- From: Anthony Grasso <anthony.grasso@cisra.canon.com.au>
- Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 09:14:34 +1000
- To: www-svg@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html
---
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
SVG Working Group Teleconference
06 Jul 2010
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010JulSep/0004.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-irc
Attendees
Present
+39.537.7.aaaa, ed, anthony_w, ChrisL, tav
Regrets
Chair
erik
Scribe
anthony
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Last Call Comments
* [6]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 06 July 2010
<scribe> scribenick: anthony_w
<scribe> scribe: anthony
<ed>
[7]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010JulSep/0004
.html
[7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010JulSep/0004.html
<ChrisL> las call comments
[8]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/products/24
[8] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/products/24
Last Call Comments
ED: If I close issues they disappear from the list because
... the tool only collects raised issues
<ChrisL> documentation at
[9]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/disco
[9] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/disco
ED: I'd like to be able to extract Issues (LC comments) based on a
particular product
... Some have already been done. But if some are completed they
disappear off the list
... I'd like to see all them, no matter the status
CL: Has anyone tried to run an XSLT over the tracker dump?
ED: I suppose we should add the notes, action changed
ISSUE-2331?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2331 -- <solidColor> references -- open
<trackbot> [10]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2331
[10] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2331
AG: I did this one
... I ran a grep over the entire spec
... removed solidColor occurrences from the spec
... only found occurrences in paintServers
<ChrisL> action anthony to add stuff from
[11]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/disco to his action
[11] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/disco
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2810 - Add stuff from
[12]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/disco to his action on
Anthony Grasso - due 2010-07-13].
[12] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/disco
<ChrisL> In addition, four notes should be added to an issue:
<ChrisL> * "ACTION: " followed by either "Reject" or "Accept"
depending on how the comment was handled.
<ChrisL> * "CHANGE-TYPE: " followed by either None, Editorial, or
Substantive.
<ChrisL> * "RESOLUTION: " followed by the text of the working
group's resolution.
<ChrisL> * "COMMENTER-RESPONSE: " followed by "Reject" or "Accept"
depending on how the commenter reacted to the resolution.
<ChrisL> see sample at
[13]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/112
[13] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/112
ED: Anthony, can you put the details of the resolution into the
Issue
AG: Ok
ED: I propose we follow the annotations listed there and put those
notes into the issue when they are completed
<ChrisL> ISSUE-2333?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2333 -- more BackgroundImage/enable-background
issues -- open
<trackbot> [14]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2333
[14] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2333
ED: Same with ISSUE-2333
<ChrisL> ISSUE-2348?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2348 -- direction property and the effect on text
elements -- open
<trackbot> [15]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2348
[15] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2348
ED: Seems we are missing some wording from Tiny 1.2
CL: The Tiny 1.2 wording is much better
ED: I went and ported the wording over
CL: Effectively we have already agreed on the wording before
ED: I will go ahead and close that one with the fields filled in
ISSUE-2334?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2334 -- filter primitive subregion and
feGaussianBlur, feTile and infinite filter input images -- raised
<trackbot> [16]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2334
[16] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2334
ED: About GauissianBlur about filter regions and sub regions
... does Inkscape support filter regions/sub regions?
TB: I don't think so
CL: Does anyone support filter regions?
<ed>
[17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2010Jul/0002.html
[17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2010Jul/0002.html
ED: Firefox has a different interpretation of what it means
TB: The difference is in Firefox you have a hard edge
ED: What I'm thinking is it would be nice to support both behaviours
and possibly a third one
... the way I'd like to do that is add a new filter element
... I could try to come up with some wording to clarify that
... if we agree that we want the old behaviour (same as the ASV)
... then extend filters in the new spec to add something new
... Robert hasn't responded to that email yet
... so not sure if he is happy with that
AG: I agree
TB: I can see cases where you want one or the other
... I think with Firefox suppose you have a picture and you want to
simulate a piece of glass in front of it
... then you want a hard edge
ED: I did make an example where you may want the other way
<ed> [18]http://files.myopera.com/MacDev_ed/blog/vistamenu.svg
[18] http://files.myopera.com/MacDev_ed/blog/vistamenu.svg
<ed>
[19]http://files.myopera.com/MacDev_ed/files/vistamenu-norequiredfea
tures-check.svg
[19]
http://files.myopera.com/MacDev_ed/files/vistamenu-norequiredfeatures-check.svg
ED: That is suppose to work in Firefox as well
TB: That suppose to have a shadow behind it
ED: I think it would be good to choose which way you want
... I haven't yet seen that much use of primitive sub regions
... I guess we are pretty free to choose whatever we want
... I think we should go with what is implemented in most viewers
currently
... Either we wait for Robert come back with a response or I take an
action to make some changes to the spec
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to Determine new wording for ISSUE-2334
(filter sub-regions) [recorded in
[20]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2811 - Determine new wording for
ISSUE-2334 (filter sub-regions) [on Erik Dahlström - due
2010-07-13].
ISSUE-2335?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2335 -- Clarify feConvolveMatrix bias property --
raised
<trackbot> [21]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2335
[21] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2335
ED: I remember reading this before and discussing this before
... I think it would be good to have some test cases for this
... I think Jasper submitted some test cases in the past
... I can dig out those test cases
... and research the issue a bit more
... I think he's probably right in saying it's not fully clear about
what effect it has
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to Find the test case, commit it and make some
proposed wording [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2812 - Find the test case, commit it and
make some proposed wording [on Erik Dahlström - due 2010-07-13].
CL: Will that be in UA tests?
... it might no so much the test will not be good enough
... more so about what is the right answer
ED: I will go back and have a discussion with the guy that
implemented convolve matrix in opera
... I'll test in all implementations that support convolve matrix
ISSUE-2336?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2336 -- SVG fragment identifiers - ok to have the
same SVGViewAttribute twice? -- raised
<trackbot> [23]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2336
[23] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2336
<ChrisL>
[24]http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/linking.html#SVGFragmentIdentifiers
[24] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/linking.html#SVGFragmentIdentifiers
CL: The grammar allows you to have multiple ones
... I can't see a way to rewrite it to disallow it
... it would be an extremely long and tedious thing to do it
... I think it is better to say you can only have one of each
... and put that in the pros
... at the moment the syntax is easy to understand
... but he's right you can have it 12 times for example
... just need a sentence to say you can't do that
... need to do some testing here
ED: I think a test would be good here
CL: But we allow overriding of one of each
Chris to Propose wording for ISSUE-2236 to say if it is malformed it
doesn't have an effect
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to Propose wording for ISSUE-2336 to say if
it is malformed it doesn't have an effect [recorded in
[25]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2813 - Propose wording for ISSUE-2336 to
say if it is malformed it doesn't have an effect [on Chris Lilley -
due 2010-07-13].
<ChrisL> and also to say you can only have one of each of the tokens
<ChrisL> action-2813?
<trackbot> ACTION-2813 -- Chris Lilley to propose wording for
ISSUE-2336 to say if it is malformed it doesn't have an effect --
due 2010-07-13 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [26]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2813
[26] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/actions/2813
ISSUE-2337?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2337 -- marker direction handling -- raised
<trackbot> [27]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2337
[27] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2337
ED: Marker and direction handling
CL: We don't have markers in Tiny 1.2?
ED: No
CL: I think for this we should say, yes in this case it is undefined
... and you shouldn't depend on that
<ChrisL>
[28]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2010May/0025.html
[28] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2010May/0025.html
CL: that's just my off the cuff response
... it's primarily in the case for zero length lines
... and things like that
TB: There's an SVG attached to that email
CL: It is quite cleaver actually
ED: Nice example
CL: He also says for next SVG version, you should suppress marks
that have no length and directionality
... mostly the direction is defined, but one that NULLs out the
markers is fine
... I would really like to get rid of markers. Have one shape that
allows you to make a marker
... they're not used that often
... and they complicate the model
<scribe> ACTION: Anthony to Add wording to the specification to say
that the behaviour is unspecified for those cases in ISSUE-2337
[recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2814 - Add wording to the specification to
say that the behaviour is unspecified for those cases in ISSUE-2337
[on Anthony Grasso - due 2010-07-13].
<ChrisL>
[30]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2010Jun/0140.html
[30] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2010Jun/0140.html
ISSUE-2338?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2338 -- type of feFunc* -- raised
<trackbot> [31]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2338
[31] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2338
ED: I think I started writing a response to this
... His interpretation is correct I think
... I think I can write a complete response to this
... I will have to look into the table values and check if they are
correct
... I think they are correct but I should probably go back and have
a second look
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to Draft a complete response to ISSUE-2338 and
research the answers to the questions asked [recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2815 - Draft a complete response to
ISSUE-2338 and research the answers to the questions asked [on Erik
Dahlström - due 2010-07-13].
ISSUE-2339?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2339 -- definition of azimuth, elevation for
feDistantLight -- raised
<trackbot> [33]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2339
[33] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2339
ED: I did put in some minor clarifications based on feedback given
... and I think Dr Hoffmann is correct
... in saying it is slightly unclear
... He does propose some changes
AG: Do you agree with those changes?
ED: I didn't get that far into the comments
<scribe> ACTION: Anthony to Look into ISSUE-2339 and report back
[recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2816 - Look into ISSUE-2339 and report
back [on Anthony Grasso - due 2010-07-13].
<ChrisL> issue-2340?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2340 -- view and animation values lists - where can
I find the promised note? -- raised
<trackbot> [35]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2340
[35] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2340
<ChrisL>
[36]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2010May/0022.html
[36] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2010May/0022.html
CL: I can add the promised note
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to Add the promised note relating to
ISSUE-2340 [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2817 - Add the promised note relating to
ISSUE-2340 [on Chris Lilley - due 2010-07-13].
ISSUE-2341?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2341 -- Clarify data types such as "<coordinate>+"
-- raised
<trackbot> [38]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2341
[38] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2341
ED: I think he's had this comment opened before
... some attributes define they're data type as being this
<coordinate>+ instead of a list
AG: What should it be? Should it be a standard thing
CL: He points out if we harmonize it then some animations will break
... and said he also provided some samples
... not sure where they are
... I can look into this but I'm a bit worried about it
ED: The question is if there are interoperability problems
CL: I'll look through his previous comments and see what they said
ACTON: Chris to Investigate ISSUE-2341 and look for previous
comments
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to Investigate ISSUE-2341 and look for
previous comments [recorded in
[39]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action08]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2818 - Investigate ISSUE-2341 and look for
previous comments [on Chris Lilley - due 2010-07-13].
ISSUE-2343?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2343 -- 15.12 Filter primitive ‘feComposite’
formula -- raised
<trackbot> [40]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2343
[40] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2343
ED: I think he's correct it what he's reading
... it's pretty clear but it could be written out like he's
suggesting
... doing the second part which includes all the formulas for the
porter duff operations is a big change
CL: Are we requiring someone to have a copy of that paper?
ED: I guess so
AG: I have all the equations in the compositing spec
ED: We could informally link to that
CL: That is a good idea
... Does feComp allow you to use all the compositing operations
... I think creating an informative link is fine
<scribe> ACTION: Anthony to Add proposed wording from ISSUE2343 and
add an informative link to the compositing specification [recorded
in [41]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action09]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2819 - Add proposed wording from ISSUE2343
and add an informative link to the compositing specification [on
Anthony Grasso - due 2010-07-13].
<ChrisL> issue-2344?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2344 -- Update references section -- raised
<trackbot> [42]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2344
[42] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2344
<Tav>
[43]http://tavmjong.free.fr/INKSCAPE/MANUAL/images/FILTERS/Filters_S
olarFlare.svg
[43]
http://tavmjong.free.fr/INKSCAPE/MANUAL/images/FILTERS/Filters_SolarFlare.svg
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to Create a test for feComposite with negative
values outside the allowable range [recorded in
[44]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action10]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2820 - Create a test for feComposite with
negative values outside the allowable range [on Erik Dahlström - due
2010-07-13].
<ChrisL> oops
CL: I noticed LR suggested that we may not want to use the latest
reference. I'm not sure why we wouldn't want to reference of the
latest version of the ICC spec
... there's been suggestion not to use some of them
ED: I think you can go ahead and edit the spec
ISSUE-2345?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2345 -- 15.17 feGaussianBlur -- raised
<trackbot> [45]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2345
[45] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2345
<ChrisL> ACTION: chris to update the references section for
issue-2344 [recorded in
[46]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action11]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2821 - Update the references section for
issue-2344 [on Chris Lilley - due 2010-07-13].
ED: First point is bad editing, so I fixed that
... the second one (B) I agree with that one as well
... and for the third one (C)...
CL: We've talked about this before
... where you get a blur in one direction
ED: It doesn't explicitly mention that case
... I don't recall if I added the test case
... There is a test in the filters module
... so can probably just move that over
... It's not exactly clear what needs to be done, but I can take a
look at it anyway
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to Respond to ISSUE-2345 and commit a test
case for it [recorded in
[47]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action12]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2822 - Respond to ISSUE-2345 and commit a
test case for it [on Erik Dahlström - due 2010-07-13].
<ChrisL> ISSUE-2346?
<trackbot> ISSUE-2346 -- previous discussion about filterRes --
raised
<trackbot> [48]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2346
[48] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2346
ED: I would have to look deeper into this
... if some ones can take a look though, that would be great
AG: It's a fairly long one
ED: I think the rounding one, wasn't that fixed?
... must have been some other filter primitive
... one filter where we had a 'c' algorithm for where we defined the
rounding
<ed> "When the seed number is handed over to the algorithm above it
must first be truncated, i.e. rounded to the closest integer value
towards zero."
<ed> feTurbulence, the 'seed' attribute
<ed> [49]http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/filters.html#feTurbulenceElement
[49] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/filters.html#feTurbulenceElement
ED: for the seed value in feTurbulence we say how to round the
number
... Not sure if it makes sense to use the same rounding methods here
<ed>
[50]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2009Jul/0029.html
[50] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2009Jul/0029.html
AG: Could we apply the same fix on feTurbulence to this one here?
ED: So if you put a very small result it, you would probably get a
good result anyway
... the round applies to anything you put in there
... Just curious about the media type thing
CL: There were two requested changes
... both comments have been folded into the master directory
... so we are good really
<fantasai> btw, can you guys look over the responses to CSS Styling
Attributes LCWD sometime and let me know if I can request CR yet? :)
The closed-but-not-verified issues are all SVGWG.
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Anthony to Add proposed wording from ISSUE2343 and add
an informative link to the compositing specification [recorded in
[51]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action09]
[NEW] ACTION: Anthony to Add wording to the specification to say
that the behaviour is unspecified for those cases in ISSUE-2337
[recorded in
[52]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Anthony to Look into ISSUE-2339 and report back
[recorded in
[53]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: Chris to Add the promised note relating to ISSUE-2340
[recorded in
[54]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: Chris to Investigate ISSUE-2341 and look for previous
comments [recorded in
[55]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action08]
[NEW] ACTION: Chris to Propose wording for ISSUE-2336 to say if it
is malformed it doesn't have an effect [recorded in
[56]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: chris to update the references section for issue-2344
[recorded in
[57]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action11]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to Create a test for feComposite with negative
values outside the allowable range [recorded in
[58]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action10]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to Determine new wording for ISSUE-2334 (filter
sub-regions) [recorded in
[59]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to Draft a complete response to ISSUE-2338 and
research the answers to the questions asked [recorded in
[60]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to Find the test case, commit it and make some
proposed wording [recorded in
[61]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to Respond to ISSUE-2345 and commit a test case
for it [recorded in
[62]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html#action12]
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [63]scribe.perl version 1.135
([64]CVS log)
$Date: 2010/07/06 21:30:49 $
_________________________________________________________
[63] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[64] 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 [65]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/
[65] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)
Succeeded: s/co/so/
Found ScribeNick: anthony_w
Found Scribe: anthony
Default Present: +39.537.7.aaaa, ed, anthony_w, ChrisL, tav
Present: +39.537.7.aaaa ed anthony_w ChrisL tav
Agenda: [66]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010JulSe
p/0004.html
Found Date: 06 Jul 2010
Guessing minutes URL: [67]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html
People with action items: anthony chris erik
[66] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2010JulSep/0004.html
[67] http://www.w3.org/2010/07/06-svg-minutes.html
End of [68]scribe.perl diagnostic output]
[68] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
Received on Tuesday, 6 July 2010 23:15:43 UTC