- From: Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 23:08:49 +0100
- To: "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
Minutes:
http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html
and as text:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
CSS-SVG Task Force Teleconference
23 Jan 2012
[2]Agenda
[2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2012JanMar/0014.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-irc
Attendees
Present
VH, ED, CM, SF
Regrets
Chair
SV_MEETING_CHAIR
Scribe
vhardy, dino
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Proposition for CSS Animations and Transitions on SVG
attributes
2. [6]CSS Transforms specification.
3. [7]drop-shadow filter vs. a separate property
* [8]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 23 January 2012
<vhardy> ScribeNick: vhardy
Proposition for CSS Animations and Transitions on SVG attributes
<ed>
[9]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2011OctDec/0168.htm
l
[9]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2011OctDec/0168.html
ed: this was discussed at the SVG F2F two weeks ago. We have a
proposal from Microsoft.
... the outcome of the discussion is that the group believes the
proposal is the best one so far and we would like to know if anybody
has objections to the proposal.
smfr: do we have a list of the property names?
... are we adding a list of properties to CSS through this
promotion. I am concerned about properties like 'r', 'tx' or 'cx'.
... another concern is that we may be using names that CSS might
want to use for other things in the future.
vhardy: the list of property names is in the proposal.
dino: I think the next step is to talk to the CSS wg. There are two
options. Here are the properties we want to add to the CSS
namespace. Do we need to prefix the properties or not. I do not
think we can make much decision here.
smfr: I agree.
vhardy: I agree.
dino: I agree too :-)
ed: in that case, we need to summarize the properties that we plan
to add and send it to the CSS WG.
<scribe> ACTION: Patrick Dengler to send an email to the CSS WG
asking for feedback on proposed list of additional properties to be
added when promoting SVG attributes to properties. Ask if properties
should be prefixed or not to deal with possible collisions.
[recorded in
[10]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Patrick
<scribe> ACTION: Erik Dahlstrohm (with Patrick Dengler) to send an
email to the CSS WG asking for feedback on proposed list of
additional properties to be added when promoting SVG attributes to
properties. Ask if properties should be prefixed or not to deal with
possible collisions. [recorded in
[11]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-65 - Dahlstrohm (with Patrick Dengler) to
send an email to the CSS WG asking for feedback on proposed list of
additional properties to be added when promoting SVG attributes to
properties. Ask if properties should be prefixed or not to deal with
possible collisions. [on Erik Dahlström - due 2012-01-30].
<smfr> vhardy, don't forget to minute yourself!
vhardy: how would we publish this new behavior for SVG presentation
attributes? Will that be a stand-alone addendum to SVG 1.1 2nd
edition, or will it be a 3rd edition of SVG 1.1
dino: it sounds it should be a separate spec. if we want to have it
alive in a reasonnable amount of time.
vhardy: if a separate spec., that would be an addendum to SVG 1.1,
right?
ed: yes, this is adding properties for SVG 1.1, so the best would be
to do an addendum to the SVG 1.1 spec. It should also be folded in
SVG 2. It depends on what people feel is appropriate.
<smfr> who's ichatting?
heycam: normally, separate specs. add to the functionality instead
of changing behavior, like here. I agree with Erik that it should be
folded in SVG 2 anyway.
... I do not have a problem leaving it initially in a separate spec.
vhardy: sounds good to me too: have a separate spec. for 1.1 and
fold into SVG 2.
<scribe> ACTION: Patrick to create an initial editor draft of the
document that can be pointed to and discussed with the CSS WG.
[recorded in
[12]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Patrick
<dino> trackbot, reload
<scribe> ACTION: Patrick to create an initial editor draft of the
document that can be pointed to and discussed with the CSS WG.
[recorded in
[13]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Patrick
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to create an initial editor draft of the SVG
with CSS Animations/Transitions document that can be pointed to and
discussed with the CSS WG. [recorded in
[14]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-66 - Create an initial editor draft of the
SVG with CSS Animations/Transitions document that can be pointed to
and discussed with the CSS WG. [on Erik Dahlström - due 2012-01-30].
ed: any other feedback on the proposal?
(silence)
CSS Transforms specification.
<dino> ScribeNick: dino
vhardy: DirkS has joined Adobe and will be focusing on the merged
transforms specification. He's captured the issues in bugzilla. He's
started on a wiki page with the difficulties of the merge
... it would be better if he was an editor. I suggest we add Dirk as
an editor.
dino: I support this.
smfr: me too
ed: me too
RESOLUTION: Dirk becomes an editor of the SVG+CSS Transforms
specification
RESOLUTION: Vincent also is an editor of the SVG+CSS Transforms
specification
vhardy: Dirk will bring some of the CSS OM issues to a telcon. After
that he'll bring up the parsing issues (units, etc).
... do we think that should come here first? or go straight to CSS
WG?
... risk is that people won't be at an FX call
dino: I think we should go straight to CSS
vhardy: ok
... I notice that the CSS 2D transform spec is now pointing at the
merged spec. The CSS 3D spec hasn't. Should we do it?
dino: I think so.
(I didn't minute that because I think we just repeated the question)
smfr: I think there are some outstanding edits that need to be
included in the spec.
... I'm not sure if we want to update the 3d spec and publish, THEN
move it to the combined spec.
vhardy: when was the last major update to transforms?
dino: Sept 11 I believe
vhardy: in which case the merged spec has all the updates to 2d
... our resolution at the TPAC was to publish 3d, noting that it is
now replaced by the merge spec
<scribe> ACTION: Vincent to edit the CSS 3D spec to point to the
merged spec [recorded in
[15]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-67 - Edit the CSS 3D spec to point to the
merged spec [on Vincent Hardy - due 2012-01-30].
smfr: so no changes other than the notification that this spec is
now elsewhere?
vhardy: correct
<vhardy> ScribeNick: vhardy
ed: there was more discussion on drop-shadow on the list.
<ed>
[16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2012JanMar/0027.ht
ml
[16]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2012JanMar/0027.html
dino: Apple's position is that drop-shadow would be better as a
separate property. We are talking about the shorthand functions.
There would still be a way to do a drop shadow with an SVG filter.
drop-shadow filter vs. a separate property
smfr: the CSS wg has talked about it multiple times in the past. It
got some pushback because there were people who wanted to apply the
drop shadow to some parts (e.g., just background or just border). I
am not arguing against or for it, just relating what discussions
happened in the past.
ed: I am not sure I understand the advantage to keep it as a
separate property. May be because it is somewhat easy to implement.
dino: performance. It is a fairly complex filter. And, when it comes
down to it, people will not put a drop shadow in the middle of their
filter operation. They will likely apply a drop shadow and then
filter the result.
heycam: you still have to support the feDropShadow, so you'll have
to worry about having it in the middle of the filter chain.
dino: yes, but the shorthand will be easier and faster to implement.
... arbitrary filter chains could be very complex anyway. Authors
will have to be aware of the complexity and that they might possibly
be slow.
heycam: it does not seem that it would be that hard to detect the
position of the drop-shadow in the chain and optimize if in
last/first position.
dino: it is going to be slow in the filter chain.
smfr: on the Mac we are relying on system framework for the
shorthand filters which is faster than going through the whole
filter chain. The method is super fast, they apply to everything. If
we have to fall out of that to the filter chain, the performance
impact is huge. There will be a lot of read-back from the GPU which
is innefficient.
... drop-shadow does not fit nicely in our implementation
constraints. In the way people use it, it makes sense to make it a
separate property.
... people do not use it like a regular filter.
dino: it would be interesting to see why people would use the drop
shadow in a filter chain and why having it as a separate property
would not work fine.
smfr: we may get push back from the CSS working group like there was
in the past. We can try again.
... there is text-shadow. May be this could extend text-shadow.
<dino> vhardy: you probably want it to knock-out the content too
<dino> vhardy: so you don't see through translucent pixels
smfr: I think you may want to have both behaviors.
dino: I think this is such a common request (drop-shadow) that it
makes sense to make is a separate property.
vhardy: why not optimize when detecting filter: drop-shadow(....)?
smfr: we can do that. The tricky thing is that when we fall off the
fast path, it is difficult to have a filter correctly applied to
children elements like video or WebGL.
dino: it would be good to know where people are with the
implementation of this spec.
... the implementation is tricky when the content of the page is
more complex.
ed: I don't see how it is much harder to do it with the filter
shorthand. I guess we can wait and see.
heycam: it seems that you want to avoid any value on the shorthand
property to go to the slow path.
smfr: yes.
dino: we can never guarantee that things will be fast, but we are
trying to design this so that we can be fast in as many situations
as possible. Right now, it is slow in too many cases. We are just
talking about the shorthands.
heycam: do you plan to make the markup filters fast in the future?
dino: yes, we want to make everything fast. The issue of performance
becomes complicated depending on the hw config.
... mobile, powerful hw...
smfr: with markup filters, people can write their own custom
filters. With the shorthand properties, we can do a lot of
optimization. It is difficult with markup filters.
dino: for the short term, custom filters may be faster than markup
filters, even if our goal is to make everything fast.
ed: it does not seem there is total agreement on what to do (keeping
a separate property or not). I guess we can keep discussing it on
the list.
smfr: does anyone object to having a separate property.
heycam: I do not object. It feels we are making decisions on current
implementation performance.
dino: that is true, but we could always add it back in.
... part of the spec. work is to get implementation feedback.
... this is the first release of the technology, we do not have to
address everything upfront.
vhardy: could we have both the drop-shadow property and the filter
shorthand as well?
dino: I would prefer to have the property. If it is a property, I do
no see the use cases for having it in the middle of shorthand
filters.
ed: do you have any pointers for prior discussions on the css
mailinglist(s) about this topic?
<smfr>
[17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Sep/0131.html
[17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Sep/0131.html
dino: We had previous discussions in the Seattle meeting. We were
pointing these problems out and reluctantly agreed to adding
drop-shadow filter shorthand
smfr: the discussion is about drop-shadow interacts with
border-image in CSS.
ed: we should ask the CSS wg about splitting the drop-shadow filter
in a separate property to get their feedback on that. I personally
think it would be interesting to mix the drop-shadow in the middle
of a chain.
... but if there are performance issues with doing that, then having
a separate property may be the best way to deal with it.
... I don't want it to be difficult or to become a problem. I think
having a filter keyword should still be an option.
... I think it is possible to keep it both ways. It depends on what
other people think.
vhardy: I think that if there are use cases where having the drop
shadow in the middle of a filter chain is useful, I think we should
keep it. Otherwise, I'd be ok keeping it.
<scribe> ACTION: Dean to ask the CSS working group if we could add a
drop-shadow property to CSS. [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-68 - Ask the CSS working group if we could
add a drop-shadow property to CSS. [on Dean Jackson - due
2012-01-30].
ed: we are almost out of time. Anything else?
(silence).
ed: adjourned.
<ed> trackbot, end telcon
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Dean to ask the CSS working group if we could add a
drop-shadow property to CSS. [recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik Dahlstrohm (with Patrick Dengler) to send an
email to the CSS WG asking for feedback on proposed list of
additional properties to be added when promoting SVG attributes to
properties. Ask if properties should be prefixed or not to deal with
possible collisions. [recorded in
[20]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to create an initial editor draft of the SVG with
CSS Animations/Transitions document that can be pointed to and
discussed with the CSS WG. [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: Patrick Dengler to send an email to the CSS WG asking
for feedback on proposed list of additional properties to be added
when promoting SVG attributes to properties. Ask if properties
should be prefixed or not to deal with possible collisions.
[recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Patrick to create an initial editor draft of the
document that can be pointed to and discussed with the CSS WG.
[recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Patrick to create an initial editor draft of the
document that can be pointed to and discussed with the CSS WG.
[recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Vincent to edit the CSS 3D spec to point to the merged
spec [recorded in
[25]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html#action06]
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [26]scribe.perl version 1.136
([27]CVS log)
$Date: 2012/01/23 21:57:32 $
_________________________________________________________
[26] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[27] 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 [28]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/
[28] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)
Succeeded: s/vhardy: don/vhardy, don/
Succeeded: s/filer/filter/
Succeeded: s/past/path/
Succeeded: s/discussions on this./discussions on the css mailinglist(s)
about this topic?/
Succeeded: s/adjouned/adjourned/
Found ScribeNick: vhardy
Found ScribeNick: dino
Found ScribeNick: vhardy
Inferring Scribes: vhardy, dino
Scribes: vhardy, dino
ScribeNicks: vhardy, dino
Present: VH ED CM SF
Agenda: [29]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2012JanMar/00
14.html
[29]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2012JanMar/0014.html
WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth
Found Date: 23 Jan 2012
Guessing minutes URL: [30]http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html
People with action items: dahlstrohm dean dengler erik patrick vincent
with
[30] http://www.w3.org/2012/01/23-fx-minutes.html
WARNING: Possible internal error: join/leave lines remaining:
<scribe> vhardy: DirkS has joined Adobe and will be focusing on
the merged transforms specification. He's captured the issues in bugzi
lla. He's started on a wiki page with the difficulties of the merge
WARNING: Possible internal error: join/leave lines remaining:
<scribe> vhardy: DirkS has joined Adobe and will be focusing on
the merged transforms specification. He's captured the issues in bugzi
lla. He's started on a wiki page with the difficulties of the merge
End of [31]scribe.perl diagnostic output]
[31] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
--
Erik Dahlstrom, Core Technology Developer, Opera Software
Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
Personal blog: http://my.opera.com/macdev_ed
Received on Monday, 23 January 2012 22:09:31 UTC