Re: PFWG comments on Touch Events

Sorry, responded to wrong thread…

From: yael <yael.aharon@nokia.com<mailto:yael.aharon@nokia.com>>
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 18:14:19 +0000
To: <cooper@w3.org<mailto:cooper@w3.org>>, <Art.Barstow@nokia.com<mailto:Art.Barstow@nokia.com>>
Cc: <public-webevents@w3.org<mailto:public-webevents@w3.org>>, <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>>, <wai-liaison@w3.org<mailto:wai-liaison@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: PFWG comments on Touch Events
Resent-From: <public-webevents@w3.org<mailto:public-webevents@w3.org>>
Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 18:15:54 +0000

People usually leave it as "existing tests already cover this functionality"

From: ext Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org<mailto:cooper@w3.org>>
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 13:09:10 -0500
To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com<mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com>>
Cc: <public-webevents@w3.org<mailto:public-webevents@w3.org>>, List WAI PF <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>>, List WAI Liaison <wai-liaison@w3.org<mailto:wai-liaison@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: PFWG comments on Touch Events
Resent-From: <public-webevents@w3.org<mailto:public-webevents@w3.org>>
Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 18:10:03 +0000

Thanks for checking with us and apologies for the delay in our review timeline. The PFWG accepts your disposition of this comment. http://www.w3.org/2011/12/07-pf-minutes.html#item11

Arthur Barstow wrote:
Hi Michael,

During WebEvents' November 22 voice conf, we agreed to move this spec to Candidate Recommendation and a related CfC is now open (until December 1). Given this, I think your response today, to my October 13 reply to you, is more than a "little late" ;-).

Nevertheless, we propose to proceed this way ...

Section 7 is all about normative UA requirements. We view your proposed addition as a non-informative note/hint/advice for Web applications (developers). As such, a few of us discussed your proposal today in #webevents. We agreed your proposed text would be a good addition as a non-normative Note and I added it as such in the version of the spec we will publish as a CR (in December):

 http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/v1/touchevents.html#mouse-events

For the purposes of LC comment tracking, we will assume this is an acceptable resolution for PFWG unless we hear otherwise (a response either way is preferred).

WebEvents members - if you have any additional feedback on this new text, please speak up by December 1 at the latest.

-AB

On 11/30/11 1:10 PM, ext Michael Cooper wrote:
Below are comments from the Protocols and Formats Working Group on the 27 October 2011 Touch Events Last Call Working Draft http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-touch-events-20111027/. Apologies they are a little late, it takes us a while to get group discussion together. Approval to send these as PFWG comments is archived at https://www.w3.org/2011/11/30-pf-minutes.html#item13.

We have no new comments, but wanted to provide a disposition on our previously submitted comments that the PF working group submitted for the 13 September version of the specification.

> 1) If a Web application can deal with touch events, it can intercept
> them, and the idea is that in this case no corresponding mouse events
> will be dispatched. However, if the Web application is not
> specifically written for touch input devices, it can react to the
> subsequent mouse events instead. This can be a powerful paradigm, but
> it is not fully described in this spec. The relation between touch
> events and mouse events should be explained in more detail for authors
> who want to achieve device independence.  There is a general needfor
> a "primer" document in the W3C space explaining the various DOM events
> and how they relate to each other, also providing best practices of
> device-specific and device-independent authoring.

For Section 7 of the document we propose the following text is inserted into the first paragraph before the last sentence:

If a Web application can process touch events, it can intercept them, and no corresponding mouse events would need to be dispatched by the user agent. If the Web application is not specifically written for touch input devices, it can react to the subsequent mouse events instead.

> 2) Minor editorial issues with the spec:
>
> - Section 3.1: For each of the attributes, the unit should be
> mentioned (device pixels, CSS pixels, etc.)
>
> - Section 7: The "preventDefault" method should be explained or listed
> in the glossary.

The updates that have been made are sufficient to address these editorial comments.

--

Michael Cooper
Web Accessibility Specialist
World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Initiative
E-mail cooper@w3.org<mailto:cooper@w3.org><mailto:cooper@w3.org><mailto:cooper@w3.org>
Information Page <http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/><http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/>



--

Michael Cooper
Web Accessibility Specialist
World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Initiative
E-mail cooper@w3.org<mailto:cooper@w3.org>
Information Page<http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/>