| CARVIEW |
Select Language
HTTP/2 200
date: Thu, 09 Oct 2025 17:22:57 GMT
content-type: text/plain
content-length: 6424
cf-ray: 98bf90207e588a2a-BLR
content-location: 30-css-irc.txt
vary: negotiate,accept,accept-charset,Accept-Encoding,Origin
tcn: choice
last-modified: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 23:45:30 GMT
etag: "4306-4d48a1af9da80;602037f93ee54
cache-control: max-age=21600
expires: Thu, 09 Oct 2025 23:22:56 GMT
content-encoding: gzip
access-control-allow-origin: *
x-backend: www-mirrors
x-request-id: 98bf90207e588a2a
strict-transport-security: max-age=15552000; includeSubdomains; preload
content-security-policy: frame-ancestors 'self' https://cms.w3.org/ https://cms-dev.w3.org/; upgrade-insecure-requests
cf-cache-status: BYPASS
accept-ranges: bytes
set-cookie: __cf_bm=d0sLL6oZHPUPqH6Kkvfe7DFrjHhEzcJfzERocjiHAo0-1760030577-1.0.1.1-igsUZrMvIqdqa2pvy3s6jK7RlNx7b7o4VB4rQSfDpWIuu4Qt9nxdWoyRRPPZ25hFES9.AtFImQrYSZpl38MnQ96AnPoHCXaxIxLc3iaAX7g; path=/; expires=Thu, 09-Oct-25 17:52:57 GMT; domain=.w3.org; HttpOnly; Secure; SameSite=None
server: cloudflare
alt-svc: h3=":443"; ma=86400
16:53:27 RRSAgent has joined #css
16:53:27 logging to https://www.w3.org/2013/01/30-css-irc
16:53:37 rrsagent, make logs public
16:53:43 zakim, this will be style
16:53:43 ok, plinss; I see Style_CSS FP()12:00PM scheduled to start in 7 minutes
16:56:23 Style_CSS FP()12:00PM has now started
16:56:29 +??P25
16:56:40 Zakim, ??P25 is me
16:56:41 +darktears; got it
16:56:44 BradK has joined #CSS
16:56:57 dbaron has joined #css
16:57:59 zakim, code?
16:57:59 the conference code is 78953 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), nvdbleek
16:58:48 +nvdbleek
16:58:49 + +1.858.354.aaaa
16:58:58 zakim, aaaa is me
16:58:58 +plinss; got it
16:59:16 +hober
16:59:26 +krit
16:59:58 cabanier has joined #css
17:00:01 rhauck has joined #css
17:00:14 zakim, krit has me
17:00:15 +stearns; got it
17:00:34 leif1 has joined #css
17:00:39 +SylvaIng
17:00:59 +BradK
17:01:03 zakim, krit has me
17:01:03 +rhauck; got it
17:01:07 +leif
17:01:38 smfr has joined #css
17:01:45 +smfr
17:02:36 +fantasai
17:02:50 Welcome, nick
17:03:08 +cabanier
17:03:36 teoli has joined #css
17:04:01 +Bert
17:04:43 +dbaron
17:06:21 +SimonSapin1
17:06:22 zakim, who is on the phone
17:06:22 I don't understand 'who is on the phone', plinss
17:06:32 zakim, who is on the phone?
17:06:32 On the phone I see darktears, plinss, nvdbleek, hober, krit, SylvaIng, BradK, leif, smfr, fantasai, cabanier, Bert, dbaron, SimonSapin1
17:06:34 krit has rhauck
17:06:48 still on Zakim with the wrong nick…
17:07:01 Scribe: Bert
17:07:28 https://wiki.csswg.org/planning/tucson-2013?&#agenda
17:07:42 teoli has joined #css
17:07:46 Topic: Welcome Nick
17:07:58 Nick wil not be at the ftf.
17:08:03 Topic: Agenda ftf
17:08:23 plinss: Please add topics to wiki
17:08:39 ... Any questions, issues about ftf?
17:08:51 smfr has changed the topic to: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jan/0557.html
17:08:59 zakim, mute me
17:09:00 nvdbleek should now be muted
17:09:08 Topic: viewport units
17:09:19 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Jan/0312.html
17:09:23 fantasai: Seems a growing consensus on www-style.
17:10:02 ... Generally you try to fit things in view;oort and don't want scroll.
17:10:07 +??P89
17:10:21 ... If you *do* want to scroll, you can do 'overflow: scroll' to have scrollbars.
17:11:04 ... Alternative is 'overflow: hidden' to be sure to not have scriollbars, but that has side effect of clipping in case things *do* overflow.
17:11:26 ??: I agree with that
17:11:37 plinss: Objections?
17:11:41 s/??/Rossen
17:11:42 rossen agrees too
17:11:50 (there was someone else)
17:12:40 TabAtkins_ has joined #css
17:12:49 RESOLVED: viewport units in case of 'overflow:auto' are sized as if scrollbar is *not* present (even if they are)
17:13:16 dbaron: Worth saying [???]
17:13:20 -hober
17:13:25 SimonSapin:
17:13:27 + +1.832.797.aabb
17:13:30 s/[???]/something about overflow:scroll/
17:13:34 zakim, aabb is me
17:13:34 +TabAtkins_; got it
17:13:39 plinss: You mean horizontal scrolling?
17:14:05 SimonSapin: with 100vh, will get overflow?
17:14:23 rossen: with 100.1vh you will have scrollbars.
17:14:45 100vw + lots of content vertically to trigger a vertical scrollbar
17:15:01 => horizontal scroll by the width of the scrollbar?
17:15:18 plinss: Any objection now, after this explanation?
17:15:54 In case of 'overflow: scroll', scrollbars are accounted for in calculating viewport units
17:16:14 plinss: When there is overflow:auto the units will be as if there is no scrollbar, but with 'overflow: scroll' the units *will* deduct the scrollbar.
17:16:15 ok, `overflow-y: scroll` would take care of my use case
17:16:15 (so that 100vh/100vw will not cause scrolling, just disabled scrollbars )
17:16:28 Topic: Box Module
17:16:32 could we have width:100% and width:100vw be different? Does that matter?
17:16:42 +[Apple]
17:16:43 plinss: Question was if we want to update the WD.
17:16:48 +Present glenn (IRC only)
17:16:51 Zakim, Apple is me
17:16:51 +hober; got it
17:17:07 sylvaing: I think it’s possible with `overflow: auto`
17:17:13 on the root
17:17:14 bert: what was the discussion last week?
17:17:20 plinss: No resolution last week.
17:17:30 s/sylvaing:/sylvaing,/
17:17:49 +Present antonp (IRC only)
17:17:51 SimonSapin, right. Just stating it looks like it could happen. I'm not sure it's a problem though.
17:17:59 Bert: Would like a new WD soon, because current is very old. Most issues listed in draft.
17:18:11 Bert: On the other hand the order of sections in the draft is in flux. It's chaos atm
17:18:28 Bert: Would like a few weeks for the editors to make sure that it is at least readable, I'm not sure that's the case at the moment
17:19:05 Bert: Started to look if all the issues were there. E.g. noticed some were mentioned 3 times
17:19:35 Bert: With a few days of work, could me much nicer draft than now. Not opposed to publishing now, but would be more readable with some time to clean it up a bit.
17:19:42 bert: /me thanks fantasai
17:19:49 jarek has joined #css
17:19:58 fantasai: I think we should defer to the editor (Bert) and let him decide when it's ready to republish
17:20:30 Bert: Maybe one week after F2F?
17:21:06 tantek has joined #css
17:21:06 https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/FXTF/rawfile/tip/compositing/index.html#cssbackgroundsyntax
17:21:17 Topic: Compositing bg images
17:21:52 cabanier: Q is if this is usful feature to pursue.
17:22:08 ... It really belongs in BG & Borders.
17:22:17 ... It is kind of hard in the Compositing spec.
17:22:50 TabAtkins_: Good idea, the visual effect. I can't say what the imple cost is.
17:23:06 ... Putting it in background4 spec may may make spec.
17:23:15 cabanier: Yes, then can put it in shorthand.
17:23:27 TabAtkins_: let it depend on which spec is faster.
17:23:39 cabanier: Pretty simple in term sof implem cost.
17:24:27 plinss: Only multiple background images of a single elt?
17:24:31 cabanier: Yes.
17:24:36 TabAtkins_: Cool.
17:25:10 plinss: But if we ever want compos of bg with other elt, syntax shoul dnot preclude that.
17:25:28 cabanier: Yes, we can add something. or another property later.
17:25:36 dbaron: Curious about use cases.
17:25:47 TabAtkins_: The use case sof compos and blen in general.
17:26:02 ... I mght want to animate bgs together.
17:26:19 cabanier: Some clouds, text that inherits what's behind it...
17:26:33 ... designers can tell you much better what they want with it.
17:26:47 plinss: Objections?
17:27:14 RESOLVED: keep it in the spec for now.
17:27:41 Topic: overlay value for overflow
17:27:53 +Tantek
17:27:55 TabAtkins_: Don't know eher eit came from, but it is in the spec.
17:27:59 zakim, mute tantek
17:27:59 Tantek should now be muted
17:28:10 smfr: A feature that is no longer part of our browser.
17:28:23 ... Should have been prefixed. And we don't want to standardize it.
17:28:39 TabAtkins_: What arte you opposed to?
17:28:45 -TabAtkins_
17:28:49 smfr: It is a user control, not an author control.
17:29:01 dbaron: Agree with smfr
17:29:01 agree with Simon as well
17:29:14 Sorry, got bumped.
17:29:30 +TabAtkins_
17:30:00 -cabanier
17:30:18 sylvaing: We have it in IE (?)
17:30:20 *sorry, I need to go*
17:30:47 we expose auto-hide overlay scrollbars in IE10/Win8 as an overflow-style
17:30:48 TabAtkins_: Avoid jumping text
17:31:01 dbaron: And what if user has never seen an ovverlay scrollbar before?
17:31:12 TabAtkins_: It looks exactly like a normal scrollbar.
17:31:14 to the extent authors can MQ touch/mouse it may be interesting for them to pick a default as well
17:31:28 not sure designing this feature in a telcon make sense?
17:31:48 rossen: Only present in case of interaction. User will understand when he sees it.
17:32:15 TabAtkins_: Chromw draw a normal scrollbar, it just overlaps. It looks weird anyway.
17:32:32 ... But another way would be perfect fine as well.
17:32:49 rossen: If the platform decides to do it, then that's what you get.
17:33:05 TabAtkins_: Not a difficult problem for design.
17:33:22 sylvaing: Do people do these scrollbars, e.g., with jQuery?
17:33:27 TabAtkins_: I don't know.
17:33:42 teoli_ has joined #css
17:33:57 smfr: We don't allow to style scrollbars, they look like traditonal scrollbars on Mac.
17:34:39 smfr: If the user hovers near the edge, the scrollbar will appear. Authors should be able to know if such scrollbars are used, maybe a Media Query.
17:34:57 fantasai: 'overflow: scroll' makes sure there is a scrollbar.
17:35:11 TabAtkins_: People don;'t liek scrollbars, don 't use ''scroll'
17:35:46 fantasai: Overlay scrollbars are great. All platforms should just use them.
17:35:54 if scrollbars are ugly, why not just use overflow:hidden?
17:36:10 tantek: overflow:hidden prevents user scrolling
17:36:26 glenn: Maybe spec scrollbars that somehow don't obscure content.
17:36:40 smfr - perhaps that's the answer then - overflow:hidden-scroll
17:36:48 TabAtkins_: Every platform that has overlay scrollbars has done something like that.
17:36:49 hide the scrollbars, but allow scrolling
17:36:56 (native apps seem to do this)
17:36:57 wrt smfr's mq idea, mq should be for how wide the scrollbars are
17:37:09 glenn: But overlay scrollbars are hidden. Maybe use a partial transparency instead.
17:37:09 (which should be sufficient a use case to justify overflow:hidden-scroll )
17:37:21 tantek, this is what iOS and Win8 do. no scrollbar until you start moving around
17:37:25 (they don't even bother to show overlay scrollbars, they just show no scrolling UI, but allow touch scrolling)
17:37:38 tantek, not sure what you mean. I don't have a scroll wheel, how exactly am I supposed to scroll a window without scrollbars?
17:37:40 TabAtkins_: I get your point.
17:37:53 sylvaing - I'm talking about native apps (e.g. iOS) which don't even show a scrollbars.
17:38:04 smfr: [something about google site]
17:38:11 fantasai - touch, page up page down, etc. native apps do this today on mobile.
17:38:37 plinss: General pricniple is also to not let authors change the fundamental UI of a platform.
17:38:53 Topic: syntax issues
17:38:59 tantek, that's not at all obvious, especially when it's a scroll view inside the page rather than the main viewport
17:39:13 SimonSapin: q what is a ASCII character.
17:39:22 fantasai - it doesn't work in all cases, just like not all color/bg combinations work in all cases
17:39:42 "not at all obvious" in some cases is never an argument against a style feature - that's a strawman.
17:39:46 TabAtkins_: Yes, change it to 7F. Should not matter. Nobody uses 7F-9F
17:39:58 dbaron: is nbsp inthe range?
17:40:02 tantek, sorry, I don't think you are making any sense
17:40:04 … just as color/bg combinations do NOT work in all cases
17:40:08 TabAtkins_: No, that is the 1st character out of that range.
17:40:24 dbaron: I'm ok with it; changing Firefox is relatively straightforward.
17:40:25 nbsp is a0
17:40:27 fantasai - just because you can come up with a confusing example (strawman) doesn't negate the utility of a feature.
17:40:41 Bert, I think you we're attributing my comments to Glenn.
17:41:04 BradK, how far back?
17:41:10 bert: is this an errata for 2.1?
17:41:16 TabAtkins_: Yes, should be.
17:41:16 s/glenn: But/BradK/
17:41:31 In the overlay scroll bar stuff
17:41:36 RESOLVED: non-ascii starts at 0x80
17:41:39 s/glenn: Maybe/BradK: Maybe/
17:42:01 Rossen has joined #css
17:42:02 ACTION bert: add errata to 2.1 about non-ascii from 0x80
17:42:02 Created ACTION-529 - Add errata to 2.1 about non-ascii from 0x80 [on Bert Bos - due 2013-02-06].
17:42:29 s/BradK overlay/BradK: But overlay/
17:42:41 rrsagent, pointer
17:42:41 See https://www.w3.org/2013/01/30-css-irc#T17-42-41
17:42:44 TabAtkins_: Some special characters are now allowed instead of undefined. So may have effect on parsers.
17:42:50 +[Microsoft]
17:42:51 -??P89
17:43:04 Zakim, Microsoft is me
17:43:04 +Rossen; got it
17:43:28 ... But another issue: 2.1 grammar allowed empty selector.
17:43:31 TabAtkins: you actually use an "empty selector" in "parse a declaration block"
17:43:41 though not that selector is not parsed
17:43:51 ... I disallowed that in 3.
17:44:03 bert: What does "not allow it mean"?
17:44:19 TabAtkins_: It's either a syntax or a semantics error.
17:44:33 TabAtkins_: Should not affect any use in browsers.
17:44:55 drublic has joined #css
17:45:05 bert: then I say do it as it was: allow in the syntax, it just doesn't match anything.
17:45:18 2.1 allows it
17:45:19 plinss: Seems reasonable to not disallow it.
17:45:30 ... Maybe we want it in the OM and add a selector by script later.
17:45:35 TabAtkins_: Potentially.
17:45:49 TabAtkins_: Isn't selector readonly?
17:46:06 SimonSapin: Empty selector prob. doens't show up in the OM.
17:46:18 plinss: Just leave it open for the future.
17:46:43 TabAtkins_: Syntax error resynchs at closing '}'
17:46:56 selectorText is read/write
17:47:19 ... (Well, tiny thing. Doesn't matter.)
17:47:28 plinss: Othe rgrammar issues?
17:47:37 TabAtkins_: Nothing that needs WG attention right now.
17:47:45 plinss: Other topics?
17:47:48 https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/95
17:48:03 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Feb/0562.html
17:48:07 SimonSapin: I'd like a feature in @page: multiple selectors with a comma.
17:48:28 +Lea
17:48:28 TabAtkins_: That seems like it was an oversight... See no reason to disallow.
17:48:32 plinss: Objections?
17:48:54 RESOLVED: allow commas in @page rules.
17:49:02