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

Draft Minutes: 21 June 2011

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 11:28:48 -0400
Message-ID: <4E00B8B0.9000004@nokia.com>
To: "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the June 21 voice conference are available at the 
following and copied below:


WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send 
them to the public-webevents mail list before June 28 (the next voice 
conference); otherwise these minutes will be considered Approved as is.

-Art Barstow


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

                                - DRAFT -

                     Web Events WG Voice Conference

21 Jun 2011



    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/06/21-webevents-irc


           Art_Barstow, Cathy_Chan, Matt_Brubeck, Olli_Pettay,





      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Tweak Agenda
          2. [6]Announcements
          3. [7]Issue-3: Click event target after DOM mutation during
          4. [8]Issue-17: Page X and Y parameters to createTouch
          5. [9]Issue-16: Should the spec be silent or prescriptive re
             Object Identity
          6. [10]Issue-18: The spec needs more examples related to the
             various lists
          7. [11]Preparing Touch Events spec for Last Call WD
          8. [12]Any Other Business (AOB)
      * [13]Summary of Action Items

<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

<scribe> Scribe: Art

    Date: 21 June 2011

Tweak Agenda

    AB: yesterday I posted a Draft Agenda (
    0127.html ). Since Laszlo sent regrets for today, I propose dropping
    Issue-17 and I'll follow-up with Laszlo to please address related
    Action-55. Any objections to that proposal?


    [None: Issue-17 will not be included in today's call]

    AB: if Doug doesn't join today's call we also drop discussion on
    Issue-16 since he has related action-53
    ... any other change requests?


    AB: any short announcements for today?

    MB: FF 6.0 will go to Beta in 2 weeks and it will include support
    for the Touch Events spec

    AB: that's fantastic Matt; good work!

Issue-3: Click event target after DOM mutation during touchstart;

    AB: Issue-3 ( [15]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/3 )
    has open Action-52 for Matt (
    [16]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/52 ). Anything to
    report on that today Matt? Last discussion was June 14 (
    [17]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item03 )

      [15] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/3
      [16] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/52
      [17] http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item03

    MB: I still need to write the text and will get it done by the end
    of the month

    AB: anything else on Issue-3 for today?

Issue-17: Page X and Y parameters to createTouch

    AB: we are skipping Issue-17 for today

Issue-16: Should the spec be silent or prescriptive re Object Identity

    AB: Issue-16 ( [18]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/16
    ) has Action-53 for Doug (
    [19]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/53 ). Anything to
    report on that today Doug? Last discussion was June 14 (
    [20]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item04 )

      [18] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/16
      [19] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/53
      [20] http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item04

    DS: I've been working on other Actions
    ... so nothing else to report today

Issue-18: The spec needs more examples related to the various lists

    AB: last week Issue-18 was created (
    [21]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/18 ) and we need
    someone to provide inputs to address this issue. The June 14
    discussion (
    [22]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item06 )
    provides some additional context.
    ... can we get someone to agree to provide some examples?
    ... we should address this issue before LC

      [21] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/18
      [22] http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item06

    DS: Sangwhan, can you take this?

    SM: yes, I can take it

    AB: thanks Sangwhan

<scribe> ACTION: moon submit an input to address Issue-18 [recorded
    in [23]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/21-webevents-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-57 - Submit an input to address Issue-18
    [on Sangwhan Moon - due 2011-06-28].

Preparing Touch Events spec for Last Call WD

    AB: on June 14 we discussed a plan for Last Call (
    [24]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item06 ) and
    that resulted in some sub-issues and actions.
    ... one consequence is splitting Touch Events spec (
    [25]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents ) into Version/Level 1/2; who is
    going to do the work?
    ... who agreed to do the split?

      [24] http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item06
      [25] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents

    DS: there are 2 parts
    ... 1st is to mark testable assertions
    ... and the classes of conformance
    ... and I am working on those assertions
    ... The 2nd part is splitting the stuff and Matt agreed to do that
    ... Matt will do his split After I get done my part

    AB: thanks for the clarification

    DS: and we must do those 2 things before going to LC
    ... I plan to complete my part this week

    AB: that would be good to get your part Doug, done this week
    ... Are we using "Version" or "Level"? What are the advantages and
    disadvantages of each

    DS: I don't care

<smaug> XHR is Level 1 & 2

    AB: I dont' feel strongly either

    DS: typically, a level is considered B/C with previous specs
    ... but new Versions typically are not B/C
    ... but in this case, I think we want B/C

    MB: initTouchEvent could give us some B/C issues

    DS: so, then, perhaps we should go with versions

    AB: does anyone object to going with versions?

    [ None ]

    RESOLUTION: we will use "Version" (not "Level") to distinguish the
    different Touch Events spec

    AB: Doug agreed to Action-56: Update the Touch Event spec to use
    markup to facilitate test case extraction (
    [26]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/56 ). What is the
    status of that Doug?

      [26] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/56

    DS: yes, I am working on this

Any Other Business (AOB)

    UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: and if there is no substantial agenda by the 27th,
    the meeting will be canceled


      [27] http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/spec-source-orientation.html

    SM: let's talk about device orieintation after we get our spec to LC

    DS: I agree we should take some of that into account
    ... but talking about it after LC is fine with me

    AB: anything else for today?
    ... please address open actions and issues
    ... Meeting Adjourned

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: moon submit an input to address Issue-18 [recorded in

    [End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2011 15:29:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:09:33 UTC