W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > November 2009

Minutes, SVG Telcon, Mon 30 Nov 2009

From: Jonathan Watt <jwatt@jwatt.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:46:24 +0100
Message-ID: <4B143D30.7060805@jwatt.org>
To: www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html

--

   [1]W3C

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

                               - DRAFT -

                   SVG Working Group Teleconference

30 Nov 2009

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Shepazu, [IPcaller], ed, +33.9.52.49.aaaa, anthony, jwatt

   Regrets
   Chair
          SV_MEETING_CHAIR

   Scribe
          Jonathan Watt

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]update on ACTION-2682 (svg errata implementation report)
         2. [5]Spec conventions
            http://www.w3.org/People/Schepers/spec-conventions.html
         3. [6]CVS patch comments
     * [7]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________



   <trackbot> Date: 30 November 2009

   Zakim: who's here?

   <scribe> scribe: Jonathan Watt

   <scribe> scribenick: jwatt

   <ChrisL> zaki, take up agendum 3

update on ACTION-2682 (svg errata implementation report)

   <ed>
   [8]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009OctDec/0049
   .html

      [8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009OctDec/0049.html

   <ed>
   [9]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009OctDec/att-
   0049/implementation-report.html

      [9]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009OctDec/att-0049/implementation-report.html

   CL: I sent an email with the implementation report
   ... if you look in the first column, it styles it in grey if there
   are no passes at all
   ... there are four of those, and we're wondering what to do about
   that
   ... or we can back those out
   ... and publish 2nd edition with a note that those need traction

   <ed> btw, latest "nightly" gogi passes the
   [10]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/animate-dom-01-f.s
   vg test

     [10] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/animate-dom-01-f.svg

   <shepazu> [11]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/

     [11] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/

   <ed> ED: types-dom-02-f tests some parts that (animVal mutability)
   that we didn't errata, it's just testing previous 1.1 behavior

   <ChrisL> types-dom-02-f could be split, some is errate related and
   some is not. opera passes the erata-elated part

   CL: my action would be to figure out which errata need to be backed
   out

   DS: backing out would not mean that the errata are lost, only that
   they would go to a 3rd Edition errata

   <shepazu>
   [12]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Errata_in_SVG_1.1_Second_
   Edition

     [12] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Errata_in_SVG_1.1_Second_Edition

   <ChrisL> Stroking subpaths of zero length painting-stroke-10-t.svg

   <ed> ACTION: ed to split types-dom-02-f.svg into two tests, one part
   testing animVal, one testing the rest (errata parts) [recorded in
   [13]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html#action01]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-2700 - Split types-dom-02-f.svg into two
   tests, one part testing animVal, one testing the rest (errata parts)
   [on Erik Dahlström - due 2009-12-07].

   <ChrisL> Firefox nightly 20090929 is elderly

   <ChrisL> jwatt: firefox trunk passes i think

   <ChrisL> ... oh, no it doesn't

   <ChrisL> References to characters in SVGTextContentElement should be
   UTF-16 code units text-dom-02-f.svg

   <ChrisL> text-dom-02-f.svg opera gogi and safari pass the top 3
   subtests.

   <ed> safari 4.0.3 passes first and third subtests

   <ChrisL> firefox nightly passes 1 and 4

   <ChrisL> [14]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_B

     [14] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_B

   JW: it might be a good idea to to use a TTF/OTF/WOFF font instead of
   SVG fonts so the test is only testing what it purports to be testing
   ... because lack of SVG fonts will mean these DOM methods will not
   pass
   ... I mean they could pass, but the test will fail because of lack
   of SVG font support

   <scribe> ACTION: ChrisL to split the test [recorded in
   [15]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html#action02]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-2701 - Split the test [on Chris Lilley -
   due 2009-12-07].

   <ChrisL> fixed in tracker to be meaningful

Spec conventions
[16]http://www.w3.org/People/Schepers/spec-conventions.html

     [16] http://www.w3.org/People/Schepers/spec-conventions.html

   DS: I was talking to Ian Jacobs about having standard conventions
   across specifications so that people could transfer knowledge
   between specifications
   ... I adopted some of the conventions from the SVG for DOM Events
   ... the above document would change what SVG is doing too in our
   next version of the spec

   <ChrisL> www-archive@w3.org

   DS: I took the convention discussion to www-archive since that seems
   to be the w3c's general discussion list

   <shepazu>
   [17]http://www.w3.org/People/Schepers/spec-conventions.html

     [17] http://www.w3.org/People/Schepers/spec-conventions.html

   DS: what do you think?

   CL: I think it's a good idea in general, and it certainly means
   people need to learn less if they have an interest in more than one
   specification
   ... in general I think it's good work

   AG: I think it's good

   DS: as long as people are using the markup conventions they can
   restyle if the default style doesn't work for them for some reason
   ... we can't simply say that there's one stylesheet that you
   reference
   ... there will be a supplementary stylesheet
   ... would the SVG WG be willing to adopt this?
   ... whatever specs I'm editing I plan to use this for
   ... there are also conventions about putting an id on things you
   call out, since if they are that important they should be linkable
   to

   JW: it sounds good in principle, but I'm minuting so haven't looked
   at the doc
   ... is this still a work in progress, will it change a lot?

   DS: I don't think it will change a lot
   ... at least not the markup
   ... the styles will probably change

   Carl proposed two different types of issue

   scribe: so I separated out blocking issues

   Hixie suggested a change to use XXX

   Bert on the chairs list proposed changes

   I incorporated those

   Fantasai suggested improvements to the semantic markup

   which I added

   using <em> rather than <span> for example

   I got a bit of pushback about that from Gregory at Opera

   but accessibility people were behind it

   CL: I think using <em> is overloading it, but I can understand where
   the accessibility people are coming from if it makes things easier
   for them given the current state of the art with screen readers
   ... is it the right time to start changing "real" documents right
   now, or should we wait a while

   JW: that's where I was coming from

   DS: well in my experience you need to use it to start getting
   feedback, good or bad
   ... so I think we should start using it to get focus on the issue

   CL: I think that's fine

   RESOLUTION: The SVG WG will start using the conventions proposed by
   Doug

CVS patch comments

   ED: for small typo type things I find patch files very useful

   DS: I prefer to see things inline, not in the form of a patch
   ... I think it's just as easy to quote the offending text in an
   email
   ... I'm also afraid that in a time of high feedback, if we set a
   trend of accepting patches, then something we might not want could
   at some point slip through

   CL: I'd also prefer an email just saying what text needs fixed

   AG: we also have the issue that our internal format is not the final
   document we generate
   ... so patches would probably be patching the wrong document and
   therefore be a problem to integrate

   <scribe> ACTION: Chris to reply to Helder explaining why we would
   prefer not to receive patch files [recorded in
   [18]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html#action03]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-2702 - Reply to Helder explaining why we
   would prefer not to receive patch files [on Chris Lilley - due
   2009-12-07].

   DS: I sent an email to the HTML WG explaining that their current
   version of params can only be used with plugins
   ... mjs sent replied saying he'd discourage use of <object> and
   would prefer <iframe>
   ... I personally don't think that meets the needs of some of the
   things people want to use this for
   ... trying to edit a URL string
   ... that seems painful to me
   ... the param element seems the natural way to go to me
   ... I agree with some of his points including having a good URI
   syntax
   ... but I think param is more user friendly
   ... and the markup is then much more clear than using encoded URI
   strings

   ED: I agree it's clearer
   ... <iframe> doesn't take <param> today

   DS: no, but it could

   [out of time]

   CL: you should keep pushing on params

   RSSAgent, generate minutes

   thanks

   trackbot: end telcon

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Chris to reply to Helder explaining why we would
   prefer not to receive patch files [recorded in
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html#action03]
   [NEW] ACTION: ChrisL to split the test [recorded in
   [20]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: ed to split types-dom-02-f.svg into two tests, one
   part testing animVal, one testing the rest (errata parts) [recorded
   in [21]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html#action01]

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [22]scribe.perl version 1.135
    ([23]CVS log)
    $Date: 2009/11/30 21:40:02 $
     _________________________________________________________

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

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

   [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135  of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20
Check for newer version at [24]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/

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

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/someone/Gregory/
Found Scribe: Jonathan Watt
Found ScribeNick: jwatt
Default Present: Shepazu, [IPcaller], ed, +33.9.52.49.aaaa, anthony, jw
att
Present: Shepazu [IPcaller] ed +33.9.52.49.aaaa anthony jwatt

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 30 Nov 2009
Guessing minutes URL: [25]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html
People with action items: chris chrisl ed

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2009/11/30-svg-minutes.html

   End of [26]scribe.perl diagnostic output]

     [26] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
Received on Monday, 30 November 2009 21:46:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:43 GMT