- From: Sangwhan Moon <smoon@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 02:55:04 +0900
- To: public-webevents@w3.org
I apologize for not attending today's call, was a public holiday here and didn't have connectivity available to send out regrets. If there are any actions that I should take, feel free to assign. /Sangwhan On 2011. May (5). 11, at 1:09 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: > The draft minutes from the May 10 voice conference are available at the following and copied below: > > http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html > > WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send them to the public-webevents mail list before May 24 (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 > > 10 May 2011 > > [2]Agenda > > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0092.html > > See also: [3]IRC log > > [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-irc > > Attendees > > Present > Art_Barstow, Matt_Brubeck, Doug_Schepers, Josh_Soref, > Olli_Pettay, Cathy_Chan > > Regrets > Chair > Art > > Scribe > Art > > Contents > > * [4]Topics > 1. [5]Tweak Agenda > 2. [6]Short Announcements > 3. [7]Object Identity > 4. [8]preventDefault Research; > 5. [9]Issue-3 - Click event target after DOM mutation during > touchstart > 6. [10]Issue-6 - Touch targets in frames > 7. [11]Issue-8 - initTouchEvent function > 8. [12]High-level Intentional Event Spec > 9. [13]AoB > * [14]Summary of Action Items > _________________________________________________________ > > <scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB > > <scribe> Scribe: Art > > Date: 10 May 2011 > > <smaug> Oops, I had muted my speaker, not microphone > > Tweak Agenda > > AB: I posted the draft agenda on May 6 ( > [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/ > 0092.html ). Any change requests? > > [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0092.html > > [ None ] > > Short Announcements > > AB: FPWD published May 5; congratulations to the Editors and WG ( > [16]http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-touch-events-20110505/ ). Any other > short annoucements? > ... FYI, Josh is no longer employed by Nokia > > [16] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-touch-events-20110505/ > > Object Identity > > AB: on April 26, Matt Brubeck sent an e-mail re Object Identity ( > [17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/ > 0068.html ). The only person that responded was Olli. > ... what do others think; what do we do about Object Identity; is > there some spec'ing that needs to be done? > > [17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0068.html > > MB: I don't have a strong opinion > ... but web devs have talked about it > ... I think we should at least get an opinion > ... We may not have to specify anything here > ... but OTOH, if there is consensus to spec something then we should > > OP: I wonder why WebKit might be changing their behavior > ... would like to understand that > ... QuirksMode indicated WebKit will change > > MB: WebKit is a bit diff than my examples > > OP: we need to discuss this with someone who is implementing this in > WebKit > ... need to know if they are reusing their Touch objects > > MB: agree we need more feedback from implementors > ... until then, I think the spec should remain silent > > OP: perhaps someone from Nokia can find out > > <scribe> ACTION: barstow follow up with Laszlo re Object Identity > implementation in WebKit [recorded in > [18]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action01] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-46 - Follow up with Laszlo re Object > Identity implementation in WebKit [on Arthur Barstow - due > 2011-05-17]. > > ISSUE: Should the spec be silent or prescriptive re Object Identity > > <trackbot> Created ISSUE-16 - Should the spec be silent or > prescriptive re Object Identity ; please complete additional details > at [19]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/16/edit . > > [19] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/16/edit > > preventDefault Research; > > AB: on April 26 Matt sent an e-mail regarding some research he did > on preventDefault ( > [20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/ > 0069.html ). Andrew Grieve and Matt had some additional responses. > ... is there some additional spec'ing that needs to be done? > > [20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0069.html > > MB: Andrew suggested a simple fix > ... I don' think there were any objections to that > ... Another open issue if spec should say something about scrolling > ... It would be useful for implementors > ... I'll make a proposal about preventing scrolling > ... Probably in terms of May or Should rather than Must requirements > > <scribe> ACTION: brubeck submit a proposal for re scrolling and the > preventDefault research thread [recorded in > [21]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action02] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-47 - Submit a proposal for re scrolling > and the preventDefault research thread [on Matt Brubeck - due > 2011-05-17]. > > Issue-3 - Click event target after DOM mutation during touchstart > > AB: Issue-3 ( [22]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/3 ) > was opened weeks ago. There was some recent follow-up by Sangwhan > and Andrew ( > [23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/ > 0081.html ). Doug has related Action-23 ( > [24]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/23 ). > ... who can take the lead here and make a proposal? > > [22] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/3 > [23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0081.html > [24] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/23 > > <shepazu> Action-23? > > <trackbot> ACTION-23 -- Doug Schepers to follow-up on Issue-3 -- due > 2011-03-29 -- OPEN > > <trackbot> [25]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/23 > > [25] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/23 > > DS: I don't see a way around this issue > ... I have some behavior defined for Activiate in the DOM 3 Events > spec > ... We could borrow some of that > ... But if someone wants to help, that's fine > > MB: our initial Gecko implementation behaves the same way as Android > and iPhone > > AB: that's quite a bit of synergy > ... are there any volunteers to help here? > ... Doug, we'll wait for your input here > > DS: I can propose something by the end of today > ... We need to decide if this is a Should or a Must > > MB: we already addressed touchstart and default actions and click > ... this is about what to do if DOM changes > > DS: I need to take a look at this > > AB: ok, so the status of Issue-3 is we will wait for Doug to > complete action-23 > ... If anyone wants to help, please do so > > MB: the reason Gecko behaves as it does is because we wait for touch > to end before simulate up/down events > ... all of those events occur in the DOM after the touch sequence > > Issue-6 - Touch targets in frames > > AB: Issue-6 was raised by Andrew last February ( > [26]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/6 ). Doug has > related Action-24 ( > [27]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/24 ). The last > discussion was February 22 ( > [28]http://www.w3.org/2011/02/22-webevents-minutes.html#item08 ). > > [26] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/6 > [27] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/24 > [28] http://www.w3.org/2011/02/22-webevents-minutes.html#item08 > > DS: I need to send an e-mail about this > > AB: is this a relatively straight fwd proposal? > > DS: would like to know what WebKit and Gecko do > ... need to consider security here > > MB: need to be careful here > ... don't want any data leaking > > DS: also could observe a pattern of how the user is moving on the > larger outside page > ... and where the iframe is > > MB: if you can trick the user in a specific way, can get some data > on the user > > AB: so Doug, you are OK with the way iOS and Android handle this? > > DS: basically, yes > > AB: so how do we close this? > > DS: just need an Editor to add the text > > MB: I can do that > > AB: that would be great Matt > > <scribe> ACTION: brubeck propose text to address Issue-6 (routing to > the child iframe) [recorded in > [29]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action03] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-48 - Propose text to address Issue-6 > (routing to the child iframe) [on Matt Brubeck - due 2011-05-17]. > > Issue-8 - initTouchEvent function > > AB: Issue-8 ( [30]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/8 ) > was created in March. Olli has related Action-34 ( > [31]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/34 ) and Doug has > related Action-36 ( > [32]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/36 ). The last > time we discussed this was during the April 12 call ( > [33]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/ > att-0039/WebEvents-min-12-Apr-2011.html#issue-8 ). > ... this method is already defined in the spec. What else needs to > be specified? > > [30] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/8 > [31] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/34 > [32] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/36 > [33] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/att-0039/WebEvents-min-12-Apr-2011.html#issue-8 > > MB: I committed a proposal > ... there is one open sub-issue > ... it is noted in the spec > ... re the arguments of this method > ... it takes page x and 'y' and client x and 'y' > ... Think we can close Issue-8 > ... and open a new issue > > AB: any objections to that? > > <scribe> ACTION: barstow move issue-8 to the closed state [recorded > in [34]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action04] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-49 - Move issue-8 to the closed state [on > Arthur Barstow - due 2011-05-17]. > > ISSUE: page x and 'y' paramters to create touch > > <trackbot> Created ISSUE-17 - Page x and 'y' parameters to create > touch ; please complete additional details at > [35]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/17/edit . > > [35] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/17/edit > > MB: I started a thread on this issue > > <mbrubeck> > [36]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/ > 0078.html > > [36] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0078.html > > MB: we should take issue-17 to the list > > OP: Gecko and Webkit aren't aligned here > > <smaug> Currently Gecko doesn't compute clientX/Y values > automatically from pageX/Y, like webkit does > > [ Scribe missed some details exchanged between Olli and Matt ...] > > <mbrubeck> The spec (which is based on what Olli implemented in > Gecko) is written to allow backward compatibility with > WebKit/Safari, while also allowing consistency with mouse events. > > <mbrubeck> If we keep the API in the spec, we should specify that if > pageX/Y are null, then they will be computed based on clientX/Y, and > vice-versa. > > AB: thanks Olli and Matt for embellishing the minutes! > > <mbrubeck> Or we could simplify the spec and make it work like mouse > events (breaking compatibility with content that uses the current > WebKit API). > > MB: I will make a proposal on the list > > <scribe> ACTION: brubeck make a proposal to address Issue-17 > [recorded in > [37]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action05] > > <trackbot> Created ACTION-50 - Make a proposal to address Issue-17 > [on Matt Brubeck - due 2011-05-17]. > > High-level Intentional Event Spec > > AB: I am interested in expectations, plans and such > > DS: I have some information > ... Apple made a proposal to Web Apps WG > ... for the Protocols and Formats WG > ... to add some a11y features to D3E > ... Decided a joint deliverable between Web Events and WAI WG would > be a good way to move fwd > > AB: is James' earlier proposal public? > > <shepazu> James Craig is working on the "Independence for User > Interface" (IndieUI) proposal > > AB: James' proposal: > [38]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2010JulSep/att-0106/ > UserInterfaceIndependence.html > ... is P&F WG working on this IndieUI spec? > > [38] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2010JulSep/att-0106/UserInterfaceIndependence.html > > DS: no, I don't think so yet; but expect it or something like it > will be > ... not sure about its priority, especially with ARIA > > AB: so is the IndieUI going to be the Intentional Events spec we are > chartered to do? > > DS: yes, that is my expectation > ... in cooperation with the P&F WG > ... I will notify Web Events WG when there is something to review > > AB: getting early access to a draft, would be very useful > > DS: I will convey that to him > > <shepazu> Recommended these resources: [$1\47] > [39]http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/ReSpec.js/documentation.html [$1\47] > [40]http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/spec-conventions.html [$1\47] > [41]http://dev.w3.org/2008/dev-ind-testing/extracting-test-assertion > s-pub.html > > [39] http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/ReSpec.js/documentation.html > [40] http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/spec-conventions.html > [41] http://dev.w3.org/2008/dev-ind-testing/extracting-test-assertions-pub.html > > AB: ok; thanks > > DS: If James follows these conventions, the spec should be similar > in format to what we are already doing > ... Need a way for author to map from low-level to high-level > intentional events > ... I can get the related paper from the IETF > > AB: I think you mean GISpL > [42]http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-echtler-gispl-specification-00 > > [42] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-echtler-gispl-specification-00 > > DS: may need a separate event listener > ... needs some more thinking > ... event types and a range of values > ... register for some event with a set of params > ... and the listener would get some set of values for the registered > params > ... I think I should send an e-mail about this > ... there could be a more elegant solution > > AoB > > AB: no call next on May 17 > ... next call will be May 24 > ... any other topics for today? > ... meeting adjourned > > Summary of Action Items > > [NEW] ACTION: barstow follow up with Laszlo re Object Identity > implementation in WebKit [recorded in > [43]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action01] > [NEW] ACTION: barstow move issue-8 to the closed state [recorded in > [44]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action04] > [NEW] ACTION: brubeck make a proposal to address Issue-17 [recorded > in [45]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action05] > [NEW] ACTION: brubeck propose text to address Issue-6 (routing to > the child iframe) [recorded in > [46]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action03] > [NEW] ACTION: brubeck submit a proposal for re scrolling and the > preventDefault research thread [recorded in > [47]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action02] > > [End of minutes] > > Best regards, -- Sangwhan Moon Opera Software ASA | Skype: innodb1
Received on Tuesday, 10 May 2011 17:55:42 UTC