W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2012

[CSSWG] Draft Minutes conf call 29-feb-2012

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:10:22 -0700
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+eryHmOootMYwYPbW6YeZkM8a8dAP7gAs1rbi_cBpQobQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>
Cc: w3c-css-wg <w3c-css-wg@w3.org>
   [1]W3C

      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                               - DRAFT -

                           SV_MEETING_TITLE

29 Feb 2012

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2012/02/29-css-irc

Attendees

   Present
          nimbu, glazou, plinss, jdaggett, glenn, florianr, smfr,
          sylvaing, +1.650.253.aaaa, stearns, Oliver_Goldman,
          TabAtkins_, hober, krit, Bert, antonp, arronei, danielweck,
          kimberly, SteveZ, ChrisL, +8521616aabb, +1.408.421.aacc,
          +1.415.766.aadd, dbaron, +47.23.69.aaee, kojiishi, dstorey,
          Rossen, alexmog_, +1.650.766.aaff, bradk, [Microsoft],
          +47.23.69.aagg, howcome

   Regrets
   Chair
          glazou

   Scribe
          glenn

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Z-Axis intersection for transforms
         2. [5]css3 images
     * [6]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

   <TabAtkins_> fantasai: The issues I didn't log were raised after the
   end of the LC period, iirc.

   <tantek> greetings

   <tantek> only on IRC this morning

   <TabAtkins_> yo, tantek

   <plinss> hola

   <TabAtkins_> Sigh. If Zakim understands the question, why does me
   make you rephrase it?

   <tantek> TabAtkins_ lazy bot programmer is lazy.

   <TabAtkins_> But it's actually *more* work to do that!

   <tantek> and failed to obey 2nd law

   <jdaggett> ack

   <TabAtkins_> lolwut?

   <fantasai> TabAtkins: That doesn't mean you don't file them.

   <fantasai> TabAtkins: You addressed them, didn't you? If you're
   going to ignore them because they're after the deadline, fine.

   <fantasai> TabAtkins: But if not, they need to be filed and
   processed.

   <smfr> a 386

   <fantasai> TabAtkins: The only time we've ever rejected a comment
   due to being after the deadline is CSS2.1, fwiw.

   <TabAtkins_> fantasai: My understanding was that the DoC was for LC
   issues.

   <fantasai> TabAtkins: And that was because if we didn't, we'd never
   finish.

   <TabAtkins_> Outside of the LC comment period, they're just regular
   comments, and are dealt with in the normal way.

   <fantasai> TabAtkins: You're addressing them between LC and CR, they
   get filed.

   <TabAtkins_> I can do that, sure. But don't complain about me not
   filing them when the instructions about what to file were apparently
   unclear. ^_^

   <scribe> scribe: glenn

   <glazou> ScribeNick: glenn

   ?WD of Flexbox: like to talk about MQ

   <nimbu> florianr is florianr

   alex: can we publish flexbox

   sylvaing: gradients on agenda?

   <tantek> TabAtkins, between end of LC period and when you publish
   the CR it's a bit of a gray area as to what's "required". I think
   it's up to editor judgment, in which case consider if addressing the
   comment will improve the spec, and in particular avoid a CR-LC-CR
   cycle.

   glazou: only normative reference on agenda

   <danielweck> (again)

   glazou: yes if possible

   <dstorey> one of those new people is me. Going to try to work out
   which

   <TabAtkins_> tantek: "Addressing" and "filing in the DoC" are very
   different things. I do the former. I didn't realize I had to do the
   latter.

   alex: discussed LC on flexbox

   florianr: would like a WD

   alex: will publish by tuesday

   chrisl: WD or what?

   <TabAtkins_> RESOLVED: Publich Flexbox as WD.

   RESOLVE: publish flexbox as WD

   <ChrisL> ACTION: ChrisL to publish flexbox wd [recorded in
   [7]http://www.w3.org/2012/02/29-css-minutes.html#action01]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-453 - Publish flexbox wd [on Chris Lilley
   - due 2012-03-07].

   <tantek> TabAtkins, agreed. If it's a cross-WG comment then I tend
   to be more liberal toward including in the DoC as it tends to
   improve inter-WG relations and reduce static/friction in future
   interactions.

   <smfr>
   [8]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/1083.html

      [8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/1083.html

   glazou: post msg from david with list of issues

   <tantek> TabAtkins, do you have a URL/webpage example of the new
   flexbox syntax/functionality/algorithm that shows it "working" (even
   prefixed) in 2+ implementations? (just curious what state of spec vs
   implementation is.

   dbaron: order as in email
   ... animation of images and gradients
   ... rules in spec about animation of gradients
   ... work in css4 images about that, should defer to that and remove
   from spec

   <tantek> thanks smfr for the link

   florianr: what is meant by defer?

   <ChrisL> I agree with all the ones in the postpone category, having
   read through them

   florianr: impls free to do what the want

   <sylvaing> ChrisL, +1

   listening

   go ahead

   <dbaron> Tab: people will depend on whatever the implementations do,
   no matter what the spec says

   <tantek> dbaron's clustering of issues postpone/easy/medium/hard is
   a good approach for helping advance these specs quickly.

   smfr: webkit has cross fade
   ... will do transitions using cross fade, agrees should be undefined
   how accomplished

   dbaron: thinks that wk is impl newer spec
   ... should not have normative statement if will soon override

   chrisl what is wrong with saying undefined?

   worried if you say can't animate, or if you say can animate but not
   what happens

   fantasai: should specify that whether and how it's animated is
   undefined
   ... then mention how it will be defined in future spec

   chrisl: if spec says you should not try to animate this, will have
   no test

   dbaron: css1/2 have said ignore props not defined in spec
   ... yet css3 is defining new props

   glazou: has to drop/rejoin due to sip problem, peter pls chair in
   mean time

   <dbaron> dbaron: I think that's fine

   <glazou> (sorry, no change, very difficult to hear you all, sound is
   cut)

   <glazou> Bert: probably

   <smfr> i'm fine with florianr's wording

   ???: such and such is not expected to animate, but different ? will
   defines how this works

   dbaron: are we talking just about images/gradients or everything not
   animatable?
   ... thinks we're talking about everything, concerned about putting
   in big loop hole

   <florianr> This level of css does not expect XXX to animate.
   Different modules or later levels may define how to animate them.

   chrisl: (1) animatable and known, (2) not animatable and known, (3)
   others not sure

   ???: is it clear on (2) vs (3)

   scribe: rather be specific when possible

   dbaron: ok if we have statement about limited set of props
   ... should i take an action to write that statement?
   ... most of the rest aren't properties

   glazou: would like a decision

   <smfr> i agree

   chrisl: agrees with entire list of things to postpone
   ... to which sylviang agreed

   <smfr> [9]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14609

      [9] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14609

   dbaron: transitions about value types you can't interpolate
   ... things would animate that people aren't expecting to animate

   Tab: can define special timing model for discrete things

   chrisl: in SVG discrete changes interpolate

   dbaron: are people not worried about this?
   ... will put constraints on what we can do

   tab: if transitions immediately after non-zero, then should work

   <smfr> transition: all 2s 2s;

   tab: find with leaving or fixing, simple to fix

   smfr: thinks not simple to fix

   tab: shouldn't have transition all

   florianr: suggests postponing

   dbaron: should work within constraints just now, is ok with
   postponing

   <smfr> i'm ok with postponing

   RESOLUTION: postponing ??? items

   <smfr> [10]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15844

     [10] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15844

   <dbaron pls s/// ??? for me>

   <dbaron> s/???/the items listed as postpone in
   [11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/1083.html/

     [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/1083.html/

   tnx

   tab: can't having impls doing different things...

   dbaron: don't want webkit behavior

   <dbaron> smfr: WebKit treats 'auto' as '0'

   dbaron: how to match lists of different lengths
   ... in transition * properties
   ... background is the length that matters

   <ChrisL> agree with the truncated/repeated proposal

   dbaron: use beginning of list ignore the rest

   <smfr> agreed

   dbaron: proposes ???

   <dbaron> RESOLVED: resolve bug 14604 as proposed

   dbaron: next, reverse animation using opposite timing function,
   people ask for feature
   ... postpone adding such feature, but add example showing how it can
   be used now
   ... a little confusing, but not too hard

   glazou: good compromise

   <dbaron> RESOLVED: resolve bug 14611 as proposed

   dbaron: spec mentions grid and zoom props

   <smfr> agreed

   dbaron: grid isn't any spec, zoom is; propose removing refs

   <ChrisL> agreed

   tab: agree

   <dbaron> RESOLVED: resolve bug 14618 and 14626 as proposed

   <smfr> agreed

   dbaron: vertical align is animatable (according to spec), but what
   does animating keywords mean?

   florianr: should we say "no keywords" or just enumerate the subset
   of what can animate?

   <dbaron> RESOLVED: resolve bug 14988 as proposed

   dbaron: last of easy items

   <smfr> [12]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15838

     [12] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15838

   <Bert> (Animating from 'top' to 'bottom' makes sense, but doesn't
   seem needed.)

   dbaron: no transition when both transition delay and ??? are zero
   seconds

   <ChrisL> agree on the zero transition

   dbaron: nothing says it

   tab: doesn't like because it is discontinuous behavior

   dbaron: the default is delay/duration not transition property

   tab: ok, need to make not a transition

   smfr: does the spec say this?

   <dbaron> smfr: implication of transition not occurring is that no
   events fire?

   <fantasai> tab: oh, we default to transition-property: all; and
   transition-duration / ?? to zero

   <Bert> ". By default the value is ā€˜0sā€™, meaning that the transition
   is immediate"

   <dbaron> smfr: does the spec say that?

   <TabAtkins_> Specifically, the current "no transitions" default is
   implemention with a property of "all" and a delay/duration of "0".

   <Bert> " (i.e. there will be no animation)."

   fantasai: why do we have default of zero?

   <fantasai> s/zero/all\/zero/

   bert: specs no animation in that case

   tab: events are important part

   <speaker pls summarize long statement in irc>

   <smfr> i approve

   <TabAtkins_> smfr: [explained the original reasoning between the
   current defaults vs defaulting to a property of 'none' and some
   default duration]

   <dbaron> RESOLVED: resolve bug 15838 as proposed

   <Bert> smfr: [there are usability reasons for defaults of 'all' and
   '0s']

   glazou: moving to Z-axis intersection issue for transforms
   ... is dirk here?

   <smfr>
   [13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/1202.html

     [13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/1202.html

Z-Axis intersection for transforms

   florianr: opera does not have impl of 3d transforms
   ... in favor of saying do intersection in spec
   ... not in favor of saying should

   dbaron: talked to Robert O'Callahan, and he agreed the correct
   behavior (plane splitting) is obvious but we don't do it correctly
   now, but we should

   tab: would like to do correctly, impl is tricky

   <smfr> RESOLVED: transform spec should make intersection behavior a
   MUST

   jdaggett: possible problem with mirroring specs
   ... multiview?

   <fantasai> scribenick: fantasai

   <glenn> ... proposal to mirror to csswg, thinks it is bad idea

   jdaggett: proposal was to host specs on csswg.org

   <glenn> <jdaggett pls speak up>

   jdaggett: means all ..., and all editor's drafts have to point to
   csswg.org
   ... I don't see that using Apache is necessary. We can use <meta> to
   do redirection.
   ... Not ideal, but better than having csswg.org be a point of
   failure

   <glenn> jdaggett: not necessary to use .htaccess facilities

   <tantek> I agree, I'd rather delay the source control transition if
   it means we can avoid one or more temporary places for specs.

   <scribe> Scribenick: glenn

   plinss: timing to be finalized today
   ... infrastructure in place
   ... wishes better docs, but working on them today
   ... no addl burden on editors

   jdaggett: questions using URLs to refer to csswg.org host

   <tantek> I have not had time to retry the hg instructions again to
   see where I get stuck next btw.

   plinss: suggests reverse proxy on dev.w3.org

   bert: pretty sure its possible

   <dbaron> (Why do a reverse proxy on a w3c server if we could just do
   a checkout on a w3c server?)

   plinss: this is just a stop gap, i.e., using csswg.org

   <tantek> exactly, what dbaron said

   jdaggett: doesn't see need for interim step

   <tantek> can we delay transition and avoid stopgaps?

   <tantek> what's the rush?

   plinss: if we use reverse proxy, nobody will know

   <tantek> I agree with the concerns that jdaggett has raised.

   plinss: will start with proxy on dev.w3.org to csswg.org

   jdaggett: doesn't like having csswg.org as a point of failure

   plinss: only for a few weeks/months

   jdaggett: doesn't see this step as necessary

   <dbaron> If there's a chance we can make this happen in a matter of
   days, I think we should try to get that to happen.

   <dbaron> I think it's preferable to have the editors drafts have
   w3.org URLs

   plinss: what's the big deal?

   jdaggett: sounds like extra work for nothing
   ... had breakage previously

   <going in loops here... glazou?>

   <fantasai> plinss: They'll be served from dev.w3.org URLs

   glazou: pls take to email or irc after call

   <fantasai> plinss: so why do you care

css3 images

   fantasai: DoC but won't get through them today

   <dbaron> [14]http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/issues-lc-2012 is
   the thing to discuss?

     [14] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/issues-lc-2012

   fantasai: all should review DoC and discuss issues during next
   telecon

   <dbaron> er, to review?

   <TabAtkins_> [15]http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/issues-lc-2012

     [15] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/issues-lc-2012

   fantasai: suggests talking now about taking V&U to LC

   glazou: reds need review

   fantasai: all are pretty tricky

   tab: need other people looking at them

   glazou: action on all to review DoC and comment

   <sylvaing> title of css3-images DoC is 'CSS Backgrounds and Borders
   Level 3'

   glazou: what else to say now about this doc?

   tab: just discuss DoC

   florianr: like to go back to MQ
   ... current TS is not latest version

   fantasai: already has action item to do this

   florianr: will write results for opera

   <fantasai>
   [16]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2012JanMar/0309.
   html

     [16] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2012JanMar/0309.html

   florianr: also some editorial changes, should republish
   ... question about when

   <florianr>
   [17]http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2012/02/28/precision-engine

     [17] http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2012/02/28/precision-engine

   fantasai: suggests passing (opera) build first
   ... go to LC then hopefully PR

   <fantasai> fantasai: or are they only editorial?

   <fantasai> florianr: Borderline

   <fantasai> florianr: Not changing what they say, just what people
   understand them to say

   florianr: a request on ML for example

   fantasai: no opinion

   <BobBie> hi

   florianr: suggest not adding this specific example because it refers
   to feature not referenced
   ... request for example using rem unit

   glazou: think is not needed

   dbaron: but may help clarify spec text, units never based on results
   of declarations
   ... unambiguous that rem behaves same way

   <dbaron> Add to "Relative units in media queries are based on the
   initial value."

   dbaron: add to sentence "relative units ..."

   florianr: sounds good, will edit and republish

   <is there a resolution? pls someone type into irc>

   <glazou> RESOLUTION: Add to "Relative units in media queries are
   based on the initial value."

   dbaron: previous version link in draft points to previous previous
   version

   chrisl: if all editorial, don
   ... don't need another LC
   ... or is proposal to go to PR?

   dbaron: possible in one week
   ... depends on impl reports

   florianr: can have IRs tomorrow

   fantasai: agreed

   dbaron: mozilla passes all the tests in the repo

   florianr: should we list previous editors as current editors or
   previous?
   ... currently listed as previous

   <jdaggett> previous editors seems fine

   glazou: no opinion

   tab: list as previous

   stevez: long tradition

   <dbaron> though sometimes the "previous editors" is editors for a
   previous level of the spec, which is sort of different...

   <Bert> RESOLVED: move editors of MQ who are no longer active to
   "Former editor"

   <dbaron> fantasai: Everybody ok with removing the comma between
   attribute name and type in the attr() function?

   fantasai: is everbody ok with removing comma between ? and ?

   glazou: not fair to ask this now at end of call

   <Bert> (I don't like it without the comma, but can live with it.)

   <dbaron> peterl: We discussed it at f2f, and howcome was only
   dissenter.

   <dbaron> peterl: And howcome just said he's ok with it.

   <is there a resolution?>

   <fantasai, pls type resolution>

   <dbaron> RESOLVED: publish last call of css3-values

   glazou: adjourned

   <fantasai> RESOLVED: drop comma between attribute name and type in
   attr()

   <TabAtkins_> RESOLVED: publish V&U as LCWD.

   trackbot, end meeting

   <fantasai> Bert, is CSS Speech CR in the pipeline yet?

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: ChrisL to publish flexbox wd [recorded in
   [18]http://www.w3.org/2012/02/29-css-minutes.html#action01]

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [19]scribe.perl version 1.136
    ([20]CVS log)
    $Date: 2012/02/29 18:03:39 $
     _________________________________________________________

     [19] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [20] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

   [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136  of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43
Check for newer version at [21]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/

     [21] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/???/florianr/
Succeeded: s/??/flexbox/
Succeeded: s/??/WD of Flexbox/
Succeeded: s/???/sylvaing/
Succeeded: s/???/florianr/
Succeeded: s/???/dbaron/
Succeeded: s/???/florianr/
Succeeded: s/dbaron:/florianr:/
Succeeded: s/???/smfr/
Succeeded: s/.../chrisl/
Succeeded: s/need not/you should not try to animate this/
Succeeded: s/should say undefined/should specify that whether and how i
t's animated is undefined/
Succeeded: s/???/Tab/
Succeeded: s/???/smfr/
Succeeded: s/???/florianr/
WARNING: Bad s/// command: s/???/the items listed as postpone in [22]ht
tp://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/1083.html/
Succeeded: s/???/dbaron/
Succeeded: s/???/florianr/
Succeeded: s/duraion/duration/
Succeeded: s/florianr/smfr/
WARNING: Bad s/// command: s/zero/all\/zero/
Succeeded: s/???/florianr/
Succeeded: s/robert/Robert O'Callahan, and he agreed the correct behavi
or (plane splitting) is obvious but we don't do it correctly now, but w
e should/
Succeeded: s/???/jdaggett/
Succeeded: s/[...]/to csswg.org/
Succeeded: s/florianr/fantasai/
Succeeded: s/CR/PR/
Succeeded: s/sylvaing/glazou/
Succeeded: s/previous version in draft is obsolete/previous version lin
k in draft points to previous previous version/
Found Scribe: glenn
Found ScribeNick: glenn
Found ScribeNick: fantasai
Found ScribeNick: glenn
ScribeNicks: glenn, fantasai
Default Present: nimbu, glazou, plinss, jdaggett, glenn, florianr, smfr
, sylvaing, +1.650.253.aaaa, stearns, Oliver_Goldman, TabAtkins_, hober
, krit, Bert, antonp, arronei, danielweck, kimberly, SteveZ, ChrisL, +8
521616aabb, +1.408.421.aacc, +1.415.766.aadd, dbaron, +47.23.69.aaee, k
ojiishi, dstorey, Rossen, alexmog_, +1.650.766.aaff, bradk, [Microsoft]
, +47.23.69.aagg, howcome
Present: nimbu glazou plinss jdaggett glenn florianr smfr sylvaing +1.6
50.253.aaaa stearns Oliver_Goldman TabAtkins_ hober krit Bert antonp ar
ronei danielweck kimberly SteveZ ChrisL +8521616aabb +1.408.421.aacc +1
.415.766.aadd dbaron +47.23.69.aaee kojiishi dstorey Rossen alexmog_ +1
.650.766.aaff bradk [Microsoft] +47.23.69.aagg howcome

     [22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/1083.html/

WARNING: No meeting title found!
You should specify the meeting title like this:
<dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting

Got date from IRC log name: 29 Feb 2012
Guessing minutes URL: [23]http://www.w3.org/2012/02/29-css-minutes.html
People with action items: chrisl

     [23] http://www.w3.org/2012/02/29-css-minutes.html

   End of [24]scribe.perl diagnostic output]

     [24] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
Received on Wednesday, 29 February 2012 18:11:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:51 GMT