W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webevents@w3.org > October to December 2013

Re: Moving Touch Events v1 to Recommendation

From: Scott González <scott.gonzalez@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 07:51:31 -0400
Message-ID: <CAO8i3ienMwDYNtmuNOe08dPOvHwte+Ogo1t72-zEf4kGO+sYxQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
Cc: Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>, Sangwhan Moon <me@sangwhan.com>, Matt Brubeck <mbrubeck@mozilla.com>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
This looks good to me.


On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 2:26 AM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi, folks–
>
> TimBL (the Director), while generally supportive of moving the Web Events
> spec forward and resolving the WebIDL dependency expeditiously, wasn't
> satisfied with the wording we proposed around conforming only to the WebIDL
> syntax; he wanted for us to make as strong a claim as possible, while not
> exaggerating the conformance we anticipate.
>
> So, PLH and I asked Cameron McCormack, the editor of WebIDL, how he thinks
> we could most accurately and precisely characterized the Touch Events
> spec's conformance criterion for WebIDL, and he suggested some text which
> I've included in the Editor's Draft of the spec [1]. TimBL accepted this
> text.
>
> We believe that this is both accurate and informative, and neither
> overstates nor understates the requirements for an implementation
> conforming to WebIDL in the context of Touch Events.
>
> Assuming this WG is happy with this text, and if we have no objections
> from the WebApps WG (ArtB, can you handle that?), the next step would be to
> move the Web Events spec to Recommendation (possibly as soon as next week).
>
> Is this text acceptable to everyone?
>
> [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/**webevents/raw-file/v1/**
> touchevents.html#webidl-**conform<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/v1/touchevents.html#webidl-conform>
>
> Regards-
> -Doug
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2013 11:51:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:03:55 UTC