- From: Anthony Grasso <anthony.grasso@cisra.canon.com.au>
- Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:13:02 +1000
- To: W3C SVG Public Working Group <public-svg-wg@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-svg-minutes.html
---
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
SVG Working Group Teleconference
18 Sep 2008
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008JulSep/0319.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-svg-irc
Attendees
Present
ed, Andrew_Sledd, anthony, Doug_Schepers, aemmons
Regrets
Chair
ED
Scribe
niklas, anthony
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Last Call comments
2. [6]Test Suite
* [7]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 18 September 2008
<ed> scribe: niklas
<ed> scribeNick: NH
Last Call comments
<ed> [8]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/products/11
[8] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/products/11
<ed> ISSUE-2054
<ed> [9]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2054
[9] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2054
ED: Is a comment from MathMl group?
... Is it possible to do anything about this now?
DS: We could put this as Core or Tiny
ED: We should move it to Core
DS: I'll move it to Core
<ed> [10]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2055
[10] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2055
ISSUE-2055
DS: Can Cameron look at this?
<anthony> scribe: anthony
<scribe> scribeNick: anthony
ED: Let's deffer this issue for a while
... until Cameron can comment on it
ISSUE-2056
ED: Should we link to CSS2.1 instead of CSS2.0
DS: I posted a comment to the list
... [Summary of comment posted]
AG: We wont be able to go to Rec if they are in CR?
ED: We can make a normative reference if they are in PR
DS: We should wait to hear back from them
ED: I would also like an answer to the first question that Doug
asked
... in particular for SVG Tiny 1.2
<ed> [11]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2057
[11] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2057
ISSUE-2057
ED: This is an issue that Chris should look at
... according to the issue the text align property is incompatible
with CSS
... I agree with the second part
DS: So in relation to the first point
... [Reads out spec]
... those are two different things
... so what she's asking is for us not to change the first part
... but to change the second part
... when a value unsupported by the UA is encountered, it must be
treated as if it were not specified
ED: Sounds ok with me
NH: I think that's good
DS: For the second point
<shepazu> [["writing system being used" is not a good basis for
alignment.]]
ED: She's right
DS: That's covered in the next issue
... The Third issue is
<shepazu> [[
<shepazu> "In SVG Tiny 1.2, vertical writing is not supported."
<shepazu> in
[12]http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile12/text.html#TextLayout that
[12] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile12/text.html#TextLayout
<shepazu> last sentence should be removed.
<shepazu> ]]
DS: Some UAs may support it
... it doesn't harm anything by having that in there
... we could add a note that says "SVG Tiny 1.2 does not mandate
vertical text"
AG: The spec says in first paragraph of 10.6.1 "In SVG Tiny 1.2,
vertical writing is not supported"
DS: Yes, but by the time you get down to the part that's commented
on it probably should be repeated
... if a user is just looking at this property then it's kind of
confusing
... so we should repeat it there
... and mark the other section as being and SVG Tiny thing
<scribe> ACTION: Doug to add informative notes for ISSUE-2057 and
reply to fantasai [recorded in
[13]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-svg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2200 - Add informative notes for
ISSUE-2057 and reply to fantasai [on Doug Schepers - due
2008-09-25].
ED: So for the second part I'm just thinking we could talk about the
reference orientation
... block progression direction
RESOLUTION: We agree to clarify sections that SVG Tiny 1.2 doesn't
support
ISSUE-2058
[14]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2058
[14] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2058
ED: So in 1.1 Full we have not a direction but a writing mode
attribute
<ed>
[15]http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/text.html#SettingInlineProgressionDir
ection
[15] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/text.html#SettingInlineProgressionDirection
<ed>
[16]http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/text.html#RelationshipWithBiDirection
ality
[16] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/text.html#RelationshipWithBiDirectionality
ED: We do have a direction as well
DS: Why was it dropped from Tiny?
ED: It's not in 1.1 Tiny either
... it is in 1.1 Basic
DS: [Reads out comment in issue]
... Sounds to me like there should be another value for direction
... which is auto
... but if we're going go according to SVG 1.1. the default would be
ltr
ED: It's ltr in CSS2 as well
<ed> [17]http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visuren.html#propdef-direction
[17] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visuren.html#propdef-direction
DS: I can't see a reason not to support it
... except it's something we'd have to make a test for
... I'm wondering what it would take to pass this
... on tiny devices they frequently don't have control over how the
font renders
... it's put to the font engine of the device
... because we don't want to have optional features they probably
took this out
<shepazu> [18]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2058
[18] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2058
AE: So you're right it doesn't have a direction property
... but we don't support it right now
... because it wasn't in the spec
... it wasn't like one of those features that was requested by
customers
NH: We don't support that
AE: It would be pretty hard to implement?
NH: That property that would make it harder
... for us Bidi text is a lower priority than others
AE: It depends on the Bidi algorithm that you're using
... it does add more burden to the Bidi
... if the API on the device doesn't give the ability to override
the direction attirbute
... it's hard to do
ED: Just speaking for Opera we have this implemented already
... so we wouldn't have a problem putting it in
... wondering if it would be possible to add the default ltr
... or leave it as it is
... to guess the direction
DS: We could say for platforms that include Bidi support they should
include rtl
... we would still make ltr the default
... or we could add a value that is auto
... and make that the default
ED: That would make us incompatible with CSS
... it sounds a bit strange to have different default values if it's
specified in a property
... or a style
AE: Maybe we should run it by Chris
... the algorithm already depends on a base direction
... if some of the systems if it's relied on deep down, there is no
way to override that
NH: For SVG font's it would be a must
AE: They could still, but the actual Bidi algorithm could be in the
platform
... because the algorithm is complicated
... and you wouldn't want to rewrite it
... putting something in there saying if the platform supports
explicitly then direction it must be supported
<scribe> ACTION: Doug to follow up with fantasai and ask her if a
platform specific word her would be sufficient to the comment
[recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-svg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2201 - Follow up with fantasai and ask her
if a platform specific word her would be sufficient to the comment
[on Doug Schepers - due 2008-09-25].
<ed>
[20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Sep/0050.html
[20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Sep/0050.html
<ed>
[21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Sep/0052.html
[21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Sep/0052.html
ED: I made a brief comment on the issue
NH: We implement it according to the current specification
... doesn't matter for us we can easily change that
ED: I think it makes more sense to align with 1.1
AE: I'd agree
<ed>
[22]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.2T/test/svg/shapes-rect-03-t.sv
g
[22] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.2T/test/svg/shapes-rect-03-t.svg
ED: Plus the test is approved
... and accepted
AE: Bitflash changed to align with the spec
ED: We did in the end decide to keep with the 1.1 rules
... it is possible that someone had an action to change it
<shepazu> ISSUE-2059
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to change the Tiny 1.2 specification to match
the 1.1 specification and to reply to Dr Hoffmann [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-svg-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2202 - Change the Tiny 1.2 specification
to match the 1.1 specification and to reply to Dr Hoffmann [on Erik
Dahlström - due 2008-09-25].
Test Suite
ED: Ikivo has some comments on the validity of the tests
... is this something we want to fix at the test fest or something
that we should fix before?
AE: I think this is where this is interesting
... if tests change whether implementations pass or fail then it
becomes a mad dash to fix things
NH: I think it's between 10 - 20 tests
ED: I think it would be good to have it in advance
... we can still make small fixes
<shepazu> [24]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2055
[24] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2055
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Doug to add informative notes for ISSUE-2057 and reply
to fantasai [recorded in
[25]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-svg-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Doug to follow up with fantasai and ask her if a
platform specific word her would be sufficient to the comment
[recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-svg-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to change the Tiny 1.2 specification to match the
1.1 specification and to reply to Dr Hoffmann [recorded in
[27]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-svg-minutes.html#action03]
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [28]scribe.perl version 1.133
([29]CVS log)
$Date: 2008/09/18 12:07:01 $
_________________________________________________________
[28] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[29] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Scribe.perl diagnostic output
[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133 of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51
Check for newer version at [30]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/
[30] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)
Succeeded: s/DS: Hold off on that for a sec//
Succeeded: s/comment/comment in issue/
Found Scribe: niklas
Found ScribeNick: NH
Found Scribe: anthony
Inferring ScribeNick: anthony
Found ScribeNick: anthony
Scribes: niklas, anthony
ScribeNicks: NH, anthony
Default Present: ed, Andrew_Sledd, anthony, Doug_Schepers, aemmons
Present: ed Andrew_Sledd anthony Doug_Schepers aemmons
Agenda: [31]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008JulSe
p/0319.html
Found Date: 18 Sep 2008
Guessing minutes URL: [32]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-svg-minutes.html
People with action items: doug erik
[31] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2008JulSep/0319.html
[32] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/18-svg-minutes.html
End of [33]scribe.perl diagnostic output]
[33] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
Received on Thursday, 18 September 2008 12:13:49 UTC