- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2011 12:19:47 -0400
- To: "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the August 8 voice conference are available at the following and copied below: http://www.w3.org/2011/08/09-webevents-minutes.html Given the critical people were not on the call, the meeting ended without discussing the topics in the draft agenda. If there is a call on August 16 and/or August 23, Doug will create the agenda and chair the meeting. -AB [1]W3C [1] http://www.w3.org/ - DRAFT - Web Events WG Voice Conference 09 Aug 2011 [2]Agenda [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0020.html See also: [3]IRC log [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/08/09-webevents-irc Attendees Present Art_Barstow, Matt_Brubeck, Olli_Pettay, Dzung_Tran, Doug_Schepers, Cathy_Chan, Sangwhan_Moon Regrets Chair Art Scribe Art Contents * [4]Topics 1. [5]Tweak Agenda 2. [6]Announcements 3. [7]Issue-19: Align initTouchEvent parameters with Webkit 4. [8]Issue-16: Should the spec be silent or prescriptive re Object Identity 5. [9]Examples of lists 6. [10]Preparing Touch Events v1 spec for Last Call WD 7. [11]Any Other Business (AOB) * [12]Summary of Action Items _________________________________________________________ <smaug> is there some voip number or such to which I could call using skype? <scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB <scribe> Scribe: Art Date: 9 August 2011 Tweak Agenda AB: draft agenda posted on August 8 [13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/ 0020.html. One change I want to make is to move the Examples List topic after Issue-16. ... any change requests? [13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0020.html. [ None ] Announcements AB: any short announcements today? Issue-19: Align initTouchEvent parameters with Webkit AB: Issue-19 [14]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/19 has open Action-55 for Laszlo [15]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/55 ... Laszlo is still unavailable so we will skip this topic ... I think we should address this before LC [14] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/19 [15] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/55 MB: after our last call, I commented on the webkit bug … re some alignment … I haven't received any feedback on what I added to that webkit bug AB: thanks for following up on that <mbrubeck> [16]https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60612 [16] https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60612 Issue-16: Should the spec be silent or prescriptive re Object Identity AB: Issue-16 [17]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/16 has open Action-53 by Doug [18]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/53. Sangwhan submitted some comments on August 3 [19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/ 0015.html ... June 14 is the last time we discussed this issue [20]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item04 [17] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/16 [18] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/53. [19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0015.html [20] http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item04 DS: no progress on that action … plan to work on it this week AB: this is somewhat related to the question about the list definitions for Target Events DS: would it be useful to try to do web searches on this issue? MB: yes, I've been using Google Code searches … it covers a lot of OSS code … but only covers code in public repos and doesn't cover everything on the Web AB: do you need anything from the rest of use Doug re this issue? DS: no; just need to do the analysis MB: I disagree with Sangwhan's latest message … I think the assert in example 2 of Issue-16 should fail … I will respond on the list … If they are all immutable the question of shared identity doesn't matter so much AB: yes, please do that DT: have we looked at the Webkit impl? DS: I think someone took an action <mbrubeck> [21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/ 0121.html [21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0121.html MB: laszlo has open action-46 action-46? <trackbot> ACTION-46 -- Laszlo Gombos to laszlo to follow-up re Object Identity implementation in WebKit -- due 2011-05-17 -- CLOSED <trackbot> [22]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/46 [22] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/46 <shepazu> [23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/ 0121.html [23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0121.html AB: so it appears then that Laszlo agrees with Matt re the 2nd example DS: I agree with Matt … thus there is no need for me to respond … if Matt responds to Sangwhan, I think that will clarify things AB: you propose Doug that action-53 be close? DS: yes, I think we've now addressed the issue CC: do any changes need to be made to the spec to clarify this? DS: yes; good point … need a different action for it though AB: what's the action <scribe> ACTION: Doug propose spec text to address the resolution of issue-16 [recorded in [24]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/09-webevents-minutes.html#action01] DS: I'll do that after Sangwhan has responded to Matt Examples of lists AB: Sangwhan checked in some examples to complete Action-57 [25]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/default/touchevents.htm l ... Cathy's sent comments re Sangwhan's examples: [26]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/ 0018.html ... Tran sent an example to the list [27]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/ 0019.html [25] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/default/touchevents.html [26] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0018.html [27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0019.html CC: I reviewed SM's examples <trackbot> Created ACTION-60 - Propose spec text to address the resolution of issue-16 [on Doug Schepers - due 2011-08-16]. … it raised the question about what targetTouches actually refers to … There appears to be a discrepancy in the spec and the example MB: I agree with Cathy's interpretation of the spec … and I need to test the examples in running code to verify CC: I looked at Safari doc … it is a bit ambiguous … I'll look for a link <Cathy> [28]http://developer.apple.com/library/safari/#documentation/UserExp erience/Reference/TouchEventClassReference/TouchEvent/TouchEvent.htm l [28] http://developer.apple.com/library/safari/#documentation/UserExperience/Reference/TouchEventClassReference/TouchEvent/TouchEvent.html CC: it says targetTouches "A collection of Touch objects representing all touches associated with this target. " MB: I can take an action to test the examples AB: thanks Matt <scribe> ACTION: brubeck test Sangwhan's list examples against implementations [recorded in [29]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/09-webevents-minutes.html#action02] <trackbot> Created ACTION-61 - Test Sangwhan's list examples against implementations [on Matt Brubeck - due 2011-08-16]. AB: Cathy also noted there is no way to determine how many touch points are currently on a particular element CC: yes; is that an issue? ... so app needs to keep track? MB: yes <mbrubeck> using touchenter and touchleave (once those are implemented) OP: you can also use coordinates from the touch point element <smaug> [30]http://dev.w3.org/csswg/cssom-view/#dom-document-elementfrompoin t [30] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/cssom-view/#dom-document-elementfrompoint SM: we may want to add some heuristics … about number of touches … it can be a problem in the long run MB: the main reason behind the current language is to align with Webkit … if we want to change that, we need to be careful SM: we can also think about adding new things in the next version of the spec AB: I think our working assumption is for v1 to match what has already been implemented ... Tran submitted an example TD: I tried my example on Safari and phone with Webkit … it's up to the group if we want to do anything with my example … want to add some additional features like rotation SM: like to have other features included … but would be good to make it a bit shorter … and just focus on the minimal amount of code TD: it's fine with me if the Editors want to change it SM: OK; I'll make some mods and then run them by you TD: ok; sounds good … do we want to introduce a Rotation example? MB: I have some comments that I will send to the list SM: the v1 spec doesn't have rotation, correct? MB: yes, that's correct Preparing Touch Events v1 spec for Last Call WD AB: one action blocking LC is Doug's Action-56 "Update the Touch Event spec to use markup to facilitate test case extraction" [31]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/56 [31] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/56 DS: my f2f meeting and other high priority stuff got in the way … should be done this week … would appreciate it if Matt would ping me about this ;-)! <smaug> we can all kick shepazu :) DS: this shouldn't stop us from creating tests, right AB: yes; good point! … there is always an Open Action for everyone to Create Tests! DS: after I complete action-56, it would be good to assign blocks of assertions to individuals … does that seem reasonable? DT: think it's a good idea <smaug> +1 <sangwhan> +1 DS: v1 will be limited to features already implemented … does it appear there will be at least 2 impls for each feature? MB: I think the main interop issue is going to be the params for initTouchEvent … Issue-19 … Other than that, I think all of the other v1 features are interoperable DS: I ask, because that will block our progress toward Recommendation AB: perhaps during LC review period we can do some analysis about what has been implemented DS: we could conceivably skip CR if we have all features implemented in the LC time frame … assuming we have the tests in place AB: want to spend some time on the spec's 2 "red block issues" … first one has to do with aligning with InkML <Cathy> [32]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/default/touchevents.htm l#attributes [32] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/default/touchevents.html#attributes AB: have we already said this is out of scope for v1? DS: yes SM: yes AB: so this will be resolved when we make the spec split? DS: yes AB: ok, the 2nd red block issue is "What are units of radiusX/Y? CSS Pixels? SM: that is also moved to v2 DS: correct CC: yes MB: the spec actually seems to address it, right above the issue DS: I had an answer at one point of time but wanted more feedback AB: so radiusX will not be in v1? DS: yes, that's correct MB: yes ... speaking of v1 … I am all set to make the split … was waiting for Doug … but won't now … I will create a v1 branch … and the trunk will continue on for v2 … and we can apply changes to both branches as needed SM: sounds good AB: +1 DS: so we can split now and still apply a changeset to both? MB: yes, we can do that … some of the patches may need to be done manually … I don't expect the two branches to ever reunite … v1 will stop changing as the spec freezes SM: for v1, we should do some testing before stripping out features DS: that implies we have the tests … but we aren't quite there yet … until we get the tests … it's a good idea and will be done during the implementation phase Any Other Business (AOB) AB: August 30 is the next time I can make a call DS: if we get enough actions and work done before then, I can chair a call AB: that works for me <sangwhan> WFM AB: meeting adjourned Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: brubeck test Sangwhan's list examples against implementations [recorded in [33]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/09-webevents-minutes.html#action02] [NEW] ACTION: Doug propose spec text to address the resolution of issue-16 [recorded in [34]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/09-webevents-minutes.html#action01] [End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 9 August 2011 16:20:17 UTC