Re: Proposed Boilerplate Information for Touch Events CG; deadline Oct 25

Your proposal looks good to me - thanks Art!  My list of specific topics
doesn't need to be definitive though - others should feel free to
add/remove/replace, they're just the things on the top of my mind...

Inline:

On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 7:43 AM, Sangwhan Moon <smoon@opera.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Here is my straw-man proposal for the three boilerplate items that need
>> to be defined when the new Community Group is proposed. You'll notice the
>> Group Description borrows heavily from Rick's feedback on the CfC.
>>
>> 1. Name: "Touch Events" i.e. "Touch Events Community Group".
>>
>> 2. Group Description:
>>
>> [[
>> The Touch Events community group was formed by members of the Web Events
>> Working Group (responsible for the Touch Events specification) and the
>> Pointer Events Working Group (responsible for the Pointer Events spec). The
>> group's focus is differences in touch event behavior between browsers. The
>> group seeks to form consensus on the best approaches for interoperability
>> outside of what's already standardized.
>>
>> Among the topics in scope for this group:
>>
>>  * Defining how touch-action should be implemented in browsers that
>>    support touch events; see [1].
>>
>>  * Defining the "right" TouchEvent / PointerEvent interaction for both
>>    browsers and pointer event polyfills; see [2].
>>
>>  * Trying to form consensus on how exactly browsers should behave in
>>    sending touch events when scrolling stars (f.ex. see the following
>>    public-webevents thread [3]).
>>
>>  * Identifying other differences that exist between these events.
>>
>>  * Discussing problems web/framework developers have with the design of
>>    touch events; see [4].
>>
>> Additionally, the group will define "mappings" between Touch Events and
>> Pointer Events" (f.ex. see [5]). The group also expects to make proposals
>> for potential future standards.
>>
>> [1] <https://docs.google.com/**document/d/**
>> 1CV2AXyrdPdGSRypAQcfGrgQVuWYi5**0EzTmVsMLWgRPM/<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CV2AXyrdPdGSRypAQcfGrgQVuWYi50EzTmVsMLWgRPM/>
>> >
>> [2] <https://docs.google.com/**document/d/**
>> 1Sasl1qYJV6agrDvGplEYlZznzc38U**-TFN_3a67-nlSc/<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Sasl1qYJV6agrDvGplEYlZznzc38U-TFN_3a67-nlSc/>
>> >
>> [3] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-webevents/**
>> 2013AprJun/0040.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2013AprJun/0040.html>
>> >
>> [4] <https://docs.google.com/**document/d/12-HPlSIF7-**ISY8TQHtuQ3IqDi-**
>> isZVI0Yzv5zwl90VU/<https://docs.google.com/document/d/12-HPlSIF7-ISY8TQHtuQ3IqDi-isZVI0Yzv5zwl90VU/>
>> >
>> [5] < https://docs.google.com/**spreadsheet/ccc?key=**
>> 0AvdBn9Kvx22qdGRnRXNPb0ZBTUl3S**EkwdUdtaW9pWWc&usp=sharing<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvdBn9Kvx22qdGRnRXNPb0ZBTUl3SEkwdUdtaW9pWWc&usp=sharing>
>> >
>> ]]
>>
>> 3. Short name: "touchevents"; this will be used for things like the mail
>> list name (e.g. public-touchevents) and the group's home page e.g. (
>> w3.org/community/touchevents/**).
>>
>> Comments, corrections, alternate proposals as well as +1's for all of the
>> above are welcome but please reply by October 25.
>>
>> Note that after the CG is proposed, at least 4 other people with W3C
>> accounts must register their support for the CG in order for it to be
>> created. As such, I will notify this list and the public-pointerevents list
>> after I submit the proposal.
>>
>> Assuming the CG is created, the details of how the group actually
>> operates (f.ex. if a `charter` is created or not), the group's scope,
>> schedule, deliverables, work mode, etc. is left for the group to decide.
>> (FWIW, my current expectation is that I will join the group and that
>>  others will lead/chair the group.)
>>
>
> Instead of covering just touch-pointer mappings, can we cover
> touch-pointer-mouse relations altogether? PE only covers pointer-mouse and
> TE only covers touch-mouse (non-normative).
>

Agreed, this is important (and really one of the trickiest points of
touch/pointer interop).

Additionally it would be really awesome if we could cover how
> pseudo-pointers (key only navigation via spatial navigation and/or caret
> browsing, virtual mouse) should behave, since that's not
> covered/standardized anywhere and most of the compatibility event firing
> has been implemented based on ad-hoc testing.
>

I agree we should have a place to discuss that, but I'm worried that would
broaden the scope of this group too far - potentially reducing it's value.
 I'd prefer to keep this group scoped to issues that involve touch events
in some form.

-- 
> Sangwhan Moon [Opera Software ASA]
> Software Engineer | Tokyo, Japan
>