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

Re: What do we want to put in the Touch Events v2 WG Note? [Was: Re: ACTION-105 ...]

From: Matt Brubeck <mbrubeck@mozilla.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 11:43:29 -0700
Message-ID: <526575D1.2010100@mozilla.com>
To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, Web Events Working Group <public-webevents@w3.org>
On 10/17/2013 7:12 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> During WebEvents' October 15 call, we discussed the Touch Events 
> version 2 Working Group Note [1]. Rather than merging important 
> changes from v1 to v2 and publishing v2 in its entirety, Rick 
> suggested that it could be simpler and more useful if the Note just 
> contained deltas of interfaces that have two or more implementations.

That would be fine with me.  I don't think we should publish the v2 
draft as-is (without merging in recent changes from v1) because of 
potential confusion caused by unintentional deltas.  I think we should 
either merge the v1 changes and then publish v2 in its entirety, or 
publish just a list of intentional changes.

> We also talked a little bit about the criteria for a feature to be 
> included in the Note. More specifically, it seems like a feature would 
> only be included in the Note if it has two or more implementations. 
> Another consideration is the degree of deployment `in the wild` for 
> these features. Thus, if (for example) Touch.force has never been 
> implemented, it probably should not included. Feedback on these 
> considerations is also welcome.

I don't have a strong opinion here.  How many of the v2 features 
actually have two implementations?  Gecko implements radiusX, radiusY, 
force, and identifiedTouch.
Received on Monday, 21 October 2013 18:43:55 UTC

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