Pointer Events WG Voice Conference

30 Jul 2013


See also: IRC log


Art_Barstow, Matt_Brubeck, Jacob_Rossi, Asir_Vedamuthu, Cathy_Chan, Olli_Pettay, Scott_González, Doug_Schepers, Sangwhan_Moon


<scribe> ScribeNick: ArtB

<scribe> Scribe: Art

Tweak agenda

AB: Welcome back everyone ;-)!

<jrossi> Congrats, Cathy!

AB: I published a draft agenda yesterday http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JulSep/0005.html. Any change requests?

[ No change requests for the agenda ]

CR implementation status

AB: let's talk about CR implementation status.
... Rick submitted an update re Blink/Chrome http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JulSep/0007.html
... Rick says a few weeks for touch-actions

JR: and Rick said a few months before the impl is complete

AS: the "few months" from Rick was about the touch-action-delay

MB: re Firefox, a Microsoft person (?) submitted a Gecko patch

<mbrubeck> Microsoft contributed patches to Gecko, currently being reviewed: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=822898

<mbrubeck> http://msopentech.com/blog/2013/06/17/w3c-pointer-events-gains-further-web-momentum-with-patch-for-mozilla-firefox/

… still a WIP

OP: that is in my review queue

… that patch was about the PE events and not the CSS property

… but I expect that person to implement that too

<mbrubeck> The contributor, Oleg Romashin ("romaxa") is a long-time Firefox developer.

<jrossi> Oleg Romashin <Oleg.Romashin@microsoft.com>

AB: thanks Matt and Olli

OP: I think there needs to be some work on mouse and pointer events interaction

… we need some tests to work on that

… Oleg is working on that

MB: Wes Johnson is interested in doing some work too

… he mentioned that to Oleg

AB: is there a timeframe for FF/Gecko?

MB: no

OP: no, events stuff is "easy" but the CSS property is not

AB: Scott, any news from jQuery?

SG: working on Polymer. The goal is to use Polymer and not our own implementation

<sangwhan> Opera 14+ is a ditto of Rick's status update

AB: Jacob, Asir, what about IE?

JR: we release IE11 Preview a few weeks ago

… it includes updated MSPointerEvents

… it is still member-prefixed

… We will ship IE 11 without prefixes

… we will announce this on our blog later this week

… We think the compat hit will be minimal

AB: when can we expect that to hit the street?

JR: we don't have an announced date

… other than we expect IE11 to be in Windows 8.1

AB: thanks Jacob

<jrossi> Windows 8.1 will be available before the end of the calendar year

JR: one thing to note is that now we don't expect to build support for the constructor

… we need to do that across the board

… not clear if that will be in IE11

DS: that's not a problem per se from the standarization PoV, but if that constructor is in the spec, we will need 2 impls that do support the constructor

… Will we get that?

JR: think it will be supported by Blink and Firefox

OP: I expect us to support it in Gecko

DS: ok, thanks

AB: Sangwhan, what about Opera?

SM: our impl will depend on Rick (Chromium's) work

… Opera's Presto - it seems unlikely we will add PE support

… unless there becomes lots of content that use it and we have an interop problem

AS: so Opera's work depends on Chromium?

SM: yes

AS: what did you say about Presto? Because I could not hear the full summary

<sangwhan> Bottom line is Opera's work now depends on Chromium

<sangwhan> As the rendering engine is now using Blink starting from Opera (Mobile) 14+

<sangwhan> Nothing else from Opera

AB: any news about Polymer?

SG: one place is a deviation is the touch-action attribute

… they've done a lot of work to remove it

… not sure where that stands now

<scott_gonzalez> https://github.com/Polymer/PointerEvents/issues/92

JR: Rick mentioned Polymer in his status report

AB: anything about WebKit?

… as I understand it, Microsoft submitted a patch for WebKit. Is that true?

AS: our patches are all online

… I don't have any new info

AB: any other impl data to share?

Test Suite status

AB: the general topic is what needs to be done to make the test suite sufficient to test an implementation of the CR.
... and, more specifically, I think it would be useful if we had an understanding about Who is going to do What and by When.
... Matt proposed an overall testing process in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013AprJun/0167.html and earlier today I codified quite a bit of that in http://www.w3.org/wiki/PointerEvents/Testing.
... let's start with an inventory
... We have Scott's pointerdown file as "approved" https://raw.github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/master/pointerevents/pointerdown.html so it is now mirrored and thus can be run directly in a browser via http://w3c-test.org/web-platform-tests/master/pointerevents/
... Last April, there were some TTWF submissions http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013AprJun/0092.html and they are not in the pointerevents repo https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/pointerevents
... how do we get review on those submissions

SM: those are put in new repos, they are not PRs

MB: correct, they were created before we had the pointerevents repo

SG: I can ask Dave to make a PR to the new repo

<scott_gonzalez> https://github.com/dmethvin/pointerevents-test

AB: that would be great; then we need PRs for the other submissions

SG: I think Dave needs to do a merge and then after that is done to make a PR for the pointerevents repo

<scribe> ACTION: scott follow up with Dave to get a PR from the April TTWF to the pointerevents repo [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/07/30-pointerevents-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-44 - Follow up with Dave to get a PR from the April TTWF to the pointerevents repo [on Scott González - due 2013-08-06].

SM: please let me know when that PR is made


AB: re notifications, I think it would be useful for people to send an email to the list after they submit a PR
... do we need to chase the other submitters or is Dave doing that?

SG: Dave's PR will include a merge of the other submissions

AB: one of the next Qs is about coverage/breath and then depth

<mbrubeck> sangwhan: Where/who should I ask for write access to that repo?

… wrt coverage, the Test Assertion table is a good way to get a handle on that

AB: Cathy, is the Test Assertions table complete? http://www.w3.org/wiki/PointerEvents/TestAssertions

<jrossi> mbrubeck: Mike Smith gave me my write access

CC: there could be a couple of sections that still need some work

<sangwhan> mbrubeck: Tobie/Mike/Robin

… f.ex. the CSS property

… other than that, I think I'm done

AB: so one Q is if the TAs are sufficient to qualify an impl re the CR

JR: I think we now have sufficient breadth

… the feature coverage seems adequate

… The depth Q is different

… I would need to do a path

… but I think what we have is pretty good

<jrossi> http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/ietestcenter/#pointerevents

… Microsoft will contribute some tests

… I need to prep then and create a PR

… and that will cover more assertions

SM: re TouchEvents, there is some variability when running them, hope we can do better with PointerEvents

SG: agree we should be more clear here, especially why some tests are not run

… we need to describe what we expect to happen and then what actually happens

<scott_gonzalez> If possible, we should generate a failing test if we can detect that a block of event assertions never ran.

AB: Jacob, when can we expect those tests?

JR: within the next two weeks.

<scott_gonzalez> But we may not be able to reliably determine that based on differing pointer types.

<scott_gonzalez> At a minimum, we should have a short description of what we expected to happen so the tester can easily determine if all assertions have run.

AB: thanks Jacob

… can you think of any features that you don't test?

JR: not sure but perhaps the touch-action property

… I will update the wiki with our tests and that will help with understanding which features we have coverage

SG: the Test Status data isn't particuarly useful

… they need to be changed to more useful status

… like "Approved"

AB: +1 Scott!

AS: re approval, is there a way they can approved in August?

SG: all of the tests, or those with PRs

AS: I mean all of the coverage we need

SG: I don't think I will be able to review everything by August

… based on history, not sure we will have all of the tests by August

AB: the minimum req is to have at least one person review each test

… and we should certaily strive to do better than that

… and avoid the "fox guarding the chicken coop"

AS: reviewing tests can be really useful, especially for the implementers

SM: how do we handle duplicates?

SG: for Dave's PR, we will take care of that

… unless a test Seattle is more comprehensive

SM: looking at the IE tests, they could be covered by Seattle tests

… who is going to take care of duplicates

JR: it could be helpful to review our submissions versus the Seattle tests

… I think it's OK for PRs to include dups

… and then we remove the dups before being merged to master

SG: perhaps it would be best if Dave waits until Microsoft submits its tests

… if the Seattle tests overlap IE, Dave could just ignore the Seattle tests

AB: so Scott will ask Dave to block until Jacob submits his tests. Is this correct?

SG: yes

AB: so I think we have a good plan then

… and Jacob is going to update the TA table re the Microsoft tests

<jrossi> Yes, Cathy's table was a big help!

<asir> Indeed!!!

AB: the TA table is really great Cathy
... anything else on testing for today?

[ No ]


AB: anything else for today?

AS: when is the next call?

AB: is the current process working?

AS: let's meet after Jacob submits his tests

AB: that sounds like a good working assumption
... is the current meeting frequency working OK?

DS: I'd leave it to you Art

<asir> +1

AB: ok, we'll continue along the way we are going

DS: I went to OSCON last week in PDX, PointerEvents was a topic

… and there is an HTML DevConf with Jacob on a PE panel

<jrossi> http://html5devconf.com/

AB: meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: scott follow up with Dave to get a PR from the April TTWF to the pointerevents repo [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/07/30-pointerevents-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2013-07-30 16:00:07 $

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)

Succeeded: s/WebKit/Firefox/
Succeeded: s/what about Presto?/what did you say about Presto? Because I could not hear the full summary/
Succeeded: s/upcoming conf/HTML DevConf/
Found ScribeNick: ArtB
Found Scribe: Art
Present: Art_Barstow Matt_Brubeck Jacob_Rossi Asir_Vedamuthu Cathy_Chan Olli_Pettay Scott_González Doug_Schepers Sangwhan_Moon
Regrets: Rick_Byers
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013JulSep/0005.html
Got date from IRC log name: 30 Jul 2013
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/07/30-pointerevents-minutes.html
People with action items: dave follow scott up with

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

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]