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

Re: CfC: Start a new Community Group for TouchEvent and PointerEvent Mapping; deadline October 22

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 10:21:01 -0400
Message-ID: <525EA0CD.9080201@nokia.com>
To: Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com>
CC: "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>
On 10/16/13 10:13 AM, ext Rick Byers wrote:
> I think this is a great way forward, beyond just the PE/TE mapping. 
>  I'd love to have a vendor neutral place to discuss other differences 
> in touch event behavior between browsers and try to form consensus on 
> the best approaches for interoperability outside of what's already 
> standardized.  He's some of the things I can imagine being in scope:
>
>   * How touch-action should be implemented in browsers that support
>     touch events (eg. my proposal
>     <https://docs.google.com/a/chromium.org/document/d/1CV2AXyrdPdGSRypAQcfGrgQVuWYi50EzTmVsMLWgRPM/edit?usp=drive_web>)
>   * What the right TE/PE interaction is for both browsers and pointer
>     event polyfills (eg. I have some initial notes here
>     <https://docs.google.com/a/chromium.org/document/d/1Sasl1qYJV6agrDvGplEYlZznzc38U-TFN_3a67-nlSc/edit#>)
>
>   * Trying to form consensus on how exactly browsers should behave in
>     sending touch events when scrolling stars (eg. public-web-events
>     thread here
>     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2013AprJun/0040.html>)
>   * What other differences exist between
>   * Discuss problems web/framework devs are having with the design of
>     touch events (eg. my issues doc
>     <https://docs.google.com/a/chromium.org/document/d/12-HPlSIF7-ISY8TQHtuQ3IqDi-isZVI0Yzv5zwl90VU/edit>)
>
> Would it be reasonable to define the community group as the touch 
> events community group, primarily for browser and framework developers 
> to discuss the issues with touch events and make proposals for 
> potential future standards (including the PE/TE mapping)?

Thanks for this information Rick!

Yes, I think your proposal is quite reasonable.

Assuming this CfC passes, the next step will be to propose a new CG. The 
barrier to start a new CG is quite low and I feel pretty confident we 
will have sufficient support.

-ArtB
Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2013 14:25:59 UTC

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