Meeting minutes
<smaug> a bit late...
Final review of 'Add new section explaining coalesced and predicted events' https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/pull/364
Patrick: did everybody have chance to review? any outstanding concerns
[No concerns noted]
Action: will merge this after the meeting (once approval on the PR etc has been sorted out)
Final review of 'Major refactoring: refer to "direct manipulation" rather than "touch"' https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/pull/350
Patrick: have you all had a chance to give one final look over this? It has not changed since last meeting (after the last change of "scrolling" to "panning" was made). still has a few instances of the word "scrolling", but only in contexts where it made sense (in an explanation, or when giving an example)
Olli: i looked over at the time, would like to go over again. [after reading over it] Yeah I think it looks fine
Patrick: so if i merge after the meeting, we happy?
[group agrees]
Action: merge after the meeting
"Should events queue a task?" https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/197
Olli: is this not a UI events issue?
Patrick: i see a reference to https://
Rob: should we not clarify when events fire?
Olli: but that is implementation-dependent
Patrick: should i close this?
Olli: we might want to keep it around until it's resolved...somewhere else
Patrick: happy to keep open, but label as "Future", so it's clear it's not v3-blocking
Olli: it might impact pointerraw events, as they will then need to align
Rob: fair enough
Action: keep issue open, mark as "Future"
"How is pointer event ctor supposed to work when coalescedEvents is passed using the PointerEventInit" https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/223
[some initial discussion]
Olli: the core issue is that we don't define what happens when you call the constructor of the event
Rob: it should just...set the list
Patrick: so we just need to add some text in the new (from the other PR) section
<smaug> https://
Patrick: as my brain isn't grokking this, mind if I assing this to you to have a look at what we might need to add to our spec?
Olli: yes, I can ask AVK what the best way to go about this is
Rob: we have something related in the web animations API that might be useful to look at
Action: Assign issue to Olli for initial check of what needs to be added to PE spec
[Rob points to keyframe event as a similar example]
"This API always returns at least one coalesced event for pointermove events and an empty list for other types of PointerEvents." https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/224
Rob: i think issue here is what you get from coalesced event list is what you get from construction, but we have somewhere else that getcoalesced event returns at least one event
Olli: let me see, this was filed so long ago
Olli: yeah the text has changed since then
<flackr> https://
Olli: maybe it needs some clarification that "if this was a user agent created event, then ... ", as we want to differentiate JS-created events
<flackr> +1
Patrick: so after merging the PR for the new section, can we bash out some clarifying text in the issue discussion itself?
Olli: +1
Olli: and it depends on the constructor issue
Action: for next time, Olli et al to come up with proposed addition to spec from discussion in https://
Patrick: that gets to the end of what I had earmarked. If there's no other business, let's reconvene in 2 weeks' time.