W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > April 2010

Minutes SVG WG telcon Apr 12, 2010

From: Anthony Grasso <anthony.grasso@cisra.canon.com.au>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 02:12:18 +1000
Message-ID: <4BC34662.5020405@cisra.canon.com.au>
To: www-svg@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html

---


    [1]W3C

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

                                - DRAFT -

                    SVG Working Group Teleconference

12 Apr 2010

    See also: [2]IRC log

       [2] http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-irc

Attendees

    Present
           Shepazu, [IPcaller], ed, ChrisL, anthony, [Microsoft], jwatt

    Regrets
    Chair
           SV_MEETING_CHAIR

    Scribe
           anthony

Contents

      * [3]Topics
          1. [4]testsuite
          2. [5]F2F Meeting
          3. [6]FX Force
          4. [7]Wording on radial gradient focal points
          5. [8]F2F Meeting
          6. [9]SVG 1.1 SE Push
          7. [10]Markers
          8. [11]Canvas and processing meeting
      * [12]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________

    <trackbot> Date: 12 April 2010

    <ChrisL> hi

    <ChrisL>
    [13]http://libregraphicsmeeting.org/2010/index.php?p=en/location

      [13] http://libregraphicsmeeting.org/2010/index.php?p=en/location

    [14]http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=R
    ue+du+Fort+35+1060+Brussels+Belgium&sll=50.828325,4.34221&sspn=0.006
    736,0.01929&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Fortstraat+35,+Sint-Gillis+1060+Saint-
    Gilles,+Brussels-Capital+Region,+Belgium&ll=50.864478,4.457016&spn=0
    .215389,0.617294&z=11

      [14] 
http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Rue+du+Fort+35+1060+Brussels+Belgium&sll=50.828325

    <ChrisL>
    [15]http://maps.google.com/maps?oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:offic
    ial&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=0,0,1314856789320127029&fb=1&
    hq=microsoft&hnear=brussels&daddr=Culliganlaan+1,+1831+Machelen,+Bel
    gium&geocode=16487724983740769806,50.884409,4.449002&ei=8zHDS_2FLI_8
    _Aanif3VBg&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=directions-to&resnum=1&ved=0CAkQn
    gIwAA

      [15] 
http://maps.google.com/maps?oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=0

    <ed> [16]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Test_Suite_1.1F2

      [16] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Test_Suite_1.1F2

testsuite

    <ed> ED: so, approve the tests labeled as "reviewed by CL, approve?"

    <ed> ALL: yes, go ahead

    [17]http://maps.google.com/maps?oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:offic
    ial&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=0,0,1314856789320127029&fb=1&
    hq=microsoft&hnear=brussels&daddr=Culliganlaan+1,+1831+Machelen,+Bel
    gium&geocode=16487724983740769806,50.884409,4.449002&ei=8zHDS_2FLI_8
    _Aanif3VBg&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=directions-to&resnum=1&ved=0CAkQn
    gIwAA

      [17] 
http://maps.google.com/maps?oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=0

    <ed> ACTION: ed to mark the "reviewed by CL, approve?" tests as
    approved, and generate updated reference images [recorded in
    [18]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-2756 - Mark the "reviewed by CL, approve?"
    tests as approved, and generate updated reference images [on Erik
    Dahlström - due 2010-04-19].

    <ChrisL> template fixed

    <scribe> scribe: anthony

    <scribe> ScribeNick: anthony

    ED: I think the grammar for the elliptical has been fixed

    <ed> paths-data-20-f.svg

    ED: I added a test for it
    ... would like some one to view the test

    DS: Jeff Schiller had more to say about the syntax on the mailing
    list

    ED: My update was after his email
    ... it covers white space after the first and second flags

    DS: We could mention at least in the context of SVG 2.0
    ... a lacuna value for any given coordinate that is out of range
    ... can say it is assumed to be zero

    ED: I'm not sure really
    ... if you want to go with 1 or 0 then you have a bias

    DS: It's only cases where the arc flags are messed up
    ... what do you do with it?

    ED: We just check if its 1 or 0 that's all
    ... if it's say 2
    ... we just say it's invalid
    ... you can't really parse it as anything else

    DS: We should have it do something
    ... does the spec say what to do if the grammar isn't followed?

    ED: It says what to do if the segment is not valid
    ... you render up to the valid point
    ... that's what is mentioned in 1.1 anyway
    ... render up to the last valid segement
    ... then continue with the rest of the document
    ... that's what the tests I wrote do
    ... and the tests from Microsoft

    PD: I'm pretty sure that the spec says for this case
    ... exactly what Erik was saying

    DS: I want to make sure this is captured in SVG 2.0
    ... I'll start an issue
    ... to make sure this is covered

    ED: Any volunteers to review the test?

    PD: We can review it

    <scribe> ACTION: Patrick to Review paths-data-20-f.svg [recorded in
    [19]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action02]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-2757 - Review paths-data-20-f.svg [on
    Patrick Dengler - due 2010-04-19].

F2F Meeting

    ED: Do we have a sign up form?

    CL: No, I'll do that today

    <ChrisL> i will make one today

    <shepazu_> trackbot, pointer?

    <trackbot> Sorry, shepazu_, I don't understand 'trackbot, pointer?'.
    Please refer to [20]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help

      [20] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc

FX Force

    ED: We should schedule a telcon time
    ... to review some of the issues

    DS: We should ask them

    ED: I can send an email to ask them to do it Thursday next week

    PD: I'm not getting any information on the discussion

    DS: Probably not on the mailing list

    <shepazu_> [21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/

      [21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/

    DS: I'll drop you a link
    ... Just thinking about the dynamics about how this would play out
    ... we have come to a conclusion about image fit
    ... and then we go to the CSS WG and they get frustrated because
    we've had these private discussions
    ... we shouldn't talk about it in the groups
    ... and do it on the FX list

    <scribe> ACTION: Erik to Suggest a new telcon time for the FX Task
    Force group [recorded in
    [22]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action03]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-2758 - Suggest a new telcon time for the
    FX Task Force group [on Erik Dahlström - due 2010-04-19].

Wording on radial gradient focal points

    [23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010AprJun/001
    6.html

      [23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010AprJun/0016.html

    AG: I've reviewed the test
    ... and the test looks fine to me

    ED: Can we go ahead and approve the test?

    ALL: Ok

    AG: I suggested some extra wording
    ... to clarify the spec

    ED: It is a bit wordy
    ... but it's sort of saying the same thing else where in xlink:href
    I think
    ... definitely something that could be interpreted in two different
    ways
    ... what does everything else thing of the additional wording?

    CL: I think it would be good to put it in 1.1 SE

    ED: It's more clear to me
    ... where should it go? In 'fx' or in 'fy' as well

    AG: So, I had written the wording to go into the 'fx' attribute
    ... can be referenced by 'fy'

    <scribe> ACTION: Anthony to Add the the proposed wording for 'fx'
    clarification to SVG 1.1 2nd Edition [recorded in
    [24]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action04]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-2759 - Add the the proposed wording for
    'fx' clarification to SVG 1.1 2nd Edition [on Anthony Grasso - due
    2010-04-19].

    <patrickd> [25]http://www.microsoft.com/ebc/brussels.mspx

      [25] http://www.microsoft.com/ebc/brussels.mspx

F2F Meeting

    PD: There's a link to the location

    ED: We have a registration page

    [26]http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/19480/SVGBrussels/

      [26] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/19480/SVGBrussels/

    CL: Doug you asked if we could have a joint meeting with LGM

    DS: The last I heard from them that they understood that we wanted
    have a meeting with them
    ... during the conference
    ... what we had intended was people from LGM to participate in the
    F2F

    CL: Seems like we need to close a loop on that
    ... I'd be happy either way
    ... or for a panel and a meeting to occur

    DS: I was going to say we could explain how the process works
    ... and see if we can get people participating from the community
    ... or at least get an understanding of why things take time
    ... but I'll follow through with them

    <ChrisL> [27]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVGF2F_2010_LGM

      [27] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVGF2F_2010_LGM

    <ChrisL> so we can add hotel etc onto that

SVG 1.1 SE Push

    CL: We have an implementation report
    ... which is largely complete

    <ChrisL>
    [28]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/errata/implementation-repor
    t.html

      [28] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/errata/implementation-report.html

    CL: I've been maintaining that
    ... updating every time new versions of implementations come out
    ... we only want one pass per test

    <ChrisL> [29]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Test_Suite_1.1F2

      [29] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Test_Suite_1.1F2

    CL: Erik can you think of specific tests we need to add to the
    report?

    ED: There are some
    ... path-data-20-f.svg

    CL: It's not on the wiki page
    ... need to add it to both of them

    ED: Do we have reviews of the tests that are on the first page?

    CL: Yes
    ... I think they are all reviewed
    ... and they are all approved as well

    ED: Just checking that now

    <ed>
    [30]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/svgdom-over-01-f.s
    vg

      [30] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/svgdom-over-01-f.svg

    ED: so one of the tests I made for the spec is unreviewed
    ... and the funny thing with that one is it conflicts with the one
    of the submitted Microsoft tests

    CL: In that case Patrick should review it

    <ed> struct-svg-01-f.svg

    CL: That needs to go into to the test report as well

    <ChrisL> svgdom-over-01-f.svg

    CL: and the SVG DOM test needs to go to the test report as well

    <scribe> ACTION: Patrick to Review the svgdom-over-01-f.svg and
    struct-svg-01-f.svg tests and resolve any of the conflicts [recorded
    in [31]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action05]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-2760 - Review the svgdom-over-01-f.svg and
    struct-svg-01-f.svg tests and resolve any of the conflicts [on
    Patrick Dengler - due 2010-04-19].

    CL: any passes for the tests we are adding?

    ED: Batik pass the first one
    ... Webkit and Inkscape fail
    ... Firefox pass and Opera passes
    ... the second one
    ... Opera 10.50 passes that one
    ... and partials on everyone else
    ... so who is going to update the implementation report?

    CL: I'll do that anyway
    ... and update the results

    DS: Are you testing Webkit Safari?

    CL: No a nightly build

    DS: Should we test Chrome as well?

    CL: We should. In this case we are just after passes
    ... the Webkit rep on the CSS WG said not to bother running Safari
    ... but just to test it on Webkit

    DS: I could test it on Safari and on Chrome

    <scribe> ACTION: Chris to Add svgdom-over-01-f.svg and
    struct-svg-01-f.svg to the implementation report [recorded in
    [32]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action06]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-2761 - Add svgdom-over-01-f.svg and
    struct-svg-01-f.svg to the implementation report [on Chris Lilley -
    due 2010-04-19].

    ED: Do we need to do anything else?
    ... I think we need to get the Test Suite fulling working

    CL: Apart from the test suite I think the spec needs to be up to
    date

    ED: There are a few editing actions

    PD: I still don't have my editing credentials

    DS: I'll look into that today

    <ed>
    [33]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Brussels%2C_Belgium_F2F

      [33] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Brussels%2C_Belgium_F2F

    <ed> [34]http://www.microsoft.com/ebc/brussels.mspx

      [34] http://www.microsoft.com/ebc/brussels.mspx

    <ChrisL> [35]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/products/1

      [35] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/products/1

    ED: Would it be helpful to gather together all the editing actions
    ... and send out emails

    CL: Some of the actions can only be done after publication
    ... JWatt there's actions on ZoomEvent and an action on Text
    ... to propose some wording
    ... we are very close
    ... to completing
    ... we have 8 open issues
    ... we either fix them or push them to another spec

    <ChrisL> close ISSUE-2017

    <trackbot> ISSUE-2017 Find sane values for getSubStringLength and
    selectSubString closed

    ED: Issue 2017 we can close because we were in agreement

    <ed> [36]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2017

      [36] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2017

    <ChrisL> issue-2259?

    <trackbot> ISSUE-2259 -- Inconsistent use of <uri> symbol -- RAISED

    <trackbot> [37]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2259

      [37] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2259

    ISSUE-2299?

    <trackbot> ISSUE-2299 -- Text on a path layout rules unclear wrt
    startpoint-on-the-path and text-anchor -- RAISED

    <trackbot> [38]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2299

      [38] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2299

    ED: We can probably push that to SVG 2.0
    ... it's not going to be small change if we start trying to tweak
    the wording there

    <ChrisL> once i had added tests or determined we don't need tests
    then i can close action-2697 and thus issue-2259

    ED: I'll update that to be SVG 2.0 then

    ISSUE-2305

    ISSUE-2305?

    <trackbot> ISSUE-2305 -- Line caps drawing on zero length lines --
    RAISED

    <trackbot> [39]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2305

      [39] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2305

    CL: We have a test for that

    <ChrisL>
    [40]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/painting-stroke-10
    -t.svg

      [40] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/painting-stroke-10-t.svg

    ED: I remember seeing one more test with the zero length lines
    ... Maybe if someone can take an action to write the test
    ... not sure if it's blocking publication
    ... there was a test submitted
    ... by the guy that originally reported the issue

    CL: I can do that
    ... that's fine

    ED: There is one point in that test case is unclear
    ... when the length matches the end of the line
    ... so that's the reason why one of the lines at the end of the test
    case
    ... was there in some and not there in others
    ... or break it up into several tests

    <scribe> ACTION: Chris to Write a test for ISSUE-2305 [recorded in
    [41]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action07]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-2762 - Write a test for ISSUE-2305 [on
    Chris Lilley - due 2010-04-19].

    ISSUE-2309?

    <trackbot> ISSUE-2309 -- Investigate impact of changing SVG 1.1
    second edition to reference CSS2.1 -- RAISED

    <trackbot> [42]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2309

      [42] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2309

    ED: I think we've said before it would be a too big of a change to
    make
    ... there have been some changes between 2.0 and 2.1
    ... such as clip and web fonts being dropped
    ... so if want to really reference 2.1 we really have to investigate
    that

    CL: We can't really reference 2.1 because it's not going to be
    finished until the end of the year
    ... there are a few things we need to reference 2.0 because they are
    not in 2.1
    ... the specificity of style attribute changed
    ... we don't want SVG 1.1 SE waiting fro CSS 2.1 to be done

    ED: We seem to know what to put in the spec

    <scribe> ACTION: Chris to Add wording to the specification to
    account for the differences between CSS 2.0 and 2.1 [recorded in
    [43]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action08]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-2763 - Add wording to the specification to
    account for the differences between CSS 2.0 and 2.1 [on Chris Lilley
    - due 2010-04-19].

Markers

    PD: Should a marker receive an event?
    ... A connecting line would get an event

    DS: If you click on any part of a shape including a marker the event
    is on the end element which the marker is applied

    PD: Styling
    ... the spec says it should style against the origination rather
    than the instantiation

    CL: In general we have the same styling as CSS
    ... there is one place we tried to do that differently
    ... which was in <use> and <symbol>

    DS: I think what should have been done with markers
    ... is basically what was done with <use>
    ... and we can't change it now
    ... we could add a set of properties that deals with markers

    CL: We can already do that with vector effects
    ... I think we should leave markers for SVG 1.1 SE as is
    ... then for 2.0 we should make them more like <use>

    <ChrisL> also, for SVG 2.0 I want to drop markers and add a
    polymarker element

    CL: Markers would effectively be deprecated

    DS: Could you change it without causing backwards compatibility
    problems

    CL: I'd rather replace it with different functionality

    PD: Would it fix styling problem?

    DS: Yes

Canvas and processing meeting

    DS: Processing is a high level language that was ported to Java

    <patrickd> patrickd: (I have to exit; hard stop)

    trackbot, end telcon

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: Anthony to Add the the proposed wording for 'fx'
    clarification to SVG 1.1 2nd Edition [recorded in
    [44]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action04]
    [NEW] ACTION: Chris to Add svgdom-over-01-f.svg and
    struct-svg-01-f.svg to the implementation report [recorded in
    [45]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action06]
    [NEW] ACTION: Chris to Add wording to the specification to account
    for the differences between CSS 2.0 and 2.1 [recorded in
    [46]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action08]
    [NEW] ACTION: Chris to Write a test for ISSUE-2305 [recorded in
    [47]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action07]
    [NEW] ACTION: ed to mark the "reviewed by CL, approve?" tests as
    approved, and generate updated reference images [recorded in
    [48]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action01]
    [NEW] ACTION: Erik to Suggest a new telcon time for the FX Task
    Force group [recorded in
    [49]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action03]
    [NEW] ACTION: Patrick to Review paths-data-20-f.svg [recorded in
    [50]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action02]
    [NEW] ACTION: Patrick to Review the svgdom-over-01-f.svg and
    struct-svg-01-f.svg tests and resolve any of the conflicts [recorded
    in [51]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action05]

    [End of minutes]
      _________________________________________________________


     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [52]scribe.perl version 1.135
     ([53]CVS log)
     $Date: 2010/04/12 16:09:10 $
      _________________________________________________________

      [52] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
      [53] 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 [54]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/

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

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/bisa/bias/
Succeeded: s/bigger/big of a/
Succeeded: s/Canvas/Canvas and processing meeting/
Found Scribe: anthony
Inferring ScribeNick: anthony
Found ScribeNick: anthony
Default Present: Shepazu, [IPcaller], ed, ChrisL, anthony, [Microsoft],
  jwatt
Present: Shepazu [IPcaller] ed ChrisL anthony [Microsoft] jwatt

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

Found Date: 12 Apr 2010
Guessing minutes URL: [55]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html
People with action items: anthony chris ed erik patrick

      [55] http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html

    End of [56]scribe.perl diagnostic output]

      [56] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
Received on Monday, 12 April 2010 16:12:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:44 GMT