- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 12:06:54 -0400
- To: "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the September 20 voice conference are available
at the following and copied below:
http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webevents-minutes.html
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webevents mail list before September 27 (the next
voice conference); otherwise these minutes will be considered Approved
as is.
-AB
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Web Events Working Group Teleconference
20 Sep 2011
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0067.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webevents-irc
Attendees
Present
Art_Barstow, Olli_Pettay, Dzung_Tran, Ted_Mielczarek,
Doug_Schepers, Scott_Graham, Matt_Brubeck, Cathy_Chan
Regrets
Anders_Hφckersten, Sangwhan_Moon
Chair
Art
Scribe
Art
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Tweak Agenda
2. [6]Announcements
3. [7]Comments on TE v1 LC
4. [8]Issue-22: Does an element have to also register for
touchstart event in order to receive touchend/touchmove
events
5. [9]Issue-21: Description of touchcancel event is missing
some details
6. [10]Testing Touch Events
7. [11]Joystick API
8. [12]Mouse Lock
9. [13]Any Other Business (AOB)
* [14]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<shepazu> trackbot, start telcon
<trackbot> Date: 20 September 2011
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
Date: 20 September 2011
<scribe> Meeting: Web Events WG Voice Conference
<smaug> ted_: are you [Mozilla] ?
<ted_> uh, probably?
<ted_> i dialed in from our asterix
<smaug> or did mbrubeck call in?
<ted_> Zakim: [Mozilla] is Ted_Mielczarek
<ted_> Zakim: nick ted_ is Ted_Mielczarek
<ted_> Zakim nick ted_ is Ted_Mielczarek
<ted_> mbrubeck: figures
Tweak Agenda
AB: yesterday I submitted a draft agenda to the list<>. Any change
requests?
[15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/
0067.html
[15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0067.html
Announcements
AB: any short announcements today?
Comments on TE v1 LC
AB: the TE LC is
[16]http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-Touch-Events-20110913/
... have the Editors decided on a LC Comment tracking document?
[17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/
0058.html
[16] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-Touch-Events-20110913/
[17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0058.html
MB: no
AB: have the Editors decided on a LC Comment tracking document?
[18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/
0058.html
... has there been any feedback from the Webkit community on
Issue-19 [19]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/19 "Align
initTouchEvent parameters with Webkit"?
[18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0058.html
[19] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/19
DS: Laszlo sent an email
AB: does anyone know if there were any responses?
let's continue. I'll ask Laszlo
AB: we received some LC comments from Anne van Kestern on
13-Sep-2011
[20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/
0053.html
... are there some issues we should discuss?
[20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0053.html
MB: yes, we should open an issue for AvK's comments
I also got some related feedback from Mozilla
there is a general precedence for dictionary use
rather than long lists
DS: but we specified what exists today
MB: well, almost
but we also have Issue-19
DS: I think the constructor is a good way forward
I tried to do that for D3E but couldn't get support for it
However, I don't think it reflects reality today
The question is if we want the spec to wait for a larger number of
impls to follow that
or do we specify what has already been deployed
I think the later
MB: agree v1 should be what we want today
but we want to get alignment
Laszlo hasn't been able to get anyone to comment on his patch
So we don't know if Webkit is going to change their impl to match
our spec
MB: there is an issue about what to do for v2
WK has 2 additional params
they don't cause a prob for v1 since they trail
but it could get ugly when people want to extend it
OP: we need to have a way to initialize the event
needed for testing
could rely on DOM4
<mbrubeck> [21]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/20
makes this a problem again for Touch Events v2
[21] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/20
but that could create a reference dependency that would be an
issue
with v1 going to REC
DS: good point
I would prefer a "quick victory" and move fwd
What if we drop the params?
MB: we can either specify what is exactly in WK
and change spec to match WK
DS: and then in v2 we go with the new constructor/initialize
MB: option #2 is to not specify initialization in v1
DS: I don't like that
OP: that would create a problem with testing
AB: we need to capture AvK's comments; do we want an issue too?
MB: yes
<mbrubeck> ISSUE: Add a DOM4-style constructor to create and
initialize TouchEvent objects.
<trackbot> Created ISSUE-23 - Add a DOM4-style constructor to create
and initialize TouchEvent objects. ; please complete additional
details at [22]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/23/edit
.
[22] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/23/edit
OP: Apple's inittouchevent is different then what's in WK
<smaug>
[23]http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/Source/WebCore/dom/TouchEve
nt.idl vs
[24]http://developer.apple.com/library/safari/#documentation/UserExp
erience/Reference/TouchEventClassReference/TouchEvent/TouchEvent.htm
l#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40009358
[23] http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/Source/WebCore/dom/TouchEvent.idl
[24] http://developer.apple.com/library/safari/#documentation/UserExperience/Reference/TouchEventClassReference/TouchEvent/TouchEvent.html
AB: is there anything else from Anne's comments for today?
MB: there is another issue
it's about document touch interface
I think his proposal makes sense
Are there any objections?
<mbrubeck> 'Instead of introducing a new interface called
DocumentTouch please use "partial interface Document" instead to
extend the Document interface. You need to add a reference here too
for Document. '
AB: Matt, did you respond to that part of AvK's comment?
MB: no
AB: please do so and if no one objects to your proposal, then let's
do it
... on September 15 we received some "table for each touch event
type" from Greg Dennis
[25]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/
0065.html
... so far no followup
[25] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0065.html
DS: I think the table in question is non-normative
we could add it without any change to normative text
AB: any other comments or opinons?
any disagreements with what Doug said
Can you Doug please respond to Dennis and say that's a reasonable
thing and we'll do it?
DS: yes
Issue-22: Does an element have to also register for touchstart event in
order to receive touchend/touchmove events
AB: Issue-22 [26]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/22
was created based on comments from Cathy. Anders responded to this
issue with some implementation data
[27]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/
0068.html.
... any followups on what Anders presented?
[26] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/22
[27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0068.html.
I presume we want to follow the current deployments as much as
possible
CC: I haven't read Anders' email yet
it appears most impls send touchend and touchcancel if touchstart
is not sent
I did some testing on Safari
I think we need some wording changes
The text should match what has been implemented
AB: would you Cathy make a proposal for the text changes to address
Issue-22?
CC: yes, I can do that
<scribe> ACTION: cathy create a proposal to address Issue-22
[recorded in
[28]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webevents-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-71 - Create a proposal to address Issue-22
[on Cathy Chan - due 2011-09-27].
Issue-21: Description of touchcancel event is missing some details
<ted_> hah
AB: Issue-21 [29]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/21
was created based on comments from Cathy.
... is this mainly about the spec being a bit under-specified?
What's it going to take to address this issue? Is some additional
testing needed?
[29] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/21
MB: I think we just have some underspecification here
AB: would you Cathy make a proposal?
CC: yes, I can do that but last time Matt suggested some testing is
needed
not sure how to test it
I can propose the text change
but we need to make sure it matches impls
<scribe> ACTION: matt produce a test to help us address Issue-21
[recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webevents-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-72 - Produce a test to help us address
Issue-21 [on Matt Brubeck - due 2011-09-27].
<scribe> ACTION: cathy propose text to address Issue-21 [recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webevents-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-73 - Propose text to address Issue-21 [on
Cathy Chan - due 2011-09-27].
AB: thanks Cathy and Matt!
Testing Touch Events
AB: last week Tran agreed to ACTION-66: Create multitouch test cases
for the Touch Events spec
[32]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/66.
... what's the status Tran?
[32] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/66.
DT: I haven't done anything yet
I'd like Olli to take the lead
and then I can follow his lead
OP: yes, I can create some tests
<scribe> ACTION: Olli create some multitouch test cases [recorded in
[33]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webevents-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-74 - Create some multitouch test cases [on
Olli Pettay - due 2011-09-27].
DT: as soon as Olli has something, I can start my tests
Joystick API
AB: as I mentioned last week
[34]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#item07, Doug
and I will move forward with the process of formally adding this
spec to our charter. I invited Mozilla's TedM to the call but didn't
hear from him
[35]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2011Sep/0011.htm
l.
... make a correction here, Ted is on the call
[34] http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#item07
[35] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2011Sep/0011.html.
Ted: I work for Mozilla
I've been writing some patches
been discussing with Webkit and Chrome teams
our spec is still experimental
Olli and Matt suggested I join the call
Re renaming the API
I really do mean "joystick"
I think game controller is too general
DS: would this cover things like Wiimotes
or Kinect?
Ted: want to stay with devices like joystick
SG: Wiimotes gets toward gestures
Ted: agree we should be careful about scope
DS: there is some work @ W3C on accelerometers
Ted: you mean Device Orientation stuff?
DS: yes
<smaug> t
<smaug> tted
<smaug> er
<smaug> ted_: you should discuss with dougt
Ted: there is some related data
agree we should do some coordination
DS: perhaps use "game pad" rather than joystick
the name will invoke concerns if we use "game controller"
Think we should define the devices we want to cover
Ted: in Linux, joystick is used
game pad would cover what we care about, buttons and multiple
accellerometers per device
DS: I don't think Nintendo is a W3C member
DT: are we going to look at TV remote?
or is that out of scope
SG: what do you mean by TV remote?
DT: there are some remote protocols
can be used with IPTV
DS: I think they are different
game controllers typically don't manage TVs
D3E does treat remote controllers differently
not sure there is anything we need to do there
D3E treats them as keyboards
Ted: in the interest of tight scope, think we should leave them out
DS: agree with Ted
SG: agree it's a different UC
AB: there is a Web and TV IG @ the W3C
and they may have an opinon on what we should or should not do in
this space
DS: yes and they are meeting in a WS now in Hollywood
AB: regarding the next steps for this API, my recommendation is that
until this spec is formally added to the charter that we use the
list for all discussions. We
could also get Scott set up with a Mercurial/Hg location to put a
draft.
and of course we can the same for Ted
SG: I'm willing to help
Ted: I would prefer to co-edit
... I have a pretty good idea about what I want
to see in the spec
SG: I'm having a prob landing a patch because there isn't a spec
DS: so you need a spec?
<smaug> (that is surprising given some other code landing to webkit)
SG: yes, I do; but we are on the right path
AB: is there an action for Doug to get these guys Mercurial access?
SG: yes, I think so
AB: should it go in the webevents directory?
DS: yes, I think that makes sense
AB: I think Ted and Scott just need W3C accounts
SG: I have an account
Ted: I don't know if I have a W3C account
DS: it's pretty simple; I'll get the link
<shepazu> [36]http://www.w3.org/Help/Account/Request/Public
[36] http://www.w3.org/Help/Account/Request/Public
[37]http://www.w3.org/Help/Account/Request/Member
[37] http://www.w3.org/Help/Account/Request/Member
AB: let's plan to use the list for discussions
and Doug and I will push the formal charter changes
DS: it would be really helpful to have a clear scope section
and some UCs and Reqs
AB: Ted and Scott, what do you think?
SG: yes, I can look into that
AB: ideally, Scott and Ted, we would be able to justifiy this API
without actually changing the scope text in our charter
and I think Doug is also asking for a scope section in the spec
itself
DS: yes, that's true
re the charter, I think the scoping will need to change somewhat
Probably just needs a short overview
AB: OK
<shepazu> [38]http://www.w3.org/mid/4E78AEDA.3020001@w3.org
[38] http://www.w3.org/mid/4E78AEDA.3020001@w3.org
DS: I sent a related note to the list
AB: anything else on Joystick for today?
Mouse Lock
AB: we have a proposal by Vincent Scheib to add Mouse Lock to Web
Events charter
[39]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/
0064.html
... Vincent's proposal was sent to both WebApps and WebEvents on
Sept 15. I don't think there have been any followups. If there are
no objections raised to Vincent's proposal by Sept 22, I will work
with Doug on the process of adding this to the charter.
[39] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0064.html
<scribe> ACTION: barstow work with Doug on formally adding Mouse
Lock to WebEvents' charter [recorded in
[40]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webevents-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-75 - Work with Doug on formally adding
Mouse Lock to WebEvents' charter [on Arthur Barstow - due
2011-09-27].
AB: if anyone has any comments on Vincent's proposal, please respond
on public-webevents
... I will followup with Vincent on how he would want to work on the
spec
DS: I would want the spec to include Scoping info and UCs and Reqs
AB: he already has some UCs in the spec
Any Other Business (AOB)
AB: any other topics for today?
... next call is Sept 27; meeting adjourned
... please continue technical discussion on the mail list
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: barstow work with Doug on formally adding Mouse Lock
to WebEvents' charter [recorded in
[41]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webevents-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: cathy create a proposal to address Issue-22 [recorded
in [42]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webevents-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: cathy propose text to address Issue-21 [recorded in
[43]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webevents-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: matt produce a test to help us address Issue-21
[recorded in
[44]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webevents-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Olli create some multitouch test cases [recorded in
[45]http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webevents-minutes.html#action04]
Received on Tuesday, 20 September 2011 16:08:58 UTC