- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:33:37 -0400
- To: "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the September 25 voice conference are available
at <http://www.w3.org/2012/09/25-webevents-minutes.html> and copied below.
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webevents mail list before October 2. In the absence
of any changes, these minutes will be considered approved.
-Thanks, ArtB
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Web Events WG Voice Conference
25 Sep 2012
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2012JulSep/0034.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2012/09/25-webevents-irc
Attendees
Present
Art_Barstow, Olli_Pettay, Cathy_Chan, Scott_Gonzαlez,
Rick_Byers, Doug_Schepers, Matt_Brubeck, Sangwhan_Moon
Regrets
Chair
Art
Scribe
Art, Rick
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Agree on Agenda
2. [6]Announcements
3. [7]Pointer Events
4. [8]Testing
5. [9]AoB
* [10]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________
<ArtB> Scribe: Art
<ArtB> ScribeNick: ArtB
Date: 25 September 2012
<smaug_> that is me
<scott_gonzalez> Doug said he couldn't join until 15 minutes
past.
<scott_gonzalez> I'm on the call, but muted.
<scribe> Scribe: Rick
<smaug_> matt will join in a minute
<rbyers> scribenick: rbyers
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
Agree on Agenda
AB: I posted a draft agenda yesterday
[11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2012Ju
lSep/0034.html.
... Since then there was an announcement about Microsoft's
Pointer Events Member Submission to the W3C
[12]http://www.w3.org/Submission/2012/SUBM-pointer-events-20120
907/ and I propose we add a related topic to today's agenda.
... any objections to adding Pointer Events discussion to the
beginning of this meeting?
[11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2012JulSep/0034.html.
[12] http://www.w3.org/Submission/2012/SUBM-pointer-events-20120907/
[ No objections ]
AB: any other change requests?
Announcements
AB: any short announcements for today?
Pointer Events
AB: Microsoft's Pointer Events spec
[13]http://www.w3.org/Submission/pointer-events/ overlaps the
Touch Events spec, at least from the use case level.
... in the submission page
[14]http://www.w3.org/Submission/2012/03/, there is a
"suggestion" a new WG be formed to standardize Pointer Events
(PE).
... depending on how one views/positions PE, it can be seen as
a super set of TouchEvents (TE).
... this raises a number of questions such as "so, what would
this mean for our TEv2 effort?" so let me open "the floor"
comments, concerns, etc. and Q&A ...
[13] http://www.w3.org/Submission/pointer-events/
[14] http://www.w3.org/Submission/2012/03/
DS: I think we should drop Touch Events v2
we don't want competing specs
there could be some IP problems with continuing with TEv2
I think it would be good to create a doc that describes PE
and TE
and I intend to create a related blog
There needs to be some clarification between the two
as well as some related by name stuff in CSS
<scott_gonzalez> I agree as well.
MB: I agree with Doug
AB: I tend to agree with Doug also
I do think we should continue with TEv1 to Recommendation
RB: I agree too
<Cathy> +1 to both shepazu and ArtB
if PE would not happen, could we restart TEv2?
AB: yes, that is certainly possible
but I would hope that wouldn't be necessary
SM: not much of an opinion
SG: yes I agree
PROPOSED RESOLUTION: the group will continue to push Touch
Events v1 to final Recommendation
AB: any objections to that?
[ None ]
RESOLUTION: the group will continue to push Touch Events v1 to
final Recommendation
AB: PROPOSED RESOLUTION: assuming a new WG is formed for
Pointer Events, the group will stop work on Touch Events v2
... any comments?
... any objections?
OP: do we have a v2 draft?
AB: yes we do
OP: should we publish that as a WG Note?
AB: good question
any comments?
in some ways we have done that in earlier drafts
<rbyers>
[15]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/tip/touchevents.ht
ml
[15] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/tip/touchevents.html
<smaug_> ah, there
AB: I can start a CfC to publish TEv2 as a WG Note
... any objections to that?
<scribe> ACTION: barstow start a CfC to publish TEv2 as a WG
Note [recorded in
[16]http://www.w3.org/2012/09/25-webevents-minutes.html#action0
1]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-99 - Start a CfC to publish TEv2 as a
WG Note [on Arthur Barstow - due 2012-10-02].
DS: if we publish TEv2, we could add something about the PAG
for v1
SM: ok; that works
AB: that's a good idea
... PROPOSED RESOLUTION: assuming a new WG is formed for
Pointer Events, the group will stop work on Touch Events v2
... any objections?
I am trying to set expectations
[ None ]
RESOLUTION: assuming a new WG is formed for Pointer Events, the
group will stop work on Touch Events v2
AB: PROPOSED RESOLUTION: after the TEv1 Recommendation is
published, the Web Events WG will close
... does that seem reasonable?
... any objections?
[ None ]
DS: there is a liaison with IndieUI WG
and the joint deliverable
Personally, I think we can ask people interested in IndieUI
to just join that WG
AB: so that's a good point re IndieUI
and I tend to agree with you -> that is, if someone is
interested in that work, they can just join the IndieUI WG
AB: any comments about IndieUI?
... any objections to PROPOSED RESOLUTION: after the TEv1
Recommendation is published, the Web Events WG will close ?
[ None ]
RESOLUTION: after the TEv1 Recommendation is published, the Web
Events WG will close
AB: anything else on PE for today?
RB: one thing we talked about is gestures
we know that is off limits for PE WG
and probably not IndieUI WG either
thus Web Events is one option
OP: I though gestures was explicity out of scope for WebEvents
DS: yes, that's true
thus Web Events could be rechartered as "where gestures are
happening"
AB: I agree it makes sense to start a group at W3C related to
gestures
I personally strongly support that
However, I would start a new WG and break the connection with
Web Events
mainly as a marketing and messaging rationale
DS: yes, I agree with Art re starting a new group
it may be better for us to start a new group with Gesture
prominent
RB: that makes sense, thanks for the input
<mbrubeck> Who just joined the call?
<mbrubeck> smaug: Did you just join? (You might be muted.)
<smaug> it is me
<smaug_> it is me
<smaug_> wait a second
<smaug_> please
<smaug_> rbyers: give me 30s
<smaug_> techinal problem here....
<scott_gonzalez> I need to drop off.
Testing
AB: take discussion to the list
... I'd like to get consensus on the single-touch test cases
soon-ish
... think we still have some work to do on the multi-touch
tests
AoB
AB: if it appears that we have a good reason, we will have a
call next week
... anything else for today?
... meeting adjourned
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: barstow start a CfC to publish TEv2 as a WG Note
[recorded in
[17]http://www.w3.org/2012/09/25-webevents-minutes.html#action0
1]
[End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 25 September 2012 16:33:52 UTC