- From: Anthony Grasso <Anthony.Grasso@cisra.canon.com.au>
- Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 20:06:48 +0000
- To: W3C SVG WG Public List <public-svg-wg@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-minutes.html
---
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
SVG Working Group Teleconference
16 Mar 2011
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0250.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-irc
Attendees
Present
[IPcaller], ed, heycam, +39.524.9.aaaa, ChrisL, anthony,
+39.537.7.aabb, tav, [Microsoft]
Regrets
Chair
Cameron
Scribe
anthony
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Telcon Time
2. [6]SVG Full 1.1 2nd Edition
3. [7]Compositing Publication
4. [8]Order of Transform and motion animation application
5. [9]Discrete Animation Fix
6. [10]CSS Animations
* [11]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 16 March 2011
<ChrisL> [12]http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-SVGCompositing-20110315/
[12] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-SVGCompositing-20110315/
<scribe> Scribe: anthony
<scribe> Scribenick: anthony
Telcon Time
<heycam>
[13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0028.h
tml
[13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0028.html
CM: US have already moved to daylight saving time
... Europe is moving soon
... AUS and NZ change on the 6th April
... we should see what time is suitable for everyone once those
changes have been made
CL: What time will the call be once the changes have been made?
CM: In AUS and NZ it will be 4:30am
... In the email there you can see what the times will be after
April 6th if the time doesn't change
... I'm assuming the current time is not suitable
... We should see if we can shift the time by a few hours
CL: I have a call after this one which is the WOFF call
... so I will have a conflict
... this call is 8:30 - 10:00 then WOFF is 10:00 - 11:00
<ChrisL> (all the above times pm)
CL: so a call after WOFF would be late for me
TB: After 11:00PM would be too late for me as well
CM: I propose we keep this current time leading up to April 6th. So
on March 30th when Europe changes
... they will go back to the original telecon time
<heycam>
[14]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Full_11#Remaining_work_fo
r_SVG1.1F2
[14] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Full_11#Remaining_work_for_SVG1.1F2
AG: Once we decide on a new telcon time it will kick in once we've
all changed to our respective daylight savings times?
CM: Yes
SVG Full 1.1 2nd Edition
CM: I've updated that page
... We haven't had any progress on these things since the F2F
... just wanted to make sure everyone is on the same page about
things left to do
CL: Sorry haven't finished my Action I need to do
... regarding ACTION-2910
CM: That's for the spec text
<heycam>
[15]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/status/implementation_
matrix.html
[15] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/status/implementation_matrix.html
CM: and for the test suite
CL: There is one test that it has a problem converting
... I'm not sure how to convert that in FontForge
... I'll ask someone in the Fonts Working Group on how it's done
<heycam>
[16]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/harness/htmlObjectMini
Approved/fonts-desc-04-t.html
[16] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/harness/htmlObjectMiniApproved/fonts-desc-04-t.html
CM: Let me see if this one already has a WOFF
... so we should wait for the WOFF variant
ED: Ok
CM: So looking at the implementation matrix
... it lists 6 testes there as not having 2 passes
... 2 of them we have decided it was ok, because there are
implementations for it on the way
... 1 of the tests is waiting for a patch in FireFox
... and another is being implemented by Abbra
<ed>
[17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2011Mar/0064.html
[17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2011Mar/0064.html
ED: I made changes to two of the font-text tests
... based on some feedbcak
<ed>
[18]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/harness/htmlObject/tex
t-intro-02-b.html
[18] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/harness/htmlObject/text-intro-02-b.html
ED: it may affect how implementations pass those
<ed>
[19]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/harness/htmlObject/tex
t-intro-09-b.html
[19] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/harness/htmlObject/text-intro-09-b.html
ED: it affects the positioning text anchor
... and both of those should pass in Opera 11.10 release
CM: I'm looking at text-intro-02 now
... I think we get incorrect behaviour
... can you say what the change was?
ED: Change was to make the last line have a specific text anchor
CM: There is no auto value?
ED: Initial value is "start"
... There was some confusion whether direction should affect the
text when unicode-bidi is set to "normal"
<ChrisL> I willretest text-intro-02 and 09 in abbra
<ed>
[20]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/text.html#TextAncho
rProperty
[20] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/text.html#TextAnchorProperty
CM: Why isn't that text-anchor="end" is considered to be the left of
the point of the text line when going "rtl"?
<ChrisL> abbra still fails -02
CM: ok, I'm happy with that
CL: I just tried that in Abbra
... it fails, I don't think it implements bidi override
<ChrisL> think bidi-override is not implemented perhaps
ED: The reasoning behind the changes, was based on the i18n groups
feedback
... so I made the tests so that they specify the direction and not
have it based off the initial character
... I think that's what Webkit does as well
CM: This is not an issue with regular HTML? With normal HTML or SVG
what effect does the direction property have?
ED: For "middle" I don't think it makes too much of a difference
... I don't think it makes any change to word order or special
substitutions. It just aligns the text fragment
CM: So in CSS 2, from their definition. It effects which side of the
box it overflows out of.
... if it's Justified text it effects which direction the last line
goes
... I guess it makes sense that the last line doesn't apply to us
<scribe> ACTION: Cameron to Retest text-intro-02 and text-intro-09
in FireFox and Webkit and report back [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-3010 - Retest text-intro-02 and
text-intro-09 in FireFox and Webkit and report back [on Cameron
McCormack - due 2011-03-23].
Compositing Publication
CL: It has been published!
AG: Yay! :D
<heycam> [22]http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-SVGCompositing-20110315/
[22] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-SVGCompositing-20110315/
<ChrisL> [23]http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-SVGCompositing-20110315/
[23] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-SVGCompositing-20110315/
CM: We have LC period for 4 weeks?
CL: Yes, usual thing. I sent an email off to the CG asking if anyone
needed longer
... no one spoke up, so it's fine then
... I asked CSS and XSL specifically if they can provide feedback
CM: Do we normally announce publish documents on www-svg?
CL: Now that is officially published
... usually the chairs send it out
... just say the document is published, give them links and say when
the last period ends
... and some small summary about the document is useful
<scribe> ACTION: Cameron to Send an email to www-svg announcing the
publication of the Compositing Specification [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-3011 - Send an email to www-svg announcing
the publication of the Compositing Specification [on Cameron
McCormack - due 2011-03-23].
CM: Is that a transition?
CL: It's not a transition in that it requires a transition meeting
<heycam> ACTION-3011: send one to chairs@ too
<trackbot> ACTION-3011 Send an email to www-svg announcing the
publication of the Compositing Specification notes added
CL: but send the same email to the chairs list but don't cross post
Order of Transform and motion animation application
<heycam>
[25]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/009
3.html
[25] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0093.html
CM: I thought it might be unclear in the spec where the transform in
motion animation gets applied in relation to element
... and implementations vary on whether they apply the motion
transform first or the transform attribute
... It would be clear in spec if it defined for each element what
order things were applied in
... in the email I put some wording in, but it's kind of unclear
... the wording "on top of" is unclear"
... I made a test to see what order things applied in
... I don't remember form that thread whether it should be one way
or not
AG: Did you try it out in Tiny 1.2 or Abbra for example?
ED: Alex replied back and said the same as Opera and Firefox
<ed>
[26]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/009
4.html
[26] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0094.html
AG: Define for SVG 2? or add something in to 1.1?
CM: We could probably add a sentence in if we are going to keep
option "A"
... we already have a test for it and there are at least 2 passes
for it
... Erik you said legacy content assumes option "A"
<ed>
[27]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/010
1.html
[27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0101.html
CM: Ikivo editor tool assumes option "A"
... I'm wondering which way makes more sense though?
... which is more useful?
... either way you can work around things by adding extra <g>
element
ED: I think it would be a good idea to ask the public list
... to see what people think. To see if there are any arguments
regarding any of those options
... Like I said in my email I don't have any strong opinion. We went
with option "A" because we wanted to be compatible with
... the content out there at the time when it was first implemented
in opera
<heycam>
[28]http://www.w3.org/mid/AANLkTimdSODDNoW7VCm8SXL+OF0GBgOdz35iRK5Jt
2_j@mail.gmail.com
[28] http://www.w3.org/mid/AANLkTimdSODDNoW7VCm8SXL+OF0GBgOdz35iRK5Jt2_j@mail.gmail.com
CM: There is a thread starting here
... and we'll have to look at that thread
... how about I look through that thread and see if it's clear one
way or another
... otherwise if it is not clear I say we go with option "A"
<scribe> ACTION: Camera to Look through the thread "SVG
animateMotion specification clarification request" to determine if
there is a preference for option "A" or "B" [recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Camera
<scribe> ACTION: Cameron to Look through the thread "SVG
animateMotion specification clarification request" to determine if
there is a preference for option "A" or "B" [recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-3012 - Look through the thread "SVG
animateMotion specification clarification request" to determine if
there is a preference for option "A" or "B" [on Cameron McCormack -
due 2011-03-23].
<ed>
[31]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2011Mar/0062.html
[31] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2011Mar/0062.html
Discrete Animation Fix
ED: So this is basically what was proposed at the face-to-face
meeting right?
CL: I remember being this discussed, or if there were any downsides
- i.e. content that broke
CM: Yes it was discussed, but I don't think it was clear whether
this would be part of the changes in SVG 2
ED: Any proposed wording
CM: There isn't any proposed wording in his email
ED: I don't see any broken content because of this
CM: So maybe somebody could take an action to write a test for this
to confirm that implementations are doing it this way
... and propose wording change
<scribe> ACTION: Cameron to Write a test to confirm that Brian's
proposal is implemented by various different implementations and
propose wording for the specification [recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-3013 - Write a test to confirm that
Brian's proposal is implemented by various different implementations
and propose wording for the specification [on Cameron McCormack -
due 2011-03-23].
CSS Animations
CM: [Summaries discussion in FX call during the week]
... the CSS people were not particularly happy with the attr()
syntax
PD: I have been following
CM: It seems the discussions we had at the face-to-face was CSS
working group may not like option 2 because they would not a lot of
properties being added
... Tab was given an action to email the working group with the
options
<ed>
[33]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0347.html
[33] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0347.html
<ed>
[34]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0350.html
[34] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0350.html
PD: I just want to get solved
... I liked the idea of '-svg-r' for radius for example
CL: The downside is it makes it hard for Filter properties which
were specific to filters
... we might be adding extra storage space in memory by adding about
30 - 40 properties
PD: I was hoping that the svg prefix wouldn't carry over that
problem to HTML
CL: Potentially it makes SVG heavier
<ChrisL> I'm concerned about dom bloat making svg heavier and
slowerr. 50-odd new properties per element ....
CM: I think it is valid something to worry about
... I don't know how easy it is to optimise but you could only store
properties that applied to certain elements
... this was raised by ROC and others
... the other issue being discussed with option number 2 whether to
only do for this for select attributes only or all of them up front
PD: I like the staging idea
CM: ROC's argument is that we need to consider what needs to be done
up front so we don't paint ourselves into a corner so we can later
promote other properties
... I think it would be good to take a look if we were to promote
all the attributes
... to see what it would be like
... to see if we need any new syntax values
PD: You want an investigation to see if the entire picture will work
CM: Yes, and how much work it will be
... my impression is once you have the architecture to handle
presentation attribute and properties it wouldn't too much extra
work
... I might have a look at that later on in the week
... so I'll post something to FX
AG: Any issues with initial values, and inheritence?
CM: Let's keep the discussion going on this for a couple of weeks
... and look at it on the next FX call
trackbot, end telcon
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Camera to Look through the thread "SVG animateMotion
specification clarification request" to determine if there is a
preference for option "A" or "B" [recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Cameron to Look through the thread "SVG animateMotion
specification clarification request" to determine if there is a
preference for option "A" or "B" [recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Cameron to Retest text-intro-02 and text-intro-09 in
FireFox and Webkit and report back [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Cameron to Send an email to www-svg announcing the
publication of the Compositing Specification [recorded in
[38]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Cameron to Write a test to confirm that Brian's
proposal is implemented by various different implementations and
propose wording for the specification [recorded in
[39]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-minutes.html#action05]
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [40]scribe.perl version 1.135
([41]CVS log)
$Date: 2011/03/16 19:57:16 $
_________________________________________________________
[40] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[41] 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 [42]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/
[42] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)
Succeeded: s/CL:/CM:/
Succeeded: s/when set to "normal"/when unicode-bidi is set to "normal"/
Succeeded: s/out there/out there at the time when it was first implemen
ted in opera/
Found Scribe: anthony
Inferring ScribeNick: anthony
Found ScribeNick: anthony
Default Present: [IPcaller], ed, heycam, +39.524.9.aaaa, ChrisL, anthon
y, +39.537.7.aabb, tav, [Microsoft]
Present: [IPcaller] ed heycam +39.524.9.aaaa ChrisL anthony +39.537.7.a
abb tav [Microsoft]
Agenda: [43]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMa
r/0250.html
Found Date: 16 Mar 2011
Guessing minutes URL: [44]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-minutes.html
People with action items: camera cameron
[43] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0250.html
[44] http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-svg-minutes.html
End of [45]scribe.perl diagnostic output]
[45] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
The information contained in this email message and any attachments may be confidential and may also be the subject to legal professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, interference with, disclosure or copying of this material is unauthorised and prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately advise the sender by return email and delete the information from your system.
Received on Wednesday, 16 March 2011 20:08:00 UTC