- From: Nikos Andronikos <Nikos.Andronikos@cisra.canon.com.au>
- Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 23:35:51 +0000
- To: www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
https://www.w3.org/2016/10/20-svg-minutes.html
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
SVG Working Group Teleconference
20 Oct 2016
[2]Agenda
[2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2016Oct/0037.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/20-svg-irc
Attendees
Present
stakagi, AmeliaBR, nikos, Tav, fguimont, shepazu
Regrets
Chair
Nikos
Scribe
nikos
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]New charter
2. [6]Testing
3. [7]Moving some SVG 2 features to WICG
* [8]Summary of Action Items
* [9]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<scribe> scribe: nikos
<scribe> scribenick: nikos
New charter
nikos: Is there anything we need to do, or any update?
shepazu: Internally, W3M decided Wednesday to extend the group
to the end of January to give us time to sort out the charter
... I've made some small updates to the charter and I'd like to
go over those
<AmeliaBR>
[10]https://w3c.github.io/charter-drafts/svg-2016.html
[10] https://w3c.github.io/charter-drafts/svg-2016.html
shepazu: main changes were scoping the charter to be very
explicit about finalising SVG 2and offering a concrete
mechanism to preserve things that do not make it into SVG 2,
for some future version of SVG
... e.g. if barename xref doesn't make it in, the suggestion is
to put it into a note
... a note is a non normative document published on W3C's site
... from there it might be picked up and turned into a spec in
a later charter period - or go to incubation
... incubation might mean that not only is it spec'd well,
everyone is signed up for the way you've defined it
... further incubation would be getting implementation
commitments
... charter covers that mechanism
... as a side note, we should try to push for as many tests as
we can, even if features aren't planned for implementation
soon.
... next change to the charter (and this may change back) - on
the charter for web platform group, there was a problem with
the charter
... MS objected to joint deliverables between Aria and web
platform group
... to forestall that object, plh suggested I remove joint
deliverable status and make them owned by either aria or svg
... there was push back from team contact of aria
... I said svg wg was fine keeping joint deliverables so right
now the charter says there are no shared deliverables but I'm
going to revert that change and send it to the AC
... I think we're on track to send the charter to the AC for
review some time in the next month
... unless we hear from anyone that they don't think it's ready
... currently being reviewed by W3M
AmeliaBR: think it's ok from our end
Tav: It sounds good, I'm wondering about the future of the
group. Even before the one year extension ends
... unless we get new contributors I'm not sure how we're going
to get the work done
nikos: I'm taking a wait and see approach at the moment, trying
to get the test suite off the ground. Then we can see how much
work we expect it to be, and whether we are able to bring
people on board to assist.
... I plan to volunteer some time over the year even if I'm not
a member - maybe one night a week
Testing
[11]https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/wiki/Testing
[11] https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/wiki/Testing
<AmeliaBR> scribenick: AmeliaBR
Nikos: I created this wiki (link above) to describe the main
process for how to create tests.
... We've mostly agreed to use web-platform-test, but it is
very web-browser specific, we may need to make adjustments for
other user agents like Inkscape.
Tav: I think it's straightforward so long as the reference is
either SVG or PNG.
Nikos: PNG has issues, because then we'd probably need separate
reference images for each platform.
AmeliaBR: Is that really true? If you're using default system
fonts, then yes, but for most SVG you should get the same
rendering on all platforms.
Tav: And for fonts, we can use web fonts to get consistency.
AmeliaBR: I'd be more worried about using SVG as a reference.
User agents may match the reference rendering on their own
system, but still not be cross-compatible because of
lower-level rendering issues.
Tav: Either way, the may concern is that the references aren't
HTML files, since we can't run them to compare.
Nikos: You could use some other rendering agent to convert
those to PNG references.
Tav: That adds a new level of complexity.
Nikos: The issue is that web platform tests doesn't give us
strict control over what gets added. Anyone who's had a good
reputation with the project gets write access to approve tests.
Tav: There are many things about it I like. I like being able
to click and see the reference image. I like having versioning
control.
... One problem is that it is quite a huge repository, and it
will get even larger as CSS joins.
Nikos: So you don't want to download the whole repo?
Tav: The repo itself is not a big problem, but watching for all
the issues could be very overwhelming. Having it all in one
repo seems not very manageable.
... I expect it's something that's been discussed internally,
but for now we'll have to deal with it as best we can.
Nikos: We could make a fork of the repo, and use it to do all
the subject-matter discussions, then when we decide on those,
push them to the main repo for a final approval of the format.
AmeliaBR: I like that idea if we can make it work. Funnel
things through a 2-stage pull request.
Tav: There's already SVG tests there. Mozilla uploaded a lot in
the past few weeks.
Nikos: Yes, one of the goals of web-platform-tests is to make
it easy for browsers to dump their internal testing suites, to
quickly add new tests.
Tav: I like the idea of making it easy to add tests. But that
doesn't always make it easy to use them.
<nikos> ACTION: Nikos to think about how we can mitigate the
issues that arise of being part of a large repository [recorded
in [12]http://www.w3.org/2016/10/20-svg-minutes.html#action01]
[12] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/20-svg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-3857 - Think about how we can
mitigate the issues that arise of being part of a large
repository [on Nikos Andronikos - due 2016-10-27].
Nikos: For example, these href tests are all HTML reference
documents. So you'd need to filter those out.
Tav: Another issue is how we are going to organize things.
E.g., the sub-folders for the chapters, and then there are
elements and attributes. But what about things that aren't
either elements or attributes?
Nikos: I think we should have guidelines for naming, but not
too strict. Because there will always be something that doesn't
fit the naming scheme.
Tav: As we import the SVG 1.1 tests, I notice you removed some
of the metadata. Would it be possible to leave that? It doesn't
hurt to keep it.
Nikos: I kept some of it if I thought it was useful. But, e.g.,
the prose description of the result isn't needed when we have
reference images.
Tav: And then, as I already mentioned, issue with HTML
references.
Nikos: Would we be able to create an automated script to
convert HTML references to SVG?
AmeliaBR: If the HTML page is just a wrapper for a single
inline SVG, that might be feasible. Would need some review, but
might cover most cases.
Nikos: What about reviewing the tests we're importing from SVG
1.1?
<nikos> [13]https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/4015
[13] https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/4015
AmeliaBR: They all need some sort of review.
Nikos: That's my feeling, although it will slow things down.
This is the pull request. One way to get yourself established
on the repo is to start by reviewing the pull requests.
Tav: A lot of activity there.
Nikos: Yes, some of their tools are a little flakey, had to do
a lot of adjustments. If anyone has difficulties trying to set
up the tools on your own computer, let me know. I may have
already figured it out myself.
... Any last questions or comments on this topic?
Doug: I think you've made a good start.
<nikos> scribenick: nikos
Moving some SVG 2 features to WICG
nikos: Mesh gradients is the first thing we want to look at
here
AmeliaBR: hatches and maybe solidcolor can tag along
nikos: It's a bit odd moving this to WICG because it's so
mature
... We're not going to remove it from the spec as soon as we
raise the issue at WICG
... we want to get some discussion happening and see if we can
keep mesh gradients in
AmeliaBR: So the purpose of the CG is to discuss implementation
possibilities for the new paint servers for the SVG 2 spec?
Which may include a recommendation at the end of the incubation
period to leave it in the spec, or move it to a module
shepazu: I like your focus there, but I agree with Tav that
mixing it all in may be a bad idea
... no one knows what a paint server is
... gradient mesh, hatching, and solid fill is three things,
when the one thing we really want is mesh gradients, and it's
easier to make a case for that
nikos: also if we are getting people on board to support, we
want them to be able to point to one feature and say they
support that
Tav: that reflects what I'm thinking - keeping it simple and
focused
AmeliaBR: part of the problem with SVG 2 was at the time the
original requirements list was set up for a very different
audience and use case than where the browser attention is now
... svg in a web page use cases are very different to svg as an
artwork format
... using a visual editor, it's hard to see where the benefit
of z-index comes from
nikos: So I'd like to prepare a draft of what we'll propose to
WICG
Tav: I'm away for two weeks so won't have much time
AmeliaBR: we can circulate and have a discussion and then Tav
can get involved when back
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Nikos to think about how we can mitigate the
issues that arise of being part of a large repository [recorded
in [14]http://www.w3.org/2016/10/20-svg-minutes.html#action01]
[14] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/20-svg-minutes.html#action01
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
The information contained in this email message and any attachments may be confidential and may also be the subject to legal professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, interference with, disclosure or copying of this material is unauthorised and prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately advise the sender by return email and delete the information from your system.
Received on Thursday, 20 October 2016 23:36:27 UTC