As James said, A Bugzilla bug[1] would be preferable. Jacob I suggest
speaking to John Jansen since he is helping move forward the microsoft
implementation and has already contributed to the WebDriver spec.
David
[1]
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/enter_bug.cgi?comment=&component=WebDriver&product=Browser+Test%2FTools+WG&blocked=20860
On 18 June 2015 at 12:06, James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk> wrote:
> On 18/06/15 11:48, Arthur Barstow wrote:
>
>> On 6/17/15 7:51 PM, David Burns wrote:
>>
>>> When the low level actions was written when Chrome had said that they
>>> were not going to Pointer Events so they are in need of rewrite. It
>>> also needs a rewrite for other reasons so let me know what changes you
>>> would like to have and I will try to accomodate them. I will be
>>> tackling this soon.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks David!
>>
>> If someone has input, do you prefer a Bugzilla bug [B], a GG Issue [GH],
>> e-mail to [p-b-t-t], reply to this thread, and/or something else? And if
>> there is a deadline, please let us know.
>>
>
> I think bugzilla is the best place for "this is a bug in the spec" type
> feedback. For things that are more like topics of discussion I suggest
> using the list directly. So far GH issues are not really being used.
>
> The group is chartered until the end of the year so if you think about
> deadlines in Process terms, it rather behooves us to have something that
> looks like it might get published by then. If you want to think about it in
> more practical terms, there are people implementing right now, so the
> sooner the better.
>
>