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

RE: Agenda, 1 October 2015 SVG WG telcon

From: David Dailey <ddailey@zoominternet.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 10:08:08 -0400
To: 'Erik Dahlström' <erik@xn--dahlstrm-t4a.net>, "'www-svg'" <www-svg@w3.org>
Cc: <svg-developers@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <000f01d0fd1b$c4c0d320$4e427960$@net>


-----Original Message-----
From: Erik Dahlström [mailto:erik@dahlström.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 4:47 PM
To: www-svg
Subject: Agenda, 1 October 2015 SVG WG telcon

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
-------------------

I see from discussion following the meeting that one of the CSS agenda items (css-writing-modes) was indeed addressed.

I think the majority of authors who have developed content that is consistent with SVG1.1 who fear that our industrial, scholarly and artistic work is about to be deprecated with no workable functionality to replace it, are more concerned perhaps, with the status of https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/23 in particular the clarification of what standards compliance means vis a vis declarative animation, relationships to existing content, the parts of SVG DOM (as with animVal vs baseVal) and methods to pass events back and forth between declarative and scripted methods (onend, onbegin, beginElement(), etc.).

When one writer on the github discussion writes

"If there is / will be consensus in the SVG WG that both script animation and declarative animation (incl SVG's animation elements) should be required for dynamic SVG viewers (I think both should be required for eg browsers), then the wording (eg in the SVG2 spec) should be updated to unambiguously state that.

Many developers want/need SVG SMIL / SVG's animation elements. If there is / will be consensus in the SVG WG that both script animation and declarative animation (incl SVG's animation elements) should be required for dynamic SVG viewers (I think both should be required for eg browsers), then the wording (eg in the SVG2 spec) should be updated to unambiguously state that.

Many developers want/need SVG SMIL / SVG's animation elements."

I think many who work in at least a dozen different sectors of world economy would concur. Human communication is far too large an issue to be left in the hands of a few narrow economic interests. 

Was that issue discussed? Was consensus found?

Regards
David
Received on Friday, 2 October 2015 14:08:44 UTC

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