W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-pointer-events@w3.org > April to June 2015

Re: W3C TPAC 2015 - Will we meet in Sapporo?

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 08:05:30 -0400
Message-ID: <552FA58A.5060900@gmail.com>
To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
CC: Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org>, Jacob Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>, Pointer Events WG <public-pointer-events@w3.org>


On 4/9/15 3:21 PM, Rick Byers wrote:
> Assuming Houdini keeps it's plan to meet in Sapporo, then I'll 
> definitely be there.
>
> I'm not sure what the best time frame is for a F2F meeting.  Ideally I 
> think we'd have some concrete data on the compat impact of the capture 
> changes I propose so we can have a data-driven debate about the design 
> choices.  But it's going to be awhile before we're far enough along in 
> our blink implementation to gather that data.  If we could get the 
> data sooner via the Mozilla or IE implementations then it would make 
> sense to meet sooner to plan a course of action.  Seattle or Mountain 
> View would be fine with me.  If folks want an excuse to visit roaring 
> Waterloo (Toronto) Canada, then I'd also be happy to host here :-).
>
> Rick
>
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Jacob Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com 
> <mailto:Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>> wrote:
>
>     It's too early for me to commit to being in Sapporo this year.
>     Between this group, Houdini, and other standards related topics I
>     have my fingers in, I'd say there's a decent chance.
>
>     For this group in particular, I think a face to face meeting of
>     some variety is a good idea to bootstrap the work for a V2 spec. 
>     Perhaps sooner than TPAC though.  Microsoft (probably) could host
>     a WG F2F either in Redmond or Mountain View if there's interest. 
>     That doesn't necessarily preclude meeting at TPAC also.
>


Hi Doug, All,

Although there are a number of advantages to f2f meetings, and I would 
support meeting at TPAC2015 if there was a clear and compelling need to 
meet then, I don't think we will have sufficient data to make an 
informed decision by April 30. As such, I recommend PEWG not formally 
meet at TPAC2015. Of course, if others have an opinion - either way - 
please do speak up.

That said, I agree with Jacob and Rick that as the work on PEv2 
progresses, if there appears to be a need for a f2f meeting we should 
certainly plan to have one.

-Thanks, ArtB
Received on Thursday, 16 April 2015 12:06:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 16 May 2015 00:31:59 UTC