- 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