W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webevents@w3.org > July to September 2011

Draft minutes: 13 September 2011 call

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 12:30:14 -0400
Message-ID: <4E6F8516.9010404@nokia.com>
To: "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the September 13 voice conference are available 
at the following and copied below:

http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html

WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send 
them to the public-webevents mail list before September 20 (the next 
voice conference); otherwise these minutes will be considered Approved 
as is.

-AB

[1]W3C

[1] http://www.w3.org/

- DRAFT -

Web Events WG Voice Conference

13 Sep 2011

[2]Agenda

[2] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0051.html

See also: [3]IRC log

[3] http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-irc

Attendees

Present
Art_Barstow, Matt_Brubeck, Anders_Hockersten, Doug_Schepers,
Cathy_Chan, Dzung_Tran, Scott_Graham, Laszlo_Gombos,
Olli_Pettay

Regrets
Sangwhan_Moon

Chair
Art

Scribe
Art

Contents

* [4]Topics
1. [5]Tweak Agenda
2. [6]Announcements
3. [7]Issue-19: Align initTouchEvent parameters with Webkit;
feedback from Webkit community?
4. [8]Targets of Touch Events; Cathy Chan on 7-Sep:
5. [9]Testing Touch Events v1
6. [10]Intentional Events spec: status and plans
7. [11]Joystick API
8. [12]Mouse Lock
9. [13]Any Other Business (AOB)
* [14]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________

<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

<scribe> Scribe: Art

Date: 13 September 2011

Tweak Agenda

AB: yesterday I sent the draft agenda to the list
[15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/
0051.html. Any change requests?

[15] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0051.html.

[ None ]

Announcements

AB: any short announcements for today? The LC for TEv1 will be
published today
[16]http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-Touch-Events-20110913/.
Congratulations to everyone and thanks to the Editors!
... any other announcements for today?

[16] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-Touch-Events-20110913/.

Issue-19: Align initTouchEvent parameters with Webkit; feedback from
Webkit community?

AB: last week we agree to close Issue-19
[17]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/19 and we said we
would put it on today's agenda in case there was feedback to
discuss.
... Laszlo isn't here today

[17] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/19

 is there any activity on that bug?

DG: there was an e-mail from Anne van Kesteren

MB: I'll respond to that

 it also affects the v2 spec

AB: we will consider AvK's e-mail as a formal LC comment

 The Editors will need to track LC comments

 and there are various ways to do that

<scribe> ACTION: barstow discuss LC comment processing with the
editors [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-63 - Discuss LC comment processing with
the editors [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-09-20].

AB: anything else on this topic?

Targets of Touch Events; Cathy Chan on 7-Sep:

AB: Cathy submitted some comments about the targets of touch events
[19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/
0046.html

[19] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0046.html

CC: the question was about touchcancel event

 it doesn't have as much info about targets

 so I was wondering if some additional text should be added

 perhaps more similar to touchend

MB: I agree those are good issues

 I suspect touchcancel should be similar to touchend

 We need to check what impls are doing

AB: so is there consensus the spec needs to change?

DS: yes, that seems reasonable to me

MB: I agree the spec needs to change

 before the spec is changed, we need to see what impls are doing

DS: I think that means we need an issue and action to check impls

<scribe> ACTION: cathy create an issue for the touchcancel question
raised on Sept 7 2011 [recorded in
[20]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-64 - Create an issue for the touchcancel
question raised on Sept 7 2011 [on Cathy Chan - due 2011-09-20].

CC: the other question

 is about target of touchend

 is that the same element as touchstart

 One of the examples may need to be updated

AB: any comments?

MB: I haven't looked at Q1 yet

DT: I think the intention is a touchstart is needed

 We should check existing impls

<anders_hockersten> dropping in and out, will comment here instead

AB: should we consider Cathy's comments as LC comments?

DS: yes

<anders_hockersten> seems like it could be hard to make an
implementation that can listen to just touchend, if it is supposed
to also emulate mouse events

<anders_hockersten> but I haven't thought it fully through

AB: feels like we should record this as an issue

 and that people should respond to Cathy's email

 after they have read the mail and done some testing

MB: I agree, to create an issue

<anders_hockersten> +1

<scribe> ACTION: cathy create an Issue for Q1 of the Sept 7 comments
[recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-65 - Create an Issue for Q1 of the Sept 7
comments [on Cathy Chan - due 2011-09-20].

Testing Touch Events v1

AB: Some test cases for the TE spec have been created by Matt
[22]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/file/923f5ba58a22/test
... do we know where the testing gaps? This would be "automatic" if
the spec's assertions were marked accordingly.

[22] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/file/923f5ba58a22/test

 wondering about the size of the problem space

MB: for v1, the test cases I wrote were for single touch use cases

 we will need additional tests for multi touch

 e.g. when added or order of removd

 we also need to cover other attrs

 We probably have about 20-25% coverage now

 Thus the test cases will need to be roughly 3 times larger than
what we have now

DS: traditionally, we separte simple things into small test files

MB: yes, I see some advantages of that for some features

DS: what about synthesizing events

MB: we could do that

<smaug> yikes

<smaug> meeting

 We may not agree on how to synthesize events

DS: ideally, some could be synthesized

 there are 4 diff event types

 If we had automated tests, we could generate a test for each type

 then a test for each attr

<mbrubeck> argh

<anders_hockersten> sound drops intermittently from voice bridge for
me

<smaug> I need to find some empty room

<anders_hockersten> really bad at times (like when I was trying to
say something) but generally the dropouts have been few and short

<smaug> my headset is somewhere in the hotel

MB: if we synth tests, we don't get much info about responses to
real inputs

DS: one goal is to test the spec itself

 need to make sure it is implementable

 The other goal is to test true interoperablility

 For the 1st goal, I think some synth test make sense

 to test e.g. attrs

 4 events with 7 attrs

MB: and there are lists too

DS: yes; also may have single or multiple items in the list

 need to test each create method

<smaug> that is me

DS: think this will give us about 50 tests t

 and they should be relatively straight forward to create

MB: sounds good
... the other thing about synth tests is they can get complicated if
we remove init method

AB: need people to create test cases

 I don't think we should expect the Editors to do all of the work

 although they are certainly welcome to do so if they want to

AB: any ideas about determining who will test what

MB: first, we need to get more than 1 person writing tests

OP: I will probably write some test cases when reviewing a patch for
multitouch

<Dzung_Tran> DT: I will help

AB: who else can commit to writing test cases

 Thanks Tran

 Is there something in particular Tran?

DT: I could look into multitouch

 if that is needed

MB: yes, but Olli is interested in that area too

 thus Tran and Olli should coordinate

AB: ok, so Tran and Olli can help. Anyone else?
... Doug, any additional thoughts or advice here?

DS: we should look closely at what the testing group is doing

 so that we leverage their work as much as possible

AB: and by "testing group", you mean what Doug?

DS: there was a WG proposed a while ago

 I'll drop a link

AB: we agreed months ago to leverage the testharness.js framework
that is being used by WebApps WG, HTMLWG and others

<shepazu> [23]http://www.w3.org/2011/05/testing-ig-charter.html

[23] http://www.w3.org/2011/05/testing-ig-charter.html

AB: anything else on testing for today?

<scribe> ACTION: Tran create multitouch test cases for the Touch
Events spec [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-66 - Create multitouch test cases for the
Touch Events spec [on Dzung Tran - due 2011-09-20].

Intentional Events spec: status and plans

AB: the last time we discussed the group's so-called "Intentional
Events" spec was June 7
[25]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/07-webevents-minutes.html#item07
... the WAI's Protocols and Formats is interested in this topic.
... Apple's James Craig has done some work
[26]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2010JulSep/att-0106/
UserInterfaceIndependence.html but that draft is more than a year
old
... Doug, do you have an update on this? Wondering about the next
steps?

[25] http://www.w3.org/2011/06/07-webevents-minutes.html#item07
[26] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2010JulSep/att-0106/UserInterfaceIndependence.html

DS: I am not aware of a newer spec

AB: do we need to talk off list about what to do next Doug?

DS: yes

<scribe> ACTION: barstow work with Doug on next steps for the
Intentional Events spec [recorded in
[27]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-67 - Work with Doug on next steps for the
Intentional Events spec [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-09-20].

DS: I think there is some talk in the WAI about starting a new group
for this area

Joystick API

AB: the RfC to add Joystick API to our charter ended 9-Sep
[28]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/
0041.html. Given there were no objections, I will move forward with
the formal re-chartering process.

[28] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0041.html.

<scribe> ACTION: barstow work with Doug and PLH to add Joystick API
to WebEvents' charter [recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-68 - Work with Doug and PLH to add
Joystick API to WebEvents' charter [on Arthur Barstow - due
2011-09-20].

MB: I talked to Mozilla's TedM

<smaug> I've asked ted to join this group

<mbrubeck> Ted wrote draft API spec at
[30]https://wiki.mozilla.org/JoystickAPI

[30] https://wiki.mozilla.org/JoystickAPI

AB: I presume Matt means Ted Mielczarek

<mbrubeck> he is willing to join the group, and might be pursuaded
to help edit the spec

AB: ok, that's great to read Matt

<smaug> (this network can't handle hundreds of mozillians and their
laptops and tablets)

<mbrubeck> As an aside, he wants to change the name to "game
controller API" because apparently only old people still call them
joysticks. :)

 I'll take an action to followup with Mozilla's AC rep to get Ted
to join

DT: I have a question about rechartering

 will it be general enough so that other input devices can be added
without chartering

 F.ex., a wheel - it works differently than a joystick

<anders_hockersten> brb redialing

SG: I agree with Matt that something like Game Controller may be a
better name

DS: I agree we need to abstract about events

 but using "Game" could cause problems with getting some members to
join

<smaug> Ted mentioned that he will probably change the name of the
APi

SG: I envisioned wheels being included within the joystick API

 need to think about keeping scope limited

 so we can get spec done in a reasonable time

DS: D3E includes wheel

 We need to be careful about expanding the scope of the charter

 If anything, tighter scope will help us get more W3C Members to
join the WG

 Think we should just include Joystick API

 and if we need a new API, then we add that explicitly

 That said, we can still talk about other things that are out of
scope

 and other stuff may be better for a CG

AB: we need to be careful about any scope changes

 would prefer to just add 1 new deliverable

<anders_hockersten> I have to leave now. Have a nice
<timezone-appropriate-time-of-day>!

 We also need to separate Touch Events into v1 and v2

AB: not sure about us having technical discussions about Joystick
without it being in the charter

DS: if we keep the discussions high level, that should be ok

 and we all have to keep in mind we can't formally publish anything
until its in the charter

AB: so what do we do next re Joystick?

 do we try to merge ...

DS: we could ask TedM to join us

 it may make sense to split the call into TE and Joystick halves

<smaug> I think joystick is perhaps such thing which could be
handled mainly in mailing list

<smaug> since it may get lots of feedback from outside the group

<scribe> ACTION: barstow invite TedM to join us next week [recorded
in [31]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action07]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-69 - Invite TedM to join us next week [on
Arthur Barstow - due 2011-09-20].

Mouse Lock

<shepazu> Mouse Lock Specification Draft
[32]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uV4uDVIe9-8XdVndW8nNGWBfqn9i
eeop-5TRfScOG_o/edit?hl=en_US&authkey=CM-dw7QG&ndplr=1

[32] 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uV4uDVIe9-8XdVndW8nNGWBfqn9ieeop-5TRfScOG_o/edit?hl=en_US&authkey=CM-dw7QG&ndplr=1

<shepazu> Vincent Scheib, Google

DS: for mouse moves

 and lock into an element

 can control viewport

 This has been a conversation on public-webapps

 Vincent's doc has a lot of reqs and use cases

 It may be appropriate to work on it in this WG

SG: I agree it makes sense to add it to this WG

 there are similar requirements to Joystick

DS: are there any objections to adding it to our charter?

AB: I need to review it

 Can you ask TV Raman before we start a RfC to add it?

DS: yes

<smaug> There are probably still security issues in the mouselock

<smaug> so, it needs to be reviewed that in mind

<scribe> ACTION: Doug ask TV Raman about Google's interest in adding
Mouse Lock to WebEvents charter [recorded in
[33]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action08]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-70 - Ask TV Raman about Google's interest
in adding Mouse Lock to WebEvents charter [on Doug Schepers - due
2011-09-20].

AB: I'll start an RFC after we hear from Raman
... any concerns or voices of support for Mouse Lock?

DS: I'm not sure that "Mouse Lock" is the best name

 since it can work for other devices too

Any Other Business (AOB)

AB: any other topics for today?

<smaug> I'm not 100% sure the mouse lock API is exactly what we
want, but atm I don't have any other proposal

AB: we should a call next week

 any objections?

AB: next call on September 20
... meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: barstow discuss LC comment processing with the editors
[recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: barstow invite TedM to join us next week [recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: barstow work with Doug and PLH to add Joystick API to
WebEvents' charter [recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: barstow work with Doug on next steps for the
Intentional Events spec [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: cathy create an Issue for Q1 of the Sept 7 comments
[recorded in
[38]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: cathy create an issue for the touchcancel question
raised on Sept 7 2011 [recorded in
[39]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Doug ask TV Raman about Google's interest in adding
Mouse Lock to WebEvents charter [recorded in
[40]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action08]
[NEW] ACTION: Tran create multitouch test cases for the Touch Events
spec [recorded in
[41]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action04]

[End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 13 September 2011 16:30:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:03:53 UTC