- 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