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

This looks good to me (other than a few typos that I took the liberty of fixing).
- Cathy.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barstow Art (Nokia-CIC/Boston)
> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 1:50 PM
> To: Rick Byers; Sangwhan Moon
> Cc: public-webevents@w3.org; Christophe Jolif; Sebastien Pereira
> Subject: 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/1CV2AXyrdPdGSRypAQcfGrgQVuW
> Yi50EzTmVsMLWgRPM/>
> >         [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=0AvdBn9Kvx22qdGRnRXNPb
> 0ZBTUl3SEkwdUdtaW9pWWc&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 20:06:23 UTC