- From: Scott González <scott.gonzalez@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:14:01 -0500
- To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Cc: "public-pointer-events@w3.org" <public-pointer-events@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAO8i3icsqdN5Z=hBvu-JsKmaHTNEHKz47mv-69F3KEGQ2HuiZg@mail.gmail.com>
At the end of the pointerId discussion, I mentioned compatibility with JS objects. Specifically, I mentioned that users may use a JS object with the pointerId as a key and using an object for pointerId would result in "[object Object]" being the key. Alex mentioned that if we use an object we can provide a custom toString(), which would solve this issue without relying on ES6 maps. On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>wrote: > The draft minutes from the February 26 voice conference are available at < > http://www.w3.org/2013/02/26-**pointerevents-minutes.html<http://www.w3.org/2013/02/26-pointerevents-minutes.html>> > and copied below. > > WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send them > to the public-pointer-events mail list before 5 March 2013. In the absence > of any changes, these minutes will be considered approved. > > -Thanks, Art > > [1]W3C > > [1] http://www.w3.org/ > > - DRAFT - > > Pointer Events WG Voice Conference > > 26 Feb 2013 > > [2]Agenda > > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-pointer-events/** > 2013JanMar/0153.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0153.html> > > See also: [3]IRC log > > [3] http://www.w3.org/2013/02/26-**pointerevents-irc<http://www.w3.org/2013/02/26-pointerevents-irc> > > Attendees > > Present > Art_Barstow, Olli_Pettay, Scott_Gonzalez, Cathy_Chan, > Asir_Vedamuthu, Jacob_Rossi, Doug_Schepers, > Matt_Brubeck, Alex_Russell > > Regrets > Rick_Byers > > Chair > Art > > Scribe > Art > > Contents > > * [4]Topics > 1. [5]Getting started > 2. [6]Spec feedback by Alex Russell > 3. [7]Tweaking wording in Introduction by Rick Byers > 4. [8]pointerType extensibility by Rick Byers > 5. [9]Should pointerId be an integer by Rick Byers > 6. [10]Click and contextmenu events by Rick Byers > 7. [11]Testing Pointer Events v1 spec > 8. [12]Any other Business > * [13]Summary of Action Items > ______________________________**____________________________ > > <scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB > > <scribe> Scribe: Art > > <smaug> Zakim: who is noisy > > Getting started > > AB: I posted a draft agenda yesterday > [14]http://lists.w3.org/**Archives/Public/public-**pointer-events/2<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2> > 013JanMar/0153.html. Any change requests? > > [14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-pointer-events/** > 2013JanMar/0153.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0153.html> > . > > JR: I enjoyed talking about PE last week @ W3Conf > > … we can talk about that during AoB > > AB: ok, we'll add that to AoB > > Spec feedback by Alex Russell > > AB: Alex submitted 7-8 bullets in his comments > [15]http://lists.w3.org/**Archives/Public/public-**pointer-events/2<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2> > 013JanMar/0110.html and they were submitted before the LC was > published. > ... we agreed during our February 12 call Alex's comments would > be considered as LC comments > [16]http://www.w3.org/2013/02/**12-pointerevents-minutes.html#**ite<http://www.w3.org/2013/02/12-pointerevents-minutes.html#ite> > m02. > ... We could do a deep dive on some set of Alex's points or let > the Editors reply first. I note one of Alex's comments is about > the issue Rick raised about the semantics of pointerID which is > on the agenda. > > [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-pointer-events/** > 2013JanMar/0110.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0110.html> > [16] http://www.w3.org/2013/02/12-**pointerevents-minutes.html#** > item02 <http://www.w3.org/2013/02/12-pointerevents-minutes.html#item02>. > > JR: I have a draft about half done re Alex's comments > > AB: sounds good > > Tweaking wording in Introduction by Rick Byers > > <slightlyoff> apologies for not seeing this earlier. Wasn't > aware there was a meeting > > AB: Rick had some comments re the Introduction > [17]http://lists.w3.org/**Archives/Public/public-**pointer-events/2<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2> > 013JanMar/0127.html > ... the LC already addresses at least some of Rick's comments > but it appears there is also a request to embellish some set of > the existing examples and/or add new example(s). > > [17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-pointer-events/** > 2013JanMar/0127.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0127.html> > > JR: 2 things > > … I made most of the changes in the LC > > … there is a bug I introduced that needs to be fixed > > … and I'll do that > > … Not sure what you mean by examples > > AB: ok, I'll re-read that thread and reply accordingly > > pointerType extensibility by Rick Byers > > AB: On Feb 19, Rick started a new thread about pointerType > extensibility > [18]http://lists.w3.org/**Archives/Public/public-**pointer-events/2<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2> > 013JanMar/0134.html. > ... is this a request to change the API defined in LC for v1 or > is this more a question about what we might want to do in v2? > > [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-pointer-events/** > 2013JanMar/0134.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0134.html> > . > > JR: I talked to Rick about this last week > > … we talked about diff ideas > > … they all have + and - > > … My conclusion is that there are 2 scenarios > > … one is providing a better path for new devices > > … we want them to have some compat with PEs > > <slightlyoff> just joined the call > > … the other issue, even if we do that there can be some > scenarios where knowing the real device id is important > > … I think we can solve the first problem by adding some more > semantics > > … We could have an API change if we go with the inheritance > chain proposal > > … could then do instanceof ... > > … and then new devices are instance of a former device > > … that would solve the extensibility prob but still think there > is a need of pointer type > > … and need to know the actual device type > > … Might be a bit weird to add it to a future spec > > … I think Rick is comfortable with followoing up on this later > > AB: we still have 3 weeks of LC > > OP: I agree we should solve this problem later > > … we can't predict future extensibility > > JR: there was a lot of talk about leap motion > > … at W3Conf > > <jrossi> [19]https://www.leapmotion.**com/<https://www.leapmotion.com/> > > [19] https://www.leapmotion.com/ > > JR: this came up at edgeconf > > DS: has anyone talked to them? > > <slightlyoff> ...because one of the folks on the panel seemed > to be a representative > > JR: I have expressed interest > > DS: I played with Joshua Davis' device; pretty cool > > <slightlyoff> I'm gonna cede the floor on this > > <slightlyoff> I owe the list email > > <slightlyoff> and don't think we can make serious progress by > phone > > <jrossi> slightlyoff: are you just on IRC? > > Should pointerId be an integer by Rick Byers > > AB: Rick started a thread about the type of pointerID > [20]http://lists.w3.org/**Archives/Public/public-**pointer-events/2<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2> > 013JanMar/0146.html > ... Alex mentioned this issue too > [21]http://lists.w3.org/**Archives/Public/public-**pointer-events/2<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2> > 013JanMar/0110.html. > > [20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-pointer-events/** > 2013JanMar/0146.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0146.html> > [21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-pointer-events/** > 2013JanMar/0110.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0110.html> > . > > <slightlyoff> jrossi: no, on the call, but don't want to queue > in just to say "not today" = ) > > <slightlyoff> why? > > <jrossi> just curious > > JR: I'll reply to the pointerID thread > > AR: why do people not want to make it opaque? > > JR: I found UCs for it being an integer > > … in one painting demo with multitouch, used integer to pick > from a random number of colors > > … perhaps not a great UC > > … Do you have a proposal for opaque? > > AR: think object identity should be sufficient > > … can't guarnatee integer stability > > … having multiple mouse isn't common > > … One objection is only having one mouse and making it 0 > > … Don't think we want an integer for a specific device > > … Breaks down when new pointer types are added > > … Don't want to set bad expectations > > JR: Rick mentioned some issues with using integers > > … e.g. when comparing > > … May need to add some more context about the integers > > … Can achieve good level of interop with integers > > … and make sure people's "false assumptions" are addressed > > … Think this would be a problem for our impl > > … if we had to switch to opaque types > > … I am willing to consider it, but would prefer to keep this > integer > > … and to add some more information and context > > … One pain point is supporting touch events which used integer > > AR: given that, I think it would be ok if using integers was > fleshed out better > > … that would be better than creating an interop problem > > JR: do you have a proposal? > > AR: opening move is to write down the IE behavior > > … then we have something to discuss > > DS: is part of your rationale pattern searching? > > AR: if integers, it permits indexing to arrays > > … and that works ok if the impl moves through the integer space > in a reasonable way > > … but if a different impl moves through the integer space > differently, there will be interop problems > > … Don't want confusion for the app devs > > … if the id is overloaded > > DS: so, need to define the semantics of the integer e.g. > before/after > > AR: need to make sure impls handle integers the same way > > OP: I prefer a random behavior > > AR: and that would meet my opapue requirement > > <jrossi> Roughly speaking, IE10 reserves 1 for mouse. Then 2+ > values are used for other inputs. With each newly recognized > pointer, the ID is increased. But there's some max at which we > wrap back around to 2. I'd have to check with the Windows > kernel folks for clarity. > > Click and contextmenu events by Rick Byers > > AB: Rick started a thread about click and contextmenu events in > [22]http://lists.w3.org/**Archives/Public/public-**pointer-events/2<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2> > 013JanMar/0151.html > ... Jacob replied > [23]http://lists.w3.org/**Archives/Public/public-**pointer-events/2<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2> > 013JanMar/0152.html. > ... is this just a matter of adding a bit of explanatory text? > > [22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-pointer-events/** > 2013JanMar/0151.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0151.html> > [23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-pointer-events/** > 2013JanMar/0152.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0152.html> > . > > <shepazu> (I think I agree with Alex about pointerId, though I > want to think about it) > > JR: there is some explanatory text that needs to be added > > … there is already some related information > > … I think it is safe to add the extra text > > … The other issue is Ricking looking for a defn of "click" > > … There is a defn in D3E > > … Not sure if he missed it; just sent today > > … This could be no change or just some additional non-normative > text > > <slightlyoff> still on the call = ) > > <slightlyoff> ES6 maps make this go away > > SG: re pointerId, whatever we do we need to make sure it is > compatible with JS objects > > <slightlyoff> you can have arbitrary keys > > <jrossi> when ES6 is interoperable :-) > > … we cannot assume everyone is using ES6 > > Testing Pointer Events v1 spec > > AB: there was some discussion on the list > [24]http://lists.w3.org/**Archives/Public/public-**pointer-events/2<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2> > 013JanMar/0157.html. > > [24] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-pointer-events/** > 2013JanMar/0157.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0157.html> > . > > <jrossi> what about polyfills? integers will be easier if > trying to polyfill older browsers, I think. > > <scott_gonzalez> By compatible with JS objects, I mean > specifically that the pointerId can be used as a unique key in > an object. > > AB: any comments re the proposed directory structure? > > JR: looks good > > AB: any comments re how to identify tests as manual vs. > automated? > > <scott_gonzalez> If we do use objects to represent pointerId, a > custom toString() which returns a unique value would be fine. > > DS: we should use metadata for auto/manual > > … I should bring in Tobie Langel, W3C's test lead > > AB: ok, let's talk about how to schedule that > > <smaug> er, what is the command > > AB: any comments about the need for test assertions e.g. > [25]http://www.w3.org/2010/**webevents/wiki/TestAssertions<http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/wiki/TestAssertions>? > Any > volunteers to lead or contribute? > > [25] http://www.w3.org/2010/**webevents/wiki/TestAssertions<http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/wiki/TestAssertions> > ? > > <smaug> thanks > > AB: any volunteers? > > CC: I can help get that started > > AB: excellent! > > … thanks Cathy! > > Any other Business > > AB: does anyone have any implementation status to share? > > DS: I think Jacob did an excellent job on PE @ W3Conf! > > … it is available on youtube > > <shepazu> [26]http://www.youtube.com/**watch?v=SCfVn4JY5yk<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCfVn4JY5yk> > > [26] http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=SCfVn4JY5yk<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCfVn4JY5yk> > > DS: I will write a blog re PE for webplatform.org > > <jrossi> > [27]http://docs.webplatform.**org/wiki/concepts/**PointerEvents<http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/concepts/PointerEvents> > > [27] http://docs.webplatform.org/**wiki/concepts/PointerEvents<http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/concepts/PointerEvents> > > … Msft has some folks creating PE materials > > … they have an overview plus reference material > > <jrossi> Shorcut url: [28]http://bit.ly/pointerdoc > > [28] http://bit.ly/pointerdoc > > DS: they will ask this group for feedback > > … Thanks Microsoft for making that happen! > > JR: I talked to a lot of devs at the conf > > … about 4 other talks mentioned Pointer Events > > … and that's pretty cool > > DS: yes, lots of interest > > <slightlyoff> am not > > AB: re next call, we have 3 more weeks of LC review > > … given that, perhaps we skip next week and next call is March > 12 > > JR: assume we want to record some Resolutions and don't want to > get too far behind > > … so it may sense to have a call next week > > AB: good point; let's you and I chat at the end of the week re > if a call on March 5 makes sense > > JR: sounds good > > AB: thanks everyone for joining. Meeting adjourned > > Summary of Action Items > > [End of minutes] > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2013 17:14:29 UTC