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