Web Events WG Voice Conference

22 Mar 2011


See also: IRC log


Art_Barstow, Cathy_Chan, Josh_Soref, Matt_Brubeck, Anders_Höckersten, Olli_Pettay, Doug_Schepers


<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

<scribe> Scribe: Art

Date: 22 March 2011

<smaug_> [17:02] shepazu will be there shortly

Tweak Agenda

AB: I posted a draft agenda yesterday ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JanMar/0073.html ). The basic idea is to have explicit agenda items for the two Open Issues and then with respect to the Raised issues, get status for those with associated actions and try to determine owners/actions for the other Raised Issues. (Open and Raised: http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/ )
... Any comments or change requests?

[ None ]

Issue-1 Resolve touch area re. radius and angle

AB: Issue-1 is "Resolve touch area re. radius and angle" ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/1 ) and we discussed this issue on Feb 22 ( http://www.w3.org/2011/02/22-webevents-minutes.html#item02 ).
... Issue-1 has at least two associated actions: Action-16 for Doug to "Follow up with the canonical guys re copyrights" ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/16 ) and Action-17 for Olli to "Investigate various angle-related work e.g. InkML, CSS, SVG, ..." ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/17 )
... Olli addressed Action-17 earlier this week via ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JanMar/0075.html ). I think we can can consider Action-17 closed. However, Olli does raise some questions in his email.
... Action-11 "Update touch events spec for next week" ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/11 ) is somewhat generic so it's not clear if this applies specifically to this issue or if this action was created during our "tracker training session" on Feb 15.

MB: Action-11 is related to Issue-1
... but am waiting for other inputs too
... I've made some other minor edits
... but the spec needs updates to address the issue

AB: so we'll leave action-11 open until issue-1 is resolved/closed
... Olli, I think we can close action-17

OP: yes
... want to ask DS about radiusX and radiusY
... is it for SVG?

DS: yes, that's the basic rationale
... but not really for compatibility
... I just did some cut-and-paste there
... I wouldn't say there is a really good reason for having those
... and if someone has a better proposal, I'm willing to listen

OP: if we want rX and rY we would need rotation angle to events
... that would be close to what Canonical is doing on Linux
... at least that is my understanding
... would prefer degree

DS: we don't have to be compatible with SVG
... but it is fine if we are

OP: does WebKit have this feature at all?

DS: no

OP: then do we need really need it

DS: yes, I think so

AB: well, any deviation from shipping deployements make it difficult to test

DS: well, it does make it more difficult to satisfy the conformance criteria e.g. for CR
... but that argues for us aligning with the Canonical way of doing it

AB: well that is true
... but they aren't really here at the table

DS: I could consider them as an Invited Expert

AB: would be good to get their IP commitment

DS: ok, give me an action

<scribe> ACTION: Doug talk to Canonical about joining the WG; possibly as an Invited Expert [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/03/22-webevents-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-21 - Talk to Canonical about joining the WG; possibly as an Invited Expert [on Doug Schepers - due 2011-03-29].

JS: would like to know how developers are going to use rotation
... will they use that in the app
... need to understand the expectation

MB: for some drawing tools, rotation of touch point is important

AB: appears we have use cases for the functionality
... How do we move forward on this issue?
... Is there something the Editors need from the rest of us?

DS: I need to catch up

MB: I am busy with FF 4 and will have more time for this spec after our release is out

AB: is there anything else for Issue-1 for today?

[ No ]

Issue-7 Targets for touch events: Elements or Nodes?

AB: Issue-7 is "Targets for touch events: Elements or Nodes?" ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/7 ) and it has associate Action-19 on Matt "to Address Issue-7 ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/19 )
... we discussed this on Feb 22 ( http://www.w3.org/2011/02/22-webevents-minutes.html#item09 ).

MB: I have not completed my action
... we did have consensus the target should be Elements
... please keep the action open and I will follow up real soon

AB: propose this issue be resolved as Elements are the target for touch events

DS: wondering aloud here ...
... example: jumbled word, a letter can be grabbed
... can isolate a piece of text
... e.g. want 'a' of 'sad' and change it
... can touch between the 's' and 'a'
... How would we deal with that case?
... Not element content

MB: that's a hard problem
... with mouse and other events
... Even if use text nodes, still have granularity issues
... would need to put each letter in its own element in the case DS described

<timeless> [ you can do this with <span>s ]

AB: so there is a way of handling that UC

DS: yes, but it's not the best way

<timeless> TextNode size is effectively random

<timeless> and relates to how the parser generates them

DS: There was some rationale for using Nodes

<timeless> partially based on network buffering

MB: but I don't think using Nodes will help in that case

OP: to be able to indicate which letter is clicked, need a range object and an offset

DS: I'm playing devil's advocate

AB: can we live making Elements the target?

DS: what are the advantages of making of Elements?

OP: consistency with mouse events
... perhaps the problem could be solved somewhere else (for touch events and mouse events)

MB: PPK claimed early WebKit had a bug in this area

<mbrubeck> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JanMar/0058.html

DS: I'm fine with moving forward
... but want to make sure we agree on the reasons and document our rationale

AB: in the absence of new info, I'd like to get agreement on this
... I propose we address Issue-7 by agreeing Elements are the target for touch events (not Nodes)
... any objections?

[ None ]

RESOLUTION: the group agrees Issue-7 should be closed with Elements being the target of touch events

Raised Issues

AB: we have 5 issues in the Raised state: ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/raised ) and we had at least a brief discussion about all of them on Feb 15 ( http://www.w3.org/2011/02/22-webevents-minutes.html )
... I'll list them here ...
... Issue-2 What should happen when a touch is dragged off the screen ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/2 )
... Issue-3 Click event target after DOM mutation during touchstart ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/3 )
... Issue-4 Does preventDefault on touchmove cause a dragging motion to fire a click event? ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/4 )
... Issue-5 What events fire if an alert is performed within a touch sequence? ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/5 )
... Issue-6 Touch targets in frames ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/6 )
... of those, the only one that has an open action is Issue-2 and that is Action-18 on Sangwan to "Investigate Issue-2" ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/18 )
... it would be good to identify a "owners" for these issues or proposals on what (if anything) should be done. Especially would like to see some work/proposals for those Raised Issues that have no associated actions i.e. #3, #4, #5 and #6.
... we need people to commit to actively work on them

OP: I can take Issue-5

<scribe> ACTION: olli follow-up on Issue-5 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/03/22-webevents-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-22 - Follow-up on Issue-5 [on Olli Pettay - due 2011-03-29].

DS: I would like some other people to get active

AB: we need someone for Issues 3, 4, 6

DS: I'll take Issue-3

<scribe> ACTION: doug follow-up on Issue-3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/03/22-webevents-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-23 - Follow-up on Issue-3 [on Doug Schepers - due 2011-03-29].

AB: so now 3 of the 5 Raised issues have owners

DS: re Issue-6
... seems pretty straight forward
... I think HTML5 addresses this
... can't propagate outside the iframe (because of security)

AB: here is the discussion from Feb 22: http://www.w3.org/2011/02/22-webevents-minutes.html#item08

DS: there is no question, the event should not bubble up to the parent

OP: I don't think this is about that case
... this is about touch start and end transaction
... if it starts in the iframe
... and then move finger to upper level frame
... Does the upper level get the touch end or the lower?

DS: I would be surprised if anyone says the parent frame should get the event

OP: there are other tricky cases
... f.ex start the touch and then the frame is removed

DS: should touch events that start inside an iframe, once it is moved outside, should it propagate inside the parent?

AB: and you say no?

DS: for security purposes, should not get anything that was started in the iframe

[ DS gives an example that is not minuted ... ]

DS: there are a few options here as the touch moves outside the initial iframe ...
... when a boundary is hit, could start new touchstart
... there are also lots of edge cases e.g. an iframe is removed
... or the iframes have different domains
... There are lots of questions

<anders_hockersten> it appears our phone system is not cooperating with me. I'll try to follow the rest of the discussion via irc

<scribe> ACTION: doug follow-up on Issue-6 on the email; enumerate some of the questions and sub-issues [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/03/22-webevents-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-24 - Follow-up on Issue-6 on the email; enumerate some of the questions and sub-issues [on Doug Schepers - due 2011-03-29].

DS: seems like this should be addressed in HTML5 spec
... but we could define this in our spec

AB: agree we may not want to build a dependency on HTML5

DS: yes, but, HTML5 defines iframes, security model, etc.
... this could be coordination point for us with the HTML WG

AB: good point;
... after we get more discussion, whether or not we need some coordination should be clear
... is there agreement this Issue-6 should be moved from Raised to Open?

DS: certainly

AB: does anyone think this is not an issue?

<scribe> ACTION: barstow move Issue-6 to Open state [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/03/22-webevents-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-25 - Move Issue-6 to Open state [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-03-29].

AB: if anyone want to help drive Issue-4 forward, please indicate that on the list


AB: next call March 29 (call will be one hour later again in Europe)
... the point of reference will remain 11:00 Boston time because that is where the MIT voice conf bridge is located
... anything else for today?

DS: what is the schedule for FF4?

MB: FF4 was release about 2 hours ago
... and we did a mobile RC
... note that FF4 RC2 == FF4

AB: Meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: barstow move Issue-6 to Open state [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/03/22-webevents-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: doug follow-up on Issue-3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/03/22-webevents-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: doug follow-up on Issue-6 on the email; enumerate some of the questions and sub-issues [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/03/22-webevents-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Doug talk to Canonical about joining the WG; possibly as an Invited Expert [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/03/22-webevents-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: olli follow-up on Issue-5 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/03/22-webevents-minutes.html#action02]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.135 (CVS log)
$Date: 2011/03/22 15:59:23 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135  of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/the lit/the list/
Found ScribeNick: ArtB
Found Scribe: Art
Present: Art_Barstow Cathy_Chan Josh_Soref Matt_Brubeck Anders_Höckersten Olli_Pettay Doug_Schepers
Regrets: Emmanuel_Nkeze
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JanMar/0073.html
Found Date: 22 Mar 2011
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/03/22-webevents-minutes.html
People with action items: barstow doug issue-6 move olli talk

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]