- From: Anthony Grasso <anthony.grasso@cisra.canon.com.au>
- Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 18:11:13 +1000
- To: public-svg-wg@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html --- [1]W3C [1] http://www.w3.org/ - DRAFT - SVG Working Group Teleconference 04 May 2009 [2]Agenda [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009AprJun/0093.html See also: [3]IRC log [3] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-irc Attendees Present Doug_Schepers, [IPcaller], heycam, ed, anthony, ChrisL Regrets Chair SV_MEETING_CHAIR Scribe Anthony Contents * [4]Topics 1. [5]Tighten up the implicit lineto commands in the path syntax 2. [6]Update on 1.1F 2nd Edition 3. [7]Some questions Heycam had about SVG Fonts 4. [8]Heycam asking about references in 1.1F 2nd 5. [9]foreignObject and position:fixed children 6. [10]DTD in 1.1F 2nd * [11]Summary of Action Items _________________________________________________________ <trackbot> Date: 04 May 2009 <heycam> Scribe: Anthony <shepazu> [12]http://www.w3.org/News/2009#item66 [12] http://www.w3.org/News/2009#item66 <heycam> ScribeNick: anthony Tighten up the implicit lineto commands in the path syntax <heycam> ISSUE-2268? <trackbot> ISSUE-2268 -- Tighten up the implicit lineto commands in the path syntax -- RAISED <trackbot> [13]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2268 [13] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2268 <heycam> DS: I think there are two sensible answers to this <heycam> ... one, they're always absolute <heycam> ... (or relative, but absolute makes more sense) <heycam> ED: i tested a few implementations <heycam> ... if you have a relative 'm', then you have relative 'l's <heycam> ... and if you have an absolute 'M', then you have absolute 'L's <heycam> DS: that's the second sensible one CM: Erik, you were saying that the first line to is absolute? ED: Even if it's lower case 'm' it will be absolute CM: All the subsequent implicit line-to's ED: That's what the test cases showed CM: I guess that makes sense ... You can always not use implicit lines if you want particular behavior ED: I couldn't find any implementation that behaved differently ... but I didn't test ASV DS: Implementations, the first 'm' whether capital is not is always absolute then everything after is absolute ... need to have a lower case 'm' after the first to make line-to commands relative CM: Are we going to errata this for 1.1F and 1.2T? ED: Yes we should <scribe> ACTION: Anthony to Create an errata of the implicit line to problem mentioned on the list [recorded in [14]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html#action01] <trackbot> Created ACTION-2542 - Create an errata of the implicit line to problem mentioned on the list [on Anthony Grasso - due 2009-05-11]. Update on 1.1F 2nd Edition CM: All of the main chapters are now building properly ... really for the building side of things is to get the element and attribute appendix building ... and to get the element summaries automatically generated from the RNG ... Just need to be careful about updating things ... what I'll do next is generate diffs ... against the current 1.1 ... so I get an idea of what's changed ... then can start folding in the errata ... are we going to publish the errata again ... before 1.1F 2nd Edition is published? CL: If it hasn't gone in we probably should ED: Would be good to encourage feedback ... before it goes in CM: I believe it only goes to AC for review CL: That's right ... normally the Errata gets published ... then people have a chance to comment CM: So there are changes I've made that aren't in the errata document ... I can still generate a change long to put in the spec CL: It depends what class of thing ... is being fixed as we go ... are you saying we should have 2nd sitting in the wings ... then produce a big errata thing from that? CM: I guess that's my question ... if the change long is enough ... then generating a change long doesn't seem a good use of time AG: I've added some errata in from ages ago CM: From your commit log I'll check ... the diff logs ... so may be after Anthony puts this errata in ... then publish the errata ... from then on just make changes to the actual check ... rather then put them in the errata ... so this errata publication will be the last errata publication ... does that seem reasonable? ED: The 2nd edition spec is public ... so people can see the changes CM: Should we email the list for feedback before we start? ED: We have to I think CM: So Anthony do you want to let me know once you've put the errata in? AG: Yes DS: That said about the winder review, it might be good to get wider review ... now that we're not caught up in doing SVG Tiny 1.2 ... it might be useful to get real feedback from implementors and others CL: We've already had real feedback ... I don't want to sort of give the message that we are going to do a whole lot more changes ... once the errata gets a bit long ... you put it all in ... then start a new errata Some questions Heycam had about SVG Fonts <heycam> [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009AprJun/008 4.html [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009AprJun/0084.html CM: As I was going through 1.1F ... I noticed there was differences between SVG Fonts between 1.1F and 1.2T ... in 1.1F the Font face element has children font-face-src and definition-src ... font-face-src is the matching properties ... and that inside that you have a number of font-face-uri elements ... that point to the actual font file ... and font-name elements ... that point to local ... fonts installed on the system ... in 1.2T name wasn't there ... and was it deliberate? CL: It was <ChrisL> i am trying to respond to your question CL: So, In CSS 2, the idea was, you could have both local aliases and remote aliases ... so I could say font-face=foo corresponds to bar ... for Tiny we felt this was too complex ... and not needed ... we just chopped it down to a single URI to make it more simple ... you could have multiple URI that are a combination of multiple fonts ... so when we put it down to a single URI the container wasn't needed anymore ... definition-src CM: I thought that definition-src was you could set up a font and reuse it CL: At one point we talked about constructing composite fonts and you point off to the fonts and give it a name ... but I don't think we tested the composite part in Tiny ... this was moved over to CSS 3 CM: Can we drop definition-src from 1.1? CL: Yes ... the original idea was apart from downloading fonts, you might synthesize them CM: The difference between the content models? CL: I'm not sure that was deliberate CM: I think it would be ok to change 1.1F to say 0 or 1 definition-src ... and 1 or more font-face-src CL: 1.1. was incorrect because theoretically you could say a local font and not give a URI for it ... there has to be at least one font-face-src CM: So 1 or more or just 1? CL: Just 1 CM: Then for Tiny where it says 0 or more should we update to say 1 or more or 1 exactly? CL: So basically it should have exactly 1 <scribe> ACTION: Cameron to Fix and align the font elements regarding font-face-src and definition-src in SVG 1.1F and SVG 1.2T [recorded in [16]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html#action02] <trackbot> Created ACTION-2543 - Fix and align the font elements regarding font-face-src and definition-src in SVG 1.1F and SVG 1.2T [on Cameron McCormack - due 2009-05-11]. CM: Need to see if there is a test for the units-per-em problem where the default is 1000 CL: There isn't one <scribe> ACTION: Cameron to Make a test for default units per em value [recorded in [17]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html#action03] <trackbot> Created ACTION-2544 - Make a test for default units per em value [on Cameron McCormack - due 2009-05-11]. <heycam> [18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009AprJun/008 7.html [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009AprJun/0087.html CL: There are not media types ... and there is not likely to be ... they should be quoted CM: My suggestion with the quoted properties ... is that the format you want to support? ... are they going to have spaces in them? CL: they're not going to have spaces in them more so different formats will have different URI ... since its separate now ... it's awkward to pair them up ... so really what we want to have is an attribute ... on font-face-uri ... and it's a separate child which means you can't group them ... so if you have multiple font-face-uris and font-face-formats ... you can't say how they pair up ED: So if you have multiple font-face-uri elements with multiple formats I don't think we say how we handle them CM: The string attribute exists already CL: We actually called it string? CM: Having an attribute on font-face-uri might be better CL: And we can say that brings it closer to existing practices ... to what CSS does CM: At the moment we don't have any tests that have font-face-format in them ED: Not sure if it's testable CL: I think it was susceptible to having multiple formats ... I'd rather have it as an attribute ... the question becomes what do we do for 1.2T CM: I think you're correct it's not in 1.2T CL: There is one other complication ... what happens if you say it's a type 1 font, but then when it comes back and it's Open type font ... so it said it's something it wasn't ... [reads section in CSS3 about format hint] CM: so you can provide more than one ... that's the really why I was asking the question about the syntax ... because of the list inside the attribute CL: Especially for Open Type you can sub types. ... You can actually point to a single font file that can have multiple formats ... I think it's still a bad design to have a format child DS: I can see Doug's point about this CL: Although making a change in an untested part of the spec brings us in to line with XSL DS: I don't object to us starting to have wording that defines this better, but this seems to be a strong difference ... if it were up to me we would work on this for SVG 2.0 CL: We can define it but it'll look ugly ED: Since tiny doesn't have font-face-format ... another solution is to drop it from 1.1F ... and add it to 2.0 CL: I'm even less happy with that one ... I'd rather keep the CSS and XSL serialisations as close as possible CM: The only issue at the moment is it's not defined ... I think it would look a bit cleaner as an attribute CL: It's a bit more clunky than what it needs to be CM: Keep it as an element? CL: ok CM: Change the tests ... to have the quotes inside the format CL: So ED Opera 10 does look at it? ED: Yes it does ... I think if you leave off the quotes ... it would ignore the whole thing ... because it wouldn't parse correctly ... I locally fixed some of the tests CL: Can you check those in please ED: Sure <scribe> ACTION: Erik to Commit his local copy of the font tests that have the fixed quotes [recorded in [19]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html#action04] <trackbot> Created ACTION-2545 - Commit his local copy of the font tests that have the fixed quotes [on Erik Dahlström - due 2009-05-11]. CM: I guess it would be hard to test, if we are copying the CSS behavior as being a should CL: Should makes it a bit untestable CM: You could construct a test that has two possible renderings ED: Depends on how hard you are on the parsing of the rule ... if it's not correct grammar then you should ignore it CL: Right, and we don't have that ... about dropping the whole rule ... that argues with the tight coupling DS: I think you can test it ... like you said ... having two different paths ... but each path being specific about what it tests CM: Yeah, if the glyph comes out as a circle or a square then it passes DS: Right ... have strict criteria about the pass ... or about it not downloading it CL: So the issue is you don't have to download it, but if you do then that's ok Heycam asking about references in 1.1F 2nd <heycam> [20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009AprJun/009 0.html [20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009AprJun/0090.html CL: In 1.1F we use DOM 2 because that was the current one at the time ... in 1.2T we started reference DOM 3 events ... is it possible to point to DOM 3 core but only reference the DOM 2 parts ... if you update the reference are you asking if we have to do all that stuff? CM: Yes ... compared to other references where it's just bug fixes CL: BCP-47 CM: Is reference it a good idea? CL: Yes it is ... XML already made that change ... if you can point to the latest version ... I agree we should not add a reference XML 1.1 DS: XML 1.1 is mostly being folded in to XML 1.0 CL: I think eventually we'll have to errata Tiny and reference XML 1.0 CM: So there is a paragraph about XSLT 2 ... they are referenced as informative things ... and Tiny references them to be a bit more complete ... alright I'll do those changes <shepazu> [21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2009May/0015.html [21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2009May/0015.html foreignObject and position:fixed children CL: He has a good point ... yes it should ... establish a new containing block CM: My feeling is like foreignObject is like object in HTML ED: I agree <scribe> ACTION: Chris to Respond to Jonathan's email regarding foreignObject [recorded in [22]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html#action05] <trackbot> Created ACTION-2546 - Respond to Jonathan's email regarding foreignObject [on Chris Lilley - due 2009-05-11]. DS: Regrets for me on Weds CL: Same for me and the following week ED: Do we want to cancel the Wed telcon? CM: I don't mind DTD in 1.1F 2nd CM: We already decided to down play them ... I had already taken out the sections for the content set ... which do mapping ... that might have been over done ... because sections say chapters can be put in to a module CL: I think we should down play it ... doesn't think it adds any value in practice CM: The organisation is going to be there in the DTD ... in the introduction there is a section where it talks about these modules <heycam> [23]http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/intro.html#Modularization [23] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/intro.html#Modularization CL: I don't really want to drive people down that path CM: I can do without the RNG for now ... getting the attribute and element appendix published, I'll need the RNG for that ... so in the intro there's a bit about the collections ... in the main chapters <heycam> [24]http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/shapes.html#shape-mod [24] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/shapes.html#shape-mod CL: There's a horrible thing there ... it is an error to include a subset and superset of the same group ... I don't think we should say that CM: I think it's going to fall out to be an error CL: Maybe we should change the wording to say that ... "Including a superset and a subset of the same group will produce an error" CM: in the main chapters it includes some parts of the DTD ... I've taken them out ... but I'm just wondering if that's ok, because of the module structure ED: I think 1.1T references those tables ... so I think they still have to be there ... otherwise we'll have to change them to point somewhere else <ed> [25]http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile11/ [25] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile11/ ED: plenty of links there to those type of modules CM: The only reason I wanted to remove them <ed> s/1.1T/1.1 Mobile (basic/tiny)/ CM: was because they were cluttering up the chapters <ChrisL> Suggest changing the title from, say, 9.9 Shape Module to 9.9 Shape DTD Module CM: If you validate for DTD doesn't guarantee conformance ... and the same for the RNG CL: So I suggest changing the name of the section heading ... For adding new stuff, I'll try to conform that module structure <ed> s/1.2T and// CL: I'm a little bit concerned that how to be sure that everything that was previous valid to the DTD ... is now valid to the RNG ... I think there are tools that let you take a DTD that generates random content that conforms to it ... I'm wondering if it will create a bunch of weird things CM: So there are various things that couldn't be expressed in the DTD that we want in the RNG CL: But if something is invalid to the DTD it should also be invalid to the RNG CM: The DTD and the schema can show that you have something that doesn't conform Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: Anthony to Create an errata of the implicit line to problem mentioned on the list [recorded in [26]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html#action01] [NEW] ACTION: Cameron to Fix and align the font elements regarding font-face-src and definition-src in SVG 1.1F and SVG 1.2T [recorded in [27]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html#action02] [NEW] ACTION: Cameron to Make a test for default units per em value [recorded in [28]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html#action03] [NEW] ACTION: Chris to Respond to Jonathan's email regarding foreignObject [recorded in [29]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html#action05] [NEW] ACTION: Erik to Commit his local copy of the font tests that have the fixed quotes [recorded in [30]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html#action04] [End of minutes] _________________________________________________________ Minutes formatted by David Booth's [31]scribe.perl version 1.135 ([32]CVS log) $Date: 2009/05/04 08:04:21 $ _________________________________________________________ [31] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm [32] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/ Scribe.perl diagnostic output [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.] This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at [33]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002 /scribe/ [33] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/... from the spec// Succeeded: s/2nd edition check/2nd edition spec/ Succeeded: s/URIs/font-face-uri elements/ Succeeded: s/BCT/BCP/ Succeeded: s/1.2T and// WARNING: Bad s/// command: s/1.1T/1.1 Mobile (basic/tiny)/ Succeeded: s/tite/title/ FAILED: s/1.2T and// Succeeded: s/RNG/DTD/ Found Scribe: Anthony Found ScribeNick: anthony Default Present: Doug_Schepers, [IPcaller], heycam, ed, anthony, ChrisL Present: Doug_Schepers [IPcaller] heycam ed anthony ChrisL Agenda: [34]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009AprJu n/0093.html [34] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2009AprJun/0093.html WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 04 May 2009 Guessing minutes URL: [35]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html People with action items: anthony cameron chris erik [35] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/04-svg-minutes.html End of [36]scribe.perl diagnostic output] [36] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
Received on Monday, 4 May 2009 08:12:03 UTC