W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webevents@w3.org > January to March 2011

Draft minutes 15 February 2011 call

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 12:38:31 -0500
Message-ID: <4D5ABA17.5020009@nokia.com>
To: "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the February 15 voice conference are available at 
the following and copied below:

   http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-webevents-minutes.html

WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send 
them to the public-webevents mail list before February 22 (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

15 Feb 2011

    [2]Agenda

       [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JanMar/0048.html

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-webevents-irc

Attendees

    Present
           Art_Barstow, Matt_Brubeck, Doug_Schepers, Olli_Pettay,
           Josh_Soref, Dzung_Tran, Cathy_Chan

    Regrets
           Sangwhan_Moon

    Chair
           Art

    Scribe
           timeless, Art, Josh

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]1. Brainstorm for agenda topics ...
          2. [6]Mercurial workflow
          3. [7]Tracker
          4. [8]Technical Discussion
          5. [9]AOB
      * [10]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________

    <timeless>  Scribe: timeless

    <ArtB>  ScribeNick: ArtB

    <scribe>  Scribe: Art

    Date: 15 February 2011

    <scribe>  Scribe: Josh

    <scribe>  ScribeNick: timeless

1. Brainstorm for agenda topics ...

    MB: We want to talk about Mercurial workflow

    DS: yep
    ... We had talked about talking about Tracker

    <mbrubeck>  In the last telcon, we also talked about test suite code
    hosting and public forking/contributions.

Mercurial workflow

    MB: Quick summary ...

    <Dzung_Tran>  I have a conflict, so I was just going to follow on IRC

    MB: for SW, DS, myself -- editors, we need to decide how we are
    going to merge eachother's changes
    ... there are many things we could do
    ... two of the simple ones are ...
    ... using the CVS model where we each push/pull from a single
    centralized repo
    ... or we could each have our own repos, push our changes to our
    individual clones
    ... and once changes have been discussed, we could push to the
    official repo

    DS: What are the advantages of each approach?

    MB: The centralized approach is easier for people to follow
    ... The advantage of people publishing changes before they're
    integrated is that it provides a way for people to review proposals
    before they're made

    DS: So this touches on Review then Commit or Commit then Review
    model
    ... traditionally @W3C we follow a Review then Commit
    ... At HTML/SVG
    ... WebApps, CSS(?), all use Commit then Review
    ... In the newer browser centric groups, we typically do Commit then
    Review
    ... it tends to be faster and provides context for review

    MB: In distributed you can do Commit, then Review, then Merge
    (=Accept)

    DS: I think that's OK

    MB: We could do any of these
    ... If the editors want to use a central repo
    ... And other people especially people without write access could
    use clones

    DS: I tend to favor for non controversial changes, in order to make
    it easy for people to understand what's going on with the group
    ... using the central repository for the three editors
    ... But if we have controversial things, we could do something else

    MB: I think that's OK, since there aren't many editors

    DS: I'm very intrigued by the prospect of having distributed
    changeset.
    ... people sending in patches on a mailing list
    ... I like the idea of multiple editors getting their ideas out
    there
    ... and letting people decide which works best

    MB: And we'll probably see some of that
    ... we've already seen some of that w/ SW

    DS: And i'll see some of that with Hg

    MB: Using central you'll have simple pull merge cycle
    ... but it won't feel much different from CVS

    JS: Another way to do things is to use Branches
    ... but I'm not at all in favor of it. Merely noting it's possible

    AB: So it sounds like we're in favor of using a central repo
    ... does that seem like a fair characterization?
    ... Anyone else have feedback/input?

    RESOLUTION: Stick with central repo

    DS: So, we covered what + how
    ... but we haven't talked about The Who
    ... Do we want to have MB/SW make some changes?

    MB: I think I can do some simple changes

    DS: You can make some changes and cause me to need to do a merge.
    ... It will be good practice for you (editing) and for me (merging)
    ... MB: have you ever been an editor before?

    MB: no

    AB: So we also agreed to a Commit then Review model

    RESOLUTION: We will follow the Commit then Review model

    AB: ... this will align us with the other groups DS mentioned

    DS: I'd also like to use this group to do some experimenting
    ... but for starters, I think this is fine
    ... so MB, for next week, you'll make some small changes?

    MB: Yes, I'll look through the issues on the mailinglist and see
    which ones I can address

    DS: I think that leads us to our next topic

Tracker

    DS: So, Tracker is our issue tracker

    <ArtB>  tracker: [11]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/

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

    DS: Let's walk through creating an issue and creating an action
    ... MB: have you used Tracker before?

    MB: No, I haven't

    DS: It's rather simple

    <shepazu>  ACTION: matt to update touch events spec for next week
    [recorded in
    [12]http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-webevents-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot>  Created ACTION-11 - Update touch events spec for next
    week [on Matt Brubeck - due 2011-02-22].

    <ArtB>  Scribe+ Art

    <ArtB>  ScribeNick: ArtB

    <mbrubeck>  and then I can see
    [13]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/11

      [13] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/11

    DS: can create Actions via IRC interface
    ... and can create Issues via IRC as well

    <shepazu>  issue: resolve touch area re. radius and angle

    <trackbot>  Created ISSUE-1 - Resolve touch area re. radius and angle
    ; please complete additional details at
    [14]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/1/edit .

      [14] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/1/edit

    DS: (provided trackbot is running ...)

    <shepazu>  issue-1?

    <trackbot>  ISSUE-1 -- Resolve touch area re. radius and angle --
    raised

    <trackbot>  [15]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/1

      [15] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/1

    DS: then in IRC, can say "ISSSUE-n?" where n is an issue number
    ... and trackbot will dump out the issue
    ... same thing works with "ACTION-n?"
    ... don't forget the "?" at the end
    ... Raised state means raised
    ... Open means WG agreees it is an issue

    <scribe>  ... Pending state means we are awaiting feedback

    <scribe>  ... Postponed state means the Issue will not be released in
    the current spec (postponed to v2)

    UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: Can also select the issue/action's "product"
    ... currently we just have the one Touch Event product

    <shepazu>  [16]http://www.w3.org/mid/4D470F74.9020208@canonical.com

      [16] http://www.w3.org/mid/4D470F74.9020208@canonical.com

    DS: after an Issue is created, an email will be sent to
    public-webevents
    ... if an email includes a {ACTION,ISSUE}-n tag, that email's
    archive link will be added to the issue or action

    <shepazu>  issue-1?

    <trackbot>  ISSUE-1 -- Resolve touch area re. radius and angle --
    raised

    <trackbot>  [17]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/1

      [17] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/1

    DS: f.ex. if you look at the issue I just raised:
    [18]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/1
    ... you will see the email trail
    ... can also define a "short name" for Issues
    ... which can be convenient way to identify an Issue

      [18] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/1

    <shepazu>  action-1?

    <trackbot>  ACTION-1 -- Arthur Barstow to work with Doug on a voice
    conference time of day that works for most people -- due 2010-12-15
    -- CLOSED

    <trackbot>  [19]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/1

      [19] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/1

    <shepazu>  action-11?

    <trackbot>  ACTION-11 -- Matt Brubeck to update touch events spec for
    next week -- due 2011-02-22 -- OPEN

    <trackbot>  [20]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/11

      [20] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/11

    DS: Issues and Actions created in IRC are "bare bones"
    ... Need to use Tracker's Web interface for more advanced management
    tasks
    ... f.ex. can change due date (which defaults to 7 days from
    creation date)
    ... tracker scans all emails on public-webevents
    ... for {Action,Issue}-n tags
    ... and adds a link to the emails archive to the Action or Issue

    MB: does Tracker track mercurial changes?

    DS: no, I don't think so
    ... but we may be able to make something like that work
    ... there is an option to do that for CVS
    ... but sure about Mercurial
    ... I'll need to talk to sysadmin team at W3C
    ... we may also be able to connect commits to twitter

    AB: I've been using Tracker for years
    ... it's easy to use and that's good
    ... may be missing some features Bugzilla has
    ... but overall, it's a good tool

    DS: a disadvantage to Bugzilla is all of the comment treads are kept
    in Bugzilla, whereas with Tracker, email is used for comment threads

    AB: anything else on Tracker for today?

    DS: I just logged one issue based on comments from two different
    people

    <mbrubeck>  ACTION: Matt Brubeck to raise issues on Tracker for
    previous mailing list discussions. [recorded in
    [21]http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-webevents-minutes.html#action02]

    <trackbot>  Created ACTION-12 - Brubeck to raise issues on Tracker
    for previous mailing list discussions. [on Matt Brubeck - due
    2011-02-22].

    DS: it may be good for Matt (and others) to create Issues based on
    comment from the list

    JS: how does one get support for Tracker?

    DS: everything is handled by W3C sysadmin team
    ... and I can be your conduit to that team

    AB: yes, please notify Doug and I if you have any Tracker issues and
    we will follow up

    DS: I would like to walk thru a merge

    MB: let's do that after the call

    DS: OK

Technical Discussion

    AB: I have some open action; I'll get to them RSN

    DS: we didn't get much response about UCs and Reqs
    ... but could defer them until next week
    ... re Andrew Grieve's email ...
    ... we may want to create some issues

    <shepazu>
    [22]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JanMar/
    0043.html

      [22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JanMar/0043.html

    DS: re what should happen if touch is dragged off the screen ....
    ... I think that is already addressed in the spec ->  touch cancel
    ... I significantly changed touch cancel
    ... oh, Matt, we should talk about "ReSpec" which is used by the
    Touch Events spec

    <mbrubeck>  issue-2?

    <trackbot>  ISSUE-2 -- What should happen when a touch is dragged off
    the screen -- raised

    <trackbot>  [23]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/2

      [23] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/2

    AB: I don't think anyone has responded to the email

    DS: I will respond to Andrew's email
    ... will need to tighten up the spec re what happens when touch is
    moved offscreen
    ... Matt, can you look at that?

    MB: yes

    DS: re 2nd issue ...

    OP: I think this is closer to a mouse use case

    <mbrubeck>  re issue-2, different hardware devices may or may not be
    able to detect whether a touch was dragged off the screen or
    released normally.

    OP: need to check this on an Android or iPhone

    DS: I could test this

    <mbrubeck>  issue-3?

    <trackbot>  ISSUE-3 -- Click event target after DOM mutation during
    touchstart -- raised

    <trackbot>  [24]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/3

      [24] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/3

    DS: would be good if someone would write a test though
    ... any volunteers for that?

    [Silence]

    DS: ok, I'll write it

    <mbrubeck>  issue-4?

    <trackbot>  ISSUE-4 -- Does preventDefault on touchmove cause a
    dragging motion to fire a click event? -- raised

    <trackbot>  [25]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/4

      [25] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/4

    <scribe>  ACTION: doug create a test for ISSUE-4 [recorded in
    [26]http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-webevents-minutes.html#action03]

    <trackbot>  Created ACTION-13 - Create a test for ISSUE-4 [on Doug
    Schepers - due 2011-02-22].

    OP: remember to test mouse up and mouse down

    MB: iPhone synthesize mouse up/down
    ... mouse up, mouse move, click
    ... needed for compatibility of apps that know about mouse events
    but not touch

    DS: what are we doing about preventDefualt in general?

    MB: will be impl-specific
    ... e.g. safari pans with touch move

    DS: we don't define all default actions the UA can take
    ... but we can define what preventDefault does
    ... There could be some issues around timing
    ... that we may need to define

    <mbrubeck>  MB: In mobile Firefox, for performance reasons, we also
    might want preventDefault on touchstart to affect which other touch
    events are fired. For example, if you don't preventDefault on
    touchstart, then no touchmove/touchend events will be dispatched.

    DS: other than "don't do that"
    ... that's good info
    ... perhaps you should put that in the spec

    MB: let me bring it up on the list first

    DS: sounds good

AOB

    AB: let's continue discussion on the lsit
    ... and meet again next week

    <mbrubeck>  shepazu: Want to try a merge?

    AB: Meeting adjourned

    <mbrubeck>  We can remove the "test" and "test2" files

    <shepazu>  mbrubeck: yes, give me 15 minutes

    <mbrubeck>  ok

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: doug create a test for ISSUE-4 [recorded in
    [27]http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-webevents-minutes.html#action03]
    [NEW] ACTION: Matt Brubeck to raise issues on Tracker for previous
    mailing list discussions. [recorded in
    [28]http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-webevents-minutes.html#action02]
    [NEW] ACTION: matt to update touch events spec for next week
    [recorded in
    [29]http://www.w3.org/2011/02/15-webevents-minutes.html#action01]

    [End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2011 17:39:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 15 February 2011 17:39:07 GMT