W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webfonts-wg@w3.org > February 2011

Minutes, 23 February 2011 WebFonts WG call

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 16:57:54 +0100
Message-ID: <337656742.20110223165754@w3.org>
To: "WebFonts WG" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
Hello WebFonts,

Minutes are in html at 
http://www.w3.org/2011/02/23-webfonts-minutes.html

and below as text

                 WebFonts Working Group Teleconference

23 Feb 2011

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/02/23-webfonts-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Vlad, Jdaggett, Christopher, Sergey, Erik, John, Chris, Tal,
          Jonathan

   Regrets
   Chair
          Vlad

   Scribe
          ChrisL

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]actions
     * [5]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

   <trackbot> Date: 23 February 2011

   <erik> (I have trouble dialing in, "this passcode is not valid" -
   will continue to try)

   it accepted my passcode

   <jdaggett> erik: i seemed to get on fine

   <jdaggett> dialing into the us number

   <erik> (Zakim Paris didn't accept, Zakim London did, calling via
   skype)

   <scribe> scribenick: ChrisL

   ChrisL: waiting on responses from Bert.
   ... sent response to Erik Muller
   ... will commit the changes after the call

   Vlad: ok
   ... wanted to discuss SOR and way to relax it
   ... but we have no-one from Apple or Microsoft or Opera on this call
   ... dont want to remove something from the spec, hoping it later
   gets added elsewhere
   ... with a note saying its subject to change in the future
   ... reviewed process document and it allows features to be marked as
   'at risk' and the WG may remove them (but is not forced to)
   ... if we do that it avoids risk of a second last call if we drop
   the feature

   <sergeym> I'm here, but can't call in

   ChrisL: yes, that is correct

   Vlad: there is a majority who want it done one way and a minority
   who want it another way
   ... so we should mark i as at risk. If we can convince CSS WG to put
   it in CSS3 Fonts then we can drop it once that is in. Its not WOFF
   specific

   jdaggett: Even then you still have a dependency of WOFF on CSS3
   Fonts which is dependent of From-Origin which does not exist yet

   Vlad: yes but we would be moving in the right direction
   ... meanwhile implementations can go forward. Currently we have two
   implementations per spec

   jdaggett: there was consensus at one point but now there is not.
   There has been a split

   Vlad: Hakon voiced some concerns and said some in Opera are for,
   some against; and company position in balance was to abstain

   jdaggett: its not majority rule. Consensus

   Vlad: we have neither a consensus to keep it or to remove it, so at
   risk seems better

   jdaggett: So you say add a note with SOR default with CORS to relax
   is at risk

   Vlad: More specific, two notes
   ... one about CORS saying we believe FO may be better but there is
   no spec
   ... second is for SOR saying we could remove it if we have consensus
   to remove it or if its added in CSS3 Fonts spec which is a better
   place for it

   jdaggett: Concerned about the feature 'might change'. at risk is
   either keep or drop

   <Vlad> [6]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#cfi

      [6] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#cfi

   Vlad: so CORS would be 'at risk' and explain why, because FO is
   better

   jdaggett: Better if its in the CSS3 Fonts spec
   ... tied to @font-face not to WOFF specifically
   ... wil lput it in an editors draft but mark as at risk then see
   what flies

   Vlad: So should people join CSS WG ?

   jdaggett: Dave Singer and Hakon arte there already

   Vlad: I could join as well

   ChrisL; So am I and Sylvain

   Vlad: Recommend people join that group as well

   jdaggett: Unfortunate no-one from Apple is here to clarify which of
   the possible future options they are comfortable with
   ... CSS WG is a different group, not clear whether they will like it
   or not. But f2f in two weeks from now

   Vlad; I can't make that meeting

   jdaggett: I will add it and we can have the discussion in CSS WG.
   ... want to avoid specs that can never move on

   Vlad: can you express the majority opinion here

   jdaggett: all sides will be well represented
   ... Chris could write up a proposed revision to mark it as at risk

   ChrisL: sure

   action Chris to propose at-risk woding

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-77 - Propose at-risk wording [on Chris
   Lilley - due 2011-03-02].

   jdaggett: then can propose it to CSS WG

   Vlad: Chris and i are not available next week, and the week after is
   CSS so we should cancel those?

   jdaggett: Not sure about that

   ChrisL: will be in NZ for SVG; not going to CSS WG in California
   unfortunately

   Vlad: proposing to postpone until we have news from the CSS WG

   (we agree on timezones and stuff - CSS WG f2f clashes with WebFonts
   WG telcon)

   Vlad: so we cancel the next two weeks calls

   John: So implementors can still choose to not implement a feature

   Vlad: (quotes from
   [7]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#cfi)

      [7] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#cfi)

   John: we seem to be headed towards non interoperability

   Vlad: at-risk features are still normative and are still tested

   jdaggett; at risk just lets us drop it later without another last
   call

   jdaggett: One way to get interop is that FO header goes in a spec,
   and people agree on a default if not present, so there is a middle
   ground. FO influences SOR or not
   ... that could get us interop
   ... One tricky thing, not clear which WG would have FO in its
   charter
   ... Hakon is pushing for HTML WG, seems not in scope there

   Vlad: Maciej mentioned WebApps

   jdaggett: That might be tricky from a rechartering perspective
   ... would have been better to have these objections and alternate
   proposals when the charer was reviewed, rather than now

   Vlad: any objections to marking SOR and CORS as at-risk

   (none heard)

   Vlad: Lets look at open actions

actions

   [8]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/open

      [8] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/open

   action-52?

   <trackbot> ACTION-52 -- Chris Lilley to respond to erik muller on
   pronunciation and sorting -- due 2010-12-08 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [9]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/52

      [9] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/52

   jdaggett: mail today - oh, different subject

   action-57?

   <trackbot> ACTION-57 -- Jonathan Kew to respons on issue-14 -- due
   2011-01-26 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [10]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/57

     [10] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/57

   jfkthame: wil lget to it this week. its on direction attributes

   action-59?

   <trackbot> ACTION-59 -- Chris Lilley to respond to I18n-ISSUE-2 --
   due 2011-01-26 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [11]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/59

     [11] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/59

   ChrisL: yes I did that one

   close action-59

   <trackbot> ACTION-59 Respond to I18n-ISSUE-2 closed

   action-61?

   <trackbot> ACTION-61 -- Chris Lilley to provide samples and respond
   to I18n -- due 2011-01-26 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [12]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/61

     [12] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/61

   ChrisL: working on that before the call

   action-62?

   <trackbot> ACTION-62 -- Jonathan Kew to modify spec text re. div and
   span in text elements -- due 2011-01-26 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [13]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/62

     [13] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/62

   blocked on 61

   action-73?

   <trackbot> ACTION-73 -- Chris Lilley to edit WOFF faq with Johns
   text incorporating Vlad's corrections -- due 2011-02-16 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [14]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/73

     [14] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/73

   John: wil send some updates in the next couple of days

   action-75?

   <trackbot> ACTION-75 -- John Daggett to contact Hakon regarding FO
   spec -- due 2011-02-23 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [15]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/75

     [15] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/75

   jdaggett: yes that is done

   close action-75

   <trackbot> ACTION-75 Contact Hakon regarding FO spec closed

   Vlad: OK so next call March 16th

   adjourned

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]

-- 
 Chris Lilley   Technical Director, Interaction Domain                 
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead, Fonts Activity Lead
 Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
 Member, CSS, WebFonts, SVG Working Groups
Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2011 15:57:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 23 February 2011 15:57:55 GMT