IRC log of webevents on 2011-09-27
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:59:43 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #webevents
- 14:59:43 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/09/27-webevents-irc
- 14:59:49 [ssharma2]
- ssharma2 has joined #webevents
- 14:59:49 [ArtB]
- RRSAgent, make log Public
- 14:59:59 [ArtB]
- ScribeNick: ArtB
- 14:59:59 [ArtB]
- Scribe: Art
- 14:59:59 [ArtB]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0082.html
- 14:59:59 [ArtB]
- Date: 27 September 2011
- 14:59:59 [ArtB]
- Chair: Art
- 14:59:59 [ArtB]
- Meeting: Web Events WG Voice Conference
- 15:00:19 [ArtB]
- RRSAgent, make minutes
- 15:00:19 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/27-webevents-minutes.html ArtB
- 15:00:33 [Zakim]
- + +1.408.653.aaaa
- 15:00:40 [ArtB]
- RRSAgent, make log Public
- 15:00:56 [ted_]
- zakim, who is here?
- 15:00:56 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see [Mozilla], +1.408.653.aaaa
- 15:01:02 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see ssharma2, RRSAgent, Zakim, ArtB, smaug, shepazu, mbrubeck, scottmg, ted_, trackbot
- 15:01:06 [ted_]
- zakim, [Mozilla] is Ted_Mielczarek
- 15:01:12 [Zakim]
- +Ted_Mielczarek; got it
- 15:01:22 [Zakim]
- + +1.206.792.aabb
- 15:01:27 [mbrubeck]
- Zakim, aabb is me
- 15:01:40 [Zakim]
- +mbrubeck; got it
- 15:01:41 [Zakim]
- + +1.781.993.aacc
- 15:01:41 [ArtB]
- zakim, who is here?
- 15:01:53 [ArtB]
- zakim, aacc is Art_Barstow
- 15:01:56 [Zakim]
- +??P34
- 15:01:58 [ted_]
- zakim: nick ted_ is Ted_Mielczarek
- 15:01:59 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Ted_Mielczarek, +1.408.653.aaaa, mbrubeck, +1.781.993.aacc, ??P34
- 15:02:02 [Cathy]
- Cathy has joined #webevents
- 15:02:05 [smaug]
- Zakim, ??P34 is Olli_Pettay
- 15:02:14 [Cathy]
- Present+ Cathy_Chan
- 15:02:15 [Zakim]
- +Art_Barstow; got it
- 15:02:25 [ssharma2]
- aaaa is ne
- 15:02:26 [ArtB]
- Regrets: Dzung_Tran, Sangwhan_Moon
- 15:02:28 [smaug]
- Zakim, nick smaug is Olli_Pettay
- 15:02:31 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see ssharma2, RRSAgent, Zakim, ArtB, smaug, shepazu, mbrubeck, scottmg, ted_, trackbot
- 15:02:37 [Zakim]
- +Olli_Pettay; got it
- 15:02:51 [Zakim]
- ok, smaug, I now associate you with Olli_Pettay
- 15:03:21 [ssharma2]
- Suman Sharma
- 15:03:45 [ArtB]
- Present: Art_Barstow, Cathy_Chan, Matt_Brubeck, Ted_Mielczarek, Olli_Pettay, Suman_Sharma, Doug_Schepers
- 15:04:05 [ArtB]
- Topic: Tweak Agenda
- 15:04:11 [ArtB]
- AB: I submitted a draft agenda on September 26 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0082.html. Any change requests? I think it makes sense to combine Issue-21 and Issue-22 as one topic. We can talk about charter update during AoB.
- 15:04:29 [mbrubeck]
- Zakim, aaaa is Suman_Sharma
- 15:04:29 [Zakim]
- +Suman_Sharma; got it
- 15:04:38 [mbrubeck]
- Zakim, nick ssharma2 is Suman_Sharma
- 15:04:38 [Zakim]
- ok, mbrubeck, I now associate ssharma2 with Suman_Sharma
- 15:04:45 [mbrubeck]
- Zakim, mbrubeck is really Matt_Brubeck
- 15:04:45 [Zakim]
- +Matt_Brubeck; got it
- 15:04:53 [ArtB]
- AB: any change requests for the agenda?
- 15:04:53 [mbrubeck]
- Zakim, nick mbrubeck is Matt_Brubeck
- 15:04:53 [Zakim]
- ok, mbrubeck, I now associate you with Matt_Brubeck
- 15:04:54 [ArtB]
- [None]
- 15:05:01 [ArtB]
- Topic: Announcements
- 15:05:11 [ArtB]
- AB: reminder our f2f meeting at the annual TPAC meeting week is November 1 and the registration deadline is October 14 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0079.html .
- 15:05:34 [ArtB]
- AB: if we do meet that day - and at the moment it is not clear if we will need to meet - it will only be in the morning (09:00-12:00 SFO time zone) and we will have a voice conference bridge for remote attendees.
- 15:05:45 [Zakim]
- +Doug_Schepers
- 15:06:50 [ArtB]
- AB: there is no requirement to come to the f2f meeting
- 15:07:06 [ArtB]
- AB: we have Suman joining us from Intel
- 15:07:22 [ArtB]
- SS: I work for Intel
- 15:07:43 [ArtB]
- … my group is interested in home related standards
- 15:07:56 [ArtB]
- … I attend other standards meeting
- 15:08:06 [ArtB]
- … f.ex. Khronos
- 15:08:18 [ArtB]
- DS: welcome; nice to have you on board
- 15:08:28 [ArtB]
- … it would be good to have a Khronos connection
- 15:08:36 [ArtB]
- Suman: I will definitely help as needed
- 15:08:53 [ArtB]
- AB: are you in same group as Tran?
- 15:09:00 [ArtB]
- Suman: no, he is in PC group
- 15:09:15 [ArtB]
- AB: welcome to the group!
- 15:09:32 [ArtB]
- … I have an action related to following up with Khronos so I'll contact you about that
- 15:09:49 [ArtB]
- AB: any other announcements for today?
- 15:10:01 [ArtB]
- DS: I published a new draft of the charter
- 15:10:07 [shepazu]
- http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/charter/2011/Overview.html
- 15:10:12 [ArtB]
- … that includes Mouse Lock and Gamepad
- 15:10:25 [ArtB]
- AB: we will take that during AoB. Thanks!
- 15:10:42 [ArtB]
- Topic: Touch Events v1 LCWD TE
- 15:10:50 [ArtB]
- AB: reminder that October 11 is the comment deadline for the TE v1 LCWD http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-touch-events-20110913/. We are doing a good job of addressing comments as they come in (i.e. not waiting until after the comment deadline).
- 15:11:16 [ArtB]
- AB: one administrivia issue is the LC Comment tracking document. I propose using a wiki http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0058.html . Any objections to that?
- 15:11:36 [ArtB]
- DS: why not use tracker?
- 15:11:43 [ArtB]
- AB: I find wiki easier
- 15:11:45 [ArtB]
- DS: OK
- 15:12:04 [ArtB]
- AB: I don't object to using Tracker
- 15:12:20 [ArtB]
- … but if we agree to use a wiki I'll take an action to create it and seed it
- 15:12:28 [ArtB]
- AB: any objections to using a wiki?
- 15:12:37 [ArtB]
- [None]
- 15:12:55 [ArtB]
- ACTION: barstow create a wiki to track comments for the TE v1 LCWD
- 15:12:55 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-76 - Create a wiki to track comments for the TE v1 LCWD [on Arthur Barstow - due 2011-10-04].
- 15:13:08 [ArtB]
- AB: Issue-19: Align initTouchEvent parameters with Webkit; any feedback from Webkit community? http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/19
- 15:13:33 [ArtB]
- AB: I note Laszlo isn't here today
- 15:13:53 [ArtB]
- … Does anyone know if there has been any related discussion by the Webkit community?
- 15:14:11 [ArtB]
- [Silence]
- 15:14:20 [ArtB]
- AB: we will continue this next meeting ...
- 15:14:33 [ArtB]
- Topic: ISSUE-23: Add a DOM4-style constructor to create and initialize TouchEvent objects
- 15:14:41 [ArtB]
- AB: Issue-23 is a result of comments from Anne http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/23 .
- 15:14:50 [ArtB]
- AB: we talked about this last week and agreed then to keep initTouchEvent method in v1 http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-webevents-minutes.html#item03. Since then, Matt and Anne had some followups http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0077.html
- 15:14:55 [shepazu]
- agend+ IE10 Touch support https://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2011/09/20/touch-input-for-ie10-and-metro-style-apps.aspx
- 15:15:07 [shepazu]
- agenda+ IE10 Touch support https://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2011/09/20/touch-input-for-ie10-and-metro-style-apps.aspx
- 15:15:38 [ArtB]
- AB: so where are we with this?
- 15:15:53 [ArtB]
- MB: Anne thinks there is no good reason to include initTouchEvent in v1
- 15:15:58 [ArtB]
- … I tend to agree with him
- 15:16:19 [ArtB]
- … I know Doug and Olli want to keep it
- 15:16:22 [shepazu]
- q+
- 15:16:28 [ArtB]
- … I think we others to reply to Anne
- 15:16:44 [ArtB]
- … I didn't need it for my tests
- 15:17:01 [ArtB]
- DS: Matt, are your tests manual?
- 15:17:18 [ArtB]
- … or automatic
- 15:17:22 [ArtB]
- MB: they are manual
- 15:17:43 [ArtB]
- DS: previous feedback is that we want to move to automatic tests if possible
- 15:18:06 [mbrubeck]
- I think even if we do write automated tests, they will be very limited in what they can test.
- 15:18:18 [ArtB]
- DS: is there an analog in existing impls?
- 15:18:19 [ArtB]
- MB: no
- 15:18:44 [ArtB]
- DS: does WK have initTouchEvent today?
- 15:18:48 [ArtB]
- MB: yes, it does
- 15:19:03 [ArtB]
- … although WK's interface is different then the LCWD
- 15:19:15 [ArtB]
- … it includes some additional params
- 15:19:31 [ArtB]
- DS: and you don't think they will change their behavior?
- 15:19:46 [ArtB]
- MB: we are still waiting for feedback from the WK community
- 15:19:57 [ArtB]
- DS: I understand the approach
- 15:20:27 [ArtB]
- … but I also am concerned their is a widely implemented replacement, I have reservations about removing it
- 15:20:36 [ArtB]
- … I don't want to stand in the way
- 15:21:12 [ArtB]
- AB: would this mean TE v1 spec would have a dependency on DOM4?
- 15:21:17 [ArtB]
- DS: not necessarily
- 15:21:38 [ArtB]
- … we could just define initializer/constructor that exists in DOM4
- 15:21:52 [ArtB]
- … because DOM4 isn't likely to be done for a couple of years
- 15:22:04 [ArtB]
- … and if DOM4 then changes, we can make a revision
- 15:22:22 [ArtB]
- … I think future specs will match the more general behavior
- 15:22:39 [ArtB]
- … It would mean we need to go back to LC, I think
- 15:22:47 [ArtB]
- … Do you agree Matt?
- 15:23:05 [ArtB]
- MB: it would significantly lengthen the time to get v1 to REC
- 15:23:50 [ArtB]
- … We want to move fwd with a constructor we need for testing and will then deprecate it
- 15:23:59 [ArtB]
- DS: I think it can be used for other purposes
- 15:24:19 [ArtB]
- MB: it has been in WK since 2007 but I have seen no code in the wild that uses it
- 15:24:39 [ArtB]
- … If someone has some data shows it is being used, I'd like to see it
- 15:24:49 [ArtB]
- … ATM, only Gecko follows the spec
- 15:24:56 [ArtB]
- DS: does anyone else have an opinion?
- 15:25:14 [smaug]
- here we have a test using initTouchEvent :p http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/content/events/test/test_bug648573.html?force=1#60
- 15:25:28 [ArtB]
- MB: if we want to take v1 fwd to match existing impls
- 15:26:33 [ArtB]
- [ Scribe missed some stuff so we pause while Matt enters his comments in IRC … ]
- 15:27:11 [ArtB]
- RRSAgent, make minutes
- 15:27:11 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/27-webevents-minutes.html ArtB
- 15:27:22 [mbrubeck]
- then we have two options: specify initTouchEvent as implemented in WebKit (with WebKit-only gesture parameters, etc.), or leave it out of v1.
- 15:27:40 [mbrubeck]
- If we are willing to wait longer on making v1 a Recommendation, then we have more options.
- 15:28:22 [ArtB]
- DS: it would mean we would need to back to LC (if the function is removed)
- 15:28:31 [ArtB]
- … we kinda' knew that
- 15:28:39 [ArtB]
- … as we talked about it before
- 15:28:49 [ArtB]
- … The 2nd LC would only be 3 weeks
- 15:29:03 [ArtB]
- … I think we need a discussion on the list
- 15:29:23 [ArtB]
- … Some people may object to us not having a constructor at all
- 15:29:31 [ArtB]
- … We don't want to keep bouncing back and forth
- 15:29:44 [ArtB]
- AB: I agree we need more discussion on the list
- 15:30:16 [ArtB]
- … do we need a new thread? or can we use the thread with Anne?
- 15:30:29 [ArtB]
- DS: we need to be clear about our proposal
- 15:30:42 [ArtB]
- … so we get a sense if there will be any objections
- 15:30:51 [ArtB]
- … We need to be clear on why we want to remove it
- 15:31:03 [ArtB]
- … and the implications of doing so
- 15:31:51 [ArtB]
- AB: would be good if someone could start a thread about this
- 15:32:03 [ArtB]
- … Are there any volunteers?
- 15:32:21 [ArtB]
- MB: I can respond on the ongoing thread
- 15:32:36 [ArtB]
- … I know Olli may have some feedback
- 15:32:41 [ArtB]
- … As well as others
- 15:32:48 [ArtB]
- OP: we need something for testing
- 15:33:14 [ArtB]
- MB: another question is how imp is it to finalize v1 as a REC as soon as we can?
- 15:33:39 [ArtB]
- … if we are willing to take longer, we aren't as constrained by existing impls
- 15:33:48 [ArtB]
- DS: I'd like to go REC as soon as we can
- 15:33:55 [ArtB]
- MB: why is that Doug?
- 15:34:11 [ArtB]
- DS: the patent commitments don't start until a spec reaches REC
- 15:34:27 [ArtB]
- … and that gives implementers more "confidence" re the patent risks
- 15:34:43 [ArtB]
- … but we also understand some implementers don't care about patent issues
- 15:35:03 [ArtB]
- … Some members want specs to proceed as chartered
- 15:35:16 [ArtB]
- … It would show we can make progress on something
- 15:35:30 [ArtB]
- … which is good for setting expectations
- 15:35:42 [ArtB]
- MB: ok; got it
- 15:36:12 [ArtB]
- AB: as a wrap up for today, Matt agreed to respond on the list
- 15:36:21 [ArtB]
- … is there anything else for this today?
- 15:36:36 [ArtB]
- … I think this is the most critical issue that has been so far
- 15:36:50 [ArtB]
- … So we need to think it through and get feedback
- 15:37:01 [ArtB]
- DS: removing eliminates two issues
- 15:37:20 [ArtB]
- … the Issue Laszlo has with his WK patch
- 15:37:58 [ArtB]
- … and might stop us from having to do the deprecation of initTouchEvent
- 15:38:24 [ArtB]
- … Certainly for v2 we need a more solid constructor function
- 15:38:36 [ArtB]
- … And doing the removal would get us to REC faster
- 15:38:48 [ArtB]
- Topic: Issue-21 and Issue 22
- 15:38:57 [ArtB]
- AB: Issue 21 is "Description of touchcancel event is missing some details" and it originates from one of Cathy's LC comments http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/21 . Matt and Cathy have related Action-72 and Action-73 http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/72 ; http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/73
- 15:39:17 [ArtB]
- AB: Issue 22 is "Does an element have to also register for touchstart event in order to receive touchend/touchmove events" http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/issues/22 and Cathy has related Action-72 http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/track/actions/72
- 15:39:36 [ArtB]
- AB: yesterday Cathy submitted proposed text to address both of these issues http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011JulSep/0083.html.
- 15:39:53 [ArtB]
- AB: the proposal is to change text in 4 sections.
- 15:40:38 [ArtB]
- MB: I haven't looked at the proposal yet
- 15:41:14 [ArtB]
- CC: there are two issues
- 15:41:25 [ArtB]
- … touchcancel description is missing some details
- 15:41:58 [ArtB]
- … to address this, I suggest a change to some existing text
- 15:42:33 [ArtB]
- … and also add a new paragraph in section 5.7 (touchcancel event)
- 15:43:39 [ArtB]
- … I also propose changing touchend and touchmove text to clarify
- 15:43:52 [ArtB]
- … (those are the 2nd and 3rd changes in my email)
- 15:44:13 [ArtB]
- AB: any comments?
- 15:44:52 [ArtB]
- … please review Cathy's proposed changes and send comments to the list
- 15:45:14 [ArtB]
- MB: at a first glance, they look good to me. Thanks Cathy!
- 15:45:19 [ArtB]
- DS: yes, thanks Cathy
- 15:45:52 [ArtB]
- AB: do we want to set a deadline for comments and if there are no comments, we consider them acceptable?
- 15:45:58 [ArtB]
- DS: yes, that's fine by me
- 15:46:50 [ArtB]
- AB: I propose then that if no one raises any issues by 12:00 Boston time on Friday Sept 30, we consider the changes acceptable
- 15:46:59 [ArtB]
- … any objections to that?
- 15:47:04 [ArtB]
- [ None ]
- 15:47:36 [ArtB]
- AB: Cathy agreed to make the changes if that's OK.
- 15:47:44 [ArtB]
- … Is that agreeable?
- 15:47:47 [ArtB]
- DS: fine with me
- 15:47:52 [ArtB]
- MB: ok with me
- 15:48:14 [ArtB]
- Topic: Testing Touch Events
- 15:48:39 [ArtB]
- AB: Olli reported on the list he hasn't done action-74 so we'll skip this topic today
- 15:48:48 [ArtB]
- Topic: Any Other Business (AOB)
- 15:48:55 [ArtB]
- AB: re adding Gamepad API and Mouse Lock API to our charter, Doug has a Draft charter that includes these two APIs http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/charter/2011/Overview.html.
- 15:49:16 [ArtB]
- AB: thanks Doug!
- 15:49:28 [ArtB]
- … Did you make any changes to section 1.?
- 15:50:28 [ArtB]
- DS: yes, to add Lock and Gamepad, I needed to create some subsections
- 15:50:43 [ArtB]
- … so the Touch Interfaces is now its own section (1.1)
- 15:51:05 [ArtB]
- … I added the new specs to the Deliverables section
- 15:51:42 [ArtB]
- AB: any comments?
- 15:51:49 [ArtB]
- AB: this looks great
- 15:52:03 [scottmg]
- I had a quick read, looks good to me
- 15:52:14 [ArtB]
- … the Intentional Events is missing from the Deliverables
- 15:52:41 [ArtB]
- DS: until we get something from P&F WG, not sure we have anything to add
- 15:52:50 [ArtB]
- … I'll need to talk to them
- 15:53:25 [ArtB]
- AB: this is an interesting question
- 15:53:38 [ArtB]
- … don't think we need to block re Intentional Events
- 15:54:13 [ArtB]
- DS: I'll add it to deliverables
- 15:54:48 [ArtB]
- Suman: re games, what about depth camera?
- 15:54:57 [ArtB]
- DS: that is out of scope
- 15:55:32 [ArtB]
- … we need to be careful about adding specs in areas where there are patent concerns
- 15:55:48 [ArtB]
- … since that can prevent some Members from joining this WG
- 15:56:02 [ArtB]
- … And I would like to get more Members involved
- 15:56:09 [ArtB]
- Suman: ok; thanks for that information
- 15:57:13 [ArtB]
- … A lot of the important players are small and not W3C Members
- 15:58:17 [ArtB]
- DS: other than IP concerns, I think we should also try to keep a relatively narrow focus
- 15:58:34 [ArtB]
- Ted: yes, I agree with keeping the scope relatively narrow
- 15:59:04 [ArtB]
- DS: we also don't want to add deliverables without editors and a draft spec
- 15:59:25 [ArtB]
- … we can also recharter at some other time e.g. 6 months from now
- 15:59:55 [ArtB]
- … Let's talk about depth offline
- 16:01:50 [ArtB]
- AB: I'll respond and ask people to send comments
- 16:02:02 [ArtB]
- … what is next?
- 16:02:13 [ArtB]
- DS: I need to get some internal W3C review
- 16:03:02 [ArtB]
- … I can try to expedite the review
- 16:03:22 [ArtB]
- AB: I would like the AC review of the charter to start before the AC meeting on Nov 1
- 16:04:23 [ArtB]
- DS: I'll work toward getting an AC review as soon as I can
- 16:05:30 [ArtB]
- AB: anything else on the charter?
- 16:05:49 [ArtB]
- DS: Microsoft has implemented some touch intentional events
- 16:05:54 [smaug]
- https://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2011/09/20/touch-input-for-ie10-and-metro-style-apps.aspx
- 16:06:07 [shepazu]
- http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/ie/hh272903.aspx#_DOMTouch
- 16:06:10 [ArtB]
- RRSAgent, make minutes
- 16:06:10 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/27-webevents-minutes.html ArtB
- 16:06:30 [ArtB]
- DS: it's unfortunate they didn't participate in our Touch Events spec
- 16:06:42 [ArtB]
- … I think there will be some interop issues
- 16:06:59 [ArtB]
- … It's simple but perhaps too simple
- 16:07:05 [ArtB]
- … They did prefix their events
- 16:07:11 [ArtB]
- … Perhaps later we can converge
- 16:07:40 [ArtB]
- AB: I think that gives us an action to followup with Microsoft
- 16:07:51 [ArtB]
- AB: next call is October 4, if there is sufficient topics.
- 16:08:04 [ArtB]
- AB: meeting adjourned
- 16:08:11 [Zakim]
- -Suman_Sharma
- 16:08:12 [Zakim]
- -Olli_Pettay
- 16:08:13 [Zakim]
- -Doug_Schepers
- 16:08:18 [ArtB]
- RRSAgent, make minutes
- 16:08:18 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/27-webevents-minutes.html ArtB
- 16:08:23 [Zakim]
- -Art_Barstow
- 16:08:27 [Zakim]
- -Ted_Mielczarek
- 16:08:48 [Zakim]
- -Matt_Brubeck
- 16:08:50 [Zakim]
- RWC_WebEven()11:00AM has ended
- 16:08:51 [Zakim]
- Attendees were +1.408.653.aaaa, Ted_Mielczarek, +1.206.792.aabb, +1.781.993.aacc, Art_Barstow, Olli_Pettay, Suman_Sharma, Matt_Brubeck, Doug_Schepers
- 16:09:35 [ArtB]
- zakim, bye
- 16:09:35 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #webevents
- 16:16:28 [ArtB]
- RRSAgent, bye
- 16:16:28 [RRSAgent]
- I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/27-webevents-actions.rdf :
- 16:16:28 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: barstow create a wiki to track comments for the TE v1 LCWD [1]
- 16:16:28 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/27-webevents-irc#T15-12-55