W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > October 2015

Re: agenda+ css-writing-modes-3 review

From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 04:14:40 +0000
To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
CC: Erik Dahlström <erik@xn--dahlstrm-t4a.net>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "Amelia Bellamy-Royds" <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, Tavmjong Bah <tavmjong@free.fr>
Message-ID: <7A5D3DE0-5FE7-4439-8CBE-67FA32D80669@adobe.com>

> On Oct 1, 2015, at 4:08 PM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi, Dirk, Amelia, Cameron–
> 
> We decided that we need (at least some of) you on the telcon to really deal with this issue and help move the CSS Writing Modes 3 spec to CR.
> 
> Are you available to be on the telcon next week?

I wonder what the issue is. I thought we resolved the last open issues at the FX TF meeting in Paris a couple of weeks ago?  fantasai and Cameron were both it the meeting and overruled me :D. I myself will not be able to join.

Greetings,
Dirk

> 
> Tav is going to be reviewing the spec in depth, and you can coordinate with him to provide feedback, if you can't be on the telcon.
> 
> Thanks–
> –Doug
> 
> On 9/30/15 9:58 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:
>> Hi, Erik–
>> 
>> Can we please add the CSS Writing Modes 3 spec review to the agenda?
>> Fantasai says she needs our feedback on 2 issues (listed below), and
>> she's available to attend the telcon tomorrow to explain the issue.
>> 
>> (Fantasai, telcon details below in Erik's original agenda email.)
>> 
>> [[
>> I'm blocked on the SVGWG here:
>> https://drafts.csswg.org/css-writing-modes-3/issues-cr-2014

>> 
>> Two issues require SVGWG review
>> 
>> first one is https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2015Sep/0016.html

>> 
>> That's the one that needs review of spec wording
>> 
>> second issue is this
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2015Sep/0017.html

>> 
>> The question on hand is whether we can fold 'writing-mode: rl' and
>> 'writing-mode: lr' together
>> 
>> From a CSS perspective, they're the same
>> 
>> The different values don't affect anything in the CSS model
>> 
>> They're both horizontal writing modes, and the rl vs. lr doesn't affect
>> bidi
>> 
>> But the SVG spec says they affect the "inline progression direction"
>> and I can't figure out what that means or should have an effect on
>> 
>> But it's quite clear that it doesn't affect reordering!
>> 
>> There's a test file here
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2015Sep/att-0027/test.svg

>> 
>> which does very interesting things in Presto
>> 
>> but otherwise renders the two values identically in Blink and InkScape
>> 
>> So, yeah, have fun with that?
>> 
>> maybe someone in the group knows what the SVG spec was trying to say,
>> and whether or not it was important
>> ]]
>> 
>> Regards–
>> –Doug
>> 
>> On 9/30/15 4:46 PM, Erik Dahlström wrote:
>>> Please find the agenda for this week’s telcon below.
>>> 
>>> Time:
>>> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=10&day=1&year=2015&hour=20&min=30&sec=0&p1=0

>>> 
>>> 
>>> Phone: +1-617-324-0000 (access code: 649 040 824)
>>> IRC for minutes/discussion: #svg on irc.w3.org, port 6665
>>> Agenda requests: http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Agenda
>>> WebEx logistics: https://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/WebEx
>>> 
>>> Agenda:
>>> 
>>> * Path stroking for paths that end with tight curves (Tav)
>>>   http://tavmjong.free.fr/blog/?p=1257

>>> 
>>> * Declarative animation and conformance
>>>   https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/23

>>> 
>>> * SVG 2 chapter progress
>>> 
>> 

Received on Friday, 2 October 2015 04:15:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:55:03 UTC