- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 16:46:14 +0100
- To: public-pointer-events@w3.org
Hi All, draft minutes from the last PEWG call are available at https://www.w3.org/2016/09/07-pointerevents-minutes.html and copied below. If you have any comments, corrections, etc., please reply to this email by 13 September . In the absence of any changes, these minutes will be considered approved. W3C - DRAFT - PEWG 07 Sep 2016 See also: IRC log Attendees Present patrick_h_lauke, Mustaq_Ahmed, Rick_Byers, teddink, shepazu, Navid_Zolghadr, scott_gonzalez Regrets Chair patrick_h_lauke Scribe patrick_h_lauke Contents Topics v2-blocking https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Av2-blocking any other interesting issues? implementation status Summary of Action Items Summary of Resolutions proposed agenda was: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2016JulSep/0316.html we don't have anybody from Mozilla on just yet. waiting another minute or so <scribe> Scribe: patrick_h_lauke Rick: we have TPAC in 2 weeks, let's prep for that ... as said in F2F, hopefully by TPAC we can compare outstanding data and resolve v2 blocking list, debates that would keep chrome from shipping we feel like we're ready to ship, been on dev channel, feel confident we don't need to wait for REC, but want to make sure rest of group is comfortable with our implementation decide if we can merge reduced hit-test spec to master, and ship doesn't mean can't change post ship, but would reduce compat concerns Ted: that sounds fair Patrick: any concerns about merging reduced hit-test branch? not hearing any objections, but would be good to send to list with a "speak now or hold your peace until after TPAC" Rick: Ted please take it to your team to just double-check Ted: i should have a machine running our build that should patch that spec for TPAC Shepazu: do we think we'll need both TPAC days? Mon/Tues? Rick: what was the arrangement with TPAC? Patrick: we have the room for both days, but fluid how much advantage we take of that Shepazu: we have observer request, so they need to know Rick: let's come up with a proposed schedule now and let observers know Patrick: probably easier to do on email than in call Rick: agree let's do on list then we can let observers know Patrick: we have observer request from Wacom, which is great [general discussion on "should we do morning on Monday, afternoon on Tuesday" etc] Rick: should we use w3c wiki, or github wiki <scribe> ACTION: rick and patrick to set up wiki page, discussion to happen on list about proposed times/clashes with other groups, etc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/09/07-pointerevents-irc] <rbyers> https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/29 v2-blocking https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Av2-blocking Rick: we're doing an intent to ship, everybody agrees it's right. if the spec goes out w/out this it would be shame, but we'd then just document it so let's take it off v2-block. objections? Patrick: not hearing objections. Rick: realistically people who would most likely object are Mozilla/Firefox, but we can discuss further at TPAC <rbyers> https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/6 Ted: what about https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/6 Rick: important to us, as devs solve problems with touch events that they can't with pointer events only thing missing is just test i expect by TPAC this should be closed as dtapuska has submitted PR that just needs review <rbyers> Implicit capture: https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/8 this is big one, as it's related to reduced hit-testing (branch) from F2F we agreed to collect additional data to resolve this https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b8aJOJcGXakstFJslKl87QwvlFHhHwGbQfJwnUTBBHg/edit?pref=2&pli=1#heading=h.tuf9doa1mr89 this likely to be a topic at TPAC too we have outstanding issue https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/61 but as far as issue 8, we have branch and want to check compat impact we discussed pointer capture API, which we now have we're hoping for an experiment in chrome beta relating to this, to gather data [discussion about data of websites in wild and how many use pointer events] based on initial dev-channel data, less than 1% of sites use PE also agreed at F2F to have flag in chrome to switch implicit capture behavior to match edge NavidZ (?): hoping to have this flag in for TPAC Rick: that's it for action items from F2F. other action was on MS to have machine with updated build in time for TPAC for people not on call, i'll include summary and give status update in our pre-TPAC email Rick: getting back to list, we hope to resolve 6, and that will leave 8 and 61 as only v2-blockers for TPAC and we hope to resolve (or have concrete plan to resolve) at end of TPAC any other interesting issues? Mustaq: [more mention of https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/61] Ted: will discuss with Jacob, but we seem to warm to this Rick: back to main topic, there are many small issues, but nothing that seems to have compat risk wider question: are there any issues currently not marked as v2-blocking that have real compat risk Ted: nothing i'm aware of Rick: after TPAC we should switch to clean-up mode to make sure smaller issues resolved, but for now let's focus on blockers and compat risks and get to stage where we can ship implementation status Mustaq: Chrome has minor bug fixes, but nothing of major concern, so confident we can go to stable soon Rick: we're running most tests automated now NavidZ: some of the tests are new/different from what we had before, as they need different environment/devices, but this is being resolved dtapuska: still more to do for pinch-zoom, web platform tests to be added to chromium tree, we already have approved intent to ship and directional touch-action Patrick: if there's no other topics, I'd say action on me/Rick to sort out TPAC logistics. will set up a wiki page on the w3c wiki (as that's more appropriate for administrivia relating to the group, rather than being spec-specific the way GH is). want to get this out by end of this week, to give observers / potential observers enough time to work out when/where we'll be Call next week, or skip as it's only another week then until TPAC? Rick: if any of the email threads coming out of today's call get any major discussion that can't be resolved on list, let's do call, otherwise let's plan NOT to have call next week Ted: sounds good Patrick: agreed Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: rick and patrick to set up wiki page, discussion to happen on list about proposed times/clashes with other groups, etc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/09/07-pointerevents-irc] Summary of Resolutions -- 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 Wednesday, 7 September 2016 15:46:31 UTC