CSS WG weekly meeting minutes 2008-05-07

Meeting: Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) Working Group Weekly Teleconference

Date: May 7, 2008
Time: 09:06am to 9:59am PDT

David Baron
John Daggett
Arron Eicholz
Elika Etemad
Ming Gao
Timothy Hatcher
David Hyatt
Peter Linss
Alex Mogilevsky
David Singer
Jason Cranford Teague
Steve Zilles
Giorgi Chavchanidze (i.e. George)

Official regrets:
Anne Van Kesteren
Bert Bos
Daniel Glazman

Scriber: Ming Gao

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2008AprJun/0165.html

Topic: CSS WG charter
 <plinss> http://www.w3.org/Style/Group/2008/draft-charter2.html
peter: any comments or feedbacks?
peter: need everyone to read and send in comments asap
peter: module priority list, any feedback?
jason: revewing the list with AOL W3C group and will get you (peter) the feedbacks soon

Topic: transition request: CSS snapshot
peter: ready to go last call?
peter: no comments from the group?
fantasai: am getting Olivier to review the draft; already got his comments in.
peter: resolution: move to LC?
peter: no objection, so this is resolved (i.e. move to LC)
 <fantasai> RESOLVED: CSS 2007 Snapshot to Last Call

Topic: scope of www-style mailing list, from fantasai
 <plinss> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2008AprJun/0005.html
peter: this is a proposal to change the description of the mailing list
Jason: what's the philosophy of the list?
 <fantasai> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/
Jason: you may mean, development of CSS, but someone may interpret it as development in  CSS.
fantasai: there is a paragraph stating that no how-to questions on the mailing list
jason: let's reword it: this (the discussion on the mailing list) must be about the  development of the CSS specification itself
jason: concern about the "technical" subjects, as this may exclude ideas that does not  consider as technical
fantasai: want ideas have some technical merit. may have another forum for the "non- technical" ideas
Steve: why would we say "the development of CSS itself"?
fantasai: about the development of CSS spec
 <dsinger> how about "the work of the CSS WG" (more than development, less than  everything)
David B: this could open up a lot of how-to questions.
steve: just leave it as is
David B: not feel strongly, either
Jason: just re-read it; and as a designer, I would consider the work as how-to-get-it- work. would think it is technical
fantasai: change to development of the CSS specification
 <fantasai> RESOLVED: adopt proposed wording with Jason's change
peter: ok. are you (elika) to change it?
fantasai: no access to make the change
peter: action item for Bert
 <plinss> action: fantasai to write final wording for www-style description, get Bert  to post
 <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-60 - Write final wording for www-style description, get  Bert to post [on Elika Etemad - due 2008-05-14].

Topic: CSS fonts, by Jason (and John)
Jason: has held discussion with John about the direction of web fonts, in the last two  weeks
jason: have some working draft
jason: contact Chris Lilley about CSS web-font module under SVG
jason: no response so far from Chris; the intent is to bring it back

John: font spec, completely depending on web font, now
john: need to bring the spec back under CSS
John: The way CSS Fonts works, the definition of new font properties that affect font  selection needs changes to the font selection algorithm
john: if Chris has a grand idea, we would talk to him and bring his idea in
john: keep everything under font spec
steve: why would we strip all font specs into one?
John: The fonts spec was very big, so split into two modules.
john: the spec is too large; font synthen. matching; font weight, font stretching, ...,  should be striped down into one spec
John: The font selection part -- Web Fonts -- is only about 20% implemented
steve: soudns plausible
John: If we strip out the extended functionality we can put them back together
john: there are several font algorithms; not many implementing these. no plan either.  would like to learn from Chris
john: no sure anyone doing anything in SVG WG. seem to be mainly Chris' undertaking  there.
Jason, John: have sent Chris mail, but gotten no response
peter: will call in hyper text meeting and try to get a hold of Chris
peter: sounds reasonable to bring this under CSS WG
Peter: If there is advanced functionality the SVG needs, maybe that can be done in the  next level
peter: AI: peter to contact Chris
jason: should we proceed as if this is done (i.e. got ok from Chris)?
 <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-61 - Contact Chris about CSS3 WEb Fonts spec [on Peter  Linss - due 2008-05-14].
jason: want to bring a working draft to UK face-to-face meeting for discussion
john: sounds fine.
fantasai: should find out if Chris has made any edits to his copy first, to incorporate  those or at least evaluate them
steve: need to take a look at XSL section 7.9 (font selection based on CSS 2)
steve: may not have the property you are working on
john: will review that section (XSL)

Topic: Logo design competition and creative spec
jason: have reworded the keywords
jason: have the big idea, highlevel of what we want to do
jason: Logo and brand identity to be worked on at the same time
jason: got feedbacks from Bert
jason: need to have basic rules, such as copyrights under W3C
jason: who in W3C should I contact to review this document
steve: Ian Jacobs, ij@w3.org
david singer: should be registerable as trademark
jason: excellent idea; any feedbacks on rules, send to jason (@aol)
fantasai: is the design to be done with CSS (completely)?
fantasai: not sure should be done
jason: this means to be a challenge; want to see if it can be done completely with CSS
jason: not a requirement
tim : would limit the inputs
jason: might roll this challenge into a different area
jason: font logo to be scalable, which means vector
tim: different logos for diff sizes.
jason: min size: 16x16, also have option for them to tweak
tim: why size 128x128 on mac?
jason: find it on my mac
david S: 512x512 on leopard
jason: these are arbitrary at this moment;
fantasai: for so few pixels, a lot of logos would be using bitmap
jason: this version (size of logo) could use bitmap
fantasai/tim: vector version and bitmap version bot should be acceptable
fantasai: Icon should require vector image + one or more bitmaps
steve: button version?
jason: make the button look better or nicer
 <fantasai> http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Buttons/
steve: ok, these are for associating the text with the logo; should spell it out if  there is any issue with sizes.

tim: who retain the ownership?
jason: there is some mention under the basic rules
steve: any submission must include the transfer of copyright;
steve: has copyright should the first question
jason: meta-question: who can participate?
jason: AOL designers?
steve: depends on who will judge
steve: assuming CSS WG is doing the judging, then can't judge their own company's  submission
fantasai: anonymous maybe?
jason: could do that, but not guarantee (that would work)
steve: who need to be satisfied with the result? those are (should be) the ones to vote
jason: anyone who use CSS
fantasai: some combination
fantasai: if the numbers of submission is large, may use online voting
jason; could do that, or let whole W3C vote
tim: to get public opinion on the submission
fantasai/steve: to narrow them (the design submissions) down
steve: consider public opinion, but not necessarily the most populare ones
 <fantasai> The suggestion was to use online voting to narrow the field down to, say,  10 options
steve: member company choose it, but not the designer choose; broad range of designer  competency.
jason: invited designer experts
 <fantasai> And then we select from those 10
 <fantasai> That gives the WG the ability to pick a design other than the most popular
jason: also get more attention to the competition as well, not just among internal  people
 <fantasai> in case there are concerns about the design, or concerns about the voting  proces
 <fantasai> or a strong opinion in favor of another design
 <fantasai> etc.
steve: want to encourage professional designers to participate, so need to handle  professional judges appropriately
jason: understand; professional designer would design according to the merit of the  logo, not their own preference.
steve: three steps process
steve: public: 10, prof judge: 5, WG: final
 <dsinger> step 1 is rule compliance (and suitability)
jason: 1. get all the submission
jason: 2. we (WG) filter out
jason: 3. online voting
 <fantasai> (filter out unacceptable submissions)
jason: 4. top 10 go for final run
jason: online voting to filter down to 10 candidate designs
steve: ok, still not sure about designers making the choice
jason: should we have a reward for the winner?
jason: design related prizes
steve: donated prizes (t-shirts,etc) from member companies
david s: will find out the rules related to that, from my company, Apple
arron: will do the same thing (Microsoft)
jason: this is great. will also get more buzz and attract more attention.
tim: well, (any qualified) designers should already have photoshop cs
peter: suggest to give some public credit to the winner
steve: ian should also announce this comptetition on W3C home page
jason: will run on AOL designer blog(?), and will also have announcement at W3C home  page.
jason: creative theme, rules, and get it started
fantasai: (jason to) get the website up asap?
jason: no later than end of May
jason: elika and I are talking about the main CSS WG (public facing) website
jason: at this moment, plan to start with minimal design
jason: will later apply the results of competition
fantasai: working on the staging sites
jason: right now, hosted on my own server
jason: using PHP capability on w3c site, peter?
fantasai: yse, PHP, but w3c site admin don't want the site to take a performance hit
fantasi: could switch to server side includes (SSI) (if there is going to be a  performance hit)
jason: will take a look (think the hit might occur in the page title: dynamic)

steve: want a clarification: if Apple/MS/Adobe donate awards, will they be listed as  sponsor (of the competition) as well?
jason: yes.

peter: meeting adjourn

Received on Friday, 9 May 2008 00:15:40 UTC