W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webevents@w3.org > April to June 2011

Draft Minutes: 26 April 2011 call

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:59:29 -0400
Message-ID: <4DB6EBE1.2070400@nokia.com>
To: "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the April 26 voice conference are available at 
the following and copied below:

   http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html

WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send 
them to the public-webevents mail list before May 10 (the next voice 
conference); otherwise these minutes will be considered Approved as is.

-Art Barstow

    [1]W3C

       [1] http://www.w3.org/

                                - DRAFT -

                     Web Events WG Voice Conference

26 Apr 2011

    [2]Agenda

       [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0064.html

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-irc

Attendees

    Present
           Art_Barstow, Josh_Soref, Olli_Pettay, Matt_Brubeck,
           Cathy_Chan, Sangwhan_Moon

    Regrets
    Chair
           Art

    Scribe
           Art

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Tweak Agenda
          2. [6]Getting Touch Events spec ready for First Public Working
             Draft
          3. [7]Testing
          4. [8]Open and Raised Issues: 1 or 2, time permitting ...
          5. [9]AoB
      * [10]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________

    <scribe>  ScribeNick: ArtB

    <scribe>  Scribe: Art

    Date: 26 April 2011

    <mbrubeck>  sangwhan: Are you able to join the call?

Tweak Agenda

    AB: yesterday I sent a draft agenda to the list (
    [11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
    0064.html ). Any change requests?

      [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0064.html

Getting Touch Events spec ready for First Public Working Draft

    AB: last week I sent an e-mail to the list about the FPWD (
    [12]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
    0055.html ). The e-mail describes the general purpose of a FPWD and
    related requirements.
    ... First, I'd like to take any questions about the process and then
    discuss the question about whether or not the Touch Events spec
    includes, at least at a broad level, all of the high priority
    features we intend to specify.
    ... if no questions about the process, are there any comments about
    missing features?
    ... I had asked for missing features by April 26 and there were no
    comments
    ... I think we consider the feature set for the Touch Events spec to
    be complete
    ... at least at a broad level
    ... we have some UCs&  Requirements documented (
    [13]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/wiki/Testing ). At a later
    stage (when we discuss publishing a Candidate Recommendation with
    the Director) we will need to identify the requirements addressed by
    the spec.

      [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0055.html
      [13] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/wiki/Testing

    <ArtB1>  AB: if anyone has any comments on the UCs and Requirements,
    please send them to the list by May 3; otherwise let's considered
    then "approved" as of that date. IOW, they can change but we also
    think they capture our main UCs and requirements.

    AB: if anyone has any comments on the UCs and Requirements, please
    send them to the list by May 3; otherwise let's considered then
    "approved" as of that date. IOW, they can change but we also think
    they capture our main UCs and requirements.

    JS: the UCs and Reqs doc is not linked from the Testing doc

    <scribe>  ACTION: barstow create a link to the UCs and Reqs from the
    Testing doc [recorded in
    [14]http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot>  Created ACTION-43 - Create a link to the UCs and Reqs
    from the Testing doc [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-05-03].

    AB: lastly, what about an Introduction section for the Touch Events
    Introduction section (
    [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
    0051.html )? Can someone commit to writing at least a short-ish
    paragraph (4-5 sentences)?
    ... any volunteers for that?

      [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0051.html

    JS: I can't commit now

    SM: I can take that action

    <scribe>  ACTION: sangwhan Create an input for the Introduction
    section by April 29 [recorded in
    [16]http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html#action02]

    <trackbot>  Created ACTION-44 - Create an input for the Introduction
    section by April 29 [on Sangwhan Moon - due 2011-05-03].

    AB: because of the W3C's May Advisory Committee meeting, there is a
    publication moratorium and that means the very last day we can
    request publication is May 6 (if we want to publish the FPWD before
    the AC meeting).

    JS: I am happy to review the Introduction

    SM: OK, I'll send you a draft

    AB: that's great; a FPWD can be prepared early next week
    ... proposed Resolution: the group agrees to publish a FPWD of the
    Touch Events spec
    ... any objections or voices of support?

    <mbrubeck>  +1

    <timeless>  +1

    <smaug_>  +1

    <Cathy>  +1

    AB: I hear no objections and only support

    <sangwhan>  +1

    RESOLUTION: the group agrees to publish a FPWD of the Touch Events
    spec

    AB: anything else on FPWD?

Testing

    AB: A few days ago Matt announced he created about 7 tests with over
    20 assertions (
    [17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
    0063.html ). This is excellent Matt! And Matt is using the
    testharness.js that is being used by the HTML WG and the WebApps WG
    (
    [18]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/file/ad7715ddbcda/test/testharne
    ss.js ).

      [17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0063.html
      [18] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/file/ad7715ddbcda/test/testharness.js

    <sangwhan>  s/Mark/Matt/

    AB: I am interested in comments on the testharness ( ) (written by
    Opera's James Graham).

    MB: the testharness is fine for what I'm doing
    ... some common patterns may result in some additional helper
    functions
    ... but no real problems with the harness

    AB: that's good to hear
    ... there is a mail list for discussions about the harness; think
    it's public-test-infra@w3.org

    MB: I have one test file
    ... it displays a rectangle to be touched
    ... initiates the touchstart event
    ... and tests some attributes
    ... Need to create some other tests for moving
    ... and multi-touches
    ... some "finger dancing"
    ... Multi-touch tests won't be supported for all hardware
    ... so we need to mention that some tests may not work

    AB: has anyone else tried testharness.js?

    <timeless>  <MB>  ... need to ensure the spec supports not supporting
    certain things

    AB: It would be good for others to contribute test cases

    MB: if someone wants to write simple tests
    ... could start with touchenter and touchleave
    ... although without some implementation, would be hard to test the
    test
    ... One question, for attrs like rX and rY, can be hard to test if
    values are accurate
    ... Not sure how to handle that
    ... Could be left for implementations to test themselves

    AB: good point; any feedback on that?

    JS: I can ask around
    ... I think we ignored rotation
    ... Could check with tablet people

    SM: the hardware people

    <timeless>  wacom

    AB: Doug an I have a standding action to try to get additional
    players in the WG

    <ArtB1>  ... by having a FPWD, that should be easier

    AB: a call or two ago we talked briefly about the "A Method for
    Writing Testable Conformance Requirements" document (
    [19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
    0031.html ).
    ... Doug had asked for the Testing topic today but he isn't here

      [19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0031.html

    MB: I looked at the doc;
    ... somewhat ambivalent
    ... the Touch Events spec is relatively small
    ... as such, I don't feel strongly that we need to use it
    ... but if someone wants to implement it (in the spec itself), I can
    work with it

    AB: since the Editors are doing the work, I want to listen to their
    feedback

    SM: I agree with Matt
    ... doesn't seem like we need it for the Touch Events spec
    ... perhaps we can consider it for the Intentional Events spec

    AB: agree we can consider the Intentional Events spec separately

    <scribe>  ACTION: Doug submit an opinion on Writing Testable
    Conformance Reqs for the Touch Events spec [recorded in
    [20]http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html#action03]

    <trackbot>  Created ACTION-45 - Submit an opinion on Writing Testable
    Conformance Reqs for the Touch Events spec [on Doug Schepers - due
    2011-05-03].

    AB: anything else on Testing for today?

Open and Raised Issues: 1 or 2, time permitting ...

    AB: issues in Raised and Open state are: Issue-3, Issue-5, Issue-6,
    and Issue-8.

    <mbrubeck>  There is also
    [21]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/11

      [21] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/11

    MB: and Issue-11

    AB: my recollection on Issue-11 is that comments should have been
    submitted before today's call

    <timeless>  action-27 is confusing :)

    MB: if we use TouchPoint that would break some existing content

    <timeless>  we could use that as a way to be a different interface...

    AB: any additional comments re Issue-11

    <timeless>  but for compatibility, renaming makes sense

    AB: I propose we change the name of TouchPoint to Touch

    <smaug_>  +1

    AB: any objections?
    ... or voices of support
    ... +1
    ... hearing no objections

    <sangwhan>  Sounds a bit ambiguous, but no better ideas so +1

    RESOLUTION: the TouchPoint Interface will be renamed to "Touch"
    interface

    AB: would you please Matt, commit that change this week?

    MB: yes, I will make that change today

    AB: thanks Matt!
    ... my inclination is to not do a deep dive on 3, 5, 6 or 8 on this
    call
    ... we can use the FPWD to explicitly ask for feedback on the
    issues.
    ... also including a pointer to the Open and Raised Issues in the
    spec (e.g. SoTD section) may be good.
    ... and Issue-14 was created today
    ... by Olli

    OP: not sure if those methods are being used
    ... eg. by Apple or Google

    SM: preventDefault is another topic

    MB: I can an action to define preventDefault

    SM: that is Action-5
    ... and I am the owner

    AB: do we want to change the owner of Action-5?

    SM: yes, please do

    AB: so I will leave it to the Editors to decide if they want to
    explicitly ask for feedback re any of the Open and/or Raised issues
    ... anything else on this topic for today?

AoB

    AB: no call on May 17
    ... I think the main task between now and May 3, is to get the spec
    ready for FPWD
    ... that's a new process for Matt and Sangwhan
    ... but Doug is an expert
    ... propose our May call schedule is May 10 and May 24
    ... any comments or concerns?
    ... next call is May 10
    ... and the 2nd call in May is tentatively May 24
    ... anything else for today?
    ... please continue to work on Issues and Actions via the mail list
    ... Meeting Adjourned

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: barstow create a link to the UCs and Reqs from the
    Testing doc [recorded in
    [22]http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html#action01]
    [NEW] ACTION: Doug submit an opinion on Writing Testable Conformance
    Reqs for the Touch Events spec [recorded in
    [23]http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html#action03]
    [NEW] ACTION: sangwhan Create an input for the Introduction section
    by April 29 [recorded in
    [24]http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html#action02]

    [End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 26 April 2011 15:59:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 26 April 2011 15:59:58 GMT