IRC log of svg on 2011-01-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:29:53 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #svg
19:29:53 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/01/26-svg-irc
19:29:55 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
19:29:55 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #svg
19:29:57 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be GA_SVGWG
19:29:57 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see GA_SVGWG(SVG1)2:30PM scheduled to start in 1 minute
19:29:58 [trackbot]
Meeting: SVG Working Group Teleconference
19:29:58 [trackbot]
Date: 26 January 2011
19:30:04 [Zakim]
GA_SVGWG(SVG1)2:30PM has now started
19:30:11 [Zakim]
+??P1
19:30:13 [heycam]
Zakim, ??P1 is me
19:30:13 [Zakim]
+heycam; got it
19:30:25 [Zakim]
+Doug_Schepers
19:31:06 [Zakim]
+ +39.537.7.aaaa
19:31:37 [Zakim]
+??P0
19:31:45 [ed]
Zakim, ??P0 is me
19:31:45 [Zakim]
+ed; got it
19:33:44 [ed]
Zakim, +39 is tbah
19:33:44 [Zakim]
+tbah; got it
19:35:46 [heycam]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0074.html
19:36:26 [adrianba]
adrianba has joined #svg
19:38:23 [Zakim]
+ +1.206.922.aabb
19:38:32 [adrianba]
zakim, aabb is me
19:38:32 [Zakim]
+adrianba; got it
19:38:55 [heycam]
Chair: Cameron
19:38:57 [adrianba]
scribenick:adrianba
19:38:58 [heycam]
Scribe: Adrian
19:39:38 [adrianba]
shepazu: people think we're not going to keep svg fonts in svg
19:39:45 [adrianba]
...i don't remember deciding this
19:39:53 [adrianba]
heycam: i don't remember that either
19:40:04 [adrianba]
ed: i think we talked about maybe moving to a separate specification
19:40:22 [ed]
s/maybe//
19:41:13 [adrianba]
Topic: 1.1 progress
19:41:28 [adrianba]
heycam: don't think we need to spend too much time on this - haven't seen much progress on actions
19:41:35 [heycam]
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/Full_11#Remaining_work_for_SVG1.1F2
19:41:37 [shepazu]
agenda+ rechartering
19:42:03 [ed]
http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/publish/filters.html#FilterPrimitiveSubRegion
19:42:10 [ed]
‘x’, ‘y’, ‘width’ and ‘height’ act as a hard clip clipping rectangle on both the filter primitive's input image(s) and the filter primitive result.
19:42:13 [adrianba]
ed: not a very big change
19:42:39 [adrianba]
...i think that's enough to satisfy the concern that was raised in the first place
19:42:53 [adrianba]
...the other change related to ISSUE-2334 was made in a separate commit
19:42:59 [adrianba]
...my action is done and in review
19:43:13 [adrianba]
...i think i need to send another e-mail about this
19:43:45 [adrianba]
shepazu: what is blocking us moving forward with second edition
19:43:54 [adrianba]
heycam: a couple of actions due for the spec itself
19:44:16 [adrianba]
...more work is for the implementation metrics and making sure we don't have tests that don't have 2 passing implementations
19:44:38 [adrianba]
shepazu: the change i'm working on, we agreed that we weren't going to add any tests, that's not a blocking action right?
19:44:47 [adrianba]
heycam: it's not blocking on conversations
19:45:12 [adrianba]
shepazu: obviously it's blocking in that we have to do it before we publish the spec but it's not blocking anyone else, no tests that we need to do?
19:45:22 [adrianba]
...how long do we estimate that it will take do do everything?
19:45:40 [adrianba]
...i ask because the issue of rechartering came up and we need to have a real estimate of when we'll be done
19:45:42 [anthony_work]
anthony_work has joined #svg
19:45:51 [adrianba]
...i said one month but that might be optimistic
19:45:57 [adrianba]
heycam: that sounds possible
19:46:00 [adrianba]
ed: i think so too
19:46:05 [adrianba]
heycam: that aligns with the f2f too
19:46:18 [adrianba]
shepazu: okay, we said we didn't want to carry 1.1 work into new charter
19:46:31 [adrianba]
heycam: there's not that much to do
19:46:38 [adrianba]
shepazu: i'll do my action this week
19:46:49 [adrianba]
...at the end of the telcon i want to talk about rechartering
19:47:18 [anthony]
anthony has joined #svg
19:47:27 [adrianba]
heycam: related to your action, i saw mail from tantek - can't remember the details - something to do with pointer events and css rules
19:47:42 [adrianba]
...seems to be exactly addressing this issue of pointer events
19:48:33 [adrianba]
heycam: only other actions are on anthony and chris who aren't here
19:48:44 [adrianba]
topic: pointer events
19:48:47 [shepazu]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2011Jan/0043.html
19:48:47 [Zakim]
+??P10
19:49:20 [anthony]
Zakim, ??10 is me
19:49:20 [Zakim]
sorry, anthony, I do not recognize a party named '??10'
19:49:28 [anthony]
Zakim, ??P10 is me
19:49:28 [Zakim]
+anthony; got it
19:50:52 [adrianba]
ISSUE-2364?
19:50:52 [trackbot]
ISSUE-2364 -- Last Call Comment: SVG 1.1 may be ambiguous about the root element acting as a proximal event target -- raised
19:50:52 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2364
19:53:05 [adrianba]
heycam: doug did you read through this mail?
19:53:15 [adrianba]
shepazu: i skimmed it too, i see what he's saying
19:53:31 [adrianba]
heycam: he wants to support both modes when the pointer is captured on the background
19:53:48 [adrianba]
shepazu: i think we resolved to punt this in v1.1 and consider in svg integration spec and svg 2.0
19:54:06 [adrianba]
...there's a part i need to follow up but i don't think this is a blocking issue for v1.1
19:54:21 [adrianba]
heycam: so this comment isn't going to block us?
19:55:25 [adrianba]
??: i was trying to do a button using svg with fallback to png and i couldn't get this to work
19:55:40 [ed]
s/??/TB/
19:55:40 [shepazu]
is/??:/tav:/
19:55:55 [adrianba]
heycam: this might be a slightly different issue - this is if you click on a region that doesn't coincide with the image
19:56:03 [adrianba]
...like the transparent part
19:56:23 [adrianba]
tav: okay, i thought i'd be able to use svg like a png but it didn't work
19:56:49 [adrianba]
shepazu: good use case - think there are some issues to work out how html integrates with svg
19:57:07 [adrianba]
...once we do v1.1. and move on then there will be issues around integration we can deal with
19:57:29 [adrianba]
ed: sounds like svg params
19:57:44 [adrianba]
shepazu: not sure, think there will be lots of issues we need to handle
19:57:53 [adrianba]
heycam: so this issue we can bring up in the task force
19:58:04 [adrianba]
tav: okay, so for now i can't do what i wanted to do
19:58:16 [adrianba]
heycam: i'd be surprised if it's not possible - maybe we can take offline
19:58:44 [adrianba]
shepazu: think it would be a good idea to discuss at some point - let's finish up this topic as it affects finishing this spec
19:59:06 [adrianba]
...so we're not going to address the integration with html in v1.1 but we're going to address soon after
19:59:26 [adrianba]
...for the specific thing from tantek, that's a possible way forward and we'll need to decide upon the defaults
19:59:50 [adrianba]
...and the defaults are different in different UAs but if we're able to address all different use cases then it's less of an issue
19:59:58 [adrianba]
...we just need to decide which defaults are correct
20:00:12 [adrianba]
...my immediate issue is the paragraph about event propagation
20:00:20 [adrianba]
...partly conflates separate issues
20:01:09 [adrianba]
ISSUE-2396?
20:01:09 [trackbot]
ISSUE-2396 -- Distinguish between the rendering area of an element and its interaction area -- raised
20:01:09 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2396
20:01:46 [adrianba]
shepazu: we basically don't talk about the rendering area and the interaction area but it is a concept implicit in svg
20:02:01 [adrianba]
...want to talk about whether introducing this concept for pointer events and hit testing
20:02:35 [adrianba]
heycam: so in the definition of pointer events at the moment it talks about visible fills and the geometry - all of those regions you'd encapsulate in this?
20:02:51 [adrianba]
shepazu: not in v1.1 - just explain that pointer events changes interaction area of a shape
20:03:04 [adrianba]
heycam: you mean it's defined already and you want to give a name to it?
20:03:22 [adrianba]
shepazu: yeah, i want to make sure implementers are happy it's a reasonable distinction to make
20:03:34 [adrianba]
...i guess i'll go ahead with it and you can decide if it's reasonable
20:03:39 [adrianba]
heycam: as part of this action?
20:03:44 [adrianba]
shepazu: yes
20:04:15 [adrianba]
...i'll be talking about event propagation and hit testing - the main question is does the svg root intercept pointer events and i believe that's what we decided to punt on in svg 1.1
20:04:30 [adrianba]
...should i say it will be addressed later or not mention it?
20:04:38 [adrianba]
heycam: i think you should call it out
20:05:07 [adrianba]
...addressing the issue was about whether pointer events affect these elements and if the answer is we're not deciding yet then pointing that out is part of the action
20:05:17 [adrianba]
topic: test suite
20:05:22 [heycam]
http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/status/implementation_matrix.html
20:05:47 [adrianba]
heycam: here's the implementation matric - we're down to 30 tests that don't have two implementations
20:05:54 [adrianba]
...better than before but not zero
20:06:36 [adrianba]
heycam: we need to know whether we'll have other implementations in the report and if so which
20:06:54 [adrianba]
...because once we know what we have we can start analysing the failing tests to see what to do with them
20:07:14 [heycam]
http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/errata/implementation-report.html
20:07:29 [adrianba]
heycam: this is the previous implementation report for the last publication of the spec
20:08:00 [adrianba]
shepazu: why don't we contact gpac
20:08:04 [adrianba]
heycam: i can do that
20:08:22 [adrianba]
action heycam to email cyril about gpac implementation results
20:08:22 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-2931 - Email cyril about gpac implementation results [on Cameron McCormack - due 2011-02-02].
20:08:45 [adrianba]
heycam: even with gpac in there i suspect we won't get to zero
20:08:59 [adrianba]
...at next week's call we should discuss what to do with tests that don't have 2 passing implementations
20:09:15 [adrianba]
heycam: issues in the agenda
20:09:18 [heycam]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0054.html
20:09:22 [adrianba]
...test-align analysis
20:09:47 [adrianba]
...this was the test that had chars from different scripts to different baselines and i said i'm not sure if the test is correct
20:10:11 [heycam]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/png/text-align-07-t.png?rev=1.3&content-type=image/png
20:10:16 [adrianba]
...i did some more investigation - i think the test is okay; that it's reasonable for the characters to hang from different baselines
20:10:24 [adrianba]
...this is the reference image for the test at the moment
20:11:08 [adrianba]
...wasn't clear to me if the spec required this behaviour but i read through and compared to css3 linebox
20:11:17 [Zakim]
-tbah
20:11:31 [adrianba]
heycam: not sure if anyone read this mail but i point out some differences between svg and css baseline alignment
20:12:02 [adrianba]
...at least one property has changed name - not a good thing - something to discuss in fx task force
20:12:14 [adrianba]
shepazu: so someone passed this?
20:12:34 [Zakim]
+ +33.9.53.77.aacc
20:12:40 [adrianba]
heycam: don't think anyone does
20:12:57 [adrianba]
anthony: think abbra does
20:14:09 [adrianba]
...not sure if this is going to be in the css3 spec - might need to check
20:14:22 [adrianba]
heycam: i think it will - at the moment what's there supports our test
20:14:58 [adrianba]
...we could possibly remove the test but it's the wrong way to go about things
20:15:11 [adrianba]
shepazu: is the wrong thing but might be necessary to move forward
20:15:23 [adrianba]
anthony: not very clear you need to go to the CSS spec
20:16:12 [adrianba]
heycam: my analysis was that the test is okay, still a little bit of alignment to do between svg and css3 about the name of the property values but that doesn't affect the test
20:16:30 [adrianba]
...i assume this test is going to end up in the list of ones we don't know what to do
20:16:55 [adrianba]
...in IE i think this was listed as a pass but that was before the reference image was updated
20:17:12 [adrianba]
ed: i think the latest IE snapshot shows the same as firefox
20:17:28 [adrianba]
action adrianba to check with patrick about whether IE ran against the latest version of the test
20:17:28 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - adrianba
20:18:00 [adrianba]
heycam: next is text selection tests
20:18:22 [adrianba]
action adrian to check with patrick about whether IE ran against the latest version of the test
20:18:22 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-2932 - Check with patrick about whether IE ran against the latest version of the test [on Adrian Bateman - due 2011-02-02].
20:18:35 [heycam]
http://www.w3.org/mid/20110120035126.GP31087@wok.mcc.id.au
20:18:52 [adrianba]
heycam: this is about text-tselect01
20:19:23 [adrianba]
...a test for text selection - firefox doesn't do text selection so we fail but as i was testing webkit in safari the test asserts that separate text elements shouldn't be selected together
20:19:40 [adrianba]
...but in safari any text element is part of all the text in the whole document
20:20:11 [adrianba]
ed: what version of safari - the one i have does what the spec expects
20:20:38 [adrianba]
...cannot get multiple lines on top but can the bottom but that's expected
20:20:50 [ed]
s/spec/test/
20:21:04 [adrianba]
heycam: same version - i can get it to select from the top all the way to the bottom
20:21:11 [adrianba]
ed: not for me - strange
20:21:40 [adrianba]
tav: in the test you see the text looks like a para - how do you know the order the text is supposed to be in
20:21:59 [adrianba]
heycam: not defined in spec since it's not expected to be possible - suspect safari uses the document order
20:22:35 [adrianba]
heycam: my feeling is that it's reasonable to allow selection across different elements so i would rather the test not fail implementations
20:22:46 [adrianba]
...in future versions we can define precise order
20:23:01 [adrianba]
tav: that can lead to strange things if the order isn't specified
20:23:24 [adrianba]
...could be security issue if you paste into something else
20:23:39 [adrianba]
heycam: can already make characters appear in different order
20:23:53 [adrianba]
...wonder what happens in adobe reader if text not laid out in order
20:24:12 [adrianba]
...would be hard to say the order is as displayed not document order
20:24:31 [adrianba]
ed: testing webkit nightly and does select across blocks but not reliable
20:24:46 [adrianba]
heycam: wanted to get feedback on whether the failure is reasonable or if we can remove part of the test
20:25:39 [adrianba]
ed: i raised an issue a long time ago - we weren't doing 1.1 at the time - the discussions back then suggested no agreement on selecting across elements was a good idea
20:25:53 [adrianba]
...something we should consider - not sure changing the test here is a good idea at this point
20:26:01 [adrianba]
...might be a good thing to allow in the future
20:26:22 [adrianba]
heycam: probably not a huge deal - don't think the webkit guys are going to remove this just because the test remains
20:26:32 [adrianba]
ed: it's one of the old tests - in the suite for a long time
20:27:03 [adrianba]
ed: could rewrite the selection to be like html
20:27:18 [adrianba]
heycam: yeah, in html you can have the same issue with absolutely positioned elements
20:27:26 [adrianba]
...maybe not a common issue there
20:27:37 [adrianba]
ed: what do people think - change the test or leave it?
20:27:52 [adrianba]
heycam: if there aren't any other opinions i think leave it
20:27:59 [adrianba]
tav: leave it and do in v1.1
20:28:09 [adrianba]
s/1.1/2.0/
20:28:34 [heycam]
http://www.w3.org/mid/20110120041158.GQ31087@wok.mcc.id.au
20:28:34 [adrianba]
heycam: let's move on to next text-tselect02 - question not about text selection
20:28:42 [shepazu]
q+
20:28:51 [heycam]
http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/harness/htmlObjectMiniApproved/text-tselect-02-f.html
20:28:59 [adrianba]
heycam: again in safari, link to the test itself
20:29:34 [adrianba]
...think in safari the hebrew chars were shown as missing glyphs because of the font - want to know if it's okay to consider the test passed if it shows missing glyphs
20:29:52 [adrianba]
ed: think it's better to add fallback with WOFF or system font
20:30:06 [adrianba]
...bad to not show the glyphs
20:30:20 [adrianba]
...we could say if you don't support bidi then skip it
20:30:30 [adrianba]
heycam: did you raise a question about directionality?
20:30:35 [adrianba]
ed: it was about baseline
20:31:08 [plinss_]
plinss_ has joined #svg
20:31:17 [adrianba]
heycam: sort of the same, directionality of the glyphs is going to be based on tables in the font - if you use the missing glyph characters should they be bidirectional and layout bidi or all do ltr
20:31:37 [adrianba]
ed: i think missing glyph in this test doesn't make the test useful
20:31:52 [adrianba]
heycam: how about i add some system font fallback and a woff font
20:32:03 [adrianba]
...that would address the issue here but it might still come up
20:32:10 [adrianba]
ed: yes, this would make it less of an issue
20:32:21 [adrianba]
action: heycam to add font fallbacks to text-tselect02
20:32:22 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-2933 - Add font fallbacks to text-tselect02 [on Cameron McCormack - due 2011-02-02].
20:32:47 [adrianba]
heycam: next is struct-image-02
20:32:48 [heycam]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0061.html
20:35:06 [adrianba]
heycam: this is a test firefox fails because we don't claim to support feature string
20:35:31 [adrianba]
...means support all the static things in the spec - there are a couple of things we don't support
20:35:57 [adrianba]
...maybe it's better to test a narrower feature string - it's odd to test the feature string in the test
20:36:11 [adrianba]
...we could fix the string to pass the test but we try to be conservative about this
20:36:43 [adrianba]
shepazu: not for 1.1 but we talked about having discrete feature strings e.g. do you support text anchor on tspan - text.tspan.textanchor
20:36:55 [adrianba]
...we're doing this kind of thing in dom l3 events
20:37:01 [adrianba]
...think we should do this in svg 2.0
20:37:06 [adrianba]
...not in 1.1 timeframe
20:37:42 [adrianba]
heycam: so question is whether we can change the test to more specific feature string - i.e. not one that means did you do all of svg
20:38:17 [adrianba]
ed: okay with me - think we should avoid using the old old feature strings org.w3.*
20:39:18 [adrianba]
heycam: it seems strange to test the feature string when the test actually tests if it the feature works
20:39:28 [adrianba]
ACTION: heycam to change struct-image-02 to use a better feature string test
20:39:29 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-2934 - Change struct-image-02 to use a better feature string test [on Cameron McCormack - due 2011-02-02].
20:40:05 [adrianba]
heycam: final one is animate-elem-81 - doesn't really require discussion - was hoping chris would be here so i could remind him to run the test
20:40:14 [adrianba]
...i made the changes here based on the discussion last week
20:40:29 [adrianba]
...just need chris to retest abbra to verify that it now fails which is what i expect the result to be
20:40:43 [adrianba]
...i'll send mail on that
20:41:18 [adrianba]
topic: rechartering
20:41:20 [shepazu]
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/charter/2010/
20:41:37 [adrianba]
shepazu: this is the current charter
20:41:59 [adrianba]
...there is a current trend in writing charters to leave out the milestones since they tend to get out of sync quickly
20:42:15 [adrianba]
...and for us to maintain more up-to-date milestones on the site or wiki
20:42:29 [adrianba]
...are you inclined to do this since we missed every milestone?
20:42:36 [adrianba]
heycam: seems reasonable
20:43:05 [adrianba]
shepazu: does mean more work for the chairs - team contacts could but...
20:43:14 [adrianba]
heycam: yeah, i think that's fine for us to do this
20:43:27 [adrianba]
shepazu: we could look at automating this but let's not get ahead of ourselves
20:43:41 [adrianba]
...just like a resolution on if we'll move the milestones into the wiki
20:44:04 [adrianba]
ed: that means we can keep them more uptodate and more reasonable than the charter which goes out of date
20:45:04 [adrianba]
shepazu: this is the current _draft_ charter
20:45:43 [adrianba]
shepazu: many changes - need to emphasise the fx task force
20:45:55 [adrianba]
heycam: need to mention the documents we're working on jointly in fx
20:46:13 [adrianba]
shepazu: will split deliverables into joint and ones we're doing
20:46:20 [adrianba]
...will change telcon to once per week
20:46:38 [adrianba]
...change meetings to 2-3 per year
20:47:00 [adrianba]
...often have 4
20:47:06 [adrianba]
...will leave it at 3-4
20:47:14 [adrianba]
heycam: will be fine if we choose to have fewer
20:47:41 [adrianba]
shepazu: we're running out of charter at end of month - in order to get extension we need to show effort in trying to recharter
20:47:59 [adrianba]
...i'll make some changes and would welcome feedback in next couple of days if you can
20:48:32 [adrianba]
heycam: concerned about some of the docs that are listed and don't have much work on them
20:48:45 [adrianba]
...does it make sense to have two lists - core and others
20:49:12 [adrianba]
...how does it reflect on us to keep listing documents that don't make progress
20:49:26 [adrianba]
shepazu: mostly held up because more work was needed on 2.0 than expected
20:49:36 [adrianba]
...e.g. composites almost ready to go
20:49:50 [adrianba]
anthony: yes, mostly, just haven't put aside the time to do more
20:50:14 [adrianba]
shepazu: filters ready soon, colour management ready soon too, maybe we just need to have a couple of dedicated telcons on to get them done
20:50:33 [adrianba]
...would look good in 2011 to get more to Rec during the year, obviously after 1.1
20:50:44 [adrianba]
...unusual number of specs to have
20:51:04 [adrianba]
...now that people are paying more attention to svg that's both good and bad
20:51:18 [adrianba]
heycam: lots there considering size of the group
20:51:55 [adrianba]
...can we divide them up?
20:52:05 [adrianba]
adrianba: the css divides into high, medium, low priority
20:52:14 [adrianba]
shepazu: i can look at what css does
20:52:24 [adrianba]
heycam: i'd like to not say we're doing all of this
20:52:31 [adrianba]
shepazu: i'll look at css and model on that
20:52:52 [Zakim]
- +33.9.53.77.aacc
20:53:24 [adrianba]
shepazu: please review, see if i missed anything or anything needs to be added - otherwise i'll update and then we can discuss
20:53:40 [Zakim]
+tbah
20:53:59 [adrianba]
topic: f2f
20:54:11 [shepazu]
http://www.w3.org/Style/2008/css-charter
20:54:15 [adrianba]
heycam: hotel information available soon - also please send agenda requests
20:54:27 [adrianba]
...over the next week please send what you'd like to be discussed to the list
20:55:07 [adrianba]
topic: stroke-linecap on zero-length subpaths
20:55:11 [heycam]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0041.html
20:55:56 [adrianba]
heycam: sent this mail the other day - one of the changes we made in second edition was to make zero length subpaths take their stroke-linecap as a square if it is set to square
20:56:09 [adrianba]
...previously only if it was set to round would it draw a circle
20:56:34 [adrianba]
...we added square but some of the wording changes confused zero-length subpaths and zero length paths
20:56:52 [heycam]
M 10,10 h 0 h 0
20:56:56 [adrianba]
...i think we want to draw for zero length subpaths but not zero length path segements
20:56:59 [heycam]
stroke-linecap="square"
20:57:26 [adrianba]
...we don't want this to draw two line paths - it's a single subpath so you should only get linecap on the end
20:58:29 [heycam]
CM: i suggested one of two changes
20:58:39 [heycam]
CM: either fix that sentence to say zero length subpaths
20:58:49 [heycam]
CM: or to remove it altogether, since it's redundant with another part of the spec
20:59:01 [heycam]
CM: Erik said he preferred to keep and fix the sentence, so if there are no objections I'll do that
20:59:30 [heycam]
ED: yeah I sent an email saying I prefer to change the implnote.html sentence, because if you remove it you have quite a bit of wording to say what to do with zero length path segments and orientation, and spreading it out in the spec
20:59:35 [heycam]
ED: you could put a link instead...
20:59:47 [heycam]
CM: I think it's fine just to fix it up, it's the smaller change
20:59:56 [heycam]
ED: I agree, and I agree with the change itself
21:00:10 [heycam]
ACITON: Cameron to make the change for zero length subpath linecapping in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0041.html
21:00:14 [heycam]
ACTION: Cameron to make the change for zero length subpath linecapping in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0041.html
21:00:14 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-2935 - Make the change for zero length subpath linecapping in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-wg/2011JanMar/0041.html [on Cameron McCormack - due 2011-02-02].
21:00:39 [shepazu]
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/tip/touchevents.html
21:00:55 [adrianba]
shepazu: off topic but want to note that the first draft of touch events is published
21:01:05 [adrianba]
...would be useful for people to review with an eye to svg
21:01:23 [adrianba]
ed: we added some experiemental support for touch in svg in android opera
21:01:49 [adrianba]
...you can register for touch events in svg - not working great yet but is interesting and would be good to have touch in svg
21:02:16 [adrianba]
shepazu: spec doesn't specify html or svg - want to make sure something you're aware of and can track
21:02:49 [adrianba]
heycam: meeting adjorned - thanks everyone
21:02:59 [adrianba]
rrsagent, make minutes
21:02:59 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/01/26-svg-minutes.html adrianba
21:03:17 [adrianba]
rrsagent, make logs public
21:06:51 [Zakim]
-ed
21:06:52 [Zakim]
-Doug_Schepers
21:06:53 [Zakim]
-adrianba
21:06:54 [Zakim]
-tbah
21:06:55 [Zakim]
-anthony
21:06:55 [Zakim]
-heycam
21:06:56 [Zakim]
GA_SVGWG(SVG1)2:30PM has ended
21:06:58 [Zakim]
Attendees were heycam, Doug_Schepers, +39.537.7.aaaa, ed, tbah, +1.206.922.aabb, adrianba, anthony, +33.9.53.77.aacc
22:50:18 [homata_]
homata_ has joined #svg
23:06:52 [homata]
homata has joined #svg
23:19:01 [homata_]
homata_ has joined #svg
23:24:03 [plinss_]
plinss_ has joined #svg