IRC log of webevents on 2011-05-24

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:59:09 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #webevents
14:59:09 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:59:16 [Cathy]
Cathy has joined #webevents
14:59:19 [ArtB]
RRSAgent, make log public
14:59:30 [ArtB]
ScribeNick: ArtB
14:59:30 [ArtB]
Scribe: Art
14:59:30 [ArtB]
14:59:30 [ArtB]
Date: 24 May 2011
14:59:30 [ArtB]
Chair: Art
14:59:31 [ArtB]
Meeting: Web Events WG Voice Conference
14:59:55 [Cathy]
Present+ Cathy_Chan
15:00:02 [Zakim]
15:01:45 [Zakim]
15:02:16 [ArtB]
Present: Art_Barstow, Cathy_Chan, Doug_Schepers
15:02:24 [Zakim]
15:02:44 [ArtB]
Present+ Matt_Brubeck
15:03:13 [Zakim]
+ +1.781.534.aabb
15:03:27 [ArtB]
zakim, aabb is Laszlo_Gombos
15:03:27 [Zakim]
+Laszlo_Gombos; got it
15:03:35 [ArtB]
Present+ Laszlo_Gombos
15:03:47 [ArtB]
Topic: Tweak Agenda
15:03:53 [ArtB]
AB: I submitted a Draft Agenda yesterday ( ). Any change requests?
15:04:13 [ArtB]
Topic: Announcements
15:04:19 [ArtB]
AB: any short announcements?
15:04:56 [ArtB]
Topic: Issue-6 (Open) Touch targets in frames
15:05:07 [ArtB]
AB: Issue-6 is the Open state ( ). I has two open actions ( ) for Doug and ( ) for Matt.
15:05:29 [ArtB]
MB: I still need to address my action
15:05:37 [ArtB]
... as discussed previously
15:05:45 [smaug]
smaug has joined #webevents
15:06:02 [ArtB]
AB: can you give us a rough ETA Matt?
15:06:14 [ArtB]
MB: yes, I'll try to get proposals out by Friday
15:06:18 [ArtB]
AB: ok, that's good
15:06:19 [smaug]
is there a conf call?
15:06:28 [smaug]
I'm in HTML Speech f2f
15:06:34 [smaug]
so can't attend, sorry
15:06:37 [ArtB]
DS: I haven't had time for my action
15:06:49 [ArtB]
... will try to get to it this week
15:07:00 [mbrubeck]
smaug: Looks like we don't have much new business since the last call, anyway.
15:07:08 [Zakim]
+ +1.415.812.aacc
15:07:13 [ArtB]
... I have some other obligations that will make it difficult for me to address my actions
15:07:34 [ArtB]
zakim, aacc is Josh_Soref
15:07:34 [Zakim]
+Josh_Soref; got it
15:07:41 [ArtB]
Present+ Josh_Soref
15:08:07 [timeless]
timeless has joined #webevents
15:08:21 [ArtB]
AB: if anyone can help Doug with Doug's actions, that would be great!
15:15:28 [ArtB]
Topic: Issue-3 (Raised) Click event target after DOM mutation during touchstart
15:15:33 [ArtB]
AB: Issue-3 is Raised state ( ). Doug has an open action ( ) for this issue.
15:16:01 [ArtB]
DS: I still need to address this action
15:16:09 [ArtB]
MB: we discussed this during May 10 call
15:16:28 [mbrubeck]
15:16:30 [ArtB]
... people should read those minutes, especially if they want to help Doug with his actions
15:16:39 [ArtB]
Topic: Issue-16 (Raised) Should the spec be silent or prescriptive re Object Identity
15:16:44 [ArtB]
AB: Issue-16 is Raised ( ). Laszlo has an open action ( ) for this issue.
15:17:22 [ArtB]
LG: no progress yet on this
15:17:27 [ArtB]
... need some more context
15:18:05 [ArtB]
MB: subsequent touch events contain objects that refer to the same touch point
15:18:13 [ArtB]
... or the touch points are in diff lists
15:18:26 [ArtB]
... Impl wise, it would be possible to reuse same objects b/w events
15:18:34 [ArtB]
... or to always use distinct objects
15:18:43 [ArtB]
... This impl detail can leak out to content
15:19:03 [ArtB]
... Thus for interop reasons, we may want to specify if objects should be reused or not
15:19:15 [ArtB]
LG: I was wondering about existing impls?
15:19:22 [ArtB]
... e.g. the pros and cons here
15:19:38 [ArtB]
MB: PPK did some research for Webkit browsers
15:19:46 [ArtB]
... there is a link to that blog in the Issue
15:20:01 [ArtB]
... and he notes the behaviour may change in Webkit
15:20:17 [ArtB]
LG: ok, I can make it clear what Webkit is going to do in the future
15:20:45 [ArtB]
... Some of the initial iPhone and Android impls have not been merged to the WK trunk
15:21:05 [ArtB]
... so there could be some differences between the WK trunk and what has been implemented
15:21:45 [ArtB]
... I assume existing impls will have a significant weight in our decision
15:22:06 [ArtB]
AB: I think historically, we have emphasized existing impls
15:22:23 [ArtB]
Topic: Issue-17 (Raised) Page X and Y parameters to createTouch
15:22:29 [ArtB]
AB: Issue-17 is Raised ( ). Matt has an open action ( ) for this issue.
15:22:59 [ArtB]
MB: this is ongoing and should have a proposal by Friday
15:23:24 [ArtB]
Topic: Proposal to specify behavior for terminals without touch hardware
15:23:40 [ArtB]
AB: this topic was started by Gregers Gram Rygg on 12-May-2011 ( ). There were some follow-ups.
15:24:38 [ArtB]
MB: a question is how can content do feature detection to determin if the UA is going to make use of touch events or not
15:24:45 [timeless]
15:24:59 [ArtB]
... there is concern we don't want content discriminating based on h/w or other factors
15:25:15 [ArtB]
... Think we can address some of this by UA capabilities
15:25:39 [ArtB]
... e.g. if a user with eye detection h/w could translate eye movements to touch events
15:26:06 [ArtB]
... But for UAs that don't implement any of this spec, is it useful for the content to detect this
15:27:15 [ArtB]
MB: most people probably haven't thought about all of the UCs especially wrt accessibility
15:27:32 [ArtB]
JS: need something like action events (not swipe)
15:27:46 [ArtB]
... I want to be able to register for zoom
15:28:04 [ArtB]
... The higher-level spec about user intentions is important
15:28:19 [ArtB]
MB: we still have a feature detection issue for contents
15:28:54 [shepazu]
15:29:09 [ArtB]
JS: we may want to make it hard to use touch events
15:29:28 [ArtB]
... and get content devs to focus on High Level Intentional events
15:29:46 [ArtB]
DS: I do not want to make it hard for anyone to do anything
15:30:07 [ArtB]
... We want it to be easy to do simple things
15:30:23 [ArtB]
... Apple's James Craig has done some work related to Intentional Events
15:30:42 [ArtB]
... I expect him to ping us when that doc is published (by WAI P&F WG)
15:30:55 [ArtB]
... I think people will implement that spec, at least eventually
15:31:04 [ArtB]
... and I agree some people will want to use that spec
15:31:16 [ArtB]
MB: well, Touch Events will not go away
15:31:36 [ArtB]
... f.ex., there will not necessarily be a "paint" event
15:31:54 [ArtB]
... Some UCs will use Touch Events and other UCs will use Intentional Events
15:32:06 [ArtB]
... and feature detection is needed for Touch Events
15:32:24 [ArtB]
DS: I don't think we will see the INDIE events implemented before mid-2012
15:32:43 [ArtB]
... but Touch Events as we have been spec'ing are already out there (implemented)
15:32:57 [ArtB]
... So devs will need to code for both types of events
15:33:31 [ArtB]
... If native impls don't support either of these specs, some script impls may help
15:33:49 [ArtB]
... e.g. add to JQuery
15:33:57 [timeless]
15:34:08 [ArtB]
... There will be a period of time where Touch Events is supported by Intentional Events are not
15:34:14 [timeless]
15:34:50 [ArtB]
DS: there will be a market reality that these specs will be implemented in phases
15:35:56 [ArtB]
AB: we don't have a draft of Intention Events so it causes a problem for use communicating what we intend to do
15:36:06 [ArtB]
DS: I can ping James and the P&F WG
15:36:20 [ArtB]
... for starters, would like to have an idea of a starting point
15:36:42 [ArtB]
... but because of scheduling issues, I don't think that will happen for a couple of weeks
15:37:09 [ArtB]
AB: is there an action for me here Doug?
15:37:24 [ArtB]
... or do you want to continue to be the lead?
15:37:34 [ArtB]
DS: I'll start dialog now
15:38:14 [ArtB]
... and then I'll report back
15:38:28 [ArtB]
AB: ok, that seems like a reasonable plan
15:39:43 [ArtB]
RRSAgent, make minutes
15:39:43 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ArtB
15:40:24 [ArtB]
Topic: AOB
15:40:54 [ArtB]
AB: let's plan to have the next call in 2 weeks
15:41:07 [ArtB]
... June 7
15:42:13 [ArtB]
AB: meeting adjourned
15:42:21 [Zakim]
15:42:23 [Zakim]
15:42:23 [Zakim]
15:42:25 [Zakim]
15:42:29 [ArtB]
RRSAgent, make minutes
15:42:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ArtB
15:42:40 [Zakim]
15:43:45 [Zakim]
15:43:47 [Zakim]
RWC_WebEven()11:00AM has ended
15:43:48 [Zakim]
Attendees were +1.781.993.aaaa, Art_Barstow, Cathy_Chan, Doug_Schepers, Matt_Brubeck, +1.781.534.aabb, Laszlo_Gombos, +1.415.812.aacc, Josh_Soref
15:45:21 [ArtB]
zakim, bye
15:45:21 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #webevents
15:47:33 [ArtB]
RRSAgent, bye
15:47:33 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items