- From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 15:30:14 +0900
- To: Sangwhan Moon <smoon@opera.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
- Cc: Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org>, "public-pointer-events@w3.org" <public-pointer-events@w3.org>, "public-touchevents@w3.org" <public-touchevents@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
Ok, given that it won't be taken up by the Web Platform WG, what's the next step? 1) community group? 2) recharter the working group? 3) create a new working group? I've started a rough new charter for the Pointer Events WG [1] (using my new charter template). Please provide feedback, issues, or pull requests to help me improve this charter, if you think this is the right approach. [1] http://w3c.github.io/charter-drafts/pointer-events-2015.html Regards– –Doug On 10/27/15 4:41 PM, Sangwhan Moon wrote: > The discussion from today says WPWG most likely won't be taking this, or > at least for now. > > http://www.w3.org/2015/10/26-webapps-minutes.html#item04 > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com > <mailto:art.barstow@gmail.com>> wrote: > > [ Newcomers to this thread can find the head at [StartHere] ] > > Hi All, > > Another option is to move PointerEvents and/or TouchEvents into the > Web Platform WG [WPWG]. Among the primary advantage would be more > "eyes" to provide input and review feedback. Doing so would also > help reduce group admin overhead and depending on who participates, > there could be a broader RF commitment for IP. > > I won't be at the October 27 WPWG meeting but I just added "Add > PointerEvents v2 and/or TouchEvents v2 to WPWG?" to the [Agenda] > (11:15-11:30). > > -Thanks, ArtB > > [StartHere] > <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2015JulSep/0026.html> > [WPWG] <http://www.w3.org/2015/10/webplatform-charter.html> > [Agenda] > <https://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/October2015Meeting#Agenda_Tuesday_October_27> > > On 7/28/15 2:29 PM, Rick Byers wrote: > > +public-pointer-events (did you include public-touchevents by > mistake?). > > Sounds like our options are: > 1) Extend the PEWG charter in preparation for publishing a Level > 2 REC document > or > 2) Broaden the charter of the TECG to include both touch events > and pointer events and continue work there until we have a > candidate spec we want to start down the publishing process. > > Do these options effect what mailing lists we use? Eg. if we go > with #2, can we continue to use public-pointer-events for > continuity? > > I do expect we'll want to publish a PE Level 2 spec within a > year or so. If that's just as easy with either option then I > don't have a strong opinion. > > Rick > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org > <mailto:schepers@w3.org> <mailto:schepers@w3.org > <mailto:schepers@w3.org>>> wrote: > > Hi, folks– > > Earlier this year, our current charter was extended until 09 > November 2015. We had just published the Pointer Events > spec as a > Recommendation, and the Community Group was formed, and > wanted to > figure out what our next steps are. > > We need to decide if we're going to create a new charter for > review by the Advisory Committee, and if so, what the > deliverables > would be, and what the timelines should be. > > Right now, I'm not convinced we need a Working Group to > continue > in our current state. I think the Community Group might be > enough > for now; We need a Working Group to publish Rec-track > documents, > but we don't have any publications scheduled, and it's not > certain > when we will have. > > This mailing list can remain for any necessary discussions. > > Our occasional telcons are useful for keeping track of > implementation progress and bug reports, but we can have those > even without a formal Working Group. > > In the Community Group, we can continue the discussions, and > develop a new draft of the spec (or other specs); once we > have a > clearer idea what our charter should contain, we can recharter > this WG, or charter a new WG with a broader scope, as needed. > > I can continue to help out, as needed. I'm being pulled > into other > work (W3C is always understaffed, and the Web Payments work > needs > some resources), but I can always make time for this group. > > Thoughts? Should we recharter in November, or should we > close the > Pointer Events WG and operate as a Community Group until we > need > to charter a formal WG again? > > Regards– > –Doug > > > > > > > > -- > Sangwhan Moon [Opera Software ASA] > Software Engineer | Tokyo, Japan
Received on Wednesday, 28 October 2015 06:31:05 UTC