W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-svg-wg@w3.org > July to September 2008

Minutes, SVG telcon Thursday 18 September 2008

From: Anthony Grasso <anthony.grasso@cisra.canon.com.au>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:13:02 +1000
Message-ID: <48D245CE.2020107@cisra.canon.com.au>
To: W3C SVG Public Working Group <public-svg-wg@w3.org>




       [1] http://www.w3.org/

                                - DRAFT -

                    SVG Working Group Teleconference

18 Sep 2008


       [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


           ed, Andrew_Sledd, anthony, Doug_Schepers, aemmons


           niklas, anthony


      * [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


    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


    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
    ... 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


    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

    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
    ... 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

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-2200 - Add informative notes for
    ISSUE-2057 and reply to fantasai [on Doug Schepers - due

    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



      [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


      [15] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/text.html#SettingInlineProgressionDirection


      [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

    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

    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
    ... 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

    <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].


      [20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Sep/0050.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


      [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

    <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
    [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
    [NEW] ACTION: Erik to change the Tiny 1.2 specification to match the
    1.1 specification and to reply to Dr Hoffmann [recorded in

    [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

      [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
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:20:09 UTC