W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2011

[CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions 2011-04-06

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 12:19:45 -0700
Message-ID: <4D9CBCD1.70000@inkedblade.net>
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>

   - Decided on Japan for June F2F, exact location TBD next week
   - RESOLVED: Proposal accepted for CSS2.1 Issue 225 with "If the element has
               children" removed, pending Anton's approval.
   - RESOLVED: dsinger's answer to Olaf adopted as official for CSS2.1 Issue 286.
               No change to the spec.
   - RESOLVED: Publish updated WD of CSS3 Speech
   - RESOLVED: Publish updated WD of CSS3 Text
   - CSS Namespaces has the required test passes for PR, need to prepare a DoC
     and implementation reports.

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

   César Acebal
   Tab Atkins
   David Baron
   Bert Bos
   John Daggett
   Brady Duga
   Arron Eicholz
   Elika J. Etemad
   Simon Fraser
   Sylvain Galineau
   Daniel Glazman
   Koji Ishii
   John Jansen
   Brad Kemper
   Hĺkon Wium Lie
   Chris Lilley
   Peter Linss
   Edward O'Connor
   David Singer
   Alan Stearns
   Daniel Weck
   Steve Zilles

<RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/04/06-css-irc
Scribe: fantasai

Note: There were some technical limitations on the conference call so
       not all participants were able to dial in.


   glazou: CSS3 Namespaces, EPUB CSS Profile, Multi-Col, anything else
           to add to agenda?
   glazou: fantasai mentioned CSS3 Writing Modes, too.

   glazou: Discussed inviting Anton Prowse to WG. Peter and I discussed
           already. He demonstrates already good expertise on CSS.
   fantasai, dbaron, arron in favor.
   several: Let's do it.
   Steve: At one point the group was very small, now it's much larger.
   Steve: What's the criteria for inviting experts?
   glazou: Bringing more expertise into the WG.
   glazou: Anton is a very sharp reviewer of our specs. Would be very useful
           to have him on the WG.
   <dsinger> Who does he work for? Just to be sure it's not a company who
             could join
   glazou: dsinger, that's a good point, we have to check that.
   glazou: Provided he is able to join, Peter and I will do necessary steps
           to invite him.

June F2F

   glazou: First thing, we need to start gathering agenda items.
   glazou: There's a wiki for that, please add items.

   glazou: Next thing is location. I step aside from discussion, only listening
   Bert: Didn't we say 2 weeks rather than 1wk?
   Steve: I think we said we'd have a decision by next week.
   sylvaing: I posted a poll to the csswg internal list
   sylvaing: we have [?] answers, which is good.
   sylvaing: 3 cannot come to any location
   sylvaing: Leaves 19
   sylvaing: 2 guys would go anywhere but are undecided
   sylvaing: so 17 attendees confirmed
   sylvaing: Number 1 location with maximum number is US at 16, Europe is 15
   sylvaing: Non-Japan Asia is 14
   sylvaing: Osaka or Kyoto is 13
   sylvaing: Tokyo is 12
   sylvaing: We already have space in Tokyo, Sophia in Europe
   sylvaing: so need to consider also the workshop in Tokyo and other things.
   Steve: Do we have a host in Japan outside of Tokyo?
   sylvaing: we don't have the budget to host
   glazou: Koji sent an email about that an hour ago
   Tab: Looking at options, nothing nailed down.
   Steve: Didn't need something nailed down until next week.
   Koji: We have places available, just evaluating which ones are better for
   sylvaing: Who's hosting? Who's paying for lunches, etc.
   Koji: Haven't confirmed ... place fee, several are free (MS, university)
   <ChrisL> Redmond would be fine for me
   Koji: not sure about lunches etc.
   jdaggett: If we go to Kyoto, and we don't have a clear sponsor of the
             meeting, but we're sort of coordinating with groups that can
             provide a meeting space
   jdaggett: Are we ok having a meeting where everyone goes dutch?
   Steve, Tab: sounds ok
   Brad asks why not Tokyo, given only one person would make Kyoto rather
        than Tokyo
   <dsinger> It does sound as if we lose only one person BECAUSE it is Tokyo...
   Brad: Seems ppl not wanting to go to Tokyo, almost all just can't go to Japan
   Sylvain: Steve was not comfortable with Tokyo.
   sylvaing: Didn't get an answer from Bert
   Tab: Howcome said he can't come, schedule-wise.
   Bert: No to Tokyo, yes to everything else
   jdaggett: So Tokyo vs. Kyoto is we pick up Steve and Bert if we go to Kyoto
   jdaggett: I think that's important to point out
   Tab: If we must go outside of Tokyo, I really don't want to go outside
        Japan, because we will miss out on workshop
   Tab: and the attendees there.
   * glazou notes we decided on tokyo BEFORE the japanese people pinged us
            for the workshop
   jdaggett: I'm uncomfortable with uncertainty of coordination in Kyoto
   jdaggett: Don't have solid logistics in place
   sylvaing: We have another week to confirm everything.
   sylvaing: If everyone is comfortable going dutch, then I can coordinate
             with Koji on hosting.
   jdaggett: So you can have a location, but just not sponsor meals.
   sylvaing: Right.
   sylvaing: Have the space, just a matter of coordinating logistics, access
             on Saturday, etc.
   kojiishi: Other than the place, what do I need to prepare? Just lunch?
   <ChrisL> network
   jdaggett: We just decided that we will share the cost, so that just means
             coordinating for the lunch meals, but that shouldn't be most of
             your problem.
   <dsinger> Lunch in Kyoto center is easy
   kojiishi: Seems people prefer Kyoto instead of Osaka. Thanks to MS we
             have Osaka place.
   <dsinger> We have had moeg and bluray there
   kojiishi: I will look for Kyoto place
   some discussion of availability of venues
   jdaggett: Confirm with network access.
   jdaggett: Conditions we have are, we need location that has good network
             access  -- not a lot of blocked ports
   jdaggett: And a projector
   sylvaing: And we need access on Saturday
   sylvaing: I'll get you details for room in Osaka, and we'll finalize that
             next week.
   <ChrisL> also please note that SVG WG had also settled on Japan, and
            wanted a shared day with CSS WG
   <ChrisL> is that still feasible, wherever the CSS WG ends up?
   Steve: Given we need at least another day for the workshop, would people
          in Japan feel more comfortable in Kyoto or Osaka?
   kojiishi: Since most companies are based in Tokyo, we're thinking to have
             first day a week before in Tokyo
   <glazou> wow
   kojiishi: Then bring people who want to speak with WG west
   <mihara> I can ask my company, NTT to pay for the place in Kyoto but not
            sure about lunch.
   <ChrisL> lunch is entirely optional. no problem to get our own lunch
   Steve: Interpretation of going dutch is that all of us would be happy to
          contribute to cost of lunch, but it's much better logistically if
          we can get it catered
   jdaggett: Yeah, we just ordered boxed lunches
   Steve: Yes, that means we can get over lunch faster
   <ChrisL> yes, downside to going to a restaurant for lunch is that the
            break becomes 1.5 hours or so
   sylvaing: At this point are we cancelling F2F in Tokyo, or do we need to
             think about that?
   Steve: Since I'm one of the swing votes, I finally heard some good news
          in the papers.
   Steve: In the end, if we don't find good solution in Osaka or Kyoto,
          I'm willing to go to Tokyo.
   Steve: And my wife says I'm crazy (yelling in background)
   Steve: More comfortable with Kyoto/Osaka, but willing to go to Tokyo.
   sylvaing: Ok, so we're settled on Japan
   glazou: Anything else for F2F?
   sylvaing: We'll make final decision Tokyo vs South next week
   glazou: Ok, next item. CSS2.1


   glazou: First, reminder to tell your AC rep about the testimonial.
   glazou: Deadline is a couple days before Consortium release the REC

   glazou: A few messages about the DoC

   <ChrisL> has anyone pinged hyatt? I see some replies from him are missing
   <hober> ChrisL: I'll ping hyatt

   glazou: Issue 225
   fantasai: Don't have a response from Anton yet on whether the proposal is ok
   dbaron: I think you should remove "If the element has children"
   dbaron: Otherwise I'm happy with it.
   arronei: I've looked at it, and I think this now more consistent with what
            we have in 8.3.1, so I think this is actually pretty good.
   arronei: Agree about comment on children
   glazou: Does the change imply any change to the test suite?
   arronei, fantasai: no
   glazou: Then let's resolve pending Anton's approval.
   plinss states a concern with Anton replying before Friday
   RESOLVED: Proposal accepted for 225 pending Anton's approval.

   discussion of colors in DoC
   * dsinger suggests Bert finds the official color list and tell us what it is...
   Bert: yellow should be gray

   Second issue is from Olaf
   plinss: We're not redefining mm or cm, we're just saying that the UA doesn't
           have to make the mm unit match actual millimeters
   <dsinger> well, not on the display surface (which might not exist).
   glazou: One of the responses in the thread should be a good response.
   <dsinger> it is an inch if the image was at normal viewing distance...
   <TabAtkins_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Dec/0206.html
   glazou: Should we adopt dsinger's answer as the official answer?
   RESOLVED: dsinger's answer adopted as official
   ACTION: glazou respond to mailing list on this issue
   <trackbot> Created ACTION-315

Requests to publish

   glazou: We have four requests: CSS3 Speech, CSS3 Text, CSS3 Writing Modes
   jdaggett: Writing Modes was not sent to lists ahead of time
   jdaggett: I think we should defer that to next week.
   glazou: np
   glazou: Please everyone review that spec before the call.

   <danielweck> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-speech/#changes
   glazou: What is the status of CSS3 Speech?
   danielweck: Has anyone looked at changes since 2004?
   danielweck: Since we last spoke about CSS3 Speech and following discussions
               on www-style, there are 3 remaining issues
   danielweck: 1 is trivial, 2 others may be contentious.
   danielweck: Should be able to reach consensus as a WG.
   danielweck: According to what I've heard, the phonemes issue, is that
               phonemes breaks content vs style
   danielweck: The other changes that have been made since 2004 deserve a
               new WD for review. We are not ready for LC.
   glazou: I see the issues are detailed in the spec itself.
   danielweck: Yes, they are in the spec and linked to Tracker
   glazou: Wonderful. I think WD is fine by me
   glazou: other opinions?
   fantasai: in favor of publishing
   Bert: in favor
   glazou: no objection?
   RESOLVED: Publish WD of CSS3 Speech.
   danielweck: Let me know if there's anything else to do
   ACTION: Bert publish CSS3 Speech as WD
   <trackbot> Created ACTION-316

   glazou: CSS3 Text
   fantasai explains the status of the draft
   fantasai: Attempted to address all the comments from last F2F and on the
             mailing list.
   fantasai: There was a suggestion to split the draft. I think splitting out
             text decoration makes sense, but the rest of the features are
             closely interconnected, so should not be separated.
   <dbaron> so a text-decoration spec would cover text-decoration-*,
            text-shadow, text-emphasis-*, and text-underline-position ?
   howcome wants the script-specific values put in another draft
   fantasai doesn't think this makes any sense at all and objects strongly
   glazou: Is this something that we can discuss in the future, or something
           you feel is a blocker to publishing the WD
   howcome: Those values have been published in the WD already. it's not a
            blocker as such
   glazou: I don't think the issue is closed.
   howcome: I think script specific values should be removed. There should
            be an issue in the spec
   Steve: You'd have to remove text-transform: uppercase | lowercase
   howcome: I fear we're going down the route of list-style-type
   Tab: we fixed list-style-type
   Tab: It's author-definable now
   Tab: But there are still a few types that need pre-definition
   Tab: The things in this draft are similar
   Steve: So the question is when to introduce a keyword vs. have a mechanism
          for author definition
   glazou: This is getting off-topic.
   glazou: The issue here is releasing a WD.
   glazou: howcome, can we get an email explaining the issue
   howcome: I will do it this week
   glazou: Anyone else objecting to publishing the WD?
   Brad asks about splitting the draft.
   RESOLVED: Publish WD for CSS3 Text.
   jdaggett: I'm not at all convinced that having a separate spec for
             text-decoration is a good idea. But we can discuss that later.
   glazou: We will revisit CSS3 Text next week

   glazou: CSS3 Namespaces. Good news is we now have implementation reports,
           FF4 and IE9 pass all tests
   glazou: Meaning we can transition to PR.
   glazou: We have a few comments between date of CR and now
   glazou: Some of them have to be addressed.
   glazou: We need to document the answers etc.
   glazou: Provided that I think we are in good shape for another REC

   <ChrisL> there was a mention on wg list of a couple new tests, not in
            test suite?
   glazou: Top of the hour
   glazou: [something about tests from Alan Gresley]

Meeting closed.
Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2011 19:20:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:45 UTC