Re: Move PointerEvents and/or TouchEvents to Web Platform WG? [Was: Future of Pointer Events WG?]]

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 16:41:38 +0900, Sangwhan Moon <smoon@opera.com> 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

Yep. We got feedback that a request like this would bring formal  
objections to the charter, and we *didn't* get any support in the room.

If there is strong support in the group overall for chartering the work,  
we still could. The benefits Art mentions are real, although I am unsure  
we'll be able to realise them.

cheers

> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Arthur Barstow <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>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
  chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com

Received on Sunday, 1 November 2015 19:06:30 UTC