[CSSWG] Minutes Telecon 2012-09-05


   - Proposed that baseline of scrollable inline-flex box be same as
     one with 'overflow: visible'.
   - RESOLVED: publish FPWD of CSS4 Images
   - Discussed lack of namespace selector API in querySelector
   - RESOLVED: publish FPWD of Intrinsic Sizing level 3
   - RESOLVED: split CSSConditionRule to have superclass CSSGroupRule
   - RESOLVED: publish WD of CSS3 Conditional Rules
   - Discussed process to survey WG for priorities
   - Discussed implementation status of Selectors 4, possibility of
     splitting spec into Level 4 and Level 5
   - Discussed communicating the non-existence of CSS4 and harmonizing
     all the grandfathered CSS spec shortnames to match CSS modularization
     and levelling practices

====== Full minutes below ======

   Tab Atkins
   David Baron
   Ryan Betts
   Elika Etemad
   Simon Fraser
   Daniel Glazman
   Molly Holzschlag
   Koji Ishii
   Brad Kemper
   Peter Linss
   Edward O'Connor (late)
   Dirk Schulze (late)
   Alan Stearns
   Leif Arne Storset
   Lea Verou
   Steve Zilles

<RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/09/05-css-irc
Scribe: smfr
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Sep/0062.html

CSS Masking

   dirk won't be on the call; regrets
   deferring the topic

Flexbox and Non-Visible Overflow

   TabAtkins: inline blocks, when they have overflow other than visible,
              baseline is calc as lower margin edge
   TabAtkins: should flex boxes do something similar?
   <TabAtkins> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-flexbox/#flex-baselines
   TabAtkins: for non-visible overflow, sythensize baseline from border
              box of the flexbox
   TabAtkins: want to make sure it's stable based on whether there's an
              item or not. think that border box is most stable
   dbaron: it was a mistake to change it at all based on whether there's
           overflow; authors are annoyed that overflow affects baselines
   TabAtkins: i'm ok with that
   TabAtkins: proposal: do baseline calculation like normal, but if it's
              scrollable, treat it like it has its initial scroll position
   plinss: do we propose to change this just for flex box, or also inline-block?
   dbaron: no, not a proposal to change inline-block
   TabAtkins: we can make a final decision next week
   dbaron: fine with me

CSS4 Images FPWD

   <plinss> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Sep/0059.html
   TabAtkins: CSS4 images ready for FPWD; still lots of issues they're
              marked, so but we can discuss them after FPWD
   smfr: would this be the first PWD of a CSS4 spec?
   dbaron: no, we did selectors 4
   smfr: ok, so this doesn't trigger anything special
   plinss: this will trigger a call for exclusions, as a FPWD
   no objections
   RESOLVED: publish FPWD of CSS4 Images

At-risk counter styles

   wait for jdagget next week

QuerySelector() with namespaces

   glazou: needed to query selectors with the selectors API with namespaces,
           not possible right now
   glazou: Anne's draft doesn't have anything
   glazou: should we resume that document inside the CSS WG, and work on
   <TabAtkins> http://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-api2/ <-- current Selectors API draft
   dbaron: there was a draft as part of the original querySelector draft.
           it had issues; mozilla had much of it implemented
   dbaron: we should get a list of what those issues were
   glazou: questions: do we want to resurrect this spec in the CSS WG,
           and if so, how should we proceed?
   TabAtkins: do we need to or raise the issues with Lachlan?
   TabAtkins: it was last touched in late June, so is active
   glazou: is it something we want to do?
   TabAtkins: i would not object, as long as they're not cumbersome
   smfr: glazou, and you explain more?
   glazou: need is in arbitrary XML documents, e.g. ePub
   glazou: it's a hole in that API, and hard to work around
   glazou: really useful in XML
   smfr: is there a risk of feature creep where a lot of different APIs
         would need to be namespace aware?
   glazou: i don't think so, mainly the selectors API
   <dbaron> http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-selectors-api-20071221/#nsresolver-interface
            was the last TR draft with NSResolver, but NSResolver
            had issues, if memory serves
   glazou to raise the issue with Lachlan

CSS Masking

   krit would like another editor for CSS Masking
   TabAtkins: I volunteer
   left off last week with mask-clip
   defer discussing mask-clip

FPWD of Intrinsic Sizing

   <fantasai> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2012JulSep/0257.html
   fantasai: a couple of sections not written yet (tables, multi-col),
             but the draft should be coherent and we'd like to publish FPWD
   * glazou agrees
   RESOLVED: publish FPWD of Intrinsic Sizing level 3

CSS3 Conditional

   <fantasai> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2012JulSep/0255.htm
   fantasai: Tab and I edited in the resolutions from the F2F
   fantasai: CSS3 Conditional is ready to have another WD published
   glazou: we have 2 different implementations?
   fantasai: possibly 3 (prefixed one in IE?)
   plinss: how far from last call?
   fantasai: WG needs to review this draft; next draft should be last call
   plinss: any objections?
   dbaron: no, but one comment. we had discussed having what's in CSS
           condition rule to be 2 separate interfaces
   TabAtkins: moving the grouping ?? up a level and having the condition
              rule inherit from that
   fantasai: discussed at the F2F but didn't come up with final changes
   [request for clarification]
   TabAtkins: in the CSS OM part, talking about splitting the CSSConditionRule
   TabAtkins: so we have a rule about @rules that contain other rules,
              then other rules that inherit from that
   <plinss> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-conditional/#the-cssconditionrule-interface
   TabAtkins: i support breaking this up
   plinss: before we publish?
   TabAtkins: yes
   TabAtkins: gonna do it live!
   plinss: any objections?
   <dbaron> I think CSSGroupRule would be the obvious name for the upper half
   RESOLVED: TabAtkins to split CSSConditionRule
   RESOLVED: publish WD of CSS3 conditional after TabAtkins makes the
             CSSConditionRule change
   plinss: anyone working on a test suite for this?
   dbaron: mozilla and opera have both contributed a bunch of tests for @supports
   plinss: we have almost 100 tests

   <TabAtkins> Edits to the Conditional spec done:

Working Group Priorities

   glazou: 4 years ago in San Diego, we started with a deep prioritization
           of the activities of the WG
   glazou: now that CSS 2.1 is over, and we have so many documents under
           work, it is time to do the same again,
   glazou: so make the specs advance at the right paces
   glazou: we have almost 30 documents; what are the right specs to work
           on Right Now?
   glazou: it's the right time to discuss the priorities again
   glazou: ideas: ping the browser vendors in the WG, in full confidentiality,
           and get info on their strategic focuses
   plinss: also looking at interest in implementation
   dbaron: i'd rather the discussion be public
   glazou: i'd prefer that of course, but some members would like to keep
           it private
   glazou: would it be OK to ping everyone in private, including a question
           about whether it's OK to make the answers public
   dbaron: that's fine
   Molly: would also like to hear from the invited experts, as well as
         the vendors
   glazou: yes, ping all the WG members, not just browser vendors
   Molly: so there are 2 layers of prioritization; implementation by the
          vendors, and the rest of the WG
   glazou: what really matters is the implementability of the specs
   glazou: i will send email before next week; make sure those emails get
           to the right people
   give vendors 2 weeks to reply
   plinss: data will be confidential, but the aggregated data will be public
   krit: how is implementation defined?
   plinss: how we normally do for getting a spec out of CR
   plinss: any other topics to discuss?

Selectors 4

   glazou: speaking of selectors 4, mozilla implemented :dir. Is it prefixed?
   dbaron: it is not prefixed
   glazou: do you plan to prefix it?
   dbaron: i can look into it
   glazou: selectors are a very visible part of CSS; if we have anything
           to change before CR that could cause problems
   glazou: we have only light reviews by i18n people
   fantasai: we could take only the UI stuff for level for, and leave the
             other stuff (e.g. column selectors) for level 5
   glazou: we should give people time to review
   fantasai: sure, let's return to this at the end of the month
   plinss: other topics?

The non-existence of CSS4

   <TabAtkins> http://www.xanthir.com/b4Ko0
   glazou: TabAtkins published a "no such thing as CSS4 item on his blog".
           We should probably publish on the W3C blog under the WG's name
   <fantasai> http://www.xanthir.com/b4Ko0
   glazou: TabAtkins can you rephrase to make it more official, and submit
          to the WG for review?
   TabAtkins: can try but want glazou to check it
   leaverou: I don't think level 4 specs are part of CSS3, they're just
             part of CSS
   <dbaron> I disagree with Tab's assertion that there is a CSS3.
   <leaverou> dbaron: That's exactly what I was saying
   fantasai: maybe leaverou can suggest some language to TabAtkins

   dbaron: i think we're stuck because of the way we make short names of
           drafts (because that requires going to the director)
   fantasai: we need to come up with a naming plan, and get batch approval
   plinss: we should come up with a concrete list of short names changes
   fantasai: i can set up a wiki page with proposals
   <dbaron> I'd think shortnames should be either css-selectors-4,
           css-text-3, etc., or css-selectors4, css-text3, etc.
   <leaverou> dbaron: +1

   plinss: we haven't published a snapshot since 2010; supposed to do
           one every year
   dbaron: they were also supposed to be normative until the director
           changed them
   <glazou> dbaron: +1
   plinss: let's get a 2012 snapshot published
   <fantasai> nothing's changed since 2012 wrt snapshots
   <fantasai> they'd need a new section on CR drafts not yet tested
   <fantasai> to require an update
   discussion of the normative nature of the spec
   TabAtkins: we will do a 2012 snapshot near the end of the year
   SteveZ: can we list candidates for what will go into the 2012 snapshot?
   fantasai: we need a test suite for the snapshot
   SteveZ: we need to drive some of those test suites
   plinss: last time we talked about publishing multiple ones during the
           year; we don't necessarily have to wait
   fantasai: there's nothing worth publishing at the moment

   plinss: we'll add a section to the wiki about renaming
   ACTION: fantasai make a wiki page to summarize proposals to overhaul
                    all CSS spec shortnames

Meeting closed.

Received on Wednesday, 5 September 2012 18:53:20 UTC