W3C

- DRAFT -

Pointer Events WG Voice Conference

04 Mar 2014

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Art_Barstow, Patrick_Lauke, Rick_Byers, Jacob_Rossi, Asir_Vedamuthu, Matt_Brubeck, Cathy_Chan, Scott_González
Regrets
Sangwhan_Moon, Olli_Pettay
Chair
Art
Scribe
Art

Contents


<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

<scribe> Scribe: Art

<patrick_h_lauke> oh, interesting zakim functionality there

Tweak agenda

AB: I posted a draft agenda yesterday http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0138.html.
... since then there has been a lot of bug activity. My inclination is to allocate some time for all of the bugs as a way to get "last chance" feedback. However, Bugs 24706 and 24777 were Resolved/Fixed via patches based on agreements made during our Feb 25 call so I propose we drop those two bug from the call.
... any objections to dropping Bug 24706 and Bug 24777?
... yesterday Olli said Anne is still OOO so we won't discuss his comments at this call.
... any other change requests?

RB: can we move manipulation topic earlier today

<patrick_h_lauke> ok with me

AB: that's finewith me

Add 'manipulation' touch-action property?

AB: this Issue/Q was raised by Rick on Feb 25 and he proposed some new text http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0125.html. There was some followup by Patrick and Jacob.

RB: IE has these additions

… think we need to rethink what we want to spec

… need something about click delay

… I proposed some wording that fits within the scope of the group (charter)

… this would help with compat

<patrick_h_lauke> +1 that click delay 300ms is a big pain point, and anything that can help alleviate it in a standardised way is a good thing

RB: extra impl burden I think is smallish

<patrick_h_lauke> removes special magic that UAs (particularly on mobile) do today

MB: I agree with Rick

… this is a good thing to add

… there are some impl-specific semantics

<mbrubeck> I like the proposal from Rick's mail that we spec it as "pan-x pan-y" plus (optional) implementation-specifiied behaviors.

JR: I replied to this thread; think this is valuable

… describe continuous zooming

<mbrubeck> I'm fine with specifying "continuous zooming" too.

… ok provided it doesn't hold up the spec

… well understood property

RB: you'd like some info from Mozilla re impl?

JR: yes, that would be good and what Matt said is sufficient

… think we have enuf support to add this

MB: need to double-check with Olli but we circulated this to Moz people

… I don't think we'll get any objections

AV: what do you expect Chrome to support

<rbyers> According to proposed definition of manipulation, it would be valid (and compatible) to implement it identically to 'auto'

… (directed to Rick)

RB: we are near branch point for Chrome 35

… if we get manipulation into ED I can get it in impl in time for Chrome 35

… need to get it into the spec

JR: I can add this today

RB: great

RESOLUTION: we will add manipulation to the touch-action property

<scribe> ACTION: Jacob add manipulation to the touch-action property [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-86 - Add manipulation to the touch-action property [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-11].

Bug 21749 : Setting a capture on an offshore element

AB: This was created 2013-Apr-04 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21749 on behalf of Francois Remy. We discussed this during our 2014-Jan-07 call http://www.w3.org/2014/01/07-pointerevents-minutes.html#item02 and Jacob has Action-57 to make a proposal https://www.w3.org/2012/pointerevents/track/actions/57.
... Jacob, what's the status of this?

JR: I still need to make a proposal; it's in my queue

… will get to it shortly

Bug 21951: [CR] pointermove dispatching when button state changes

AB: Jacob Resolved/Fixed this bug on Feb 28 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21951 via patch https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerevents/rev/a9862eea23f5 per the resolution on 2014-Jan-07 http://www.w3.org/2014/01/07-pointerevents-minutes.html#item03.
... We'll talk about Asir's related e-mail about this bug separately, but first, are there any objections to Jacob's patch?

SG: looks good to me

<patrick_h_lauke> looks good to me

RB: good to me

RESOLUTION: Jacob's fix for Bug 21951 is OK.

AB: Asir proposed in https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21951#c2 test assertions 5.4 and 5.5 be deleted since they "cannot be tested using the current test harness and cannot be run manually" https://www.w3.org/wiki/PointerEvents/TestAssertions#Test_Assertions_for_pointermove_events.

AV: as we review assertions and test coverage, we discovered these two cannot be tested

RB: not sure why 5.4 can't be tested

… can't change button state w/o changing the pointer

JR: yes, I think you are correct Rick

… a manual test here would be hard

… There is a discussion by the WebDriver group about this general problem

RB: yeah even if had a test, there is no API to check

AB: does anyone object to strking 5.4 and 5.5?

SG: we could move them to another section

… so if/when WebDriver can handle these cases, we could consider creating tests

<mbrubeck> "Awaiting harness improvements (or WebDriver)"

… if we strike them, should add a note

AV: we could add them to v2 list

AB: so do both strike and add to v2 list

<patrick_h_lauke> no objection

AB: anyone object to striking these plus adding these to v2 list?

[ None ]

JR: would be good for people in this group to provide input for WebDriver

… so they can handle our type of requirements

… we have John Jansen

RB: any one from Google?

<jrossi> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webdriver/raw-file/default/webdriver-spec.html

JR: this is the Browser Testing WG

CC: what about 5.6 and 5.7?

… does the same reasoning apply to these two assertions?

RB: yes, they are the same

AB: any different thoughts?

SG: no

AB: so we want to strike all 4 assertions?

AV: yes

AB: thanks Cathy

RESOLUTION: strike test assertions 5.{4,5,6,7} and add them to the v2 list

<scribe> ACTION: asir strike test assertions 5.{4,5,6,7} and add them to the v2 list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-87 - Strike test assertions 5.{4,5,6,7} and add them to the v2 list [on Asir Vedamuthu - due 2014-03-11].

Bug 24346: Clarifications on Pointer Events Types section

AB: Jacob Resolved/Fixed Bug 24346 on Feb 25 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24346 as discussed on Feb 25 http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#item09.
... Since then Patrick submitted some comments via the [["List of Pointer Events" table default actions]] thread; see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0132.html

PL: think table still needs a clarification

MB: the table lists the action that will be prevented if call preventDefault

<jrossi> See Step 3 in: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerevents/raw-file/tip/pointerEvents.html#mapping-for-devices-that-support-hover

… if call it on pointerdown all compat mouse events will be prevented

… there are some mouse events that aren't prevent-able

PL: perhaps the header of table

MB: could add a link to the text and section for canceling

JR: I can change the table headings

… think I just used headings from other DOM specs

… could add a defn and have the header link to that

PL: need to what happens when event is canceled

JR: [ reads part of the spec … ]

… could add a defn for defaultAction

<jrossi> "cancelled eventAn event whose default action was prevented by means of preventDefault(), returning false in an event handler, or other means as defined by [DOM-LEVEL-3-EVENTS] and [HTML5]."

MB: there's a diff between default action and defaultAction

<patrick_h_lauke> so currently, table column "Default Action". Text in the column is "Varies: when the pointer is primary, all default actions of the mousedown event plus firing of compatibility mouse events". How about just adding a bit of text

AB: Patrick can you take this info and create a proposal?

PL: [ makes a proposal … ]

… I can do some wordsmithing

<scribe> ACTION: Patrick make a proposal for Bug 24346 (using discussion from 2014-Mar-04 call) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-88 - Make a proposal for bug 24346 (using discussion from 2014-mar-04 call) [on Patrick Lauke - due 2014-03-11].

<patrick_h_lauke> thx

Bug 24772: releasePointerCapture() should fail if called from a node that doesn't currently capture the pointer

AB: Jacob proposed text in the bug via comment #1 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24772#c1 as actioned on Feb 25 http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#item05.
... any objections to Jacob's proposal?
... looked ok to me

RB: sounds good

SG: so noop, no error?

JR: yes

RESOLUTION: group agrees with Jacob's proposal for Bug 24772

<scribe> ACTION: Jacob submit changeset for his proposed text for Bug 24772 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-89 - Submit changeset for his proposed text for bug 24772 [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-11].

Bug 24783: non-normative examples for event sequences to be added to end of 11.2

AB: after the draft agenda was posted, Jacob Resolved/Fixed https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24783 via patch https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerevents/rev/0fc30a2b5dfe and then Patrick had some followup.
... We'll discuss Patrick's editorial followup in a minute but first, any objections to Jacob's patch?

JR: this is verbatim from what Patrick proposed

PL: yes; the two minor comments are editorial nits

<patrick_h_lauke> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0148.html

JR: oh, yes, I'll make those two changes

AB: any objections to the patch + the 2 editorial nits?

RB: LGTM

PL: +1

<patrick_h_lauke> oops

RB: why are pointerenter and pointerleave not in the list?

JR: that's an oversight

AB: any objections to adding pointerenter and pointerleave?

[ None ]

<patrick_h_lauke> hah mbrubeck

<patrick_h_lauke> save that for the touch events CG

RESOLUTION: group agrees with Jacob's patch for Bug 24783 + add pointerenter and pointerleave + add PL's two editorial nits

<scribe> ACTION: Jacob update the spec for bug 24783 including discussion from 2014-Mar-04 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-90 - Update the spec for bug 24783 including discussion from 2014-mar-04 [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-11].

Bug 24784: ACTION-69: Create a proposal re informative note re pointerevent and touchevent compatibility

<patrick_h_lauke> not unlike my 100s of tests, rick http://patrickhlauke.github.io/touch/

AB: this bug had some additional activity yesterday between Patrick and Jacob https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24784.
... I think what we want here is a relatively terse statement. Jacob's proposal https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24784#c1 meets that but I'd say Patrick's  counter-proposal https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24784#c3 meets the ICanLiveWithItTest.

JR: yes

AB: any objections to adding PL's proposed text for 24784?

RB: fine with me

<patrick_h_lauke> i'll follow up at later point to add my thoughts to the touch events CG wiki

RESOLUTION: group agrees with PL's proposed text for bug 24784

<scribe> ACTION: Jacob update the spec for bug 24784 per PL's proposal [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-91 - Update the spec for bug 24784 per pl's proposal [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-11].

Bug 24786: Propose a non-normative note re the keyboard compat issue

AB: Patrick has done quite a bit of research and added several comments to this bug and so far no one else has added any comments https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24786.
... we discussed this on Feb 25 and the group was actioned to add their feedback to the bug http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#item11.
... seems like we need a clear proposal we can review and comment #5 might have such a proposal https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24786#c5.

<patrick_h_lauke> mind that the first part of https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24786#c5 is mainly for interest

RB: I don't have an objection if UAs implement something like this

… but need to separate that from designing things into the platform

… want the compatibility hacks at higher lever e.g. frameworks

<patrick_h_lauke> ...or user agent behavior

… don't want "surprising" behavior included in the platform

<patrick_h_lauke> i actually agree with rick here

… PL's proposal is good but need to separate that from platform requirements

PL: agree with you Rick

… think the end of comment #5 is the important part we want to capture

… some more text is needed

[ Scribe didn't capture comments from Rick … ]

PL: should I use this feedback to create a new proposal?

AB: sounds good

<scribe> ACTION: Patrick make a specific proposal for Bug 24786 per discussion on 2014-Mar-04 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action07]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-92 - Make a specific proposal for bug 24786 per discussion on 2014-mar-04 [on Patrick Lauke - due 2014-03-11].

<rbyers> my main point was to emphasize using high-level APIs (focus, blur, click, etc.) wherever possible. When you must use low-level input events, be sure to support ALL types of input devices, including keyboards.

PL: might want to block for feedback from Sangwhan

… since one of his actions is related

<patrick_h_lauke> https://www.w3.org/2012/pointerevents/track/actions/63

… Action-63

<patrick_h_lauke> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0140.html

PL: the Q is whether Action-63 is covered by my proposal

RB: yes, I think so

AB: how about after you make your proposal Patrick, we make sure Sangwhan is given a headsup and then address action-63 accordingly?

PL: sounds good

Bug 24894: Tweaks to 5.1.2 The Primary Pointer

AB: after the draft agenda was posted, Jacob Resolved/Fixed https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24894 via Jacob's patch https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerevents/rev/b168701f0522.

<patrick_h_lauke> LGTM

AB: this was discussed on Feb 25 as "Slight softening of language in the note for 5.1.2" http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#item08.
... any objections to this patch?

PL: LGTM

RB: LGTM

AB: +1

<patrick_h_lauke> :)

RESOLUTION: group agrees with Jacob's patch for Bug 24894.

<patrick_h_lauke> right, shooting off. thanks everybody

Testing status

AB: any new testing news (beyond Feb 25 http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#item12)?

CR implementation updates

AB: any new implementation news (beyond Feb 25 http://www.w3.org/2014/02/25-pointerevents-minutes.html#item13)?

<mbrubeck> It is now possible to enable touch-action and pointer events in nightly builds of Firefox for Windows 8 Metro.

AB: awesome!

<asir> Very cool!!

MB: portions of that also work on some other platforms

<mbrubeck> Pointer Events (but not touch-action) can also be enabled in Firefox for desktop, and (I think) Firefox OS.

<rbyers> Woot!

RB: we are continuing to land touch-action patches

… still on track for Chrome 35

AoB

AB: Any other Business for today?
... I might have a conflict with this time on March 11 so a call that day is currently not likely
... down to 4 bugs + Annes comments
... anything else?
... meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: asir strike test assertions 5.{4,5,6,7} and add them to the v2 list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Jacob add manipulation to the touch-action property [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Jacob submit changeset for his proposed text for Bug 24772 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Jacob update the spec for bug 24783 including discussion from 2014-Mar-04 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: Jacob update the spec for bug 24784 per PL's proposal [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: Patrick make a proposal for Bug 24346 (using discussion from 2014-Mar-04 call) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Patrick make a specific proposal for Bug 24786 per discussion on 2014-Mar-04 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html#action07]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2014-03-04 16:58:22 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138  of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11  
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 Patrick_Lauke Rick_Byers Jacob_Rossi Asir_Vedamuthu Matt_Brubeck Cathy_Chan Scott_González
Regrets: Sangwhan_Moon Olli_Pettay
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014JanMar/0138.html
Got date from IRC log name: 04 Mar 2014
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/03/04-pointerevents-minutes.html
People with action items: 4 5 5. 6 7 add asir assertions jacob manipulation patrick strike test them

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]