Draft minutes: 24 June 2014 call

The draft minutes from the June 24 voice conference are available at the 
following and copied below:


WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send 
them to the public-pointer-events mail list before July 1. 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

    24 Jun 2014


See also:IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-irc>


    Art_Barstow, Cathy_Chan, Olli_Pettay, Rick_Byers, Doug_Schepers,
    Patrick_Lauke, Asir_Vedamuthu, Jacob_Rossi
    Sangwhan_Moon, Scott_Gonzαlez


  * Topics <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-minutes.html#agenda>
     1. Tweak agenda
     2. Bug 26013: Note in "10 Pointer Capture" to mention implicit
        pointer capture
     3. Adding a note about the 300ms-ish delay to "9. Declaring
        candidate regions for default touch behaviors" ?
     4. News/summary from June 23 "Web input brainstorming face-to-face"
     5. Testing
     6. CR implementation: status and updates
     7. AoB <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-minutes.html#item07>
  * Summary of Action Items


<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

<scribe> Scribe: Art

<smaug> rbyers: please don't type here while driving ;)

<rbyers> Heh luckily a coworker volunteered to drive :-)

<patrick_h_lauke> whoah, has uk number changed for w3c zakim?

<smaug> mbrubeck__: ping

<jrossi> calling...

      Tweak agenda

AB:I sent a draft agenda to the list yesterday 

<rbyers> I'm on route to the airport, hope my cell quality is OK

AB:any objections to dropping editorial Bug 26094 and letting Patrick 
and Jacob take a crack at it 

<patrick_h_lauke> artb your voip client sounds clear to me

AB:any objections to dropping Bub 26094?


<patrick_h_lauke> 26094 is fairly trivial i'd say, if jrossi agrees

AB:any other change requests?


      Bug 26013: Note in "10 Pointer Capture" to mention implicit
      pointer capture

AB:this bug was submitted by Patrick 
<https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26013%3E.>It started via 
the "gotpointercapture/lostpointercapture on <button>s in IE" thread 
... Patrick included a concrete proposal for a non-normative Note in 
don't feel strongly either way (adding it or not) and the proposal 
doesn't seem harmful.

JR:if everyone is ok with the behavior

<jrossi> hang on

<rbyers> I heard Jaxob

<patrick_h_lauke> i can hear you

JR:if the IE behavior is ok or if other browers behave differently, then 
I'm ok with add it

AB:does anyone objet to Patrick's proposal?

<rbyers> No objection

[ None ]

AB:is the text ok as is Jacob?

JR:want to make one tweak to avoid RFC2119 keywords

… otherwise it is fine

PL:I've got no strong feelings either way

AB:sounds like we have agreement to add it

<scribe>*ACTION:*Jacob re bug 26013, add Patrick's proposal and tweak 
the text as necessary [recorded 

<trackbot> Created ACTION-112 - Re bug 26013, add patrick's proposal and 
tweak the text as necessary [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-07-01].

      Adding a note about the 300ms-ish delay to "9. Declaring candidate
      regions for default touch behaviors" ?

AB:Patrick started this thread 
... no reply so far

JR:I don't want to add this to the spec

… the 300ms is because of certain gesture support

… I don't think our spec needs to document this

<rbyers> I agree with Jacob

<smaug> +1


<patrick_h_lauke> fine, be like that ;)


PL:no strong feelings

… think it would remove some surprise

… since it is defacto behavior in browsers

… but if consensus is to be silent, I can live with that

*RESOLUTION: the group agrees not to add Patrick's "300ms-ish" proposal 
to the spec*

      News/summary from June 23 "Web input brainstorming face-to-face"

AB:who from PEWG attended?

JR:Rick, Matt and me

… others from Rick's team

… some have participated on the list

AB:any highlights from the June 23 Web input gathering?

… or do we wait for a report/summary?

RB:we talked about a lot of things

… including PE vs. TE debate

… growing consensus on Blink team

… I had some slides I'll share the URL later

… look at the speaker notes

… and we can followup when I have better connectivity than today


… We have 3 issues that block us from implementing PE now

… we can't deprecate TE; we will have to support them forever

… there are some perf issues e.g. hit tests

… hard to build pull to refresh

<patrick_h_lauke> hard to build "pull to refresh" etc

… Our priorities have shifted a lot in the last 6 mos and PE is 
problematic vis-a-vis those priorities

AB:Jacob, Matt, do you want to add anything?

JR:there were a lot of other great topics that we discussed

… and made good progress on them

… Expect to see some CSS related devlopments

… We'll share that with other goods

… Think it was successful and think we want to do it again (perhaps @ TPAC)

RB:we talked a lot about focusing on primitives

… we did find quite a bit of common ground

… and even if Blink doesn't support PE, there are other areas we can 
work on to get interop

<jrossi> nope, just said "yes that's good"

JR:yes, that's good

AB:anything else on yesterday's meeting?

<rbyers> As or was that you?

AB:any specific followon actions for the PEWG group?

JR:no, don't think so for this group

… probably stuff for TE CG

… some CSS related developements

JR:Apple is discussing touch-action in a WebKit bug


… would be good to get touch-action in (Mobile) Safari

<rbyers> S/JR/RB

DS:re the TouchEvents errata and/or Edited REC, need to understand if 
the scope is small corrections or new features

RB:think it is mostly small corrections

… but too early to know if need larger changes

… so probably will need something beyond the errata

DS:Art, re small corrections, we can keep working on those in the TECG

… but if substantive, we will need a different structure

… wanted to know if that is your understanding

AB:yes, what Rick and you said Doug is consistent with my take of the 
potential changes

<scribe> … new features will require a WG to publish them

JR:I'll submit proposal and then we can review it

DS:yes, please do

<jrossi> all implementations already behaved this way, i don't think 
it'd change someone's review. just a bug fix

… are your blocked Rick?

<jrossi> re: cancellability

RB:no, I am not
... my understanding is that the TECG can discuss TECG business in a 
PEWG call

DS:is anyone uncomfortable with that?

JR:that's OK

AB:that works for me

<patrick_h_lauke> only slight concern: not ALL CG participants are here 
as well

JR:if it gets into substantive discussions, we can have separate calls

RB:sounds good

<patrick_h_lauke> but as long as we share things on CG pages/wiki once 
things get moving...should be good


AB:Scott replied to action-108 
... what's the status and what next?

JR:need a PR from Scott

… we are working on some PRs

<asir> can you unmute me?

AB:here is my reply to 

AV:high level view ...

… there are ~66 TA in the wiki

… PR324 covered ~54 of the TAs

… thus we have 12 remaining TAs

… Scott's PRs cover another 9 TAs

… Jacob mentioned some PRs we will submit and they cover 2/3 of the missing

… Art had one PR and we are going to submit a PR to cover that

… If Scott would submit his PRs for reviews, that would be good

AB:you will create a PR for the test file I submitted, right?


… So the next step is for Scott to submit his PRs as soon as possible

AB:thanks for that summary

<asir> is matt on the call?

… Scotts' not here but he's good about reviewing minutes

<asir> please unmute me

AB:anything else on testing?

      CR implementation: status and updates

AB:any new news?

RB:touch-action is shipping in Chrome 36

<patrick_h_lauke> nice

AV:Matt's not here today; he mentioned the FF Metro implementation

… I think they are now 97% implementation

… have one bug to fix and that will get the impl to 100%

AB:thanks for the FF update


AB:anything else for today?

… we will have a call when we have a need for it

… main thing is for Scott to submit his PRs for review

… last call for topics?

… thanks everyone

<patrick_h_lauke> thank you

… Meeting adjourned

    Summary of Action Items

*[NEW]**ACTION:*Jacob re bug 26013, add Patrick's proposal and tweak the 
text as necessary [recorded 

[End of minutes]

Received on Tuesday, 24 June 2014 15:45:28 UTC