IRC log of webevents on 2011-04-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:58:54 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #webevents
14:58:54 [RRSAgent]: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-irc
14:59:01 [ArtB]: RRSAgent, make log Public
14:59:30 [ArtB]: ScribeNick: ArtB
14:59:30 [ArtB]: Scribe: Art
14:59:30 [ArtB]: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0064.html
14:59:30 [ArtB]: Date: 26 April 2011
14:59:30 [ArtB]: Chair: Art
14:59:31 [ArtB]: Meeting: Web Events WG Voice Conference
15:00:20 [Zakim]: +[IPcaller]
15:00:35 [ArtB]: zakim, IPcaller is Olli_Pettay
15:00:35 [Zakim]: +Olli_Pettay; got it
15:00:37 [smaug_]: Zakim, [IPcaller] is Olli_Pettay
15:00:37 [Zakim]: sorry, smaug_, I do not recognize a party named '[IPcaller]'
15:01:02 [smaug_]: Zakim, nick smaug is Olli_Pettay
15:01:02 [Zakim]: sorry, smaug_, I do not see 'smaug' on this channel
15:01:04 [Zakim]: + +1.206.792.aabb
15:01:05 [Cathy]: Cathy has joined #webevents
15:01:09 [ArtB]: Present: Art_Barstow, Josh_Soref, Olli_Pettay
15:01:10 [mbrubeck]: Zakim, aabb is me
15:01:10 [Zakim]: +mbrubeck; got it
15:01:11 [smaug_]: Zakim, nick smaug_ is Olli_Pettay
15:01:11 [Zakim]: ok, smaug_, I now associate you with Olli_Pettay
15:01:23 [ArtB]: Present+ Matt_Brubeck
15:01:30 [Cathy]: Present+ Cathy_Chan
15:02:46 [mbrubeck]: sangwhan: Are you able to join the call?
15:03:07 [ArtB]: Topic: Tweak Agenda
15:03:13 [ArtB]: AB: yesterday I sent a draft agenda to the list ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0064.html ). Any change requests?
15:03:20 [Zakim]: +cathy_
15:03:48 [ArtB]: Topic: Getting Touch Events spec ready for First Public Working Draft
15:04:15 [ArtB]: AB: last week I sent an e-mail to the list about the FPWD ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0055.html ). The e-mail describes the general purpose of a FPWD and related requirements.
15:04:39 [ArtB]: AB: First, I'd like to take any questions about the process and then discuss the question about whether or not the Touch Events spec includes, at least at a broad level, all of the high priority features we intend to specify.
15:05:10 [Zakim]: +??P24
15:05:21 [Cathy]: zakim, cathy_ is me
15:05:21 [Zakim]: +Cathy; got it
15:05:23 [ArtB]: Present+ Sangwhan_Moon
15:05:31 [sangwhan]: zakim, +??P24 is me
15:05:31 [Zakim]: sorry, sangwhan, I do not recognize a party named '+??P24'
15:05:51 [ArtB]: AB: if no questions about the process, are there any comments about missing features?
15:06:37 [ArtB]: AB: I had asked for missing features by April 26 and there were no comments
15:06:54 [ArtB]: AB: I think we consider the feature set for the Touch Events spec to be complete
15:07:03 [ArtB]: ... at least at a broad level
15:07:09 [ArtB]: AB: we have some UCs & Requirements documented ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/wiki/Testing ). At a later stage (when we discuss publishing a Candidate Recommendation with the Director) we will need to identify the requirements addressed by the spec.
15:08:02 [ArtB1]: ArtB1 has joined #webevents
15:08:15 [ArtB1]: AB: if anyone has any comments on the UCs and Requirements, please send them to the list by May 3; otherwise let's considered then "approved" as of that date. IOW, they can change but we also think they capture our main UCs and requirements.
15:09:01 [ArtB]: ArtB has joined #webevents
15:09:18 [ArtB]: AB: if anyone has any comments on the UCs and Requirements, please send them to the list by May 3; otherwise let's considered then "approved" as of that date. IOW, they can change but we also think they capture our main UCs and requirements.
15:09:21 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html timeless
15:09:43 [ArtB]: RRSAgent, make Public
15:09:43 [RRSAgent]: I'm logging. I don't understand 'make Public', ArtB. Try /msg RRSAgent help
15:09:53 [ArtB]: RRSAgent, make log Public
15:10:00 [ArtB]: RRSAgent, make minutes
15:10:00 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html ArtB
15:11:16 [ArtB]: JS: the UCs and Reqs doc is not linked from the Testing doc
15:11:29 [ArtB]: ACTION: barstow create a link to the UCs and Reqs from the Testing doc
15:11:29 [trackbot]: Created ACTION-43 - Create a link to the UCs and Reqs from the Testing doc [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-05-03].
15:11:41 [ArtB]: AB: lastly, what about an Introduction section for the Touch Events Introduction section ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0051.html )? Can someone commit to writing at least a short-ish paragraph (4-5 sentences)?
15:12:08 [ArtB]: AB: any volunteers for that?
15:12:12 [ArtB]: JS: I can't commit now
15:12:20 [ArtB]: SM: I can take that action
15:12:49 [ArtB]: ACTION: sangwhan Create an input for the Introduction section by April 29
15:12:49 [trackbot]: Created ACTION-44 - Create an input for the Introduction section by April 29 [on Sangwhan Moon - due 2011-05-03].
15:13:00 [ArtB]: AB: because of the W3C's May Advisory Committee meeting, there is a publication moratorium and that means the very last day we can request publication is May 6 (if we want to publish the FPWD before the AC meeting).
15:13:54 [ArtB]: JS: I am happy to review the Introduction
15:14:01 [ArtB]: SM: OK, I'll send you a draft
15:14:19 [ArtB]: AB: that's great; a FPWD can be prepared early next week
15:14:29 [ArtB]: AB: proposed Resolution: the group agrees to publish a FPWD of the Touch Events spec
15:14:44 [ArtB]: AB: any objections or voices of support?
15:14:47 [mbrubeck]: +1
15:14:50 [timeless]: +1
15:14:51 [smaug_]: +1
15:14:54 [Cathy]: +1
15:15:03 [ArtB]: AB: I hear no objections and only support
15:15:04 [sangwhan]: +1
15:15:13 [ArtB]: RESOLUTION: the group agrees to publish a FPWD of the Touch Events spec
15:15:35 [ArtB]: AB: anything else on FPWD?
15:15:45 [ArtB]: Topic: Testing
15:15:56 [ArtB]: AB: A few days ago Mark announced he created about 7 tests with over 20 assertions ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0063.html ). This is excellent Mark! And Mark is using the testharness.js that is being used by the HTML WG and the WebApps WG ( http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/file/ad7715ddbcda/test/testharness.js ).
15:16:18 [mbrubeck]: s/Mark/Matt/g
15:16:26 [sangwhan]: s/Mark/Matt/
15:16:41 [ArtB]: AB: I am interested in comments on the testharness ( ) (written by Opera's James Graham).
15:17:04 [ArtB]: MB: the testharness is fine for what I'm doing
15:17:18 [ArtB]: ... some common patterns may result in some additional helper functions
15:17:24 [ArtB]: ... but no real problems with the harness
15:17:29 [ArtB]: AB: that's good to hear
15:17:55 [ArtB]: ... there is a mail list for discussions about the harness; think it's public-test-infra@w3.org
15:18:28 [ArtB]: MB: I have one test file
15:18:38 [ArtB]: ... it displays a rectangle to be touched
15:18:49 [ArtB]: ... initiates the touchstart event
15:18:56 [ArtB]: ... and tests some attributes
15:19:10 [ArtB]: ... Need to create some other tests for moving
15:19:17 [ArtB]: ... and multi-touches
15:19:26 [ArtB]: ... some "finger dancing"
15:19:38 [ArtB]: ... Multi-touch tests won't be supported for all hardware
15:19:55 [ArtB]: ... so we need to mention that some tests may not work
15:20:21 [ArtB]: AB: has anyone else tried testharness.js?
15:20:34 [timeless]: <MB> ... need to ensure the spec supports not supporting certain things
15:20:37 [ArtB]: ... It would be good for others to contribute tet cases
15:20:45 [ArtB]: s/tet cases/test cases/
15:21:09 [ArtB]: MB: if someone wants to write simple tests
15:21:18 [ArtB]: ... could start with touchenter and touchleave
15:21:34 [ArtB]: ... although without some implementation, would be hard to test the test
15:22:02 [ArtB]: ... One question, for attrs like rX and rY, can be hard to test if values are accurate
15:22:10 [ArtB]: ... Not sure how to handle that
15:22:20 [ArtB]: ... Could be left for implementations to test themselves
15:22:36 [ArtB]: AB: good point; any feedback on that?
15:22:41 [ArtB]: JS: I can ask around
15:22:49 [ArtB]: ... I think we ignored rotation
15:23:30 [ArtB]: ... Could check with tablet people
15:23:38 [ArtB]: SM: the hardware people
15:23:40 [timeless]: wacom
15:24:18 [ArtB]: AB: Doug an I have a standing action to try to get additional players in the WG
15:24:29 [timeless]: s/an/and/
15:24:46 [ArtB1]: ArtB1 has joined #webevents
15:24:55 [ArtB1]: ... by having a FPWD, that should be easier
15:25:00 [smaug_]: Zakim, who is noisy
15:25:00 [Zakim]: I don't understand 'who is noisy', smaug_
15:25:14 [ArtB]: ArtB has joined #webevents
15:25:34 [ArtB]: ArtB has joined #webevents
15:25:40 [ArtB]: AB: a call or two ago we talked briefly about the "A Method for Writing Testable Conformance Requirements" document ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0031.html ).
15:27:12 [ArtB]: AB: Doug had asked for the Testing topic today but he isn't here
15:27:20 [ArtB]: MB: I looked at the doc;
15:27:27 [ArtB]: ... somewhat ambivalent
15:27:38 [ArtB]: ... the Touch Events spec is relatively small
15:27:58 [ArtB]: ... as such, I don't feel strongly that we need to use it
15:28:11 [ArtB]: ... but if someone wants to implement it (in the spec itself), I can work with it
15:28:38 [ArtB]: AB: since the Editors are doing the work, I want to listen to their feedback
15:28:57 [ArtB]: SM: I agree with Matt
15:29:11 [ArtB]: ... doesn't seem like we need it for the Touch Events spec
15:30:05 [ArtB]: SM: perhaps we can consider it for the Intentional Events spec
15:30:25 [ArtB]: AB: agree we can consider the Intentional Events spec separately
15:31:14 [ArtB]: ACTION: Doug submit an opinion on Writing Testable Conformance Reqs for the Touch Events spec
15:31:14 [trackbot]: Created ACTION-45 - Submit an opinion on Writing Testable Conformance Reqs for the Touch Events spec [on Doug Schepers - due 2011-05-03].
15:31:38 [ArtB]: AB: anything else on Testing for today?
15:31:54 [ArtB]: Topic: Open and Raised Issues: 1 or 2, time permitting ...
15:32:11 [ArtB]: AB: issues in Raised and Open state are: Issue-3, Issue-5, Issue-6, and Issue-8.
15:32:19 [mbrubeck]: There is also http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/11
15:32:39 [ArtB]: MB: and Issue-11
15:33:00 [ArtB]: AB: my recollection on Issue-11 is that comments should have been submitted before today's call
15:33:16 [timeless]: action-27 is confusing :)
15:33:55 [ArtB]: MB: if we use TouchPoint that would break some existing content
15:34:08 [timeless]: we could use that as a way to be a different interface...
15:34:17 [ArtB]: AB: any additional comments re Issue-11
15:34:24 [timeless]: but for compatibility, renaming makes sense
15:34:28 [ArtB]: AB: I propose we change the name of TouchPoint to Touch
15:34:33 [smaug_]: +1
15:34:38 [ArtB]: AB: any objections?
15:34:46 [ArtB]: ... or voices of support
15:34:56 [ArtB]: AB: +1
15:35:07 [ArtB]: AB: hearing no objections
15:35:08 [sangwhan]: Sounds a bit ambiguous, but no better ideas so +1
15:35:35 [ArtB]: RESOLUTION: the TouchPoint Interface will be renamed to "Touch" interface
15:36:08 [ArtB]: AB: would you please Matt, commit that change this week?
15:36:14 [ArtB]: MB: yes, I will make that change today
15:36:19 [ArtB]: AB: thanks Matt!
15:37:15 [ArtB]: AB: my inclination is to not do a deep dive on 3, 5, 6 or 8 on this call
15:37:25 [ArtB]: AB: we can use the FPWD to explicitly ask for feedback on the issues.
15:37:36 [ArtB]: AB: also including a pointer to the Open and Raised Issues in the spec (e.g. SoTD section) may be good.
15:38:10 [ArtB]: AB: and Issue-14 was created today
15:38:18 [ArtB]: ... by Olli
15:38:34 [ArtB]: OP: not sure if those methods are being used
15:38:43 [ArtB]: ... eg. by Apple or Google
15:38:57 [ArtB]: SM: preventDefault is another topic
15:39:27 [ArtB]: MB: I can an action to define preventDefault
15:39:34 [ArtB]: SM: that is Action-5
15:40:06 [ArtB]: ... and I am the owner
15:40:18 [ArtB]: AB: do we want to change the owner of Action-5?
15:40:23 [ArtB]: SM: yes, please do
15:41:30 [ArtB]: AB: so I will leave it to the Editors to decide if they want to explicitly ask for feedback re any of the Open and/or Raised issues
15:41:56 [ArtB]: AB: anything else on this topic for today?
15:42:06 [ArtB]: Topic: AoB
15:42:12 [ArtB]: AB: no call on May 17
15:42:37 [ArtB]: AB: I think the main task between now and May 3, is to get the spec ready for FPWD
15:42:50 [ArtB]: ... that's a new process for Matt and Sangwhan
15:42:55 [ArtB]: ... but Doug is an expert
15:43:18 [ArtB]: AB: propose our May call schedule is May 10 and May 24
15:43:50 [ArtB]: AB: any comments or concerns?
15:43:58 [ArtB]: AB: next call is May 10
15:44:11 [ArtB]: ... and the 2nd call in May is tentatively May 24
15:44:18 [ArtB]: AB: anything else for today?
15:44:32 [ArtB]: ... please continue to work on Issues and Actions via the mail list
15:44:38 [ArtB]: AB: Meeting Adjourned
15:44:46 [Zakim]: -Olli_Pettay
15:44:48 [Zakim]: -Art_Barstow
15:44:49 [Zakim]: -sangwhan
15:44:53 [ArtB]: RRSAgent, make minutes
15:44:53 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html ArtB
15:45:06 [Zakim]: -mbrubeck
15:47:00 [Zakim]: -Cathy
15:47:01 [Zakim]: -timeless
15:47:01 [Zakim]: RWC_WebEven()11:00AM has ended
15:47:03 [Zakim]: Attendees were +1.781.993.aaaa, Art_Barstow, Olli_Pettay, timeless, +1.206.792.aabb, mbrubeck, Cathy, sangwhan
15:49:29 [sangwhan]: sangwhan has left #webevents
15:49:57 [ArtB]: ArtB has joined #webevents
16:03:50 [ArtB]: RRSAgent, bye
16:03:50 [RRSAgent]: I see 3 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-actions.rdf :
16:03:50 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: barstow create a link to the UCs and Reqs from the Testing doc [1]
16:03:50 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-irc#T15-11-29
16:03:50 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: sangwhan Create an input for the Introduction section by April 29 [2]
16:03:50 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-irc#T15-12-49
16:03:50 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Doug submit an opinion on Writing Testable Conformance Reqs for the Touch Events spec [3]
16:03:50 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-irc#T15-31-14