15:02:05 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pointerevents
15:02:05 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/05/25-pointerevents-irc
15:02:20 <patrick_h_lauke> present+ patrick_h_lauke
15:02:38 <patrick_h_lauke> scribe: patrick_h_lauke
15:03:00 <teddink> teddink has joined #pointerevents
15:03:29 <teddink> +present teddink
15:03:30 <NavidZ> present+ NavidZ
15:03:30 <scott_gonzalez> present+ scott_gonzalez
15:03:46 <teddink> present+ teddink
15:04:13 <smaug> present+ smaug
15:04:24 <patrick_h_lauke> topic: Add additional digitizer/pen attributes: twist (rotation)  https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/25
15:04:25 <rbyers> present+ rbyers
15:04:42 <shepazu> scribenick: patrick_h_lauke
15:05:20 <dtapuska> dtapuska has joined #pointerevents
15:05:29 <patrick_h_lauke> TOPIC: Add additional digitizer/pen attributes: twist (rotation)  https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/25
15:05:56 <dtapuska> present +dtapuska
15:06:16 <patrick_h_lauke> Add additional digitizer/pen attributes: barrel pressure (tangential  pressure) https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/70
15:06:30 <patrick_h_lauke> PL: did trawl through github, these seem low hanging fruit
15:07:59 <patrick_h_lauke> PL: do we agree in principle?
15:08:20 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: as long as there's at least one device that supports these on at least one platform, Blink would be happy to implement
15:09:13 <patrick_h_lauke> Ted: we agree in principle, as long as it's available in Windows, but not opposed to property at all
15:09:59 <patrick_h_lauke> Oli: how many % of users will use this feature?
15:10:10 <smaug> s/Oli/Olli/
15:10:51 <patrick_h_lauke> ??: it would not be a priority to implement
15:11:01 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: but if no engine implements it, there won't be user uptake
15:11:18 <patrick_h_lauke> Ted: it's worth conversation to discuss how useful it is to web developers
15:12:02 <patrick_h_lauke> Doug?: we should put the question to the issue about what device support currently is and what use cases are
15:12:41 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: it's chicken and egg - if not implemented, web devs won't even think of use cases; in principle, the web should have same power/functionality that native has
15:13:52 <patrick_h_lauke> ??: we can spec it, it's then up to browsers to implement it.
15:14:11 <rbyers> s/??/SG/
15:14:26 <patrick_h_lauke> Doug: from standards/process perspective, if we add to spec, and nobody implements it, we can mark it at risk when we come to CR
15:14:48 <patrick_h_lauke> but as we now have language for it, we can defer it to future versions of the spec until support does exist
15:15:17 <patrick_h_lauke> actions to do: find out from original poster what specific devices have this; spec it out and mark at risk pending implementations
15:15:59 <patrick_h_lauke> PL: i think the device was wacom...airbrush
15:16:07 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: link to store where i can buy it would be helpful
15:17:10 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: i met with wacom folks few months ago and asked if they have other properties that matter to them. they listed the ID which we rejected on privacy grounds
15:17:25 <patrick_h_lauke> RB/Doug: we'll reach out to Wacom to participate
15:17:48 <patrick_h_lauke> RESOLUTION: find out from original poster what specific devices have this; spec it out and mark at risk pending implementations
15:17:59 <patrick_h_lauke> TOPIC: Make width/height default to 1, remove UA "guessing"/faking geometry  https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/pull/69
15:18:36 <patrick_h_lauke> PL: discussed on github/list, anybody disagree?
15:18:53 <patrick_h_lauke> not hearing any disagreements
15:19:01 <patrick_h_lauke> RESOLUTION: merging after the call
15:19:18 <patrick_h_lauke> TOPIC: Spec implies lost/gotpointercapture is delayed until the next pointer  event but Edge does otherwise https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/32
15:19:59 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: this is more for Ted - can you explain what Edge does?
15:20:46 <patrick_h_lauke> Ted: working on proposed change, but got put on backburner. change is going to match current Edge behavior, there's a bit of history from previous implementation. actively working on it and will send a PR in next week or so.
15:21:03 <patrick_h_lauke> to rick's point: it's also intention to submit a test to make sure we're interoperable
15:21:18 <patrick_h_lauke> RESOLUTION: Ted to submit PR and test
15:21:45 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: sometimes it's quite complicated due to historical reasons for implementations etc, so having tests will help a lot
15:21:56 <patrick_h_lauke> (general agreement)
15:22:10 <patrick_h_lauke> TOPIC: Should a captured pointer send boundary events by default?  https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/61 (linked to  https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/39 and  https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/8)
15:22:59 <patrick_h_lauke> PL: can we move forward, or are we at a stalemate?
15:23:40 <patrick_h_lauke> NavidZ?: we were waiting for Jacob's use case, we're waiting on feedback on our proposed solution. Ted any feedback
15:23:53 <rbyers> s/NavidZ?/NZ/
15:24:32 <patrick_h_lauke> solution being: doing manual X/Y checking rather than relying on hit testing/events
15:25:57 <patrick_h_lauke> Ted: it's a viable technical solution; could do some A/B testing in the summer to see how interoperable that change would be to the spec. when i first started with PE, one of first things that drew me to it was that as developer i don't care about what source of input is, i just listen to PE and i'm done - no "if it's touch it has this slightly different behavior..."
15:26:25 <patrick_h_lauke> trying to make sure we don't lose sight of this high-level goal/concept when we're talking about making fundamental changes in behavior for certain pointer types in the context of the APIs
15:26:54 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: it's a good/valid concern. the particular proposal that Navid has doesn't have different behavior for different pointers
15:27:25 <patrick_h_lauke> NZ: basically we deal with all pointers the same. it just relates to pointer capture - if you do that, there won't be hit test on the element
15:27:52 <patrick_h_lauke> there won't be any complications for transitions/events (pointerenter, pointerleave, etc)
15:27:57 <rbyers> s/valid concern/valid concern for the larger issue of our desire to avoid hit testing for touch/
15:29:08 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: we were debating developer ergonomics, how developers can implement the proposed use case easily. may be best for us to just code up the actual example (mail app example ted sent to list/github)
15:29:18 <patrick_h_lauke> that will make it easier to evaluate ergonomics
15:29:28 <patrick_h_lauke> Ted: done code for example 1, need volunteers for 2 and 3
15:29:33 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: i can take one on
15:29:41 <patrick_h_lauke> SG: i can take that on too
15:31:07 <patrick_h_lauke> CONCLUSION: scott to make example code samples for different potential approaches so we can debate more concretely how ergonomic this change may be for devs
15:31:21 <NavidZ> https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/8
15:32:00 <patrick_h_lauke> NZ: beyond capture, this related issue has both the notion of not hit testing when pointer captured, and...[missed] touch
15:32:15 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: when we talked about this before it was blocked on compat data
15:32:43 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: number one thing we need is data
15:33:10 <patrick_h_lauke> Oli: is there compat data that microsoft can provide?
15:33:33 <smaug> (that wasn't me)
15:33:37 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: hopefully microsoft can collect data? anything in time for july?
15:33:47 <patrick_h_lauke> (sorry smaug, my voice recognition is shockingly bad)
15:34:00 <patrick_h_lauke> Ted: i'd have to ask around
15:34:26 <patrick_h_lauke> CONCLUSION: ted to check if any compat data is available/can be collected, then discuss further
15:35:09 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: as soon as we feel we have major issues fixed, we (blink) can put PE behind experimental flag and get more reports from users/devs
15:35:43 <patrick_h_lauke> TOPIC: Mouse Event compatibility model for touch is incompatible with current  practice https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/7 - should we add  gesture-based compat mouse events for touch to the spec?
15:35:59 <dtapuska> that was me about the compat data question
15:36:00 <rbyers> s/i can take one on/if no-one else is interested I can do it/
15:36:23 <rbyers> s/Oli: is there/DT: is there/
15:37:23 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: do we only do this behavior for touch?
15:37:51 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: i believe that's what Edge does. if you enable touch event support in edge for desktop, you get ... [missed it]
15:38:02 <patrick_h_lauke> Chrome does same as Edge currently
15:38:23 <patrick_h_lauke> ted's comment is that when touch events are disabled it follows the model currently in spec
15:38:40 <patrick_h_lauke> so question is: do we want to split out "if the browser supports touch, use this model; otherwise, use that model"
15:39:16 <patrick_h_lauke> Ted: there is ongoing debate with each release if we enable touch events on desktop
15:39:29 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: maybe we should do same and disable touch on desktop
15:39:53 <patrick_h_lauke> maybe: if pointertype is touch and touch events are supported, use this behavior. otherwise, ...
15:40:17 <patrick_h_lauke> i'd support changing spec to match Edge behavior, which Chrome is matching
15:40:28 <patrick_h_lauke> Ted: easiest going forward. do we need to worry about Mozilla/Firefox?
15:40:53 <patrick_h_lauke> Oli: currently touch events are enabled in nightlies on windows, but there have been compat issues similar to what chrome has experienced
15:41:42 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: so should we initially update spec to match reality in Edge/Chrome?
15:42:05 <patrick_h_lauke> ted do you know if there are any other gestures that fire mouse events beyond tap and long-tap gestures?
15:42:15 <patrick_h_lauke> Ted: i'd have to ask / poke around in code, but not aware of any
15:42:24 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: another area where tests would be nice
15:42:50 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: patrick keeps telling us this matters to devs
15:42:55 <patrick_h_lauke> PL: well it matters to me
15:42:56 <NavidZ> https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/pull/56
15:43:02 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: who wants to own this / make a PR?
15:43:22 <patrick_h_lauke> NZ: we have THIS pull request that addresses this area
15:43:46 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: missed this one, unless anybody on call has concerns, we can land this?
15:44:05 <patrick_h_lauke> PL: not hearing any disagreement, so probably good to go ahead
15:44:32 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: this was area where spec didn't match Edge, but there was some bug. would be good to know what Edge's behavior would be once bug fixed
15:44:52 <patrick_h_lauke> Ted: it is our intention to behave the way Mustaq wrote up the PR
15:45:24 <patrick_h_lauke> but we were cautious on the discussion as it wasn't clear WHEN the bug / behavior can be addressed
15:45:45 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: all our changes are tentative until all browsers implement anyway. will review once more
15:45:54 <patrick_h_lauke> CONCLUSION: Rick to review and merge
15:46:15 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: anybody interested in owning the issue of mouse compat?
15:46:25 <patrick_h_lauke> it's not urgent, not blocking
15:46:37 <patrick_h_lauke> NZ: i'd be interested
15:47:38 <patrick_h_lauke> PL: AOB?
15:47:48 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: anybody played with chrome's PE implementation yet?
15:47:56 <patrick_h_lauke> Ted: yes, and we sent you some emails
15:48:03 <patrick_h_lauke> RB: appreciated
15:49:52 <patrick_h_lauke> TOPIC: FPWD question
15:50:16 <patrick_h_lauke> PL: at what point can we start with getting the FPWD gears in motion?
15:52:46 <patrick_h_lauke> (discussion about when it's appropriate to request FPWD, needing to update intro/changelog, but not to worry too much about how "stable" the spec is)
15:53:37 <patrick_h_lauke> rrsagent, generate minutes
15:53:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/05/25-pointerevents-minutes.html patrick_h_lauke
15:54:07 <patrick_h_lauke> rrsagent, set logs world-visible
15:54:27 <patrick_h_lauke> rrsagent, stop