- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:59:29 -0400
- To: "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>
The draft minutes from the April 26 voice conference are available at
the following and copied below:
http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html
WG Members - if you have any comments, corrections, etc., please send
them to the public-webevents mail list before May 10 (the next voice
conference); otherwise these minutes will be considered Approved as is.
-Art Barstow
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Web Events WG Voice Conference
26 Apr 2011
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0064.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-irc
Attendees
Present
Art_Barstow, Josh_Soref, Olli_Pettay, Matt_Brubeck,
Cathy_Chan, Sangwhan_Moon
Regrets
Chair
Art
Scribe
Art
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Tweak Agenda
2. [6]Getting Touch Events spec ready for First Public Working
Draft
3. [7]Testing
4. [8]Open and Raised Issues: 1 or 2, time permitting ...
5. [9]AoB
* [10]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB
<scribe> Scribe: Art
Date: 26 April 2011
<mbrubeck> sangwhan: Are you able to join the call?
Tweak Agenda
AB: yesterday I sent a draft agenda to the list (
[11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
0064.html ). Any change requests?
[11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0064.html
Getting Touch Events spec ready for First Public Working Draft
AB: last week I sent an e-mail to the list about the FPWD (
[12]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
0055.html ). The e-mail describes the general purpose of a FPWD and
related requirements.
... First, I'd like to take any questions about the process and then
discuss the question about whether or not the Touch Events spec
includes, at least at a broad level, all of the high priority
features we intend to specify.
... if no questions about the process, are there any comments about
missing features?
... I had asked for missing features by April 26 and there were no
comments
... I think we consider the feature set for the Touch Events spec to
be complete
... at least at a broad level
... we have some UCs& Requirements documented (
[13]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/wiki/Testing ). At a later
stage (when we discuss publishing a Candidate Recommendation with
the Director) we will need to identify the requirements addressed by
the spec.
[12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0055.html
[13] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/wiki/Testing
<ArtB1> AB: if anyone has any comments on the UCs and Requirements,
please send them to the list by May 3; otherwise let's considered
then "approved" as of that date. IOW, they can change but we also
think they capture our main UCs and requirements.
AB: if anyone has any comments on the UCs and Requirements, please
send them to the list by May 3; otherwise let's considered then
"approved" as of that date. IOW, they can change but we also think
they capture our main UCs and requirements.
JS: the UCs and Reqs doc is not linked from the Testing doc
<scribe> ACTION: barstow create a link to the UCs and Reqs from the
Testing doc [recorded in
[14]http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-43 - Create a link to the UCs and Reqs
from the Testing doc [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-05-03].
AB: lastly, what about an Introduction section for the Touch Events
Introduction section (
[15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
0051.html )? Can someone commit to writing at least a short-ish
paragraph (4-5 sentences)?
... any volunteers for that?
[15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0051.html
JS: I can't commit now
SM: I can take that action
<scribe> ACTION: sangwhan Create an input for the Introduction
section by April 29 [recorded in
[16]http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-44 - Create an input for the Introduction
section by April 29 [on Sangwhan Moon - due 2011-05-03].
AB: because of the W3C's May Advisory Committee meeting, there is a
publication moratorium and that means the very last day we can
request publication is May 6 (if we want to publish the FPWD before
the AC meeting).
JS: I am happy to review the Introduction
SM: OK, I'll send you a draft
AB: that's great; a FPWD can be prepared early next week
... proposed Resolution: the group agrees to publish a FPWD of the
Touch Events spec
... any objections or voices of support?
<mbrubeck> +1
<timeless> +1
<smaug_> +1
<Cathy> +1
AB: I hear no objections and only support
<sangwhan> +1
RESOLUTION: the group agrees to publish a FPWD of the Touch Events
spec
AB: anything else on FPWD?
Testing
AB: A few days ago Matt announced he created about 7 tests with over
20 assertions (
[17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
0063.html ). This is excellent Matt! And Matt is using the
testharness.js that is being used by the HTML WG and the WebApps WG
(
[18]http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/file/ad7715ddbcda/test/testharne
ss.js ).
[17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0063.html
[18] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/file/ad7715ddbcda/test/testharness.js
<sangwhan> s/Mark/Matt/
AB: I am interested in comments on the testharness ( ) (written by
Opera's James Graham).
MB: the testharness is fine for what I'm doing
... some common patterns may result in some additional helper
functions
... but no real problems with the harness
AB: that's good to hear
... there is a mail list for discussions about the harness; think
it's public-test-infra@w3.org
MB: I have one test file
... it displays a rectangle to be touched
... initiates the touchstart event
... and tests some attributes
... Need to create some other tests for moving
... and multi-touches
... some "finger dancing"
... Multi-touch tests won't be supported for all hardware
... so we need to mention that some tests may not work
AB: has anyone else tried testharness.js?
<timeless> <MB> ... need to ensure the spec supports not supporting
certain things
AB: It would be good for others to contribute test cases
MB: if someone wants to write simple tests
... could start with touchenter and touchleave
... although without some implementation, would be hard to test the
test
... One question, for attrs like rX and rY, can be hard to test if
values are accurate
... Not sure how to handle that
... Could be left for implementations to test themselves
AB: good point; any feedback on that?
JS: I can ask around
... I think we ignored rotation
... Could check with tablet people
SM: the hardware people
<timeless> wacom
AB: Doug an I have a standding action to try to get additional
players in the WG
<ArtB1> ... by having a FPWD, that should be easier
AB: a call or two ago we talked briefly about the "A Method for
Writing Testable Conformance Requirements" document (
[19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/
0031.html ).
... Doug had asked for the Testing topic today but he isn't here
[19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011AprJun/0031.html
MB: I looked at the doc;
... somewhat ambivalent
... the Touch Events spec is relatively small
... as such, I don't feel strongly that we need to use it
... but if someone wants to implement it (in the spec itself), I can
work with it
AB: since the Editors are doing the work, I want to listen to their
feedback
SM: I agree with Matt
... doesn't seem like we need it for the Touch Events spec
... perhaps we can consider it for the Intentional Events spec
AB: agree we can consider the Intentional Events spec separately
<scribe> ACTION: Doug submit an opinion on Writing Testable
Conformance Reqs for the Touch Events spec [recorded in
[20]http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-45 - Submit an opinion on Writing Testable
Conformance Reqs for the Touch Events spec [on Doug Schepers - due
2011-05-03].
AB: anything else on Testing for today?
Open and Raised Issues: 1 or 2, time permitting ...
AB: issues in Raised and Open state are: Issue-3, Issue-5, Issue-6,
and Issue-8.
<mbrubeck> There is also
[21]http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/11
[21] http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/11
MB: and Issue-11
AB: my recollection on Issue-11 is that comments should have been
submitted before today's call
<timeless> action-27 is confusing :)
MB: if we use TouchPoint that would break some existing content
<timeless> we could use that as a way to be a different interface...
AB: any additional comments re Issue-11
<timeless> but for compatibility, renaming makes sense
AB: I propose we change the name of TouchPoint to Touch
<smaug_> +1
AB: any objections?
... or voices of support
... +1
... hearing no objections
<sangwhan> Sounds a bit ambiguous, but no better ideas so +1
RESOLUTION: the TouchPoint Interface will be renamed to "Touch"
interface
AB: would you please Matt, commit that change this week?
MB: yes, I will make that change today
AB: thanks Matt!
... my inclination is to not do a deep dive on 3, 5, 6 or 8 on this
call
... we can use the FPWD to explicitly ask for feedback on the
issues.
... also including a pointer to the Open and Raised Issues in the
spec (e.g. SoTD section) may be good.
... and Issue-14 was created today
... by Olli
OP: not sure if those methods are being used
... eg. by Apple or Google
SM: preventDefault is another topic
MB: I can an action to define preventDefault
SM: that is Action-5
... and I am the owner
AB: do we want to change the owner of Action-5?
SM: yes, please do
AB: so I will leave it to the Editors to decide if they want to
explicitly ask for feedback re any of the Open and/or Raised issues
... anything else on this topic for today?
AoB
AB: no call on May 17
... I think the main task between now and May 3, is to get the spec
ready for FPWD
... that's a new process for Matt and Sangwhan
... but Doug is an expert
... propose our May call schedule is May 10 and May 24
... any comments or concerns?
... next call is May 10
... and the 2nd call in May is tentatively May 24
... anything else for today?
... please continue to work on Issues and Actions via the mail list
... Meeting Adjourned
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: barstow create a link to the UCs and Reqs from the
Testing doc [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Doug submit an opinion on Writing Testable Conformance
Reqs for the Touch Events spec [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: sangwhan Create an input for the Introduction section
by April 29 [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2011/04/26-webevents-minutes.html#action02]
[End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 26 April 2011 15:59:57 UTC