W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-pointer-events@w3.org > January to March 2016

Re: Pointer Events Charter?

From: Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:00:51 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFUtAY9CcN0AYFXFf0bXGaMBYOxw5jAvbFL_u4PP-t=aW066Vg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jacob Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>
Cc: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "public-pointer-events@w3.org" <public-pointer-events@w3.org>
I assume we're not meeting today then?  Is there anyone else who's feedback
we're blocked on?

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Jacob Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>
wrote:

> Just saw this.  We can schedule for next week – or if no one has feedback
> on the proposal, perhaps we don’t need to meet and can just start the
> review process?
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail <http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
> Windows 10
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 12, 2016 5:06 AM
> *To: *Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
> *Cc: *public-pointer-events@w3.org
> *Subject: *Re: Pointer Events Charter?
>
>
>
> I'm available today too, but probably too late for the west coasters?
>
> On Jan 12, 2016 3:57 AM, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> FWIW I'm available for a call today if needed, but in principle I agree
> with the changes that Jacob made in the PR.
>
> P
>
> On 12/01/2016 03:28, Doug Schepers wrote:
>
> Hi, Jacob–
>
> It doesn't seem like the call was scheduled for tomorrow. Should we try
> anyway, or should we be more proactive for next week?
>
> Regards–
> –Doug
>
> On 1/5/16 12:13 AM, Jacob Rossi wrote:
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> Thanks for sending (beat me to it!).  Since we're producing editor's
> drafts of the Pointer Events L2 spec and have consensus that the
> group wants to eventually publish that as a Recommendation, we agree
> that the next step is to recharter the Pointer Events WG.
>
> I've submitted a PR to your charter draft that provides our suggested
> changes [1]. To summarize:
>
> * For the Scope intro, I've used similar text to the previous PEWG
> charter. - I've added specific example features we intend to pursue
> for 2.0 that weren't in 1.0. These are meant to be examples and not a
> commitment nor an exhaustive list. * For Out of Scope, I have copied
> the same scope as the previous PEWG charter. * Pointer Events 2.0
> deliverable - I've removed the language about building on the Touch
> Events specification. I don't believe it's a goal for the PE 2.0
> deliverable to incorporate any Touch Events features. * Added Github
> as a forum for technical discussion and communication * Added Touch
> Events Community Group as a point of coordination for the PEWG given
> the related technology
>
> Shall we schedule a call next week to discuss next steps for
> rechartering?
>
> -Jacob
>
> [1] https://github.com/w3c/charter-drafts/pull/10
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Doug Schepers
> [mailto:schepers@w3.org] Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 8:19 PM To:
> public-pointer-events@w3.org; Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org>; Jacob
> Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>; Art Barstow
> <art.barstow@gmail.com> Subject: Pointer Events Charter?
>
> Hi, folks–
>
> As you know, the Pointer Events WG charter expired on 9 November
> 2015, so there is currently no formal WG; this isn't really a problem
> until we want to publish something, but it does tend to detract from
> a sense of urgency and momentum.
>
> During the last Pointer Events / Touch Events telcon [1], on 3
> November, the conclusion was that we did indeed want to recharter the
> Pointer Events WG (or some new WG that continues the work of Pointer
> Events and Touch Events).
>
> I've drafted a very rough charter, and I need your concrete feedback
> on what the charter should say, what work is in scope, and what
> deliverables (i.e. specs) should be listed.
>
> We sent out early notice to the AC that this rechartering was going
> on, but it seems to have stalled out. The next step is to finalize
> the charter, and put it out for AC review.
>
> I haven't yet received any feedback on the new charter, or
> suggestions on what it should say; it's not yet ready for AC review,
> and it won't be until I get this crucial feedback.
>
> Do we still want to re-form the Pointer Events WG, or are we still in
> a holding pattern in the Community Group.
>
> Please advise me on what you'd like to do at this point.
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2015/11/03-pointerevents-minutes.html#item06
> [2] http://w3c.github.io/charter-drafts/pointer-events-2015.html
>
> Regards– –Doug
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
>
> www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 19 January 2016 16:01:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 19 January 2016 16:01:44 UTC