W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-svg-wg@w3.org > April to June 2011

RE: collaboration on FX documents in the SVG charter

From: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 04:58:05 -0700
To: "'Cameron McCormack'" <cam@mcc.id.au>, "public-svg-wg@w3.org" <public-svg-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D23D6B9E57D654429A9AB6918CACEAA98064E917FC@NAMBX02.corp.adobe.com>
Is "pagination and slides" really something that belongs in SVG or FX?  It would seem to me that's more of a general HTML issue, since you'd want any type of HTML-aligned content on such things.  This is especially true when considering the use of HTML outside the web (eg. Email, EPUB, etc.)

Leonard

-----Original Message-----
From: public-svg-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-svg-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Cameron McCormack
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 1:52 AM
To: public-svg-wg@w3.org
Subject: collaboration on FX documents in the SVG charter

Last telcon Doug asked us to mail the list with comments/questions about work items in the draft SVG WG charter that relate to FX documents.

First, it’s not clear to me looking at the FX charter what its charter period is (or if that even makes sense for a taskforce).  I ask because Pagination and Slides is listed as a (possible) FX document in the draft SVG charter but not in the FX charter.  Does the FX taskforce need rechartering to add this?

Here is my impression of the status of the various FX documents is.
Please correct/clarify as appropriate.

Filters: we have an FX Filters spec, and this is going to be the sole spec going forward for SVG and CSS.  Is that right?

Compositing: we don’t have an FX spec yet.  Should we be moving the Compositing spec to the FX repository?

Gradients: is this spec for future gradient types, or is it meant to encompass existing linear/radial gradients, which are covered in css3-images?  Is the FX taskforce happy to begin such a document?

2D Transforms: it looks like the plan here is to continue with separate FX and CSS specs unless the FX spec has an active editor who can progress the spec along quickly enough to satisfy CSS people.  Is that the official point of view of the taskforce?

3D Transforms: I’m not sure what our plan is here.  Do we have an editor who can pull together an FX version of the spec to encompass CSS and SVG requirements?

Parameters: we have an SVG draft, but not an FX draft.  Parameters is listed in the FX charter.  Should we be moving this over; is the taskforce ready to work on this?

Pagination and Slides: I don’t think we’ve really discussed this spec much in SVG or at all in FX.

Layout: I don’t think we have a clear plan forward for this spec, or whether the FX taskforce is aware of what we might like to do with it.

Web Animation: I know that this was mentioned at the Auckland F2F, but I am unsure what this document would contain, or whether the CSS members of the FX TF are on top of this.


So I’d like to be clear on where we are and where we plan to be with all of these specs and to document our plan on the FX wiki and in the SVG charter.  I want the SVG and CSS WGs and thus the FX taskforce to have a common understanding on this.

Thanks!

Cameron

--
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/


Received on Thursday, 2 June 2011 11:58:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 2 June 2011 11:58:41 GMT