- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:09:39 -0400
- To: "public-pointer-events@w3.org" <public-pointer-events@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the July 30 voice conference are available at <http://www.w3.org/2013/07/30-pointerevents-minutes.html> and copied below. WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send them to the public-pointer-events mail list before 11 August 2013. In the absence of any changes, these minutes will be considered approved. -Thanks, ArtB W3C <http://www.w3.org/> - DRAFT - Pointer Events WG Voice Conference 30 Jul 2013 Agenda <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JulSep/0005.html> See also:IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2013/07/30-pointerevents-irc> Attendees Present Art_Barstow, Matt_Brubeck, Jacob_Rossi, Asir_Vedamuthu, Cathy_Chan, Olli_Pettay, Scott_Gonzαlez, Doug_Schepers, Sangwhan_Moon Regrets Rick_Byers Chair Art Scribe Art Contents * Topics <http://www.w3.org/2013/07/30-pointerevents-minutes.html#agenda> 1. Tweak agenda <http://www.w3.org/2013/07/30-pointerevents-minutes.html#item01> 2. CR implementation status <http://www.w3.org/2013/07/30-pointerevents-minutes.html#item02> 3. Test Suite status <http://www.w3.org/2013/07/30-pointerevents-minutes.html#item03> 4. AoB <http://www.w3.org/2013/07/30-pointerevents-minutes.html#item04> * Summary of Action Items <http://www.w3.org/2013/07/30-pointerevents-minutes.html#ActionSummary> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ <scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB <scribe> Scribe: Art Tweak agenda AB:Welcome back everyone ;-)! <jrossi> Congrats, Cathy! AB:I published a draft agenda yesterdayhttp://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JulSep/0005.html.Any change requests? [ No change requests for the agenda ] CR implementation status AB:let's talk about CR implementation status. ... Rick submitted an update re Blink/Chromehttp://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JulSep/0007.html ... Rick says a few weeks for touch-actions JR:and Rick said a few months before the impl is complete AS:the "few months" from Rick was about the touch-action-delay MB:re Firefox, a Microsoft person (?) submitted a Gecko patch <mbrubeck> Microsoft contributed patches to Gecko, currently being reviewed:https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=822898 <mbrubeck>http://msopentech.com/blog/2013/06/17/w3c-pointer-events-gains-further-web-momentum-with-patch-for-mozilla-firefox/ still a WIP OP:that is in my review queue that patch was about the PE events and not the CSS property but I expect that person to implement that too <mbrubeck> The contributor, Oleg Romashin ("romaxa") is a long-time Firefox developer. <jrossi> Oleg Romashin <Oleg.Romashin@microsoft.com> AB:thanks Matt and Olli OP:I think there needs to be some work on mouse and pointer events interaction we need some tests to work on that Oleg is working on that MB:Wes Johnson is interested in doing some work too he mentioned that to Oleg AB:is there a timeframe for FF/Gecko? MB:no OP:no, events stuff is "easy" but the CSS property is not AB:Scott, any news from jQuery? SG:working on Polymer. The goal is to use Polymer and not our own implementation <sangwhan> Opera 14+ is a ditto of Rick's status update AB:Jacob, Asir, what about IE? JR:we release IE11 Preview a few weeks ago it includes updated MSPointerEvents it is still member-prefixed We will ship IE 11 without prefixes we will announce this on our blog later this week We think the compat hit will be minimal AB:when can we expect that to hit the street? JR:we don't have an announced date other than we expect IE11 to be in Windows 8.1 AB:thanks Jacob <jrossi> Windows 8.1 will be available before the end of the calendar year JR:one thing to note is that now we don't expect to build support for the constructor we need to do that across the board not clear if that will be in IE11 DS:that's not a problem per se from the standarization PoV, but if that constructor is in the spec, we will need 2 impls that do support the constructor Will we get that? JR:think it will be supported by Blink and Firefox OP:I expect us to support it in Gecko DS:ok, thanks AB:Sangwhan, what about Opera? SM:our impl will depend on Rick (Chromium's) work Opera's Presto - it seems unlikely we will add PE support unless there becomes lots of content that use it and we have an interop problem AS:so Opera's work depends on Chromium? SM:yes AS:what did you say about Presto? Because I could not hear the full summary <sangwhan> Bottom line is Opera's work now depends on Chromium <sangwhan> As the rendering engine is now using Blink starting from Opera (Mobile) 14+ <sangwhan> Nothing else from Opera AB:any news about Polymer? SG:one place is a deviation is the touch-action attribute they've done a lot of work to remove it not sure where that stands now <scott_gonzalez>https://github.com/Polymer/PointerEvents/issues/92 JR:Rick mentioned Polymer in his status report AB:anything about WebKit? as I understand it, Microsoft submitted a patch for WebKit. Is that true? AS:our patches are all online I don't have any new info AB:any other impl data to share? Test Suite status AB:the general topic is what needs to be done to make the test suite sufficient to test an implementation of the CR. ... and, more specifically, I think it would be useful if we had an understanding about Who is going to do What and by When. ... Matt proposed an overall testing process inhttp://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013AprJun/0167.htmland earlier today I codified quite a bit of that inhttp://www.w3.org/wiki/PointerEvents/Testing. ... let's start with an inventory ... We have Scott's pointerdown file as "approved"https://raw.github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/master/pointerevents/pointerdown.htmlso it is now mirrored and thus can be run directly in a browser viahttp://w3c-test.org/web-platform-tests/master/pointerevents/ ... Last April, there were some TTWF submissionshttp://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013AprJun/0092.htmland they are not in the pointerevents repohttps://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/pointerevents ... how do we get review on those submissions SM:those are put in new repos, they are not PRs MB:correct, they were created before we had the pointerevents repo SG:I can ask Dave to make a PR to the new repo <scott_gonzalez>https://github.com/dmethvin/pointerevents-test AB:that would be great; then we need PRs for the other submissions SG:I think Dave needs to do a merge and then after that is done to make a PR for the pointerevents repo <scribe>*ACTION:*scott follow up with Dave to get a PR from the April TTWF to the pointerevents repo [recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2013/07/30-pointerevents-minutes.html#action01] <trackbot> Created ACTION-44 - Follow up with Dave to get a PR from the April TTWF to the pointerevents repo [on Scott Gonzαlez - due 2013-08-06]. SM:please let me know when that PR is made SG:OK AB:re notifications, I think it would be useful for people to send an email to the list after they submit a PR ... do we need to chase the other submitters or is Dave doing that? SG:Dave's PR will include a merge of the other submissions AB:one of the next Qs is about coverage/breath and then depth <mbrubeck> sangwhan: Where/who should I ask for write access to that repo? wrt coverage, the Test Assertion table is a good way to get a handle on that AB:Cathy, is the Test Assertions table complete?http://www.w3.org/wiki/PointerEvents/TestAssertions <jrossi> mbrubeck: Mike Smith gave me my write access CC:there could be a couple of sections that still need some work <sangwhan> mbrubeck: Tobie/Mike/Robin f.ex. the CSS property other than that, I think I'm done AB:so one Q is if the TAs are sufficient to qualify an impl re the CR JR:I think we now have sufficient breadth the feature coverage seems adequate The depth Q is different I would need to do a path but I think what we have is pretty good <jrossi>http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/ietestcenter/#pointerevents Microsoft will contribute some tests I need to prep then and create a PR and that will cover more assertions SM:re TouchEvents, there is some variability when running them, hope we can do better with PointerEvents SG:agree we should be more clear here, especially why some tests are not run we need to describe what we expect to happen and then what actually happens <scott_gonzalez> If possible, we should generate a failing test if we can detect that a block of event assertions never ran. AB:Jacob, when can we expect those tests? JR:within the next two weeks. <scott_gonzalez> But we may not be able to reliably determine that based on differing pointer types. <scott_gonzalez> At a minimum, we should have a short description of what we expected to happen so the tester can easily determine if all assertions have run. AB:thanks Jacob can you think of any features that you don't test? JR:not sure but perhaps the touch-action property I will update the wiki with our tests and that will help with understanding which features we have coverage SG:the Test Status data isn't particuarly useful they need to be changed to more useful status like "Approved" AB:+1 Scott! AS:re approval, is there a way they can approved in August? SG:all of the tests, or those with PRs AS:I mean all of the coverage we need SG:I don't think I will be able to review everything by August based on history, not sure we will have all of the tests by August AB:the minimum req is to have at least one person review each test and we should certaily strive to do better than that and avoid the "fox guarding the chicken coop" AS:reviewing tests can be really useful, especially for the implementers SM:how do we handle duplicates? SG:for Dave's PR, we will take care of that unless a test Seattle is more comprehensive SM:looking at the IE tests, they could be covered by Seattle tests who is going to take care of duplicates JR:it could be helpful to review our submissions versus the Seattle tests I think it's OK for PRs to include dups and then we remove the dups before being merged to master SG:perhaps it would be best if Dave waits until Microsoft submits its tests if the Seattle tests overlap IE, Dave could just ignore the Seattle tests AB:so Scott will ask Dave to block until Jacob submits his tests. Is this correct? SG:yes AB:so I think we have a good plan then and Jacob is going to update the TA table re the Microsoft tests <jrossi> Yes, Cathy's table was a big help! <asir> Indeed!!! AB:the TA table is really great Cathy ... anything else on testing for today? [ No ] AoB AB:anything else for today? AS:when is the next call? AB:is the current process working? AS:let's meet after Jacob submits his tests AB:that sounds like a good working assumption ... is the current meeting frequency working OK? DS:I'd leave it to you Art <asir> +1 AB:ok, we'll continue along the way we are going DS:I went to OSCON last week in PDX, PointerEvents was a topic and there is an HTML DevConf with Jacob on a PE panel <jrossi>http://html5devconf.com/ AB:meeting adjourned Summary of Action Items *[NEW]**ACTION:*scott follow up with Dave to get a PR from the April TTWF to the pointerevents repo [recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2013/07/30-pointerevents-minutes.html#action01] [End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 30 July 2013 16:10:12 UTC