- From: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 18:49:36 +0100
- To: W3C style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
Summary:
The WG looked at the handful of remaining test cases for CSS 2.1
that don't have two passes yet. Some are no doubt invalid, some will
need careful study at the ftf.
The upcoming ftf will have some extra guests to talk about layout
grids and non-rectangular flows. The one after that should have a
forum right before or after it to meet with Japanese designers and
companies.
Resolutions:
- Resolved: Accept proposed edit for issue 214.
- Conditionally resolved: Accept Tab's proposal for issue 224,
pending review of tests by Elika.
====== Full minutes below ======
Attendees
Present
David Singer, Peter Linss, Sylvain Galineau, David Baron, John
Jansen, Elika Etemad, Arron Eicholz, Brad Kemper, Simon Fraser,
Koji Ishi, Bert Bos, Ted O'Connor, Tab Atkins
Regrets
Chair
Peter
Scribe
Bert
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]1. CSS2.1 Issues / Test Status Update
2. [5]2. March F2F
3. [6]3. Tokyo F2F / Workshop
4. [7]4. List-style-image
__________________________________________________________________
1. CSS2.1 Issues / Test Status Update
PL: Looking for data on block tests. Nothing happened there? We need to
get this finished. My deadline is the ftf.
SG: Can we talk at the ftf?
PL: Wrap-up beforehand would be perfect, otherwise at ftf. Issue 205?
<plinss>
[8]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Sep/0074.html
EE: Can we postpone for a few minutes? Need my computer…
PL: Issue 207?
EE: Not looked at margin collapsing yet. Sent a proposal on some other
issue.
PL: Issue 214? There is a proposed edit.
SG: Would any of the edits require test changes?
PL: I think the tests already changed.
EE: Don't think there is anything open anymore agaist the issues list.
<plinss>
[9]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Feb/0528.html
AE: Didn't find any to change.
PL: Accept edits for 214?
<dbaron> (which is the URL plinss pasted above)
RESOLUTION: edit for 214 accepted.
BB: I have made a raw list of comments that were sent to www-style.
Anybody interested in it?
EE: Can you add them to the wiki?
PL: The other issues on CSS 2.1 are also on the wiki.
BB: I find the wiki not really handy. Hard to edit and not easy to see
which issues are open and closed.
PL: Let's not switch tools for now.
SG: What needs to be done for next week in the tests? is there page
that lists what remains to be done?
JJ: Should be on the two links given in the agenda.
SG: A single wiki page would be handy.
PL: It seems a few issues are complex enough that we need the ftf for
them. But mostly we are waiting for enough implementations.
JJ: What does that mean for CSS 2.1? Will CSS 2.1 just sit there until
a suitable beta is published?
PL: In theory, yes. We can change the spec if necessary.
SG: Are we planning to add any test cases for currently open issues?
PL: That was not my intention. I think we decided to close the test
suite some time ago. We will have errata, a snapshot of the testsuite,
and keep editing it. No additional tests. Maybe just if we have a
substantive change with absolutely not coverage in the test suite…
2. March F2F
PL: There is a wiki page for the agenda.
<dbaron> [10]http://wiki.csswg.org/planning/mountain-view-2011
<dbaron> [11]http://www.w3.org/Style/Group/2011/MountainView
SG: We have some extra MS people coming for layout/grid stuff.
PL: A new member from Adobe as well. Interested in “regions” and
flowing text between them. I'm hoping they can attend.
TA: Google Chrome also will have a meeting on layout. They may not be
at the ftf itself, but I will be at both meetings.
SF: We're also interested in the flow regions from Adobe.
PL: Overlap with templates and other things. Good opportunity for
synergy. Please post other agenda items on the wiki.
EE: Some css3-text issues. Please raise any other issues soon. Before
April. With Koji trying to resolve all known issues. But expecting more
than one Last Call anyway. There are still open issues we know about.
But please mention any others soon.
SG: Tuesday would be good for layout, regions and related. So the extra
MS people can come that day.
PL: Can you mention on the wiki what issues you like grouped? Then we
can do agenda planning.
3. Tokyo F2F / Workshop
PL: Some discussion about a workhop.
TA: Good idea, as said on the thread. Some sort of impromptu meeting.
KI: Some informal forum is preferred.
BB: Agreed. We don't have a sponsor for a costly event.
PL: Where would this be?
KI: So should I respond that we prefer some sort of informal forum?
PL: Yes, that sounds good. I'm only available before our ftf, not
after. May 30 or 31 is possible.
KI: Maybe I can ask for vote? I think EE preferred after the ftf?
BB: Preference for before, but can probably make after as well.
DB: It depends on what flights I can find.
TA: I already have my flights and can be there after. Otherwise have to
rebook.
SG: Prefer before.
PL: Seems it's about 50-50… Our ftf dates are firm. I guess.
TA: Yes, as I said, I already booked my flight…
PL: Koji, any idea when we can know when and where?
KI: Date is up to us. The place I can ask around. Probably Keio, maybe
also NTT. I'm not so worried about that. How do we decide the date as
soon as possible?
EE: Wiki?
PL: We can at least start a wiki to collect ideas for the contents. We
can give people a week and decide the date next week . who would be
attending, apart from us?
KI: Some people who want to meet us. And it depends on the topics. EPUB
people also.
<fantasai> [12]http://wiki.csswg.org/planning/tokyo-workshop-2011
KI: We can put that on the wiki, too.
SG: Yes, I'm interested in the constraints of Japanese designers.
4. List-style-image
<plinss>
[13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2011JanMar/0193.html
<dbaron> I think there's a slight wording issue:
[14]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Feb/0674.html …
but otherwise it seems fine
TA: If you have an image with no ratio but a width and no height, the
rules force the ratio to 1:1.
<fantasai> [15]http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-224
TA: Such an image is difficult to make, so I don't expect anything to
break if list style images use the rules for images instead. We also
don't have tests for it. Some browsers are quite close to my suggested
rule. Another issue is making the wording easier. DB had some
suggestions.
DB: There is something else: you leave some undefined cases, where no
rules apply.
TA: Ah, you're right. Will fix that. Chrome and Opera handle such
images. Opera does it like I propose. Chrome not exactly but close.
SG: Do you have the test case?
TA: looking…
<TabAtkins_>
[16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Feb/0364.html
TA: IE9 does what the spec says now. So I'm asking IE to change.
SG: So apparently the spec can be implemented.
TA: Yes, but it is inconsistent with images in other places.
SG: Do you know of a use case?
TA: Such images seem weird to me.
EE: Yes, I think we just spec'ed that for completeness.
SG: Are there any testcases for this now?
TA: Now, there aren't.
SG: Do we need to add some?
TA: We have one implementation, Opera, that does it. So we don't have
two implementations yet.
SG: We have one implementation for the current spec, too. Should we add
a test case at all? Should the edit be in CSS3 instead?
EE: CSS2 and 3 cannot contradict each other, 3 can only be more
precise.
DB: I think we can make the change and add the tests to the pool of
tests to add after the PR test snapshot.
<JohnJan> * agree with DB
BK: Do we make it undefined, or make your change?
TA: I propose to make the actual change.
DB: We can add tests after PR, they improve interop, but do not
invalidate the PR.
PL: I think we can accept the edit for the CSS 2.1 errata.
BB: But we don't have errata, we have a WD currently.
PL: Yes, but we will have errata later.
EE: I don't think we should postpone the edit.
PL: Conditionally accept?
EE: Yes, but want to review proposed tests first.
BB: OK with me.
BK: OK
SF: OK
RESOLUTION: conditionally accept Tab's edit on list-style-image size,
pending review of tests by Elika.
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [17]scribe.perl version 1.135
([18]CVS log)
$Date: 2011/02/24 17:25:14 $
References
1. http://www.w3.org/
2. http://www.w3.org/2011/02/23-css-irc
3. http://www.w3.org/2011/02/23-css-minutes.html#agenda
4. http://www.w3.org/2011/02/23-css-minutes.html#item01
5. http://www.w3.org/2011/02/23-css-minutes.html#item02
6. http://www.w3.org/2011/02/23-css-minutes.html#item03
7. http://www.w3.org/2011/02/23-css-minutes.html#item04
8. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Sep/0074.html
9. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Feb/0528.html
10. http://wiki.csswg.org/planning/mountain-view-2011
11. http://www.w3.org/Style/Group/2011/MountainView
12. http://wiki.csswg.org/planning/tokyo-workshop-2011
13. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2011JanMar/0193.html
14. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Feb/0674.html
15. http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-224
16. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Feb/0364.html
17. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
18. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
--
Bert Bos ( W 3 C ) http://www.w3.org/
http://www.w3.org/people/bos W3C/ERCIM
bert@w3.org 2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93
+33 (0)4 92 38 76 92 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Thursday, 24 February 2011 17:50:05 UTC