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

[ 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] 

-Thanks, ArtB

[WPWG] <>

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 < 
> <>> 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

Received on Monday, 26 October 2015 23:08:00 UTC