W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-svg-wg@w3.org > April to June 2009

Minutes, June 29 2009 SVG WG telcon

From: Anthony Grasso <anthony.grasso@cisra.canon.com.au>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 09:33:05 +1000
Message-ID: <4A494F31.8020203@cisra.canon.com.au>
To: www-svg@w3.org
<Zakim>  GA_SVGWG()2:30AM has now started
<Zakim> +Doug_Schepers
<Zakim> +??P1
<anthony>   Zakim, ??P1 is me
<Zakim> +anthony; got it
<Zakim> +??P2
<ChrisL>    zakim, ??p2 is me
<Zakim> +ChrisL; got it
-->|    heycam (cam@ has joined #svg
<Zakim> +[IPcaller]
<Zakim> +??P4
<ed>    Zakim, [IP is me
<Zakim> +ed; got it
<heycam>    Zakim, ??P4 is me
<Zakim> +heycam; got it
<heycam>    Zakim, who is on the call?
<Zakim> On the phone I see Doug_Schepers, anthony, ChrisL, ed, heycam
<Zakim> +??P5
* shepazu 
<anthony>   scribe: anthony
<jwatt> Zakim, ??P5 is me
<Zakim> +jwatt; got it
<heycam>    Agenda: 
<anthony>   Chair: Cameron
<ChrisL>    http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Errata_in_SVG_1.1_Second_Edition
<anthony>   Topic: Issues and open actions for 1.1 2nd Edition
<anthony>   CM: Thought it might be a good idea to go through some
<anthony>   ... move some to Core 2
<anthony>   CL: Most are done except for 4 items
<anthony>   DS: Would be good to get do the clip path one
<anthony>   CL: I think that one is covered by another one
<anthony>   CL: I think we can mark it as not needed
<anthony>   ... because it's covered by another one
<anthony>   CM: It would be good to discuss those other two ones
<anthony>   ED: Looks fine
<anthony>   DS: It's about JW not wanting to make something more confusing
<anthony>   ... we agreed to discuss it when JW had time to look at it
<anthony>   ... if we go forward with the other boundingBox ones it kind of 
clarifies it
<anthony>   ... I think we should probably wait with that as well
<anthony>   CM: There is one left on JW's list
<anthony>   ... and that can be left as well
<anthony>   CM: I haven't made much progress in writing of tests for the ones 
I've folded in
<anthony>   ... don't really need to discuss them at the moment
<heycam>    http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/products/1
<anthony>   ... I'd like to take a look at the open actions in Tracker
<anthony>   ... on 1.1
<anthony>   CM: There are certainly some that sound like they might have been 
done already
<anthony>   ... should we go through and mark these off one by one?
<anthony>   CL: So you said some of these have been done already?
<anthony>   CM: I think some of the actions are done
<anthony>   ... but the action in tracker has been left open
<anthony>   Topic: One telcon a week
<anthony>   DS: Chris as I recall the reason you said we went to two
<anthony>   ... was we were talking about Full and Tiny
<anthony>   CL: Yes that was originally the reason
<anthony>   ... I think two telcons in general is good
<anthony>   ... but if one of them is going to be about has everyone done there 
<anthony>   ... then time is better spent doing the actions
<anthony>   CM: I do like the idea of having the time of doing the actions
<anthony>   ... if we just said no telcon at this time
<anthony>   ... people can allocate the time for work
<anthony>   ... I would be happy with turning the Monday telcon to time for Actions
<anthony>   ED: I think it's easier for me
<anthony>   ... to come up with action items
<anthony>   ... and things to discuss
<anthony>   ... if there is only one telcon later on in the week
<ed>    ED: I'd prefer having the telcon on wednesdays, and the monday for doing 
actions (or another day in the week)
<anthony>   CM: So baring changing the telcon time all together
<anthony>   ... would it be ok to have the time for actions
<anthony>   DS: We could do it like we do our marathons just a smaller version
<anthony>   ED: We could see if the time is not enough to discuss things we 
could go back to two telcons?
<anthony>   CL: Sounds fine with me
<anthony>   DS: So next week we'll just have a Wed telcon?
<anthony>   CL: I suggest we do this for July
<anthony>   ... and re-evaluate in August
<anthony>   DS: This ties in with summer plans for people
<anthony>   ED: I will be gone for half of July
<anthony>   ... so may be we should extend the trial period
<anthony>   AG: I'll be gone for a week in July
<anthony>   ... might still dial in
<anthony>   CM: No plans
<anthony>   JW: Away two weeks time
<anthony>   ... week of the 13th
<anthony>   DS: So I guess we can say July and August we do one telcon a week
<anthony>   ... and see how it goes
<anthony>   CM: having defined time is good because it gives us allocated time 
to work on SVG
<anthony>   ... outside our other work
<anthony>   RESOLUTION: We will only meet for one telcon a week during July and 
<anthony>   Topic: Sending agenda to www-svg
<anthony>   CL: No objection to that
<anthony>   ... as long as it also keeps going to the same place
<anthony>   DS: With the minutes we planned on sending them to www-svg and bcc 
<anthony>   ... by contrast with the Agenda
<anthony>   ... it would be bcc-ed www-svg and sent to the working group list
<anthony>   CL: I don't mind that
<anthony>   CM: I think sending the agend to www-svg is probably less useful 
than the minutes
<anthony>   ... but it shows that their topics will be discussed
<anthony>   DS: That was one of my ideas to sending them to the list
<anthony>   ... them = agenda
<anthony>   RESOLUTION: We will send to the agenda public list and bcc the 
www-svg list
<anthony>   Topic: Open Actions on 1.1
<heycam>    http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/products/1
<anthony>   ACTION-2021?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2021
<trackbot>  ACTION-2021 -- Erik Dahlström to add informative implementation tip 
regarding filter primitive subregion and research the second question in 
Robert's email and respond to that as well -- due 2008-05-22 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2021
<anthony>   CM: Erik's action
<anthony>   ED: I'm wondering if this is for Filters 1.2
<anthony>   ... and not for the errata anyway
<anthony>   CM: Sounds like this might be for later
<anthony>   ED: I raised an issue about primitive sub regions
* heycam    has lost his audio, sorry
* heycam    will call back
<ed>    related to ISSUE-2284
* anthony   ok
<Zakim> -heycam
<anthony>   ISSUE-2284?
* trackbot  getting information on ISSUE-2284
<trackbot>  ISSUE-2284 -- Clarify how the primitive subregion affects the filter 
input and outputs for all filter primitives -- RAISED
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2284
<Zakim> +??P4
<heycam>    Zakim, ??P4 is me
<Zakim> +heycam; got it
<anthony>   ACTION-2067?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2067
<trackbot>  ACTION-2067 -- Anthony Grasso to add Eriks proposed wording to the 
Errata. Link to ACTION-2066 -- due 2008-06-19 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2067
<anthony>   AG: Haven't really checked back if wording for filters has been updated
<anthony>   ED: This could probably go into 1.1
<anthony>   ... not super urgent
<heycam>    s/1.1/1.2/
<ed>    this is ISSUE-2188
<anthony>   CM: I'll reassign it to SVG
<anthony>   ... unless there is any objection
<anthony>   ED: Issue is raised on the filters module
<anthony>   CM: AGs action is to port the wording
<anthony>   ... just reassigned that
<anthony>   ACTION-2077?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2077
<trackbot>  ACTION-2077 -- Erik Dahlström to test implementations for percentage 
values in clipPath, etc. -- due 2008-07-03 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2077
<anthony>   ED: This one is more of an exploritory one
<anthony>   ... to see what implementations are doing for clipPaths
<anthony>   ... would be nice to do it for core 2
<anthony>   CM: Ok, I'll reassign that
<anthony>   ACTION-2134?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2134
<trackbot>  ACTION-2134 -- Doug Schepers to find someone who knows about xsd to 
review and make the changes in gavin's e-mail -- due 2008-08-21 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2134
<anthony>   DS: Not completed this action
<anthony>   ... have started it
<anthony>   ... couldn't find anyone who had time to help us do XSD
<anthony>   CL: Long standing problem
<anthony>   ... so we published XSD for 1.1?
<heycam>    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Mar/0085.html
<anthony>   s/... so we/CM: so we/
<anthony>   CL: I don't think we did
<anthony>   ... This is a schema as far as I can tell
<anthony>   ... Oxygen made up
<anthony>   ... they were at one point providing it with Oxygen
<anthony>   ... I think it was made from a DTD
<anthony>   CM: So it's
<anthony>   ... not really our issue
<anthony>   CL: No
<anthony>   DS: But it says that "no of the XSDs supplied by W3C..."
<anthony>   CM: Just found an XSD in the 1.0 spec
<anthony>   ... I found it in the old repository
<anthony>   CL: We may have intended to work on it one point
<anthony>   ... but it didn't get published with the spec
<anthony>   CM: Maybe we didn't have in the final draft of the spec
<anthony>   DS: I should do something about it
<anthony>   CM: Maybe it's a good idea email Gavin and say we don't provide one
<anthony>   CL: I think a good response might be to say we look more at RNG 
rather than XSD
<anthony>   ... I think he's taken it from Oxygen and we didn't make it
<anthony>   DS: If he supplied it why didn't I do it at the time?
<anthony>   CL: Snowed under?
<anthony>   CM: Anyway, lets reassign this action so it's not part of 1.1
<ChrisL>    http://www.oxygenxml.com/forum/topic2481.html
<anthony>   CL: I found a forum posting about this
<anthony>   ... not sure if it's relevant
<ChrisL>    http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-SVG11-20020108/SVG.xsd
<anthony>   ... link to our site with an XSD
<anthony>   CL: Produced by XMLspy
<anthony>   ... is this linked in a spec?
<anthony>   CM: Looks like it was dropped
<ChrisL>    http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-SVG11-20020108/#schema
<anthony>   DS: I'll try to talk to Gavin
<anthony>   ... if supplied it maybe we should supply an XSD
<anthony>   CL: That document that we had in 2002 is not necessarily up to date
<anthony>   DS: What value is there in us supplying an XSD
<anthony>   CL: I would rather that we have a relaxNG and generate an XSD from that
<anthony>   DS: This relates to a later action
<anthony>   ... I got
<ChrisL>    was in a wd, was not developed fiurther. its not in the final rec
<anthony>   ... which was to ask Robin Berjon about generating a RelaxNG
<ChrisL>    better to develop an xsd from the rng (once we make one)
<anthony>   CM: I'll reassign that action of your DS to be on 1.1
<anthony>   ACTION-2163?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2163
<trackbot>  ACTION-2163 -- Erik Dahlström to add 1.1 errata for stroke-dasharray 
to align 1.1 with SVGT1.2 (to allow whitespace-separated values) -- due 
2008-08-30 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2163
<anthony>   ED: I held off on this one
<anthony>   ... because you had an action to deal with the syntaxes
<anthony>   CM: Maybe should assign this one to me then
<anthony>   ED: Would like to have this in the errata
<anthony>   ... would be nice, because it's something I always run into trying 
to get things running in all the browsers
<anthony>   CM: Ok, I'll keep this one open
<anthony>   ACTION-2203?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2203
<trackbot>  ACTION-2203 -- Doug Schepers to add to the 1.1 Full errata that the 
initial value for the root overflow property is scroll rather than hidden -- due 
2008-09-30 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2203
<anthony>   CM: Seems like it's about overflow initial values on the SVG element
<anthony>   DS: We definitely need to put that in
<anthony>   RESOLUTION: ACTION-2203 will go into 1.1 Full 2nd edition
<anthony>   ACTION-2358?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2358
<trackbot>  ACTION-2358 -- Doug Schepers to propose wording for the clip path 
pointer-events erratum and masking/compositing module change -- due 2008-12-04 
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2358
<anthony>   CM: This one sounds like it's probably been done
<anthony>   DS: I think so
<anthony>   ... this should be maybe pending review
<anthony>   ACTION-2367?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2367
<trackbot>  ACTION-2367 -- Erik Dahlström to propose an errata item for rx and 
ry -- due 2008-12-08 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2367
<anthony>   ED: I did send the proposal and we haven't agreed on what should be 
final text
<anthony>   ... I'm fine to changing the implementation to something we can all 
agree on
<anthony>   ... I think there are 3 or so proposals
<anthony>   ... The one I made, the Mozilla one, and the third is CSS3
<anthony>   ... and align to that
<anthony>   JW: I thought 2 and 3 were quite similar
<anthony>   ED: I could try and look at that
<anthony>   ... which is what's left to do
<anthony>   ... for that one
<anthony>   ... does it need to be done for the errata or can it leave for core 2?
<anthony>   JW: It's an edge case
<anthony>   ... so can probably leave it
<anthony>   CM: We can probably leave it for core 2
<anthony>   ED: I started make test cases for it
<anthony>   ... not sure if I committed those
<anthony>   ... I'll move this to Core 2
* shepazu   has re-contacted berjon about relaxng
<anthony>   ACTION-2372?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2372
<trackbot>  ACTION-2372 -- Doug Schepers to propose revised wording for the 
errata item "Capturing pointer-events with a zero opacity mask" to clarify it 
with clip-path -- due 2008-12-11 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2372
<anthony>   CM: Do you want me to close this one?
<anthony>   ... or mark it pending review?
<anthony>   DS: Mark it pending review
<anthony>   CM: They are separate issues but the solution was the same place in 
the spec
<anthony>   ACTION-2386?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2386
<trackbot>  ACTION-2386 -- Jonathan Watt to investigate the "SVGZoomEvent - 
Interface" errata item further -- due 2008-12-25 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2386
<anthony>   JW: I finished this one already
<anthony>   CM: What was the result of the investigation?
<anthony>   ... what happened to the errata on it?
<anthony>   JW: May have not written it
<anthony>   CM: Is it something you think is important enough to do for 2nd edition?
<anthony>   JW: Well, no body seems to implement it other than Mozilla
<anthony>   ED: We send it
<anthony>   JW: I mean providing an interface
<anthony>   ... I'm just wondering if nobody provides anything for the interface
<heycam>    http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Errata_in_SVG_1.1_Second_Edition
<anthony>   ... there is no rush to get it done
<anthony>   ... it's easy to do
<anthony>   ... just involves removing stuff
<anthony>   CM: Can wait for you to do that
<anthony>   ... once you're done with your work
<anthony>   CL: yeah, probably easier to remove it
<anthony>   ACTION-2402?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2402
<trackbot>  ACTION-2402 -- Erik Dahlström to go through the 1.2 Tiny test suite 
to check if there are any tests for zero length paths that test for 
directionality and add those to the 1.1 Full test suite -- due 2009-01-22 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2402
<anthony>   CM: Sounds more like a test suite action
<anthony>   ... than something on the spec
<anthony>   ED: I wonder if this is a generic one
<anthony>   ... I don't know if it's totally necessary to do it for 1.1 2nd edition
<anthony>   ... the tests for Tiny should mostly work in a 1.1 viewer
<anthony>   CM: Should we put this one off then?
<anthony>   ED: I wonder if we even need this one though
<anthony>   CM: In general we want to add more coverage to the test suite
<anthony>   ... but I don't know if there was a reason for adding these tests
<anthony>   ED: We were thinking of back porting wording from 1.1 Tiny
<anthony>   ... going through that there was nothing to back port
<anthony>   CM: So we don't need to do anything special?
<anthony>   ED: Right
<anthony>   CM: Sounds like we should just close it and when we get to 
tightening up the wording in SVG 2
<anthony>   ... we'll make the tests
<anthony>   ED: I'll close the action
<anthony>   ACTION-2403?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2403
<trackbot>  ACTION-2403 -- Jonathan Watt to take a look at the discussions in 
the errata item http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/errata/errata.xml#bzwidth 
before the SYD F2F -- due 2009-01-22 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2403
<heycam>    action-2469?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2469
<trackbot>  ACTION-2469 -- Jonathan Watt to flesh out the intrinsic sizing 
erratum with text backported from 1.2T -- due 2009-02-24 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2469
<anthony>   CM: Related to ACTION-2469
<anthony>   ... ACTION-2403 can be closed
<anthony>   ACTION-2404?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2404
<trackbot>  ACTION-2404 -- Doug Schepers to add errata item for root overflow -- 
due 2009-01-22 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2404
<anthony>   ED: Didn't we discuss this previously?
<anthony>   DS: Ok, I'll just close this one
<anthony>   ACTION-2415?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2415
<trackbot>  ACTION-2415 -- Chris Lilley to check the Tiny 1.2 Chapter to see if 
there is any text in there that can be used for ISSUE-2001 -- due 2009-02-02 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2415
<ChrisL>    http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGTiny12/fonts.html#FontFaceElement
<anthony>   CL: Looked into it
<anthony>   ... seems like there is some wording
<ChrisL>    17.8.2 The 'font-face' element
<anthony>   ... it's a bit round-about
<ChrisL>    When used to describe the characteristics of an SVG font contained 
within the same document, it is recommended that the 'font-face' element be a 
child of the 'font' element it is describing so that the 'font' element can be 
self-contained and fully-described. In this case, any 'font-face-src' elements 
within the 'font-face' element are ignored as it is assumed that the 'font-face' 
element is describing the characteristics of its parent 'font' element.
<anthony>   ... says that here's a case where it should be inside
<anthony>   ... if we were putting that wording in, I'd like to add a sentence in
<anthony>   ... that says
<ChrisL>    prefer to add a second sentence to say explicitly that otherwise, it 
need not be a child of font-face
<ChrisL>    s/font-face/font/
<heycam>    http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/fonts.html#FontFaceElement
<anthony>   CM: Looks like that the text in 1.1 is pretty similar
<anthony>   CL: Do you think the second sentence would help?
<anthony>   CM: I think it would
<anthony>   ... in the test suite they're all children of font-face
<anthony>   CL: I thought we had samples where it wasn't
<anthony>   ED: I think we have both
<anthony>   CL: There's an example in 1.2 Tiny that doesn't have it explicitly 
in a font
<anthony>   ... if we've agreed to that I'll stick that wording in
<anthony>   CM: So you'll just re-use that action?
<anthony>   CL: yes
<anthony>   ACTION-2461?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2461
<trackbot>  ACTION-2461 -- Jonathan Watt to suggest some rewritten text for 
these suspend methods -- due 2009-02-23 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2461
<anthony>   CM: JW you were champion this one in SYD, do you want in 2nd edition?
<anthony>   JW: Yes, would want it in there
<anthony>   ... I'll try to get to this after the telcon
<anthony>   ACTION-2472?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2472
<trackbot>  ACTION-2472 -- Doug Schepers to fill in the 
currentTranslate/currentScale erratum to explicitly make using those attributes 
on inner <svg> elements undefined -- due 2009-02-24 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2472
<anthony>   CM: Is this something we want to be in?
<anthony>   DS: I think I did this
<anthony>   ... I'll research and see if I did this
<anthony>   ... I think I did
<anthony>   CM: Wrong link
<anthony>   ... I can't see it in that file
<anthony>   ED: Yeah, it's not in the published version of 2nd edition
<anthony>   CM: Wrong link again
<anthony>   CM: There it is
<anthony>   CM: I can keep it open
<anthony>   DS: Yeah, I think this should go in there
<anthony>   ACTION-2477?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2477
<trackbot>  ACTION-2477 -- Doug Schepers to propose a solution for ISSUE-2071, 
referring to external resources and how that affects security (\"tainting\" an 
svg) and how that might apply to methods like elementFromPoint -- due 2009-02-26 
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2477
<anthony>   DS: This is the one from ROC
<anthony>   ... I think JW should take this
<anthony>   CM: I remember we have long discussions in SYD about this
<anthony>   ... I don't think this is as critical to get done
<anthony>   ... only because we don't really deal with origins in the spec at 
the moment
<anthony>   CL: It's better to have not anything in there
<anthony>   ... than have something that needs to be changed
<anthony>   DS: I remember we said we would put something saying there is a 
security risk
<anthony>   ... and we'd look at fixing the risk in SVG 2
<anthony>   ACTION-2489?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2489
<trackbot>  ACTION-2489 -- Doug Schepers to look into allowing RDF in the SVG 
DTD -- due 2009-03-16 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2489
<anthony>   CL: Not possible
<anthony>   ... can't have a DTD which covers all of the RDF
<anthony>   ... you can't do this
<anthony>   ... you'd need every possible name space
<anthony>   ... just can't do it
<anthony>   DS: Could it be solved in the context of RelaxNG
<anthony>   CL: In NVDL you can do it
<anthony>   DS: I'm going to add that
<anthony>   CL: I'm not sure about using RelaxNG for this either
<anthony>   DS: Could RelaxNG or NVDL look at DTD?
<anthony>   CL: no
<anthony>   ... you can, but not for this case
<anthony>   ... it's not going to help in this case
<anthony>   CM: DS will you assign this to a different product?
<anthony>   DS: I'm going to leave it open
<anthony>   ... we could reach some conclusion on this
<anthony>   ... when I talk to Robin Berjon
<anthony>   ACTION-2507?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2507
<trackbot>  ACTION-2507 -- Doug Schepers to contact robin berjon to ask for help 
with converting the 1.1 DTD to RNG and related issues -- due 2009-04-06 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2507
<anthony>   CM: Already in the process of doing this DS?
<anthony>   DS: I have contacted him about it
<anthony>   ... and I just did again
<anthony>   ... put it to pending review
<anthony>   ... The action of contacting him, I've done that
<anthony>   ... That's not really what needs to be done
<anthony>   CM: I think that means we can close the next two then
<anthony>   CL: I wanted to talk about the second one
<anthony>   ... there was a second edition published of XHTML 1.1
<anthony>   ... they got knocked back on DTD
<anthony>   ... I think it would be risky to do that
<anthony>   ... For people that need an RNG it doesn't hurt for it to be in 
separate spec
<anthony>   CM: There were a few reasons for having an RNG for 1.1
<anthony>   ... were thinking of building a spec on it
<anthony>   ... but this late it might be a bit of work
<anthony>   DS: I don't particularly mind doing that where we publish it as a note
<anthony>   CL: It's very easy to say it's not an errata
<anthony>   DS: I do want to do it
<anthony>   CM: Probably the RNG would make it easier to do some checking
<anthony>   CL: The RNG wouldn't be used to introduce new things
<anthony>   DS: I do understand where you're coming from
<anthony>   ... I don't want us to be accused of changing the SVG spec with 
another spec
<anthony>   ... the work is going to be done either way
<anthony>   CL: There is also some stuff on correctness of NVDL that we need to 
follow up on
<anthony>   CM: I'm happy with what CL proposes
<anthony>   ... so ACTION-2508 can be closed
<anthony>   ... ACTION-2516 can be left open
<anthony>   CL: Perhaps put it on a separate product
<anthony>   ACTION-2543?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2543
<trackbot>  ACTION-2543 -- Cameron McCormack to fix and align the font elements 
regarding font-face-src and definition-src in SVG 1.1F and SVG 1.2T -- due 
2009-05-11 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2543
<anthony>   CM: One of mine
<anthony>   ... haven't done
<anthony>   ... I mailed the list at one point
<anthony>   ... talking about the differences in content models
<anthony>   between Tiny 1.2 and Full 1.1
<anthony>   ... this action may have already been done
<anthony>   ... happy to keep that one open for now
<anthony>   ACTION-2547?
* trackbot  getting information on ACTION-2547
<trackbot>  ACTION-2547 -- Cameron McCormack to re-render the equations in the 
implnote appendix -- due 2009-05-15 -- OPEN
<trackbot>  http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2547
<anthony>   CM: This was to make the equations in the appendix better looking
<anthony>   ... lower priority than other ones
<anthony>   ... so I'll leave it until last
<anthony>   ... if there is time for it I'll do it
<Zakim> -ChrisL
<Zakim> -ed
<Zakim> -heycam
|<--    heycam has left irc.w3.org:6665 (Quit: bye)
<Zakim> -Doug_Schepers
<Zakim> -anthony
<Zakim> -jwatt
<Zakim> GA_SVGWG()2:30AM has ended
<Zakim> Attendees were Doug_Schepers, anthony, ChrisL, [IPcaller], ed, heycam, jwatt

Received on Monday, 29 June 2009 23:34:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:29:42 UTC