Draft minutes: 1 October 2013 call

The draft minutes from the October 1 voice conference are available at 
<http://www.w3.org/2013/10/01-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 October 8. In the 
absence of any changes, these minutes will be considered approved.

-Thanks, ArtB

    [1]W3C

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

                                - DRAFT -

                    Pointer Events WG Voice Conference

01 Oct 2013

    [2]Agenda

       [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JulSep/0048.html

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2013/10/01-pointerevents-irc

Attendees

    Present
           Art_Barstow, Jacob_Rossi, Scott_Gonzαlez, Matt_Brubeck,
           Asir_Vedamuthu, Cathy_Chan, Rick_Byers,
           Sangwhan_Moon(IRC_only), Sangwhan_Moon

    Regrets
    Chair
           Art

    Scribe
           Art

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Tweak agenda
          2. [6]CR implementation status
          3. [7]Test Suite status and plans
          4. [8]touch-action comment by ROC
          5. [9]AoB
      * [10]Summary of Action Items
      __________________________________________________________

    <scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

    <scribe> Scribe: Art

    <rbyers> can anyone see this? IRC seems to be acting up...

    <sangwhan> rbyers: I can see your messages

Tweak agenda

    AB: I posted a Draft agenda yesterday
    [11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2
    013JulSep/0048.html. Any change requests?
    ... after the Draft agenda was submitted, a question was asked
    re the relationship between the PE spec's pointerType and EMMA
    spec
    [12]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2
    013JulSep/0050.html. We can add this to the end of meeting
    provided we have time or reply on the list.
    ... any preference?

      [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JulSep/0048.html.
      [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JulSep/0050.html.

    JR: I'd like to read it before discussing

    RB: same here

    JR: your suggestion Art probably makes sense

    <jrossi> [13]http://www.w3.org/TR/emma11/

      [13] http://www.w3.org/TR/emma11/

    … I'm not sure of the impl status

    AB: good question

    … pointerType ref is new in EMMA 1.1 (does not occur in the
    EMMA 1.0 REC)

    … ok, so let's leave that for the list

    RB: should we pay attention to this spec?

    … or is it orthoganal

    JR: I don't have any context

    AV: same with me

    AB: same here

    JR: it could overlap with PE
    ... not sure if they use an event model like PE does

    AB: please everyone read up on this EMMA vs PE question

CR implementation status

    AB: any new news re implementations of the Pointer Events CR?

    RB: re Chrome

    … no big `landings`

    … still need to re-architect gestures

    … think we have consensus

    … still need to `prove in code`

    … it's a big job

    … within a few weeks think we can land an impl of touch-action

    AV: can you give any dates?

    RB: depends on the reviewers

    … my best guess is on the order of "3 weeks"

    … Without this change, would have interop problems

    … so we are being careful here re interop

    AV: do you think you'll be ready for testing by end of October?

    RB: that's probably pushing it

    … probably won't be feature complete re touch-action by end of
    October

    <rbyers> Bug to follow progress on chromium event flow
    re-architecture necessary for touch-ACTION:
    [14]https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=294239

      [14] https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=294239

    MB: in Gecko, still have some Mozilla people + Msft Open Tech
    working on impl

    … for touch-action still mostly talking about design

    … we don't have any dates for completion yet

    AB: is Rob O'Callahan part of the discussion?

    MB: yes

Test Suite status and plans

    AB: Matt submitted some comments re Microsoft's tests PR324
    [15]https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/324.

      [15] https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/324.

    <mbrubeck> On a side note, I'm working on a Firefox feature
    that would be much easier to build if we had touch-action
    implemented already:
    [16]https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=915328

      [16] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=915328

    AB: a few of us (me, Matt, Cathy, Rick) agreed to review the
    tests based on a division by Matt.

    <mbrubeck> issue 45?

    MB: I added the split/division to Tracker

    <mbrubeck> issue 45

    AB: ah, ok, good

    action-45?

    <trackbot> action-45 -- Matt Brubeck to Divide up msft's tests
    for review by rick, cathy, art and matt -- due 2013-09-17 --
    CLOSED

    <trackbot>
    [17]http://www.w3.org/2012/pointerevents/track/actions/45

      [17] http://www.w3.org/2012/pointerevents/track/actions/45

    AB: my status is that the PE review was trumped by a commitment
    to review Web IDL tests

    … but that is done

    … so I will Q up PE review next

    RB: I just started looking

    … I have some questions about the process

    … As we review, should we run them?

    … i.e. to test the tests or just review

    … Would love to test with Polymer or something

    … I'd feel more comfortable if I can run the test

    MB: yes, I agree need to run them

    AB: I agree

    AV: can run with Polymer and Chrom

    JR: if wait until Oct 18, IE11 on Windows 8.1 will be available

    … expect banners to "get Windows 8.1 for free"

    RB: should people then wait until Oct 18 to test?

    JR: check my e-mail; notes IE11 preview for Windows 7
    ... the tests we submitted were run against IE for Windows 8.1

    AV: are there other submissions?

    AB: yes and Scott is blocking on the review of Microsoft's
    tests is complete

    SG: yes, that's true

    CC: I'll try to test them on Windows 7 and IE11 Preview

    … what about Windows Phone?

    … what can we expect there?

    JR: Windows Phone has the prefixed version of PE

    MB: the TestTWF tests, what are we doing with them?

    SG: Dave and I will meet in two weeks and go work on this

    MB: thanks

    AB: if you can help with any reviews, please do so

touch-action comment by ROC

    AB: Mozilla's Robert O'Callahan submitted a comment
    "touch-action on elements that aren't scrolled by their nearest
    scrollable element ancestor"
    [18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2
    013JulSep/0047.html
    ... Matt clarified Rob is working on the Gecko implementation

      [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JulSep/0047.html

    JR: I think we can dig back to previous discussions with Tab
    and the CSS WG

    … in the specific example, the behavior Rob describes is
    correct

    … but not correct that it can't be prevented

    … needs another touch-action rule to address this example

    MB: can prevent on the inner most without affecting outter
    elements

    … if touches on inner element never scrooll, touches on other
    elements should scroll

    AB: Jacob, would you please reply to Rob?

    JR: sure

    MB: discussed on a Mozilla list

    … question about if the algorithm

    RB: algorithm is defined in terms of the DOM

    … is the behavior in IE just dependent on the DOM

    … and cannot be changed by altering the CSS

    JR: that's correct

    RB: with respect to compat, I think we just want to follow what
    IE did (keeping all things equal)

    MB: this came up in the context of scrollable rectangles

    … we are fine with either behavior, just want to make it clear

    … and documented

    JR: we've been thinking about test cases for this scenario

    RB: that would be great

    … f.ex. "scroll here and X should happen"

    <scribe> ACTION: jacob Reply to Rob O'Callahan's e-mail re
    touch-action [recorded in
    [19]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/01-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
    ion01]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-51 - Reply to rob o'callahan's e-mail
    re touch-action [on Jacob Rossi - due 2013-10-08].

AoB

    AB: we have some test cases

    RB: I think we still need test cases, especially for
    touch-action

    … don't want people to think we are "in good shape"

    AV: we have some touch-action tests that we will submit

    AB: great

    RB: would be interested in hearing from Scott re Polymer and
    jQuery

    SG: still working on it

    … it is complicated

    … lots of layers

    … and difficult to debug

    … best we can do is to test some demos

    … error reporting isn't very good

    … need to think more on how to make progress

    … may have to create a pollyfill for old IE

    … (IE 6, 7)

    … So far, only one place we had a problem polyfilling and that
    is the getter

    RB: please feel free to create PRs for Polymer

    SG: hopefully we will soon have something to send

    RB: ok, awesome, thanks for the update

    AB: meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: jacob Reply to Rob O'Callahan's e-mail re
    touch-action [recorded in
    [20]http://www.w3.org/2013/10/01-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
    ion01]

    [End of minutes]

Received on Tuesday, 1 October 2013 15:54:04 UTC