IRC log of pointerevents on 2014-02-25

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:58:31 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #pointerevents
15:58:31 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:58:37 [ArtB]
RRSAgent, make log public
15:58:47 [ArtB]
ScribeNick: ArtB
15:58:47 [ArtB]
Scribe: Art
15:58:47 [ArtB]
15:58:47 [ArtB]
Chair: Art
15:58:47 [ArtB]
Meeting: Pointer Events WG Voice Conference
15:58:52 [ArtB]
RRSAgent, make minutes
15:58:52 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ArtB
15:59:15 [ArtB]
RRSAgent, make log Public
16:00:11 [Zakim]
RWC_PEWG()11:00AM has now started
16:00:19 [Zakim]
+ +44.797.663.aaaa
16:00:26 [Zakim]
16:00:40 [ArtB]
zakim, aaaa is Patrick
16:00:40 [Zakim]
+Patrick; got it
16:00:51 [rbyers]
rbyers has joined #pointerevents
16:00:52 [Zakim]
16:01:12 [jrossi2]
Zakim, Microsoft is jrossi2
16:01:12 [Zakim]
+jrossi2; got it
16:01:13 [Zakim]
16:01:18 [jrossi2]
hmm mic not working
16:01:37 [smaug]
Zakim, [IPcaller] is Olli_Pettay
16:01:37 [Zakim]
+Olli_Pettay; got it
16:01:50 [smaug]
Zakim, nick smaug is Olli_Pettay
16:01:50 [Zakim]
ok, smaug, I now associate you with Olli_Pettay
16:02:02 [rbyers]
hmm, bridge issues (just ringing)
16:02:07 [Cathy]
Cathy has joined #pointerevents
16:02:11 [ArtB]
Present: Art_Barstow, Cathy_Chan, Jacob_Rossi, Olli_Pettay, Patrick_Lauke, Rick_Byers
16:02:11 [smaug]
rbyers: I had the same first
16:02:29 [Zakim]
16:02:47 [Zakim]
16:02:58 [Zakim]
16:03:27 [ArtB]
Present+ Scott_González
16:03:31 [patrick_h_lauke]
reminder that i'll have to shoot off early...probably in 40 mins or so
16:04:00 [ArtB]
Topic: Tweak agenda
16:04:09 [ArtB]
AB: I posted a draft agenda yesterday <>. Since then there has been quite a bit of activity on the list.
16:04:09 [Zakim]
16:04:23 [ArtB]
Present+ Asir_Vedamuthu
16:04:28 [ArtB]
AB: the two topics started by Anne were more like "reminders" we are waiting for a reply from Anne and since Olli indicated Anne is not available today, I propose we drop these two topic today and continue discussion on the list. If necessary, we could invite Anne to attend a future call. Any objections to that?
16:04:49 [Zakim]
16:05:02 [ArtB]
Present+ Doug_Schepers
16:05:06 [ArtB]
[ None ]
16:05:11 [ArtB]
AB: the "Awkward wording in 5.2.3" raised by Patrick resulted in a spec update by Jacob that Patrick says is OK. As such, any objections to deleting this topic?
16:05:52 [ArtB]
JR: this isn't a substantial change
16:06:03 [ArtB]
… but would still appreciate people reviewing it
16:06:12 [ArtB]
RB: I looked over it
16:06:17 [ArtB]
JR: yes thanks
16:06:34 [ArtB]
AB: everyone feel an obligation to review changeset
16:06:41 [ArtB]
AB: Topic 2 (non-normative examples for event sequences) is now Bug 24783
16:06:57 [ArtB]
AB: any other change requests?
16:07:07 [ArtB]
Topic: Bug 24783 non-normative examples for event sequences to be added to end of 11.2
16:07:10 [rbyers]
zakim, who is noisy?
16:07:15 [ArtB]
AB: this bug was started by Patrick on February 10 and Rick replied
16:07:21 [Zakim]
rbyers, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Art_Barstow (77%), [Microsoft] (49%)
16:07:34 [rbyers]
zakim, mute [Microsoft]
16:07:34 [Zakim]
[Microsoft] should now be muted
16:08:17 [ArtB]
JR: I'm happy to make the proposed changes
16:08:23 [Zakim]
16:08:26 [ArtB]
RB: think there is one open Q here
16:08:36 [ArtB]
Present+ Matt_Brubeck
16:08:53 [ArtB]
… think one clarification is needed
16:09:13 [asir]
asir has joined #pointerevents
16:10:01 [ArtB]
[ discussion about what to do if hover not supported ]
16:10:46 [ArtB]
JR: re order and when click happens, impls do vary based on touch event model
16:11:01 [ArtB]
… click needs to come before mouse out
16:11:40 [patrick_h_lauke]
"also listing the click event, to clarify that this is fired at the very end of sequence"
16:11:42 [Zakim]
16:11:52 [ArtB]
PL: should we soften the above
16:12:12 [Zakim]
16:12:26 [Zakim]
16:12:43 [ArtB]
RB: this is non-normative text i.e. examples
16:12:52 [ArtB]
… we can add clarifications
16:13:05 [jrossi2]
touch-action: none; /* disables double-tap-zoom in IE */
16:13:16 [ArtB]
PL: how about removing click from the numbered list and add a not after the list
16:13:24 [ArtB]
… that click happens at one position or another
16:13:31 [ArtB]
… I could add that to the bug
16:13:37 [ArtB]
… and then we can discuss
16:13:46 [ArtB]
JR: I prefer to add click to the sequence
16:13:58 [ArtB]
… so impls will be interoperable
16:14:13 [ArtB]
RB: doubletap delay gives lots of probs
16:14:27 [ArtB]
PL: so action on me to update the wording in the bug?
16:14:44 [Zakim]
16:14:46 [ArtB]
RB: ok and move click right after mouse up
16:15:04 [ArtB]
JR: not sure pointercapture events make sense here
16:15:29 [ArtB]
RB: maybe omit pointercapture
16:15:42 [ArtB]
… don't think they are essential to what we want to say here
16:16:10 [ArtB]
ACTION: Patrick update bug 24783 with a proposal the group can review
16:16:10 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-78 - Update bug 24783 with a proposal the group can review [on Patrick Lauke - due 2014-03-04].
16:16:22 [ArtB]
Topic: Bug 24696 - Line too long in example 8
16:16:29 [ArtB]
AB: this bug is purely editorial so I don't think there is anything to discuss, is that right Jacob and Rick?
16:17:12 [ArtB]
RB: this line is especially bad with mobile devices
16:17:29 [ArtB]
JR: the template for code samples uses a <pre> element
16:17:31 [patrick_h_lauke]
should we add overflow:auto to the pre
16:17:38 [ArtB]
… and getting it to wrap is challenging
16:17:47 [ArtB]
RB: can make it wrap via CSS?
16:17:53 [ArtB]
JR: sure
16:18:18 [ArtB]
ACTION: Jacob update the spec for Bug 24696 per discussion on 2014-Feb-25
16:18:18 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-79 - Update the spec for bug 24696 per discussion on 2014-feb-25 [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-04].
16:18:22 [jrossi2]
16:18:28 [ArtB]
Topic: Bug 24706 - Clarify when setPointerCapture is supposed to work
16:18:38 [ArtB]
AB: Olli raised this bug on Feb 17 and Jacob proposes text in comment #5
16:18:57 [ArtB]
AB: Olli, is Jacob's reply sufficient?
16:19:49 [ArtB]
OP: yes, I think that is ok
16:20:07 [ArtB]
JR: if the two terms are confusing, I'm not "married" to those terms
16:20:13 [ArtB]
OP: I think they are fine
16:20:25 [rbyers]
jrossi2: FYI your 'hacked' version looks fine on chrome android now. overflow: auto is probably better than overflow: scroll. But if it's tricky I'm happy to leave as is with the extra line breaks...
16:20:28 [ArtB]
ACTION: Jacob update the spec for Bug 24706 per discussion on 2014-Feb-25
16:20:28 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-80 - Update the spec for bug 24706 per discussion on 2014-feb-25 [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-04].
16:20:39 [ArtB]
Topic: Bug 24772 - releasePointerCapture() should fail if called from a node that doesn't currently capture the pointer
16:20:50 [ArtB]
AB: raised by Jacob Feb 21 based on feedback from "romaxa".
16:21:16 [ArtB]
JR: romaxa is doing the Gecko impl
16:21:37 [ArtB]
… if capture on A and then release on B with same ID does it still release pointercapture
16:21:42 [ArtB]
… with IE, it does not
16:21:48 [ArtB]
… and we think that's a good thing
16:21:54 [ArtB]
RB: I agree
16:22:06 [patrick_h_lauke]
16:22:15 [ArtB]
AB: any disagreement?
16:22:17 [ArtB]
[ None ]
16:22:46 [ArtB]
AB: how about Jacob you make a proposal in the bug?
16:22:50 [ArtB]
JR: yes, I can do that
16:23:07 [ArtB]
ACTION: Jacob update bug 24772 with a proposed change
16:23:08 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-81 - Update bug 24772 with a proposed change [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-04].
16:23:19 [ArtB]
Topic: Bug 24776 - mouseenter/mouseleave in 11.1/11.2 note
16:23:35 [ArtB]
AB: this bug was raised by Patrick Feb 22 Jacob made a spec change and closed the bug and then Patrick reopened it with new proposed text.
16:24:04 [ArtB]
PL: I want to make sure the text is as unambiguous as possible
16:24:20 [ArtB]
JR: the note is global in the sense mouse over/out are not prevented
16:24:58 [ArtB]
PL: I got this the wrong way in my comments
16:25:24 [patrick_h_lauke]
"mouseenter and mouseleave can only be prevented when the pointer is down, while mouseover and mouseout are never prevented."
16:25:50 [patrick_h_lauke]
"mouseover and mouseout can only be prevented when the pointer is down, while mouseenter and mouseleave are never prevented." ?
16:26:05 [jrossi2]
mousedown, move, up can only be prevented when the pointer down, mouseover/out/enter/leave can never be prevented
16:26:12 [patrick_h_lauke]
PL getting confused
16:26:13 [ArtB]
[ JR clarifies which events can be ignored ]
16:26:51 [ArtB]
PL: I'll go ahead and close the bug (based on this conversation)
16:27:16 [ArtB]
Topic: Bug 24777 - Add tiny note to 11.2 - list item nr 2 (mousemove) to clarify the reason for it
16:27:22 [ArtB]
AB: this bug was raised by Patrick Feb 22 Jacob thinks the text in 11.2's intro is sufficient.
16:28:14 [ArtB]
PL: I prefer to have things spelled out
16:28:26 [ArtB]
… mainly because developers skip this type of stuff
16:28:33 [ArtB]
… but I don't feel real strongly
16:28:48 [ArtB]
JR: I don't mind adding it
16:29:26 [ArtB]
ACTION: Jacob update the spec per the Patrick's comment for Bug 24777
16:29:27 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-82 - Update the spec per the patrick's comment for bug 24777 [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-04].
16:29:44 [ArtB]
Topic: Slight softening of language in the note for 5.1.2
16:29:53 [ArtB]
AB: Patrick raised this issue on Feb 22
16:30:09 [ArtB]
PL: since then, I was drawing the wrong conclusion for that one
16:30:56 [Zakim]
16:31:22 [ArtB]
… Process Q - can the Archived-at header be included in the emails
16:31:33 [ArtB]
DS: I have a TBird extension
16:31:56 [ArtB]
RB: if there are multiple pointers down, there can be some compat issues
16:32:20 [ArtB]
JR: if we add anything, could change "will" to "may" or "might"
16:32:28 [shepazu]
16:32:46 [Zakim]
16:33:06 [ArtB]
RB: I think there are no impls that do anything inconsistent with the "will"
16:33:41 [Zakim]
16:34:22 [ArtB]
PL: my last email suggests adding a note
16:34:34 [ArtB]
… does that make sense?
16:34:40 [ArtB]
RB: yes, I think so
16:34:51 [Zakim]
16:35:30 [ArtB]
… not sure we want to add too many requirements
16:36:02 [ArtB]
PL: I can file a bug and we can discuss it
16:36:11 [ArtB]
RB: I think a note would be ok
16:36:16 [mbrubeck]
"first to become active" would be tricky because a mouse device's pointer is always active
16:36:22 [ArtB]
PL: I'll create a bug
16:36:50 [ArtB]
ACTION: Patrick file a bug re the "slight softening of lang in the note for 5.1." issue
16:36:50 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-83 - File a bug re the "slight softening of lang in the note for 5.1." issue [on Patrick Lauke - due 2014-03-04].
16:37:21 [ArtB]
RB: I don't think the impls need to change
16:37:40 [ArtB]
… each pointer type should have one primary pointer
16:37:58 [ArtB]
MB: think the note there is a bit confusing
16:38:23 [ArtB]
PL: I'll look at that note and take discussion to the list
16:38:35 [ArtB]
Topic: Bug 24346 - Clarifications on Pointer Events Types section ?
16:38:47 [ArtB]
AB: Patrick submitted some input for this bug Rick agreed with Patrick's proposed changes but no one else has commented on the bug.
16:39:11 [ArtB]
JR: I made this change last night
16:39:15 [ArtB]
… it's a good change
16:39:26 [ArtB]
… I only made some minor changes
16:39:55 [ArtB]
ACTION: Jacob close/resolved bug 24346
16:39:55 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-84 - Close/resolved bug 24346 [on Jacob Rossi - due 2014-03-04].
16:40:06 [ArtB]
Topic: Bug 24784: ACTION-69: Create a proposal re informative note re pointerevent and touchevent compatibility
16:40:16 [ArtB]
AB: the bug is and includes a relatively lengthy proposal to change text in the intro re compatibility f.ex. with TouchEvents.
16:40:37 [ArtB]
AB: one issue is how much to explicitly say about TouchEvents versus linking to some other document f.ex. a document by the Touch Events Community Group.
16:41:11 [ArtB]
PL: I put a lot of text in my proposal
16:41:27 [ArtB]
… I'm not so married to the text but the overall sense is very important
16:41:38 [ArtB]
… developers need some help here
16:41:46 [ArtB]
… f.ex. the main points of divergence
16:42:12 [ArtB]
… If we can deal with the bulk of this on the CG side, that would be fine with me
16:42:23 [ArtB]
… either way is OK with me
16:42:44 [ArtB]
JR: I think a lightweight note that points to CG work would be fine
16:43:02 [ArtB]
… and let the CG specifiy the details
16:43:15 [ArtB]
RB: we can use the CG's wiki for that
16:43:42 [ArtB]
MB: it is also possible for the spec to include extension points to other docs
16:44:07 [ArtB]
DS: there is a diff b/w documentation and specifications
16:44:31 [mbrubeck]
I'm referring to e.g.
16:44:46 [ArtB]
… in the Audio work, we are experimenting with annotations
16:45:08 [ArtB]
… that could be something for us to consider
16:45:34 [ArtB]
… thus instead of "go to this wiki" the spec can have an annotation to other info
16:47:04 [ArtB]
AB: I support trying to use annotations in the longer term but agree with Rick about using the wiki
16:47:16 [ArtB]
PL: should I put the text in the bug in the wiki?
16:47:26 [ArtB]
… and then have a link in the spec to the wiki?
16:47:42 [ArtB]
AB: that sounds reasonable to me
16:47:51 [ArtB]
JR: yes, a link in the spec to the wiki is OK with me too
16:48:15 [ArtB]
ACTION: Patrick move text in Bug 24784 to the Touch Event CG wiki
16:48:15 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-85 - Move text in bug 24784 to the touch event cg wiki [on Patrick Lauke - due 2014-03-04].
16:48:37 [ArtB]
Topic: Bug 24786: ACTION-64: Propose a non-normative note re the keyboard compat issue
16:48:53 [ArtB]
AB: the bug is and Patrick included proposed addition to the Introduction re keyboards and PointerEvents.
16:49:36 [ArtB]
JR: I need to read it and then I'll comment in the bug
16:49:57 [ArtB]
RB: I think some text like this is fine
16:50:46 [ArtB]
… pointers need a coordinate system
16:51:21 [ArtB]
RB: I'll add some comments to the bug
16:51:29 [Zakim]
16:51:56 [ArtB]
AB: if anyone else has comments re Patrick's proposed text in bug 24786, please add it to the bug
16:52:09 [ArtB]
Topic: Testing status
16:52:13 [patrick_h_lauke]
side note: voiceover/iOS allows sequential navigation AND fires touch events. will test what x/y coords are passed on in that situation
16:52:16 [ArtB]
AB: any new news re testing?
16:52:24 [patrick_h_lauke]
patrick_h_lauke has left #pointerevents
16:52:38 [ArtB]
JR: we will have some testing updates within the next week
16:53:16 [ArtB]
… some internal changes we are doing will facilitate updates to GH
16:53:21 [ArtB]
DS: excellent
16:53:50 [ArtB]
Topic: CR implementation updates
16:53:55 [AutomatedTester]
AutomatedTester has joined #pointerevents
16:53:56 [ArtB]
AB: any new news re Implementations?
16:54:12 [ArtB]
RB: we are continuing to land patches
16:54:20 [ArtB]
… still planning Chrome 35
16:54:34 [ArtB]
OP: we are also landing patches in Gecko
16:54:47 [rbyers]
zakim, unmute [Microsoft[
16:54:47 [Zakim]
sorry, rbyers, I do not know which phone connection belongs to [Microsoft[
16:54:48 [rbyers]
zakim, unmute [Microsoft]
16:54:49 [Zakim]
[Microsoft] should no longer be muted
16:55:07 [ArtB]
AV: what is the timeline for Chrome 35?
16:55:22 [mbrubeck]
16:55:23 [ArtB]
RB: 35 will lock down at the end of March
16:55:45 [ArtB]
… by end of march, touch-action will be on be default
16:56:15 [ArtB]
AV: are there open bugs?
16:56:29 [ArtB]
RB: we have fixed some bugs and have some new ones
16:56:39 [ArtB]
OP: we aren't bug free in Gecko
16:56:56 [ArtB]
RB: Jacob, you still have some actions re touch-action elements?
16:56:58 [ArtB]
JR: yes
16:57:05 [smaug]
s/Gecko/in spec/
16:57:17 [ArtB]
JR: I think the only element is <svg>
16:57:34 [ArtB]
RB: think there are some other block elements
16:58:00 [ArtB]
… need to check css2.1 spec
16:58:30 [ArtB]
JR: I have that action; agree we need to get on the same page
16:59:14 [ArtB]
AV: how close is Gecko to accepting the patches?
16:59:23 [ArtB]
OP: we are landing them when they are ready
16:59:33 [ArtB]
… think branching by end of March is possible
16:59:47 [ArtB]
… and then it takes about 3 months to get it into a release
17:00:16 [ArtB]
Topic: AoB
17:00:21 [ArtB]
AB: anything else for today?
17:00:52 [ArtB]
JR: Microsoft is joining the Touch Events CG
17:00:56 [ArtB]
RB: that's great
17:01:00 [ArtB]
DS: yes agree
17:01:12 [ArtB]
AB: excellent
17:01:34 [ArtB]
DS: re the CG, it can be nice to have a Chair
17:01:49 [ArtB]
RB: I'll need to think about the time commitment
17:02:25 [Zakim]
17:02:27 [Zakim]
17:02:28 [Zakim]
17:02:28 [Zakim]
17:02:29 [ArtB]
AB: meeting adjourned
17:02:29 [Zakim]
17:02:30 [jrossi2]
jrossi2 has left #pointerevents
17:02:31 [Zakim]
17:02:34 [Zakim]
17:02:37 [Zakim]
17:02:45 [Zakim]
17:02:47 [Zakim]
RWC_PEWG()11:00AM has ended
17:02:47 [Zakim]
Attendees were +44.797.663.aaaa, Art_Barstow, Patrick, jrossi2, Olli_Pettay, Cathy, rbyers, Scott_Gonzalez, [Microsoft], Doug_Schepers, Matt_Brubeck
17:02:54 [ArtB]
RRSAgent, make minutes
17:02:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ArtB
17:06:15 [AutomatedTester]
AutomatedTester has joined #pointerevents
17:09:27 [Automate_]
Automate_ has joined #pointerevents
17:49:40 [ArtB]
17:49:40 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #pointerevents
17:49:54 [ArtB]
rrsagent, bye
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
I see 8 open action items saved in :
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Patrick update bug 24783 with a proposal the group can review [1]
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jacob update the spec for Bug 24696 per discussion on 2014-Feb-25 [2]
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jacob update the spec for Bug 24706 per discussion on 2014-Feb-25 [3]
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jacob update bug 24772 with a proposed change [4]
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jacob update the spec per the Patrick's comment for Bug 24777 [5]
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Patrick file a bug re the "slight softening of lang in the note for 5.1." issue [6]
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jacob close/resolved bug 24346 [7]
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Patrick move text in Bug 24784 to the Touch Event CG wiki [8]
17:49:54 [RRSAgent]
recorded in