- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:13:23 -0400
- To: "public-pointer-events@w3.org" <public-pointer-events@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the March 11 voice conference are available at the following and copied below: <http://www.w3.org/2014/03/11-pointerevents-minutes.html> WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send them to the public-pointer-events mail list before March 18. 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 11 Mar 2014 [2]Agenda [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0169.html See also: [3]IRC log [3] http://www.w3.org/2014/03/11-pointerevents-irc Attendees Present Art_Barstow, Cathy_Chan, Rick_Byers, Asir_Vedamuthu, Scott_Gonzαlez, Patrick_Lauke, Jacob_Rossi, Matt_Brubeck, Olli_Pettay Regrets Sangwhan_Moon, Doug_Schepers Chair Art Scribe Art Contents * [4]Topics 1. [5]Tweak agenda 2. [6]Add 'manipulation' touch-action property? 3. [7]Bug 21749: Setting a capture on an offshore element 4. [8]Bug 24786: Propose a non-normative note re the keyboard compat issue 5. [9]Bug 24921: Clarification of "Default Action" for pointerdown wrt compat mouse 6. [10]Bug 24922: Tweak to 11. Compatibility Mapping with Mouse Events 7. [11]Bug 24923: What should happen to the mouse events if pointer event listener removes the target ... 8. [12]Bug 24971: Should got/lostpointercapture be dispatched asynchronously or synchronously 9. [13]Open Actions for Jacob re spec updates 10. [14]Testing status 11. [15]CR implementation updates 12. [16]AoB 13. [17]moving touch-action to a separate spec * [18]Summary of Action Items __________________________________________________________ <scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB <scribe> Scribe: Art <smaug> hmm, skype didn't like a kernel update Tweak agenda AB: draft agenda sent to the list yesterday [19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2 014JanMar/0169.html. ... any change requests? [19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0169.html. RB: we got a Q about putting touch-action in its own spec would like to understand the tradeoffs could be a diff re process <patrick_h_lauke> take to list? <mbrubeck_> I have no strong preference. AB: we could add it or take it to the list ... let's add it if we have time RB: OK Add 'manipulation' touch-action property? AB: Jacob's proposed text is in [20]https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerevents/rev/018f1b69c985; followups on this thread: [21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2 014JanMar/thread.html#msg158. ... Need to get agreement on the text and grammar. [20] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerevents/rev/018f1b69c985; [21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/thread.html#msg158. JR: I replied last night [ Scribe is having a hard time hearing Jacob ] <rbyers> JR: Either we change the spec/IE to match MSDN docs, or we just fix the MSDN docs <rbyers> ... don't see much value in changing IE's behavior RB: I don't have a strong pref agree it's a minor point if there is no good reason to have a surprising grammar comes down to if think this is a bug in IE, we should spec it the right way but if IE is behaving as design, spec should match IE JR: API could be more or less forgiving think the intent is already clear <patrick_h_lauke> +1 if it's by design, spec should match IE. otherwise, i'd have an idealistic spec with "magic" done by UAs (if that doesn't introduce compat issues down the line) but I can see how there would be confusion in some cases RB: not completely clear how it should be designed <patrick_h_lauke> RB: how does this impact on IE, if you try to get computed style, does pan-x get silently dropped <patrick_h_lauke> JR: computed style should return exactly what was specified, so pan-x should be returned as well <patrick_h_lauke> np JR: could make an argument either way OP: have we asked CSS WG for feedback? JR: good Q; no I have not OP: I think we should ask JR: I talked to some people and I agree we should ask <patrick_h_lauke> whatever outcome, i'd like to just make sure spec is unambiguous and does not open up door to future incompatibility <scribe> ACTION: Jacob ask CSS WG (www-style) re the Add 'manipulation' touch-action property issue [recorded in [22]http://www.w3.org/2014/03/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#act ion01] <trackbot> Created ACTION-93 - Ask css wg (www-style) re the add 'manipulation' touch-action property issue [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-18]. RB: I think we should just pick something now AV: yes I agree JR: agree we should just pick something I'll propose mutual exclusive solution <patrick_h_lauke> +1 RB: that sounds fine with me and PL agreed JR: this is a good example where we don't really need a test case <Cathy> +1 since it isn't likely to impact developers AB: if we agree on a solution, do we still need to ask CSSWG? OP: yes, I think we should ask them I'll take that action AB: thanks Olli RESOLUTION: re manipulation touch-action property, we will update the spec and consult with CSS WG Bug 21749: Setting a capture on an offshore element AB: [23]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21749. Jacob made a proposal in [24]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21749#c2. ... any comments, or is more time needed to review the proposal? ... we need to ask Francois Remy for feedback before closing the bug but we can record a resolution on the proposal. [23] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21749. [24] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21749#c2. SG: what if pointercap set and then removed from the DOM JR: in IE when leaves the DOM, looses capture SG: common to pull elements out of DOM and put them back in JR: this touches on another issue on the agenda [ Scribe not getting all of Jacob's comments ] <smaug> nor me OP: not clear what is the next possible target target could have moved to another document one option is to fire an event on the document JR: I'd be OK with that RB: what's the objection to firing lostcapture on the element removed from the DOM JR: can be problems with state machines keeping track <smaug> (some odd background noise ) RB: ok, firing lostpointercapture at the doc is ok SG: what about firing it on the element and then firing on the document? JR: we do something like that in some other scenarios RB: what about lostcap is fired before the remove OP: that is what mutation events do that's a reason for getting rid of them RB: for this bug, I think we all agree there is a failure when a target is not in the document JR: yes, agree; we are discussing a separate bug too AB: do we want to create a new bug? RB: easier to generalize this bug <scribe> ACTION: Jacob Bug 21749: update the bug to reflect discussion on 2014-Mar-11 [recorded in [25]http://www.w3.org/2014/03/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#act ion02] <trackbot> Created ACTION-94 - Bug 21749: update the bug to reflect discussion on 2014-mar-11 [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-18]. RESOLUTION: Bug 21749 group agree with Jacob's comment #2 Bug 24786: Propose a non-normative note re the keyboard compat issue AB: [26]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24786. Patrick's proposal is in comment #6 [27]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24786#c6. ... Rick and Jacob expressed support for Patrick's comment (although Rick suggested a minor tweek). ... any comments or objections to the proposal, including Rick's clarification request? [26] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24786. [27] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24786#c6. <patrick_h_lauke> happy with RB's tweak, good catch RESOLUTION: Bug 24786: group agrees with PL's proposal + RB's clarification <scribe> ACTION: Jacob Bug 24796: implement agreement discussed on 2014-Mar-11 and then Resolve/Fix the bug [recorded in [28]http://www.w3.org/2014/03/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#act ion03] <trackbot> Created ACTION-95 - Bug 24796: implement agreement discussed on 2014-mar-11 and then resolve/fix the bug [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-18]. Bug 24921: Clarification of "Default Action" for pointerdown wrt compat mouse AB: [29]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24921. Patrick created this bug to address action-88 and it contains proposed text to review. ... Jacob said he is fine with the proposal. Any other comments? [29] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24921. <jrossi> yeah i'll contribute from IRC RB: I like it JR: ok with me RESOLUTION: Bug 24921: group agrees with PL's proposed text <patrick_h_lauke> :) <scribe> ACTION: Jacob Bug 24921: implement PL's proposed text as agreed on 2014-Mar-11 and then Resolve/Fix the bug [recorded in [30]http://www.w3.org/2014/03/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#act ion04] <trackbot> Created ACTION-96 - Bug 24921: implement pl's proposed text as agreed on 2014-mar-11 and then resolve/fix the bug [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-18]. Bug 24922: Tweak to 11. Compatibility Mapping with Mouse Events AB: [31]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24922. New bug by Patrick including proposed text changes. ... Jacob said he is fine with the proposal. Any other comments? [31] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24922. RB: LGTM AB LGTM2 RESOLUTION: Bug 24922: group agrees with PL's proposed text <scribe> ACTION: Jacob Bug 24922: implement PL's proposed text as agreed on 2014-Mar-11 and then Resolve/Fix the bug [recorded in [32]http://www.w3.org/2014/03/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#act ion05] <trackbot> Created ACTION-97 - Bug 24922: implement pl's proposed text as agreed on 2014-mar-11 and then resolve/fix the bug [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-18]. Bug 24923: What should happen to the mouse events if pointer event listener removes the target ... AB: [33]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24923. New bug by Olli and comments from Scott, Rick, Jacob and a proposal by Patrick in [34]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24923#c12. [33] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24923. [34] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24923#c12. <patrick_h_lauke> i have no strong opinions on this bug btw <patrick_h_lauke> looking at this purely from a noob perspective, not knowing what the "PROPER" behavior as per DOM etc should be <patrick_h_lauke> so more my naive "i know basic JS, enough to be dangerous" view on it JR: want some more time to think about this we might need some more defns <mbrubeck> If we go with something like the proposal, perhaps we should use "an ancestor" instead of "the parent" RB: agree this is non-trivial if we want to specify this JR: need to investigate IE behavior AB: we agree then to continue discussion on the list <scott_gonzalez> [35]http://dev-test.nemikor.com/behavior/mouseover-when-element -is-shown.html [35] http://dev-test.nemikor.com/behavior/mouseover-when-element-is-shown.html SG: re my comment, and "mouse spec", need to be be clear about what changes in the DOM ... if put mouse into green box, it will turn red a new element is created under the mouse and it will be red it will be pink if hovering JR: I agree this is not in scope for PE <rbyers> Note this is considered (by some at least) a bug in blink: [36]http://crbug.com/246304 [36] http://crbug.com/246304 SG: this is a manifestiation of mouse events in general think FF does the best RB: we need to fix this in Blink to make it work like FF SG: we see issues with autocomplete scenarios and hover RB: agree it is out of scope for this group we need to figure this out though in the appropariate place/group OP: yes I agree SG: there are three scenarios and we need to agree on behavior for all 3 1) remove from doc and stays out [ Scribe didn't get Scott's 3 scenarios ] JR: we don't want to have to do hit testing again RB: agree; that creates issues AB: please continue discussion in the bug Bug 24971: Should got/lostpointercapture be dispatched asynchronously or synchronously AB: [37]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24971. New bug by Olli; needs feedback. ... Jacob said he needs to do some investigation. Any other feedback? [37] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24971. OP: why would ever want then to be dispatched asynchronously RB: Jacob mentioned stack overflow potential ... this could be a web compat issue OP: this came up as I reviewed a patch for Gecko JR: I need to look at our code AB: there's agreement to keep this bug open and for everyone to noodle on it Open Actions for Jacob re spec updates AB: This topic is just a reminder that Jacob has a few actions to update the spec (Action-51, Action-62, Action-63, Action-65, Action-70). I wasn't expecting to discuss these today unless someone has something specific to say. JR: I'll get to them ;) MB: I also have an open action re an issue AvK raised Testing status AB: any new info re testing? ... status is we are waiting for updates from Jacob/Asir <patrick_h_lauke> [38]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2 014JanMar/0172.html [38] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0172.html AB: how about we defer discssion to the list for now if no resolution, we'll add it to a meeting agenda CR implementation updates AB: any new info re implementations? <patrick_h_lauke> yup sorry, let's continue on list for this (i'll make a bug). just that it popped into my head <smaug> ([39]http://mozilla.pettay.fi/moztests/events/event_loop.html is my old event dispatching loop test for recursion depth) [39] http://mozilla.pettay.fi/moztests/events/event_loop.html RB: I sent out an Intent to Ship for touch-action I don't expect any major issues OP: we have some issues to fix <rbyers> blink touch-action "Intent to ship" thread: [40]https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!searchin/b link-dev/CSS$20touch-action/blink-dev/sc5lHnlcLvM/ntJWuKKHUqYJ [40] https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!searchin/blink-dev/CSS$20touch-action/blink-dev/sc5lHnlcLvM/ntJWuKKHUqYJ OP: the issues I filed are blocking Gecko AB: that's good info. We need to make those bugs high prio AV: what about auto-loading the pollyfill Rick? RB: we have some things to do first but that's still in plan we need to some research AV: a Chrome extension to load the polyfill? RB: yes AV: ok, thanks AoB AB: anything else for today? moving touch-action to a separate spec JR: need to think about this RB: I understand it might not be worth the effort but I need to provide an answer JR: think splitting it out raises too many issues RB: sounds good; I'll report that and we can go from there JR: think there is too much info that would need to be moved AB: we have a `temporary` resolution to not split out touch-action into a separate spec ... meeting adjourned Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: Jacob ask CSS WG (www-style) re the Add 'manipulation' touch-action property issue [recorded in [41]http://www.w3.org/2014/03/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#act ion01] [NEW] ACTION: Jacob Bug 21749: update the bug to reflect discussion on 2014-Mar-11 [recorded in [42]http://www.w3.org/2014/03/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#act ion02] [NEW] ACTION: Jacob Bug 24796: implement agreement discussed on 2014-Mar-11 and then Resolve/Fix the bug [recorded in [43]http://www.w3.org/2014/03/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#act ion03] [NEW] ACTION: Jacob Bug 24921: implement PL's proposed text as agreed on 2014-Mar-11 and then Resolve/Fix the bug [recorded in [44]http://www.w3.org/2014/03/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#act ion04] [NEW] ACTION: Jacob Bug 24922: implement PL's proposed text as agreed on 2014-Mar-11 and then Resolve/Fix the bug [recorded in [45]http://www.w3.org/2014/03/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#act ion05] [End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 11 March 2014 16:14:20 UTC