Re: Proposed Boilerplate Information for Touch Events CG; deadline Oct 25

I created a wiki doc with the information I sent in my original email on 
this thread, plus the first point in  Sangwhan's proposal:

A few of us (Rich, Sangwhan and I) briefly discussed Sangwhan's second 
proposal in IRC and we agree not to include that because it is mostly a 
separate subject.

Comments from all are welcome and feel free to edit the document directly:

   <http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/wiki/DraftTouchEventsCG>

-Thanks, ArtB

On 10/23/13 11:53 AM, ext Rick Byers wrote:
> Your proposal looks good to me - thanks Art!  My list of specific 
> topics doesn't need to be definitive though - others should feel free 
> to add/remove/replace, they're just the things on the top of my mind...
>
> Inline:
>
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 7:43 AM, Sangwhan Moon <smoon@opera.com 
> <mailto:smoon@opera.com>> wrote:
>
>     On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Arthur Barstow
>     <art.barstow@nokia.com <mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com>> wrote:
>
>         Hi All,
>
>         Here is my straw-man proposal for the three boilerplate items
>         that need to be defined when the new Community Group is
>         proposed. You'll notice the Group Description borrows heavily
>         from Rick's feedback on the CfC.
>
>         1. Name: "Touch Events" i.e. "Touch Events Community Group".
>
>         2. Group Description:
>
>         [[
>         The Touch Events community group was formed by members of the
>         Web Events Working Group (responsible for the Touch Events
>         specification) and the Pointer Events Working Group
>         (responsible for the Pointer Events spec). The group's focus
>         is differences in touch event behavior between browsers. The
>         group seeks to form consensus on the best approaches for
>         interoperability outside of what's already standardized.
>
>         Among the topics in scope for this group:
>
>          * Defining how touch-action should be implemented in browsers
>         that
>            support touch events; see [1].
>
>          * Defining the "right" TouchEvent / PointerEvent interaction
>         for both
>            browsers and pointer event polyfills; see [2].
>
>          * Trying to form consensus on how exactly browsers should
>         behave in
>            sending touch events when scrolling stars (f.ex. see the
>         following
>            public-webevents thread [3]).
>
>          * Identifying other differences that exist between these events.
>
>          * Discussing problems web/framework developers have with the
>         design of
>            touch events; see [4].
>
>         Additionally, the group will define "mappings" between Touch
>         Events and Pointer Events" (f.ex. see [5]). The group also
>         expects to make proposals for potential future standards.
>
>         [1]
>         <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CV2AXyrdPdGSRypAQcfGrgQVuWYi50EzTmVsMLWgRPM/>
>         [2]
>         <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Sasl1qYJV6agrDvGplEYlZznzc38U-TFN_3a67-nlSc/>
>         [3]
>         <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2013AprJun/0040.html>
>         [4]
>         <https://docs.google.com/document/d/12-HPlSIF7-ISY8TQHtuQ3IqDi-isZVI0Yzv5zwl90VU/>
>         [5] <
>         https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvdBn9Kvx22qdGRnRXNPb0ZBTUl3SEkwdUdtaW9pWWc&usp=sharing>
>         ]]
>
>         3. Short name: "touchevents"; this will be used for things
>         like the mail list name (e.g. public-touchevents) and the
>         group's home page e.g. (w3.org/community/touchevents/
>         <http://w3.org/community/touchevents/>).
>
>         Comments, corrections, alternate proposals as well as +1's for
>         all of the above are welcome but please reply by October 25.
>
>         Note that after the CG is proposed, at least 4 other people
>         with W3C accounts must register their support for the CG in
>         order for it to be created. As such, I will notify this list
>         and the public-pointerevents list after I submit the proposal.
>
>         Assuming the CG is created, the details of how the group
>         actually operates (f.ex. if a `charter` is created or not),
>         the group's scope, schedule, deliverables, work mode, etc. is
>         left for the group to decide. (FWIW, my current expectation is
>         that I will join the group and that  others will lead/chair
>         the group.)
>
>
>     Instead of covering just touch-pointer mappings, can we cover
>     touch-pointer-mouse relations altogether? PE only covers
>     pointer-mouse and TE only covers touch-mouse (non-normative).
>
>
> Agreed, this is important (and really one of the trickiest points of 
> touch/pointer interop).
>
>     Additionally it would be really awesome if we could cover how
>     pseudo-pointers (key only navigation via spatial navigation and/or
>     caret browsing, virtual mouse) should behave, since that's not
>     covered/standardized anywhere and most of the compatibility event
>     firing has been implemented based on ad-hoc testing.
>
>
> I agree we should have a place to discuss that, but I'm worried that 
> would broaden the scope of this group too far - potentially reducing 
> it's value.  I'd prefer to keep this group scoped to issues that 
> involve touch events in some form.
>
>     -- 
>     Sangwhan Moon [Opera Software ASA]
>     Software Engineer | Tokyo, Japan
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2013 17:56:29 UTC