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

[CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions 2011-05-18

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 11:22:27 -0700
Message-ID: <4DD55FE3.6000703@inkedblade.net>
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
   - Discussed Tokyo F2F planning
   - Discussed status of Multi-col test suite, CSS2.1, Namespaces, Regions,
     and proposal to define intrinsic widths of multi-column elements.
   - RESOLVED: Switch CSS test suites to Mercurial, providing there is adequate
               easy-to-follow documentation.

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

   Arron Eicholz
   Elika Etemad
   Simon Fraser
   Daniel Glazman
   Vincent Hardy
   Koji Ishii
   John Jansen
   Brad Kemper
   Håkon Wium Lie
   Peter Linss
   Edward O'Connor
   Alan Stearns

   Tab Atkins
   David Baron
   Bert Bos
   David Singer

<RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/05/18-css-irc
Scribe: vhardy


   glazou: The listserv at W3C has issues. I sent the agenda yesterday evening.
           It can take a ong time to see an email in your inbox.
   glazou: this is for W3C mailing lists in general, not just the CSS lists.
   arno: some of the email just seem to never make it to my inbox.
   glazou: this happened to me too.
   arno: yes, I do not see other people's email.
   glazou: other agenda items?
   vhardy: will we have a meeting next week?
   glazou: not sure, we have a chairing problem.
   fantasai: maybe Bert or szilles can chair?
   glazou; yes, I'll try to find a replacement.

Tokyo F2F

   <glazou> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/32061/css-ftf-2011-06
   glazou: please respond to the questionaire about the next F2F.
   <plinss> http://wiki.csswg.org/planning/japan-2011
   glazou: please also fill out the information about your flight and
           arrival/departure info.
   glazou: agenda items for Kyoto meeting. For now, we have CSS
           Regions/Exclusions, etc... (see above link).
   glazou: are there other items?

Multi-col Test Suite

   Hakon: could we discuss the multi-col test suite?
   hakon: the test suite is a start.
   glazou: how complete is it?
   hakon: it is a bit short on functionality.
   hakon: we need more test cases for edge cases.
   hakon: we would like to reach about 200 tests.
   hakon: we currently have about 20.
   hakon: I think Microsoft has between 50 and 100 tests.
   johnjan: It is Microsoft's intention to contribute the tests.
   glazou: other agenda items?
   <johnjan> we just want to make sure we're not going to submit a bunch
             of duplicates to the opera tests

Tokyo F2F (cont.)

   glazou: anything else about Kyoto?
   plinss: I'll be there a few days in advance.
   vhardy: the SVG WG will not meet in Kyoto.
   glazou: yes, we had a message from them.
   glazou: Cameron McCormak sent a message on May 12th. The SVG WG will
           reschedule the meeting likely late July in the US.


   glazou: next agenda item. CSS 2.1 review period ended yesterday.
   glazou: 23 answers. 21 are ok-go ahead. 2 are requesting changes.
   glazou: some of the changes sent by Mohamed are related to references.
   glazou: David from Mozilla had a comment about issue 225. Nokia mentioned
           it too. Saying we could add it to the document since it is resolved.
   glazou: if we have add the resolution to the document, it could delay
           things. I would propose to move as fast as possible.
   fantasai: Bert said the director could agree to make that change.
   glazou: I am worried about a technical change that is not just editorial.
   fantasai: I think the Director should make that decision.
   fantasai: nobody objects to the change.
   glazou: the Director could also be worried that not everybody reviewed
           the issue 225 resolution.
   fantasai: That should be the director's call.
   glazou: our responsibility as chairs is to decide on what we should
           recommend for the director.
   glazou: unfortunately, Bert is not on the call.
   fantasai: I don't think we should recommend against the change
   glazou: If we can make some of the changes Mohamed recommended.

   glazou: please remind your AC rep. about PR release about 2.1

<glazou> http://wiki.csswg.org/planning/agenda
glazou: let's move to other agenda items.

Publishing Regions

   vhardy: what do I need to do to prepare for WD publication, other than
           get a WG resolution. Formatting, etc?
   fantasai: talk to me and Bert off-line.
   vhardy: ok, will do.

   glazou: did you incorporate comments in the draft.
   vhardy: I am in the process to do that.
   glazou: we cannot make a decision to publish to WD because we do not
           have enough attendance in that call.
   glazou: I propose we wait until next week if we have a call or decide
           during the F2F.


   glazou: next item, we can talk about namespaces.
   glazou: I had an AI to ping the i18n WG.
   kojiishi: Actually, this was just discussed in the i18n meeting earlier
   kojiishi: we should have an answer by next week.
   glazou: I hope it will not imply a lot of changes. If it does not, we
           can publish.
   glazou: anything else on that topic?

Intrinsic Widths of Multi-col Elements

   glazou: anything else we should discuss today?
   fantasai: I have a question about what to do about the intric width
             of multi-col elements.
   hakon: I do not think this is a multi-col specific issue.
   hakon: I think this is an issue that we need to address, just not
          as a multi-col issue.
   glazou: do you mean that the algorithm to compute the width of columns
           is orthogonal to the width of the elements themselves.
   fantasai: where should I address this?
   fantasai: we need to define the shrink wrap algorithm for table and
             other use cases.
   fantasai: I would like if this issue should be left undefined or if
             we should add it to the appendix of writing modes.
   hakon: yes, I think you should do.
   fantasai: multi-col has special considerations, such as the
             max-content-width that is different for multi-col elements.
   hakon: I do not think we should single out the multi-col elements.
   hakon: we have simplified the multi-column specification.
   fantasai: I would like to address use cases with this
   fantasai: we have 3 options:
   <fantasai> a) leave shrinkwrap undefined, as currently in css3-multicol
   <fantasai> b) define shrinkwrap to ignore multi-col properties,
                 calculate as if columns weren't there
   <fantasai> c) define shrinkwrap with consideration of multicol properties
   hakon: there is already interoperable implementations of shrinkwrap
          in multi-col. It is not documented, but it is interoperably
          implemented -- you use the same width as you would if it's not
   hakon: if we document it, it should document current implementation.
   fantasai: The current spec doesn't consider shrinkwrap an important
             situation, so it's left undefined. But it's important in
             mixed writing modes.
   fantasai: and other horizontal-only use cases we had not though of yet.
   glazou: so we are not ready yet to standardize that?
   fantasai: no, it is just that shrinkwrapping multi-col elements is that
             it is more important than we thought.
   glazou: we have a pretty stable multi-col spec. that we can move along
           the spec. track.
   glazou: the shrinkwrap algorithm needs to be extended separately, and
           implementors will have to do their work.
   hakon: yes, I agree.
   hakon: if there are new use cases, we could address them in a later spec.
   glazou: yes, if we wait to address all use cases, we will drag the effort.
   fantasai: I am not asking to modify the multi-col spec.
   hakon: but you are asking to specifiy multi-col functionality in a
          different spec.
   glazou: do we have a proposal?
   fantasai: yes.
   glazou: we need the whole group to be present for this discussion.
   glazou: we cannot resolve it today. We can discuss it next week or during
           the F2F.
   glazou: changing something in the feature related to the relation between
           two specification is something we can still discuss.
   glazou: in the meantime, I propose we make progress on the multi-col spec.
           and make progress on the test suite, move it along as it is today.
           We have implementations, use cases on the web.
   fantasai: ok with me.
   hakon: ok with me.
   glazou: no change in the multi-col spec. for now. We will discuss shrinkwrap
           issues related to multi-col with hakon present.


   plinss: I proposed change to mercurial. Did not hear any objection.
           Planning to make the change today.
   fantasai: do we have documentation on the mercurial client.
   arronei: I have concerned about the documentation as well. We would need
            a place with documentation.
   fantasai: we would need instructions for common functionality.
   plinss: I can put this together.
   fantasai: documenting merge process would be great.
   (discussion about CVS/SVN/Mercurial)
   glazou: any objection to move to mercurial?
   fantasai: none if we have instructions.
   <fantasai> very simple, clear, easy-to-follow instructions
   <fantasai> not "here's a link to the manual" :)
   (no objection)
   RESOLUTION: moving test suite to mercurial.
Received on Thursday, 19 May 2011 18:22:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:46 UTC