[CSSWG] Minutes, 18 March 2009 CSSWG telcon

Hello www-style,

Fantasai asked me to send out the minutes for the 18th as well.

RESOLUTION: publish all four: Animations, 3D Transforms, 2D Transforms, and Transitions.
RESOLUTION: accept proposal 1, Bert to come up with wording, submit for review to www-style; no objections means accepted.

(no new actions)

                             CSS telcon

18 Mar 2009

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2009/03/18-css-irc


          dsinger, +1.858.354.aaaa, plinss, Daniel_Glazman, sylvaing,
          ChrisL, anne, Bert, fantasai, Melinda_Grant, Shepazu, SteveZ

          Dean, Tona, Molly, CÚsar




     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Today's agenda
         2. [5]Publishing Transforms in coordination with SVG
         3. [6]Test review process
         4. [7]Matrix Layout
         5. [8]Counter-increment
     * [9]Summary of Action Items

Today's agenda


     [10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2009Mar/0042.html

   Anne: I suggest talking about test suite [see pointer above]

Publishing Transforms in coordination with SVG

   Chris: SVG understood that CSS would publish it last week, but then
   they stopped the process when they noticed CSS wasn't publishing.

   <dsinger> Dave is puzzled at the lack of reaction to dean's comments
   to svg

   <dsinger> And also puzzled with chrisl

   <dsinger> Lack of pib

   <dsinger> Pub

   <shepazu> dsinger, what do you mean?

   <anne> We did not publish because the CSS WG did not formally go on
   record for publishing.

   Chris: We agreed to publish jointly with SVG, but CSS wasn't ready
   and nothing was published.

   DaveS: Why were we not ready?

   <ChrisL> Bert, whats up with these four documents?

   Bert: I couldn't find any resolution in the minutes, so couldn't
   publish a 1st WD.

   Doug: I couldn't find resolution either, maybe it was just not
   correctly minuted?

   <ChrisL> ok so since we all recall agreeing this a couple of weeks
   ago lets have a minuted resolution today

   Fantasai: There was indeed no resolution, only discussion.

   DaveS: We got stuck on talking on one para in 2D.

   <ChrisL> hearing no objections here

   Steve: We approved 2D provided that para was added.

   Doug: SVG really wants to see all 4 published. Can we get resolution
   on that? 2D, 3D, animation and transition.

   <fantasai> Steve: Think we had approval on all but 3d

   <fantasai> DavidSinger: We agreed to publish 3d, but make it clear
   it's on a longer timescale

   <ChrisL> so we can publish all four

   RESOLUTION: publish all four: Animations, 3D Transforms, 2D
   Transforms, and Transitions.

   Doug: SVG said to Dean already we are very interested in cooperating
   on all four.

   Chris: At last week's SVG's meeting we talked about Dean's comments.

   Doug: Yes, the SVG editor has an action to work on them.

   <ChrisL> the editor in svg has an action to fold in all deans
   commentsbefore publication

   Doug: Might be good to have joint telcon SVG-CSS. Maybe even a

   DaveS: But not in the middle of the night for Dean...

Test review process


     [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2009Mar/0042.html

   Anne: At ftf we decided that if you review a test, you would
   indicate that. Also decided you could change and somebody else would
   review that. But not clear from the test itself who reviewed it. So
   proposal is a small change to test format.

   Melinda: So anybody who makes a change should add a link?

   Anne: yes, add a "reviewer" link.

   Fantasai: "Author" is who wrote the test, maybe has copyright.

   Melinda: So are we adding "author" "contributor" or "reviewer"

   <fantasai> Add "author" if you make a significant contribution to
   the test

   <fantasai> i.e. not fixing a typo or tweaking the title

   <fantasai> actually changing the test

   Fantasai: [writing in IRC]

   <sylvaing> so if I submit a test, then fantasai edits it then anne
   approves it we'll have...

   <fantasai> The problem I had with the reviewer link idea, is that
   it's not clear when the complete test is reviewed

   <sylvaing> a link rel=author for fantasai's edit

   <fantasai> for example

   <fantasai> a test is submitted with some problems

   <fantasai> I review it

   <fantasai> it's mostly good

   <sylvaing> then a link rel=reviewer for anne ?

   <fantasai> but this one part needs a fix

   <fantasai> I can fix it and then ask the author to review my chang

   <fantasai> in that case

   <fantasai> we're both actually reviewers

   <anne> sylvaing, yes

   <sylvaing> ok

   <anne> sylvaing, but you can review it yourself as well

   <fantasai> that doesn't help fantasai programmatically figure out
   whether the test is *approved* yet or not

   <anne> (dates should be clear from SVN)

   Melinda: So probably the review needs a date field as well.

   <fantasai> Anyone can review

   <anne> fantasai, "reviewer" means approved

   <fantasai> peers will approve the tests and move it over, and that
   might mean rubber-stamping a review by someone competent

   Chris: We have a list of who reviews which chapter in principle.

   <anne> fantasai, is what we decided

   <sylvaing> right, not sure I as microsoft should review our own
   tests. am open to reviewing other tests

   <fantasai> e.g. if jdaggett is reviewing the fonts test,s I'll
   assume he's rgith

   <fantasai> if someone I've never heard of reviews them, I will
   probably take another look first

   Melinda: No record of who "approves" a test?

   <fantasai> before copying the tests into CVS

   <fantasai> no, just cvs record for that bit

   <fantasai> So

   Melinda: So whoever approves must do a CVS check-in?

   <fantasai> there's two levels of "review" one is mainly about
   reviewing the test

   <fantasai> the other is mainly checking that the test has been
   appropriately reviewed

   <fantasai> the first level is where we send comments to

   <fantasai> and mark reviewr in the test case itself

   <fantasai> the second level is mainly about copying it into the main

   <fantasai> it should mean that you looked at the test and approve of

   Peter: Confused about the "reviewer" link: is that marking review or
   approval? Or both?

   <fantasai> at least

   <fantasai> that was the goal

   Peter: And the "contributor" link?

   <fantasai> the main purpose of the reviewer link isn't to say who
   revieed the test for posterity

   <fantasai> it's so that someone knows the test has been approved

   <fantasai> "contributor" doesn't exist

   <fantasai> we are using "author'

   Sylvain: OK, so there is no "contributor." Fine.

   <fantasai> The *point*

   <fantasai> of this link

   <fantasai> was to mark "this test has been reviewed"

   Peter & Melinda: Is this for all existing tests as well?

   <fantasai> without creating a new system for recording which test
   have been reviewed

   Steve: Do the tests already have "author" links?

   Melinda: Yes, I think they do.

   <fantasai> yes, they have "author" links

   Fantasai: Yes, all tests have "author." I put them in. Goal is not
   to know who reviewed, but to approve. There were other ideas, such
   as a wiki page. I don't really care about the mechanism, but we need
   some way to track. Depending on who is the reviewer I may or may not
   do another review myself.

   Melinda: So "reviewer" means approval.

   Steve: Except when reviewer makes changes in the process.

   Melinda: But then you would use an "author" link rather than
   reviewer, wouldn't you?

   Steve: OK, I see.

   Fantasai: The fixes by a reviewer need to be reviewed, by the
   original author, e.g. We could put a date in comments or something.

   Steve: Idea is to know that last reviewer is not not the same as the
   last author. Author has signed off that *he* believes it is correct.
   Just need somebody else after that. Can we put a date field in the

   Fantasai: A comment on the same line might work.

   Steve: Or just an unknown attribute?

   Fantasai: It needs to validate.

   Fantasai & Steve: OK, so a date in a comment, then.

   <fantasai> <link rel="author reviewer" title="Elika Etemad"/> <!--
   2009-03-17 -->

   <ChrisL> it will do

   <fantasai> meaning "everything looks ok except the stuff I changed,
   and the stuff I changed needs to be reviewed"

   Fantasai: rel="author reviewer" (plus a date) means I reviewed
   everything except for the parts I changed.

   Steve: and thus rel="reviewer" means you did not change anything.

   Steve: Can you point to example?

   <fantasai> [12]http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/format

     [12] http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/format

Matrix Layout


     [13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0135.html

   Fantasai: I agree with the comments Bert sent.


     [14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0183.html

   Peter: It looks like an itneresting idea. Would it fit? and if so

   Steve: We have to talk about Grid and Template at the same time.
   Maybe not urgent and better for a ftf meeting.

   Daniel: Is MS still working on Grid? Haven't heard from Alex in a

   Sylvain: Yes, still interested, but CSS 2.1 takes all resources
   right now. Alex should be at ftf in June.

   Steve: I haven't reviewed the new proposal yet.

   <fantasai> Melinda: I think we should put these three proposals side
   by side and compare their pros and cons

   Melinda: Putting the three together at a ftf seems a good idea,
   indeed. Towards some combination of them.

   Steve: And GCPM seems to have some stuff as well.

   Bert: Yes moveto/pullfrom and similar ideas.

   <fantasai> It seems to me this matrix proposal is just like template
   layout, except with the added ability to overlap elements

   Melnda: There is a need for improved layout techniques, but we need
   to be clear about our objectives.

   Steve: Peter, is that what you meant when you asked about how it

   Peter: Yes, ftf seems reasonable. But also wants to know who is
   interested at the moment.

   Fantasai: We should look at the proposal and focus on use cases, but
   not focus on syntax too much now. Maybe the matrix things can be
   done by extending layout elsewhere.

   Sylvain: I heard there was interest in this stuff.

   Steve: It has always been clear that people want this. Less clear if
   there are implementers for it.

   <sylvaing> i.e. web designers came up during and after the CSS3
   panel at SXSW to express interest in Jonathan Snook's proposal

   Steve: I mean: as a priority.

   Peter: So to summarize: I hear interest in evaluating the proposal.
   Don't hear anything about it being implemented soon. I suggest we
   pencil it in as a topic for the ftf.

   Steve:  Somebody should respond to Jonathan to say we probably won't
   talk about it until June.

   Peter: Who will represent the matrix proposal?

   Steve: We can invite Jonathan... Other question: are there patents

   Bert: Anybody know Jonathan Snook?

   All: No, never met him.

   <sylvaing> [15]http://snook.ca/

     [15] http://snook.ca/


     [16] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0133.html



     [17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0194.html

   Fantasai: David Baron posted proposals.

   <Melinda> *jonathan is a member of the CSS 11 ;-)


     [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0194.html

   <fantasai> I'm in favor of option 1

   Steve: I like option 1

   Fantasai: Same question for other keywords, such as 'inherit'

   <fantasai> so any objections? :)

   Bert: Leaning to option 1 as well.

   Melinda: So what does this mean for 'inherit'?

   Steve: Can't use it is a counter name.

   Chris: Can you escape it? With a backslash?

   Fantasai: No.

   Sylvain: What's the use case for 'counter-increment: none'?

   Fantasai: I can't think of a reason for a counter named "none", but
   I can certainly see a case to explicitly set 'counter-increment' to
   'none' to stop the counter from incrementing.

   Sylvain: I don't get the 'counter-increment: none 1' rule.

   Peter: That is just invalid. I think that's implied by the prose,
   but not explicit.

   Melinda: We need some words to describe 'none' then.

   Peter: Yes, agree.
   ... Bert, can you write text?

   Bert: OK.

   Fantasai: I'll note it in the issues list.

   Peter: Should be enough if Bert sends it to www-style. We'll see
   what comments, if any, it gets.

   <szilles> Steve has probable regrets for next week due to AB meeting

   RESOLUTION: accept proposal 1, Bert to come up with wording, submit
   for review to www-style; no objections means accepted.

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]

 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Technical Director, Interaction Domain
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead
 Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG

Received on Wednesday, 25 March 2009 17:16:10 UTC