- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 12:09:25 -0400
- To: "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the May 10 voice conference are available at the
following and copied below:
http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webevents mail list before May 24 (the next voice
conference); otherwise these minutes will be considered Approved as is.
-Art Barstow
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Web Events WG Voice Conference
10 May 2011
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0092.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-irc
Attendees
Present
Art_Barstow, Matt_Brubeck, Doug_Schepers, Josh_Soref,
Olli_Pettay, Cathy_Chan
Regrets
Chair
Art
Scribe
Art
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Tweak Agenda
2. [6]Short Announcements
3. [7]Object Identity
4. [8]preventDefault Research;
5. [9]Issue-3 - Click event target after DOM mutation during
touchstart
6. [10]Issue-6 - Touch targets in frames
7. [11]Issue-8 - initTouchEvent function
8. [12]High-level Intentional Event Spec
9. [13]AoB
* [14]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
Date: 10 May 2011
<smaug> Oops, I had muted my speaker, not microphone
Tweak Agenda
AB: I posted the draft agenda on May 6 (
[15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
0092.html ). Any change requests?
[15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0092.html
[ None ]
Short Announcements
AB: FPWD published May 5; congratulations to the Editors and WG (
[16]http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-touch-events-20110505/ ). Any other
short annoucements?
... FYI, Josh is no longer employed by Nokia
[16] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-touch-events-20110505/
Object Identity
AB: on April 26, Matt Brubeck sent an e-mail re Object Identity (
[17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
0068.html ). The only person that responded was Olli.
... what do others think; what do we do about Object Identity; is
there some spec'ing that needs to be done?
[17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0068.html
MB: I don't have a strong opinion
... but web devs have talked about it
... I think we should at least get an opinion
... We may not have to specify anything here
... but OTOH, if there is consensus to spec something then we should
OP: I wonder why WebKit might be changing their behavior
... would like to understand that
... QuirksMode indicated WebKit will change
MB: WebKit is a bit diff than my examples
OP: we need to discuss this with someone who is implementing this in
WebKit
... need to know if they are reusing their Touch objects
MB: agree we need more feedback from implementors
... until then, I think the spec should remain silent
OP: perhaps someone from Nokia can find out
<scribe> ACTION: barstow follow up with Laszlo re Object Identity
implementation in WebKit [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-46 - Follow up with Laszlo re Object
Identity implementation in WebKit [on Arthur Barstow - due
2011-05-17].
ISSUE: Should the spec be silent or prescriptive re Object Identity
<trackbot> Created ISSUE-16 - Should the spec be silent or
prescriptive re Object Identity ; please complete additional details
at [19]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/16/edit .
[19] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/16/edit
preventDefault Research;
AB: on April 26 Matt sent an e-mail regarding some research he did
on preventDefault (
[20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
0069.html ). Andrew Grieve and Matt had some additional responses.
... is there some additional spec'ing that needs to be done?
[20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0069.html
MB: Andrew suggested a simple fix
... I don' think there were any objections to that
... Another open issue if spec should say something about scrolling
... It would be useful for implementors
... I'll make a proposal about preventing scrolling
... Probably in terms of May or Should rather than Must requirements
<scribe> ACTION: brubeck submit a proposal for re scrolling and the
preventDefault research thread [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-47 - Submit a proposal for re scrolling
and the preventDefault research thread [on Matt Brubeck - due
2011-05-17].
Issue-3 - Click event target after DOM mutation during touchstart
AB: Issue-3 ( [22]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/3 )
was opened weeks ago. There was some recent follow-up by Sangwhan
and Andrew (
[23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
0081.html ). Doug has related Action-23 (
[24]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/23 ).
... who can take the lead here and make a proposal?
[22] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/3
[23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0081.html
[24] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/23
<shepazu> Action-23?
<trackbot> ACTION-23 -- Doug Schepers to follow-up on Issue-3 -- due
2011-03-29 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [25]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/23
[25] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/23
DS: I don't see a way around this issue
... I have some behavior defined for Activiate in the DOM 3 Events
spec
... We could borrow some of that
... But if someone wants to help, that's fine
MB: our initial Gecko implementation behaves the same way as Android
and iPhone
AB: that's quite a bit of synergy
... are there any volunteers to help here?
... Doug, we'll wait for your input here
DS: I can propose something by the end of today
... We need to decide if this is a Should or a Must
MB: we already addressed touchstart and default actions and click
... this is about what to do if DOM changes
DS: I need to take a look at this
AB: ok, so the status of Issue-3 is we will wait for Doug to
complete action-23
... If anyone wants to help, please do so
MB: the reason Gecko behaves as it does is because we wait for touch
to end before simulate up/down events
... all of those events occur in the DOM after the touch sequence
Issue-6 - Touch targets in frames
AB: Issue-6 was raised by Andrew last February (
[26]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/6 ). Doug has
related Action-24 (
[27]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/24 ). The last
discussion was February 22 (
[28]http://www.w3.org/2011/02/22-webevents-minutes.html#item08 ).
[26] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/6
[27] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/24
[28] http://www.w3.org/2011/02/22-webevents-minutes.html#item08
DS: I need to send an e-mail about this
AB: is this a relatively straight fwd proposal?
DS: would like to know what WebKit and Gecko do
... need to consider security here
MB: need to be careful here
... don't want any data leaking
DS: also could observe a pattern of how the user is moving on the
larger outside page
... and where the iframe is
MB: if you can trick the user in a specific way, can get some data
on the user
AB: so Doug, you are OK with the way iOS and Android handle this?
DS: basically, yes
AB: so how do we close this?
DS: just need an Editor to add the text
MB: I can do that
AB: that would be great Matt
<scribe> ACTION: brubeck propose text to address Issue-6 (routing to
the child iframe) [recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-48 - Propose text to address Issue-6
(routing to the child iframe) [on Matt Brubeck - due 2011-05-17].
Issue-8 - initTouchEvent function
AB: Issue-8 ( [30]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/8 )
was created in March. Olli has related Action-34 (
[31]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/34 ) and Doug has
related Action-36 (
[32]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/36 ). The last
time we discussed this was during the April 12 call (
[33]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
att-0039/WebEvents-min-12-Apr-2011.html#issue-8 ).
... this method is already defined in the spec. What else needs to
be specified?
[30] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/8
[31] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/34
[32] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/36
[33] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/att-0039/WebEvents-min-12-Apr-2011.html#issue-8
MB: I committed a proposal
... there is one open sub-issue
... it is noted in the spec
... re the arguments of this method
... it takes page x and 'y' and client x and 'y'
... Think we can close Issue-8
... and open a new issue
AB: any objections to that?
<scribe> ACTION: barstow move issue-8 to the closed state [recorded
in [34]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-49 - Move issue-8 to the closed state [on
Arthur Barstow - due 2011-05-17].
ISSUE: page x and 'y' paramters to create touch
<trackbot> Created ISSUE-17 - Page x and 'y' parameters to create
touch ; please complete additional details at
[35]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/17/edit .
[35] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/17/edit
MB: I started a thread on this issue
<mbrubeck>
[36]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
0078.html
[36] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0078.html
MB: we should take issue-17 to the list
OP: Gecko and Webkit aren't aligned here
<smaug> Currently Gecko doesn't compute clientX/Y values
automatically from pageX/Y, like webkit does
[ Scribe missed some details exchanged between Olli and Matt ...]
<mbrubeck> The spec (which is based on what Olli implemented in
Gecko) is written to allow backward compatibility with
WebKit/Safari, while also allowing consistency with mouse events.
<mbrubeck> If we keep the API in the spec, we should specify that if
pageX/Y are null, then they will be computed based on clientX/Y, and
vice-versa.
AB: thanks Olli and Matt for embellishing the minutes!
<mbrubeck> Or we could simplify the spec and make it work like mouse
events (breaking compatibility with content that uses the current
WebKit API).
MB: I will make a proposal on the list
<scribe> ACTION: brubeck make a proposal to address Issue-17
[recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-50 - Make a proposal to address Issue-17
[on Matt Brubeck - due 2011-05-17].
High-level Intentional Event Spec
AB: I am interested in expectations, plans and such
DS: I have some information
... Apple made a proposal to Web Apps WG
... for the Protocols and Formats WG
... to add some a11y features to D3E
... Decided a joint deliverable between Web Events and WAI WG would
be a good way to move fwd
AB: is James' earlier proposal public?
<shepazu> James Craig is working on the "Independence for User
Interface" (IndieUI) proposal
AB: James' proposal:
[38]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2010JulSep/att-0106/
UserInterfaceIndependence.html
... is P&F WG working on this IndieUI spec?
[38] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2010JulSep/att-0106/UserInterfaceIndependence.html
DS: no, I don't think so yet; but expect it or something like it
will be
... not sure about its priority, especially with ARIA
AB: so is the IndieUI going to be the Intentional Events spec we are
chartered to do?
DS: yes, that is my expectation
... in cooperation with the P&F WG
... I will notify Web Events WG when there is something to review
AB: getting early access to a draft, would be very useful
DS: I will convey that to him
<shepazu> Recommended these resources: [$1\47]
[39]http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/ReSpec.js/documentation.html [$1\47]
[40]http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/spec-conventions.html [$1\47]
[41]http://dev.w3.org/2008/dev-ind-testing/extracting-test-assertion
s-pub.html
[39] http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/ReSpec.js/documentation.html
[40] http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/spec-conventions.html
[41] http://dev.w3.org/2008/dev-ind-testing/extracting-test-assertions-pub.html
AB: ok; thanks
DS: If James follows these conventions, the spec should be similar
in format to what we are already doing
... Need a way for author to map from low-level to high-level
intentional events
... I can get the related paper from the IETF
AB: I think you mean GISpL
[42]http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-echtler-gispl-specification-00
[42] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-echtler-gispl-specification-00
DS: may need a separate event listener
... needs some more thinking
... event types and a range of values
... register for some event with a set of params
... and the listener would get some set of values for the registered
params
... I think I should send an e-mail about this
... there could be a more elegant solution
AoB
AB: no call next on May 17
... next call will be May 24
... any other topics for today?
... meeting adjourned
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: barstow follow up with Laszlo re Object Identity
implementation in WebKit [recorded in
[43]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: barstow move issue-8 to the closed state [recorded in
[44]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: brubeck make a proposal to address Issue-17 [recorded
in [45]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: brubeck propose text to address Issue-6 (routing to
the child iframe) [recorded in
[46]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: brubeck submit a proposal for re scrolling and the
preventDefault research thread [recorded in
[47]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/10-webevents-minutes.html#action02]
[End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 10 May 2011 16:09:56 UTC