- 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