- From: Dael Jackson <daelcss@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 21:42:58 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
=========================================
These are the official CSSWG minutes.
Unless you're correcting the minutes,
Please respond by starting a new thread
with an appropriate subject line.
=========================================
fill-stroke
------------
- RESOLVED: FPWD of fill-stroke as level 3
Spec REC-ing
------------
- Fonts 3
- ChrisL requested some help getting the test font to work in
Edge and Firefox.
- The decisions on what to move into Level 4 are blocked on
the test font issue.
- Cascade 3
- Some tests have been added, Microsoft is working on adding
more.
- Conditional Rules
- RESOLVED: Republish CSS Conditional Rules CR update
- The edits around CSSOM will wait until during or after the
F2F.
- Values & Units
- Publication is waiting on review of the <position> changes.
Review was requested over the next week.
- Backgrounds & Borders
- The implementation report from tmichel had 82% passage. 20
of the tests had problems so he'll fix them and re-run the
tests.
- Transforms
- fantasai is preparing an agenda before scheduling a
conference call with SVG folks.
- Flexbox
- Open items will be added to the agenda.
- gregwhitworth is working to understand what tests are
currently in the test suite.
- CSS UI
- The open pull requests have been reviewed and those that
needed changes are ready for re-review.
Publish request to updated WD of css-align-3
--------------------------------------------
- RESOLVED: Republish updated WD of css-align-3
Blink Intent to Implement conic-gradient()/Images 4
---------------------------------------------------
- RESOLVED: Add leaverou as co-editor for CSS Images
- RESOLVED: New WD publication for CSS Images 4
- RESOLVED: Update shortname to css-images-4
Multicol
--------
- RESOLVED: column-spans create a formatting context, not a
specific one
- Issue 1074 (definition of `column-span` should say what happens
without an ancestor multicol /
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1074)
was discussed, but no resolution was reached.
- Originally a few people believed that the logical behavior
would be to retain the formatting context as the author
laid out the context with the assumption that it
establishes a new formatting context.
- However, it was then brought up that this is inconsistent
with how other layout modes like flexbox and grid work.
- These two sides couldn't agree on the best solution during
the course of the call, so conversation will continue on
github.
===== FULL MINUTES BELOW ======
Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2017Mar/0083.html
Present:
Rachel Andrew
Rossen Atanassov
David Baron
Bert Bos
Tantek Çelik
Alex Critchfield
Benjamin De Cock
Emil Eklund
Elika Etemad
Daniel Glazman
Dael Jackson
Brad Kemper
Vladamir Levantovsky
Chris Lilley
Peter Linss
Thierry Michel
Anton Prowse
Matt Rakow
Melanie Richards
Jen Simmons
Geoffrey Sneddon
Alan Stearns
Lea Verou
Steve Zilles
Regrets:
Tony Graham
Michael Miller
Scribe: dael
Rossen: Let's get going.
Rossen: Any extra items that you want on the agenda?
glazou: The CSS Grid issue I mentioned. Issue 1137.
Rossen: Thanks. This issue hasn't had any take on GH so I'll leave
it for the end. If we don't get it it'll take it's turn on
github.
Rossen: Quick reminder. Next F2F is coming up soon. We have a
couple weeks. If you haven't made travel arrangements you
better hurry up.
Rossen: Also please add topics to the F2F agenda.
fill-stroke
===========
fantasai: For the agenda, for fill-stroke to publish I need a
level so we need to resolve on that.
Rossen: Did you have one in mind?
fantasai: I would suggest 3.
ChrisL: makes sense to me
Rossen: Any objections to FPWD of fill-stroke as level 3?
<tantek> ship it!
RESOLVED: FPWD of fill-stroke as level 3
Spec REC-ing
============
Writing Modes
-------------
Rossen: First is writing modes. I didn't hear from koji. Is he on
the call?
Rossen: Okay, let's come back to that.
Rossen: Updates on Fonts L3? I know Chris was adding tests and
myles IDing features for L4.
ChrisL: I sent an update with more tests and I started converting
to ref tests. Still blocked that Edge and FF don't render
the test font correctly. The font renders differently...I
sent you a message Rossen
Rossen: It's an interop issue between the browsers?
ChrisL: Yes.
fantasai: Sounds like it might be on the font.
<dbaron> I think Chris said something about the advance in the
test font
ChrisL: Yes. I think Firefox is passing some tests but it's hard
to tell because characters are on top of each other.
Rossen: Did you try IE?
ChrisL: I did not.
fantasai: Maybe CC Sergey on the issue?
Rossen: I have fonts people I can talk to. I'm looking for the
email from you and I'm not seeing it yet. Once I find it
I'll get someone to look.
<dbaron> ChrisL, maybe cc: jfkthame about the font thing for
Gecko... although my guess might be that the bug is the
other way around... ?
Rossen: In respect to the test, besides that blocker you said you
added a number of tests. Do you need any help?
ChrisL: I need a bit of help. Some things aren't testable using
that method. In general it's going well.
Rossen: In terms of IDing features to move to L4 have we made
progress?
ChrisL: Not yet. It's hard to tell FF and Edge pass/fail.
Rossen: So because of the blocker we can't make progress.
ChrisL: Yes.
Rossen: Thank you.
Cascade 3
---------
Rossen: Next is Cascade 3
Rossen: We had scoped style edits for fantasai I think those are
done.
fantasai: I don't think so. I don't remember doing them.
Rossen: Okay. So these are still pending.
Rossen: From last time we had that you were going to drop scoped
styles.
Rossen: gregwhitworth testing update?
gregwhitworth: We weren't able to get any of our tests converted
except one, but we're looking at that internally.
We're hoping to get the others in this week. I
think another browser was doing testing too.
Rossen: I think there was an ask for dbaron to find someone from
Mozilla to convert those tests. Has that happened?
dbaron: No.
Rossen: Okay. Thanks
Conditional Rules
-----------------
Rossen: Conditional rules.
Rossen: We had some edits to be done for CSSOM. Did we make those
dbaron or zcorpan?
dbaron: I didn't.
Rossen: Okay.
Rossen: I don't see zcorpan on. I'll reach out. If he can't help,
would you need someone else to help?
dbaron: I don't know. Depends on speed. I'm pretty unavailable
before the F2F.
Rossen: I'm just trying to draw a timeline for expectations. If
you can't work and zcorpan isn't available maybe we can
get someone else.
fantasai: I suggest deferring to the F2F. dbaron and zcorpan can
work it out there. They seemed like simple edits.
fantasai: There have been some edits that should probably be
published. If ChrisL or Bert can prepare a CR that would
be good.
Rossen: I recall last week we wanted the CSSOM edits before we
republish. If we want another publish before the F2F I'm
in favor of that. But I wouldn't want too much paperwork
for Chris & Co in this month if there aren't that many
edits. I'll give it to the editors for a preference.
dbaron?
* fantasai can take care of publication requirements, if ChrisL
can handle the webmaster side
dbaron: I don't know what's in it.
Rossen: fantasai do you know?
fantasai: We made changes to how parenthesis are handled in
@supports rules. They were resolved on a few years ago.
If ChrisL will do publication I can do the paperwork on
dbaron's behalf.
ChrisL: Updated CR with technical edits. Is there a DoC?
fantasai: I can draft one.
Rossen: Objections to republishing CSS Conditional Rules CR update?
RESOLVED: Republish CSS Conditional Rules CR update
Rossen: There was a request for tests from Mozilla and Microsoft.
gregwhitworth?
gregwhitworth: We haven't gotten to that one yet.
Rossen: Okay.
Rossen: Did we get Mozilla tests?
dbaron: I haven't looked yet. I don't know if someone else has a
chance.
Rossen: tantek can you help?
<tantek> Not for now, but I can look into it?
Rossen: We'll continue to wait for more tests.
Values & Units
--------------
Rossen: Values & Units.
Rossen: Any updates on...there was a republication call. Are the
edits ready?
fantasai: They are. Waiting for people to look over <position>
edits. If they're approved we're good to go.
<fantasai> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2017Mar/0054.html
Rossen: Has anyone been able to look at the edits?
Rossen: Let's give people one more week on this.
Rossen: It would be good to hear from implementors and anyone else
with interest since it's a core spec. Please look we'd
like to republish.
Backgrounds & Borders
---------------------
Rossen: Backgrounds & Borders
Rossen: We were going to get an implementation report, maybe some
Mozilla tests. dbaron I'll take it you couldn't look into
those tests.
dbaron: Right. I haven't had a chance to look into any testing in
the last week.
* fantasai will need a resolution to republish css-backgrounds
along with css-values
astearns: tmichel sent the implementation report to the list. I
haven't had a chance to look.
tmichel: I don't have more than the email I sent.
tmichel: I did a list of the tests that have 1 or 0
implementations and also some links to what we call an
implementation report that lists all the tests and
results.
tmichel: As I said we have about 80% fulfilling the requirements
<tmichel> 82 % passing.
Rossen: So 82.5% of the tests pass. We have about 17.5% with 0 or
1 impl meaning we're not that ready. Thank you tmichel for
preparing the reports.
<Bert> (There were several dubious tests for backgrounds. What to
do with those?)
<fantasai> Bert, correct them :)
Rossen: Next call to action would be a look from implementors to
see what is not passing and start to evaluate the tests
and impl so we can get closer to CR.
<fantasai> Next action is file bugs and link them from the report
Rossen: So again, thank you tmichel
tmichel: I'd like to add...I have some email with Gerard and he
pointed out about 20 tests that were wrong so I should be
able to edit those today. They have improper images or
links.
tmichel: 20 broken tests. I should be fixing those and then I will
run the implementations again on those. So there's 20
more tests that may be passing.
Rossen: That would be great news.
tmichel: Sure.
tmichel: I'll let you know when it's done.
<fantasai> gsnedders, dbaron: do we have export set up from
mozilla's repo to WPT's CSS repo?
<dbaron> fantasai: for the stuff that we were previously exporting
to csswg-test?
<fantasai> dbaron, yeah
<fantasai> dbaron, also in general...
<dbaron> fantasai, I figure I'll continue doing it
<gsnedders> dbaron, fantasai:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1341077#c2
<gsnedders> dbaron: probably should've :needsinfo'd you
<fantasai> dbaron, wanted to know what's the best way to shift
things from mozilla's internal to csswg
<fantasai> dbaron, since understanding that process would make it
possible to shift more Mozilla tests into WPT :)
<gsnedders> fantasai: in a few weeks, cp from anywhere in the repo
to testing/web-platform/tests will get them there
<gsnedders> fantasai: I think there are some rules about making
sure they're not MPL licensed before moving them there
<dbaron> fantasai, did we drop the various metadata requirements?
Otherwise the issue is still needing to add all the spec
metadata that the tests don't currently have.
<fantasai> dbaron, not all of them, no
<fantasai> dbaron, they still need to be tied into a spec section
Transforms L1
-------------
Rossen: Transforms L1
Rossen: We were going to set up a conference call with SVG folks.
Did we get around to this fantasai?
fantasai: I'm going to do that. I'll have to check with Simon. But
I wanted to prep the agenda first.
Flexbox
-------
Rossen: Flexbox
Rossen: We had a few more edits holding us from republication. Did
those edits make it over the week?
Rossen: fantasai?
fantasai: It was a couple of open issues, not just edits. We need
to get those on the agenda.
Rossen: Alright.
Rossen: Did we make progress on tests?
gregwhitworth: I did a brief review of the tests. There's quite a
few in there. I'll run those against the browsers,
figure out where they fail as a start to figure out
what needs to be looked into. Once I get a handle
on that I'll figure out where we need more
coverage. I couldn't find any report from previous.
gregwhitworth: I don't know the earliest I could get it to you,
I'm busy for a few weeks.
Variables
---------
Rossen: Progress on variables?
gregwhitworth: I submitted our test suite. It is against the css
wg repo currently.
Rossen: Awesome. Thanks gregwhitworth.
CSS UI
------
Rossen: Finally, CSS UI there was a call for astearns or fantasai
to review tests
Florian: There were 4 pull requests. fantasai reviewed 3,
gsnedders did the 4th. gsnedders' and one of fantasai's
are done. The edits requested for fantasai's other two
are done and awaiting review.
fantasai: Should be able to work on that today.
Rossen: So the tests you have...the pull requests were approved?
Florian: The 4 PRs were by me so I needed review.
Rossen: Okay. Good, good.
Rossen: I thought it was spec edits.
Florian: Hopefully not. I'll report soon.
Rossen: Circling back to writing modes, I know koji sent a report.
koji are you on?
Rossen: Implementation reports are 98% passing which meets the TR
exit criteria. We'll transition soon. We'll loop back next
week.
Rossen: Thanks for the updates and awesome progress.
Publish request to updated WD of css-align-3
=============================================
Rossen: Did people get to look through the edits?
fantasai: It's a bunch of bug fixes. There's no real change. it
was clarified to say what was intended.
Rossen: Objections to republishing?
RESOLVED: Republish updated WD of css-align-3
<fantasai> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2017JanMar/0198.html
fantasai: There's two open issues. One is the one discussed
earlier about scrollable inline blocks. We should add
that to next week's agenda. Other is syntax on fallback
alignment. TabAtkins and I were thinking we should just
drop fallback from this level so we can go to CR.
Rossen: Thank you. Issues are highlighted in the private list as
well. Please provide feedback
Blink Intent to Implement conic-gradient()/Images 4
===================================================
leaverou: We have not published a draft of CSS Images 4 for 5
years. Now that Blink published an intent to implement
conic gradients, we need to publish one as soon as
possible, so that people are not referring to outdated
syntax. On that subject, since I wrote the initial
proposal for conic gradients 6 years ago, edited that
part of the spec several times, wrote a polyfill, and
promoted it to both authors and implementors, it makes
sense to be added as a co-editor so I can continue
pushing the specification forward.
<tantek> leaverou++ yes please!!!
<tantek> also +1 to adding leaverou as co-editor
<dbaron> https://www.w3.org/TR/css4-images/
fantasai: I'm in favor of all that. We don't have a FPWD for
images 4
ChrisL: We do. It's 2012.
<leaverou> https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-css4-images-20120911/
leaverou: Here it is ^
fantasai: Yeah. We should update that.
<ChrisL> minuted resolutions?
gsnedders: I presume we want to resolve to change the short name.
<ChrisL> yes it should be css-images-4
<fantasai> the shortname change is against previous resolutions
<fantasai> don't need to re-resolve :)
Florian: That too. I'm in favor of the coeditor
TabAtkins: Me too.
Rossen: Let's go one at a time. First one, add leaverou as
co-editor for css images. Objections?
RESOLVED: add leaverou as co-editor for css images
Rossen: Thanks leaverou and welcome as a coeditor.
Rossen: Next is a new WD publication for css-images 4. Objections?
RESOLVED: new WD publication for css-images 4
Rossen: Final, short name for the spec.
Rossen: I heard TabAtkins.
fantasai: We have resolutions to update the short names. We're
fine there.
Rossen: What was the new shortname?
fantasai: css-images-4
Florian: Another resolution is easier to find. Rather than hunt.
Rossen: Yes, please update.
RESOLVED: Update shortname to css-images-4
Rossen: Anything else to discuss in regards to conic-gradient()?
leaverou: There are a lot of outstanding issues, but we can
discuss after WD.
Multicol
========
Rossen: Who wants to take those?
'column-span' and tables
------------------------
<Rossen> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1071
fantasai: I think column-span & tables is an error in the spec. It
should just say the element creates a new formatting
context.
Florian: I agree.
Rossen: I couldn't agree more.
Rossen: Objections to correcting wrong verbiage in the spec?
Rossen: column-spans create a formatting context, not a specific
one.
Florian: Clarification, what we want is if it creates a formating
context, good, if it doesn't it's a BFC
fantasai: Its formatting context is determined by the display. We
could do something in the future like block where you're
sharing formatting context.
Florian: We have a definition of establishes one that determines
what you should establish?
fantasai: I think so. If it's not clear in display we'll clarify.
<fantasai> https://drafts.csswg.org/css-display/#formatting-context
<fantasai> It's defined
Rossen: For multicol it should be establishes.
dbaron: It does need to link to something.
Florian: If it exists good, if it doesn't I'll file an issues.
Rossen: Objections?
RESOLVED: column-spans create a formatting context, not a specific
one
dbaron: Other question in that issue was around interop and tables.
TabAtkins: I thought everyone agreed.
dbaron: Nevermind. I'm crossing two issues.
Definition of `column-span` should say what happens without an
ancestor multicol
---------------------------------------------------------------
Rossen: Next was issue 1074
<Rossen> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1074
Rossen: Florian added this.
Florian: We initially postponed because we wanted to work on other
things, but there's no dependency. If you set column-span
on something that's not a child of the multi-col what do
you do? Nothing? Establish a formatting context? We have
implementors doing both. What do we want?
fantasai: I recommend always a formatting context. The author laid
out the context with the assumption that it establishes
a new formatting context, meaning it contains floats and
margins--its children's margins don't collapse with the
spanner itself. If the author is tweaking the layout and
turns off multi-col there unexpected behavior on how the
kids collapse in the spanner.
<bradk> +1 fantasai
fantasai: In order to minimize the difference between being a
multicol and then not we may as well make it a
formatting context. I'm not dead set, though.
Florian: I believe we have the logic that if it is in a one column
multi-col it does a formatting context so extending makes
sense to me.
Florian: Anyone feels the other way?
<bradk> What fantasai said is right for when you have media
queries too.
jensimmons: I'm thinking about how this will feel consistent or
not with Grid.
jensimmons: Will it be weird the children will behave as if the
formatting context exists where if you remove
display:grid the children don't act separate.
Rossen: I recall this issue...we discussed with howcome 5 years
ago. I believe he pushed for not a formatting context.
Those are probably some of the last changes he made so
they should be easy to trace. Doesn't mean we can't change.
Florian: We had a similar discussion. We did not discuss if you're
not in multicol, we discussed the narrow one column
multicol.
Florian: We resolved in that case you get a formatting context.
It's not clear if it's meant to apply when there's no
multi-col.
Rossen: With those options, what do people think?
Florian: I agree with fantasai and no one is speaking against.
<Bert> (Sounds strange to me that 'column-span' has any effect
outside columns.)
Rossen: There was jensimmons's question.
Florian: Yeah. Absolutely.
<Florian> sorry Jen, didn't mean to dismiss your comment
<dbaron> fwiw, my intuition was that it should work the other way,
but...
Rossen: In that case...do we have...dbaron your intuition is for
the other way. Can you expand?
dbaron: It was that it seemed weird for column-span do something
when you're not in a multicol. It is different then a one
column multicol.
jensimmons: I agree. It feels weird it would do something when not
in a multicol. If there's a one column multicol you're
still in a multicol.
Rossen: Yeah. it would feel weird if I added a grid property to
the table and it behaves different.
jensimmons: Right.
fantasai: I think what makes it different from grid as far as its
contents are concerned it like a special kind of block
container. So it's still a block container, just not a
multicol block container.
Florian: If you change your mind and stop using grid you have to
change the design of the grid items. If you change your
mind and stop using multicol you don't have to change the
contents so you might forget you have something. I could
be convinced either way.
jensimmons: I think of this as a matter of how the browsers use
this then I have no opinion. But if there's anything
like margin collapsing that would change then it
doesn't impact authors and we should do things the way
that works for browsers.
Florian: It does make a difference for margin collapsing and float
intrusion. fantasai meant that multicol layout isn't very
different than block layout except that there's a
boundary. Almost everything is the same as normal block
layout. You might not change everything and be left with
just spanners. For grid or tables you'd have to rework
everything.
* bradk thinks that Column-span will become a hack for getting
bfc. Not necessarily a bad thing.
<fantasai> bradk, we have 'display: flow-root' for that!
<fantasai> bradk, you can request a BFC explicitly :)
Rossen: Let me try to move this forward. If we have an element to
which we apply column-span:all and there's a 2 column
multicol. The element will be taken out of the flow, made
BFC, and everything around it would behave like a BFC
would such as margin collapsing. Then the container of the
multicol is resized so it becomes a single column- nothing
else has changed.
Rossen: Because of the column definition it became a single
column. This column-span:all is still spanning all
columns. Questions is if this is a BFC. correct?
Florian: No, that one is so far a BFC. If you now remove that this
is a multicol at all, should we still have a BFC?
Rossen: Right, right. This is how it works when the parent is a
multicolumn. The last change is we remove the root. In
which case what happens?
Rossen: First my intuition as an implementor if this element that
used to be multicol no longer has a reason to be a BFC
there will be a layout change. The fact that there's
something inside of it that changes its BFC-ness shouldn't
be any different. Do we have a reason to believe it should
be treated differently?
<dbaron> The other content-editing risk is that if people start
using 'column-span: all' to force a BFC, they might get
unexpected results if they then take their content and
put it inside a multicol...
<gsnedders> don't we have a proposal to add a property that
literally just creates a BFC?
<Rossen> gsnedders, yes :)
<gsnedders> IMO that's something we should try to get to REC ASAP
given it'll stop authors doing weird hacks
Rossen: I'm making a case for it to not be a BFC anymore.
jensimmons: I lean that way too. If we don't do it that way...we
would create column-span into a brand new property
that works by itself. You remove the multi-col and you
think you're done, but you're not because there's a
column-span.
Florian: I think that's the critical question. If you're writing
from scratch it makes no sense. But if you're in the
scenario should you have to go through all your
stylesheets and remove everything? If you remove the
multicol do you have to go back into all your style
sheets. If you want to remove all column-ness you may
want to remove them from everywhere if they still have
effect without multicol. The scenario where you had
multicol and edited it away.
jensimmons: And that's the case fantasai is making that you had
the layout working and you remove the multicol it
would be good to have it still work. But I think it
makes sense to work more like grid.
<rachelandrew> agree with jensimmons, I'm not keen on it creating
a BFC if multi-col is gone
fantasai: But this is the only part that behaves differently.
Currently all your children and descendants don't care
that they're in a multicol in terms of layout.
column-span does change how a child or
descendant...that's the only property with an effect.
For grid or layout everything changes from block to grid
container. You will notice if something is off. This is
fairly subtle and it's rarely used feature. The other
children have no special behavior
<Bert> (Keeping the BFC only makes (a little) sense if you had
*one* column before you removed the 'columns' property.
With more columns, ignoring the column-span is probably
exactly what you want...)
Florian: I have a slightly different argument. If instead of
thinking in terms of editing the multicol, we think of MQ
putting it in and out.
Rossen: That's the same thing.
Florian: Technically, but authorwise the thinking is different.
* fantasai thinks there will be more errors in pages if we don't
create a BFC
Rossen: I think we need to discuss this. As an implementor I'm
leaning toward jensimmons.
Rossen: We're at the top of the hour. I would encourage people to
continue discussing in issue 1074.
Rossen: Thanks for joining us and we'll talk to you next week.
jensimmons: Congrats to everyone for getting grid out in the last
month!
<ChrisL> cheers
<bdc> +1000 jen, huge win for the web!
Received on Thursday, 30 March 2017 01:44:03 UTC