W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webevents@w3.org > July to September 2012

Draft minutes: 25 September 2012 call

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:33:37 -0400
Message-ID: <5061DCE1.7000707@nokia.com>
To: "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the September 25 voice conference are available 
at <http://www.w3.org/2012/09/25-webevents-minutes.html> and copied below.

WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send 
them to the public-webevents mail list before October 2. In the absence 
of any changes, these minutes will be considered approved.

-Thanks, ArtB


    [1]W3C

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

                                - DRAFT -

                      Web Events WG Voice Conference

25 Sep 2012

    [2]Agenda

       [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2012JulSep/0034.html

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2012/09/25-webevents-irc

Attendees

    Present
           Art_Barstow, Olli_Pettay, Cathy_Chan, Scott_Gonzαlez,
           Rick_Byers, Doug_Schepers, Matt_Brubeck, Sangwhan_Moon

    Regrets
    Chair
           Art

    Scribe
           Art, Rick

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Agree on Agenda
          2. [6]Announcements
          3. [7]Pointer Events
          4. [8]Testing
          5. [9]AoB
      * [10]Summary of Action Items
      __________________________________________________________

    <ArtB> Scribe: Art

    <ArtB> ScribeNick: ArtB

    Date: 25 September 2012

    <smaug_> that is me

    <scott_gonzalez> Doug said he couldn't join until 15 minutes
    past.

    <scott_gonzalez> I'm on the call, but muted.

    <scribe> Scribe: Rick

    <smaug_> matt will join in a minute

    <rbyers> scribenick: rbyers

    <scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

Agree on Agenda

    AB: I posted a draft agenda yesterday
    [11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2012Ju
    lSep/0034.html.
    ... Since then there was an announcement about Microsoft's
    Pointer Events Member Submission to the W3C
    [12]http://www.w3.org/Submission/2012/SUBM-pointer-events-20120
    907/ and I propose we add a related topic to today's agenda.
    ... any objections to adding Pointer Events discussion to the
    beginning of this meeting?

      [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2012JulSep/0034.html.
      [12] http://www.w3.org/Submission/2012/SUBM-pointer-events-20120907/

    [ No objections ]

    AB: any other change requests?

Announcements

    AB: any short announcements for today?

Pointer Events

    AB: Microsoft's Pointer Events spec
    [13]http://www.w3.org/Submission/pointer-events/ overlaps the
    Touch Events spec, at least from the use case level.
    ... in the submission page
    [14]http://www.w3.org/Submission/2012/03/, there is a
    "suggestion" a new WG be formed to standardize Pointer Events
    (PE).
    ... depending on how one views/positions PE, it can be seen as
    a super set of TouchEvents (TE).
    ... this raises a number of questions such as "so, what would
    this mean for our TEv2 effort?" so let me open "the floor"
    comments, concerns, etc. and Q&A ...

      [13] http://www.w3.org/Submission/pointer-events/
      [14] http://www.w3.org/Submission/2012/03/

    DS: I think we should drop Touch Events v2

    … we don't want competing specs

    … there could be some IP problems with continuing with TEv2

    … I think it would be good to create a doc that describes PE
    and TE

    … and I intend to create a related blog

    … There needs to be some clarification between the two

    … as well as some related by name stuff in CSS

    <scott_gonzalez> I agree as well.

    MB: I agree with Doug

    AB: I tend to agree with Doug also

    … I do think we should continue with TEv1 to Recommendation

    RB: I agree too

    <Cathy> +1 to both shepazu and ArtB

    … if PE would not happen, could we restart TEv2?

    AB: yes, that is certainly possible

    … but I would hope that wouldn't be necessary

    SM: not much of an opinion

    SG: yes I agree

    PROPOSED RESOLUTION: the group will continue to push Touch
    Events v1 to final Recommendation

    AB: any objections to that?

    [ None ]

    RESOLUTION: the group will continue to push Touch Events v1 to
    final Recommendation

    AB: PROPOSED RESOLUTION: assuming a new WG is formed for
    Pointer Events, the group will stop work on Touch Events v2
    ... any comments?
    ... any objections?

    OP: do we have a v2 draft?

    AB: yes we do

    OP: should we publish that as a WG Note?

    AB: good question

    … any comments?

    … in some ways we have done that in earlier drafts

    <rbyers>
    [15]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/tip/touchevents.ht
    ml

      [15] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/tip/touchevents.html

    <smaug_> ah, there

    AB: I can start a CfC to publish TEv2 as a WG Note
    ... any objections to that?

    <scribe> ACTION: barstow start a CfC to publish TEv2 as a WG
    Note [recorded in
    [16]http://www.w3.org/2012/09/25-webevents-minutes.html#action0
    1]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-99 - Start a CfC to publish TEv2 as a
    WG Note [on Arthur Barstow - due 2012-10-02].

    DS: if we publish TEv2, we could add something about the PAG
    for v1

    SM: ok; that works

    AB: that's a good idea
    ... PROPOSED RESOLUTION: assuming a new WG is formed for
    Pointer Events, the group will stop work on Touch Events v2
    ... any objections?

    … I am trying to set expectations

    [ None ]

    RESOLUTION: assuming a new WG is formed for Pointer Events, the
    group will stop work on Touch Events v2

    AB: PROPOSED RESOLUTION: after the TEv1 Recommendation is
    published, the Web Events WG will close
    ... does that seem reasonable?
    ... any objections?

    [ None ]

    DS: there is a liaison with IndieUI WG

    … and the joint deliverable

    … Personally, I think we can ask people interested in IndieUI
    to just join that WG

    AB: so that's a good point re IndieUI

    … and I tend to agree with you -> that is, if someone is
    interested in that work, they can just join the IndieUI WG

    AB: any comments about IndieUI?
    ... any objections to PROPOSED RESOLUTION: after the TEv1
    Recommendation is published, the Web Events WG will close ?

    [ None ]

    RESOLUTION: after the TEv1 Recommendation is published, the Web
    Events WG will close

    AB: anything else on PE for today?

    RB: one thing we talked about is gestures

    … we know that is off limits for PE WG

    … and probably not IndieUI WG either

    … thus Web Events is one option

    OP: I though gestures was explicity out of scope for WebEvents

    DS: yes, that's true

    … thus Web Events could be rechartered as "where gestures are
    happening"

    AB: I agree it makes sense to start a group at W3C related to
    gestures

    … I personally strongly support that

    … However, I would start a new WG and break the connection with
    Web Events

    … mainly as a marketing and messaging rationale

    DS: yes, I agree with Art re starting a new group

    … it may be better for us to start a new group with Gesture
    prominent

    RB: that makes sense, thanks for the input

    <mbrubeck> Who just joined the call?

    <mbrubeck> smaug: Did you just join? (You might be muted.)

    <smaug> it is me

    <smaug_> it is me

    <smaug_> wait a second

    <smaug_> please

    <smaug_> rbyers: give me 30s

    <smaug_> techinal problem here....

    <scott_gonzalez> I need to drop off.

Testing

    AB: take discussion to the list
    ... I'd like to get consensus on the single-touch test cases
    soon-ish
    ... think we still have some work to do on the multi-touch
    tests

AoB

    AB: if it appears that we have a good reason, we will have a
    call next week
    ... anything else for today?
    ... meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: barstow start a CfC to publish TEv2 as a WG Note
    [recorded in
    [17]http://www.w3.org/2012/09/25-webevents-minutes.html#action0
    1]

    [End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 25 September 2012 16:33:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 25 September 2012 16:33:52 GMT