Re: Draft minutes: 24 June 2014 call

Minor correction.

After I said "we're focusing a lot on primitives (instead of higher level
"magic")", I added:
MS and Apple raised legitimate concerns about that approach (perf foot guns
etc.).  Despite our differing philosophies here we still found a lot of
common ground.

Without the middle context added before "common ground", the notes
incorrectly suggest there was agreement on the primitives principle.

Rick
On Jun 24, 2014 8:45 AM, "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@gmail.com> wrote:

> The draft minutes from the June 24 voice conference are available at the
> following and copied below:
>
> <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-minutes.html>
>
> 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
>
> Agenda <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/
> 2014AprJun/0112.html>
>
> See also:IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-irc>
>
>
>    Attendees
>
> Present
>    Art_Barstow, Cathy_Chan, Olli_Pettay, Rick_Byers, Doug_Schepers,
>    Patrick_Lauke, Asir_Vedamuthu, Jacob_Rossi
> Regrets
>    Sangwhan_Moon, Scott_González
> Chair
>    Art
> Scribe
>    Art
>
>
>    Contents
>
>  * Topics <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-minutes.html#agenda>
>     1. Tweak agenda
>        <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-minutes.html#item01>
>     2. Bug 26013: Note in "10 Pointer Capture" to mention implicit
>        pointer capture
>        <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-minutes.html#item02>
>     3. Adding a note about the 300ms-ish delay to "9. Declaring
>        candidate regions for default touch behaviors" ?
>        <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-minutes.html#item03>
>     4. News/summary from June 23 "Web input brainstorming face-to-face"
>        <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-minutes.html#item04>
>     5. Testing
>        <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-minutes.html#item05>
>     6. CR implementation: status and updates
>        <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-minutes.html#item06>
>     7. AoB <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-minutes.html#item07
> >
>  * Summary of Action Items
>    <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/24-pointerevents-minutes.html#ActionSummary>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> <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 <
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/
> 2014AprJun/0112.html>. <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/
> Public/public-pointer-events/2014AprJun/0112.html%3E.>
>
> <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 <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/
> Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26094>? <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/
> Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26094%3E?>
>
> <patrick_h_lauke> artb your voip client sounds clear to me
>
> AB:any objections to dropping Bub 26094?
>
> [None]
>
> <patrick_h_lauke> 26094 is fairly trivial i'd say, if jrossi agrees
>
> AB:any other change requests?
>
> [None]
>
>
>      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>. <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/
> Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26013%3E.>It started via the "gotpointercapture/lostpointercapture
> on <button>s in IE" thread <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/
> Public/public-pointer-events/2014AprJun/0087.html>. <
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/
> 2014AprJun/0087.html%3E.>
> ... Patrick included a concrete proposal for a non-normative Note in <
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/
> 2014AprJun/0092.html>. <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/
> Public/public-pointer-events/2014AprJun/0092.html%3E.>I 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 inhttp://www.w3.org/2014/06/
> 24-pointerevents-minutes.html#action01]
>
> <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 <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/
> Public/public-pointer-events/2014AprJun/0104.html>. <
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/
> 2014AprJun/0104.html%3E.>
> ... 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
>
> RB:agree
>
> <patrick_h_lauke> fine, be like that ;)
>
> OP:agree
>
> 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
>
> <jrossi>https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qRqLKQjOnGgrM-
> UkMAb2RH6mQCFQHk8R01s5qvjm2Po/edit#slide=id.g355c5631f_145
>
> … 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
>
> <patrick_h_lauke>https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=133112
>
> … 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
>
>
>      Testing
>
> AB:Scott replied to action-108 <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/
> Public/public-pointer-events/2014AprJun/0101.html> <
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/
> 2014AprJun/0101.html%3E>
> ... 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 Scotthttp://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-
> pointer-events/2014AprJun/0106.html
>
> 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?
>
> AV:yes
>
> … 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
>
>
>      AoB
>
> 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 inhttp://www.w3.org/2014/06/
> 24-pointerevents-minutes.html#action01]
>
> [End of minutes]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>