[CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions 2008-06-16

   David Baron
   Arron Eicholz
   Elika Etemad (co-scribe)
   Daniel Glazman (chair)
   Peter Linss
   Alex Mogilevsky
   Saloni Mira Rai
   Anne van Kesteren (scribe)

<RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/06/11-css-irc


   RESOLVED: Add note about CSSWG members list being public, submit charter
             to W3C management.
   RESOLVED: Publish css3-color LC asap after Bert's review; last call period
             for six weeks; ask SVG and XSL for comments
   RESOLVED: Publish flexbox module as a FPWD
   RESOLVED: Peter's draft for disclaimer for IRC logs accepted with
             s/working communication/informal working communication/.
             See http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/actions/57
   RESOLVED: Proposal accepted for CSS2.1 Issue 8
   RESOLVED: Proposal accepted for CSS2.1 Issue 6
   RESOLVED: Proposal accepted for CSS2.1 Issue 24
   RESOLVED: Proposal accepted for CSS2.1 Issue 39
   RESOLVED: Accept proposed Media Queries changes unless comments sent
             by next telecon:

Other notes:
   - Discussion of CSS2.1 issues 42, 48, 45, and 35 deferred for now.

Full minutes below.

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2008AprJun/0268.html
Daniel: Two new items for agenda
Daniel: David Baron wanted to discuss css3-color
Daniel: Anne wanted to discuss Media Queries
Daniel: Regrets from Bert, Molly, MoZ, Steve.. and that's all

Scribe: Anne


   DG: Peter e-mailed the last document with integration of comments
   DG: need to e-mail it to W3M ASAP
   DG: is anything else needed?
   EE: I was happy with the charter
   AE: No additional issues
   EE: given peterl's explanations and assuming Anne is ok with his modules
   AvK: ok (through IRC)

   Topic: Public list of members
   <dbaron> Saying that the member list is public makes sense to me.
   DG: Karl Dubost suggested making the member list public
   DG: should we make that explicit in the charter?
   DG: making things more official
   DG: no objections?
   [none heard]
   DG: PL will you add that to the charter? great
   RESOLVED: Add note about public list of members to charter, submit to
             w3c management

CSS3 Color

   DB: My understanding with LC is that the chairs ask other WGs who want
       to review before LC
   DG: we do that every two weeks at the HCG meeting
   DG: we have to prepare a list of groups that should review the document
   DB: I would suggest just SVG
   DG: XSL?
   DB: maybe
   DG: it's a list of groups we explicitly ask to review the document
   EE: SVG and XSL sounds fine
   DG: ok
   DG: how much time do we give for review?
   DG: six weeks because of the holiday season
   DG: publication date ASAP
   DG: need review of status of this document
   AvK: Bert Bos should probably do that
   DG: he's back in next week
   DB: I'm gonna be on vacation starting the end of next week for a week and a day
   EE: I can help out if needed
   RESOLVED: publish ASAP after Bert's review; last call period for six weeks;
             ask SVG and XSL for comments


   DG: lots of comments, still think it's worth publishing?
   DB: pretty much entire thread dominated by another proposal
   DB: that doesn't change my mind
   DB: maybe a few comments on the spec, but that doesn't change my mind on this
   DG: other opinions?
   AvK: I think we should do it
   AE: I think it's ok
   EE: I'm happy to publish
   RESOLVED: publish flexbox

Scribe: fantasai

Media Queries

   AvK: The main issue was one David Baron raised in April.
   AvK: I discussed with him, and decided to make the edit.
   AvK: The issue was error handling for unknown media types
   AvK: Originally said UAs should ignore unknown media types
   AvK: Now says unknown media types are false
   AvK: which is what it was in CR
   AvK: It does mean that 3d-glasses is malformed media query and would
        be ignored
   AvK: because that's not an identifier
   AvK: The other change is that the resolution feature was not defined
        by the spec
   AvK: I added a paragraph saying that resolution is <integer> followed
        by <identifier>
   <anne> disposition MQ: http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-mediaqueries/disposition.html
   AvK: Stewart also made some editorial comments
   AvK: Here is the disposition of comments
   AvK: The orange areas are proposals
   AvK: If the WG agrees with those, then we move forward. They are
        already edited.
   AvK: Red is comments considered out-of-scope for Level 3
   Daniel: I propose an action item to everyone to review the disposition
           of comments.
   Daniel: And if there are no comments sent by next week, then we consider
           the changes accepted.
   ACTION all: review http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-mediaqueries/disposition.html

Action Items

   <glazou> http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/actions/overdue
   Elika has nothing to report
   waiting on Peter to check in changes for selectors move to dev.w3.org
   peter says to go ahead
   Anne: close ACTION-58
   <trackbot> ACTION-58 Add caretRangeFromPoint to CSSOM and prepare for
              publication closed
   * anne needs to start doing the CSSOM properties stuff soonish :/
   Arron: wrote testcase for CSS2.1 issue 6
   * fantasai missed Arron's other comments
   Alex: i wrote up the proposal for vertical alignment property
   ACTION: Alex convert vertical alignment property action item to an issue
   <trackbot> Created ACTION-67 - Convert vertical alignment property action
              item to an issue [on Alex Mogilevsky - due 2008-06-18].
Scribe: Anne
   EE: for ACTION-22 can you post a link to the testcases?
   AE: can do
   AE: I'll post them to the mailing list as the link I have doesn't work

IRC Disclaimer

   <plinss_> http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/actions/57
   PL: I have ACTION-57; I wrote the disclaimer
   PL: for the IRC log
   <glazou> http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/actions/57
   EE: I would add something that states it's informal or unofficial
   <fantasai> I suggest s/working communication/informal working communication/
   RESOLVED: Proposed wording accepted with above change.
   AvK: Where do we put this?
   DG: On the public page for the group
   DG: and in the topic
   DG: of this channel
   DG: we don't want unofficial statements to be taken as official
   EE: I can take an action item to put the text on W3C space
   EE: and the link from the topic as well
   ACTION to Elika put the text from ACTION-57 on w3.org and link to it from
           the #css topic
   <trackbot> Created ACTION-68 - Put the text from ACTION-57 on w3.org and
              link to it from the #css topic [on Elika Etemad - due 2008-06-18].

CSS 2.1 issues

   Topic: CSS 2.1 issues
   <fantasai> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2008AprJun/0276.html
   DG: EE can you guide us through?
   EE: I forgot to add CSS2.1 issue 6

   <glazou> http://csswg.inkedblade.net/spec/css2.1#issue-8
   EE: Opera didn't agree with the wording initially
   AvK: my recollection was that everyone agreed, but Opera wanted to have other wording
   EE: CSS 2.1 issue 6 is about margin collapsing, AE and I did testcases
   <fantasai> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008May/0215.html
   RESOLVED: proposal accepted for CSS2.1 issue 8

   EE: I recall that DB agreed (see above e-mail)
   EE: DB anything to add?
   DB: no
   RESOLVED: CSS 2.1 issue 6 resolved as suggested

   <fantasai> http://csswg.inkedblade.net/spec/css2.1#issue-24
   DG: the next is CSS 2.1 issue 24 ^^
   DG: from my recollection we already used them everywhere
   EE: that's what I thought until I read the spec
   DB: the prose isn't as generic, but the grammar is
   EE: the proposal is to make the prose more generic
   DG: no objections at all
   the proposal is here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008May/0252.html
   AE: it's ok
   AvK: yes!
   DG: great, resolved
   RESOLVED: CSS 2.1 issue 24 resolved per proposal

   <fantasai> http://csswg.inkedblade.net/spec/css2.1#issue-39
   EE: CSS 2.1 issue 39 is problem with the CSS 2.1 spec; clear in CSS 3
   RESOLVED: CSS 2.1 issue 39 resolved per proposal

   DG: CSS 2.1 issue 42 is about position:static and clear:none
   EE: no opinion
   DG: no opinion
   DG: IE doesn't match the proposal, IE8 appears to match it
   DB: prefer to defer to Matt and Boris on this
   DG: this needs more technical discussion

   DG: lets move to CSS 2.1 issue 48
   DB: prefer to discuss together with (as of now non-existing) 49

   EE: lets discuss CSS 2.1 issue 35
   EE: should probably discuss with DH

   <fantasai> http://csswg.inkedblade.net/spec/css2.1#issue-45
   EE: CSS 2.1 issue 45 has a good proposal ^^
   [scribe missed something]
   DB: problem with this proposal is that the specified value could be inherit
   EE: the proposal gives you a specified value that is not inherit
   <fantasai> Current text is
   <fantasai> The static position for 'left' is the distance from the left edge
              of the containing block to the left margin edge of a hypothetical
              box that would have been the first box of the element if its
              'position' property had been 'static' and 'float' had been 'none'.
   DG: need more review time?
   DB: I'm still not following it yet
   DB: might want to add a parenthetical to make it more clear
   <fantasai> Add something like: (This may require a hypothetical recomputation
              of the 'display' property.) ?
   DB: not sure I'd put it that way
   <dbaron> Something more like: (Note that the rules in section 9.7 mean that
            a different specified value of 'position' or 'float' can result in
            a different value for 'display', which means this hypothetical
            calculation may need to presume a different value for 'display'.)
   DG: maybe you can change the issues so that everyone can review it. Probably
       not something we can solve here. Is that ok?
   EE: yes

   EE: for CSS 2.1 issue 46 I'd like to improve the proposal so I rather wait
       with that

   <glazou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008May/0265.html
   ACTION: Daniel to ping Melinda about her CSS 2.1 issue
   <trackbot> Created ACTION-69 - Ping Melinda about her CSS 2.1 issue [on Daniel Glazman - due 

DG: that was the last item on the agenda and it was about time. Anything else?
DG: ok, thanks you! bye!
Meeting closed.

Received on Monday, 16 June 2008 18:54:06 UTC