Reword/expand touch-action definition https://
github.com/ w3c/ pointerevents/ pull/ 349
Patrick: [asking if people have had a chance to look over this PR - not yet. raising potential concern around wording/IPR issues that may be tied to talking too much about "gesture", but think it's unavoidable and should hopefully not pose a big problem]
Mustaq: looking at the diff. wondering if we can avoid the potentially problematic word?
Patrick: it does get awkward trying to avoid the word. I think we have some other places where we talk about "gestures", even in our charter in terms what we WON'T cover
<mustaq> One suggestion for "auto": "The user agent MAY determine any permitted touch behaviors that affect panning/scrolling and zooming of the viewport, for touches that begin on the element."
Olli: i think so far only in notes, not spec text
Patrick: let me try and reword without "gesture"
[group looks at some specific wordings]
Patrick: updated the PR https://
Patrick: while we're here, https://
Patrick: that first sentence and note make no sense to me
Mustaq: [explains that this is about preventDefault shouldn't affect panning/zooming]
<mustaq> Bottom line: browser panning decision shouldn't be blocked by JS event handler's prevent-defaulting.
<mustaq> If the default action of any event is panning/zooming, then the browser has to wait for the event handler code to finish before deciding to manipulate.
<mustaq> which hurts responsiveness.
Patrick: this feels like a non-sequitur. it may need something positive first a la "By default, on touchscreens, touch manipulations lead to panning/zooming regardless of JS. this is for performance reasons (scrolling etc doesn't wait for JS first). But if developers/authors are doing something specific, they want a way to opt out of that, that's where touch-action comes in"
Patrick: I'll make a separate PR for this once i wrapped my head around this some more
Patrick: with the PR, are we ok with it or need more time to review?
Mustaq: may need a few days just to double-check
Patrick: sure, no rush. let's aim for decision before next meeting
Major refactoring: refer to "direct manipulation" rather than "touch" https://
github.com/ w3c/ pointerevents/ pull/ 350
<mustaq> InputDeviceCapabilities: here is a Chrome bug https://
Olli: concerned about WICG reference
Patrick: this was already in PE2 and nobody blinked
<smaug> Olli: could have 'direct manipulation action' in the glossary using touch action as an example, that way looking for 'touch action' would still find something.
[making some changes to spec, adding extra wording]
Mustaq: instead of on call, let's iterate over this on github
Patrick: sure, this is important and complex, but if we can get this right (or at least acceptable), it'll be a huge win. for PE4 if that ever happens, we can then consider more fundamental changes like renaming the CSS property itself
Add a SHOULD clause about pan gestures and what happens if a gesture suddenly changes direction https://
github.com/ w3c/ pointerevents/ pull/ 351
[discussing the use of "gesture" here again]
Patrick: we could remove the first instance of "gesture", but the second one becomes tricky... "direct manipulation path"? "direction of the direct manipulation action"? they start becoming very obscure and made-up. I'm tempted to say this is a reasonably valid use of the generic word "gesture", as we're not trying to define it, only making a reference to it...
Mustaq: let's try to come up with some ideas on github if there's anything we can change it to
Patrick: sure, let's get this aspect right.
Patrick: these three issues are the last big ones I feel we have outstanding, if we can get these right we'll be in a good position. meanwhile, remaining issues in github, feel free to change labels to "future" for insteresting ideas that we know we won't get to in time for PE3. let's keep momentum going, and reconvene in 2 weeks' time