Web Events WG Voice Conference

21 Jun 2011


See also: IRC log


Art_Barstow, Cathy_Chan, Matt_Brubeck, Olli_Pettay, Sangwhan_Moon


<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

<scribe> Scribe: Art

Date: 21 June 2011

Tweak Agenda

AB: yesterday I posted a Draft Agenda ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0127.html ). Since Laszlo sent regrets for today, I propose dropping Issue-17 and I'll follow-up with Laszlo to please address related Action-55. Any objections to that proposal?

[None: Issue-17 will not be included in today's call]

AB: if Doug doesn't join today's call we also drop discussion on Issue-16 since he has related action-53
... any other change requests?


AB: any short announcements for today?

MB: FF 6.0 will go to Beta in 2 weeks and it will include support for the Touch Events spec

AB: that's fantastic Matt; good work!

Issue-3: Click event target after DOM mutation during touchstart;

AB: Issue-3 ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/3 ) has open Action-52 for Matt ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/52 ). Anything to report on that today Matt? Last discussion was June 14 ( http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item03 )

MB: I still need to write the text and will get it done by the end of the month

AB: anything else on Issue-3 for today?

Issue-17: Page X and Y parameters to createTouch

AB: we are skipping Issue-17 for today

Issue-16: Should the spec be silent or prescriptive re Object Identity

AB: Issue-16 ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/16 ) has Action-53 for Doug ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/53 ). Anything to report on that today Doug? Last discussion was June 14 ( http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item04 )

DS: I've been working on other Actions
... so nothing else to report today

Issue-18: The spec needs more examples related to the various lists

AB: last week Issue-18 was created ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/18 ) and we need someone to provide inputs to address this issue. The June 14 discussion ( http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item06 ) provides some additional context.
... can we get someone to agree to provide some examples?
... we should address this issue before LC

DS: Sangwhan, can you take this?

SM: yes, I can take it

AB: thanks Sangwhan

<scribe> ACTION: moon submit an input to address Issue-18 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/21-webevents-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-57 - Submit an input to address Issue-18 [on Sangwhan Moon - due 2011-06-28].

Preparing Touch Events spec for Last Call WD

AB: on June 14 we discussed a plan for Last Call ( http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-webevents-minutes.html#item06 ) and that resulted in some sub-issues and actions.
... one consequence is splitting Touch Events spec ( http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents ) into Version/Level 1/2; who is going to do the work?
... who agreed to do the split?

DS: there are 2 parts
... 1st is to mark testable assertions
... and the classes of conformance
... and I am working on those assertions
... The 2nd part is splitting the stuff and Matt agreed to do that
... Matt will do his split After I get done my part

AB: thanks for the clarification

DS: and we must do those 2 things before going to LC
... I plan to complete my part this week

AB: that would be good to get your part Doug, done this week
... Are we using "Version" or "Level"? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each

DS: I don't care

<smaug> XHR is Level 1 & 2

AB: I dont' feel strongly either

DS: typically, a level is considered B/C with previous specs
... but new Versions typically are not B/C
... but in this case, I think we want B/C

MB: initTouchEvent could give us some B/C issues

DS: so, then, perhaps we should go with versions

AB: does anyone object to going with versions?

[ None ]

RESOLUTION: we will use "Version" (not "Level") to distinguish the different Touch Events spec

AB: Doug agreed to Action-56: Update the Touch Event spec to use markup to facilitate test case extraction ( http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/56 ). What is the status of that Doug?

DS: yes, I am working on this

Any Other Business (AOB)

UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: and if there is no substantial agenda by the 27th, the meeting will be canceled

<Sangwhan> http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/spec-source-orientation.html

SM: let's talk about device orieintation after we get our spec to LC

DS: I agree we should take some of that into account
... but talking about it after LC is fine with me

AB: anything else for today?
... please address open actions and issues
... Meeting Adjourned

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: moon submit an input to address Issue-18 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/21-webevents-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.136 (CVS log)
$Date: 2011/06/21 15:26:15 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136  of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found ScribeNick: ArtB
Found Scribe: Art
Present: Art_Barstow Cathy_Chan Matt_Brubeck Olli_Pettay Sangwhan_Moon
Regrets: Laszlo_Gombos
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0127.html
Found Date: 21 Jun 2011
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/06/21-webevents-minutes.html
People with action items: an input moon submit

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]