- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:46:50 -0500
- To: "public-pointer-events@w3.org" <public-pointer-events@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the November 11 voice conference are available at the following and copied below: <http://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-minutes.html> WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send them to the public-pointer-events mail list before November 18. 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 11 Nov 2014 Agenda <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014OctDec/0056.html> See also:IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-irc> Attendees Present Art_Barstow, Rick_Byers, Cathy_Chan, Jacob_Rossi, Asir_Vedamuthu, Olli_Pettay, Doug_Schepers Regrets Sangwhan_Moon, Patrick_Lauke, Scott_Gonzαlez, Doug_Schepers Chair ArtB Scribe ArtB Contents * Topics <http://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#agenda> 1. Tweak and agree on agenda <http://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#item01> 2. Testing and implementation report status <http://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#item02> 3. Call for Consensus to publish a LCWD of Pointer Events <http://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#item03> 4. AoB <http://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#item04> * Summary of Action Items <http://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#ActionSummary> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ <scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB <scribe> Scribe: ArtB <smaug> sip never works <smaug> back to skype <smaug> in some distant future sip might start working Tweak and agree on agenda AB:I posted a draft agenda yesterdayhttp://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014OctDec/0056.html.Any change requests? Testing and implementation report status AV:we found some issues but they aren't blocking a couple of test case issues we are preparing PRs Jacob, can you get them this week? JR:yes, I think so one change is to change expected event sequence I don't think that is an interop issue AV:after we get through these issues, the aggregated report should be straight forward I just need the JSON files JR:we are running our tests on IE and Matt is doing FF testing we have one issue to check think it is just timing it might require a tweak to a test file he have an internal change and now I need to push that change to w-p-t AB:ok, thanks for that clarification OP:we noticed an issue AB:so are you going to submit a new PR? OP:I think we pass all of the tests but one we will need to run all of the tests after a patch lands in Gecko OP:we need to run the tests after we land all of the Gecko patches for Pointer Events I just reviewed one Gecko patch earlier today AB:how many PE patches for Gecko have not been reviewed? OP:none <smaug>https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1094913 but the patch needs to land and be compiled into an implementation we can test OP:expect that patch to land tomorrow AB:is Matt aware of this? OP:yes, Matt has been involved AB:do you know when we can expect Matt to run the tests with this patch? OP:no, I don't know <scribe>*ACTION:*barstow followup with Matt re the timeframe to run the tests on a build that includes a fix for but 1094913 [recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#action01] <trackbot> Created ACTION-144 - Followup with matt re the timeframe to run the tests on a build that includes a fix for but 1094913 [on Arthur Barstow - due 2014-11-18]. AV:what about 109 ? do you know when that will be closed? OP:sorry, not sure AV:the bug is 1094913? OP:yes AV:if that issue is closed, I think Gecko is done OP:I just completed a review of 1094913 about 20 minutes ago JR:I need to run the tests end-to-end without any operator errors I have run them all, and they all pass AB:ok, I think that means we're in pretty good shape for IE RB:I was running the tests on w3test.org is there a harness? JR:yes, runner/index.html there is a tool to create test report RB:for Chrome, we only want to run touch-action tests AB:yes, I think you'll have to do that all by hand RB:oh, that's tedious AB:agree ... do we want to include Chrome's touch-action data? RB:I can send the results to the list JR:yes, it would be good to get that data AB:until we look at the Chrome data, not sure it would be helpful or not ... anything else on testing? Call for Consensus to publish a LCWD of Pointer Events AB:there are no more open spec bugs. we could publish the LCWD now we could wait until the ImplReport is complete AB:what do people think? any strong prefs one way or another? JR:don't think we need to block on the ImplReport especially since the Gecko patch will give us 2 100% impls so I recommend publishing LC now <Cathy> +1 on publishing LCWD now We did previously talk about some type of "pre LC" period not sure we need to do that CC:publish LCWD now AB:my inclination is to publish now don't see a strong need for some type of pre LC comment period and I prefer to publish LC now <shepazu> +1 to publish AV:I'm ok with publishing RB:fine with me OP:ok with me too AB:hearing no objections, I'll record a resolution *RESOLUTION: group agrees to publish LCWD of Pointer Events* AB:Draft LC ishttps://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerevents/raw-file/tip/pointerEvents.html?specStatus=LC;edDraftURI=https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerevents/raw-file/tip/pointerEvents.html;publishDate=2014-11-13;lcEnd=2014-11-30;previousPublishDate=2013-05-09;previousMaturity=CR;processVersion=2005 ... the LCWD should include text that includes a link to the test suite and the implementation report. It should also state that if no substantive changes are made as a result of the LC review, the next publication will be a Proposed Recommendation. ...https://github.com/w3c/test-results https://github.com/w3c/test-results/tree/gh-pages/pointerevents need to remove UC10.json file <jrossi>https://w3c.github.io/test-results/pointerevents/all.html AB:not sure about the workflow DS:I'm not sure either AB:we could use lables JR:yes, let's use labels AB:ok, that's fine with me ... I'll create the LC if you want Jacob JR:ok, please do AB:and I'll make the ImplReport:https://w3c.github.io/test-results/pointerevents/all.html <scribe>*ACTION:*barstow create draft LCWD and ping the list for review [recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#action02] <trackbot> Created ACTION-145 - Create draft lcwd and ping the list for review [on Arthur Barstow - due 2014-11-18]. AB:anything else on the LCWD? AV:so we includehttps://w3c.github.io/test-results/pointerevents/all.htmlas the ImplReport in the LCWD? AB:yes AV:and anyone can submit a PR? AB:yes and we will label the ImplReport versions of the JSON files <scribe>*ACTION:*jacob label JSON files that are used for the Implementation Report [recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#action03] <trackbot> Created ACTION-146 - Label json files that are used for the implementation report [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-11-18]. AB:anything else on LC? AoB RB:what about PE discussion at BlinkOn that's a conf for Blink devs it was last week we talked about PEs and TEs no specific takeaways for the group but wanted to share this info <rbyers> Slides:https://docs.google.com/a/chromium.org/presentation/d/1AgcAyn6HLDkWNDkvPEDAAPsqx4Jv6kzMjLowZJ1wbBc/edit JR:there is some work underway about Polymer polyfill for PointerEvents could use W3C test suite to make sure polyfill is high quality and interoperable with native impls of PE DS:if going to have polyfill, one thing re host potential is webplatform.org AB:seems like we need to have a discussion re Touch Events evolution RB:agree the polyfill interoperability issue is high priority tough to polyfill without touch-action AB:anything else? ... thanks everyone I'll get the LCWD published on Nov 13 <rbyers> In particular, if you readhttps://extensiblewebmanifesto.org/- polyfills are key to the strategy we should be following meeting adjourned Summary of Action Items *[NEW]**ACTION:*barstow create draft LCWD and ping the list for review [recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#action02] *[NEW]**ACTION:*barstow followup with Matt re the timeframe to run the tests on a build that includes a fix for but 1094913 [recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#action01] *[NEW]**ACTION:*jacob label JSON files that are used for the Implementation Report [recorded inhttp://www.w3.org/2014/11/11-pointerevents-minutes.html#action03] [End of minutes] ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2014 16:47:09 UTC