- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 12:18:28 -0700
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Summary:
- Reviewed status of publication requests for Namespaces, CSS3 Images
- Reviewed proposed CSS module template updates
- RESOLVED: publish CSS3 Speech next week as LCWD unless fantasai's review finds problems
- (RE)RESOLVED: Seattle dates are firm (exact location still TBD)
- RESOLVED: Add editor's draft link to module template
- RESOLVED: Publish CSSOM as FPWD
- RESOLVED: and add link to editors drafts in all working drafts
- Reviewed state of mailing list discussion over CSS3 Fonts same origin restriction
====== Full minutes below ======
Present:
Tab Atkins
Kimberly Blessing
Tantek Çelik (late, via IRC)
Cathy Chan
John Daggett
Arron Eicholz
Elika Etemad
Simon Fraser
Daniel Glazman
Arno Gourdol
Koji Ishii
John Jansen
Brad Kemper
Peter Linss
Edward O'Connor
Florian Rivoal
Alan Stearns
Anne van Kesteren
Daniel Weck
Steve Zilles
Some Zakim identified as Oliver_Goldman???
<RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/06/29-css-irc
Scribe: Simon Fraser
Publications / Review requests
------------------------------
plinss: ready to request PR for Namespaces. i18n removed objection
<anne> Request for finding:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Jun/0188.html
CSS Exclusions
vincent: not ready for publication yet. still working on use cases etc.
CSS Speech
(danielweck not on the call)
<danielweck> PS: I'm on the IRC...still trying to connect on SIP
<dbaron> Was there a resolution on publishing namespaces?
<Ms2ger> (When namespaces goes to PR, can selectors become a REC?)
<fantasai> http://www.w3.org/blog/CSS/2011/06/22/resolutions_167
<glazou> Ms2ger: I hope yes
CSS3 Images
Tab sent a list of changes
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jun/0716.html
fantasai: section 5.1 it's unclear what changed. we have resolution to
change the degrees issue with gradients
fantasai: what is the current meaning of the keywords in the draft?
bradk: it's opposite
fantasai: should make it consistent with the previous WD and then mark
it an issue
TabAtkins: i will do it
will revisit next week
CSS Module Templates
--------------------
fantasai: had some feedback from jdaggett and dbaron; have not incorporated
feedback from dbaron yet
<dbaron> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-module/
<fantasai> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jun/0509.html
<fantasai> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jun/0534.html
jdaggett: the intro is separated from the body by 3 sections which contain
info that should be in a preface
jdaggett suggests an initial section with that stuff in, before the intro
TabAtkins: agrees; boilerplate stuff should be collected together at
beginning or end
Florian: would prefer it be at the top
* glazou agrees with Florian
fantasai: don't want it to merge with the status section. Move Document
Conventions section to the conformance section near the end?
<dbaron> I wonder how much we can do and remain compliant to http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules
jdaggett: put after TOC, before Intro
TabAtkins: how much flexibility do we have with the Status section?
fantasai: there is some useful stuff, but much is not useful
glazou: we don't have total flexibility. see pubrules above
jdaggett: confused by the formatting. issues sprinkled all over the place
fantasai: these are things that need to be replaced. they come from the template
<dbaron> pubrules do appear to require Abstract, then SOTD, then TOC
jdaggett: all the issues imply that there's something wrong with the template
glazou: jdaggett wants another way to showing this
jdaggett: issue is not the meaning that's implied here
* Ms2ger agrees with jdaggett
<dbaron> I actually like the big "Issue" markers for actual issues
smfr: this is a template after all. does it matter?
jdaggett: there are people coming into the group who will be confused by
all these issues
dbaron: I think we should not worry about what the template looks like,
only what the resulting spec looks like.
plinss: ugly is better!
* fantasai will have to put blink in there just because now
Florian: put all the boilerplate that immediately follows introduction to
immediately before introduction
TabAtkins: put all the boilerplate related to implementors at the bottom?
glazou: not sure we can do that?
fantasai: we can, and have
glazou: specs are made for implementors, not authors, so do we care?
TabAtkins: some authors read specs.
glazou: they can skip that section
fantasai: we can move down; what matters is what's normative, and what's
informative
fantasai: values section can be tailored based on the spec
glazou: suggest fantasai comes up with a reshaped template and we discuss
again
CSS3 Speech
-----------
danielweck: would like to publish CSS3 Speech as LCWD
danielweck: there has been discussion about epub3 media overlays, but
believes that this does not interact with css3 speech
smfr: what would a test suite look like?
* glazou s/look/hear :-)
danielweck: there's some discussion; would have to talk to implementors
about implementation
danielweck: LCWD does not require test suite
TabAtkins: right; needs suite to exit CR
danielweck: would be good to have new WD, but a LCWD would give the draft
more presence
glazou: and triggers comments from other WGs
glazou: please list in email the WGs you think are interested
glazou: fantasai you need another week?
fantasai: i can review before Tuesday
RESOLVED: publish CSS3 Speech next week as LCWD unless fantasai's review
finds issues
Seattle F2F
-----------
vincent: trying to find a room to host at Adobe, but also working with
Microsoft to find space
sylvaing: assuming that folks will prefer Seattle
glazou: before going on, but do we still keep this July F2F?
jdaggett: we have a lot of work and having a F2F makes sense
glazou: is that opinion shared?
[general yes]
glazou: are the dates firm?
[general yes]
RESOLVED: Seattle dates are firm
glazou: sylvaing, when can you post an update on the final location
sylvaing: end of next week, pref. earlier?
sylvaing: hotels might book up because its a busy weekend
johnjan: hotel on the wiki is close to Adobe for sure
<dbaron> wiki url?
vincent: Marriott Courtyard is listed or the SVG meeting
<anne> it's not listed on http://wiki.csswg.org/planning ?
<vhardy> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/F2F/Seattle_2011
anne: when can we have an agenda?
glazou: we would like to talk with anne about the CSS OM
<dbaron> And the dates are June 24-26, correct?
<Ms2ger> July?
<dbaron> And the dates are July 24-26, correct?
<Florianr> July 24-26, yes.
CSSOM
-----
anne: CSS OM hasn't changed for a while (been on vacation)
Aug 2010: implementors would experiment to see if the proposed values
API makes sense
anne: hasn't had any feedback from implementors
anne: need more discussion for caret position(?)
anne: dbaron raised issue with media query listeners and when listeners
are called
anne: TabAtkins suggested new APIs for location of elements on screen,
border boxes, margin boxes, including transforms
anne: unclear if need more than getBoundingClient rect etc.
glazou: i sent mail "CSS OM list of issues" in May
anne: these are new feature requests; I haven't looked into them in detail
glazou: what's the immediate future for the document?
anne: need feedback from implementors before things can proceed
glazou: would a first public WD give it more visibility
anne: yes
glazou: is there immediate work to make it ready for first public WD?
anne: no, but would like link to current editors draft
smfr: shouldn't we just publish WD more frequently
fantasai: we should publish new WD when there are significant changes
+tantek via IRC
glazou: the W3C needs to produce stable documents
jdaggett: the font spec does this. doesn't seem like an issue
anne: why would you review the WD when the ED has lots of fixes
glazou: in CSS 2.1 we've backed out changes, to it can happen that the
ED is wrong
glazou: WD needs to be stable
glazou: :)
<tantek> IETF drafts have expiration dates, what's the historical reason
why WDs don't have expiration dates?
<tantek> or rather, could we, as one WG, put expiration dates in our WDs?
glazou: should we link to the editors draft here?
fantasai: we should have this in the template and do this for all WDs
<tantek> fantasai - agreed
<tantek> all WDs should link to their EDs
<Ms2ger> Absolutely
* tantek is on another phone call - so can only attend via IRC today
RESOLVED: Add editor's draft link to module template
RESOLVED: Publish CSSOM as FPWD
RESOLVED: and add link to editors drafts in all working drafts
CSS Fonts etc
-------------
jdaggett: glen adams from samsung has objected to any kind of same origin
restriction
jdaggett: need to resolve whether the same origin restriction is removed
from the CSS3 Fonts spec
jdaggett: propose this as s topic for next week
sylvaing: there is an organization that has normative dependencies on CSS3
working drafts; it's a problem
sylvaing: They're objecting to what they see as breaking changes
kimberlyblessing: Comcast is also in this group. I'm trying to explain as
much as I can to the team how W3C works
glazou: would help to have a liason person communicate with this group
jdaggett: how can they refer to the CSS3 Fonts spec? It used to be 2 specs
(fonts, and Web Fonts), and @font-face used to be in Web Fonts
sylvaing: we have to resolve a hard dependency here, since there may be a
breaking change here
sylvaing will keep the WG informed
Line Grid proposal
------------------
Florian: fantasai made alternative proposal at Kyoto F2F, but it hasn't
been written down
jdaggett: this is not my recollection from Japan
Florian: we discussed why we need it, not the details of the proposal itself
jdaggett: we talked about merging this and the Line Layout spec
jdaggett: suggests Florian post an email describing the issue and referring
to the minutes
<fantasai> ACTION fantasai: post summary of proposal to www-style
<trackbot> Created ACTION-336
Charter
-------
fantasai: what's the state of the charter?
vhardy: we have to discuss the FX part
move charter discussion to email
Received on Friday, 1 July 2011 19:18:57 UTC