See also: IRC log
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
<smaug> Zakim: who is noisy
AB: I posted a draft agenda yesterday http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0153.html. Any change requests?
JR: I enjoyed talking about PE last week @ W3Conf
… we can talk about that during AoB
AB: ok, we'll add that to AoB
AB: Alex submitted 7-8 bullets in
and they were submitted before the LC was published.
... 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.
... 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.
JR: I have a draft about half done re Alex's comments
AB: sounds good
<slightlyoff> apologies for not seeing this earlier. Wasn't aware there was a meeting
AB: Rick had some comments re the
... 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).
JR: 2 things
… I made most of the changes in the LC
… there is a bug I introduced that needs to be fixed
… and I'll do that
… Not sure what you mean by examples
AB: ok, I'll re-read that thread and reply accordingly
AB: On Feb 19, Rick started a new
thread about pointerType extensibility
... 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?
JR: I talked to Rick about this last week
… we talked about diff ideas
… they all have + and -
… My conclusion is that there are 2 scenarios
… one is providing a better path for new devices
… we want them to have some compat with PEs
<slightlyoff> just joined the call
… the other issue, even if we do that there can be some scenarios where knowing the real device id is important
… I think we can solve the first problem by adding some more semantics
… We could have an API change if we go with the inheritance chain proposal
… could then do instanceof ...
… and then new devices are instance of a former device
… that would solve the extensibility prob but still think there is a need of pointer type
… and need to know the actual device type
… Might be a bit weird to add it to a future spec
… I think Rick is comfortable with followoing up on this later
AB: we still have 3 weeks of LC
OP: I agree we should solve this problem later
… we can't predict future extensibility
JR: there was a lot of talk about leap motion
… at W3Conf
JR: this came up at edgeconf
DS: has anyone talked to them?
<slightlyoff> ...because one of the folks on the panel seemed to be a representative
JR: I have expressed interest
DS: I played with Joshua Davis' device; pretty cool
<slightlyoff> I'm gonna cede the floor on this
<slightlyoff> I owe the list email
<slightlyoff> and don't think we can make serious progress by phone
<jrossi> slightlyoff: are you just on IRC?
AB: Rick started a thread about
the type of pointerID
... Alex mentioned this issue too http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0110.html.
<slightlyoff> jrossi: no, on the call, but don't want to queue in just to say "not today" = )
<jrossi> just curious
JR: I'll reply to the pointerID thread
AR: why do people not want to make it opaque?
JR: I found UCs for it being an integer
… in one painting demo with multitouch, used integer to pick from a random number of colors
… perhaps not a great UC
… Do you have a proposal for opaque?
AR: think object identity should be sufficient
… can't guarnatee integer stability
… having multiple mouse isn't common
… One objection is only having one mouse and making it 0
… Don't think we want an integer for a specific device
… Breaks down when new pointer types are added
… Don't want to set bad expectations
JR: Rick mentioned some issues with using integers
… e.g. when comparing
… May need to add some more context about the integers
… Can achieve good level of interop with integers
… and make sure people's "false assumptions" are addressed
… Think this would be a problem for our impl
… if we had to switch to opaque types
… I am willing to consider it, but would prefer to keep this integer
… and to add some more information and context
… One pain point is supporting touch events which used integer
AR: given that, I think it would be ok if using integers was fleshed out better
… that would be better than creating an interop problem
JR: do you have a proposal?
AR: opening move is to write down the IE behavior
… then we have something to discuss
DS: is part of your rationale pattern searching?
AR: if integers, it permits indexing to arrays
… and that works ok if the impl moves through the integer space in a reasonable way
… but if a different impl moves through the integer space differently, there will be interop problems
… Don't want confusion for the app devs
… if the id is overloaded
DS: so, need to define the semantics of the integer e.g. before/after
AR: need to make sure impls handle integers the same way
OP: I prefer a random behavior
AR: and that would meet my opapue requirement
<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.
AB: Rick started a thread about
click and contextmenu events in
... Jacob replied http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0152.html.
... is this just a matter of adding a bit of explanatory text?
<shepazu> (I think I agree with Alex about pointerId, though I want to think about it)
JR: there is some explanatory text that needs to be added
… there is already some related information
… I think it is safe to add the extra text
… The other issue is Ricking looking for a defn of "click"
… There is a defn in D3E
… Not sure if he missed it; just sent today
… This could be no change or just some additional non-normative text
<slightlyoff> still on the call = )
<slightlyoff> ES6 maps make this go away
SG: re pointerId, whatever we do we need to make sure it is compatible with JS objects
<slightlyoff> you can have arbitrary keys
<jrossi> when ES6 is interoperable :-)
… we cannot assume everyone is using ES6
AB: there was some discussion on the list http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0157.html.
<jrossi> what about polyfills? integers will be easier if trying to polyfill older browsers, I think.
<scott_gonzalez> By compatible with JS objects, I mean specifically that the pointerId can be used as a unique key in an object.
AB: any comments re the proposed directory structure?
JR: looks good
AB: any comments re how to identify tests as manual vs. automated?
<scott_gonzalez> If we do use objects to represent pointerId, a custom toString() which returns a unique value would be fine.
DS: we should use metadata for auto/manual
… I should bring in Tobie Langel, W3C's test lead
AB: ok, let's talk about how to schedule that
<smaug> er, what is the command
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?
AB: any volunteers?
CC: I can help get that started
… thanks Cathy!
AB: does anyone have any implementation status to share?
DS: I think Jacob did an excellent job on PE @ W3Conf!
… it is available on youtube
DS: I will write a blog re PE for webplatform.org
… Msft has some folks creating PE materials
… they have an overview plus reference material
<jrossi> Shorcut url: http://bit.ly/pointerdoc
DS: they will ask this group for feedback
… Thanks Microsoft for making that happen!
JR: I talked to a lot of devs at the conf
… about 4 other talks mentioned Pointer Events
… and that's pretty cool
DS: yes, lots of interest
<slightlyoff> am not
AB: re next call, we have 3 more weeks of LC review
… given that, perhaps we skip next week and next call is March 12
JR: assume we want to record some Resolutions and don't want to get too far behind
… so it may sense to have a call next week
AB: good point; let's you and I chat at the end of the week re if a call on March 5 makes sense
JR: sounds good
AB: thanks everyone for joining. Meeting adjourned
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.137 of Date: 2012/09/20 20:19:01 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/ZZZ/leap/ Succeeded: s/Topic: Testing Pointer Events v1 spec// Succeeded: s/[None]// Found ScribeNick: ArtB Found Scribe: Art Default Present: +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 Present: Art_Barstow Olli_Pettay Scott_Gonzalez Cathy_Chan Asir_Vedamuthu Jacob_Rossi Doug_Schepers Matt_Brubeck Alex_Russell Regrets: Rick_Byers Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JanMar/0153.html Got date from IRC log name: 26 Feb 2013 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/02/26-pointerevents-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]