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

Re: Moving Touch Events v1 to Recommendation

From: Sangwhan Moon <sangwhan@iki.fi>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 22:45:31 +0900
To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
Cc: Scott González <scott.gonzalez@gmail.com>, 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>, Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org>
Message-ID: <58985F9F748F4F5A919C7FED955F69A1@gmail.com>
No concerns here as well in terms of the actual specification matters, nitpick  
would be the two massive one liners in changeset 351dffeaeb4c which aren't
really consistent with the rest of the document. (or even the rest of the commit)

…and indentation. :-)  

--  
Sangwhan "OCD" Moon


On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Rick Byers wrote:

> Looks fine to me.
>  
>  
> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Scott González <scott.gonzalez@gmail.com (mailto:scott.gonzalez@gmail.com)> wrote:
> > This looks good to me.
> >  
> >  
> > On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 2:26 AM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org (mailto: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
> > >  
> > > Regards-
> > > -Doug
> >  
>  
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2013 13:46:16 UTC

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