14:58:25 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pointerevents
14:58:25 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/10/21-pointerevents-irc
14:58:31 <ArtB> RRSAgent, make log public
14:58:35 <Zakim> +Doug_Schepers
14:59:03 <ArtB> ScribeNick: ArtB
14:59:03 <ArtB> Scribe: ArtB
14:59:03 <ArtB> Meeting: Pointer Events WG Voice Conference
14:59:03 <ArtB> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014OctDec/0022.html
14:59:03 <ArtB> Chair: ArtB
14:59:34 <patrick_h_lauke> patrick_h_lauke has joined #pointerevents
14:59:35 <jrossi2> jrossi2 has joined #pointerevents
14:59:57 <rbyers> Regrets from me this week - sorry for the very short notice.
15:00:16 <ArtB> Regrets: Rick_Byers, Sangwhan_Moon
15:00:32 <Zakim> + +44.797.663.aabb
15:01:03 <Zakim> + +1.717.578.aacc
15:01:39 <scott_gonzalez> Zakim, aacc is me
15:01:39 <Zakim> +scott_gonzalez; got it
15:01:43 <Zakim> + +1.770.402.aadd
15:01:50 <patrick_h_lauke> zakim, aabb is me
15:01:50 <Zakim> +patrick_h_lauke; got it
15:02:06 <jrossi2> Zakim, aadd is me
15:02:06 <Zakim> +jrossi2; got it
15:02:25 <Zakim> +Matt_Brubeck
15:03:03 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
15:03:18 <ArtB> Present: Art_Barstow, Cathy_Chan, Doug_Schepers, Patrick_Lauke, Scott_González, Jacob_Rossi, Matt_Brubeck, Asir_Vedamuthu
15:03:43 <ArtB> Topic: Tweak and agree on agenda
15:03:49 <ArtB> AB: yesterday I posted a Draft agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014OctDec/0022.html.
15:03:56 <ArtB> ... Since then PR-1287 was merged so I propose we drop that agenda item and add the two new PRs (PR-1299 and PR-1300) that were added after the draft agenda was posted
15:04:09 <Zakim> +[Microsoft.a]
15:04:13 <Zakim> -jrossi2
15:04:19 <ArtB> AB: any objections?
15:04:40 <jrossi2> Zakim, Microsoft.a is jrossi
15:04:40 <Zakim> +jrossi; got it
15:04:40 <ArtB> [ None ]
15:04:44 <ArtB> AB: any other change requests?
15:04:52 <ArtB> DS: let's talk TPAC during AoB
15:04:56 <ArtB> AB: sounds good
15:05:05 <ArtB> Topic: PR-1299 and PR-1300
15:05:11 <ArtB> AB: Jacob submitted PR-1299 https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/1287 and PR-1300 https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/1287yesterday.
15:05:17 <ArtB> ... Jacob, what's up with these PRs?
15:05:47 <mbrubeck> s/1287/1299/
15:05:57 <mbrubeck> s/1287yesterday/1300/
15:06:07 <ArtB> JR: 1299 https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/1287
15:06:10 <asir> asir has joined #pointerevents
15:06:16 <ArtB> … 1300 https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/1287
15:06:42 <ArtB> … not good for testing, especially scrolling
15:06:49 <ArtB> … these make the tests more reliable
15:06:59 <ArtB> … 1300 just updates 1 test file
15:07:50 <ArtB> … this will also help with the reliability
15:08:04 <ArtB> … I will also fix any -manual issues
15:08:22 <jrossi> https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/1299
15:08:23 <ArtB> … that is, I'll just update the names since that doesn't affect the test
15:08:26 <jrossi> https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/1300
15:08:49 <ArtB> AB: so we need some to review these PRs
15:08:59 <ArtB> … any volunteers?
15:09:14 <ArtB> MB: I can review them
15:09:21 <ArtB> … would be happy to have help
15:09:28 <ArtB> CC: I can help
15:09:42 <ArtB> JR: probably only need 2 people for 1299 and just one for 1300
15:10:04 <ArtB> AB: how will you split this up Matt and Cathy?
15:10:10 <ArtB> CC: will figure it out offline
15:10:35 <ArtB> ACTION: Matt work with Cathy to review PRs 1299 and 1300
15:10:35 <trackbot> Created ACTION-137 - Work with cathy to review prs 1299 and 1300 [on Matt Brubeck - due 2014-10-28].
15:10:42 <ArtB> AB: thanks Matt and Cathy
15:11:07 <ArtB> AB: if you review leads to a +1, then please go ahead and merge the PRs
15:11:21 <ArtB> Topic: Bug-26888 - Add "pointerleave" to "9.1 The touch-action CSS property"
15:11:27 <ArtB> AB: we discussed this bug previously and Jacob submitted a patch yesterday https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerevents/rev/0dc3e51284e4.
15:11:38 <ArtB> ... Any comments on the patch?
15:11:45 <patrick_h_lauke> LGTM
15:12:00 <ArtB> AB: I also would say LGTM
15:12:26 <ArtB> … if people need more time, that's fine
15:12:50 <ArtB> JR: the last time we talked about this there was some speculation this issue could be in other parts of the spec
15:13:00 <ArtB> … I searched and did not find any other occurences
15:13:05 <Zakim> - +1.857.300.aaaa
15:13:22 <Zakim> + +1.857.300.aaee
15:13:48 <ArtB> AB: if no one needs more time, then let's record a Resolution that we agree with Jacob's proposal
15:13:59 <ArtB> RESOLUTION: group agrees with Jacob's patch for Bug-26888
15:14:10 <ArtB> Topic: Testing and Interop
15:14:17 <ArtB> AB: before we can start formal interop testing, we'll need to get closure on PR-1299 and PR-1300. If we assume those PRs will be ok, then we have a few Q and issues to discuss.
15:14:44 <ArtB> AB: one item is who is going to run the tests http://w3c-test.org/pointerevents/ on various implementations?
15:14:50 <ArtB> ... can we get commitments to run the tests on IE and FFMetro?
15:15:11 <ArtB> JR: I can run the IE tests
15:15:44 <ArtB> … re constructor stuff, we have an internal build
15:15:55 <ArtB> MB: I or someone else can run the tests on FF Metro
15:16:25 <ArtB> ACTION: Jacob run the PE tests on IE after all open PRs are resolved
15:16:26 <trackbot> Created ACTION-138 - Run the pe tests on ie after all open prs are resolved [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-10-28].
15:16:51 <ArtB> ACTION: Matt run the PE tests on FF Metro after all open PRs are resolved
15:16:51 <trackbot> Created ACTION-139 - Run the pe tests on ff metro after all open prs are resolved [on Matt Brubeck - due 2014-10-28].
15:17:02 <ArtB> AB: another related issue is whether or not to use the w-p-t runner http://w3c-test.org/tools/runner/index.html to run the tests.
15:17:15 <ArtB> ... Given most tests are manual, it's not clear that using the runner will be the most efficient way to run the tests but it does have a good benefit of optionally creating a JSON file of the results and there is a tool to merge results files to create an Interop/Implementation Report.
15:17:46 <ArtB> ... For an example, see the IndexedDB test result repo https://github.com/w3c/test-results/tree/gh-pages/IndexedDB. Note the 4 *.json files of test results for 4 different implementations.
15:18:11 <ArtB> ... I haven't used the tool to merge the results but I'm sure PLH/Robin/JGraham/Ms2ger or other good folks in the W3C's #testing channel can help us. (For some additional info see https://www.npmjs.org/package/wptreport.)
15:18:41 <ArtB> … still a bit bleeding edge
15:18:55 <ArtB> MB: has anyone used runner with the PE tests?
15:19:14 <Zakim> -Matt_Brubeck
15:19:18 <ArtB> JR: for manual tests, can those tests be verified?
15:19:27 <ArtB> AB: yes, I do believe that is the way it works
15:19:45 <Zakim> +Matt_Brubeck
15:19:46 <ArtB> … but I haven't tried it
15:20:16 <ArtB> JR: seems to be working
15:20:50 <ArtB> AB: can you Matt try it now?
15:20:55 <ArtB> MB: no not now
15:21:07 <ArtB> … but you can assign me an action and I'll try it
15:21:46 <ArtB> ACTION: matt try using w-p-t runner to run the PE tests on FF Metro and report the results to the group
15:21:46 <trackbot> Created ACTION-140 - Try using w-p-t runner to run the pe tests on ff metro and report the results to the group [on Matt Brubeck - due 2014-10-28].
15:22:05 <ArtB> JR: it uses Window.open
15:22:13 <ArtB> … not sure if FFMetro supports that
15:22:35 <ArtB> MB: there could be some probs there; I'll need to check
15:23:07 <ArtB> AB: we have some experimenting to do before we can agree or not on using runner
15:23:21 <ArtB> … but we'll try to use it if/when possible
15:23:53 <ArtB> AV: so is the default to just do manual testing?
15:24:03 <ArtB> AB: yes, that seems to be the case
15:25:07 <ArtB> JR: if runner doesn't work, then can run runner just to get the JSON file and then directly update the file with the data from running the tests manually
15:25:15 <ArtB> AB: that makes sense to me
15:25:23 <ArtB> MB: yes agree
15:25:38 <abarsto> abarsto has joined #pointerevents
15:25:49 <abarsto> abarsto has joined #pointerevents
15:26:47 <ArtB> DS: do you foresee any probs with us using runner test results for our Impl Report?
15:26:56 <ArtB> s/DS: do you/AB: do you/
15:27:03 <ArtB> DS: I'll check with PLH
15:28:00 <jrossi> example output from merging JSON: https://w3c.github.io/test-results/IndexedDB/all.html
15:28:42 <Zakim> - +1.857.300.aaee
15:28:51 <ArtB> ACTION: Doug check with Philippe if the runner test reporting mechanism is OK for CR
15:28:51 <trackbot> Created ACTION-141 - Check with philippe if the runner test reporting mechanism is ok for cr [on Doug Schepers - due 2014-10-28].
15:28:57 <ArtB> AB: here's an example http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-test-infra/2014OctDec/0017.html
15:29:00 <Zakim> + +1.857.300.aaff
15:29:25 <ArtB> … http://w3c.github.io/test-results/eventsource/all.html
15:30:19 <ArtB> AB: so my Q to Doug, is if something like this all.html file is acceptable
15:30:26 <ArtB> DS: yes, let me check with PLH
15:31:26 <ArtB> AB: any other Qs about testing?
15:31:48 <ArtB> AV: what is the realtionship between the TA table and the Impl Report?
15:32:02 <ArtB> AB: there is no requirement to have a linkage
15:32:26 <ArtB> … the TA doc should be part of the test suite
15:32:38 <ArtB> AV: yes, it is difficult to keep it in sync
15:33:00 <ArtB> … what is the key metric for the report?
15:33:22 <ArtB> JR: the runner is test cases (more granualr than test file)
15:33:39 <ArtB> AV: so metric is number of tests passed?
15:33:57 <ArtB> JR: the runner tool lists test cases
15:34:16 <ArtB> … we should consider the TA doc as superceded by the test report
15:34:27 <ArtB> … don't think we need to do any additional work on the TA doc
15:34:47 <ArtB> AV: so the wiki is no longer important once we have the test report
15:35:36 <ArtB> AB: I see the TA doc as a good tool with getting us organized but its not important once we have detailed test results
15:35:49 <ArtB> AV: then I think the TA doc should be documented as such
15:36:39 <ArtB> ACTION: Art work with Asir on a bold heading on the TA doc that says it is frozen and no longer being worked on
15:36:39 <trackbot> Created ACTION-142 - Work with asir on a bold heading on the ta doc that says it is frozen and no longer being worked on [on Arthur Barstow - due 2014-10-28].
15:37:02 <ArtB> AB: anything else on testing for today?
15:37:05 <ArtB> [ None ]
15:37:12 <ArtB> Topic: "click" in the example event sequences in 11.2 Mapping for devices that do not support hover
15:37:29 <ArtB> AB: Patrick started this thread on October 17; http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014OctDec/0020.html. Jacob replied yesterday http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2014OctDec/0025.html.
15:37:38 <patrick_h_lauke> (famous for my short and to the point email subjects...)
15:37:46 <ArtB> AB: it's not clear if the spec needs to change or not.
15:38:00 <ArtB> JR: I don't think we need to change the spec
15:38:11 <ArtB> … it's a bug in IE
15:38:19 <patrick_h_lauke> "The relative ordering of these high-level events (click, contextmenu, focus, blur, etc.) with pointer events is undefined and varies between user agents."
15:38:30 <ArtB> PL: for developers, could use some clarification
15:39:25 <patrick_h_lauke> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerevents/raw-file/tip/pointerEvents.html#compatibility-mapping-with-mouse-events
15:39:26 <ArtB> … but I'm not adamant; could leave it as is too
15:39:47 <patrick_h_lauke> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerevents/raw-file/tip/pointerEvents.html#mapping-for-devices-that-do-not-support-hover
15:39:58 <ArtB> PL: see 2nd Note in section 11.1
15:40:26 <patrick_h_lauke> so wondering if worth adding a small reminder of the note from 11. to the note in 11.1
15:41:13 <ArtB> JR: I don't want to document an IE bug
15:41:24 <ArtB> … think another note is overkill
15:42:00 <ArtB> … we will fix this so don't want to mention it
15:42:35 <ArtB> … If I put a note in it could imply current behavior is intended
15:43:48 <ArtB> PL: if we decide it would be overkill, then that's ok
15:44:06 <patrick_h_lauke> happy to leave it
15:44:46 <ArtB> AB: if anyone feels real strong, please speak up
15:44:54 <patrick_h_lauke> as the "typically produce" wording a the start of the informative note gives us enough leeway anyway
15:45:28 <ArtB> RESOLUTION: re "click" in the example … we agree to leave the spec as is
15:45:33 <patrick_h_lauke> +1
15:45:41 <ArtB> Topic: AoB
15:45:48 <ArtB> AB: I'll be at TPAC next week so no call on Oct 28. I hope to see some of you there.
15:46:00 <ArtB> AB: Rick organized a "Scroll linked effects - demos and brainstorming" ad hoc meeting @ TPAC on Tuesday Oct 28 11:00-12:00 https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC2014/ad-hoc-meetings#Scroll_linked_effects_-_demos_and_brainstorming. This could be interesting to some of you.
15:46:03 <jrossi> https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC2014/ad-hoc-meetings#Scroll_linked_effects_-_demos_and_brainstorming
15:46:12 <patrick_h_lauke> any chance to remotely connect?
15:46:54 <ArtB> AB: my understanding is that support for remote participation in "ad hoc meetings" is ad hoc
15:47:04 <ArtB> … that is, the answer is "it depends"
15:47:29 <patrick_h_lauke> i'll check closer to the time with rick, no worries
15:48:45 <ArtB> ACTION: barstow determine if Rick's scrolling ad hoc meeting will facilitate remote participation and report that on p-pointer-events
15:48:45 <trackbot> Created ACTION-143 - Determine if rick's scrolling ad hoc meeting will facilitate remote participation and report that on p-pointer-events [on Arthur Barstow - due 2014-10-28].
15:48:47 <asir> I like to listen in
15:48:48 <jrossi> IRC channel: #tpacscroll
15:49:35 <patrick_h_lauke> borrow a google glass and film/stream it live ;)
15:49:54 <ArtB> DS: for those of us that are going to be at TPAC, perhaps we should have an informal chat session
15:50:04 <ArtB> … for topics like Touch Events
15:50:13 <ArtB> … could try to get Apple involved
15:50:41 <ArtB> … nothing formal but since we're all there, perhaps we should try to get together
15:50:48 <ArtB> JR: yes agree
15:51:06 <ArtB> … CSSWG is taking about relevant events
15:51:19 <ArtB> … I'll be there M+Tu+W
15:51:19 <patrick_h_lauke> as side note, ICYMI https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=137069
15:51:32 <ArtB> s/relevant events/snappoint events/
15:52:20 <ArtB> DS: I'd like to participate in the snappoint talk so please let me know if/when that happens
15:52:26 <ArtB> AB: anything else?
15:52:34 <ArtB> AB: thanks all; meeting adjourned.
15:52:50 <patrick_h_lauke> fedex the champagne over...
15:52:53 <patrick_h_lauke> ah...foiled
15:53:04 <ArtB> RRSAgent, make minutes
15:53:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/10/21-pointerevents-minutes.html ArtB
15:53:10 <Zakim> - +1.857.300.aaff
15:53:11 <Zakim> -Doug_Schepers
15:53:11 <Zakim> -patrick_h_lauke
15:53:12 <Zakim> -jrossi
15:53:17 <Zakim> -scott_gonzalez
15:53:24 <Zakim> -Matt_Brubeck
15:53:28 <patrick_h_lauke> patrick_h_lauke has left #pointerevents
15:54:55 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
15:54:56 <Zakim> RWC_PEWG()11:00AM has ended
15:54:56 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.857.300.aaaa, Doug_Schepers, +44.797.663.aabb, +1.717.578.aacc, scott_gonzalez, +1.770.402.aadd, patrick_h_lauke, jrossi2, Matt_Brubeck, [Microsoft], jrossi,
15:54:56 <Zakim> ... +1.857.300.aaee, +1.857.300.aaff
16:03:44 <rbyers> patrick_h_lauke / shepazu: CSSWG folks want to move that ad-hoc scrolling meeting into the formal part of the CSS WG meeting: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Oct/0283.html
16:03:49 <rbyers> Not sure what that means for remote participation
16:03:58 <rbyers> I haven't seen a schedule for the CSSWG meeting yet
16:16:25 <smaug> smaug has joined #pointerevents
16:30:16 <smaug> crap, I so didn't see the agenda for today
16:30:29 <smaug> (and would have sent regrets )
16:38:42 <ArtB> Regrets+ Olli_Pettay
16:38:51 <ArtB> RRSAGent, make minutes
16:38:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/10/21-pointerevents-minutes.html ArtB
16:39:32 <ArtB> zakim, bye
16:39:32 <Zakim> Zakim has left #pointerevents
16:58:13 <ArtB> RRSAgent, bye
16:58:13 <RRSAgent> I see 7 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/21-pointerevents-actions.rdf :
16:58:13 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Matt work with Cathy to review PRs 1299 and 1300 [1]
16:58:13 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/21-pointerevents-irc#T15-10-35
16:58:13 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Jacob run the PE tests on IE after all open PRs are resolved [2]
16:58:13 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/21-pointerevents-irc#T15-16-25
16:58:13 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Matt run the PE tests on FF Metro after all open PRs are resolved [3]
16:58:13 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/21-pointerevents-irc#T15-16-51
16:58:13 <RRSAgent> ACTION: matt try using w-p-t runner to run the PE tests on FF Metro and report the results to the group [4]
16:58:13 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/21-pointerevents-irc#T15-21-46
16:58:13 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Doug check with Philippe if the runner test reporting mechanism is OK for CR [5]
16:58:13 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/21-pointerevents-irc#T15-28-51
16:58:13 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Art work with Asir on a bold heading on the TA doc that says it is frozen and no longer being worked on [6]
16:58:13 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/21-pointerevents-irc#T15-36-39
16:58:13 <RRSAgent> ACTION: barstow determine if Rick's scrolling ad hoc meeting will facilitate remote participation and report that on p-pointer-events [7]
16:58:13 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/21-pointerevents-irc#T15-48-45
16:58:24 <ArtB> ArtB has changed the topic to: Pointer Events Working Group