes -- raised
<trackbot> [12]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2346
[12] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2346
ED: No action assigned to it
... does Inkscape handle filterRes?
TB: No
ED: Opera does, but my guess is it is not very clearly defined what
it means
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to Investigate ISSUE-2346 [recorded in
[13]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2908 - Investigate ISSUE-2346 [on Erik
Dahlström - due 2010-11-25].
ISSUE-2351?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2351 -- Last Call Comment: Clarify that units are
required on <length>s in style attribute; fix examples in text. --
raised
<trackbot> [14]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2351
[14] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2351
ED: Can we mark this as resolved or is there anymore actions to be
done?
TB: I recommended text changes for this one
CL: I thought we had made some changes
... we clarified the style sheets, for example you could omit the
unit
... I think people are confused is because they are looking at style
attributes
ED: There is nothing linked to the issue
... just wondering if that edit was made and not updated
TB: I suggested some changes in July
<tbah>
[15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010JulSep/004
2.html
[15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010JulSep/0042.html
TB: with some example changes
CL: It wouldn't surprise me if those examples are wrong
TB: It wasn't the SVG file that was a problem
... it was the text
... in Section 7.10
<ed>
[16]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/master/coords.html
[16] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/master/coords.html
<ed>
[17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010JulSep/004
3.html
[17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010JulSep/0043.html
CL: I'm editing this one in place
<ChrisL> <text font-size="50">Text size is 50 user
units</text>
ED: Pointed out some minor issues
CL: I've changed it to use the font-size property
... I changed it to be a presentation attribute
TB: That's what I suggested it to be
... Aside from that, I did suggest some other changes
... to the text
ED: Chris are you doing those edits as well?
CL: Just trying to see where the edits are
... there are really 3 cases and not 2
<ChrisL> For properties defined in CSS2 [CSS2], an angle unit
identifier must be provided. For angle values in SVG-specific
properties and their corresponding presentation attributes, the
angle unit identifier is optional.
CL: That what is says currently
TB: The problem is to get to that place
... you have to go through a bunch of steps
... which is very confusing
... the suggested text changes I had were to clarify that
CL: Ok I see
TB: I'd be happy to edit the spec, but I don't have CVS access
<ChrisL> I will fix that
<scribe> ACTION: Tav to Make suggested edits to the specification
that address ISSUE-2351 [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2909 - Make suggested edits to the
specification that address ISSUE-2351 [on Tavmjong Bah - due
2010-11-25].
ED: Any more actions
CL: Yes there a few things that Helder metioned
... I've started addressing those
... In some cases he's made suggestions for the changes
... and we can use what he's suggested
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to Cleanup changes appendix for SVG Full 1.1
2nd Edition [recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2910 - Cleanup changes appendix for SVG
Full 1.1 2nd Edition [on Chris Lilley - due 2010-11-25].
CL: Also given an action to port some stuff over from SVG TIny 1.2
... on intrinsic dimensions
... had to port across some definitions as well
... which the new text referenced
... I've closed the action off just before the call
ED: Was there a last call issue?
CL: No, the CSS working group were looking at it and David Baron
thought there was good text in SVG 1.2 Tiny
<ed> ACTION-2815?
<trackbot> ACTION-2815 -- Patrick Dengler to draft a complete
response to ISSUE-2338 and research the answers to the questions
asked -- due 2010-07-13 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> [20]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2815
[20] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2815
ED: I saw Patrick has almost completed ACTION-2815
<ChrisL> that was ACTION-2896: Copy the Intrinsic sizing wording in
Tiny 1.2 to Full 1.1 2nd Edition by the way
ED: I think the answer looks mostly complete
... one minor thing that wasn't quite clear
... Tav can you try to clear that up?
TB: Ok
<scribe> ACTION: Tav to Finish the response to Dr Olaf regarding
ISSUE-2815 and fix the issues highlighted by Dr Olaf [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2911 - Finish the response to Dr Olaf
regarding ISSUE-2815 and fix the issues highlighted by Dr Olaf [on
Tavmjong Bah - due 2010-11-25].
ED: Was actually ISSUE-2338
... Ok I have a few issues
<ed>
[22]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010OctDec/015
8.html
[22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010OctDec/0158.html
ED: the first one was clarify paced animations
... it will just be porting wording from the Tiny 1.2 specification
CL: Ok looks good
<ed>
[23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010OctDec/015
5.html
[23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010OctDec/0155.html
ED: The other one is defining clip-path
... quite minor edit
... saying again if you put a clip-path property on a clip-path
element then there is an effect
CL: Ok
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to clarify paced animations in SVG Full 1.1 by
adding wording from SVG Tiny 1.2 [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2912 - Clarify paced animations in SVG
Full 1.1 by adding wording from SVG Tiny 1.2 [on Erik Dahlström -
due 2010-11-25].
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to Clarify that the clip-path property has an
effect on the clipPath element [recorded in
[25]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2913 - Clarify that the clip-path property
has an effect on the clipPath element [on Erik Dahlström - due
2010-11-25].
Test Suite
ED: One of the first things is to clear up the confusion on the WOFF
thing
CL: I think there is some confusion that Microsoft wanted to make
WOFF mandatory
... The idea is to add WOFF as a fall back
... I'm part way through that
... What I did find though it helped with I.E. 9
... but It didn't work with Firefox
... WOFF is required to read from the same origin
... so in a local file system having /../ is not allowed
... which means we will need to put the font in a sub directory in
the test suite files directory with the WOFF files
... will this break any of the scripts?
AG: Should be ok, as long as it is the last thing that gets done
ED: We also use a packaging script to package all the directories up
into a single archive
RESOLUTION: For tests that use SVG fonts as part of the test we will
add WOFF fall back fonts in addition to the SVG fonts
<ed> styling-css-06-b.svg
ED: I don't think the test should be dropped
... if anything we should have more tests for active and focus
... as this test is limited
CL: Well we didn't originally have a test for it at all
ED: I haven't tested this in Safari or Chrome
CL: It passes in Opera
ED: Ok so Safari doesn't seem to do the stroking it does do the
underline
... not sure why that is
... might be because it's been selected
... apart from that, I think Safari is passing everything except
that point with the particular stroke
... not sure what the cause is
... seems to be doing the same style rule and they should both apply
at the same time
CL: I don't see anything wrong with the test
... and I see specific wording in the SVG spec
ED: It's close to being passed by more than one implementation
... I mean it is applying the correct style rule
CL: I'm sort of tempted to leave it because it encourages them to
fix their bug
<ChrisL>
[26]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/text.html#TextSelec
tion
[26] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/text.html#TextSelection
CL: found the wording
... section 6.7
... in the old version
<ChrisL> CSS2's dynamic pseudo-classes :hover, :active and :focus
and pseudo-classes :first-child, :visited, :link and :lang ([CSS2],
section 5.11). The remaining CSS2 pseudo-classes, including those
having to do with generated content ([CSS2], chapter 12), are not
part of the SVG language definition. (Note: an SVG element gains
focus when it is selected. See Text selection.)
<ChrisL>
[27]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/styling.html#Stylin
gWithCSS
[27] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/styling.html#StylingWithCSS
AG: Just wondering if we should change the wording
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to Remove the "Note:" in section 6.7 in the
specification regarding style events on text [recorded in
[28]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2914 - Remove the "Note:" in section 6.7
in the specification regarding style events on text [on Chris Lilley
- due 2010-11-25].
<ed>
[29]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010OctDec/007
2.html
[29] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010OctDec/0072.html
Opacity on mask elements
ED: Email is about whether opacity and mask elements have some sort
of effect
... I think that most implementations apply an opacity on a mask
element
... the test on the email show that Firefox, Opera and Safari
... render the square red
... meaning there is no effect from the opacity
... I think Patrik was asking this to be clarified
... first of all is that the behaviour that we want
TB: Inkscape is doing the same thing as firefox
... one red square, two green
AG: when you mask something you're clipping it
ED: Yes
AG: So doesn't really make sense to have an opacity on a mask
ED: I think adding some wording to say that opacity doesn't apply to
mask elements is a good clarification to make
AG: Where would you add that?
ED: The mask property lists that it applies to container elements
... and that it is a container element
<ed> 'opacity' property -> Applies to: graphics elements and
container elements (except for the <mask> element)
ED: The alternative thing to do would be remove mask elements from
container elements
... Another possible change would be list all the general elements,
but that wouldn't be very pretty
CL: Could even add a sentence to say that if the mask element is not
directly rendered the opacity has no effect
... Might be worth explaining in the specification why that is
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to Clarify that opacity does no apply to mask
[recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action08]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2915 - Clarify that opacity does no apply
to mask [on Erik Dahlström - due 2010-11-25].
trackbot, end telcon
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Chris to Cleanup changes appendix for SVG Full 1.1 2nd
Edition [recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Chris to Remove the "Note:" in section 6.7 in the
specification regarding style events on text [recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to clarify paced animations in SVG Full 1.1 by
adding wording from SVG Tiny 1.2 [recorded in
[33]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to Clarify that opacity does no apply to mask
[recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action08]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to Clarify that the clip-path property has an
effect on the clipPath element [recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to Investigate ISSUE-2346 [recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Tav to Finish the response to Dr Olaf regarding
ISSUE-2815 and fix the issues highlighted by Dr Olaf [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Tav to Make suggested edits to the specification that
address ISSUE-2351 [recorded in
[38]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html#action02]
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [39]scribe.perl version 1.135
([40]CVS log)
$Date: 2010/11/18 21:36:48 $
_________________________________________________________
[39] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[40] 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 [41]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/
[41] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)
Succeeded: s/would/wouldn't/
Succeeded: s/no effect/an effect/
Succeeded: s/other/alternative/
Succeeded: s/element is directly/element is not directly/
Succeeded: s/'mask' property/'opacity' property/
Found Scribe: Anthony
Inferring ScribeNick: anthony
Found ScribeNick: anthony
Default Present: [IPcaller], ed, anthony, +33.9.53.77.aaaa, tav, ChrisL
Present: [IPcaller] ed anthony +33.9.53.77.aaaa tav ChrisL
Regrets: PD CM
Agenda: [42]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010OctDe
c/0150.html
Found Date: 18 Nov 2010
Guessing minutes URL: [43]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html
People with action items: chris erik tav
[42] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010OctDec/0150.html
[43] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/18-svg-minutes.html
End of [44]scribe.perl diagnostic output]
[44] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
The information contained in this email message and any attachments may be confidential and may also be the subject to legal professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, interference with, disclosure or copying of this material is unauthorised and prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately advise the sender by return email and delete the information from your system.
Received on Thursday, 18 November 2010 21:46:17 UTC