W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2008

[CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions 2008-10-01

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2008 11:24:58 -0700
Message-ID: <48E3C07A.1070805@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org

Summary:

   - Charter has been sent to AC for approval
   - RESOLVED: Add to css3-marquee Bert's note:
                 Note that the 'direction' property is often set by rules
                 in the UA style sheet based on mark-up in the document,
                 as recommended in CSS 2.1 [CSS21] section 9.10 ("Text
                 direction: the 'direction' and 'unicode-bidi' properties").
   - RESOLVED: Publish CSS3 Marquee as CR
   - Accepted to clarify spec that comments are not allowed inside url()
     syntax, pending MSFT's approval.
   - RESOLVED: Proposal accepted for CSS2.1 Issue 74
                 http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-74
   - For CSS2.1 Issue 72, need text that also says that widths of columns
     in fixed layout is undefined when table has extra columns after 1st row.
       http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-72
   - RESOLVED: For CSS2.1 Issue 76, proposed to rewrite 1st paragraph of
               http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/page.html#outside-page-box as
                 When formatting content in the page model, some content
                 may end up outside the *current* page box. For example,
                 an element whose 'white-space' property has the value
                 'pre' may generate a box that is wider than the page box.
                 *As another example*, when boxes are positioned absolutely
                 *or relatively*, they may end up in "inconvenient" locations.
                 For example, images may be placed on the edge of the page
                 box or 100,000 meters below the page box.
               (Changes emphasized.)
               http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-76
   - RESOLVED: For CSS2.1 Issue 77
                 http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-77
               accepted Saloni's proposal
                 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Sep/0233.html
               with the last sentence changed to
                 Parts of the fixed position box that are not visible in the
                 initial containing block will not print.
   - Added
       http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Sep/0232.html
       http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Sep/0232.html
     to TPAC agenda.

====== Full minutes below =====

Attendees:

   David Baron
   Bert Bos
   Arron Eicholz
   Elika Etemad
   Sylvain Galineau
   Daniel Glazman
   Peter Linss
   Saloni Mira Rai
   David Singer
   Jason Cranford Teague

<RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/10/01-css-irc
<RRSAgent> http://www.w3.org/2008/10/01-css-minutes.html

Agenda
------

   Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2008OctDec/0000.html
   Daniel: Any other items for agenda?
   Daniel: I tried to get agenda items from both mailing lists, let me know if I missed any
   Daniel: regrets from molly, jeffrey, mohamed

Charter
-------

   Daniel: Charter was sent by IJ to list of AC reps for approval and vote
   Daniel: In case they missed it, I suggest you ping your AC reps to let them know that the charter is up for approval
   Daniel: In the voter form, the AC rep needs to indicate intent or not to join WG
   Daniel: It's important, please don't miss it

CSS3 Marquee
------------
   <glazou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2008JulSep/0248.html
   Daniel: First issue is about potential change in 'direction' of marquee
   <glazou>     Note that the 'direction' property is often set by rules
   <glazou>     in the UA style sheet based on mark-up in the document, as
   <glazou>     recommended in CSS 2.1 [CSS21] section 9.10 ("Text direction:
   <glazou>     the 'direction' and 'unicode-bidi' properties").
   fantasai: works for me, I think we should add it
   RESOLVED: Accepted to add Bert's note
   Daniel: Question is shall we publish css3-marquee as CR.
   Daniel: Got 2 comments from i18n, above and one other, both are resolved.
   Daniel: Any objections to moving to CR?
   RESOLVED: Publish CSS3 Marquee as CR
   ACTION: Bert publish CSS3 Marquee as CR
   <Bert> (Publishing moratorium is 13 Oct - 27 Oct)

CSS2.1
------

   Daniel: Many recent comments about spec, mostly from Saloni
   Daniel: First one

   http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-73
   <glazou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Sep/0198.html
   Peter: The more I think about it, the more I think we should not allow
          comments in URLs
   Peter: comment delimiters are valid URL syntax, and URLs have a special
          tokenization
   Peter: you're not in normal CSS rules
   Peter: There are places where you can determine whether it's a comment
          or part of URL
   Peter: other places where you can't
   <dbaron> I agree with Peter about how it should work.
   dbaron: Are there any browsers that don't do what you think we should do?
   Peter: I talked with zweinberg
   Peter: Opera does not allow comments within parentheses
   dbaron: I'm ok with the proposal given that
   Jason: I did a quick search, don't see anyone using it as a hack either
   Peter: IE7 and Gecko allow comments
   Daniel: So if proposal is accepted, there's no change for Opera, slight
           change for Mozilla and IE
   Daniel: David is ok with it
   Daniel: What about MS?
   dsinger: Anyone know about webkit?
   <Bert> Konqueror seems not to allow comments.
   ACTION: Saloni return to WG with response about whether proposal is
           acceptable
   <Bert> Webkit seems the same as Konqueror.
   dbaron: So my understanding is no change to the spec
   Daniel: We might need a note saying that it's explicitly forbidden
   Peter: There are various bits of text in the spec that talk about comments
   Peter: Saying that they're allowed between any tokens
   Peter: and URL is one token
   ACTION: Peter create note about how URL has its own syntax and parsing rules
   Peter: I also noticed that the grammar for URL leaves out a-z and 0-9
   dbaron: There might be a range in there that doesn't look like a range
   Peter: I didn't see one
   dbaron: *-~ is a range, and includes everything you mentioned

   http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-74
   <glazou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Sep/0228.html
   fantasai: I am strongly in agreement with the proposal
   RESOLVED: Proposal accepted

   http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-72
   <glazou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Sep/0152.html
   Saloni: With fixed table layout in CSS, if a row has more columns than
           the first row
   Saloni: The spec says you shouldn't render those columns, but the
           browsers actually do render those cells
   Saloni: I understand the value of fixed layout, I think it's important
   Saloni: So I propose relaxing the requirement in CSS2.1, and then clarify
           in CSS3 what exactly should happen
   dbaron: That would leave internal contradictions in the spec
   fantasai: we could say that if there are extra cells, rendering is undefined
   fantasai: or at least the widths of columns and the table are undefined
   <sylvaing> agrees with Elika+Saloni
   Saloni: So we'd be saying if you have fixed table layout, and extra cells,
           the layout is undefined
   ACTION: Saloni propose text for CSS2.1 Issue 75

   <glazou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Sep/0153.html
   Saloni: That's resolved, we got an explanation of why this rule is in place

   http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-76
   <glazou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Sep/0229.html
   <fantasai> When formatting content in the page model, some content may
              end up outside the *current* page box. For example, an element
              whose 'white-space' property has the value 'pre' may generate
              a box that is wider than the page box. Also, when boxes are
              positioned absolutely *or relatively*, they may end up in
              "inconvenient" locations. For example, images may be placed
              on the edge of the page box or 100,000 meters below the page
              box.
   Daniel: Change "Also" to "As another example"
   RESOLVED: Accepted above proposal

   http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-77
   <glazou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Sep/0233.html
   Daniel: "Parts of the fixed position box that are not visible in the
            initial containing block will not print"
   RESOLVED: Proposal accepted with above change.

   <glazou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Sep/0232.html
   Some discussion
   Added to agenda for TPAC

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Sep/0230.html
   fantasai: Jason, I think we'll want your feedback on this issue
   <Bert> (Prince shows a fourth option: the box is 500px high on *both*
           pages. I don't particularly like that solution.)
   discussion ...
   fantasai: So I think the distance between the bottom of the last
             content on the page that fit and the bottom of the page
             should not count as part of the used height
   fantasai: So in this case you would still have used height left
             over that you use on the next page
   fantasai: Whether the background prints in that space (between the
             page break and the bottom of the page) is a separate issue
   Daniel: Postponed to TPAC
   fantasai: I think we need a web designer involved in this discussion
   Jason: I should be able to be online 9-5 EST during TPAC

Media Queries
-------------

   dbaron: Given that anne isn't here, we should postpone that one
   <glazou> postponed

Meeting closed.
Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2008 18:25:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:13 GMT