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

[CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions 2011-05-25

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 19:29:43 -0700
Message-ID: <4DDDBB17.2090506@inkedblade.net>
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Summary:

   - Discussed some details of CSS2.1 publication.
   - Discussed Kyoto F2F agenda
   - RESOLVED: Publish Writing Modes as WD.
   - RESOLVED: Once the WG gets an email saying that Regions edits are done,
               publish as FPWD.
   - Discussed what remains to publish CSS3 Images updated WD
   - Discussed Namespaces and Unicode normalization
   - Discussed CSSWG website and switching the blog to WordPress

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

Present:
   César Acebal
   Tab Atkins
   David Baron
   Bert Bos
   Cathy Chan
   Arron Eicholz
   Elika Etemad
   Sylvain Galineau
   Daniel Glazman
   Koji Ishii
   John Jansen
   Hĺkon Wium Lie
   Peter Linss
   Alan Stearns

   ... and a couple others who forgot to identify themselves to the minute-taker

<RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/05/25-css-irc
ScribeNick: TabAtkins

Administrative
--------------

   glazou: Extras for today?  Bert sent one.

CSS2.1
------

   glazou: Let's start with the CSS 2.1 pub request.
   Bert: There was an internal meeting about the 2.1 review, all comments
         were positive.
   * Ms2ger would hope so

   glazou: Another thing you mentioned was the acks section.
   glazou: I suggested listing the current members of the WG.
   glazou: Because some former members of the WG are not listed, or people
           from www-style.
   Bert: If people have names to add, please give them to me quickly.
   Bert: Especially anyone who's sent lots of issues in LC.
   fantasai: I think it's fine to list people who contribute to the testsuite.
   fantasai: Maybe in a separate section, specifically titled?
   fantasai: I don't think listing *all* WG members is a very honest thing
             to do, because there's a significant number of members who have
             never sent an email or attended a telcon.
   glazou: I don't like the "don't put anything" option, because it
           misrepresents the work the w3c members have done on this document.
   glazou: Bert, I'll mail you a compromise after the call.
   sylvaing: Did you get the testimonial from MS?
   Bert: Dunno, where did it come from?
   sylvaing: From Michael Champion.

   plinss: I'd like to add the links to the annotation system to the spec.
   arronei: I presume Bert will produce a diff from the last draft to the PR?
   Bert: I hadn't thought about how to make it public yet, any ideas?
   arronei: Hadn't thought.  I don't particularly need it public yet, so we
            can get it quickly and then deal with public later.

Kyoto F2F
---------

   <glazou> http://wiki.csswg.org/planning/japan-2011
   glazou: Please update the page with your arrival, etc.
   glazou: f2f agenda items, we have 9 including stuff coming from the forum.
   TabAtkins: I'm definitely going to want to talk about Variables/Mixins/etc
   sylvaing: I think Feature Queries in the backlog is an interesting topic.
   howcome: We'd like to talk about the CSS Viewport spec.

   glazou: I know Anne is on vacation, but do you think he'll have time to
           contribute to CSSOM when he's back?
   howcome: That's my assumption.
   glazou: Good, I've been playing with it and it's a huge pain.
   sylvaing: It definitely needs some talking about.  It needs the 2.1
             treatment, but it needs to move forward to new areas as well.
   howcome: I think Anne's goal has been to describe something more than
            what exists today.
   howcome: From our perspective, the CSSOM his high priority too.
   sylvaing: I think the discussion should be about how to take this gigantic
             editors draft and get it to move forward.
   glazou: It's going to take time, but it's worth doing it.
   glazou: I'm going to start mailing the list about issues I've found with it.
   howcome: The most important thing from our perspective is to offer
            alternative to the string-based api.
   TabAtkins: Big priority for us too.
   glazou: Yes, definitely.  Tons of serialization.

   glazou: Anything else about the f2f?

Publication Requests
--------------------

   glazou: Now, publication requests.
   glazou: First is about Writing Modes.  Elika requested an LCWD.
   fantasai: jdaggett suggested to wait and just publish a WD.
   fantasai: I'm fine with that, so we can talk over the issues at the f2f
             and publish again afterwards.
   glazou: I'm fine with that.
   RESOLVED: Publish Writing Modes as WD.

   glazou: Anyone from Adobe on the call?
   glazou: We have a request for Regions & Exclusions.
   glazou: Lots of discussion about this on the lsit, and Vincent said he
           was integrating the feedback.  Is that done?
   stearns: Not sure if he's finished that yet, but I know he's working on it.
   fantasai: I think there was a lot of discussion about merging or splitting
             Exclusions into/from Floats, so if Regions is ready it makes
             sense to publish, but we should wait for Exclusions until after
             the f2f.
   arronei: I agree.
   alexmog: Me too.
   RESOLVED: Once the WG gets an email saying that Regions edits are done,
             publish as WD.

   glazou: Next, publishing Images.
   fantasai: should have a changes list
   TabAtkins: I'd like to resolve on gradient angles.
   Daniel: probably better at F2F
   fantasai: Got some Web author feedback on this issue from authors
   <fantasai> http://www.css3.info/angles-in-gradients/
   <fantasai> 95 comments atm
   Tab: overwhelming majority go in one direction, which is how I've now
        changed the spec
   Tab: now it's 0deg is north, 90deg is east, clockwise...

CSS Namespaces
--------------

   glazou: Next is CSS3 Namespaces.
   glazou: We were supposed to get some comments from i18n, and still have
           nothing so far.
   fantasai: I see the draft response on their list.
   fantasai: They give some background information, and recommend that
             Namespaces say that selectors should be compared as canonically
             equivalent.
   fantasai: I replied saying that was out-of-scope for this draft, because
             we don't deal with selector matching in Namespaces.
   glazou: Can you mail the list with references to these two emails?
   fantasai: The in-scope issue that they could make would be that namespace
             prefixes should be canonicalized.
   glazou: Do we fall into normalization hell?
   fantasai: I think that if we wanted to address their concern if would be
             relatively straightforward to require that all CSS identifiers
             are parsed into NFC or whatever.  Normalize on parsing, and just
             store it that way from then on.
   glazou: I think I remember a comment from david that normalizing at parse
           time is going to be very expensive.
   dbaron: I remember a discussion where I said I'd much rather normalize
           strings than normalize later - I'd rather do it at the same time
           we do encoding conversion and such.
   glazou: So if we store all identifiers in a given normalization, is that
           okay?
   dbaron: I was suggesting encoding-time normalization - authors could still
           manually get unnormalized things by using escape chars.
   glazou: Could you suggest some text?
   dbaron: I think this is higher-level than namespaces.
   dbaron: And I think we need good agreement between browsers that they're
           willing to do.
   glazou: Ok.  The comment that it's something that must be addressed at
           a higher level is a good comment for us.
   glazou: Elika, please mail references to the two emails, and I'll write
           prose saying what dbaron just said.  That way we can move the
           document along the rec track.
   fantasai: Okay.  Also, I think dbaron's suggestion makes a lot of sense.
   fantasai: So everyone should ping their parser guys and see what they think.
   <fantasai> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2011AprJun/0077.html
   glazou: Whatever the answer, we can say that the issue shouldn't be
           addressed for the Namespaces spec itself.
   fantasai: We can potentially say that namespace prefixes specifically are
             canonicalized.  So we'd have to reject that suggestion to say
             that the greater issue is out of scope.

   glazou: At some point I'd like to discuss the OM for namespaces.
           Right now we have nothing, and it makes it impossible to serialize
           a stylesheet.

Website Issues
--------------

   glazou: We have a few technical items on the wiki to discuss still.
   fantasai: Did we go over the website?
   [uncaught talk about alternate stylesheets?]
   <fantasai> Bert said to go to http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/
   <fantasai>  and switch the alternate style sheet to "Main"
   <fantasai> for comparison, here's the design submitted by Divya
   <fantasai> http://csswg.inkedblade.net/staging/redesign/index-divya.html
   glazou: So, should we switch?  I say yes.
   TabAtkins: Yes.
   arronei: Yes.
   <plinss_sfo> yes
   Bert: Anyone, please check for errors or anything I can improve.
   Bert: I plan to turn it on before I leave for Japan, so sometime Monday.
   RESOLVED: Change the website over to the new design.

   glazou: A companion item - the csswg blog.
   glazou: "What will it take to switch to wordpress?"
   Bert: On the tech side, it's easy, just put in a sysreq.
   fantasai: Can we please do that?  It would be amazingly wonderful.
   Bert: The only thing I'm unsure of is how to do templates.
   fantasai: If the only thing we're blocked on is getting a wp template,
             we can do that.
   glazou: We'll just need the template before the switch.
   fantasai: I'll be the point person, but I can't do the template myself.
   glazou: Ok, let's do the coordination offline.

Meeting closed.
Received on Thursday, 26 May 2011 02:30:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:40 GMT