- From: Anthony Grasso <anthony.grasso@cisra.canon.com.au>
- Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 02:12:18 +1000
- To: www-svg@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html
---
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
SVG Working Group Teleconference
12 Apr 2010
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-irc
Attendees
Present
Shepazu, [IPcaller], ed, ChrisL, anthony, [Microsoft], jwatt
Regrets
Chair
SV_MEETING_CHAIR
Scribe
anthony
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]testsuite
2. [5]F2F Meeting
3. [6]FX Force
4. [7]Wording on radial gradient focal points
5. [8]F2F Meeting
6. [9]SVG 1.1 SE Push
7. [10]Markers
8. [11]Canvas and processing meeting
* [12]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 12 April 2010
<ChrisL> hi
<ChrisL>
[13]http://libregraphicsmeeting.org/2010/index.php?p=en/location
[13] http://libregraphicsmeeting.org/2010/index.php?p=en/location
[14]http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=R
ue+du+Fort+35+1060+Brussels+Belgium&sll=50.828325,4.34221&sspn=0.006
736,0.01929&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Fortstraat+35,+Sint-Gillis+1060+Saint-
Gilles,+Brussels-Capital+Region,+Belgium&ll=50.864478,4.457016&spn=0
.215389,0.617294&z=11
[14]
http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Rue+du+Fort+35+1060+Brussels+Belgium&sll=50.828325
<ChrisL>
[15]http://maps.google.com/maps?oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:offic
ial&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=0,0,1314856789320127029&fb=1&
hq=microsoft&hnear=brussels&daddr=Culliganlaan+1,+1831+Machelen,+Bel
gium&geocode=16487724983740769806,50.884409,4.449002&ei=8zHDS_2FLI_8
_Aanif3VBg&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=directions-to&resnum=1&ved=0CAkQn
gIwAA
[15]
http://maps.google.com/maps?oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=0
<ed> [16]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Test_Suite_1.1F2
[16] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Test_Suite_1.1F2
testsuite
<ed> ED: so, approve the tests labeled as "reviewed by CL, approve?"
<ed> ALL: yes, go ahead
[17]http://maps.google.com/maps?oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:offic
ial&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=0,0,1314856789320127029&fb=1&
hq=microsoft&hnear=brussels&daddr=Culliganlaan+1,+1831+Machelen,+Bel
gium&geocode=16487724983740769806,50.884409,4.449002&ei=8zHDS_2FLI_8
_Aanif3VBg&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=directions-to&resnum=1&ved=0CAkQn
gIwAA
[17]
http://maps.google.com/maps?oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=0
<ed> ACTION: ed to mark the "reviewed by CL, approve?" tests as
approved, and generate updated reference images [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2756 - Mark the "reviewed by CL, approve?"
tests as approved, and generate updated reference images [on Erik
Dahlström - due 2010-04-19].
<ChrisL> template fixed
<scribe> scribe: anthony
<scribe> ScribeNick: anthony
ED: I think the grammar for the elliptical has been fixed
<ed> paths-data-20-f.svg
ED: I added a test for it
... would like some one to view the test
DS: Jeff Schiller had more to say about the syntax on the mailing
list
ED: My update was after his email
... it covers white space after the first and second flags
DS: We could mention at least in the context of SVG 2.0
... a lacuna value for any given coordinate that is out of range
... can say it is assumed to be zero
ED: I'm not sure really
... if you want to go with 1 or 0 then you have a bias
DS: It's only cases where the arc flags are messed up
... what do you do with it?
ED: We just check if its 1 or 0 that's all
... if it's say 2
... we just say it's invalid
... you can't really parse it as anything else
DS: We should have it do something
... does the spec say what to do if the grammar isn't followed?
ED: It says what to do if the segment is not valid
... you render up to the valid point
... that's what is mentioned in 1.1 anyway
... render up to the last valid segement
... then continue with the rest of the document
... that's what the tests I wrote do
... and the tests from Microsoft
PD: I'm pretty sure that the spec says for this case
... exactly what Erik was saying
DS: I want to make sure this is captured in SVG 2.0
... I'll start an issue
... to make sure this is covered
ED: Any volunteers to review the test?
PD: We can review it
<scribe> ACTION: Patrick to Review paths-data-20-f.svg [recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2757 - Review paths-data-20-f.svg [on
Patrick Dengler - due 2010-04-19].
F2F Meeting
ED: Do we have a sign up form?
CL: No, I'll do that today
<ChrisL> i will make one today
<shepazu_> trackbot, pointer?
<trackbot> Sorry, shepazu_, I don't understand 'trackbot, pointer?'.
Please refer to [20]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help
[20] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc
FX Force
ED: We should schedule a telcon time
... to review some of the issues
DS: We should ask them
ED: I can send an email to ask them to do it Thursday next week
PD: I'm not getting any information on the discussion
DS: Probably not on the mailing list
<shepazu_> [21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/
[21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/
DS: I'll drop you a link
... Just thinking about the dynamics about how this would play out
... we have come to a conclusion about image fit
... and then we go to the CSS WG and they get frustrated because
we've had these private discussions
... we shouldn't talk about it in the groups
... and do it on the FX list
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to Suggest a new telcon time for the FX Task
Force group [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2758 - Suggest a new telcon time for the
FX Task Force group [on Erik Dahlström - due 2010-04-19].
Wording on radial gradient focal points
[23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010AprJun/001
6.html
[23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010AprJun/0016.html
AG: I've reviewed the test
... and the test looks fine to me
ED: Can we go ahead and approve the test?
ALL: Ok
AG: I suggested some extra wording
... to clarify the spec
ED: It is a bit wordy
... but it's sort of saying the same thing else where in xlink:href
I think
... definitely something that could be interpreted in two different
ways
... what does everything else thing of the additional wording?
CL: I think it would be good to put it in 1.1 SE
ED: It's more clear to me
... where should it go? In 'fx' or in 'fy' as well
AG: So, I had written the wording to go into the 'fx' attribute
... can be referenced by 'fy'
<scribe> ACTION: Anthony to Add the the proposed wording for 'fx'
clarification to SVG 1.1 2nd Edition [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2759 - Add the the proposed wording for
'fx' clarification to SVG 1.1 2nd Edition [on Anthony Grasso - due
2010-04-19].
<patrickd> [25]http://www.microsoft.com/ebc/brussels.mspx
[25] http://www.microsoft.com/ebc/brussels.mspx
F2F Meeting
PD: There's a link to the location
ED: We have a registration page
[26]http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/19480/SVGBrussels/
[26] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/19480/SVGBrussels/
CL: Doug you asked if we could have a joint meeting with LGM
DS: The last I heard from them that they understood that we wanted
have a meeting with them
... during the conference
... what we had intended was people from LGM to participate in the
F2F
CL: Seems like we need to close a loop on that
... I'd be happy either way
... or for a panel and a meeting to occur
DS: I was going to say we could explain how the process works
... and see if we can get people participating from the community
... or at least get an understanding of why things take time
... but I'll follow through with them
<ChrisL> [27]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVGF2F_2010_LGM
[27] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVGF2F_2010_LGM
<ChrisL> so we can add hotel etc onto that
SVG 1.1 SE Push
CL: We have an implementation report
... which is largely complete
<ChrisL>
[28]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/errata/implementation-repor
t.html
[28] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/errata/implementation-report.html
CL: I've been maintaining that
... updating every time new versions of implementations come out
... we only want one pass per test
<ChrisL> [29]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Test_Suite_1.1F2
[29] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Test_Suite_1.1F2
CL: Erik can you think of specific tests we need to add to the
report?
ED: There are some
... path-data-20-f.svg
CL: It's not on the wiki page
... need to add it to both of them
ED: Do we have reviews of the tests that are on the first page?
CL: Yes
... I think they are all reviewed
... and they are all approved as well
ED: Just checking that now
<ed>
[30]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/svgdom-over-01-f.s
vg
[30] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/svgdom-over-01-f.svg
ED: so one of the tests I made for the spec is unreviewed
... and the funny thing with that one is it conflicts with the one
of the submitted Microsoft tests
CL: In that case Patrick should review it
<ed> struct-svg-01-f.svg
CL: That needs to go into to the test report as well
<ChrisL> svgdom-over-01-f.svg
CL: and the SVG DOM test needs to go to the test report as well
<scribe> ACTION: Patrick to Review the svgdom-over-01-f.svg and
struct-svg-01-f.svg tests and resolve any of the conflicts [recorded
in [31]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2760 - Review the svgdom-over-01-f.svg and
struct-svg-01-f.svg tests and resolve any of the conflicts [on
Patrick Dengler - due 2010-04-19].
CL: any passes for the tests we are adding?
ED: Batik pass the first one
... Webkit and Inkscape fail
... Firefox pass and Opera passes
... the second one
... Opera 10.50 passes that one
... and partials on everyone else
... so who is going to update the implementation report?
CL: I'll do that anyway
... and update the results
DS: Are you testing Webkit Safari?
CL: No a nightly build
DS: Should we test Chrome as well?
CL: We should. In this case we are just after passes
... the Webkit rep on the CSS WG said not to bother running Safari
... but just to test it on Webkit
DS: I could test it on Safari and on Chrome
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to Add svgdom-over-01-f.svg and
struct-svg-01-f.svg to the implementation report [recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2761 - Add svgdom-over-01-f.svg and
struct-svg-01-f.svg to the implementation report [on Chris Lilley -
due 2010-04-19].
ED: Do we need to do anything else?
... I think we need to get the Test Suite fulling working
CL: Apart from the test suite I think the spec needs to be up to
date
ED: There are a few editing actions
PD: I still don't have my editing credentials
DS: I'll look into that today
<ed>
[33]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Brussels%2C_Belgium_F2F
[33] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Brussels%2C_Belgium_F2F
<ed> [34]http://www.microsoft.com/ebc/brussels.mspx
[34] http://www.microsoft.com/ebc/brussels.mspx
<ChrisL> [35]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/products/1
[35] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/products/1
ED: Would it be helpful to gather together all the editing actions
... and send out emails
CL: Some of the actions can only be done after publication
... JWatt there's actions on ZoomEvent and an action on Text
... to propose some wording
... we are very close
... to completing
... we have 8 open issues
... we either fix them or push them to another spec
<ChrisL> close ISSUE-2017
<trackbot> ISSUE-2017 Find sane values for getSubStringLength and
selectSubString closed
ED: Issue 2017 we can close because we were in agreement
<ed> [36]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2017
[36] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2017
<ChrisL> issue-2259?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2259 -- Inconsistent use of <uri> symbol -- RAISED
<trackbot> [37]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2259
[37] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2259
ISSUE-2299?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2299 -- Text on a path layout rules unclear wrt
startpoint-on-the-path and text-anchor -- RAISED
<trackbot> [38]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2299
[38] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2299
ED: We can probably push that to SVG 2.0
... it's not going to be small change if we start trying to tweak
the wording there
<ChrisL> once i had added tests or determined we don't need tests
then i can close action-2697 and thus issue-2259
ED: I'll update that to be SVG 2.0 then
ISSUE-2305
ISSUE-2305?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2305 -- Line caps drawing on zero length lines --
RAISED
<trackbot> [39]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2305
[39] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2305
CL: We have a test for that
<ChrisL>
[40]http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/painting-stroke-10
-t.svg
[40] http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/svg/painting-stroke-10-t.svg
ED: I remember seeing one more test with the zero length lines
... Maybe if someone can take an action to write the test
... not sure if it's blocking publication
... there was a test submitted
... by the guy that originally reported the issue
CL: I can do that
... that's fine
ED: There is one point in that test case is unclear
... when the length matches the end of the line
... so that's the reason why one of the lines at the end of the test
case
... was there in some and not there in others
... or break it up into several tests
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to Write a test for ISSUE-2305 [recorded in
[41]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2762 - Write a test for ISSUE-2305 [on
Chris Lilley - due 2010-04-19].
ISSUE-2309?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2309 -- Investigate impact of changing SVG 1.1
second edition to reference CSS2.1 -- RAISED
<trackbot> [42]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2309
[42] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2309
ED: I think we've said before it would be a too big of a change to
make
... there have been some changes between 2.0 and 2.1
... such as clip and web fonts being dropped
... so if want to really reference 2.1 we really have to investigate
that
CL: We can't really reference 2.1 because it's not going to be
finished until the end of the year
... there are a few things we need to reference 2.0 because they are
not in 2.1
... the specificity of style attribute changed
... we don't want SVG 1.1 SE waiting fro CSS 2.1 to be done
ED: We seem to know what to put in the spec
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to Add wording to the specification to
account for the differences between CSS 2.0 and 2.1 [recorded in
[43]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action08]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2763 - Add wording to the specification to
account for the differences between CSS 2.0 and 2.1 [on Chris Lilley
- due 2010-04-19].
Markers
PD: Should a marker receive an event?
... A connecting line would get an event
DS: If you click on any part of a shape including a marker the event
is on the end element which the marker is applied
PD: Styling
... the spec says it should style against the origination rather
than the instantiation
CL: In general we have the same styling as CSS
... there is one place we tried to do that differently
... which was in <use> and <symbol>
DS: I think what should have been done with markers
... is basically what was done with <use>
... and we can't change it now
... we could add a set of properties that deals with markers
CL: We can already do that with vector effects
... I think we should leave markers for SVG 1.1 SE as is
... then for 2.0 we should make them more like <use>
<ChrisL> also, for SVG 2.0 I want to drop markers and add a
polymarker element
CL: Markers would effectively be deprecated
DS: Could you change it without causing backwards compatibility
problems
CL: I'd rather replace it with different functionality
PD: Would it fix styling problem?
DS: Yes
Canvas and processing meeting
DS: Processing is a high level language that was ported to Java
<patrickd> patrickd: (I have to exit; hard stop)
trackbot, end telcon
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Anthony to Add the the proposed wording for 'fx'
clarification to SVG 1.1 2nd Edition [recorded in
[44]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Chris to Add svgdom-over-01-f.svg and
struct-svg-01-f.svg to the implementation report [recorded in
[45]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: Chris to Add wording to the specification to account
for the differences between CSS 2.0 and 2.1 [recorded in
[46]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action08]
[NEW] ACTION: Chris to Write a test for ISSUE-2305 [recorded in
[47]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: ed to mark the "reviewed by CL, approve?" tests as
approved, and generate updated reference images [recorded in
[48]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to Suggest a new telcon time for the FX Task
Force group [recorded in
[49]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Patrick to Review paths-data-20-f.svg [recorded in
[50]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Patrick to Review the svgdom-over-01-f.svg and
struct-svg-01-f.svg tests and resolve any of the conflicts [recorded
in [51]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html#action05]
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [52]scribe.perl version 1.135
([53]CVS log)
$Date: 2010/04/12 16:09:10 $
_________________________________________________________
[52] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[53] 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 [54]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/
[54] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)
Succeeded: s/bisa/bias/
Succeeded: s/bigger/big of a/
Succeeded: s/Canvas/Canvas and processing meeting/
Found Scribe: anthony
Inferring ScribeNick: anthony
Found ScribeNick: anthony
Default Present: Shepazu, [IPcaller], ed, ChrisL, anthony, [Microsoft],
jwatt
Present: Shepazu [IPcaller] ed ChrisL anthony [Microsoft] jwatt
WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth
Found Date: 12 Apr 2010
Guessing minutes URL: [55]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html
People with action items: anthony chris ed erik patrick
[55] http://www.w3.org/2010/04/12-svg-minutes.html
End of [56]scribe.perl diagnostic output]
[56] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
Received on Monday, 12 April 2010 16:13:03 UTC