/irc-logs / w3c / #css / 2012-03-07 / end

Options:

  1. # Session Start: Wed Mar 07 00:00:01 2012
  2. # Session Ident: #css
  3. # [00:16] * Quits: nimbu (Adium@24.18.47.160) (Quit: Leaving.)
  4. # [00:21] * Joins: nimbu (Adium@24.18.47.160)
  5. # [00:26] * Quits: nimbu (Adium@24.18.47.160) (Quit: Leaving.)
  6. # [02:13] * Quits: arno (arno@192.150.10.200) (Quit: Leaving.)
  7. # [02:32] * Quits: dbaron (dbaron@159.63.23.38) (Quit: 8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.)
  8. # [02:44] * Joins: jarek (jarek@83.27.240.225)
  9. # [03:29] * Joins: jdaggett (jdaggett@202.221.217.73)
  10. # [03:30] * Quits: jet (jet@159.63.23.38) (Quit: jet)
  11. # [03:33] * Joins: nimbu (Adium@24.18.47.160)
  12. # [04:28] * Quits: jarek (jarek@83.27.240.225) (Quit: jarek)
  13. # [04:31] * Parts: nimbu (Adium@24.18.47.160)
  14. # [05:15] * Quits: leaverou (leaverou@67.180.84.179) (Quit: leaverou)
  15. # [05:37] * Joins: leaverou (leaverou@67.180.84.179)
  16. # [05:55] * Quits: leaverou (leaverou@67.180.84.179) (Quit: leaverou)
  17. # [07:20] * Joins: jarek (jarek@83.27.240.225)
  18. # [07:46] * Quits: jarek (jarek@83.27.240.225) (Quit: jarek)
  19. # [09:19] * Quits: glenn (gadams@174.29.111.125) (Client exited)
  20. # [09:31] * Quits: jdaggett (jdaggett@202.221.217.73) (Quit: jdaggett)
  21. # [10:42] * Joins: SimonSapin (simon@82.232.219.95)
  22. # [11:21] * Quits: shepazu (shepazu@128.30.52.169) (Quit: shepazu)
  23. # [13:46] * Joins: leaverou (leaverou@67.180.84.179)
  24. # [14:17] * Quits: shans_ (shans@74.125.56.17) (Quit: shans_)
  25. # [15:24] * Joins: glenn (gadams@174.29.111.125)
  26. # [15:36] * Joins: nimbu (Adium@24.18.47.160)
  27. # [16:25] * Joins: myakura (myakura@110.233.178.43)
  28. # [16:44] * Joins: ksweeney (ksweeney@63.119.10.10)
  29. # [16:57] * Joins: florianr (florianr@213.236.208.22)
  30. # [17:04] * Joins: kojiishi (kojiishi@61.195.153.110)
  31. # [17:10] * Joins: arno (arno@192.150.10.200)
  32. # [17:19] * Quits: arno (arno@192.150.10.200) (Quit: Leaving.)
  33. # [17:21] * Joins: glazou (glazou@82.247.96.19)
  34. # [17:22] * Joins: Zakim (rrs-bridgg@128.30.52.169)
  35. # [17:22] * Joins: RRSAgent (rrs-loggee@128.30.52.169)
  36. # [17:22] <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/03/07-css-irc
  37. # [17:22] <glazou> Zakim, this will be Style
  38. # [17:22] <Zakim> ok, glazou; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 45 minutes
  39. # [17:22] <glazou> RRSAgent, make logs public
  40. # [17:22] <RRSAgent> I have made the request, glazou
  41. # [17:27] * Joins: tantek (tantek@207.239.114.206)
  42. # [17:30] * Joins: kojiish__ (kojiishi@222.158.227.129)
  43. # [17:30] * Quits: kojiish__ (kojiishi@222.158.227.129) (Quit: Leaving...)
  44. # [17:30] * Joins: kojiishi_ (kojiishi@222.158.227.129)
  45. # [17:32] * Quits: kojiishi (kojiishi@61.195.153.110) (Ping timeout)
  46. # [17:36] * Joins: Ms2ger (Ms2ger@81.242.176.209)
  47. # [17:40] * kojiishi_ is now known as kojiishi
  48. # [17:51] * Quits: SimonSapin (simon@82.232.219.95) (Quit: Leaving.)
  49. # [17:51] * Joins: SimonSapin (simon@82.232.219.95)
  50. # [17:54] * Quits: tantek (tantek@207.239.114.206) (Quit: tantek)
  51. # [17:57] * Quits: Ms2ger (Ms2ger@81.242.176.209) (Ping timeout)
  52. # [17:58] <glazou> Zakim, code?
  53. # [17:58] <Zakim> the conference code is 78953 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), glazou
  54. # [18:00] * Joins: antonp (50a94e63@207.192.75.252)
  55. # [18:03] <Zakim> Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started
  56. # [18:03] * Joins: bradk (bradk@99.7.175.117)
  57. # [18:03] <Zakim> +??P39
  58. # [18:03] <glazou> Zakim, ??P39 is me
  59. # [18:03] <Zakim> +glazou; got it
  60. # [18:04] <Zakim> + +1.206.324.aaaa
  61. # [18:04] <sylvaing> Zakim, aaaa is sylvaing
  62. # [18:04] <Zakim> +sylvaing; got it
  63. # [18:04] * Joins: katie (kellison@131.107.0.119)
  64. # [18:05] * Joins: oyvind (oyvinds@213.236.208.22)
  65. # [18:05] <Zakim> + +1.408.536.aabb
  66. # [18:06] <Zakim> + +93550aacc
  67. # [18:06] <glazou> Zakim, aabb szilles
  68. # [18:06] <Zakim> I don't understand 'aabb szilles', glazou
  69. # [18:06] <antonp> Zakim, aacc is me
  70. # [18:06] <Zakim> +antonp; got it
  71. # [18:06] <glazou> Zakim, aabb is szilles
  72. # [18:06] <Zakim> +szilles; got it
  73. # [18:07] <Zakim> + +1.619.846.aadd
  74. # [18:07] <hober> Zakim, aadd is me
  75. # [18:07] <Zakim> +hober; got it
  76. # [18:07] <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
  77. # [18:07] <Zakim> +[Microsoft.a]
  78. # [18:07] * Joins: JohnJansen (qw3birc@128.30.52.28)
  79. # [18:08] * Joins: tantek (tantek@207.239.114.206)
  80. # [18:08] * Joins: SteveZ (chatzilla@192.150.10.201)
  81. # [18:08] <Zakim> +Bert
  82. # [18:08] <JohnJansen> Zakim, Microsoft has JohnJansen
  83. # [18:08] <Zakim> +JohnJansen; got it
  84. # [18:08] <Zakim> + +1.415.832.aaee
  85. # [18:08] <tantek> good morning
  86. # [18:08] <Zakim> +[Mozilla]
  87. # [18:08] <Zakim> +??P65
  88. # [18:08] * tantek is in SFO awaiting a sequence of flights to SXSW.
  89. # [18:09] <glenn> zakim, ??p65 is me
  90. # [18:09] <Zakim> +glenn; got it
  91. # [18:09] <Zakim> + +1.206.552.aaff
  92. # [18:09] <glenn> zakim, mute me
  93. # [18:09] <Zakim> glenn should now be muted
  94. # [18:09] * Joins: krit (Adium@192.150.10.201)
  95. # [18:09] <glazou> Zakim, aaee is katie
  96. # [18:09] <Zakim> +katie; got it
  97. # [18:09] <glazou> Zakim, aaee is krit
  98. # [18:09] * Joins: dbaron (dbaron@159.63.23.38)
  99. # [18:09] <Zakim> sorry, glazou, I do not recognize a party named 'aaee'
  100. # [18:09] * Bert wonders how much luggage Tantek has that he needs more than one plane...
  101. # [18:09] * dbaron Zakim, who is on the phone?
  102. # [18:09] * Zakim sees on the phone: glazou, sylvaing, szilles, antonp, hober, [Microsoft], [Microsoft.a], Bert, katie, [Mozilla], glenn (muted), +1.206.552.aaff
  103. # [18:09] * Zakim [Microsoft] has JohnJansen
  104. # [18:10] <dbaron> Zakim, [Mozilla] is dbaron
  105. # [18:10] <Zakim> +dbaron; got it
  106. # [18:10] <Zakim> +??P74
  107. # [18:10] <florianr> Zakim, I am ??P74
  108. # [18:10] <Zakim> +florianr; got it
  109. # [18:10] * tantek points out to Bert that sequence implies serial rather than parallel ;)
  110. # [18:10] <katie> Zakim, [Microsofta] is katie
  111. # [18:10] <Zakim> +katie; got it
  112. # [18:10] <glazou> Zakim, katie is krit
  113. # [18:10] <Zakim> +krit; got it
  114. # [18:10] <nimbu> Zakim: aaff is me
  115. # [18:10] <glazou> Zakim, who is on the phone?
  116. # [18:10] <Zakim> On the phone I see glazou, sylvaing, szilles, antonp, hober, [Microsoft], katie.a, Bert, krit, dbaron, glenn (muted), +1.206.552.aaff, florianr
  117. # [18:10] <Zakim> [Microsoft] has JohnJansen
  118. # [18:10] <nimbu> Zakim, aaff is me
  119. # [18:10] <Zakim> +nimbu; got it
  120. # [18:11] <katie> rookie moves. :)
  121. # [18:11] <nimbu> :)
  122. # [18:11] * Joins: Cathy (qw3birc@128.30.52.28)
  123. # [18:11] * Joins: Ms2ger (Ms2ger@81.242.171.145)
  124. # [18:12] <Zakim> +[Microsoft.a]
  125. # [18:12] <arronei_> zakim, microsoft.a has me
  126. # [18:12] <Zakim> +arronei_; got it
  127. # [18:12] * Joins: ChrisL (ChrisL@128.30.52.169)
  128. # [18:13] * Quits: tantek (tantek@207.239.114.206) (No route to host)
  129. # [18:13] * Joins: tantek (tantek@207.239.114.206)
  130. # [18:13] <glazou> ScribeNick: antonp
  131. # [18:14] * Parts: ksweeney (ksweeney@63.119.10.10)
  132. # [18:14] <antonp> Topic: css3-transforms
  133. # [18:14] <glazou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Mar/0117.html
  134. # [18:14] <antonp> ??: 2 related issues :
  135. # [18:15] <glazou> s/??/krit
  136. # [18:15] <antonp> transform-origin vs background-position syntax
  137. # [18:15] <antonp> ... should we try to achieve a common syntax, ie use background-position syntax
  138. # [18:15] <antonp> ??: would the change break compat?
  139. # [18:15] <glazou> s/??/sylvaing
  140. # [18:15] <Zakim> +ChrisL
  141. # [18:16] <Zakim> +??P18
  142. # [18:16] <kojiishi> zakim, ??p18 is me
  143. # [18:16] <Zakim> +kojiishi; got it
  144. # [18:16] <antonp> sylvaing: don't want to break interop
  145. # [18:16] <antonp> florianr: keep interop
  146. # [18:16] * Bert thinks the easiest solution is to remove 'transform-origin' from the spec. :-)
  147. # [18:16] * Quits: tantek (tantek@207.239.114.206) (Quit: tantek)
  148. # [18:17] <antonp> ??: 1-value or 2-value doesn't really matter
  149. # [18:17] * sylvaing Bert I was thinking the same thing about templates in the grid spec :)
  150. # [18:17] <glazou> s/??/krit
  151. # [18:17] * Joins: smfr (smfr@17.212.152.232)
  152. # [18:17] <Zakim> + +1.408.636.aagg
  153. # [18:17] * glazou wow sound of sylvaing's phone is so good it really sounds he's here next to me !
  154. # [18:18] <smfr> Zakim, aagg is me
  155. # [18:18] <Zakim> +smfr; got it
  156. # [18:18] <antonp> ??: would a new conforming implementation force authors to rewrite existing code?
  157. # [18:18] <glazou> s//??/sylvaing
  158. # [18:18] <antonp> ... don't want to revisit gradiants debacle
  159. # [18:18] <antonp> smfr: don't know if there would be breakage; but it's unlikely
  160. # [18:18] * sylvaing glazou yeah i finally got around to getting new NiMH batteries in the thing.
  161. # [18:19] <antonp> dbaron: not clear how the change would work
  162. # [18:19] <antonp> smfr: first option: use a new param 'z'
  163. # [18:19] * ChrisL everything can be solved by forever tweaking the syntax
  164. # [18:19] <antonp> ... second option: [...]
  165. # [18:19] <smfr> s/param/property, transform-origin-z
  166. # [18:20] <antonp> ... separate 2-d part from 3-d part by a slash
  167. # [18:20] * Bert to sylvain: there's en essential diff. though: 'transform-origin' adds no functionality...
  168. # [18:20] <antonp> florianr: if we have support for calc, whatever works right now could continue working, and we open new possiblities
  169. # [18:21] <Zakim> + +1.650.766.aahh
  170. # [18:21] <bradk> zakim, aahh is me
  171. # [18:21] <Zakim> +bradk; got it
  172. # [18:21] <sylvaing> My ask is that existing content works unchanged since authors have already 'future-proofed' their code with unprefixed transform-origin. As long as that's preserved to the largest possible extent, I'm good
  173. # [18:22] <krit> background-postion and trtansform orgin share the same behavior. So why not harmonize the syntax of both
  174. # [18:22] <glazou> florian: my position is the same as sylvaing's
  175. # [18:23] <antonp> various: whatever we do, existing content should not break
  176. # [18:23] <sylvaing> krit: why not would be if the change broke content. given that we aim to standardize what is already interoperable it would be undesirable.
  177. # [18:23] <antonp> smfr: some but not very much
  178. # [18:23] <krit> is there content that uses transform-origin for translationg on z-axis
  179. # [18:23] <antonp> smfr: some but not very much
  180. # [18:24] <antonp> kirt: no conclusion on www-style
  181. # [18:24] <antonp> krit: smfr, would change break content?
  182. # [18:24] <antonp> smfr: I'm not sure. I'd have to see
  183. # [18:24] * Joins: tantek (tantek@66.87.7.29)
  184. # [18:24] <antonp> florianr: [...]
  185. # [18:25] <antonp> dbaron: no concrete proposal; can't check if things break, without a proposal
  186. # [18:25] <antonp> sylvaing: don't want to break 2d, but some 3d breakage might be acceptable
  187. # [18:25] * Quits: tantek (tantek@66.87.7.29) (Quit: tantek)
  188. # [18:25] <antonp> dbaron: 1 option is to say not bother with concrete proposal, just keep things as they are
  189. # [18:25] <antonp> ChrisL: what's the disadvantage from keeping things as is?
  190. # [18:26] <antonp> dbaron: it doesn't work like background-position
  191. # [18:26] <antonp> Bert: problem is that it's different but similar; confusing
  192. # [18:26] <florianr> s/[...]/What I hear you saying is that changing would not break anything on 2d, and may break 3d, but there is not much content relying on it./
  193. # [18:26] <antonp> ChrisL: we're not designing from scratch, so we can live with it
  194. # [18:26] <dbaron> I'm also inclined to just leave it as it is (i.e., matching CSS2 background-position but not css3-background background-position)
  195. # [18:27] <antonp> 1st value means translation on horizontal axis, 2nd value is vert translation, 3rd value is z
  196. # [18:27] <ChrisL> I am not hearing a really high value to changing from the current syntax
  197. # [18:27] <antonp> krit: calc isn't yet implemented everywhere; it could solve problem in future
  198. # [18:27] <antonp> ??: if we keep transform-origin as is, could we change background-position
  199. # [18:27] <glazou> s/??/hober
  200. # [18:28] <antonp> krit: no way to change background-position; it's already in use
  201. # [18:28] <antonp> florianr: it's too late for this discussion
  202. # [18:28] <antonp> florianr: could live with a change if it doesn't break 2d, but neutral about it
  203. # [18:28] <ChrisL> +1 to not changing
  204. # [18:28] <antonp> glazou: people are saying it's not worth the hassle of changing
  205. # [18:29] <antonp> ?? (sylvaing?): there's already content using the current stuff, no-one is complaining. not a problem in real world
  206. # [18:29] <antonp> ChrisL: let's drop change and move on
  207. # [18:30] <antonp> glazou: no objections
  208. # [18:30] <antonp> RESOLVED: no change to syntaxes
  209. # [18:30] <Zakim> -krit
  210. # [18:30] * Quits: krit (Adium@192.150.10.201) (Quit: Leaving.)
  211. # [18:30] <antonp> Topic: Media Queries
  212. # [18:30] <antonp> florianr: 2 imps pass test suite: Op and Fx
  213. # [18:30] <ChrisL> pointer to imp reports?
  214. # [18:30] <antonp> .. not many changes, jhust editorial
  215. # [18:31] <antonp> ... let's publish!
  216. # [18:31] <antonp> ChrisL: excellent!
  217. # [18:31] <oyvind> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Mar/0083.html
  218. # [18:31] <antonp> florianr: i've sent an imp report to www-style
  219. # [18:31] <dbaron> changes list is http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-mediaqueries/#changes-2010
  220. # [18:31] <antonp> florianr: do I have to do anything as an editor? Or does Bert do it
  221. # [18:31] <dbaron> implementation reports at http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/MediaQueries/20120229/reports/implement-report.html
  222. # [18:31] <antonp> ChrisL: transition call to Director... point to test results
  223. # [18:32] * glazou loves GREEN :-)
  224. # [18:32] <antonp> ... next thing: transition call
  225. # [18:32] <dbaron> ChrisL: But you, the editor, don't need to do that.
  226. # [18:32] <antonp> RESOLVED: publish Media Queries as a Proposed Rec
  227. # [18:32] <ChrisL> rrsagent, here
  228. # [18:32] <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2012/03/07-css-irc#T17-25-29
  229. # [18:32] <glazou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/1083.html
  230. # [18:32] <antonp> Topic: transitions issues
  231. # [18:33] <antonp> dbaron: last time: no transition when duration and delay are both zero
  232. # [18:33] <antonp> ... Next one: rules for interpolating font-weight
  233. # [18:33] <Zakim> +??P7
  234. # [18:33] <antonp> ... current ED says font-weight is interpolated as a number
  235. # [18:34] <antonp> ... it's not quite right since 100 - 900 that are multiples of 1000
  236. # [18:34] <antonp> .. [something about rounding]
  237. # [18:34] <florianr> s/100/1000/
  238. # [18:34] <florianr> s/1000/100/
  239. # [18:34] <antonp> ... it's an ordered series of keywords. In Gecko, implemented interpolation of font-stretch
  240. # [18:34] <antonp> ??: ordered sequence of keywords that could be animated
  241. # [18:35] <antonp> dbaron: Question is: who implements what? Gecko implementes interpolation as mentioned above. What do others do
  242. # [18:35] <glazou> s/??/sylvaing
  243. # [18:35] <antonp> florianr: I don't know what we do, but I don't have anything against it
  244. # [18:35] <bradk> How about font-size keywords?
  245. # [18:35] <antonp> smfr: webkit: not interpolate font-weight
  246. # [18:35] <antonp> dbaron: I think you /do/ interpolate font-weight
  247. # [18:36] <antonp> ChrisL: unclear whether font-weight varies continuously, or is it just keywords that happen to be numeric
  248. # [18:36] <antonp> florianr: but they are ordered
  249. # [18:36] <antonp> ChrisL: makes sense to interpolate and snap to nearest 100
  250. # [18:37] <antonp> szilles: defined in font match algorithm?
  251. # [18:37] <antonp> ... there are fonts with a weight of 250
  252. # [18:37] <Bert> q+ to say that the font algo may make the transition less than smooth...
  253. # [18:37] * Zakim sees Bert on the speaker queue
  254. # [18:37] <antonp> dbaron: that doesn't match to CSS tho
  255. # [18:37] <antonp> ChrisL: what OpenType abnd CSS do are related but not identical
  256. # [18:37] <antonp> szilles: we should use the same mapping here
  257. # [18:38] <antonp> Bert: even though they are ordered, algo means that the steps are not uniform
  258. # [18:38] <antonp> s/algo/algorithm/
  259. # [18:38] <antonp> ... not sure we want to animate font-weight
  260. # [18:38] <antonp> szilles: gonna have strange effects in any case, since few fonts have a continuous range
  261. # [18:38] <antonp> glazou: authors will check transitions anyway; if they like it, they'll do it
  262. # [18:39] <antonp> szilles: costs effort to implement. Is there any use in this?
  263. # [18:39] <antonp> Bert: authors won't see problems, because their fonts are not the same as other peoples'
  264. # [18:39] <antonp> ChrisL: nowadays, people provide fonts with the pages, and better ways of specifying weights, so authors will feel more confdent to use this
  265. # [18:40] <antonp> ??: it's definitely possible to author with this; there are examples
  266. # [18:40] <glazou> s/??/sylvaing
  267. # [18:40] <antonp> [missed stuff]
  268. # [18:40] <antonp> expression of worries about equivalence with font matching algorithm
  269. # [18:41] <antonp> florianr: start with 100, then you go match things
  270. # [18:41] <antonp> szilles: ah, you're saying that the animation is continuous but it switches when it crosses the rounding point
  271. # [18:41] <antonp> ??: really, we're animating through a bunch of keywords
  272. # [18:41] <glazou> s/??/sylvaing
  273. # [18:42] <antonp> objections to : round to nearest multiple of 100?
  274. # [18:42] <antonp> no
  275. # [18:42] <antonp> RESOLVED: round to nearest multiple of 100
  276. # [18:42] <antonp> dbaron: Next: rules for transitioning visibility
  277. # [18:42] <antonp> ... spec says it can be interpolated
  278. # [18:43] <antonp> ... but what do we do about 'collapse'
  279. # [18:43] <antonp> one possibility: not allowed
  280. # [18:43] <antonp> dbaron: I don't have any other proposals
  281. # [18:43] <antonp> ... what's in Gecko probably isn't what's wanted
  282. # [18:43] <antonp> smfr: rules were set up so that we could make something appear and change its appearance in the same transition
  283. # [18:44] <antonp> ... if we were to do something similar for collapse, we should look at the pairs of values
  284. # [18:44] <antonp> dbaron: one way: make collaps/visible work like hidden'/visisble
  285. # [18:44] <antonp> dbaron: but say that collapse/hidden doesn't interpolate
  286. # [18:45] <antonp> smfr: webkit doesn't implement hidden-to-collapse
  287. # [18:45] <antonp> dbaron: table-row: at some point you'd switch at some point (indeed like all these rules)
  288. # [18:45] <sylvaing> not sure I understand what happens when going from collapse to visible
  289. # [18:46] <antonp> dbaron: summary: proposal right now is: interpolating between hidden/visible or collapse/visible then all of the intermediate points act as visible
  290. # [18:46] <antonp> glazou: the transition is immediate?
  291. # [18:46] <antonp> dbaron: the transition is immediate at some point, the question is whether it happens at the beginning or the end
  292. # [18:47] <antonp> sylvaing: what's the use case for [????]
  293. # [18:47] <glazou> s/???/going from collapse to visible
  294. # [18:47] <antonp> dbaron: new option: collapse/hidden transition behaves as hidden, rather than interpolate. I don't really care, and doubt anyone will notice
  295. # [18:47] <Bert> (I like david's proposal.)
  296. # [18:47] <smfr> no
  297. # [18:47] <antonp> glazou: any objection?
  298. # [18:48] <antonp> RESOLVED: accept david's proposal:
  299. # [18:48] <bradk> 'collapse' and 'hidden' appear to have identical results in webkit.
  300. # [18:48] <Zakim> + +8521616aaii
  301. # [18:48] <dbaron> collapse/hidden isn't interpolable; visible/hidden and visible/collapse interpolate so the intermediate states are all visible
  302. # [18:48] <glazou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Dec/0311.html
  303. # [18:49] <antonp> dbaron: last issue: pseudo-elements
  304. # [18:49] <antonp> .. transition events fire, what should happen when a transition ends on a pseudo-element?
  305. # [18:49] <antonp> ... one possiblity: fire an event at the element
  306. # [18:49] <antonp> ... another possibility: no event at all
  307. # [18:49] <antonp> ... another: add a field to the transition event saying which pseudo it's for
  308. # [18:49] <antonp> ... maybe there are more?
  309. # [18:50] <antonp> glazou: want consistency with getComputedStyle
  310. # [18:50] <antonp> ... first element is the event, second is the pseudo
  311. # [18:50] <antonp> dbaron: compat issues? maybe not many people use pseudos
  312. # [18:50] <antonp> florianr: the new field doesn't bother anyone not looking at them
  313. # [18:51] <antonp> glazou: few people are transitioning on pseudos
  314. # [18:51] <antonp> dbaron: gecko doesn't fire the events
  315. # [18:51] <antonp> glazou: safe change then?
  316. # [18:51] <antonp> dbaron: people happy with adding a field to the event saying which pseudo it's for
  317. # [18:51] <antonp> florianr: provided no evidence that it breaks something
  318. # [18:51] <antonp> RESOLVED: add a field to the event saying which pseudo-element it's for
  319. # [18:52] <antonp> glazou: four issues remaining in dbaron's list, but need wider discussion
  320. # [18:52] <antonp> dbaron: let's not discuss now, more productive for editors to figure out how to get proposals for them first
  321. # [18:53] * dbaron fantasai, so you joined about 4 minutes ago?
  322. # [18:53] <antonp> Topic: css3-images issues needing WG review
  323. # [18:53] <glazou> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Mar/0006.html
  324. # [18:53] <fantasai> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-images/issues-lc-2012
  325. # [18:53] * dbaron Zakim, who is on the phone?
  326. # [18:53] * Zakim sees on the phone: glazou, sylvaing, szilles, antonp, hober, [Microsoft], katie.a, Bert, dbaron, glenn (muted), nimbu, florianr, [Microsoft.a], ChrisL, kojiishi, smfr, bradk, ??P7,
  327. # [18:53] * Zakim ... +8521616aaii
  328. # [18:53] * Zakim [Microsoft] has JohnJansen
  329. # [18:53] * Zakim [Microsoft.a] has arronei_
  330. # [18:53] <antonp> fantasai: issue number 2
  331. # [18:54] * sylvaing wonders if we can go CR with known issues against at-risk features?
  332. # [18:54] <antonp> ... syntax issue
  333. # [18:54] * sylvaing we seem to have no issues against gradients which is the one we want to standardize...
  334. # [18:54] <antonp> ... 2 options: keep syntax, give consideration to the mailing list comment, reply with rationale
  335. # [18:55] <fantasai> other option is to revert to old syntax
  336. # [18:55] <antonp> florianr: we've changed gradients too much
  337. # [18:55] <Zakim> -kojiishi
  338. # [18:55] <antonp> .. can't tell if a revert makes things less changed or more changed!!
  339. # [18:56] <antonp> sylvaing: I don't want to change anything again about gradients
  340. # [18:56] <antonp> glazou: seems we don't want to change
  341. # [18:56] <antonp> fantasai: should evaluate what gradient generators are outputting
  342. # [18:56] <antonp> glazou: it won't change our decision
  343. # [18:57] <antonp> fantasai: it makes a difference on the compat issue
  344. # [18:57] <antonp> florianr: i don't want to reopen the topic but i agree
  345. # [18:57] <antonp> florianr: we need to know what grandients generators produce
  346. # [18:57] <antonp> ChrisL: the issue is browser support
  347. # [18:57] <antonp> florianr: Op and Moz support both syntaxes
  348. # [18:58] <antonp> glazou: it's not a large issue; online generators have updated their code various times in past, they'll do it again cos it's a cool feature
  349. # [18:58] <bradk> http://www.colorzilla.com/gradient-editor/
  350. # [18:58] <antonp> .. it's not that hard
  351. # [18:58] <antonp> fantasai: should be support both options?
  352. # [18:58] * Bert to sylvain: CR requires an *answer* to all open issue. But, the answer may be that the behavior is undefined...
  353. # [18:58] <antonp> ... that's what Moz is doing
  354. # [18:58] <antonp> florianr: Opera does the same
  355. # [18:59] <antonp> szilles: given that we aren't running unprefixed, i don't see the need to support both options
  356. # [19:00] <antonp> florianr: authors are already using unprefixed, but it doesn't kick in anywhere
  357. # [19:00] <antonp> szilles: how can they use unprefixed if syntax is unknown
  358. # [19:00] * smfr doesn't see prepositions in output for -moz- in any of the gradient generators that google finds
  359. # [19:00] <antonp> florianr: you know what the answer is ;-)
  360. # [19:00] <antonp> szilles: they're breaking the system
  361. # [19:00] <antonp> Bert: if they use it, it's their risk not ours
  362. # [19:00] <antonp> florianr: i'm not interested in dropping support for the first(??) syntax
  363. # [19:01] <antonp> florianr: why should both syntaxes exists?
  364. # [19:01] <florianr> s/first(??)/to/
  365. # [19:01] <antonp> ??: when are we going to stop tweaking this syntax
  366. # [19:01] <antonp> .. stop this madness! we don't need to keep changing this
  367. # [19:02] <antonp> Bert: people out there don't think it's good enough
  368. # [19:02] <antonp> ??: got to stop sometime and let it be
  369. # [19:02] <glazou> s/??/sylvaing
  370. # [19:02] * antonp needs sylvain to send me a recording of his voice :-p
  371. # [19:02] * Ms2ger sylvaing++
  372. # [19:03] <antonp> proposal: keep the 'to' syntax, and only that syntax, because this has been tweaked too much. It's a reasonable compromise and changing it is not OK any more
  373. # [19:03] <SteveZ> +1 for Florian's statement
  374. # [19:03] <antonp> RESOLVED: keep the 'to' syntax, and only that syntax, because this has been tweaked too much. It's a reasonable compromise and changing it is not OK any more
  375. # [19:03] <antonp> glazou: 3 mins left, let's keep remaining issues for next time
  376. # [19:04] <antonp> ... many people away next week for SXSW
  377. # [19:04] * dbaron will probably not be able to attend next week
  378. # [19:04] * nimbu neither.
  379. # [19:04] <SteveZ> steve sends regrets for next week
  380. # [19:04] <antonp> ... should we have call next week?
  381. # [19:04] <antonp> ... probably not
  382. # [19:04] <antonp> .. OK. Next week's call is cancelled
  383. # [19:05] <antonp> ... Is there anything needed for Fragment identifiers in URLs?
  384. # [19:05] <antonp> sylvaing: there are issues against gradients, and issues against other at risk things. Can we move forward somehow?
  385. # [19:06] <antonp> (above comment was in relation to a different topic, which i missed)
  386. # [19:06] <hober> thursday at the same time is the html call
  387. # [19:06] <antonp> fantasai: can we move telecon to Thursday?
  388. # [19:06] <antonp> sylvaing: how can we get Gradients to CR? When?
  389. # [19:06] <Zakim> -hober
  390. # [19:06] <antonp> fantasai: features in document are mostly 'element' and 'object-fit'.
  391. # [19:07] <antonp> fantasai: to get Gradients to CR, we should drop 'element'
  392. # [19:07] <antonp> fantasai: need lots of reviewers to review the recent changes and current discussions
  393. # [19:07] <antonp> sylvaing: if we want it to get to CR in the next week or 2, move 'element' to CR
  394. # [19:08] <antonp> fantasai: it's currently at risk anyway
  395. # [19:08] <antonp> glazou: should we move element to level 4?
  396. # [19:08] <antonp> dbaron: I'd prefer not to
  397. # [19:08] <antonp> Bert: what's the use case for 'element'?
  398. # [19:08] <smfr> none in webkit
  399. # [19:08] <antonp> sylvaing: do we have use cases
  400. # [19:08] * fantasai can be on the call next week
  401. # [19:08] <antonp> ...: if we don't have 2 implementations...
  402. # [19:09] <antonp> glazou: do others plan to implement this?
  403. # [19:09] <antonp> ??: not in coming weeks
  404. # [19:09] <antonp> florianr: it's a nice feature but not high priority
  405. # [19:09] <antonp> smfr: same for webkit
  406. # [19:09] <antonp> glazou: seems that it won't be implemented level 3
  407. # [19:09] <antonp> sylvaing: so we only have 1 implementation
  408. # [19:10] <antonp> dbaron: but various other things only have 1 implementation
  409. # [19:10] <antonp> fantasai: yes, but they don't have issues
  410. # [19:10] <antonp> sylvaing: do we hold up gradients for this?
  411. # [19:10] <antonp> glazou: it'll be harder and harder to move on if we get held up on this
  412. # [19:10] <antonp> szilles: why is it important to get 'element' in level 3 and not 4?
  413. # [19:11] <antonp> dbaron: consensus on this concept, been around for a while. I don't want the group to only ship features that there are already dependencies on
  414. # [19:11] <antonp> glazou: web authors are using it a lot, that's the essential reason
  415. # [19:11] <antonp> sylvaing: well, a year ago but that was before big changes
  416. # [19:12] <antonp> glazou: we discussed extracting things from specs to increase REC speed, but now we're doing the opposite
  417. # [19:12] <antonp> dbaron: I think we should also drop obejct-fit and object-position then
  418. # [19:12] <antonp> .. we shoould drop everything with issues
  419. # [19:12] <smfr> we should just have css3-gradients
  420. # [19:13] <antonp> florianr: if it takes more than 1 telecon to resolve, then drop it?
  421. # [19:13] * Quits: bradk (bradk@99.7.175.117) (Quit: Get MacIrssi - http://www.sysctl.co.uk/projects/macirssi/ )
  422. # [19:13] <antonp> szilles: what's the likelihood of implementations? Judging this on issues is not the right way
  423. # [19:13] <antonp> smfr: split out spec
  424. # [19:13] <antonp> glazou: don't want to enter border-radius hell. We need to move fast
  425. # [19:13] <ChrisL> +1 to css3-gradients spec
  426. # [19:14] <antonp> ... that property stayed on the radar for ever before we moved on
  427. # [19:14] <antonp> fantasai: bunch of issues in gradients that don't even have proposal
  428. # [19:14] <sylvaing> ChrisL as long as having a new document doesn't create another n weeks of LC period etc
  429. # [19:14] <antonp> ... one issue on object-fit, wont' require much discussion
  430. # [19:14] <antonp> ... just check with smfr about whether the wording is good for EXIF data
  431. # [19:14] <sylvaing> i.e. ok with a rename. I don't want to go through another month of process if we can just as easily move things to level 4 and publish what we have
  432. # [19:15] <dbaron> I agree we should just have css3-gradients.
  433. # [19:15] <antonp> ... just need WG to review
  434. # [19:15] <antonp> glazou: proposal: just have css3-gradients
  435. # [19:15] <antonp> fantasai: don't want to drop /everything/ that has issues
  436. # [19:15] <antonp> dbaron: will have to drop them anyway to enter PR
  437. # [19:15] <antonp> glazou: I want PR asap
  438. # [19:15] <Zakim> -ChrisL
  439. # [19:15] <antonp> florianr: move ?? out and leave the rest
  440. # [19:16] <antonp> sylvaing: don't want new LC period
  441. # [19:16] <antonp> fantasai: that proposal doesn't save anybody any time
  442. # [19:16] <Bert> (People have been asking for images slices for longer than they have been asking for gradients...)
  443. # [19:16] <glenn> notes we are out of time...
  444. # [19:16] <antonp> szilles: if you've got the imps and reports, you can go from PR to LC
  445. # [19:16] <antonp> fantasai: can't drop everything with issues
  446. # [19:17] <fantasai> s/with/without/
  447. # [19:17] <antonp> glazou: we must stop the call now
  448. # [19:17] <antonp> ... resolve on the mailing list
  449. # [19:17] <sylvaing> My bad for taking the call over...
  450. # [19:17] <Zakim> -glenn
  451. # [19:17] <antonp> ... next week is cancelled!
  452. # [19:17] <Zakim> -smfr
  453. # [19:17] <Zakim> -szilles
  454. # [19:17] <Zakim> -[Microsoft.a]
  455. # [19:17] <Zakim> -glazou
  456. # [19:17] <Zakim> -bradk
  457. # [19:17] <Zakim> -dbaron
  458. # [19:17] <Zakim> -florianr
  459. # [19:17] <Zakim> -??P7
  460. # [19:17] <Zakim> -sylvaing
  461. # [19:17] <Zakim> -nimbu
  462. # [19:17] <Zakim> -Bert
  463. # [19:17] <Zakim> - +8521616aaii
  464. # [19:17] <Zakim> -katie.a
  465. # [19:17] <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
  466. # [19:17] <fantasai> glazou, dbaron: Next time... please call me if I'm not on the call and I should be!
  467. # [19:17] * Quits: katie (kellison@131.107.0.119) (Quit: Leaving)
  468. # [19:17] * antonp swears that he will never talk fast again ;-)
  469. # [19:17] <fantasai> :(
  470. # [19:18] * Quits: florianr (florianr@213.236.208.22) (Quit: Leaving.)
  471. # [19:18] <antonp> anything I have to do to end the meeting on here?
  472. # [19:18] * Quits: JohnJansen (qw3birc@128.30.52.28) (Quit: Page closed)
  473. # [19:18] <glazou> antonp: now you understand why minuting is hard ? :-)
  474. # [19:18] <antonp> haha
  475. # [19:18] <glazou> antonp: ask fantasai
  476. # [19:19] * Joins: krit (Adium@192.150.10.201)
  477. # [19:19] <Ms2ger> RRSAgent, please publish the minutes
  478. # [19:19] <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/03/07-css-minutes.html Ms2ger
  479. # [19:19] <fantasai> glazou: Would it be possible to replace the cancelled telecon with 3 resolutions by email?
  480. # [19:20] <Bert> Yes, resolution by e-mail is possible. It's the chairs' responsibility to declare consensus.
  481. # [19:21] <Bert> Whether they feel comfortable declaring consensus after just a few days of e-mail is another matter...
  482. # [19:21] <fantasai> glazou: Dropping element(), approving issue 24 edits and/or dropping object-fit/position (btw, SVG wants those to map their preserveAspectRatio attribute), and go to CR.
  483. # [19:21] <fantasai> glazou: I can summarize those for the mailing list.
  484. # [19:21] <glazou> cool
  485. # [19:21] <glazou> do it
  486. # [19:21] <fantasai> Bert: probably a week would be enough?
  487. # [19:21] <Ms2ger> Zakim, list attendees
  488. # [19:21] <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been glazou, +1.206.324.aaaa, sylvaing, +1.408.536.aabb, +93550aacc, antonp, szilles, +1.619.846.aadd, hober, Bert, JohnJansen, +1.415.832.aaee,
  489. # [19:21] <Zakim> ... glenn, +1.206.552.aaff, dbaron, florianr, krit, nimbu, [Microsoft], arronei_, ChrisL, kojiishi, +1.408.636.aagg, smfr, +1.650.766.aahh, bradk, +8521616aaii
  490. # [19:22] * Quits: dbaron (dbaron@159.63.23.38) (Quit: 8403864 bytes have been tenured, next gc will be global.)
  491. # [19:22] <fantasai> Bert: esp. if we replace the ocnf call announcement with a "You must spend the next hour reading and deciding on this" :)
  492. # [19:22] <glazou> fantasai: ok for email resolutions
  493. # [19:22] * Joins: dbaron (dbaron@159.63.23.38)
  494. # [19:22] <glazou> I'll monitor that
  495. # [19:22] <fantasai> Ok
  496. # [19:22] <Ms2ger> Zakim, please excuse us
  497. # [19:22] <Zakim> leaving. As of this point the attendees were glazou, +1.206.324.aaaa, sylvaing, +1.408.536.aabb, +93550aacc, antonp, szilles, +1.619.846.aadd, hober, Bert, JohnJansen,
  498. # [19:22] * Parts: Zakim (rrs-bridgg@128.30.52.169)
  499. # [19:22] <Zakim> ... +1.415.832.aaee, glenn, +1.206.552.aaff, dbaron, florianr, krit, nimbu, [Microsoft], arronei_, ChrisL, kojiishi, +1.408.636.aagg, smfr, +1.650.766.aahh, bradk, +8521616aaii
  500. # [19:22] <Bert> As long as enough people chime in...
  501. # [19:22] <glazou> sure
  502. # [19:22] <fantasai> Bert: yes, let's get explicit yay/nay responses
  503. # [19:22] <glazou> we still need a minimal quorum
  504. # [19:23] <Bert> Especially those who are travelling, because otherwise we don't know if they even read the question.
  505. # [19:23] * glazou has to leave, bye people
  506. # [19:23] <fantasai> glazou: will send you email
  507. # [19:23] <glazou> ok
  508. # [19:23] * Quits: glazou (glazou@82.247.96.19) (Quit: glazou)
  509. # [19:24] * Parts: nimbu (Adium@24.18.47.160)
  510. # [19:26] * Parts: oyvind (oyvinds@213.236.208.22)
  511. # [19:26] * Quits: SimonSapin (simon@82.232.219.95) (Ping timeout)
  512. # [19:27] * Quits: ChrisL (ChrisL@128.30.52.169) (Quit: Fire on main board error, client combusted)
  513. # [19:28] * Quits: krit (Adium@192.150.10.201) (Quit: Leaving.)
  514. # [19:29] * Quits: SteveZ (chatzilla@192.150.10.201) (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.88 [Firefox 10.0.2/20120215223356])
  515. # [19:36] * Joins: jet (jet@67.169.43.128)
  516. # [19:44] <fantasai> TabAtkins: Your DoC responses suck. How am I supposed to work with this? http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Feb/0270.html
  517. # [19:44] <fantasai> TabAtkins: Can't expect the commenter to review your changes if you don't state what they are...
  518. # [19:44] <fantasai> :/
  519. # [19:44] <fantasai> :/
  520. # [19:46] * Parts: smfr (smfr@17.212.152.232)
  521. # [19:49] * Parts: antonp (50a94e63@207.192.75.252)
  522. # [19:51] <Ms2ger> :/
  523. # [20:03] * Quits: glenn (gadams@174.29.111.125) (Ping timeout)
  524. # [20:07] * Joins: shans_ (shans@74.125.56.17)
  525. # [20:07] * Joins: arno (arno@192.150.10.200)
  526. # [20:10] * Joins: glenn (gadams@174.29.118.34)
  527. # [20:21] * Quits: Cathy (qw3birc@128.30.52.28) (Quit: Page closed)
  528. # [20:32] * Quits: jet (jet@67.169.43.128) (Quit: jet)
  529. # [20:43] * Quits: arronei_ (arronei@131.107.0.89) (Connection reset by peer)
  530. # [20:43] * Joins: arronei (arronei@131.107.0.89)
  531. # [20:56] * Quits: glenn (gadams@174.29.118.34) (Ping timeout)
  532. # [21:03] * Joins: glenn (gadams@174.29.103.233)
  533. # [21:37] * Quits: Ms2ger (Ms2ger@81.242.171.145) (Quit: nn)
  534. # [21:56] * Joins: jet (jet@159.63.23.38)
  535. # [22:15] * Quits: jet (jet@159.63.23.38) (Quit: jet)
  536. # [22:24] * sylvaing is now known as sylvaing_away
  537. # Session Close: Thu Mar 08 00:00:03 2012

The end :)