Minutes, 22 November FX taskforce call


Minutes of the 22 November FX taskforce call are here

and below in text for tracker to harvest.

                               - DRAFT -

                   CSS-SVG Task Force Teleconference

22 Nov 2010


      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2010OctDec/0060.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/22-fx-irc


          +1.650.253.aaaa, TabAtkins, heycam, [IPcaller], ed, Shepazu,
          ChrisL, anthony



          ChrisL, TabAtkins


     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]public-fx-editors
         2. [6]task force specs
         3. [7]Maintenance / progress
         4. [8]CSS3-UI pointer-events
         5. [9]Publishing resolutions and WG communication
         6. [10]CSS3-UI pointer-events
     * [11]Summary of Action Items

   <trackbot> Date: 22 November 2010

   <ChrisL> scribenick: ChrisL

   <scribe> Agenda:

     [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2010OctDec/0060.html


   ed: logs cvs changes

   <ed> [13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx-editors/

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

   ed: for entire fx taskforce area on dev.w3.org

   cm: am i on?

   cl: will chec
   ... no you weren't

task force specs

   ed: see agenda, only 2d transforms is committed so far and the
   editors anre not here
   ... sounds like 2d transforms is ready to publish

   <ed> [14]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/fx/charter/

     [14] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/fx/charter/

   ed: charter mentions other specs too

   cm: what is the status?

   ds: at tpac it was clarified that css wg, being larger and with only
   a subset of members on the tf, publication decisions need separate

   cl: anything which is in scope for both charters can be worked on by

   ds: svg has most members on the tf so does not need separate

   ed: anthony, what is the expected date for publication on 2d?

   ag: some changes needed before publication, and simon has an action
   about api comparisons
   ... and a way to get back the trasform value, which is not a matrix
   ... glazou wanted a human readable transform list
   ... or we could publish as is and add more stuff later

   ed: is it ok to publish now

   ag: needs an intro and some red bits removed, before fpwd
   ... minor edits then publish
   ... css wg was keen to move forward. just needs some cleanup here
   and there

   cl: suggest making the edits first then making a publication

   ag: estimate two weeks for edits, another week for examples so 3

   ed: so around 13 december
   ... (adds as due date to wiki)
   ... this would be fpwd
   ... filters module is closer to publication. will move over to fx
   space then incoproprate roc proposal
   ... some work already to allow that to be used in css/html but needs
   more definition

   cl: due date?

   ed: aim for an editors draft around 20 december
   ... for the other specs I think we are waiting for dean to propose
   the animation model, maybe someone from microsoft also had an action

   cm: on the list, moz request animation frame was brought up
   ... seems a reasonable fit for webapps

   ds: appropriate for this group as well

   cm: hmmm

   ds (link to webapps discussion)

   tab: point is to sync with animation


     [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010OctDec/0644.html

   cm: not just to syn with declarative animation, also to allow purely
   user written animations to not hog the cpu

   ds: yes it hooks into refresh rates
   ... its all about animation
   ... need to have a suitable api to make that work

   cm: no preference where it goes

   ds: good to have discussion in multiple places to get more feedback
   ... in terms of charters its in scope of svg wg charter
   ... but not webapps
   ... css has animation in scope as well, not explicitly scripting
   ... can alert that list to this discussion

   ed: looking forward to seeing the proposals

   cm: mentioned to dino interested in helping out with unified
   animation model. he plans to add a wiki page

Maintenance / progress

   ed: looking through tracker, we have three open issues with no


   <trackbot> ISSUE-1 -- Consider not adding transformRef to Transforms
   spec -- raised

   <trackbot> [16]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/fx/track/issues/1

     [16] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/fx/track/issues/1

   ed: no actions for this

   ag: not on my list. did we discuss at tpac?

   ed: definitely an issue, is it important or can we live without?
   ... need sa note in the spec that its an issue

   <scribe> ACTION: anthony to add a note to 2d transforms with issue
   on transformRef [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-22 - Add a note to 2d transforms with
   issue on transformRef [on Anthony Grasso - due 2010-11-29].


   <trackbot> ISSUE-2 -- Need to figure out how transitions affect a
   transform on an element that has an animation running on it --

   <trackbot> [18]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/fx/track/issues/2

     [18] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/fx/track/issues/2

   simon says "I don't understand this Issue."

   tab: who raised it?

   ed: raised in telcon

   ag: its a transitions issue
   ... dbaron said there wwere some bugs with transitions affecting
   transforms, so the transitions chapter was removed from the fx 2d

   ed: so the issue could be closed then?

   ChrisL: better to close and re-open a more specific issue that is
   better documented

   <TabAtkins> ScribeNick: TabAtkins

   cm: A metapoint - I saw Siomon's notes on this issue, and Patrick
   put some notes on other actions/issues, and I wonder if that's not a
   good use of Tracker, because it doesn't send out emails.
   ... Perhaps it should be the other way around - send emails to the
   list and have tracker pick them up automatically.

   ChrisL: Agreed.

   ed: Last open issue is #3, about writing mode values across CSS and

   <ed> issue-3?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-3 -- writing-mode values across CSS and SVG --

   <trackbot> [19]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/fx/track/issues/3

     [19] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/fx/track/issues/3

   ag: I'm not sure what this issue is about really.

   TabAtkins: It's just a harmonization issue between the two versions
   of writing-mode.

   <ChrisL> scribenick: chrisl

   <TabAtkins> ag: SVG picked a bunch of writing modes a while back,
   and fantasai was trying to pick something out that made more sense.

   ed: to agree on the set of values, not much problem for svg side

   cm: seen one of the rtl in inkscape output. or was it the ttb one
   ... not much content that iuses it

   ed: ok to drop some if that is what we decide
   ... can we assign an action to this, and if so what?

   cl: original problem description is clear, so its just a case of
   doing it

   ds: will raise an issue on svg2
   ... while grumbling

   ed: pity tracker has no move or duplicate functionality

   <shepazu> [20]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2392

     [20] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2392

CSS3-UI pointer-events


     [21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2010OctDec/0058.html

Publishing resolutions and WG communication

   ed: we need to be careful to minute resolutions and to ensure the
   parent groups are well informed

   cm: tantek did not seem to see the tf work as on scope

   tab: the css wg is large enough that css wg is not on the radar for

   ds: disappointed we don't have adobe here

   tab: szilles is not directly involved with css implementation. was
   talking with some authoring-related adobe employees. will prod them
   to join

   ed: should ee communicate the milestone dates now, or when edits are

   cm: does tf stuff get discussed?

   tab: only 2.1 stuff at the moment.

   cm: worried that there is not enough communication

   ChrisL: agree, but its 100% on css 2.1 at the moment

CSS3-UI pointer-events

   ed: some discussion and a few issues raised
   ... and kevinr asked some questions too
   ... should css3 spec be what svg references in the future, or would
   it diverge?

   ChrisL: copy pasting from svg 1.1 into css3 ui is a bad idea, it
   should normatively reference for svg-specific details

   ed: there are issues raised,

   <ed> [22]http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css3-ui

     [22] http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css3-ui

   ChrisL: seems tantek accepts on issue 6, and is just waiting for a
   reference to use

   ed: ok

   <scribe> ACTION: erik to send normative links for fill and stroke
   [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-23 - Send normative links for fill and
   stroke [on Erik Dahlström - due 2010-11-29].

   ed: can we resolve this?

   resolved: css3 ui should reference svg spec for svg specifics, uris
   will be provided

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: anthony to add a note to 2d transforms with issue on
   transformRef [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: erik to send normative links for fill and stroke
   [recorded in

   [End of minutes]

 Chris Lilley   Technical Director, Interaction Domain                 
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead, Fonts Activity Lead
 Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
 Member, CSS, WebFonts, SVG Working Groups

Received on Monday, 22 November 2010 22:08:15 UTC