- From: Peter Krautzberger <peter@krautzource.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 18:54:40 +0100
- To: mathonweb <public-mathonwebpages@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CABOtQmF=d=iaSqS9V1YcAvp3cw2NxWjbmJ2xp41k9At=6SCT0g@mail.gmail.com>
Hi everyone, The minutes are blow. The next meeting will be on Feb 1 and we will focus on kick-starting the task forces for 2018. Best, Peter. # MathOnWeb CG 2018-01-18 * Volker: didn't write a comment; it would have been "let's not re-hash the same old discussions every week" * Dani: I think F2F will be best to sort some things out * Peter: * review call for comments * plan potential task forces for 2018 * Neil: font improvements are interesting. Anyone interested? * Volker: * Arno: only have one font b/c I can't get access to metrics of fonts * interesting beyond equations * reference for other work? * Peter: https://discourse.wicg.io/t/font-metrics-api/2417 * Neil: is Houdini alive? * Peter: yes. Look up Tab Atkins * Dani: for equation display, I see two approaches * 1) no JS. I.e., HTML+CSS * 2) with JS. Then have to compute metrics * Neil: right. metrics means client-Side JS * Peter: though Houdini sits in between as it uses JS for new CSS, claims its path towards new CSS features * Arno: editing obviously needs JS * Think we need both and they might differ * Dani: agreed. It's just that it requires different task forces * Peter: agreed, while I wished it wasn't the case * ideally, client and server-side rendering would be identical * Peter: @Dani so propose two task forces for client / server rendering? * Dani: yes but I personally more on server-side * Peter: is there interest in purely client-side rendering (web components, Houdini)? * Neil: I'd be interested but have no plans * Peter: you might want to talk to the developer of fmath * Neil: promise to write a comment * Volker: interested in ARIA spec for navigation * Dani: I'd be interested in that * Dani: if we can come up with a unified vision for mathematics, then we can try to bring that to TPAC for feedback * Dani: we come across as divided * Neil: it would be good to take one piece of CSS and try to get wider support from web devs * Peter: makes sense; it's what I've been trying to do and continue * Neil: stretchy characters might be another * Peter: anyone interested? * Neil: strike-through might be another * Arno: interested * Arno: my email had two CSS definitions * stretchy * menclose-like notations (crossing out etc) * Dani: I think we need to document how people are doing things right now * ACTION: Peter should start with collecting that * Peter: should we set up two meetings, both bi-weekly? * ACTION send out test doodles * ACTION: * @Everyone start your task forces * @task forces: start gathering existing techniques * @Arno write email about ideas for common abstract format needs
Received on Thursday, 25 January 2018 17:55:25 UTC