15:59:43 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pointerevents
15:59:43 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/02/26-pointerevents-irc
16:00:14 <Zakim> +Art_Barstow
16:00:45 <ArtB> ScribeNick: ArtB
16:00:45 <ArtB> Scribe: Art
16:00:45 <ArtB> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0153.html
16:00:45 <ArtB> Chair: Art
16:00:45 <ArtB> Meeting: Pointer Events WG Voice Conference
16:00:51 <ArtB> RRSAgent, make minutes
16:00:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/02/26-pointerevents-minutes.html ArtB
16:01:02 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:01:12 <ArtB> RRSAgent, make log Public
16:01:14 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
16:01:27 <smaug> Zakim, [IPcaller] is Olli_Pettay
16:01:27 <Zakim> +Olli_Pettay; got it
16:01:37 <smaug> Zakim, nick smaug is Olli_Pettay
16:01:37 <Zakim> ok, smaug, I now associate you with Olli_Pettay
16:01:38 <Zakim> + +1.781.362.aabb
16:01:52 <Zakim> + +1.770.402.aacc
16:01:57 <Cathy> zakim, aabb is me
16:01:57 <Zakim> +Cathy; got it
16:02:03 <Cathy> Present+ Cathy_Chan
16:02:07 <smaug> Zakim: who is noisy
16:02:12 <ArtB> Present: Art_Barstow, Olli_Pettay, Scott_Gonzalez, Cathy_Chan, Asir_Vedamuthu
16:02:25 <ArtB> Present+ Jacob_Rossi
16:02:31 <ArtB> Regrets: Rick_Byers
16:02:42 <ArtB> Topic: Getting started
16:02:48 <ArtB> AB: I posted a draft agenda yesterday http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0153.html. Any change requests?
16:03:11 <ArtB> JR: I enjoyed talking about PE last week @ W3Conf
16:03:20 <ArtB> … we can talk about that during AoB
16:03:22 <Zakim> +Doug_Schepers
16:03:32 <ArtB> AB: ok, we'll add that to AoB
16:03:40 <ArtB> Present+ Doug_Schepers
16:03:57 <ArtB> Topic: Spec feedback by Alex Russell
16:04:03 <ArtB> AB: Alex submitted 7-8 bullets in his comments http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0110.html and they were submitted before the LC was published.
16:04:08 <ArtB> AB: we agreed during our February 12 call Alex's comments would be considered as LC comments http://www.w3.org/2013/02/12-pointerevents-minutes.html#item02.
16:04:19 <ArtB> AB: We could do a deep dive on some set of Alex's points or let the Editors reply first. I note one of Alex's comments is about the issue Rick raised about the semantics of pointerID which is on the agenda.
16:04:58 <ArtB> JR: I have a draft about half done re Alex's comments
16:05:05 <ArtB> AB: sounds good
16:05:21 <ArtB> Topic: Tweaking wording in Introduction by Rick Byers
16:05:24 <slightlyoff> apologies for not seeing this earlier. Wasn't aware there was a meeting
16:05:24 <Zakim> +Matt_Brubeck
16:05:38 <ArtB> Present+ Matt_Brubeck
16:05:41 <ArtB> AB: Rick had some comments re the Introduction http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0127.html
16:05:49 <ArtB> AB: the LC already addresses at least some of Rick's comments but it appears there is also a request to embellish some set of the existing examples and/or add new example(s).
16:06:12 <ArtB> JR: 2 things
16:06:23 <ArtB> … I made most of the changes in the LC
16:06:38 <ArtB> … there is a bug I introduced that needs to be fixed
16:06:41 <ArtB> … and I'll do that
16:06:50 <ArtB> … Not sure what you mean by examples
16:07:16 <ArtB> AB: ok, I'll re-read that thread and reply accordingly
16:07:29 <ArtB> Topic: pointerType extensibility by Rick Byers
16:07:34 <ArtB> AB: On Feb 19, Rick started a new thread about pointerType extensibility http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0134.html.
16:07:48 <ArtB> AB: is this a request to change the API defined in LC for v1 or is this more a question about what we might want to do in v2?
16:08:07 <ArtB> JR: I talked to Rick about this last week
16:08:13 <ArtB> … we talked about diff ideas
16:08:19 <ArtB> … they all have + and -
16:08:33 <ArtB> … My conclusion is that there are 2 scenarios
16:08:42 <ArtB> … one is providing a better path for new devices
16:08:43 <Zakim> + +1.415.997.aadd
16:08:53 <ArtB> … we want them to have some compat with PEs
16:08:58 <slightlyoff> just joined the call
16:09:25 <ArtB> … the other issue, even if we do that there can be some scenarios where knowing the real device id is important
16:09:52 <ArtB> … I think we can solve the first problem by adding some more semantics
16:10:07 <ArtB> … We could have an API change if we go with the inheritance chain proposal
16:10:19 <ArtB> … could then do instanceof ...
16:10:29 <ArtB> … and then new devices are instance of a former device
16:10:49 <ArtB> … that would solve the extensibility prob but still think there is a need of pointer type
16:10:56 <ArtB> … and need to know the actual device type
16:11:12 <ArtB> … Might be a bit weird to add it to a future spec
16:11:23 <ArtB> … I think Rick is comfortable with followoing up on this later
16:11:58 <ArtB> AB: we still have 3 weeks of LC
16:12:08 <ArtB> OP: I agree we should solve this problem later
16:12:18 <ArtB> … we can't predict future extensibility
16:13:09 <ArtB> JR: there was a lot of talk about ZZZ motion
16:13:15 <ArtB> … at W3Conf
16:13:26 <jrossi> https://www.leapmotion.com/
16:13:35 <ArtB> s/ZZZ/leap/
16:13:53 <ArtB> JR: this came up at edgeconf
16:14:00 <ArtB> DS: has anyone talked to them?
16:14:04 <slightlyoff> ...because one of the folks on the panel seemed to be a representative
16:14:09 <ArtB> JR: I have expressed interest
16:14:32 <ArtB> DS: I played with Joshua Davis' device; pretty cool
16:15:34 <slightlyoff> I'm gonna cede the floor on this
16:15:38 <slightlyoff> I owe the list email
16:15:47 <slightlyoff> and don't think we can make serious progress by phone
16:15:49 <jrossi> slightlyoff: are you just on IRC?
16:15:58 <ArtB> Topic: Should pointerId be an integer by Rick Byers
16:16:03 <ArtB> AB: Rick started a thread about the type of pointerID http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0146.html
16:16:09 <ArtB> AB: Alex mentioned this issue too http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0110.html.
16:16:12 <slightlyoff> jrossi: no, on the call, but don't want to queue in just to say "not today" = )
16:16:18 <slightlyoff> why?
16:16:22 <jrossi> just curious
16:16:35 <slightlyoff> q+
16:16:39 <ArtB> JR: I'll reply to the pointerID thread
16:16:55 <ArtB> Present+ Alex_Russell
16:17:14 <ArtB> AR: why do people not want to make it opaque?
16:17:31 <ArtB> JR: I found UCs for it being an integer
16:17:54 <ArtB> … in one painting demo with multitouch, used integer to pick from a random number of colors
16:18:06 <ArtB> … perhaps not a great UC
16:18:18 <ArtB> … Do you have a proposal for opaque?
16:18:30 <ArtB> AR: think object identity should be sufficient
16:18:39 <ArtB> … can't guarnatee integer stability
16:18:53 <ArtB> … having multiple mouse isn't common
16:19:20 <ArtB> … One objection is only having one mouse and making it 0
16:19:41 <ArtB> … Don't think we want an integer for a specific device
16:19:52 <ArtB> … Breaks down when new pointer types are added
16:20:01 <ArtB> … Don't want to set bad expectations
16:20:19 <ArtB> JR: Rick mentioned some issues with using integers
16:20:25 <ArtB> … e.g. when comparing
16:20:37 <ArtB> … May need to add some more context about the integers
16:20:58 <ArtB> … Can achieve good level of interop with integers
16:21:17 <ArtB> … and make sure people's "false assumptions" are addressed
16:21:26 <ArtB> … Think this would be a problem for our impl
16:21:37 <ArtB> … if we had to switch to opaque types
16:22:00 <ArtB> … I am willing to consider it, but would prefer to keep this integer
16:22:10 <ArtB> … and to add some more information and context
16:22:39 <ArtB> … One pain point is supporting touch events which used integer
16:23:11 <ArtB> AR: given that, I think it would be ok if using integers was fleshed out better
16:23:20 <ArtB> … that would be better than creating an interop problem
16:23:34 <ArtB> JR: do you have a proposal?
16:23:49 <ArtB> AR: opening move is to write down the IE behavior
16:23:59 <ArtB> … then we have something to discuss
16:24:12 <ArtB> DS: is part of your rationale pattern searching?
16:24:26 <ArtB> AR: if integers, it permits indexing to arrays
16:24:43 <ArtB> … and that works ok if the impl moves through the integer space in a reasonable way
16:25:03 <ArtB> … but if a different impl moves through the integer space differently, there will be  interop problems
16:25:16 <ArtB> … Don't want confusion for the app devs
16:25:25 <ArtB> … if the id is overloaded
16:25:47 <ArtB> DS: so, need to define the semantics of the integer e.g. before/after
16:26:00 <ArtB> AR: need to make sure impls handle integers the same way
16:26:09 <ArtB> OP: I prefer a random behavior
16:26:24 <ArtB> AR: and that would meet my opapue requirement
16:26:50 <jrossi> Roughly speaking, IE10 reserves 1 for mouse. Then 2+ values are used for other inputs. With each newly recognized pointer, the ID is increased. But there's some max at which we wrap back around to 2.  I'd have to check with the Windows kernel folks for clarity.
16:27:12 <ArtB> Topic: Click and contextmenu events by Rick Byers
16:27:19 <ArtB> AB: Rick started a thread about click and contextmenu events in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0151.html
16:27:30 <ArtB> AB: Jacob replied http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0152.html.
16:27:37 <ArtB> AB: is this just a matter of adding a bit of explanatory text?
16:27:56 <shepazu> (I think I agree with Alex about pointerId, though I want to think about it)
16:27:58 <ArtB> JR: there is some explanatory text that needs to be added
16:28:06 <ArtB> … there is already some related information
16:28:16 <ArtB> … I think it is safe to add the extra text
16:28:30 <ArtB> … The other issue is Ricking looking for a defn of "click"
16:28:40 <ArtB> … There is a defn in D3E
16:28:52 <ArtB> … Not sure if he missed it; just sent today
16:29:10 <ArtB> … This could be no change or just some additional non-normative text
16:29:26 <ArtB> Topic: Testing Pointer Events v1 spec
16:29:42 <ArtB> s/Topic: Testing Pointer Events v1 spec//
16:30:08 <slightlyoff> still on the call = )
16:30:19 <slightlyoff> ES6 maps make this go away
16:30:23 <ArtB> SG: re pointerId, whatever we do we need to make sure it is compatible with JS objects
16:30:26 <slightlyoff> you can have arbitrary keys
16:30:28 <jrossi> when ES6 is interoperable :-)
16:30:35 <ArtB> … we cannot assume everyone is using ES6
16:31:58 <ArtB> Topic: Testing Pointer Events v1 spec
16:32:05 <ArtB> AB: there was some discussion on the list http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0157.html.
16:32:06 <jrossi> what about polyfills? integers will be easier if trying to polyfill older browsers, I think.
16:32:08 <scott_gonzalez> By compatible with JS objects, I mean specifically that the pointerId can be used as a unique key in an object.
16:32:12 <ArtB> AB: any comments re the proposed directory structure?
16:32:28 <ArtB> JR: looks good
16:32:37 <ArtB> AB: any comments re how to identify tests as manual vs. automated?
16:32:44 <scott_gonzalez> If we do use objects to represent pointerId, a custom toString() which returns a unique value would be fine.
16:33:12 <ArtB> DS: we should use metadata for auto/manual
16:33:49 <ArtB> … I should bring in Tobie Langel, W3C's test lead
16:33:57 <smaug> Zakim, who is noisy
16:33:57 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is noisy', smaug
16:34:01 <ArtB> AB: ok, let's talk about how to schedule that
16:34:02 <smaug> er, what is the command
16:34:17 <ArtB> AB: any comments about the need for test assertions e.g. http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/wiki/TestAssertions? Any volunteers to lead or contribute?
16:34:20 <shepazu> Zakim, who is noisy?
16:34:31 <Zakim> shepazu, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: [Microsoft] (39%)
16:34:51 <smaug> thanks
16:35:25 <ArtB> AB: any volunteers?
16:35:28 <ArtB> [None]
16:35:40 <ArtB> s/[None]//
16:35:48 <ArtB> CC: I can help get that started
16:35:52 <ArtB> AB: excellent!
16:35:55 <ArtB> … thanks Cathy!
16:36:03 <ArtB> Topic: Any other Business
16:36:17 <ArtB> AB: does anyone have any implementation status to share?
16:36:19 <shepazu> q+
16:36:57 <ArtB> DS: I think Jacob did an excellent job on PE @ W3Conf!
16:37:03 <ArtB> … it is available on youtube
16:37:08 <shepazu> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCfVn4JY5yk
16:37:34 <ArtB> DS: I will write a blog re PE for webplatform.org
16:37:43 <jrossi> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/concepts/PointerEvents
16:37:44 <ArtB> … Msft has some folks creating PE materials
16:37:54 <ArtB> … they have an overview plus reference material
16:37:55 <jrossi> Shorcut url:  http://bit.ly/pointerdoc
16:38:09 <ArtB> DS: they will ask this group for feedback
16:38:16 <ArtB> … Thanks Microsoft for making that happen!
16:38:56 <ArtB> JR: I talked to a lot of devs at the conf
16:39:14 <ArtB> … about 4 other talks mentioned Pointer Events
16:39:18 <ArtB> … and that's pretty cool
16:39:22 <ArtB> DS: yes, lots of interest
16:43:11 <ArtB> RRSAgent, make minutes
16:43:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/02/26-pointerevents-minutes.html ArtB
16:46:25 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
16:49:35 <shepazu> q+
16:50:20 <slightlyoff> am not
16:50:22 <slightlyoff> q-
16:53:54 <Zakim> - +1.415.997.aadd
16:56:33 <Zakim> -Olli_Pettay
16:56:35 <Zakim> -Art_Barstow
16:56:36 <Zakim> -Cathy
16:56:36 <Zakim> - +1.770.402.aacc
16:56:37 <Zakim> -Doug_Schepers
16:56:43 <Zakim> - +1.717.578.aaaa
16:56:46 <ArtB> AB: re next call, we have 3 more weeks of LC review
16:56:59 <Zakim> -Matt_Brubeck
16:57:00 <Zakim> RWC_PEWG()11:00AM has ended
16:57:00 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.717.578.aaaa, Art_Barstow, [Microsoft], Olli_Pettay, +1.781.362.aabb, +1.770.402.aacc, Cathy, Doug_Schepers, Matt_Brubeck, +1.415.997.aadd
16:57:01 <ArtB> … given that, perhaps we skip next week and next call is March 12
16:57:22 <ArtB> JR: assume we want to record some Resolutions and don't want to get too far behind
16:57:32 <ArtB> … so it may sense to have a call next week
16:58:01 <ArtB> AB: good point; let's you and I chat at the end of the week re if a call on March 5 makes sense
16:58:05 <ArtB> JR: sounds good
16:58:24 <ArtB> AB: thanks everyone for joining. Meeting adjourned
16:58:28 <ArtB> RRSAgent, make minutes
16:58:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/02/26-pointerevents-minutes.html ArtB
16:58:54 <ArtB> zakim, who's here
16:58:54 <Zakim> ArtB, you need to end that query with '?'
16:59:03 <ArtB> zakim, who's here?
16:59:03 <Zakim> apparently RWC_PEWG()11:00AM has ended, ArtB
16:59:04 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, Cathy, Zakim, jrossi, smaug, scott_gonzalez, ArtB, mbrubeck, dfreedm, shepazu, slightlyoff, sangwhan, trackbot
16:59:10 <ArtB> zakim, bye
16:59:10 <Zakim> Zakim has left #pointerevents
17:00:26 <scott_gonzalez> I just created http://www.w3.org/wiki/PointerEvents/TouchAction
17:00:48 <scott_gonzalez> It might be useful to investigate some Android apps as well.
17:03:47 <ArtB> this is great scott_gonzalez
17:04:00 <ArtB> would you please announce this on the list?
17:04:08 <ArtB> rssagent, bye
17:05:36 <ArtB> RRSAgent, bye
17:05:36 <RRSAgent> I see no action items