Minutes Oct 7, 2010 SVG WG telcon

(Resending without accidental legal disclaimer, just so it's clear that 
these minutes are public.)




       [1] http://www.w3.org/

                                - DRAFT -

                    SVG Working Group Teleconference

07 Oct 2010

    See also: [2]IRC log

       [2] http://www.w3.org/2010/10/07-svg-irc


           [Microsoft], ed, anthony, ChrisL, +39.537.7.aaaa, tbah,




      * [3]Topics
          1. [4]TPAC Issues
          2. [5]ISSUE-2331
          3. [6]ISSUE-2353
          4. [7]ISSUE-2339
          5. [8]Public-FX
      * [9]Summary of Action Items

    <trackbot> Date: 07 October 2010

    <ChrisL> anthony, are you in a position to quickly turn the crank to
    update the test suite status?

    <ChrisL> zakim +39 is tbah

    <pdengler> scribeNick: pdengler

TPAC Issues

    ed: ACTION: Setting up meeting with CSS Group
    ... Will there be a session for publicFX?

    ChrisL: Yes, there will be a meeting for that task force
    ... No time yet established
    ... Will we need a phone

    anthony: chance I'll be attending

    ed: Will Tav be dialing in?

    pdengler: what are our options for getting a phone?

    ChrisL: I've asked for a regular call in phone

    <ChrisL> a polycom bridge thing

    ed: Got an email from Alex asking to fill out the form and asking
    whether or not we need a flip cord

    ChrisL: I already asked for this

    <ChrisL> already asked for a polycom phone and a flip chart

    ChrisL: they are allocating rooms

    pdengler: If I have payed have i regesitered?

    ChrisL: Not necessarily


      [10] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2010reg/registrants#Svg

    <ChrisL> [11]http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2010reg/

      [11] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2010reg/

    <shepazu> [12]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/TPAC/#Registration

      [12] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/TPAC/#Registration

    shepazu: that's 6 of us if Tony can make it

    pdengler: (galaga sounds)

    <ChrisL> zakim who is making noise?

    ed: Any items that we want on the agenda for TPAC

    ChrisL: Are we expected to have implementations ready by then?

    ed: I wanted that as another topic
    ... Unless we have the report it is not going to be done at the
    time, and it depends upon how many tests there are

    pdengler: We discussed that we wouldn't get this done mostly because
    we want to get the microsoft tests reviewed and the analysis about
    potential name chages from Microsoft for some of themn

    ChrisL: I've done 'de-red-ding' (removing red)
    ... Which is why I was asking Anthony to run the status regen, but I
    am basically down to basic shapes
    ... I wanted to get a better handle on how we were doing

    anthony: I went through the test suite to generate the XML
    impelementation report file and some just don't have approval

    ChrisL: I think there are more now than there were yesterday

    anthony: There were only 300 or so tests that had been accepted

    ChrisL: last one that was run was a month ago

    ed: When can we have then, the full list of tests?

    ChrisL: I am 3/4 done.

    pdengler: Does that include the ones Microsoft submitted?

    ChrisL: No, mine was for the previous, older ones
    ... We should talk about the recent tests and go through those

    pdengler: Last conf call we discussed Microsoft's effort to do an
    all-up surface review to help modularize the test suite so
    developers can understand the support for SVG better across



    anthony: I see 408 accepted tests now

    ed: I would like to have the template ready to test before TPAC

    What does testing before TPAC mean?

    ed: If we have some preliminary results from some implementations,
    we can start doing the implementation report
    ... we don't expect the tests that have already been accepted to
    change, and we can therefore test and rely on those results
    ... the tests that are already accepted should be tested

    <shepazu> scribeNick: shepazu

    pdengler: I hear what you're saying...
    ... there's a set of tests that we all agree on and are stable
    ... and doug is saying this doesn't preclude us from recategorizing
    ... my question is, are we going to publish the results before the
    recategorization and analysis

    ChrisL: depends on what you mean by publish
    ... we need to get a sense of where we are, to push implementations
    ... this will not be the final implementation report that we publish
    for transition from CR to PR to Rec

    pdengler: so, with regard to new tests... we would like to submit a
    few more tests for inclusion in the implementation report

    ChrisL: we are open to reviewing them

    ed: I think they are nice tests, just a matter of resources

    ChrisL: I've reviewed about half of the new MS tests
    ... of the first lot

    ed: I'd like to prioritize the tests relevant to second edition

    pdengler: what was the quality of the tests, ChrisL?



    ChrisL: the first tests had some errors, but they have improved over
    ... most are straightforward
    ... I haven't looked at the more recent batch

    ed: the ones I've seen I had to adapt to the test framework, which
    is a pita

    pdengler: that's because SVG fonts is in the template

    <ChrisL> which are used for labelling text. its not needed to pass
    the tests

    <ChrisL> i would expect the svg 2 test suite to use woff fonts

    shepazu: I think we should go through some tests and report errors
    that make them hard to review, so microsoft can improve conformance
    to the template

    <ed> some feedback from me on the last batch of tests:


    <pdengler> shepazu: We will push through some spot testing (Doug,
    Chris, maybe Tony) of recently submitted tests on Monday

    <pdengler> pdengler: How about we adjust the tests based on the
    feedback first (the tests we submitted0

    <pdengler> pdengler: If that is before Monday we will let you know

    <ChrisL> nuqDaq 'oH puchpa''e'

    <pdengler> pdengler: plan is to start spot testing on Monday

    <pdengler> anthony: I am redoing status report now

    <pdengler> ChrisL: on the subject of implementations, alex danilo is
    sending his work so I will run the tests

    <pdengler> pdengler: I have some opinions on backward compat and
    "promoting" attributes to properties at a high level which I am
    still working through


      [16] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2010OctDec/0013.html



    <ed> think you need to install Image::Magick (via CPAN)

    <anthony> [18]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2331

      [18] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2331



    <ChrisL> ISSUE-2353?

    <trackbot> ISSUE-2353 -- Last Call Comment: Clarify coordinates for
    feImage. -- raised

    <trackbot> [19]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2353

      [19] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2353



    <ed> "the default subregion is 0%,0%,100%,100%, where as a
    special-case the percentages are relative to the dimensions of the
    filter region, thus making the the default filter primitive
    subregion equal to the filter region."



    <anthony> Scribe: anthony

    TB: The the change regarding that issue is fine

    <ChrisL> issue-2339?

    <trackbot> ISSUE-2339 -- Last Call Comment: definition of azimuth,
    elevation for feDistantLight -- open

    <trackbot> [22]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2339

      [22] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2339


    <shepazu> scribenick: anthony

    AG: Hoping to have my investigation finished for the telcon nextweek

    <ed> [23]http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/products/24

      [23] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/products/24

    ED: That's the list of last call issues

    CL: If people let me know when we are in good shape I'll do another

    AG: Might be worth doing an update end of next week


    ED: Noticed that CSS wanted to have premultiplied values for the
    gradient interpolation

    CL: The idea is to get around a grey effect that they didn't like
    ... I've made a change to CSS Color which says that transparent
    gives you transparent black

    DS: This touches on the topic before
    ... where SVG has a separate opacity

    CL: Means that SVG needs to deal with RGBA
    ... and it the just need to multiply together
    ... it's not too hard for us to add that
    ... and we already have the infrustructure to add that
    ... Opera already implements that

    ED: FF since v3.5 IIRC has that as well

    trackbot, end telcon

Summary of Action Items

    [End of minutes]

Received on Thursday, 7 October 2010 22:38:55 UTC