See also: IRC log
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
Date: 13 September 2011
AB: yesterday I sent the draft agenda to the list http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0051.html. Any change requests?
[ None ]
AB: any short announcements for
today? The LC for TEv1 will be published today http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-Touch-Events-20110913/.
Congratulations to everyone and thanks to the Editors!
... any other announcements for today?
AB: last week we agree to close
and we said we would put it on today's agenda in case there was
feedback to discuss.
... Laszlo isn't here today
… is there any activity on that bug?
DG: there was an e-mail from Anne van Kesteren
MB: I'll respond to that
… it also affects the v2 spec
AB: we will consider AvK's e-mail as a formal LC comment
… The Editors will need to track LC comments
… and there are various ways to do that
<scribe> ACTION: barstow discuss LC comment processing with the editors [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-63 - Discuss LC comment processing with the editors [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-09-20].
AB: anything else on this topic?
AB: Cathy submitted some comments about the targets of touch events http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0046.html
CC: the question was about touchcancel event
… it doesn't have as much info about targets
… so I was wondering if some additional text should be added
… perhaps more similar to touchend
MB: I agree those are good issues
… I suspect touchcancel should be similar to touchend
… We need to check what impls are doing
AB: so is there consensus the spec needs to change?
DS: yes, that seems reasonable to me
MB: I agree the spec needs to change
… before the spec is changed, we need to see what impls are doing
DS: I think that means we need an issue and action to check impls
<scribe> ACTION: cathy create an issue for the touchcancel question raised on Sept 7 2011 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-64 - Create an issue for the touchcancel question raised on Sept 7 2011 [on Cathy Chan - due 2011-09-20].
CC: the other question
… is about target of touchend
… is that the same element as touchstart
… One of the examples may need to be updated
AB: any comments?
MB: I haven't looked at Q1 yet
DT: I think the intention is a touchstart is needed
… We should check existing impls
<anders_hockersten> dropping in and out, will comment here instead
AB: should we consider Cathy's comments as LC comments?
<anders_hockersten> seems like it could be hard to make an implementation that can listen to just touchend, if it is supposed to also emulate mouse events
<anders_hockersten> but I haven't thought it fully through
AB: feels like we should record this as an issue
… and that people should respond to Cathy's email
… after they have read the mail and done some testing
MB: I agree, to create an issue
<scribe> ACTION: cathy create an Issue for Q1 of the Sept 7 comments [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-65 - Create an Issue for Q1 of the Sept 7 comments [on Cathy Chan - due 2011-09-20].
AB: Some test cases for the TE
spec have been created by Matt http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/file/923f5ba58a22/test
... do we know where the testing gaps? This would be "automatic" if the spec's assertions were marked accordingly.
… wondering about the size of the problem space
MB: for v1, the test cases I wrote were for single touch use cases
… we will need additional tests for multi touch
… e.g. when added or order of removd
… we also need to cover other attrs
… We probably have about 20-25% coverage now
… Thus the test cases will need to be roughly 3 times larger than what we have now
DS: traditionally, we separte simple things into small test files
MB: yes, I see some advantages of that for some features
DS: what about synthesizing events
MB: we could do that
… We may not agree on how to synthesize events
DS: ideally, some could be synthesized
… there are 4 diff event types
… If we had automated tests, we could generate a test for each type
… then a test for each attr
<anders_hockersten> sound drops intermittently from voice bridge for me
<smaug> I need to find some empty room
<anders_hockersten> really bad at times (like when I was trying to say something) but generally the dropouts have been few and short
<smaug> my headset is somewhere in the hotel
MB: if we synth tests, we don't get much info about responses to real inputs
DS: one goal is to test the spec itself
… need to make sure it is implementable
… The other goal is to test true interoperablility
… For the 1st goal, I think some synth test make sense
… to test e.g. attrs
… 4 events with 7 attrs
MB: and there are lists too
DS: yes; also may have single or multiple items in the list
… need to test each create method
<smaug> that is me
DS: think this will give us about 50 tests t
… and they should be relatively straight forward to create
MB: sounds good
... the other thing about synth tests is they can get complicated if we remove init method
AB: need people to create test cases
… I don't think we should expect the Editors to do all of the work
… although they are certainly welcome to do so if they want to
AB: any ideas about determining who will test what
MB: first, we need to get more than 1 person writing tests
OP: I will probably write some test cases when reviewing a patch for multitouch
<Dzung_Tran> DT: I will help
AB: who else can commit to writing test cases
… Thanks Tran
… Is there something in particular Tran?
DT: I could look into multitouch
… if that is needed
MB: yes, but Olli is interested in that area too
… thus Tran and Olli should coordinate
AB: ok, so Tran and Olli can
help. Anyone else?
... Doug, any additional thoughts or advice here?
DS: we should look closely at what the testing group is doing
… so that we leverage their work as much as possible
AB: and by "testing group", you mean what Doug?
DS: there was a WG proposed a while ago
… I'll drop a link
AB: we agreed months ago to leverage the testharness.js framework that is being used by WebApps WG, HTMLWG and others
AB: anything else on testing for today?
<scribe> ACTION: Tran create multitouch test cases for the Touch Events spec [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-66 - Create multitouch test cases for the Touch Events spec [on Dzung Tran - due 2011-09-20].
AB: the last time we discussed
the group's so-called "Intentional Events" spec was June 7
... the WAI's Protocols and Formats is interested in this topic.
... Apple's James Craig has done some work http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2010JulSep/att-0106/UserInterfaceIndependence.html but that draft is more than a year old
... Doug, do you have an update on this? Wondering about the next steps?
DS: I am not aware of a newer spec
AB: do we need to talk off list about what to do next Doug?
<scribe> ACTION: barstow work with Doug on next steps for the Intentional Events spec [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-67 - Work with Doug on next steps for the Intentional Events spec [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-09-20].
DS: I think there is some talk in the WAI about starting a new group for this area
AB: the RfC to add Joystick API to our charter ended 9-Sep http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0041.html. Given there were no objections, I will move forward with the formal re-chartering process.
<scribe> ACTION: barstow work with Doug and PLH to add Joystick API to WebEvents' charter [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-68 - Work with Doug and PLH to add Joystick API to WebEvents' charter [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-09-20].
MB: I talked to Mozilla's TedM
<smaug> I've asked ted to join this group
<mbrubeck> Ted wrote draft API spec at https://wiki.mozilla.org/JoystickAPI
AB: I presume Matt means Ted Mielczarek
<mbrubeck> he is willing to join the group, and might be pursuaded to help edit the spec
AB: ok, that's great to read Matt
<smaug> (this network can't handle hundreds of mozillians and their laptops and tablets)
<mbrubeck> As an aside, he wants to change the name to "game controller API" because apparently only old people still call them joysticks. :)
… I'll take an action to followup with Mozilla's AC rep to get Ted to join
DT: I have a question about rechartering
… will it be general enough so that other input devices can be added without chartering
… F.ex., a wheel - it works differently than a joystick
<anders_hockersten> brb redialing
SG: I agree with Matt that something like Game Controller may be a better name
DS: I agree we need to abstract about events
… but using "Game" could cause problems with getting some members to join
<smaug> Ted mentioned that he will probably change the name of the APi
SG: I envisioned wheels being included within the joystick API
… need to think about keeping scope limited
… so we can get spec done in a reasonable time
DS: D3E includes wheel
… We need to be careful about expanding the scope of the charter
… If anything, tighter scope will help us get more W3C Members to join the WG
… Think we should just include Joystick API
… and if we need a new API, then we add that explicitly
… That said, we can still talk about other things that are out of scope
… and other stuff may be better for a CG
AB: we need to be careful about any scope changes
… would prefer to just add 1 new deliverable
<anders_hockersten> I have to leave now. Have a nice <timezone-appropriate-time-of-day>!
… We also need to separate Touch Events into v1 and v2
AB: not sure about us having technical discussions about Joystick without it being in the charter
DS: if we keep the discussions high level, that should be ok
… and we all have to keep in mind we can't formally publish anything until its in the charter
AB: so what do we do next re Joystick?
… do we try to merge ...
DS: we could ask TedM to join us
… it may make sense to split the call into TE and Joystick halves
<smaug> I think joystick is perhaps such thing which could be handled mainly in mailing list
<smaug> since it may get lots of feedback from outside the group
<scribe> ACTION: barstow invite TedM to join us next week [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-69 - Invite TedM to join us next week [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-09-20].
<shepazu> Mouse Lock Specification Draft https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uV4uDVIe9-8XdVndW8nNGWBfqn9ieeop-5TRfScOG_o/edit?hl=en_US&authkey=CM-dw7QG&ndplr=1
<shepazu> Vincent Scheib, Google
DS: for mouse moves
… and lock into an element
… can control viewport
… This has been a conversation on public-webapps
… Vincent's doc has a lot of reqs and use cases
… It may be appropriate to work on it in this WG
SG: I agree it makes sense to add it to this WG
… there are similar requirements to Joystick
DS: are there any objections to adding it to our charter?
AB: I need to review it
… Can you ask TV Raman before we start a RfC to add it?
<smaug> There are probably still security issues in the mouselock
<smaug> so, it needs to be reviewed that in mind
<scribe> ACTION: Doug ask TV Raman about Google's interest in adding Mouse Lock to WebEvents charter [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html#action08]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-70 - Ask TV Raman about Google's interest in adding Mouse Lock to WebEvents charter [on Doug Schepers - due 2011-09-20].
AB: I'll start an RFC after we
hear from Raman
... any concerns or voices of support for Mouse Lock?
DS: I'm not sure that "Mouse Lock" is the best name
… since it can work for other devices too
AB: any other topics for today?
<smaug> I'm not 100% sure the mouse lock API is exactly what we want, but atm I don't have any other proposal
AB: we should a call next week
… any objections?
AB: next call on September
... meeting adjourned
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) Succeeded: s/thous/thus/ Succeeded: s/name/API/ Found ScribeNick: ArtB Found Scribe: Art Default Present: +184.108.40.206.aaaa, scottmg, Art_Barstow, +1.206.697.aabb, mbrubeck, +220.127.116.11.aacc, anders_hockersten, Doug_Schepers, +1.503.712.aadd, lgombos, Olli_Pettay Present: Art_Barstow Matt_Brubeck Anders_Hockersten Doug_Schepers Cathy_Chan Dzung_Tran Scott_Graham Laszlo_Gombos Olli_Pettay Regrets: Sangwhan_Moon Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0051.html Found Date: 13 Sep 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/09/13-webevents-minutes.html People with action items: barstow cathy doug invite plh tedm tran with work WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]