W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-pointer-events@w3.org > January to March 2014

Draft minutes: 25-Feb-2014

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 12:09:55 -0500
Message-ID: <530CCE63.4010707@nokia.com>
To: "public-pointer-events@w3.org" <public-pointer-events@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the February 25 voice conference are available at 
the following and copied below:

<http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html>

WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send 
them to the public-pointer-events mail list before March 4. 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

25 Feb 2014

[2]Agenda

[2] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0106.html

See also: [3]IRC log

[3] http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-irc

Attendees

Present
Art_Barstow, Cathy_Chan, Jacob_Rossi, Olli_Pettay,
Patrick_Lauke, Rick_Byers, Scott_Gonzαlez,
Asir_Vedamuthu, Doug_Schepers, Matt_Brubeck

Regrets
Chair
Art

Scribe
Art

Contents

* [4]Topics
1. [5]Tweak agenda
2. [6]Bug 24783 non-normative examples for event
sequences to be added to end of 11.2
3. [7]Bug 24696 - Line too long in example 8
4. [8]Bug 24706 - Clarify when setPointerCapture is
supposed to work
5. [9]Bug 24772 - releasePointerCapture() should fail if
called from a node that doesn't currently capture the
pointer
6. [10]Bug 24776 - mouseenter/mouseleave in 11.1/11.2
note
7. [11]Bug 24777 - Add tiny note to 11.2 - list item nr 2
(mousemove) to clarify the reason for it
8. [12]Slight softening of language in the note for 5.1.2
9. [13]Bug 24346 - Clarifications on Pointer Events Types
section ?
10. [14]Bug 24784: ACTION-69: Create a proposal re
informative note re pointerevent and touchevent
compatibility
11. [15]Bug 24786: ACTION-64: Propose a non-normative note
re the keyboard compat issue
12. [16]Testing status
13. [17]CR implementation updates
14. [18]AoB
* [19]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________

<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

<scribe> Scribe: Art

<jrossi2> hmm mic not working

<rbyers> hmm, bridge issues (just ringing)

<smaug> rbyers: I had the same first

<patrick_h_lauke> reminder that i'll have to shoot off
early...probably in 40 mins or so

Tweak agenda

AB: I posted a draft agenda yesterday <
[20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2
014JanMar/0106.html>. Since then there has been quite a bit of
activity on the list.
... the two topics started by Anne were more like "reminders"
we are waiting for a reply from Anne and since Olli indicated
Anne is not available today, I propose we drop these two topic
today and continue discussion on the list. If necessary, we
could invite Anne to attend a future call. Any objections to
that?

[20] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0106.html%3E.

[ None ]

AB: the "Awkward wording in 5.2.3" raised by Patrick resulted
in a spec update by Jacob that Patrick says is OK. As such, any
objections to deleting this topic?

JR: this isn't a substantial change

… but would still appreciate people reviewing it

RB: I looked over it

JR: yes thanks

AB: everyone feel an obligation to review changeset
... Topic 2 (non-normative examples for event sequences) is now
Bug 24783
... any other change requests?

Bug 24783 non-normative examples for event sequences to be added to
end of 11.2

AB: this bug
[21]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24783 was
started by Patrick on February 10
[22]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2
014JanMar/0075.html and Rick replied
[23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2
014JanMar/0092.html.

[21] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24783
[22] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0075.html
[23] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0092.html.

JR: I'm happy to make the proposed changes

RB: think there is one open Q here

… think one clarification is needed

[ discussion about what to do if hover not supported ]

JR: re order and when click happens, impls do vary based on
touch event model

… click needs to come before mouse out

<patrick_h_lauke> "also listing the click event, to clarify
that this is fired at the very end of sequence"

PL: should we soften the above

RB: this is non-normative text i.e. examples

… we can add clarifications

<jrossi2> touch-ACTION: none; /* disables double-tap-zoom in IE
*/

PL: how about removing click from the numbered list and add a
not after the list

… that click happens at one position or another

… I could add that to the bug

… and then we can discuss

JR: I prefer to add click to the sequence

… so impls will be interoperable

RB: doubletap delay gives lots of probs

PL: so action on me to update the wording in the bug?

RB: ok and move click right after mouse up

JR: not sure pointercapture events make sense here

RB: maybe omit pointercapture

… don't think they are essential to what we want to say here

<scribe> ACTION: Patrick update bug 24783 with a proposal the
group can review [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-78 - Update bug 24783 with a proposal
the group can review [on Patrick Lauke - due 2014-03-04].

Bug 24696 - Line too long in example 8

AB: this bug is purely editorial
[25]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24696 so I
don't think there is anything to discuss, is that right Jacob
and Rick?

[25] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24696

RB: this line is especially bad with mobile devices

JR: the template for code samples uses a <pre> element

<patrick_h_lauke> should we add overflow:auto to the pre

… and getting it to wrap is challenging

RB: can make it overflow:scroll via CSS?

JR: sure

<scribe> ACTION: Jacob update the spec for Bug 24696 per
discussion on 2014-Feb-25 [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-79 - Update the spec for bug 24696
per discussion on 2014-feb-25 [on Jacob Rossi - due
2014-03-04].

Bug 24706 - Clarify when setPointerCapture is supposed to work

AB: Olli raised this bug on Feb 17
[27]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24706 and
Jacob proposes text in comment #5
[28]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24706#c5.
... Olli, is Jacob's reply sufficient?

[27] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24706
[28] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24706#c5.

OP: yes, I think that is ok

JR: if the two terms are confusing, I'm not "married" to those
terms

OP: I think they are fine

<rbyers> jrossi2: FYI your 'hacked' version looks fine on
chrome android now. overflow: auto is probably better than
overflow: scroll. But if it's tricky I'm happy to leave as is
with the extra line breaks...

<scribe> ACTION: Jacob update the spec for Bug 24706 per
discussion on 2014-Feb-25 [recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-80 - Update the spec for bug 24706
per discussion on 2014-feb-25 [on Jacob Rossi - due
2014-03-04].

Bug 24772 - releasePointerCapture() should fail if called from a node
that doesn't currently capture the pointer

AB: raised by Jacob Feb 21
[30]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24772 based
on feedback from "romaxa".

[30] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24772

JR: romaxa is doing the Gecko impl

… if capture on A and then release on B with same ID does it
still release pointercapture

… with IE, it does not

… and we think that's a good thing

RB: I agree

<patrick_h_lauke> agree

AB: any disagreement?

[ None ]

AB: how about Jacob you make a proposal in the bug?

JR: yes, I can do that

<scribe> ACTION: Jacob update bug 24772 with a proposed change
[recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-81 - Update bug 24772 with a proposed
change [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-04].

Bug 24776 - mouseenter/mouseleave in 11.1/11.2 note

AB: this bug was raised by Patrick Feb 22
[32]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24776. Jacob
made a spec change and closed the bug and then Patrick reopened
it with new proposed text.

[32] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24776.

PL: I want to make sure the text is as unambiguous as possible

JR: the note is global in the sense mouse over/out are not
prevented

PL: I got this the wrong way in my comments

<patrick_h_lauke> "mouseenter and mouseleave can only be
prevented when the pointer is down, while mouseover and
mouseout are never prevented."

<patrick_h_lauke> "mouseover and mouseout can only be prevented
when the pointer is down, while mouseenter and mouseleave are
never prevented." ?

<jrossi2> mousedown, move, up can only be prevented when the
pointer down, mouseover/out/enter/leave can never be prevented

<patrick_h_lauke> PL getting confused

[ JR clarifies which events can be ignored ]

PL: I'll go ahead and close the bug (based on this
conversation)

Bug 24777 - Add tiny note to 11.2 - list item nr 2 (mousemove) to
clarify the reason for it

AB: this bug was raised by Patrick Feb 22
[33]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24777. Jacob
thinks the text in 11.2's intro is sufficient.

[33] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24777.

PL: I prefer to have things spelled out

… mainly because developers skip this type of stuff

… but I don't feel real strongly

JR: I don't mind adding it

<scribe> ACTION: Jacob update the spec per the Patrick's
comment for Bug 24777 [recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-82 - Update the spec per the
patrick's comment for bug 24777 [on Jacob Rossi - due
2014-03-04].

Slight softening of language in the note for 5.1.2

AB: Patrick raised this issue on Feb 22
[35]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2
014JanMar/0101.html

[35] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0101.html

PL: since then, I was drawing the wrong conclusion for that one

… Process Q - can the Archived-at header be included in the
emails

DS: I have a TBird extension

RB: if there are multiple pointers down, there can be some
compat issues

JR: if we add anything, could change "will" to "may" or "might"

<shepazu> [36]http://schepers.cc/archived-link

[36] http://schepers.cc/archived-link

RB: I think there are no impls that do anything inconsistent
with the "will"

PL: my last email suggests adding a note

… does that make sense?

RB: yes, I think so

… not sure we want to add too many requirements

PL: I can file a bug and we can discuss it

RB: I think a note would be ok

<mbrubeck> "first to become active" would be tricky because a
mouse device's pointer is always active

PL: I'll create a bug

<scribe> ACTION: Patrick file a bug re the "slight softening of
lang in the note for 5.1." issue [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion06]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-83 - File a bug re the "slight
softening of lang in the note for 5.1." issue [on Patrick Lauke
- due 2014-03-04].

RB: I don't think the impls need to change

… each pointer type should have one primary pointer

MB: think the note there is a bit confusing

PL: I'll look at that note and take discussion to the list

Bug 24346 - Clarifications on Pointer Events Types section ?

AB: Patrick submitted some input
[38]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2
014JanMar/0103.html for this bug
[39]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24346. Rick
agreed with Patrick's proposed changes but no one else has
commented on the bug.

[38] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0103.html
[39] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24346.

JR: I made this change last night

… it's a good change

… I only made some minor changes

<scribe> ACTION: Jacob close/resolved bug 24346 [recorded in
[40]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion07]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-84 - Close/resolved bug 24346 [on
Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-04].

Bug 24784: ACTION-69: Create a proposal re informative note re
pointerevent and touchevent compatibility

AB: the bug is
[41]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24784 and
includes a relatively lengthy proposal to change text in the
intro re compatibility f.ex. with TouchEvents.
... one issue is how much to explicitly say about TouchEvents
versus linking to some other document f.ex. a document by the
Touch Events Community Group.

[41] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24784

PL: I put a lot of text in my proposal

… I'm not so married to the text but the overall sense is very
important

… developers need some help here

… f.ex. the main points of divergence

… If we can deal with the bulk of this on the CG side, that
would be fine with me

… either way is OK with me

JR: I think a lightweight note that points to CG work would be
fine

… and let the CG specifiy the details

RB: we can use the CG's wiki for that

MB: it is also possible for the spec to include extension
points to other docs

DS: there is a diff b/w documentation and specifications

<mbrubeck> I'm referring to e.g.
[42]http://annevankesteren.nl/2014/02/monkey-patch

[42] http://annevankesteren.nl/2014/02/monkey-patch

… in the Audio work, we are experimenting with annotations

… that could be something for us to consider

… thus instead of "go to this wiki" the spec can have an
annotation to other info

AB: I support trying to use annotations in the longer term but
agree with Rick about using the wiki

PL: should I put the text in the bug in the wiki?

… and then have a link in the spec to the wiki?

AB: that sounds reasonable to me

JR: yes, a link in the spec to the wiki is OK with me too

<scribe> ACTION: Patrick move text in Bug 24784 to the Touch
Event CG wiki [recorded in
[43]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion08]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-85 - Move text in bug 24784 to the
touch event cg wiki [on Patrick Lauke - due 2014-03-04].

Bug 24786: ACTION-64: Propose a non-normative note re the keyboard
compat issue

AB: the bug is
[44]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24786 and
Patrick included proposed addition to the Introduction re
keyboards and PointerEvents.

[44] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24786

JR: I need to read it and then I'll comment in the bug

RB: I think some text like this is fine

… pointers need a coordinate system

RB: I'll add some comments to the bug

AB: if anyone else has comments re Patrick's proposed text in
bug 24786, please add it to the bug

Testing status

<patrick_h_lauke> side note: voiceover/iOS allows sequential
navigation AND fires touch events. will test what x/y coords
are passed on in that situation

AB: any new news re testing?

JR: we will have some testing updates within the next week

… some internal changes we are doing will facilitate updates to
GH

DS: excellent

CR implementation updates

AB: any new news re Implementations?

RB: we are continuing to land patches

… still planning Chrome 35

OP: we are also landing patches in Gecko

AV: what is the timeline for Chrome 35?

<mbrubeck> [45]http://www.chromium.org/developers/calendar

[45] http://www.chromium.org/developers/calendar

RB: 35 will lock down at the end of March

… by end of march, touch-action will be on be default

AV: are there open bugs?

RB: we have fixed some bugs and have some new ones

OP: we aren't bug free in in spec

RB: Jacob, you still have some actions re touch-action
elements?

JR: yes
... I think the only element is <svg>

RB: think there are some other block elements

… need to check css2.1 spec

JR: I have that action; agree we need to get on the same page

AV: how close is Gecko to accepting the patches?

OP: we are landing them when they are ready

… think branching by end of March is possible

… and then it takes about 3 months to get it into a release

AoB

AB: anything else for today?

JR: Microsoft is joining the Touch Events CG

RB: that's great

DS: yes agree

AB: excellent

DS: re the CG, it can be nice to have a Chair

RB: I'll need to think about the time commitment

AB: meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Jacob close/resolved bug 24346 [recorded in
[46]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion07]
[NEW] ACTION: Jacob update bug 24772 with a proposed change
[recorded in
[47]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion04]
[NEW] ACTION: Jacob update the spec for Bug 24696 per
discussion on 2014-Feb-25 [recorded in
[48]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion02]
[NEW] ACTION: Jacob update the spec for Bug 24706 per
discussion on 2014-Feb-25 [recorded in
[49]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion03]
[NEW] ACTION: Jacob update the spec per the Patrick's comment
for Bug 24777 [recorded in
[50]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion05]
[NEW] ACTION: Patrick file a bug re the "slight softening of
lang in the note for 5.1." issue [recorded in
[51]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion06]
[NEW] ACTION: Patrick move text in Bug 24784 to the Touch Event
CG wiki [recorded in
[52]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion08]
[NEW] ACTION: Patrick update bug 24783 with a proposal the
group can review [recorded in
[53]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#act
ion01]

[End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 25 February 2014 17:10:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:20:26 UTC